[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: NANFA vs. NFC?

> >Why do we need two very similar organizations?
To me they're not similar.  NFC may focus on conservational issues beyond
the scope of NANFA.  NANFA may focus on continuing to educate people at a
hobbyist level, and acting as a hobbyist level group, which it already
NFC, meanwhile, can serve as a group more deicated to education en masse,
as well as conservational issues.  I'm sure Robert Rice will expand on
these ideas in the future, probably one of the other 8 mails I've gotten
in the past hour or so. :)

> This is my personal opinion: Because two groups of intense,
> passionate and highly motivated people let their differences get
> between them, and not their commonality: which is the love of
> America's native fishes.
I think this is a valid point, but theres a lot more to it than that....

> Personally, I beleive one organization is stronger than two. And I
> hope to talk to Robert Rice about this when I see him at the NANFA
> convention in Chattanooga in June.
I disagreee.  Two organizations may have different focuses, different
goals.  NANFA is more of an aquarium club, with hobbyistl level
publications, information, activies, and so forth.  NFC, again, is a
conservation group.  Two groups working together are stronger, and with
different scopes.  Too much conservation stuff in NANFA may scare off
someone just wanting to know how to keep "Those neat shiners" alive for
their kids science project.  Too much aquarium stuff makes the group look
too aquaria oriientated,, thus scaring off the more conservation
orientated people, who may  not even care if a given fish may survive in
an aquarium.  
As I said, the two groups appear, to me, who unfortunately am not
currently affiliated with either (My wallets full of moths, and nothing
else. :)) in a membership or higher level fashion, to be very differently
orientated, with differnt scopes, views, and goals.
J. L. Weigert

Follow-Ups: References: