Princess Parrots/ecosystem services

["michael norris" <>]

What an interesting discussion.  Is there anyone on the list who can tell us 
what is government thinking about money and biodiversity?
I recently went to a conference where there was a paper on how much people 
would be prepared to pay to preserve beaches faced with erosion e.g. because 
of sea level rise etc (eg. by groynes or "renourishment") .
And there is more commodification of the environment through vegetation 
offset/protection schemes like the Victorian ones (Bush Tender/Bush Broker I 
think) with the recent White Paper making much of the need for private 
investment to create the vegetation corridors required for biodiversity to 
adapt to climate change.
I don't want to bang on about costing ecosystem services (such as reducing 
salinity or pest damage....) but I believe "we" should clearly be 
prioritising some public goods like the spiritual and educational values of 
contacts with nature and its changes over time. And recognising that it 
costs so much more to recreate damaged systems than to protect them.  Great 
nature reserves are good, but growing people who respect them is more so?
The original human inhabitants of central Australia have managed their land 
more sustainably than we.  I pay them my respects and  hope the money goes 
in sustainable directions.
Michael Norris