|
Partners In Flight--NABCI NGO Subcommittee Meeting, 29 November 1999 | |
NABCI NGO SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
29 November 1999 B Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, DC
Attendees:
AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY
George Fenwick gfenwick@abcbirds.org
David Pashley (US NABCI Coordinator) dpashley@abcbirds.org
AMERICAN BIRDING ASSOCIATION
Paul Baicich baicich@aba.org
CORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGY
Ken Rosenberg kvr2@cornell.edu
DUCKS UNLIMITED
Scott Sutherland ssutherland@ducks.org
Alan Wentz (US NABCI Committee member) awentz@ducks.org
NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION
Megan Hill hill@nfwf.org
Gary Kania kania@nfwf.org
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
Doug Inkley Inkley@nwf.org
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
Dave Mehlman dmehlman@tnc.org
ORNITHOLOGICAL COUNCIL
Ellen Paul epaul@dclink.com
POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY
Don Messersmith dm88@umail.umd.edu
WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY
Tony Melchiors tony.melchiors@weyerhaeuser.com
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
Terry Riley wmitzr@aol.com
Rollie Sparrowe (US NABCI Committee member) wmirs@aol.com
Jim Woehr wmijw@aol.com
Also invited but unable to attend:
COLORADO BIRD OBSERVATORY
CONSERVATION FUND
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
MANOMET CENTER FOR CONSERVATION SCIENCES
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY
THE PEREGRINE FUND
INTRODUCTION - The meeting was co-chaired by Rollie Sparrowe and Alan Wentz , current members of the US NABCI Committee. They and David Pashley summarized the history of NABCI and referred to the vision and opportunity offered by NABCI and its NGO Subcommittee. Thereafter, discussion revolved around the following themes:
VISION - This Subcommittee must be clear as to what it intends to do. It should break down the huge volume of bird conservation issues into a systematic vision, and provide this as a roadmap to all of those individuals and organizations active in the process. The Subcommittee should not try to dictate, but rather to develop this vision and share it with others. Building a coordinated team with a shared vision is a worthy effort, in that many problems are overcome in that manner.
There are funding, policy, and technical issues that this Subcommittee can address. Infrastructure issues are also within its purview, in that the infrastructure necessary to accomplish bird conservation does not currently exist. There is much about the current conservation landscape that is changing rapidly - for example, CARA will be huge, and we cannot predict its impact.
Specifically, in the short run, we must identify the needs of the NGO community that are not incorporated into the current draft of the US NABCI Vision document. Thereafter, we need to develop a policy strategy.
We need to focus on long-term goals. We are just at the beginning of this process, and we have to create our own future.
POLICY AND FUNDRAISING - The US NABCI Committee, due to federal involvement as well as its developing charge, will not develop policy or become involved in raising funds. This can be a major area of focus for the NGO Subcommittee. Discussions regarding the need for and nature of new legislation supporting bird conservation should occur within this Subcommittee. The IAFWA is going to recreate a Bird Conservation Funding Committee, that will initially be separate from the NABCI NGO Subcommittee. However, the responsibilities of those two entities are very similar, their relationship will evolve over time, and cross-involvement is highly desirable and likely. For example, the broad directions that the Funding Committee should take could develop out the NABCI NGO Committee.
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL ISSUES - Many of the NGOs involved in NABCI, including the Ornithological Council and the bird observatories, deal principally with the science, monitoring, and technical components that are also critical for the success of NABCI. In order to maintain their scientific purity, they cannot be involved with policy and fundraising priorities. The NGO Subcommittee must learn how it can best take advantage of these opportunities to increase our scientific credibility.
COMMUNICATIONS - How are we going to communicate the complicated picture of NABCI and bird conservation today to all of our constituents? We have a major challenge in developing a popular understanding of NABCI. There are many things that local groups can do, particularly to the extent that objectives are specified in bird conservation plans, and particularly as their potential roles in bird conservation delivery mechanisms such as Joint Ventures are specified.
Within the NGO and bird conservation community, we need a Adenser network@ of communication to be effective. This Subcommittee can lead in serving this role.
On a specific issue, it is necessary to maintain communication between the NGO & Federal Subcommittees. D. Pashley and Gary Kania of NFWF will participate in both and will serve this role.
COMMITMENT - Questions were raised as to the value of maintaining this Subcommittee. There was agreement that the NGO Subcommittee is essential for policy, fundraising, technical, and communication reasons. However, the Subcommittee will only be useful if it states explicitly what it is attempting to accomplish. There was no question of should we do this, but rather how to move it forward.
MISSION STATEMENT - This Subcommittee needs to develop a Mission Statement of sorts, in order to communicate to others what we intend to do. We need a diagram of the structure of NABCI. D. Pashley will draft this, including statements as to how the Subcommittee relates to PIF, etc., and will circulate the draft to members for editing.
NEW CHAIR - George Fenwick of American Bird Conservancy was chosen to serve in this role. Alan Wentz and Rollie Sparrowe will continue as co-chairs of the NGO Subcommittee along with George. George will become a member of the US NABCI Committee and will also be one of the new Group of 3 representing the US on the Tri-National NABCI Steering Committee.
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PARTNERS IN FLIGHT NGO COMMITTEE - The relationship between the PIF NGO Committee and the NABCI NGO Subcommittee is not clear. The PIF Group could be replaced by the NABCI Committee in that their Visions are so similar. This, however, could reduce the autonomy of PIF. Historically, the role of the PIF NGO Committee has been to communicate a vision of bird conservation in hopes that a greater number of NGOS will contribute to the process. Many of the organizations only peripherally involved in PIF could be drawn in to NABCI, because unlike the technical work of PIF, NABCI is all about implementation. So, the PIF NGO Committee will continue to exist, but its communications hereafter should stress that we are learning how to implement bird conservation, and that is through NABCI.
ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE NABCI NGO SUBCOMMITTEE - It was agreed that participation in the Subcommittee must be broadened.
* The timber industry needs to continue being involved, initially through the NGO Subcommittee. It was suggested that ultimately there may be a seat on the National Committee for private industry. We should reach beyond the timber industry for private corporate involvement.
* The main species-specific game bird groups have been contacted, and will be asked to participate directly in the future.
* Several organizations that are absent and should be involved were mentioned - R. Sparrowe, G. Fenwick and D. Pashley will start a list of these and circulate it to participants for comment.
* Non-traditional participants were suggested - bird seed companies, binocular companies, etc.
* It was cautioned that we might get bogged down if the subcommittee gets too large. It was also noted that breaking into various groups - game and non-game, non-profit and industry - sends the wrong message. We should integrate at the level of the NGO Subcommittee as well as elsewhere.
NEXT MEETING B JANUARY 11 AT THE ABC WWF BUILDING B We will discuss the needs of NGOs relative to the Vision document as well as to longer term issues. How do we get more organizations engaged in NABCI? Can we engage them in local Farm Bill work or other issues that are local in nature?
This will be a specifically focused meeting, and there will not be a concerted effort to greatly broaden participation (a large more general meeting will be held sometime thereafter). There will be background material provided ahead of time, with only a short presentation on background at the meeting. The bulk of the time will be spent working on the Vision document, in order to have a consensus statement by the Jan. 18 due date.
