The negative impact of human activities on the Earth's ecosystems has gained more attention in the last few decades; in turn interest and scholarship in the area of environmental rhetoric has also grown. This case study provides an in-depth examination of outreach material generated by Tampa Bay Watch to determine if grassroots environmental organizations are using rhetorical appeals that recent scholarly literature argues are ineffective. Alternative rhetorical appeals are also examined for their persuasiveness. Using an open coding approach, the analysis finds that the organization used persuasive appeals which varied from those predicted by the literature, and that a combination of appeals produced better results than any one appeal alone. The group also varied its appeals based on the type of outreach. The study reveals that qualitative study of one organization's persuasive appeals renders more nuanced findings than have quantitative studies of multiple organizations or analyses of single rhetorical documents.