Subject: Re: This Collecting Debate(?)

From: "William E. Rhodes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 21:41:04 GMT

Christopher Conlan <[email-masked]> wrote:

>3)  I would take exception though where you are irritated with those who do not support the laws.  The laws should be the central issue of this debate.

I am sorry if I led anyone to believe that I feel that laws, once 
enacted, should not be the subject of debate, and when need be, amended. 
I simply meant to say that laws, when in force, should be obeyed, until 
such time as they are modified or repealed.  Of course, this opens up the 
debate as to the positive impact of passive resistance or agressive 
non-compliance based upon the nature of the laws in question and the 
weight of popular opinion.  (resisting or breaking oppresive laws has 
been the only means by which beneficial changes have occurred in many 
societies)  In the case of insect conservation, I believe that more work 
needs to be done to educate lawmakers, to provide information with which 
they may change legislation, rather than make headlines by breaking it.

I suppose I take the point of view that in this case, working within the 
system to effect change is the most likely way to achieve success.  

>insect?  It seems like the current climate is to blame the collector and not the developer.  We need to work on bringing these laws up to speed.  

I absolutely agree.  Remember, I am a person who enjoys collecting.  The 
right laws can allow conservation and collecting to both continue and 
benefit.  

>somebody with some influence will be watching when some reasonable
>conclusions show up on this list?  We need to work on making some changes instead of just complaining.  Any ideas out there?

I'll be reading for these ideas as well.  Perhaps someone more involved 
with addressing these issues might comment as to how anyone interested 
(like me) might help "the cause?"?   

Regards,

Bill Rhodes