[Guy L. Monty]

Thank you for your anonymous input.

I think I remember the incident you are accusing me of, and if it is what I am thinking of, this is more of an incidence of an evolving situation, rather than pure hypocrisy.

You see, I want to share information as much as anyone, and it really pains me to suggest that this is no longer a good idea in certain instances. If you know of my activities in the BC birding scene over the past 20+ years, I think its pretty clear that I have always promoted the free sharing of information, except where the welfare of a particular bird is in question. As times change, our community has to adapt to changing situations. This is all I am suggesting. You are certainly entitled to your own opinion on the subject.

I do think though, that if you are going to make accusations about people, you should sign your name to them.

Anyway, thanks for the input.

Guy L. Monty
Nanoose Bay, Vancouver Island, BC

[Terrance316]

As I was trying to make clear and some will take it personally snd get butt hurt over it but that's not the point. When we share the hoddy grows. When we ban or limit than that hurts and dose not help. I always share what I find with other photographers and always will. Through knowledge we grow this hobby. Again banning on this site will make no difference this site has become irrelevant. Most people post on Facebook groups and share that way. If you don't like what I said than you did not get the point and not really worth Continuing this conversation.

[birdergirl]

Hi Terrence,

I actually wrote on here and said that I think photographers are getting painted all with the same brush and that it's unfair to photographers that follow ethics I also said I understand why some would be upset with the not posting to Flickr option.

So I actually defended them and I don't share any owls online that I hear about.
I see your side of the argument and it's upsetting you feel so marginalized this seems to happen every time this issue comes up in Vancouver.

All the best,
Mel

[revs]

I know the 2 people running this site will pprobably ban me for what I said but again this is supposed to be an open forum.

They don't run the site by the way, there is only one Admin and his name is Craig.

[birdergirl]

Yes the admin is Kevin Slagboom

Cheers,
Mel

[Terrance316]

Again I try to make it clear. In stating a ban on information is the wrong approach. Just my opinion. Birder girl I appreciate what you wrote. I think for me I have not met you yet so trying not to be judgemental not always easy. I do my best not to judge but again were human prone to mistakes. This topic comes up almost once a year. For me it dose more damage than good no matter what the original intention was. When I first got into the hoddy I meet good friendly people and some used to post on the site until they had a bad experience. I also met not so friendly people and at the time did not understand why they so rude and took it personally. I try not to be like them and love to share what I find.

[birdergirl]

Terrence if you read what I wrote I never said anything should be banned at all I just posted the rules from another site when Sue asked what this was in regards to and also said I believe sensitive owl locations should not be posted on Ebird until the bird left that's all.
I also said "The sad fact is that when things like this happen it blankets all photographers as bad eggs when that is not the case."

So before you accuse me of telling others what to do please read the whole thread.


Melissa

[merlinator]

There is no room for personal attacks on this forum or any other forum. If it is not a rule on this list, it should be. It's easy to throw around unsubstantiated rumours if you are not held accountable. People who know Mel will undoubtedly ignore your posts but what about those who do not know her? She has given greatly to this list and to birding in BC. Like most other ethical birders she shares information on sensitive birds with those she respects and trusts.

[revs]

I meant Kevin when i said Craig earlier by the way, what do they say about "out of sight, out of mind"?

[BirdingBC]

Yes the admin is Kevin Slagboom

Correct and I have been following this thread.

Forum conduct rules apply here as with every other posting on this site.

I am aware of the issues with owl and species at risk sighting reports. In my experience there are no black and white answers to ethical viewing problems however within this Birding BC community, members are expected to learn and apply ethical viewing practices when out in the field and to birdwatch responsibly.

If there are new guideline proposals to address rising or recurrent issues with public behavior and viewing pressure, then I think these should be considered.

[birdergirl]

There is no room for personal attacks on this forum or any other forum. If it is not a rule on this list, it should be. It's easy to throw around unsubstantiated rumours if you are not held accountable. People who know Mel will undoubtedly ignore your posts but what about those who do not know her? She has given greatly to this list and to birding in BC. Like most other ethical birders she shares information on sensitive birds with those she respects and trusts.

Thank you Roy, that means a lot.

Mel

[Terrance316]

Trust me no personal attack was ment. If I had somthing to say about someone i do it to there face not a forum. Like I said in the other post I am not judging any one by what other say. What I am against is the arrogance of some that think they know what is good for the whole hobby. Also what was stated is that only owls are bothered by crowds of people and I asked for the person to back up there statement. . Again what is being lost is what I said from the beginning. Is that banning any information dose not help but limit the hoddy. The best way to improve the hoddy is to share. Now if your going to get so butt hurt over what other people think than there is nothing anyone can say to help. Even if you help one Birder who is doing the wring thing to become better and be more respectful to wards the animals they are photographing. Than I consider that a victory. But that can never happen if we start to limit what people can post and not post.

[merlinator]

It takes more than a spurious rant to get my knickers in a twist. Throwing unsubstantiated rumours and innuendo says more about your character than hers. I don't want to get into a pissing contest so this is my last post on this matter. Troll away.

[markj]

Hey Mr. Anonymous why don't you take a hike!

You know nothing about Birdergirl and also very little about spelling.

Birdergirl is the one person who tirelessly keeps us all informed with sightings and is the most sharing person who is kind to everyone.

You are barking up the WRONG tree here!

Mark

[Jeremy Gatten]

I think the confusion here is about whether we're helping the hobby or the birds. The thread is about the welfare of birds, so the continual mention of this causing degradation to the hobby of birding is irrelevant. It might cause sighting information not to trickle down to the photography community (and to a lesser extent the birding community), but most of the time this will not impact birders. Birders can find owls... maybe the odd sighting of something unusual like Flammulated, Boreal, Great Grey, or Northern Hawk-Owl won't make it to birders that are less plugged in and that is unfortunate. Most birders I know enjoy seeing owls, but it doesn't reach the same level of fanaticism that it does with photographers. What we're seeing is an attempt at a solution to a burgeoning problem. It is far from perfect and of course sightings will be spread by word of mouth and through various social media channels, but some of us are content to attempt to minimize this.

Overly defensive responses that have a bit more acid in them are from those who have the most to lose.

Jeremy Gatten
Saanichton, BC