From: Alan Ford [
Sent: Tuesday, 17 January 2017 8:22 AM
To: 'David Rees'
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
David
COG has been writing submissions for as long as I can remember to try and prevent local birds from becoming “functionally extinct”. COG members have been out
surveying sites gathering evidence for those submissions.
Others in the city have done similar submissions on ecosystems, plants, reptiles and insects. (You know more about insects having published books on them.)
If people in the past had moved on instead of fighting for the natural world then we wouldn’t have the bush capital that we live in.
It isn’t time to move on. We need to continue to concern ourselves with issues like the Arboretum to ensure that something of our Australian natural world is
left for the next generation.
The Arboretum is a monster that burns cash-money that might have been used to assist the Emergency Department of Canberra hospital meet its day to day obligations.
(It struggles even on good days.)
The Arboretum is a symbol of the past, a relic from the time when people planted things from far-away places to remind them of what they considered home. Those
attitudes die hard. But if anything Australian is to survive attitudes need to change.
I notice your final comment about land around the Cotter. Your country needs you-join a Parkcare Group.
Alan
From: David Rees
Sent: Monday, 16 January 2017 10:02 PM
To: Mark Clayton
Cc: Alan Ford; <>
Subject: Re: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
Mark
When was the last time a Regent Honeyeater or a Swift Parrot was seen in what is now the reduced-in-size suburb of Throsby, which is what I think you are alluding to. I think we need to be honest and admit that the Regent Honeyeater is
'functionally extinct' in the ACT. In recent years Swift Parrots have been seen using non-local eucalyptus in the older suburbs as well as local trees on Mt Ainsle - is that a bad thing?. True, Superb parrots used this area as they still use many other
areas nearby, however there seem to be more of them in and around northern Canberra in recent years than say 20 years ago, again is that a bad thing?.
Was there any reason why the ACT Government could have kept going with building Gungahlin to the NSW border if they wanted to? no, they made a decision not to, and a good one at that. As a result we have two good nature reserves on the
northern edge of Canberra. Same goes for some other reserves around the place. Would have been nice to preserve more - yes, but we have to be realistic. This is a medium sized Australian city, with that comes conveniences which you and I enjoy and have enjoyed
(like jobs, places to live, education, transport links, health care, social and cultural activities, shops etc. etc.) to provide this there are costs.
You mention support in emails posted here, that may be so. There have been several elections in Canberra where this could have been an issue and it was not - why, I suspect a majority of people around the city don't mind the arboretum
now (aka a big public park with wonderful views, great kids playground, cafe and trees which will grow and give cool shade- something local natives do not). Time to move on.
There is heaps of scraggy ex pine plantation such as near the base of the Cotter dam along the road to Tidbinbilla that could so with some TLC to improve its use over and above a location to dispose of stolen cars etc.
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Mark Clayton <> wrote:
Once again Alan, well said. I am concerned about what is happening to the habitat for the Critically
Endangered Regent Honeyeater, The Endangered Swift Parrot and the Threatened Superb Parrot locally. I suggest if people are really concerned about these three species, plus may others that are rapidly declining locally, then they should go and look at what
the ACT Government has done to the area between Mulligan’s Flat and Goorooyarroo Nature Reserves, critical Box Gum Woodland habitat that these three and other species rely on, then go and look at the Arboretum. I know which I would prefer to have saved.
As for planting casuarinas to attract Glossy Black-Cockatoos, dream on people. This species rarely
travels over urban areas to get to food sources. They have known for generations where these food trees are. The cockatoos have not found the casuarina species in the ANBG so what makes people think they will find those in the Arbortum? By the time the casuarinas
in the Arboretum are fully grown, the whole surrounding area will be filled with houses.
Funnily enough the majority of emails that have been sent to me are supporting my view that the Arboretum
is a waste of space and would have better been used to make the ACT Government a lot of money selling the land for exclusive housing
a la O’Malley. I thought that I would be inundated by people critical of my views. People are however entitled to their view as we live in a supposed democracy.
Mark
From: Alan
Ford [
Sent: Monday, 16 January 2017 5:49 PM
To:
Subject: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
From: Alan
Ford
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
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)?
On 16 Jan 2017, at 9:34 AM, Philip Veerman <> wrote:
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).
From: Alan
Ford Sent: Monday, 16 January,
2017 7:39 AM To: 'CanberraBirds'
Subject: RE: [canberrabirds] What are they for?
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.
|
|
