[Birdtalk] Politics of birding (was "Time for Birders to Flock Together")

Mon Aug 18 22:17:06 MDT 2008

Oh to clarify since there's possibly some confusion - my comments about the
select few only refers to those who would not welcome a forum of open
sharing. I apologize to anyone I offended. All I was trying to say was I
think we should be able to share thoughts and ideas as they relate to birds
and bird issues. Peace everyone. :)

Jeff

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 9:14 PM, Jeff Bilsky <jbilsky at gmail.com> wrote:

> All any of this back and forth banter is serving to do I assure you is
> discourage people except the select overly confident few from ever posting
> on this list-serv. Why would a silent observer want to post when they risk
> judgment from so many? All Doug was trying to do was share some information
> that was related to birds - even if you could argue that it is a dotted line
> - there is an obvious connection between birds and environmental issues.
> What is wrong with that? What is everyone so afraid of? Maybe its
> threatening to be called to action because of guilt that is felt for
> inaction? Is that it? I really don't get it. If this list serv is going to
> be so stringent that sharing something that others might be interested in is
> going to be questioned and attacked then there is no place for me here and
> I'd imagine there'd be no place for many many others who'd like to have
> something to say and share without being attacked. Like I said, no one is
> going to want to post anymore - but maybe that's what is wanted by the
> select few.
>
> Jeff Bilsky
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:57 PM, B.G. Sloan <bgsloan2 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Very interesting! The listowners of the Illinois and Indiana state birding
>> lists I'm on probably would have kicked Doug Roberts off the list after the
>> first posting, or reprimanded him severely at the very least.
>>
>> Vive la difference...
>>
>> Bernie Sloan
>>
>>
>> --- On Mon, 8/18/08, Doug Roberts <djrob1943 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > From: Doug Roberts <djrob1943 at yahoo.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [Birdtalk] Politics of birding (was "Time for Birders to
>> Flock Together")
>> > To: "M. H. Wallace" <pooder at xmission.com>
>> > Cc: "Bird Talk" <birdtalk at utahbirds.org>
>> > Date: Monday, August 18, 2008, 5:56 PM
>> > Thanks Matthew!
>> > That's 9 supporters of environmental action on
>> > BirdTalk, vs 1 negative.
>> > Still, dissent is ok! We need to thank the negative votes
>> > too.
>> > I'm so open minded my brains may fall out.
>> > Doug
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: M. H. Wallace <pooder at xmission.com>
>> > To: David Wheeler <dswheeler at utah.gov>
>> > Cc: Birdtalk Talk <birdtalk at utahbirds.org>
>> > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:41:06 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [Birdtalk] Politics of birding (was "Time
>> > for Birders to Flock Together")
>> >
>> > I second the Amen!
>> >
>> > Matthew Wallace
>> > East Mill Creek / Salt Lake County
>> >
>> > David Wheeler wrote:
>> > Amen to that!  If we can't be bothered with the
>> > "inconvenience"
>> > of e-mails alerting us to the very environmental issues
>> > which most
>> > affect our hobby, we have to ask ourselves what we really
>> > stand for and
>> > why we are doing this.  If caring is too difficult, the
>> > delete button
>> > beckons.  But before you press, ask yourselves what all you
>> > are
>> > deleting.
>> >
>> > Mark, this is why I love you, dude!  Rant on, baby!!
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> > >>> Mark Stackhouse <westwings at sisna.com>
>> > 8/16/2008
>> > 11:17 AM >>>
>> > "Rant Alert "- if you don't want to read
>> > this, hit delete now.
>> >
>> > Let's consider the topic of "Birding Ethics,"
>> > something that is not
>> > only considered appropriate for this forum, but has been
>> > discussed
>> > many times and has been the subject of numerous posts. No
>> > one objects
>> > when birders are admonished for playing recordings or
>> > excessively
>> > pursuing a far-out-of-range, non-breeding (unless someone
>> > can show
>> > evidence of a pair being present), Whip-poor-will in Green
>> > Canyon.
>> > Such concerns are entirely valid, and this forum is the
>> > proper place
>> > to express opinions on the subject.
>> >
>> > Most who advocate for "ethical behavior" while
>> > birding do so out of a
>> > concern for the welfare of the individual bird and the
>> > population of
>> > its species. The more unusual the sighting, the stronger
>> > the call for
>> > "ethical" birding practices. But please don't
>> > kid yourself into
>> > thinking that "behaving properly" around a rare
>> > bird has any benefit
>> > whatsoever to the bird, or especially its species. Not
>> > harassing an
>> > extra-limital individual may increase the chances that
>> > other birders
>> > may see it (a valid concern), but even shooting such a bird
>> > will have
>> > absolutely ZERO effect on the species.
>> >
>> > The fate of a breeding pair of White-faced Ibis at Bear
>> > River MBR is
>> > infinitely more important to the future of birds and
>> > birding than the
>> > fate of whatever out-of-range or edge-of-range rarity that
>> > catches the
>> > fancy of the birding community.
>> >
>> > Inasmuch as the future of ibis (and many thousands of other
>> > birds) is
>> > threatened by plans for a dam on the Bear River, and that
>> > said dam is
>> > proposed in order to meet demand for water on the Wasatch
>> > Front, then
>> > a birder not practicing greatest possible water
>> > conservation, over-
>> > watering their lawn (or even having a lawn), not having
>> > low-flow
>> > toilets and showers, etc. should be considered in gross
>> > violation of
>> > birding ethics.
>> >
>> > That is, of course, assuming that "birding
>> > ethics" is all about
>> > concern for the birds themselves and not just about
>> > protecting
>> > sighting opportunities and birder's lists.
>> >
>> > If, indeed, "birding ethics" is about protecting
>> > birds and ensuring
>> > that they, and therefore our shared hobby, have a future,
>> > then being a
>> > strong environmentalist, and living a "green"
>> > lifestyle should be
>> > considered an integral part of practicing good birding
>> > ethics. Birders
>> > should view the use of pesticides and weed-killers around
>> > the home
>> > with the same condemnation as turning a pack of dogs loose
>> > into a
>> > waterfowl nesting area at Farmington Bay, for example.
>> > It's more
>> > harmful to birds than an army of iPod and spotlight
>> > wielding birders
>> > in Green Canyon.
>> >
>> > That brings us to the "elephant" in the room.
>> > Political decisions, and
>> > who is in control of our government, have a profound and
>> > long-lasting
>> > effect on the health of our environment and therefore the
>> > future of
>> > birds and birding. That isn't a political statement in
>> > itself, it's
>> > simple reality. Another simple reality is that the current
>> >
>> > administration in Washington, supported by so many in Utah
>> > and
>> > virtually all elected representatives from our state (even
>> > Jim
>> > Matheson hasn't shown concern for the environment equal
>> > to his
>> > father), has been among the most damaging to the
>> > environment and birds
>> > in our nation's history. The gutting of endangered
>> > species protections
>> > by administrative fiat just a few days ago is but the
>> > latest of a long
>> > list of insults to our environment promulgated by the Bush
>> >
>> > administration.
>> >
>> > Now decisions of for whom to vote (our ultimate political
>> > power as
>> > individuals) are complex, and rarely based upon a single
>> > issue.
>> > Perhaps your concern for gays getting married in California
>> > eclipses
>> > your concern for the future of birds and our planet, much
>> > in the same
>> > way that Boyd K. Packer once explained to me the lack of a
>> > strong pro-
>> > environment position by the LDS church by stating that
>> > doing so would
>> > cause the church "to be associated with groups with
>> > whom they didn't
>> > want to be associated."
>> >
>> > But if you helped elect a representative whose actions have
>> > not been
>> > helpful to birds, and you consider yourself to be an
>> > ethical birder,
>> > it's your duty to let said representatives know that
>> > you don't agree
>> > with their actions. It's exactly what Doug Roberts was
>> > asking you to do.
>> >
>> > Consider it your duty in fulfilling your pledge as an
>> > ethical birder.
>> > Consider it your part in helping ensure that you, your
>> > children, your
>> > grand-children and their children will continue to be able
>> > to enjoy
>> > birds as you do now.
>> >
>> > If such subjects aren't appropriate in this forum, then
>> > no one should
>> > ever post here about "birding ethics."
>> >
>> > End of rant.
>> >
>> > Mark Stackhouse
>> > (currently) San Blas, Nayarit, Mexico
>> > mark at westwings,com
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Birdtalk mailing list
>> > Birdtalk at utahbirds.org
>> > http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/birdtalk
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Birdtalk mailing list
>> > Birdtalk at utahbirds.org
>> > http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/birdtalk
>> >
>> >
>> >       _______________________________________________
>> > Birdtalk mailing list
>> > Birdtalk at utahbirds.org
>> > http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/birdtalk
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Birdtalk mailing list
>> Birdtalk at utahbirds.org
>> http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/birdtalk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff Bilsky
> Salt Lake City
> jbilsky at gmail.com
>

-- 
Jeff Bilsky
Salt Lake City
jbilsky at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://secureserver.securesites.net/pipermail/birdtalk/attachments/20080818/dcc3f9d0/attachment.htm