It is not a matter of either lobbying or doing good science. Both are necessary. And both need to be a constant dribble plus intermittent major ‘flood events’.
Likewise, there could potentially be both a quick, cheap report based on data from highly biased ebird sampling (referred to as crap data in one of the previous emails) AND later a more carefully
prepared, more costly exercise based on more systematic sampling. (The PR experts would need to think ahead about how best to explain to funding sources, the changes in threat status that arose when the more reliable information became available later.)
Whether it was decided to do both of these reports, or only the more reliable one, work needs to start as soon as possible on the more reliable one which takes longest to complete.
From: Canberrabirds <>
On Behalf Of jandaholland--- via Canberrabirds
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 11:57 AM
To: 'Philip Veerman' <>;
Subject: Re: [Canberrabirds] Blitz wind up
I strongly disagree that we should develop a new national Bird Atlas, which would take at least 10 years to plan, fund, gather the data and then analyse and publish it. By that time the situation
will be even more dire, if not completely irreversible. There is plenty of evidence out there already, and what is needed is to gather the data from all sources (in whatever form) and condense it into a readable document rather than a very thick atlas, so
that this can be brought to governments’ attention as soon as possible. Then of course it’s another thing to get them to read and act upon it in the face of other strong lobbies, just look at how hard it’s proving to get proper protection for Bluetts Block
in spite of having a “friendly” labor/green government. Or proper action on climate change. Jack Holland
I reckon all comments and questions made on this so far, are totally valid. Here is another thought. What would we try to compare any new data to? Data collection
on Australian bird populations is haphazard and always has been. It is a huge task. Some schemes have done a bit better than others. The better ones have better protocols and are more focussed on just a few species or small areas. Data collection on Australian
bird distributions is fairly good. But only in the widest interpretation of thoughts can we generalise from distributions to populations. Would we like to compare with the situation prior to 1788? We don’t have any statistical information prior to 1788. Yes,
we have lots of general impressions, like that Regent Honeyeaters once occurred in big flocks. From that we can credibly give fair information on a small number of species, even without close analysis of data. So how precious can we be about justifying how
valid our comparison statistics are?
Philip
Martin,
Unfortunately the collection of data by eBird and other such organisations is haphazard at best as everyone seems to have their own way of doing things. I know of several scientists with excellent statistical skills who
consider the way eBird collects data is basically crap (their comment, not mine) so how do you get around issues like that. Doing a National Atlas using the exact same system as the last atlas at least adds some stability to collecting the required data.
Mark
Sent from
Mail for Windows
Given the amount of data around in eBird (both Nationally and for the COG AOI) the problem is going to be getting people with the analytical skills to extract and interpret the data. Mounting a
further data collection enterprise seems a waste of time.
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 at 08:37, Mark Clayton via Canberrabirds <> wrote:
Good morning Alison,
I meant to reply to your original email but got tied up with other things. Like Chris I think this is an excellent idea and happy that I suggested it. Several comments to my original post missed the point, it is not just in certain local
areas where things are rapidly declining, it is a national problem. I have been saying this for a long time now but keep getting the same reply “but people are still recording species x, y and z” but just don’t realise that their numbers are way down.
If Birdlife Australia doesn’t want to do a National Atlas then perhaps COG could/should redo the local one that was done quite a few years ago now. Things like the GBS and Blitz weekends don’t really show what is happening long-term and across
broad areas, they only cover very small areas at best.
Mark
Sent from
Mail for Windows
Hi Alison, I think that would be an excellent suggestion as long as the protocol is the same as the previous Atlas.
Chris
Hi Mark and others
It might be a very good time to propose to BirdLife Australia that an Atlas of Australia would be a very god idea sitting on both the Blitz and the Aussie Bird Count. I have just met with the new CEO of BLA and would be happy to raise this suggestion with her
if it is felt this would be a good thing to do.
Regards
Alison
Alison Russell-French OAM
PO Box 101
Curtin ACT 2605
m("iinet.net.au","alisonrf");" target="_blank">
M: +61 419 264 702
I know that Philip is a very good birder and for him to say that things are not good bird wise just backs up what I said in an email to Nicki this morning and have been commenting on for quite a few years now. Climate change with the two
extremes in weather we have had, coupled with the excess removal of trees, both natural and planted, for the expansion of suburbia and on farmland, and the general “cleaning up” of paddocks has had a major impact on birds EVERYWHERE. I have been surveying
birds both professionally and as an amateur for nearly 60 years. I think it is now time for Birdlife Australia, if it wants to continue as supposedly Australia’s premier birding organisation, to redo an “Atlas of Australia’s Birds”, I think they will get an
almighty shock as to just what is happening. I can remember 30 – 40 years ago driving down country roads and seeing Willie Wagtails and Yellow-rumped Thornbills fly off the road, other Thornbill and fairy-wren species doing much the same. Now the occasional
Magpie-lark, Apostlebird and a lot fewer White-winged Choughs are to be seen. There are some birds on the ACT”s Threatened Species list that I, and I know a lot of others, consider should not be on it, and a lot more that should. We are finding the same is
happening with our bird banding site near West Wyalong, an area that still has a lot of native vegetation in the general area. I was surprised to find species like the Noisy Miner, Common Starling and Common Myna were in very few numbers in areas I have surveyed
in previous years.
Be interested in hearing people’s comments.
Mark
Sent from
Mail for Windows
From:
Sent: Monday, 23 October 2023 10:31 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Canberrabirds] Blitz wind up
I did 10 sites over the 2 days, with about 95 km travel, which is the most travel I have done for birding for a very long time but probably a lot less than most other people. Even though
pleasant being out, the low numbers of birds in species and individuals is getting concerning. For example at Castle Hill which in most years it has been so full it has been a struggle for just me to get to find most of what is there, yesterday I had to look
pretty carefully to come up with the list I did. Though it was nice to be there. Previously it has had Hooded Robin, Brown Treecreeper, Diamond Firetail, Leaden Flycatcher, White-browed Woodswallow, none of them left (at least within the area I look at).
Good bits were a Tawny Frogmouth on nest with at least one chick in I think exactly the same spot on a tree as last year (or was it 2 years ago?). A pair of kestrels, male seen hunting
and female seen flying around a group of trees so presumably nesting in one of them, although the tree they were nesting in 2 years ago has now fallen down. Unlike 2 years ago I was not accosted by a woman who saw me at Kambah Pool and I thought she wanted
to know what I was looking at (the above mentioned Tawny Frogmouth on nest) but she saw I was standing still and rushed at me and launched a barrage of preaching Jesus at me. The car park at Kambah Pool on Saturday afternoon was totally full of cars, even
along the access road.
Otherwise fairly ordinary.
Philip
--
This is the email announcement and discussion list of the Canberra Ornithologists Group.
Emails posted to the list that exceed 2 MB (2,000 kB) in size, including attachments, will be rejected.
All emails distributed via the list are archived at
http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/archives/html/canberrabirds. It is a condition of list membership that you agree to your contributions being archived.
Canberrabirds mailing list
https://lists.canberrabirds.org.au/mailman/listinfo/canberrabirds
|
ATT00001.txt
Description: ATT00001.txt
|
