Comments for museumpests

Comment on IPM blog post from the Canadian Museum of Nature by Kit

Kit — Thu, 09 May 2013 07:09:21 +0000

Unquestionably believe that which you said. Your favorite reason appeared to be on the web the easiest thing to be aware of. I say to you, I certainly get irked while people think about worries that they plainly do not know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and defined out the whole thing without having side-effects , people can take a signal. Will probably be back to get more. Thanks

Comment on Hello world! by James M. Bryant

James M. Bryant — Tue, 03 May 2011 17:48:00 +0000

Looking over the white paper, I have a few thoughts:
I don’t know that implementation of IPM strategies in museums is very much easier than it was quite a few years ago, especially when one considers the larger universe of museums – all the smaller organizations, historical societies, etc. So I have a feeling the overall challenge is still a considerable one, and that the role for an effective clearing house of IPM information and technical assistance is a substantial one. That being said, with all the personnel reductions in force at museums around the world, it is ever more challenging to find the time allowances needed to keep every conceivable professional activity viable and vital. I can’t help thinking that merger and consolidation might be the most important component of the “growth” option: to avoid the burden of separate incorporation, all the details of separate organization and governance, merge with a group with the most strongly shared mission and then become a standing committee or permanent interest group within the larger organization.

Comment on Hello world! by Pat Kelley

Pat Kelley — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 19:43:26 +0000

I think that the current version of the white paper is clear and concise enough to put out to the entire group.

Comment on Hello world! by Lisa Bruno

Lisa Bruno — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:35:35 +0000

I agree with Chris. This website is a great resource, but it is daunting to think of the organizational tasks of writing bylaws etc. for continued growth. I think joining with another organization and pooling stretched resources makes sense.

Comment on Hello world! by Chris Del Re

Chris Del Re — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:04:44 +0000

Thank you for all of your hard work putting together the white paper. While I -of course- feel that the only future course for this group is to grow, I do still see that as being a challenge. I assume that an umbrella organization such as SPNHC or ICOM-CC would be appropriate, but I leave the important details of the future of the group in your capable hands.

If I actually understood Rachael’s message, this is where I was to post my comments on the while paper posted so far.

Please let me know how I can help. Chris Del Re

Comment on IPM-WG Draft White Paper by Laura Smyk

Laura Smyk — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:38:35 +0000

I have to agree with both comments so far about disbanding, and also staying as is. I think growth is the only way to go, although a big question is just how far do we go?
I think training courses, workshops etc. are an exciting prospect, but agree that it is a bit daunting to be done by volunteers, and we will have some financial resources we will need to secure.
I think the timeline, like Derya says, is ambitious, but there does need to be set dates or we all know what happens!! I am still disapointed I couldn’t make the meeting this year, but still would like to be involved, and am willing to help on the LRPG.

Comment on IPM-WG Draft White Paper by Catharine Hawks

Catharine Hawks — Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:40:13 +0000

I concur with the comment above about disbanding – it really is not an option given the extraordinary success of the Web site.

Now that FAIC can offer CoOL with its worldwide distribution (the AIC is in the progress of setting up new open-source platforms for its Web-based resources), it may be worth revisiting them as an option for an organizational sponsor. To obtain funding for growth, the group now doing all the content development for MuseumPests.net would have to become a formal entity with some sort of tax exempt status and if soliciting and administering grant funds would be best served by paid staff and formal accounting/auditing procedures. Just setting all this up would be burdensome for a volunteer group, not to mention expensive. Also, expecting Leon Zak to continue to maintain the site gratis for the long term is neither fair nor professional.

The Steering Committee concept is excellent and would be essential no matter where the site was vested. FAIC would not want to take this on without some means for development and moderation of content.

The White Paper is a wonderful synopsis of the situation and the needs. Congratulations to all who took part in its development.

Comment on IPM-WG Draft White Paper by D. Golpinar

D. Golpinar — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 20:28:23 +0000

Thank you to the planning group for putting this white paper together for discussion and for soliciting the feedback of the IPM-WG stakeholders. I hope to read many more comments here.

At this point, with the museumpests.net website receiving so many recommendations and being touted a useful resource nearly everywhere I look, I think option A (disbanding) would be the wrong way to go.

We have accomplished a lot of our goals and we should now focus on creating a sustainability plan for the website – and moving forward with growing the WG is the best way to achieve this. I would like to see option C (growth) as the path taken by the WG. I am not certain what the relationship will/ should be between the website and the group moving forward, so I look forward to hearing the thoughts of the LRPG.

I think the roadmap makes sense although the timing might be a little ambitious, since we are all busy, maybe we should give ourselves a year to accomplish this (although I also see the need to keep moving so as not to give up the momentum started at the last meeting).

I think Heritage Preservation should also be considered as a host organization (depending on the outcome of the work of the LRPG).

Comment on IPM-WG Draft White Paper by Genevieve Lewis-Gentry

Genevieve Lewis-Gentry — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 13:38:39 +0000

This is my test comment for the white paper post. I am excited to see what people think of the ideas above and seeing the future of the group unfold.