I won’t wade
into this debate too much but a couple of points:
Under the
Management Plan no boats are allowed within the
reserve/Jerra Creek past the harbour entrance. At the moment
this is difficult to enforce as the boat club is within the
exclusion area. The boat club will shortly be moving as this
area will be developed as part of Kingston Harbour. It is
likely that we will put a buoy line across the entrance of
Jerra Creek in the future. People have been kayaking up
Jerra Creek for a long time and it won’t stop overnight –
old habits die hard. A certain percentage of dog owners are
blind to ‘no dog signs’ so I guess a certain percentage of
kayakers will be blind to ‘no water craft’ signs. We also
need to have a chat with the AFP Water Police who ride their
jetski’s all the way up to the silt trap .....
Milburn’s point
about ‘huge amounts of human traffic’ – in general
visitation has increased, although most come via the
cycleway (which rightly or wrongly is routed through the
reserve). Yes the new boardwalk will increase visitation and
we are getting more people through guided walks and
schools/universities. The development of Kingston harbour is
bringing the wetlands more neighbours. More people will use
the area if we do nothing so we try to manage the visitation
to reduce its impact but also provide an educational role
(this is one of the aims for the reserve as outlined in the
Management Plan). Most unmanaged access into the refuge area
is birdwatchers, although I have removed bow hunters and
public just wandering. Another ‘unmanaged’ group is ACTEW
who go in and out as they see fit to manage the powerlines
and cut vegetation under the lines. The grazier also goes
around the refuge area every few days to check on his
cattle. Which group causes the most disturbance ? all will
cause a level of disturbance. Some we cannot manage as they
are essential (eg ACTEW, grazier) but in theory I can reduce
the number of birdwatchers, university groups etc. I cannot
manage the refuge area without entering it and my presence
causes a level of disturbance. The pair of sea eagles that
were around in the refuge area last autumn for a couple of
months would always take flight when they saw the vehicle.
I think the 74
species in a day at Jerra Wetlands can only be achieved by
entering the refuge area .....
‘Huge amounts
of devegetation’ – I will disagree with this point. Yes
there has been removal of exotic vegetation but all areas
have been re-planted with natives. As natives support more
insects than exotics then as these plantings mature they
should support more native birds. The main value for exotic
trees/shrubs at the wetlands is as roost sites, cover and
nesting. In some areas we have left exotics for this purpose
eg the less invasive mature weeping willows with hollows are
used by red-rump parrots for nesting and the poisoned
African boxthorn is left as shelter for fairy wrens and
finches. The new plantings also cover more area than the
removed area. Along the Molonglo we have just completed some
‘forward plantings’ – establishing native veg before we
remove exotics in the future. One area of poisoned willows
has been left to rot down, with natives planted among it to
grow through. The area (approx 0.5ha) of willows and alder
removed opposite Kingston Harbour was replanted with 5,000
reeds but also had good natural regen of reeds. While this
is a ‘habitat’ change I would say it is for the better. This
area had about 10 Lathams Snipe in residence all summer –
that is how many were flushed each time we went in to do
follow up removal of willow and alder seedlings. It is also
well used by other water birds. Thought does go into the
process and while some disturbance is inevitable the long
term benefit of replacing the exotic with the native far out
ways it. Think also how much disturbance this reserve has
had ? look at old aerial photos. In 1980 there were no trees
around Kellys Swamp. The Kingston side of Jerra Creek had no
trees because it was a rubbish dump – all has been planted.
The wetlands of the refuge area did not exist until Lake
Burley Griffin was filled in the 60’s. The whole area has
been influenced by man and the nature reserve is a very
recent ‘land use’. It has been a treeless dairy farm for a
lot longer. The wildlife that exists currently has evolved
with the changing land use. Our aim is to improve the
reserve for both wildlife and people and that will involve
removing exotic vegetation. When you look at the history of
the site, the current ‘devegetation’ is a very minor and
temporary disturbance event. If thinking purely of birds
then foxes, cats, rats and people are a much bigger
disturbance.
Michael
Maconachie
Senior Ranger
Jerrabomberra
Wetlands Nature Reserve
ACT Parks and
Conservation Service
TAMS
Directorate
0428 113 533
www.jerrabomberrawetlands.org
My apologies- I
was in a small 3.5 m boat (Mirror) oars/electric motor in
the entrance to the creek about to head up towards the
rowing club boathouse inside the creek when I saw the birds
in the trees immediately opposite the apartments at the
point/entrance to the “harbour”). I photographed them with a
zoom lens from about the centre of the creek and had no
intention of flushing them. I will certainly keep a wider
distance in future. With the rowing club further up the
creek, and I assume some marine traffic using the “harbour”
entrance, this part of the creek entrance must be subject to
a certain amount of marine disturbance. Perhaps some
rules/advice/signage restricting or limiting waterborne
movement upstream beyond the rowing club area into the
refuge would be worthwhile?
Robin Hide
I hate to say this but the birds in the
image posted are clearly not happy about being
photographed. Surely the purpose of a wildlife refuge is to
provide a space where wildlife is not disturbed.
Jerrabomberra Wetlands has suffered massive disturbance in
the the last 12 months. Huge amounts of devegetation and
human traffic. If we love it any more we will ruin it.
Milburn
