[Tweeters] Inappropriate posts - from the thread Amerigo Vespucci

[Beverly Choltco-Devlin via Tweeters]

I rarely post here, but would like to register my concern about the about
overgeneralizations about different generations that seem to be occurring.
Regardless of age or generation, we all share a common love of birds and
the environment. It would be better if using that as a starting point.

Beverly CD

On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 2:21 PM Jr Mikulec via Tweeters <
tweeters at u.washington.edu> wrote:


> I love taking conservation advice from the generation who oversaw this

> decline:

>

> From stateofthebirds.org

>

> “Three Billion Birds Lost

>

> 1 in 4 breeding birds have been lost from the United States and Canada in

> the past 50 years.

> 70 Tipping Point Species in the United States

>

> These 70 species have collectively lost 2/3 of their populations in the

> past 50 years, and are on track to lose another 50% in the next 50 years.

> Downward Trends Across the Board

>

> Birds across the U.S. show downward trends in every habitat except in

> wetlands, where comebacks of waterfowl show the power of funding and policy

> investments.”

>

>

> Thanks guys, keep it up!

>

>

> Sincerely,

>

> A young Birdwatcher

>

> On Jun 25, 2024, at 9:57 AM, Dennis Paulson via Tweeters <

> tweeters at u.washington.edu> wrote:

>

> I’m sorry, but I have to respond to these extreme statements.

>

>

> No one who I know is “okay with keeping others out in order to maintain

> the status quo.” That inflammatory statement just doesn’t hack it in

> reality. Just about all of us old white males (and there are plenty of

> females) derided by Steve and Carmelo are in complete agreement with you in

> wanting birding and birds to be open to anyone who shows interest. But I

> guess you are just writing about bird names.

>

> My argument is entirely that changing bird names is the lowest-hanging

> fruit that entails making no effort at all in encouraging others into our

> world, while in fact causing chaos and confusion out of proportion for the

> good it will do.

>

> For over 60 years, I have never done anything but encourage others to be

> interested in birds and the environment, and I have never had any

> indication that it was the names of the birds that kept anyone from that

> interest. I still don’t think so, and I doubt very much that it was an

> issue until you have raised and promoted it. You surely have a better idea

> of the real reasons.

>

> As has been repeatedly said, why don’t you put your energies into making

> the world a better place for everyone? I and so many others fail to see how

> changing bird names offers any solution to that. Your arguments are

> generic, very persuasive, but they don’t really present any evidence

> relating bird names to sociological realities.

>

> Even worse, how dare you use the term “racist” on any of us who believe

> that bird names shouldn’t be changed? With your virtue signaling and

> castigating of older birders and ornithologists, you are the ones causing

> this rift in our community that may never be healed.

>

> Dennis Paulson

> Seattle

>

> On Jun 25, 2024, at 9:00 AM, Carmelo Quetell via Tweeters <

> tweeters at u.washington.edu> wrote:

>

> Steve, thank you for taking the time and energy to highlight some of the

> nuances and impacts of the continued opposition to the AOS name change via

> Tweeters. To your points:

>

> In the op-ed

> <https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/bird-names-should-be-about-birds-not-people/> I

> authored, many people were upset when I wrote:

>

> "As of now, the majority of birders are white and have fewer years ahead

> of them than they do behind them. In a world of technology addiction and

> rampant nature deficit disorder, can the birding community tolerate the

> cost of remaining a Good Ol’ Boys Club? Most importantly, can our feathered

> siblings continue to bear the burden of human chauvinism?"

>

> I was called an ageist and a racist in the comment section for making

> these observations but look at what demographic (at least on the Tweeters

> listserv) has been most vocal in their opposition and resistance to change

> (even though this isn't the first time there has been naming changes).

> Also, look at how many announcements there have been on Tweeters in the

> last 6 months alone regarding the passing of people in the birding

> community. Who is going to stand in their place in defense of the birds and

> the land if the community is pushing younger and non-white people away with

> their own personal biases, resistance, and vitriol?

>

> Sadly, some people in the birding community are okay with keeping others

> out in order to maintain the status quo. While there are a variety of

> reasons why this is so, we must remember that while it is not always about

> race, it is never not about race. Colorism and White Supremacy live in

> every single person, regardless of that person's skin color or ethnicity.

> We are all imperfect, with our own wounds, traumas, biases, and life

> stories.

>

> We are only being asked to take a small step in a new direction. When you

> had to start calling an Old Squaw a Long-tailed Duck, did you die? When you

> had to call a Canada Jay a Gray Jay, only to later call it a Canada Jay

> again, was your life ruined? Also, Audubon was the kindest person to birds,

> even though he painted them beautifully. It will be okay.

>

> And if you are genuinely concerned with making changes that are going to

> actually lead to morescholarship

> <https://www.audubon.org/news/systemic-barriers-hinder-bird-research-say-124-latin-american-ornithologists>,

> funding, conservation, and inclusivity...will all of you who oppose the AOS

> name changes instead support an effort to include Puerto Rico and Mexico in

> the ABA Area? Would you use your contacts and membership in the ABA to put

> this up for a vote and support it?

>

> Puerto Rico has been a U.S. colony since 1898. Puerto Ricans have been

> U.S. citizens by birth since 1917. Puerto Ricans have fought and died in

> every major U.S. military engagement since WW1, and they even fought in

> naval battles on the side of the American colonists in the Revolutionary

> War. The sole tropical rainforest in the U.S. National Forest System (El

> Yunque) is in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is home to over 300 bird species (18

> endemic), many of which we regularly celebrate witnessing in the

> continental U.S.

>

> Mexico is part of North America, same as Canada. Portions of the historic

> northern border of Mexico were as far north as some towns in Oregon. Why

> does the Chihuahuan Raven count towards your Big Year total as long as it's

> spotted on the northern side of the Rio Grande?

>

> Again, how many of you are genuinely willing to stand for a change that

> would be more beneficial to birds and future generations of birders than a

> name change?

>

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------

> *From:* Tweeters <tweeters-bounces at mailman11.u.washington.edu> on behalf

> of Steve Hampton via Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 25, 2024 9:35 AM

> *To:* TWEETERS tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>

> *Subject:* [Tweeters] Inappropriate posts - from the thread Amerigo

> Vespucci

>

> In the absence of any intervention by a Tweeters administrator, I will

> reply.

>

> These posts against proposed bird name changes - usually with incorrect

> information and speculation regarding scope, costs and benefits, and other

> aspects - are inappropriate here and do harm to the birding community and

> the use of Tweeters as representative of the birding community.

>

> Without trying to convince anyone why bird names (and organization names)

> matter, I'll point out that they seem to matter to a lot of people.

> Regardless of the rationale, there are three basic facts about this issue:

>

> 1) The demographic breakdown on this issue is stark. Most younger people

> and people of color support the changes. Nearly all of the opposition comes

> from white people over 65. This tells me, from a diversity, equity, and

> inclusion perspective, there is a "there" there. We should pay attention to

> why this is.

>

> 2) Due to historical biases and discrimination in opportunities and

> privileges, the former group are the exact same demographics that are

> under-represented in birding; and the latter are far more likely to be

> today's field trip leaders, esteemed ornithologists, and conservation

> organization leaders. This is evident and much has been written about it.

>

> 3) Having the latter group publicly dismiss the former group (on any

> issue) is both insensitive and reckless when it comes to the future of

> birding. Using Tweeters as a safe space for the latter group to openly

> gripe and plan opposition is "gatekeeping" - public actions that preserve

> the status quo and drive certain newcomers away. Intentions don't matter

> here; impacts do. This is why so many younger people and people of color do

> not participate in Tweeters, certain other social media groups, many

> birding organizations, and their field trips.

>

> I'm dubious anyone will learn from this post, or be inspired to learn

> more. And I'm dubious about my continued participation in Tweeters.

>

> I do wish everyone good birding,

>

>

> --

> Steve Hampton

> Port Townsend, WA  (qatáy)

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>

> _______________________________________________

> Tweeters mailing list

> Tweeters at u.washington.edu

> http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20240625/e9d4ee6e/attachment.html>