RE: [news] Myna Matters Bulletin #25

["Philip Veerman" <>]

Of course, as Mark says, there are far more severe threats to our wildlife than the Common Myna. Though as we are discussing birds, I suggest the impact of trout is somewhat limited (but that is another issue). Yes the Common Myna likely has had localised negative impacts on populations some bird species, especially when combined with other things (mainly diminished supply of suitable large hollow forming trees). However that impact is still mainly hypothesised on limited evidence. That is not to say we shouldn't still be cautious and do something about it in places where there is still the capacity to reduce the impact. There are reasons to reduce Mynas apart from any potential negative impact on other species. Yes the Myna can surely at an individual level out compete other species at particular nesting sites. In Canberra the only evidence is that their impact is most obviously shown on the Common Starling, with no empirical evidence (and indeed limited suggestive information) of direct negative impact on abundance of any other species. The parrots that we might have expected could most be impacted have all done very well locally during the establishment of the Myna and continue to do so. Yes they might have increased even more than most have done without the Myna here but who knows. We don't have a parallel universe. Maybe a clue is that the King Parrot, that never breeds in Canberra (but only in forests where the Myna does not breed) and thus cannot have been impacted at all by nest competition from the Myna, has increased the most of all the parrots.

 

Philip

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Clayton [
Sent: Monday, 24 December 2012 8:08 AM
To: 'Bill Handke'; ;
Cc: 'Alison Russell-French'; 'Anne I'ons'; 'Bruce Lindenmayer'; 'Graham Gliddon'; 'Greg Flowers'; 'Ian Andrew Fuller'; 'Kate Grarock'; 'Marg Peachey'; 'Megan Vandervelde'; 'Peter Ormay'; 'ray barge'; 'Rosemary Blemings'; 'Ross Dalton'; 'Tony Peacock'; 'COG List'
Subject: [canberrabirds] RE: [news] Myna Matters Bulletin #25

Bill et al,

 

Again a very informative newsletter. I would however like to make a point on one comment, that being the work of Darren le Roux and whether it can help getting the Myna listed as a threatening process. It should in theory be an easy task given that so many people dislike the bird. Unfortunately there are far more severe threats to our wildlife, particularly native fish and amphibians posed by introduced trout and other fish species but let anyone suggest removing them, especially trout, from our lakes, rivers and streams or declaring them a threatening process, and watch the outcry from the fishing fraternity. I know many people in departments like the NSWNPWS would like to see this happen but politicians don’t have the guts to try it! Just look at the ludicrous laws allowing hunting in National Parks that are proposed by the O’Farrell government in NSW and the power of the gun lobby.

 

Just something for people to think about!

 

Merry Christmas all and a Happy New Year,

Mark

 

From: Bill Handke [
Sent: Sunday, 23 December 2012 10:23 PM
To: ;
Cc: Alison Russell-French; Anne I'ons; Bill & Jenny Handke; Bruce Lindenmayer; Graham Gliddon; Greg Flowers; Ian Andrew Fuller; Kate Grarock; Marg Peachey; Megan Vandervelde; Peter Ormay; ray barge; 'Rosemary Blemings'; Ross Dalton; 'Tony Peacock'
Subject: [news] Myna Matters Bulletin #25

 

Please find enclosed Myna Matters Bulletin #25 – the 2012 Xmas Edition.  There has been an amazing amount of myna control stuff happening all up and down the eastern seaboard over the past year.  Lots of it reported in here.

On behalf of the CIMAG Committee, have a great, safe Xmas and a wonderful 2013.

Cheers
Bill Handke

Canberra Indian Myna Action Group