Decline in NAFA membership

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Before the recent thread on 'Beebe and Webster', I had became aware of a somewhat related issue, NAFA membership. Since I joined this forum in late 1997, ever so often individuals have expressed dissatisfaction with past NAFA leadership. It is my guess that such criticism has increased the past year in response to how the current NAFA leadership has dealt with the two controversies of 'Private Property' (of falconry birds) and the 'Petition' issue.

So the question becomes, has this dissatisfaction resulted in a further erosion of NAFA membership? The reason I mentioned 'further erosion' is because over the past 10 years (Nov. 1998 - Jan. 2008), a highly significant loss in membership has already been documented. In my search for the facts in the 'Private Property' issue, I came across an article in the August, 2008 issue of Hawk Chalk entitled "Vanishing Membership--Fact or Fiction". The article was authored by NAFA past president Darryl Perkins who is now the NAFA Membership Secretary.

Somewhat puzzling is why Darryl chose that title as he amply demonstrated as FACT, that a very substantial decline in membership occurred over the prior 10 year period. Darryl
indicated an unknown amount of drop in membership occurred from 1997 to 1998 and as of November of 1998, membership stood at 2933. So it is not unreasonable to assume that the 1997 membership would have approached about 3000 +/- members.

Then from the information provided by Darryl in the 'Petition' controversy (see link in 'Beebe and Webster' thread), membership as of mid Jan., 2008 stood at 1959. Thus, in a 10 year period, a whopping loss of approximately 1000 members had taken place. That represents a 34% - 35% decline in just 10 years.

I do not pretend to know just what factor or combination of factors may have contributed to the large decline in membership. One person I contacted believes that one contributing factor has been the increased use of the internet with this forum being a perfect example. In years past, I have not followed NAFA goings-on usually leaving my NAFA Journals and Hawk Chalks unread so have little to no knowledge of past NAFA history.

Perhaps others on this forum have some insight as to what transpired, and in particular, what may have happened during the two year period from 1998 to 2000 when a precipitous decline occurred of about 700 - 750 members as shown by Darryl's graph on page 22 of the August, 2008 Hawk Chalk. I find it a stretch to believe that use of the internet could result in such a steep decline in membership over just two years. And I believe that decline occurred before the annual membership dues were increased from $25 to $35.

Another manner of looking at the situation is as follows: It is my recollection that in the late 1990s, there were about 3900 licensed falconer in the U.S. As of last year, there were approximately 4500 licensed falconers in the U.S. These figures are based in my recollection of information I read from USF&WS sources but may be off. If anyone has better information, please set the record straight. At any rate, in spite of an increase in licensed falconers in the U.S., instead of maintaining or increasing membership, NAFA has been loosing members during the same period of time.

Keep in mind, I am not taking into account Canadian or other non-U.S NAFA members which possibly might alter the picture to some degree. But if the above figures are close, what has occurred is as follows: As of Nov., 1998, NAFA represented 77% of licensed U.S. falconers (3000 divided by 3900). Then 10 years later, as of January, 2008, NAFA's representation of U.S. licensed falconers dropped to about 43.5 % (1959 divided by 4500).

So some questions come to mind. As of right now (mid June 2009), what is the current NAFA membership? In the past year and a half since Jan., 2008, has NAFA membership increased, declined, or held steady? Has the recent handling of the two controversies had any effect on membership? The individual that mentioned the internet as being a probable factor for some of the decline over the past 10 years also suggested that the recent discontent with current NAFA leadership has likely resulted in a negative effect on membership. But at this point, I don't know that to be the case.

Beside a decline in representation, one can surmise that the resulting loss of revenue quite possibly complicates the NAFA budgetary process. At $35 membership dues, a drop of 1000 members translates into an approximate loss of $35,000.

I could be in error but it would seem that any continued loss in membership is likely to damage the organization and its ability to claim it represents U.S falconers. Having become a member of NAFA in 1962, I am saddened to see what has taken place with NAFA over the past decade and instead of continued to grow, it has instead shown signs of decline.

Again, I a not a follower of NAFA affairs. So I do not know if the current NAFA leadership has examined this problem and if so, if they have proposed anything of substance to stem the tide. And if they haven't, they have their heads in the sand. Hope I am wrong.

Richard F. Hoyer

[longbow]

This should be fun...............................

[Zarafia]

I'll tell you what.
I think that NAFA has always benefited from the fact that almost all sponsors encourage their apprentices to become NAFA members. Therefore there will always be a number on new members each year.
The internet forums are simply a fact of life these days. They are not to be blamed for the drop in membership. It does so happen that internet forums provide falconers with a way to communicate. A much more modern and efficient way than the Journals or Hawkchalks could ever do.
ChrisL has extended a very gracious offer to NAFA in terms of giving them a place here.
No doubt about it, if there was a forum like this one where NAFA members could communicate, discuss things, the members would feel like they had gotten their opportunity to aire their feelings.
JMO

[sharptail]

It seems the voice of US falconers is still changing and has changed. I am glad that any US orginization that ignores its own by laws and its voting members can no longer claim to be 'THE' voice.

That said. I am still a member and still seek change from within. It is a sad day to think of all the truly great things that have come through NAFA and that a few that no longer represent us should control all of the greatness associated with the club, for so many years. I personally reject the idea that much of the current and recent past board has a right to NAFA's glorious past and look forward to a day when we again have a worthy NAFA board to once again lead.

[Hawkmom]

I feel that there should be more direct, tangible 'benefits' to a NAFA member rather than just publications. Membership in other organizations, such as the NRA has benefits, such an insurance option. I would like to see a liability insurance for falconers offered. Or even an accidental death insurance offered. Other groups offer such benefits. Maybe we can team up with a pre-paid legal service for falconry and bird of prey related legal issues would be another. Oh yes, I've mentioned this to NAFA officials before. So, it is not a new thing. I also agree, a forum for NAFA members only. Why is NAFA soo slow to get it going with a newer and more streamlined website? I remember that there was great resistance (by certain members of the board) to even having a NAFA website when everyone else had one going in the late 90's. They need to get with the times. News and issues move very, very fast nowdays. I will still remain a NAFA member, have been one since 1977.

[goshawks00]

Interest topic... it reminds me of folks running around in the foriegn cars berating the American auto industry, how sad they are at the troubles they are having, how they deserve what they get, it's just to bad ...I remember this or that and on and on...

I sometimes think members want a "braveheart" type leadership , an in your face mentality rather than a quieter, slower, diplomatic/dogmatic style... There have been too many issues that drug on and on.. the situation in Colorado.. for example, or the Beebe issue , or responses to some of the USFWS directives... Some complain about inactivty, some complain about to many polls and not enough response to the polls if it goes contrary to the established. There is definately a need for that oft used term transparency

Yes NAFA does need a forum for the members, it does need better representation, it does need to function in a quicker matter to issues that the MEMBERSHIP deems important....

Does NAFA represent the falconers of the US... well.. until another group is larger than them, yes they do.... You will NOT get the other 58% of falconers to stand up and voice their opinons in joint unison on any given isuue , there is just to much complacency, so they are the 'voice' appointed by it's members to represent them. The rest will continue to talk and jesture and try to stir up discord. it's the American way.
.02 Barry

[sevristh]

...it would seem that any continued loss in membership is likely to damage the organization and its ability to claim it represents U.S falconers.

I sure hope so!

Richard, you write this dissertation about the decline of NAFA membership and theorize about the possible causes yet at the end, you say that you do not follow them closely but you still support them.... confusedd

I think this IS THE MAIN PROBLEM with NAFA! Too many people just doing what they've always done and the keep sending in that check every year and they have NO CLUE what the hell goes on! This fact is VERY evident in the last round of elections. The turnout on voters was pathetic. While I don't agree with Jeff's stand of trying for change from within (simply because I don't think it's possible at this point), at least he has TAKEN a stand! It's not the board that needs to pull their heads out of the sand.....it's the MEMBERSHIP that needs to pull their heads out of their collective ASS!

[jfseaman]

NAFA - Falconers United for the benefit of the few.

I have conflicting emotions and depressed aspirations for the effectiveness of the organization.

I get very up beat when I think about the possibilities with a strong NAFA. More falconry freedoms, less persecution from LE, the list would seem endless.

I get so depressed when I think about the realities, in fighting, self aggrandizement, subsidized travel at members expense and finally total and complete hostility to a new organization that attempts to fill the void left by NAFA. The new organization should have been a supported interest group within NAFA or at a minimum a member organization. Instead we get wasted time, mimickery and my pet peeve, members of the 'rival' organization seem to be singled out for dificulties in expressing their voice though voting.

The current leadership consists of small minded protectionists with small views of what falconry is, small asperations for falconry in the US and small opinions of the membership. I cringed when they came into power and my fears have prooved founded.

I get so frustrated, I can't even figure out how to get involved because they don't act. The web site is crap, no formum, no connection to this forum, no action for volunteers outside field meets.

NAFA has become a stinking rotten dinasour carcass.

YES, I'm still a member and I will continue to be a member.

[sevristh]

YES, I'm still a member and I will continue to be a member.

Well that's good. At least that way nothing will change... crazyy

[jfseaman]

Well that's good. At least that way nothing will change... crazyy
I have to be a member in order to make NAFA change, that is if I ever figure out how to break the old guard.

Just re-read the last approved minutes. I wish we would stop subsidizing travel expenses. Next thing you know, they board will vote themselves a salary just like congress.

[wyodjm]

I have to be a member in order to make NAFA change, that is if I ever figure out how to break the old guard.

Just re-read the last approved minutes. I wish we would stop subsidizing travel expenses. Next thing you know, they board will vote themselves a salary just like congress.

Subsidizing? Over the years, I spent $12K - $14K out of my own pocket working on the eagle issue. I know it was at least $12 grand. NAFA knew I spent that much money. Would I do it again? I'm not sure. I doubt it. Not for this administration. NAFA is just down right hostile to anyone with an opinion.

I just don't know what to say anymore. I think the NAFA leadership is counting on the silent majority membership. Falconers are lazy. As long as there isn't some sort of political, or legal cataclysmic issue directly affecting them, you won't hear from them. I'm just learning to accept it. It's just that I'm such a slow learner. :)

[wyodjm]

I have to be a member in order to make NAFA change, that is if I ever figure out how to break the old guard.

Just re-read the last approved minutes. I wish we would stop subsidizing travel expenses. Next thing you know, they board will vote themselves a salary just like congress.

Actually, the subsidizing of travel expenses isn't that big of a deal to me. I've served on several national, state, and regional boards over the years. Getting reimbursed for expenses is quite normal if you serve on a voluntary board. I wouldn't have served on a few of these boards if, while traveling around the country, I had to buy my own airline tickets or pay for my hotel accommodations.

Serving on a board for a large organization takes quite a bit of commitment and time. People should get reimbursed for their expenses. It's the least an organization can do for a person willing to put in the time and energy. It also levels the playing field by allowing everyone to participate and just not the independently wealthy from holding key board positions.

If NAFA grew to the size of an organization where it actually did represent the vast majority of licensed falconers in the U.S,, I would even be in favor of paying people to hold certain key positions, such as the membership secretary. No one, in the history of NAFA, has ever held that position as efficiently and as thoroughly as Alan Beske did. It was practically a full time position for Alan. Yet he did it completely on a voluntary basis. Bridget did an outstanding job also. A national organization with a vision for expanding its horizons simply can't depend solely on volunteer positions. Not really. Not today.

Now, all this has to be approached using common sense and there has to be a system of checks and balances to assure a certain standard of excellence and to prevent abuse. That's where a strong board comes in. Elected by the membership. The president should not, under any circumstances dictate to the board. A regional director is responsible to his/her constituency. Who's watching the president?

[sharptail]

Reality is, that what keeps falconry in this country from being legislated out of existance is falconers being informed about upcoming threats so they can respond through the governmental political machine.

Individual, non club associated people's voices can be heard, but the main problem is without club affiliation they would have to be there own political watchdog nation wide. The clubs put out publications and throw falconry parties that are very popular, but to me this is not what it all about.

Currently the 2 lagrer clubs are about equal in sending out email notice of what is on the political horizon. In recent memory, Darryl P. dropped the ball on this when he quit sending (at least me) these warnings, even after repeated requests. As stated in my previous post, and well thought out in advance, NAFA is no longer "THE", as in only place to get the information and represent yourself. In the short run the AFC has been better. Both are members of the IAF and both deal with Dept. of Interior on falconry law. Without watch dog groups I suspect that falconry would be gone in 10 years. Neither orginization has a spotless record and NAFA's members, need to clean up the boards act, through the ballot, as no one else is able. Even with radically declilning membership, it is not going to go away.

By the way Barry, I own 5 rigs and all are either Chevy, Ford or Jeep, and that is no accident.

[goshawks00]

Dan, it's funny I had written something about paid positions within NAFA then deleted it, figuring no one in their right mind would think that any position within the org should be paid. I have long thought that a full time legislative laison and PR co-ordinator to work WITHIN the club would serve us all. Just listening to the complaints about membership mishaps and voting slips not being delivered to members would be enough to cause NAFA to recognize that if you want something done right, then pay to have it done. With the current atmosphere surrounding it's every move NAFA wouldn't dare approach it's membership with yet more expenitures would it?
barry
Jeff likewise we own three Fords, two old Willys (forerunners to Jeeps)

[jfseaman]

Dan, it's funny I had written something about paid positions within NAFA then deleted it, figuring no one in their right mind would think that any position within the org should be paid. I have long thought that a full time legislative laison and PR co-ordinator to work WITHIN the club would serve us all. Just listening to the complaints about membership mishaps and voting slips not being delivered to members would be enough to cause NAFA to recognize that if you want something done right, then pay to have it done. With the current atmosphere surrounding it's every move NAFA wouldn't dare approach it's membership with yet more expenitures would it?
barry
Jeff likewise we own three Fords, two old Willys (forerunners to Jeeps)
You know who are excellent in association with NAFA, Brandi, Krys, Sheldon and all the other THA that helped make Amarillo, the Colorado Hawking Club, the Nebraska club and more that I haven't had the honor to meet yet.

If NAFA got to %70 of the quality of effort that THA put out we wouldn't be having this discussion. Everyone would feel that they were heard, had a chance to vote and what happens is the will of the falconers. I wouldn't care a dime about expenses because I would be convinced that it was for the good of falconry. I wouldn't mind paying for better PR.

I am/was a professional IT person so I don't belive that membership should be that hard, I'd still be resistive to paying for the membership management.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

As usual, errors of various types and magnitude creep into my posts. The only one I wish to correct is as follows: The second sentence in the 8th paragraph should read, 'As of Nov., 1998, NAFA represented approximately 75% of licensed U.S. falconers (2933 divided by 3900)'
-------------------------------------------------------------

Meridith M, up until the present time, I have always suggested to my apprentices that they join both the state falconry organization and NAFA. At the present time, I will no longer be advocating joining NAFA. Once a change occurs toward a more responsive and responsible leadership, I could change my current stance.

I believe that only NAFA members that belong to forums such as this one have a real chance of viewing different perspectives. Unfortunately, the majority of NAFA member only hear the sanitized information put out by the NAFA president. Without being exposed to a variety viewpoints, individuals have no satisfactory way of making comparisons and arriving and an informed positions. So I completely agree with your last sentence.

Since the fall of 2008, I have felt that this forum would be an excellent venue for the membership of NAFA (all falconers) in order to review and discuss issues. The amateur herping community have a special section in a widely popular forum (www.fieldherpersforum) that allows for such discussion and exchange of views.

If I understand you correctly, has the administration of this forum offered NAFA such an opportunity?

Richard F. Hoyer

[Saluqi]

Wow! I just got home from a short vacation and when I checked NAFEX I found this thread. Thank you Richard for taking the time and energy to put this together. Thank you to everyone who responded, your ideas and comments were all dead on. Tomorrow when I'm not so road weary I'll re-read it, and hopefully have something useful to add.

[areal]

If I understand you correctly, has the administration of this forum offered NAFA such an opportunity?

Sadly, you are 100% correct, and they turned down the offer.

I am not a member of NAFA, never will be, I dont even live in the right country.

Thing is I've seen a few threads on this topic and just as above, sadly I have to speculate and say they will never provide such a facility.

To add a VB forum to the existing NAFA site would cost around $150 and take no more than 30 minutes work or an open Source Forum would take me around 45 minutes to setup and would cost the "club" absolutely nothing!!.
So in less than an hour they could have their own, members only forum but that is never going to happen because current board, insist before they can add a forum to the NAFA site the entire site needs to be re-developed from scratch. Cow dung!!

Sorry but I simply dont get why they feel the need to "replace" everything that existed before they took charge, unless its simply an excuse for not achieving anything.

The current board/membership should be building and adding on to the foundations laid by those who put their heart and soul into it before they came along. Instead there seems to be a pervasive need to replace the old with whatever their current opinion is on what's best.

Sadly NAFA's problem is not unique, I've seen these same happen in small local club with a few handfuls of members.

I dont claim to know the answer and for my part I couldnt even be bothered to turn up to hand in my resignation. Once I realized how the club was being run I sent a short e-mail to the chairmain and never returned.

[everetkhorton]

Richard:
Just wanted to clean up an item in your post, Darryl Perkins is not longer the NAFA membership Sec. He has not been for over a year or so. But that does not hinder the intent of your post.

[everetkhorton]

I feel that there should be more direct, tangible 'benefits' to a NAFA member rather than just publications. Membership in other organizations, such as the NRA has benefits, such an insurance option. I would like to see a liability insurance for falconers offered. Or even an accidental death insurance offered. Other groups offer such benefits. Maybe we can team up with a pre-paid legal service for falconry and bird of prey related legal issues would be another. Oh yes, I've mentioned this to NAFA officials before. So, it is not a new thing. I also agree, a forum for NAFA members only. Why is NAFA soo slow to get it going with a newer and more streamlined website? I remember that there was great resistance (by certain members of the board) to even having a NAFA website when everyone else had one going in the late 90's. They need to get with the times. News and issues move very, very fast nowdays. I will still remain a NAFA member, have been one since 1977.

Kitty:
There is someone on this forum that is on the web site committee, maybe they can charm in on the question on the web site. As far a having council for legal issues, you must know what a lawyer cost per/hour. Some people think $35.00 a year is to much. Our State club only represent about 45% of regular members. The membership has very little to say on what goes on with the club. We only vote on officer and have a meeting once a year. I guess what bother me is that all falconer get the same benefit as a member in regards to wild take, and the rules and regulation that govern falconry and they did nothing to help and they feel the cost of the dues is to much. But they still fly there bird every year.
JMO.

[everetkhorton]

Actually, the subsidizing of travel expenses isn't that big of a deal to me. I've served on several national, state, and regional boards over the years. Getting reimbursed for expenses is quite normal if you serve on a voluntary board. I wouldn't have served on a few of these boards if, while traveling around the country, I had to buy my own airline tickets or pay for my hotel accommodations.

Serving on a board for a large organization takes quite a bit of commitment and time. People should get reimbursed for their expenses. It's the least an organization can do for a person willing to put in the time and energy. It also levels the playing field by allowing everyone to participate and just not the independently wealthy from holding key board positions.

If NAFA grew to the size of an organization where it actually did represent the vast majority of licensed falconers in the U.S,, I would even be in favor of paying people to hold certain key positions, such as the membership secretary. No one, in the history of NAFA, has ever held that position as efficiently and as thoroughly as Alan Beske did. It was practically a full time position for Alan. Yet he did it completely on a voluntary basis. Bridget did an outstanding job also. A national organization with a vision for expanding its horizons simply can't depend solely on volunteer positions. Not really. Not today.

Now, all this has to be approached using common sense and there has to be a system of checks and balances to assure a certain standard of excellence and to prevent abuse. That's where a strong board comes in. Elected by the membership. The president should not, under any circumstances dictate to the board. A regional director is responsible to his/her constituency. Who's watching the president?

thumbsupp clapp

[Ken S.]

Kitty:
There is someone on this forum that is on the web site committee, maybe they can charm in on the question on the web site.

I'm not in a position to give too many details here (I'm not a NAFA spokesperson by a long shot) but I also strongly believe that NAFA needs a better web site with some of the basic functionality we've all come to expect in our organization. I have been saying it for years, and complained openly to other Falconers about it, etc. But finally I realized that I had no business complaining about it unless I was willing to do something about it myself. I'm an Internet professional (web programmer and project manager) so I decided to put my money where my mouth is. A month or so ago I started making phone calls and sending emails to get involved. Several NAFA officers called me back and asked me to get involved. I learned that they have been trying hard to make improvements for a really long time but progress has been slow. Way way too slow in my opinion... there have been some barriers to getting things done but I think we're past that now. As others pointed out, installing a forum is easy, and there's some other nice functionality we should be going for. I'd also like to see members be able to check their own membership status, etc. I have found that the technology is the easy part... it's dealing with all the "other stuff" that takes more time and energy than most people can stand. I'm putting my money and time into making this work, along with some great Falconers like Greg M., Eric E., etc.

The web site committee has been working on many improvements that are launching this summer. One of which includes a NAFA forum, which is already installed and being tested. There are still some details being discussed on the permissions and guidelines, etc. I'll keep everyone posted on the progress but I expect this will be opened up for registering very soon.

Here's another thing I've learned. We are NAFA. Period. There is no big office building somewhere with a bunch of 'old guys' sitting around a table planning out the future of Falconry. There is no board room full of high priced Falconry lawyers. There is no call center with NAFA representatives manning the phones 24/7. There are only volunteers spread out across the country, most of which have full-time jobs, families and other commitments. For me, NAFA is really about the community of members and what we can build together. I hope when the new forum launches you'll all join the community and help guide the future of the organization.

[goshawks00]

I hope when the new forum launches you'll all join the community and help guide the future of the organization.[/quote]

Ken thanks for stepping up to the plate.... the issue at least to this point as far as NAFA is concerned, isn't about "helping guide NAFA" , but rather NAFA allowing it's members to guide them....
I will go as far as predicting there will be a heavy handed restiction clause for the forum section... there will be no latitude for constructive criticism, or disagreement to what the "board" does/doesn't do. It could be a very useful and timely tool for us all, and really be an opportunity to steer NAFA back to being an org that is /for/ and by it's members.
I also hope that some how there will be online voting for elections, and the possibility that we can actually listen to board discussions about issues before them. Anyone else have a wish-list of how to get NAFA to be transparent, and attentive to the desires of the majority of it's members?
Barry

[Ken S.]

I also hope that some how there will be online voting for elections, and the possibility that we can actually listen to board discussions about issues before them.
Barry

Sounds good to me Barry... and thanks for the support. I hope everyone will share their ideas... that's the only way it can get better.

Online voting sounds like a great idea... I like that it would be faster/easier and maybe would increase the voter turn-out. Hopefully that would also end the issue of people not receiving ballots too. The one complaint I'm sure we'll get and one I'm not sure how to address, would be for members that don't have Internet access. Obviously they can go to any public library (or possibly a friend's house)... but I'm sure some will complain that NAFA membership shouldn't require Internet access. Any thoughts on this? One related point that I thought of is that our future 3186-A's will be filled out online... so I guess everyone will be online at some point anyway. :)

[Eragon]

Hey Ken,
It's awesome that you care enough to get involved and actually make a change. Do you know if the Board plans to post things like meetings, discussions, and such so the membership will have a chance to get involved? It doesn't seems like there would be much of a point if the membership can't see what the board does.

[jfseaman]

Subsidizing? Over the years, I spent $12K - $14K out of my own pocket working on the eagle issue. I know it was at least $12 grand. NAFA knew I spent that much money. Would I do it again? I'm not sure. I doubt it. Not for this administration. NAFA is just down right hostile to anyone with an opinion.

I just don't know what to say anymore. I think the NAFA leadership is counting on the silent majority membership. Falconers are lazy. As long as there isn't some sort of political, or legal cataclysmic issue directly affecting them, you won't hear from them. I'm just learning to accept it. It's just that I'm such a slow learner. :)
I don't think it's fair to the members to subsidize directors trips to NAFA field meet, they would go anyway and if they wouldn't I'd question their commitment to the organization.

I don't think it fair for the members to subsidize IAF delegate trips to South Africa. While it has some importance to falconry worldwide it is not direct to the NAFA membership.

I DO think it's fair to subsidize trips to meet with USFWS and state FG departments regarding any falconry, raptor propogation, education, rehabilitation, exhibition or conservation issue.

I love Dick Morrison but I don't want to pay for his trip to NAFA. He is the only NAFA board member I've ever spoken to. I went along as a visitor hawking with him and his apprentice in 2005. Daryl was there that morning as well. My own director, not a clue who he is. I think I'll fix that with an e-mail or phone call.

[goshawks00]

Ken we are all becoming more and more a paperless society. It may be as easy as offering an opportunity to vote one way, online or request a physical ballot It would also be easy to publish names of those voting as a kind of checks and balances ( btw not how they voted but just the fact that they did) that way paper balloters will know their ballots were received.

Speaking of going paperless there may be a great interest in getting HCs on line also which could save alot of monies for us all to spend on other issues-( but I still want my Journal<G>)
.02
Barry

[jfseaman]

I hope when the new forum launches you'll all join the community and help guide the future of the organization.

Ken thanks for stepping up to the plate.... the issue at least to this point as far as NAFA is concerned, isn't about "helping guide NAFA" , but rather NAFA allowing it's members to guide them....
I will go as far as predicting there will be a heavy handed restiction clause for the forum section... there will be no latitude for constructive criticism, or disagreement to what the "board" does/doesn't do. It could be a very useful and timely tool for us all, and really be an opportunity to steer NAFA back to being an org that is /for/ and by it's members.
I also hope that some how there will be online voting for elections, and the possibility that we can actually listen to board discussions about issues before them. Anyone else have a wish-list of how to get NAFA to be transparent, and attentive to the desires of the majority of it's members?
Barry[/quote]
All the features needed to manage an accurate membership database and a forum for the members is available in vBulletin. Member would be able to vote, manage their own address, phone, e-mail details. There would be a unique member ID. Everything.

[goshawks00]

Fred , I agree with some of your comments... though I do think we could pay for our representative at the IAF. The operant word is "OUR" not the person the board decides upon without representation and agreement from it's members...
It the same old NAFA ' good ole boys" club slapping each other on the back , which is actually nothing short of a slap in the face to it's members. That's the crap that needs to change and is the reason what NAFA is becoming more and more a non issue in the falconry community.
.02
Barry

[goshawks00]

Ev wrote:""Our State club only represent about 45% of regular members. The membership has very little to say on what goes on with the club. We only vote on officer and have a meeting once a year.""

Hi Ev hope all is well. Do you see it as just a coincidence that our club is a near exact reflection of NAFA?
B.

[Ken S.]

All the features needed to manage an accurate membership database and a forum for the members is available in vBulletin. Member would be able to vote, manage their own address, phone, e-mail details. There would be a unique member ID. Everything.

I couldn't agree with you more. I bought and paid for it already, it's installed on the server, and being tested with the NAFA web site committee. I've been running vBulletin for a long time on saubier.com for our small caliber shooting forum. I started out with a forum program that I wrote myself, and then upgraded to something else, and then we migrated to vBulletin. I can't remember when that was... but it's been good for us.

[Eagle Owl]

Richard:
Just wanted to clean up an item in your post, Darryl Perkins is not longer the NAFA membership Sec. He has not been for over a year or so.

Ev, that is incorrect. Darryl was the membership secretary during the NAFA meet as I was having to e-mail him all the time to ask questions about members. I went and looked at the NAFA e-mails and January 24, 2009, is when it was announced that Pete was the new secretary.

[TexasFalconer]

As a web site developer and programmer myself, I'm absolutely in favor of NAFA building a new web site that doesn't look and perform like it was put together by an amateur twenty years ago. However, please be aware that certain technological aspects of modern web design such as on-line voting are not easily accomplished due to the innate difficulity of securing the voting process from fraud or tampering. There are a number of different ways to approach the issue: however most are extremely complex and expensive in terms of both hardware and programming costs. While it's certainly a possibility to implement on-line voting, I sincerely hope that it's not something NAFA jumps into without considerable scrutiny and professional guidance.


Ken thanks for stepping up to the plate.... the issue at least to this point as far as NAFA is concerned, isn't about "helping guide NAFA" , but rather NAFA allowing it's members to guide them....
I will go as far as predicting there will be a heavy handed restiction clause for the forum section... there will be no latitude for constructive criticism, or disagreement to what the "board" does/doesn't do. It could be a very useful and timely tool for us all, and really be an opportunity to steer NAFA back to being an org that is /for/ and by it's members.
I also hope that some how there will be online voting for elections, and the possibility that we can actually listen to board discussions about issues before them. Anyone else have a wish-list of how to get NAFA to be transparent, and attentive to the desires of the majority of it's members?
Barry
All the features needed to manage an accurate membership database and a forum for the members is available in vBulletin. Member would be able to vote, manage their own address, phone, e-mail details. There would be a unique member ID. Everything.[/quote]

[goshawks00]

Thanks Greg for your input, it's good to know these things. If I can ask.. what do you mean expensive? If you figure how much postage costs to mail out ballots, along with paper, printing, and other misc stuff and figure that out for use over a number of years then would it be more cost effective...? If we could use these type of voting mechanism for many of the issues that our board makes for us ...(possibly because it's more cost effect yea that's it<G>) then it may be a cheap price to pay for generating more involvemenet within our ranks.... or maybe less paid trips by delegates would cover the costs nicely... Hmm... just curious.
Thanks again Greg,
Barry

[Ken S.]

I'm absolutely in favor of NAFA building a new web site that doesn't look and perform like it was put together by an amateur twenty years ago.
I strongly agree. And for the record... I have nothing to do with the design currently, and I'm not sure at this time if my input on the future design will be considered.



However, please be aware that certain technological aspects of modern web design such as on-line voting are not easily accomplished due to the innate difficulity of securing the voting process from fraud or tampering. There are a number of different ways to approach the issue: however most are extremely complex and expensive in terms of both hardware and programming costs.

I respectfully disagree. Care to share some specifics on why you think it would need to be extremely complex and expensive?




While it's certainly a possibility to implement on-line voting, I sincerely hope that it's not something NAFA jumps into without considerable scrutiny and professional guidance.

I agree... but so far I have yet to see NAFA jump into anything quickly and without considerable scrutiny, especially when it comes to web technologies. :) In fact, I might argue that we seem to be stuck in the quicksand created by over analyzing every decision and it's potential for problems however real or imagined. As for professional guidance, I'm hoping that we have more web professionals in the membership like you and myself that can look at these issues together. Wanna work with me some more on this?

[TexasFalconer]

I respectfully disagree. Care to share some specifics on why you think it would need to be extremely complex and expensive?

As I'm sure you know, the paramount concern with voting through the internet is security. In order to implement a secure on-line voting strategy, mechanisms must be in place that insure that each member has both the opportunity to cast their vote, and protection of that vote from infringement prior to and during transmission, as well as protection after receivership by the server. How, exactly, do you go about voting through a web site? What mechanisms would need to be in place to prevent people from voting multiple times? How would you prevent the interception of a vote, or ascertain whether or not a vote that was cast actually arrived to the server? What lengths do you go to that would prevent someone from tampering with the server or the database (assuming your votes are coming in to a database.) Do you inject redundancy into the system? What levels of security do you implement,that is sufficient to protect your client (in this case, NAFA) should someone decide to file a lawsuit protesting the validity of the vote? Personally I would start with a managed, stand-alone sever with a back-up system and it's own private t1, (whether full 24 port or partial) as well as a VPN to generate individual encrypted keys dispensed by email to members that can only be used once, linked to a secure SQL server that would encrypt the tables and send a response message to the voter---as a starting, or base system. Naturally it would all be behind a firewall. All that hardware and subsequent design, programming, testing for such a system, not to mention the monthly T1 costs would run somewhere in the nieghborhood of 50-75 grand. Then there is the matter of system support/tech support costs (someone has to keep everything running and some user (voter), somewhere is going to push the "Submit" button on their screen and have....nothing happen.) I suppose you could host the server out and trust the ISP to know what they are doing, but be prepared to deal with their unexpected down times and "maybe" backups of the site. If you go with a hosted server, unless you're on a private server (more bucks) you're going to share the MySQL database with 8,000 other websites on that server. Secure? I've stumbled into other people's MySql tables on more than one occassion on a hosted box. Not that hard to do. So I'll have to respectfully disagree with you- it certainly CAN be done, but it's not cheap or easy if you want it done correctly.

[Roper]

Im not sure I want it on this .. but that is not like me .. so I have a question..
I hear you some of you guys say " I dont think nafa board members should be reimbursed for their expenses"
Why dont you think they should be reimbursed?
My take is this .. when you go to nafa meet do you spend all your time in meetings ,, no you dont ,, you go hawking, visiting , sight seeing, your in the pool , drinking and curousing with your buds.
Am I wrong to beleive that the board members spend most of their times in meetings and get very little hawking done at all.?

Let me ask you guys this : What super duper secrets do you think these people are discussing at the meetings? What information is not available that you don't have? Is it possible that you are just chasing shadows.?

Correct me if I am wrong but is not falconry at some of the best levels it has ever been .. What do you guys want that you are not getting.
I think they general paranoied big brother thing is somewhat over rated.

Earlier Barry mentioned that 58% of the falconers are complacent.. Well is it possible that 58% of the falconers are just plain OK with the way things are?
What do you want that you are not getting? Is this really a tangeable item?

I think you should also look at " The times they are a changin"
Look at the world in which we live in .. the very vehicle that we use to communicate here , could in fact be are own demise..
People are not as out doors orientated " Kids today sit on there ass and text each other, when they are sitting across the room from each other."
when I was a kid , we were always getting kicked outside to go play .. now kids sit on there ass and play vidio games and the only thing that gets used are their thumb muscles..

Is it possible that they do not have a good orgainization for their web sight. being that they are all volenteers , this is just one more thing they should do, for the people that sit on their asses and complain but do not get involved and just point fingers and complain.. we call this the 80/20 rule. with 20% of the people doing 80% of the work. I hope that last statment was not to harsh but I am just trying to make a point,, not enemies.

[COMEAUX]

Im not sure I want it on this .. but that is not like me .. so I have a question..
I hear you some of you guys say " I dont think nafa board members should be reimbursed for their expenses"
Why dont you think they should be reimbursed?
My take is this .. when you go to nafa meet do you spend all your time in meetings ,, no you dont ,, you go hawking, visiting , sight seeing, your in the pool , drinking and curousing with your buds.
Am I wrong to beleive that the board members spend most of their times in meetings and get very little hawking done at all.?

Let me ask you guys this : What super duper secrets do you think these people are discussing at the meetings? What information is not available that you don't have? Is it possible that you are just chasing shadows.?

Correct me if I am wrong but is not falconry at some of the best levels it has ever been .. What do you guys want that you are not getting.
I think they general paranoied big brother thing is somewhat over rated.

Earlier Barry mentioned that 58% of the falconers are complacent.. Well is it possible that 58% of the falconers are just plain OK with the way things are?
What do you want that you are not getting? Is this really a tangeable item?

I think you should also look at " The times they are a changin"
Look at the world in which we live in .. the very vehicle that we use to communicate here , could in fact be are own demise..
People are not as out doors orientated " Kids today sit on there ass and text each other, when they are sitting across the room from each other."
when I was a kid , we were always getting kicked outside to go play .. now kids sit on there ass and play vidio games and the only thing that gets used are their thumb muscles..

Is it possible that they do not have a good orgainization for their web sight. being that they are all volenteers , this is just one more thing they should do, for the people that sit on their asses and complain but do not get involved and just point fingers and complain.. we call this the 80/20 rule. with 20% of the people doing 80% of the work. I hope that last statment was not to harsh but I am just trying to make a point,, not enemies.

clapp clapp WELL PUT David!! All this whining about NAFA reminds me of the people that bitch about what is on TV, the radio or in my yard! If ya don't like it then don't watch, listen or look but don't screw it up for the people that do.

Comeaux

[goshawks00]

Dave, First of all are you a NAFA member?

[Roper]

Barry
yes I am . have been for ,I think 20 years +.

[Eagle Owl]

Let me ask you guys this : What super duper secrets do you think these people are discussing at the meetings? What information is not available that you don't have? Is it possible that you are just chasing shadows.?

David,

We don't know what secrets NAFA is keeping since they have closed board meetings and the membership is not allowed to know what happens there. Since this is OUR club, we should be allowed to know what is happening in OUR club, and that is just not the way it is.


Is it possible that they do not have a good orgainization for their web sight. being that they are all volenteers , this is just one more thing they should do, for the people that sit on their asses and complain but do not get involved and just point fingers and complain.. we call this the 80/20 rule. with 20% of the people doing 80% of the work. I hope that last statment was not to harsh but I am just trying to make a point,, not enemies.

No, the reason the website has not been updated is because of the NAFA board. FredFogg has mentioned several times that he has offered his services to update the website FOR FREE to the NAFA board and has been turned down. The committee that has supposedly been working on the website and forum have been doing so for at least a year now. It does NOT take that long to get a new website and forum up and running. Not placing blame since I don't know who is to blame since we are never kept informed about such things.confusedd

I personally e-mailed our central director several times offering my help to him with getting information out to the central directorship. I have NEVER received a response back from him. I also have to say that more than once while doing the 2008 NAFA meet registration I met with resistance and less than cooperative board members. I was volunteering my time to help NAFA. I sure as heck didn't benefit from all that work. So some of us have helped and have offered to help in other ways and have been met with just plain rude behavior from board members. So not all of those complaining about NAFA are doing so from their arm chair!;)

[everetkhorton]

I'm not in a position to give too many details here (I'm not a NAFA spokesperson by a long shot) but I also strongly believe that NAFA needs a better web site with some of the basic functionality we've all come to expect in our organization. I have been saying it for years, and complained openly to other Falconers about it, etc. But finally I realized that I had no business complaining about it unless I was willing to do something about it myself. I'm an Internet professional (web programmer and project manager) so I decided to put my money where my mouth is. A month or so ago I started making phone calls and sending emails to get involved. Several NAFA officers called me back and asked me to get involved. I learned that they have been trying hard to make improvements for a really long time but progress has been slow. Way way too slow in my opinion... there have been some barriers to getting things done but I think we're past that now. As others pointed out, installing a forum is easy, and there's some other nice functionality we should be going for. I'd also like to see members be able to check their own membership status, etc. I have found that the technology is the easy part... it's dealing with all the "other stuff" that takes more time and energy than most people can stand. I'm putting my money and time into making this work, along with some great Falconers like Greg M., Eric E., etc.

The web site committee has been working on many improvements that are launching this summer. One of which includes a NAFA forum, which is already installed and being tested. There are still some details being discussed on the permissions and guidelines, etc. I'll keep everyone posted on the progress but I expect this will be opened up for registering very soon.

Here's another thing I've learned. We are NAFA. Period. There is no big office building somewhere with a bunch of 'old guys' sitting around a table planning out the future of Falconry. There is no board room full of high priced Falconry lawyers. There is no call center with NAFA representatives manning the phones 24/7. There are only volunteers spread out across the country, most of which have full-time jobs, families and other commitments. For me, NAFA is really about the community of members and what we can build together. I hope when the new forum launches you'll all join the community and help guide the future of the organization.

Thanks Ken for jumping in and helping to explain what is going on. I also liked you explanation of NAFA.

[everetkhorton]

Hey Ken,
It's awesome that you care enough to get involved and actually make a change. Do you know if the Board plans to post things like meetings, discussions, and such so the membership will have a chance to get involved? It doesn't seems like there would be much of a point if the membership can't see what the board does.

Ryan:
The agenda for the teleconference is posted on the NAFA web site. This may help. Are you on the NAFA list-serv?

[Roper]

Brandi
I am to assume the nafa is being run much like any corperation .. a business. When we meet in our construction company board meeting . we do not have our workers involved in the meetings.
I am interested in what my laborers have to say , but i dont want them running or telling me how to run my company .
In all due respect ,, there is a reason that they are laborers, and work for me and not owners and or board members of the company.


I can show you time and time again, when the general work force is running things ,, it is in the toilet in no time.

Much is the same in every well run organization,
If they were to allow all of the members in the board meetings , think about all of the types and personalities that we have in nafa , jeese it would be absolute and total disruption. Nothing would ever get accomplished.It would be totally counter productive. Lets not forget one thing here: All of these board members were elected by whom?
the general populus of falconers. They were elected by us,

Im not saying that it is ok that lance didnt call you back..
couple of thoughts, here .. if what you had was so important did you think of calling him until you got him on the phone..?
Your issues are just that " Your issues", just because its important to you, doesnt mean it is important to him or anyone else.. Not trying to be a jerk here ,, just trying to get you to think about the concept here.

[everetkhorton]

Ken we are all becoming more and more a paperless society. It may be as easy as offering an opportunity to vote one way, online or request a physical ballot It would also be easy to publish names of those voting as a kind of checks and balances ( btw not how they voted but just the fact that they did) that way paper balloters will know their ballots were received.

Speaking of going paperless there may be a great interest in getting HCs on line also which could save alot of monies for us all to spend on other issues-( but I still want my Journal<G>)
.02
Barry

Barry:
Can't have your cake and eat it to. <G> I see the MUCC sent our last magazine this month. Lets see how it works out. Maybe this is what the MHC should do. I guess I am from the old school. If I want to go outside and read a publication I do not want to have to hall the computer outside etc. I know, buy a lap top. We will have to wait and see how it works out. JMO.

[everetkhorton]

Ev wrote:""Our State club only represent about 45% of regular members. The membership has very little to say on what goes on with the club. We only vote on officer and have a meeting once a year.""

Hi Ev hope all is well. Do you see it as just a coincidence that our club is a near exact reflection of NAFA?
B.

Barry:
No, I get a call now and them from my director, she sends out information on the NAFA agenda and ask me if I have any comments. I am on the list serv. it gives me information on what is going on in different parts of the country. I get the NAFA publication, but they are limited to what people are willing to write. Look how long it is taking MHC to get its new web site going. People have lives outside of falconry. It take a lot of time when working with a group of people that are all in different location. Phone tag etc. I get very impatient at times. I speak my mind, but could I do better, most likly not. There never will be a club or law or regulation that we all agree on 100% NEVER. JMO. Things are good, to hot

[Eragon]

Ryan:
The agenda for the teleconference is posted on the NAFA web site. This may help. Are you on the NAFA list-serv?

Thanks Ev,
I'm not on the NAFA list-serv, I haven't even tried to join. Several people who I hawk with’s applications have been "lost". Nobody seems to get ballots, they lose applications, and stuff like that. I don't see the point in sending them money if they won't even respond. Along with a lot of crap during the last election and how they delt with the formation of the AFC. Quite a few things have factored into my decision not to join. I was just curious if they posted
their meetings.

Do they post the closed-door meetings too? Or is that what the teleconferences are? Seems really stupid to not let the membership in on the decisions made that will affect them, especially once they have an open discussion forum.

All the best,

[Eagle Owl]

Brandi
I am to assume the nafa is being run much like any corperation .. a business. When we meet in our construction company board meeting . we do not have our workers involved in the meetings.
I am interested in what my laborers have to say , but i dont want them running or telling me how to run my company .
In all due respect ,, there is a reason that they are laborers, and work for me and not owners and or board members of the company.


I can show you time and time again, when the general work force is running things ,, it is in the toilet in no time.

Much is the same in every well run organization,
If they were to allow all of the members in the board meetings , think about all of the types and personalities that we have in nafa , jeese it would be absolute and total disruption. Nothing would ever get accomplished.It would be totally counter productive. Lets not forget one thing here: All of these board members were elected by whom?
the general populus of falconers. They were elected by us,

Im not saying that it is ok that lance didnt call you back..
couple of thoughts, here .. if what you had was so important did you think of calling him until you got him on the phone..?
Your issues are just that " Your issues", just because its important to you, doesnt mean it is important to him or anyone else.. Not trying to be a jerk here ,, just trying to get you to think about the concept here.

David,

You are comparing apples to oranges! This is not a business OWNED by the NAFA board and I am not an employee of NAFA. It is an organization that I pay money to, so yes, I expect to have a say in how it is run and I expect to be informed in what the board is doing. Just as if I owned stock in your company I would expect the same. You can't look at this the same as a company that you own.

Yes, these board members were elected by the members and they owe it to us to keep us informed. When these people volunteered to run for board positions, they do so with full knowledge of what is expected. I e-mailed Lance and called him to help him out with something he claimed to want help with. If he didn't want my help, then fine, at least have the decency to acknowledge me. If he has no desire to do his damn job, then he needs to freaking quit and for gosh sake, he shouldn't run again. That goes for every other board member as well.

You are looking from the outside. I had lots of dealings with NAFA board members when doing the Meet registration. I am not going to go into specifics, but getting help with some of the NAFA registration stuff was like pulling teeth. E-mails were ignored and sometimes people were just downright rude!!!! I guarantee if I had been rude or didn't respond to e-mails from the board or even members regarding Meet stuff, I would have been read the riot act.

Let me ask you this...you had several questions for me regarding the Amarillo Meet. We exchanged several e-mails and I did everything I could to answer your questions, as I did with anyone else who e-mailed/called me. What would you say about me had I not responded to your e-mails or did, but 3 weeks later? Would you defend me the same way you are the board?

Those of us that have volunteered our time and have TRIED to volunteer to help NAFA have every right to bitch and moan.

[Lowachi]

Thanks Ev,
I'm not on the NAFA list-serv, I haven't even tried to join. Several people who I hawk with’s applications have been "lost". Nobody seems to get ballots, they lose applications, and stuff like that. I don't see the point in sending them money if they won't even respond. Along with a lot of crap during the last election and how they delt with the formation of the AFC. Quite a few things have factored into my decision not to join. I was just curious if they posted
their meetings.

Do they post the closed-door meetings too? Or is that what the teleconferences are? Seems really stupid to not let the membership in on the decisions made that will affect them, especially once they have an open discussion forum.

All the best,
Just being nosey, who lost applications? & who's not getting ballots "and stuff like that"?
Rich

[Lowachi]

David,

You are comparing apples to oranges! This is not a business OWNED by the NAFA board and I am not an employee of NAFA. It is an organization that I pay money to, so yes, I expect to have a say in how it is run and I expect to be informed in what the board is doing. Just as if I owned stock in your company I would expect the same. You can't look at this the same as a company that you own.

Yes, these board members were elected by the members and they owe it to us to keep us informed. When these people volunteered to run for board positions, they do so with full knowledge of what is expected. I e-mailed Lance and called him to help him out with something he claimed to want help with. If he didn't want my help, then fine, at least have the decency to acknowledge me. If he has no desire to do his damn job, then he needs to freaking quit and for gosh sake, he shouldn't run again. That goes for every other board member as well.

You are looking from the outside. I had lots of dealings with NAFA board members when doing the Meet registration. I am not going to go into specifics, but getting help with some of the NAFA registration stuff was like pulling teeth. E-mails were ignored and sometimes people were just downright rude!!!! I guarantee if I had been rude or didn't respond to e-mails from the board or even members regarding Meet stuff, I would have been read the riot act.

Let me ask you this...you had several questions for me regarding the Amarillo Meet. We exchanged several e-mails and I did everything I could to answer your questions, as I did with anyone else who e-mailed/called me. What would you say about me had I not responded to your e-mails or did, but 3 weeks later? Would you defend me the same way you are the board?

Those of us that have volunteered our time and have TRIED to volunteer to help NAFA have every right to bitch and moan.
clappyou go girl ! I saw and heard abit of it in TX.

[Ken S.]

As I'm sure you know, the paramount concern with voting through the internet is security. In order to implement a secure on-line voting strategy, mechanisms must be in place that insure that each member has both the opportunity to cast their vote, and protection of that vote from infringement prior to and during transmission, as well as protection after receivership by the server. How, exactly, do you go about voting through a web site? What mechanisms would need to be in place to prevent people from voting multiple times? How would you prevent the interception of a vote, or ascertain whether or not a vote that was cast actually arrived to the server? What lengths do you go to that would prevent someone from tampering with the server or the database (assuming your votes are coming in to a database.) Do you inject redundancy into the system? What levels of security do you implement,that is sufficient to protect your client (in this case, NAFA) should someone decide to file a lawsuit protesting the validity of the vote? Personally I would start with a managed, stand-alone sever with a back-up system and it's own private t1, (whether full 24 port or partial) as well as a VPN to generate individual encrypted keys dispensed by email to members that can only be used once, linked to a secure SQL server that would encrypt the tables and send a response message to the voter---as a starting, or base system. Naturally it would all be behind a firewall. All that hardware and subsequent design, programming, testing for such a system, not to mention the monthly T1 costs would run somewhere in the nieghborhood of 50-75 grand. Then there is the matter of system support/tech support costs (someone has to keep everything running and some user (voter), somewhere is going to push the "Submit" button on their screen and have....nothing happen.) I suppose you could host the server out and trust the ISP to know what they are doing, but be prepared to deal with their unexpected down times and "maybe" backups of the site. If you go with a hosted server, unless you're on a private server (more bucks) you're going to share the MySQL database with 8,000 other websites on that server. Secure? I've stumbled into other people's MySql tables on more than one occassion on a hosted box. Not that hard to do. So I'll have to respectfully disagree with you- it certainly CAN be done, but it's not cheap or easy if you want it done correctly.

Good post Greg... and thought provoking. I hope we can keep talking about this kind of thing, it helps me think through the challenges and objections I'm sure we'll face. Especially the part about the lawsuit, that opened my eyes a bit. It is a really really foreign concept for me to imagine filing a lawsuit against a Falconry club because I don't think my vote counted or something... but in this day and age stranger things have happened. There are no guarantees on any of this stuff... just look at the complaints of people who don't get their ballots through the US Mail for example. (Not to mention the fact that none of us can get any confirmation our ballot was received and counted when sent by snail-mail today.) I realize the online world is going to be held to a much higher standard of course. And I know I said it before, but the whole idea that people have of NAFA being some huge corporation still dumbfounds me. As far as the architecture that you recommend... I can only say that if money were no object, then I'd probably agree with you on most of it... but in our case I can think of some much much cheaper ways using a hosted solution. There are some very low cost solutions available that specialize in hosting online surveys and polls... and some very large corporations use these all the time without building their own data center or spending 50k a month. If we only have a vote once or twice a year... we don't need to build and host our very own voting system. Go to google and search for "secure online voting" for example, and I think it could be possible you would find an acceptable solution for our purposes and I'm guessing it could be done for about a grand or so. I think the disconnect for me here is that you have recommended a very professional and well thought out corporate solution for what is in my mind still a Falconry club web site.

[jfseaman]

As a web site developer and programmer myself, I'm absolutely in favor of NAFA building a new web site that doesn't look and perform like it was put together by an amateur twenty years ago. However, please be aware that certain technological aspects of modern web design such as on-line voting are not easily accomplished due to the innate difficulity of securing the voting process from fraud or tampering. There are a number of different ways to approach the issue: however most are extremely complex and expensive in terms of both hardware and programming costs. While it's certainly a possibility to implement on-line voting, I sincerely hope that it's not something NAFA jumps into without considerable scrutiny and professional guidance.
Greg,

I have the interesting history of being second generation programmer, developer, analyst, systems engineer and internet security engineer. I've been around computers since I was 8 years old, that's 42 years of exposure with 30 years as a professional.

I'll say it again, vBulliten has everything needed. We are talking about NAFA not the US presidency. Security and one membership one vote are in there.

Professional assistance is available from within the NAFA membership at no cost!

[sharptail]

Im not sure I want it on this .. but that is not like me .. so I have a question..
I hear you some of you guys say " I dont think nafa board members should be reimbursed for their expenses"
Why dont you think they should be reimbursed?
My take is this .. when you go to nafa meet do you spend all your time in meetings ,, no you dont ,, you go hawking, visiting , sight seeing, your in the pool , drinking and curousing with your buds.
Am I wrong to beleive that the board members spend most of their times in meetings and get very little hawking done at all.?

Let me ask you guys this : What super duper secrets do you think these people are discussing at the meetings? What information is not available that you don't have? Is it possible that you are just chasing shadows.?

Correct me if I am wrong but is not falconry at some of the best levels it has ever been .. What do you guys want that you are not getting.
I think they general paranoied big brother thing is somewhat over rated.

Earlier Barry mentioned that 58% of the falconers are complacent.. Well is it possible that 58% of the falconers are just plain OK with the way things are?
What do you want that you are not getting? Is this really a tangeable item?

I think you should also look at " The times they are a changin"
Look at the world in which we live in .. the very vehicle that we use to communicate here , could in fact be are own demise..
People are not as out doors orientated " Kids today sit on there ass and text each other, when they are sitting across the room from each other."
when I was a kid , we were always getting kicked outside to go play .. now kids sit on there ass and play vidio games and the only thing that gets used are their thumb muscles..

Is it possible that they do not have a good orgainization for their web sight. being that they are all volenteers , this is just one more thing they should do, for the people that sit on their asses and complain but do not get involved and just point fingers and complain.. we call this the 80/20 rule. with 20% of the people doing 80% of the work. I hope that last statment was not to harsh but I am just trying to make a point,, not enemies.
David, there are very good answers to all of these questions, some in this thread and others in various places on this forum but with your attitude, you do not deserve my time to point them out to you. You state that you are not trying to make enemies, this post is inflammatory and contradicts your statement.

[jfseaman]

As I'm sure you know, the paramount concern with voting through the internet is security. In order to implement a secure on-line voting strategy, mechanisms must be in place that insure that each member has both the opportunity to cast their vote, and protection of that vote from infringement prior to and during transmission, as well as protection after receivership by the server. How, exactly, do you go about voting through a web site? What mechanisms would need to be in place to prevent people from voting multiple times? How would you prevent the interception of a vote, or ascertain whether or not a vote that was cast actually arrived to the server? What lengths do you go to that would prevent someone from tampering with the server or the database (assuming your votes are coming in to a database.) Do you inject redundancy into the system? What levels of security do you implement,that is sufficient to protect your client (in this case, NAFA) should someone decide to file a lawsuit protesting the validity of the vote? Personally I would start with a managed, stand-alone sever with a back-up system and it's own private t1, (whether full 24 port or partial) as well as a VPN to generate individual encrypted keys dispensed by email to members that can only be used once, linked to a secure SQL server that would encrypt the tables and send a response message to the voter---as a starting, or base system. Naturally it would all be behind a firewall. All that hardware and subsequent design, programming, testing for such a system, not to mention the monthly T1 costs would run somewhere in the nieghborhood of 50-75 grand. Then there is the matter of system support/tech support costs (someone has to keep everything running and some user (voter), somewhere is going to push the "Submit" button on their screen and have....nothing happen.) I suppose you could host the server out and trust the ISP to know what they are doing, but be prepared to deal with their unexpected down times and "maybe" backups of the site. If you go with a hosted server, unless you're on a private server (more bucks) you're going to share the MySQL database with 8,000 other websites on that server. Secure? I've stumbled into other people's MySql tables on more than one occassion on a hosted box. Not that hard to do. So I'll have to respectfully disagree with you- it certainly CAN be done, but it's not cheap or easy if you want it done correctly.
FUD - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

Do you think USPS based voting is more secure, more accurate, more fare. I didn't get to vote last year. You think a web based system would be worse, not possible.

The rest of your analysys is based on technologies from the 80's and is the exact view the board takes. Outdated, old style and protectionist.

[sharptail]

Just being nosey, who lost applications? & who's not getting ballots "and stuff like that"?
Rich

I have been so called "lost" a couple of times. Others off of the top are Fred Fogg, Bill(Outhawkin) and JF Seaman. I don't think this list is even close to complete. I don't think that the past sec.(Bridgette) was the problems. I equate problems to Steve Jone's statement in a past hawkchalk, something about the board not careing about those members whom could not get there dues paid on time and Rusty Scarboro's so called, coincidental, inability to handle the membership sec. job, dues paid on time or not and a second 'loss', as Daryl P. took over.

[everetkhorton]

Ev, that is incorrect. Darryl was the membership secretary during the NAFA meet as I was having to e-mail him all the time to ask questions about members. I went and looked at the NAFA e-mails and January 24, 2009, is when it was announced that Pete was the new secretary.

Brandi:
You are right, it has not been a year. But I was working with Pete before while Darryl was still sec. Sure seem longer that that. On a side note. Before everyone jump up and down. You can go in the NAFA web site and update you information. But I think you have to change it all, not just one part. Like if you have moved etc. But you can not see what you have in at the present time. People move and never change there address. I just got an update on an order today that the person has moved. I hope he left a forwarding address. I have nothing to do with the data base at all. Maybe the new site will make it easier.

[Ken S.]

Greg,

I have the interesting history of being second generation programmer, developer, analyst, systems engineer and internet security engineer. I've been around computers since I was 8 years old, that's 42 years of exposure with 30 years as a professional.

I'll say it again, vBulliten has everything needed. We are talking about NAFA not the US presidency. Security and one membership one vote are in there.

Professional assistance is available from within the NAFA membership at no cost!

Thanks Fred... I believe we are on the same page with this and I'm too am concerned that the FUD principle could be used to slow us down if these types of objections get put to the board. I do appreciate Greg's perspective because I think it helps us prepare for the discussions are bound to come up(some have already)... so thank you Greg for your thoughts and I hope you'll keep posting with us on this.

Fred I like what you are saying with engaging the membership more to build something together. This is EXACTLY why I got involved. I believe that WE ARE NAFA. As the saying goes, "the church is only as strong as it's congregation". I believe that the time will come when we will want to look to the NAFA membership more to use their individual expertise to help. And that time is rapidly approaching. Interested?

[Ken S.]

Brandi:
You are right, it has not been a year. But I was working with Pete before while Darryl was still sec. Sure seem longer that that. On a side note. Before everyone jump up and down. You can go in the NAFA web site and update you information. But I think you have to change it all, not just one part. Like if you have moved etc. But you can not see what you have in at the present time. People move and never change there address. I just got an update on an order today that the person has moved. I hope he left a forwarding address. I have nothing to do with the data base at all. Maybe the new site will make it easier.

Ev - I hope so too. Allowing members to check their status, renew online, and update their own contact information are high on the list of improvements. (I realize folks can renew online and update their contact information now but I hope we can refine this process a little bit)

[jfseaman]

I have been so called "lost" a couple of times. Others off of the top are Fred Fogg, Bill(Outhawkin) and JF Seaman. I don't think this list is even close to complete. I don't think that the past sec.(Bridgette) was the problems. I equate problems to Steve Jone's statement in a past hawkchalk, something about the board not careing about those members whom could not get there dues paid on time and Rusty Scarboro's so called, coincidental, inability to handle the membership sec. job, dues paid on time or not and a second 'loss', as Daryl P. took over.
JFYI: Except for my initial application, I've paid my dues with my field meet registration except for 2006 when I couldn't go. I've had to contact NAFA more than once to make them trace my dues payment to the registration.

[goshawks00]

"""Am I wrong to beleive that the board members spend most of their times in meetings and get very little hawking done at all.?"""

Yes I do believe you are wrong... wasn't it our own then pres. that skipped out to another state with several board members to go hawking and not attend scheduled meetings? BTW, for the record I have no problem meeting SOME of their expenses .


"""Earlier Barry mentioned that 58% of the falconers are complacent.. Well is it possible that 58% of the falconers are just plain OK with the way things are?"""

No actually I don't think 58% are satisfied. If as quoted, NAFA numbers represent 42% of all falconers in the US then that means 58% are not members... Are you saying that 58% are not members because they are satisfied? Ask just a simple question here to the number of falconers that have spoke up and said they quit NAFA, they are now part of the 58%. It's complacency, it's apathy and it's disgust that make up a major part of that 58% Ask those members that make up this new falconry club why they are not members ... do you think it's because they are happy with NAFA.... Might even ask them if they allow thier members a say in shaping their org.

""What do you want that you are not getting? Is this really a tangeable item?""

Well for starters how about a voice in how NAFA is run... was anyone here ask who they wanted to represent them at AIF? How they felt about the B&W issue? What am i not getting.... How about private ownership?.... How about better easier accessto non indigenous through better, faster importation regs and pratices? How about more liberal seasons and quarries?... I mean we are a no impact sport right? Start there then if you are serious we can continue.


""Is it possible that they do not have a good orgainization for their web sight. being that they are all volenteers , this is just one more thing they should do, for the people that sit on their asses and complain but do not get involved and just point fingers and complain.. we call this the 80/20 rule. with 20% of the people doing 80% of the work. I hope that last statment was not to harsh but I am just trying to make a point,, not enemies. ""

No Dave that wasn't to harsh, it just shows the mindset of why we are in predicament we are in today. The 20 /80 rule is usually found in the balance of the 20% not willing to give up their power so the 80% can help... other than the obilgatory "send money" greetings. The 80% are not mindless robots they too have .. or should I say should have a say it shaping their future... When that stops then you get to this point. How many folks have to write and say they have offered thier expertise only to be turned down before it becomes apparent where the problem is?
.02
Barry

[TexasFalconer]

Fred, I never said that USPS voting was more secure than on-line voting. Nor did I state that a web-based system would be "worse, not possible." Please don't interject your own personal statements into mine.

I don't know what your credentials are. I'd be curious to know what type computers you were around 42 years ago (1967) "I've been around computers since I was 8 years old, that's 42 years of exposure with 30 years as a professional." You must indeed have been a very advanced child to build your own vacuum tube UNIVAC.

For your edification, VPN technology is not "80's" technology- DNS wasn't created until 1983. The first Cisco router didn't ship until 1987. Netscape wasn't launched until 1993. And the first framework for IP-based VPN routing wasn't discussed until 2000. As a Certified Network Engineer, which is my profession, I stay fairly up to date with technologies as it's my job to design systems utilizing the latest architecture. What I outlined above is the basics for a secure system (without adding in all the frivolous details of transmission protocols, etc.) Would it be overkill? Probably. I design systems for corporations, not clubs. My point (which you missed apparently) is security. To design a secure on-line voting system, you need invest in the technology that has a proven track record of being immune to attack, whether through simple human error or malicious behavior. Could NAFA get by with a less extravagant system? Sure it could. But it would also have to accept a margin of error which would need to be defined and made public. In these litigious times, on-line voting could become a lightening rod, and should not be undertaken lightly. Nor should NAFA back away from on-line voting: my point is that they need to consult with professionals (in this case certified systems engineers) to outline their needs, address security issues, and be made aware of the costs involved in designing a system suitable to their needs.

Finally, vBulletin is nothing more than a BBS, much like this one. Why you would believe it to be a secure vehicle for managing voting is beyond me. But then again I didn't build my first computer 40 years ago.


FUD - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

Do you think USPS based voting is more secure, more accurate, more fare. I didn't get to vote last year. You think a web based system would be worse, not possible.

The rest of your analysys is based on technologies from the 80's and is the exact view the board takes. Outdated, old style and protectionist.

[goshawks00]

Thanks Greg for your input, it's good to know these things. If I can ask.. what do you mean expensive? If you figure how much postage costs to mail out ballots, along with paper, printing, and other misc stuff and figure that out for use over a number of years then would it be more cost effective...? If we could use these type of voting mechanism for many of the issues that our board makes for us ...(possibly because it's more cost effect yea that's it<G>) then it may be a cheap price to pay for generating more involvemenet within our ranks.... or maybe less paid trips by delegates would cover the costs nicely... Hmm... just curious.
Thanks again Greg,
Barry
__________________

[Migisi]

People should get reimbursed for their expenses. It's the least an organization can do for a person willing to put in the time and energy.

I agree - and ALL the trip-related expenses should be reimbursed. Imagine spending $7,000 of your own money. Now imagine coming home, submitting receipts, and the org deciding after-the-fact that they'll only cover $1,000 of your expenditures. You have to absorb the remaining $6,000.

I think it needs to be made perfectly clear beforehand that there's a $ cap on trip expenses, or that only the independently wealthy need apply for the rep position.


That's where a strong board comes in. Elected by the membership.

I've always contended that everyone serving on the Board - including and especially the President - should be elected by the membership.

[Ken S.]

Greg - again, I appreciate your perspective so I hope you don't take any of the comments too harshly. I would like us to continue sharing ideas if you are willing.

I agree with you that security is very important. I'm glad we also agree that your first recommendation is more appropriate for a multi-billion dollar corporation than a Falconry club so thank you for acknowledging that. Part of your recommendation included 50-75 grand in monthly charges alone. Obviously this is totally unreasonable and can never happen for us. I'm resisting the urge to react too strongly to this kind of recommendation, as I'm genuinely afraid the board could hear this kind of stuff from a professional like you and it will stop all progress dead in it's tracks. I feel like all of us need to get some alignment around these issues before the water gets too muddy to swim.

Can you suggest some alternatives that might be more appropriate and affordable?

(fyi - vBulletin is in fact a forum as you mentioned, EXACTLY like this one... because it is also running on vBulletin.)

Thanks.

[jfseaman]

...

I don't know what your credentials are. I'd be curious to know what type computers you were around 42 years ago (1967) "I've been around computers since I was 8 years old, that's 42 years of exposure with 30 years as a professional." You must indeed have been a very advanced child to build your own vacuum tube UNIVAC.
...
Finally, vBulletin is nothing more than a BBS, much like this one. Why you would believe it to be a secure vehicle for managing voting is beyond me. But then again I didn't build my first computer 40 years ago.
I never said I built a computer in 1967 but yes 1967 is when I was at my parents office, IBM 1401, learning a little about binary, machine language, flow charts, card punch, card readers. In my teen years I hated it and wanted to be a professional surfer. Then I found out you can make things for people to use and I was away.

If you want to get into a pi$$ing match on credentials we can do that but that would have to result in a winner and a looser and I'm not into that. If I was into winners and loosers I'd still be in the computer industry which I can't stand it anymore.

Yes Vbulliten is BBS software. But then you don't know what you don't know.

[areal]

No point me flashing credentials, most people dont even know what an ISC2 accreditation is until an incident handler arrives after they get hacked. I have however done a bit of dabbling with security ;)

With due respect to the geeks, youre both acting like the man in the hot air balloon right now. Technically correct, but absolutely no use to mankind.

Bottom line, no "club" could afford $50k+ a month on hosting fees (I kind of read it to be for development costs and kept quiet, but if that's hosting costs, someone's making a fortune or expecting to host the national lottery alongside NAFA's home site. (for what its worth I used to run the UK lottery site for Camelot on a lot less hardware and it took around 8 million hits every wednesday and saturday) Dont know how much voting they are planning but you'd have the tin to do a lot of it.

VB may be a BBS (technically correct) but its a whole lot more on top and for the money it costs, you'd have to find some really generous developers prepared to do a lot of coding for free to match what VB provides.
By all means go and buy or develop a fancy skin to present VB to the world, but you'd be talking months if not years to develop a bespoke system from scratch.
VB is by no means perfectly secure, but then if you want a secure computer system, dig a big hole in the ground, put the disk in the bottom, fill the hole with concrete and its secure for as long as it would take someone to dig it up with a jackhammer. Complete total security of a computer system is more of a goal or objective (generally only achieved by unplugging the power cable) than a destination.

VB provides all the features you want, either native or as small addons, for the money a club can reasonably spend, why re-invent the wheel?

Look objectively at what youre trying to achieve (an improvement in reliability over postal votes).
Work out how much is spent at the moment and how much of that you could effectively do away with by having online voting system and you have a rough budget for what you can spend.
Unless the votes are guilted hand made paper, hand delivered by a knight riding a white charger, I think you'll find your budget starts running out around the cost of VBulletin.

Then again, what do I know, I'm just a low life geek with no more right to live on god's clean earth, than a weasel.

[TexasFalconer]

I should have been clearer in my original statement concerning costs. The 50-75k estimate was a one-time cost for all the hardware/software/programming fees. The only recurring monthly cost would be the connection to the Internet. In this case I was quoting a fractional T1 @ around $200/mo. Depending on traffic (I was assuming that NAFA would have it's public website on this same server thus the higher bandwidth line), you could get by with a commercial high speed cable connection (although I'd not personally go that way as they are not nearly as reliable as a dedicated T1.) So no, not 50k a month. More like $200 a month. From that you have to subtract your current ISP costs (I don't know what the relationship is between NAFA and Peregrine Productions or what the hosting fees are, if any.)

There are a number of ways to go with this as I've stated- you could go with a hosted, secure (single user) server. You could go with a company that provides this type of service such as vrelectionservices.com (I don't know anything about them other than what I've read.) I do know that some of them can be pricey. The benefits to what I outlined originally is that you OWN THE SERVER. You can do with it whatever you want, and are not reliant on a 3'rd party for security, backups, maintenance, etc. Again, if NAFA wants to put their toes in the water on this, I would strongly urge them to contact a reputable internet engineering consultant firm and explore which options would best work for the organization.


Greg - again, I appreciate your perspective so I hope you don't take any of the comments too harshly. I would like us to continue sharing ideas if you are willing.

I agree with you that security is very important. I'm glad we also agree that your first recommendation is more appropriate for a multi-billion dollar corporation than a Falconry club so thank you for acknowledging that. Part of your recommendation included 50-75 grand in monthly charges alone. Obviously this is totally unreasonable and can never happen for us. I'm resisting the urge to react too strongly to this kind of recommendation, as I'm genuinely afraid the board could hear this kind of stuff from a professional like you and it will stop all progress dead in it's tracks. I feel like all of us need to get some alignment around these issues before the water gets too muddy to swim.

Can you suggest some alternatives that might be more appropriate and affordable?

(fyi - vBulletin is in fact a forum as you mentioned, EXACTLY like this one... because it is also running on vBulletin.)

Thanks.

[wyodjm]

I agree - and ALL the trip-related expenses should be reimbursed. Imagine spending $7,000 of your own money. Now imagine coming home, submitting receipts, and the org deciding after-the-fact that they'll only cover $1,000 of your expenditures. You have to absorb the remaining $6,000.

I think it needs to be made perfectly clear beforehand that there's a $ cap on trip expenses, or that only the independently wealthy need apply for the rep position.

I've always contended that everyone serving on the Board - including and especially the President - should be elected by the membership.

You should let Ralph Rogers know that!

I understand that Ralph is up for NAFA's nomination choice as the IAF's Vice President for the America's. I'm not very comfortable with this.

Parts of Europe and of course Asia have very strong ties to golden eagles and their use for falconry purposes. I would think the IAF would want a strong advocate for the use of eagles for falconry purposes To my knowledge, Ralph Rogers has never supported the use of eagles for falconry purposes in the United States. I remember discussing the subject with him at a couple of NAFA Board meetings while I was NAFA's Eagle Committee chairman. So, I was there.

Craig Hendee has also been nominated for the same position. I believe Craig is very supportive of the use of eagles for falconry purposes and he has associations with eagle falconers in Asia. IMO, Craig would be a great IAF, VP for the Americas.

[Eragon]

Just being nosey, who lost applications? & who's not getting ballots "and stuff like that"?
Rich

Hey Rich,
I know that Rob S. had a very big problem with them "losing" his payment and then he couldn't run for the directorship. I think that other people said at the same meeting that they had had problems also. At the last picnic there was a petition signed, do you know what happened to that? I never heard any other mention of it. I believe it was about peregrine research.

[areal]

Sorry Fred, couldnt resist

learning a little about binary
Hope you didnt spend much more than an afternoon on that one, there's only two things to know ;)


machine language

if you mean push, pop, mov, call, ret etc, again, I hope you didnt spend more than an afternoon or two on it



If you want to get into a pi$$ing match on credentials we can do that but that would have to result in a winner and a looser and I'm not into that. If I was into winners and loosers I'd still be in the computer industry which I can't stand it anymore.

No it would prove youre both sad


Yes Vbulliten is BBS software. But then you don't know what you don't know.

Hmmm, are we talking known unknowns or unknown unknowns here? (man that was hard to type correctly) Personally I really DONT KNOW!!

[Ken S.]

I should have been clearer in my original statement concerning costs. The 50-75k estimate was a one-time cost for all the hardware/software/programming fees. The only recurring monthly cost would be the connection to the Internet. In this case I was quoting a fractional T1 @ around $200/mo. Depending on traffic (I was assuming that NAFA would have it's public website on this same server thus the higher bandwidth line), you could get by with a commercial high speed cable connection (although I'd not personally go that way as they are not nearly as reliable as a dedicated T1.) So no, not 50k a month. More like $200 a month. From that you have to subtract your current ISP costs (I don't know what the relationship is between NAFA and Peregrine Productions or what the hosting fees are, if any.)

There are a number of ways to go with this as I've stated- you could go with a hosted, secure (single user) server. You could go with a company that provides this type of service such as vrelectionservices.com (I don't know anything about them other than what I've read.) I do know that some of them can be pricey. The benefits to what I outlined originally is that you OWN THE SERVER. You can do with it whatever you want, and are not reliant on a 3'rd party for security, backups, maintenance, etc. Again, if NAFA wants to put their toes in the water on this, I would strongly urge them to contact a reputable internet engineering consultant firm and explore which options would best work for the organization.

Thank you for correcting yourself on the monthly costs, but I think you are still killing a fly with a sledghammer. The current site is probably hosted on a desktop pc in someone's basement sharing their cable modem so an upgrade to a $10/month hosting plan would be a huge improvement and I'm sure would handle the small amount of traffic it would get. Lots of people doing it. You think this site (NAFEX) is hosted for $200 a month? If it is... then I can save Chris about $190 or more a month because I have larger sites with more traffic running for less. :) And why would NAFA care about owning it's own server??? There's nobody to maintain it and change backup tapes. There's no NAFA data center. There's no NAFA building for that matter. And as for any relationship with other companies... I could only assume this could be a NAFA member that works or owns a facility, and I know nothing about that. Please understand this one point I keep trying to make --> NAFA IS NOT A HUGE CORPORATION, IT IS A FALCONRY ORGANIZATION. Maybe the term, "Board of Directors" throws people off... and maybe it would be better to call it, "Team of Elected Volunteers" or something. :) Just a thought...

[TexasFalconer]

You read it correctly- the ball park figure was hardware/software/engineering/programming.

I agree- there are all levels of security- it depends on how warm and fuzzy you want to be with allowing people to vote electronically in your organization.

The "point" (if there really ever was one) to my posts was to simply "point" out that when people start yelling "On-Line Voting! Yeah! Let's do That!" they need to be aware that it's not that easy to implement and there are a lot of things to be considered.

And with that said... I don't see the point of adding to the conversation further.


No point me flashing credentials, most people dont even know what an ISC2 accreditation is until an incident handler arrives after they get hacked. I have however done a bit of dabbling with security ;)

With due respect to the geeks, youre both acting like the man in the hot air balloon right now. Technically correct, but absolutely no use to mankind.

Bottom line, no "club" could afford $50k+ a month on hosting fees (I kind of read it to be for development costs and kept quiet, but if that's hosting costs, someone's making a fortune or expecting to host the national lottery alongside NAFA's home site. (for what its worth I used to run the UK lottery site for Camelot on a lot less hardware and it took around 8 million hits every wednesday and saturday) Dont know how much voting they are planning but you'd have the tin to do a lot of it.

VB may be a BBS (technically correct) but its a whole lot more on top and for the money it costs, you'd have to find some really generous developers prepared to do a lot of coding for free to match what VB provides.
By all means go and buy or develop a fancy skin to present VB to the world, but you'd be talking months if not years to develop a bespoke system from scratch.
VB is by no means perfectly secure, but then if you want a secure computer system, dig a big hole in the ground, put the disk in the bottom, fill the hole with concrete and its secure for as long as it would take someone to dig it up with a jackhammer. Complete total security of a computer system is more of a goal or objective (generally only achieved by unplugging the power cable) than a destination.

VB provides all the features you want, either native or as small addons, for the money a club can reasonably spend, why re-invent the wheel?

Look objectively at what youre trying to achieve (an improvement in reliability over postal votes).
Work out how much is spent at the moment and how much of that you could effectively do away with by having online voting system and you have a rough budget for what you can spend.
Unless the votes are guilted hand made paper, hand delivered by a knight riding a white charger, I think you'll find your budget starts running out around the cost of VBulletin.

Then again, what do I know, I'm just a low life geek with no more right to live on god's clean earth, than a weasel.

[Ken S.]

You read it correctly- the ball park figure was hardware/software/engineering/programming.

I agree- there are all levels of security- it depends on how warm and fuzzy you want to be with allowing people to vote electronically in your organization.

The "point" (if there really ever was one) to my posts was to simply "point" out that when people start yelling "On-Line Voting! Yeah! Let's do That!" they need to be aware that it's not that easy to implement and there are a lot of things to be considered.

And with that said... I don't see the point of adding to the conversation further.

Makes sense... and thank you for adding your perspective. I enjoyed the discussion and I hope you don't take any of it too harshly. Your support is appreciated.

Thanks!

[Migisi]

You should let Ralph Rogers know that!

Oh, he knows. But he's not fretting. He voted to *reimburse 60% of pre-approved travel for future NAFA IAF Representatives.


Note: "Future" NAFA reps.



But before that vote, the Board voted to reimburse *Mike Dupuy $1,000.00, as a one time reimbursement for Mr. Dupuy for his recent travel to Africa as NAFA’s IAF Representative.

Big whoop! Round trip airfare alone can run $1000 to $1300 from the US to Africa (South African Airways). I suppose Dupuy was supposed to sleep on the beach and beg for food?

If NAFA's going to send a rep to the IAF, NAFA should be willing to pay the full freight (airfare, meals, and hotel). If the budget doesn't permit it, don't send anyone! As I see things, anyway...

(* Board teleconference 09.2 minutes)

[areal]

Big whoop! Round trip airfare alone can run $1000 to $1300 from the US to Africa

I say serves him right for flying, he could have done the trip with two apprentices as slaves in a rowing boat.
Start off the florida oast and keep paddling southeast'ish till you hit land or have eaten both the slaves to stay alive :)

[Migisi]

I say serves him right for flying, he could have done the trip with two apprentices as slaves in a rowing boat.
Start off the florida oast and keep paddling southeast'ish till you hit land or have eaten both the slaves to stay alive :)

Feel free to submit your "slave ship" idea to NAFA. But who will be expected to buy the row boat? Craig or Ralph... or maybe the slaves themselves? If the slaves buy it and are eaten, nobody need be reimbursed. Great idea!! NAFA will love it. toungeout

[goshawks00]

Yea maybe so but that only gets him as far as the Bahamastoungeout

Now then this is where NAFA is really sticking it to us... who voted Ralph as king pin for this noble venture? Let's see anyone want to make a guess as to who will be next in line for the perks?
B.

[Migisi]

Let's see anyone want to make a guess as to who will be next in line for the perks?

I'm guessing... the guy who doesn't need them the most.

[Migisi]

Hey Rich,
I know that Rob S. had a very big problem with them "losing" his payment and then he couldn't run for the directorship. ... At the last picnic there was a petition signed, do you know what happened to that? I never heard any other mention of it...

In a nut shell: NAFA spent $ to hire lawyers to declare that the petition was no good.

[areal]

Yea maybe so but that only gets him as far as the Bahamastoungeout

Why because my directions are that bad or because he's going to eat his propulsion system by then?

Thrift is supposed to be the order of the day. Perhaps a requirement that he not eat more than one slave per 10k sea miles.

[jfseaman]

Spoken like a true job protectionist. Don't use the expertise of the members, hire an outside firm. Sheesh.


I should have been clearer in my original statement concerning costs. The 50-75k estimate was a one-time cost for all the hardware/software/programming fees. The only recurring monthly cost would be the connection to the Internet. In this case I was quoting a fractional T1 @ around $200/mo. Depending on traffic (I was assuming that NAFA would have it's public website on this same server thus the higher bandwidth line), you could get by with a commercial high speed cable connection (although I'd not personally go that way as they are not nearly as reliable as a dedicated T1.) So no, not 50k a month. More like $200 a month. From that you have to subtract your current ISP costs (I don't know what the relationship is between NAFA and Peregrine Productions or what the hosting fees are, if any.)

There are a number of ways to go with this as I've stated- you could go with a hosted, secure (single user) server. You could go with a company that provides this type of service such as vrelectionservices.com (I don't know anything about them other than what I've read.) I do know that some of them can be pricey. The benefits to what I outlined originally is that you OWN THE SERVER. You can do with it whatever you want, and are not reliant on a 3'rd party for security, backups, maintenance, etc. Again, if NAFA wants to put their toes in the water on this, I would strongly urge them to contact a reputable internet engineering consultant firm and explore which options would best work for the organization.

[everetkhorton]

You should let Ralph Rogers know that!

I understand that Ralph is up for NAFA's nomination choice as the IAF's Vice President for the America's. I'm not very comfortable with this.

Parts of Europe and of course Asia have very strong ties to golden eagles and their use for falconry purposes. I would think the IAF would want a strong advocate for the use of eagles for falconry purposes To my knowledge, Ralph Rogers has never supported the use of eagles for falconry purposes in the United States. I remember discussing the subject with him at a couple of NAFA Board meetings while I was NAFA's Eagle Committee chairman. So, I was there.

Craig Hendee has also been nominated for the same position. I believe Craig is very supportive of the use of eagles for falconry purposes and he has associations with eagle falconers in Asia. IMO, Craig would be a great IAF, VP for the Americas.

D. McCarron:
I think Craig H. is the AFC nomination to the IAF VP. for the Americas.

[Lowachi]

I have been so called "lost" a couple of times. Others off of the top are Fred Fogg, Bill(Outhawkin) and JF Seaman. I don't think this list is even close to complete. I don't think that the past sec.(Bridgette) was the problems. I equate problems to Steve Jone's statement in a past hawkchalk, something about the board not careing about those members whom could not get there dues paid on time and Rusty Scarboro's so called, coincidental, inability to handle the membership sec. job, dues paid on time or not and a second 'loss', as Daryl P. took over.
I was just checking w/Ryan as I took it that he meant here in Illinois, I know re the others, just hadn't heard of them here per se. The more I dig, the more I find. And I'm inclined to agree with you as to past problems and Steve's comment

[Lowachi]

In a nut shell: NAFA spent $ to hire lawyers to declare that the petition was no good.
Thanks Bernie, ya beat me to the typing...but that was BIG $.

[Lowachi]

Spoken like a true job protectionist. Don't use the expertise of the members, hire an outside firm. Sheesh.
Oops, thought you were talkin' about the slaves/row boat sorr:Dy

[TexasFalconer]

Fred, you are a man of many wonders.


Spoken like a true job protectionist. Don't use the expertise of the members, hire an outside firm. Sheesh.

[areal]

Fred, you are a man of many wonders.
That was a very dignified response to a blatant troll'ism clapp

[wyodjm]

D. McCarron:
I think Craig H. is the AFC nomination to the IAF VP. for the Americas.

Right you are, my fine falconer comrade. Here's hoping Craig gets elected by the international delegates.

And please.....it's Dan!

ATB Ev,

Dan

[Migisi]

Thanks Bernie, ya beat me to the typing...but that was BIG$.

Indeed it was ... a tidy sum wasted (IMO) on lawyers just to keep one man off the Board. Your membership dues could've been better used to cover IAF rep Dupuy's travel expenses, and upgrade NAFA's website, and ... yadda ya.

As I see things, anyway.

[Saluqi]

This thread started out great, but has spiraled down into uselessness. Please only add comments that are pertinent to the original post by Richard. Thanks.

[everetkhorton]

Richard:
I think there is several reason for the decline, economy, feel there is no need, negative opinion from others. feel NAFA is not meeting there needs.
Have person issues with the administration. Feel they get the main benefit with out paying(flying there birds) More information in other places. Don't want to be bothered, just want to fly there birds. The demographies show a big decline after 7 years. NAFA does not solicit new members. There maybe more but I think you get the picture.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Evan,
Concerning your message yesterday, I would like to understand why the NAFA leadership rejected the opportunity so I could judge if their decision was rational. As of now, I am unable to fathom any valid reason for not accepting such an offer. Perhaps others can chime in so I might acquire a better understanding.

The type of divergent opinions that have already been expressed in just this single thread I believe demonstrates the value of having an open forum of this type. It is somewhat similar to a group brainstorming session. All falconers, be they members or non-members of NAFA, have the opportunity to view different positions thereby having a chance to evaluate and be better informed.

Another situation that has been puzzling is that official pronouncements by the NAFA president come with a disclaimer that his message is only for NAFA members. It has always been my view that 'keeping secrets' from non-members is a big mistake. Most, if not all such messages have a positive NAFA public relations value and I fail to understand why the NAFA leadership would not want ALL falconers to be exposed the such information

As for the issue about declining NAFA membership, I received a private message in which the person indicated he thought the big drop of about 700 - 750 members in the two year period between 1998 and 2000 coincided with the delisting of the Peregrine and with the accompanying USF&WS provision that no Peregrines were to be removed from the wild populations.

At any rate, thanks for your input as it is always nice to hear the perspective of someone from the other side of the pond.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Dirthawking]

In a nut shell: NAFA spent $ to hire lawyers to declare that the petition was no good.

From what I understand, the lawyers told them that YES the petition was good. But was still ignored!

Just what I was told....

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Ev,
You may be correct that the reasons for the decline in membership are as varied as what you mention and possibly more. But I can't help but feel there is likely to be a core, underlying cause at play.

To my way of thinking, by remaining silent and not explaining their position, I believe the NAFA leadership is hurting the organization. But that is just my view and I could be all wet.

Richard F. Hoyer

[goshawks00]

Richard if you are all wet then move over as the pool is getting crowded. To me it's real simple NAFA needs money not opinions, not exchange but those that can follow the finger snap and be happy to do it...
Barry

[wyodjm]

This thread started out great, but has spiraled down into uselessness. Please only add comments that are pertinent to the original post by Richard. Thanks.

Point well taken. I apologize Richard and Paul. I'm guilty of going down a few rabbit trails myself.

NAFA is clearly in decline. The last two NAFA administrations (presidents) have held their positions as if they were some sort of blood right dynasties. It has been my experience that when trying to engage the NAFA administration in any type of dialog about serious issues or concerns the attempts went completely ignored. A couple of times the past president even became a little condescending with me which was like throwing gas on a fire in my book.

On a positive note, a few of the recent NAFA directors have been quite responsive to the concerns of their constituency. However, to anyone really paying attention, a few of these directors appear to have been isolated and ostracized for some sort of future blackballing. It also happened to me, but I could give a rat's petunia. It hasn't affected the quality of my falconry one bit. Not a bit.

The last two NAFA presidents have been volleying and positioning themselves for more power and authority within the club, at the expense of the regional directors. Under no circumstances should the president feel that he or she isn't expendable. The president should be accountable to the directors. It's not the other way around. The current NAFA president has never held a single elected position within the club. People better wake up and figure out what's going on. It's happening right under peoples' noses and nothing is being done about it.

I'm no longer a NAFA member. I'm not bashing NAFA. NAFA is broken and no one seems to give a plug nickel about it. It's about power, control, and it's about egos. I can do without that. I'd rather donate my money to an organization that cares about me as a member. My last NAFA editorial.

ATB,

Dan McCarron

[Lowachi]

Point well taken. I apologize Richard and Paul. I'm guilty of going down a few rabbit trails myself.

NAFA is clearly in decline. The last two NAFA administrations (presidents) have held their positions as if they were some sort of blood right dynasties. It has been my experience that when trying to engage the NAFA administration in any type of dialog about serious issues or concerns the attempts went completely ignored. A couple of times the past president even became a little condescending with me which was like throwing gas on a fire in my book.

On a positive note, a few of the recent NAFA directors have been quite responsive to the concerns of their constituency. However, to anyone really paying attention, a few of these directors appear to have been isolated and ostracized for some sort of future blackballing. It also happened to me, but I could give a rat's petunia. It hasn't affected the quality of my falconry one bit. Not a bit.

The last two NAFA presidents have been volleying and positioning themselves for more power and authority within the club, at the expense of the regional directors. Under no circumstances should the president feel that he or she isn't expendable. The president should be accountable to the directors. It's not the other way around. The current NAFA president has never held a single elected position within the club. People better wake up and figure out what's going on. It's happening right under peoples' noses and nothing is being done about it.

I'm no longer a NAFA member. I'm not bashing NAFA. NAFA is broken and no one seems to give a plug nickel about it. It's about power, control, and it's about egos. I can do without that. I'd rather donate my money to an organization that cares about me as a member. My last NAFA editorial.

ATB,

Dan McCarron
Thanks Dan (and others)for all you've done and your insights. As one of the "staying another round", I've taken all your words to heart, and lest I forget, I know where to find them. Ever the optomist, I think NAFA can be brought around/turned from the dark side/what ever, for my sons I stay and will try to figure it out.Sons that have posed questions I can't answer. Maybe I make no more difference than those of you before me, but I'm compelled to try awhile longer. If I don't succeed, I couldn't be in better company. "Nuff Said"

[areal]

Evan,
Concerning your message yesterday, I would like to understand why the NAFA leadership rejected the opportunity so I could judge if their decision was rational. As of now, I am unable to fathom any valid reason for not accepting such an offer. Perhaps others can chime in so I might acquire a better understanding.

Richard, assuming you refer to them not adding features to the existing site, as far as I understand, they want a completely new website, redesigned from scratch, rolled out in one go, that keeps everyone happy.
Personally I'd sooner try and learn to walk on water, at least there is a narrow window when things freeze over, that I might actually succeed.

Big redevelopments work, only, when they have serious money being thrown at them (the $75k already mentioned is actually very reasonable), everyone is happy to wait for however long it takes for everything to be developed, tested and all the bugs ironed out and one or maybe two people have the final say over signoff and everyone is happy to accept their decision.

Unless all those criteria can be met, the only thing you can guarantee is the project will drag on forever, the developers will keep having to go back to their code to make petty changes (I think it should be green, no pink, hmmm, could we see what it would look like if you have to read from right to left, could we have that date in yyyy/mm/dd instead of mm/dd/yyyy, no sorry we liked it as it was before change it back, it never ends) and you will blow whatever budgets were set, clean out the water.

IMO the whole project would be a bit of a failure if they removed the picture of the white redtail on the gallery and didnt reproduce it in the new site's equivalent location. I realize it has "nothing" to do with the actual site, but its the first thing I go and look for when I visit the site. Beautiful bird, the site would be "less rich" without it.

I think what I'm trying to get across is the existing site has history, its served the club well, why replace the whole thing in one go when it is going to be pretty near impossible to satisfy everyone?
Far better and easier to add a forum get it working, if they dont have the source files to recreate the menu's then replace the bits you have to, but do it so that people have a minimal number of things they can pick on. (actually its so you have a minimal no of things to debug but it also means people have less to criticise)
They either pick on the new menu or the new forum, everything else has grown on people over time.

Bascally it comes down to whether they decide to provide the things members are asking for at minimal cost (VBulletin really would do everything NOW that a $75k bespoke development might eventually achieve in a year or two's time) by extending what they already have or do they insist on developing an entirely new site that members and probably one or two cyber miscreants are going to have a good go at ripping apart. If the existing site has lasted 6 months without being hacked, why replace it with something that may not even achieve that?

[everetkhorton]

One of the option was to vote on line. IMO this should be as fool proof as possible. If not you will be right back in the same situation that we are now. People complaining they could not get in, they forgot there access number/name. It has to be tamper proof. All this talk about TPR's WEGG etc. is all dutch to me. But it is great for those who understand it because they know what works and doesn't. But you can see they do not agree on all the points. Some times I wonder if there is ever a majority in falconry. LOL. I hope this is still on the main subject.

[Migisi]

The current NAFA president has never held a single elected position within the club.

In your opinion, should one be required to have served in an elected position before he is eligible to become President? Just curious.

[wyodjm]

In your opinion, should one be required to have served in an elected position before he is eligible to become President? Just curious.

That's a great question that I'm sure will be discussed from time to time. I'm sure you'll get as many different opinions for, as you will against.

It doesn't matter any longer to me what NAFA does or doesn't do. With the states taking over and administering the new federal regs, I see state clubs stepping up to the plate and taking on a much larger role than they historically have. State clubs will be the main liaisons between falconers and their states. Because of this, I see NAFA playing a much smaller role on the national level. It's already happening. I think we'll see it continue.

The various forms of communication in this day and age, such as this forum and the probably hundreds of other smaller forums and list serves all play a role in keeping falconers informed and connected with each other. Even the NAFA Journal and Hawk Chalk compete for articles with international, national magazines and state club periodicals. Look at the quality of stuff published in the Journal and Hawk Chalks just in the last 10 years. Water reaches its own level.

So, does it matter if the NAFA presidency is an elected position or not? I really don't care. As I said earlier, to me, NAFA is a nonevent.

ATB,

Dan MCCarron

[FredFogg]

One of the option was to vote on line. IMO this should be as fool proof as possible. If not you will be right back in the same situation that we are now. People complaining they could not get in, they forgot there access number/name. It has to be tamper proof. All this talk about TPR's WEGG etc. is all dutch to me. But it is great for those who understand it because they know what works and doesn't. But you can see they do not agree on all the points. Some times I wonder if there is ever a majority in falconry. LOL. I hope this is still on the main subject.

Ev, online voting could easily be done and it could be secure. An online membership database could be accessed and when someone votes, the database is updated with the vote, the person voting, an email sent back to the person showing them that they voted and cofirming their actual vote. That is the most complicated way, yet very easily doable. Now if someone wanted to do it a harder way, they could email a ballot in online form (word document, PDF format, etc), folks fill it out and email it back, the committee counting votes because NAFA had to have a damn committee for everything and then email the voter back to confirm to them that their vote was received. There are endless ways to do it online. And I am tired of hearing all this crap about security on a freaking online voting system, it's a damn vote for a falconry club, not for the president of the United States! After all, they already have online payment of dues on the NAFA website, I would be more concerned about a online financial transaction than about a online vote!

[TexasFalconer]

Not to get into trouble (again) by going off topic, but I’m curious about the scenario you just posted, as well as your comments concerning security being “crap.” In your example, an online membership databases is accessed (how?) and when someone votes (how?) the database is updated with the vote, [then] an email is sent back to the person showing them that they voted and confirming their actual vote. Ok, so, what credentials do they use to access this database? Or I guess if I understand this correctly, you don’t believe in credentials, as that amounts to “security” which is “crap.” But just for giggles, let’s suppose you conceded the point that there has to be SOME level of “crap” security (else anyone in the world could go to the site and vote.) So let’s say that they would use their email address to sign in. But what is to prevent someone from grabbing the email addresses of, say, 300 NAFA members and forging 300 votes for their candidate of their choice? Of course all these people (who didn’t really vote) would receive an email saying that they did vote. The outcome of that would be an outcry of cheating, and would render the vote null. Correct? What about if only three people complain that they received an email saying they had voted but they didn’t? Their rights as full voting members have still been compromised. Who gets to write them a letter and say, “Gee, that’s too bad your vote was stolen, Bob. Not a thing we can do about it though.” I guess I fail to see what was accomplished. You are correct that this is just a vote for a club and not the President (and we all saw how secure that voting process was in Florida) so you’re probably correct that accuracy is a trivial matter, and security is, in fact, “crap.”


Ev, online voting could easily be done and it could be secure. An online membership database could be accessed and when someone votes, the database is updated with the vote, the person voting, an email sent back to the person showing them that they voted and cofirming their actual vote. That is the most complicated way, yet very easily doable. Now if someone wanted to do it a harder way, they could email a ballot in online form (word document, PDF format, etc), folks fill it out and email it back, the committee counting votes because NAFA had to have a damn committee for everything and then email the voter back to confirm to them that their vote was received. There are endless ways to do it online. And I am tired of hearing all this crap about security on a freaking online voting system, it's a damn vote for a falconry club, not for the president of the United States! After all, they already have online payment of dues on the NAFA website, I would be more concerned about a online financial transaction than about a online vote!

[wyodjm]

Not to get into trouble (again) by going off topic, but I’m curious about the scenario you just posted, as well as your comments concerning security being “crap.” In your example, an online membership databases is accessed (how?) and when someone votes (how?) the database is updated with the vote, [then] an email is sent back to the person showing them that they voted and confirming their actual vote. Ok, so, what credentials do they use to access this database? Or I guess if I understand this correctly, you don’t believe in credentials, as that amounts to “security” which is “crap.” But just for giggles, let’s suppose you conceded the point that there has to be SOME level of “crap” security (else anyone in the world could go to the site and vote.) So let’s say that they would use their email address to sign in. But what is to prevent someone from grabbing the email addresses of, say, 300 NAFA members and forging 300 votes for their candidate of their choice? Of course all these people (who didn’t really vote) would receive an email saying that they did vote. The outcome of that would be an outcry of cheating, and would render the vote null. Correct? What about if only three people complain that they received an email saying they had voted but they didn’t? Their rights as full voting members have still been compromised. Who gets to write them a letter and say, “Gee, that’s too bad your vote was stolen, Bob. Not a thing we can do about it though.” I guess I fail to see what was accomplished. You are correct that this is just a vote for a club and not the President (and we all saw how secure that voting process was in Florida) so you’re probably correct that accuracy is a trivial matter, and security is, in fact, “crap.”

I'm far from being an online, technical advisor......... but the AFC has been holding online elections and using online features for the membership to vote on key issues with no problems. This includes having the membership vote on the recent name change from WRTC to the AFC.

Is this really rocket science? What gives? Why is it the AFC can do it?

[areal]

Ev, online voting could easily be done and it could be secure. An online membership database could be accessed and when someone votes, the database is updated with the vote, the person voting, an email sent back to the person showing them that they voted and cofirming their actual vote. That is the most complicated way, yet very easily doable.

Fred you may not know any of the fancy techy language that makes it sound like you know what youre talking about, but that's a very workable solution. In fact its not too far off how I would design something like this.



Now if someone wanted to do it a harder way, they could email a ballot in online form (word document, PDF format, etc), folks fill it out and email it back, the committee counting votes because NAFA had to have a damn committee for everything and then email the voter back to confirm to them that their vote was received. There are endless ways to do it online.

Youre right, there are endless ways of doing this, and that example is about the worst way to go about it.
You cannot trust email to anywhere near the level of non-repudiation (being able to prove someone actually did something and not someone else on their behalf.) required for a vote (that's why you dont e-mail bank instructions, ever!!)
I'd be prepared to bet I could intercept at least 25% of those votes before they even got to their recipients. In fact if I put my mind to it there's a way I could compromise every single one of those emails (hack the smtp server and put an alias into the exim/postgress/sendmail deamon's config files and redirect all mails to my address)


And I am tired of hearing all this crap about security on a freaking online voting system, it's a damn vote for a falconry club, not for the president of the United States! After all, they already have online payment of dues on the NAFA website, I would be more concerned about a online financial transaction than about a online vote!
You are absolutely right, except, how much would you spend to "secure" a $1 transaction? Is it worth spending $10 to protect it? $100? $1000?
If you decide $1 is an acceptable loss, what happens when someone steals $1, a million times.

Same thing with a vote, your security needs to be credible so people can have trust in the results but at the same time its more important to log exactly what goes on, than it is to prevent every possible means of circumventing any security you've put in place.
I wont go into how you do that here, I've seen another post which asks specific questions, I'll try and reply to Greg's questions as best I can next.

[TexasFalconer]

THAT is the only point my long, drawn out note was attempting to convey.

This is my last post on this thread- it keeps getting hijacked from the original intent. Frankly, discussing on-line voting, its ramifications and how it would/should be implemented is moot. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Go for it. I've got a mews to clean.


...your security needs to be credible so people can have trust in the results....

[areal]

Not to get into trouble (again) by going off topic,
Yea I need to watch out for that one, btw, did we work out how many apprentices the AIF rep would need to eat to make it to Cape Town?


but I’m curious about the scenario you just posted, as well as your comments concerning security being “crap.” In your example, an online membership databases is accessed (how?)

A username and Password, same as any other online system. Yes that doesnt answer your question, but its in the signup that you do the verification.
Basically you have a list of registered members (I'll assume for the purpose of voting all dues must be paid as well)
When a new user signs up to your membership system, the details they supply is either manually or programatically compared to a list of valid members. Once verified each member is assigned to a group according to their "status" in the voting rights (assuming you have different voting rights according to full/associate/apprentice level of the member)
Once assigned to groups the voting is easy.


and when someone votes (how?)

Okay this is a bit dirty and has had minimal "debugging" but I would use one table containing your members eligible to vote (could be a query or a view if you store more than one type of user in the same table) and a table linked by a right join to your members table which will store votes cast.
As each member starts the process of casting their vote, lookup their membership details with an isnull call to the votes cast table. This will return only eligible members who have not cast a vote.
Collect their vote, provisionally and store it in the votes cast table, along with the date/time of the vote, IP address, if you want to be pedantic, the hostname or DNS prt records etc and then generate an E-Mail to the member (you could explain this is happening on the voting screens) which contains a confirmation or voiding link.
When the user clicks the confirm or void links, you compare the IP address the confirmation comes from to the address the vote was cast from and if they match you could say with 99% certainty that the right person placed the vote. If youre worried about the votes being intercepted do it over SSL. Yes those keys can be broken, but it costs a lot more than even the Nafa presidency is worth (IMO anyway)


the database is updated with the vote, [then] an email is sent back to the person showing them that they voted and confirming their actual vote. Ok, so, what credentials do they use to access this database? Or I guess if I understand this correctly, you don’t believe in credentials, as that amounts to “security” which is “crap.” But just for giggles, let’s suppose you conceded the point that there has to be SOME level of “crap” security (else anyone in the world could go to the site and vote.)

I can solemly swear that everytime I have corrupted an insecure vote it was done so even an idiot could tell there's something funny going on ;)


So let’s say that they would use their email address to sign in. But what is to prevent someone from grabbing the email addresses of, say, 300 NAFA members and forging 300 votes for their candidate of their choice?

Good point and the only way I know to prevent that from happening is by verifying the person signing up against known good data long before you even get to voting.
Never mind voting, I sincerely hope Nafa implement some good verification over all member accounts, especially the forums. The last thing they want is some South African sat in the UK passing comment on their internal business in the forums, as I am quite blatantly doing now.


Of course all these people (who didn’t really vote) would receive an email saying that they did vote. The outcome of that would be an outcry of cheating, and would render the vote null. Correct?

Not if the vote is pending until confirmed or voided through the email confirmation links.
There's loads of ways to bolt on layers of security but at the end of the day its all to nout if someone can come along and root the underlying OS or even the RDBMS for that matter.


What about if only three people complain that they received an email saying they had voted but they didn’t? Their rights as full voting members have still been compromised. Who gets to write them a letter and say, “Gee, that’s too bad your vote was stolen, Bob.

For that task I would like to nominte Fred Seamen who is keen for the membership to help in these things clapp


so you’re probably correct that accuracy is a trivial matter, and security is, in fact, “crap.”
Odly enough a very high ranking member of her majesty's government came to pretty much the exact same conclusion, when the only way they could stop us from hacking into "certain machines" so they could get signoff for their project and pay the contractors, was by unplugging the ethernet cable from the dirty side of the firewall for the duration of the inbound penetration tests.

[sharptail]

Thanks Evan, that last statement is profound and we all sit "secure" behind our firewalls feeling, oh so secure! I got a good chuckle out of that! I bet you are a blast to know in person!

[Saluqi]

This thread is a perfect example of why NAFA is probably hesitant to host an online forum. A conversation that started as a well directed inquiry quickly degraded into some weird conversation about internet security. Can you imagine a NAFA forum where actual policy would be discussed? Who would want to be a moderator of the that? You would be signing up to be hated by your fellow falconers because you had to direct the conversation, delete posts, and tell people to shut up. Maybe NAFEX is all that is necessary so the people can vent about NAFA policy.

[Roper]

Paul I soooo agree,, but I gotta ask what the hell did you sit on a cactus, your usually not so intense , but I like it...!!!!!!!

[Zarafia]

Paul, I think that the way this thread has evolved is entirely on-topic with the beginning post. Conversations move to different aspects of the subject.
It was presented in the first post that internet forums such as NAFEX may be contributing to the decline in NAFA membership. This may be true, but it certainly isn't the fault of any forum. It is, IMO because falconry forums are a great way to communicate.
Computers are more and more a part of our daily lives. Our banking, communication, work and certainly our passions/hobbies. What business doesn't have a website these days?
Security is a major issue when considering changing the way things are done. And I think its quite clear that change needs to come.

[Migisi]

I'm far from being an online, technical advisor......... but the AFC has been holding online elections and using online features for the membership to vote on key issues with no problems. This includes having the membership vote on the recent name change from WRTC to the AFC.

Is this really rocket science? What gives? Why is it the AFC can do it?

Thanks for making that point, Dan. I'd add that it didn't cost AFC a ton of money to add the necessary technology to do it either.

[Roper]

Brandi
I had to think about things for a while.. before I responded to your "?"
Yes I appreciate that you responded to me as you did.
But first off Lance C is not Nafa he might be a part of it. but he is not nafa.
as far as the board goes i think some things need to be clarified.
at the nat field meet they have 3 meetings
1. is a closed meeting this meeting is not for the general public.
this is to discuss topics of discretion.. Not all things need to be out in the open .. this is not the TMZ show with all of the petty bullshit they do.
I believe this is a necessary thing .. say for instance if someones membership etc...
2. then there is the open to the public board meeting, where you as the general public can watch the meetings and are not allowed to comment unless you are recognized by the board.
3. then there is the general meetings in the evenings that allows you to corrispond with the directors and voice your concerns of the meeting number 2. It is my understanding that no concerns were brought to the board members at the evening meetings.

did you attend any of those meetings, I damn sure didnt i was out in the field hawking..
I did come back in the evenings and I did speak with Dan C and Ralf Rodgers at length on some issues. i did get introduced to Lance C personally ( or impersonally), he struck me as not interested in to much of what i had to say, so it was short and tenative at best.
with Dan C regular emails and so forth, what information do you think your missing.
this thread is a perfect example as was so elloquently pointed out earlier on how quickly things denegrate or change course .
I cannot see how you would think it would be beneficial to have people being able to contribute ( disrupt) or however you want to look at as benificial.
I understand that you think because you paid your annual dues that you think you have part ownership in nafa.. I really cant disagree with you there. But I am truely at a loss as to what you think your not getting..
What are they prohibiting you from doing...

Now if these remarks are to inflamitory and they are not worth your time to respond then kindly just be quiet and man up

[Zarafia]

I did just check the NAFA website and there was a section right up front called "NAFA's Purposes". Number one there was: To provide communication among, and to disseminate information to, interested members.
Forums are a very good and effective way to communicate, that's pretty obvious. Falconers tend to be opinionated, strong willed folks. Forum or no forum, that is not likely to change.

[Roper]

Meridith would you please pm me with your pin number :D

[Zarafia]

Meridith would you please pm me with your pin number :D



Sure. Best of luck trying to get anything out of that account LOL.

[wyodjm]

This thread is a perfect example of why NAFA is probably hesitant to host an online forum. A conversation that started as a well directed inquiry quickly degraded into some weird conversation about internet security. Can you imagine a NAFA forum where actual policy would be discussed? Who would want to be a moderator of the that? You would be signing up to be hated by your fellow falconers because you had to direct the conversation, delete posts, and tell people to shut up. Maybe NAFEX is all that is necessary so the people can vent about NAFA policy.


Paul:

Again, sorry. I've probably taken up way too much space on here. Anymore, this stuff makes my head spin.

I'll do my best to just talk about hawking and trapping from now on. :)

Dan

[Saluqi]

Paul I soooo agree,, but I gotta ask what the hell did you sit on a cactus, your usually not so intense , but I like it...!!!!!!!

I guess because I sit here and read this stuff and I wonder what the hell do firewalls have to do with decreasing NAFA membership, then I try a redirect and a half dozen posts later we're talking firewalls again. Give me a break, someone, not me, should click that magic button at the bottom the of the page and begin a new thread on internet security programming, seriously.

No one has contributed a new idea about the dwindling membership in many posts. Ev did a good job of summarizing it, and in my mind the over riding reason is apathy. I think it may have been Barry who said it first (if it wasn't I apologize to whomever did), but falconers are lazy, the status quo is fine. I get all the info I need from NAFEX, AM Fal Mag, and other sources like friends. Why join NAFA when all I want to know about the pros and cons of using chaps for hunting squirrels, or whatever your favorite pet topic is, can be found right here online? Why re-new my NAFA membership? So, sure membership falls, all people really want is someone to hold their hand and tell them how to fly their birds. At some point before the internet when all American falconers had was the Hawk Chalk and the Journal NAFA ruled supreme. NAFA periodicals and the annual meet functioned as major avenue for dissemination of information on all aspects of falconry. Now in the internet age with NAFA's role diminished people don't join in the first place, and old members don't renew for many reasons already given in this thread.

The problem with this new "internet falconer" is that it's a virtual world, and those unaffiliated with an organization don't have any physical representation where and when it matters, like in the federal government. In this internet era NAFA and AFC do not need to function as the center of falconry knowledge anymore, but they do need to represent us in the face of the increasing legislation against us, from habitat issues to outright assaults of our ability to fly birds and hunt.

As an example of the apathy I've observed here on NAFEX, I routinely get lots of warnings about animal rights issues from a sighthound email list that I'm a member of, and many times I cross post them to NAFEX and it never ceases to amaze me just how few people even bother to look at those posts. I think people are afraid to get down and dirty because it might mean that they have to take a stand and call their congressman, or go to the state legislature and protest. In my mind the only way to have some voice on a national level is to join NAFA and AFC, (I need to join AFC myself) because regardless of how these organizations deal with some of the BS that we all hate them for, they do have a function and that function is stay on the forefront of the big issues.

So David, I guess that's why I have pricker in my butt!

[sharptail]

Paul, I thought my last post was no topic, however if you disagree feel free to delete it!

[wyodjm]

Paul, I thought my last post was no topic, however if you disagree feel free to delete it!

Same here.

DM

[Eagle Owl]

Brandi
I had to think about things for a while.. before I responded to your "?"
Yes I appreciate that you responded to me as you did.
But first off Lance C is not Nafa he might be a part of it. but he is not nafa.

I understand that Lance is not NAFA, but I have had dealings with other board members and lets just say they were not always nice or helpful. I do not want to name names and didn't mention Lance by name until you did. Dealing with some of the board for the meet was like pulling teeth. I worked long and hard for the Amarillo meet doing registration and helping Krys with the raffle. You would think board members would be appreciative of the time and effort, but instead, to say that some of the board members were down right rude is an understatement. These dealings, along with other dealings in the last few years, are what I base my perception of the NAFA board on. I do have to say, though, that Ralph Rogers and his wife stopped by the registration table many times asking me if I was OK and if I needed anything. I don't agree with him on most issues, but I have to say he was super nice to me.



as far as the board goes i think some things need to be clarified.
at the nat field meet they have 3 meetings
1. is a closed meeting this meeting is not for the general public.
this is to discuss topics of discretion.. Not all things need to be out in the open .. this is not the TMZ show with all of the petty bullshit they do.
I believe this is a necessary thing .. say for instance if someones membership etc...
2. then there is the open to the public board meeting, where you as the general public can watch the meetings and are not allowed to comment unless you are recognized by the board.
3. then there is the general meetings in the evenings that allows you to corrispond with the directors and voice your concerns of the meeting number 2. It is my understanding that no concerns were brought to the board members at the evening meetings.

did you attend any of those meetings, I damn sure didnt i was out in the field hawking..

I was a bit busy to attend any of the meetings/talks/activities at this meet. I did, however, attend some of the meetings in Colorado. I understand that some things need to be handled behind closed doors. I served on the THA board for almost 2 years and when we had to discuss specific members, their names were left out of the minutes. But we are never told anything about what happens in the closed meetings. The board can still report what is being discussed without giving specifics or naming names. It is their refusal to do so that leads people to believe there is something fishy going on behind closed doors.


I did come back in the evenings and I did speak with Dan C and Ralf Rodgers at length on some issues. i did get introduced to Lance C personally ( or impersonally), he struck me as not interested in to much of what i had to say, so it was short and tenative at best.
with Dan C regular emails and so forth, what information do you think your missing.
this thread is a perfect example as was so elloquently pointed out earlier on how quickly things denegrate or change course .
I cannot see how you would think it would be beneficial to have people being able to contribute ( disrupt) or however you want to look at as benificial.
I understand that you think because you paid your annual dues that you think you have part ownership in nafa.. I really cant disagree with you there. But I am truely at a loss as to what you think your not getting..
What are they prohibiting you from doing...

Now if these remarks are to inflamitory and they are not worth your time to respond then kindly just be quiet and man up

David, I am not asking for the NAFA board to bend over backward and cater to me. But as a dues paying member, I do expect certain things. When a person volunteers for a position with NAFA, they know the expectations. If I e-mail a board member, no matter how trivial, then I expect to be answered. First of all, it is just common courtesy, and second, it is their responsibility as a board member. The board, collectively, appears to not care about the members. All I want to see is a board that actually seems to care about what the members think. There are board members that do seem to care and are trying to change things (like Eric E.), but we need more in there like him.

[sharptail]

just be quiet and man up
Well David, the problem is the same, attitude, and my response is the same as back in post 53.

[frootdog]

If I e-mail a board member, no matter how trivial, then I expect to be answered. First of all, it is just common courtesy, and second, it is their responsibility as a board member. The board, collectively, appears to not care about the members. All I want to see is a board that actually seems to care about what the members think. There are board members that do seem to care and are trying to change things (like Eric E.), but we need more in there like him.

I just have to say that in all my dealings with the central director getting in contact with him was difficult at best. After mentioning that to him he stated that he had no desire to be the central director and if he were the type to quit/throw in the towel he would quit. He said he would dtick it out for his term and had no desire to run again. I'm not the only one he said that too either. Now the nominations are out and there you have it he's on the ballot. So just keep in mind he has stated he has no desire to do the job, yet is running again.........

[Eragon]

Ok, here's another question: Do you think that the Feds disassociating themselves with falconry after 2014 will cause a very large decrease in NAFA membership? Since everything will be state run, it seems like NAFA will lose many members and much of it's purpose.

[sharptail]

There are board members that do seem to care and are trying to change things (like Eric E.), but we need more in there like him.

Unfortunately, we lost another one like Eric in Ken Mesch. I asked him to run again but he declined.

Of the new people running for DOL which would make the best choice for change and why?

[sharptail]

Ok, here's another question: Do you think that the Feds disassociating themselves with falconry after 2014 will cause a very large decrease in NAFA membership? Since everything will be state run, it seems like NAFA will lose many members and much of it's purpose.

I think that it is possible to loose falconry in one or more states if they cannot adopt the new regs in time. A brilliant move for the anti falconry feds.

[Lowachi]

[quote=sharptail;86328]Unfortunately, we lost another one like Eric in Ken Mesch. I asked him to run again but he declined.

quote]
I asked as well, but I knew the answer already.

[everetkhorton]

Ev, online voting could easily be done and it could be secure. An online membership database could be accessed and when someone votes, the database is updated with the vote, the person voting, an email sent back to the person showing them that they voted and cofirming their actual vote. That is the most complicated way, yet very easily doable. Now if someone wanted to do it a harder way, they could email a ballot in online form (word document, PDF format, etc), folks fill it out and email it back, the committee counting votes because NAFA had to have a damn committee for everything and then email the voter back to confirm to them that their vote was received. There are endless ways to do it online. And I am tired of hearing all this crap about security on a freaking online voting system, it's a damn vote for a falconry club, not for the president of the United States! After all, they already have online payment of dues on the NAFA website, I would be more concerned about a online financial transaction than about a online vote!

Fred:
Thanks, but like I said it is a dutch to me.frus

[FredFogg]

I guess because I sit here and read this stuff and I wonder what the hell do firewalls have to do with decreasing NAFA membership, then I try a redirect and a half dozen posts later we're talking firewalls again. Give me a break, someone, not me, should click that magic button at the bottom the of the page and begin a new thread on internet security programming, seriously.

No one has contributed a new idea about the dwindling membership in many posts. Ev did a good job of summarizing it, and in my mind the over riding reason is apathy. I think it may have been Barry who said it first (if it wasn't I apologize to whomever did), but falconers are lazy, the status quo is fine. I get all the info I need from NAFEX, AM Fal Mag, and other sources like friends. Why join NAFA when all I want to know about the pros and cons of using chaps for hunting squirrels, or whatever your favorite pet topic is, can be found right here online? Why re-new my NAFA membership? So, sure membership falls, all people really want is someone to hold their hand and tell them how to fly their birds. At some point before the internet when all American falconers had was the Hawk Chalk and the Journal NAFA ruled supreme. NAFA periodicals and the annual meet functioned as major avenue for dissemination of information on all aspects of falconry. Now in the internet age with NAFA's role diminished people don't join in the first place, and old members don't renew for many reasons already given in this thread.

The problem with this new "internet falconer" is that it's a virtual world, and those unaffiliated with an organization don't have any physical representation where and when it matters, like in the federal government. In this internet era NAFA and AFC do not need to function as the center of falconry knowledge anymore, but they do need to represent us in the face of the increasing legislation against us, from habitat issues to outright assaults of our ability to fly birds and hunt.

As an example of the apathy I've observed here on NAFEX, I routinely get lots of warnings about animal rights issues from a sighthound email list that I'm a member of, and many times I cross post them to NAFEX and it never ceases to amaze me just how few people even bother to look at those posts. I think people are afraid to get down and dirty because it might mean that they have to take a stand and call their congressman, or go to the state legislature and protest. In my mind the only way to have some voice on a national level is to join NAFA and AFC, (I need to join AFC myself) because regardless of how these organizations deal with some of the BS that we all hate them for, they do have a function and that function is stay on the forefront of the big issues.

So David, I guess that's why I have pricker in my butt!

Paul, the way I am looking at it, it all relates. The decline in membership is from dissatisfaction of the members mainly about communications from NAFA and its members. Part of that communications is their website. Folks want a better website and the discussion turned to how we could have a better website and do certain things on that website that the members are dissatisfied with currently (voting, for example). It all relates depending on how you look at it. Aside from a few little stabs here and there, I have found the thread to be very imformative and constructive. And like any other thread, if there are post that you don't like or feel they are over you head (internet security), skip them and go on reading. There are lots of threads I have no interest in, and lots I don't understand, but they have the right to be there for those that do. Police the rudeness and that type of stuff, not the content!

[FredFogg]

Not to get into trouble (again) by going off topic, but I’m curious about the scenario you just posted, as well as your comments concerning security being “crap.” In your example, an online membership databases is accessed (how?) and when someone votes (how?) the database is updated with the vote, [then] an email is sent back to the person showing them that they voted and confirming their actual vote. Ok, so, what credentials do they use to access this database? Or I guess if I understand this correctly, you don’t believe in credentials, as that amounts to “security” which is “crap.” But just for giggles, let’s suppose you conceded the point that there has to be SOME level of “crap” security (else anyone in the world could go to the site and vote.) So let’s say that they would use their email address to sign in. But what is to prevent someone from grabbing the email addresses of, say, 300 NAFA members and forging 300 votes for their candidate of their choice? Of course all these people (who didn’t really vote) would receive an email saying that they did vote. The outcome of that would be an outcry of cheating, and would render the vote null. Correct? What about if only three people complain that they received an email saying they had voted but they didn’t? Their rights as full voting members have still been compromised. Who gets to write them a letter and say, “Gee, that’s too bad your vote was stolen, Bob. Not a thing we can do about it though.” I guess I fail to see what was accomplished. You are correct that this is just a vote for a club and not the President (and we all saw how secure that voting process was in Florida) so you’re probably correct that accuracy is a trivial matter, and security is, in fact, “crap.”

Greg, I admit, saying security is "crap" was a poor choice of words. I also admit you, Ken and Evan are way above my skills with websites, but I do know enough to be dangerous. LOL And for what NAFA needs, it doesn't have to be complicated and can be done by volunteers. And it is time for change, time for NAFA to join the online world or be left behind.

[wyodjm]

I've been thinking about this whole thread and peoples' responses to it.

I've been reminiscing a bit. We weren't always like this. The hawks, the quarry, and the pursuits are ageless. The rest of us change.

ATB,

[Eagle Owl]

Of the new people running for DOL which would make the best choice for change and why?

Jeff, I can't answer that right now. I do not know all the candidates, so I will have to read their bios and ask around to get more info on them. I don't want to just make a decision on name alone.

[jfseaman]

Lack of confidence
Lack of perceived relevance
Lack of responsiveness


Fix the voting process. Stop appointing the president.

Update the website to one that is current and get real.

Be on the new website and reply to e-mails and phone calls.

If word gets out that these three things are fixed membership will grow.

[jfseaman]

There is obvious passion about NAFA. The members on this board want it to work or this thread would have died long ago.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

The following a resume is from Ron Clarke, running for DAL It was received by the Oregon FA president and passed on to the membership as Mr. Clarke may be able to attend the OFA summer campout in central Oregon (Madras) this coming weekend.

I have contacted Mr. Clarke and believe he can be a good replacement for Ken Mesch.

Richard F. Hoyer.
================================================

NAFA Biography of Ronald G. Clarke, Summer 2009

We falconers are lucky people. Our art cannot be hurried, purchased, or faked. We must concentrate to the exclusion of all else. We observe and interact with the natural world as it is, in its own time, without jump-cut editing, computer-enhanced colors, or roaring soundtracks. We get to concentrate. On real things. One at a time. What sweet luxury.

We falconers are lucky people. We enjoy outdoor experiences most people cannot begin to imagine, thanks to the dedicated volunteers of NAFA. My long-time contribution to NAFA has been to pay dues and fly birds. Taking full advantage of falconry opportunities is both appropriate and important, but I'm ready to do more -- and I'm well-prepared to do a good job for you.

Over the past 30 years, I've played a central and repeatedly successful role in improving Alaska's state falconry regulations. Spearheading positive, meaningful change has taught me the value of solid research, thorough preparation, positive collaboration, and reasoned negotiation. With academic training (M.S., Zoology, University of Alaska Fairbanks; B.S., Fish and Wildlife Management, Montana State University) extensive field biology experience, and a decade each in politics and public broadcasting, I bring a wide-ranging and diverse package of skills to NAFA.

Recently retired (at 52) as Assistant Director of Wildlife Conservation of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, I served as Alaska's representative to the Pacific and National Flyway Councils, and I chaired the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council. Before that, I was special assistant to Alaska Governors Steve Cowper and Tony Knowles, and legislative aide to Alaska Representatives Niilo Koponen and David Guttenberg. When the Exxon Valdez went aground, I was in Governor Cowper's office. Long hours, high stress, and intense scrutiny through that environmental disaster taught me a lot, not the least of which was how to survive a crisis. Through years as a host/producer and development director with two Alaska public radio and TV stations, I learned how to effectively spread information, marshal volunteers, and raise money. When I ran a fishing industry-sponsored, non-profit marine advocacy organization, I launched a statewide grassroots marine debris cleanup program and secured more than $1 million to make it run. I've surveyed peregrines on the Yukon River, and lived for three seasons on the sea ice with Inupiaq whaling crews as a biologist for the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission.

And through it all, I've hunted with raptors -- accipiters, buteos, falcons, and eagles -- with a hefty dose of rehab work, public demonstrations, and school group lectures along the way. I've been a falconer since 1973, a NAFA member since 1975.

We falconers are lucky people. We enjoy the richest opportunities to practice our art that ever existed. Perfect? Of course not. No golden age is. There's room for improvement. We must be vigilant and ready to protect our hard-won gains by sharing expertise among falconers, defining potential for improvements, preparing for contests (whether regulatory reforms or social struggles), identifying threats, and celebrating the art of falconry. To a large extent, "luck" is based on diligence and hard work. NAFA has always been and remains the best vehicle to accomplish all this.

Let me lend a hand to the organization that has done so much for all falconers. I've begun pitching in as a member of NAFA's Conservation Committee. Please give me your vote for NAFA Director-At-Large. Thank you.

As offensive as it is to have to say it, I have never been convicted or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any felony of whatever kind, or any misdemeanor falconry or wildlife related activity.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Below is part of an edited message I sent to someone else that has contacted me.

Richard F. Hoyer
========================================

I am always uncomfortable with not having 'all of the facts' before I launch a post. In the situations dealing with the manner in which Mr. Dupuy's petition was handled (see Beebe and Webster thread), I was uneasy in that I only have attorney Mathew Gould's summary of events and conclusion. Nevertheless, because I could not budge Dan Cecchini into responding to Gould's assessment, I went forward with my post in that thread

As for the membership issue, I was cautious in that I only stated the facts as they had already been revealed plus adding some analysis.

Yesterday, I sent a request to the current NAFA membership secretary asking for information on current membership. I received an answer this evening. In comparison to the figure provided by Darryl Perkins for January, 2008, another drop of about 200+ members has occurred.

So the question becomes, what has caused this further deterioration in NAFA membership? The answer could be determined with research but that would take an inordinate amount of time and effort. Certainly the current downtrend in the economy, job loss, etc. must be a contributing factor. Whether or not dissatisfaction with NAFA leadership plays a role can only be a guess at this point in time.

Mr. Rodas mentions that he is finding that new memberships are coming in at about 8 per month and of course, there are members that will be paying their dues late. Nevertheless, it would appear that by the end of 2009, there likely will be another sizeable decline in total NAFA membership.

Richard F. Hoyer

[FredFogg]

The following a resume is from Ron Clarke, running for DAL It was received by the Oregon FA president and passed on to the membership as Mr. Clarke may be able to attend the OFA summer campout in central Oregon (Madras) this coming weekend.

I have contacted Mr. Clarke and believe he can be a good replacement for Ken Mesch.

Richard F. Hoyer.
================================================


Richard, do you by any chance have any information on Mr. Clark's stance on non resident trapping in Alaska? It is my understanding that the Alaska Falconers Association is very much against it. Is Mr. Clark part of the AFA?

[everetkhorton]

Lack of confidence
Lack of perceived relevance
Lack of responsiveness


Fix the voting process. Stop appointing the president.

Update the website to one that is current and get real.

Be on the new website and reply to e-mails and phone calls.

If word gets out that these three things are fixed membership will grow.

Fred:
Now that is what I like to see. Say what you think is wrong, Keep it simple. You see page after page of thought, but most do not say what they would like to see change.

[Mitchellbrad]

Richard, do you by any chance have any information on Mr. Clark's stance on non resident trapping in Alaska? It is my understanding that the Alaska Falconers Association is very much against it. Is Mr. Clark part of the AFA?

I'm not gonna touch this NAFA stuff, not being a member and all. I have to tell you something about non resident take. The game commission got a "Sky is Falling" letter from a well known breeder very much against out of state take. He stated the small population of gyrs here would be ruined. the trappers who come out here don't seem to be able to find hardly any much less catch them so I'd say no dent what so ever has been made. Alaska should contact SD and find out how few folks have come here to "rape our resources" We do appreciate their money though. It's more like falconers hating other falconers.

[FredFogg]

I'm not gonna touch this NAFA stuff, not being a member and all. I have to tell you something about non resident take. The game commission got a "Sky is Falling" letter from a well known breeder very much against out of state take. He stated the small population of gyrs here would be ruined. the trappers who come out here don't seem to be able to find hardly any much less catch them so I'd say no dent what so ever has been made. Alaska should contact SD and find out how few folks have come here to "rape our resources" We do appreciate their money though. It's more like falconers hating other falconers.

Brad, non resident take ISN'T a NAFA issue, it is a falconry issue. You couldn't have said it better. I wish any state that is concerned about this issue would contact SD and see the light! LOL

[wyodjm]

I'm not gonna touch this NAFA stuff, not being a member and all. I have to tell you something about non resident take. The game commission got a "Sky is Falling" letter from a well known breeder very much against out of state take. He stated the small population of gyrs here would be ruined. the trappers who come out here don't seem to be able to find hardly any much less catch them so I'd say no dent what so ever has been made. Alaska should contact SD and find out how few folks have come here to "rape our resources" We do appreciate their money though. It's more like falconers hating other falconers.

That well known breeder meant to say the small, wintering population of gyrs that don't breed anywhere near SD.

Wyoming has had a non resident take of raptors for 40+ years. No impact whatsoever. It was easy. They were never our birds to begin with. I've always wondered why I could go to any state in the country and hunt wigratory waterfowl, with the apprpriate licences and a duck stamp, but couldn't take a raptor in the same state with the appropriate federal permits for falconry purposes. Even with some sort of lottery system. They're all migratory birds.

The states that are starting to allow nonresident take: What took you so long?

[Mitchellbrad]

The states that are starting to allow nonresident take: What took you so long?

And people wonder why I'm convinced we are our own worst enemy. I'm so sick and tired of falconers who plant all 4 feet and begin to bray for all they are worth.

[wyodjm]

That well known breeder meant to say the small, wintering population of gyrs that don't breed anywhere near SD.

Wyoming has had a non resident take of raptors for 40+ years. No impact whatsoever. It was easy. They were never our birds to begin with. I've always wondered why I could go to any state in the country and hunt wigratory waterfowl, with the apprpriate licences and a duck stamp, but couldn't take a raptor in the same state with the appropriate federal permits for falconry purposes. Even with some sort of lottery system. They're all migratory birds.

The states that are starting to allow nonresident take: What took you so long?


And people wonder why I'm convinced we are our own worst enemy. I'm so sick and tired of falconers who plant all 4 feet and begin to bray for all they are worth.

Brad:

I've known you for over 20 years. It's not braying. It's a good question. I think it is good that SD has a nonresident take. But please don't be so high an mighty and think I can't ask a simple question.

I'm surprised actually that you did that. What's with that? I don't care if SD has a nonresident take. It's of no consequence to me.

Easy pard. Relax.

[Mitchellbrad]

Brad:

I've known you for over 20 years. It's not braying. It's a good question. I think it is good that SD has a nonresident take. But please don't be so high an mighty and think I can't ask a simple question.

I'm surprised actually that you did that. What's with that? I don't care if SD has a nonresident take. It's of no consequence to me.

Easy pard. Relax.

I think you mis understood me Dan. I was talking about other states who have falconers who are against out of state takes in their own states. Those were the 4 legged critters I was talking about. You and I are on the same wavelength.

Brad

[wyodjm]

I think you mis understood me Dan. I was talking about other states who have falconers who are against out of state takes in their own states. Those were the 4 legged critters I was talking about. You and I are on the same wavelength.
Brad

I'm sorry Brad, my mistake. I misinterpreted your post. Please accept my apology. Another example of how the written word can be misunderstood.

ATB Brad,

Dan

[FredFogg]

And folks, that is how real falconers and gentlemen handle a misunderstanding! clapp clapp clapp

[Migisi]

Ok, here's another question: Do you think that the Feds disassociating themselves with falconry after 2014 will cause a very large decrease in NAFA membership? Since everything will be state run, it seems like NAFA will lose many members and much of it's purpose.

My opinion (tardy as it is)... I think there will always be a very real need for strong and active national falconry orgs. Just an example... the NRA deals with gun legislation proposed at the federal level - and rallies its state chapters for support/opposition on that legislation. In turn, when a state chapter has issues with proposed gun legislation at the state or local level, they can ask for assistance from the national org.

However, the problem with my example is that NAFA has held a longtime policy against involvement in state/local issues and/or assisting affiliates. I learned of this policy from NAFA officers when I served on GLFA's Board some time ago. To my knowledge, that policy hasn't changed. So, it's always been essential that each state have a strong local org to protect and serve their falconry interests.

Just my perspective on your question.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Fred,
I have yet to respond to Mr. Clarke's last couple of messages so when I do, I will ask him about his views on the non-resident issue.

Richard F. Hoyer

Berni,
I agree with your stance that a strong national organization(s) is very desirable and that is one of the reasons for my concerns with what has been happening to NAFA with respect to the decline in membership (and the cause of that decline).

According to Mr. Rodas, membership is currently below 1750 and unless something unusual happens during the next 6 months, it would seem to me that it will end up below 1800 by the end of the year. If that turns out to be what transpires, that would constitute yet another drop of between 150 to 200 members since January, 2008.

As for NAFA helping state falconry organizations, Frank Bond did a stupendous job here in Oregon where the Portland Audubon Society had brought suit to prevent our wildlife commission from delisting the Peregrine in Oregon. Mr. Bond brought in a number of authorities on raptor biology to give testimony at the hearing with the end result that the judge ruled against Audubon (in favor of the delisting the Peregrine).

With the facts put out for all to see concerning the Peregrine population, Audubon has since come on board and worked cooperatively with both the Oregon Falconers Assn., the Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, and the Oregon Wildlife Commission (commissioners that oversee ODFW).

But you may be right that the above is an exception.

Richard F. Hoyer

[outhawkn]

Do you suppose that the folks who are ruining NAFA know "its about them" and that they just dont care what everyone else thinks. Or do they honestly think its everyone else?

[Migisi]

I agree with your stance that a strong national organization(s) is very desirable and that is one of the reasons for my concerns with what has been happening to NAFA with respect to the decline in membership (and the cause of that decline).

I'm really not all that concerned with NAFA's decline. Its been happening for a long time, but few noticed or were willing to admit it - lest NAFA might appear to be losing its influence. NAFA will either respond to the will of its members, or not. There IS another national falconry org to join.


As for NAFA helping state falconry organizations, Frank Bond did a stupendous job here in Oregon where the Portland Audubon Society had brought suit to prevent our wildlife commission from delisting the Peregrine in Oregon......

Not to denigrate Frank's effort in any way (I applaud it!) .... but the NAFA president does live in Oregon. I'd expect NAFA counsel to respond - if not officially, then as a favor to the president (and some other influentials). How would it look if Audubon won that suit in the NAFA president's home state? Maybe Frank will come to Illinois to help GLFA get the Peregrine delisted? I'll have my people call his people ;).


But you may be right that the above is an exception.

Unless someone can give me examples where NAFA assisted state falconry orgs on local issues, I suspect it is indeed an exception. Anyone?

[ericedw]

WOW, what a thread.
I don't want to get this discussion started back up, I'm sorry I missed out, I was catching bonefish in the FL Keys all last week. I don't want anyone to think I was ignoring this thread.

I did want to say I read through this thread and appreciate some of the kind words.

[sharptail]

WOW, what a thread.
I don't want to get this discussion started back up, I'm sorry I missed out, I was catching bonefish in the FL Keys all last week. I don't want anyone to think I was ignoring this thread.

I did want to say I read through this thread and appreciate some of the kind words.

Would you care to endorse one of the canidates for DAL? I sure don't know who to vote for. Reading Mr. Clarks resume, he looks like the NAFA 'old guard' to me. He has spent time in the goveners office, yet I don't see Alaska as a falconry friendly place. Makes me wonder if Alaska has what he wants in falconry or was he ineffective, in getting better regs. and attitude?

Just some discussion of those running would help, I know not one of the names.

[ericedw]

Would you care to endorse one of the canidates for DAL? I sure don't know who to vote for. Reading Mr. Clarks resume, he looks like the NAFA 'old guard' to me. He has spent time in the goveners office, yet I don't see Alaska as a falconry friendly place. Makes me wonder if Alaska has what he wants in falconry or was he ineffective, in getting better regs. and attitude?

Just some discussion of those running would help, I know not one of the names.

Jeff,
Like you, I don't know much about the candidates at this point. I do intend to call each of them soon and get a feel for who they are, can't learn much from a bio. Sounds like a good topic for a new thread.

[wyodjm]

WOW, what a thread.
I don't want to get this discussion started back up, I'm sorry I missed out, I was catching bonefish in the FL Keys all last week. I don't want anyone to think I was ignoring this thread.

I did want to say I read through this thread and appreciate some of the kind words.



Why be sorry? Bonefishing in the keys I would have traded with you.

Dan McCarron

[FredFogg]

Jeff,
Like you, I don't know much about the candidates at this point. I do intend to call each of them soon and get a feel for who they are, can't learn much from a bio. Sounds like a good topic for a new thread.

Eric, I asked Richard to find out Mr. Clark's view on non-resident take and he is going to report back. From what I have read and heard, there was a group of falconers in Alaska against non-resident take. If he is against it, I will not vote for anyone that is against non-resident take!

[ericedw]

Why be sorry? Bonefishing in the keys I would have traded with you.

Dan McCarron

This one almost spooled me, I had to palm the reel at almost 200yrds.
http://www.merlinfalconry.com/images/Fishing/Keys2009_010_[1024x768].JPG

[wyodjm]

This one almost spooled me, I had to palm the reel at almost 200yrds.

Hey Eric. Nice fish. I won't be going to Florida anytime soon. Was there last summer though and had a blast.

I've got a couple of trips planned in a few weeks to Cody, Jackson, and a few lakes in the Wind Rivers. The South Fork of the Shoshone River in Cody, on the east side of Yellowstone, has great dry fly fishing in early August. Big hopper patterns, big browns.

I've got new 5 wt. and 8 wt. rods I want to try out.

Nice fish.

ATB,

Dan

[Roper]

I have done a little research here.. I strongly suspect that I think you guys are just venting frustration. and have your head in the sand..
I think if you go back and look that yes we have had a decline in the numbers for Nafa from the 3000. members. but I think you will find if you look at the say 20 years you will find that the membership has had ebbs and flows. One of our lowest times was right after Operation falcon. and one of the other times was around Nafa's previous President that wanted to run everything as a closed meetings.. But from the information I have gathered the mean has been right around 2000. members.. I beleive we are around 1750 at this point, but it is common and usual to pick up another 150 members or so by the time the Nat. field meet comes around.

as far as Nafa respsonding to state concerns it is my understanding that Nafa does not get involved in state concerns unless asked to do so..
not that they have a policy on not getting involved ..

I am astounded at the limited vision that if not for Nafa we would not have an extended season in any state .. Our season would totally coinside with the gun hunters.

Think of the fall out on the positive side that Nafa has had . If it were not for Nafa we would not have the information from many many authors, that we do . example: McElroy or many others that the very cause to expound on the vast amount of information that is readily available is contributed to the common goal or unified effort to be a falconer.

Everything in life is a choice, and how you choose to look at things and see such a limited view astounds me. This is not directed at any one person, but if the shoe fits...

[everetkhorton]

Like most, but not all I am undecided on who to vote for DAL. I will give them a call when things get closer. I like to get a better feel for who I am voting for. I can not turn down a person on just one point I do not like. He may have several issue I support or agree with. One issue will be the decline in membership. But I will do the foot work, that way it is my discussion. JMO

[wyodjm]

I have done a little research here.. I strongly suspect that I think you guys are just venting frustration. and have your head in the sand..
I think if you go back and look that yes we have had a decline in the numbers for Nafa from the 3000. members. but I think you will find if you look at the say 20 years you will find that the membership has had ebbs and flows. One of our lowest times was right after Operation falcon. and one of the other times was around Nafa's previous President that wanted to run everything as a closed meetings.. But from the information I have gathered the mean has been right around 2000. members.. I beleive we are around 1750 at this point, but it is common and usual to pick up another 150 members or so by the time the Nat. field meet comes around.

as far as Nafa respsonding to state concerns it is my understanding that Nafa does not get involved in state concerns unless asked to do so..
not that they have a policy on not getting involved ..

I am astounded at the limited vision that if not for Nafa we would not have an extended season in any state .. Our season would totally coinside with the gun hunters.

Think of the fall out on the positive side that Nafa has had . If it were not for Nafa we would not have the information from many many authors, that we do . example: McElroy or many others that the very cause to expound on the vast amount of information that is readily available is contributed to the common goal or unified effort to be a falconer.

Everything in life is a choice, and how you choose to look at things and see such a limited view astounds me. This is not directed at any one person, but if the shoe fits...

Hi David:

Good one. If you believe in NAFA and choose to belong to NAFA, then I think you should.

ATB,

Dan

[FredFogg]

I have done a little research here.. I strongly suspect that I think you guys are just venting frustration. and have your head in the sand..
I think if you go back and look that yes we have had a decline in the numbers for Nafa from the 3000. members. but I think you will find if you look at the say 20 years you will find that the membership has had ebbs and flows. One of our lowest times was right after Operation falcon. and one of the other times was around Nafa's previous President that wanted to run everything as a closed meetings.. But from the information I have gathered the mean has been right around 2000. members.. I beleive we are around 1750 at this point, but it is common and usual to pick up another 150 members or so by the time the Nat. field meet comes around.

as far as Nafa respsonding to state concerns it is my understanding that Nafa does not get involved in state concerns unless asked to do so..
not that they have a policy on not getting involved ..

I am astounded at the limited vision that if not for Nafa we would not have an extended season in any state .. Our season would totally coinside with the gun hunters.

Think of the fall out on the positive side that Nafa has had . If it were not for Nafa we would not have the information from many many authors, that we do . example: McElroy or many others that the very cause to expound on the vast amount of information that is readily available is contributed to the common goal or unified effort to be a falconer.

Everything in life is a choice, and how you choose to look at things and see such a limited view astounds me. This is not directed at any one person, but if the shoe fits...

David,

I don't think anyone here has their head in the sand! And yes, many are venting frustrations. No one here is denying what NAFA has done. But the things that have happened recently with a petition being swept under the table, the website needing updated and being told it is coming, and communications being not exactly the best, well, folks have reasons to be frustrated. I would think our view is less limited if we want things to be better, so maybe you should check how well your shoe fits!

[frootdog]

I have done a little research here.. I strongly suspect that I think you guys are just venting frustration. and have your head in the sand.....

Venting frustration yes. Heads in the sand no. Have you even read all the talk on here? A lot of well thought out points have been brought up, so for you to say that we have our heads in the sand is downright offensive. As a paid member I have a right to question how things are done. Following blindly while letting NAFA get away with some of the bullshit they have pulled lately would be having my head in the sand.


I think if you go back and look that yes we have had a decline in the numbers for Nafa from the 3000. members. but I think you will find if you look at the say 20 years you will find that the membership has had ebbs and flows. One of our lowest times was right after Operation falcon. and one of the other times was around Nafa's previous President that wanted to run everything as a closed meetings.. But from the information I have gathered the mean has been right around 2000. members.. I beleive we are around 1750 at this point, but it is common and usual to pick up another 150 members or so by the time the Nat. field meet comes around.....

David it has already been proven that the membership IS declining. Since the days of Perkins NAFA has been looking at ways to rebuild membership. If you think the NAFA meet draws 150 new members then you are sadly mistaken. I'm sure Brandi can give you those #s from the last field meet. Just to take your #s as an example. Ebbs and flows considered 3000 vs 1900 (1750+ your theoretical 150) is a 37% loss of members. 37%! Thats not chump change David. That's a huge statistical drop. 42% if you don't add the 150 you think will join by the meet. That my friend is NOT ebb and flow. Thats the masses showing thier disapproval.


as far as Nafa respsonding to state concerns it is my understanding that Nafa does not get involved in state concerns unless asked to do so..
not that they have a policy on not getting involved ..

I am astounded at the limited vision that if not for Nafa we would not have an extended season in any state .. Our season would totally coinside with the gun hunters....

How so? How did NAFA have anything to do with extended hunting seasons in my state? Your state? THA and the FRC did it in TX NOT NAFA.


Think of the fall out on the positive side that Nafa has had . If it were not for Nafa we would not have the information from many many authors, that we do . example: McElroy or many others that the very cause to expound on the vast amount of information that is readily available is contributed to the common goal or unified effort to be a falconer....

No one here is denying that NAFA does good things. They can do good and have disgruntled membership at the same time. What does NAFA have to do with authors that publish books? Last I checked none of the Desert Hawking series was published by NAFA. Just because McElroy, McDermott, and others are NAFA members and publish books does not mean NAFA had anything to do with it.


Everything in life is a choice, and how you choose to look at things and see such a limited view astounds me. This is not directed at any one person, but if the shoe fits...

Who has the limited view? Maybe it's you that has your head in the sand.

[Migisi]

.... as far as Nafa respsonding to state concerns it is my understanding that Nafa does not get involved in state concerns unless asked to do so..
not that they have a policy on not getting involved ..

Dan Cecchini wrote: "It's important for each of us to continue to work on falconry regulations at the local level while NAFA continues to work at the national level." (NAFA News Archives, Florida Peregrine Falcon Management Plan Update, Jan 2009 - my bold)

[Roper]

Krys and Bernie
6:00 am and not had any coffer yet soo

I am sure in my smooth talking easy going way i was going to get you excited.. My point with the comment about head in the sand, perhaps could have been better worded to something like Blinders on the side of your head,, no that would have been just as clumsey.. so lets say " really focused on the one side of things.
I am suggesting that Yes i agree, there are ebbs and flows but the "Mean" the middle , the average, membership over the years has been around 2000 members. Nafa has had its high points ie 3000 but on an average it is closer to 2000

as far as nafa being involved in the state level .. yes I see the quote Dan C wrote but i will say this again yes it is Nafas first interest to take care of things on the national level. but if asked they will get involved in the state level .. To me that makes total sence . they let the state clubs take care of state issues ie delagating authority if you will.

I did not mean to suggest that the Nafa field meet will bring in the new membership .. what I was trying to say that by the time the national field meet comes around we will have gained aprox 150 new members.. with any and all new members that would come from the field meet.

As far as the authors go I am simply saying that Nafa as part of *(the whole falconry exprience thing. ) has brought cause for this information to become available.. I m not saying that nafa published this stuff..
I mean who gives a shit about falconry except falconers, a collective interests so to speak.

[FredFogg]

David, with the states pretty much handling everything in the near future and NAFA mainly working on the national level, NAFA is pretty much making themselves unnecessary! Hmmm, maybe that is a good thing! LOL

[Migisi]

Krys and Bernie
6:00 am and not had any coffer yet soo

I'm just finishing my third cup, so... ;)


I am suggesting that Yes i agree, there are ebbs and flows but the "Mean" the middle, the average, membership over the years has been around 2000 members.

Would you concede that NAFA is currently experiencing an ebb? Can you offer some ideas on why that is? Do you believe it's just a natural cycle of things, or something more is behind it? Just curious.

I did notice in a recent treasury report (meeting minutes) that international membership (therefore dues from abroad) is down considerably. And that NAFA's general drop in dues income vs spending is such that it's put NAFA into deficit for the first time. Any comments on that?


as far as nafa being involved in the state level .. yes I see the quote Dan C wrote but i will say this again yes it is Nafas first interest to take care of things on the national level. but if asked they will get involved in the state level .. To me that makes total sence . they let the state clubs take care of state issues ie delagating authority if you will.

I reviewed most of the News Archives online last night, especially the meeting minutes and states' peregrine-related efforts. NAFA did send official letters on NAFA letterhead supporting P delistings in a few states. That coincides with NAFA's national efforts on the P, so it makes sense for NAFA to get involved in that particular local issue. I applaud their action. (See, I can and do give credit where it's due.)


what I was trying to say that by the time the national field meet comes around we will have gained aprox 150 new members.. with any and all new members that would come from the field meet.

I'd be interested in the breakdown of new members gained prior to a meet - whether they're practicing falconers or unlicensed wanna-bes.


As far as the authors go I am simply saying that Nafa as part of *(the whole falconry exprience thing. ) has brought cause for this information to become available..

I don't think NAFA played a big role, but I dasn't speak for every author. Maybe some do give that credit to NAFA. I just don't know, so I don't presume.

[Migisi]

David, with the states pretty much handling everything in the near future and NAFA mainly working on the national level, NAFA is pretty much making themselves unnecessary! Hmmm, maybe that is a good thing! LOL

I don't think that's a good thing. I believe it's essential that we have strong and active orgs to represent falconry at the federal level and at the local level. However, our national representation doesn't necessarily need to be through only one org. As I see it, two heads are often better than one -- especially when it comes to providing input on regs.

[robruger1]

Just a quick note Migisi, Dan C did not live in Oregon until AFTER Oregon pretty much had things tied up and in place for our peregrine take. Jan 2008 was his first field meet after transplanting from Colorado which was about the time that the Oregon peregrine take was announced as being a done deal, all the work to get to that point was done while Dan C. was still a colorado resident.

And he should concentrate his efforts on NATIONAL regs since he after all is president of the NATIONAL club. I have talked with Dan C. on a few different occasions and heard about the sleepless nights and constant phone calls around the clock and that is just with NAFA stuff and you want him to add all the phone calls and headaches from 50 states as well.

I also got a great opportunity to spend some one on one time with Mr. Ron Clark this last weekend at the Oregon Falconers Association summer meet and he is a serious game hawker getting it done in probably the hardest state to do it in, I applaud him. He will get my vote.

So he wasn't able to single handedly change alaska's regs while working under the governor, that has nothing to do with his abiblity to perform as DAL. It probably would not have been good for him to push his agenda while working for the governor, could have been considered a conflict of interest. I work for the state and know how those types of things can go. But Ron is now retired and can use his experience and knowledge to positively effect change without creating a conflict of interest.

[Migisi]

Just a quick note Migisi, Dan C did not live in Oregon until AFTER Oregon pretty much had things tied up and in place for our peregrine take. Jan 2008 was his first field meet after transplanting from Colorado which was about the time that the Oregon peregrine take was announced as being a done deal, all the work to get to that point was done while Dan C. was still a colorado resident.

So, you're saying that Dan C. can't take credit for getting the P issue settled in Oregon. Okay.


I have talked with Dan C. on a few different occasions and heard about the sleepless nights and constant phone calls around the clock and that is just with NAFA stuff and you want him to add all the phone calls and headaches from 50 states as well.

Please understand... I don't want Dan C. to do anything. I was simply discussing NAFA's policy on state involvement. NAFA is divided into directorates, each having its own elected rep to field phone calls from their constituents. As I see it, Directors should be responding, rather than the President.

Regarding sleepless nights and headaches, those come with the job - a job which one volunteers to do. Many of us have held leadership positions and have endured the same. So, pardon me if I don't join in a pity party for Dan, or any of them.

[sharptail]

He will get my vote.

So he wasn't able to single handedly change alaska's regs while working under the governor, that has nothing to do with his abiblity to perform as DAL. It probably would not have been good for him to push his agenda while working for the governor, could have been considered a conflict of interest. I work for the state and know how those types of things can go. But Ron is now retired and can use his experience and knowledge to positively effect change without creating a conflict of interest.

Do you have any reason to believe that he is not satisfied with the regs. the way they are currently in Alaska?

[Roper]

Bernie
I do beleive that Nafa's current membership is right around 1750 so perhaps we are in a down trend based on an average membership of 2000 members.
I believe a couple of things can contribute to this. first I beleive that the general mentality of a recession is emminant. i think it is like a pebble in the pond and the ripple effect carries into everything.

Falconry is a luxury ( a life style by some) but I view the general public as shallow and self serving and they want immediate gratification and they want it now. Falconry does not usually offer that, it is usually more methodical.. ie ..the idea that most people conclude that it takes two years to become a falconer.
We all know the misconseption of that. the idea of taking a test, building a house for the hawk, the training, the idea that we can get a hawk to come back to us and why doesnt the hawk retreive the rabbit back to us.
as a whole preceeds the general mentality that this is to difficult.
Young people today think its ok to sit on their ass and push buttons with a vidio game. and they actually think they are exercising with a Weee.
the culmination of the recession and desire for self gratification etc... it intense.

I see it in the Rodeo world also. I have been competing in Pro Rodeos for over 20 years in the roping events. The crowds are smaller, the people that attend rodeos is a smaller demographics than your average suburbanite.. They have become so removed from life itself. People can kill 50 people in vidio game and think nothing of it ..
But when people here that we slaughter our cattle and butcher them the say " How can you do that to that poor little cow" Now thats life
Because we all know that meat just shows up in a white rapper at the grocery store.. its magic.. .

Fred in response to your remarks I say Divide and Concor.. the fighting umongst our selves will be our own demise and they ( who ever that is Peta, Humain Society, Feds, who ever) is not the problem
We will be our own undoing if we do not have unification.

Falconry is convenient to many the allowing apprentices to aquire captive bred birds and the diversity of birds that they I think is a terrible idea
I think apprentices should be made to tow the mark, make the treck and have to trap their own birds.. As a general rule I am not interested in making things easy for apprentices at all.. But that is another story and probably needs to be on another thread all together, so i will step away from that for now.
I believe that falconry is better today then it was yesterday and that just didnt happen by some willy nilly bullshit, it happend because of many (not just nafa directors ) efforts .. but again i say this , this falconry shit is only important to falconers, just like rodeo if it was easy, a whole lot more people would be doing it.

As far as wanna be's vs. hunters. If you pay your dues, your a member.
Believe me I go off about falconers that are just walking the walk, and talkin the talk, but not doin the do.
This is a hobby to some , a life style to others , a passion to some etc..
I had to learn a long time ago .. that just because i am on a horse every day training, or competing and because Our construction company shuts down right after Thanksgiving and i have more days than most to be in the field . I have had to learn to give some latitude to those that only hunt on saturdays.

[wyodjm]

NAFA's greatest problem is that its losing many of it's members who have been supporters for 20-30+ years. It has serious image problems, and for good reason. As I suggested earlier, however, if you support NAFA and choose to be a member that's great.

If NAFA doesn't do an about change soon it's going to be history, as far as having any real clout on the national level. With the feds, with the states, or with any falconer who has been around any length of time and knows what day it is. Am I that much of an anomaly? I can't be. 10 years ago I would have been eligible as NAFA's poster boy!

NAFA is clearly in decline. Much of the NAFA leadership (not all) is in denial. They can't keep urinating down peoples' backs and telling them it's raining.

This is getting so old. I know, I know.....I can simply not read this thread anymore. But seriously, it's really getting old.

[Roper]

then step off , if its that old and I really mean getting old .. quit winning and go, nobody is forcing you to read or participate . This is what I am talking about a lot of bitching but no solutions.. I have yet to hear what you really want done.. just complaining,
I am probably missing it what do you see is the solution. I still keep asking this what are you not getting ???

what do you expect the board to do .. you cant force people to join an orgainization, if in fact you say that it is a lot of old membership that is disapearing , I am curious as to how many of those old time falconers are actually flying birds and are actually out in the field. or have they become lathargic and apathetic and as time goes by it is just not that important to them to be in the crooks of things. As you get older some times it is just easy to sit back and watch . not all the pushin and shovin and goin ons

[wyodjm]

then step off , if its that old and I really mean getting old .. quit winning and go, nobody is forcing you to read or participate . This is what I am talking about a lot of bitching but no solutions.. I have yet to hear what you really want done.. just complaining,
I am probably missing it what do you see is the solution. I still keep asking this what are you not getting ???

what do you expect the board to do .. you cant force people to join an orgainization, if in fact you say that it is a lot of old membership that is disapearing , I am curious as to how many of those old time falconers are actually flying birds and are actually out in the field. or have they become lathargic and apathetic and as time goes by it is just not that important to them to be in the crooks of things. As you get older some times it is just easy to sit back and watch . not all the pushin and shovin and goin ons

I had a feeling this was going to happen. :) It's the risk you pay for speaking out. No matter.

Not lethargic or apathetic. Not whining either. Just burned out. However, I certainly wasn't getting rude either, to you personally or to any other individual. So ease up.

Perhaps you should go back and read the older posts on this and the Beebe and Webster thread. Much of the information you're asking for is in those old posts. Start gathering your own, solid information like many of us have.

Take a year or two out of your life and do an exhaustive, historical, in-depth research study on the inner workings of NAFA the last ten years. Go interview past directors, past officers, former and current members. Go read every NAFA publication that has ever been published or distributed the last ten years. Go read all of the NAFA Board agendas that have been brought forward the last ten years. Just the last ten years. That's all. You really don't have to go back any further that that. It will give you some idea of what I was referring to. Draw your own conclusions.

Go read, compare, and contrast the proposed federal falconry regulations, NAFA's comments on those proposed falconry regulations, and then the final, published ruling on those regulations. See how much influence NAFA really had on the new federal falconry regulations. Seriously, go and do it. Find out for yourself.

After you have conducted your own, in-depth research project, please feel free and contact me. If, after you have conducted your exhaustive search and you have any questions, I'll help you fill in the blanks. If I honestly can't answer your questions, I'll personally point you in the direction of at least 50 people who probably could answer your questions.

I'm not looking for trouble. And I don't even care if I'm right. I was basing my comments on simple observations. But knock yourself out pard, go push NAFA all you want. It's of no consequence to me. This thread's all yours.

I've never heard of you. How much dues have you paid?

Dan McCarron

[Mitchellbrad]

then step off , if its that old and I really mean getting old .. quit winning and go, nobody , I am curious as to how many of those old time falconers are actually flying birds and are actually out in the field. or have they become lathargic and apathetic and as time goes by it is just not that important to them to be in the crooks of things. As you get older some times it is just easy to sit back and watch . not all the pushin and shovin and goin ons

I am and a lot of my friends are. These guys are hard core! The biggest difference is when we are on trips we don't sleep on the ground anymore when it's below 0F. We like warm beds and nice, long showers after a good day of hawking.

Brad

[Mitchellbrad]

, I am curious as to how many of those old time falconers are actually flying birds and are actually out in the field. or have they become lathargic and apathetic and as time goes by it is just not that important to them to be in the crooks of things. As you get older some times it is just easy to sit back and watch . not all the pushin and shovin and goin ons

I think you blew it David. Good hawking

Brad

[wyodjm]

I think you blew it David. Good hawking

Brad

I don't think David blew it. From the things I've read of his, I'm sure he's a pretty good guy. I was just rying to point him in the right direction.

But then ........ the $64 question. Is my compass on? :)

Dan

[sharptail]

looks like true north to me!

[Mitchellbrad]

I don't think David blew it. From the things I've read of his, I'm sure he's a pretty good guy. I was just rying to point him in the right direction.

But then ........ the $64 question. Is my compass on? :)

Dan

To be honest Dan I think just about everyone's compass is on. The problem is, is it pointing at true N or magnetic N<G> I think David is a decent fellow from what I've read but when anyone makes comments about the Geritol generation my hackles go straight up. He's not the first either. Someone recently asked me if I was still hawking. That didn't sit right at all. I've got friends in their 80's who are still at it.

Heck, I'm rejoining AFC. Nafa is out but AFC seems to be the group I"d fit in with much better.

Brad

[jhausman]

To be honest Dan I think just about everyone's compass is on. The problem is, is it pointing at true N or magnetic N<G> I think David is a decent fellow from what I've read but when anyone makes comments about the Geritol generation my hackles go straight up. He's not the first either. Someone recently asked me if I was still hawking. That didn't sit right at all. I've got friends in their 80's who are still at it.

Heck, I'm rejoining AFC. Nafa is out but AFC seems to be the group I"d fit in with much better.

Brad

Brad,

We'd be honored to have you!

Jason

[wyodjm]

Brad,

We'd be honored to have you!

Jason

Oh please, Jason....................... that's not what he needs to hear. :)

Hey Brad, don't forget to put me down as a character reference for membership! :)

Dan

[Roper]

Dan
there you have it .. I am not trying to get personal here I am just trying to get to the absolute point here.. where you were comming from ..
And now I see where your comming from..
I am not on anyones ass on how old they are and if they are hawking.
I was simply trying to make a point not a judgement on older falconers.
It has been my experience ( not that I am old and wise) take for instance
when I was 20 and when grouse hunting .. I didnt think i was hunting unless I filled my bag with the max amount of birds.. as I got older i began to stop kicking my dog and started to appreciate good dog work and the day .. If i got 10 birds or 2 it didnt make as much difference to me .
I just enjoyed the day of being out in the field. To appreciate the whole experience..
case in point i went down and picked up a friends hawk down south because i was close by where my friend had put his bird up in a breeding project . the bird didnt pair up with another bird.. When I went to this guys place, he had birds in their chambers about 6-10 birds and he was off doing something else.. I spoke with his wife, she helped me get the bird out of the chambers. the end result after a real nice conversation, was that he really wasnt flying much any more he had moved on to other things..
I m not making a judgement here on anybody I am just saying things change and people change. in turn memberships ebb and flow

[jhausman]

Oh please, Jason....................... that's not what he needs to hear. :)

Hey Brad, don't forget to put me down as a character reference for membership! :)

Dan

LMAO! Maybe your right. Let me rephrase! We would "really really like" to have you aboard! (?) Is that better Dan!? ;)

I wouldn't trust ANY of you guys/gals as a character reference! ;)

J.

[jhausman]

A club needs to be run by it's membership. It needs to have issues voted on by it's membership. It needs to be open to it's membership about what it is doing. It needs to make damn sure that it is controlled by it's membership and not outsiders (in this case voting non-falconers). Officers need to be elected by the membership. It needs to be about LESS regulation. It needs to spend it's monies on making sure that the rights of it's membership is being protected and not fluffy newsletters.

I am not saying that NAFA is or isn't any of these things.

I am just saying, that is what I am looking for in both a National and State club.

We are from all walks of life, all the reaches of the earth and we all share a common bond. We hunt with birds of prey and we want to continue to do so with as little regulation as possible. I would like to see wild take in Europe. I'd like to see open (fully open - like RT's) peregrine take in the US. I would like to see ALL STATES open to non-residents (they are not your birds - they belong to the world and at the very least the citizens of this country!). I would like to see the unreasonable searches, ridiculous paperwork and permitting to go away! I want open seasons for falconers. We have no impact! Until we do we should have open season. Etc Etc Etc.

Sorry for he rant! It's what happens when I hold my tongue for so long on a thread like this one. Fire away.

Love you all,

Jason

[wyodjm]

Dan
there you have it .. I am not trying to get personal here I am just trying to get to the absolute point here.. where you were comming from ..
And now I see where your comming from..
I am not on anyones ass on how old they are and if they are hawking.
I was simply trying to make a point not a judgement on older falconers.
It has been my experience ( not that I am old and wise) take for instance
when I was 20 and when grouse hunting .. I didnt think i was hunting unless I filled my bag with the max amount of birds.. as I got older i began to stop kicking my dog and started to appreciate good dog work and the day .. If i got 10 birds or 2 it didnt make as much difference to me .
I just enjoyed the day of being out in the field. To appreciate the whole experience..
case in point i went down and picked up a friends hawk down south because i was close by where my friend had put his bird up in a breeding project . the bird didnt pair up with another bird.. When I went to this guys place, he had birds in their chambers about 6-10 birds and he was off doing something else.. I spoke with his wife, she helped me get the bird out of the chambers. the end result after a real nice conversation, was that he really wasnt flying much any more he had moved on to other things..
I m not making a judgement here on anybody I am just saying things change and people change. in turn memberships ebb and flow

Hi David:

That's cool. No worries. I only fly passage goshawks and eagles now. I don't intermew goshawks anymore. I'm too lazy. Besides, passage birds don't molt worth a darn the first year and I like to fly fish in the summer. I do, however, intermew eagles. They're too much of an investment in time to just turn loose and get another one, although I have turned a few eagles loose. I'm smarter now. I'm looking forward to hawking my eagle around varoius locations in the west to get jack slips.

If I can't do the eagle justice this season, I'll probably turn him loose. I'll just have to go back and trap another passage gos I guess. I'll have to settle for ducks and bunnies with the gos. :)

Stay in the fight. The name of the game is being in the game, not watching from the sidelines. Still, at the end of the day, NAFA can go pound sand!

Do your research and get back with me if you have any questions.

ATB,

Dan

[Mitchellbrad]

Oh please, Jason....................... that's not what he needs to hear. :)

Hey Brad, don't forget to put me down as a character reference for membership! :)

Dan

I'm just sending them some money. If they say I smell too bad or something along those lines I'll probably agree with them and leave it at that.

Brad

[Roper]

Dan & Jason
no worries here I like it when people are direct and respectful i like the candid approach ,, plane and simple..

[wyodjm]

I had a feeling this was going to happen. :) It's the risk you pay for speaking out. No matter.

Not lethargic or apathetic. Not whining either. Just burned out. However, I certainly wasn't getting rude either, to you personally or to any other individual. So ease up.

Perhaps you should go back and read the older posts on this and the Beebe and Webster thread. Much of the information you're asking for is in those old posts. Start gathering your own, solid information like many of us have.

Take a year or two out of your life and do an exhaustive, historical, in-depth research study on the inner workings of NAFA the last ten years. Go interview past directors, past officers, former and current members. Go read every NAFA publication that has ever been published or distributed the last ten years. Go read all of the NAFA Board agendas that have been brought forward the last ten years. Just the last ten years. That's all. You really don't have to go back any further that that. It will give you some idea of what I was referring to. Draw your own conclusions.

Go read, compare, and contrast the proposed federal falconry regulations, NAFA's comments on those proposed falconry regulations, and then the final, published ruling on those regulations. See how much influence NAFA really had on the new federal falconry regulations. Seriously, go and do it. Find out for yourself.

After you have conducted your own, in-depth research project, please feel free and contact me. If, after you have conducted your exhaustive search and you have any questions, I'll help you fill in the blanks. If I honestly can't answer your questions, I'll personally point you in the direction of at least 50 people who probably could answer your questions.

I'm not looking for trouble. And I don't even care if I'm right. I was basing my comments on simple observations. But knock yourself out pard, go push NAFA all you want. It's of no consequence to me. This thread's all yours.

I've never heard of you. How much dues have you paid?

Dan McCarron



Dan & Jason
no worries here I like it when people are direct and respectful i like the candid approach ,, plane and simple..

I'm not worried. But before another lightning strike hits this thread again, take my suggestion to heart. Do your homework. Do the research. You just might find the answers you were looking for. I took the liberty of pasting my earlier post again.

People need good, solid information in which to make a decision, whatever it is. But no one spoon fed me.

You do the background research on NAFA. Feel free to get back to me.

ATB,

Dan McCarron

[outhawkn]

The biggest difference is when we are on trips we don't sleep on the ground anymore when it's below 0F. We like warm beds and nice, long showers after a good day of hawking.

Brad

amennn.......:D

[sharptail]

Dan
there you have it .. I am not trying to get personal here I am just trying to get to the absolute point here.. where you were comming from ..
And now I see where your comming from..
I am not on anyones ass on how old they are and if they are hawking.
I was simply trying to make a point not a judgement on older falconers.
It has been my experience ( not that I am old and wise) take for instance
when I was 20 and when grouse hunting .. I didnt think i was hunting unless I filled my bag with the max amount of birds.. as I got older i began to stop kicking my dog and started to appreciate good dog work and the day .. If i got 10 birds or 2 it didnt make as much difference to me .
I just enjoyed the day of being out in the field. To appreciate the whole experience..
case in point i went down and picked up a friends hawk down south because i was close by where my friend had put his bird up in a breeding project . the bird didnt pair up with another bird.. When I went to this guys place, he had birds in their chambers about 6-10 birds and he was off doing something else.. I spoke with his wife, she helped me get the bird out of the chambers. the end result after a real nice conversation, was that he really wasnt flying much any more he had moved on to other things..
I m not making a judgement here on anybody I am just saying things change and people change. in turn memberships ebb and flow
David,
I am fed up with your condesending garbage! You make judgements about me and my falconry based on flakey connections of yours. I have and continue to practice more world class falconry than 99% of the living falconers world wide. When it comes to world class falconry, I don't think you would recognize it if a falling grouse hit you in the head.
Your posts here are full of contradictions, and ramblings and don't really say much of anything. You claim that you want know what the problem is when it is posted all around your posts, and then challange many that you disagree with, as not being real, hard core falconers...get a life!

[Roper]

Sorry dude didn't realise the thread was all about you .. I guess they should have called it "all about Jeff in Wyoming"

Here i thought we were having a nice interaction of views ... different views... none the less .. just different approaches.
I dont beleive I have had an attitude

Once I got to the real root of what people were trying to say .. I in turn took some of those concerns and made a few phone calls to my flakey connections , which I wont mind telling you, were some of the very people that they complaints are about and asked them directly what and why some people are complaining about their actions. And would greatly appreciate their response to these situations.

Not once did I hear them respond that they were better falconers and practiced better falconers than 99% of the falconers ... blah blah blah.
Sound familiar??

Case and Point: got one of those email from Dan C the other day .. i responded back to him with when some vented with their concerns that the board was unresponsive I then asked and suggested that since the web sight seems to be slow in comming .
how about putting up a questions with the authors and answere section in the hawk chawk..
So you see its not just lip service, I am actually trying to find a solution here. Attitude? , check the mirror.

[jhausman]

I'm just sending them some money. If they say I smell too bad or something along those lines I'll probably agree with them and leave it at that.

Brad

I thought all falconers smelled a little funny! You should be in the clear!

[Richard F, Hoyer]

In a series of posts, I am going to present my take on a number of topics that have surfaced during this thead.

#1) On June 22nd, Roper (David) mentioned, "Correct me if I am wrong but is not falconry at some of the best levels it has ever been .."

I have seen similar statements made over the years as if such were fact.

I can agree with the statement where it pertains to states in which falconry was not originally legal. But that isn't the case for other states such as here in Oregon. So those that have harbored the belief that falconry was never better than the present time in the U.S., ask yourself the following: Would you rather be participating in falconry with, or without all of the current federal / state regulations and red tape?

I have been involved in falconry since the late 1940's so I know what it is like not having to cope with all of the governmental BS that presently exists. From my perspective, falconry was better during the 40's, 50's, and 60's with not having to deal with all of the bureaucratic nonsense.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Richard F, Hoyer]

#2) Roper, in your July 1st post, you indicate you have "done a little research--." You mention that if one looks back say 20 years, ebbs and flows occurred in NAFA membership. If you found some membership numbers that support your statement, that would be informative. However, in the absence of such information, your statement is not consistent with the information provided in the August, 2008 Hawk Chalk article by Darryl Perkins. So I am left without knowing which version is correct.

As noted in Darryl's article, as of about 10 years ago (Nov. 1998), NAFA membership stood at 2933. In referring to that 2933 figure, the article then mentions and quote, "This is the first decline in membership since 1981." So one can infer that during the 16 or 17 years from 1981 to late 1997, NAFA membership showed a steady increase Consequently, 20 years ago, it would appear there was no ebb and flow in membership. Here again, if you have some data that demonstrates otherwise, please set the record straight.

On the other hand, your statement would be correct if instead of the looking back 20 years as you mention, we just look back at the past 10 years. The graph provided by Darryl Perkins shows that from 2000, a modest increase in membership occurred in 2002. Membership then again declined in 2003 and 2004 but then increased again in 2005. Darryl's graph then shows that from 2005, declines have taken place in 2006, 2007 and 2008. And from the information I recently received from the NAFA Membership Secretary, that decline will likely continue through this year.

I'm not willing to take the time to do a more thorough effort at looking at this issue but should you do more than just a 'little research', I think many of us would be interested in your findings.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Tom Smith]

I have been involved in falconry since the late 1940's so I know what it is like not having to cope with all of the governmental BS that presently exists. From my perspective, falconry was better during the 40's, 50's, and 60's with not having to deal with all of the bureaucratic nonsense.

Richard F. Hoyer[/QUOTE]

I have to agree Richard. The late 50's through the mid 70's when everything began to slow down and falconry took on a statutory nature with the BS as you say, was like heaven for me. If one has never experienced freedom then one probably wouldn't miss it.

Tom Smith

[Roper]

Richard
very sound argument from your point I cannot argue the 1940-60 Born in 1956 .. In the 70's I sat on horse back all day and checked cattle and fence in the northwest corner of wyoming and Montana. I had an interest in falconry back when you could buy a hawk out of the back pages of the "Boys Life" magazine,
I personally view that rules and regs serve a purpose, because their will always be people that push the envelope, and take more and do more than they should. For those of you that are able to govern yourself and tend to task I commend you .. and then there are those that do not ..
Now forth comming that is about to change with the new regs and maybe things will be more like the 40-60's


I am not putting blame on anyone here I am simply stating that maybe it is just the way people are and not all of the fault is the nafa board.

I am not saying that the Nafa board hasn't had a contribution in some of this stuff.. I just dont agree that the entire fault lies in the hands of the board of directors.
During the course of the Perkins Presidency I have had little to do with that. I'm not saying the errogance by the board or any of its reps didn't have an effect on people, it did.. I have a saying" Anyone that is more errogant than me is a jerk(insert what ever adjective you would like") I just simply dismiss those people and move on.

This blaime thing gets old to me .. I guess in the course of this conversation perhaps a solution is possible. In my efforts of evoking and questioning and some hostility from the special few I would like to ask
"what is the solution",, How do We get more members in this club.

[Migisi]

How do We get more members in this club.

Just some thoughts on leadership in general:

"Humans are ambitious and rational and proud. And we don't fall in line with people who don't respect us and who we don't believe have our best interests at heart. We are willing to follow leaders, but only to the extent that we believe they call on our best, not our worst." - Rachel Maddow

"You do not lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership." - Dwight D. Eisenhower

"What you always do before you make a decision is consult. The best public policy is made when you are listening to people who are going to be impacted. Then, once policy is determined, you call on them to help you sell it." - Elizabeth Dole

[wyodjm]

This blaime thing gets old to me .. I guess in the course of this conversation perhaps a solution is possible. In my efforts of evoking and questioning and some hostility from the special few I would like to ask
"what is the solution",, How do We get more members in this club.

Easy. Join the AFC.

Let that select group of people running NAFA, who are in love with themselves, have their own sandbox.

One of the "solutions" in my opinion is to not let Ralph Rogers become the Vice President of the America's for the International Association of Falconry (IAF). Rogers was NAFA's choice candidate.

The international falconry community has a strong following and history of hunting with golden eagles, especially in Europe and Asia. Mr. Rogers has had absolutely no involvement in supporting and promoting the use of golden eagles for falconry purposes in North America. Mr. Rogers, historically has also been adamently opposed to a nonresident take of raptors for falconry purposes in his home state in Montana.

If the same old players, are allowed to play the same old games in their positions of power and authority, then you're going to get the same old results. Then whose fault is it? Falconers either don't care or they're dumber than a box of rocks.

I would think you would not want Ralph Rogers representing you and I on the International falconry scene. Are you kidding me? Heavens no. My opinions regarding Mr. Rogers come from experience in working on the national eagle scene that goes back 20+ years.

But sit back and watch what will happen. Rogers is banking on no one doing anything to oppose his nomination and he'll just slide into that international position like butter on warm toast.

Richard.....you asked. There's one suggestion.

Dan McCarron

[outhawkn]

Easy. Join the AFC.

Let that select group of people running NAFA, who are in love with themselves, have their own sandbox.

One of the "solutions" in my opinion is to not let Ralph Rogers become the Vice President of the America's for the International Association of Falconry (IAF). Rogers was NAFA's choice candidate.

The international falconry community has a strong following and history of hunting with golden eagles, especially in Europe and Asia. Mr. Rogers has had absolutely no involvement in supporting and promoting the use of golden eagles for falconry purposes in North America. Mr. Rogers, historically has also been adamently opposed to a nonresident take of raptors for falconry purposes in his home state in Montana.

If the same old players, are allowed to play the same old games in their positions of power and authority, then you're going to get the same old results. Then whose fault is it? Falconers either don't care or they're dumber than a box of rocks.

I would think you would not want Ralph Rogers representing you and I on the International falconry scene. Are you kidding me? Heavens no. My opinions regarding Mr. Rogers come from experience in working on the national eagle scene that goes back 20+ years.

But sit back and watch what will happen. Rogers is banking on no one doing anything to oppose his nomination and he'll just slide into that international position like butter on warm toast.

Richard.....you asked. There's one suggestion.

Dan McCarron

clapp Exactly..................:D

[Roper]

I guess that is a way of doing it, getting your point across but leaving nafa isnt that a contradiction of trying to improve the numbers of membership.. I mean that is one less nafa member, but
maybe it gets your point across and that is what is necessary but isnt it a divide and conquor thing a lesser united front.

[goshawks00]

Dave maybe you make your own point ..."isn't a divide and conquer thing a less united front". Yes it is, and that in a nutshell is why NAFA is getting smaller and smaller, less and less effective.. They do not listen to it's members , drag their feet on what the membership wants, and follow the same old worn out direction as to how they handle issues. The best way to unite NAFA is to jointly ,in mass migration, exit them... Maybe, MAYBE, then they will get it, that the membership, er...., make that ex-membership has had enough and has gone to become a more united front, under a different name. A group that will/does listen to it's members and fights for their common good not just those that are like minded to their philosphies.
Barry

[wyodjm]

I guess that is a way of doing it, getting your point across but leaving nafa isnt that a contradiction of trying to improve the numbers of membership.. I mean that is one less nafa member, but
maybe it gets your point across and that is what is necessary but isnt it a divide and conquor thing a lesser united front.

Hi David. Forgive me, I called you Richard earlier.

OK, I'll try and say this as carefully and as clearly as I can. I don't give a rat's petunia about NAFA anymore. They've screwed so many people, including me, over the last ten years or so that I just don't care. NAFA can go pound sand.

Join the AFC.

If, in the future, NAFA changes its current administration and its old tactics, I may join again. I was a dues paying, major contributing member of NAFA for over 30 years. I chose to dump it. It's my choice, my time, and my money. That's what's nice about America. I say this without fear, because I have the experience to back my opinions up.

Perhaps more people in my position should make a similar statement. If not, I don't care. I'll stand alone. I basically took on the USFWS by myself for almost 10 years, in a blood and guts bar room fight over eagles when almost everyone else in NAFA who could have helped me was afraid of their shadow. Frank Bond helped me and I will always acknowledge Frank in public. Frank and I are old friends. We now have golden eagles available and we can take golden eagles out of the wild.

Contradiction? I've earned my opinion and right to leave NAFA. What's your resume look like?

May I please be excused from this now? It appears that I'm spinning my wheels on this thread.

Best,

Dan McCarron

[Roper]

Barry
see that is what I like about you consice and to the point
perhaps you are correct. I can truely see what you are saying..
I just have never had the issues with the board that some of the members are having.. but if I did then I probably would take that tack.

[Roper]

dan you obviously have had experiences with nafa or not I should say that I have not encountered.
I have not ever taken the course you have with the eagles.
My resume" I really dont want to get into what I have done type stuff.
but I worked with Robert Anderson (first person to breed, peregrines in MN) I am not sure if it was the midwest but MN I am sure of.
AI'd the birds and Helped build the chambers on the farm where the birds were bred.
The orginal nest boxes that were built on the cliffs of MN and Wisconsin and the buildings in and around the cities of Minneapolis, other places , our construction company built and provided at not cost.
Patrick Redig and Myself were the ones that repelled off the cliffs and installed these nest boxes. Our company provided the generators , scafolding for hack boxes, climbing gear etc . labor fuel , time effort and etc... for this effort.
Worked with the U of Mn Raptor Center, Harrison (Bud ) Tordoff , Bob Anderson, Andy Weaver and all the others in the midwest Peregrine reintroduction. When the new John Gabbert U of M Raptor Center was built, the MN falconers and myself helped install all the perches etc....
I have been a falconery for over 20 years, and have flown a variety of birds from redtails to Peregrines.
I am sure this is minischule to some others efforts but that is part of my resume. I'm not interested in getting into a pissing match here.
Perhaps I misread your intent here, but there you have it.
If no offense ment , none taken , just statin the facts.
best

[wyodjm]

dan you obviously have had experiences with nafa or not I should say that I have not encountered.
I have not ever taken the course you have with the eagles.
My resume" I really dont want to get into what I have done type stuff.
but I worked with Robert Anderson (first person to breed, peregrines in MN) I am not sure if it was the midwest but MN I am sure of.
AI'd the birds and Helped build the chambers on the farm where the birds were bred.
The orginal nest boxes that were built on the cliffs of MN and Wisconsin and the buildings in and around the cities of Minneapolis, other places , our construction company built and provided at not cost.
Patrick Redig and Myself were the ones that repelled off the cliffs and installed these nest boxes. Our company provided the generators , scafolding for hack boxes, climbing gear etc . labor fuel , time effort and etc... for this effort.
Worked with the U of Mn Raptor Center, Harrison (Bud ) Tordoff , Bob Anderson, Andy Weaver and all the others in the midwest Peregrine reintroduction. When the new John Gabbert U of M Raptor Center was built, the MN falconers and myself helped install all the perches etc....
I have been a falconery for over 20 years, and have flown a variety of birds from redtails to Peregrines.
I am sure this is minischule to some others efforts but that is part of my resume. I'm not interested in getting into a pissing match here.
Perhaps I misread your intent here, but there you have it.
If no offense ment , none taken , just statin the facts.
best

Yes, you misread my intent. But, that's ok.

Join the AFC.

Cheers David,

Dan

[Peregrinus]

As frustrated and disenfranchised as some (former) members may be, I am of the opinion that a good percentage of NAFA's drop in membership can be attributed to the rise of internet forums. Until recently, two of a club's main functions were to distribute information and provide a social network. Both of these functions have been taken over- to a large extent- by the internet. Some clubs are too afraid of liability to allow forums on their websites, which makes groups like NAFEX even more important.

All of this leads me to think that there is one primary function for a falconry club: the preservation of falconers' rights. I would guess that a club must adhere to the idea that falconry is a right in order to be effective in that endeavor.

Bridget


I guess that is a way of doing it, getting your point across but leaving nafa isnt that a contradiction of trying to improve the numbers of membership.. I mean that is one less nafa member, but
maybe it gets your point across and that is what is necessary but isnt it a divide and conquor thing a lesser united front.

[Migisi]

dan you obviously have had experiences with nafa or not I should say that I have not encountered.
I have not ever taken the course you have with the eagles.
My resume" I really dont want to get into what I have done type stuff.
but I worked with....

Very nice resume, David. However, none of the above involved working with or for NAFA.

[sharptail]

Great point Bridget,....'how can you eat your pudding if you don't believe in eating?'.
Seem I have been trying to make a silk purse of a sows ear. At least I had help...not the only fool in the room.

[Dirthawking]

Can we stop the chest pounding, lower the testosterone levels, and get back onto topic? frus

[Tom Smith]

I'm curious, has any of the studies revealed how many falconers have died or at a point in age where they do not practice falconry any more. Seems there were a large number of falconers in NAFA that would be in there late 50's through 70's that are no longer practicing falconry due to age or death. Perhaps some one else mentioned it. I haven't followed the thread faithfully as it has deviated considerably.

I know some really remarkable falconers that haven't practiced for years due to health concerns.

And there are some who have spent so much time patting themselves on the back they have injured their shoulders to the point they can no longer carry a bird on the their fist.

Tom Smith

[Mitchellbrad]

Can we stop the chest pounding, lower the testosterone levels, and get back onto topic? frus

On Saturday night they need some excitement,
Jane gets right and the monkey gets tight,
And their voices unite, in the pale moon light,
And it sounds alright, yeah, it's dynamite,
It's outta sight.
Let's hear it, right nnnnnnnnow!

Chest pounding at it's finest.

Well, it looks to me whether the NAFA board is really doing it's job or not the perception within many in the community is it isn't. Until that is changed this thread could stretch on and on and on. Or they simply think of us as falconers out of step with them. Each falconer is going to have to decide one way or another. The only way is to do what you think it right by doing one of 4 things as I see it. There are other options though right now I can't think of them. You can drop out, join that other club like I did, Stay a member and raise Hell with the board or stay a member and keep your mouth shut. I'm gonna go have a drink with the monkey and toast Ray Stevens who sang the above.

[wyodjm]

And there are some who have spent so much time patting themselves on the back they have injured their shoulders to the point they can no longer carry a bird on the their fist.

Tom Smith

It's too bad all this NAFA stuff couldn't have been reconciled earlier. Perhaps there's too much water under the bridge. Perhaps it's merely personalities.

I really don't think anyone ever intended this to happen. It's not always that enjoyable when you take a stand. And stand by it.

Dan

[Roper]

Barry
cant argue that .. you are right.. that wasnt for Nafa I quess helping save the Peregrine had nothing to do with nafa and the constant efforts of the delisting of the Peregrine Falcon by individual members , local and national club.

[Migisi]

Or they simply think of us as falconers out of step with them.

confusedd Well, that's true, isn't it?

[Richard F, Hoyer]

In part # 1, I questioned the notion repeated by falconers that the practice of falconry in the U.S is better than it has ever been. In part #2, I returned to the original topic of this thread, the declining membership of NAFA. So in part #3, I will continue with that theme.

#3) Roper mentioned that the average or mean NAFA membership as being about 2000. He also mentioned current membership at 1750 (an approximation I mentioned earlier) and estimated an increase of 150 members by the end of the year.

When I contacted the NAFA Membership Secretary in mid June, the actual figure he mentioned was 1722. With an increase of 150, by the end of this year, NAFA membership would reach an estimated 1872 representing a further decline from the 1959 members documented by Darryl Perkins as of July, 2008.

I really don't know if David's suggested increase of 150 members by the end of 2009 is realistic. That would mean an increase of 25 members for the next 6 months. The Membership Secretary indicated that new memberships were averaging about 8 per month for the previous four months. Just for speculative purposes, if the combination of new and renewed membership took place at the rate of 12 per month for the next 6 months, by the end of 2009, membership would stand at 1794. Which figure is more realistic is anyone's guess so we will have to wait until next January to possibly find out.

Secondly, as a statistical measure, the means (or average) is not often used as in many cases, it does not tell much about the data and sometimes can be misleading. In our situation, an average of 2000 members over the past 10 -11 years is not really meaningful. Trends are far more informative. As I mention in my initial post., when referring to the number of falconers, there exists two trends that when viewed together, are far more informative than citing the average number of NAFA members over the past decade.

If the approximations I provided were reasonably close, an upward trend has occurred in U.S falconers from about 3900 in the late 1990s to about 4500 at the present time . During the very same period of time, an opposite downward trend has occurred in NAFA membership from about 3000 down to less that 1800.

Interpretations can vary and without more information, it is not safe to reach a firm conclusion. But I suggest that with these two opposite trends occurring simultaneously, there
exists the distinct possibility that dissatisfaction (frustration) with NAFA leadership is a likely factor contributing to the decline in NAFA membership.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Richard F, Hoyer]

#4) You were correct David as I definitely was one that had my 'head in the sand'. I never paid attention to what was transpiring within NAFA. Most of my Hawk Chalks and Journals have sat unopened. But that all changed last year when in mid April of 2008, I became aware of the nasty controversy within NAFA involving the 'Private Property' issue.

David, have you really informed yourself as to 1) just what occurred and 2) why it occurred? If you haven't, then I can understand some of the positions you have taken during this thread. But if anyone has truly informed themselves of the particulars of that controversy, I find it difficult to understand how anyone could not be disturbed with the manner in which the NAFA leadership acted or failed to act in a rational and responsible manner.

I suggest that there are many individuals such as myself, that are disenchanted and disturbed at what transpired, all of which was completely preventable had the NAFA leadership behaved in a responsible manner.

For instance, are you aware that 6 of 10 2008 board members and NAFA president Dan Cecchini failed to do the most elementary search for factual information on that issue? Instead, they blindly adopted and then repeated the personal opinions espoused by former NAFA board member Dick Musser. Dick's positions was that not just falconry birds, but all live wildlife could never be privately owned but instead, indefinitely remained as public property (in the public trust).

It is my understanding that the controversy began sometime in 2007. I don't know what transpired before I became involved in mid April of 2008. With my biological background, the positions taken by Dick Musser (who was very sincere in his convictions), Dan Cecchini, and the majority of the NAFA board members simply did not make sense.

I then went to the trouble of searching for the facts, something that a responsible leadership SHOULD have undertaken but didn't. Within 6 months, I had accumulated sufficient factual information to demonstrate that the positions taken by the NAFA leadership on the 'Private Property' issue, were in error and informed them of my findings. Shortly thereafter, many individuals became aware that Dr. George Allen of the USF&WS informed Dan Cecchini that indeed, falconry birds were private property.

So for at least a year or possibly longer, the NAFA leadership adopted and supported a false stance on that issue. With other falconers jumping on board and adopting that flawed position, the resulting controversy became ugly. To my knowledge David, neither Dan Cecchini nor any of the 6 board members have publicly admitted to their error in judgment nor apologized for their mistakes that created a very large chasm within NAFA and perhaps the falconry community at large. That terrible episode in N. A. falconry history never should have happened had the NAFA leadership acted responsibly. And I would suggest that as an organization, NAFA's reputation has suffered as well.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Migisi]

So for at least a year or possibly longer, the NAFA leadership adopted and supported a false stance on that issue.

That clinched it for me... I considered NAFA's declaration for Public Trust as a blatant betrayal of all the falconers who fought for years for our private ownership rights.

May, 2007, Pres. Perkins 'clarifies' NAFA's position on private ownership. He focused mostly on ownership rights to captive bred birds in new proposed regs, but delayed addressing the issue regarding wild taken birds.

Dec. 2007, NAFA supports WRTC's position on private property and donates $5,000 to WRTC's Legal Fund, "for the purposes of securing private property rights on the raptors we use and a rewrite of the regulations to acknowledge this fact.”

June 2008 (Cechinni - NAFA President), only six short months later, NAFA completely reverses its position and votes in favor of the Public Trust. In effect, NAFA conceded to the government claims that they own our birds, and surrendered falconer ownership rights. This resulted in chaos and serious division within the falconry community.


Shortly thereafter, many individuals became aware that Dr. George Allen of the USF&WS informed Dan Cecchini that indeed, falconry birds were private property.
October 2008, the NAFA Board decides to 'review and upgrade' NAFA's private ownership position, and change the committee's name from "Private Ownership" committee to the "Falconry Raptor Rights" committee.

It's all there to read in meeting minutes on the NAFA website.

What's NAFA's 'reviewed and upgraded' position on ownership today? Anyone know?

[jhausman]

All of this leads me to think that there is one primary function for a falconry club: the preservation of falconers' rights. I would guess that a club must adhere to the idea that falconry is a right in order to be effective in that endeavor.

Bridget

;) Bingo. clapp

[Roper]

Richard
I appreciate your cander and elloquence to this specific subject.
of private property. I wish to note your careful wording of this subject as to inform without being condisending.
Yes I am aware of the position that the Nafa board has taken.
I quess being that if you trulely feel betrayal I can totally understand why you would take the stance you have.
I would find that past presidencies have been arogant to say the least, but has anyone asked in a general forum in publicwith the board present and the people present as to why they took this position say at the Nafa meet. And if you stood toe to toe with these people one on one .. looking them straight in the face , what do they say. What is their rebuttle to this statement ... ?

[Richard F, Hoyer]

David, other than what Dan McCarran has mentioned, I am not aware of past situations involving NAFA leadership that have caused individuals to drop their membership. However, besides the botched 'Private Property' issue, in the past year I have become aware of several other questionable situations which I mention below.

1) In the thread by Fred Fogg entitled 'Beebe and Webster', one finds that the board voted not to abide by NAFA by-laws with respect to a submitted, valid petition. In essence, the board did not trust the membership and substituted their judgment as being superior.

2) In the same thread, there is a link with information by Colorado attorney Mathew Gould pertaining to the 'Petition' issue. The last two paragraphs of Mr. Gould's letter of 11/21/08 provide his assessment. With only having only Mr. Gould's side, I asked Dan Cecchini to provide his, and the NAFA board's side of the petition issue. Dan Cechinni declined to provide a response.

3) The NAFA board expressed concerns with the petition process. They proposed the membership vote to increase the needed number of valid signatures from 5% to 25%. The leadership mentioned the problems they perceived but failed to inform the membership that by increasing the number of signatures needed from 5% to 25% would effectively kill the petition process altogether. The petition process in the By-laws is now worthless verbiage.

4) The board set aside $15,000 to hire a Colorado law firm to examine the NAFA petition process. But earlier, with an issue of far greater importance ('Private Property' issue), the board failed to seek outside, expert legal opinion.

5) The minutes of the June 22, 2008 NAFA board meeting are worth viewing. They can be accessed in the 'Members Only' section of the NAFA Web site. In particular, read proposals #1 and #2 both submitted by Lance Christensen and seconded by Mark Williams. Keep in mind, the two proposals were submitted at the height of the 'Private Property' controversy within the board. Also understand that Mr. Christensen and Mr. Williams sided with the flawed position supported by Dan Cecchini, Ralph Rogers and others.

For those that cannot access that information, if one cuts through the fancy language of the two proposals, it is clear those proposals were meant to intimidate other board members and thus suppress discussion on the 'Private Property' issue. I vaguely recall hearing about that situation last year but only looked into it recently because what transpired this past June 25. (see #6 below)..

6) The most recent example of NAFA leadership is as follows: On June 25, I contacted all board members and Dan Cecchini asking for clarification and comments about a questionable statement concerning the current board that had been sent to 16 falconers including myself. I did so wishing to head off another potential controversy. I also contacted the other 15 falconers that received the statement asking they hold off on making any judgment about the statement one way or the other.

I received answers from Dan Cecchini and most of the board members. Responses were civil with two exceptions. Below is the worst of the two. The board member was
comfortable about his reply since he sent copies to all other board members plus Dan Cecchini, Frank Bond and Larry Dickerson. You can reach your own conclusions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mr. Hoyer,

You seem like you are an intelligent individual.

I would have thought that after the president and several board members replied to you that this issue was in fact false, would have been sufficient

To recap then for those of us that need to here things more then once.

1 the president and several board members have already answered your questions.

2 you do understand there is a constitution and bylaws within the NAFA organization that we must follow.

3 Mr. Hoyer. Do you remember yourself or any of your associates voting to amend the current NAFA constitution to allow the directors to remove a board member. That is what it takes to change the constitution, a vote from the membership

4 In case all the other emails and the first part of this email are not clear enough for you the answer is still No or False.

I trust this is clear enough for you this time.

Mr. Hoyer, some friendly advice if I may. Let's all try to work towards building up NAFA not to tear it down. You will find this to be more advantageous for the falconry community.

This is my final answer. The NAFA board has several important issues to deal with. This not being one. We have already wasted more time on this then necessary.

Good luck at what ever it is you are trying to accomplish."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With what I have learned about the NAFA leadership since April, 2008, I can now identify with the falconers that have become so disenchanted they have not renewed their NAFA membership. In consideration of what I have mentioned above, and particularly if the above board member is re-elected, in all probability I will not renew my NAFA membership for next year.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Migisi]

3 Mr. Hoyer. Do you remember yourself or any of your associates voting to amend the current NAFA constitution to allow the directors to remove a board member. That is what it takes to change the constitution, a vote from the membership.

(S)He's absolutely correct.

In the Bylaws, the Board can remove a Director for unreasonable absence from his residence. (Sect. 5, b) That's the only reason I've found for Board removal. Maybe I missed some others? (Conviction - and proof thereof - of a wildlife-related crime is a no-brainer.)

The membership can remove a Director by submitting a written petition signed by 25% (was 5%) of the regular members in his electorate, and then a majority (over 50%) in his electorate must vote in favor of removal.

However, how are we to interpret the following, which was passed by the Board last year?


Agenda 8.3b Item #1 (June 2008 - NAFA website - News Archive page).

"Any NAFA Director not abiding by the above responsibilities will be considered to be acting outside of their duties and obligations to the organization and its members, and will be liable to disciplinary action from the NAFA Board as a whole. The refusal of a NAFA Director to agree to these responsibilities can be considered grounds for their removal as a NAFA Director. All current and future NAFA Directors will be required to agree in writing to the above responsibilities."

To me, it appears that the Board has given itself the authority to remove a Director for more reasons than the Bylaws allow (absence from residence).

To my knowledge, the general membership did not vote to amend the Const/Bylaws to include the Board-drafted description of Director's responsibilities, the penalties for failing to meet those responsibilities, or a requirement for an oath of agreeance, loyalty, and obedience signed by Directors.

Am I off base here? If so, how far?

[Roper]

Now thats attitude, I would strongly suggest that person examine his position in life and who he is on the board.
everything in life is a choice and this guy made a choice to be a horses ass.
after reading that I just shake my head in disgust..
care to share the author. I think it should be stated.

[goshawks00]

Berie I do agree with you as far as this that you wrote: "it appears that the Board has given itself the authority to remove a Director for more reasons than the Bylaws allow (absence from residence)." It does seem to beg an explanation....

That said I do think you are reading more in to it than it says..

"To my knowledge, the general membership did not vote to amend the Const/Bylaws to include the Board-drafted description of Director's responsibilities, the penalties for failing to meet those responsibilities, or a requirement for an oath of agreeance, loyalty, and obedience signed by" Directors.

I believe you are incorrect in the assumption that agreeance/loyalty/and obediience or lack there of are grounds for dismissal. Now then just what they mean by duty and obligations to members and the board I haven't a clue, other than representation to the affairs of those they represent.
.02
Barry

[Dirthawking]

6) The most recent example of NAFA leadership is as follows: On June 25, I contacted all board members and Dan Cecchini asking for clarification and comments about a questionable statement concerning the current board that had been sent to 16 falconers including myself. I did so wishing to head off another potential controversy. I also contacted the other 15 falconers that received the statement asking they hold off on making any judgment about the statement one way or the other.



Out of curiousity, what was the questionable statement?

[Roper]

in my haist I read through this to quickly . is it my understanding that the rebuttle from your concerns came from Dan C? or someone else.

[robruger1]

How about you show some loyalty and thanks to the organization that is responsible for us being able to practice our passion in this country. Everyone is against us, we need to be unified, if you don't like how things are, run for office and change it. I think this thread has now violated the no politics rule of the forum, and personally it makes me sick.frus

[FredFogg]

in my haist I read through this to quickly . is it my understanding that the rebuttle from your concerns came from Dan C? or someone else.

Richard said "The board member was comfortable about his reply since he sent copies to all other board members plus Dan Cecchini, Frank Bond and Larry Dickerson." Therefore, it couldn't have been Dan, Frank, or Larry, I would think!

[frootdog]

How about you show some loyalty and thanks to the organization that is responsible for us being able to practice our passion in this country. Everyone is against us, we need to be unified, if you don't like how things are, run for office and change it. I think this thread has now violated the no politics rule of the forum, and personally it makes me sick.frus



Falconry politics are a totally different issue. We are not discussing the presidency here.

No offence Rob but member's like you that follow blindly are just what NAFA wants. You say run for office and that's great, but how many people actually research the candidates vs. who votes for the name they recognize? Perfect example. There were 2 or 3 central director candidates 2 years ago that were not big names and not NAFA lackeys. NAFA went to Lance and asked him to run. One reason was he was a name people recognised and the second was he would fit nicely with the current board. I could have told you that he would be elected by default, because when I was new I too did the same thing and voted for the name I recognised instead of the best candidate. Lance has stated numerous times to numerous people that he had no desire to be a director and would NOT seek reelection, yet there he is on the ballot.

Just like a sports team, past championships/victories don't buy you the fans good will forever. For example paying fans of the Dallas Cowboys expect nothing less than greatness and more superbowls. The fact that they won 3 in the 90's means nothing now. No one is arguing what NAFA has done in the VERY distant past , but the current board is running amock and then posting the evidence online for the few that actually read the board minutes. Are you familiar with the issues being discussed? Do you know how they tried to royaly screw us over the whole private property issue? They have not made a profit in the past few years yet they are now spending a lot of money on a planner to organize the future of the organization....WTF! At the same time they have yet to spend a dime to make or falconry actually better in this country. With or without NAFA the feds were going to make the rules less restictive. NAFA has nothing to do with the individual states adopting the rules. So I ask what exactly has NAFA done lately? When someone comes along and makes valid points and complaints they are either swept under the rug (Bebee Webster petition), ignored, or treated like dirt for questioning the organization. What the board needs is more directors like Eric that actually keep thier directorate informed and seek advice from the members, but low and behold they have given themselves the right to terminate directors that don't tow thew company line. You really think they are the be all end all still? Like you Rob I am a NAFA member. Like the sports fan I have paid my money and have a right to complain.

[Lowachi]

Falconry politics are a totally different issue. We are not discussing the presidency here.

No offence Rob but member's like you that follow blindly are just what NAFA wants. You say run for office and that's great, but how many people actually research the candidates vs. who votes for the name they recognize? Perfect example. There were 2 or 3 central director candidates 2 years ago that were not big names and not NAFA lackeys. NAFA went to Lance and asked him to run. One reason was he was a name people recognised and the second was he would fit nicely with the current board. I could have told you that he would be elected by default, because when I was new I too did the same thing and voted for the name I recognised instead of the best candidate. Lance has stated numerous times to numerous people that he had no desire to be a director and would NOT seek reelection, yet there he is on the ballot.

Just like a sports team, past championships/victories don't buy you the fans good will forever. For example paying fans of the Dallas Cowboys expect nothing less than greatness and more superbowls. The fact that they won 3 in the 90's means nothing now. No one is arguing what NAFA has done in the VERY distant past , but the current board is running amock and then posting the evidence online for the few that actually read the board minutes. Are you familiar with the issues being discussed? Do you know how they tried to royaly screw us over the whole private property issue? They have not made a profit in the past few years yet they are now spending a lot of money on a planner to organize the future of the organization....WTF! At the same time they have yet to spend a dime to make or falconry actually better in this country. With or without NAFA the feds were going to make the rules less restictive. NAFA has nothing to do with the individual states adopting the rules. So I ask what exactly has NAFA done lately? When someone comes along and makes valid points and complaints they are either swept under the rug (Bebee Webster petition), ignored, or treated like dirt for questioning the organization. What the board needs is more directors like Eric that actually keep thier directorate informed and seek advice from the members, but low and behold they have given themselves the right to terminate directors that don't tow thew company line. You really think they are the be all end all still? Like you Rob I am a NAFA member. Like the sports fan I have paid my money and have a right to complain.

thumbsupp

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Berin, others,
Perhaps the following will address some of your comments and questions.

The statement was part of a personal email from one falconer to another. Due to the word 'current', the falconer that received the statement then sent it to 16 other falconers thinking he was passing on a new development within NAFA. All just a misunderstanding. Here is the statement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Did you know that the current board, under a proposal brought up by Lance Christiansen, voted itself the right to dismiss a sitting board member? All they have to do is get a majority vote of the sitting board members, that the person is "Disrupting" the board, and they can remove that person.

They voted themselves the right to remove an elected board member."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When I received that statement on June 25th, I immediate had reservations. In order to possibly ascertain the facts, I contacted Dan Cecchini and all board members with the following:

"I just received the message copied below. Wondering if it is true and/or if some details may have been omitted. Any clarification or comments would be appreciated.
Richard F. Hoyer (Corvallis, Oregon)"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The word 'current' was the culprit and should have been 'former'. The originator of the statement was referring to the two proposals by Lance Christensen found in Agenda 08.3 of the June 22, 2008 board meeting. Part of proposal #1, copied by Berni above, shows the factual basis for the origin of the statement but where the wording of the statement left something to be desired.

Below is my reply to Ralph Rogers of June 28th which incorporated my last message to Dan Cecchini of June 27th.
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ralph,
I involved myself with this situation in the hope that by doing so, I could possibly prevent a situation similar to what transpired during the 'Private Property' issue in which a chasm occurred within NAFA and falconry community as a whole.

I don't know what Dan Cecchini may have forwarded to you but below is the last message I sent to him last night.

Richard F. Hoyer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan,
I told my wife yesterday there had to be a plausible explanation and that has turned out to be the case.

Problem solved! The proposal in question was last year's NAFA Agenda 08-3.

It is quite understandable that individuals (including myself) misconstrued the contents of the statement. The first sentence begins with, "Did you know that the current board---."
Consequently, most individuals thought that just recently, Lance Christensen made a proposal "---- to dismiss a sitting board member" And the last sentence mentioning "They voted themselves the right to remove an elected board member." can be interpreted to produce an incorrect perception as well.

So as to set the record straight, I have copied this information to the 15 falconers that received a copy of the statement. If you will copy this information to the current board members, I hope we can lay this issue to rest.

Richard F. Hoyer"

[bgibson]

Falconry politics are a totally different issue. We are not discussing the presidency here.

No offence Rob but member's like you that follow blindly are just what NAFA wants. You say run for office and that's great, but how many people actually research the candidates vs. who votes for the name they recognize? Perfect example. There were 2 or 3 central director candidates 2 years ago that were not big names and not NAFA lackeys. NAFA went to Lance and asked him to run. One reason was he was a name people recognised and the second was he would fit nicely with the current board. I could have told you that he would be elected by default, because when I was new I too did the same thing and voted for the name I recognised instead of the best candidate. Lance has stated numerous times to numerous people that he had no desire to be a director and would NOT seek reelection, yet there he is on the ballot.

Just like a sports team, past championships/victories don't buy you the fans good will forever. For example paying fans of the Dallas Cowboys expect nothing less than greatness and more superbowls. The fact that they won 3 in the 90's means nothing now. No one is arguing what NAFA has done in the VERY distant past , but the current board is running amock and then posting the evidence online for the few that actually read the board minutes. Are you familiar with the issues being discussed? Do you know how they tried to royaly screw us over the whole private property issue? They have not made a profit in the past few years yet they are now spending a lot of money on a planner to organize the future of the organization....WTF! At the same time they have yet to spend a dime to make or falconry actually better in this country. With or without NAFA the feds were going to make the rules less restictive. NAFA has nothing to do with the individual states adopting the rules. So I ask what exactly has NAFA done lately? When someone comes along and makes valid points and complaints they are either swept under the rug (Bebee Webster petition), ignored, or treated like dirt for questioning the organization. What the board needs is more directors like Eric that actually keep thier directorate informed and seek advice from the members, but low and behold they have given themselves the right to terminate directors that don't tow thew company line. You really think they are the be all end all still? Like you Rob I am a NAFA member. Like the sports fan I have paid my money and have a right to complain.

krys, the sports analogy is right on. in the eyes of the masses, you are only as good as your last play. and in the eyes of many, Nafa has booted the grounder and is not willing to stay after the game and practice.

[Migisi]

Berie I do agree with you as far as this that you wrote: "it appears that the Board has given itself the authority to remove a Director for more reasons than the Bylaws allow (absence from residence)." It does seem to beg an explanation....

I think so too. I'm not sure how this policy can be carried out without amending the Bylaws.

Indulge me a bit here, if you will...

Say a majority on the Board come to a concensus that a Director isn't fulfilling his responsibilities. Does the Board have the authority to remove a Director per current Bylaws? From my review, I say no. Per comments included with their votes, Directors Edwards, Jones, and Sulski affirmed the Board doesn't have the authority.

So, if only the membership can remove a Director (per Bylaws), does the Board intend to contact the entire regular membership in that directorate and ask them to petition the Board to remove the Director? Then they have to put it to a vote - 50% or more in that directorate must be in favor. Is that how it's going to go?

I think all NAFA members need to know how the Board plans to legally implement their policy (a step-by-step procedure), and all regular members must vote for its inclusion in the Bylaws.

In addition, what exactly does the Board mean by "liable to disciplinary action from the NAFA Board as a whole"? If that discipline includes public censureship (#2, Agenda 08.3b "This formal censure will be published in the following Hawk Chalk as a full page notice.”), doesn't NAFA open itself up to slander/liable litigation? More dues misspent on attorney's fees to answer a defamation suit?


That said I do think you are reading more in to it than it says..

I think more like reading between the lines, and questioning what hasn't been made clear to the membership - and perhaps some Board members.


I believe you are incorrect in the assumption that agreeance/loyalty/and obediience or lack there of are grounds for dismissal.

Well, the Board demands the submission of a written statement declaring his/her agreeance with the Board-drafted responsibilities, allegiance, and obedience. ("All current and future NAFA Directors will be required to agree in writing to the above responsibilities.") It doesn't state whether every canditate for Director is required to submit this statement with his bio, or if (s)he submits it after (s)he's been elected. If the latter, what if (s)he refuses to submit this written statement? Can the Board legally rescind the election and remove him/her from office? Just more questions.


Now then just what they mean by duty and obligations to members and the board I haven't a clue, other than representation to the affairs of those they represent.

If you and I don't know what the Board means, then IMO, it needs further examination and explanation - rather than leave everything open to arbitrary interpretation, no?

As I see things...

[Migisi]

Berin, others,
Perhaps the following will address some of your comments and questions.

The statement was part of a personal email from one falconer to another.

I knew exactly what you were referring to, as I also received the same personal email. And I knew it was last year's news. I'd posted my comments about it on this forum months ago ("NAFA Considerations..", Sept. 2008).

[Migisi]

"... All they have to do is get a majority vote of the sitting board members, that the person is "Disrupting" the board, and they can remove that person.

They voted themselves the right to remove an elected board member."

Actually, they voted themselves the right to publicly humiliate and criticize (censure) a sitting Director - in a full page notice in the Hawk Chalk.

[Richard F, Hoyer]

Berni,
I really appreciate your filling in the gaps with your comments and analysis. Your last post is spot on as I had reached the same conclusion.

And you established beyond doubt the fact that I have not paid attention to what has been going on in NAFA until the ugly squabble over the 'Private Property' issue surfaced. I suspect it was on this forum (and perhaps your posts) that I became vaguely aware of the ill advised proposals by Lance Christensen during the June 22, 2008 board meeting. But at the time, I was probably still focused on gathering factual information about the 'property' issue.

Richard F. Hoyer

[Peregrinus]

Rob:

Those who get elected on a platform of change will be accused of 'trying to take over NAFA', and will be thwarted by whatever means is deemed necessary. Most who have given even cursory examination to the events of the last year realize that.

Bridget


How about you show some loyalty and thanks to the organization that is responsible for us being able to practice our passion in this country. Everyone is against us, we need to be unified, if you don't like how things are, run for office and change it. I think this thread has now violated the no politics rule of the forum, and personally it makes me sick.frus

[everetkhorton]

Berni:
Just wondering are you still a member of NAFA?

[Migisi]

Berni,
I really appreciate your filling in the gaps with your comments and analysis. Your last post is spot on as I had reached the same conclusion.

And you established beyond doubt the fact that I have not paid attention to what has been going on in NAFA until the ugly squabble over the 'Private Property' issue surfaced. I suspect it was on this forum (and perhaps your posts) that I became vaguely aware of the ill advised proposals by Lance Christensen during the June 22, 2008 board meeting. But at the time, I was probably still focused on gathering factual information about the 'property' issue.

Richard F. Hoyer

Paying attention to the goings-on in falconry orgs - both national, and my state - is what I do. I reckon if I can't change things, at least I won't be caught off guard when the stuff hits the fan.

Agenda 08.3 was a hum dinger, as was the Board maneuverings around the Great Lakes Director and Beebe/Webster petitions. To be honest, these issues I viewed as NAFA internal business which didn't hold a lot of importance - for me, anyway. However, those issues and others have opened some eyes, and force falconers to take a hard look at what their national org represents, and the direction they're taking falconry. And I think that's a good thing.

As I said earlier, the clincher for me was NAFA's flip-flop on private property and their adoption of Public Trust. That directly impacts me and my falconry. When people mess with my rights and my falconry, my hackles go way up! If my state club or WRTC (AFC) had done this, I'd be just as vocal in opposing it.

My POV...

[Peregrinus]

Berni:
Yes, Agenda 8.3 was an entertaining one. Oaths of fealty and ideological litmus tests for all incoming directors. Too bad they left out the secret handshake and the decoder ring. Oddly, they passed the Public Trust Doctrine 'resolution' exactly as Mr. Musser had given it to them. Unfortunately, he neglected to tell them that he lifted the wording from an essay which appeared on a Sierra Club website; in its zeal, the Board adopted the language without any research.

Most NAFA members don't know this stuff because they join merely for the comic book. I daresay if more of them had actually bothered to read the agendas, they might have felt differently at election time.

Bridget

\
Paying attention to the goings-on in falconry orgs - both national, and my state - is what I do. I reckon if I can't change things, at least I won't be caught off guard when the stuff hits the fan.

Agenda 08.3 was a hum dinger, as was the Board maneuverings around the Great Lakes Director and Beebe/Webster petitions. To be honest, these issues I viewed as NAFA internal business which didn't hold a lot of importance - for me, anyway. However, those issues and others have opened some eyes, and force falconers to take a hard look at what their national org represents, and the direction they're taking falconry. And I think that's a good thing.

As I said earlier, the clincher for me was NAFA's flip-flop on private property and their adoption of Public Trust. That directly impacts me and my falconry. When people mess with my rights and my falconry, my hackles go way up! If my state club or WRTC (AFC) had done this, I'd be just as vocal in opposing it.

My POV...

[wyodjm]

Paying attention to the goings-on in falconry orgs - both national, and my state - is what I do. I reckon if I can't change things, at least I won't be caught off guard when the stuff hits the fan.

Agenda 08.3 was a hum dinger, as was the Board maneuverings around the Great Lakes Director and Beebe/Webster petitions. To be honest, these issues I viewed as NAFA internal business which didn't hold a lot of importance - for me, anyway. However, those issues and others have opened some eyes, and force falconers to take a hard look at what their national org represents, and the direction they're taking falconry. And I think that's a good thing.

As I said earlier, the clincher for me was NAFA's flip-flop on private property and their adoption of Public Trust. That directly impacts me and my falconry. When people mess with my rights and my falconry, my hackles go way up! If my state club or WRTC (AFC) had done this, I'd be just as vocal in opposing it.

My POV...



Berni:
Yes, Agenda 8.3 was an entertaining one. Oaths of fealty and ideological litmus tests for all incoming directors. Too bad they left out the secret handshake and the decoder ring. Oddly, they passed the Public Trust Doctrine 'resolution' exactly as Mr. Musser had given it to them. Unfortunately, he neglected to tell them that he lifted the wording from an essay which appeared on a Sierra Club website; in its zeal, the Board adopted the language without any research.

Most NAFA members don't know this stuff because they join merely for the comic book. I daresay if more of them had actually bothered to read the agendas, they might have felt differently at election time.

Bridget

\

Trouble makers! :)

Please don't respond. I'm off on a camping / fly fishing trip with the family for four days. Remind me to give you my opinion of NAFA sometime. Wait.......I probably already have! :)

Best,

Dan

[Migisi]

.... Most NAFA members don't know this stuff because they join merely for the comic book. I daresay if more of them had actually bothered to read the agendas, they might have felt differently at election time.

I couldn't agree more. frus

[wyodjm]

I sincerely hope people aren't getting too tied of this thread. I have learned some things from reading this thread. I hope other people have as well. I think information is good. Being informed is a good thing, if you're to make intelligent decisions.

With that said, I was very disappointed to learn that Ralph Rogers was elected as the new International Association of Falconry (IAF) vice president of the Americas.

Perhaps not so much that Rogers won .......... but how he won. I have heard that during his speech, Rogers made the comment, in front of the international, voting IAF community, that he loves eagles and eagle falconry and that one of his life long goals is to fly an eagle. If this is true it is certainly news to me. I also understand that there were rumors floating around the IAF delegates, prior to the meeting, that if Rogers didn't win, the Americans (NAFA) would pull out of the IAF. Is this true?

Could anyone verify this? If any of this is true, it seems that NAFA has extended it's dirty and manipulative political dendrites onto the international scene. When will this stuff stop?

There seems to be a handful of people within NAFA who have held positions of power for so long that they will go to extreme measures to keep their power.

I am convinced, more than ever, that NAFA clearly doesn't represent the American falconer.

Again, if you're tired of me bringing this sort of thing out in the light, please advise. I'll stop.

Respectfully submitted for your review.

Dan McCarron

[Saluqi]

...I also understand that there were rumors floating around the IAF delegates, prior to the meeting, that if Rogers didn't win, the Americans (NAFA) would pull out of the IAF. Is this true?

Could anyone verify this? If any of this is true, it seems that NAFA has extended it's dirty and manipulative political dendrites onto the international scene. When will this stuff stop?

Dan McCarron

I sort of doubt that rumor was true considering that Frank Bond is the IAF president.

[wyodjm]

I sort of doubt that rumor was true considering that Frank Bond is the IAF president.

I want to believe that also Paul.

[everetkhorton]

I sincerely hope people aren't getting too tied of this thread. I have learned some things from reading this thread. I hope other people have as well. I think information is good. Being informed is a good thing, if you're to make intelligent decisions.

With that said, I was very disappointed to learn that Ralph Rogers was elected as the new International Association of Falconry (IAF) vice president of the Americas.

Perhaps not so much that Rogers won .......... but how he won. I have heard that during his speech, Rogers made the comment, in front of the international, voting IAF community, that he loves eagles and eagle falconry and that one of his life long goals is to fly an eagle. If this is true it is certainly news to me. I also understand that there were rumors floating around the IAF delegates, prior to the meeting, that if Rogers didn't win, the Americans (NAFA) would pull out of the IAF. Is this true?

Could anyone verify this? If any of this is true, it seems that NAFA has extended it's dirty and manipulative political dendrites onto the international scene. When will this stuff stop?

There seems to be a handful of people within NAFA who have held positions of power for so long that they will go to extreme measures to keep their power.

I am convinced, more than ever, that NAFA clearly doesn't represent the American falconer.

Again, if you're tired of me bringing this sort of thing out in the light, please advise. I'll stop.

Respectfully submitted for your review.

Dan McCarron

Dan:
I guess my problem is with people make actuation against some thing or someone not knowing the facts and then asking if someone can verify there position. Everyone should know the facts before casting the stone. It is sort of like saying that someone is a for example a rapist and it is put on the front page of the local newspaper, and later finding out this is not true then they put a retraction on the back page, the harm is done. How many Country's make up the IAF, they all get one vote. Don't for get to vote for DAL in the up coming election. How many times has our new President back paddles in the last few month. I guess we better be carefully this is getting political

[Mitchellbrad]

I sincerely hope people aren't getting too tied of this thread. I have learned some things from reading this thread. I hope other people have as well. I think information is good. Being informed is a good thing, if you're to make intelligent decisions.

With that said, I was very disappointed to learn that Ralph Rogers was elected as the new International Association of Falconry (IAF) vice president of the Americas.

Perhaps not so much that Rogers won .......... but how he won. I have heard that during his speech, Rogers made the comment, in front of the international, voting IAF community, that he loves eagles and eagle falconry and that one of his life long goals is to fly an eagle. If this is true it is certainly news to me. I also understand that there were rumors floating around the IAF delegates, prior to the meeting, that if Rogers didn't win, the Americans (NAFA) would pull out of the IAF. Is this true?

Could anyone verify this? If any of this is true, it seems that NAFA has extended it's dirty and manipulative political dendrites onto the international scene. When will this stuff stop?

There seems to be a handful of people within NAFA who have held positions of power for so long that they will go to extreme measures to keep their power.

I am convinced, more than ever, that NAFA clearly doesn't represent the American falconer.

Again, if you're tired of me bringing this sort of thing out in the light, please advise. I'll stop.

Respectfully submitted for your review.

Dan McCarron

I don't get tired of reading this. I do get tired of scratching my head wondering if many of us are either wrong, dont tow the line or are from another planet.

The question I often ask myself is, does either NAFA or WRTC represent the American falconer. I think the answer is NO on both accounts. Looking at the membership numbers of both organizations it seems to me the North American falconer isn't eager to join either group.

I happen to know Ralph and like him a lot. I don't agree with a lot of what he says and stands for but I can divest myself from that. Yes I do like Ralph. Would I rejoin NAFA? Not in this lifetime. It also took a lot for me to rejoin WRTC. Ya know someone tried to come down on me very hard when I told him I liked Ralph. I told him, well I can't say it in polite company. What I can do is say I disagree with my friends a lot and at the end of the day we are still friends.

Lets look at it this way. The ball is in the North American falconer's court. If they/us are satisfied with what is going on then so be it. Silence is acceptance in most everyone's book. On the other hand if the NA falconer is really disgusted then a mass exidus is necessary to get the point across. Personally I believe the falconers have to speak with their actions. Which means stay with NAFA and keep your mouth shut which is acceptance or join WRTC or raise Hell with the NAFAites and WRTCites it that is your game. I don't see that coming in the near future.

That's just me.

Brad

[Tom Smith]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't NAFA create IAF? Along with all the other orgnizations over the years that now look like the opponents of NAFA like the outfit formerly known as WRTC.


Tom Smith

[wyodjm]

I don't get tired of reading this. I do get tired of scratching my head wondering if many of us are either wrong, dont tow the line or are from another planet.

The question I often ask myself is, does either NAFA or WRTC represent the American falconer. I think the answer is NO on both accounts. Looking at the membership numbers of both organizations it seems to me the North American falconer isn't eager to join either group.

I happen to know Ralph and like him a lot. I don't agree with a lot of what he says and stands for but I can divest myself from that. Yes I do like Ralph. Would I rejoin NAFA? Not in this lifetime. It also took a lot for me to rejoin WRTC. Ya know someone tried to come down on me very hard when I told him I liked Ralph. I told him, well I can't say it in polite company. What I can do is say I disagree with my friends a lot and at the end of the day we are still friends.

Lets look at it this way. The ball is in the North American falconer's court. If they/us are satisfied with what is going on then so be it. Silence is acceptance in most everyone's book. On the other hand if the NA falconer is really disgusted then a mass exidus is necessary to get the point across. Personally I believe the falconers have to speak with their actions. Which means stay with NAFA and keep your mouth shut which is acceptance or join WRTC or raise Hell with the NAFAites and WRTCites it that is your game. I don't see that coming in the near future.

That's just me.

Brad

I think you're probably right about falconers Brad. I'm somewhere in the middle I guess. Depends on which day you catch me on.

Best,

Dan

[ericedw]

I also understand that there were rumors floating around the IAF delegates, prior to the meeting, that if Rogers didn't win, the Americans (NAFA) would pull out of the IAF. Is this true?


Dan,
I heard this rumor today also. I can say that it certainly was not a board action and I sure hope it's not true.

[1goshawk]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't NAFA create IAF? Along with all the other orgnizations over the years that now look like the opponents of NAFA like the outfit formerly known as WRTC.


Tom Smith

WRTC or AFC was not started by NAFA. NAFA wants that organization to disappear.

WRTC / AFC was started as a direct result of NAFA’s inaction/inability to represent North American falconers.

AFC clearly represents North American falconers. Just go to their website and you can see what they have done for us already, and remember this is a young organization. http://falconryconservancy.org/

Josh Halverson