Fw: Field data (Sightings)

[Ron Gatrelle]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Gatrelle" <gatrelle at tils-ttr.org>
To: <mbpi at juno.com>; "Leps-l" <Leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: Field data (Sightings)


 My comments follows this post

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <mbpi at juno.com>
> To: <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Field data (Sightings)
>
>
>  You know, Chris, when you make such blanket statements as
"anti-collector
>  types" being "rude, arrogant, and silly," the same could just as easily
>  be said about you!  There are just as many "obnoxious types" on BOTH
>  sides of the fence, and just as many who aren't.  Everyone is entitled
to
>  their opinion, but considering the hostility that is often exhibited on
>  this listserv, it's hardly a mystery why more people don't offer their
>  input on any discussions that predominate these airwaves.  Obviously,
>  they're afraid of being black-balled for some innocent remark!  It took
>  me a YEAR just to open my mouth here, and I've yet to report anything
>  specific about butterflies simply because I'm neither "arrogant" nor
>  "silly," and would hate to be mistaken as such.  And even though I'm not
>  a "collector," I don't think I'm "rude" about it, either.  My interest
in
>  butterflies (and Bill's in Tucson)  may be very different from yours,
but
>  I hardly think it is any less qualifying.  I guess I'm speaking for the
>  "silent majority" out there...
>
>  God, I HATE winter!  Arizona beckons...
> M.B. Prondzinski
> ___
 From Ron
 I can not speak for Chris or what he had in mind in his comments below. I
 can speak as to my take on what he said. My take, like everyone else's, is
 filtered through the prism of my (our) own experiences. As a guy who has
 spent most of my butterflying life in a world where "watcher" was not only
 not mentioned but was nonexistent - I often use the word "collector" for
 all lepsters.

 Now although I am aware of the one sided feud between "watch only" and
 "collectors," Chris' comment was taken by me to be referring to Redneck
 types we all (birders, lepsters, botanists) encounter occasionally in the
 field. I don't like meeting these people in the field especially during
 Deer season. To them, I am wearing pink tights.

 Another reason for my lack of picking up on just who Chris may have been
 referring to may lay in the fact that I have _never_ encountered a watcher
 or anti-collector in the field. I know a couple and have read the rhetoric
 of several, but have never met, much less been harassed by, one in the
 field.  I see how and why Ms Prondzinski took the remarks as she did - and
 likely perceived properly. I didn't take it that way - at all - never
 crossed my mind. Which is why I am responding.

 I have said this before and repeat it again. This is a terrible format for
 anything other than yes/no conversation. Misunderstanding is much easier
to
 facilitate here than understanding. As a personal defensive posture, my
 post following
 Bill's posted "counts" was not addressed to Bill at all. ( I specifically
 stated that in my post.)  I was addressing my (and others) observation
that
 counts - as on a score card - are more like fish stories than science. In
 Bill's case, he may be a keen experienced observer - but HE was not the
 issue. This is a party line. There are specific and private
communications.
 But for the most part this is a microphone to the masses. That means it is
 more topical than personal. Thus, this very post is not a person to person
 response - I have simply used the original post as a spring board to
launch
 some of my own thoughts. Thoughts which may well provoke/provide a
 venting/editorializing opportunity to someone else.

 Butterflies fly, in season.  Human's talk, all the time. Our minds are our
 wings. Our words are the colors, form and substance of those wings.
Thought
 without speech (spoken or written) is like a butterfly without wings. To
 deprive others of the freedom of speech is to stifle thought. This is why
 tyrants oppose free speech. It is one thing to have someone clip your
 wings. It is another to clip one's own. So speak up. Stretch your wings.

 One last thing. I think it is passion and frustration being expressed and
 not just base hostility - at least that is what it often is with me. The
 bark is not only much worse than the bit - it is most easily quited by a
 pet and not a stick.

>  On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 09:17:05 -0600 "Chris J. Durden"
>  <drdn at mail.utexas.edu> writes:
>  > Mine works well with the volume at half when it is in a belt holster.
>  > I
>  > usually use the pause button to conserve tape. It is great to hear
>  > the
>  > field sounds later while typing data into the computer. Sometimes I
>  > just
>  > play tropical tapes for nostalgia.
>  > Try not to drop your recorder on a rock! It is also useful to have
>  > the
>  > recorder on when encountering those rude anti-collector types. They
>  > are so
>  > arrogant and silly.
> > ..............Chris
>
> snip
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl