I wish I could share John Leonard’s gratefulness to the Australian Government
for their conservation and management of Australia’s Indian Ocean Territories.
Unfortunately (and no offence intended to John), my experiences do not allow me
such comfort, as I will explain below. I can assure that birding has had no
relevance or influence on any Australian Government policies relating to
management, conservation or sovereignty of Christmas or Cocos (Keeling) Islands.
I led a detailed biodiversity research and monitoring program on Christmas
Island for the federal government (as an employee of the then Department of
Environment and Heritage – DEH) from 2003 to 2007. This included a study of the
decline of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle (a micro-bat) for 3.5 yrs. From
2005 onwards I advised DEH that the bat would likely become extinct by the end
of 2008 if there was no intervention. My Ministerial Memo prepared in January
05 was delayed and edited by DEH bureaucrats and (I was told) in Dec 05 the
Parliamentary Secretary, Greg Hunt, finally got to read it. When I met him on
the Island in December 2005 he invited me to Canberra to discuss this issue and
others with him, his advisors and parliamentary members. Unfortunately he did
this in front of two very senior DEH bureaucrats who were not amused. They
quickly shut this down, put me on notice of termination for unauthorised
communications and prohibited me from
going to Canberra. Six quarterly reports in 2005 and 2006, a detailed
conservation assessment in August 2005, a detailed report on the research in
March 2007 and a summary my main report on the biodiversity of Christmas Island
in April 2007 addressed the pending extinction of the bat. All were buried by
bureaucrats in Canberra and Darwin, and all remain unavailable to the public to
this day. One piece of advice particularly ignored by the government in 2006
was that they should not clear a certain regrowth field to mine topsoil for the
lawns and sports fields of the new detention centre, because it was being used
by the bats for foraging. Almost 2 years later in Jan 2009 the then Minister of
the Environment Peter Garrett acted on lobbying from the Aust Bat Society and
Lindy Lumsden. In Sept 2009 after clearing the red-tape a 'rescue party'
arrived on CI in time to find 1 remaining bat and declare the species extinct.
In 2004 my team's research found that 4 out of 5 endemic reptiles and 1 native
(not endemic) reptile on CI were declining severely and on the brink of
extinction. My reports, memos and advice were repeatedly ignored. I was
specifically prevented from nominating any of these for listing as threatened
species by the most senior bureaucrats in Darwin and Canberra. I was verbally
rebuked for trying to do so. Two of these species are now thought to be
extinct. Two are extinct in the wild but small numbers are being held in
captivity. The other is just too rare to know.
My team's research demonstrated severe declines in the CI flying-fox. My
reports, memos and advice were repeatedly ignored. I was specifically prevented
from nominating the fox for listing as threatened species by the most senior
DEH bureaucrats in Darwin and Canberra. A third party independently nominated
the species to be listed on the EPBC Act, so the department had to respond. The
nomination took 2 years to be accepted and was open to public comment for 6
weeks, but none was received. The Department's Scientific Advisory Committee
(which advises on all nominations) was provided with a large supply of
documents by the Department. This included some incorrect data and some
unsubstantiated statements maintaining that all of the Departments data (i.e.
data collected by my team) were unreliable. Our 2006 research report, the only
substantial scientific data on the subject since 1985, was not provided to the
committee, according to one member I queried
after their decision. The committee determined that there was not enough
information to support a listing. This is publicly available. The species
remains unprotected to this day and no substantial research or monitoring is
occurring. However, I can at least say that I saw about 100 individuals on my
recent visits and it is not on the immediate brink of extinction.
In 2006 I witnessed senior bureaucrats rewrite my memo on the Department’s
conservation efforts for Abbott’s Booby to suite themselves, which led to
misleading claims made before the Senate Estimates Committee. In 2006 my team's
research documented complete nesting failure of Red-tailed tropicbirds in a
subcolony of about 300 pairs, and demonstrated that it resulted from predation
by cats and rats. The situation remains unchanged. Java Sparrow, introduced
about 100 years ago, and White-breasted Waterhen, self introduced about 20
years ago are both on the verge of extinction. This is apparently due to cats.
The Department has been claiming to work towards controlling cats for years,
but has done very little and achieved nothing practical.
I advised the Government that projected immigration activities on the Island
would cause unsustainable kills of Red Crabs on Robber Crabs, only to be
ignored. Evidence suggests that these predictions, based on robust research,
are occurring right now.
I think the Australian Government could and should do much better. When I
worked for the government I tried my heart out to conserve the biodiversity of
Christmas Island. However I will live in the shadow of this immense failure for
the rest of my days, knowing that others involved remain on very fat government
salaries paid from the Australian tax base.
--- On Fri, 14/1/11, <>
wrote:
From: <>
Subject: Re: RE: [Birding-Aus] Re: Cocos & Christmas Island Rarities
To: "Birding-aus" <>
Received: Friday, 14 January, 2011, 11:21 AM
The really vital thing about Christmas and Cocos Islands is that the endemics
(inc Abbott's Booby), and other birds and fauna and flora are properly
protected. To that extent I am grateful that Australia administers these
territories because I think there is more chance of proper conservation
happening there than if a poorer country administered them. And all credit to
birdwatchers and others who keeps these issues in the public and official eye.
Having said that if I ever went to these territories I would add any birds that
I saw there to to my oriental list, not my australian list, because I think
that lists have to have a biogeographic sense. For example I don't have an ACT
list because "The ACT" isn'ta biogeographical area. (All right, all right, I
know how many species I've seen within the borders of the ACT, I just haven't
written a list).
As to the other issue, I would prefer to see field guide to Australian Birds
kept to the Australian mainland and Tasmania, so they aren't too bulky and
confusing for beginners. I think there is scope, especially with the ease of
publishing nowadays, for local field guides to territories. I think that A
Guide to the Birds of Christmas and Cocos Islands would be a nice title and
very suitable for selling to visitors to the island, and such a title would
also raise conservation issues and inform local people about these.
John Leonard
On , Peter Shute <> wrote:
> I didn't see it as an attempt to change the direction of the debate. The idea
> was put forward that including birds seen on these islands on the Australian
> list encouraged birders to visit them, and that that would be good for the
> birds because the locals would see some value in protecting them.
> I'm not necessarily agreeing that that fully justifies having them on the
> list. I agree that for most of us, for most of the time, these species are
> adding to the size of the field guides for no good reason (but to what
> extent, I haven't actually checked).
> I like the idea of a supplementary list, but would it result in smaller field
> guides? Unless there's a viable market for guides just for this list, it
> would still be more practical to just keep adding them to the current guides.
> Peter Shute
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> > On Behalf Of Lloyd Nielsen
> > Sent: Friday, 14 January 2011 6:48 AM
> > To:
> > Subject: [Birding-Aus] Re: Cocos & Christmas Island Rarities
> >
> > I also found it rather puzzling that an attempt was made to
> > change the
> > direction of the debate, the original direction of which was
> > clearly the
> > adding of those accidental Asian birds from the distant island
> > territories to the Australian list.
> >
> > It seems that two things are responsible for the change in
> > direction in
> > regard to the Australian list - firstly Christidis & Boles
> > changing the
> > name from "The Taxonomy and Species of Birds of Australia and its
> > Territories" (1994) to "Systematics and Taxonomy of Australian Birds"
> > (2008) both of which in turn were adopted by Birds Australia as the
> > official list of Australian birds. Secondly the apparent
> > acceptance it
> > seems of everything that is accepted by BARC onto the
> > Australian list no
> > matter where it is from.
> >
> > In the recent visit to those islands, some birders added up to 10 new
> > birds for their "Australian" list - all Asian etc accidentals or
> > vagrants to islands a huge distance out from the Australia
> > mainland and
> > well away from the continental shelf. That's fine! Whatever people do
> > with their own personal lists, how they keep them and what
> > they regard
> > as "Australian" is their business - but the official
> > Australian list is
> > everyone's business. If this direction continues, where is it
> > going to
> > stop? With 10 or more Asian accidentals added to the Australian list
> > every year, the situation will be mind boggling in a few
> > years and the
> > end product will be little more than worthless and a joke into the
> > bargain. Would it happen in any other country or region? I
> > would bet not.
> >
> > I am not saying don't stop visiting the island territories - what is
> > coming out of those islands is fascinating and important
> > stuff. What I
> > am saying is let's get our listing right. Perhaps Birds
> > Australia has to
> > take the initiative? And please - no red herrings (eg
> > tourism) in the
> > debate!
> >
> > The only practical and sensible thing (officially) and to get some
> > science (and sanity) back into our listing seems to be the
> > creation of
> > supplementary lists for the Australian political territories.
> > If not it
> > will entice authors to create their own lists as is already happening.
> >
> > Finally, to David's comment about Australian Field guides
> > ie "If you
> > don't like field guides illustrating vagrant birds.... just don't read
> > them". Field guides are not there to be "read" but are tools for the
> > identification of our birds - which can be rather difficult and
> > frustrating, especially for people who are new or casual to
> > birding when
> > the guide is overloaded with birds from other regions.
> >
> > Lloyd Nielsen
> >
> > Mt Molloy, Nth Qld
> >
> >
> > ===============================
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> > send the message:
> > unsubscribe
> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> > to:
> >
> > http://birding-aus.org
> > ===============================
> >
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
> http://birding-aus.org
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,send the message:
unsubscribe(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
==============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
=============================
|
