canberrabirds

Flushing Cormorants

To:
Subject: Flushing Cormorants
From: Con Boekel <>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:00:43 +1100
Having been in the game of reserve management for many years, I would like to pass along to Michael and the management a big thank you for a well-managed reserve.

Well done.

There are four basic rules of thumb that operate here:

(1) You can't maximise all your variables.
(2) You will never please everyone.
(3) The ones who are displeased will be the noisiest people.
(4) The ones who are pleased will get on with their enjoyment, but will not feel such a great need to say so.

The inevitable result with a high-visitation, and an increasingly densely-populated neighbourhood, is that some natural values will be compromised - as will other values, such as lovers seeking privacy, hunting, shooting, and the gathering of bird experiences in all its forms.

The strategic aim of replacing feral woody weeds with native vegetation is sound - even if it causes short-term disturbance to both birds and the sensibilities of some visitors.

Excluding casual users from some areas is sound as well.

On my impact as an observer and a photographer, I find it troubles me constantly.

I have a sort of mental line: if I am contributing to the birds by sharing photos and inputting data then there is a positive side to what I am doing that balances the negative of (sometimes) inevitable disturbance. If I go for the sole purpose of enjoying the birds and my disturbance causes some use of energy (they fly away, they stop feeding, they lose concentration on real predators) or causes some additional exposure to predators by creating scent trails for foxes, for example,) then I regard myself solely as a bird consumer.

When I consume common birds I am not all that concerned. When I disturb Common Mynahs, I am delighted. When I consume the time, energy and/or breeding activities of species that are rare, declining, endangered, or at the edge of their range it can get a bit more serious.

I acknowledge that I have walked, and sometimes still do walk, both sides of the line.

regards

Con



On 14/10/2014 9:59 AM, Maconachie, Michael wrote:

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

 

 

 

 

From: Robin Hide [m("anu.edu.au","robin.hide");">]
Sent: Monday, 13 October 2014 10:57 PM
To: milburns; m("canberrabirds.org.au","canberrabirds");">
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] Flushing Cormorants

 

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

 

From: milburns [m("homemail.com.au","milburns");">]
Sent: Monday, 13 October 2014 9:46 PM
To: m("canberrabirds.org.au","canberrabirds");">
Subject: [canberrabirds] Flushing Cormorants

 

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


 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the Canberra Ornithologists Group mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the list contact David McDonald, list manager, phone (02) 6231 8904 or email . If you can not contact David McDonald e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU