there is a question that never seems to be asked in relation to receding
populations, but seems to come up in my thinking on a regular basis.
There is a tendency to write habitat off in relation to development
assessments, when it is confirmed that a subject species is no longer present
and hasn't been for some time, Greg Roberts' Eastern Bristlebird habitat may be
a candidate for such a notion in the future, as an example, as is
Black-throated Finch habitat.
On the other hand threatened species are subject to recovery actions by
government departments to promote their return to a more secure status. If the
southern population of Black-throated Finch is confirmed as not being present
at this site, should the habitat be rendered unusable? If so, where will the
proposed recovering populations live?
The writing off of previously occupied habitat, due to a threatened species not
being present is surely ensuring that the species will remain threatened,
particularly in that area.......yes....no?
On 22/10/2011, at 12:48 PM, Andrew Bell wrote:
> Which I'm sure leaves most of us who are naive to this (which I suspect
> includes most of the general public) totally gobsmacked. I guess one could
> hope for an intervention to maintain the spirit of, as opposed to the legal
> status of, such a reserve
> Andrew Bell
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Rita & Ian
> Sent: Friday, 21 October 2011 3:23 PM
> To: Peter Ewin; ? birding-aus
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Black-throated Finches and mining
> Hi everyone
> some comments - mining leases can be issued under the Mineral Resources Act
> 1989 over Nature Refuges. The declaration of a Nature Refuge, even thought
> it is declared under the Nature Conservation Act 1992, does not preclude
> The clearing of vegetation for mining is not assessed under the Vegetation
> Management Act 1999.