To not tick them, then don't go to Wakehurst Pkwy and search the undergrowth
from the Deep Creek bridge up towards the Sports Academy.
And to not tick the second population which is best seen at evenings around
dusk and with some Brush Turkeys, then don't head down Morgan Rd @ Oxford Falls
and don't look for them near the satellite dishes near the small narrow bridge.
Hope this helps.
> Carl Weber <> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> Where are the 2 populations. I am very keen to not tick them for my
> Beaches List.
> I've previously ticked peafowl in Cairns - please tell me that this is
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of
> Sent: Friday, 27 November 2009 10:11 AM
> To: Dave Torr
> Cc: ; Bill Stent
> Subject: Re: Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [Birding-Aus] Peafowl
> Is there a general consensus on this?
> There are 2 populations of this bird on the Northern Beaches which I
> have been around for that time, but I can't prove that, and which I
> like to tick, but haven't. But having just ratified my list to be more
> accurate I don't want to tick unless it's a valid tick.
> Also, how is the decision made that a certain population at a certain
> location is now tickable?
> And if you know of a population that isn't widely known, how do you get
> population to be accepted as being there for 10 years so it can be
> > Dave Torr <> wrote:
> > Seems one of the ongoing questions on Birding-Aus is "is xxxx a
> > population". There seem to be two easy alternatives - either we count
> > introduced birds or we count them all. That would save a lot of debate
> > 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
> > population - I recall that someone reckoned the Melbourne Bayside
> > Barbary
> > Doves were being replenished by further releases from time to time?
> > being fed artificially stop them being self-sustaining?
> > 2009/11/27 Bill Stent <>
> > > I feel somehow that the Melbourne populations aren't tickable, but
> > > 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
> > no
> > > actual evidence for this).
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >