Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:41:09 EDT Reply-To: Maryland Birds & Birding Sender: Maryland Birds & Birding From: Bob Mumford Subject: Re: Inappropriate behavior - a future strategy (long) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have read with interest the many thoughtful responses to the Hoopers Island incident and think it is safe to conclude the following: 1. No one, other than the people directly involved, knows exactly what happened at 1845 Hoopersville Road on the weekend of July 29-30. We on the net know what Les Roslund was told by the property owners and some neighbors. We do not know, for example, whether there was one or more than one photographer with a large lens. We apparently have not identified any of the culprits. 2. Regardless of what actually occurred, it has been interpreted and labeled as aggressive and inappropriate. Some behavior, such as driving over people's lawns, is beyond debate. But other things are much more subjective. To the neighbor, a photographer with a large lens was "intimidating". To most of us a large lens is just a large lens, no more intimidating than a pair of binoculars. It is hard to believe that anyone knowingly "sneaked up" on the poor woman gardening. But she was frightened. 3. In a "community" a large as birding has become, there will be some folks who step over the line to unacceptable behavior. Regardless of our own personal behavior, and that of the vast majority of others, the reputation of birders (and environmentalists in general) can be damaged by the aggressive behavior of a few. 4. Many, if not most, birders are reluctant to speak to the miscreants at the time of an infraction, either because it is not their nature and/or they have had unpleasant experiences with confrontation in the past. 5. Virtually all birders want to preserve access to rare birds on both private and public property. To the above, I add my own assumptions and conclusions: 1. MOS members are uncommonly decent, law-abiding and conservative and responsible in their behavior and unlikely to be the transgressors in "the incident". (I could be wrong, of course). 2. Most people will behave appropriately if they know what is expected of them. 3. There is a world of difference between unknowingly violating ground rules and willful aggressive behavior that violates other's privacy or property rights. 4. If we do not learn from this unfortunate incident and set up a SYSTEM for the future, we are almost guaranteed to have a repeat a year or two down the road. Maybe sooner. Exhortations to the choir are seldom successful in correcting the sins of the parishioner in the back pew. Prevention is the strategy of choice. Ex post facto regrets and recriminations are a poor alternative. MOS would do an enormous favor to the larger birding community by establishing a SYSTEM for managing the response to rare birds. Such a system might work as follows: 1. A person would volunteer (or be assigned from a pool of volunteers) to be the point person for a newly discovered rare bird. He/she would be the sole point of contact and the bridge between home/land owner and the birding groups. 2. The point person would meet with the home/land owner BEFORE an address or directions were posted on the net. During the initial conversation, the point person would brief the home/land owner on the likely response to a posting, suggest some ground rules for managing visitors and ask the home/land owner for his/her own needs/requirements, etc. 3. Only after the home/land owner gave specific permission and identified ground rules would the rare bird be announced with directions on the net. Guidance and ground rules would accompany the post. 4. The point person would be responsible for providing whatever was necessary for the execution of the home/land owner's ground rules: a sign or signs, orange plastic construction type tape to mark off-limits areas, etc. (the cost of these items ought to be borne by the MOS). The whole philosophy should be to make visitors viewing of the bird as close to "hassle free" to the home/land owner as humanly possible. 5. It is not beyond reason to think of a watch system, where an MOS person would be on location, on duty, for perhaps two hours at a time, during weekend hours, to guide visitors, prevent problems and to intercede if untoward behavior was developing. Aren't there enough of us now to staff such a watch? 6. Following departure of the rare bird, the point person would be responsible for preparing a letter signed by, say, the MOS president, thanking the home/land owner for granting access and accommodating the birders. ABA type framed certificates would seem a likely follow-on project. If we are not willing to devote this kind of time and effort, we have no one to blame but ourselves in the future if we are cut off from access because of the unruly behavior of a few. I personally would hate to go back to the old system of only a select few being advised by a telephone tree of the rare birds, or the other suggested alternative of only organized groups being granted access. Bob Mumford Darnestown ========================================================================= To leave the MDOsprey list, send e-mail to listserv@home.ease.lsoft.com with the following message in line 1: signoff mdosprey ========================================================================== ==========================================================================