Corrections and additions to me.

National Audubon Society

Board of Directors Meeting

Red Wing, Minnesota

Friday, 6/6/97.

FINANCE COMMITTEE:

As always, this committee throws out numbers like confetti, far beyond the abilities of your humble reporter to set down. Anyone who wishes to see the budget details can email Jim Cunningham <jcunninghamSPAM@audubon.org>. Major messages: the 96/97 budget will miss the bullseye by a very small amount; the 97/98 budget is over $50 million for the first time; our growth makes it necessary to analyze our risk exposure.

There was a detailed discussion of the risks we face in increasing in the budget: more research has been done on specific sources of contributed income; our time line has increased due partially to the difficulty of finding both state directors and development people for the new state offices; optimism in fundraising at the state level has been overstated. There was a request to have this discussion put into a publication for prospective state offices. State office directors and development people will meet four times a year. We will undertake better monitoring.

Latin America: committee proposes a $100,000 first year budget; an office in Miami which is centrally located for travel in Latin America; office space to be shared with Stuart Strahl in Miami; a search for a board member from Latin America will start immediately.

The Audubon Academy budget will be built into the management budget.

Presentation by State Office Directors:

Over ten state directors, regional directors and development directors each gave a short presentation on their particular offices. These are selected comments after a question on structure and how it affects chapter unity of purpose. Typically (but not always) a state council directs the state office.

New York is run by the state council; on quick-action items such as positions on legislation, the council guarantees a five day turnaround where good science allows an intelligent decision. On a day to day basis only council-approved issues are carried out by the state office.

The Texas council (board) consists of one officer and one member for each of the 19 chapters in Texas.

In New Mexico the level of trust is only problem to solve - the council has no oversight authority. Council relationship is loose. Independence is important.

Alaska is a work in progress. There is a real bias against *national* environmental organizations in the state, but at the same time there is no way to operate without financial help from the other 49 states. Therefore Alaska Audubon is a 501[c]3 with a Board of Directors - 1/3 from members, 1/3 from Alaska at large, 1/3 from rest of USA. They also plan to add a board of scientific advisors.

Nebraska - the council based on population of chapters. The council is the boss. For the future, a stewardship council should also have representation on the board.

Field Trip to see Mississippi bottom-land hardwood forest:

Perfect weather, beautiful forest (although birds stayed high in the canopy). By accident found a Bald Eagle nest with nearly fledged chick.

Saturday, 6/7/97.

BOARD FORUM

BIRD POPULATION DYNAMICS (Frank Gill):

Some common bird species are in decline (hence the WatchList). An overview of our changing landscape shows fragmented and lost habitat. Half of the wetlands are gone. What should we do to protect our birds? There are no simple answers, but one immediate suggestion is that we should articulate birds as flagships of the environment.

Next, how do we do our best to help the birds themselves? It won't be easy, and there are many options. Although we have limited resources, Audubon is in an excellent position to do the job. We have an impressive tool kit to use - education, science, advocacy, and our grassroots chapter structure. We need measurable goals. We need to know how to measure success. Then, once goals are defined, we need to spend the energy. We need to manage bird populations.

Certain Fundamentals of Bird Ecology can help us define our priorities - now comes the controversial stuff. If nobody gets upset, then I haven't done my job.

The first lesson is to learn not to overreact. Don't pick scapegoats.

Separate emotion from fact. Activities such as rehabilitation projects have a purpose beyond saving individual birds; their affect on populations is not significant but their effect on people is.

We'll use four categories in the discussion: threats, overall population numbers, mortality and winter.

THREATS:

Preliminary estimates of the percentage of endangered species affected by each of several threats are: habitat loss 82%, exotic species 18%, toxics 10%, disease 22%, hunting 21%.

The percentage of species on the WatchList affected by similar threats are: habitat loss 75%, exotic species 0% (zero), toxics 24%, disease 15%, hunting 9%, collisions 15%, human disturbance 9%, cowbird predation 16%.

NUMBERS:

ROUGHLY 10 billion birds live in North America.

MORTALITY:

Annual mortality is 7 billion, made up of 90% of fledged young birds and 50% of adults. Birds exhibit both high mortality *and* a high rebound potential.

Mortality breakdown: 98% of causes are "natural", 2% are human-caused.

But, cats are not included in the "human-caused" numbers and could be very high. Probably inaccurate estimates are 4 million birds per day and 1+ billion per year. It is also a question as to which species are affected by cat predation - are they limited to "garden" birds or not?

Pesticide affects are unknown beyond some well-documented examples such as the recent Swainson's Hawk poisoning. There are both immediate mortality and long-term mortality and/or stress effects that need research.

WINTER:

What are the normal limiting factors to bird populations? Primarily two - adult winter survival and migration rest stops. Breeding success, surprisingly, is not usually a major factor, but.... the double whammy of high winter mortality *and* lack of breeding success can be extremely dangerous.

CONCLUSIONS:

Habitat stewardship is the top, and other issues should be addressed surgically. How do we implement Habitat Stewardship? We need to maintain: 500+ acre blocks of breeding habitat; corridors between blocks, long-term mosaics of different aged growth; conservation plans built around keystone species that cover other species as well. Example - the proposed Mississippi flyway project.

Question from Chuck Bragg: how do we go from these generals to the specifics? For example, what about wind towers and endangered species? Frank: the burden of proof is on the conservationist because it is highly likely that populations at large are not affected seriously by wind power mortality. Possible answer would be to make friends with the wind power entity and ask for some habitat mitigation.

========

MISSISSIPPI RIVER CAMPAIGN

Audubon has agreed to join with citizen groups and government agencies to carry out a campaign for the river’s conservation. Here are some highlights of the presentation.

===Rising world grain prices increase risks to the Mississippi:

- Rising affluence in developing world is increasing food demand; global beef, pork, poultry consumption per capita up 11% in decade

- Increasing grain prices ($3 corn is 50% higher than normal)

- Expanding acreage: 10% increase in corn; National Corngrowers seek 50% sales increase in six years

- Increasing fertilizer and pesticide use

- Expansion of navigation system; Army Corps report (1999) and recommendation (2000)

===What threatens the Mississippi?

- Farm runoff that pollutes rivers and aquifers tributary to the Mississippi with pesticides, fertilizer, and sediment: (1) Sedimentation from eroding farmlands filling river pools and backwaters, destroying fish and wildlife habitat; (2) Elevated herbicide levels in 154 drinking water systems in the Midwest and Louisiana; (3) 6000 square mile oxygen-depleted dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico (in comparison, the entire Chesapeake Bay covers 4000 square miles).

- Dams and levees that disrupt the Mississippi's natural processes, preventing the river from renewing itself

- A weak economy that forces a *perceived* tradeoff between environment and jobs

===Who suffers from river degradation?

- Urban and suburban residents, whose water supplies are threatened by pollution and who lose opportunities for recreation

- Children, who are especially vulnerable to pollution in drinking water and whose legacy of a healthy environment is threatened by degradation of the Mississippi ecosystem

- Taxpayers, who must foot the bill for Corps of Engineers projects serving agribusiness

- Louisianans, who are at special risk from polluted drinking water, coastal loss, and pollution of the Gulf of Mexico

===Who is responsible?

- The Corps of Engineers: a bloated and arrogant dinosaur, out of touch with the public and vassal of the special interests

- Agribusiness: grain traders, pesticide and fertilizer companies, and corporate farms

===A conservation strategy to protect the Mississippi:

- Manage Upper Midwest watersheds to reduce farm runoff, restore wetlands, and reduce rural flooding

- Create urban river greenways to buffer water intakes, maintain floodplains, restore habitats, provide recreation, revitalize city centers in the Twin Cities, Quad Cities, and St. Louis, and encourage riverside tourism

- Reform Army Corps of Engineers' operation of the navigation and flood control systems to assure that wildlife, fisheries, and their habitats are protected and that users pay the system’s costs

- Protect unique landscapes in the Blufflands and Delta

- Restore coastal Louisiana to buffer New Orleans from hurricanes, protect fisheries and wildlife, and absorb runoff polluting the Gulf

EDUCATION & COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE

Two State Stories:

Anne Swaim, Education and Communications Director of the NY state council presented an overview of their education programs and structure. The message was, roughly, that education is everywhere - almost everything we do is tied to education in some way. The presentation slides are on the Web at <http://www.audubon.org/chapter/ny/ny/edplan>.

Mike Link, Audubon Center of the North Woods: the center is a *Residential* Environmental Learning Center. It is an independent 501[c]3 *and* is accredited as a school. Mike said that this overcomes some people’s bias against pure "environmental" programs, and it allows them to tap larger funding sources. Some programs: a week-long program for 6/7/8^th grade "home-school" kids; the Raptor Center outreach to schools and other community functions with an optional Bald Eagle; naturalist training courses; the list goes on. For more information email <audubonSPAM@norsol.com>.

Discussion

Lynne Dolnick: how can NAS clone these two people and programs? Mike: we can share experiences, but each center has to be unique. In my experience each one requires a long term commitment, so Audubon has to stick with it. Anne: what gets done should arise from the needs and abilities of the grassroots. Center functions should be integrated into the state and council needs as well - synergy! As always, we can use NAS support for training.

Hardy Eshbaugh: state regulations limit our ability to "duplicate" centers. We can only do what is possible in the education community locally.

Jack Dempsey: how can we follow the fundraising success Mike has had? Mike: it takes time and persistence (9 years so far). Networking and coalitions can cast a wider net than any single center can (i.e. for a national fundraising campaign). We emphasize education and not the environment per se, which comforts many people. We are also certified as a school which opens up a much larger funding pot.

Jack: what's been new and exciting in NY? Anne: (1) Audubon Adventures follow-up with a year-end event involving schools and the community. (2) Long Island resort atmosphere allowed chapters to plan events during a normal downtime (summer). (3) Workshops for chapter leaders and education chairs. (4) The networking of the centers has been very exciting - synergy again.

Three Audubon Center Reports:

Dave Henderson, Randall Davey Audubon Center of New Mexico. We have hope and plans to partner with Bosque del Apache NWR; this will combine education and the Audubon mission very closely, and the opportunity to partner with NWR system is to be desired. We hope they will build an education center that we will operate. Oddly, the SW United States is an urban area (a higher percentage of people live in cities here vs. the countryside than they do in the eastern USA) and we have been lacking in delivering to the rural areas, which is where the issues are. This is one way to make Audubon as effective in small states as in large ones.

Jeff Parsons: We have been invited to participate in Dungeness River Natural History Center, a.k.a. the River Center. <http://www.dungenessrivercenter.org/>

Catriana Glazebrook, Texas Audubon Director, announced plans for "The World Birding Center" in the Lower Rio Grande valley.

Audubon Centers are, like state offices, a very fast-growing part of Audubon. David Heil, Executive Director, Audubon Centers, filled us in on the concepts , criteria and goals for Audubon Centers. He is developing a Tool Kit for chapters interested in starting a center <dheilSPAM@audubon.org>. Here is the draft front page of the Tool Kit to whet your interest:

========

What Is An Audubon Center?

(1) A Recognizable "Place on the Landscape". Audubon Centers establish themselves as an active, recognizable resource in their community. Each Audubon Center upholds the reputation of the Audubon Centers Network by adhering to high standards for quality and service.

(2) Maintain Strong Relationships Within the Community. Forming partnerships with other organizations helps Audubon Centers expand their pool of economic, educational and social resources. Working closely with local government, schools, business and civic groups promotes goodwill within the community and enables Audubon to reach a wider, more diverse audience.

(3) Serve A Range of Audiences. Audubon Centers strive to meet the needs of their local citizenry. In addition to serving current Audubon members, centers reach out to new audiences with appropriately designed programs and services.

(4) Offer A Variety of Programs, Products, and Services. Guided by their mission, Audubon Centers develop programs, products and services that address the identified needs of their audiences and serve a variety of interests, such as education, outreach, public service, leadership training, and advocacy.

Ted Eubanks gave a short update on the progress of Electronic Communications of which this is an even shorter summary: we now have an internal listserve capacity and WWW capability; it would never have happened without the members and chapters.

Ben Olewine read a draft statement to the effect that more educational effort is needed in our bird conservation program. I was unable to get a copy - anyone out there have one? Ben is not yet wired (gasp).

FIELD COMMITTEE:

Latin America - Ted: the draft proposal is complete, in 3 months! This report (for a copy contact Sandra Skrei <sskreiSPAM@audubon.org>) reflects the wishlist and budget proposed by the Latin American chapters and Ted and Sandra and Hardy. We will report the management recommendations to the board.

Canada: we are about to start a similar process to Latin America, in Canada. Many people said they have experience with trans-boundary issues and working groups and, in effect, volunteered to participate in the planning.

Regional Directors: we must have a time for these directors and interested parties to hold discussion without time conflicts with other scheduled meetings. Hardy proposes after dinner on the first night (Thursday) when dinner programs are short. Dorothy Waltz (Minnesota chapter member attending) asked if such a meeting is the place to discuss chapter issues? Ted and Ruth say yes, we should be able to gather such topics in advance. Ted proposed a mechanism to allow chapter members to email questions to a group of regionally nominated board members (and all others who want to participate) for discussion and problem solving. Watch for an announcement.

Glenn Olson discussed State Directors and the Audubon Academy.

Questions: Ted Eubanks - in the last 6 years we have not made progress in mentoring and training. I don't have a good feel ("I am profoundly concerned…") for what we are going to do. What I see is a modest set of successful chapters but we have a majority of struggling chapters. If chapters are the building blocks, how can we not devote resources to strengthening them?

Glenn - we are providing state offices, but in the interim we need the Audubon Academy.

Ted - how do we train the trainers?

Catriana Glazebrook - I had no Audubon experience but when I came on board I had ten years of volunteer training experience.

Joyce Wolf - what can we offer the chapters to supplement the old and vanishing regional conferences that supplied this kind of training? It has to be very close to the chapters, physically, or nobody will go.

Ruth Russell - is there money for such training? Perhaps we need to see exactly where the regional conferences have lapsed.

Walt - until now we have responded to requests for help when asked, but those in need sometimes do not ask.

Dorothy Waltz - we frequently get no requests for help even when help is available; those chapters most needing help are also most likely *not* to ask for it.

Jack Dempsey - we need success measurement abilities built in to the Audubon Academy program.

The State and Regional Directors were asked what they have learned so far (remember this is only what I was able to type in, not everything they said):

Cindy Dunn (PA) - there is never enough communication; think broadly about who your partners should be - get everyone together; talk about the results you want, not about programmatic or administrative details.

Dave Sands (NE) - I began with too many other responsibilities and it caused delays. Wish we had a fundraising letter *first*, when office opened. It was a time of great publicity, but didn't take advantage of that window. Maybe NAS could have a master fundraising letter ready to go on Day 1?

John Shoen (AK) - immediately get another area's development director to help you get your own. The sooner the better for a DD.

Dave Whelan (CA) - we learned a lot this year; had a successful program year; we have a long way to go in organizational aspects; it takes a lot longer for the decentralization idea to get down to the grassroots; still having problems with the Audubon membership database; this is a very competitive funding state.

Jeff Parsons (WA) - make sure the new director know what he will be facing; our fiscal situation needed immediate help, for instance, which was a big surprise.

Steve Sedam (Great Lakes Region) - need to identify major donor prospects, but not too far ahead of the proposed state director; thanks for the efforts of the state office planning team.

Catriana Glazebrook (TX) - since I am *very* new, the lessons learned are yet to come - I have a lot to learn in general; I am very impressed with the caliber of the Audubon volunteers.

Dave Miller (NY) - have faith in the chapter and council leadership (democracy isn't always pretty but it works); incredibly high turnover rate means passing on the institutional history is important; face to face meeting are best, even in the age of the Internet; participate when you're there, don't just watch; leadership development - first get *us* trained. Steve Young commented - mistakes are to be *expected*. Norm Schapiro added - in spite of best efforts, one of our best people in the planning process went nuts on us - therefore put everything in writing, it's worth the time;

Don Arnosti (MN) - we need a better system to track member/activists.

Genevieve Thompson (ND) - I’m brand new; thanks for all the lessons I'm hearing about.

Walt Pomeroy (Mid-Atlantic Region) - thanks for all the strategic plans that are now being recycled and modified.

Short Discussion on "What is a Chapter?"

Ted Eubanks - it’s important to think broadly and creatively; if you look at the trend lines in our membership you can see we are stagnant; we need a million members, 20 million members, from a new constituency; it won't happen in the way *we* all came to Audubon; nothing is off limits.

Dick Reynolds (Minnesota chapter member) - we may be flat because people at large are feeling alienated. This might be a great opportunity for us, if we can show that we are different.

Glenn Olson - how do we elect regional board members in the future, without regions? I propose that the Field office handle logistics.

Ted proposed a process for answering The Question. Each part is predicted to take 3 months but *it will take whatever it takes*. A motion to go forward in principle passed.

(1) Situation Analysis (where are we now?).

(2) Needs assessment - get a wishlist from members, directors, staff - everyone.

(3) Program development - how do we meet the wishlist needs?

(4) Program Implementation - write a plan in 3 months.

6/8/97

FORMAL BOARD MEETING

Chairman's Report:

recognition of resignations of two important staff - Willem Brans and John Echeverria - and thanks for their service.

board pledge to make the Mississippi a high priority.

thanks for the presentations by the state office directors. It’s hard to believe we have come so far in just two years, since electing John Flicker as president and embarking on the Strategic Plan.

President's Report:

recognition of Pat Heidenreich’s efforts - we are here because of her advocacy for the upper Mississippi.

recognize Maria Aull; 40 years after creating the Aullwoood Sanctuary as a living trust, instead of leaving it in her will, she just celebrated her 100^th birthday and has been able to see just how much good her gift has done.

PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE REPORT

Helen Engle read the following statement to the committee in camera, not before the entire board:

========

Audubon Forest Campaign, Pacific Northwest Region

This is a shorter version, by Helen Engle, of the full update for the Public Policy Committee meeting on June 5, 1997 and for the Board of Directors of the National Audubon Society. The report was prepared by Mike Leahy, Paul Engelmeyer, Paul Ketcham, David Jennings, Chuck Bragg, et. al. The unexpurgated version is available from any of us by USPS mail, ccMail, e-mail, FAX. We would be eternally grateful for your interest and inquiries.

We're making progress towards an effective Audubon Forest Habitat Campaign for the native forests of the USA. This report reflects efforts in the Pacific Northwest -- Washington, Oregon, and northern California -- Santa Cruz to Bellingham. It's the result of State meetings including chapter activists and NAS staff, plus a regional strategy meeting hosted by Portland Audubon Society in April.

Our message is NO FURTHER LOSS OF NATIVE FORESTS AND RESTORATION OF DAMAGED FORESTS AND WATERSHEDS. Our Strategies are:

- Increasing chapter effectiveness through training and guidance in grassroots organizing, fundraising, and communication programs such as the Sister Chapter program, a chapter mentor program, and an Audubon network of forest experts and activists. A related goal is to increase individual activist effectiveness with scientific, legal, lobbying, computer training and facilitated communication among activists.

- A well-developed Citizen Science program to raise public awareness, to monitor the Northwest Forest Plan and Habitat Conservation Plans, to increase chapter involvement in watershed councils and public forest planning and management processes.

- Leadership by a steering committee of chapter leaders and National staff charged with an effective, fundable, focused regional forest strategy,

Policy goals, objectives, and actions will loosely follow the Oregon Audubon Council's example, which addresses issues, endorsements, and suggested actions for a number of key conservation issues. All programs will focus on helping chapters protect the forests they are most concerned about, regardless of whether they are federal, state, or private forests. Portland Audubon Society's Chapter Capacity Building Program will be used as a model for how chapters can increase their effectiveness.

National Audubon has long been a leader for forest habitat conservation in the northwest and our activists are committed to working with National Audubon to craft the High Priority Forest Campaign across the country in its diverse bio-regions. The Board's continued interest in and endorsement of this effort is greatly appreciated.

========

POLICY COMMITTEE before the Board:

There has been a lot of progress since the Strategic Plan was approved - six national campaigns of which four have been approved by the board. Forest and ESA are yet to come, as well as the regional campaign of the Upper Mississippi River. We are now able to oversee them as well, not just plan them (they now have budget line items).

ESA. A "Principals and Goals for Reauthorization of the ESA" statement was approved by the board. (personal comment: for a copy, email me until (and if) it goes up on Audubon’s web page. It’s way too long to include here.) Among other things it advocates *no* incentives to meet basic ESA law but does advocate rewards for going beyond basic requirements. There was a long discussion about how to pay for all of this, including land acquisition.

There was a discussion of the Upper Mississippi Campaign (see earlier notes).

Cats: what you’ve all been waiting for. Here is the resolution as passed by the board. The intent of the resolution is *very* narrow - to prevent more states from enacting a specific kind of legislation.

Opposition to the resolution came from those who thought it would irritate the cat-loving people more than it would do good for birds and therefore be counterproductive, as well as those who thought it was *too* narrow for one reason or another.

========

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the National Audubon Society recognizes that feral and free-ranging cats have a significant impact on birds and other wildlife;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the National Audubon Society:

(1) Opposes the enactment of legislation that allows the release of captured and sterilized feral cats back into the wild; and

(2) Urges state and local governments to enact legislation that prohibits the abandonment of domestic cats into the wild.

National Audubon intends to work with state and local governments, as well as humane societies and other organizations, to educate citizens regarding the impacts of free-ranging cats and feral cats on birds and other wildlife.

========

Discussion (vigorous). Ted Eubanks - it ignores the larger predation issue that we should address. Cats are a long term education problem. What about fox, raccoon, Black-crowned Night-Heron, Brown-headed Cowbird? We need to make the effort for a science based predation statement.

Donal O’Brien - the committee *did* start such a discussion. TBAR (acronym for this legislation) programs are in the ascendancy and they include release of *cats* into the wild. We have to prevent these from being adopted.

Norm Schapiro - this is a first step in the cat problem. Cats are unique in the predator category. They exist way out of proportion to the area's carrying ability (they are fed by us!).

Ben - although this makes sense, I want to keep the cats in the bounds suggested by Frank's talk yesterday. It’s also important to be as specific as possible, such as cowbirds and Kirtland’s Warblers.

John Whitmire - how many states are thinking about TBAR?

Donal - I have inquired and do not have an answer. Comment - international experts agree that predation is second only to habitat in danger to birds; we need to address predators.

Reid Hughes - we will be stirring the pot with this resolution. I oppose.

Pat Heidenreich - I am also troubled about the perception from cat lovers and some of them are our members. What does free range mean? It seems most cats *are*.

Hardy Eshbaugh - what is the sense of the immediacy here?

Leslie Dach - it is hard to remove the laws once they are enacted.

Hardy - I still have concern; this is a small piece of a large issue that is not yet scientifically reviewed. I feel neutral but concerned about the science.

Howard Brokaw - support.

Joyce Wolf - point #2 might put ordinary cat owners in violation, interpreted broadly.

Doug Costle - we ought to state our science case in an accompanying document, i.e. we are not against cats. Let's document this.

Howard - the Humane Society supports this kind of action.

Ted - would like to strike #2 and the last paragraph. Motion not made, and no action taken.

The resolution passed with 5 nays and two abstentions.

FIELD COMMITTEE (see also previous notes)

Latin American management team recommendations adopted unanimously. We are now in the concept phase with lots to be determined and implemented:

========

As part of next year's budget, the Management Team is making the following recommendations to the Board:

1. To create a new senior position of director of Latin American programs.

2. To locate the office in Miami, sharing space with the office for the Everglades campaign. As Miami is the transportation hub of Latin America, this location will provide access to key Latin American in-country contacts. Stuart Strahl spent nine years as Director of the Latin American program for the Wildlife Conservation Society. He lived in Latin America for much of that time, and is eager to mentor Audubon's new director.

3. The director would report to Glenn Olson.

4. The approach for the program would follow the advice given to the Board in Mexico such as:

___support existing Audubon programs in Latin America, and help develop new programs.

___support other people and programs that share Audubon's vision and that show promise.

___provide technical support and training.

___help raise money

___link chapters and state programs in the US with activities in Latin America.

5. The Director will be responsible for working with all interested parties to develop a work plan for the program, using the May 6 proposal as a foundation.

6. $100,000. will be included in the budget for the next fiscal year for the office. The director will be responsible for raising money for the budget and to grow the program, working closely with the New York office.

7. The Nominating Committee of the Board will be asked to seek out an appropriate Board candidate from Latin America as soon as possible who can help develop Audubon's Latin American program.

========

EDUCATION & COMMUNICATIONS (see previous notes)

SCIENCE COMMITTEE:

BirdSource - data from Christmas Bird Counts from 1958 to the present now have been recorded and will shortly be in the database. CBC from 1996 will be available in July, six months before the traditional date.

We met with IBM about setting up BirdSource with IBM equipment. IBM is interested in expanding their profile with the public and the Web, now that they have momentum from the Deep Blue chess match. They predicted a hit rate of 50,000 per day for that and they got a high of 22 million a day!! They see many connections to our project and want to move forward with the proposal. It looks promising.

We need comments on the Science Draft by September. Please give us suggestions.

A resolution was introduced that proposed that NAS join with the ABA in the publishing of "Field Notes" with the goal of turning it over to ABA in toto after a two year trial. The rationale is that we are not spending money (by Board vote) to market Field Notes and it is dying a slow death. With our other commitments to bird conservation (e.g. BirdSource) it is felt that the ABA is in a better position to make Field Notes grow and prosper. We are spending $70K+ per year with a circulation of 3500. Here is the resolution:

========

Resolution: An Alliance Between National Audubon Society and American Birding Association

WHEREAS, National Audubon Society, Inc. (NAS), has published NAS Field Notes and its predecessors for 51 years as the preeminent journal of citizen science ornithology; and

WHEREAS, The American Birding Association (ABA), the leading national association of expert birders, maintain a substantial publication program; and

WHEREAS, NAS and ABA propose to join in alliance together to promote the collection by active field birders of data crucial to understanding the population dynamics and conservation needs of North American birds; and

WHEREAS, NAS and ABA believe that the content and distribution of Field Notes could be strengthened as a cooperative project during a two-year transition period, with ownership transferring to ABA;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the President is hereby authorized, on behalf of NAS, to enter into an agreement with ABA relating to the future publication of Field Notes and related activities consistent with the following:

1. ABA and NAS will work together for a period of two years commencing on or about August 1, 1997 (the "Transition Period") to effect an orderly transfer of Field Notes from NAS to ABA.

2. The publication will continue to be called Field Notes. During the Transition Period, each issue of the publication will include the following statement: "Published by the American Birding Association in alliance with the National Audubon Society."

3. NAS will provide ABA with financial support not to exceed $76,000.00 during the Transition Period based on the business plan submitted to NAS by ABA on February 17, 1997. NAS will also release all copy liability in its possession for a given issue upon publication of that issue, until its copy liability reserves are exhausted.

4. NAS will continue to manage the Christmas Bird Counts as a separate programmatic, financial and editorial entity.

========

Discussion:

Hardy Eshbaugh - let's do an article in Audubon Magazine to avoid a PR disaster.

Norm Schapiro - what’s the situation with "American Birds"?

Frank Gill - we still own the trademark; it *could* be part of our future strategy.

Ted Eubanks - FN is a valuable repository of citizen science and this is a serious move on our part. On a related issue, I would like to strike the phrase in the Audubon Magazine writer's guidelines that says, " Articles on birdwatching should be directed to another National Audubon Society publication, Field Notes."

Hardy - data in FN is not really "science" other than about anomalous events.

John Whitmire - will FN data appear in BirdSource?

Frank -BirdSource will assume much of the role of FN, with caveats. FN provides photos and a written record, both of which I want to continue.

Helen - I agree that PR effort is needed; *we* know the situation because we have been briefed.

Hardy - subscribers are down to 3500. Board would not support the marketing. It would cost $250K a year to get back to 20K readers. Would that be a wise expenditure?

Frank - I don't think there is a risk in relinquishing FN *now*. We're doing it now because there is an opportunity - we can let it die in or hand it over to a better world. Most people I’ve talked with think this is a good move. We are not competing with the ABA here.

David Dominick - how about an editorial in FN to explain the move?

Chuck Bragg - if it's good science we should just do it.

Ted - many articles that promoted conservation came from FN. ABA is only dipping a toe into conservation.

Hardy - we are not turning over conservation to the ABA. What our vehicle will be is debatable - we will not abrogate our historical function.

Resolution passed with one abstention.

Donal O’Brien - recognition of Susan Drennan's contributions to Field Notes, American Birds, and NAS. Susan received a standing ovation from all present.

John Flicker - the "birdwatching" phrase in the writers’ guidelines doesn't exist any more. This is official.

Ted - still inclined to ask the board make that statement. Secondly, what about NAS and its lack of bird conservation publications? What’s our program here?

Ben Olewine - there is no need for a special task force to approach this. Ed/Com has an element to address communicating (including publications) as a whole.

Vicki Shaw - Monday we are filming in CT the 3rd of our TV birds and conservation series.

John Flicker - we are spending $1 to 2 million a year in newsletters; can we use these vehicles to have a consistent bird conservation message?

Ben - this committee will have joint meetings with Science on bird conservation and communications.

The meeting wrapped up with reports from the Development, Investment, Nominating and Site Selection committees. Don O’Brien recognized the outgoing chapter officers and thanked them for their contributions to Audubon. We closed with thanks to the Minnesota Auduboners and NAS staff who organized and administered the meeting.

-30-