Two questions:
1. A semi-birding friend who went with us to see Travelling Birds asked me
why birds migrate such long, and dangerous, distances when they seem to
have quite suitable habitat for their needs (including nesting?) in their
wintering grounds. I started proffering responses gathered from my reading
over the years, but found it more difficult than I expected justifying say
a Red-necked Stint flying from what seems to be relatively food-rich
mud-flats (and associated coastal habitat) in south-eastern Australia to
somewhere in northern Asia to breed, and then to endure the equally long
and hazardous return flight for the non-breeding season.
What are the scientific reasons/theories for these complex and frequently
very long migration patterns, ie what are the present (or past - assuming
that it is now genetically-acquired behaviour, which may not any longer
actually be necessary) survival advantages of making such a flight, over
the obvious disadvantages. Does it date back to a previous age when the
advantages were more apparent, or are the present advantages of migration
still so great that the behaviour continues to be truly necessary?
2. A much more prosaic matter: Is it correct that the name "rosellas" is a
corruption of "Rose Hillers" after the early Botany Bay locale, and
present-day Sydney suburb, of Rose Hill where they were commonly seen by
early naturalists and travellers between Sydney Cove and (?)
Parramatta? If not, what is the correct origin of the name?
Richard Nowotny
Birding-Aus is on the Web at
www.shc.melb.catholic.edu.au/home/birding/index.html
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message
"unsubscribe birding-aus" (no quotes, no Subject line)
to
|
