Sorry, I posted this back t'other day and only sent it to Dion.
> In the UK, there is a (recent) history of complete transparency concerning
> rare bird sites. This hasn't really evolved from a conscious decision
rather
> than a massive eruption in the number of birders. However, highlighting
> sites has extraordinary benefits that never seem to be considered in
> postings like this. Firstly, if more people know about and visit well
known
> sites, it raises profile of a site, increases the chance that visitors can
> alert authorities of environmental impacts before they reach fruition and
> provide regular free updates on the status of the species at the site
> (pre-empting the need to fund regular monitoring surveys).
>
> The most obvious example in the UK where damage was caused to a site due
to
> a lack of publicity was Golden Orioles in East Anglia. One particular
colony
> was lost when a whole poplar plantation was felled. Only the birders in
the
> local vicinity knew about it as they had decided to suppress the site!!
>
> In addition, etiquette should arise as a function of more people visiting
> sites. Self-regulation works very well in the UK. I've been on twitches
with
> hundreds of people and strict 'rules' are often adhered to. Of course you
> get the odd loose cannon, but they don't go unnoticed and the vast
majority
> realise that there is a lot to lose if they get a bad reputation. In
> general, birders are tolerated. After all, they extend the tourist season
in
> many places and provide the majority of the tourist income for
> back-of-beyond sites.
>
> Simon Mustoe.
>
>
>
|
