Tweet
I will hence-forth try to not post replies to threads in the wee hours of the morning after a hard weeks’ work! Having re-read my last para it is not worded as well as it would hopefully had been if my brain was in gear…
You’ve misunderstood the point I was trying to make but in doing so have actually illustrated what I was getting at better than I could have done!
I wasn’t saying that the BTS had no interest in conservation or hadn’t done anything. I am aware that it has/does do, as I’m sure most of the membership are too. I knew a lot of what you had written but not all. What I was saying was that to an outsider it is very easy to get the impression that the BTS has little interest in conservation. You have to delve quite deeply into the website to find this out. The lack of a ‘Conservation Officer’ or some other clearly identified contact does so too – this is important b’cos you could hand someone a sample Journal that could contain no articles on conservation or any other mention. A quick scan though the list of Officials and there is nothing to indicate any interest in conservation whatsoever – there is no ‘Conservation Officer’. The ‘presumptive’ impression of the society is therefore of one that is only really interested in the husbandry and care of captive Ts.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way the BTS has been going about its’ interest in conservation and it has done much laudable and commendable work. However, this is only really known about and appreciated within the rather small “T-world” – an ‘outsider’ spending 5 minutes on the website or looking at an ‘average’ Journal (i.e. predominantly containing husbandry/care articles [again not a criticism as this is the predominant reason for the BTS having been formed]) would not form any other impression.
The point that I was trying to make is that if the BTS wants to have wider recognition for its’ support and involvement in conservation (other than within the “T-world”) it has to publicise the work that it has/is doing more and state an active interest in it. As someone relatively new to this hobby/society, to me, the BTS seems to be in a bit of an ‘indecisive phase’ in relation to conservation – as seen in this thread lots of members and officials have expressed views that a wider voice and involvement is wanted. If this is a stance that the BTS wants to take then it has to publicly blow its own trumpet much more than it has been doing so.
The IUCN publishes annually a directory of worldwide clubs, societies and organisations that have an active interest or involvement in conservation. This directory is also produced in slimmed-down versions on taxonomic and country levels too and is the pre-eminent source of contact/advice for conservation worldwide. The BTS is not listed – “Why?” Not because of some ‘us and them’ antagonism but because they don’t know the BTS is interested! I bet that the BTS hasn’t contacted them to say “hey, we exist, we are interested/active and this is what we can do” and as I said the website and journal doesn’t make it clear that there is any interest either so, anonymous web/library searches wouldn’t indicate differently either. To give an example consider two websites that you are familiar with – the BTS and the BAS (=British Arachnological Society). Grab a friend who has no interest in spiders and give them 5 mins on the BTS and then the BAS website with the objective of ascertaining their interest/involvement in conservation – you know, or can guess, what the answer would be… The BAS is listed by the IUCN and is/will be consulted on matters relating to its ‘conservation remit’, the BTS wont be b’cos they don’t think it is interested or can help.
On the contrary I don’t have strong views! In fact you will rarely meet a more impassive, pessimistic or cynical conservationist than me. My ‘passion’ for conservation has been gradually eroded but the ‘candle of desire’ is still, just about, alight. I have however, worked in the field of conservation in years gone by (in the right light, the faint impression of bricks on my furrowed brow are still evident) and I have many friends and colleagues who still insist on slogging away at it. I therefore have some experience and knowledge of how to ‘play the game’ which is a prerequisite to get anywhere these-days. I would be happy to advise and help in drafting proposals, etc. but as for direct/actual involvement I just don’t know enough about Ts to be of any practical help (and have quite frankly been burnt-out by trying to do so too in the past!).
I would sum-up by saying that to me the BTS is a great society! From a personal point of view it doesn’t matter to me if the BTSs’ aim is solely that of being promoting good husbandry and care of captive Ts or, having a wider remit and encompassing conservation. However, if it is the later then to have a wider voice and acknowledgement then it DOES need to make some changes. Sing your own praises beat your own drum, etc. Become more pro-active.
I am not usually one to support or sing the praises of large/global conservation organisations (= don’t mention the WWF to me!!!) but the IUCN is an exception and despite the constraints of such a large organisation (=endless bureaucracy, etc.) it does do a good job and is well worth the BTS becoming involved with – both will benefit from it.
Originally posted by Mark Pennell
View Post
You’ve misunderstood the point I was trying to make but in doing so have actually illustrated what I was getting at better than I could have done!
I wasn’t saying that the BTS had no interest in conservation or hadn’t done anything. I am aware that it has/does do, as I’m sure most of the membership are too. I knew a lot of what you had written but not all. What I was saying was that to an outsider it is very easy to get the impression that the BTS has little interest in conservation. You have to delve quite deeply into the website to find this out. The lack of a ‘Conservation Officer’ or some other clearly identified contact does so too – this is important b’cos you could hand someone a sample Journal that could contain no articles on conservation or any other mention. A quick scan though the list of Officials and there is nothing to indicate any interest in conservation whatsoever – there is no ‘Conservation Officer’. The ‘presumptive’ impression of the society is therefore of one that is only really interested in the husbandry and care of captive Ts.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way the BTS has been going about its’ interest in conservation and it has done much laudable and commendable work. However, this is only really known about and appreciated within the rather small “T-world” – an ‘outsider’ spending 5 minutes on the website or looking at an ‘average’ Journal (i.e. predominantly containing husbandry/care articles [again not a criticism as this is the predominant reason for the BTS having been formed]) would not form any other impression.
The point that I was trying to make is that if the BTS wants to have wider recognition for its’ support and involvement in conservation (other than within the “T-world”) it has to publicise the work that it has/is doing more and state an active interest in it. As someone relatively new to this hobby/society, to me, the BTS seems to be in a bit of an ‘indecisive phase’ in relation to conservation – as seen in this thread lots of members and officials have expressed views that a wider voice and involvement is wanted. If this is a stance that the BTS wants to take then it has to publicly blow its own trumpet much more than it has been doing so.
The IUCN publishes annually a directory of worldwide clubs, societies and organisations that have an active interest or involvement in conservation. This directory is also produced in slimmed-down versions on taxonomic and country levels too and is the pre-eminent source of contact/advice for conservation worldwide. The BTS is not listed – “Why?” Not because of some ‘us and them’ antagonism but because they don’t know the BTS is interested! I bet that the BTS hasn’t contacted them to say “hey, we exist, we are interested/active and this is what we can do” and as I said the website and journal doesn’t make it clear that there is any interest either so, anonymous web/library searches wouldn’t indicate differently either. To give an example consider two websites that you are familiar with – the BTS and the BAS (=British Arachnological Society). Grab a friend who has no interest in spiders and give them 5 mins on the BTS and then the BAS website with the objective of ascertaining their interest/involvement in conservation – you know, or can guess, what the answer would be… The BAS is listed by the IUCN and is/will be consulted on matters relating to its ‘conservation remit’, the BTS wont be b’cos they don’t think it is interested or can help.
Originally posted by Mark Pennell
View Post
On the contrary I don’t have strong views! In fact you will rarely meet a more impassive, pessimistic or cynical conservationist than me. My ‘passion’ for conservation has been gradually eroded but the ‘candle of desire’ is still, just about, alight. I have however, worked in the field of conservation in years gone by (in the right light, the faint impression of bricks on my furrowed brow are still evident) and I have many friends and colleagues who still insist on slogging away at it. I therefore have some experience and knowledge of how to ‘play the game’ which is a prerequisite to get anywhere these-days. I would be happy to advise and help in drafting proposals, etc. but as for direct/actual involvement I just don’t know enough about Ts to be of any practical help (and have quite frankly been burnt-out by trying to do so too in the past!).
I would sum-up by saying that to me the BTS is a great society! From a personal point of view it doesn’t matter to me if the BTSs’ aim is solely that of being promoting good husbandry and care of captive Ts or, having a wider remit and encompassing conservation. However, if it is the later then to have a wider voice and acknowledgement then it DOES need to make some changes. Sing your own praises beat your own drum, etc. Become more pro-active.
I am not usually one to support or sing the praises of large/global conservation organisations (= don’t mention the WWF to me!!!) but the IUCN is an exception and despite the constraints of such a large organisation (=endless bureaucracy, etc.) it does do a good job and is well worth the BTS becoming involved with – both will benefit from it.
[THIS IS A SPLIT POST DUE TO CHARACTER LIMITS,
PLEASE READ AS CONTINUOUS WITH THE NEXT POST...]
PLEASE READ AS CONTINUOUS WITH THE NEXT POST...]
Comment