Those are Victoria Crowned Pigeons…
“Mom! She’s panicing again!” Well, I’m really not. But scheduling everything I need to get done is proving to be a challenge. But one thing I could not miss was the American Federation of Aviculture Conference.
One of the reasons I had to go was because I was asked to speak. They wanted me to talk about “Chop” of all things, so I was on my way. I was joined by my good friends Janet and Cameron Hilton and we managed to coordinate our flights so we were able to meet at baggage claim within a half hour of each other.
Yup, That’s Cameron. So that worked. From then on it was non-stop talking, wandering and networking. I had a great time seeing so many people I already knew. I even got to see some of the scarves I had made for various non-profit events debut at the AFA for an appearance. Here’s Jan Cheney with her Cockatoo scarf:
The one I am wearing belongs to Georgia Hayes I think. Could be Georgia Fletcher, I forget.
The usual leaders, movers and shakers were there. Jason Crean, Robin Shewokis and Barbara Heidenreich all spoke as well as some people I had yet to meet. Dr. Donald Brightsmith was there to speak on “Nesting, Movements and Conservation Perspectives for Large Macaws in Southeastern Peru.” He also had his brand new little baby with him. I asked him how he liked her so far. Apparently she’s a keeper.
Here’s a great photo of Rick Jordan and Nancy Speed. Nancy is the current President of the AFA and Rick is heavily involved with their education program.
The AFA has a kids education program that encourages children to learn about birds and their proper care. It seems to be quite successful as they LOTS of kids attending the event to meet birds and learn more about Avian Husbandry. Here’s Janet with one of the cockatoos attending the children’s event:
I have discovered that the AFA is rather controversial among a few factions of Aviculture. But the AFA has been around for literally decades and in my opinion they have done a lot of good for the world of aviculture. I tend to look at the overall intention of a person or organization. I pick my battles and this isn’t one of them.
Dr. Susan Friedman once told me that she would speak wherever she had an opportunity to get her message across. The AFA informs, enlightens and educates. As far as I am concerned, that is their purpose.
I had the opportunity to get my message across to many in the field including people attending who are involved in adoption and rescue at the AFA Conference. Yes, the AFA supports rescue and adoption along with education. I asked a few people how they feel about the AFA. Most of these people are heavily involved in adoption and rescue. Emily Strong, Blogger over at “From Beaks to Barks” and member of The Austin Parrot Society, a parrot club that is involved in adoption and rescue weighed in heavily on the subject:
“I think a lot of people take a reactionary stance to AFA because they are against the breeding of captive parrots and immediately associate AFA with breeders, but what they are unaware of or have not considered is that AFA’s primary goal is education and the improvement of the lives of captive parrots in every facet of avian husbandry–including (but not limited to): combating harmful legislation, housing, nutrition, enrichment, behavior, adoption, and yes, even improving how and why people breed parrots. The goal is to educate breeders, too, so that they do a better job of raising captive parrots and of providing support and education to their customers both before and after they purchase a baby. The end result, ideally, is that suboptimal breeders will improve their breeding practices or stop breeding altogether, leaving a smaller pool of higher quality breeders who can meet the needs of the pet parrot demand to prevent the resurgence of smuggling wild-caught birds, which would further damage the health of wild populations.”
Lorry Burgr, an adoption Coordinator for Florida Parrot Rescue had this to say about it:
“I am and always will be Pro Rescue. I also believe education is the key. I fully believe the AFA conference is a great educational avenue for those who wish to use it and and fully support the “Chop Revolution” for educating them on a great and innovative way to feed their birds a healthy diet.”
Bonnie Grafton, co-owner of Bonnie’s Birds in Port Charlotte, Florida, held the first Chopalooza that raised over ten thousand dollars for Florida Parrot Rescue (FPR.) Bonnie and her partner Rebecca Stockslager are major supporters of adoption. They also foster and rehab parrots of all kinds; especially the tough cases from FPR. And on top of that, Bonnie and Rebecca help place these birds in homes. Well! Here’s what Bonnie had to say about this subject:
“I am pro-rescue, but that does not mean that I am anti-breeding. The AFA holds the power to facilitate changes to legislation and empower animal agencies to act in the best interests of all birds by creating guidelines for standards of care that would encompass everyone: breeders, rescues, sanctuaries and the average pet parrot owner.”
And finally, Lisa Bono, Owner of The Platinum Parrot in New Jersey, and a respected member of the Avian Community, wanted to make a statement about the subject of the AFA. Lisa is the owner of The Platinum Parrot, contributing writer for BirdTalk, Birdchannel.com, BirdsUSA and MYlifebook. She is the founder of The Sussex County Exotic Bird Club, guest Behaviorist on various sites, An Associate Certified Parrot Behavior Consultant, an Allied Professional member of the AAV, and active in fundraising for various organizations dedicated to the health and wellbeing of parrots worldwide:
“I own a small store dedicated to the health and well-being of companion parrots in NJ. I do not however, sell birds. This is a choice I made when I founded the store. Should I have a person who is looking for a baby bird, I will refer them to reliable stores or I suggest a breeder.
With that said, in my mind one question remains: Where can we find good breeders? The AFA is there to help. They hold conferences and offer continuing education. They network. The AFA is a resource for the public.
For instance, Fundamentals of Aviculture is a course the AFA offers. The course covers conservation and research, courtship and nesting, basic avian genetics, color mutations, hybrids, breeding stimuli, incubation, hand-rearing, non-parrot studies, basic microbiology, illnesses, first-aid, avian enrichment and more.
Another facet of the AFA is the education offered to younger aviculturists. AFA4Kidz is a program designed to help young people learn more about birds.
As stated :”The mission and purpose of AFA shall be to promote the advancement of Aviculture through educational programs that support the advancement and improvement of breeding practices, husbandry practices, and living conditions for exotic birds, conservation, research and legislative awareness.”
There are many opinions out there and these are just a few of them. And I can almost promise you there will be a Part Two to this post.
And now, on to my personal opinion:
Now, let me explain what this blog is about. It’s about education. It’s about my experiences in life learning about this field of aviculture. Parrot Nation isn’t really about birds at all. It’s more about the people that have birds and what they do to help them. It’s about the families with birds as members.
Andy Sanford: Huge Supporter of NPRPF and the Houston Parrot Festival
I have stated before that if you educate the families and the people in the field about good nutrition, about husbandry and everything else I’ve been writing about for the past four years, I believe the birds will be better off.
I have never pretended to be a trainer, an ace rescuer or adoption coordinator. I’m a writer and I write about the work of other people. I am learning every day and try and spread what I have learned through this blog to other people by writing about it in a semi-entertaining manner.
As far as I am concerned it’s about the information. Where I can get good information and once I have it, how I can move that good information on to other people who want to know more. I really don’t care where it comes from because I hate that Mean Girls approach: “You got that information there? Well, we don’t like her so you can’t sit at our table at lunch!” This is petty and tends to throw the baby out with the bathwater. And I’ve written about this very subject before:
I’m writing about this field and the work being done in it. I don’t promote anything other than good ideas, having a good sense of humor about it and helping people realize that they are not alone in their occasional frustrations. I have adopted and or fostered many birds, helped raise tens of thousands of dollars for adoption and rescue organizations and spent countless hours promoting their work. I believe in helping families keep their birds in their homes. I believe in adoption and rescue. What I don’t believe in is a bunch of high school lunchroom politics.
Patricia Sund
Parrot Nation 
August 21, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Thank you Patricia! It was great to see you and Janet and I hope to see you next year too! Education – that’s the best way to help birds and to make sure that we have a future with birds.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 3:58 pm
Thank YOU Jamie! It was an honor to speak and I thank you for all you do.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:02 pm
It was wonderful to have a chance to visit with You and Janet. I am glad you enjoyed the bird show and look forward to seeing you next year too .
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:04 pm
Yeppers! I loved it! I KNOW I’ll see you in Raleigh…
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:03 pm
Thanks for another great post, Patricia. We will keep screaming from the rooftops until they pay attention. The key is education and you are doing a fine job of riding the waves and leading the revolution!
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Bonnie, to be honest, I don’t censor where it comes from. Good education is good information. I don’t give a damn what the source is. Thank you so much for all you do for birds. My love to Scout.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:19 pm
Great post and pictures Patricia ! I thoroughly enjoyed being #1 to get the picture and I enjoyed meeting Janet also. I am trying to figure out where to put my picture of you and your fids right now.
Diana Fowler Megginson/Hannah’s Perch
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Very well said. Everyone is represented and welcome at AFA. We need everyone at the table without the politics if we are to have a future with birds.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 4:29 pm
Thanks for your positive review. AFA is all about education–we educate on a variety of topics. All of us must unite and fight those against aviculture.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 5:38 pm
❤
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Patricia, I was so nice to see you again, this time at the AFA Convention in San Antonio. You are so right EDUCATION is the key to the future of Aviculture. Everyone, pet owners, large and small breeders, conservationists, rescues and sanctuaries need to work together AND learn together to assure the future of birds.
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 6:08 pm
I was honored to meet all of you! Patricia has made a very valid point, and I believe we all are working together to enrich the lives of our parrot families!
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 6:32 pm
You were just great, Patricia, and all of us who listened to your “Chop” talk had a fun time! The whole idea of controversy regarding AFA is a joke! My wonderful bird club, RDCBS, has had a “Chop’ session..great fun..with more to come..and has supported AFA for a great many years along with an impressive list of other avian-focused organizations. Education is the first description of our purpose and AFA is where that’s at. and there’s scarcely a member of our club who doesn’t have a bird or other pet that they’ve rescued . That’s because, in the end, “It’s all about the birds!”
LikeLike
August 21, 2012 at 9:13 pm
I agree that anyone trying to inform others about the needs of birds should be viewed in a positive light. I just have to disagree with a few statements.
Jason Crean said, “Everyone is represented and welcome at AFA.” I don’t feel welcome. I found it very disturbing when I got a couple of issues of The Watchbird last year, that was very insulting to people who espouse animal rights. Breeders may not agree with us, but I felt so personally attacked by the nastiness of the column. I wear my AFA members’ label of “Animal Rights Freak,” or “AFF” proudly, but I feel I have a pretty good sense of humor. Better than the members who call me that. I’m sorry to say, I’m no longer a member, precisely because I don’t feel welcome.
As for what Nancy Speed said, “All of us must unite and fight those against aviculture.” I’m not against aviculture, I’m against the idea that the aviculturist is put before the avian. I don’t understand why so many AFA-member breeders deny the existence of all the horrible backyard breeders. And I certainly don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to have certain regulation to protect the good names of those breeders who do good in aviculture. And why even say you need to unite against those who don’t agree with you on all issues, when maybe you could be more inclusive. Wouldn’t that help birds more?
Well, my 2¢, for what it’s worth.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 6:11 am
Shari,
I am a part of the AFA and you ARE welcome.
Jason
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 9:28 am
I do think the Rescue community would feel more comfortable with the AFA if rescues were equally represented in the Organization.
With that said, I believe information is the key and I support Patricia 100% and hope she continues to speak at any venue she can.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 3:25 pm
The AFA Board really tries to represent aviculture as a whole. The rescue community is a part of aviculture, it’s not a matter of aviculture vs rescue. As far as representation goes, Genny Wall has had a sanctuary for many years, I have been involved in re-homing birds for 20 years and Georgia Hayes is the president of NPRPF we are all on the board of AFA. AFA represents the interests of aviculture and focuses on the future of birds. We want to have a future with birds in our lives and we want you to be able to have that too.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 3:37 pm
I appreciate your comments Jamie and mine were in no way an attack on the AFA. I was merely stating that when one goes to the AFA site , you do not see rescue very well represented.
I looked at the about us section and Rescue is not even mentioned at all.
So I believe many in the rescue community feel left out.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Thank you Jamie. I appreciate your posting here. As you can see, there are some people who feel a bit hesitant about the AFA. I feel that over the years, the AFA has evolved to include more rescue organizations and make them feel included. However, I think more work has to be done by the organization to make them feel more welcome and more a part of the proceedings.
For what it’s worth, I witnessed a 26 year-old Amazon being relinquished right there at the AFA due to the fact that his Human Dad had cancer and Dad wanted to ensure he would be taken care of and have a good life after he passed on.
Officers of the AFA were responsible for that and it was such a wonderful thing they did.
The AFA has changed over the years. They are no longer just about breeders. They have had to shift. And they have! But I really believe the AFA needs to do more work in the area of featuring and celebrating the rescue aspect of aviculture. Make that your next theme and you’re on your way.
Rescue is a HUGE part of aviculture these days and it needs to be recognized as a part of the organization; not the third cousin they have felt like in the past.
With all due respect to your efforts, this is merely a suggestion for consideration. Birds are birds, no matter where they came from into our homes. Thanks for your thoughts Jamie.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 3:52 pm
There is a place for both types of Organizations Miss Patricia 🙂 And many of us in the Rescue community do not begrudge the AFA at all. I am sorry if my posts came off that way.
LikeLike
August 22, 2012 at 3:56 pm
Not at all Lorry, not at all!
LikeLike
August 23, 2012 at 5:58 am
Oh good :)..I think the AFA and YOU are both great educators and that is the most important part of this article 🙂
LikeLike
August 23, 2012 at 11:37 am
Another exceptional Parrot Nation post Ms. Sund! Let me start by saying I am involved in rescue and its not because I am anti breeder. As for the AFA I had initially taken a very strong dislike to the organization based on a few people that claimed to be heavily involved in it. I found them belittling of rescue efforts as well belittling of the knowledge base of those that do not breed. I may not know how to best make two parrots of a given species have sex and pump out the maximum clutches in the minimum time. However, I am knowledgable about doing that with pigeons and horses and I am therefore aware of the dangers of overbreeding, excessive inbreeding and the need to carefully select your pairs for the traits that will make strong healthy examples of their species. These were issues that seemed lost on the breeders I encountered. Through the comments of some of these individuals I deduced the AFA must be a market driven organization ensuring breeders always had a way to sell even an overabundance of baby birds without regard for selective breeding and the health of the breeding pair. I neglected to even research the organization and failed to notice they really are a great conduit of knowledge that will lead to happier, healthier birds in captivity. I hope going forward, with continued efforts of the AFA, this focus on education can bring rescuers and breeders to a middle ground where we can work together to ensure a better life for a our feathered friends.
LikeLike
August 23, 2012 at 12:57 pm
I don’t mean to harp on this, but it was brought up that all are welcomed; however, I can’t tell you how unwelcome I have been made to feel. These two quotes were printed in Watchbird (v. XXXVIII, nos. 1 & 2, 2011):
“Animal rights is mental illness masquerading as philosophy.”
“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.”
Well, I’m not mentally ill, and I’m not evil, but it sure makes it easy for someone to dismiss everything I have to say if you make them believe it’s true.
And, it’s not just about the animal rights/animal welfare arguments, but also from an avicultural standpoint. I’ve asked this question before, and never got an answer…..
While Southern California was in a quarantine for 13 months from an END outbreak in @2002, not a single AFA representative came to any meetings held between people with birds, UDSA, APHIS, and CDFA. No one came during that whole time, to my knowledge, to lobby on our and our birds’ behalf. Why?
LikeLike
August 23, 2012 at 1:35 pm
Hmm. I don’t think “animal rights” is listed in the DSM IV.
That really is a questionable quote. I don’t expect bird breeders to all accept the animal rights philosophy, but just dismissing someone else as being ‘mentally ill’ is a questionable debate tactic. I’ve seen that one elsewhere too e.g. “liberals all have a mental illness.”
It’s not true, for one thing. For another, a large proportion of people DO have mental illnesses, so it’s sleazy to accuse someone of being mentally ill as an insult. It’s a serious problem for some people. Plus, a lot of people I know who suffer or have suffered from serious anxiety, depression, or PTSD are actually very intelligent.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 5:27 am
Shari, I too find those comments disturbing and they imply the illness is merely the desire to help birds in need. I think maybe what the AFA could do going foward is craft a statement that encompasses their stance on parrots in need of rescue or rehoming. Boldly claim there is indeed a real need in this area. It would not even require addressing the controversial topic of whether there is an overpopulation of parrots in captivity. All it need be is an acknowledgment that given the lifespan of many of these birds there will always be a segement of aviculture that involves finding these creatures new homes. Additionally, perhaps state what if any responsibilty breeders have beyond the sale of their birds. Alternatively, they could merely state euthanasia is the preferred action in cases in which the birds resale value is less than the cost of the care required till its resale or rehoming is complete. At least we would know definitvely where the AFA stands and the rescue community can either accept the organization for what it is or can reject it on principle.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:20 am
AFA promotes animal welfare, the animal rights agenda does not. People often confuse the 2.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:24 am
I still do not see the Animal Welfare agenda being supported or at least not the rescue agenda.
I am certain “animal welfare” means very different things to different people
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 12:14 pm
We are a diverse group of people and birds are also very diverse so I’m sure we all have different interpretations. On the AFA website http://afabirds.org/about.shtml there is a statement about AFA’s beliefs regarding birds.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 12:31 pm
I know about the page and it was the one I was referencing…
“AFA has a membership consisting of bird breeders, pet bird owners, avian veterinarians, pet/bird store owners, bird product manufacturers, and other people interested in the future of aviculture.”
Not one mention of rescue organizations or those who participate them. It suggests that AFA is about commercial interests which is fine but also what makes it controversial
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Again none of this was meant as an attack. It is just my opinion as to why the AFA has not necessarily been embraced by the rescue community.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 12:58 pm
This has been an interesting topic as well as enlightening. First let me say my impression is the AFA does do good work in providing education in many areas of bird ownership. It even seems to understand there are many things about birds that make their needs unique and unlike that of a cat or dog. However, it has become rather clear that rescue is never going to be a part of of it. That is fine and I actually understand why. Its a tricky thing have an organization that would not exist without the breeding and rearing of exotic birds to expect them to listen to what rescues see. Acknowledging the need of rescue organizations would place a fear within its members because it could be interpreted to mean there is a shortcoming to having parrots in captivity. It may be seen to be implying a need to montior the number of birds being rehomed rather than relying on market conditions to dictate the population of certain species in captivity. Its just a reality and a reason I will not be a supporter of AFA. Please understand I am not a detractor either. Its just that it apparent that although the AFA and I have a common ground we are never likely to overlap enough in philosophy for me to be active in joining it or attending one of its conferences.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 1:48 pm
Thanks for your comments Chris, I will say that I consider rescue to be a part of aviculture. I have re-homed, successfully, many parrots in the last 20 years. As a behavior consultant I have also helped many to stay in their homes. I know that most birds will have more than 1 home in it’s lifetime for many reasons and I think most people realize that. It shouldn’t be AFA vs rescue. We should all be on the side of the birds and their future. We agree on much more than we disagree on.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Jamie, you are exactly right. As long as there are birds, there will be the need for rescues, just as there is for dogs and cats. There is always owners who cannot or will not properly take care of their birds. Myself, I have rescued quite a few birds, just in my home, and I am proud to be in the AFA as a hobby breeder.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:27 am
Hello Shari, AFA was very involved in the END outbreak in California. I’m sure that many of the people you saw at the meetings were AFA members. You might remember that they were going to take all of the birds in the quarantine area without having them tested first. The AFA was instrumental in helping to change that policy to include a home quarantine. AFA was there to help all of the birds in the affected area and all of their owners, regardless of their affiliation with AFA. If you are interested, I have a copy of documents I can forward you. Just write to me at bjwbird @ abcbirds.com (remove the spaces).
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Yes, I would like to see those. Please forward to SpeakingForParrots@gmail.com. Thanks.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Chris, if you came to a convention; you would see that many rescue people do attend are welcomed. Most of the Members and the Directors of AFA have been involved in taking in birds that need a home or helping to place them. Just because we do not call ourselves a Rescue, does not mean we do not share common goals.
I personally have several birds in my home that have been taken in when they needed a place, and they are pets, not breeders, also have taken in some breeder pairs that needed help, but I do not consider myself a “rescue”. Just someone willing to help birds in need.
AFA’s tagline is ” A Future With Birds” and that includes all birds and bird people, no matter the title or the species.
I hope you will consider attending a convention, and please make sure to introduce yourself so we can welcome you properly.
—-Julie—-
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 3:32 pm
I think what many of us are trying to say Julie is that the AFA site does not even touch on rescue. The About page does not even suggest rescues are part of the group and it does not leave a place for most.
if they have Rescue Organizations speaking and have Rescues involved, that is great, but it is not seen by the general public.
I do not think that means those who do not choose to get involved have any ill will against your Organization and I agree we likely to share some common goals.
With all that said, I believe if the AFA wants to embrace the Rescue community they have a long way to go. If they do not, no one would fault them.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Lorry, I don’t know what to say. Either they really don’t get it, or they hope in constantly repeating they represent everyone, we’ll all believe it.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 8:32 pm
Jamie, the fact that you don’t respond to the nature of those quotes tells me you support the sentiment. To say that people don’t understand the difference is a shining example of the pompous nature of AFA. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen in writing, AFA members telling others in the bird community that breeders know best, and harp on how much good you’re doing by all the birds you’ve placed over the years, breeders were the first rescues, and conservation would be nothing without breeders. The reality is, the dire need for rescues is because of you (bird breeders). You want credit for aiding in something you and you alone created.
I am deeply saddened to see this statement by you, “I know that most birds will have more than 1 home in it’s lifetime for many reasons and I think most people realize that,” You drop that like it’s just a fact of life, and we all have to live with it. Well, no we don’t. We don’t have to accept that, and if that’s your idea of animal welfare, then it just proves more to me that AFA’s idea of animal welfare is via breeder welfare.
If you want to know what animals rights is really about, it’s about the animal first. There are different ways of going about that, but that’s its core. It’s not some sort of lynch mob out to get YOU, it’s to make life for these animals the best it can be. Losing a home even just once in a lifetime is too much, and no self-respecting dog breeder would just throw that kind of comment out there like that. Those breeders (I’m sure like the one whose comment was quoted in that article) fight against things like puppy mills, backyard breeders, and dogs in unacceptable conditions. Instead, the AFA does nothing to speak out against the backyard breeders whose birds live in horrid conditions. In fact, not only do you deny the existence of bad breeders, but you welcome anyone and everyone if they breed birds, regardless.
And you wonder why enrollment is down? Everyone knows that AFA has members falling by the wayside, and there aren’t enough new members to make up for the loss. The talk was you had trouble finding people to submit papers for the past convention. I’m not saying you have to change, but it seems pretty obvious that nobody’s buying the BS we’ve been sold all this time. The image of the AFA of the everyday bird people and those out in the trenches, is that AFA is there to make business easier for breeders to sell their wares unfettered by regulation, scrutiny, or what’s really best for their birds. Period. That is not acceptable to me, and I’m tired of trying to extend the olive branch.
I have tried on numerous occasions to work with AFA members, and all I ever get is the company line of “PETA,” or “ARF.” ARF, or “animal rights freak” I will wear proudly, and I thank your senior members for that title. Even here on this forum, where I have posted those quotes, you still don’t hear what I and others are trying to say; therefore, I have decided I will no longer try to communicate what I think I and people like me can do with AFA to help parrots. Instead, you can count on me to air what I see as the self-serving “mission” of AFA, and that parrots and the people to whom you sell them, have little to do with the mission itself. You have your right to exist as an organization that’s there to look out for its member breeders, but I won’t let you obfuscate that. Not anymore.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 10:47 pm
I’m sorry you feel that way Shari, I promise that much of your impression is really not correct. AFA and it’s members have been devoted to birds for 38 years and the main reason is, and always has been, the birds. I could address all of your points, but you aren’t likely to hear me. I don’t want to be argumentative and so I will stop here.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 10:54 pm
Again, a preconceived notion of who I am: mentally ill, evil, and unwilling to listen. I’m sure it makes it much easier for you to then just dismiss me altogether.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Shari, I never said or thought any of those things about you. I will say that I am not the one with the preconceived notions. I have made no judgments.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:46 pm
Jamie, you didn’t have to say them…. you PUBLISHED them in your magazine.
LikeLike
August 25, 2012 at 12:04 am
It’s not MY magazine and I didn’t publish it. I am sure that AFA didn’t say it, it was quoted by someone who wrote an article. As I said before, I don’t have that issue in front of me and I don’t know how the quote was used. A google search on that quote brings up over a million hits – none of which are associated with AFA. If you want to use that to write off an organization that is working for the future of birds that’s your choice.
LikeLike
August 25, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Why would AFA publish that if they didn’t agree with it? Even if they did agree, it shouldn’t have been allowed to get through, particularly if you’re saying everyone is welcome. What I’m doing here is trying to make you see why people don’t feel welcome; yet, you make excuses for it by rationalizing, “I am sure that AFA didn’t say it, it was quoted by someone who wrote an article.” Well, an AFA member wrote it, and AFA printed it. These kinds of excuses are part of why people don’t want to be a part of AFA. I don’t know how else to present it to you. Others have told you why they don’t feel welcome, yet you guys don’t hear it. There’s always some kind of runaround. If someone points out that rescue isn’t included in AFA’s mission statement, someone points to the mission statement as being all-inclusive. It’s really quite maddening.
But, it’s okay, because you have every right to conduct business the way you see fit. You’re not going to appeal to everyone, so why not just own it. Just say that people like me, or many people in rescue will not find too much of their business addressed by AFA. Simple.
LikeLike
August 25, 2012 at 11:50 pm
AFA is concerned with the future of birds in your home, in my home, everywhere in the US. AFA is also concerned about birds in the wild in their natural habitats. If those are not things that you are concerned with then AFA does not address your concerns. If those things are important to you then AFA should be important too. AFA will continue to educate people who are interested in learning more about birds. AFA will continue to support conservation projects as much as it can and AFA will continue to make it’s members aware of legislation that can seriously affect them and their birds whether you support AFA or not. It’s not about breeding, not about selling, not about rescue – it’s simply about the birds and their future.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 12:36 am
Very well said Jamie.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 1:12 am
If AFA supports conservation projects (as said below), may I ask what percentage of its revenue goes to such projects?
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 1:21 am
We raise money for specific projects. Here is a link to some of our past projects
http://www.afabirds.org/past_projects.shtml
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 1:29 am
Jamie – thanks for the link.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 2:24 pm
That link does not answer the question of “how much,” which seems to be the rule rather than exception.
Anyone can say a feel-good statement like, “it’s simply about the birds and their future,” but that doesn’t say how you go about making it about the birds. Rescues feel it’s all about the birds, too, but you still don’t include them in your mission statement. So, either “everyone is welcome,” or “If those are not things that you are concerned with then AFA does not address your concerns.”
It’s been like attempting to get a straight answer from a politician.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 2:45 pm
I sent you a link to programs that AFA has helped over the years. I said that AFA raised money for those specific projects. AFA is not primarily a conservation organization, AFA is an educational organization that also supports conservation. Most of the money is spent on education as it should be. If you are truly interested you can go to guidestar where the 990’s are posted.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 2:56 pm
I don’t know why you get angry. The mission statement says you support conservation, and someone asked about it. The statement doesn’t say that you are “….not primarily a conservation organization….” (which didn’t answer the question, either). All that was asked was what percentage of revenue goes to such projects. You should be proud of your accomplishments, and desire to answer such a question directly. At least, that’s how I think most 501(c)3s would feel.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 3:09 pm
I’m not sure why you thought I was angry. I was just repeating what I said, not yelling or being defensive just clarifying. AFA raises money to help with conservation and that money goes to conservation.
There isn’t a specific percentage put into the budget each year which is how I understood the question. If people donate more money then more will be given to conservation.
AFA also donated a new laptop computer to the Puerto Rican amazon project last year after a hurricane. Much of the data that had been accumulated might have been lost without that donation. The dollar amount on Guidestar is actual grants that were given. AFA also partnered with World Parrot Trust on the African Grey confiscation last year.
I think it is all listed on the website, that was why I originally sent the link to that page.
LikeLike
August 29, 2012 at 10:20 pm
I don’t think it’s Jessie making the organization look bad. I think you all do that quite well on your own. It’s only taken a tiny bit of scrutiny for it to become evident that the “education” you profess is just self-serving. I’m not saying you don’t love your birds, but it’s not enough to do what’s in any bird’s best interest, which is to leave them alone. I’d like to see all of us out of business, and that goes for breeders, rescuers, poachers, vet techs, and advocates.
So, let’s face it, when you say your work is for the future of birds, it’s so they’re there to be exploited in the future. I’m backing out of this conversation because I’m becoming infuriated. I’m not stupid, and I know when someone’s talking out of both sides of their mouth. Unlike Chris, I don’t go back to my usual distaste for AFA every time this comes up. I end up even more disheartened.
LikeLike
August 24, 2012 at 11:28 pm
I’ve always thought the division of everyone into either an “animal welfare” vs “animal rights” camp is too simple. My views on the way people should treat animals cannot really be summed up in two words. I think the strict abolitionists go way too far and I certainly don’t want all animal use banned (only a handful of people really do), but on the flip side, the term animal welfare has been so watered down by various corporate front groups that it’s nearly meaningless. I don’t like using either word to describe myself.
I’ve noticed that even if one disagrees with any aspect of aviculture (even fringe parts), a lot of AFA people will write you off as an “ARF.” That’s even if you are merely against importing wild-caught birds, or selling big, difficult parrot species at chain pet stores or flea markets. I personally am not against all bird breeding and have bred a few finches myself. However, it does bother me to see birds like Moluccan Cockatoos or Scarlet Macaws for sale at shops run by people who don’t know that much about birds. That sort of thing keeps the rescues really busy. There are also species I actually think we should breed way, way fewer of (again, I’m thinking primarily of the white cockatoos here, but there are others). I suspect a lot of breeders would write me off as an ARF for those views. I think it’s too bad that so few bird people can even discuss ethical vs. questionable breeding practices without being accused of being fanatics who want all pet-keeping banned.
I don’t want to criticize anyone who joins AFA or who speaks at the conference since any attempts at educating people are great, but I can see where Shari is coming from. AFA really seems more like a trade group for breeders than anything and speaks up more for breeders than for birds. That’s fine, but it’s not really my thing, personally.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 2:52 pm
Well, I looked it up on Guidestar. For the three years on there, about $1000 to $2000 goes to funding field work per year.
LikeLike
August 26, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Oh my.
LikeLike
August 27, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Oh my, indeed! It’s actually only about four percent of the amount of money that’s given to one of the members for office space.
Overall, about 1% of revenue goes to conservation. So, there you have it.
LikeLike
August 27, 2012 at 8:24 pm
What is your point Jessie? Most organizations have an office, so does AFA. If you read more closely you will see that it is an office management contract so it also includes telephone, utilities, rent, paper clips, paper, and office staff. That is the only money that AFA pays out that is not related to the mission statement which is education.
AFA supports conservation efforts in many ways including fundraising and giving out small grants. At the recent convention there were several speakers on conservation and there were tables with conservation displays. I know that there were donations collected there that went straight to those organizations.
You don’t have to be a part of AFA, but there is no reason to try to spin information to make the organization look bad. AFA is there for your birds and for my birds and for anyone else’s birds. If you support the organization it makes it easier for them to be there in the future.
Once again, the revenue that went to conservation was raised specifically for conservation it doesn’t come from the general fund which is spent primarily on education.
With a hurricane hitting Florida and the gulf coast surely there are more important things to talk about.
LikeLike
August 27, 2012 at 11:58 pm
I’m spinning nothing and am just noting the numbers. You said the dollar amounts are on guidestar so I looked them up and noted what they were. The $45 600 that goes to an aviary is indeed listed as office/management.
As far as education goes, yes, I can see that plenty of money goes to printing and sending Watchbird, which makes sense. A nice colour publicaton like that would cost a lot to print and mail out and people do get something for their membership dues. Since Bird Talk went under, at least there’s a bird magazine left in the States. I guess the other educational things would be the conference and the online course.
LikeLike
August 28, 2012 at 5:29 am
Initially when this discussion started I was neutral and had a preconceived notion of what the AFA is. Basically, I saw it as an organization that has a primary interest in promoting propagation of birds in captivity and in doing so provided much needed research and education on issues affecting their care. This view is what gave me the impression the AFA was a well meaning organization, but one that really did not have much to do with my goals in the bird community. As a matter of fact I saw it as working against the rescue community based on discussions with other AFA members. Some that were downright condescending and nasty by the way. I had come to accept its just a fact that rescues interests and breeders interests cannot intersect in the AFA in a manner that would be either positive or functional.
Now after reading Jamie’s comments that have ranged from evasive to defensive I am convinced the AFA is exactly what I had intially believed it to be, a breeder centric organization protecting breeder’s rights. Again, I do accept this and do not begrudge their existence. I still believe there is good in the existence of the AFA, but I just wish they would be forthright and admit they are not rescue friendly and stop pretending to be. They are just too heavily biased to breeding for people involved in rescue to find a common ground in the AFA. From now on I will go back to my position of viewing the AFA from afar.
LikeLike
August 29, 2012 at 11:24 pm
No matter what I post here in support of AFA, there will be those who attack under the guise of concern to prove their point. As someone who has been on both the outside looking in and the now the inside looking out, I can honestly say I am quite proud to be part of the AFA and the work they do. It simply isn’t possible for the AFA to solve all the world’s problems or be present for every issue that crops up in aviculture. But the positive work I see myself in the organization outweighs any negative misconceptions that are out there. This year’s very successful convention is just one more reason I am proud to be part of the AFA!
LikeLike
August 31, 2012 at 2:15 am
I operate one of the oldest parrot rescue/sanctuaries in the US – started back in 1988. I have cared for (and sometimes rehomed) hundreds of parrots and other birds over the decades.
I am also AFA’s Legislative Vice President. I became (and have stayed) involved with AFA because I understand that there are some people in the “animal protection business” that don’t want any of us keeping any parrots for any purpose (be we breeders, rescuers, sanctuaries – it doesn’t matter). The people with that mindset are far ahead of us in the legislative arena.
My work with AFA is to alert bird owners to the legislative issues that affect us and our birds, and to try to stop the freight train of restrictive legislation that is heading straight at all of us an our birds.
The most current example is the pending proposal from the US Fish and Wildlife Service to add 4 macaws to the US Endangered Species Act (the hyacinth, the scarlet, the buffon’s, and the military). Sounds like a good idea, right?
Well, unfortunately, there are many serious restrictions on any species that becomes listed under the US ESA. For example, one that will affect everyone that owns one of these birds, is that it can’t be transported across state lines without a permit, and you can’t get an ESA permit for a pet. What will happen to our birds when we can no longer keep them (for health reasons, or we die, or whatever..) ? We won’t be able to send them to anyone out of state who is willing to care for them. Most pet owners, and rescues and sanctuaries don’t unerstand that they aren’t exempt from these rules.
This is just the first salvo in a campaign to seek the listing of all parrots under the US ESA. IMO, once any parrot species is listed under the US ESA (in essence because its survival in the wild is being destroyed in its native habitat), and as a result of the US ESA restrictions, the US captive breeding of that species is stopped, the long term survival of that species is essentially doomed. I find that outcome reprehensible and unacceptable for those who claim to care about species survival.
As far as I am concerned, AFA exists to serve and to try to protect all of us who love and own birds, and to serve and try to protect those birds we all say we love.
If anyone thinks that’s a bad thing – what more can I say?
LikeLike
August 31, 2012 at 3:45 pm
This is why people are criticizing the AFA, Genny. Your statements are not entirely factual. There are currently several bird species listed on the ESA, and they cross state lines all the time, as commodities and as pets. Why would it be any different for the proposed birds? Seems to me, the only people who would find this, at most, a nuisance are people who want to sell birds.
I mean really, you guys play the victim and think we are too stupid to understand the workings of “aviculture,” or that we can’t figure out how to get information. It’s even on your own website, for Pete’s sake!
http://www.afabirds.org/esa.shtml
If you die, and someone from another state is willing to take your endangered macaw, THEY CAN. What’s regulated is the SALE of such bird. I don’t worry about such things because any bird that comes into my home never has nor ever will be FOR SALE.
You stated that your “….work with AFA is to alert bird owners to the legislative issues that affect us and our birds, and to try to stop the freight train of restrictive legislation that is heading straight at all of us an our birds.” Well, I don’t have a problem with legislation that protects parrots from the atrocities we’ve been seeing by both breeders and rescues. I certainly don’t have a problem with enlisting a parrot like the hyacinth macaw onto the ESA, considering there are only a few populations left in the wild. I’m not afraid of that “freight train,” and when it comes by me, I’m getting on. I’m not afraid to put my interests before those of the parrots in my care.
For those interested, here is a fact sheet on restrictions for those keeping ESA birds:
Click to access Macaw%20FAQs.final.pdf
LikeLike
August 31, 2012 at 6:08 pm
Hi Shari,
You want to discuss the law and its application, lets do that 🙂
THE LAW ITSELF
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 is codified at 16 USC 35.
Here’s a link to that law.
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/16C35.txt
The language of the ESA (the law itself) controls how it is implemented – not what anyone (USFWS, or anyone else) puts out on the internet in a “fact sheet” or other publication. “Fact Sheets” have no legal authority. IMO the “fact sheet” you have quoted is misleading by omission, and, given the present political makeup of USFWS, is designed to deter pet owners from making formal comments to USFWS in opposition to the proposed rule.
The ESA and its restrictions are far more complex than you describe in your post.
Section 1538(a)(1)(F) of the ESA makes it unlawful to “sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce any such species”. (i.e. prohibits interstate SALES (across state lines)). That’s the part that affects breeders and sellers.
But Section 1538(a)(1)(E) of the ESA also makes it unlawful “to deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of a commercial activity, any such species”.
So, for those who already own a species that becomes listed under the ESA and who can prove it’s origins, unless you are going to personally drive your macaw (or other ESA listed parrot) across one or more state lines to its ultimate destination (something that will be a tad hard to do if you are incapacitated or dead), carriers (airlines, railroads, commercial shippers, rescue railroads, etc., all of whom are engaged in “commercial activity”), won’t accept your shipment of an endangered species from you or your personal representative because that itself violates the ESA.
Commercial carriers are not going to commit what would be a criminal act under the ESA because you or your personal representative want to move your bird(s) across state lines. Many airlines already refuse to ship or allow birds in the cabin because of political pressure from “animal protection” groups. This refusal to ship or transport on any commercial carrier of any kind will become universal for any species listed under the ESA. It is also unlikely that in the event of your death your personal representative will be able to prove the origin of your pets.
Section 1539 doesn’t provide any exception to the ESA or its prohibited acts, and does not allow for any permits to “take” or move ESA listed species that are pets.
THE POLITICS OF THE LAW
It is easy for those trying to push this regulation through to say “don’t worry, your pets are OK” – but that isn’t true. I guess, as long as they are in your house, and as long as you stay under the radar, no federal agent is going to invade your home and seize your ESA listed pet (at least at this time, as the language of the Act and the regulations presently stand).
But if you live in a jurisdiction (local or state) that prohibits the ownership of any ESA listed species (and they exist), your pets will be illegal and will be subject to seizure. If you ever need to move your ESA listed pet across state lines, you are going to have serious difficulties. And, history has shown that the restrictions of the ESA (and other prohibitive laws) only get tighter, not looser.
If you think that the prospects for the long term survival of parrots in the wild are good, then fine, focus on the evils of greedy breeders and the horrors of what you have seen in rescues. Support the ESA listing of all parrots.
I won’t do that. IMO the only hope for the long term survival of most parrots will come from the captive breeding of these species so that their genetic material is maintained and their numbers are increased. This is what is now being done with the Spix Macaw overseas in private breeding programs. This is what is now being done with the Puerto Rican parrot in Puerto Rico (interestingly, the only program I know of that is currently being carried on by the USFWS – I am not aware of any captive breeding programs overseas that are supported by the USFWS despite requirements in the ESA that such support be provided – perhaps someone will alert me to one). AFA and its members support both programs.
Breeders have the skills, the knowledge, the history, and the motivation, necessary to keep these species in existence, in the hopes that someday the countries where they originated will be able to restore and actually protect them in the wild. Unfortunately, given the track record of those countries of origin to date, I’m not very hopeful that such a circumstance will occur in our lifetimes.
We have many good breeders in this country, doing extraordinary work with endangered species. I will do everything I can to help preserve their ability to continue to do their important work. I believe we have a duty to these birds to try to protect them and their continuing existence as species.
I disagree with the “animal protection” proponents who believe “better dead than bred” and “better dead than in a cage”. Pursuing an agenda that brings about the extinction of a species is not “animal protection”. I will stand in front of the “animal protection” freight train that is forcing these species into extinction by putting legal obstacles in the way of their preservation, for as long as I can.
NOW FOR A QUESTION
Shari, I’m curious about your statement “I’m not afraid to put my interests before those of the parrots in my care.” What personal interests are you putting before those of your parrots?
Genny
LikeLike
August 31, 2012 at 8:00 pm
Interesting…. I didn’t hear myself say, “’better dead than bred’ and ‘better dead than in a cage[.]’.”
I also find it interesting that you consider AFA breeders to be on a par with programs like that of the Spix’s macaw or the Puerto Rican Amazon. Do AFA members have living areas like that just made for the macaws at Al Wabra? I think you all have some nerve comparing yourselves to the people who are out in the forests really making a difference in wild bird populations. Those who are breeding these species aren’t selling chicks, and that’s the difference. That’s conservation. They’re not trying to solve one problem by making another problem worse. Those people are the solution, not breeders in the US who breed parrots to sell chicks, year after year after year. How many AFA members have a conservation plan? In what ways have any AFA breeders, individuals, made some contribution with their breeder birds in helping wild populations?
You’re right about it being far more complex, and to debate the intricacies here would be silly. So, how about an every day example. I can go to a local bird store right now and buy a golden conures, vinaceous Amazons and Cuban Amazons. Every so often, a red-vented cockatoo is for sale. I also just took samples for a store who is shipping a sold-for-money scarlet macaw to Antigua. So, please give me examples of how listing those macaws on ESA will cause someone to have their companion confiscated and endanger the wild population. Why is it better that anyone can go buy a golden conure, never bring it to see a vet, and upon necropsy, we find horrendous liver damage? How did that help wild golden populations?
You say that commercial carriers have stopped accepting birds due to political pressure from “animal protection” groups. Do you have some data on that, because last I heard, some airlines stopped accepting birds since the outbreak of avian influenza a few years back. But still, there are those birds from whom we take samples, write up government forms, and send them on their way to various destinations.
And can you please give us the facts about the misleading fact sheet. Misleading how? Or are you saying that this is just one way for the government to get a foothold into making stricter regulation? Or is this just a big conspiracy by the government so they can take away our birds, and do…… what? What is it that the government wants with them?
About my statement: I don’t care if my life is inconvenienced because my parrots and the millions of parrots in captivity are protected. The regulations on the books now may not be ideal, but that’s what you get when you have bureaucrats making policy. AFA’s zero-tolerance on any regulation means that people who know nothing about birds will be the ones making these policies. Instead of fighting tooth-and-nail against it, you’re missing the opportunity to be a part of the process. And while you fight against it, there are parrots out there languishing in horrid conditions because there are so few laws protecting them.
LikeLike
August 31, 2012 at 8:30 pm
“Captive breeding” is not the only hope for ‘most’ parrot species. While a few species have indeed been saved by captive breeding, many others are greatly benefiting from programs that aim to protect and restore habitat. “Conservation” is about more than breeding and selling animals – it must also involve protecting habitat in the wild. Otherwise, populations can never be restored in the wild. “Conservation biology” is actually an interdisciplinary field which is quite complex and reducing it to “breeding and selling” badly oversimplifies it.
Additionally, neither the Puerto Rican Amazon nor the Spix Macaw projects are aiming to produce chicks to sell to pet stores. Honestly, that is the primarily aim for some parrot breeders and it’s dishonest to pretend otherwise. At any rate, only 1% of AFA funds go to conservation, so I do not consider it a major conservation organziation.
I actually do not see the point of listing certain parrot species under the ESA, as international trade in most species is well-regulated by CITES (as I think it should be, unlike a lot of breeders who appear to want no restrictions whatsoever). However, if I personally see a problem with some sort of legislation, I can research it myself and write my own letters. That way, I can know my name won’t be associated with anything I think is questionable (e.g. the claim that “animal rights is a mental illness.”)
LikeLike
September 1, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Closing the Kitchen Door
I have neighbors, a nice young couple with 4 kids all under the age of 5. Except for what seems to be the constant crying and screaming of their children. The first time we heard it, we were sitting out on our back patio which overlooks their back yard. Neighbors were in their back yard having a family get-together and the (then only 2) kids were playing in the back yard. All of a sudden both boys started crying at the top of their lungs. We looked over, and there they were, just standing there crying – nothing apparently wrong, just crying. The parents and other adults at the gathering ignored them and the boys continued to cry for about 20 minutes. Eventually the cries turned into screaming (and I mean screaming like they do in horror movies), and finally the parents took them inside. We found the scenario disturbing yet strangely interesting. We decided to stay out of it, and watch to see if we could figure out what in the hell was going on over there.
Fast forward two years and two more kids (now there are 4, all under the age of 5). The kids all still cry, seemingly incessantly, but now the oldest boy is the one doing most of the screaming. It turns out the oldest boy takes pleasure in inflicting pain on the younger children until they cry – at times enough pain that they scream. We have seen him hitting and shoving the younger kids (even the baby) in the back yard. Seems he does this a lot, both inside the house and outside in the back yard.
Apparently when the parents have had enough of his sociopathic behavior when he is inside the house, they put him outside the kitchen door. That area is just a few yards from our house – and when our windows are open you can hear everything. He stands there at the closed kitchen door, screaming at the top of his lungs. No words, no crying, just screaming. Periodically they open the door and quietly tell him that if he wants to come back in he has to stop screaming. He continues to scream and pound on the door. This procedure repeats, sometimes for over an hour. Eventually he stops screaming, and the parent of the hour opens the door and lets him back into the house.
Although some people may think that the parents are wrong to lock the boy out of the kitchen when he is acting out, I think they are handling the child in the most practical way they can. If they were to yell back at him, or hit him, they would only reinforce his bad behavior, and harm themselves. By removing him from the house when he is acting like a sociopath, and putting him outside the kitchen door, they let him know that when he decides to act in a civil fashion he can re-engage with the family.
I believe in the “marketplace of ideas” (a belief that holds that the truth will emerge out of the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse). I am open to discussing any of the many issues that affect all of us who own animals, with anyone. That’s how we learn. However, I have decided, for me, that it’s time to close my kitchen door on AFA-bashers. Unfortunately, no matter what facts we provide to answer their criticisms, they insist on continuing to recite their AFA sucks mantra. If any AFA-bashers would like to participate in a civil discussion of issues, support your opinions with documentable facts, and not just spew negativity, then the discussion door can be reopened to you. Until then you can just stand outside screaming – eventually you will wear yourself out. While you stand there screaming, those of us who want to carry on civil discourse inside the house will do just that.
LikeLike
September 1, 2012 at 8:44 pm
So, now I’m a sociopathic child who likes to hurt others. You are accusing me and Jessie of not acting in a “civil fashion,” yet, I don’t see it. I don’t see where I have done any name-calling, but if I have missed something, please bring it to my attention. I have also been accused of screaming and spewing opinions without any documentable facts; however, the elephant in the room is still, why aren’t rescues the only part of the bird community left out of AFA’s mission statement?
BUT….. I love love love that you brought up the concept of the Marketplace of Ideas! Brilliant! Let’s do just that. Let’s have something like a debate, out in the open, face to face, in public, say, the next AFA convention. Me, a simple, evil, mentally ill musicologist, and you, the learned aviculturist and distinguished attorney. We could have people like Patricia moderate it, ask questions, etc.
So, what does everyone think?
LikeLike
September 2, 2012 at 6:17 am
Genny that is one of the rudest and most condescending posts I’ve seen. However, I say thanks for showing your true colors and thanks for again letting us see what the AFA is all about.
LikeLike
September 1, 2012 at 3:54 pm
In what way am I screaming? I think you are actually being quite rude and hurtful in comparing me (or Shari?) to a screaming child. I personally do present facts and numbers and anything I say goes quite a bit beyond “AFA sucks.” What point did I say that you think is factually incorrect? I actually don’t think the AFA is entirely bad (the conference does actually look interesting but it’s too far for me) and I did join once. However, it seems no one can bring up any shortcomings with regards to it without being accused of being a fanatic (I’m not) or bringing up falsehoods (I’m not – actually I’ve looked up all of their finances) or, now, being condescendingly compared to a screechy kid. I actually think listening to critics can help one improve and refine one’s ideas. With regards to an organization, listening to lapsed members can help fix problems that made them leave. I’d be thinking about rejoining to do the part II of the online course (I did part one), but why would I want to do that now?
It seems you like a marketplace of ideas only if they 100% match your ideas. That’s not much of a marketplace. No where have I insulted any individual people (I don’t think Shari has either).
LikeLike