birding-aus

Hot air and OBP's

To: Birding-aus <>
Subject: Hot air and OBP's
From: "Evan Beaver" <>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 13:54:55 +1100
Dean Ingwerson replied to me off list with a quote from the original report,
if anyone wants it I'll be happy to send it over.

Turns out Ms Plibersek glased over the truth, as pollies are wont to do.
Here's a quote from the report:

"The mortality rate predicted is around 1 bird per annum (depending on
turbine avoidance rate), not one bird per 1000 years."

With 150 birds in the population it wouldn't take long to make it
unsustainable.

Evan

On 9/6/06, Bill Stent <> wrote:

I strongly agree.

As an economist, my tendency is to look at "all available alternatives".
As far as I can see, options that add less than one OBP death every
thousand years are clearly "not available".  Increased coal soot
pollution, global warming, and habitat encroachment are going to have a
far greater impact.

Perhaps these options are less unpalatable as the bodies of dead birds
are less obvious - or nonexistent in the case of declining birth rates.

Bill



-----Original Message-----
From: 
 On Behalf Of Carl Clifford
Sent: Wednesday, 6 September 2006 8:19 AM
To: Evan Beaver
Cc: Birding-aus
Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Hot air and OBP's

If they blocked the wind farm because one OBP might be killed by it
every 1000 years, we had better clear every Raptor, snake, monitor,
cat, dog, human, building any other possible cause of mortality in
any OBP habitat real or potential. Oh, and halt any effects of global
warming in these areas as well, as this is probably the greatest
threat to their survival, as it is to most species.
Statements like these make the Conservation movements look right
idiots in the eyes of the public,
Carl Clifford


On 06/09/2006, at 6:59 AM, Evan Beaver wrote:

Tanya Plibersek wrote an article in this mornings SMH regarding climate
change. It can be found here if you're keen:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/inconvenient-truth-that-cant-be-
ignored/2006/09/05/1157222129857.html

All very interesting, but nothing new. The one thing that stood out
was this
reason given for overturning the Bald Hill Wind Farm:

"The reason given was that one endangered orange-bellied parrot might
get
killed every 1000 years."

Were the numbers really that low, or is this another excellent
example of
statistical bending? Can anyone confirm or deny?

--
Evan Beaver
Lapstone, Blue Mountains, NSW
lat=-33.77, lon=150.64
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message:
unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================

===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 




--
Evan Beaver
Lapstone, Blue Mountains, NSW
lat=-33.77, lon=150.64
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================

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