French Island Report – Indian Peafowl

By Birding-Aus, on September 19th, 2014

Since late last year, I have been trying to understand the status of the Indian Peafowl on French Island. Through various research and sightings by other birders, I was led to believe that this population might be ‘tickable’ – but required further research and evidence. Part of my initial research was talking to other birders who have visited the island in recent years. My first positive piece of information was when I received the brief but hopeful comment of “*after the BirdLife Bayside outing there last year (2013) I checked with one of the top ornithologists at DEPI and they confirmed that the population on French Island is considered self-sustaining and tickable*”. Fueled by that piece of information I shot off a couple of emails to other Victorian birders who shared the common belief that it is actually quite probable, but further proof of the ten year wild status and self-sustainment policy was required. Today, I finally got across to the island myself accompanied by Scott Baker and Brian Johnston to check out the population and status for ourselves. When we arrived on the island, we met the Parks Victoria French Island ranger David Stephenson. He gave us directions to the best spots for Indian Peafowl and gave us a lot of promising information. According to David, there have been three separate introductions of Peafowl to the island. Initially the first release was in 1979 by a man when he first moved there. After only 6 years, the same individual left the island but released his remaining captive birds. The third release was in the early-mid 90’s by a man named David Russell – who apparently bought a number over to have on his property. Today, David Stephenson and Parks Vic estimate an overall population of 100+ birds on the island, located in three different areas/populations. These birds are now so widespread across the island; there is a culling program in place. In fact, approx. 20 birds have been shot in the last month. On our trip, we managed to locate a single adult male bird off Mount Wellington Road in the central eastern side of the island. Later in the afternoon we happened upon 5-6 birds (both male/female) along Bullock Rd approximately 10-15kms away from the first site. All birds seen were extremely flighty and showed absolutely no signs of tame behaviour. In fact, the first adult bird took off so quickly, only two of our number saw the bird. According to David, the peafowl are also responsible for the spread of blackberry across the island and have done a lot of damage to the scrubland and other native flora. Also worth noting, two years ago, the peafowl population was over double the size it is today (est. 220) but Parks Vic have since started the culling program. The locals and Parks Vic have seen lots of evidence of breeding including nests, chicks and the obvious growth in numbers. The population is strongest around the Bullock Road and Bullock Swamp area (*bullock swamp no longer open to public*). This is believed to be because the owners of the Bullock Swamp area protect the peafowl from the rangers. They like the birds and also occasionally feed them. This seemed to be a negative reason to the credibility of ‘wild’ bird status – however this population have been around Bullock Swamp for over 20 years (15 years before the current owners arrival) and are the remnants of the second released population back around the mid 80’s. I draw comparison to the King Parrot’s at Grant’s Picnic Ground or the Regent Bowerbirds in Lamington National Park. Just because they get fed sometimes hardly changes their status from wild birds to captive/tame/untickable. So with all this information now compiled, I’d be interested to spark further discussion with other birders and people with opinions and/or further information on these birds. If all that information mentioned is agreed upon, does this make French Island the first acceptable and hence tickable peafowl population in Victoria? James Mustafa 0400 951 517 http://jamesmustafabirding.blogspot.com.au

Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org

flambeau

September 21, 2014 at 10:54 am

Certainly Indian Peafowl should be recorded, wherever they turn up, whether free-range domestic, escapee, or established feral. I certainly took notes of a free-range family of Peafowl encountered one autumn afternoon on a road somewhere near Seymour. Two parents and 4 young birds – male with train moulted. They were marching up the road in good order (to the great interest of passing motorists), and presently crossed it, to go under a gate into a schoolyard (adults had to squirm rather oddly to manage this) and were last seen moving directly towards a farm-house. We assumed they had spent the day in a stubble-field nearby. Presumably they had ‘owners’ but they seemed pretty independent. When I started bird-watching circa 1970, there was something of a fashion for not recording introduced birds of any species, because they were ‘not Australian birds’. I felt then, and still do, that anything with feathers should be recorded – likewise mammals, reptiles, frogs, fish and the more noticeable invertebrates. They are all part of the environment and can affect its future. Anthea Fleming

martinflab

September 21, 2014 at 9:33 am

And the same surely applies to “escapes” which could be regarded as pre-ferals! Martin Martin Butterfield http://franmart.blogspot.com.au/

davidtorr

September 21, 2014 at 8:54 am

Quite agree – if people don’t record ferals (and I know some people don’t) we will never know if they are spreading or declining.

jspk

September 20, 2014 at 4:02 pm

I don’t think anyone is saying not to record their presence, just whether or not to be able to “tick” them on a personal list. People keep all sorts of records, and for all sorts of reasons, Cheers, John Tongue Devonport, Tas.

pveerman

September 20, 2014 at 10:26 am

Well done to James to research and provide the information. If all people had considered it “not tickable” and considered that was an important criterion for keeping records until a certain period of time (or generations), then if adhered to, presumably there will be no records of it until after that time. Thus we probably would not have a start date from which to measure. This would be from “tickers” deciding not to keep records due to some weird logic of “non tickability”. Logically that could infinitely extend a non-decision. The information James sent has indicated that fortunately not everyone goes by such arbitrary thoughts. I go by: if something is there it is there, if not it is not and records should reflect that. If something is introduced to a place and does not survive long term then it was still there. Nonsense about “not tickable” removes information. Beyond that, I wonder are Indian Peafowl any more interesting on French Island than anywhere else, to want to go there for them, compared to other reasons to go there or other easier places to see them and why care what “tickable” rules anyone else uses. If the species has ecological impacts, surely that is the aspect of far greater importance than whether its existence goes on personal tick lists. Philip —–Original Message—– Sent: Saturday, 20 September 2014 8:56 AM Cc: birding-aus@birding-aus.org I can’t recall what the figures are, now, but I’m sure I’ve heard it as “So many years, OR so many generations” Either way, come to Tassie. We’ve got tick-able Peafowl…. 😉 Cheers, John Tongue Devonport, Tas.

jamesmustafamusic

September 20, 2014 at 9:41 am

In truth, the reason for my initial investigation was for whether I could add them to my VicTwitch list. So the tassie tick isn’t quite applicable in this case. I have seen them on Rottnest Island and Tassie before though. I did forget to add information into my write up about the generations. It seems like there have been at minimum 4-5 generations of peafowl on the island according to the parks Vic people. Best James Mustafa 0400951517 http://www.jamesmustafajazzorchestra.com

September 20, 2014 at 8:56 am

I can’t recall what the figures are, now, but I’m sure I’ve heard it as “So many years, OR so many generations” Either way, come to Tassie. We’ve got tick-able Peafowl…. 😉 Cheers, John Tongue Devonport, Tas.

September 20, 2014 at 8:16 am

Interesting report James. I have seen a “10 year period” mentioned before when considering whether or not birds are “tickable” and I wonder what the basis for this is – for some small birds this could represent 10 generations I guess, whereas for an Ostrich it might be barely 3 generations. I would personally have thought that 3 generations is a reasonable proof of being wild, but this means the criteria would change according to species? <>

Birding-Aus

French Island Report – Indian Peafowl

8 comments to French Island Report – Indian Peafowl

Mailing List

Book Search

Meta