This is the original quote from Doug von Gausig and i will add parts
of this to the intro page..
> The stated purpose of this list is: "This moderated group is
> interested in
> techniques, issues and general discussion of recording natural sounds.
> Topics include, but aren't limited to recording techniques and
> equipment,
> recording venues and discussions of various animal vocalizations and
> communication. Other natural sounds, such as water, weather and
> wind-generated sounds are valid topics.
>
> Issues related to computerized editing of sounds, copyrights, Internet
> applications and commercial uses of files are encouraged."
>
> In promoting that purpose it is sometimes necessary to limit
> discussions
> that, although they may be pertinent or desirable to some, have become
> contentious. In the interest of the list's survival as a forum for
> discussion of recording natural sound, I recognized that the
> "playback"
> thread has the potential for creating an atmosphere on the list that
> is not
> conducive to civil discussion. As the list owner, I have decided
> that this
> discussion needs to reach an end that all can live with and move on,
> thus
> my suggestion of the code of ethics.
>
> I still feel that further discussion about playback may be valuable
> and
> interesting, but not on this list.
Martyn
*************************************
Martyn Stewart
http://www.naturesound.org
Redmond WA
425-898-0462
Make every garden a wildlife habitat
**************************************
Listen to the Birds and the Bees at
http://naturesound.libsyn.org/
------------------------------------------------
View a Nature Recordists Blog!
http://naturesound.blogspot.com/
http://naturesound.org/Copyright.html
On Oct 15, 2008, at 6:38 AM, Rob Danielson wrote:
> Hi Michael--
>
> Searching the list archive it seems there have been quite a few folks
> who were surprised by the unannounced "field playback" policy. Maybe
> there is a statement somewhere that I'm missing?
>
> I find your wording to be a good start towards text that could be
> added either to the list description or another page of list related
> FAQ's. Other list participants will have to chime in for us to
> address a possible change this in a semi-democratic way. Rob D.
>
> =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D
>
> At 12:53 PM +1100 10/15/08, Michael Gallagher wrote:
> >Dear Naturerecordists,
> >
> >I agree with the moderator's determination to steer discussion away
> from
> >field playback, for I believe it has the potential to seriously
> >disrupt bird
> >lives when used carelessly. When I read accounts involving use of the
> >technique
> >by researchers or bird observers, I often feel that the benefits
> >gained do not
> >outweigh the potential for seriously disrupting bird lives.
> >
> >We are still largely ignorant about animal communication and the
> >functions of
> >calls. Much research has yet to be done, and many methods will need
> >to be
> >employed, including use of playback, But, I believe that should be
> >restricted
> >to tightly controlled research enclosures and laboratories, and be
> >monitored
> >by responsible ethical standards committees.
> >
> >For the most part, Naturecordists discusses techniques for recording
> >in natural
> >environments. I believe, along with most other group members, I
> >assume, that
> >field playback to call birds in, should generally not be used in
> natural
> >environments.
> >
> >In responding to requests for information about field playback, I
> >believe we
> >should inform requesters of our concerns regarding its use.
> >
> >Perhaps a member could prepare a statement that specifies why this
> >topic is not
> >generally discussed in this forum that could be sent in response to
> such
> >queries.
> >
> >Perhaps we should add a statement regarding our position on field
> >playback to
> >the introductory statement on the home page.
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Michael Gallagher
> >Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
> >
> >
>
>
>
|