I don't want to get into the biodiversity merits of the Arboretum beyond noting that I had hoped the entire area would be rehabilitated to offset the ever-growing loss of box woodland elsewhere in the ACT.
Alas and alack. Disappointed yet again.
Nevertheless, I feel I should point out some small birdy things.
Spurred on by Barbara's request for someone, anyone, to do the Arboretum, I was one of a surging maelstrom of COGites who ended up Blitzing the Arboretum. We enjoyed a bit of a laugh at ourselves as we met accidentally by the big dam at the entrance and
divvied up the workload.
As usual with somewhat low biodiversity alien treescapes, the Arboretum still has scrappy bits, the boundaries, the edges, a relict paddock tree or two, the odd patch of blackberries and some unmown long grass in the rocky bits and near the watery bits.
These scraps were the best for birdy biodiversity.
Notably, it was in this sort of leftover bit where there was a breeding record for the White-fronted Chat - which is some strife. In another such scrappy area I recorded what may have been the only Rufous Songlark for the Blitz. Not sure about that.
I would encourage Arboretum staff to deliberately leave scrappy bits of long grass (tastefully hidden from tourists and senior managers) over the duration of the breeding season to offset the somewhat the stultifying effects of the manicured bits.
Looking at the bright side of life, if we all wait another century or so, the large numbers of eucs will develop hollows, and the avian nature of the Arboretum will then be very different. It will then also definitely be a superior contributor to our avian
biodiversity than the vast monocultural swathes of Pinus radiata that they replaced. Not perfect. But good.
As for the tourism, if you fancy being a lord in the lap of the gods overlooking LGB, and directing the fates of the ant-like creatures scurrying about the Big House on the Hill, and if you also appreciate a nifty bit of architecture, then a cuppa up top
is well worth the time and effort and a jolly good place to take your interstate and o/s friends and rellies.
The nearby pale echo of the Sydney Opera House is apparently increasingly a popular venue for wedding photography.
Alas the planning for the Wide Brown Land sculpture, which I like, failed to take into account the nature of trees... which is that they grow and hide sculptures from view. The wind sculptures add a bit of couth.
The playground is usually jumping with Canberra's juvenalia. A quick visit to the deliberately stunted trees exhibition is also well worth a go.
I enjoyed the native area being rehabilitated by the volunteers, and picked up some species there that were recorded nowhere else in the Arboretum on Blitz day.
I trust that the alien trees will eventually produce fruits, nuts and seeds to suit the taste of our suite of fruit, nut and seed eaters. But I am not overly optimistic about this.
I believe that the Cork Oak Plantation has been incorporated into the Arboretum.
Oh, and if you run out of feathery wings, I have been informed by an expert that the big entrance dam is a good place for dragonflies and damselflies.
regards
Con
On 1/16/2017 5:48 PM, Alan Ford wrote:
From: Alan Ford [m("bigpond.com","eremophila1");">]
Sent: Monday, 16 January 2017 5:47 PM
To: 'Fleur r Leary'
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
Ms Leary
I began by quoting a definition of an arboretum, nothing about birds in that.
I only referred to birds as this is a bird group.
My main interest in this question is the problem of the disappearing ecosystems-birds are part of those and depend on them for their sustenance.
I mentioned ecosystems in my earlier posting and Mr Harris referred to STEP (Southern Tablelands ECOSYSTEM Park), an element of the arboretum.
People need to think about the systems that sustain birds. It is true that the arboretum is not there primarily for birds. On my walks around the Arboretum
it is a bird desert. Perhaps if people thought about the problem, that might change.
Alan
From: Fleur r Leary [m("gmail.com","fleurr.leary");">]
Sent: Monday, 16 January 2017 1:15 PM
To: Philip Veerman
Cc: CanberraBirds
Subject: Re: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
Thanks Philip - I agree with you. The arboretum is not there primarily for birds. Questions/opinions about the value of the arboretum would be better held on another platform such as the RiotAct. Has someone actually tried to find out
what those nesting boxes are for (the original question in this email trail)?
It is reasonable to discuss the role of the arboretum to learn lessons from it and inform future choices. It is curious to think about the arboretum and whether
it is a good thing or not, as though the issue is birds. We are a bird interested group but not all the world is. We should chose our battles and do as well as we can in pushing conservation issues when they involve our expertise. So we can not and should
not attempt to judge everything by birds. It simply is not realistic in a public tax paying democracy. I see the arboretum as something of an experiment and a nice place to visit (not often). The area could easily have been devoted to housing, sports stadiums
or car parks. It is reasonable that some conservation efforts be devoted primarily to birds, some to bettongs, some to various trees or whatever. Whether the
Deodar Cedar, is of no value to birds is hardly important, provided that plantings of Deodar Cedar are of value to Deodar Cedar and there is some well considered basis for allocating the space to it and that the space is only token and that the species does
not become invasive. I hope the arboretum does not become a modern version of the thoughts of the acclimatization society of the 1850s. Though I doubt it would.
I cannot see it as realistic to accept a blanket statement that: “The fact is that the bird life around us is disappearing.” It can hardly be “the policy of
the Barr Labor government”. Yes there are significant changes going on and various actions of almost any government around the world contribute to conservation problems. But there is not an overall disappearing. Those changes are consequence of many things,
including habitat loss (often well outside the ACT). Affecting each species in its own way. A small amount of Deodar Cedar is not going to impact adversely on most birds (well not more than a car park of the same size).
An arboretum is a botanic garden devoted to trees. The people who thought of this one were clearly interested in trees. I doubt if they were interested in anything
else.
One of the odd things is that this arboretum is defended on the basis that it has a role in tree conservation by planting those trees in danger of extinction.
This argument appears to have arisen in the context of attempts to justify the amounts spent on the arboretum project.
I am uncertain about its potential role in bird conservation. What I do know is that one of its trees, the Deodar Cedar, is of no value to birds. When I had
one not even the local Common Mynas would bother to perch in it. Based on my observations around town, the exotic trees in the Canberra landscape are of little value to the local birds. Perhaps that applies to the exotics in the Arboretum.
While STEP is an important part of the Arboretum these days it is a small element in the total project.
The fact is that the bird life around us is disappearing, That appears to the policy of the Barr Labor government and no one can deny the habitat destruction
that occurs every day around us.
The problem with the arboretum is that it concentrates on trees. While they may be important to birds there are other elements in the landscape, such as complete
ecosystems, that are also important. Attempts to defend this arboretum ignore the role of other elements of the local native flora in the life of the native animals more generally.
Lastly, it is a fire trap and it must cost a huge amount to prevent fire going through it.
