Hi Richard,
I find your email both funny and mildly offensive at once – specifically your assertion that I’ve plagiarised John Huxley’s Brisbane Times report from 2007. Mildly offensive because I was under the strong impression at the time that Huxley had, in fact, come dangerously close to plagiarising MY original report on the 2006 Night Parrot specimen in the June 2007 issue of Wingspan! (Which, due to the quarterly publication’s long lead time, was written probably in April-May of that year.) My opening paragraph for that story reads:
“On Saturday 17 September 2006, Robert “Shorty” Cupitt, the ranger-on-duty of Diamantina National Park in south-west Queensland, was grading an interior road of the reserve when the blade of his vehicle exposed the yellow underbelly of a bird he didn’t recognise.”
Compare that to Huxley’s opening paragraph and judge for yourself:
“THE park ranger Robert “Shorty” Cupitt was repairing a section of track in a remote part of Diamantina National Park, Queensland, when the blade of his grader exposed the headless corpse of a bird he could not immediately identify. The yellow-bellied bird…”
The issue back then was that neither Birds Australia nor the National Night Parrot network were informed about the discovery of the 2006 bird by the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service – contrary to its own management plans for the species. I’d suggest you read the rest of the original report before you start throwing (misspelt) accusations of hypocrisy around…
Cheers
Andrew
Austrlian birding friends. I am research more around the Night Parrot. And I find this on the www.
It is funny no?
Why ?
Well the Age writer has copied same ideas – ‘Tasmanian Tiger’ and ‘Budgie’ from Brisbane Times. ‘Dubbed the Tasmanian tiger of the skies, this small, drab, budgerigar-like bird has fascinated scientists’ Naughty naughty! Ha ha ha
And more even funny – Birds Australia keep this record secret to hide it from birdwatchers ‘hunting the bird down.’
But at 2007 they told us all when dead bird found in Queensland like chicken with no head:
Mike Weston, research and conservation manager at Birds Australia, says the “incredible secrecy” prevented a concerted inquiry that might have yielded clues to the birds’ habits. “The way it was handled was most disappointing.”
Ha ha ha – I translate from www it is called ‘hypocpacy’ No?
If may be proper bird watcher go to look and see – may be now we now no more about the Night Parrot? NO? May be too many chickens run with no heads and hiding at their desk?
Richard
===============================
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 Steve,
I agree with a lot of what you say, particularly needing all hands on deck to actually find a bird. The main point I disagree with is that we couldn’t learn anything from actually finding one. While you are correct, one sighting won’t help us learn how to predict where they will be/are, there are a host of benefits to capturing a live bird. We could record their call, allowing us to use playback as a survey technique, and to calibrate remote sound recording stations to their call. We could have a live bird to train sniffer dogs with! We could learn more about their diet, which in turn would help us learn more about their habitat requirements, at least in terms of what species of plants they might eat. And last but not least, it would be an amazing outcome that would grab international news and give conservation a place in the spotlight, however briefly, in this age of mining, oil and gas.
Next time there is a credible sighting of a live bird, I hope that a large-scale survey is organised. Clearly there is a lot of goodwill in the birding community for such a thing to happen, and many people who would volunteer to help.
Cheers, Chris
Jeff. That’s exactly right. If the bird is indeed nocturnal, nomadic, and cryptic in its habits, chance encounters would be very unlikely to eventuate unless there are a lot more of them than is commonly supposed. But it is difficult to imagine what sort of knowledge would enable us to “guarantee their survival”. The sort of things we can imagine might have an impact on their survival, e.g., feral animals, climate change, habitat loss etc.’, are difficult enough to control in a localised area, but nomadic desert birds likely range over thousands of kilometres, and the reality is that very little could be done to enhance the survival prospects of a nomadic desert species. It is highly unlikely that enough could be learnt about its movements to do anything at all. Consider the Princess Parrot or the Scarlet Chested Parrot. These (presumably) are much easier to study than Night Parrots, but apparently we do not know enough about their movements to be able to predict where they are going to turn up at any given time. So if one of those species were to become critically endangered what could we do about it? Very little, I would suggest. Obviously, we hope that these species are able to make good use of reserves like Gluepot and Newhaven, but there would be little point in gazetting a National Park because a rare nomadic bird has turned up there. It might never reappear there. So, what is my point? That letting birders in on the secret is unlikely to have any significant detriment to the species, but may in fact help. To people who have been lucky enough to spot a Night Parrot: Should you be surprised if you return the next day and can’t find it? Most birds can cover vast distances in a relatively short time and some birds do it for a living. People who keep sightings secret, I imagine have good motives, thinking, possibly, that if a population could be located, there might be time to set up some sort of scientific study. And that this study might not be possible in the presence of hordes of rabid twitchers. But realistically, in the vast Australian landscape you might need an all-hands-on deck approach to actually find the birds first. This has been suggested by a few and I agree. Steve Murray
Good points Jeff, my guess is the Night Parrot is more common than the Orange-bellied Parrot.
cheers David Andrew
G’day Carl,
I doubt very much that “their end is Nigh” when the population is large enough to leave to dead ones on the side of the road across two decades and more importantly for them to actually be found by accident, how many dead ones didn’t get found. Looks more like a much reduced population of a naturally extremely furtive species to me. What’s the probability of finding a dead bird on the side of the road in a remote location and what minimum population size would be required to deliver that outcome twice over a two decade period in extremely remote location with few people looking for dead birds on the side of the road. The bird is surviving out there, but it would be good to learn more about it so we can guarantee it survives out there. I rest my case.
Cheers Jeff.
Rob,
Probably we won’t find out much about Nigh Parrots, as anyone can tell, their end is Nigh.
Cheers,
Carl Clifford
Sent from my iPad
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
The only things I would point out are: 1) The Tasmanian Tiger is actually declared extinct. The Night Parrot is almost certainly not extinct.2) We know quite a lot about Tasmanian Tigers. We know very little about Nigh Parrots. It is an analogy which the general public will be able to understand (and perhaps be misled by?)….. Rob Morris
Brisbane, Australia
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Andrew, Richard and BAers,
From my point of view it makes perfect sense for an article about night parrots to quote both the Tassie Tiger (the most well known “lost species”) and budgie (the closest similar well-known bird). Both pieces are for a popular non- birding readership and address this perfectly.
In this case I would suspect this is a case of “editorial convergent evolution” as it makes complete sense and logic.
I also don’t think BA as a forum should be used for accusations of plagiarism either.
Cheers all,
Ed
Ed Williams Kingsville, VIC
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
http://birding-aus.org ===============================