[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Species maintenance ideas Reward the Affilate clubs and their members.
As a gesture to get some interest in the program and also get the local
level clubs to participate. Each club that supports the program and sends in
monthly reports gets a case of brine shrimp eggs compliments of the AKA.
These eggs are to be dispersed to the club members that support it.
Damn few want to do something for nothing. I feel this is the real reason
that there are no true efforts being made at species Maint. there are no
rewards. I think Wright is on the right track and I like the efforts that
Mr. Grady is making. We need a lot more Toms.
killiman at indy_net
317 253 2170
317 466 1615 FAX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wright Huntley" <huntley1 at home_com>
To: <killietalk at aka_org>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: Species maintenance ideas
> Thanks, Lee, for inviting input.
> Here's some FWIW.
> LeeH920226 at aol_com wrote:
> > In a message dated 6/15/2000 12:41:39 PM, dkarpawi at indiana_edu writes:
> > << SMC/KCC with two primary responsibilities: >>
> > The SMC (Species Maintenance Committee - Tom Grady) keeps a database of
> > fish that are being kept/maintained in the hobby. There is also a
> > tracking aspect of this that helps identify, over time, changes in what
> > are or are not being maintained compared with prior years. There will be
> > updated publication of the status this summer.
> I think this is a fine thing for us to be supporting.
> I suggest that every affiliate club compile a list of fish known to be in
> their area in the last year (not just members, BTW), plus a list of what
> they have auctioned in the last year or two. That compilation can be sent
> Tom annually, and will be a lot easier than trying to get about a thousand
> members to respond. [That's about like getting them to vote! :-)]
> I believe in the case of BAKA, we have done that already, but the
> was kept at the local information-gatherer's site and not forwarded to
> AFAIK. Believe me when I say that it will be many years before most
> experienced folks will trust AKA with private information. A few bad
> are mighty hard to live down. A local individual is bound to be more
> trusted for this function.
> > The KCC (Killifish Conservation Committee- Art Leuterman) is newly
> > (within the last 2 years) and is based on a proposal by a study group
> > by Charles Nunziata. The current strategy is still being formulated.
> > Volunteers and suggestions are needed.
> I like the old process of defining core species of pretty, easy, but
> likely-to-be-lost collections, and getting a few breeders each to promise
> keep them going for a year or two. IMHO, expecting them to do it for much
> longer than that is neither fair nor very good for the fish. Life changes,
> and so do our fishrooms. Recruiting good new ones is the trick.
> As I recall there was a genus or type coordinator who was supposed to take
> the lead in recruiting species coordinators who were expected to find
> own breeder/helpers with the species they chose. This may be where the
> system fell apart. Once going, they were not very active in recruiting
> next bunch of sucke.. oops, volunteers. ;-)
> Rather than have a person be the coordinator for the genus, I would
> we enlist the affiliates in this task. Let each local club take
> responsibility for a major group, at first, and then let them organize the
> genus/species coordination. Maybe the genus coordinators would mostly be
> active local club members, but species coordinators and breeders recruited
> more widely from their friends in AKA and even elsewhere.
> A little competition between clubs could be a fun way to put a bit of
> into the effort, with recognition at the convention and in BNL/JAKA of
> outstanding work by the better ones. Defining the competitive tasks would
> a great way to put a bit more written structure into the program. Reports
> filed, species counts, program improvements, etc. might all be fair game
> Getting written descriptions of the function and operation of KCC has been
> really frustrating phenomenon, for me. I *know* this part can be done
> than it is now. It has severely hampered me in recruiting much-needed
> breeders. No one commits a huge percentage of his fishroom to a nebulous
> group with shifting priorities and poor communication. It ain't rocket
> science, folks.
> We have also been buying "outside genes" out of our own pockets, which
> cheap when we have to import from Europe. The local affiliates could plan
> spend a few bucks in this area to support "their" group. I suggest them
> rather than AKA because they have the information to know where the fish
> will be housed best, etc.
> If you think all this is a subtle suggestion that the organization of AKA
> needs to be modernized, perish the thought. I don't want to introduce any
> such gloomy thoughts into a really fun thread. (^_^; [That's the same as
> the (^_^) smiley, but sweating.]
> Wright Huntley, Fremont CA, USA, 510 494-8679 huntleyone at home dot com
> It was all for naught. Taxation with representation sucks too!
> *** http://www.self-gov.org/index.html ***
> See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe