Forrest's question of why the Malheur situation discussion in permitted by
the Audubon chapters but not by OBOL is a good one. The answer to this
question lies in the distinction between the mission statements of the
organizations. Audubon is an environmental advocacy organization and its
work is inherently political in nature. The Oregon Birding Association (the
owners of OBOL) is *not* an advocacy organization that gets involved in
public policy. Its mission statement is: "The organization’s primary
purpose is to further the knowledge, education, enjoyment and science of
birds and birding in Oregon."
That said, the OBA folks were kind enough to set up a parallel forum for
those who are interested in discussing Audubon-like issues. So please
respect their wishes.
Brandon
Eugene
-----
*Subject: Re: Malheur Posts*
Date: Tue Jan 12 2016 10:39 am
From: forrest.english AT gmail.com
I'm a little baffled how the occupation of the most famous birding
destination in Oregon, the destruction of refuge property, and our
inability to bird there currently is not an allowed topic for discussion.
Every Audubon chapter in the state is talking about it, but we can't on the
statewide bird list?
