birding-aus

Land acquisition by Birds Australia

To: <>
Subject: Land acquisition by Birds Australia
From: "richard jordan" <>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:21:40 +1000
Hello all
 
I may have come into this debate a little late, having been on tour until recently. I have, however, caught up on the news about the possible acquisition of Newhaven Station by Birds Australia.
 
I spend a great deal of my time on public lands of various descriptions - 'national' -ie state - parks, real national parks, nature reserves, state forests, bird observatories - as well as Gluepot.
 
Our public lands are generally in a parlous state. It is hard to understand how management of a property by Birds Australia could possibly be worse than the example set by government. Although, it must be said, there are many examples of good management.  And, OK, we have to pressure government to lift their act as they do control an awful lot of land. But the good examples usually involve the expenditure of vast amounts of money - much of it wasted or spent on large 'information' centres (ie restaurants and shops - with some posters and stuffed animals for 'information'). Feral animal and weed control is usually non-existent or perfunctory and 'field' staff never seem to make it into the field, or are spread so thinly as to be invisible.
 
I could mention some shining lights to counter this impression - the early years of Lawn Hill National Park, Two Peoples Bay Nature Reserve, Dryandra Forest, Uluru (except for the rock-climbing), the cultural centre in Kakadu National Park, Currawinya National Park, the walks in Minnamurra Rainforest and Tibooburra Park Information Centre all come to mind. But the overall picture is a mixture of under-resourcing combined with wastage. If you add to that the continual organisational revolutions and you do not have a pretty picture.
 
The theory that we should pressure government on conservation issues is great - the actual result on the ground will never be up to the standards set by expert and highly-motivated groups such as Birds Australia - and be nowhere near as cost effective or amenable to a high level of public support, including bequests. And what a perfect way to make a bequest - it is rather less likely that governements will ever benefit much from bequests!  Just look at the reserves owned by the RSBP in Britain - funded in large part by bequests.
 
I believe that Birds Australia should continue to purchase reserves. However, I also feel that they need more 'selling' to a wider audience - and to be used to vastly increase the membership of Birds Australia. But don't neglect the bird observatories! They are also an important part of the fabric.
 
We need every skerrick of land we can put our hands on to be managed for its wildlife values - be it 'Land for Wildlife', 'Wildlife Refuges', Birds Australia Reserves - or parcels managed by other bird clubs and nature bodies. The management will be imperfect in various ways - but a lot better than the alternative!
 
Richard
 
Richard Jordan
Emu Tours, PO Box 4, Jamberoo, NSW 2533, Australia

www.ozemail.com.au/~emutours/
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Land acquisition by Birds Australia, richard jordan <=
Admin

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