Originally Posted by
Montucky
As such, it has not only made huge strides in that mission, but one could argue the NAFA legacy is a model. You would be hard pressed to show any other example of a stakeholder member organization that worked with officials to create a continent-wide framework for a practice that had no context in existing law and was generally opposed by majority of environmental stakeholder voices. In just 50 years, they shepherded what was essentially an illegal practice with no historical roots in NA, to a legally entrenched sport continent-wide. The trajectory has been the gradual liberalization of rules as trust and understanding has grown. Personal attacks directed at NAFA leadership are pathological in the face of this legacy (nevermind 99% of the attacks are factually/historically wrong). At worst its a positive trend of effective rational advocacy with the agencies. At worst! At best, NAFA has been one of the premier voices in raptor conservation.
Well-put, John. Thanks for pointing out the work that NAFA did early on to make sure falconry was "legal," in the face of a real threat from organizations like the Audubon Society. But, let us not forget that California and Colorado led the way, as the first states to have sanctioned falconry regulations.
I was wondering if you would clarify, "The falconry community needs to basically grow a pair, and tell the truth about who we are and where we came from"; in other words, why would falconers not want to tell the truth about where they came from? Also, it appears you are saying that what motivates these people is simply pure politics; that there is no validity to their protests. Yes?
Bill Boni
Bill Boni
Reply With Quote