Martyn Stewart wrote:
>Is it because you are part of Audubon that you are trying to justify
>playback in the field?
>=20
>
As I have made perfectly clear, I am not trying to justify playback,
I am trying to investigate the underlying issues so that I can make a
more informed personal decision and so that a code of ethics can be
developed by this group for the education of everyone. As I also
previously stated, I will not use playback where there is a risk of
proximate injury and at the same time I cannot object to others using it
under the same circumstances because to my knowledge the only rational
model for conservation is a population model and I do not know the
effects, if any, of individual injury on populations.
Your experience with Audubon has been that many of your chapter
members disagree with your opinions on playback. Your question projects
your experience on to me, in spite of your lack of knowlege as to my
connection with Audubon, and in spite of my previously plainly stated
personal position. Regarding Audubon: I am a local chapter member only;
I resigned from the National Audubon Society a year ago. I am unaware of
any NAS policy on playback, as I have also previously stated. My chapter
has no policy on playback.
In short, I am not trying to justify playback, there is no Audubon
policy for me to justify either nationally or locally, and there is no
connection between me and National Audubon that might influence me to
defend such a policy even if it existed.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Chuck Bragg, Pacific Palisades, CA
Membership, Newsletter, Web manager
Santa Monica Bay Audubon Society
www.smbas.org
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|