Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [Birding-Aus] Peafowl

To: Bill Stent <>
Subject: Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [Birding-Aus] Peafowl
From: Dave Torr <>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:55:20 +1100
Seems one of the ongoing questions on Birding-Aus is "is xxxx a tickable
population". There seem to be two easy alternatives - either we count no
introduced birds or we count them all. That would save a lot of debate I
guess.... :-)
Slightly more seriously - I guess it is very hard for anyone to determine in
many cases whether the population has been self-sustaining for the required
period of time (10 years I believe?). How do we know for any of these
populations whether or not there have been further releases to boost the
population - I recall that someone reckoned the Melbourne Bayside Barbary
Doves were being replenished by further releases from time to time? Does
being fed artificially  stop them being self-sustaining?

2009/11/27 Bill Stent <>

> I feel somehow that the Melbourne populations aren't tickable, but I'm
> looking for a good reason why not.
> I'd be surprised if there were more than a dozen or so, which would suggest
> they might be partially supported by human feeding (although I've got no
> actual evidence for this).
> Bill

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

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