|To:||Chris Davey <>|
|Subject:||Bush Stone-Curlew status|
|From:||Martin Butterfield <>|
|Date:||Wed, 15 Jan 2020 06:50:23 +0000|
There has also been discussion of whether the birds were tickable or not. I think the concision was “not”. The word “ chook” may have been used.
From memory the issue was the time the colony had to exist after assisted establishment to be counted as self-sustaining.
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:09, Chris Davey <> wrote:
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Bush Stone-Curlew status, Chris Davey|
|Next by Date:||Bush Stone-Curlew status, shorty|
|Previous by Thread:||Bush Stone-Curlew status, Chris Davey|
|Next by Thread:||Bush Stone-Curlew status, shorty|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|
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: email@example.com.EDU.AU