[mou] response to the post of Bernard P. Friel

Thu Oct 9 21:56:36 CDT 2008

Thank you, I'd much rather read about this on MOU than multiple posts for a week or more about the best camera, digiscope or spotting scope to buy???  It seems at this point that the economics of technology is more important than habitat or environment for the birds???
 Please, Mr. Friel, keep me informed about this....I will still delete out all that chatter about scopes and cameras....I can learn about that when and if I am in the market for one.

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Jordan <sbme at umn.edu>
Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 16:39
Subject: [mou] response to the post of Bernard P. Friel
To: network MOU <mou-net at moumn.org>

> Re: A response to the post of Bernard P. FrielGood points, Eric--
> 
> Since we birders use e-mail to communicate about species seen, 
> then shouldn't we also communicate about habitats used, hence 
> needed by these birds?  [i.e., no habitat, no wild birds]
> 
> It follows then we should be interested in saving habitats, just 
> as we are in protecting birds
> 
> Protecting habitats more often involves economics and politics, 
> because habitats are part of a landscape that is either "owned" 
> privately or publicly controlled by government bodies.
> 
> So that brings us directly to getting politically involved just as 
> it does to contributing $$ to environmental causes.  
> 
> As for those with other views, if they're relevant to birds and 
> their habitats, then let's hear from them.
> 
> So, pardon me if I use this network to make a pitch for voting 4 
> Nov, while urging you not to forget a  "YES" on our state 
> constitutional amendment for funding habitat protection, and 
> alerting you that leaving that box unmarked = a "NO" vote!
> 
> 
> Peter Jordan
>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>  From: Bernard P. Friel 
>  To: gentilis03 at yahoo.com ; Tom Bell ; MOU net 
>  Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 8:11 PM
>  Subject: Re: [mou] A response to the post of Bernard P. Friel
> 
> 
>  Ladies and Gentlemen,
>      There is an excellent editorial in the Wednesday October 8th 
> edition of the Highland Villager on the Constitutional amendment 
> that does an excellent in depth analysis.
> 
>  Bernie Friel
> 
>  -- 
>  Bernard P. Friel
>  Web Pages - http://www.wampy.com  ;
>              http://www.wampy.com/bn   Owl Gallery
>              http://www.wampy.com/bn2  Songbirds 
> 
>              http://www.agpix.com/bernardpfriel
> 
>              
> http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=1113   
>        
>              http://www.digitalrailroad.net/bernardfriel
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
>  From: Eric Harrold <
>  Reply-To: <
>  Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 08:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
>  To: Tom Bell <, MOU net <, "Bernard P. Friel" <
>  Subject: A response to the post of Bernard P. Friel
> 
>  Folks,
>   
>  Being that an opportunity presented itself, let me ask a question that has puzzled me for some time. I've been a member of birding forums in North Carolina and Virginia. Political discussions as they pertain to bird conservation are frowned upon by some folks who would no doubt describe themselves as birders. Can someone please provide answers to a couple of questions actually, that I just don't seem to understand, even over many years. 
>   
>  1) If birders don't take political initiative, who will for many issues such as habitat conservation/preservation that are critical to sustainable populations of certain species? The one group that has done a tremendous amount for conservation, hunters, often get derided on internet forums and in birding publications. It seems a whole lot of birders are out of touch on how conservation is achieved and its inherent political aspect. 
>   
>  2) How does noncommunication and the ignorance it promotes help anything? We can conveniently avoid political discussions altogether to the end of being polite, but other than this, I don't know what it can accomplish. What forum or setting would be more appropriate for discussing the politics of avian conservation than a birding forum? 
>   
>  Sincerely,
>   
>  Eric Harrold
> 
>  --- On Sat, 10/4/08, Bernard P. Friel < wrote:
> 
>    From: Bernard P. Friel <
>    Subject: Re: [mou] vote November 4, for constitutional amendment
>    To: "Tom Bell" <, "MOU net" <
>    Date: Saturday, October 4, 2008, 6:39 PM
> 
>    Please explain to me how you can initiate expression of an opinion on a subject on MOU net, as you did, and simultaneously caution against initiating an expression of opinion on the same subject? Is it your intent to limit the expression of opinion to a particular view ...the one you expressed? 
>    -- 
>    Bernard P. Friel
>    Web Pages - http://www.wampy.com <http://www.wampy.com/>   ;
>                http://www.wampy.com/bn   Owl Gallery
>                http://www.wampy.com/bn2  Songbirds 
> 
>                http://www.agpix.com/bernardpfriel
> 
>                http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=1113
>             
>                http://www.digitalrailroad.net/bernardfriel
> 
> 
>     
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
>  ---
>  This mailing list is sponsored by the Minnesota Ornithologists' Union.  Mailing list membership available on-line at http://moumn.org/subscribe.html.
>  -----
>  To unsubscribe send a blank email to mou-net-request at moumn.org with a subject of unsubscribe.
> 
> ---
> This mailing list is sponsored by the Minnesota Ornithologists' 
> Union.  Mailing list membership available on-line at 
> http://moumn.org/subscribe.html.-----
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to mou-net-request at moumn.org 
> with a subject of unsubscribe.