Hi,
I note there have been quite a few posting on the chat-line
re the article in CT today concerning the clearance of willows. The story
is as follows:
At the start of the year COG was approached to provide
advice on the removal of willows along Molonglo Reach. Jack Holland and I
with a ranger from the Lakes Group of TAMS visited the area and suggested that
there should be at least a couple of surveys to count and identify the areas
that were being used by the nesting birds. Nothing more was heard until
about 20th April. I was most surprised at the request and indicated that the
breeding season had virtually ceased. The Department indicated that they
still wanted a survey so on the 24th and again on the 27th April Nicki Taws visited the
area between the two bridges and recorded a couple of nests. Then on 1st May
Peter Fullagar and I surveyed the entire Reach using Jim Armstrong and his
electric boat. We subsequently wrote a report indicating that we had
found very few active nests, that virtually all were to be found in Crack
Willow and that the timing of the survey did not enable us to obtain any idea
of the numbers or extent of the breeding area. We pointed out that nests
that were present during the COG outing on 16th March were in many cases not present
and that the vegetation surrounding any nest must remain. The sites of
all old and occupied nests were marked with flagging tape. At the time
there were 11 nests (old plus occupied) along the north side and 31 along the
south side. I have not subsequently visited the area but, as agreed, I
understand that the north side has been cleared but not the south side.
Given that the Department was determined to go ahead with
the clearing before the end of the financial year it was suggested that it may
be possible to obtain a measure of disturbance by comparing the number of nests
on the north side with that on the south side, then repeat the survey next year
to compare the ratio. It has been suggested that for next year the survey
should occur on at least a couple of occasions spread out over the breeding
season. I should point out that the Department is between a rock and a hard
place on this one with the need to get rid of a declared noxious weed species
yet protect the breeding sites. In my view the answer is to go about the
clearing over a lengthy time period and to replant with trees that will provide
appropriate nesting habitat.
MI partners is a group set up by Peter, myself and two
others primarily to conduct work on Montagu Island (hence
MI). MI Partners has never contracted their services for money and this
was certainly true in this case, in fact our motto is ‘Intellectual
property provided free of charge for the benefit of bird conservation’.
The boat was paid for by the Department. We decided to write the report
under the name of MI Partners to distance the survey from COG. As soon as
Jack returns from overseas I intend to arrange to give a short talk at Members
Night. May I point out that Peter and I have both been lucky enough to
work for many years professionally on waterbirds.
I hope this clears up some of the concerns expressed over
the chat-line,
Regards
Chris Davey
24 Bardsley Place
Holt
ACT 2615
Tel: 02-62546324
