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

Re: Opinions, Comments, etc.

Actually, our BP is quite different from most club's, as their protocol 
basically limits donations to two bags of 3+ fish, leading to things 
like a breeding pair of cichlids making the rounds so people can get 
breeder points, where most of the fry are used for feeder fish due to 
the limitation. Personally, I would like to see our BP protocol have 
options where a breeder can choose from.  For instance, we have 
discussed the requirement for a breeder to donate at least 50% of the 
offspring to the program.  We should offer options, such as allowing 
donations up to 100% of offspring, incentives for providing breeding 
stock, etc. We should also offer a range of options concerning each 
fish, such as a per fish tax donation receipt OR a 1/2 of sale price per 
fish cash remittance OR double program points for each fish donated 
outright to the NFC Fish Sales Program.  For those that don't itemize, a 
tax deduction is meaningless.  However, cash would help to offset 
production costs for breeders with limited funds or fish which are more 
expensive to raise due to special needs.  Doubling program points would 
make outright donations more inviting, especially if the double points 
applies to donations of breeding stock.

As a member of the North American Fish Breeder's Guild, I can tell you 
that they seem to have shipping protocols down pat.  They also sell fish 
bags and elastics in small lots (100) rather than the 250 - 1000 
quantities that Mail Order Pet Shop sells.  However, keep in mind that 
their protocols apply to tropical fish more than natives, although there 
is some applicability. I will try to provide a text copy of an article 
on shipping that appeared in a recent NAFBG newsletter for everyone's 
review.

Also, see my recent posting on the silversides issue for recent 
developments on shipping issues and a possible donation of shipping 
supplies by Mail Order Pet Shop

>From top_side at geocities_com Wed Jun 24 02:43:59 1998
>Received: (qmail 446 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1998 05:57:30 -0000
>Received: from mx03.netaddress.usa.net (HELO operations.dev.usa.net) 
(204.68.24.140)
>  by 204.68.24.180 with SMTP; 24 Jun 1998 05:57:30 -0000
>Received: (qmail 24844 invoked by uid 0); 24 Jun 1998 05:56:58 -0000
>Received: from mail.anc.net [208.133.27.6] by mx03 via mtad (2.6)
>	with ESMTP id mx03-cFXF510086; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 05:56:52 GMT
>Received: from geocities.com (max01-cr-25.cr.anc.net [205.198.195.218]) 
by mail.anc.net (8.8.8/SunOS5.5.1) with ESMTP id AAA10843 for 
<nfc_bp_exec at usa_net>; Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:54:14 -0500 (CDT)
>Message-ID: <3590950F.3BF5B72F at geocities_com>
>Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 00:56:31 -0500
>From: Herb Harris <top_side at geocities_com>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; U)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: nfc_bp_exec at usa_net
>Subject: Re: Opinions, Comments, etc.
>References: <199806240410.VAA20487 at lsbsdi1_lightspeed.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Team,
>
>	Dave's idea of contacting other organizations sounds good, at least at
>first blush. :)
>	Got any contacts? Anyone?
>	Not so much for needing to pattern our program on theirs, but if we 
can
>get a look at the by-laws, shipping procedures, and other policy
>decisions, we can get an idea of what works where and perhaps why. 
Maybe
>avoid some of the mistakes they have made, or know that we need to be 
at
>least more creative in our approach.
>
>	BTW: any experience with awards programs Dave? I know you have good
>ideas to share about breeding various species, so assume there is good
>background with this. Where are you with this? I ask cause we also need
>more input from those members that know what other organizations do
>along these lines, again not to pattern after them so much as to get
>ideas about what works for them.
>
>	Since these ideas have a general common point of the need for 
research,
>what do you have on this, Dwight?
>
>Herb
>
>
>The Halls wrote:
>> 
>> Herb, et. al
>> 
>> I think you are headed in a good direction... I'm not a details type 
person
>> and so this stuff is a little beyond my thought capacity without 
sitting
>> down and mapping it out carefully, I am liable to comment on 
something,
>> completely missing the fact that it is already covered....suffice to 
say
>> the Breeders Program is taking on a lot of responsibility for the 
NFC....No
>> problem.  You need rules and regulations to implement a program ... 
has
>> anyone thought that contacting other fish organizations like the AKA 
or ACA
>> to see what they have in place?  Let's not reinvent the wheel unless
>> completely necessary ( I know we are working in a collect our own 
area that
>> they are not ).
>> I will help in areas that I can, but this is not an area of 
expertise.
>> 
>> Dave Hall
>

***********************************************
Dwight D. Moody
P.O. Box 214
East Montpelier VT  05651-0214
802-476-0685 (home), 802-241-3482 (work)
***********************************************
One of the earliest Christian symbols was the fish
(Greek: icthys, which was an abbreviation for the Greek
words in the phrase: Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior).
Thus, disciples could identify each other by their use
of the fish symbol, which continues to be used today.
************************************************
Jonah was swallowed by a huge fish and remained
within it for three days and three nights. Afterwards,
he was "vomited" (literal translation) onto the beach
to go and minister to the people of Ninevah (Jonah 2:1-11).
While we often find references in aquarium books
concerning the first instances of fishkeeping
by humans, this appears to be the first instance
of humankeeping by a fish!
**********************************************




______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com