....................yawn.........................................

Rolan Nelson
Fircrest, WA
rnbuffle at yahoo.com

--- On Mon, 4/25/11, Michael Price <loblollyboy at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Michael Price <loblollyboy at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] Perfect response Michael
To: "Ted Ryan" <coffeemonkey101 at comcast.net>
Cc: Tweeters at u.washington.edu
Date: Monday, April 25, 2011, 3:35 AM



Ted,


>Splintering the group into factions is silly and childish.


I agree, but the factions were there,?mostly incited by bad photographer behavior,?long before I arrived on the scene. So I decline your invitation to be responsible for this.


>Us and them rhetoric will not serve the cause well. ?Listen to yourself, this is the root of bigotry, stereotyping a group based on a subset of that group and applying the stereotype to everyone.


I based my opinions on decades of observation and experience, not rhetoric and presupposition. Were it my remit, some photographers I have witnessed would be in jail for their crimes against birds they committed in pursuit of the ideal shot. I'm not talking one or two, but tens and, occasionally, usually involving owls, hundreds of photographers doing everything but uprooting nearby trees for that perfect shot.


And I'm no longer taken in by the plaintive bleating that 'it's only one or two bad apples.' It's far more widespread than that. And it is a problem the photographic community needs to address.


In Britain, the RSPB has wardens to police birders and photographers at twitch sites to prevent such obnoxious behavior. Maybe Canadian and American local Audubons and local natural history societies should start examining this precedent as a way to prevent harassment of the birds by birders and photographers alike.


>Knock it off, really, knock it off. ?This is not sarcasm.


Not interested. Whoever harasses birds should be pursued and held accountable. I don't care what group they belong to.


best wishes

Michael Price
Vancouver BC Canada
loblollyboy at gmail.com

Every answer deepens the mystery.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - E.O. Wilson



On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Ted Ryan <coffeemonkey101 at comcast.net> wrote:



Splintering the group into factions is silly and childish. ?Us and them rhetoric will not serve the cause well. ?Listen to yourself, this is the root of bigotry, stereotyping a group based on a subset of that group and applying the stereotype to everyone.


Knock it off, really, knock it off. ?This is not sarcasm.


Ted Ryan
Fredrickson, WA







On Apr 24, 2011, at 3:28 AM, Michael Price <loblollyboy at gmail.com> wrote:





>Perfect response Michael
You lumped all photographers in a "group", and your "data" of 80% of unscrupulous photographers I'm sure is an accurate number from diligent note-taking. And lets not forget when people tell us how long they have been birding or leading tours....that makes their OPINION more valid. This is exactly why the discussion should be ended. Everyone has their opinion, and Michael is right, there are jerks with cameras out there. But the discussion goes nowhere except to vent personal feelings towards unscrupulous people. And those people could care less what they do.
Nothing anyone has to say about this topic could possibly add any value, but go for it...because I know these type of silly discussions won't end.
Jonah


Well, Jonah---BTW, thanks for the gratuitous sarcasm, very classy on your part----when I was the hopefully conscientious?operator of the of the Vancouver BC Bird Alert, a post from which I was summarily removed because I was too conscientious, I noticed a pattern of photographer-based abuse of the birds: flushed shorebirds, disrupted nesting birds, and disrupted owls. By photographers who needed a full-frame shot, not birders who were satisfied by a simple sighting. I then removed the exact sighting locations, not a popular decision---okay with most birders, but photographers like you hated it. So, Jonah... ?Oh, you know what those three little dots means, eh? Don't have to say them out loud, yeah? I mean, you have your pride, right? Okay, if you still don't get it, it's irony. It's even sarcasm. It means, according to your own wording, you're one of them, not us.

Michael Price
Vancouver BC Canada
loblollyboy at gmail.com

Every answer deepens the mystery.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? - E.O. Wilson

_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters