Antennae vs. antennas

[Sharyn Fernandez]

Dear Newsgroup, Well, I'm late on this thread, but it's too juicy for me to
pass up!
Being a  Naba &  Lep. Soc. as well as an Audubon member I joined since I
was a Bio Sci. major, and it was a way to "stay in touch"; but finding a
wide assortment of people in Audubon, from the Science/engineering field,
some biologists- lab and field, a lot of "nature lovers" and those with a
love of the beauty of nature (everyone else in the world), I think what
Glassberg is trying to do in part,and that you better understand if you
knew Audubon people, is to get more of them to join NABA. Since it requires
the use of binocs, and an appreciation of nature's beauty. Auduboners are
so used to just using 'COMMON" NAMES, for whatever reasons. They just like
the great outdoors and it's probably easy for them to learn common, common
bird names. I thought it strange they weren't interested in Scientific
names - sort of a heck with science I just want to enjoy the day attitude -
but of course for me, that's part of the enjoyment. I wish I could figure
out how to get them to "take the next step". Perhaps Glassberg should be
cajoling National Audubon to take a more scientific approach; but he does
seem to have another agenda...

Audubon in fact has gone the "opposite" way (environmental/conservation)
than "scientific"; expanding their publication articles to other species,
and consequently lost a lot of die-hard bird fans who thought they were in
a small part helping "science".

I'm just trying to accomodate all views and all popular terminology, that's
another odd way I have fun- ultimately, keeping an open mind for all and
more, I guess - altho' some may argue "too fuzzy, or diluted" perhaps.

part of my email to Audubon's Western REgional office:

PS On the other hand, to gear people for doing butterflies, (which
emphasize the binomial system - scientif. names vs common names) I hope
Audubon, in their literature, will perhaps include a more scientific
reference. A lot of the older people seem reluctant to want to pickup on
this. Perhaps their lives have been other than natural history, but I think
Audubon owes it to the conservation movement and environmentalism, since
they  have their roots in science, and sound conservation should rely on
sound science, I hope. Thanks.

AS for Glassberg making collecting illegal. I can believe this.
I think he did mention it. Maybe he would consider just having reference
collections; then, it would be like F&W's permit process; doubt it tho'.
Maybe he's just tired of doing the Magazine. Rumors have it he may not be
doing the count, anyway... Anyone heard about this?

I really think NABA should be "Butterfly Gardeners Association" (formerly
in Pennsylvania, and now in Berkeley, but not a 'ligit' 501c3!!! and does
too many peace marches and not enough gardening! - anyone out there with
suggestions on this, please contact me ASAP!

well, that said, I'll try to hold off for another couple months, promise -
I really think this newsgroup should be more internationally
directed,anyway, Apologies to the rest of the world!


sff



Sharyn Fernandez
Concord CA