It's the first time the Sierra Club has sanctioned civil disobedience. | M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO Sierra Club goes bolder

After 121 years of lobbying, letter-writing campaigns and law-abiding protests, the Sierra Club is retooling itself for the flash-mob age — and showing an increasingly aggressive edge.

That edge was on display last week, when the Sierra Club’s two top leaders and 46 other climate activists zip-tied themselves to the White House gates to protest the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline. The organization called it the first time it had suspended its decades-long policy against club-sanctioned civil disobedience.


( PHOTOS: The Keystone XL protests)

That protest followed a trend in which the 1.4 million-member organization has toughened its rhetoric against fossil fuels, pursued a campaign to phase out coal and willingly brought on a public relations headache by outing its hidden financial ties to the natural gas industry.

Sierra Club leaders and supporters say they’re not undergoing a radical makeover — and they stressed that the invitation-only White House arrests Feb. 13 were a “one-time” dalliance with civil disobedience.

But they also acknowledged increasing frustration with Washington’s paralysis in the face of what they call a global climate emergency. And some say new tactics are required in an era when mass protests can be organized via Twitter.

( Also on POLITICO: TransCanada ownplays Keysteon XL protests)

“Civil disobedience is the response of ordinary people to extraordinary injustices,” the group said in a statement before the protest, casting the climate debate as akin to previous struggles over “slavery, child labor, suffrage, segregation and inequality for gays and immigrant workers.”

Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune and the other protesters wrote that they were also inspired by massive anti-Keystone sit-ins at the White House in late 2011, organized by the upstart climate group 350.org, that led to more than 1,200 people being hauled to jail.

The Sierra Club partnered with 350.org this month, both for the White House fence protest and a subsequent anti-Keystone rally on the National Mall that drew at least 35,000 people — what organizers billed as the largest climate demonstration in U.S. history.

Some Sierra activists say the group’s more in-your-face style is less a departure from the club’s roots than a sign of how times have changed.

“It’s a function of things changing outside the club than inside,” said Jack Darin, head of the Sierra Club’s Illinois chapter. “What’s changed is not Sierra’s willingness to speak our mind. It really is a deepening frustration with the inaction from Washington and the big energy companies to make any large-scale progress to address the climate crisis.”

It also reflects the stamp of Brune, who joined Sierra Club President Allison Chin, environmental lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr., actress Daryl Hannah and civil rights leader Julian Bond in subjecting themselves to arrest at the White House.

Brune came to the Sierra Club in 2010 after seven years as executive director of the Rainforest Action Network, a group whose activists have rappelled down office buildings and trespassed at corporate headquarters to get the attention of businesses like paper manufacturers, coal mining companies and banks. Brune, a former Greenpeace organizer, has gone to jail before.

At the helm of the Sierra Club, Brune has even exposed one of the group’s own demons: A year ago, he went public with the admission that Sierra had secretly taken $26 million from natural gas interests to fund the club’s campaign against coal.

That arrangement had taken place under Brune’s predecessor, Carl Pope, as did a controversial endorsement deal that the Sierra Club made with Clorox in 2008 for the company’s Green Works line of eco-friendly cleansers. The Clorox deal, which angered a number of members, expired in December 2011.

The revelation of the natural gas money left some Sierra Club activists feeling betrayed. But Brune told POLITICO last year that it would allow the organization to “have our hands clean” as it confronted the gas industry on issues like fracking.

He said more recently that he’s only implementing the vision that the club’s members want.

“I would say I came to Sierra to focus on how we could be the most effective we could be,” he said. “And that’s what we’ve done over the last few years.”

But Brune’s radical bona fides were almost certainly one reason why the club’s elected leadership wanted him aboard, said Christopher Bosso, professor of public policy and urban affairs at Northeastern University and author of the book “Environment, Inc.”

“He is reflecting more than pulling the organization along,” Bosso said. “I think the fact that he was hired shows the way they wanted to go.”

Friends of the Earth President Erich Pica said the change under Brune has been noticeable.

“He brings a much more action-oriented style to the club,” Pica said. “I think he has the opportunity, and really, he is pushing the club into doing new stuff.”

Brune’s management style is what stood out to board members when it came time to choose a new director, said Sierra Club Secretary Lane Boldman.

“Frankly, that he had a strong command of management and the environment and was a tremendously capable leader” was “highly attractive to us,” she said. “That is not an easy fit and certainly not an easy fit for an organization of our size.”

This isn’t the first time the Sierra Club — founded by John Muir in 1892 as a hiking and conservation club that pushed for protection of wild lands out West — has shifted its tactics, said Donald Worster, a professor of American history at the University of Kansas and a life member of the organization.

In the 1960s, the group became more politically active with a furious battle against proposals to dam the Grand Canyon. The fight prompted the Internal Revenue Service to change the club’s nonprofit status — the reason donations to the club aren’t tax deductible.

“Sierra Club’s role in the political process has shifted back and forth,” Worster said. “I think everyone is frustrated in this country today. It’s not just Sierra that has had a failure to get change to happen. Lots of people are getting antsy and thinking that situations call for more radical change and challenging power.”

Some of the group’s aggressive efforts predate Brune’s tenure — notably a “Beyond Coal” campaign that the club credits with leading to the shuttering of dozens of coal-fired plants. He has followed that with a “Beyond Oil” campaign and has come out against proposals for exporting liquefied natural gas.

While the Sierra Club has adopted some more aggressive tactics, Worster said other green groups are adopting new methods as well. In addition to protests, for example, Greenpeace says it now works to encourage companies to adopt environmental practices, then lobbies the government to make the practices the norm.

“They’re not just going to court,” Worster said.

Boldman said Sierra Club members have discussed civil disobedience for years, but this time they thought the stakes on climate change are higher than ever. She said Sierra’s turn to civil disobedience also sent a message because the group had other options.

“Generally, civil disobedience is designed to get a reaction when an entity doesn’t have the resources to do so otherwise,” she said. “We do. But we’ve chosen this option. And it’s to make a fine point. This really is a historic moment and we need to be very bold in our statements on climate change. We really are at a key moment where we clearly can’t hesitate anymore.”

Still, others called it doubtful that the club would have pulled the trigger without Brune.

“Mike was the one who led it,” said Greenpeace Executive Director Phil Radford. “It’s a big organization. They couldn’t have gotten this to happen without huge support from the staff.”

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 7:14 p.m. on February 22, 2013.