Brian Everingham wrote:
>
> I did provide money for Gluepot but I do have my doubts about the wisdom of
> private purchase. My own organisation, the National Parks Association of NSW
> (to which I am Hon Secretary) has spent its whole existence fighting for a
> public national park system.
> I know that the status of the title does not affect the quality of the
> reserve and that it is the management regime that is important (so long as a
> reserve is managed according to the best level of IUCN category possible,
> especially categories 1-4) but in this era of government retreat from
> service provision I do wonder if the actions of Birds Australia are not an
> excuse for even this area to be the target of privatisation.
> Let us not yet condemn those who question the purchase of properties by
> Birds Australia. I am pleased that an area can be protected but still hope
> that it is not at the cost of public reserve systems across the country.
This is certainly a complex issue. My answer though is that we
shouldn't put all our conservation eggs in the one sort of basket.
Government's come and go, and the adequacy of their support for the
reserve system waxes and wanes. [It is certainly a contentious issue in
Qld at the moment].
The bottom line is that the state cannot afford to maintain a sufficient
reserve system in its own right, and so conservation efforts have to
depend on appropriate management on private tenures.
The key issue with landowners such as the bush heritage fund and birds
australia is whether they are in a position to undertake the necessary
ecological maintenance [weed and feral control, application of
appropriate fire regime etc.]
Regards, Laurie.
To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to
Include ONLY "unsubscribe birding-aus"
in the message body (without the quotes)
|
