I hardly think recognising a Pica pica as being here encourages people to
accept introduced species - indeed I would take the opposite view in that I
have met birders who refuse to record introduced birds as they are not
"real" - and by thus ignoring them we fail to gather data about their
spread.
Assuming that the identification is in no doubt (and it hardly can be) there
would seem to be several possibilities - it came on a boat by accident, it
was introduced deliberately or it has got here as its range is expanding.
The first two are of little concern as a single bird is not going to cause
much destruction of the environment - the latter is interesting as if a bird
reaches here naturally and then others arrive and the numbers build up is
this a cause for concern? We probably should expect this to happen more in
future with "Climate change" (although admittedly Pica pica is an unlikely
candidate) and who are we to say "go away" - perhaps we should set up a
detention centre on Christmas Island for such illegal immigrants??
The only thing that is a real concern to me is the deliberate introduction
of a number of birds of an alien species such that they might breed up and
become a problem - hopefully we are over that by now (cane toad, common
myna......) but one can never be sure.
On 12/12/2007, peter crow <> wrote:
>
> Its hardly a case of ignoring them. its more a matter of taking steps
> to see that they don't over-run anything.
>
> We have enough environmental problems destroying native diversity so
> why introduce others by any means. recognising any as Asutralian
> birds (or anything else) encourages people to accept the introduced
> species.
>
> Do we recognise rabbits as Australian Animals?
>
> Yes, they live in Australia but I'm sure they are a few enlightened
> enough people in this country to wish they didn't.
>
> Let's not encourage ferals for the satisfaction and self promotion of
> a few mad tickers.
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 12/12/2007, at 12:54 PM, Evan Beaver wrote:
>
> > Nikolas,
> >
> > I agree with the thrust of your statement but differ on interpretation
> > of one point. If the aim is to record where birds are nowadays, why
> > does it matter how they got there? If Australian dams become over-run
> > with say, greylag geese or mallards that are escapees/releases, are
> > they not there? I think ignoring birds because of their potential
> > heritage is foolish in the extreme and could ignore valuable data for
> > tracking trends etc.
> >
> > EB
> >
> > On 12/11/07, Nikolas Haass <> wrote:
> >> Keith,
> >>
> >> I "give a shit what Rare Birds Committees think"! I can't speak
> >> for BARC.
> >> However, in my "American life" I was a member of the New Jersey
> >> Rare Birds Committee (NJBRC, the New Jersey counterpart of BARC)
> >> and in my "German life" I was a member of the Hessen Rare Birds
> >> Committee (AKH) and the Schleswig-Holstein Rare Birds Committee
> >> (AKSH) (two German counterparts of BARC). The idea of Rare Birds
> >> Committees is NOT to 'kill' a tick on someone's 'list'. No, the
> >> most important job of Rare Birds Committees is to peer review the
> >> documentation of a 'rare bird' (reports and photos, sketches,
> >> sound recordings - or whatever you submit), to collect, publish,
> >> and archive the records that prove that a 'rare bird' occurred.
> >> Therefore, documentation must eliminate any other species that
> >> might be confused with the claimed rarity. Some documentation is
> >> clear cut, such as a good photograph which shows identification
> >> characters. Some documentation is less clear cut, and that's why
> >> there is a large committee with a variety of specialties, opinions,
> >> and skills to vote on the evidence. To learn about recent range
> >> expansions of certain species it is also important to get an idea
> >> if a bird came on its own or was released by someone.
> >> Serious scientific journals only use data that were accepted by
> >> the responsible Rare Birds Committee for their analysis. That's
> >> why I'd like to encourage observers of a 'rarity' to document it,
> >> so that it can be used for scientific studies.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Nikolas
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------------
> >> Nikolas Haass
> >>
> >> Sydney, NSW
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Keith Weekes <>
> >> To: Frank O'Connor <>
> >> Cc: Tony Palliser <>; birding-
> >> ; Bill Ramsay <>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 8:26:33 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Magpie Pica pica in Port Hedland WA
> >>
> >> Well it's a bird and at least it's in the geographical confines of
> >> what most
> >> of us think of as "Australia".
> >>
> >> Who really gives a shit what BARC thinks anyway? More interested
> >> in weird
> >> vagrants found in territorial waters than anything mere mortals
> >> could hope
> >> to twitch.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 05/12/2007, Frank O'Connor <> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> There was considered to be a good chance that the bird escaped / was
> >>> released from a cage on a boat. Apparently they are kept fairly
> >>> commonly
> >>> for their song.
> >>>
> >>> Personally, I would have no problem with counting a bird hitching
> >>> a ride
> >>> on
> >>> a boat (especially for a state list), but not if it probably came
> >>> from a
> >>> cage. I don't have a lot of problems accepting that it might be
> >>> shot in
> >>> this case. 7 Tree Sparrows were recently shot in Port Hedland,
> >>> presumably
> >>> ship assisted.
> >>>
> >>> At 04:19 PM 4/12/2007, Simon JR Muirhead wrote:
> >>>> Ive been thinking about this, and I not sure which side of the
> >>>> fence I
> >>> sit
> >>>> on. While this species is not specifically migratory, it still
> >>>> has made
> >>> it
> >>>> too Australia and the bird was recorded out of captivity. If the
> >>>> bird had
> >>>> floated here on raft as an example without the aid of human
> >>>> intervention,
> >>>> would that make the sighting more acceptable? I guess the point
> >>>> I would
> >>> like
> >>>> to make is where is the line drawn at an acceptable sighting, as
> >>>> animals
> >>> in
> >>>> general have been crossing bodies of water accidentally for
> >>>> millons of
> >>>> years, and does it make a difference if it is aided by humans? I
> >>> certainly
> >>>> wont be giving out any ear bashings, but the question you raise
> >>>> has got
> >>> me
> >>>> intrigued and I would like to hear what other people think as im a
> >>> relative
> >>>> newcomer to the field but I am lucky enough to do bird surveys
> >>>> for work.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards, Simon Muirhead
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From:
> >>>> On Behalf Of Mike Carter
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:14 PM
> >>>> To: ; Frank O'Connor
> >>>> Cc: Tony Palliser; Bill Ramsay
> >>>> Subject: [Birding-Aus] Re: Magpie Pica pica in Port Hedland WA
> >>>>
> >>>> I know of two previous reports of the common Eurasian and N
> >>>> American
> >>> Magpie
> >>>> (aka Black-billed Magpie) Pica pica in Australia, both I think
> >>>> in the
> >>> last
> >>>> 15 years. One was at Newcastle, NSW and the other near the Hay
> >>>> Point Coal
> >>>> Terminal 37 km S of Mackay, QLD. So all occurrences have been
> >>>> near busy
> >>>> international ports.
> >>>>
> >>>> My objections to accept these reports as valid records and
> >>>> therefore to
> >>>> twitch them, was received with much acrimony in some quarters
> >>>> and I still
> >>>> occasionally get earbashed on the matter. Whilst in my view ship
> >>> assistance
> >>>> per se, i.e. the bird hitched a ride on a moving object at sea
> >>>> is no bar
> >>> to
> >>>> acceptance, this species is not a migrant but is a common urban
> >>>> bird in
> >>>> China and environs. They are sedentary birds, weak, laborious
> >>>> flyers,
> >>>> reluctant to cross water. See 'Birds of Western Palearctic' where
> >>> dispersal
> >>>> and movements are measured in metres rather than km! Therefore
> >>>> I think
> >>> they
> >>>> boarded the ship at the point of departure or were even taken
> >>>> aboard as
> >>> pets
> >>>> and released here. They could not have made the journey without
> >>>> being
> >>> looked
> >>>> after by man and were really pets that escaped or were deliberately
> >>>> released. I'm comfortable counting Ostrich seen in the 70's but
> >>>> some
> >>> think
> >>>> that is stretching it a bit but if I saw or heard a Magpie I
> >>>> wouldn't be
> >>>> happy to count it!
> >>>>
> >>>> So no Frank, I don't agree that the Port Hedland bird is the
> >>>> first, or
> >>> for
> >>>> that matter the third record for Australia!
> >>>>
> >>>> Mike Carter
> >>>> 30 Canadian Bay Road
> >>>> Mount Eliza VIC 3930
> >>>> Tel (03) 9787 7136
> >>>>
|
