<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><head><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml><o:OfficeDocumentSettings><o:AllowPNG/><o:PixelsPerInch>96</o:PixelsPerInch></o:OfficeDocumentSettings></xml><![endif]--></head><body>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; overflow-wrap: break-word !important;"><br></div><div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; overflow-wrap: break-word !important;"><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">Hi Tweeters,</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; overflow-wrap: break-word !important;"><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">I get why the powers that be want to change the names, but who does this exercise benefit? </span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">It’s seems unlikely that it will help birds</span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">. </span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">Has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis? </span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">In this era of</span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);"> habitat loss</span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">, climate change, etc., it strikes me that </span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">the birds would be better served by directing</span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);"> that funding toward</span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);"> bird research and </span><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">conservation.</span></div><div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; overflow-wrap: break-word !important;"><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">Paula Crockett </span></div><div dir="ltr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; overflow-wrap: break-word !important;"><span style="color: rgb(29, 34, 40);">Lake Joy, Carnation, WA</span></div>
</body></html>