-
If you see ads here, log in and they will disappear. If you need help logging in or getting registered, send request to: webmaster@southernairboat.com
Muffler Regs Working?
- Thread starter cowboy
- Start date
cowboy
Moderator
Olf,
I ain't trying to set nobody up for an attack...... just figured enough time has elasped since passage of the muffler legislation for measurable results to have been obtained.
Perhaps it's been long enough to tell. perhaps not.
I don't know where to begin to look for the answer myself.
Really curious to know about it though.
Hope it has had a positive result.
Sure do.
Hope it is working! 8)
I ain't trying to set nobody up for an attack...... just figured enough time has elasped since passage of the muffler legislation for measurable results to have been obtained.
Perhaps it's been long enough to tell. perhaps not.
I don't know where to begin to look for the answer myself.
Really curious to know about it though.
Hope it has had a positive result.
Sure do.
Hope it is working! 8)
airduds
Well-known member
Population growth alone will ensure the numbers never go down no matter what we do.
Realistically, the best we can hope for is to stretch out the number of years we get to keep our boats. When (not if) 90 at 50 (or whatever) becomes law it will only be a matter of time before we get squeezed completely out. Next will be jet-skis and eventually anything over 9.9 hp.
Realistically, the best we can hope for is to stretch out the number of years we get to keep our boats. When (not if) 90 at 50 (or whatever) becomes law it will only be a matter of time before we get squeezed completely out. Next will be jet-skis and eventually anything over 9.9 hp.
cowboy
Moderator
I have not resaerched this, but I beleive this is correct....
Jet skis, and the personal watercraft industry sucessfully lobied for, and got protection ammendments (anti-discrimination) to the Florida Constitution.
They don't have much to worry about after that I don't think.
I love my pwc..... it looks alot like an airboat!
Jet skis, and the personal watercraft industry sucessfully lobied for, and got protection ammendments (anti-discrimination) to the Florida Constitution.
They don't have much to worry about after that I don't think.
I love my pwc..... it looks alot like an airboat!
I know it, Cowboy. I never took it that way, Bro.
Airduds has just about nailed it, IMO. If you're really serious about keeping your airboat, then (IMO) get it USCG equipped,
and get yourself SAR qualified.
Law Enforcement and official Search and Rescue boats will always be exempt from any future restrictions.
Airduds has just about nailed it, IMO. If you're really serious about keeping your airboat, then (IMO) get it USCG equipped,
and get yourself SAR qualified.
Law Enforcement and official Search and Rescue boats will always be exempt from any future restrictions.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Duds,
That's about the size of it. The anti's just keep chipping away at not only airboats, but all internal combustion engines. Look what damage the Save the Manatee group did to all boats & docks in coastal areas. Airboats are by no means alone in attacks but we are the smallest, most vulnerable group with the smallest pockets and least amount of friends.
As for complaints, contact FWC Office of Boating & Waterways. They have records of tickets & complaints, you just have to dig & that takes time. Additionally, the County Sheriff's offices (County by County) need to be searched for complaints too. It's only been a little over a year since the law passed. That is a short amount of time for public records data to come in.
Complaints are not a great litmus test for airboats. A survey of outdoor recreational users who come into contact with airboats would be a better test. The goal should be for survey results of outdoor users where 8 out of 10 respondents reply that "Airboats are not intrusive, offensive or excessively loud." If we reach that point, then we have appeased a very large group of REASONABLE folks who could come to bat with us.
The chronic complainers are not going away. They feed the anti's in the environmental movement who want everything fun gone. The battle is for the acceptance of REASONABLE folks and this is where the good deeds, our environmental record and our efforts to "do the right thing" come into play to win these folks over. We have the history, culture, good deeds, actions, etc to do this. Like it or not, the sound reduction efforts will play a key role in this. If you don't have them, you're missing an important ingredient.
That's about the size of it. The anti's just keep chipping away at not only airboats, but all internal combustion engines. Look what damage the Save the Manatee group did to all boats & docks in coastal areas. Airboats are by no means alone in attacks but we are the smallest, most vulnerable group with the smallest pockets and least amount of friends.
As for complaints, contact FWC Office of Boating & Waterways. They have records of tickets & complaints, you just have to dig & that takes time. Additionally, the County Sheriff's offices (County by County) need to be searched for complaints too. It's only been a little over a year since the law passed. That is a short amount of time for public records data to come in.
Complaints are not a great litmus test for airboats. A survey of outdoor recreational users who come into contact with airboats would be a better test. The goal should be for survey results of outdoor users where 8 out of 10 respondents reply that "Airboats are not intrusive, offensive or excessively loud." If we reach that point, then we have appeased a very large group of REASONABLE folks who could come to bat with us.
The chronic complainers are not going away. They feed the anti's in the environmental movement who want everything fun gone. The battle is for the acceptance of REASONABLE folks and this is where the good deeds, our environmental record and our efforts to "do the right thing" come into play to win these folks over. We have the history, culture, good deeds, actions, etc to do this. Like it or not, the sound reduction efforts will play a key role in this. If you don't have them, you're missing an important ingredient.
cowboy
Moderator
Yup,
I think I get it now.
Using airboat complaints ain't a good measure of a law, that was supposed to reduce airboating complaints. Got it.
It's not a good measurement of the effectivness of the law.
Just trust that it was the right thing to do. Just get on board with more laws now, cause it will be the right things to do. Head off the antis at the pass, cause they'll do it for us anyhow.
Got it.
Old Country was right about one thing. We have a law for Airboats now, and we can expect more to follow.
I hope the law is working for us. sure do.
Great Sportsmen pushed hard for a law in the late 60's.
They got it done in the Early 70's.
Once they got it done, the Big Cypress National Preserve was created.
The Government came in, and exterminated every vestage of the Traditional Gladesman culture possible. Destroying all the things the Sportsmen wanted to protect the most.
Yup,
No more laws for airboats is what I say.
You can bet you'll get something. Perhaps worthless at best, or ruination at the worst.
I think I get it now.
Using airboat complaints ain't a good measure of a law, that was supposed to reduce airboating complaints. Got it.
It's not a good measurement of the effectivness of the law.
Just trust that it was the right thing to do. Just get on board with more laws now, cause it will be the right things to do. Head off the antis at the pass, cause they'll do it for us anyhow.
Got it.
Old Country was right about one thing. We have a law for Airboats now, and we can expect more to follow.
I hope the law is working for us. sure do.
Great Sportsmen pushed hard for a law in the late 60's.
They got it done in the Early 70's.
Once they got it done, the Big Cypress National Preserve was created.
The Government came in, and exterminated every vestage of the Traditional Gladesman culture possible. Destroying all the things the Sportsmen wanted to protect the most.
Yup,
No more laws for airboats is what I say.
You can bet you'll get something. Perhaps worthless at best, or ruination at the worst.
jpatter123
Well-known member
cowboy":29ww8sew said:
sort of thats correct. But discrimation still exists and is being fought. The downside is sometimes fighting descrimation ends in results you don't want. Take the park outside of everglades city no jet skis may run inside the park yet boaters can. Well its obvious descrimation with no supporting facts that jet skis cause more harm then other water craft do. The outcome however might end up being all powered craft usage of the park may be shut down.
Its like a few other peoples saying the lobbyists, protection agencies and govermental agencies say heres your crap sandwich eat and like it or tommorrow your going to have to eat a bigger one.
The flip side is someone is happy about this. Chances are the group that is happy is the one that has the time to lobby and the dinero to support political groups and the agencies that skew enviromental research to produce results that appear to be in favor of the group thats writing the checks.
One big point that people bring up in Big Cypress is outdoorsman passing laws that they thought were intended to help protect our outdoors while protecting our rights but without the legal assistance to know they are hidden agendas. Like some of the conservation acts that anglers were duped into believing they were voting for something that would perserve their sport while perserving the waterways they fish but in reality all the laws did were open the doors to complete area closures.
Then you have the infighting amongst outdoor groups that disagree. Commercial fisherman vs recreational. Sailboats , jet skis , power boats. High fence hunters vs fair chase. On top of that some of the organaztions that have fancy names that sound like they an agency for the protection of outdoorsman and are sending you stuff in the mail asking for donations to protect your rights are nothing more then enviromentalist groups betting on the fact that we will not investigate these organazations to see what our money is going to and we are just glad to hand out money or join, which is even worse we give them a number count, to someone who will fight these battles for us.
I am sure everything I have said here you have all heard before. And this is just my opinions of stuff I have read and heard and by no means is meant to be taken for actual legal fact. I also know this may have drifted off topic a bit.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Patter-
You are on the money in your assessment. You understand the political process & system..............
My feeling is either you show up & play or you get shut out. Showing & playing is no assurance of winning,; however not showing & playing is a certain defeat. You just have to play your best players with a sound game plan and cross your fingers.
You are on the money in your assessment. You understand the political process & system..............
My feeling is either you show up & play or you get shut out. Showing & playing is no assurance of winning,; however not showing & playing is a certain defeat. You just have to play your best players with a sound game plan and cross your fingers.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Cowboy wrote:
Great Sportsmen pushed hard for a law in the late 60's.
They got it done in the Early 70's.
Once they got it done, the Big Cypress National Preserve was created.
The Government came in, and exterminated every vestage of the Traditional Gladesman culture possible. Destroying all the things the Sportsmen wanted to protect
Did we learn anything from this?
It was not the "government" per se but the Government driven by the environmental groups $$$, lawyers, lobbyists and media smear campaign. Basically, they took the worst side of the sportsmen (poaching, environmental destruction, ESA act) distorted the hell out of it then sold this distortortion to the public, politicians bureaucrats & other sporting groups. Apparently it worked as activities by the folks who saved the area are currently severely limited.
Again, did we learn anything or do we repeat past mistakes?
Here where something along these line can be prevented as this is the plan that was effectively used against us:
1) Active media presents. When an anti speaks we need to counter EVERY action. They have a story, we need our story. Why? Because this INFLUENCES both public perception and the perception of the state agencies. If the public has a negative image of you, the other side will leverage this image AGAINST YOU, no matter how minute it is.
2) Clean up your image and greatly reduce the "outlaw element" within your ranks. This takes the ammunition AWAY from our opponents and makes their cries empty. This means doing the right thing. It means CHANGE because you now have someone watching & analyzing what you do. You need to fight & protect what's defendable and change what's not because if you don't change it yourself, then it will be changed for you by some else. See above.
3) Fight them on the same level. You need representation in Tallahassee. You need to be aware of public/political perception BEFORE it hits you. You need to have solutions to issues or strong lines to defend them.
These are general engagement ideas that have worked against us and will work for us. While we will never match the environmental folks dollar for dollar, like the NRA, a well planned and defenable platform will work wonders. It's a two way street only if you understand the rules and sadly, our side cries while the other side organizes and executes and perpetuates half truths.
I don't like regulation either. Less government is better government. However, you have to be real, learn from past mistakes, limit the changes that are made but most importantly, for the changes that will come, make them as close to your terms as possible.
Great Sportsmen pushed hard for a law in the late 60's.
They got it done in the Early 70's.
Once they got it done, the Big Cypress National Preserve was created.
The Government came in, and exterminated every vestage of the Traditional Gladesman culture possible. Destroying all the things the Sportsmen wanted to protect
Did we learn anything from this?
It was not the "government" per se but the Government driven by the environmental groups $$$, lawyers, lobbyists and media smear campaign. Basically, they took the worst side of the sportsmen (poaching, environmental destruction, ESA act) distorted the hell out of it then sold this distortortion to the public, politicians bureaucrats & other sporting groups. Apparently it worked as activities by the folks who saved the area are currently severely limited.
Again, did we learn anything or do we repeat past mistakes?
Here where something along these line can be prevented as this is the plan that was effectively used against us:
1) Active media presents. When an anti speaks we need to counter EVERY action. They have a story, we need our story. Why? Because this INFLUENCES both public perception and the perception of the state agencies. If the public has a negative image of you, the other side will leverage this image AGAINST YOU, no matter how minute it is.
2) Clean up your image and greatly reduce the "outlaw element" within your ranks. This takes the ammunition AWAY from our opponents and makes their cries empty. This means doing the right thing. It means CHANGE because you now have someone watching & analyzing what you do. You need to fight & protect what's defendable and change what's not because if you don't change it yourself, then it will be changed for you by some else. See above.
3) Fight them on the same level. You need representation in Tallahassee. You need to be aware of public/political perception BEFORE it hits you. You need to have solutions to issues or strong lines to defend them.
These are general engagement ideas that have worked against us and will work for us. While we will never match the environmental folks dollar for dollar, like the NRA, a well planned and defenable platform will work wonders. It's a two way street only if you understand the rules and sadly, our side cries while the other side organizes and executes and perpetuates half truths.
I don't like regulation either. Less government is better government. However, you have to be real, learn from past mistakes, limit the changes that are made but most importantly, for the changes that will come, make them as close to your terms as possible.
cowboy
Moderator
An Act to establish the Big Cypress National Preserve in the Stats of Florida, and for other purposes. (88 Stat. 1255) (P.L. 93-440)
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) in order to assure the preservation, conservation, and protection of the natural, scenic, hydrologic, floral and faunal, and recreational values of the Big Cypress Watershed in the State of Florida and to provide for the enhancement and public enjoyment thereof, the Big Cypress National Preserve is hereby established.
Read on....
http://www.nps.gov/bicy/naturescience/u ... losure.pdf
Yup,
they lobbied for a Bill, seeking Federal Protections for the Big Cypress swamp.
I reckon once it got a sponsor, the legislation was then up to him, or her and other members of Congress.
They took it through Congress, and the verbage was written to suit their agendas, without consideration of what the Traditional users were really trying to protect.
They perhaps created a monster of their own undoing.
Kinda like the muffler law, as it went through Tallahassee. It did'nt turn out quite the way we had hoped. I understand that, and got no problem with it. It is what it is.
Then you also have the fact that the law is open to "interpretation"
The NPS reads the law to say, what they prefer it to say. Than act accordingly.
This ain't nothing new. It's been that way from the outset.
Yup,
The sportsmen wanted to control their destiny for the future. All the bullcrap you mention above was used to justify the NPS endgame. They took the bill, and made it what they wanted.
We see the end result today.
I got no problem with the fact we have to run mufflers.
I was never a part of the problem, but I run mufflers cause it's the law.
A law we sought out for ourselves, and obtained with the goal of reducing airboating complaints.
So don't tell me reduced, unchanged, or elevated complaints are not a good way to measure the effectivness of the muffler law.
I believe it is a valid litmus test, or if it's not.... we were all led down a primrose path a year ago, by people telling us one thing when their motives were something entirely different regarding the muffler law.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) in order to assure the preservation, conservation, and protection of the natural, scenic, hydrologic, floral and faunal, and recreational values of the Big Cypress Watershed in the State of Florida and to provide for the enhancement and public enjoyment thereof, the Big Cypress National Preserve is hereby established.
Read on....
http://www.nps.gov/bicy/naturescience/u ... losure.pdf
Yup,
they lobbied for a Bill, seeking Federal Protections for the Big Cypress swamp.
I reckon once it got a sponsor, the legislation was then up to him, or her and other members of Congress.
They took it through Congress, and the verbage was written to suit their agendas, without consideration of what the Traditional users were really trying to protect.
They perhaps created a monster of their own undoing.
Kinda like the muffler law, as it went through Tallahassee. It did'nt turn out quite the way we had hoped. I understand that, and got no problem with it. It is what it is.
Then you also have the fact that the law is open to "interpretation"
The NPS reads the law to say, what they prefer it to say. Than act accordingly.
This ain't nothing new. It's been that way from the outset.
Yup,
The sportsmen wanted to control their destiny for the future. All the bullcrap you mention above was used to justify the NPS endgame. They took the bill, and made it what they wanted.
We see the end result today.
I got no problem with the fact we have to run mufflers.
I was never a part of the problem, but I run mufflers cause it's the law.
A law we sought out for ourselves, and obtained with the goal of reducing airboating complaints.
So don't tell me reduced, unchanged, or elevated complaints are not a good way to measure the effectivness of the muffler law.
I believe it is a valid litmus test, or if it's not.... we were all led down a primrose path a year ago, by people telling us one thing when their motives were something entirely different regarding the muffler law.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Cowboy wrote:
They took it through Congress, and the verbage was written to suit their agendas, without consideration of what the Traditional users were really trying to protect.
Yes, that's what our opponents do. They have their "coat & tie" lobbyists & lawyers sway the politicians to their half truth views via direct contact, grassroots lobbying and pop media slander stories. It happened because the sportsmen did not counter this effort effectively with our own "coat & ties," effective grass roots or media campaign.
Cowboy wrote:
Yup,
The sportsmen wanted to control their destiny for the future. All the bullcrap you mention above was used to justify the NPS endgame. They took the bill, and made it what they wanted.
BS I wrote? I'm simply summarising the situation as to what happened and suggesting to prevent the same situation from recurring, you have to effectively deal with what's being used against you. If you don't correctly recognize what you're dealing with, you can't effectively resolve the situation.
Mentioned in many other treads is the need to attend the endless meetings concerning our activities. It's critical to have representation there to protect our interests. Additionally, it's critical to have equal capacity (ie: they have a lawyer, you need a lawyer) to what our opponents have.
Cowboy wrote:
So don't tell me reduced, unchanged, or elevated complaints are not a good way to measure the effectiveness of the muffler law.
I believe it is a valid litmus test, or if it's not.... we were all led down a primrose path a year ago, by people telling us one thing when their motives were something entirely different regarding the muffler law.
PW wrote:
Complaints are not a great litmus test for airboats. A survey of outdoor recreational users who come into contact with airboats would be a better test. The goal should be for survey results of outdoor users where 8 out of 10 respondents reply that "Airboats are not intrusive, offensive or excessively loud."
I'll stand corrected. Complaints ALONE should not be the sole criteria for lowering sound. We don't have COMPLAINTS on carbon emissions but the hysteria about reducing them is prevalent. Complains should be one measure of effectiveness,
I have never said in any forum or address that last year's effort in Tallahassee is a "promised path" or "silver bullet" although many may have interpreted the effort as such. I have said 100x that we must be involved where our opponents are active and we must defend our interests on the same level they are attacking us. This is an ongoing and never ending effort as our opponents are in for the long haul, we must also be. The Tallahassee effort was both new to myself and new to the airboat group with little to no previous experience. We must build & learn and put the best & brightest up to bat for us.
If you want to read the future, just look to your past..............
I hope sportsmen have learned from the Big Cypress & Additional Lands issues by changing & adapting to effectively deal with what we're facing.
They took it through Congress, and the verbage was written to suit their agendas, without consideration of what the Traditional users were really trying to protect.
Yes, that's what our opponents do. They have their "coat & tie" lobbyists & lawyers sway the politicians to their half truth views via direct contact, grassroots lobbying and pop media slander stories. It happened because the sportsmen did not counter this effort effectively with our own "coat & ties," effective grass roots or media campaign.
Cowboy wrote:
Yup,
The sportsmen wanted to control their destiny for the future. All the bullcrap you mention above was used to justify the NPS endgame. They took the bill, and made it what they wanted.
BS I wrote? I'm simply summarising the situation as to what happened and suggesting to prevent the same situation from recurring, you have to effectively deal with what's being used against you. If you don't correctly recognize what you're dealing with, you can't effectively resolve the situation.
Mentioned in many other treads is the need to attend the endless meetings concerning our activities. It's critical to have representation there to protect our interests. Additionally, it's critical to have equal capacity (ie: they have a lawyer, you need a lawyer) to what our opponents have.
Cowboy wrote:
So don't tell me reduced, unchanged, or elevated complaints are not a good way to measure the effectiveness of the muffler law.
I believe it is a valid litmus test, or if it's not.... we were all led down a primrose path a year ago, by people telling us one thing when their motives were something entirely different regarding the muffler law.
PW wrote:
Complaints are not a great litmus test for airboats. A survey of outdoor recreational users who come into contact with airboats would be a better test. The goal should be for survey results of outdoor users where 8 out of 10 respondents reply that "Airboats are not intrusive, offensive or excessively loud."
I'll stand corrected. Complaints ALONE should not be the sole criteria for lowering sound. We don't have COMPLAINTS on carbon emissions but the hysteria about reducing them is prevalent. Complains should be one measure of effectiveness,
I have never said in any forum or address that last year's effort in Tallahassee is a "promised path" or "silver bullet" although many may have interpreted the effort as such. I have said 100x that we must be involved where our opponents are active and we must defend our interests on the same level they are attacking us. This is an ongoing and never ending effort as our opponents are in for the long haul, we must also be. The Tallahassee effort was both new to myself and new to the airboat group with little to no previous experience. We must build & learn and put the best & brightest up to bat for us.
If you want to read the future, just look to your past..............
I hope sportsmen have learned from the Big Cypress & Additional Lands issues by changing & adapting to effectively deal with what we're facing.
cowboy
Moderator
Thanks for the responses Gatorstick.
The bullcrap was refering to the tactics used by THEM, angainst US.
Not that your opinion was bullcrap.
I still remain of the opinion that once a piece of legislation gets started, you can't reasonably predict or control where you'll wind up.
Probably on the short end of the stick would be the safest bet.
That is why I oppose any efforts for any new airboat specific laws.
You, nor I can control it.
I'm remain unconvinced that "WE" can control it.
That's the opinion I form, after I look to our past... while considering the future.
As always..... just my opinion.
Everybody's got one.
The bullcrap was refering to the tactics used by THEM, angainst US.
Not that your opinion was bullcrap.
I still remain of the opinion that once a piece of legislation gets started, you can't reasonably predict or control where you'll wind up.
Probably on the short end of the stick would be the safest bet.
That is why I oppose any efforts for any new airboat specific laws.
You, nor I can control it.
I'm remain unconvinced that "WE" can control it.
That's the opinion I form, after I look to our past... while considering the future.
As always..... just my opinion.
Everybody's got one.
grant
Well-known member
Airboat specific legislation is very dangerous and needs to be countered at every level possible....whats next? too fast...too slow...too big...too small...too many seats....not enough seats....and on and on
If airboat specific legislation is allowed to stand we will be done sooner, rather than later!!
If airboat specific legislation is allowed to stand we will be done sooner, rather than later!!
A
Anonymous
Guest
Here's one for you Cowboy,
I agree with you 100%. We differ in how it should be dealt with. We must be offensive as well as defensive and active.
I'm not nearly as pessimistic on controlling results as you allude to. I work with the mass media & have produced good results for us. (Taking a local network out tonight) The secret is you have to understand how the entire system works. The first key is to have a message they will swallow while allowing for what they want or won't bite on. The second key is to tightly control the environment and message you are delivering as this increases your upside while limiting the possible negative, and allow me to emphasize, the folks presenting this message are key.
Same with the legislature. You work within a sound guideline with sharp, knowledgeable folks who can rapidly adapt to the changing situation in politics. That is how the "otherside" beats us up & the recipe to stand them down. Too many on our side do not comprehend the issues facing us or understand what is needed to effectively defend and often think "a single silver bullet" is the answer. WE need an arsenal of "silver bullets" to hold our ground.
Both you & Grant are right in you don't know what you'll end up with once you open the can of worms. That's politics. All I've been saying is bring your best & brightest to the table as you could be surprised (positive) with the results over time. Same if you played sports. Practice hard. Keep a positive attitude. Stay determined & focused on the goal. Have confidence in you fellow players. With that as a plan, you may not win all but you'll darn sure will be competitive.
WE have bright, able folks in our ranks but they don't or won't become involved. You look at the recent BS over the FAA and don't have to wonder why. This is where I fundamentally differ with current leadership in that our best, brightest and ablest have been lost and creating a favorable climate to cultivate recruiting the needed talent & ideas is not considered or recognized as a serious issue.
Business as usual, same old, same old........This is not the long term recipe for good tidings for our cause.
I agree with you 100%. We differ in how it should be dealt with. We must be offensive as well as defensive and active.
I'm not nearly as pessimistic on controlling results as you allude to. I work with the mass media & have produced good results for us. (Taking a local network out tonight) The secret is you have to understand how the entire system works. The first key is to have a message they will swallow while allowing for what they want or won't bite on. The second key is to tightly control the environment and message you are delivering as this increases your upside while limiting the possible negative, and allow me to emphasize, the folks presenting this message are key.
Same with the legislature. You work within a sound guideline with sharp, knowledgeable folks who can rapidly adapt to the changing situation in politics. That is how the "otherside" beats us up & the recipe to stand them down. Too many on our side do not comprehend the issues facing us or understand what is needed to effectively defend and often think "a single silver bullet" is the answer. WE need an arsenal of "silver bullets" to hold our ground.
Both you & Grant are right in you don't know what you'll end up with once you open the can of worms. That's politics. All I've been saying is bring your best & brightest to the table as you could be surprised (positive) with the results over time. Same if you played sports. Practice hard. Keep a positive attitude. Stay determined & focused on the goal. Have confidence in you fellow players. With that as a plan, you may not win all but you'll darn sure will be competitive.
WE have bright, able folks in our ranks but they don't or won't become involved. You look at the recent BS over the FAA and don't have to wonder why. This is where I fundamentally differ with current leadership in that our best, brightest and ablest have been lost and creating a favorable climate to cultivate recruiting the needed talent & ideas is not considered or recognized as a serious issue.
Business as usual, same old, same old........This is not the long term recipe for good tidings for our cause.
cowboy
Moderator
Yup,
Perhaps if you were working hard to help the current FAA leadership, then we would all be better off. Not attacking.
"It takes a team"." Team players"." Assembled a Team". I think I've heard someone around here say those things.
Perhaps if you were IN THERE...
helping them in the betterment of airboating, all that you say would not make my ears so deaf, or my views pessimistic.
I personally have heard some of the current FAA leadership make the statement to me that "I have to put my personal feelings aside sometimes, and go on with business"
Wish you could do that. I know it probably would make a difference.
Perhaps I would not be so pessimistic if we had some of our best and brightest involved at this time.
That's just my opinion, and perspective. Not judgement. Far be it from me to do so little as I do compared to some, so as to judge anyone who has put forth.
Just another opinion of mine.
Everybodys got one
Perhaps if you were working hard to help the current FAA leadership, then we would all be better off. Not attacking.
"It takes a team"." Team players"." Assembled a Team". I think I've heard someone around here say those things.
Perhaps if you were IN THERE...
helping them in the betterment of airboating, all that you say would not make my ears so deaf, or my views pessimistic.
I personally have heard some of the current FAA leadership make the statement to me that "I have to put my personal feelings aside sometimes, and go on with business"
Wish you could do that. I know it probably would make a difference.
Perhaps I would not be so pessimistic if we had some of our best and brightest involved at this time.
That's just my opinion, and perspective. Not judgement. Far be it from me to do so little as I do compared to some, so as to judge anyone who has put forth.
Just another opinion of mine.
Everybodys got one