26 TH BE cA.U DU.BIO'N’ “8B U/L Pees 
TO WHAT ARE WE COMMITTED? 
By RAYMOND MOSTEK 
THIS ARTICLE IS NOT concerned with the activities of those conservationists 
who labor by the hundreds in our prairie state for the preservation of wild- 
life and the more careful use of land and stream. It is devoted to the 
larger problem — how can we mobilize the vast potential strength of con- 
servationists to effect desperately needed changes in Illinois? A leading 
consel'vationist who now occupies a sensitive post in the Interior Depart- 
ment in Washington, D.C., recently observed that “the cloud of complacen- 
cy which lingers over the conservation movement in Illinois is ominous. 
The conservationists don’t know their own strength.” 
In our state we have over 40,000 members of the Illinois Federation of 
Sportsmens’ Clubs; we have almost 3,000 members of the Izaak Walton 
League; there are over 1,000 members of the Illinois Audubon Society and 
affliated groups. In addition there are thousands of members of the Gar- 
den Clubs of Illinois. the League of Women Voters, the Illinois Federation 
of Women’s Clubs, and several men’s garden clubs. There are scores of 
hiking clubs and other outdoor groups. Even allowing for duplications, 
this is a vast army, but it is an army led by General Apathy and captained 
by complacency. 
No other conclusion is possible after watching one conservationist bill 
after another go down the drain in Springfield for lack of support. For 
example, the bill to establish a bi-partisan conservation commission for 
Illinois drew most of its support from Cook and Will Counties. Other bills 
fared far worse. Lack of leadership by many groups, and lack of enthu- 
siasm by the rank and file, has placed Illinois 25 years behind the times 
in many conservation efforts. 
Where does the problem lie? For one thing, it is almost impossible to ob- 
tain information on conservation legislation affecting Illinois from our 
daily press; only now and then will the big metropolitan papers print any 
articles concerning conservation bills before the General Assembly. Though 
some groups still protect their lists of officers and committee members from 
the gaze of “outsiders” with the air of Horatio at the bridge, the major 
conservation organizations have begun to work more closely for the ad- 
vancement of mutual concerns. Examples are found in the Natural Re- 
sources Council of Illinois, the Prairie Chicken Foundation of Illinois, and 
more recently, the Joint Committee for a Bi-Partisan Conservation Com- 
mission and the Illinois Joint Committee on Pesticides. 
A sage once remarked: “People are of two kinds — they are either part 
of the problem, or part of the solution.” One problem may be lack of com- 
munication between club officers and the rank and file. All too often a club 
newsletter will contain little or no information on conservation problems. 
While the officers may often be informed, they fail to relay data to the sup- 
porting members. 
Charles Sauers, the General Superintendent of the Cook County Forest 
Preserve District, once told me that: ‘Conservationists will make little 
progress until we develop more ‘nuts.’ We must encourage more people to 
take hold of a single problem and fight it to a conclusion.” To put it more 
elegantly, we need to persuade people to develop a capacity for indignation 
and to relate that indignation to the decision-making processes of our gov- 
ernment. The Quakers call this a “concern.” If only 25% of the dues- 
