Hi,
This is a slightly better response than the last but it still doesn't help
anyone understand the situation. Let's reflect on another significant
Commonwealth issue regarding a near-extinct parrot that is happening right now.
Greg Hunt says the reason why the decision is strange is that "there has been
no activity for over a quarter of a century and an operating harbour has been
in place for the last 10 years"
This week, conditional approval was given to Fortescue Mining to operate in an
area where there has been the only recent sighting of Night Parrot. The
original confirmed report from the site is now years old and consultants have
since had no success refinding birds
(http://bird-o.com/2011/05/09/a-shot-in-the-dark-night-parrot-evidence-at-a-proposed-mine-site/).
So because time has passed, does this now mean the habitat is insignificant?
Greg Hunt seems to be suggesting that this might be a reason to ignore the
existence of habitat and protect it - but hasn't explained why he believes 25
years is relevant. I would like to know from him, and those who regulate
environmental protection in Australia:
Q. How many years after an extant (not imaginary) species occurs in an area, do
we assume it no longer exists and for the purpose of that species' survival,
render the habitat disposable?
I am also confused by Greg Hunt's statement that this has been "an operating
harbour in place for the last 10 years". What is this implying? Is it
suggesting that an operating harbour cannot be habitat for a rare bird? I may
be assuming too much but if this is what Greg is implying, why do people think
that just because a bird is rare, it can't occur as part of the human
landscape? After all, for decades, Orange-bellied Parrots have largely
over-wintered in Melbourne's largest active sewage treatment plant. A few years
ago, they were even seen "just outside Geelong Grammar school"
(http://bioacoustics.cse.unsw.edu.au/birding-aus/2003-05/msg00377.html).
There are too many misconceptions and untruths being told about Orange-bellied
Parrots and too many opinion-leaders in the media and politics prepared to beat
up OBPs so they can appear authoritative. In this case, Greg Hunt has
over-stepped the mark. I don't doubt that he takes these things seriously but
he has demonstrated a certain lack of understanding and allowed himself to
become a mouth-piece for others who would rather be allowed to develop
anywhere, with minimal or no environmental requirements.
This is not about OBP, this is about Australia's ability to create
ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES for development that allow economic progress whilst also
preserving important ecological function (which ultimately protects species ...
and not the other way around).
Greg Hunt has some explaining to do because these responses of his have not yet
proved that he cares about the future of this and other Australian wildlife.
Regards,
Simon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Simon Mustoe
Tel: +61 (0) 405220830 | Skype simonmustoe | Email
Visit BIRD-O at http://www.bird-o.com
Follow BIRD-O on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/birdodotcom
Like BIRD-O on Facebook? Visit
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/pages/Bird-O/117732794921095
Email BIRD-O at
> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:00:41 +0800
> From:
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Response to Greg Hunt re beating-up
> Orange-bellied Parrots
>
> Hi All,
>
> See below a response Greg Hunt sent to me regarding comments made about the
> OBP.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nathan
>
> "Hi Nathan,****
>
> ** **
>
> I respect your views.****
>
> ** **
>
> My concern is to protect against real and current environmental threats.
> Where however the law is used for something speculative and with no fact
> base it genuinely undermines confidence in the process.****
>
> ** **
>
> My goal is to offer genuine protection, but where there has been no
> activity for over a quarter of a century and an operating harbour has been
> in place for the last 10 years the ruling has no connection to reality.****
>
> ** **
>
> In that sense it was perhaps the strangest EPBC ruling I have ever seen.****
>
> ** **
>
> So I have been genuinely concerned about whale and dolphin populations,
> existing bird populations and of course turtle and dugong protection.****
>
> ** **
>
> It is just that this case I think genuinely undermines the law given that
> it has no connection to any actual animal population.****
>
> ** **
>
> I hope that this helps,****
>
> ** **
>
> greg
>
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I would just like to point out that i am disapointed in your short sighted
> view of the proposed marina development at Western Port in Victoria.
>
> To imply that because an OBP hadn't been seen at a site for 25 years being
> a reason to dismiss it all together is short sighted. Furthermore to make
> comments such as "imaginary parrot" does nothing positive for peoples
> understanding of the issues at hand.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nathan Waugh
>
> "****
> On 13 February 2012 08:26, Simon Mustoe <> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Alex,
> >
> > Thanks for forwarding this. I am going to respond because I feel strongly
> > that Greg Hunt seems to misunderstand.
> >
> > The fact that he stood against certain developments is far from the point.
> > Birdwatchers are a broad demographic and don't necessarily object to
> > everything. Some may even support the marina development. People don't want
> > politicians who are lobbyists.
> >
> > The point is, how does Greg justify calling Orange-bellied Parrot an
> > 'imaginary' parrot on national television when his own liberal government
> > brought in the very legislation (EPBC Act) that creates recovery plans for
> > these species? If a recovery plan exists and recently historic habitat is
> > present, does this not represent a place for potential recovery? How can
> > Greg Hunt say that OBP which is not extinct (yet) is an 'imaginary' parrot?
> >
> > That is one issue. There are others ... as clearly set out in my article.
> > It would help a great deal if our politicians understood why it is
> > important to identify critical habitat using indicators such as OBP.
> >
> > These are complex problems that require complex solutions and OBP is only
> > one part of the legislative framework. Greg Hunt appears to believe that
> > the protected species aspects are an insignificant part. If our politicians
> > believe this, then where does it end? The majority of Australian avifauna
> > and mammals are heading for extinction, so is Greg suggesting that because
> > they have not been seen 'for a while' in a given place, we should just
> > assume they will never recover?
> >
> > In my opinion, this means Greg Hunt doesn't understand his own legislation
> > very well. He may understand how he wants it to work but he may not
> > understand some of the key principles under which the legislation has been
> > developed by his own government. After all, we would not have any Federal
> > EPBC Act if his government didn't believe in the importance of
> > international law* Does Greg's position suggest that it was convenient for
> > the Howard government to exercise this power based on constitutional right
> > but inconvenient to his current shadow portfolio, to have to implement such
> > international agreements?
> >
> > Given that Greg Hunt is the
> > Shadow Environment Minister, his position would have to be tenable to
> > represent us in international environmental affairs in future.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Simon.
> >
> > *Note, the EPBC Act was only possible due to external affairs provisions
> > of the Australian constitution.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From:
> > > To:
> > > Subject: RE: [Birding-Aus] Politicians, media and developers
> > beat-up Orange-bellied Parrots
> > > Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:37:36 +0000
> > >
> > > Hi Simon,
> > >
> > > I sent an email to Greg Hunt after reading the Bird-O article and he
> > replied this morning. I don't know enough about the area to fight back. Is
> > what he says valid do you think?
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > >
> > > Many thanks for the message.
> > >
> > >
> > > The points are appreciated but people come from all different positions.
> > >
> > >
> > > I agree on fact based arguments.
> > >
> > >
> > > That is precisely why I have stood for protection of numerous areas.
> > >
> > >
> > > However, in an existing industrial zone which has not seen the bird in
> > question for 25 years, that is precisely why I am concerned with facts.
> > >
> > >
> > > In crib point, pt Nepean and Phillip Island where there have been
> > legitimate issues I have clearly stood against development.
> > >
> > >
> > > It is actually about the facts as you say and in this case a 25 year
> > fact base is pretty powerful.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPad
> > >
> > > On 11/02/2012, at 8:01 PM, "alex randell and chris hall" <
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear Greg,
> > >
> > > I am a 6th/7th generation Australian. My father fought for this country
> > and sacrificed any chance of going to university for it. My grandfather
> > fought for it and sacrificed his inheritance, and his sight for it. I hate
> > the sense of entitlement I see amongst those who have not made any
> > investment in the future of “my” country, just in their own personal and
> > family future. The mindless, habitual disrespect, ignorance and rape of
> > this country’s beautiful biological resources and heritage (which include
> > the orange-bellied parrot and its habitat) disgusts me.
> > > I have worked most of my life since I was 15 and paid for my education
> > (Bachelor of Science, Biodiversity and Conservation), in more ways than
> > just with my hard-earned money, so I could develop knowledge to enable me
> > to feel confident to contribute to a scientifically valid dialogue on
> > environmental issues, but I wonder - what was the point? What good is there
> > in gathering data, presenting evidence, presenting rational, considered,
> > scientifically defensible arguments, put calmly and in unemotional
> > language? There are lots of educated and articulate Australians like me
> > trying to play by rules that the “rich boys” just laugh at: Their calls
> > are the loudest and the only ones that matter now in “my/your”
> > country...not the calls of wisdom, nor science or intelligent sensitivity,
> > not creativity, not observation, not logic - but the loudest, richest
> > calls, echoed by a gaggle of cackling cuckoo twits in the media. Who do you
> > listen to? I’m sure you won’t listen to me if I call out “fat-belly!””right
> > wing!” ”red-neck!” (the language of ridicule seems pathetic, doesn’t it
> > Greg – until it is amplified by money and the media). Do you listen to
> > people like me or not?
> > >
> > > Alex Randell.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Alex
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: [
> > on behalf of Simon Mustoe [
> >
> > > Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 11:18 PM
> > > To:
> > > Subject: [Birding-Aus] Politicians, media and developers beat-up
> > Orange-bellied Parrots
> > >
> > > A genuinely important birding issue for this list-server:
> > >
> > >
> > http://bird-o.com/2012/02/09/obp-no-emotional-fairwell-from-aussie-media/
> > >
> > > It would be great if even a fraction of the time spent perusing this
> > list could be spent tweeting or emailing your Federal member and our
> > environment Ministers about how shameful this is.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Simon.
> > >
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > Simon Mustoe
> > > Tel: +61 (0) 405220830 | Skype simonmustoe | Email
> >
> > >
> > > Visit BIRD-O at http://www.bird-o.com
> > > Follow BIRD-O on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/birdodotcom
> > > Like BIRD-O on Facebook? Visit
> > http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/pages/Bird-O/117732794921095
> > > Email BIRD-O at
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ===============================
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> > > send the message:
> > > unsubscribe
> > > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> > > to:
> > >
> > > http://birding-aus.org
> > > ===============================
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ===============================
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> > send the message:
> > unsubscribe
> > (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> > to:
> >
> > http://birding-aus.org
> > ===============================
> >
> ===============================
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
> http://birding-aus.org
> ===============================
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
