I was not going to comment further on this subject but I think it is necessary to add a few further lines. Since my posting, the response has been overwhelming – my inbox has literally overflowed with comments from many Australian and a few international birders – every one, without exception, with a positive message. Thanks indeed to you all for the support and for your support for John. It is very very evident that nearly everyone, as I am, is thoroughly tired of the continued verbal assault. It is also evident that John has a huge amount of support out there in the birding world and those who have continued with the assault are very much in the minority. Let’s hope that this is the end of it and let’s get back to some good birding news and debate. Thank you all again! I have just spoken with John (he is up at Iron Range at the moment) and he is grateful and very humbled by your support and asked me to extend his sincere thanks and appreciation as well. Lloyd Nielsen Mt Molloy, Nth Qld www.birdingaustralia.com.au =============================== 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 ===============================
And just to add a bit to that, I’ve yet to hear of a politician with any real interest in environmental issues. Many of them make the right sorts of noises but their main concerns are what will get them back in at the next election, not the environment. Their eyes are set on their salaries and a fat pension. Tony. —–Original Message—– [mailto:birding-aus-bounces@lists.vicnet.net.au] On Behalf Of Denise Goodfellow Sent: Saturday, 19 October 2013 9:38 PM Cc: Birding Aus Politicians who have no interest in environmental issues are elected either by voters who have no interest in environmental issues or by those with other priorities. Denise Lawungkurr Goodfellow PO Box 71, Darwin River, NT 0841 043 8650 835 On 19/10/13 4:11 PM, “Andrew Thelander” < thelander.a@gmail.com> wrote: issues) and we might get somewhere. discovery. and publicising as much information as quickly as possible. individual. =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Chris said: “There is also the potential benefit of releasing the call to consultants employed to survey these areas prior to development in that they should in theory have much more success at finding Night Parrots if they are there. Lack of ability to find the species is probably one of the greatest threatening processes for them at this stage given resource development continues in potential habitat at a rapid rate.” Chris, that’s an excellent point, provided that consultants put in adequate survey effort, search the right microhabitats, and conduct the surveys at the right times of the year and under the right environmental conditions. From memory, I think it was Lloyd (happy to stand corrected if it was someone else) who said that John Young had spent a commendable 17,000 hrs of his time before he sighted, photographed and videoed the Night Parrot. John is one of only a few people, if not the only one, who has knowledge of where and how to locate Night Parrots successfully. This is why I believe the results of his discovery should be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, as well as making voice recordings available, so that consultants, scientists, land managers etc are better informed and equipped to search for Night Parrots and learn how to avoid destruction or degradation of important habitats or microhabitats. The rate at which inland areas of Australia are being modified by mining, livestock grazing, feral animal grazing etc means that this information should, in my opinion, be made available sooner rather than later. Therefore, it is out of a sense of urgency, not impatience, that I make this point. Stephen Ambrose Ryde NSW =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
It seems to me there is quite a difference between “vast potential range” and actual known range. Aside from one sighting Western Australia, in the past 25 years the dead specimens have been in SW Queensland where John Young reportedly found this bird. Without extensive field surveys we can’t assume we have more than 1 or 2 critically small, critically isolated, critically endangered populations. The one thing that could help to change that picture is extensive field surveys taking advantage of John’s recorded calls, should he agree to make them available to a small number of people. Cheers Ross Macfarlane —–Original Message—– Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:53 PM Cc: birding-aus ; Greg Roberts Hi Ian, Mining is an ongoing process in this country, and with little to no ability in the short periods of time allocated to environmental impact field surveys to pick up Night Parrot (or other cryptic species) there is a real concern that this property, along with any other potential Night Parrot populations not yet discovered, could easily fall beneath the bulldozer. Don’t forget the way our legislation works means that pastoral land can be mined in spite of any objections landholders may have, so at the stage the only known population of Night Parrots is definitely not secure from mining or coal seam gas. Announcing the location, at least to the government, may help ameliorate this risk, though of course that isn’t guaranteed if you look at the Great Barrier Reef at the moment. There is also the potential benefit of releasing the call to consultants employed to survey these areas prior to development in that they should in theory have much more success at finding Night Parrots if they are there. Lack of ability to find the species is probably one of the greatest threatening processes for them at this stage given resource development continues in potential habitat at a rapid rate. Cheers, Chris Sent from my iPhone On 19/10/2013, at 6:26 PM, Ian May < birding@ozemail.com.au> wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Politicians who have no interest in environmental issues are elected either by voters who have no interest in environmental issues or by those with other priorities. Denise Lawungkurr Goodfellow PO Box 71, Darwin River, NT 0841 043 8650 835 On 19/10/13 4:11 PM, “Andrew Thelander” < thelander.a@gmail.com> wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hi Ian, Mining is an ongoing process in this country, and with little to no ability in the short periods of time allocated to environmental impact field surveys to pick up Night Parrot (or other cryptic species) there is a real concern that this property, along with any other potential Night Parrot populations not yet discovered, could easily fall beneath the bulldozer. Don’t forget the way our legislation works means that pastoral land can be mined in spite of any objections landholders may have, so at the stage the only known population of Night Parrots is definitely not secure from mining or coal seam gas. Announcing the location, at least to the government, may help ameliorate this risk, though of course that isn’t guaranteed if you look at the Great Barrier Reef at the moment. There is also the potential benefit of releasing the call to consultants employed to survey these areas prior to development in that they should in theory have much more success at finding Night Parrots if they are there. Lack of ability to find the species is probably one of the greatest threatening processes for them at this stage given resource development continues in potential habitat at a rapid rate. Cheers, Chris Sent from my iPhone On 19/10/2013, at 6:26 PM, Ian May < birding@ozemail.com.au> wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
What is the urgency? Because of its vast potential range and extreme cryptic behavior i doubt that virtually anything anyone does or does not do in the near future would or could affect the ultimate survival of Night Parrot It’s survival so far within the Channel Country and Boulia area despite the history of regular drought, extreme heat, heavy domestic animal grazing, mega infestations of rabbits, foxes, cats, weeds, wind and water erosion and just about every other ecological pressure that has been applied is testimony to this.. The only conceivable short term local threats would be from misguided researchers influencing misinformed land use and bird conservation policy. Especially 1, Policy that might recommend significant change to the current ecological blend that has allowed this species to survive so far and 2, misguided policy that allows intervention such as targeting, capturing and handling Night Parrots for some other quasi research purpose including captive breeding. “Lessons in History” might also consider some other prominent parrot species recovery programs that have developed into research conservation disasters and lack adequate transparency. Ian May St Helens. Tasmania Greg Roberts wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Greg The Night parrot photographed by John Young is the property of the State of Queensland, an entity controlled by the likes of Campbell Newman and Jeff Seeney. I somehow don’t think that remembering the bird’s proprietorial status is going to help it one iota. Our governments are failing our endangered species and we keep re-electing them. Stop the votes (to politicians who have no interest in environmental issues) and we might get somewhere. cheers Andrew On 18/10/2013, at 8:48 PM, Greg Roberts wrote: Andrew Thelander Mob: 0400 034 809 =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Well said Greg. Carl Clifford On 18/10/2013, at 21:48, “Greg Roberts” < ninderry@westnet.com.au> wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
There’s probably no way to post on this subject without annoying people
I have nothing to contribute on the people or passions involved as I don’t know anyone involved personally. I’ve got no axe to grind with anyone here. As an observation, I’ll just add that new species are discovered and lost species are rediscovered ever year. Not so much in Australia, but a fair few in South America and Asia. In these cases, headlines are rare (unless you name your species Scaptia beyoncea.) James Eaton, for example, seems to keep turning up lost species. There are well-established procedures for documenting new and rediscovered species. For whatever reason, or combination of reasons good and/or bad, the Night Parrot discovery has been handled in a novel manner. To some degree, the complaints likely stem from that (?) Then again, I’m not sure how much it matters to anyone with a stake in the matter what people on this list say or don’t say. =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Just as an aside, has anyone noticed that it’s most frequently John’s images that are subjected to such intense photographical scrutiny whilst others, perhaps depicting birds of a lesser rarity, ie unusual seabirds, notoriously difficult to ID, often slide through without too much discussion and certainly less fervour. John will reveal all if and when it suits him. Meanwhile there do seem to be some tender agendas at work out there. Patience people, patience. Tony, Adelaide. —–Original Message—– [mailto:birding-aus-bounces@lists.vicnet.net.au] On Behalf Of Ian May Sent: Tuesday, 15 October 2013 6:26 PM Hello all After revealing irrefutable evidence about the existence of Night Parrot, including hundreds of photographs, video, call recordings, DNA specimens and backed up with credible confirmation by another respected observer, what more could a reasonable person want. But John Young’s antagonists now try to justify their personal nasty stuff as quasi scientific discussion. But the irony of it all is that most of their comments are based on completely unsupported speculation. Quick searches of Birdforum archives, shows there are a couple of prominent critics pursuing this thread; mostly the same names previously generating this insensitive queasy agenda on birding-aus. One can only speculate why? Are there some mean spirited individuals out there trying to force John Young to reveal more information so as to defend himself or could there be someone with a personal “axe to grind”. Either way, I reckon there should be no place for it here on the birding-aus forum. Ian May St Helens, Tasmania ———————————————————————— Geoff Price wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
A quick view from across the ocean. It is, of course necessary to distinguish between news media and what are essentially publications for entertainment. Even many news media will “manipulate” photos when the change has no substantive relevance. When reading a birding magazine,as opposed to a scientific journal, I no more expect bird photos to be untouched for cosmetic reasons than I do models on magazine covers. I understand the importance of the discovery, but this quibbling strikes me as essentially a tempest in a teapot among people impatient to see the raw photos.. Just my two cents (or about 2.1 cents in Australian dollars). Eric Jeffrey Falls Church, VA USA —–Original Message—– Cc: birding-aus < birding-aus@vicnet.net.au> Sent: Tue, Oct 15, 2013 10:16 am On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 06:38:59PM +1000, Lloyd Nielsen wrote: Actually it doesn’t. This sort of modification of news photos is anathema to major news organizations . The Australian which published John’s photos editorial policy prohibits such manipulation. I don’t know Australian Birdlife’s policy, but I think many of its readers would be disappointed it has published bird images with part of the plumage faked (cloned from elsewhere). No doubt some news organisations are less scrupulous and in other parts of the media digital manipulation is ubiquitous, but John Young himself said in an ABC interview (about fig parrot photos) that such manipulation in this context was inappropriate: “I lightened them, darkened them, did my own sort of stuff and I was criticised and probably rightly so.” And in a 2007 story about the fig parrot he said he’d avoiding even the possibility of such alterations in future: ” [Mr Young] has since bought a special $6000 camera which takes pictures which cannot be digitally altered” Andrew =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Hello all After revealing irrefutable evidence about the existence of Night Parrot, including hundreds of photographs, video, call recordings, DNA specimens and backed up with credible confirmation by another respected observer, what more could a reasonable person want. But John Young’s antagonists now try to justify their personal nasty stuff as quasi scientific discussion. But the irony of it all is that most of their comments are based on completely unsupported speculation. Quick searches of Birdforum archives, shows there are a couple of prominent critics pursuing this thread; mostly the same names previously generating this insensitive queasy agenda on birding-aus. One can only speculate why? Are there some mean spirited individuals out there trying to force John Young to reveal more information so as to defend himself or could there be someone with a personal “axe to grind”. Either way, I reckon there should be no place for it here on the birding-aus forum. Ian May St Helens, Tasmania ———————————————————————— Geoff Price wrote: =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Well said Stephen. This isn’t about John Young, its about the discovery – and the minimal amount of info released to date. It’d be more upsetting if no one cared. Colin On Tue, Oct 15, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Stephen Murray wrote: — Colin Reid jangles@fastmail.fm So many birds, so little time…… — http://www.fastmail.fm – Email service worth paying for. Try it for free =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Isn’t it possible to be Pro-Young and also question the validity of the pictures or to question the actions of John? Or does one have to act woth total faith? Hell – I don’t always agree with my wife… Cheers and have a happy day all. Ken Cross —————————————— Well said Stephen. I for one have been wondering why some cannot differentiate between personal attacks and scientific debate. Certainly, there have been more personal attacks from the pro-Young camp than those who question the scientific validity of the pictures. As you say – we are entitled to question, especially given the man’s history. As I see it, many respected scientists are questioning certain behavioural aspects of the finder, such as suppressing the call and altering images. This is scientific debate, NOT casting aspersions on the validity of the find. So why are so many getting so heated up when anyone dares question this, and the assumption that he alone knows what is good for this species? On 15/10/2013 12:29 PM, Stephen Murray wrote: — =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Well said Stephen. I for one have been wondering why some cannot differentiate between personal attacks and scientific debate. Certainly, there have been more personal attacks from the pro-Young camp than those who question the scientific validity of the pictures. As you say – we are entitled to question, especially given the man’s history. As I see it, many respected scientists are questioning certain behavioural aspects of the finder, such as suppressing the call and altering images. This is scientific debate, NOT casting aspersions on the validity of the find. So why are so many getting so heated up when anyone dares question this, and the assumption that he alone knows what is good for this species? On 15/10/2013 12:29 PM, Stephen Murray wrote: — =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Lloyd. Thank you for sharing this information. However, I have to say that say I am completely taken aback by the way people have been demonised for daring to ask a few questions about the photos. These are the first pictures we have ever been shown of a live Night Parrot. Did Mr Young really think people were not going to look closely at the photograph? People just wanted to know was why was it altered, how much of it was altered, and did the publishers know it was altered. For that they are told to ‘shut up’, ‘get a life’ or worse, accused of slander. The religious fervour building up around this event is starting to cloud people’s judgement. All the information about what a good bloke John is, and how much he has sacrificed to get to this point, is totally irrelevant to the discussion about the photo. I particularly don’t like the implication that because the photos were only for public consumption it doesn’t really matter that they were altered. You have to remember that, until this discovery makes its way into a scientific journal, members of the public have very little to go on. Just a few altered photos and what we have been told. Steve Murray —–Original Message—– [mailto:birding-aus-bounces@lists.vicnet.net.au] On Behalf Of Lloyd Nielsen Sent: Monday, 14 October 2013 6:39 PM Someone asked for the truth in this matter so please read below. I should add that I have known John for about 30 years, have worked with him on many occasions and regard him as a close friend. John finally got the photos of the Night Parrot with the help of a birding friend who has accompanied him on many of the trips (and who also saw the parrot during that time). After the night of photography and some sleep was had, they packed up and headed for home – a 15 hour drive. As soon as John got within mobile range, he phoned me to say “We got it!” He was so excited that he could hardly get the words out. They arrived back in Cairns late that night. Next morning around 9.00 am John arrived up here at my place and we sat at my kitchen table and spent a couple of hours going through about 50 or so of the best photos as well as the video. I was the first to see them. I had already heard much of the sound that John had got on previous visits but we went through some of that again. Over previous years, I spent time with him out at some of the sites where he has been looking for the parrot, including the one where he finally got the photos. I have not been fortunate enough to see the bird myself but know the exact site where he photographed it – in fact the very spinifex bush the bird disappeared under! As far as John altering the photo digitally is concerned, all he did was to take a small spinifex twig off the birds back which was spoiling the photo. I have just spoken to him again and he assures me adamantly that before he sent the photo that is all he did (not that I needed that assurance). The photo (a jpg!) was not for scientific consumption but for PUBLIC consumption! What is the drama over that? Some people seem to have problems differentiating between the two – just read the debate on Bird Forum. It is something which happens a million times a day in the publishing world. There are another hundred plus original Raw files which will be available for publication at a later date with a scientific paper if needed. I really can’t believe some of the comments and doubting from some people which has made its way onto Birding-aus!! John Young is one of the most remarkable and talented field ornithologists Australia has ever seen and yet there are people out there (mostly those who have never met him) who still try to put him down at every opportunity. And as far as the “debate” on the Bird Forum website is concerned, after reading a few of those postings, I quickly hit the delete button – I have better things to do than to waste time reading discussion such as that which at times denigrates Australian birding and birders, with some bordering on defamation. Why don’t these people take some notice of the Aussies? A few noted Australian ornithologists made an attempt to convince them that the sighting and photographs were genuine but that seemed to be ignored but a number of contributors. Finally, a message to the doubters and knockers – for goodness sake, go take a cold shower and give the man a break!! Recognise his ability, what he has achieved and what he is doing. Allow him to make more data available in his own good time. He is already working on the parrot and its welfare (voluntarily with no financial remuneration) with others including some from the scientific community. The object of this is to determine the status of the bird etc etc, trying to locate it in other areas, to determine the best ways to protect the bird, AND ways in which others might see it without endangering the species. You are not helping either the cause (especially when and if funds need to be raised at some time), the future of the Night Parrot or the chance for others to see it! And for those people asking (almost demanding) him to divulge all that he has gained, discovered and learned so far – does one immediately write a paper at first encounter with a species? He has already conducted a public forum at his own expense for the benefit of birders. Just remember this – John derives a living from consultancy etc. in the natural history field (he does not have a highly paid government or other job) and the quest for the Night Parrot has already cost him more than 6 figures of his own money as well as thousands of hours in the field for which he has received very little remuneration to date. Are these people going to contribute to some form of remuneration. Give the man a break! Lloyd Nielsen, Mt Molloy, Nth Qld http://www.birdingaustralia.com.au =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================
Dear Tony, John Leonard, Lloyd & BirdingAus, First I’d like to thank Lloyd for the provided explanation. It looks like there is a huge misunderstanding going on – likely induced by hitting the delete button too early? This discussion was never meant to be an emotional one about John Young, it was meant to be an objective one about the first ever taken photographs of a live Night Parrot – regardless if they were published for public or scientific consumption, Lloyd, as every bit of valid information should provide a piece of the puzzle in the Night Parrot’s biology and therefore will contribute to its conservation. You are right, John L.. Night Parrot has currently the status ‘endangered’ (Birdlife International), http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=1491 However, as opposed to many other endangered species, there is very little known about the status and the current distribution of this species, which may well go extinct if we lose the (last?) sites, where it occurs. The last accepted record was a dead juvenile bird found in Diamantina National Park in 2006 (seven years ago). So, this photographic documentation is of major importance! Since these are the only ever photographs of a live Night Parrot, it would be very important to use some of the 600 taken photographs – raw files, without any manipulation for whatever reason (spinifex twigs are much less disturbing than multiple out-of-place cloned feathers) –, the 17-second movie, the sound recordings and the DNA analysis to properly document this sighting! That is a great opportunity that should not be missed, as I believe that any new information will help to conserve this endangered species! Finally, John, I don’t see that much novelty in the behaviour as other parrot species can ‘fluff up like an Echidna’ and hop, too. So at this point, this is certainly worth noting but I am not sure how much this adds to the knowledge. I think the main importance of this sighting is the actual photographic and sound documentation. Best wishes, Nikolas —————- Nikolas Haass nhaass@yahoo.com Brisbane, QLD ________________________________ From: Tony Russell < pratincole08@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:47 AM Oh Lloyd, well said ! It’s about time someone of your stature in the birding world stood up in support of all the fantastic work that John Young does. One can only assume that his knockers are either very extreme sceptics or just plain jealous and it’s not worth spending any more time on them. I’ve been out in the field with John and can only bow to his abilities, patience, veracity and expertise. Tony. —–Original Message—– [mailto:birding-aus-bounces@lists.vicnet.net.au] On Behalf Of Lloyd Nielsen Sent: Monday, 14 October 2013 7:09 PM Someone asked for the truth in this matter so please read below. I should add that I have known John for about 30 years, have worked with him on many occasions and regard him as a close friend. John finally got the photos of the Night Parrot with the help of a birding friend who has accompanied him on many of the trips (and who also saw the parrot during that time). After the night of photography and some sleep was had, they packed up and headed for home – a 15 hour drive. As soon as John got within mobile range, he phoned me to say “We got it!” He was so excited that he could hardly get the words out. They arrived back in Cairns late that night. Next morning around 9.00 am John arrived up here at my place and we sat at my kitchen table and spent a couple of hours going through about 50 or so of the best photos as well as the video. I was the first to see them. I had already heard much of the sound that John had got on previous visits but we went through some of that again. Over previous years, I spent time with him out at some of the sites where he has been looking for the parrot, including the one where he finally got the photos. I have not been fortunate enough to see the bird myself but know the exact site where he photographed it – in fact the very spinifex bush the bird disappeared under! As far as John altering the photo digitally is concerned, all he did was to take a small spinifex twig off the birds back which was spoiling the photo. I have just spoken to him again and he assures me adamantly that before he sent the photo that is all he did (not that I needed that assurance). The photo (a jpg!) was not for scientific consumption but for PUBLIC consumption! What is the drama over that? Some people seem to have problems differentiating between the two – just read the debate on Bird Forum. It is something which happens a million times a day in the publishing world. There are another hundred plus original Raw files which will be available for publication at a later date with a scientific paper if needed. I really can’t believe some of the comments and doubting from some people which has made its way onto Birding-aus!! John Young is one of the most remarkable and talented field ornithologists Australia has ever seen and yet there are people out there (mostly those who have never met him) who still try to put him down at every opportunity. And as far as the “debate” on the Bird Forum website is concerned, after reading a few of those postings, I quickly hit the delete button – I have better things to do than to waste time reading discussion such as that which at times denigrates Australian birding and birders, with some bordering on defamation. Why don’t these people take some notice of the Aussies? A few noted Australian ornithologists made an attempt to convince them that the sighting and photographs were genuine but that seemed to be ignored but a number of contributors. Finally, a message to the doubters and knockers – for goodness sake, go take a cold shower and give the man a break!! Recognise his ability, what he has achieved and what he is doing. Allow him to make more data available in his own good time. He is already working on the parrot and its welfare (voluntarily with no financial remuneration) with others including some from the scientific community. The object of this is to determine the status of the bird etc etc, trying to locate it in other areas, to determine the best ways to protect the bird, AND ways in which others might see it without endangering the species. You are not helping either the cause (especially when and if funds need to be raised at some time), the future of the Night Parrot or the chance for others to see it! And for those people asking (almost demanding) him to divulge all that he has gained, discovered and learned so far – does one immediately write a paper at first encounter with a species? He has already conducted a public forum at his own expense for the benefit of birders. Just remember this – John derives a living from consultancy etc. in the natural history field (he does not have a highly paid government or other job) and the quest for the Night Parrot has already cost him more than 6 figures of his own money as well as thousands of hours in the field for which he has received very little remuneration to date. Are these people going to contribute to some form of remuneration. Give the man a break! Lloyd Nielsen, Mt Molloy, Nth Qld http://www.birdingaustralia.com.au =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org =============================== =============================== To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line) http://birding-aus.org ===============================