I for one didn't read Simon's email to mean that the plan shouldn't go
ahead because "hard-core twitchers" will be disappointed! His research
and comments seemed very favourable to the idea. (correct me if I'm
wrong Simon)
Surely Lord Howe Island depends to a large degree on tourism. It's
natural beauty and the significant appeal of the rare birds (notably
the woodhen) would be huge drawcards to tourists from all over the
world and certainly Australia. You don't have to be a hard core
twitcher to appreciate these things but I can imagine any half
interested nature lover being a bit disappointed if the islands famous
bird was locked up when they got there.
Yes of course the survival of these birds is paramount but Simon's
comments were about public awareness for an important event which
hasn't been easily forthcoming. The greater goal of the bird's
survival is indeed taking precedence (which is fantastic) but there
could be serious implications to tourism if no-one knew about it til
they got there.
Cheers
David Stowe
On 29/06/2009, at 6:46 PM, Ross Macfarlane wrote:
At risk of upsetting the hard-core twitchers, I must express the view
that "potentially serious direct consequences for birding and birders
both in Australia and visiting from overseas", of the woodhens'
temporary removal from the wild, should be a lower-order issue against
the conservation benefits to the woodhens's survival. Fair enough,
birders should be let know if & when it's happening, but upsetting
their travel plans shouldn't be a reason not to proceed. The greater
goal of the birds' survival would take precedence.
In my opinion... :-)
Ross Macfarlane
|
