ENTS,
Gary Beluzo posted a series of questions about the future
of ENTS and suggested we are on a cross-roads of sort to
determine the future of the organization. I agree, but not
in the sense that Gary means. I think the growing number of
ENTS members and a broader diversity of ideas is the future
of ENTS. I believe that by making this suggested change
would serve both to promote the broader goals of a diverse
membership and to promote our scientific goals at the same
time. Simply organizing the discussions into two broad
categories for easier management and accessibility would be
a benefit, while members would retain full access and right
to participate in all of the discussions. Not choosing this
option I believe would be harmful as the number of posts
grow, it is becoming more chaotic and harder to find those
posts of particular interest to you. This I think will put
a damper on participation and membership growth in the long
term.
As for Gary's specific questions:
1. What is ENTS? What IS the primary mission,
what are the intended goals, and who decides the future path
now that the "membership" is over 300?
2. Who is ENTS? Is it the original core group with additional members
looking on or is it the sum total of the current membership
which includes many non-scientific folks.
3. Who should decide where ENTS goes and what it becomes? Should there
be a core group of officers that create policy and
"official" members vote on that policy? Should the vote be
binding?
4. Is ENTS to become a more formal organization with things like
membership dues in addition to a Bulletin, annual
rendezvous, and special conferences? Is ENTS a casual
gathering and membership?
5. Can and should ENTS become everything to everyone?
1) I believe the primary mission of ENTS is as stated in
the mission statement. "The Eastern Native Tree Society
(ENTS) is a cyberspace interest group devoted to the
celebration of trees and forests of the eastern North
America and around the world, through art, poetry, music,
mythology, science, medicine, wood crafts, and collecting
research data for a variety of purposes. " Our mission is
all of these things. To collect research data we must
develop better and refine existing measurement techniques.
Some members are interested primarily in and focused on
this aspect of the mission statement. At times I think
there is a backlash among the non-measurement people against
the people involved in scientific goals of the organization.
2) Who is ENTS? ENTS is the sum total of the current
participating membership. I think it is only reasonable
that those members that are actively participating have a
greater say than those who do not. I also think that people
who have worked for a long time to make the ENTS
organization viable and to help it grow should have more of
a say than more recent members. Ideas on what ENTS should
or should not do are posted to the list for everyone to
discuss. Everyone is encouraged to make comments and
suggestions and really not major decisions that I can think
of have ever been made without this public discussion. In
every discussion people disagree about what should be done.
Eventually a general consensus is reached among the most
active members and a decision is made. I lobbied for a long
time, over a year or more, before the decision was finally
made to get our own domain name and website.
3) Who should have the final say? In this respect I must
point out that ENTS is not a membership organization as
defined under the non-profit regulations. Members do not
pay dues, nor do they have a vote on policy matters. The
officers of the organization have the legal right to make
all of the decisions. I am not an officer, I do not have a
vote. That said the officers of the organization are
extremely responsive to the wants and needs of the average
member and are always working to to encourage participation
by these members in all aspects of the organization.
5) ENTS can't be everything to everyone. As it is set up
ENTS is a scientific organization and not a political
organization. Clearly many people have strong political
leanings and these are expressed in the discussion list, but
are not an overtly political organization. I think everyone
want the organization to have influence on how our forests,
parks, and trees are managed. This is best accomplished by
growing the organization and by producing the scientific
results that can impact public policy. Toward that end I
think it is important that the organization support these
scientific research efforts.
4) The future of ENTS. That is the question of the day.
There has been some discussion of
formally organizing ENTS as a separate group under our own
bylaws and our own Non-profit status. That will cost
perhaps $2000 to accomplish. I could try to write the
bylaws myself and likely get away cheaper (I bought a book)
for less money but I have no experience in doing so under
current regulations . In these bylaws we could structure
ENTS as we saw fit. I would like to see the group run by a
Board of Directors that included both permanent members -
the current officers - and elected members chosen by the
general membership. We could create formal committees on
different subjects - a scientific steering committee for
example. Meeting could be held at our semi-annual
gatherings. Day to day activities would be run by the
officers. This would facilitate the chance of getting
external funding for research projects and the like, but
would create operating cost that we currently do not have.
It is likely that membership dues might need to be charged
and more money to keep track of would mean more paperwork...
It would require more time spent on organizational
activities than the organization requires currently. The
are pros and cons. This option is a good topic for further
discussion.
Ed Frank