Dues and whatever...

[MrBill]

Hi Greg,

As you know, NAFA's membership over the past ten years has dropped dramatically, which equates to less, rather than more publications. So, the cost of producing these should have dropped, unless there has been a corresponding increase in printing and mailing. Has this been the case?

Having siad this, I have no qualms at all about a $10.00 increase in dues. I'm just curious if the reason is the cost of the publications or a drop in membership, or both.

Bill Boni
Norman, Oklahoma

[Hunter45]

Hi Greg,

As you know, NAFA's membership over the past ten years has dropped dramatically, which equates to less, rather than more publications. So, the cost of producing these should have dropped, unless there has been a corresponding increase in printing and mailing. Has this been the case?

Having siad this, I have no qualms at all about a $10.00 increase in dues. I'm just curious if the reason is the cost of the publications or a drop in membership, or both.

Bill Boni
Norman, Oklahoma

. . . . . . . .as it seems. Printing costs are NOT linear. You pay so much for a base number and then (usually) progressively less/copy for increments over this. So a decrease in membership could actually have raised the average cost/publication. And you are right that costs did rise in the 10 years since NAFA last raised its dues to $35. If you look it up, the dues increase are right in line with the cost of living increase for the same time period. Consider what you paid for gas/diesel for your hawking vehicle 10 years ago, vs. the $3-$3.5/gallon today for the same.

So, while NAFA was operating at a deficit (not fiduciarily responsible, or fiscally possible to sustain), this situation has been cured by the dues increase AND a nice bounce back in membership numbers! This, combined with the Strategic Planning Committee's ongoing work on revenue enhancement should go a long way towards mitigating the need or extent of future increases, something we ALL want.

Consider that publications have been a huge percentage of dues for ALL types of associations, not just ours. The trend to digital is growing. Look at the decline in the size/circulation of newspapers and magazines, and the explosion of digital devices to receive/read material on. I have no doubt print will survive to a certain extent in NAFA, but consider some of the advantages of digital going forward:

1. Lower cost 2. Higher quality (full color at no marginal cost difference) 3. Embedded links to related matters 4. Central and personal archiving with digital search possibilities (where is that article on . . .? or hmmm. . . . let me see every article on tiercel goshawks . . ) 5. Ability to sell copies or accesss to a wider audience such as falconers in Europe, Asia, the Middle East, etc. without the insurmountable barriers of local printing, distribution, collection of funds, etc. Hey, I'm an old fart (65 yrs old, 45 years in NAFA, and 50 years in falconry) and I know the younger members are reading this, smiling, and nodding their heads. Dylan said it well, "The times they are a changing!"

NAFA is looking into and working on every way possible to function better at the lowest per member cost, but we will certainly get there faster and better by leveraging the ongoing contributions of our diverse and talented membership. So, if you see a problem, OR an opportunity, do what you can to help get it fixed (problem) or adopted (opportunity).

I hope this provides a ray of sunshine this morning (it's raining here in No. CA at my daughter's house - no white Christmas this year).

Good hawking!

[Hunter45]

Paul,

Could you remove the LAST sentence of my response to Bill Boni as it refers to the thread this was moved from.

Thanks!

[Saluqi]

Done.

[MrBill]

Greg,

Thanks for your response, but again, in your opinion, is the increase in dues to cover publication costs the result of the decline in membership over the past ten years? If this is the case, and I think it is, then the premise for increasing the dues would be questionable (IMO), because, NAFA would be asking the "faithful" to shoulder the costs due to reasons beyond the general memberships' control. Frankly, NAFA's situation is like that of our country--one of two things has to happen. We either increase taxes, or reduce spending to get our budget under control. NAFA has chosen to increase taxes. Ity seems to me, the future answer is--as you have pointed out--go digital. I think Kenn has done a fantastic job presenting HC on-line. There is no reason, in this day and age, to send a hardcopy out to everyone (IMHO).

Bill Boni
Norman, OK

[Hunter45]

Greg,

Thanks for your response, but again, in your opinion, is the increase in dues to cover publication costs the result of the decline in membership over the past ten years? If this is the case, and I think it is, then the premise for increasing the dues would be questionable (IMO), because, NAFA would be asking the "faithful" to shoulder the costs due to reasons beyond the general memberships' control. Frankly, NAFA's situation is like that of our country--one of two things has to happen. We either increase taxes, or reduce spending to get our budget under control. NAFA has chosen to increase taxes. Ity seems to me, the future answer is--as you have pointed out--go digital. I think Kenn has done a fantastic job presenting HC on-line. There is no reason, in this day and age, to send a hardcopy out to everyone (IMHO).
Bill Boni
Norman, OK

. . . . combination of things, Bill. We haven't had a dues increase in 10 years. Everything has pretty much gone up over that time period. Technology related savings have still required the user to have the "tool" to use the technology; i.e. computers, internet access, etc. that have their own costs, too.

But to specifically answer your question, while the drop (now being REVERSED) in membership had something to do with it, the main culprit was general inflation. Most every category of expense has been or is being examined for ways to reduce them.

While going "all digital" is, indeed, the way many associations are handling their publication costs/distribution issues, NAFA, must deal with the rural homesteads of a not insignificant number of our members where high speed internet and/or computer ownership/use are not available or in use. Full digital will remain a work in progress, but as outlined in my other post, other benefits (when available) may move this process along more quickly.

Membership growth and revenue enhancement through other than dues are two key areas getting attention by the Strategic Planning Committee. So, no I don't think NAFA is purposely asking the members to shoulder a situation they have no control over any more than the price increases that come to us from a variety of sources for a variety of reasons.

It's been my business experience that "value" and choosing between "wants" and "needs" are what drive most people's purchasing decisions. NAFA remains an excellent value and pretty consistently delivers the (more valuable) "wants" of our community. Ideally we can come up with good non-dues revenue sources that allow for greater benefits.

With our relatively small numbers (falconers are only about twelve 10,000ths of 1% of the U.S. population) we are a pretty amazing group of people! My guess is that the next 10 years will see us do what we need not just to survive, but to THRIVE.

[MrBill]

Thanks for the response, Greg, and cluing me in on an absence of membership computers and high speed Internet, which pretty much ends any discussion of going digital. And, BTW, just a reminder, I was all for a raise in dues. A statement was made earleir condemning NAFA for raising dues, what this gentleman overlooked is that it was voted in by the membership. So, obviously, a majority was fine with the dues increase, so it's now time to move on.

Bill Boni
Norman, OK

[sharptail]

I have several comments to make that concern NAFA but do not know just where the line is with me getting banned. I am not afraid of the heat from other NAFA wrong or right supporters. I do feel that the club has take some strides in the right direction and several NAFEX members are owed my and our gratatude. I also think that the steering commitee is a wonderful thing and that elected officials are no longer left on there own to lead the way, in a direction all their own, without a care what the rest of the members think.

[outhawkn]

I also think that the steering commitee is a wonderful thing and that elected officials are no longer left on there own to lead the way, in a direction all their own, without a care what the rest of the members think.

I agree with this..........

[everetkhorton]

I think those who do not want hard copies of there HC or Journal should let Kenn F. know so he can take them off the mail list. I think the HC is now on line on the NAFA web site. Postage is going out of site.

[goshawkr]

I think those who do not want hard copies of there HC or Journal should let Kenn F. know so he can take them off the mail list. I think the HC is now on line on the NAFA web site. Postage is going out of site.

Thats a great suggestion Everet.

However, there is no damn way that I am going to pay the same amount in my NAFA dues as someone who is getting the glossy magazine and take an electronic copy. Even if I am tossing the hawk chalk in the burn pile the moment it arrives (when I am a dues paying NAFA member, I rarely read them except to see what the board members are up to), if I am paying for it through my dues costs, I am going to recieve it.

I am planning on returning to NAFA this year - all of my major grievences with the organization have either been completely resolved (as in RR leaving the board) or are being worked on very earnestly (as in listening to the membership instead of dicatating to them).

I am not happy to hear that the dues went up. Honestly, that is making me a bit reluctant to come back.

As Bill Boni mentioned earlier - when expenses outstreatch funds, there are two options. Reduce expenses, or gather more funds. In an economic climate where many are out of work, and those who are working have had to settle for lower paying jobs, raising dues should have only been done after a lot of internal belt tightening. Did that occur? As a non-member and a non-board member I can only speculate. But I can make a very educated speculation.

Just a question - did NAFA ask the membership if the slick glossy magazine is worth an extra $10 a year to them? NAFA isnt really about the magazine, or at least it shouldnt be. I will concede that many members think it is, and only join because of it.

As a frequent leader of my state club, which publishes its own magazine, I know what the costs of pruction are. I am pretty sure several dollars per member can be found just by toning down (not eliminating, toning down) the production value of the hawk chalk.

[hawkerev]

QUOTEI am not happy to hear that the dues went up. Honestly, that is making me a bit reluctant to come back.


Honestly falconers, $10.00 dollars, $10.00 stinkin dollars? and still people complain ... its time when I read little junk like this, make me think were doomed to loose our sport.

Spend a day with Larry D. and see how much he puts into NAFA, believe it or not ... I for one think $45.00 is a deal.

I had someone tell me a long time ago ... dogs are going to bark no matter what direction you go.

Notice to all our NAFA leadership: You ain't perfect, imagine that! But I for one appreciate all your dedication and hard work to grow and protect our sport!
Thank you!

[goshawkr]

While going "all digital" is, indeed, the way many associations are handling their publication costs/distribution issues, NAFA, must deal with the rural homesteads of a not insignificant number of our members where high speed internet and/or computer ownership/use are not available or in use. Full digital will remain a work in progress, but as outlined in my other post, other benefits (when available) may move this process along more quickly.

Hi Greg.

Your right that going all digital is problematic, because it leaves some people out.

Here is a compromise option that I would like to see NAFA take, and actually, its in line with many other organizations. Have a tiered dues system, that in effect takes the Hawk Chalk and the Journal and turns them into subscriptions. NAFA members that dont want the publications, which are likely a minority, wont be forced to pay for them.

This notion is complicated because, as you indicated earlier, print costs dont scale in direct coralation to the numbers of copies printed (the costs per issue go up as the number of issues goes down).

Computer access is certainly not 100% in North America, and what ever course NAFA takes, they certainly cant afford to arbitrarily cut off those who dont have access to digital information.

[Hunter45]

Hi Greg.

Your right that going all digital is problematic, because it leaves some people out.

Here is a compromise option that I would like to see NAFA take, and actually, its in line with many other organizations. Have a tiered dues system, that in effect takes the Hawk Chalk and the Journal and turns them into subscriptions. NAFA members that dont want the publications, which are likely a minority, wont be forced to pay for them.

This notion is complicated because, as you indicated earlier, print costs dont scale in direct coralation to the numbers of copies printed (the costs per issue go up as the number of issues goes down).

Computer access is certainly not 100% in North America, and what ever course NAFA takes, they certainly cant afford to arbitrarily cut off those who dont have access to digital information.

. . . Geoff, of the issues at hand on this topic. You mirror the thinking on this issue that is part of a larger study on how to both increase NAFA's funding (from other than dues) and its membership numbers. Technology, regulatory changes, the ability to respond to potential future threats, possible enhancement to existing or addition of new services, etc. are all on the table for discussion.

With two new directors taking their seats this January, I am confident 2011 will be a very productive year for NAFA. We are looking at both the "low hanging fruit" that is easily plucked and implemented, as well as those that are more complex and require planning, funding sources, etc. The open mind and heart your post suggests is what I am looking for on a broad scale from the existing membership, and I hope both lapsed old members and new members are attracted to NAFA.

Thanks for your comments.

[everetkhorton]

Honestly falconers, $10.00 dollars, $10.00 stinkin dollars? and still people complain ... its time when I read little junk like this, make me think were doomed to loose our sport.

Spend a day with Larry D. and see how much he puts into NAFA, believe it or not ... I for one think $45.00 is a deal.

I had someone tell me a long time ago ... dogs are going to bark no matter what direction you go.

Notice to all our NAFA leadership: You ain't perfect, imagine that! But I for one appreciate all your dedication and hard work to grow and protect our sport!
Thank you!

Brent:

When I see people paying big bucks to have a cell phone, hi speed internet. Smoke at $5.00 dollars a pack. Drive a 4wd truck because it cool. $45.00 dollars is a deal. JMO My sewer rate went up 230% last year, and I got nothing more for the raise. Every time gas goes up I have to pay more for garbage. This list can go on and on. The only thing different I can not get out of paying for them, I can not just stop the service, I am stuck. Just think how much people have save over the years, they are not even keeping up with the price if smokes :D, I wish NAFA would tailor NAFA around me, and forget everyone else ;) I have not have spell check loaded but will get around to it, because it is FREE.
Ha everyone have a Great New Year.

[Dirthawking]

Just a question - did NAFA ask the membership if the slick glossy magazine is worth an extra $10 a year to them? NAFA isnt really about the magazine, or at least it shouldnt be. I will concede that many members think it is, and only join because of it.




Dues increase was put to the membership. It passed. We must be okay with it. Just saying.....

[goshawkr]

Dues increase was put to the membership. It passed. We must be okay with it. Just saying.....

Fair enough - if the members asked to be charged more, the NAFA leadership is being unethical to do otherwise. :D

[sharptail]

I have to applaud Bruce Haak's opinion expressed in the Dec. 2010 Hawk Chalk under Mountain Director. He expresses that NAFA should "exert greater influence on the USFWS to take a hard line with certain Canadian bureaucrats who ARE maneuvering to keep the incidental take of migrant peregrines within the U. S. borders to a paltry 36 birds annually." Well, better way late than never!

Gee, I think that some members of the Alberta club have read something along this line a couple of years back and strongly defended ther bureaucrats as being right on. I also seem to remember some of them expressing that wild taken raptor should not be used in falconry at all, or am I mistaken?

[goshawks00]

I also seem to remember some of them expressing that wild taken raptor should not be used in falconry at all, or am I mistaken?

Not sure about that, but I do know that the Ontario falconry club has for more than 10 years now fought with their province ( with no results yet) to get wild take, rather than just CB for falconry

[FredFogg]

I also seem to remember some of them expressing that wild taken raptor should not be used in falconry at all, or am I mistaken?

If I recall correctly, at the Flyway Council meetings, their vote was No vote for an increase in take. For some reason, they have this delusion that the peregrine falcon is theirs. Just because some of them breed up there, doesn't make them theirs. The insignificant take that falconers would get here in the U.S. has already been proven to not have any impact. Why don't people get that? frus)

[jmnucci]

Would it be a comprimise to offer the hawk chalk / journal online at the regular periods throughout the year and then send out a single conglomerate publication once a year? I would assume that this would make printing and shipping more cost effective.

It's just that there are a lot of folks with shelves full of hawk chalks. It would be a pity to see the last one go up there.

[sharptail]

I wonder how one or many might go about exerting greater influence on USFWS to make things right in a Canadian providence?

[Saluqi]

I wonder how one or many might go about exerting greater influence on USFWS to make things right in a Canadian providence?

I think it may take the Canadians to do that, I seriously doubt the USFWS has any influence there. It's tough in Canada since, at least as I understand it, the provinces act autonomously with regard to wildlife issues.

[sharptail]

I think it may take the Canadians to do that, I seriously doubt the USFWS has any influence there. It's tough in Canada since, at least as I understand it, the provinces act autonomously with regard to wildlife issues. I wonder if the Alberta falconers could be of assistance?

[sharptail]

I think it may take the Canadians to do that, I seriously doubt the USFWS has any influence there. It's tough in Canada since, at least as I understand it, the provinces act autonomously with regard to wildlife issues.Or perhaps the Canadian NAFA director?

[Saluqi]

Agreed. I don't pretend to understand how things in Canada work, it's hard enough figuring out our own system...

[goshawkr]

Or perhaps the Canadian NAFA director?

Now there is a novel concept.

Perhaps NAFA could even act like Canada was a vital part of it. NAFA was, after all, founded by Canadians.

I am sure it would be unfair to say that NAFA has ignored Canadian interests, but from what I have seen it has largely been true.

This is not intended as NAFA bashing - I am just pointing out an "area of growth"

[Pedioecetes]

You are fair in your assumptions Geoff. I don't think it was at any time a purposeful thing on NAFA"s part. Canada has a very similar management scheme as the US, except where raptors is concerned. In 1971 when the US gave control of raptors to the feds at the conference in Portland, Oregon, the reps from several Canadian provinces refused to give up their jurisdiction to the federal government of Canada. If they had falconry would have been illegalized in Canada in short order. The spin off though is that in 1971 only BC and Saskatchewan had laws permitting falconry and in Ontario falconry was "permitted" with non-native raptors because Ontario didn't regulate non native wildlife. Since then falconry has been legalized in all provinces except New Brunswick and Newfoundland/Labrador, though that may soon change in the latter. It is not legal in any of the 3 territories

The Peregrine harvest of passage birds in the US is definitely opposed by several, if not all, of the provinces in the Maritimes. I'm not sure how much influence they have, other than through the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which also influences waterfowl harvest. What interests me more is the games the Flyway councils themselves play, because one would think they would follow some firmer protocols from on high. However, when you look at things like Mississippi getting 8 permits, where it is not easy to trap and Maryland/Virginia being cut where trapping could be more successful it does make one wonder. I regard Bruce Haak as a long time friend as well as a straight shooting guy and what he said in HC is right on. Our Canadian Director already does above and beyond his regular duties for NAFA as well as flies hard, works hard at his job and has a strong family life.

[Pedioecetes]

When Saskatchewan re-legalized the trapping of passage Peregrines in 2001 (it had closed in 1988 which is a story in its own right), it was because they had the jurisdiction to do so. They didn't have to go through the flyway councils, the Canadian Wildlife Service, the USFWS, Nova Scotia or anyone else. They just did it because it was their call. On a side, some falconers in other provinces opposed. Now get that! Passage Peregrines never have been real useful in Saskatchewan in their first year because of weather and quarry issues, but nevertheless the privilege of having that option is important and we went after it once the Peregrine was delisted. The falconers made a proposal to re-open them and 7 months later they were. A mistake of honest ignorance made by some US falconers and even some NAFA people was that Canada had opened passage Peregrines, why can't the US? Well, Canada did no such thing- it was just Saskatchewan. BC has opened up a limited harvest for both eyas and passage Peale's, but politics has made the reality of actually doing it almost impossible. But now, the BC falconers have it open, they need to work on making it workable. My guess the US falconers need to do the same. And this is where you need a STRONG lobby (ie. NAFA), which is respected in the political arena falconry must exist in.

[sharptail]

What interests me more is the games the Flyway councils themselves play, because one would think they would follow some firmer protocols from on high. However, when you look at things like Mississippi getting 8 permits, where it is not easy to trap and Maryland/Virginia being cut where trapping could be more successful it does make one wonder. I regard Bruce Haak as a long time friend as well as a straight shooting guy and what he said in HC is right on. Hi Bob,
I truely appreciate you concern for the antics of the flyway council and the US passage take, so please don't take this wrong. I also want to congratulate you and Sas. for your passage take and I believe that you are sincere in you wishes for US passage take, and I thank you!

I now understand that it was Sas. that opened up the take to their falconers. I however did take a look on the map and Sas. is roughly the size of N. Dakota, S. Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas combine, a rather sizable chunk of even Canada. I don't think that the ' just Sas.' is a very fair way to put it. Farther, a nation full of falconers quibbling over 36 passage peregrines in the eastern US is a great way to 'divide and conqure', when, there should be 4 times this amount allowed over the entire lower 48.

I understand that Bruce is your friend and no one likes to be critical of friends. However I was offened by one of his comments in the last Hawk Chalk where he suggests that those who cannot afford to travel to the eastern US to trap cannot not afford to fly a passage peregrine is just damn elitist besides, not being true, a position unbecoming to a public servant drawing a salary from public coffers, but not unlike NAFA'S long time reputation.

[Pedioecetes]

Good reply, Jeff. I guess my intent is always just to tell stories about things that happened and how,(and tell it like it is). My amazement about the passage Peregrine "season" in the US is how ridiculous the bag limit is and how limited it is. The political arena is, however, a hard reality and I agree NAFA has some issues, but they also have a lot of allies that need to help push this. Its time for the Peregrine to become a non-issue, there are a lot more important band wagons for the enviro and enforcement people to work on.

What amazes me also is how little the falconers in the UK work at wild take, or any of Europe for that matter. Captive breeding has been a wonderful thing for modern falconry and I fully support them for what they do and for what they get for their product. But a large percentage of modern falconers have never taken a wild falcon and flown it and wildness is a huge part of the cultural heritage of falconry. Perhaps the recent UNESCO decision will help.

Haven't gotten my HC yet, but read a few of the director's reports online. I understand what Bruce is getting at, but agree it probably would have been better not said.

Hope you are still getting those grouse flights in. This is quite a winter. Gotta go, cows want supper!