Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Anbody Know...

Started by Guest_Irate Mormon_* , Oct 14 2007 05:52 PM

Next

Reply to this topic

25 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 14 October 2007 - 05:52 PM

...what our actual membership count is right now? I'd like to know when we pass 500. AFIK we have never passed that particular milestone.

#2 Guest_Scenicrivers_*

Guests

Posted 15 October 2007 - 03:14 PM

...what our actual membership count is right now? I'd like to know when we pass 500. AFIK we have never passed that particular milestone.

From the Geographical Listing of NANFA members I counted 512. This was sent to me late summer, so it may not be completely up to date.

The top 3 states with members are;

Illinois - 37
Ohio - 30
California - 26

We have 14 international members including 6 members in Canada. I found it incredible that we have members in Austria, Germany, Japan, Taiwan and the United Kingdom.

It is wonderful to have all of these people who want to support such a wonderful program. If we could continue to grow, imagine the impact we could have for Native Fishes!

#3 Guest_drewish_*

Guests

Posted 15 October 2007 - 03:25 PM

I know Chris does a quarterly report. Considering the last quarter count plus the new members from the forum we should be over 500 active members. That is if the people renewed their membership.

#4 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guests

Posted 15 October 2007 - 05:47 PM

Anyone else find it interesting what the top 3 states are for membership numbers (if those are correct)? Illinois has some pretty, while well defined, restrictive rules for hobbyists. Though Ohio historically had a pretty high and cool fish fauna, few states have seen the losses and reductions in extant species that Ohio has. California, well yeah, really strict restrictions, relatively little diversity. Why doesn't Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama have one member per species of fish!?!?!

#5 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 15 October 2007 - 11:37 PM

For years Mississippi only counted four members. Now I see about a dozen. Mostly recruited by Jan Hoover, I think. Elmer Guerri had a very large and active region in his day. It has less to do with what fish are available for the taking, than with the people who are active and energetic in their endeavors. One industrious person can make a big difference in local membership numbers. If, however, a regional rep (or whatever) goes about trying to recruit members and garner public interest as an end in itself, he will frequently be disappointed and feel unappreciated. But if he does what he does because it's a natural calling, then good results will follow.

#6 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 15 October 2007 - 11:53 PM

It is wonderful to have all of these people who want to support such a wonderful program. If we could continue to grow, imagine the impact we could have for Native Fishes!

This is why I have been pushing so strongly for forum members to join up. We did a survey several years ago to see what the membership wanted NANFA to do for native fishes, and asked them to put their money where their mouth was (we proposed a dues increase from $15 to $20). Our grant programs were a result of members' opinions. For those of you who are still wondering what NANFA does for the fishes, and lack a historical perspective - well, up to that time NANFA was pretty much hobby driven, and no money was available for anything much except producing club publications. But everybody wanted more, and was willing to pay a few dollars a year to make it happen. I personally think we should now go to $25 a year and introduce family membership rates too. (Note to self: propose this to the BOD). I think a portion of that additional money should be spent on recruitment - advertisements in national aquarium and conservation publications, for example. It always amazes me how some extremely specialized (Harpoon 3, anyone?) hobby groups can amass thousands of members, but we can only manage 500, tops.

#7 Guest_tglassburner_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 05:40 PM

It always amazes me how some extremely specialized (Harpoon 3, anyone?) hobby groups can amass thousands of members, but we can only manage 500, tops.

Off topic: what is Harpoon 3?

I agree, I would like to see some $$ spent on advertisements in magazines, I would have found NANFA sooner personally if you had.

Just my $0.02.

Tom

#8 Guest_fundulus_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 06:59 PM

NANFA tried advertising in some of the hobby 'zines back in the 1980s and 1990s. There was no response, so they stopped the advertising. Maybe some web sites would work? We're open to suggestion.

#9 Guest_seanmc_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 09:41 PM

We have 14 international members including 6 members in Canada.

I am proud to be the newest member from Canada! I am promoting NANFA in a local aquarium forum, and am going to a local club show/auction next weekend, where I will enter some of my natives in the show (I was surprised to find that they actually have a native class in the show). I am hoping to be able to generate enough interest to create a local "native scene", and eventually to become successful enough at husbandry, and to learn enough that I can visit local aquarium clubs to do presentations on (responsible/ethical) native fishkeeping.

This is a great organization, I hope it continues to grow, and continues to promote conservation and the responsible hobbyist.

Cheers - Sean

#10 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 10:43 PM

Off topic: what is Harpoon 3?

http://www.harpoonhq.com/

#11 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 10:47 PM

NANFA tried advertising in some of the hobby 'zines back in the 1980s and 1990s. There was no response, so they stopped the advertising. Maybe some web sites would work? We're open to suggestion.

This forum is a great recruitment vehicle. As far as ads in hobby 'zines, that would involve a perpetual comittment. Is it worth the money and effort? I dunno. I remember hearing about NANFA in the 70's in FAMA. It took awhile, but eventually I joined. You never know.

#12 Guest_drewish_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 10:59 PM

This forum is a great recruitment vehicle. As far as ads in hobby 'zines, that would involve a perpetual comittment. Is it worth the money and effort? I dunno. I remember hearing about NANFA in the 70's in FAMA. It took awhile, but eventually I joined. You never know.

With a forum in place, some place for people to go to other than a website, it may be more productive. You may run into the hobbyist vs academics issue though. With NANFA being a mix of both, are we going to advertise to just hobbyists or try to do both?

#13 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 11:04 PM

That's a good question Drew, and I hadn't thought about that. I was thinking more along the lines of hobby 'zines. I would think the pro's join more from word of mouth, but hell, I dunno. I'm not sure it's even worth the money - just throwing ideas out there.

#14 Guest_teleost_*

Guests

Posted 16 October 2007 - 11:13 PM

Pay for space in a zine?????c'mon! were a non profit! Well maybe we can work a deal. If we intend to place an add in zine's, we need to focus our efforts and specialize for the audience. As I see NANFA we could put adds in many zines from conservationist to tropical fish publications......we just need an in :cool2:

Perhaps writing substantial articles for such publications and giving credit to NANFA might achieve the same goal without all the cost of advertising fee's????

#15 Guest_seanmc_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 06:32 AM

There is an article on native fish in the December 2007 issue of FAMA: Going Native

Just got my issue and haven't read it all yet, but it looks to be a simple introduction.

I would think that getting articles published (with attribution to NANFA members) would be a much more cost effective method of advertising. The problems would be getting members to write the articles, getting the magazines to publish them, and of course, deciding what audience you want to target.

Cheers - Seasn

#16 Guest_fundulus_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 06:50 AM

The July 2003 issue of FAMA was a NANFA-focused issue, with a big splashy cover photo. I think 5 or 6 of us had articles in it. It was great, but ultimately of little direct impact. Most hobbyists want to go out and buy cheap fish on demand, and be able to do what everyone else is doing, from my experience. Natives will never be cheap on the market, short of collecting your own. You can't produce large numbers of most natives year-round to supply a market. But, there are always a few flakey tropical keepers who get intrigued by something seemingly off the grid like keeping natives (like most readers of this thread...). We have to keep the outreach going but display ads aren't the way to go, unless people change suddenly and dramatically. Like Drew of the drewish said, the forum is our best vehicle at the moment. But you already knew that, yes?

#17 Guest_AC-Editor_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 08:43 AM

> The July 2003 issue of FAMA was a NANFA-focused issue, with a big splashy cover photo.

Actually, it was Tropical Fish Hobbyist, not FAMA. NANFA owned that issue. We pitched the idea to the TFH editor, commissioned and wrote all the articles, and hit up different members for photographs. We got a few new members from it. Don't know if they're still members, though.

Instead of trying to increase membership, why not increase what we do for the members we have, and the fishes we love? NANFA has quite a few dollars in the bank account and not enough volunteers with worthy ideas and projects to spend it on.

Chris Scharpf

#18 Guest_TurtleLover_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 09:53 AM

There is an article on native fish in the December 2007 issue of FAMA: Going Native

Just got my issue and haven't read it all yet, but it looks to be a simple introduction.

Cheers - Seasn

I read the article and I was pretty pleased with the way it was done to introduce new hobbyists to native tanks. I give it a thumbs up

#19 Guest_fundulus_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 10:15 AM

> The July 2003 issue of FAMA was a NANFA-focused issue, with a big splashy cover photo.

Actually, it was Tropical Fish Hobbyist, not FAMA. NANFA owned that issue. We pitched the idea to the TFH editor, commissioned and wrote all the articles, and hit up different members for photographs. We got a few new members from it. Don't know if they're still members, though.

That's what happens when I write something before drinking a sufficient dose of coffee in the morning. TFH it was, and I just packed some of those issues as we prepare to move to a new building.

And you're right otherwise, we as NANFA could always pick up the pace in terms of what we do. That would need the assistance of the vast majority of members who aren't active in NANFA projects but who may well be open to suggestion. Maybe Irate can talk to them.....

#20 Guest_MScooter_*

Guests

Posted 17 October 2007 - 12:57 PM

I would think that NANFA would benefit more targeting fishermen than aquarists. I discovered the forum looking for information on captive care for bluegill but became a member because of the information provided on the nonsport fish. Those who I fish with are blown away, as was I the first time, when I show them what lives in the creeks we have routinely walked past on our way to fish for bream and bass in the lakes and rivers around here. To learn, from NANFA that the Yazoo Darter, Etheostoma Raneyi, is endemic to the creek that flows through my mother's back yard and a handful others stunned me. I consider myself a conservationist and am a longtime member of TU and CCA yet an special concern fish had been right under my feet my whole life that I had no clue about. Therefore, I believe that conservation education should be both the major focus and major draw of/for NANFA.