PRESIDENT'S REPORT ON FIELD OPERATIONS

Glenn Olson, Senior Vice President

HIGHLIGHTS

State Directors Meeting: All of the state executive directors were brought together in Newton, Massachusetts for a 3-day meeting in September. The focus of the meeting was "Building a Network of Audubon Centers." It was a terrific meeting. We had the active planning and participation of Jerry Bertrand, Laura Johnson, and Gary Clayton and the Massachusetts Audubon staff. In addition, Richard Moore, Executive Director of the Audubon Society of New Hampshire and Thomas Urquhart, Executive Director of Maine Audubon Society also participated in the meeting. In addition to learning about Audubon Centers, workshops and skills training sessions were held on building state boards of directors and building the capacity of state programs.

Maryland: The foundation has been laid to open an Audubon State Office in Maryland in the very near future. The combined efforts of Dave Pardoe, Tamar Chotzen, and John Flicker together with Rick Leader, Director of Pickering Creek Audubon Center, have positioned us for the establishment of our 24^th state program.

Arkansas: Through Donal O’Brien’s extraordinary leadership, we were approved in September for a 3 year grant totaling $450,000 from the Winthrop Rockefeller Trust to establish an Arkansas State Program. Donal is a member of the Trust’s board, as is former NAS Director, Bob Schultz.

Connecticut Audubon Society: Following the NAS Board meeting in Brewster, Glenn and Tom Baptist met with Sherman Kent, Executive Director of Connecticut Audubon Society, and members of their board of directors to discuss collaborative opportunities.

STATE OFFICE REPORTS

ALASKA STATE OFFICE

Stanley E. Senner, Executive Director

Audubon Centers/Education: Bucky Dennerlein met with representatives of the Anchorage Audubon Society, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and others to organize a volunteer training workshop for the Audubon Bird Academy, which will begin sessions for children in grades 4-6 at the Campbell Creek Science Center. A special Alaska issue of Audubon Adventures has been produced, and distributed widely in Alaska schools.

Science & Bird Conservation: Stan Senner was named to the Steering Committee of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative representing Audubon and the U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan. He serves on this 9-member steering committee with the director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and others. As part of our participation in the Boreal Partners in Flight program, we reviewed and commented on a draft landbird conservation plan for Alaska.

Public Policy Issues: John Schoen drafted a widely circulated letter from North American scientists to the President, describing the scientific rationale for including the Tongass National Forest as part of the new national roadless area policy. Alaska Audubon, in cooperation with the Anchorage chapter, developed an alternative for revision of the Chugach National Forest Land Management Plan. The Audubon option forms the foundation for one of six final alternatives selected for further consideration by the forest planners. John flew several aerial surveys of Beluga Whales this fall and documented a stranding of 58 whales for more than six hours in Turnagain Arm. At least five whales died as a result of this stranding.

Conservation Projects: In September, John Schoen was appointed by the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to represent conservation interests on the Kenai Brown Bear Task Force. John is one of 13 stakeholders to serve on the group.

Fund Raising: We received a two-year grant of $140,000 from the Alaska Conservation Foundation for the Kenai Brown Bear conservation project. The Henry P. Kendall Foundation provided the second of three grants of $25,000 each in general support for the Alaska State Office. Following the June board meeting in Girdwood, members of the board were invited to become "Friends of Alaska Wildlife" by contributing gifts of at least $1,000 to the Alaska State Office. In the first quarter, three new board members became Alaska donors at this level. In September, John Flicker, Stan Senner, and John Schoen participated in a weeklong cruise in Southeast Alaska with Audubon friends and donors on a boat donated by Mike McIntosh of The Boat Company.

CALIFORNIA STATE OFFICE

Daniel Taylor, State Executive Director

Audubon Centers/Education: Los Angeles Nature Center - Planning for the Los Angeles Nature Center continued at a brisk pace. In August, Andy Kendall, developer of Massachusetts Audubon Society’s Boston Nature Center, worked with staff to create a model for financial sustainability for the LA Center. Staff also participated in a series of workshops with an education-planning consultant to develop a comprehensive education and interpretive plan for the new center. The volunteer leadership committee for the center now includes Robert Stephens, Packard Foundation president Dick Schlosberg, Andy Kendall, and Catellus Development Senior Vice President, Doug Gardner.

In September, staff biologist, Dan Cooper, completed a comprehensive habitat management plan for Debs Park that identifies priorities for restoration and habitat enhancement. With the habitat management plan in hand, the Debs Park Community Advisory Committee completed its Draft Framework Plan and presented it to the community at a series of public meetings in October. The plan, which sets aside nearly half the park adjacent to the nature center as an urban wilderness, was enthusiastically received. The Committee will now finalize its recommendations and forward the plan to the Recreation and Parks Commission for approval.

State Education: In partnership with the Mountain Lion Foundation, we have reinstated our previously successful California Endangered Species Education Program targeted at middle grade students in California. We have updated the education materials and have identified and contacted 400 schools in targeted locations around the state where Audubon is initiating a conservation campaign or there is a key legislative district that can help us secure an ongoing source of funding to expand the program. This fall and winter Audubon will be conducting teacher workshops in these targeted areas in partner-ships with chapters. Our goal is to be able to offer the program much more widely throughout California with a secure source of state funding. This program is recognized as one of the most successful project-based learning programs available and has been featured in a number of publications as a way to engage students in their own learning while raising public awareness and making positive environmental change.

Science and Bird Conservation: Researchers at Starr Ranch Audubon Sanctuary during late summer-fall investigated reptiles and amphibians (and now, ants!) of coastal sage scrub, mychorrhizal relationships to diversity in grasslands, hummingbird-pollinated plants, scrub jays, and of course artichoke thistle eradication and biology. Volunteers came weekly to help with artichoke thistle research. Staff and Starr Ranch-trained volunteers had their final MAPS bird banding session for the season and then celebrated their first year with a picnic at the Ranch for all volunteers. Sandy DeSimone’s paper on her coastal sage scrub research appeared in the September issue of Ecology and work on restoration applications of her coastal sage scrub research was featured at the annual meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration.

We are pleased to report that a settlement has been reached on the proposed Enron wind project in Gorman, California. With the help of Dan Beard, Bob Barnes and the Tejon Ranch Company, Enron has agreed to abandon plans for their wind project in light of the threat to endangered California Condors in the area. An easement on this particular property has been created to permanently prohibit a wind energy project.

Public Policy Issues: State Bond Acts - Audubon-California was a leading force behind the passage of two major bonds from the State Legislature, a parks and habitat bond act for $2.1 billion and a water resources conservation bond for $1.97 billion. The measures will now go before the voters at the March 2000 primary election. If passed these measures will contribute enormously to all of our major conservation goals in the state, including the protection of the Salton Sea, wetlands restoration in San Francisco Bay, and riparian habitat protection at the Kern River. Most significantly, the measures would provide $100 million in available funding for nature centers in under-served communities. We plan to make it the conservation centerpiece for the next five months, and we will be adding staff to work exclusively on the bond act campaign.

Salton Sea: We drafted and released a comprehensive campaign plan to help stabilize and restore the Salton Sea. We are now actively engaged in finding the funds necessary to launch the campaign. In the meantime, we continue to be the leading conservation voice working to solve this extremely important, yet difficult environmental challenge.

Conservation Projects: Union School Slough - Our project to restore 14,000 acres of private land as a laboratory for working with ranchers and farmers made great strides during the quarter. We hired Jeanne Wirka as the Restoration Ecologist on the Union School Slough Watershed Improvement Program team. We worked with two rangeland landowners to conduct approximately 300 acres of prescribed burns to help control rangeland weeds. We will be reseeding approximately 200 acres of the burned area this fall with native perennial grasses. We also erected a fence to enclose an approximately 1-mile reach of the riparian corridor through an upper watershed ranch to control cattle grazing in this area. We will be revegetating portions of the corridor during the fall of 2000. We have developed designs and will begin construction this fall of a tailwater pond, and native vegetation along 1000 feet of irrigation canal. We have also developed designs and initiated permitting for a riparian enhancement project on 1/2-mile reach or lower watershed slough for construction beginning next spring.

We sent a program description and survey to all (about 70) landowners in the watershed, and have received an overwhelming response for landowners (about 15 farmers and 5 ranchers) who are interested in implementing conservation activities on their properties. We also co-sponsored our first 2-day workshop with the California Native Grass Association, the Yolo Resource Conservation District, and The Nature Conservancy on "Using Prescribed Fire for Grassland Restoration and Vegetation Management," and have several other workshops planned for the fall, winter and spring.

Starr Ranch Sanctuary - This fall, Starr Ranch welcomed three new full-time staff. Two new staff members were hired under a grant for our artichoke thistle eradication/grassland restoration project: Curtis Kendall is now Project Manager for artichoke thistle and Starr Ranch Assistant Manager; Dana Kamada is also an artichoke thistle Project Manager and Biologist-Educator for Bird Programs. Another Starr Ranch veteran has also joined our staff. Ernie Clarke was an intern at the Ranch and now, after completing a master’s degree in environmental studies at University of Maryland, will work with Sandy to expand Ranch public programs as our new Biologist-Educator.

Chapter Leadership Development: National Audubon Society Convention – The theme for this year’s convention is "Audubon: The Gateway to Nature." Our staff, in coordination with NAS senior staff and chapter services is leading the effort to plan for a successful convention. Our goal is to attract a large, diverse audience to our convention that will resemble an Audubon Center. We will feature a mixture of workshops appropriate for all ages and activity levels, from families with small children to those with a keen interest in science.

Financial Management: Audubon-California moved out of the first quarter with typically low gift income for operational support. All major prospects for California have been assigned to key staff and fall proposals have been sent to traditional donors. In addition, major donor contact has intensified for the LA project. Over the last two months, over twenty donor meetings have taken place and the creation of an advisory board is going well.

Board Development: We met as a state board by way of conference call. Our board is now in the midst of an election process that will produce this year’s class of chapter elected leaders, and I am actively working to attract new, outstanding, at-large members to our board. We are very pleased to announce that one of our board members has made a pledge of $25,000 per year for three years for general support, and to leverage giving of other board members.

Staff Management: We held a productive meeting of our state program leadership in order to form teams around our key conservation goals for more effective work. Marty Fujita resigned from her position as director of the Richardson Bay Center. We are actively recruiting for her replacement. Development Director, David Wheelan is also leaving soon to work for the Trust for Public Land in San Francisco. A search is now underway for his replacement.

Development Department Coordination: We hosted a visit with Carol Ann May and John Byrne who were in the state to review some of our programs. The visit included several productive meetings and conversations which will lead to improved collaboration between the headquarters Development Department and Audubon-California.

COLORADO STATE OFFICE

Susan Kirkpatrick, State Executive Director

Audubon Centers/Education: Two nature centers are under development in Colorado at this time. As a consequence, much of the time in the Colorado State office is devoted to facilitating the success of these new ventures.

The Grand Valley Audubon Society is making real progress on the plans for the center to be located near the Colorado River in Grand Junction. The chapter held a strategic planning session in late August. Carol Ann May joined Susan Kirkpatrick at the planning session. Carol Ann provided valuable guidance for the chapter as they move forward with an ambitious fundraising plan.

The Audubon Society of Greater Denver is also developing a Nature Center at Chatfield State Park in southwest Denver. This Center will provide needed respite in the sprawling Denver suburbs. The state office is working to develop a formal Memorandum of Understanding with the Denver chapter to assure our efforts there are collaborative and coordinated. In addition to work with the two chapters that are creating nature centers, the state director has conducted planning sessions with the Evergreen and Fort Collins chapters.

Board Development: Development of the new state board for Audubon in Colorado is progressing smoothly. A nominating committee has been formed which includes two active Audubon Council members, two Audubon members who are not active in chapters and two at-large members with a passion for conservation. The nominating committee is using a process modeled on the method used by Steve Sedam in Ohio. We should have the at-large members of the new state board identified by late December. Each of the eleven chapters in the state will send a delegate to the new state board to join the at-large members.

Conservation: Our partnership with the Colorado Bird Observatory to develop an Important Bird Area program has generated more than 40 nominations for sites to be considered for designation.

The Colorado State Office welcomed Tricia Hamilton as the office manager on August 30, 1999. Tricia had worked as a Travel Manager for Massachusetts Audubon at Drumlin Farms before she relocated to Colorado. We are very fortunate to have her on our team.

CONNECTICUT STATE OFFICE

Thomas Baptist, State Executive Director

Audubon Centers/Education: A key step in the evolution of the Connecticut State Office occurred this quarter with the hiring of Carolyn J. Hughes as Deputy State Director. Ms. Hughes brings to the team an extraordinary depth of experience in environmental matters affecting Connecticut. Her career includes major management positions at the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Connecticut Fund for the Environment. Carolyn has led many successful initiatives to the benefit of Connecticut’s environment and our State Office welcomes her with great enthusiasm.

Significant progress has been made at the Greenwich Center relating to its capital campaign. Susie Hilfiger is chairing the effort, and fund-raising has exceeded $3 million in pledges and gifts. With the assistance of Tamar Chotzen, a comprehensive education plan has been completed and has been favorably received by our local board, the Audubon Society of Greenwich, as well as major donor prospects. Work on upgrading the facility continues, and program attendance is increasing steadily.

At Sharon, the kid’s summer camp was fully subscribed and a waiting list existed for each session. The 32^nd annual Sharon Audubon Festival was a success despite hot weather and high humidity. Fundraising for the protection of the Osbourne Property is nearing completion. The Center hosted a major reunion of the families of Keyo and Clement Ford, who donated the entire facility to National Audubon Society in 1935. Center Manager Scott Heth reports that the family witnessed first hand that the preserve is being used as the donors had wished: as a place where people can learn about and appreciate nature just as they and their children had years ago.

Jim Nolan reports that the Bent of the River Center is participating in two important efforts. In coordination with other conservation organizations, more than $500,000 has been raised toward preservation of a critical 100-acre open space (up river from the Center) valued at $1.4 million. The Center staff is also assisting the formation of the Pomperaug River Watershed Coalition to help protect the fragile watercourse that flows directly through the Bent.

Public Policy: The State Office is formulating its advocacy agenda for the upcoming legislative session, and enhancing funding options for open space preservation will be the priority. The implementation of the Connecticut strategic plan and improving coordination with Audubon chapters and Audubon Council of Connecticut are important initiatives.

FLORIDA STATE OFFICE

Stuart Strahl, State Executive Director

NAS/FAS Strategic Alliance: Many NAS-Florida staff attended the July meeting of the Florida Audubon Society whose Board of Directors passed a resolution for the unification of all FAS and NAS Florida operations. The executive committee of FAS recently voted in favor of unification, a new Board has been nominated, and we look forward eagerly to the results of the vote for merging at the annual membership meeting in November 1999!

Audubon Centers/Education: Congratulations to the Corkscrew Capital Campaign for receiving $1 million pledge to (nearly) complete the campaign, and construction has begun on the Blair Audubon Center!

Our Education staff is growing stronger. Since July, the following new staff have joined our team: Myrta Ferro, Education Associate for the Everglades Conservation Office’s Education Department; Ged Caddick, West Florida Program Officer; and Vernita Nelson, Education Coordinator. Part-time educators were hired at Corkscrew and ECO.

In fulfilling Audubon’s 2020 Vision, the Education Department is taking steps to establish a network Audubon Centers with a focus on saving land and engaging people through environmental education, science/research, and conservation action – thus creating a culture of conservation across Florida. To date this network will consist of two types of Audubon Centers. "Type One" Centers will be managed by NAS (i.e. Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary). Several "Type One" Centers in the preliminary stages: Franklin Park (Ft. Lauderdale) and Everglades City. "Type Two" Centers NAS will partner with a host organization to enhance new or existing programs. Local chapters will play an important part in these initiatives.

Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary - Corkscrew Education programs reached a total of 182 adults and 438 students. For adults, we conducted one guided walk for the new Florida Gulf Coast University faculty and a slide show for the local Kiwanis Club. Students on the boardwalk were from the YMCA of Naples. Two seminar programs were conducted as part of Corkscrew’s lunchtime seminar series. Corkscrew Education staff paid a visit to the Everglades office for a one-day training on Everglades Restoration Issues conducted by Mark Kraus.

Everglades Conservation Office - ECO Education programs reached 732 students and 25 teachers/adults for this quarter. Teacher/Adult programs included a program for the North American Association of Environmental Education in Ohio entitled Integrating Environment into Education and Florida Keys Teacher Workshop-Everglades Watershed Series.

ECO’s Education Department conducted its first "Raised in South Florida: The Link between Environment, People, and Agriculture" student field trip on October 6, 1999. The field trip included a visit to University of Florida’s Tropical Research and Education Center to learn about Insect Control, Biotechnology in Ag, and a tour of the tropical fruit grove. Students then headed to South Dade High School’s Ag Lab for a tour through the fields and farm equipment lead by South Dade High School students, along with a "soil" station, and a "water" station. Finally, students visited the Fruit and Spice Park to eat lunch and learn about the economic/historical importance of farming to Miami-Dade County. Our goal is to have over 1050 Miami-Dade high school students participate in this program. We are pleased to have 20 more high school classes reserved for programs up until December.

Everglades Watershed Teacher Workshop Series: Florida Department of Education’s Office of Environmental Education asked us to collaborate with them in offering a series of workshops for pre-service teachers that would travel through the Everglades Watershed. Teachers will be learning about the Everglades ecosystem, along with its hydrological and restoration issues. Classroom activities are correlated with each site, with at least one being a Project WET activity.

Kissimmee Sanctuary & C-OKEE: We have successfully partnered on a grant to take all 4^th and 6^th grade classes in Okeechobee County on a boat tour of the Indian River Lagoon. This is done in cooperation with Chop Lege’s Swampland Tours and Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute.

Science and Bird Conservation: Second Florida Birding Festival a Big Success: The Second Annual Florida Birding Festival in Tampa was attended by 850 people from 20 states, and its associated Nature Expo was attended by over 3,000. Audubon staff was intimately involved in the festival planning, and field trips were led by Rich Paul, Ann Schnapf, and Bill Pranty. Rich gave a well-received talk about "Wading Birds of Florida: Then and Now." NAS Florida’s Coastal Islands Sanctuaries, Corkscrew Swamp, and Everglades Conservation Office were popular exhibitors at the event.

Important Bird Areas - Bill Pranty has joined our team as IBA Program Coordinator. Bill has exceptional knowledge of Florida Birds and their distribution. He is the author of "A Birder's Guide to Florida" published by the ABA as an excellent compendium of birding hotspots throughout the state.

NAS met with Tampa Audubon chapter leaders to initiate a study of wetlands in Hillsborough County important for White Ibis and other wading birds. The hope is that this information will help target and emphasize the importance of wetland protection efforts.

Kissimmee Prairie Ordway-Whittell & Lake Okeechobee Sanctuaries - Paul Gray completed and distributed the final report on our Florida Grasshopper Sparrow monitoring this year. He surveyed sparrows ten times during the breeding season, covering each of the previous sparrow monitoring plots at least three times each. No sparrows were observed and they likely are extirpated from the Sanctuary. Plans are proceeding to burn areas between the Kissimmee Prairie State Preserve’s sparrow populations and our Sanctuary so they can re-colonize our sparrow habitat. Kissimmee Sanctuary staff and Florida Park Service staff submitted joint grant proposal to USFWS for Grasshopper Sparrow work.

Edwin Bridges and Gary Reese completed a 200-page report, "Microhabitat characterization for the Florida Grasshopper Sparrow" for the Department of Defense. The Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary was one of four study sites and figures prominently in the report.

Citizen Stewardship at Kissimmee: NAS is helping to foster common ground with our neighbors, Fish Slough landowners. Former SFWMD Chair Sonny Williamson arranged a meeting between the agricultural community and conservationists to facilitate communication regarding Lake Okeechobee’s nutrient problems. We took ranch and dairy tours and had a good discussion afterward about the nutrient issues and the substantial common ground between the environmental and agricultural communities.

Restoration Science: At the Everglades Conservation Office work has focused on Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule Study (LORSS): NAS submitted comments to the United States Army Corps of Engineers concerning the LORSS Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In general, NAS found that the proposed Water Supply and Environmental (WSE) alternative was acceptable as an interim operational modification to the Lake Okeechobee regulation schedule.

NAS staff at Kissimmee Prairie Ordway-Whittell & Lake Okeechobeee Sanctuaries submitted our 5^th annual report to the South Florida Water Management District on the "Entrance Road Mitigation Project" on the Kissimmee Prairie Sanctuary. The project has reached most of its restoration goals and ongoing management likely will complete the restoration process.

At the Tavernier Science Center Jerry Lorenz’s paper The Response of Fishes to Physiochemical Changes in the Mangroves of Northeastern Florida Bay was published in the journal Estuaries Vol. 22, No. 2B, June 1999. This issue was dedicated to Florida Bay: A Dynamic Subtropical Estuary. Jerry submitted the spoonbill report for publication as a book chapter and his dissertation and final report to Everglades National Park are progressing.

Outreach: At the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary Andrew Mackie participated in the August board meeting of Collier County Audubon Society (CCAS). CCAS voted to give Corkscrew $3,000 for the Blair Audubon Center, $2,000 for Corkscrew’s "A Swamp In Your Backyard" program, and $2,000 for the expanded Audubon Adventures program with Corkscrew. They will also give $800 to jointly sponsor with Corkscrew, David Stokes from Schlitz Audubon Center in Wisconsin coming down to Southwest Florida in March 2000. David is a well-known environmental educator and will do several school programs, family programs and a staff-training workshop at Corkscrew.

Everglades Conservation Network: Shannon Mayorga recently joined the Miami office as a Conservation Associate, continuing to develop and cultivate the Everglades Grassroots Network throughout Florida. Shannon will identify, recruit, and train the best civic-minded volunteers to act as community spokespersons for the Everglades. The position is primarily focused on South Florida until funds can be raised to add a second position for the rest of Florida. Initial activities include contacting chapter leadership, rebuilding the database, and creating new fact sheets and revising existing materials.

Roundtable with Carol Browner: NAS coordinated a roundtable discussion with USEPA Administrator Browner entitled A New Corporate Culture of Conservation, hosted by the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, Chamber South and the Environmental Economics Council, to discuss Everglades/ecosystem restoration and the role of business, as supporters and beneficiaries. John H. Hankinson, Regional Administrator, and Richard Harvey, Chair of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Working Group were also in attendance. Topics discussed include Everglades restoration, the proposed research facility, the Overtown Charrette, opportunities for this partnership group (GMCC, CS, EEC) to co-host public hearings for the business community, and opportunities to collaborate on brownfields issues and channel more resources to South Florida. The administrator volunteered EPA staff to work with us. Charge from the Administrator--be more visible and more vocal.

Public Policy: Interior Appropriations - The Interior Appropriations bill again is the source of controversy between Congress and the President. While the House and Senate passed the conference report for H.R. 2466, the bill for fiscal year 2000, the President has promised to veto the bill because of numerous anti-environmental riders and deficient funding levels for land acquisition. It is expected that President Clinton's veto will be sustained; however, the bill passed by Congress contains provisions regarding the issues of water guarantees for the Everglades and a 50-50 federal cost-share for land acquisition in the 8.5 Square Mile Area (8.5 SMA) that the National Audubon Society supports. The assurances language was included by Ralph Regula (R-OH), the Chairman of the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. This language is designed to guarantee that the national parks, wildlife refuges, and other natural areas within the Everglades ecosystem will receive the proper quantity, quality, timing and distribution of freshwater from the Everglades restoration plan. Opposed by the State of Florida and the South Florida Water Management District, the water guarantee provisions are the subject of further negotiations as the Interior bill crawls toward enactment.

National Audubon worked closely with Senator Connie Mack (R-FL), Senator Bob Graham (D-FL), Rep. Peter Deutsch (D-FL), and Rep. Regula to include language that explicitly commits the federal government's to a 50% cost share for acquisitions in the 8.5 SMA. Based on language included in the FY 1999 Interior appropriations bill, the Department of the Interior had pledged, pending the completion of a NEPA process, a 50% cost share to the South Florida Water Management District as part of a decision to fully acquire the 8.5 SMA. However, a concerted misinformation campaign by certain parties opposed to the District's full acquisition decision had confused local and state decision makers on the issue of how much the federal government could contribute to acquisitions in the 8.5 SMA. This provision is intended to leave no doubt as to the federal government's cost-share authority. Unlike the water guarantee provision, there is a strong likelihood that this issue will not be revisited during the deliberations that will lead to final passage of the FY 2000 Interior budget.

The fiscal year 2000 budget for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that was signed into law by President Clinton includes a record high for funding of Everglades restoration programs. The budget, just under $100 million, funds the three main Everglades programs of the Corps of Engineers. These programs are the Central and Southern Florida Project line item, the Kissimmee River Restoration Project, and the so-called "critical projects." National Audubon worked closely with the Florida congressional delegation to obtain these record funding levels -- almost twice the previous high.

PRESIDENT'S REPORT ON PUBLIC POLICY

Dan Beard, Senior Vice President

Wildlife Refuge Campaign

America's Hidden Lands: A Proposal to Discover our National Wildlife Refuge System.

We developed a new policy document, "America’s Hidden Lands: A Proposal to Discover Our National Wildlife Refuge System," which outlines our proposal to create a new bureau within the Department of the Interior, the National Wildlife Refuge Service. A resolution at the September Board meeting paved the way for moving ahead with this initiative. On October 22, in an apparent attempt to deflect our initiative, Fish and Wildlife Service Director Jamie Clark announced a top-level organizational restructuring. The restructuring is unlikely to provide any appreciable improvements in refuge visibility, management and opportunities for increased funding.

During Refuge Week, the campaign sent Refuge Vote 2000 materials to more than 300 local organizations and held two informational conference calls. Just two weeks later, we have already received more than 300 ballots from people in 10 states, all voting in favor of our proposal. The campaign will continue to pressure Congress by generating grassroots pressure in 69 targeted districts.

Comments on NWRSIA regulations. We prepared detailed comments on the first of a series of FWS regulations intended to implement the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. This first regulation, relevant to the Service’s new process for implementing Comprehensive Conservation Planning, has potentially far-reaching implications for the management of all wildlife refuges.

Tracking Threats to Individual Refuges. We are continuing to track various threats – ranging from massive dredging projects to proposed developments – at several refuges, including Salton Sea NWR, CA; Klamath Basin Refuge Complex, OR; White River NWR, AK; and Lee Metcalf NWR, MT.

LWCF Appropriations. We made a push to ensure that the Interior Appropriations bill included funds for Pelican Island NWR, FL and Red Rock NWR, MT. The conference report showed that the bill included both acquisitions. In all, 16 out of 42 Audubon Priorities received funding for FY2000.

Audubon Refuge Keepers (ARK). The ARK program is thriving and has expanded to include 77 ARK groups. We are now increasing the outreach potential of the program to an even higher level by enlisting State ARK Coordinators in WA, WI, MN, SC, NC, AZ.

In late September, we hosted a joint Refuge Advocacy Workshop in New Jersey with the National Wildlife Refuge Association, in which 45 activists from variety of local organizations participated. Congressman Rodney Freylinghuysen (R-NJ) participated as a workshop speaker. We also held an ARK workshop in Texas, in which people attended from five different organizations, and also met with three additional chapters/organizations and visited two refuges.

We are developing new outreach materials to help citizens become involved with refuges. At this time, we are collecting data for an "Audubon at Work on Refuges" report (to be printed January 2000); printing a new ARK brochure; and distributing a Refuge Support Group Directory. For Refuge week (October 10th-16th), we provided organizing kits that included new Refuge Week posters.

Earth Stewards. We have been working with Audubon volunteers and friends groups to launch "Earth Stewards" programs in this school year. New program sites include:

Nestucca Bay NWR, part of Oregon Coastal Refuges;

Southwestern VA field office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and,

Blackwater NWR, MD. Refuge Campaign staff will speak about Earth Stewards at next board meeting of Friends of Blackwater.

Refuge Campaign staff attended the Earth Stewards field trip and Refuge Week event at Back Bay NWR, VA. The Earth Stewards Coordinator participated in an ARK workshop at Balcones Canyonlands NWR, TX in October. Workshop participants, as well as staff at the TX State Office, expressed interest in Earth Stewards. In November, a conference call will bring together representatives from current Earth Stewards sites as well as Audubon members and refuge staff who have expressed interest in joining the program.

Bringing Home Alaska (BHA). Since September, we have conducted eight Bringing Home Alaska Presentations. Four more are currently scheduled for November. In late September, the campaign took part in Arctic Wilderness Week with the Alaska Coalition, during which we helped trained 30 new activists. From that training, we gained twenty new BHA activists.

Population

We had a major victory in the House of Representatives last August when the FY 2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill was passed with an increase in funding for population assistance and the United Nations Population Fund. We received more good news when the House-Senate conference committee agreed to the funding level previously agreed to in the House. This marks the first time in nearly five years that population assistance funding was approved by the Congress at levels close to our recommendations.

In addition, the House-Senate compromise made the funds available without onerous restrictions. We managed to prevent the worst "gag rule" language from becoming a part of the final bill. Unfortunately, because of inadequate funding levels elsewhere in the bill, the President vetoed the whole package. The final outcome for population assistance is once again caught up in the end-of-year budget battles. Nevertheless, we feel reasonably confident that all the hard work of our dedicated network of advocates will result in a continuation of funding for international family planning and population assistance at or above last year’s $385 million level.

The Day of 6 Billion (October 12) brought a high level of attention to the population issue in the U.S. media. Audubon staff and volunteers contributed significantly to this effort through a variety of op-ed articles and letters to the editor in newspapers around the country and numerous radio interviews on local and national broadcasts.

Audubon’s special contribution to marking the Day of 6 Billion was the organizing of dozens of Youth Summits and other youth-oriented activities in communities from New York to California and from Wisconsin to Florida. The wide range of activities included high school class programs, college talks and panel discussions, town meetings, inter-generational forums, outdoor symposia, screenings of the new PBS special "Six Billion and Beyond," youth rap sessions, nature center events, and many other gatherings of young people in widely varying settings. In all cases, the general theme was the consideration by the participants of their responsibility for the future of this planet, by the choices they make about their family size and their personal lifestyles.

Annette Souder, our former highly effective Ohio Population & Habitat Organizer, has assumed the duties of the Senior Population Policy Associate in the Washington, DC office. She is filling the position that was vacated by Rhonda Schlangen, and everyone is excited to have her back on the team.

Pat Waak was invited to make a presentation at the annual meeting of the Affinity Group of foundations that fund population activities. Thanks to her hard work and the confidence the donor community has in our campaign, we are meeting this year’s fundraising goals for our campaign faster than ever before. We are anticipating new opportunities to expand our public outreach and to make our message even more effective in 2000 than it has been in the current very successful year.

Agriculture Policy Program

In mid-October, House and Senate conferees agreed on a final Agriculture Appropriations bill for FY ‘00 that included $8.7 billion in emergency relief for producers. Although Audubon had joined several other conservation and sustainable agriculture groups and members of Congress in calling for some of this emergency funding to be dedicated to conservation programs, none of the emergency money was designated for this purpose. A last minute rider inserted in the bill will also allow participants in the Conservation Reserve Program ("CRP") to purchase and farm highly erodible land, a move that could negate some of the net environmental benefits of the CRP.

Audubon policy staff promoted a series of USDA public forums in various locations across the country to Audubon field staff and other potential activists. Staff assisted the Colorado state office Director in preparing Audubon-Colorado’s testimony for the Denver forum.

The Agriculture policy program has taken a leadership role in opposing new wetlands permitting system being proposed by the Omaha District of the Army Corps of Engineers. This "letter of permission" process could lead to greatly accelerated losses of agricultural wetlands within some of the most productive wetlands in North America for waterfowl. Agriculture policy staff produced an alert on the issue, disseminated it widely, and coordinated a conference call of conservation, sporting, and environmental groups from the eight state region in which a strategy to thwart the proposed rules was developed.

As noted in the last report, the Board Litigation Committee approved our involvement in an important lawsuit dealing with Prairie Pothole wetlands. The suit was filed because the Natural Resource Conservation Service unilaterally, and with no prior notification or consultation, changed the wetlands mapping convention for South Dakota. They replaced the criteria in the 1994 MOA with a much less comprehensive definition and criteria borrowed from Minnesota. The result was to significantly decrease the number of wetlands in South Dakota.

We’re pleased to report that the court granted our motion for the temporary restraining order to prohibit the NRCS from implementing their new delineation methodology. The court will hear the case in early December.

Wetlands

During August and September, the Army Corps of Engineers held their final public comment period on proposed new Nationwide Permits to replace NWP 26. The Wetlands Campaign focused most of its efforts through October on improving these draft regulations, which could lead to increased use of these "rubber stamp" permits in wetlands and streams. The campaign:

conducted an in-depth analysis of the draft rules;

analyzed and publicized recently released Corps data that show, among other problems for wetlands, a steady increase in the use of these rubber stamp nationwide general permits and a steady decrease in the use of individual permits (that require environmental review);

circulated action alerts, analysis, post cards, and sample letters to over a thousand activists to encourage their participation in the public comment period;

compiled a summary of all the proposed "regional conditions" on the national rules and distributed this information to activists along with materials on how to comment on regional conditions;

held conference calls to assist activists to comment on several Corps Districts that proposed especially weak regional conditions;

submitted a 19-page comment letter to the Corps on the permits, which included recommended language changes;

coordinated meetings for the environmental community with lead officials of the U.S. EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Army Corps of Engineers and Federal Emergency Management Agency to request their assistance in closing loopholes in the permits; and

organized a national call-in day (October 27) to the President to ask him to instruct the Corps to close the worst loopholes.

In addition to work on the nationwide permits, the campaign was active in fighting off anti-environmental riders on appropriations bills. Our efforts to strip two anti-wetlands riders from the Energy and Water FY 2000 Appropriations bill were finally successful in September. These riders would have weakened the nationwide permit process even further. The Administration held to its veto threat, which finally lead to removal of the most egregious language from the bill. We also continued to monitor Rep. Jones (R-NC) weak mitigation banking bill, which is stalled for this year, but remains viable for the 2000 session.

We worked in coalition with the Clean Water Network on designing, planning, recruiting participants for, and presenting a wetlands training session for 30 activists from target Congressional Districts on Sept. 25-27 in Washington DC. Audubon staff were key presenters at the workshop, which trained participants in basic wetlands law and regulation, permit review, communications and media relations, and lobbying skills. The group then lobbied their legislators on current wetland issues in Congress. Audubon was represented by chapter leaders from San Diego Audubon, Big Bluestem Audubon (IA), Pine Woods Audubon (MS), Lahontan Audubon (NV), Redrock Audubon (NV), and Appalachian Audubon. Lea Mitchell also presented a training workshop for Tahoma Audubon earlier in the month.

Our Fall newsletter went to 10,000 people and highlighted chapter success stories. We continued work to help chapters find funding for their wetland projects, helping Grays Harbor Audubon ($600,000) and Audubon Society of Omaha ($40,000) on their applications to the North America Wetlands Conservation Act grants. The grant we secured for Buffalo Audubon Society last winter has leveraged an additional $18,000 grant for their wetlands acquisition project. We continued working with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to help fund local Audubon wetland restoration projects.

Upper Mississippi River Campaign

The "Audubon Ark" tour was completed on August 27th, resulting in direct contact with more than 1200 people at 38 riverfront stops, 63 print media stories, including several full-color front-page stories in river town newspapers, and 15 television and radio appearances. In addition, Ark staff and our Birding Trail Coordinator, Jon Stravers, took 200 people on backwater tours along the way. A summary of the trip is being prepared for general distribution this winter and a slide presentation about the Ark tour is being completed for use during the coming year. A Discovery Channel segment about the tour is expected to be released in early 2000.

The National Eagle Center project has gained momentum, with the campaign opening and staffing (on a part time basis by Kim Shearer-Maxwell until a full time center director is hired) a local project office with the Chamber of Commerce in Wabasha, Minnesota. The City, working with Audubon, has submitted a request for construction funds through the state of Minnesota bonding bill in 2000. The campaign hosted the McKnight Foundation on a tour of the area in October. Working with Congressman Gil Gutknecht of Minnesota, we secured $250,000 in federal funds in October. Preliminary construction drawings for the National Eagle Center were completed on October 27th.

The Minnesota Audubon Council and Upper Mississippi River Campaign are now reviewing the plans and looking at several "green" building and site enhancement options for the National Eagle Center, actively seeking applicants for the Center Director position, and actively seeking capital funds for the project.

"A River That Works and a Working River" is the title of a report being completed by the Campaign staff in collaboration with the five-state Upper Mississippi River Conservation Committee (UMRCC). The 40-page full-color report, in final graphic production stage, will be published and widely disseminated in December, 1999. It will document the extent to which we have modified the Upper Mississippi River and its watershed and, in the process, have degraded its ecological health. The report also will present nine "tools or measures" that can be taken to restore the health of the river.

Campaign staff continues to make the rounds of Audubon chapters in the five states. In October Dan McGuiness met with the Four Seasons Audubon Chapter in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, the Coulee Region Audubon Chapter in La Crosse, Wisconsin and the Fargo-Moorhead Audubon Chapter in Moorhead, Minnesota.

During the visits, the campaign is recruiting support and help for the Great River Birding Trail project. Working with the Audubon Councils in Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Wisconsin, our birding trail coordinator, Jon Stravers, has gathered data from several local sources and is in the process of designing base maps for the birding trail system. A five-state birding trail conference is being planned for 2000 with financial support obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Tom Adams and Dan McGuiness are working with several other nonprofit organization leaders in the Midwest as we evaluate the environmental and economic reports that are now being provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as part of their navigation system expansion study on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers. The "Conservation Agenda" prepared by Audubon in the summer of 1999 has been widely circulated and is being used as a basis for recommending a moratorium on system expansion at this time.

The Campaign received a $75,000 grant from the Environmental Protection Agency to expand its scientific evaluations and advocacy work into the five state Upper Mississippi River Basin. The grant provides for the completion of a "State of the Watershed Report", a network of "watershed stewards" in the 16 sub-watersheds of the basis, and five-state workshop to look at high priority needs for improving water quality and habitat in tributaries of the Upper Mississippi River.

Funding for Wildlife

Efforts are still underway in both the House and Senate to move major legislation to provide permanent funding for land acquisition for recreation and wildlife habitat. Both the House and Senate Resources Committees have scheduled markup session only to cancel them when it was apparent they did not have the votes to pass the bills. These bills would insure that several billion dollars is made available each year for recreation and wildlife habitat acquisition. The Clinton Administration has their own proposal – called the "Lands Legacy Initiative" – and they are working to encourage Congress to provide the necessary funds. The D.C. policy staff has been spending considerable time working on these bills. We will continue our efforts when the Congress returns in the fall.

Garrison

The Garrison Diversion Unit legislation continues to be a possibility in the Senate. The Administration agreed to support the latest version of the Garrison legislation after the bill was changed to accommodate a number of concerns raised at hearings last summer. The Senate Energy Committee then reported out the amended version of the bill, and it is possible the full Senate will consider the bill next year. We have expressed our opposition to the latest version of the bill, although it is much improved over earlier drafts.

Forest Campaigns

In part due to the work of Audubon’s Heritage Forests Campaign, President Clinton announced a proposal to protect 40 to 60 million acres of unroaded, unlogged national forest lands. These unprotected roadless areas are some of the most important habitat in the country for birds and wildlife that need undisturbed, unfragmented deep forest habitat. President Clinton has directed the Forest Service to develop this plan through the official agency rule-making process, which offers significant opportunity for public comment. He has also ordered that a full Environmental Impact Statement be completed on this rule by the end of next year, allowing more opportunities for public input. Going through these processes will make it harder for future Administrations to undo this historic work. Audubon will be encouraging our members to help define this policy and make it stronger by submitting comments in the initial public comment period, which ends December 22.

The Audubon Forest Campaign is also working on a number of bills dealing with how the federal government compensates counties for the tax-free status of federal lands. Traditionally, federal land management agencies give 25% or more of their timber sale revenues to counties for school and road budgets. We are opposing bills in the House and Senate that attempt to keep education payments tied to resource extraction, and promoting the Clinton Administration’s alternative that would separate these payments from timber sales and other activities.

We have a priority list of ten forestry issues for the coming year and are beginning to implement plans to move these priorities forward. We are hoping to get at least one-third of our chapters to take at least one action on each of these ten issues. Already, approximately a quarter of our chapters have signed up for this program.

Chris Soderstrom was hired as an Outreach Specialist for both the Forest and Refuge Campaigns. She will serve as the grassroots organizer and communications point person for the Forest Campaign. She has an extensive ornithology background, and has environmental policy experiences as well. She is already an excellent addition to the staff.

Partnership Project

The Partnership Project is a coalition effort of 11 national conservation organizations. The Project was founded with a grant from the Turner Foundation to facilitate the compilation of national conservation organization’s membership lists, enhance those lists with publicly available demographic information, and use them in 3-5 collaborative campaigns per year. Other participating organizations include: National Wildlife Federation; National Parks and Conservation Association; Natural Resources Defense Council; Environmental Defense Fund; Defenders of Wildlife; The Wilderness Society; American Rivers; Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund; Union of Concerned Scientists; and the Isaac Walton League. World Wildlife Fund is also expected to join this effort.

The Partnership Project has launched three campaigns, including ones on the Clinton Administration’s Lands Legacy initiative, the anti-environmental riders attached to appropriations bills, and global warming. Although each campaign is developed according to the particular issue and congressional targets, the commmunication methods generally involve print and radio advertisements in Washington, D.C. and congressional targets’ home districts, phone banking and constituent "patch-throughs" to congressional offices, and direct mail with postcards to return to the administration. Response rates have been high. So far, President Clinton has received nearly 58,000 postcards urging him to veto legislation that contains anti-environmental riders. In addition, the patch-through phone calls have had a 40 percent response rate, translating into thousands of calls from our members to their elected officials.

SCIENCE DIVISION

Frank Gill, Senior Vice President

First and foremost, a hearty welcome to Jeff Wells to the national Science team. Jeff has distinguished himself as the Director of Bird Conservation in New York State, demonstrating the political and conservation powers of the IBA program. He joins my team on December 6 as the national Director of Bird Conservation. Jeff’s top priority will be to integrate IBAs/WatchList/BirdSource into unified bird conservation initiatives by state programs.

Important Bird Areas

Fred Baumgarten

Conservation Highlights: The New York State Office received a commitment from the Buffalo Community Foundation for an annual donor-advised grant of $18,000. The first installment will be used to help the Buffalo Audubon Society complete purchase of a 52- acre wetland in the Niagara River Corridor IBA. Future funds will go to educational and public outreach programs in the area. The federal purchase of Champion lands in the Northeast has resulted in protection of the spectacular Nulhegan wildlands in Vermont, soon to be dedicated as an IBA. The Texas State Office has gotten voluntary IBA nominations from private landowners representing over 16,000 acres and several endangered species. The state office is providing these owners with technical assistance for nongame management, vegetational surveys, and landowner incentive programs. The state office is also preparing a manual for landowners on Brown-headed Cowbird control. National Coordinator Fred Baumgarten and Pennsylvania State Director Cindy Dunn provided documentation and a signed letter to the FCC on the importance of Hawk Mountain the Kittatinny Ridge as an IBA for migratory raptors and songbirds. A proposal to build a large communications tower along the ridgeline is being contested.

State Program Highlights: The Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife has come through with a grant of $67,700 to fund the next two years of the Washington State IBA Program, which will include the completion of IBA identification of more than 100 sites and the development of conservation plans. High-profile IBA dedication ceremonies have been held for Dead Creek Wildlife Management Area and Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge in Vermont and Andrew Molera State Park in California. Colorado chapters and volunteers have nominated over 40 sites in that state, and another 40 or more are expected in Wyoming. Bill Pranty has been hired as full-time IBA Coordinator for Florida. Connecticut has identified its first 21 Important Bird Areas.

New State Initiatives: The Iowa IBA Program was formally launched at the first statewide Iowa Audubon meeting in October. Arizona, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and West Virginia are all in the planning stages for IBA Programs, even though none of these states has a state office. The IBA Program is uniquely positioned to provide a rallying point for many state partners – the building blocks of future state offices. Minnesota and North Dakota are focusing on a joint, regional based IBA Program for the Red River area.

IBA and NABCI: National Coordinator Fred Baumgarten has been working with David Pashley of American Bird Conservancy and Mike Carter of Colorado Bird Conservatory on a proposal to create model Bird Conservation Regions in the Northern Rockies and Shortgrass Prairie under the new North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI). This will include Important Bird Areas projects, habitat restoration, private landowner outreach, and research and monitoring. The initial proposal will be a two-year, $800,000 ask to the LaSalle Adams Fund, which last year funded the "Prairie to Peak" initiative.

BirdSource

Sally Conyne

Trials of powerful new mapping and database technology, which we call E-Bird, are underway in a nationwide expansion of HawkWatch and in the tracking of irruptive bird species. It looks like the northern finches will be coming south in large numbers this fall and winter. At the same time we are gearing the new technology for a major public debut in concert with the 100^th Christmas Bird Count in December.

We received a EPA Legacy grant for $380,000 to begin the pilot project we call Birdcast. Working with four partners - Clemson University, BirdSource, the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, and Geomarine, we will model this unique project in the Delaware Valley, southern New Jersey, Baltimore & Washington DC areas. Basically, the project uses Nexrad radar to predict bird migration surges and, through BirdSource and a local information campaign, educate people about migration and the hazards to birds along the way. A special emphasis will be placed on changing backyard and municipal behaviors particularly pertaining to the use of pesticides. We will also use local Audubon chapters and the bird watching community to ground-truth the radar images. Look for this project to be up and running for spring migration 2000.

A priority this fall has been to design educational materials for BirdSource, particularly designed for classes, youth groups, and families who participate in the Great Backyard Bird Count 2000. Preparations for the Great Backyard Bird Count 2000 are in high gear. Materials about the count (including the handsome, full-color poster you'll find in this folder) have been distributed to chapters, state offices, centers & sanctuaries, a variety of youth groups, magazines, bird clubs, and others. Interest by youth groups (4-H, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Girls Clubs and Boy Scouts) is encouraging

Turnstone Publishing presented their market analysis of the viability of Classroom FeederWatch to NAS and Cornell Lab staff at a meeting at their office in Boston. Their insightful and thorough research indicated a significant niche exists for CFW. They are currently putting together a proposal concerning the form that CFW should adopt in order to fit that niche.

Christmas Bird Count

Geoff LeBaron

The review of the data included in the 99^th Christmas Bird Count by Regional Editors is complete, and production of the 99^th Christmas Bird Count issue of American Birds is under way. The challenges relating to producing that issue from the BirdSource database have been significant, and the issue should be in the mail around Thanksgiving. It appears that a record number of counts, well over 1800, were conducted in the 99^th season.

Compiler’s Packets for the upcoming 100^th Christmas Bird Count are in production, and will be in the mail in November. The hope is that three-quarters of all counts this season will be submitted via the BirdSource website, and that with all the bugs worked out from the on-line conversion this season, next year will proceed smoothly and quickly.

A tool is under construction for the Christmas Bird Count on the BirdSource website that will enable range maps to be generated from historical CBC data of all bird species in the database. This tool will be an integral part of the interactive display of CBC data through the public interface on the website.

The last in a series of around-the-continent meetings, this one in California, will be conducted during the last week of October. The input from conversations with Regional Editors, Compilers, and key CBC participants has been very instructive, as well as facilitating better communication with all volunteers involved in the Count

Seabird Restoration

Stephen W. Kress

This period included the final weeks of the summer, 1999 field season. The highlights of the season were summarized during this period in the current issue of Egg Rock Update which will be mailed to approximately 5000 supporters in early November (see also the May-July issue of this report). On August 9, the seabird program organized the annual meeting of the Gulf of Maine Seabird Working Group which met at Hog Island. A total of 58 biologists and interns gathered at Hog Island for what has become the largest assemblage of seabird researchers in the northeast. Summaries of seabird projects from Cape Cod to Nova Scotia were presented.

The project to restore Northern Gannets to Perroquet Island on the North Shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence continued for its third year with encouraging results. At least two gannets spent most of the summer among the decoys at this historic nesting site. The birds were adults and did some nest building behavior. The sightings and associated behaviors offer encouragement for the project which is a joint program sponsored by NAS, the Quebec Labrador Foundation and the Mingan Islands Cetacean Study. If successful, this will be the first restored gannet colony in the world and another demonstration of recolonization techniques pioneered at Audubon’s Maine Coast Seabird Sanctuaries.

The project to restore Common Murres to Devil’s Slide Rock concluded its 4^th field season. Devil’s Slide Rock lost its long-established colony following the Apex Houston Oil Spill in 1986, but recolonization techniques (use of decoys, sound recordings and mirrors) resulted in recolonization the first year that the techniques were applied. This past summer, the colony increased from 15 pairs in 1998 to 70 pairs this summer. The project is managed by USFWS through the San Francisco NWR. Audubon has worked as a partner since the beginning. Many of the staff on the project are former interns that have worked with Steve in Maine. Steve visited the site in mid October to work with staff biologists and to assist in the production of new video presentations about the project which USFWS considers to be one of its most successful examples of oil spill restoration.

Appleton-Whittell Research Ranch

Bill Branan

Research: The Research Ranch (TRR) is the site for about thirty ongoing MS and Ph.D. level studies. Check our web site: ww.audubon.org/local/sanctuary/appleton. The Research Ranch Foundation (TRRF) provided $3,000 to make incentive grants to ongoing researchers, and intends to substantially increase this amount to help TRR seek out key research on how grasslands function and how citizens can safeguard our native birds, other wildlife, and habitats. New research underway includes a study of Agave in relation to grazing or non-grazing, and thus the impact on the food source for the endangered lesser long nosed bat. A three-year study on the nesting of Botteri’s sparrow has completed its first summer, directed by Drs. Jane and Carl Bock and funded by a $110,000 grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF). The Bocks have been closely associated with TRR for over 25 years. We are currently seeking funding for several other studies related to plant succession over the 30 years that TRR has been ungrazed.

Regional Outreach:

National Conservation Area (NCA): Congressman Jim Kolbe will introduce legislation to designate the Sonoita Valley, including TRR, as an NCA. TRR is working through the Sonoita Valley Community Forum to encourage citizens of the valley to join the effort. Results have been favorable thus far.

South River Road: TRR is assisting a local effort aimed at preventing the paving of South River Road, which would greatly increase the truck traffic through the Sonoita Valley. The Southwest Center for Biological Diversity has assisted greatly in informing the county that such an action would require substantial review, including an Environmental Impact Study that considers the cumulative off-site impacts of the paving.

Sonoita Crossroads: TRR and the Crossroads Community Forum are engaged in monthly workshops through which local citizens are developing a community plan for the 215 square mile Sonoita Valley. Bill Branan attended an Arizona Department of Transportation workshop aimed at identifying key visual corridors for purchase and protection, within the Sonoita Valley along our two main roadways.

Fire Working Group: TRR, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) have scheduled TNC’s Y2K western burn workshop for May 2000 at TRR. BLM has agreed to particiate and to burn about 1,000 to 2,000 acres of TRR. We will check to make sure that the drip torches are Y2K compliant.

Grassland Science Center: Our ceiling is up and will be painted by the end of October. The roof lacks only minor trim work. The outside is painted. The toilets and final wiring will be completed in November. Our goal is to have our certificate of occupancy by Christmas.

Living Oceans

Carl Safina

Living Oceans staff is preparing a full-color program "vision document." It will serve as a fundraising tool, but will also be used for promotional purposes.

Senior Scientist Merry Camhi has completed her latest work in our Sharks on the Line series of reports. Sharks on the Line II: An Analysis of Pacific State Shark Fisheries is primed for publication and the executive summary has been posted on the Living Oceans web page of Audubon’s web site. Dr. Camhi continues her research, updating our original Sharks on the Line report, which focused on the condition of Atlantic Coast shark fisheries.

Mercédès Lee is editing and producing Living Oceans’ upcoming Audubon Seafood Lover’s Almanac, with illustration research assistance from Kerri Kirvin. The almanac will be 90+ pages, with full-color illustrations. In connection with the publicity garnered from the Almanac ad that appeared in AUDUBON magazine, David Wilmot was interviewed live on KWAB in Colorado; Carl Safina was quoted in Seafood Business magazine; and Mercédès Lee was interviewed for a Florida Tribune paper. The Almanac is slated for release in January 2000. Kara Grobert of AUDUBON’s public affairs office is assisting in developing a media plan around its release. Additionally, AUDUBON will be using the almanac as a test-premium for membership in the new year.

Living Oceans was awarded a $40,000 grant from the Oak Foundation, to fund our Seafood Public Awareness Project. The Almanac is a cornerstone of that educational outreach effort.

"Footsteps in the Sea," produced by Mercédès Lee in 1998, was awarded Honorable Mention for Columbus International Film & Video festival. Since its release in January 1999, this is the third such valued recognition our video has received. In addition to this honor, we were a CINDY Award finalist and won the Bronze Apple Award at the National Media Educational Network film competition. Bullfrog Films is the official distributor for the film.

David Wilmot, executive director of Living Oceans, moderated a panel discussion on sustainable cuisine at the Culinary Institute of Arts in September.

Carl Safina was awarded the Carl R. Sullivan Fishery Conservation Award by the American Fisheries Society, at their annual meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina, in early October.

Living Oceans hired Andy Cooper as a staff scientist. He will soon receive his Ph.D. from the University of Washington, Seattle. Andy’s specialty is quantitative ecology and resource management.

FOR APPROVAL BY THE STATES AND CENTERS COMMITTEE
National Audubon Society Board of Directors
Resolution for the Establishment of Governance Guidelines for State Programs
Dated: December 4, 1999

Whereas, an integral part of the NAS strategic plan is the creation of State Offices in each state to carry out the Audubon mission and goals; and

Whereas, each State Office is charged with the task of developing its own strategic plan within the context of the overall NAS Plan, to guide the State Office in developing state programs and priorities; and Whereas, NAS's strategic plan anticipated the need for and encouraged the formation of State Boards to oversee and assist State Directors with the implementation of state Programs and the financial management of the State Offices; and

Whereas, the NAS Board of Directors recognizes the importance of empowering the State Boards and State Directors to develop and conduct programs and to raise and allocate funds in order to best achieve the Audubon mission in their state; and

Whereas, the NAS Board of Directors recognizes the need for guidelines to aid State Boards and assure standards of operation for State Programs.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the NAS Board of Directors hereby adopts the Governance Guidelines for State Programs, attached hereto.

GOVERNANCE GUIDELINES FOR STATE PROGRAMS
Adopted by the National Audubon Society Board of Directors
December 4, 1999

I. National Audubon Society Strategic Plan
An integral part of the NAS strategic plan is the creation of State Offices in each state to carry out the Audubon mission and goals. In turn, each State Office is charged with the task of developing its own strategic plan within the context of the overall NAS Plan, to guide the State Office in developing state programs and priorities. In support of the goals of NAS's strategic plan. State Boards will work with State Directors to implement state programs and to oversee the financial management of the State Offices. The NAS Board of Directors recognizes the importance of empowering the State Boards and State Directors to develop and conduct programs and to raise and allocate funds in order to best achieve the Audubon mission in their state.

II. NAS Legal and Corporate Structure
National Audubon Society, Inc. is a New York not-for-profit corporation. NAS is also a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt entity, as determined by the Internal Revenue Service. NAS has also applied for and received in all states in which it does business (i) corporate authority to do business, (ii) state tax- exempt status, including sales tax exemptions, and (iii) authority to fundraise. Accordingly, NAS files all federal and state corporate tax returns, solicitation reports, sales tax returns, and employment PICA and withholding returns. In addition, NAS must also file returns periodically, but at least annually, related to the pension, 403(b), medical and other benefit plans, and reports annually to the EEOC on the composition of its workforce; is subject to A-133 government audits on grants received by federal and state governmental entities and undergoes an extensive annual audit by outside auditors as required by New York law. In order to ensure that these and other fiduciary and legal obligations are met and in order to avoid the inefficiency and expense associated with duplication of services, the National Board has determined that all State Offices should be included as part of the NAS corporate legal entity and that State Offices should not be separately incorporated. In addition, in order to fulfill its legal and fiduciary responsibilities, the NAS Board must maintain control over certain policy areas that will be administered centrally and applied uniformly throughout NAS to ensure that the organization is protected against potential and unforeseen liabilities.

III. Powers and Responsibilities of State Boards
Subject to and in accordance with the NAS policies set forth in Article V below, the National Board delegates to the State Boards the following functions to be performed on behalf of and in support of the State Offices:

1. Policy Development: The State Board should work with the State Director to formulate and adopt policies to influence public policy, as they deem appropriate, on matters of state and local jurisdiction to further the Audubon mission. All such policy positions should be consistent with the overall general policy direction and corporate strategy of the organization, as determined by the National Board. On matters of national and international jurisdiction, the National Board will be open to the advice and opinions of State Boards in formulating and adopting policies to further the Audubon mission. Once national and international policy positions arc taken by the National Board with input from the states, all states should support those national and international policy positions.

2. Programmatic Development: The State Board should work with the State Director to formulate and adopt programs in advocacy, science and education and to formulate policies and procedures to ensure that the programs are being properly implemented. (State Boards and State Directors will be guided in their work by the statement "Six Essential Elements of a State Program," adopted by the National Board on March 22, 1998 and attached hereto). The State Board should receive reports from the State Director, review and evaluate them, and provide direction to the State Director, as required. Each State Board should also receive input on policies and programs directly from local chapters and through chapter representatives on Committees of the State Board. It is expected that State Offices and Boards will independently develop state and local priorities and will work with the National Office and its programs regarding national policies and priorities.

3. Chapters: The State Board should work with the State Director to build and maintain a close working relationship between the state's chapters and the State staff. Each State Board and Office should establish its own process for state/chapter governance and communications. This will differ from state to state based on what works best in each state. Chapter certification authority decision making will be at the State Board level, although the National Office will retain final approval authority over certifications and decertifications.

4. Centers: The State Board should work with the State Director to establish a network of Audubon Centers in each state. The staff at Audubon Centers should be part of the State Office staff reporting to the State Director, and Center budgets should be integrated into the State Office budget. The National Office will set standards that apply to all Audubon Centers in such areas as the character and quality of the educational programming, the character and quality of buildings, improvements and signage, and retail operations. The National Office will assist and support State Offices in establishing and operating Centers.

5. Fiscal Oversight (including Revenue and Expenditure Review): The State Board should provide necessary direction to the State Director to ensure that the State Office's fiscal plan is sound. The State Board should provide direction on the overall fiscal needs of the state program present and future, ranging from annual budget development (within the context of the National Office's budget process and policies) to long-term planning and review. The State Board should review revenues received and projected, and provide appropriate direction to the State Director to develop and meet objectives and organizational needs. Each State Board should review the financial statements and regular expenditure reports in relation to the state program's budget and revenue projections.

6. Fundraising: The State Board should actively support and fundraise for the State Office and its programs, provide critical information on funding sources and help to identify and expand sources of funds for the State Office.

7. Organizational Priorities and Personal Involvement: The State Board should work with the State Director to help set organizational priorities based on grassroots input and policies. State Board members should participate in all Audubon functions and activities to the extent possible.

8. State Director Supervision: The State Board will jointly participate with the NAS President and Senior Vice President of Field Operations (or such other NAS officers as designated by the President) in the hiring of, the setting of goals for, and the annual performance review of the State Director. Either the State Board or the NAS President may make the decision to dismiss the State Director after good faith consultation with each other and after a good faith effort to reach a joint decision. All personnel actions (including hiring and dismissal) will be accomplished in accordance with NAS personnel policies and applicable laws.

IV. State Board Composition, Structure and Governance Rules
Each State Board is encouraged to create for itself governance rules (not inconsistent with NAS's legal stnicture) which will encourage participation on the Board from a cross section of individuals representing member, chapter, philanthropic, policy, business, science, education, and advocacy interests as well as providing geographic and other diversity within each state. Each State Board should have the flexibility to set the number of individuals on the Board, its meeting schedules and dates, terms and term limits of its members and to create whatever committees will make the Board most effective. Members of State Boards are covered under the definition of "covered insureds" under NAS's directors and officers liability policy as long as (i) the member is acting in his or her capacity as a State Board member (subject to certain exclusions for illegal or deliberately dishonest acts) and (ii) the State Office for which they are serving is NOT separately incorporated.

V. NAS Policies Applicable to State Boards and State Offices
As noted above, the NAS Board requires that certain procedures are followed uniformly throughout the organization to ensure that NAS is run efficiently and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Certain of these policies applicable to State Boards and Offices are, as follows:

1. Finance

• Each State Board should set its own budget (within the context of the NAS budget process) and ensure sound financial management of the state program. For states that continually grow and meet their state budget, it is expected that the National Office will provide minimal budgetary oversight beyond the annual budget review. For states that are struggling financially (i.e. missed budget significantly in the last year), it is expected that the National Office will monitor budget and finances more closely.
• Budget surpluses will stay in the state budget, to be used as the State Board sees fit (e.g. maintained as future budget contingency, rolled into endowment).
• The National Office will provide administrative assistance and support for budget and financial management (subject to an administrative fee set by the National Office for partial reimbursement of costs related to these and other services rendered to State Offices).

2. Fundraising/Development:

• All funds raised by a State Office will stay in the state budget, to be used exclusively for state programs.
• Each state should establish an endowment to support future programs. All state established endowments will be managed by the National Office pursuant to endowment policies (including spending rules) adopted by the National Board, with all disbursements going to the state.
• The National Office will provide support for local and state fundraising.
• Fundraising by NAS units involves the potential for overlap. State Boards and Offices and all other NAS units will follow NAS procedures developed to alleviate this potential problem.

3. Branding (Use of Name and Logo); Licensing

• In order to establish and maintain a clear and more forceful image of Audubon, State Boards and Offices and other Audubon entities reporting to and constituting State Offices will follow all NAS policies on the use of and/or licensing of the NAS and Audubon name and logo, and trademark and copyright registration.

4. Membership

• The National Office will set membership policies; provided that within the context of such policies each state will be encouraged to recruit members through new, creative membership recruitment programs.

5. Personnel

• To ensure compliance with and to limit NAS's liability under a variety of laws, it is essential that all units of the organization, including State Offices, adhere to standardized NAS personnel policies, available from the NAS Office of Human Resources.
• As explained above in Article III. Section 5, State Directors will report jointly to the State Boards and to the National Office.
• All staff in the state other than the State Director will report directly to the State Director, and will be subject to all NAS personnel policies and procedures.

6. Litigation

• To minimize internal conflict and undermining of goals. State Boards and Offices, like all units of NAS, should obtain NAS approval for participation as a plaintiff or co-plaintiff in litigation. For environmental impact litigation, approval will be obtained through an application process involving the President and a Litigation Committee of the National Board. All other litigation must be approved by the General Counsel.

7. Commitments

• State Boards and Offices should not enter into any contracts, agreements or other binding commitments (including the acquisition or sale of real estate and agreements for the receipt of grants) except to the extent that State Directors have been expressly provided with signature authority by the NAS Board.

In summary, the State Boards should provide the needed program and fiscal oversight as well as fundraising and policy support to ensure that the state programs are successful and that Audubon's mission is achieved in each state.

National Audubon Society Board of Directors

Resolution for the Establishment of Essential Elements for Audubon Centers

December 4, 1999

WHEREAS, an integral part of the NAS strategic plan is the establishment of a network of Audubon Centers in each state to carry out the Audubon mission and goals; and

WHEREAS, the 2020 Vision which outlines a plan for establishing a network of 1000 nature centers across the country, reaching I in 4 school children each year, protecting I million acres and increasing our membership to 1% of the population, was adopted by the Board of Directors on December 5, 1998 in Santa Barbara California; and

WHEREAS, our existing and developing State Offices and their respective Boards, with the support of the NAS Centers and Education staff will have the primary responsibility of implementing the 2020 Vision; and

WHEREAS, Centers will provide new opportunities for chapters to collaborate with NAS, strengthen chapter programs, increase chapter leadership, and expand volunteerism: and

WHEREAS, the NAS Board of Directors recognizes that many of the Audubon Centers will be developed from scratch, while others will involve partnerships with existing entities; and

WHEREAS, the NAS Board of Directors recognizes the need to provide guidelines to aid State Directors, chapter leaders and other potential partners in establishing Centers; and

WHEREAS, the following essential elements will also help assure standards of operation for Audubon Centers.

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the NAS Board of Directors hereby adopts the "Implementing the Vision", Essential Elements for Audubon Centers, attached hereto.

AUDUBON CENTERS:
IMPLEMENTING THE 2020 VISION
(Final Plan 12/04/99)

The Philosophy of Audubon Centers

Audubon Centers are places that connect people to nature in a positive and meaningful way. Their purpose is to provide experiences in nature for people to develop an appreciation for their environment, to instill environmental values, and to provide people with the knowledge and skills needed to act to protect the environment.

Audubon Centers are permanent institutions in local communities that promote environmental knowledge and values to every generation. Each Audubon Center will include a combination of science, education and conservation action appropriate to the site and the community. Audubon Centers will form a powerful network of staff and volunteers trained and committed to Audubon's mission. Over time, Audubon Centers will transform the environmental movement by creating a broad-based and diverse constituency for the environment that will act on their environmental knowledge and values.

By the year 2020 the National Audubon Society will create more than 1,000 Audubon Centers across the nation. This will be accomplished both by developing new centers, and by partnering with existing centers. While centers will come in all shapes and sizes, collectively Audubon Centers will help to protect more than a million acres of land, serve hundreds of thousands of people each year, and serve as a base for generating membership, volunteerism, and community leadership on environmental issues.

The Ten Essential Elements of Audubon Centers

1. Audubon Centers promote the National Audubon Society mission: to conserve and restore natural ecosystems, focusing on birds, other wildlife, and habitat for the benefit of humanity and the earth's biological diversity.

2. Audubon Centers focus on quality education programs that build a relationship between people and the natural world and that give people the knowledge, skills and motivation to act to protect the environment.

3. Audubon Centers emphasize site-based education; programs that focus on teaching about the environment, in the environment. They emphasize field programs for a range if audiences, including young children, teens, families, and adults using hands-on concept-based methodology; and providing a range of science-based programs for all ages designed to take each participant to a higher level of knowledge, understanding and action. The goal will be to reach I in 4 children in their community.

4. Audubon Centers educate the community on the public policy process, conservation issues, and effective citizen advocacy. Centers encourage active citizen participation in conservation and in the resolution of public policy issues. When partnering with a public agency at a center, public policy activities at the center will be subject to the limitations of any agreement with the agency involved.

5. Audubon Centers will include facilities owned by NAS, chapters, other organizations or public agencies. When establishing a new center, the staff and budget for the center should be fully integrated into the state office, and the center should identify itself as an Audubon Center consistent with other Centers around the country. When integrating a previously existing center into the Audubon Center network, individual agreements will be negotiated to accommodate each particular situation.

6. Audubon Centers will have an individualized strategy for long term sustainability. This will include earned income, fund raising, and endowment.

7. Audubon Centers will serve diverse ethnic and socio-economic groups in the community.

8. Audubon Centers are community-based and revolve around a protected place in the community, such as an Audubon Sanctuary, IBA, a land trust preserve, park, or refuge.

9. Audubon Center buildings are built to incorporate "green building" principles which serve as learning tools for their community.

10. Audubon Centers will use qualitative and quantitative tools provided by NAS to regularly evaluate their success.

Strategies for Implementing Audubon Centers

1. Empower locally.
State Directors and their staff will be the front-line implementers of Audubon Centers. The Centers and Education Division along with the entire Senior Management Team will support State Directors and their staff and volunteers in implementation.

2. Respond to Community Needs.
Audubon Centers must be relevant to the communities where they are located. This will require assessing and understanding the needs of each community, and designing programs and facilities that address those needs simultaneous to achieving NAS goals.

3. Utilize Available Resources.
Audubon Centers may involve NAS operations such as sanctuaries and IBA's, partnerships with government agencies and private organizations, and involvement and leadership of chapters. Chapters will work with Audubon Centers, providing grassroots leadership, volunteerism, scientific expertise, etc., and have access to Centers as a base of operations for meetings, birding activities, etc.

4. Lead with Programs.
The priority of Audubon Centers is to connect people to nature, not to build buildings.

5. Start with Children and Families.
Research has consistently demonstrated that lifelong attitudes and values are developed in the first 8 years of childhood, and that the most effective way to "grow an environmentalist" is to provide a child with a direct experience in nature assisted by an inspired adult interpreter. Further more, one of the greatest influencers of adult behavior is feedback from their children. Serving children is the most effective way to reach parents, older siblings, teachers, and community leaders.

6. Provide a Range of Programming.
Audubon Centers will also offer programs for all ages: in general, programming for young children will emphasize broad concepts about natural systems and the development of values and attitudes; programs at the intermediate and high school level will emphasize science, critical thinking and problem solving skills; programming for adults will emphasize topical knowledge and public policy issues.

7. Coordinate With Schools.
Field programs and site based curriculum for school aged children will be designed in connection with federal, state and local educational standards and requirements in order to be relevant to both students and teachers.

8. Engage People.
Audubon Centers will build a broad-based constituency and provide increased opportunities for volunteer participation, membership growth, and chapter involvement.

9. Take Action.
All Audubon Centers will provide pro-active opportunities for participants to take positive action to improve the environment and seek durable solutions for environmental problems. These activities will range from habitat restoration, to citizen science activities, to civic participation and engagement in the community decision making process, to advocacy.

10. Think Creatively.
Each Audubon Center will be unique. While we can apply best practices and lessons learned from one to the next, there is no "cookie cutter" formula for a successful center.

Determining Priorities

There are currently more opportunities and interest in Audubon Centers than can be accommodated with OUT existing resources. While every effort will be made to give all interested parties a positive response to their inquiries, the internal screen for determining where to focus our limited resources will be as follows:

1. States with State offices. (Adequate NAS leadership "on the ground" to ensure success).

2. Opportunities that include adequate financial and natural resources for long-term sustainability.

3. Opportunities that reach traditionally under-served populations.

4. Opportunities that include a significant impact on a major conservation issue.

5. Opportunities where we already have a commitment and/or that strengthens and expands the Audubon Centers network.

6. Opportunities that will significantly catapult the 2020 Vision and effectively brand Audubon.

7. Opportunities where we can significantly shape and influence programming.

Measures of Success

The success of the NAS Centers Program will be measured in terms of:

1. The number of well-established centers.

2. The number of people served.

3. The diversity of communities served.

4. The extent to which the centers develop environmental attitudes, knowledge, and activism.

Canon Envirothon

The Envirothon idea is simple — combine the proven concepts of hands-on education with the excitement of a good competition and the fun of spending a day in the outdoors. The result is an effective educational tool which will help our schools to nurture environmentally aware students and meet the immediate need to teach more environmental education.

Because of its diversity and complexity, environmental science is a mixture of disciplines difficult to integrate together. To help teachers with the task, schools around the country have begun using supplemental curricula and activities, often developed with the help of various community resources. Envirothon, with its rapid growth and exciting success, is a first rate example of how well such programs can work.

Essentially, Envirothon is a series of hands-on contests in which teams of high school students compete to solve environmental problems. The event works much like an athletic competition, and the winners of that event get the chance to compete on the international level at the Canon Envirothon.

Envirothon stimulates practical curriculum development by establishing broad study areas and helping schools to find useful resources in their community. Partnering schools with your local Soil Conservation District, and other environmentally concerned organizations, is a smart match. Conservation Districts alone can not provide students with a first hand look at what environmental careers are like.

Unlike programs which hand out curricula on a platter and depend entirely on school personnel for support, Envirothon encourages a constantly changing curriculum and helps to build strong ties between schools and the organizations that can help them teach a practical, interdisciplinary brand of environmental awareness. It's an exciting program that has attracted wide community involvement and grown rapidly in every state and province where it has been introduced.

By incorporating the Envirothon curriculum into classrooms. Conservation Districts across the nation are taking a notable lead in responding to the public school system's need for a strong, hands-on approach to environmental education.

For more information, visit www.envirothon.org

Audubon’s Greening of America Campaign

—"Crossing the Finish Line"—

Established offices in dark green, pending in light green.

In 1995 the National Audubon Society approved a new Strategic Plan to move the organization forward into its second century. The plan called on the Society to sharpen its focus on birds, wildlife, and their habitats and to decentralize its structure by establishing 50 state field programs. These field programs, supported by sound science, would use the twin strategies of influencing public policy and environmental education through the development of a network of "Audubon Centers" in communities across the country.

Now, four years later, much has been accomplished. There are 23 state programs plus a Latin America/Caribbean Program. These programs are having extraordinary conservation impacts on the ground in their states. These are among the many conservation outcomes to-date resulting from our state programs:

• Spearheading an $8 billion Everglades Restoration Program in Florida
• Blocking the proposed Garrison Diversion Project from draining or destroying key wetlands in Prairie Potholes of North Dakota.
• Partnering to develop durable solutions to put water back in the Platte River to provide critical roosting habitat for migrating Sandhill Cranes
• Identifying the most important bird habitats in New York State and securing legislative protection for these on state lands

Now we want to finish the job and add state programs in the 27 remaining states. In the next 3 years we propose to have Audubon state programs in all 50 states. The "Greening of America" Campaign is a $30 million initiative over 3 years to achieve the goal of 50 state programs.

The sum total of each of these 50 state programs working together focused on national and international conservation issues will make Audubon the strongest, most effective public policy advocacy organization in America. From there we will move to protect a million acres of key habitat, establish 1,000 Audubon Centers, reach 1 in 4 school children and influence 1% of the population to become members. In doing so, we will have "created a culture of conservation" in America.

Strategy

The first 23 state offices were opened primarily as a result of the incentives created by skilled staff, such as Glenn Olson, going into a prospective state with matching money, primarily from the Packard Foundation. Those matching funds were used to challenge local supporters to step up and help us establish new state offices. This campaign would build on this proven and successful formula of combining skilled staff with matching challenge money working state by state to establish local programs tailored to each state's situation.

The campaign would be structured in two parts which would proceed in tandem. The first part would revolve around a goal of raising approximately $15 million in a Challenge Leadership Fund which would serve a similar purpose as the Packard Foundation grants have served in establishing the current state offices. It would pay for the support staff needed to get the new offices up and running, and it would also provide the matching challenge money to attract and build a local donor base in each state.

The second part of the campaign would be local fundraising in each state. The goal would be to raise a combined total of at least $15 million mostly from new sources in the states to match the Challenge Funds. Building this new donor base in each state is essential to the long-term success of those new state programs.

The total campaign goal builds in the actual cost of supporting state offices from Field Division and the Centers Division. It also builds in the cost of placing four planned giving staff in the field to work with state directors to raise state office endowments. It also assumes that we will hire a consulting firm to staff this campaign just like any major capital campaign of this size.

National Audubon Society
Grassroots Plan

Public Policy Committee
Greenwich, CT
December 4,1999

Goals

The goal of Audubon’s grassroots program should be the advancement of our public policy agenda, as determined by the Board. We should strive to have the most effective grassroots program of any national environmental organization. Our grassroots program needs to be cost-effective and assist in the development of state offices and centers. It also should become involved in our policy agenda in the right way and at the right time. Our goals should be to develop a base of at least 1,000 Key Contacts, 20,000 Leaders, and 100,000 Advocates for our program.

Assumptions

Audubon's grassroots program should be -

• Developed and implemented on an incremental basis over 3 to 5 years.
• Predicated on our public policy agenda.
• Developed as a compliment to our communications and lobbying efforts on individual issues.
• Compliment the rest of the organization.
• Take advantage of the latest technology.
• Cost-effective, and fiscally responsible.

The Ideal Approach

The "ideal" approach for Audubon's grassroots efforts would follow this sequence -

1. The Board should approve an agenda for policy activities as the foundation for our communications, lobbying, and grassroots activities.
2. A plan should be developed for each of these three areas. The plan should lay out the objectives we are trying to achieve and how we intend to work toward those goals. The approach will vary from issue-to-issue. For example, the approach for the Everglades Restudy legislation will be very different from our efforts to protect America's Heritage Forests.
3. For each issue, we need to determine and involve the right "mix" of our Key Contacts, Leaders and Advocates.
   1. "Key Contacts" are generally defined as very well connected individuals with direct access to decision makers. "Leaders" are individuals with the ability to speak publicly on issues and make presentations on behalf of our agenda. "Advocates" are those who can write, or occasionally speak, on issues.
   2. Our long-term goal should be to develop the capability to have 1,000 Key Contacts, 20,000 Leaders and 100,000 Advocates.
4. A strong recruitment effort needs to be undertaken to develop our grassroots base. Key Contacts will be obtained from state boards, friends and development sources. Leaders will come from our campaigns and general recruitment. Advocates will be developed from solicitation of our membership through the Partnership Project, the Internet, and recruitment efforts by states, centers, campaigns, and general membership.
5. Deployment of these grassroots resources will be determined by what we need in order to achieve our advocacy agenda. This could include personal visits with legislators, letters, phone calls, faxes, activist weekends, etc.

Assessment of Current Conditions

As we move toward implementation of an improved grassroots program, we need to be aware of several important preconditions:

1. We are in the midst of significant change in Audubon. We have opened 24 state offices in the past four years, and we hope to have another 26 in the next few years. We have set out a goal of opening 1,000 centers over 20 years. The challenges involved in managing such a dynamic and changing organization presents real difficulties. For example, our staff has increased by 50 percent in the past 3 years, and most state offices are primarily concerned with developing a financial base.
2. There are very few organizations we can use as models for development of an effective grassroots program. Every organization - even those that are perceived as having strong grassroots - feels the need for improved capability.
3. With the exception of our campaigns, we are starting at "ground zero" for recruitment of advocates and leaders. In addition, we have almost no history of recruiting or employing key contacts in our grassroots efforts. This deficiency could significantly hurt our efforts to have success in a number of issues, e.g., funding for Audubon centers.
4. We have great assets, and tremendous potential. However, on a majority of issues, we've failed or organize and deploy these assets in an effective way. There are cases where we have had success, such as the Heritage Forest, Population and Habitat, and the Refuge Campaigns.
5. The funds we have from unrestricted sources for grassroots efforts are limited. If we can't make the adjustments needed to increase unrestricted revenue, we will have to rely on campaigns or individual program areas to raise the funds for our grassroots efforts. This will significantly inhibit our abilities to improve our grassroots program.
6. We do not have an adequate grassroots database management system, nor do we have adequate Internet capability.

Next Steps

The following steps are recommended for improving our grassroots efforts:

1. The Board needs to approve initiating a 3 to 5 year commitment for improving Audubon's grassroots capabilities.
2. Assuming such a commitment is approved increased staffing for an improved grassroots program will have to be made as soon as practicable given our budget priorities.
3. We need to insure that state offices share the goal of building an effective grassroots program. As a first step in that process, a grassroots plan should be discussed with state directors. In addition, one person in each state office should be designated as the grassroots liaison and training should be provided. The state offices should develop key contacts for their state, meet with appropriate elected or appointed officials and the press, and form working relationships with key organizations. These items should be made a part of the performance evaluation criteria for each state. The goal should be to have at least 10 states meet this objective by the end of 2000.
4. Steps need to be taken to improve our recruitment of key contacts, leaders, and advocates. Our goal should be to develop 1,000 key contacts, 20,000 leaders and 100,000 advocates within five years. In 2000, we will work with the state offices and others to identify at least 200 key contacts in 10 states; develop 4,000 leaders using campaigns and other sources; and, using the Partnership Project and Heritage Forest Campaign data, we will strive to develop at least 20,000 advocates in 2000.
5. We need to improve both our database management and Internet capabilities so that we can deliver our message in the right way, at the right time. By the end of 2000, we will need to have in-place the systems required to develop, manipulate and deploy our grassroots capability.
6. The following issues will be the primary targets of our grassroots capability in 2000: Heritage Forests, funding for Audubon Centers, international population assistance, and consideration of our Refuge Service legislative proposal.

Resolution
National Audubon Society
Greenwich, CT
December 4,1999

RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ENHANCED GRASSROOTS PROGRAM

The Board of Directors of the National Audubon Society supports improving our grassroots capability over the next 3 years so that we will: advance our public policy agenda; be the most effective grassroots program of any national environmental organization; cost-effectively assist in the development of state offices and centers; and, insure that we are involved in issues in the right way and at the right time.

The Board further supports taking the following steps over the next 3 years—

1. Approval of a yearly advocacy agenda;

2. Improved capability to staff grassroots efforts;

3. Involvement of our State offices and chapters in implementing a new grassroots program;

4. Development and improvement of our recruitment of key contacts, leaders, and advocates; and,

5. Improve both our database management and Internet capabilities.

SUBJECT: Report on Campaign Accomplishments and Future Opportunities

In 1996, the Board approved our campaign plan which called for a three year effort to build and strengthen the Population & Habitat Campaign grassroots network. This effort was undertaken as a foundation for our overall goal of establishing sound population policies for the long-term well-being of both humans and non-human species and their habitats.

As we assess this 3-year effort and look to the future, we can report that we have exceeded all major objectives that we had set for the campaign in 1996. Those Objectives (0) and the actual Accomplishments (A) as of November 1999 are listed below:

1. 0 - Triple the size of our grassroots advocacy network to 15,000.
   A - We now have a grassroots network of over 20,000, and it continues to grow.
2. 0 - Maintain staff organizers in 6 priority states (with key Congressional districts, etc.).
   A - Staff organizers have worked for 3 years in the 5 highest priority states (CA, FL, NY, OH, PA), for 2 years in CO & TX, and part-time/consulting in AZ, MT & UT.
3. 0 - Link the network through a bi-monthly newsletter, a website and electronic alerts.
   A - We maintain a bi-monthly newsletter and website, as well as a listserv, electronic alerts, regular eMail Updates, and periodic mailings, meetings and workshops.
4. 0 - Produce a handbook and factsheets as tools for grassroots citizen advocates.
   A - We produced the handbook Population & Habitat in the New Millennium, plus the Population Pressure toolkit, the video Who's Counting, a Youth Summit Organizing handbook, and numerous factsheets.

While accomplishing these objectives, we became increasingly effective at maintaining and even increasing U.S. funding for international population assistance in the face of a hostile Congress. Today Audubon's Population & Habitat network is generally recognized as the largest and most effective grassroots advocacy network working on global population and environment issues.

With a greatly expanded advocacy network, we have a responsibility to use our grassroots strength as effectively as possible to advance population policies that will help Audubon achieve its goals of conserving wildlife and their habitats. We also have the challenge of nurturing our network and informing and mobilizing them. But with our increased strength and recognized leadership on this issue, we have new opportunities to reach beyond our network to a broader audience, to expand the U.S. constituency for addressing population growth.

Looking to the future, we are shifting the focus of our program objectives toward a broader outreach strategy that involves more extensive use of the media and special projects designed to reach a cross-section of the American public. At the same time, we will intensify the training and nurturing of our network.

The donor community is poised to help us in our efforts and is offering a level of support equal to or even greater than in the past. An example of this is a new initiative by the Packard Foundation called the "Think Big" project, which began with a planning meeting that included John Flicker and other CEOs of organizations working on population.

We have now submitted a proposal to Packard that includes a selection of the major outreach initiatives we plan to undertake in the next 2 to 3 years. If funded at the level requested, it would represent a major expansion of our current level of activity. This in itself will lead to new challenges, as well as opportunities.

SCORECARD ON AUDUBON'S
Action Agenda for the 106th Congress

1. Protect the Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by increasing co-sponsors for legislation to designate the coastal plain of the refuge as wilderness.

Activity: The number of co-sponsors rose from 150 to 165. No action was taken on the bill during 1999.

2. Protect the Forest Services' remaining roadless areas - America's Heritage Forests as wilderness by urging members to sign a letter to President Clinton.

Activity: 167 Members of Congress signed the letter. In October, the President directed the Forest Service to undertake a process that would evaluate designating up to 60 million acres of remaining roadless areas as wilderness.

3. Urge Members to oppose riders to the appropriations bill that would restrict the use of international population assistance funds.

Activity: We had a "mixed" set of successes. The Congress approved the level of funding we supported for international population assistance funding. In addition, we worked hard to obtain introduction of additional authorizing legislation. On the minus side, restrictions were still attached to the appropriations bill, although the President can waive them.

4. Support the National Wildlife Refuge System through the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement group by urging increased funding for operation and maintenance activities.

Activity: Letter was sent, and funding for the Refuge System was increased.

5. Support reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act by obtaining more cosponsors for legislation introduced by Congressman George Miller.

Activity: The legislation was introduced with 90 co-sponsors. We are still working with supporters to have a bill introduced in the Senate.

6. Support action on clean water by urging for full funding of the President's Clean Water Act Initiative.

Activity: We urged the Congress to support the President's budge request for the initiative, but the Congress failed to appropriate all the funds.

7. Support efforts to restore the Upper Mississippi River by fully-funding the Upper Mississippi River Environmental Management Program.

Activity: We were successful in this effort and the Congress appropriated $19 million.

8. Support protection of wildlife habitat by urging full funding of the Conservation and Wetland Reserve Programs.

Activity: The CRP and WRP were fully funded by the Congress, but they did add a rider to allow farmers to buy new, highly-erodible lands and farm those even though they are enrolled in CRP.

9. Re-invigorate the Everglades ecosystem restoration effort by urging that the "Everglades Restudy" legislation include environmental goals.

Activity: The Clinton Administration completed the Restudy effort and included positive environmental provisions, and they have submitted the plan to the Congress.

10. Increase protection for migratory birds by urging enactment of the "Neotropical Migratory Bird Habitat Enhancement Act".

Activity: The Congress is still considering the legislation. The Senate has passed the bill, and the House Resources Committee has reported out a different version; the bill is awaiting floor consideration in the House.

11. Support introduction and enactment of the Better America Bonds legislation.

Activity: The legislation was introduced in both the House and Senate, but no further action was taken on the bill.

NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY
2000 Advocacy Action Agendas

Bird Action Agenda

1. Protect America's Heritage Forests
2. Enact the Everglades Restudy legislation
3. Enact the Conservation and Reinvestment Act
4. Enact the National Wildlife Refuge Service proposal
5. Secure funding for operation of the National Wildlife Refuge System
6. Lay the foundation for Conservation and Wetland Reserve Programs
7. Oppose legislative and administrative efforts to weaken wetland laws

Environmental Education Action Agenda

1. Federal funding for Audubon Centers
2. Advocate for Environmental Education on the national level

Population Action Agenda

1. Secure adequate funding for international population assistance
2. Improve media outreach for population and habitat

Thoughts at my Last Board Meeting
Rob Socolow

A written version of remarks made at the Board meeting in Greenwich, Connecticut
December 4, 1999

I very much appreciate the opportunity to make these remarks here in Greenwich at this, my last meeting as a member of the Board of the National Audubon Society. I have been privileged to be on this Board for seven years, completing the statutory two three-year terms plus an extra year at the front completing someone else's term.

I have placed my thoughts under four headings: 1) What is great about Audubon now; 2) Memories; 3) Messages to Board and staff for the next decade; and 4) Thank yous.

1. What is great about Audubon now

What is great now about Audubon is its solidarity, its devolution of action from the national arena to local arenas, its creation of a new kind of science, and its success in constructing a big tent. A few words about each.

In the seven years that I have known Audubon intimately, Audubon has never been happier and more unified than it is today. The solidarity is amazing, and certainly not to be taken for granted.

The new emphasis on action at the local level is effective. Audubon is engaging people with its broad themes by involving them in those particular local issues they most care about. As one who thinks more about decisions in Washington and even decisions in other world capitals than about decisions in my own community, I confess that I resisted this change at first. But I now understand that Audubon's comparative advantage lies in its decentralized structure, and that to realize that comparative advantage Audubon needs to help its members engage in local environmental issues.

Not widely noticed, but of enduring importance, I think, is the new kind of citizen science currently being implemented in the Science Division in a program called BirdSource developed jointly by Audubon and the Cornell Ornithological Laboratory. BirdSource takes advantage of the Internet to link thousands of independent observations by amateurs of varying levels of skill. By aggregating backyard observations that hitherto had value almost only to the individuals directly involved, and introducing various kinds of data cleaning to reduce the impact of doubtful observations, BirdSource is allowing new scientific questions within ornithology and ecology to be posed and answered -- questions that play out over large times and distances. BirdSource is pioneering not only a new sub-field of science, but also a new way of participating in science.

In referring to Audubon's success in creating a big tent, I mean, of course, Audubon's steady progress in creating a single Audubon family. John Flicker's achievements in state after state -- achievements my kids would call "awesome" -- are reducing friction and enhancing effectiveness. Each state, it appears, poses its own unique challenges. My state, New Jersey, seems to be one of the tougher nuts to crack.

2. Memories

Audubon has changed so quickly that a seven-year veteran is a rarity. I am a voice of Audubon Past.

Today at Audubon, the institutional memory of the hurly-Berle days is weak. But I was recruited to the Board because my interests were judged to resonate with Peter Berle's missions, and thus, today, I feel some obligation to bring the Berle Audubon back into view for a few moments. The Berle Audubon was engaged in a quarrel with the world. It was a social change organization, an organization focused on "root causes." It saw as its peers the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council. The Berle Audubon sought to lead the U.S. environmental community. The organization was immensely proud of Peter's leadership role at the U.N.'s 1994 International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo. The Berle Audubon was a great organization, of a different kind from today's Audubon.

In remembering the Berle Audubon, homage should be paid to the science projects led by Jan Beyea, Berle's head of science. Beyea worked with the forestry industry to establish guidelines for land management for wildlife. He also made Audubon the leader in defining the environmental dimensions of renewable energy. Audubon convened the first national discussions of managing biomass sustainably for biofuels. And Audubon worked constructively with the wind industry to reduce the killing of birds by wind mills.

Riding through the rapids as the Board came apart in 1995 was an adventure I will not forget. From the point of view of Audubon as a whole, the adventure was unfortunate and damaging over the short run. But from the point of view of this participant, the dominant memory is of intensity of purpose and camaraderie. The Board was split, roughly, 10 + 10 + 10. One group of 10 wanted the organization to change course and wanted Peter removed immediately. Balancing them was my group, who wanted the organization to stay as it was. My comrades in arms as we bonded through this struggle included Scott Reid, Pete Myers, Paul Ehrlich, Doug Costle, Cindy Dunn, Lowell Johnston, Harriet Bullitt, Oakes Ames, Bart Rea, Arsenio Milian, and Ruth Russell. (In all, we were a bit more than ten.) Through conference calls and late night meetings, we bonded in steely determination not to let the Board repudiate its leader and the path the organization was pursuing.

The organization might have truly lost its way, were it not for the group of 10 in the middle, led by Donal, (our chairman since that time), Marian Heiskell and John Beinecke. This group insisted on respect for Peter and for what Audubon was accomplishing, but it also believed that by being an activist social change organization Audubon was not fulfilling its destiny. The centrist group voted with our group to keep Peter in his job: the critical vote was actually 20 to 10. Then, with appropriate patience and deliberation, and with Mackenzie's help, over the following year, the centrist 10 took the lead in redefining Audubon, setting a different course, and choosing a new captain matched to its new mission.

It is wonderful that such a divisive period in Audubon's history, although in fact so very recent, seems so far in our past, so inconceivable in our present times.

I expect some of my most lasting memories will be memories of the knotty, intellectually challenging arguments we have had within the Board, where an issue was genuinely complicated and there was no right answer, but there were better and worse answers. Around two arguments, in particular, I saw myself being protective of Audubon as a whole, against a logic that, suitably circumscribed, was hard to refute. One argument was about immigration, the other about cats.

I debated immigration in the Berle days, pitting myself against a Board member who passionately believed that the natural environment in the U.S. was being wrecked by our growing numbers, that the best lever to control U.S. population was to control legal immigration, and that Audubon had a duty to advocate policies to that end. I was one of several on the Board, joined by Peter too, who saw the urgency of creating a multi-cultural Audubon, and saw an anti-immigration Audubon as counterproductive. As a Jew proud of our country being a nation of immigrants, and all too aware of the times in our history when our door was nearly tight shut, I wanted (and still want) Audubon to advocate policies that address the environmental impacts of a growing U.S. population by encouraging smaller families, not by restricting legal immigration.

I debated cats more recently. There is good evidence that feral cats are capable of creating ecological imbalances wherever they proliferate. There is good evidence that household cats whose owners allow them to have the run of their neighborhoods kill millions of birds. The question is how Audubon should position itself vis a vis cat owners. I argued to Board and staff that nothing could give greater glee to those who wish to see a powerless environmental movement than to have lovers of particular animals wrestling one another. The risk that this issue could cause Audubon to lose focus continues to strike me as high. I am relieved that Audubon has kept its campaign against free-ranging cats in a quiescent state.

Most of those who were on the losing side of the historic 20 to 10 vote resigned almost immediately. Most of those who were my fellow activists on the winning side resigned over the next two years, as the new Audubon took form. I have been asked many times why I chose to remain on the Board. My answer is that being on the Board of the National Audubon Society has been a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to watch an important organization carrying out fundamental change -- and to play some small role along the way. It has been a terrific learning experience. A great organization of one kind has emerged from a great organization of another kind. A beautiful butterfly has emerged from a beautiful caterpillar.

3. Messages to Board and staff for the next decade

Audubon's greatest risk over the next decade is that it will fail to develop a message worthy of its superb delivery vehicles for messages. Audubon is at risk of owning a wonderfully designed circuit, but sending nothing important along the wires. Much of the work to date has been focused on improving the delivery vehicles: Audubon centers and state offices and chapters and education programs. Much less work has been done to develop the messages themselves. There has been a tendency to settle for feel-good messages that present the world as simple and conflict-free. Above all, I wish for an Audubon that works consciously to strengthen its bite, its toughness. The world needs to stay afraid of Audubon.

Audubon's messages must certainly focus on the importance of the natural environment to ourselves and on its intrinsic value. But Audubon's messages must also identify the roles of human choice and human action. Audubon is the voice of the American middle, and it speaks to the American middle. Audubon, of all America's organizations, is the one best suited to work out the connections between environmental damage and the American lifestyle: What we eat, the vehicle we drive, how we use our forests and range lands, how we zone and landscape our cities, the chemical we use in our backyards -- even, how many children we have.

Audubon is also well suited to speak pointedly to the world, as the world indiscriminately imitates the American life style. Although both environmentalism and industrialization are components of globalization, environmentalism moves across borders more slowly than industrialization. Audubon can accelerate the globalization of environmentalism. The Latin American initiative is a wonderful way to start. I hope that over the next decade Audubon can demonstrate to the world how a major U.S. non-governmental environmental organization can enhance the capacity in developing countries to address their own environmental issues -- and global issues.

A hard-hitting Audubon message linking lifestyle and environmental quality will not be easily formulated. Audubon should neither preach nor chastise. Audubon should find ways to encourage exuberance, but environmentally respectful exuberance. To decide the details of Audubon's messages will require lots of intra-organization discussion. Intra-organization discussion is Audubon's strongest suit.

Audubon is getting better at using good science to guide its choices of what to work on and what to say. Science helps distinguish what is important from what, while true, is unimportant. The meaning of "science-based organization" is being demonstrated beautifully at this time by Frank Gill. The explorations of deer and snow geese are good beginnings. The stellar work on the living oceans by Carl Safina is developing a new area for Audubon leadership. May Audubon continue to move resolutely toward becoming an organization that routinely incorporates the wisdom that science, at its best, can provide.

Biotechnology, including the introduction into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMO), is certain to present a big new challenge to Audubon, one for which, at present, Audubon is totally unprepared. The biotechnology debate thus far has been almost entirely focused on whether we humans will damage ourselves directly by the changes we introduce in other organisms. Audubon, potentially, could add an important dimension to the argument by noting that human beings also care about damage to other creatures for their sakes.

My final wish for Audubon is that it remain an organization that cherishes internal disagreement. Big organizations make big mistakes. Never silence your whistle blowers. They are the source of your self-correction.

4. Thank yous

I am full of thank yous. First, for many many individual friendships. There are so many members of board and staff whose company I feel privileged to have kept for seven years. It has been so much fun.

Second, for your good-humored patience and respect for this non-birder, curious to understand you. I have enjoyed your interest in me, your welcoming of my sometimes discordant points of view. As you probably know, department faculties at universities are not known for their collegiality and mutual respect. I have sometimes needed Audubon more than you could have known.

Third, for opportunities to be with you as you ask questions of nature. I have felt like George Plimpton playing football with the Detroit Lions, when going birding with Susan Drennan or Frank Gill or Kenn Kaufman.

Fourth, for the amazing trips. I recall at this moment:

Sandhill cranes swooping down on the Platte to spend the night, providing the setting for a meeting of the International Crane Foundation and for pronouncements from Bruce Babbitt and Tim Wirth

The bay separating the Rainey Sanctuary from the mainland, blown dry of water, like the Red Sea when Moses crossed it, on a day of dislocated meteorology up and down the East Coast. Thus, for us at the Lafayette, Louisiana, board meeting, a fly-over instead of a visit.

The trees full of song birds in Central Park, trees I had passed under thousands of times as a child not knowing how to listen to them. The trees were coming alive on a birdathon with Susan Drennan and Donal and Katie O'Brien..

The potholes of North Dakota, inspected during our meeting in Jamestown, ND. For this city boy, an introduction to agricultural policy of greater value than a thousand briefings. Please continue to have board meetings at locations, like Jamestown, where critical environmental issues are accessible, even if these are locations where big donors are scarce.

The puffins on the remote islands off Hog Island, Maine, being brought to sustainable numbers by Steve Kress's restoration project.

The nesting shore birds high on the cliff faces of an island off the Kenai peninsula, brought so close one could almost touch them thanks to the skills of an Audubon-loving ship captain determined to add enchantment to our Girdwood meeting.

Fifth, for welcoming Jane. It is wonderful that membership on the Audubon board is a two-spouse experience. Jane has looked forward to each Board meeting and the friendships she would renew there. She, as much the perpetual student as I am, has reveled in how every meeting has been an occasion to learn new ideas and facts and stories about nature and our place in it.

Sixth, for Donal's leadership and for his personal guidance and support.

And seventh, for the opportunity to make these remarks to all of you.

Resolution for Sale of the Greenidge Property
in Jamaica Bay, New York

WHEREAS, National Audubon Society, Inc. ("Audubon") and New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (ORPHR) have reached a preliminary agreement regarding the purchase by ORPHR of Audubon's Greenidge property (the "Property"), consisting of approximately 5 acres abutting Jamaica Bay in Queens County, New York; and

WHEREAS, Audubon received the Property from the estate of Victoria J. Greenidge on December 31,1990; and

WHEREAS, New York City Audubon has since then managed the Property as the Greenidge Estate; and

WHEREAS, New York City Audubon has determined that the property no longer fits within the programmatic priorities of the chapter; and

WHEREAS, ORPHR will continue to use the Property for purposes consistent with the mission and policies of Audubon, namely as a park area with public access, and

WHEREAS, the ORPHR will pay to Audubon a purchase price an amount that is less than the property could have been sold for if it were to be put to private use;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that John Flicker, President, and James A. Cunningham, Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, are hereby authorized to enter such agreements and execute such documents as are necessary to complete the sale of the Property by Audubon to ORPHR.

National Audubon Society
Greenwich CT
December 4, 1999

DECLINE OF NORTH AMERICAN QUAIL POPULATIONS

Whereas North American quail species are sensitive indicators of the quality and availability of wildlife habitats, and also connect millions of people to nature; and

Whereas quail are highly visible, keystone species of brushland habitats that support many other WatchList species; and

Whereas regional populations of all 6 species of North American quail are in decline and recent extirpation; and

Whereas Northern Bobwhite is on 11 State WatchLists of species in trouble, released by the National Audubon Society in April 1999; and

Whereas Northern Bobwhite populations are declining significantly in most states of the U.S. (regional, statewide and local declines of 70-90% from 1965-1995) were common and widespread in 80% of states in its range (Brennan 1999);

Therefore, be it

Resolved that the Board of the National Audubon Society encourages appropriate management entities to investigate the causes of decline of these species and to be proactive in stabilizing regional quail populations; and be it further

Resolved that the Board of the National Audubon Society encourages all state programs and chapters in the ranges of these quail species to promote the recognition and restoration of quail as keystone species of nongame wildlife habitats. And be it further

Resolved that the Board of National Audubon Society recognize with appreciation the initiatives of Texas Audubon Society to address this issue, in a state that harbors some of the best remaining populations of Northern Bobwhite and Scaled Quail.

NAS and its Human Resources

Chairman O'Brien, President Flicker, Members of the Board, and Senior Staff of NAS:

I have several concerns about our human resources at and associated with National Audubon Society.

First: Board meetings are simply too brief for adequate consideration of issues. There must be some middle ground we can find between those who for work or personal reasons require that meetings be limited to two days and those who find that the frantic pace and crowded agendas that result leave them drained and exhausted and feeling that their best efforts were not applied to the tasks at hand. In addition, the two-day schedule leaves virtually no convenient time for ad hoc committee meetings, casual discussion, deeper understanding of issues, kiting of new ideas, and the collegial visits that both strengthen relationships and generate creative synergy. We sacrifice a lot in doing this.

One mitigation would be to provide more extensive information sufficiently prior to meetings so that there is time for questions and discussion (on the board listserv, perhaps).

Another could be a day scheduled in advance of the two-day board meeting for committees and for staff briefings on complex topics. A concern was raised about creating a two-tiered board those who could come for the extra day and those who could not. Fundamentally, though, I think we must allow time for the informal business of board and staff to be conducted and for ensuring that board members have the opportunity to be fully informed or at least better informed than we often are now.

NAS issues and programs are closely intertwined. There should not have to be a choice between attending states and centers committee and marketing, science and public policy. These are four appendages on the same body. We need to be able to hear the deliberations of all standing committees, if we so choose. Double booking these committees results in our being less informed and more compartmentalized. I absolutely support the committee process and am not recommending to have all committees be committees of the whole, but since we move so quickly, there is no time outside these committee meetings for adequate education and engagement by all members of the board.

The alternative of further limiting board discussion is not desirable. The questions, opinions, and reflections of various board members provide perspective and context for staff recommendations and our subsequent decisions. Limiting the level of awareness, understanding, and contemplation risks yielding board members who are not fully informed and are not, therefore, bringing their unique talents and backgrounds to bear on NAS issues. We risk becoming a "rubber stamp" board because we are rushed. This is not an optimal use of the human resources on our board or our staff.

Second: NAS has an extensive mission and an aggressive set of programs to carry it out. This has resulted from the excellent work in strategic planning that the organization undertook several years ago. The plan dictated substantial change in the structure of the organization, intense focus on mission, and extraordinary pressure to simultaneously develop funding for and implement the new vision. NAS has never been an organization of "meets requirements" people. Audubon is peopled in great part by self-motivated, high-achieving drivers who are motivated not only by the need for a job but also a fervent dedication to Audubon's objectives.

As I look back on the past several years I am alarmed that once again we are failing to handle our human resources with the same care we try to demonstrate for birds, wildlife, and habitat. As a result, we may sometimes risk our primary objective. Implementing change especially change of this scope requires careful management and tangible nurturing. People at all levels of the NAS organization are working their hearts out to do their jobs. Sometimes this means that communications are cut short, are incomplete, or don't happen effectively the loop doesn't get closed. Sometimes the level of management that does happen falls short and the element that is first lost to the time crunch is the sensitivity to nuances that should be given attention and understood. The work we do that staff does is not just rote performance. There is an enormous emotional component to this work. If we want to excel at it, we must recognize this and encourage and ensure the kind of management throughout the organization that this requires. I'm not suggesting coddling, but management of whole people by whole people. So care must be taken that at all levels of the organization people are caring for themselves so they can do the job of caring for and working with others effectively.

I do not want the pressures and challenges of our tasks to be "managed" until they become "unmanageable." We have too much to lose - too many wonderful people involved. We must care for them humanely and lovingly, for that is what we ask of them in their work.

I hope we will address these issues and develop a creative plan to value and nurture our human resources in the quest to achieve our mutual goals.

Respectfully, Susan Hughes