Interesting! I read the same thing that you highlighted in bold and can appreciate it. However, the first thing that came to my mind is people are not infallible and that on this issue NAFA may have fumbled the ball at that time in history (I'm not blaming anyone). Or they were forced too compromise on issues this being on of them. I don't know as I wasn't there.
I could be wrong but I'm wondering if the blow back on this issue from some of the falconry community has more to do with the fear of retaliation in other ways with the USFWS than anything else and that reality is masked by better sounding arguments? If that is the case, it will be a monumental task to unite the two groups of falconers in deciding the course of action (and get's tiresome to read). One group not being afraid to be more forceful and the other preferring a slower political wine and dine solution. Obviously, both groups are passionate about falconry and believe that they feel they know the best course of action.
Maybe it's the old good cop bad cop routine going on here. Good cop being NAFA bad cop being AFC.