The upcoming vote

[sharptail]

I recieved another email from NAFA president Dickerson today. He anounced the close of nominations and dates for sending out the TWO (2) ballots. One obviously for upcoming director positions.

The other, on May 20th, the Board of Directors approved sending the recommendation to increase dues to the membership in accordance with NAFA by-laws.

I have read of several reasons to increase the amount of money the club gets, but can also think of a coulpe reasons to limit funds. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?

[Paul Mascuch]

Jeff -

This year I will have been a member of NAFA for 40 continuous years. While I don't always agree with what NAFA does, overall I get more from being a member than I get frustration.

My opinion on the dues increase is mixed. I understand that costs are increasing and it has been a while since dues were increased. Another $5 or so each year is insignificant compared to the total dollars I spend on this sport every year. If they increase the dues, I'll pay and continue to be a member.

My concern is that NAFA has been losing members and I'm afraid that increasing the dues will cause more people to drop out.

I think that the current people involved in the NAFA leadership are trying to make changes and are trying to make NAFA more responsive and relevent to the membership. If there is some large challange to the soprt in the future, I think it is essential that NAFA is strong and able to represent and fight for the falconers in North America.

My 2 cents.

Best regards,

Paul

[Chris L.]

I think a list of why the due increase should be posted. Where is the extra money going? That will help people decide if it is right or wrong.

Not many will like a due increase, but if there are legitimate reasons for it I think many will agree to it.

[sharptail]

The timing of the 2 ballots is interesting... I would have prefered to have the dues increase vote after seeing who gets ellected.

[everetkhorton]

The timing of the 2 ballots is interesting... I would have prefered to have the dues increase vote after seeing who gets ellected.

Jeff:
Why would it make a difference, it would have been another .44 cents spent.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Jeff:
Why would it make a difference, it would have been another .44 cents spent.

That's correct Ev. Plus the cost of printing 1500 copies to mail out.

Your Association is very carefully looking at cutting every cost and expenditure possible. You might have noticed when you received the nomination form it was printed on plain white paper. I wanted the light gray but to save $25 it was printed on white. I am doing my part as are many others serving the membership.

[frootdog]

The timing of the 2 ballots is interesting... I would have prefered to have the dues increase vote after seeing who gets ellected.

Interesting how so? The CURRENT board is the one that came up with this what the crap does it matter who gets elected? They won't take the new posts til Jan (if I remember right). Are you saying that you will vote one way or the other based on who you like and who you don't? Oh and by the way let's spend more money by sending out 2 different mailings.

[sharptail]

Interesting how so? The CURRENT board is the one that came up with this what the crap does it matter who gets elected? They won't take the new posts til Jan (if I remember right). Are you saying that you will vote one way or the other based on who you like and who you don't? Oh and by the way let's spend more money by sending out 2 different mailings.

What I am thinking is that I would not agree to give a board that I thought was headed in the wrong direction any more money. It had nothing to do with the cost of ballots. Sure would be convienient of we could vote online.

[Flatwater Falconer]

I think a list of why the due increase should be posted. Where is the extra money going? That will help people decide if it is right or wrong.

Not many will like a due increase, but if there are legitimate reasons for it I think many will agree to it.

The issue is extremely well covered by Finance Committee Chair Mark Williams in the April 2010 Hawk Chalk. Please see pages 11-13.

Boiled down to one line it is this:

Publications and their postage takes $31 of $35 annual dues leaving $4 operating expenses for all other functions.

For full detail please see Mark's article.

[Eragon]

That may help the current NAFA members who have that hawk chalk but that doesn't help those of us who are about to join or are considering joining. Having the list for everybody to see could be extremely helpful. My application is going in ASAP so I hope the proccess it in time for me to vote. Knowing ahead of time could make it that much easier.

[Flatwater Falconer]

That may help the current NAFA members who have that hawk chalk but that doesn't help those of us who are about to join or are considering joining. Having the list for everybody to see could be extremely helpful. My application is going in ASAP so I hope the proccess it in time for me to vote. Knowing ahead of time could make it that much easier.

Hi Ryan,

Yes, I see what you mean. As I mentioned above it boils down to publications and postage - the one liner - that really sums it up. Another draw on the remaining $4 is the paypal FEE of $1.32 paypal levies to online renewers. So now we're looking at a figure of about $2.68 per member operating capital. This simply will not keep things working! Not a difficult concept at all - it really is this simple.

I appreciate your interest in voting! Please do get your application in quickly so you may participate. As soon as your application is processed you'll have access to the member area of the web site. The ballot will have information about proposals and candidates so you will be able to make informed selections.

All the best,

[sharptail]

That may help the current NAFA members who have that hawk chalk but that doesn't help those of us who are about to join or are considering joining. Having the list for everybody to see could be extremely helpful. My application is going in ASAP so I hope the proccess it in time for me to vote. Knowing ahead of time could make it that much easier.

Hi Ryan, great to see you as a new young falconer steppin up and getting in touch with what helps keep falconry alive and well. I hope to see NAFA change from it's past stance of not caring about maintaining member numbers and processes you new application quickly. Many say that NAFA is changing, I am waiting for more real change to pass judgement, and membership(processing new members, not loosing members ballots and even longtime memberships) has been one of the crutial subjects, in my eyes.

[everetkhorton]

That may help the current NAFA members who have that hawk chalk but that doesn't help those of us who are about to join or are considering joining. Having the list for everybody to see could be extremely helpful. My application is going in ASAP so I hope the proccess it in time for me to vote. Knowing ahead of time could make it that much easier.

Ryan:
You are cutting it REAL close, in regards to your becoming a member and being able to vote. How many place do you thing NAFA should put who is running for office. Look on the web site it maybe there, I am not sure. Ron Clark and Ralph Roger are running for DAL. The Great Lakes Dir. is running unopposed.

[sharptail]

Thanks Donna!

I would be in favor of cutting costs on the HAWK CHALK and one way to start would be to cut the glossy full color cover, reserving the fancier format for just the journal.

[Flatwater Falconer]

Hi Jeff,

You might wish to get in touch with your director and a director-at-large. There were several options kicked around one of which was a possible option to view all publications on the web site and print your own copy or simply store the pdfs on your own computer and preserve dues at the current rate.

The survey response to this option seemed to indicate that about 3/4 of members (who responded) wanted hard copies mailed to them. The remaining members would be happy viewing the 'Chalks online and printing items as they wanted.

If this option were put into policy the idea was that your dues would not increase if you were willing to forgo printed paper copies.

Still considering dues have not increased for a long time the amount the board is recommending amounts to about 1/2 a tank of gas for a hawking trip, or a round of beers on a friday night . . .

[sharptail]

Jeff -
If there is some large challange to the soprt in the future, I think it is essential that NAFA is strong and able to represent and fight for the falconers in North America

That one hit home!

[Flatwater Falconer]

This year I will have been a member of NAFA for 40 continuous years. While I don't always agree with what NAFA does, overall I get more from being a member than I get frustration.

My opinion on the dues increase is mixed. I understand that costs are increasing and it has been a while since dues were increased. Another $5 or so each year is insignificant compared to the total dollars I spend on this sport every year. If they increase the dues, I'll pay and continue to be a member.

I think that the current people involved in the NAFA leadership are trying to make changes and are trying to make NAFA more responsive and relevent to the membership. If there is some large challange to the soprt in the future, I think it is essential that NAFA is strong and able to represent and fight for the falconers in North America.

Paul

With stats like that Paul I am going to ask you to run for director next year!

You mention "If they increase the dues . . . " We are they. Increasing dues (or not) is up to the voting membership. The board is making the recommendation to us, the voting members. Since the board represents us a recommendation is something to be considered and hopefully acted upon by membership.

Your statement about a strong Association is well stated. If something as elemental as fox hunting can be banned in England, our own sport could go under attack any time. For me it's not a question of if, but of WHEN. When the attack comes we will need every member (and non-member!!) to stand up or possibly lose falconry. It looks remote at present but things can and do change fast sometimes.

Thank you for your 40 years of dedication. Falconers are passionate edgy people and that's a good thing in my opinion. When all else is boiled away the one thing we all can agree on is that we want to be able to fly our bird on quality land with wild quarry abounding.

[Tony James]

With stats like that Paul I am going to ask you to run for director next year!

You mention "If they increase the dues . . . " We are they. Increasing dues (or not) is up to the voting membership. The board is making the recommendation to us, the voting members. Since the board represents us a recommendation is something to be considered and hopefully acted upon by membership.

Your statement about a strong Association is well stated. If something as elemental as fox hunting can be banned in England, our own sport could go under attack any time. For me it's not a question of if, but of WHEN. When the attack comes we will need every member (and non-member!!) to stand up or possibly lose falconry. It looks remote at present but things can and do change fast sometimes.

Thank you for your 40 years of dedication. Falconers are passionate edgy people and that's a good thing in my opinion. When all else is boiled away the one thing we all can agree on is that we want to be able to fly our bird on quality land with wild quarry abounding.

Hi Donna,

I watch this from afar with an element of sadness. Sadness at seeing a repeat of what it is that has allowed us, British fieldsportsmen, to be so easily undermined. Disunity.

Those who are expected to fight the fight are, there as here, little more than willing volunteers utilising what talent they may have, for the benefit of others. Generally that willingness costs the volunteer not just time and money, but a certain loss of faith in those they are trying to serve, as they find their motives, their falconry credentials, even their morality questioned.
How is it that we expect so much of others, while offering so little by way of support?

Forums are great places for the disaffected to pour scorn on those who have offered themselves to serve, and are rarely by comparison used to post messages of support and gratitude for their efforts --- and it would be a brave man who, after reading comments on any forum, offered himself for the cause.

I sincerely hope, in the computerised world in which we now live, that falconers in the US can find it within themselves to be more supportive (both online and off) of those who do the best they can on behalf of falconry.
You (the US) have huge enthusiasm and talent at your disposal, and it's been my priviledge to meet a number of your representatives, and believe me, the time will come when their dedication is required to stop falconry going the way of fox hunting.

Best wishes,

Tony.

[Eagle Owl]

Here is the article Mark wrote for the HC. Hopefully it will help to answer some questions some of you may have regarding the proposed membership increase. If not, talk to your directors as they will better be able to answer your questions.

Reprinted from
Hawk Chalk Vol. XLIX No. 1 — April 2010

NAFA membership dues increase proposal
By Finance Chairman Mark Williams

The issue of increasing membership dues has raised its head numerous times over the past several years and, as many long time members will be aware, NAFA has not had a dues increase for more than 25 years, since the days of Operation Falcon whereby NAFA was essentially left broke and unable to even print the publications and needed funds in order to operate. Once again a proposal has been brought before the board who are currently divided on both the timing and the need to do so. As a result, the purpose of this letter in this Hawk Chalk is to raise both awareness and insight by notifying the membership of our intent. If nothing else you are prepared and understand the rationale for this proposal. If this were to be approved by the board in the May 2010 teleconference call it would take effect March 2011.

EXPENSE CONTROL
Several years ago under the leadership of then President Perkins a NAFA Finance Committee was created to advise the board in matters of fiscal responsibility. One of the numerous responsibilities bestowed the finance committee is to look at ways to cut costs, standardize accounting practices and consider areas of income revenue. As you can imagine since its inception NAFA has grown far beyond the initial concept and now it is time, like it or not, to run it like a business. As Finance Chair and working alongside the NAFA treasurer and Finance Committee, we review the annual PnL (financial profit and loss statement) and annual operating budgets. The budgets are also provided to the Board of Directors at each AGM. Most of you may not be aware that in recent years we have run at a deficit budget. This is not fiscally responsible thing to do, particularly consciously.

Until recent years membership dues were the only source of income for NAFA. For the past several years, thanks to the efforts of field meet chairs, the NAFA meets and its raffles, (kindly funded and supported by many of our member/suppliers), have added to that income line. Previously we were just happy to cover costs.

With the assistance of the Finance Committee, we continue to monitor the expense lines and consider ways to improve, including renegotiating printing, shipping rates or general streamlining of doing business. This being said, it is time to face the brutal facts that we need to increase revenue to keep the business running and the lights on. I acknowledge that this might require a paradigm shift for some who consider NAFA a “not for profit” organization. The reality is that this is more of a reflection of our tax status than anything. Please understand that the intent here is not to make money for you, the shareholders of this organization, but to cover the costs of providing current and future services that attracted you to the organization in the first place.

JUSTIFICATION
As mentioned previously and without going into line-by-line detail to every expense on the PnL here is a basic overview of why we need to increase membership dues. For the past 25 years or so our membership fees have been $35 for domestic (N.A.) membership. As within your own household in the past 25 years The cost of everything has gone up. Print and postage are no exception and today we currently pay $31 per member to provide the publications you enjoy. Add to that that those majority members who pay or renew on line costs NAFA via Paypal approximately $1.32 each (for one-year renewal, more if longer), so the remaining “revenue” to pay toward insurance, audits, non-publication mail outs, teleconference calls etc, etc, is $2.68 per member for a one year subscription. Unfortunately as our budget reflects, the $2.68 income per member is not enough and we are fast eating into any reserves we had accumulated over the years. A $10 a year increase would provide NAFA approximately $20,000 in increased annual revenue which currently would cover the costs of the budget deficit.

Most of us, including myself were not around in NAFA in the day of Operation Falcon when NAFA found itself on the brink of bankruptcy trying to defend the rights of North American Falconry. As previously eluded to, we were in the difficult situation whereby we could not even afford to print a Hawk Chalk or Journal and relied on the generous donations of some of our more affluent members in order to do so. We never want to be in that situation again. The late Ed Freienmuth, NAFA Treasurer at the time, raised our awareness that good business sense dictates to have approximately two years operating expenses in reserve in case of any unforeseen situation like happened before.

OPTIONS
One way to avoid increasing dues is to reduce some of the big expenses. In most businesses labor is the biggest expense line. As a voluntary organization this is not the issue for NAFA, but instead our biggest expense line is our publications. If members would accept perhaps one less publication and/or no color and just black and white Journals, costs can be significantly saved. Maybe some members are happy to not receive hard copy publications at all and prefer to read on line only. This could be made available if demand dictated and would save NAFA money of which we can pass onto those members by way of no membership dues increase. Alternatively you can simply pay an extra $10 proposed a year to keep the services you currently enjoy. In the teleconference call on January I raised awareness of this to the board. On the March 18 2010 teleconference call I presented this proposal to the board for a vote and five out of the nine Directors present were understandably uncomfortable, if not concerned, about raising dues even though they knew it was well overdue, in part because of the timing due to the current economic downturn we are experiencing.

Quite correctly it was felt the membership deserved and explanation or advanced notification as to why this initiative is being proposed which is the purpose of this report. Granted some Directors including myself have already done that following the January discussion and have gotten positive and supportive feedback from our constituents. By all means if you have more questions about the proposal please contact your director who should now be better informed as to why or if not, will be able to get an answer to your question.

Please understand that while the current focus is directed at increasing both membership retention and attracting new members, under the current circumstances each new member stands to cost NAFA more money than it is receiving in order to service that member. Therefore we are standing to compound our financial predicament as we increase our membership.

YOUR INPUT
Looking ahead, in the near future you will no doubt receive some notification, probably via presidential e-mail, or perhaps an on-line survey or questionnaire via our website as to some options you have available in order to remain a member and not have to pay more. For example if the $10 increment is going to cause some members great discomfort, you can remain at $35 renewals and be able to read and download a pdf copy of the publications from the NAFA website. Furthermore, you will be given an opportunity to access the membership directory on our website and print if you desire, instead of NAFA sending hard copies by mail as is currently practiced. All these are cost saving measures your board, its officers and various committees are working towards in making NAFA more efficient while maintaining if not improving services.

Previously, you the membership have asked for more transparency and input, therefore I encourage you to please look out for these communications and take time to respond.

Your input and support is both needed and appreciated.

[Hunter45]

As one of your NAFA Directors at Large, I would offer the following for your consideration and comment.

The current dues of $35 were set about 2000. Using a govenment statistics based inflation calculator (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl) that would be $44.31 in 2010. SO the proposed $45 barely covers the current inflation adjusted amount. Assuming the same inflation rate over the next 10 years (not likely in our current debt ridden society - it will likely skyrocket), $45 will take $56.97 in 2020 to have the same purchasing power. Indeed,I fought for an increase to $55 (before you pillory me for this remember I'm just the bearer of bad mathematical facts and $20 won't even move your gas gauge from empty to half full on your truck).

If you read the recent "News From NAFA" emails since the 5.20.10 Board Meeting, you will see the motions to implement a modern professional managment approach for NAFA (YourMembership.com) and the additional management survey were narrowly defeated mostly on the basis of finances (and the mistaken thought that it would offend or turn off our volunteer culture - more on this in another post). By implementing a convenience charge for those who use PayPal (to cover their fees) and just raising the dues to $50 there would have been adequate funds for
these two matters - both of which are necessary to keep NAFA advancing and providing it's members with things that both protect our sport, provide new services, ensure consistancy and quality of services, and offer the opportunity for new sources of income to NAFA.

The comment by the Brit (Tony James) on this thread is dead on - we either invest in and cooperate in building and ensuring falconry's future or we risk oblivion. I ran my campaign based on us having a unified, non-apathetic, hard working falconry community. Despite my recent personal trials and travails, I am still focused on us living this goal together. I'm into my eighth day of walking on my healed broken leg and am up to almost 2 miles. My neck brace (halo) comes off in 30 days. I hope to see many of you at NAFA this year and, God willing, I plan on being in the field with Tess giving the jackrabbits a hard time.

Take care, be positive, forgive and forget, and bring all the good you can to your personal, local, and national falconry!

[MrBill]

Greg,

You are, indeed, an inspiration to all of us. And, I hope to see you and Tess at the NAFA meet.

I don't want to put a negative slant on the dues increase, but, in years gone by (before the Internet) I used to wait by my mailbox for the HC or Journal, because I was starved for current information relative to falconry. Nowadays with things like this list, and others, as well as all the other sources of information about falconry available on the web, I'm not waiting by the mailbox anymore. And, predicating a dues increase to garner needed revenue because the bulk of dues is eaten up by publications suggests that perhaps we should be thinking about going on-line with these publication, as the HC is now, and leave it at that. We could send the Journal out in print each year (for folks like me). This would free up a lot of money for the things that people feel are important for the future of falconry in the United States. At this day and age, I afraid that if we increase the dues, some folks will not renew and other may not join, and gawd knows we need all the members we can get.

Bill B.
Norman, OK

[tking308]

I just sent my application in for new membership about a month ago, so take what I say with that in mind. I applied for membership at the encouragement of my sponsor. I was hesitant because I wasn't sure if the benefits were worth the cost to me. As an outsider it also appears that there is more bickering amongst the membership than I cared to get involved in. Those things being said, and in order to keep this fairly short, I've seen the light! I understand the importance of NAFA to falconry and will gladly help support it's causes. $50 a year isn't unreasonable. I have to ask though, why limit ourselves to membership dues as a source of income. There are too many examples of "volunteer" organizations (DU, QU, TU, Pheasants unlimited etc....) that come up with ways to raise funds. Have regional banquets, on-line auctions for donated goods, increase offerings in the NAFA store. If you want to increase membership, look at what these other organizations do. They're constantly giving stuff away to intice people to join. Should that be necessary, NO, but it must help them.

Just my .02

[sharptail]

Hi Paul,
I am sure that Wyoming does deserve to have falconry! Being stonewalled by the person assigned(the head of LE) to deal with the new falconry regs is not the fault of falconers here. Her personal problems(a sexual harassment law suit) spill over into her job performance in dealing with her peers and the club.

Funny thing how drawing down a pay check from the government can help one to see things there way and abandon this countries heritage of freedom.

[Ron Clarke]

I have to ask though, why limit ourselves to membership dues as a source of income. There are too many examples of "volunteer" organizations (DU, QU, TU, Pheasants unlimited etc....) that come up with ways to raise funds. Have regional banquets, on-line auctions for donated goods, increase offerings in the NAFA store. If you want to increase membership, look at what these other organizations do. They're constantly giving stuff away to intice people to join. Should that be necessary, NO, but it must help them.

Just my .02

You may be onto something here, Todd. As a long-time Ducks Unlimited member and volunteer, I've seen firsthand what a bunch of committed duck hunters and a well-organized national group can do to raise funds.

Make no mistake, though, the difference between NAFA and DU is immense. DU has more than three-quarters of a million members and mobilizes 40,000 volunteers in a typical year. I don't know the exact number, but I'll bet DU employs more people than NAFA has members. When I was Alaska's state representative to the Pacific Flyway Council, DU routinely gave a reception (as I'm sure they did at every other meeting of every other flyway council) at the Council's meetings; each single event probably cost five or ten times the total cost of a new membership management service recently debated by the NAFA Board.

DU has $20 million in investments, $100 million in assets, and raises $200 million in revenue annually. That's how they are able to offer the items they are constantly pushing as benefits of membership and rewards for additional donations. I'd encourage any falconer to volunteer at a local DU banquet. You'll see a staggeringly impressive fundraising machine dedicated to improving waterfowl habitat. The packages of outdoor gear, art, furniture, and firearms available to local committees from the DU national team are jaw-dropping. DU routinely has three or four different manufacturers issuing special edition commemorative shotguns for use in fundraising. Every year. Amazing.

Obviously, NAFA is too small to do that. But DU started small, too. So what can we do? How about this: everyone following this thread secures one item for the annual raffle at the NAFA Meet. Buy it, make it, find someone to donate it, whatever. One thing of possible interest to other falconers. One thing.

And then, through this forum or on the NAFA web site, we can compare notes on what worked and what didn't and how we might find more and better items. Along the way, maybe we'll find businesses or individuals willing to cover special items for all renewing members or bankroll a banquest or a regional meet. We are limited only by our imaginations. We can make this up any way we want.

Here's another thing we can all do. Send an e-mail to or call a NAFA director and tell him/her what's on your mind. I'll bet if directors heard from NAFEX participants once for every hundred messages posted here, that'd constitute more input than they've seen from members in a long time.

Surely, there are other ideas out there. Let's hear them.

[Tony James]

As one of your NAFA Directors at Large, I would offer the following for your consideration and comment.

The current dues of $35 were set about 2000. Using a govenment statistics based inflation calculator (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl) that would be $44.31 in 2010. SO the proposed $45 barely covers the current inflation adjusted amount. Assuming the same inflation rate over the next 10 years (not likely in our current debt ridden society - it will likely skyrocket), $45 will take $56.97 in 2020 to have the same purchasing power. Indeed,I fought for an increase to $55 (before you pillory me for this remember I'm just the bearer of bad mathematical facts and $20 won't even move your gas gauge from empty to half full on your truck).

If you read the recent "News From NAFA" emails since the 5.20.10 Board Meeting, you will see the motions to implement a modern professional managment approach for NAFA (YourMembership.com) and the additional management survey were narrowly defeated mostly on the basis of finances (and the mistaken thought that it would offend or turn off our volunteer culture - more on this in another post). By implementing a convenience charge for those who use PayPal (to cover their fees) and just raising the dues to $50 there would have been adequate funds for
these two matters - both of which are necessary to keep NAFA advancing and providing it's members with things that both protect our sport, provide new services, ensure consistancy and quality of services, and offer the opportunity for new sources of income to NAFA.

The comment by the Brit (Tony James) on this thread is dead on - we either invest in and cooperate in building and ensuring falconry's future or we risk oblivion. I ran my campaign based on us having a unified, non-apathetic, hard working falconry community. Despite my recent personal trials and travails, I am still focused on us living this goal together. I'm into my eighth day of walking on my healed broken leg and am up to almost 2 miles. My neck brace (halo) comes off in 30 days. I hope to see many of you at NAFA this year and, God willing, I plan on being in the field with Tess giving the jackrabbits a hard time.

Take care, be positive, forgive and forget, and bring all the good you can to your personal, local, and national falconry!

Dear Greg,

your commitment to playing a part in the continuance of falconry is sobering during such difficult times for you.
I wish you well in your recovery, and thank you for maintaining that positive outlook.

Best wishes,

the Brit (Tony).

[Flatwater Falconer]

Hi All,

It's official - visit n-a-f-a.com to view a list of candidates.

The list of nominations is in the Member area under Breaking news.

Ballots will be mailed on or about July 15 for the election.

If your address has recently changed please visit the Association web site to UPDATE it so your ballot can get to you.

Every mailing we receive a half dozen returns due to slight inaccuracies in the addresses. The post office computers routinely send items back due to tiny errors. The best way to avoid delays is to check your address and update it if necessary. Even if your address hasn't changed please confirm that it is correct by going online.

Thanks to all candidates!

[sharptail]

Hi Tony,
Here in the US, where NAFA is concerned, things are not very simple and just supporting a club that should be working to keep falconry legal may not be all that is required. You may be aware of the current falconry law transition that the USFWS is shoving down the throats of all states and therefore all US falconers. The new laws have a sunset clause in them and if all states do not make this deadline than falconry will be no more in those states. Here we see Interior, a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, posing the biggest threat to falconry since the last time they tried to end falconry with OPERATION FALCON.

The problem that I see here is that the USFWS has a large history in falconry with a past NAFA president serving also as head of migratory birds, a very high position in the USFWS. There are other examples of high ranking agency people in our ranks and current members of the NAFA board are way to chummy with those who's job it is to place major challanges to keeping falconry legal. From my perspective it looks like complacency instead of falconry interests being served by falconers.

In my opinion this is happening here in the States with other issues, like The National Rifle Association and government pushed gun control, in violation of our national constitution, making many government officials, criminals, in my view. Us Americans seem to be asleep at the switch and about to pay dearly for it.

We have met the enemy and they are us!

[Saluqi]

Hi Tony,
Here in the US, where NAFA is concerned, things are not very simple and just supporting a club that should be working to keep falconry legal may not be all that is required. You may be aware of the current falconry law transition that the USFWS is shoving down the throats of all states and therefore all US falconers. The new laws have a sunset clause in them and if all states do not make this deadline than falconry will be no more in those states. Here we see Interior, a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, posing the biggest threat to falconry since the last time they tried to end falconry with OPERATION FALCON.

Jeff,

You realize that all any state needs to do in order to comply with the new federal falconry regulation is to add a single line to their existing regulation that reads something along the lines of:

Notification of acquisition, disposition, or transfer of raptors shall be filed through the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3-186A electronic reporting system unless otherwise approved by the Department.

If your state falconry association is unable to get your state G&F department to make that one small change to the regulations, then I'm not sure your state deserves to have falconry as a legal activity.

The problem that I see here is that the USFWS has a large history in falconry with a past NAFA president serving also as head of migratory birds, a very high position in the USFWS. There are other examples of high ranking agency people in our ranks and current members of the NAFA board are way to chummy with those who's job it is to place major challanges to keeping falconry legal. From my perspective it looks like complacency instead of falconry interests being served by falconers.

In my opinion this is happening here in the States with other issues, like The National Rifle Association and government pushed gun control, in violation of our national constitution, making many government officials, criminals, in my view. Us Americans seem to be asleep at the switch and about to pay dearly for it.

We have met the enemy and they are us!

I don't understand your concern with falconers who work for the USFWS and who also serve on NAFA. Wouldn't you rather have your own state game & fish department populated with hunters rather than tree hugging biologists? With hunters and falconers working for the state and also serving NAFA, or other hunting organizations, they are in the unique position to recognize an administrative threat, they'll have inside information to position NAFA for a meaningful response to the threat, that's why these people seek positions in these agencies, without them we would be at the mercy of biologists who are not sympathetic to falconry and hunting in general.

[frootdog]

Jeff,

You realize that all any state needs to do in order to comply with the new federal falconry regulation is to add a single line to their existing regulation that reads something along the lines of:

Notification of acquisition, disposition, or transfer of raptors shall be filed through the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3-186A electronic reporting system unless otherwise approved by the Department.

It's a bit more than that Paul, but still not rocket science. TX added a line that simply said where our regs were more lenient than the current fed regs then we would defer to the fed regs to get certified. (The most glaring example was the general falconer being 2 years b4 sponsoring someone).

Also to Jeff about that looming deadline. I doubt the feds are going to be that heavy handed about it. The electronic filing JUST went live, meaning that 4 states have been operating under the new regs WITHOUT electronic filing for 6 months now. So do you think that on Jan 1, 2014 they will really pull the plug? Given that they have been very helpful so far I doubt it.

But if you think that your state can't get it crap together and doomsday is lurking then maybe Paul's right.

[Tony James]

Hi Tony,
Here in the US, where NAFA is concerned, things are not very simple and just supporting a club that should be working to keep falconry legal may not be all that is required. You may be aware of the current falconry law transition that the USFWS is shoving down the throats of all states and therefore all US falconers. The new laws have a sunset clause in them and if all states do not make this deadline than falconry will be no more in those states. Here we see Interior, a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, posing the biggest threat to falconry since the last time they tried to end falconry with OPERATION FALCON.

The problem that I see here is that the USFWS has a large history in falconry with a past NAFA president serving also as head of migratory birds, a very high position in the USFWS. There are other examples of high ranking agency people in our ranks and current members of the NAFA board are way to chummy with those who's job it is to place major challanges to keeping falconry legal. From my perspective it looks like complacency instead of falconry interests being served by falconers.

In my opinion this is happening here in the States with other issues, like The National Rifle Association and government pushed gun control, in violation of our national constitution, making many government officials, criminals, in my view. Us Americans seem to be asleep at the switch and about to pay dearly for it.

We have met the enemy and they are us!

Hi Jeff,

I'm afraid my knowledge of US falconry politics, past and present, is limited, but it seems obvious to me that US falconers (like most others) need the best possible representation, and rely on the work of committed amateur volunteers to get it.
Of course that work will fall short of being 'the best', but it will always be, at that moment, the best possible.
Falconers world-wide make incredible demands on their representatives. We expect them to be totally committed falconers, and good ones at that, and we expect them to be strong and unyielding, while at the same time being politically astute and diplomatic. We expect them to represent most forcefully the very narrow perspective that we each have, while at the same time safeguarding every other aspect of falconry. And we expect them to be vigilant to the sophisticated backdoor threats to falconry while we, considering ourselves the lifeblood of falconry, quietly enjoy flying our hawks.
Furthermore, we hold them accountable for their shortcomings, while offering neither significant financial, emotional, or practical support.

I think you're right to say the enemy is us, simply because we find it so difficult to unite in support of one another. We are, on the whole, completely unfair in our demands.

Regarding the example you cite as being of concern, I would suggest you may be well served by those who have a foot in other camps.
Good relations between falconers and conservation bodies for example, can be valuable in dispelling suspicion, myth, and mistrust. Should those relations break down, they can take many years to re-establish, during which time untold damage can occur.

I'm sure the situation is far from simple Jeff, and I apologise for passing comment as I am, but having spent many years on both sides of the fence I am convinced that our best hope lies in mutual support, or at least following the advice my mother used to give, as she said to me, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything".

Falconers really must learn to support the representatives we have, because what we have is the best available. If we had better available, they would have stepped up to the plate.

Best wishes,

Tony.

[sharptail]

Hi Tony,
It seems as if your mom has a pretty rosey view on things.
Unfortunately if no one talks about what they veiw as problems, than nothing changes. I am dissatisfied with the direction that NAFA has taken, and feel that the foot in every camp type of strategy, has failed to stave off the current attack as well as a couple of others. I think it is time to get some new ideas into the leadership of the club so we do not continue to be blind sided by those whom act like friend but are a part of a culture that attacks falconry.

The only 2 major gains that US falconry has enjoyed recently, we have had to fight for tooth and nail. One of those gains required action just short of sueing Interior. Something the NAFA board had no stomach for.

I must admit, that Brian Milsap, past head of migratory bird, for USFWF did a great job of finally pushing through the partial take of Passage Peregrines, by documenting the overwelming recovery of peregrines producing young throughout Canada, something denied by many Canadian Wildlilfe Officials. It was also in my view, 10 years overdue. I must ask, at what point, are the falconers in antifalconry camps, a part of the 'tail wagging the dog' problem? In my view, they became so, long ago. Again, in my view it is time for a change in direction at the NAFA board level. Another possible approach would be to act like a sovereign nation and allow a passage peregrine take across the lower 48 and Alaska based on healthy migration numbers and not being party to a cartel pushing international control.

Thanks for your reply and the opportunity to put my view out in the open. I hope that I have not offended you. I haven't checked, but hope that you are a NAFA member. I am sorry that our views on how to deal with what, I see as a NAFA problem, are in oppositon. I will not, just keep quite.

[Saluqi]

Hi Tony,
It seems as if your mom has a pretty rosey view on things.
Unfortunately if no one talks about what they veiw as problems, than nothing changes. I am dissatisfied with the direction that NAFA has taken, and feel that the foot in every camp type of strategy, has failed to stave off the current attack as well as a couple of others. I think it is time to get some new ideas into the leadership of the club so we do not continue to be blind sided by those whom act like friend but are a part of a culture that attacks falconry.

The only 2 major gains that US falconry has enjoyed recently, we have had to fight for tooth and nail. One of those gains required action just short of sueing Interior. Something the NAFA board had no stomach for.

I must admit, that Brian Milsap, past head of migratory bird, for USFWF did a great job of finally pushing through the partial take of Passage Peregrines, by documenting the overwelming recovery of peregrines producing young throughout Canada, something denied by many Canadian Wildlilfe Officials. It was also in my view, 10 years overdue. I must ask, at what point, are the falconers in antifalconry camps, a part of the 'tail wagging the dog' problem? In my view, they became so, long ago. Again, in my view it is time for a change in direction at the NAFA board level. Another possible approach would be to act like a sovereign nation and allow a passage peregrine take across the lower 48 and Alaska based on healthy migration numbers and not being party to a cartel pushing international control.

Thanks for your reply and the opportunity to put my view out in the open. I hope that I have not offended you. I haven't checked, but hope that you are a NAFA member. I am sorry that our views on how to deal with what, I see as a NAFA problem, are in oppositon. I will not, just keep quite.

Jeff,

Can you explain to me exactly what is the "current attack" that we are under? You speak in such vague terms, spit it out. What falconers are in "anti-falconry camps"? You make it sound as if this is the last season that falconry will be legal, what exactly are you talking about? I know there are issues at hand that need to be dealt with, getting all the states compliant with the new regs, dealing in some intelligent manner with the eagle issue, and figuring out how many passage peregrines go to which states, but I think these are all things that we can work on. The chicken little attitude is self defeating from where I stand.

[Tony James]

Hi Tony,
It seems as if your mom has a pretty rosey view on things.
Unfortunately if no one talks about what they veiw as problems, than nothing changes. I am dissatisfied with the direction that NAFA has taken, and feel that the foot in every camp type of strategy, has failed to stave off the current attack as well as a couple of others. I think it is time to get some new ideas into the leadership of the club so we do not continue to be blind sided by those whom act like friend but are a part of a culture that attacks falconry.

The only 2 major gains that US falconry has enjoyed recently, we have had to fight for tooth and nail. One of those gains required action just short of sueing Interior. Something the NAFA board had no stomach for.

I must admit, that Brian Milsap, past head of migratory bird, for USFWF did a great job of finally pushing through the partial take of Passage Peregrines, by documenting the overwelming recovery of peregrines producing young throughout Canada, something denied by many Canadian Wildlilfe Officials. It was also in my view, 10 years overdue. I must ask, at what point, are the falconers in antifalconry camps, a part of the 'tail wagging the dog' problem? In my view, they became so, long ago. Again, in my view it is time for a change in direction at the NAFA board level. Another possible approach would be to act like a sovereign nation and allow a passage peregrine take across the lower 48 and Alaska based on healthy migration numbers and not being party to a cartel pushing international control.

Thanks for your reply and the opportunity to put my view out in the open. I hope that I have not offended you. I haven't checked, but hope that you are a NAFA member. I am sorry that our views on how to deal with what, I see as a NAFA problem, are in oppositon. I will not, just keep quite.

Hi Jeff,

I suppose you might say my mum likes the smell of roses around her.

You've not offended me at all, and funny as it may sound, I perceive my lack of awareness of US issues and personalities as something of a gift in this instance, enabling me to offer my thoughts, usefully or not, without prejudice. I must tell you I am not a NAFA member, but hope that will not disqualify me from sharing a thought or two with you.

Sitting as I do, thousands of miles away, and seperated to a degree from what are very real concerns to you, it would be unrealistic of me to imagine my thoughts might be given much credibility, but I promise you our views are not in opposition, nor are our dreams or our hopes. I would also hazard a guess that your differences with some in NAFA are almost irrelevant when compared to what you share.

As passionate falconers we find it all too easy to argue with one another, sometimes venomously, over things that non-falconers would not even recognise as differences.

It is healthy to air our views, and at times to accept them as being different, but we must never conclude them to be in opposition.

Best wishes,

Tony.