Re: birding-aus Re: culled

To: "Peter Waanders" <>
Subject: Re: birding-aus Re: culled
From: Tony Russell <>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 15:47:14 +0900
Thank you Peter, they evidently sent you the exact same standard garbage
they sent me. Tony.

At 09:17  18/08/99 +0930, you wrote:
>     Hi all, ""  talk and the most striking argument I found was the
>following:      You can find  the full text of the reply below.   Regards  
>Peter Waanders
>  ================== Dear Mr Waanders  Thank you for your e-mail dated 21
>July 1999 to  the Premier of South Australia, Hon John Olsen MP, regarding
>the removal of the  requirement for destruction permits for common native
>parrots causing damage to  commercial orchards in a number of districts. As
>this matter is the  responsibility of my portfolio as Minister for
>Environment and Heritage, the  Premier has asked that I respond on his
>behalf.   Removal of the requirement to have a destruction  permit is not
>an indiscriminate act. Exemptions from permit are specific to musk 
>lorikeets, rainbow lorikeets, Adelaide rosellas and yellow rosellas. These 
>species may only be taken within the local government areas of: Adelaide
>Hills,  Alexandrina, Barossa, Gawler, Kapunda and Light, Marion, Mitcham,
>Mount Barker,  Onkaparinga, Playford, Tea Tree Gully, Victor Harbor,
>Yankalilla, Berri and  Barmera, Loxton Waikerie, Mid Murray, Murray Bridge
>and Renmark Paringa. Birds  may only be shot under circumstances where they
>are causing damage to commercial  orchards and vineyards and the only
>persons authorised to do so are the  landowners and their employees or
>agents. In addition, the shooting of birds  must not contravene the
>Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1985 and the  Code of Practice for the
>Humane Destruction of Galahs and Little Corellas by  Shooting, the latter
>available from National Parks and Wildlife South  Australia and local
>council offices. A species identification pamphlet will be  available for
>orchardists to distinguish between exempt and non-exempt  species.  It is
>important to recognise that the species to  which the exemptions apply are
>very common and cause significant damage to  commercial orchards and
>vineyards in these areas. The taking of other protected  bird species or
>these birds outside of the above conditions without a  destruction permit
>is still illegal and people doing so will be subject to  prosecution.   ""
>program before bird damage becomes widespread within the crop.  Removing
>the requirement for destruction permits will enable commercial  orchardists
>to act quickly and implement a damage control campaign. Depending on 
>economic feasibility, region and the species targeted, this approach must
>be  integrated with other techniques such as netting, visual scaring
>methods,  trapping by professionals, timing of maturing crops, orchard
>location and the  planting of decoy crops.    Since shooting is an adjunct
>to a scaring program  rather than simply a means of reducing bird numbers,
>it is anticipated that the  current initiative will not noticeably impact
>upon the populations of the  species exempted from destruction permits.
>Growers will only attempt shooting  during the time that buds are forming
>or fruit is maturing and the birds are  causing damage to crops.   The
>removal of the requirement for destruction  permits was carefully planned
>and considered with a view to improving the  State&rsquo;s management for
>the conservation of native species by:            preventing the
>concentration of birds on orchards by      enabling orchardists to
>implement scaring and shooting programs when birds      first arrive, thus
>maximising early deterrent capabilities while minimising      the number of
>bird deaths;                enabling National Parks and Wildlife South
>Australia and      orchardists to establish a cooperative approach to pest
>native bird      management by having practical and integrated management
>systems that are      sensitive to more vulnerable species and that provide
>sustainable long-term      strategies; and               removing an
>administrative requirement that was      time-consuming and costly while
>not serving a conservation outcome.             Controlling damage to crops
>by taking those  species to which this action applies is not new,
>destruction permits were  previously approved as a matter of course when
>damage was occurring. By removing  the requirement for destruction permits
>in some areas, we become more strategic  in our approach to management for
>conservation, thus strengthening our efforts  to conserve all species.  
>Thank you for your correspondence on this matter.    Yours sincerely    

Tony Russell,
Adelaide, South Australia
Ph:  08 8337 5959
To unsubscribe from this list, please send a message to

Include ONLY "unsubscribe birding-aus" in the message body (without the

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

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 birding-aus 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 archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU