Month: July 2013

A rare sighting of a WTNT in the Outer Hebrides (UK). Only for it to be killed in a Wind Turbine. As the Telegraph reports “The corpse will be sent to a museum but obviously this is just terrible. Some people will have lost the cost of their flights”. Yup – terrible but oddly quite weird, rare bird, wind turbines and mad twitchers. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/10146081/Twitchers-flocking-to-see-rare-bird-saw-it-killed-by-wind-turbine.html Chris Gregory =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

Evening all, Just back from an eight day trip to PNG with a couple of days in Cairns (trip report to follow) – had a great time, though birding is ridiculously difficult. A couple of questions about a couple of IDs. We visited Hasties Swamp near Atherton on Monday and cranes could be heard on the private land behind the swamp, but could only be vieiwed (without a scope) from the road over the hill. It is probably a long shot but does anyone have a potential ID on these – my thoughts are Sarus, based on location (and comments in Weineke) but any local knowledge would be appreciated (if both likely then I will have to leave as unknown) The other concerned a fantail seen at Brown River near Port Moresby. We were looking at a group of birds in lowland swamp forest west of Brown River with our guide Daniel Wakra, Black Thicket and Northern Fantails were present but another fantail was also there, which Daniel called as a Friendly Fantail. It wasn’t until I got back that evening that I looked at guides and this would appear to be an exceptionally low altitude for this species. The bird certainly looked like the picture in Beehler et al. and behaved much more like a typical fantail (i.e. certainly not like a Northern with much tail fanning and movement) and there were was no rufous present (the thought was possible juvenile Chestnut-bellied but this would also appear to be too high as well). The problem is no other species seems to occur at this altitude and so I was wondering if anyone has any experience with this or other species of Fantails in this are/habitat. Cheers, Peter =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

I have today written the following letter to Sunshine Coast Mayor Mark Jamieson about the need to protect former cane farmland as a reserve for rare and threatened bird species in the region. Anyone wishing to do the same can email Mayor Jamieson at mail@sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au. Mayor Jamieson, I draw your attention to the urgent need for the Sunshine Coast Regional Council to give consideration to the acquisition of privately owned former cane farmland for environment purposes. There presently exists on the market an excellent property on River Road, Yandina Creek, that would make an ideal wildlife reserve. Several rare and threatened bird species have adapted to the grasslands and wetlands created in areas once planted with cane. Many of these species once occupied the wallum heaths and swamplands that originally occurred in the region. We have a unique opportunity to restore much of the fauna that formerly frequented the Maroochy River flatlands. My understanding is that the council has dismissed suggestions for the property acquisition in River Road because the land is not natural and is human-modified. There are numerous examples around Australia and the world of excellent wildlife reserves being created from human-modified land. There is no reason to believe that cannot be the case here. In the property presently for sale in River Road, I have recorded rare and difficult-to-find birds such as Eastern Grass Owl, Lewin’s Rail, Spotless Crake, Brolga, Black-necked Stork, Black-tailed Native-hen and Australian Painted Snipe. There has been some media coverage of this issue: http://tinyurl.com/q5r2nc9 I have also written about some of the damaging developments that have taken place in the area: http://tinyurl.com/olnqwse Unfortunately, my representations to your council’s environmental officers have been ignored. I hope you will give urgent consideration to council acquiring the property available for sale before the opportunity is lost. Greg Roberts =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

I’ve been following the postings on the re-discovery of the Night Parrot and on John Young, mainly between the earliest reports on 27 June through until 6 July. Most of that coverage was congratulatory, but a few couldn’t help expressing suspicion and distrust. Following the presentation of Young’s evidence in support of his find, postings on the subject seemed to die away after 6 July One of the reasons for this may have been a posting by Friarbird 43 on 6 July, providing his notes from when he attended Young’s presentation. This provided so much more information than had previously been available, with an insight into how Young had gone about his search, what had been learned about the bird’s biology and its habitat, plus his ideas on the management considerations and research priorities which lie ahead. It also referred to the location being on private land, and the understanding he had earlier established with the landowner that the site would not be publicised. If you haven’t read this posting, it is highly recommended. It is easy to skate over the days and nights involved in Young’s search without thinking about it too much. The search area would most likely have had no running water, and temperatures varying from around zero to the mid forties. This went on for days and particularly nights on end, then weeks, then months, then years without the slightest sign of success or progress. How anyone could show such determination and persistence for that length of time and in such rugged and demanding environment is quite beyond me. Then when he finally did identify a call, it took him another five years to obtain the evidence needed to verify his find. If you heard one of the radio interviews at the time, you will have heard the excitement in Young’s voice and so get some understanding of how he felt about this bird that he had worked so long to find. Clearly in his view the bird will come first ahead of any other considerations, and that extends to his determination to see it adequately conserved and protected. Against this background, two major issues have emerged – the release of the call and how the bird can be best conserved and protected – that are legitimate matters of debate. I can see both sides of the argument in regard to the release of the call, but it is not valid to assume that because Young has stated that he will not be releasing the call generally that it may not play a role in future research ( read Friarbird’s notes on research and conservation). Similarly everyone agrees that conservation/protection is essential, but views differ on how it should best be managed. One position is put that it should be handed over to Government for best results. This at a time where Government is proposing to permit shooting in National Parks. If it were to be passed to Government, we would see TV bites and headline-grabbing press releases, and then it would become just another item of expenditure. How long adequate funding would be available in the tight future budgetary years that are being forecast , as it becomes just another program to be pruned back, is anybody’s guess. If we think outside the square, there are a number of privately funded organisations which already carry out valuable work of this nature. An obvious example is the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, which took over the running of Newhaven Station from Birds Australia. So in the end, we all agree that conservation action is critical. From Friarbirds notes, that includes Young perhaps more than any of us. Maybe action will be taken by both Government and privately funded organisations. Let’s keep an open mind in the interim. If commentary was restricted to these legitimate debates, I probably wouldn’t have put pen to paper myself. However other comments have been made which I think are so negative that they need some sort of response. It has been stated that there are “numerous inconsistencies in Young’s recounting of his latest (my italics) discovery”. The author’s previous paragraphs were highly critical of the standard of journalism and the lack of good science journalists, but as the author stated that he has never spoken to Young, the recounting referred to had to be what the media said Young had said. I have had some experience with the media, to the point that I always prepared a written handout of the key points I wanted to make , but even that seldom prevented inaccurate reporting of what had been said. The author went on to say that if Young “had located an active nest, as he claims (my italics again), then it should have been as straightforward as placing a camera trap at the entrance to the nest and he would have procured images of birds coming and going in short order.” That may be right. However two earlier postings are relevant; Rob Morris (3 July): “Having listened to John and seen his presentation – I am just beginning to get a sense of how sensitive this species is”; Ian Davies (4 July): “John really stressed the value of disturbing the species as little as possible, as they are an extremely shy and wary creature, and as he says they are the hardest bird he has ever worked with”. With the birds being so sensitive to disturbance, anyone who put the birds first would not even consider intrusion around the next site even if there was only the slightest risk of the nest being abandoned . I’m not sure when the last Night Parrot chicks were sighted, but who would want to risk these historic ones being abandoned? Another criticism was that Young had known of the population of the birds for 5 years but had told no-one. Its one thing to know something, another all together to be able to prove it. If he had simply announced that he had found the bird, but had no physical evidence to support the claim, what sort of response might he have expected? I won’t go on to react to the many personal asides that are made in Young’s direction, such as a.. “Raises suspicions as to John’s motives” b.. “By trying to hold on to a monopoly of information..he has create a situation that almost guarantees his irrelevance” c.. “the depiction of John in that future natural history is right now on the knife-edge, teetering between legend and infamy” d.. “again this brings us back to John’s sharing of the call or eventual irrelevance when another recording becomes available , as it certainly will” e.. “it makes one wonder at his motivations for the big reveal in the first place … What forced his hand? Rivals threatening to steal his thunder?” f.. “I have been told the location of the site…this just points to John’s complete inability to manage the on-going stewardship of the site and the species..” Why must people be so negative? It seems that those who have had issues with John in the past are unable to put them aside and must continue to view whatever he does through that prism. Invariably they will include their apparently sincere congratulations of his undisputed achievement, but then can’t just leave it at that. Another of Young’s major detractors has been blacklisted as by two reputable bird tour operator (not Young!) because of an unpleasant experiences he has created on previous tours, as well as by a significant Government scientific institution, but then writes as (hanging) judge and jury in constantly critical articles about Young. Perhaps the best way I can conclude this article is to quote Russell Woodford, Birding-Aus Founder and List Owner, from his posting of 30 June… “Can I please make the point that dragging up old issues that have been debated, argued and fought over is not likely to resolve them any better this time around? I don’t stifle genuine debate, but I will do whatever I can to prevent mud-slinging, bullying and abuse on this forum. Stirring up old arguments is unlikely to do anything but generate resentment and intemperate invective.” … and simply ask that John Young be given a fair go Mick Brasher =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

Hi all,   See note below regarding the Swift Parrot / Regent Honeyeater survey weekend this coming weekend.   As Dean points out, it has been a tale of no more than scattered reports of not-so-large numbers of Swift Parrots and a general lack of Regent Honeyeaters in 2013 thus far. We’re particularly keen to have people in the New England / NSW NW Slopes / Southern Qld regions out searching as these areas have provided the most of the small handfull of Regent records this year and could be harbouring more birds. I’ve had reports of White Box starting to flower well in some areas too, so getting coverage in these landscapes is important.   And if you’re fortunate (skillful!) enough to find Regent Honeyeaters keep an eye out for colour bands (if you’ve got a camera get some shots).   Contact Dean or I if you’d like to get involved (and surveys can be done in the days leading up to and after the weekend too).   Cheers Mick —– Forwarded Message —– From: Dean Ingwersen <dean.ingwersen@birdlife.org.au> To: Mick Roderick <mick.roderick@birdlife.org.au> Cc: “mickhhb@yahoo.com.au” <mickhhb@yahoo.com.au> Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013 12:30 PM Subject: Swift Parrot-Regent Honeyeater surveys Dear Swift Parrot-Regent Honeyeater volunteer,   The next winter survey is upon us again and we would be delighted if you would consider taking part in the upcoming searches to be held on the 3rd-4th August.   You can find a summary of recent information regarding both species (including feedback from recent surveys) and the official survey form here: http://www.birdlife.org.au/projects/woodland-birds-for-biodiversity/latest-news.  This year has certainly been an interesting one, with no really large concentrations of Swift Parrots obvious so far, and only scattered records of Regent Honeyeaters.  The number of each species seen over the year is also lower than we’d hoped for, thanks we think to scattered flowering across south-east Australia.  So the challenge is on to track down some flowering trees and search them thoroughly!   If you participate in the survey or would like to report sightings, please contact Dean Ingwersen (dean.ingwersen@birdlife.org.au)or Mick Roderick (mick.roderick@birdlife.org.au) or call (03) 9347 0757.  Remember – nil reports are also vital information as they give us an indication of exactly where searching took place.  Please note that Chris Tzaros (chris.tzaros@birdlife.org.au) is currently on extended leave and won’t be able to reply to any correspondence until October.    We thank you again for your support of this very important long-term monitoring program and hope you will be able to continue to assist us and the birds.   Best wishes,   Dean Ingwersen, Chris Tzaros and Mick Roderick   BirdLife Australia’s Woodland Birds for Biodiversity project       Dean Ingwersen| Woodland birds for Biodiversity Regent Honeyeater recovery coordinator BirdLife Australia Suite 2-05, 60 Leicester Street, Carlton VIC 3053 M0409 348 553 | T03 9347 0757 ext 247 | F03 9347 9323 dean.ingwersen@birdlife.org.au | birdlife.org.au ABN 75 149 124 774 =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

Finally seem to have completed my “Global-Images” web-page, this is just a record of all of the photographic pix that I’ve taken digitally…..it’s not supposed to be a ‘Photographic’ website (so please keep criticism constructive [?]) It just helps me to remember all the species that I’ve got images of, unfortunately all are ‘Old-World’ species as I haven’t yet visited Central or South America……although I was in Canada last century. Please visit http://www.aviceda.org/piw and give me some feedback. Tom — ******************************** Tom Tarrant Kobble Creek, Qld http://www.aviceda.org ******************************** =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

Hi all Due to a run of bad weather weekends, we’ve had to cancel another pelagic last weekend. We’re not giving up though! We’re having another go this weekend. So if you’d like to get out this weekend on Sunday 4th August & see some excellent seabirds off Port Fairy, could you contact Neil McCumber either by ringing 0413 628 306 or emailing birdswing@bigpond.com him. We are bound to get out sooner or later!-Kevin Bartram =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

The following is a digest of Sightings Reported on Birdpedia for the period Monday, July 29, 2013 to Sunday, August 4, 2013: Area: SA Location: On our property in Critchley Road, Rockleigh Elegant Parrot (Neophema elegans) (6) This is only the second time we have seen elegant parrots; last was 2 years ago. They were fossicking on the ground in a treeless area late in the day, and were seen again today. Mistletoebird (Dicaeum hirundinaceum) (2) A pair of mistletoebirds (flying together) was another unusual sighting for our place, also last seen 2 years ago. Eurasian Skylark (Alauda arvensis) (2) And to complete a very successful birding day, a pair of skylarks performed what looked like a synchronised courting flight only 2 metres above the ground. Then one soared high and sang. Reported by: Barbara and Peter Bansemer on Monday, July 29, 2013 ——————————————— Need more information about a sighting? Login and contact the poster directly. Receive sightings via email or SMS immediately they are posted. Not a member of Birdpedia? Membership is free and gives you access to information for over 230 countries. To sign up go to the Birdpedia Web Site (http://www.birdpedia.com/). To find out more about Birdpedia and what it can do for you, see ‘What is Birdpedia?’ ——————————————— =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au 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: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================

BARC Checklist v2013July is released Greetings birders, A new version of the BARC Australian Checklist v2013July is now available on the BARC website as a downloadable Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (BARC_Australian_Checklist_v2013July.xls). The BARC Website is at: http://www.tonypalliser.com/barc/barc-home.html Like previous versions, this checklist is intended to follow the IOC World Bird Names checklist to the letter, in terms of species taxonomy, scientific and English names, spelling and sequence. As with previous versions, subspecies are not included. There are no intended deviations from the IOC list (other than abbreviating it to species and Australia) and there are no novel taxonomic opinions expressed by BARC in that regard. This upgrade includes changes to the IOC up to 1 July 2013 (Gill, F & D Donsker 2013; IOC World Bird List v 3.4; http://www.worldbirdnames.org/). It also includes some corrections to spelling and species sequence from the previous BARC Checklist (v2.0). If you download the spreadsheet you will find two worksheets. One worksheet is the full v2013July. The second worksheet is an upgrade tool for those who are already using the BARC Checklist (v2.0) and would prefer to modify their personalised lists rather than start with a blank checklist again. It contains a set of instructions for converting the old BARC Checklist v2.0 to this new v2013July. Upgrading involves inserting 7 new species, replacing 6 rows due to changes or corrections, changed scientific names and sequence to 18 species of honeyeater and removal of the supplementary list. The upgrade worksheet will also allow users to identify the changes that have been made in v2013July. Summary of changes: One new species has been split by the IOC (Lesser Sooty Owl). Six species new for Australia have been accepted by BARC since v2.0 (Eurasian Wigeon, Purple Heron, Chinese Sparrowhawk, Japanese Sparrowhawk, Lesser Black-backed Gull and Mugimaki Flycatcher). The genus Lichenostomus has been split into seven genera, affecting 18 species. Only the generic names and the sequence of species change. One species (Crested Bellbird).is moved to a new (uncertain) family. There are name changes or spelling corrections for four species (Watercock, Greater Sooty Owl, Northern Boobook and Nullarbor Quail-thrush). The sequence of Middendorff’s and Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler is reversed.   The Supplementary List has been disbanded. It has proven impossible to be consistent about which species deserve inclusion, and there seems to be little point in maintaining a list for consolation purposes. Thus all unverified species have been deleted. Extinct native species and extirpated introduced species have been returned to the main list, but are still listed at the end rather than in taxonomic sequence. These changes bring the total Australian list to 918 confirmed species, 20 of which are extinct or extirpated. There are several other changes to BARC lists and the BARC website coinciding with this new version of the checklist. BARC_Index_of_Cases_v2013July.xls The former “Index of decisions and case summaries” html page is now an Excel spreadsheet and downloadable. It has been updated to follow the taxonomy of the checklist v2013July. It now includes all cases starting from case 1 in 1975. The spreadsheet format allows searching (using the Excel ‘Find” function) sorting and filtering by species, case, date, state, etc. There are hyperlinks to most but not all cases. Many early case summaries are not available electronically. Note that the case summaries have not been altered and still follow whatever taxonomy was used when the case was in progress. BARC_Review_List_v2013July.xls The BARC Review list has been updated to match the IOC taxonomy. It is also in an Excel spreadsheet and downloadable.  BARC_Unsubstantiated_List_v2013July.xls A new list has been prepared, the “Unsubstantiated Species List”. It contains species which might be added to Australian list in the future, but which BARC has so far not reviewed. To qualify for inclusion there needs to be some evidence such as published and unambiguous photos, reports of a museum specimen, a submission that BARC is reviewing, etc. The intention is that the BARC Australian Checklist will be updated every 6 months (in Approximately January and July). The other three lists will all be updated at the same time. The versions of each will be identified by year and month as follows: [list]_v2013July.xls, [list]_v2014Jan.xls, etc. Why BARC Follows the IOC With the recent release of Birdlife Australia’s Australian Checklist, it is worth recording why BARC uses the IOC sequence. As noted by Tony Palliser recently, BARC has been following the IOC checklist to some extent since 2006. Prior to that BARC had followed Christidis & Boles (1994) for species already recorded in Australia and Sibley & Monroe (1993) for species that might be new to Australia. By 2006 both these lists were out of date and Dr Walter Boles (from the former Taxonomic Advisory Committee of Birds Australia) recommended that BARC follow the then new IOC list instead. Soon after that Christidis & Boles (2008) was published, so BARC followed that for species already recorded in Australia and the IOC for potential new species. However, Christidis & Boles (2008) became dated much faster than its predecessor, not least of all due to increased birding close to Asia and frequent reports of Asian species not treated in Australian texts. By 2011 C&B (2008) was well out of date and it was inconvenient for BARC to follow two checklists that sometimes clashed. Therefore BARC decided to prepare an Australian list based on a world-wide list. We did not automatically choose the IOC list as the base list, but considered a number of criteria. We wanted a base list that covered the whole world, was widely used, was dynamic and frequently updated, was publicly available for free (non-commercial), had transparent decision making processes, and provided potential for some input from Australia. The Clements and Howard & Moore (etc) checklists are produced for commercial purposes and therefore potentially unsuitable for BARC to copy. The Birdlife International checklist is, like the IOC checklist, downloadable from the internet, and it ran a close second. However, the taxonomic decisions in that checklist are made by staff at Birdlife International in the UK and there seems to be no process for outside input. It is an aim of BARC that there should be some Australian input into our country’s checklist and we hope to contribute to the IOC checklist process in some manner in the future. The IOC World Bird List site contains more information about the open processes, dynamic revisions and cooperative approach of the IOC checklist system. http://www.worldbirdnames.org/ The BARC Australian Checklist v1 was first released in November 2011 and this current version is the 3rdupdate. Good birding to you all, David James =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) to: birding-aus-request@vicnet.net.au http://birding-aus.org ===============================