Dan,
Just joined AFC. No longer a NAFA member - looks like AFC is now leading the way...
Not disparaging NAFA - just not my group...
Cheers,
Kevin
Dan,
Just joined AFC. No longer a NAFA member - looks like AFC is now leading the way...
Not disparaging NAFA - just not my group...
Cheers,
Kevin
Kevin R. Suedmeyer
I belong to both NAFA and the AFC, as well as a number of sportsman advocacy organizations who share an interest in issues important to our community.
For me it’s simple. Us versus all the tree hugger and anti-2nd Amendment types who have a bigger bank roll and vastly out number us.
Think about it and if you can afford the small cost of annual membership join both NAFA & AFC. Despite past differences both share a larger common interest, and from my perspective the small cost of annual membership to both is well worth the price.
Kevin,
Maybe you should think about who has been fighting (and continues to fight) all these years to allow you and all of us to practice falconry in the manner that we enjoy today. NAFA has always been the driving force and will continue in that role. By not supporting NAFA, you are doing a disservice to all the work that they have done since the 1960's, not to mention riding the coat tails of the organization. Something to consider.
Ray Gilbertson-Montana
Here is my concern:
Scenario 1
Let's say there are 2000 falconers in NA. All 2000 belong to this one organization.
Scenario 2
There are 2000 falconers. 1000 belong to one organization and the other 1000 belong to another organization.
Which organizations will be the strongest? Obviously the one in scenario#1.
My personal feeling is that if the AFC and its members divide North American Falconers into two smaller groups, it has weakened our position and influence. That's why I couldn't conscientiously join myself. I know many here feel differently.
Keith Thompson
Treat everyone you meet with dignity and respect....but have a plan to kill them just in case
Ideally, I would agree with that.
However the reality is more like this:
Scenario 3
There are ~4000+ falconers in. Less than 1000 of them belong to one organization, and that organization claims the other 3000 who are non members are apathetic freeloaders and thumbs their nose at them. Of those who are members, far less than 10% had any real influence and those who did have influence had a well earned reputation for telling the other 90% of the members to "shut up about what you want, we know best."
Given that scenario, I don't blame some passionate folks for striking off on their own and making a fresh start. "Scenario 3" has begun to change in the last few years, but only time will tell if those changes will take hold.
The reality of the situation is there is now two national orgs working on improving falconry. They - and their members - can either respectfully share the sandbox, or they can poop in the sand. Those are the two options. Using your two original scenarios, the only reason why scenario 2 is different from scenario one is if those two groups refuse to treat each other in a respectful manner.
Now, I am not an AFC member (I am currently a NAFA member, but certainly no cool-aid drinking flag waver if you cant tell).
Ray,
With all due respect, I think you should have reconsidered posting something like this on the AFC sub-forum. At the very least, its in poor taste. Go to NAFA's forum to flag wave! Don't forget, 100% of the founding membership of the AFC were NAFA members who were tired of their interests not being represented.
Geoff Hirschi - "It is better to have lightning in the fist than thunder in the mouth"
Custom made Tail Saver Perches - http://www.myrthwood.com/TieEmHigh/
Policies within NAFA are what has caused past members to break away and form a new club. Just a couple of the issues are: NAFA's current policy that Falconer's birds are somehow, owned by the governments, a complete myth, exposed by the AFC and NAFA asserting along with USFWS that hybrid raptors are native, naturally occuring in N. America, and therefore under the MBTA, just because the FWS says it is so, in contradiction to court cases to the contrary. With issues like these, the question beggs, is NAFA sided with the Falconers or those groups that are anti-falconry?
Jeff,
Northern Black Hills, Wyoming
AFC wants to eliminate all forms of regulation so that the system in the US is exactly like that of the UK. With no regulation on who can own a raptor, the take of wild raptors will be lost. This is not a surprising mentality for the AFC given the past and present leadership of the AFC, i.e., they make their livings off of breeding raptors. Same issue with hybrids, remove restrictions on hybrids that contain a fraction of native raptor, and suddenly the market for who can buy such hybrids increases beyond licensed falconers. I find the AFC's stance on these issues ironic given that they used to call themselves the WRTC, or Wild Raptor Take Conservancy.
Paul Domski
New Mexico, USA
First, this is clear hyperbole.
However, lets take your statement on face value. This is not a bianary equation. Falconry existed for thousands of years without regulation on its practitioners AND with wild take, and there is little reason it cant do so again in the US in that fashion. The MBTA protections on raptors would either have to be repealed (no one in AFC would go that far) or there would need to be some regulation allowing take, similar to duck hunting.
There are in fact several countries right now with no regulation on falconry or falconers AND wild take (just about anywhere in the mid east for example, as well as Pakistan).
Lastly, if this were to come down to a choice between having wild take or getting the USFWS jack boots off my neck, well, I'd burn my trapping gear in a new York minute. And in my falconry career I have had 2 out of my 15 hawks that were not taken from the wild. I think you may well be surprised at how many others would agree with me on that.
Geoff Hirschi - "It is better to have lightning in the fist than thunder in the mouth"
Custom made Tail Saver Perches - http://www.myrthwood.com/TieEmHigh/
Hi Paul,
Much of what you have posted here is simply not true. The AFC does not want to eliminate falconry regulations, we just want them to conform to our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The AFC has never been anything close to any kind of an agenda that would promote changing the U.S. falconry regs to resemble or duplicate those in the UK. I even believe in the three tiered licensing system that we have, with the exceptions that government personel should not do testing or inspections. These should be done by qualified Falconers. Many government personal are not qualified to determine what is best for our birds and are more concerned with violations of law than the welfare of our raptors. Many who inspect cannot even determine the difference in similar size raptors, such as a Gyrfalcon and a Redtail, when perched nearby.
I do not make a living off of breeding raptors. I do not breed at all. Nor do several of the other current board members. It is darn difficult to make a living, breeding raptors. Your whole reference to 'AFC breeders' is off target and inappropiate.
On the hybrid issue, all non-native raptors are NOT under the control of FWS and present no special problems and there are many in this country. Hybrids, like non-natives are best handled at the state level. All any state would need to do, is require a falconry license to practice or posess. The idea that we would loose wild take is simply fear mongering.
Whether you call it the WRTC or the AFC, we are all about falconers rights. The use of our natural resources, within sustainable restraints, is the right of every qualified(in our case licensed falconer) U.S. citizen. Make no mistake about it, wild raptors are a natural resource. The AFC is a great and honorable orginization and I am proud to serve it.
What I find to be a suprising mentality is, the disreguard for the freedom in the falconry regs. Our country was established as a free nation under our, blood steeped Constitutions(federal and states) and the Bill of Rights. The MBTA and the falconry regs are in blatant violation of several rights. I am apalled that so many have forgotten their roots and choose to assist the FWS in making laws in contradiction to the Bill of Rights. There is no reason why the falconry regulations cannot co-exist within the framwork of our founding documents.
Jeff,
Northern Black Hills, Wyoming
Protect ALL natural resources for the pubic. Not from the public. And by the way, get off my damn lawn!
tony
I'm sorry, but this is not accurate information. It just isn't. AFC is simply promoting intelligent and reasonable regulations including wild take based on biology.
Personally, I feel good, sound promulgated rule and regulation legitimizes falconry and protects it legally.
What started out as a simple and polite invitation to join AFC has again turned into an AFC bashing platform. And from a NAFA official. Would this be allowed on the NAFA forum if someone attacked NAFA? I'm thinking not. So why here? Is there a double standard?
BTW, I am an AFC and NAFA member.
This stuff has to stop. It's getting really old. The fact is there are two national U.S. falconry clubs. People just need to come to grips with the reason why.
Best,
Dan McCarron
John 3: 16
I would like to apologize to the members of NAFEX for stooping to the level of vindictive, there really is no place for that tone. My post was me lashing out at Jeff Odell's post, quoted above, Jeff and I have a long history of verbal sparing here on NAFEX, and over recent years I have all but stopped posting anything even mildly acerbic. However, after reading Jeff's post I was fed up and I let my emotions get the better of me and let loose with a perception of the AFC that is not unique to me alone. Truth or not, it's irrelevant, once something is posted to the internet and people read it, then it can become a reality in which they believe. Just as my assertions of the AFC may be misguided, so are Jeff's assertions of NAFA. There is no truth in what Jeff says, but as I already pointed out that fact is irrelevant, because there is a certain fraction of people who read his post who take it at face value, as fact. If you have questions regarding either NAFA or the AFC and their policies and philosophies I suggest that you do your research and not believe what people say on the internet.
Paul Domski
New Mexico, USA
Paul,
There seems to be a real propensity on this list to assume that people will somehow be mislead by what others have written, and feel obligated to "set the record straight." IMHO, this type of approach does not discredit what someone else has said, regardless of how profound or dramatic this opposition is pronounced, because invariably these type of comments amount to categorical statements without any real substance; in other words, they don't offer any supporting evidence. As a result, these pronouncements come across as rants, regardless of who is doing the ranting. I've learned long ago that people are not so gullible as to accept everything that they read or are told; that would be terrible, as we would all be clones (more or less), so no need to be too concerned about them being mislead, and if they are, it won't be for long :-)
Bill Boni
I will tell you where you can find it and than you can look it up and post it on nafex, if you would be so kind. I was told recently that all of the comments on the FWS portal on the subject of the hybrid proposed regulation are still available for public view. Perhaps you remember where they provide a box to type in your comments on the website. I remember objecting to what Mr. Dickerson put on the record as NAFA'S official comment. My comment as well as others are also on display. Thanks for the opportunity to clear my name. I was none too happy to have NAFA tell FWS that it was OK to place hybrids on their list while I was a member.
Jeff,
Northern Black Hills, Wyoming
Every so often I get to thinking how nice it would be to join a national falconry organization, socialize with like minded individuals, maybe meet people who I can respect and learn a thing or two from. Maybe contribute something to this sport I love.
Then a NAFA / AFC thread comes up and the pettiness, tribalism, us v. themness and sanctimony on display remind me why I have never joined. Every thread is dominated by three types of people: the NAFA is terrible because reasons people, the AFC is terrible because reasons people, and the if you are not a NAFA member you are leaching off Those Who Went Before You and how dare you not step in line with what you are told is important people.
I know there are good people working hard in each organization but frankly I cant get past the pettiness displayed by the partisans. No thank you.
Jacob L'Etoile
Western MA
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)