Hi all,
I'd like to weigh into this debate with the obvious comment that it is not
just humans who make differences that lead to change in the environment.
Humans can and do make significant changes for "good" and "bad". Personally
I have witnessed the extension of the range of hummingbird species,
particularly Anna's Hummingbird up the West Coast of N. America by plantings
of eucalypts that provide off-season sustenance. Likewise it could be argued
that the huge increase in corvids in the same area is due to wasteful human
refuse to the detriment of other avian species.
I sense that a lot of the questions around Pied Currawongs are similar to
the crows of N.America.
At the end of the day, change is inevitable. The passage of time will
accomplish that on its own but usually there is more than one catalyst. As a
brief example, the little corellas I am hearing in the early morning chorus
were not here when I first set foot in Canberra in the 70's. It is not human
intervention that has brought them here but atmospheric change (OK there is
an argument that humans are changing the environment but as a matter of
total responsibility I think that is a bit narcissistic). Nevetheless they
have found food sources and shelter that would not ordinarily have been
available due to plantings of plant species that sustain them.
What I am trying to say , in a rather leaden-prose way, is that as observers
of bird life we are sensitive to changes that take place in our environment
in a way that is not valued enough in the wider community. Whether we like
it or not, the causes of that change are often promoted in a way that does
no justice to their complexity. I wake up every morning, to my great
wonderment, in a world that is a kaleidoscope of colours and details. Black
and white is interesting but ultimately not true to the world if viewed as
just this or that. As humans we have an effect on the world around us, yet
it is supremely arrogant to assume that our actions will rule the world.
They may for a while but they are but a part of the complex that has been
here for millions of years.We are but one species on this planet. Good
stewardship is what I understand most of us (that is the "us" that give time
to nature) aspine to. It seems to me that stewardship, if we are to consider
ourselves so gifted, is not a negative position, abhorring change, but one
embracing change in a way that challenges accepted perceptions with
observations that can be built on to offer positive outcome. So what that
says is that as a community we should be a lot more positive about what is
possible. It's all very well to sit back and say "ah, yes but they don't
really understand." Huddling about what is past or presumed in the future
does us no favours nor the world we intend to nurture. My plea is that as a
community we focus on what we can do in a positive way, rather than as a
rearguard action.
What say you COGS members?
|
