This was delayed due to the Easter break, I believe it to be still pertinent.
Personally I agree with the points raised by Andrew Taylor except the
inference that raising these sort of issues is
destructive. Firstly if local people don't raise a strident voice then who
will, bureacrats?.
Secondly there is a great danger in ending up playing God over both the
environment and the public pressure that can be bought to bear on its behalf.
To link the OBP into this issue is an example of the latter, in my personal
view.
Science has it, I believe, that Pt Lillias is not a "die-in-the-ditch" issue
for the OBP (the blatant disregard for an international treaty IS perhaps,
because of the potential for it being used again and again, when it really
does count).
Hence whilst Pt Lillias is awful and avoidable, to attack it on bird
science grounds may lead to opponents doing what Andrew has done with the
M2, saying that "I know more than you and hence I can decide that your
opposition is not worthwhile". The widespread and voluble opposition to Pt
Lillias on behalf of the OBP is valuable for the conservation of the species
because of the focus and media attention it creates.Perhaps the M2 protest
will bring new people into the conservation movement.
I would suggest that we bird people need to recognise that ordinary, local
people are allies that we can neither control nor manipulate , even if their
knowledge is not up to the same level as their enthusiasm.
I am of course willing to accept that this is not a popular view amongst
some bird lovers/birdos etc.
Bill Fenton
.
|
