DOCSLIB.ORG

Ssd 15 7228, Sydney Zoo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ssd 15 7228, Sydney Zoo 26 July 2017 Mr David Mooney Team Leader Secretariat Planning Assessment Commission Level 3, 201 Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW 2000 Dear David, SSD 15_7228, SYDNEY ZOO On behalf of Elanor Investors Group, the owners and operators of Featherdale Wildlife Park, we make the following response to the Social Impact Assessment by UTS for the Sydney Zoo dated 11 July 2017 (UTS SIA) and the response of Sydney Zoo dated April 2017 (Zoo RTS) lodged in support of the above SSD application. In summary we submit: 1. That the PAC cannot be satisfied with the response provided by the proponent to its request for additional information, and the PAC should not accept the UTS conclusions; 2. The development application should be refused for the reasons outlined in the Urbis letter dated 3 November 2016 because there is likely to be a material impact on the visitor numbers to Featherdale (an impact not denied by the UTS SIA although ranked as a lower risk based on UTS’s but not Urbis’ predictions) and therefore on the ability of Featherdale to maintain programs which have material positive environmental, economic and social benefits. These programs have developed over a 45 year period and cannot readily be replicated in the locality. 3. If the PAC determines to approve the development application, it should only do so with the imposition of a condition prohibiting the exhibition of any native animals so that the operations of Sydney Zoo and Featherdale are differentiated and complementary. Sydney Zoo response to PAC request for further information We have not been provided with a copy of the PAC request for further information, but have sought to understand the request from the contents of the Zoo RTS. We note that the Zoo RTS is heavily redacted and it is not possible to comment on the proposed species list. However, we understand from the other documents submitted by Sydney Zoo and the Zoo and Aquarium Association’s Collection Online Planning System list submitted by Sydney Zoo (attached at Annexure C) that the proposed native animal exhibition will cover about 25% of the exhibition space and be diverse (at least 40 species), with proposals to exhibit kangaroos, wallabies, wombats, emus, koalas, insects, reptiles and other nocturnal natives, Tasmanian devils and quolls. We submit that this diversity of native animals does not sufficiently differentiate the Sydney Zoo offering from Featherdale. Rather it PAC Submission (Final) largely replicates the key offerings at Featherdale. The Urbis Socio Economic Impact Report dated November 2016 (Urbis 2016 Report) indicates that the key reasons for visitors attending Featherdale is to touch animals that they like, close to home and at a good price. More alarmingly, it is noted on page 71 of the Zoo RTS that all Australian species are available but that not all exotic animals are available. This means that there is nothing stopping Sydney Zoo operating with a majority of native animals when the only proposed condition on exhibition of native animals is that the area be limited to 1.6ha. For this reason the PAC can have no comfort that there will be differentiation and no impact on Featherdale’s programs unless there is a condition restricting the exhibition of native animals. Social Impact Assessment by UTS (UTS SIA) We attach to this letter detailed responses to the UTS SIA – Annexures A and B (in the footnotes). In summary: 1. The UTS SIA has not been prepared in accordance with the SIA and CBA Guidelines because it does not meet many material requirements of those Guidelines. For instance, the SIA makes no attempt to quantify whether the benefits resulting from the Sydney Zoo development would outweigh its negative economic and social costs/impacts. Therefore, the UTS SIA conclusion that the Sydney Zoo will result in net benefits cannot be relied on. 2. The online survey and stakeholder consultations relied on in the UTS SIA are poorly designed, biased and unreliable. UTS is not neutral in the questions it has asked, has bias in the selection of stakeholders interviewed (includes former Featherdale employees and Sydney Zoo employees), does not draw a sample from the relevant market of regular animal attraction visitors, and does not independently verify proponent information. This makes the results misleading and they should be given little if any weight. 3. The Co-existence Scenario is the least likely scenario. Sydney Zoo has told Featherdale that it wants to match Featherdale’s offering but at Sydney Zoo. There is no intent by Sydney Zoo to co-exist. The conclusion that the Co-existence Scenario is the most likely scenario is not based on robust empirical evidence. The Hill PDA and Urbis Reports demonstrate the risk of closure or reduction in environmental and social programs is higher. 4. The SIA relies on generic academic research about tourism clusters where apparently differentiation is stated as the key factor to success. The proposed condition B6 limiting native animal exhibits to 1.6ha does not ensure differentiation where Sydney Zoo proposes 40 Australian species with no limit on the species being exhibited. Sydney Zoo intends to match not differentiate the key native animal offerings of Featherdale being “hands on” experiences with native animals and particularly mammals and marsupials (see Urbis 2016 Report findings). Given the very close physical proximity between Sydney Zoo and Featherdale, true “thematic complementarity” will only occur where one operations has exotic animals and the other native animals. Where one operation offers A and the other A + B, it is common sense that A will receive less visitors. This common sense outcome is reflected in the outcomes of the random survey in the Urbis 2016 Report. 5. The SIA accepts at face value that the social, educational and environmental programs proposed by Sydney Zoo will be implemented. The programs conducted by Featherdale PAC Submission (Final) 2 have taken 45 years to develop and no other zoo anywhere has looked to fill the role on the tiger quolls or its endangered bird programs. Not one of the “programs” attributed to Sydney Zoo by the UTS SIA are the subject of a statement of commitment or draft condition of consent except: (a) That Sydney Zoo must consult on regional tourism initiatives (C9). “Consultation” does not ensure a positive outcome. (b) That Sydney Zoo is to collaborate with Muru Mittigar and registered Aboriginal parties on an Aboriginal heritage experience strategy and demonstrate an ongoing role of Aboriginal people. There is no commitment to the 10% employment target or that participation will be materially significant (C21). 6. The majority of potential consumers would not attend both Sydney Zoo and Featherdale, and would not prefer Featherdale over Sydney Zoo. The practical reality is that potential consumers will be constrained (for reasons of cost, time and interest) from attending both facilities. 7. Sydney Zoo will not increase overall visitor participation. There is no compelling evidence presented that the market is large enough to support both Sydney Zoo and Featherdale. The UTS conclusion is flawed and not based on any robust empirical evidence. The Urbis market research on the other hand frames and links questions regarding future usage to real behaviour, making it more robust than the UTS survey. Most of the visits to Sydney Zoo would be a re- direction of already existing business from other facilities. The majority of the visits to Sydney Zoo will not be additional demand and will not generate additional economic benefits. Therefore, the UTS SIA like the KPMG and HillPDA reports overstate the extent of economic and social benefits claimed. 8. Featherdale’s social, education and conservation programs have significant material value. The fact that certain programs offered by Featherdale are not ‘unique’ does not necessarily mean that they do not provide value for the purposes of the PAC’s determination as to whether Sydney Zoo will give rise to overall adverse social impacts in the locality. 9. Featherdale’s social, education and conservation programs cannot be readily replicated in the locality which is the Blacktown LGA and Western Sydney Region which will be grossly contrary to the interests of Western Sydney and the environment, specifically conservation biology.. There is no compelling evidence presented that the Featherdale’s social, education and conservation programs will be replicated at Sydney Zoo. 10. Approval of Sydney Zoo will result in significant net adverse social impacts in the locality because it will most likely result in the closure of Featherdale, Featherdale’s social, educational and conservation programs have significant value, and these programs will not be replicated by Sydney Zoo or any other facilities in the locality. It is evident from the CPOS species list that Featherdale is heavily involved in active breeding programs and not just for display purposes, more so than indicated by Sydney Zoo in its CPOS species list request – Annexure C. 11. The SIA does not address or respond to the matters identified in the Urbis Socio Economic Impact Report dated November 2016. PAC Submission (Final) 3 Accordingly, the PAC should give greater weight to the Urbis 2016 Report by refusing the application for the reasons in our letter dated 3 November 2016 being: 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the aim of the SEPP (Western Sydney Parklands) to deliver ‘beneficial social and economic outcomes to Western Sydney’. 2. The proposal will result in unacceptable adverse social and economic impacts in the locality associated with the likely closure of an existing facility that provides tourism, employment, environmental and social services to Western Sydney. 3. The suggested differentiation of the proposed zoo (Sydney zoo) to the existing zoo (Featherdale) is not certain or enforceable unless a condition was imposed requiring no native mammals to be displayed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Birding Nsw Birding
    Birding NSW Newsletter Page 1 birding NewsletterNewsletter NSWNSW FieldField OrnithologistsOrnithologists ClubClub IncInc nsw IssueIssue 287287 JuneJune -- JulyJuly 20182018 President’s Report I am pleased to inform you that Ross Crates, who is doing We had 30 surveyors, some of whom were new. One of important work on the endangered Regent Honeyeater, the strengths of the survey is that while some surveyors will receive the money from this year’s NSW Twitchathon cannot attend every survey, there are enough new people fund-raising event. This decision was made at the recent that there is a pool of about 30 surveyors for each event. Bird Interest Group network (BIGnet) meeting at Sydney Most surveyors saw Superb Parrots in March. Olympic Park. At this meeting, it was also agreed At the club meetings in April and May, we were fortunate unanimously that in future, all BIGnet clubs would have to have had two superb lectures from the National Parks an equal opportunity to submit proposals annually for and Wildlife Service branch of the Office of Environment funding support from the Twitchathon in NSW, replacing and Heritage, one by Principal Scientist Nicholas Carlile the previous protocol of alternating annual decision- on Gould’s Petrels, and another by Ranger Martin Smith making between NSW clubs and BirdLife Southern NSW. on the Little Tern and other shorebirds. Both speakers Allan Richards led a highly successful campout to Ingelba were obviously highly committed to their work and to the near Walcha on the Easter Long Weekend. One of the National Parks and Wildlife Service. At a time of major highlights was great views of platypuses.
    [Show full text]
  • Whistler3 Frontcover
    The Whistler is the occasionally issued journal of the Hunter Bird Observers Club Inc. ISSN 1835-7385 The aims of the Hunter Bird Observers Club (HBOC), which is affiliated with Bird Observation and Conservation Australia, are: To encourage and further the study and conservation of Australian birds and their habitat To encourage bird observing as a leisure-time activity HBOC is administered by a Committee: Executive: Committee Members: President: Paul Baird Craig Anderson Vice-President: Grant Brosie Liz Crawford Secretary: Tom Clarke Ann Lindsey Treasurer: Rowley Smith Robert McDonald Ian Martin Mick Roderick Publication of The Whistler is supported by a Sub-committee: Mike Newman (Joint Editor) Harold Tarrant (Joint Editor) Liz Crawford (Production Manager) Chris Herbert (Cover design) Liz Huxtable Ann Lindsey Jenny Powers Mick Roderick Alan Stuart Authors wishing to submit manuscripts for consideration for publication should consult Instructions for Authors on page 61 and submit to the Editors: Mike Newman [email protected] and/or Harold Tarrant [email protected] Authors wishing to contribute articles of general bird and birdwatching news to the club newsletter, which has 6 issues per year, should submit to the Newsletter Editor: Liz Crawford [email protected] © Hunter Bird Observers Club Inc. PO Box 24 New Lambton NSW 2305 Website: www.hboc.org.au Front cover: Australian Painted Snipe Rostratula australis – Photo: Ann Lindsey Back cover: Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva - Photo: Chris Herbert The Whistler is proudly supported by the Hunter-Central Rivers Catchment Management Authority Editorial The Whistler 3 (2009): i-ii The Whistler – Editorial The Editors are pleased to provide our members hopefully make good reading now, but will and other ornithological enthusiasts with the third certainly provide a useful point of reference for issue of the club’s emerging journal.
    [Show full text]
  • Disaggregation of Bird Families Listed on Cms Appendix Ii
    Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 2nd Meeting of the Sessional Committee of the CMS Scientific Council (ScC-SC2) Bonn, Germany, 10 – 14 July 2017 UNEP/CMS/ScC-SC2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II (Prepared by the Appointed Councillors for Birds) Summary: The first meeting of the Sessional Committee of the Scientific Council identified the adoption of a new standard reference for avian taxonomy as an opportunity to disaggregate the higher-level taxa listed on Appendix II and to identify those that are considered to be migratory species and that have an unfavourable conservation status. The current paper presents an initial analysis of the higher-level disaggregation using the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World Volumes 1 and 2 taxonomy, and identifies the challenges in completing the analysis to identify all of the migratory species and the corresponding Range States. The document has been prepared by the COP Appointed Scientific Councilors for Birds. This is a supplementary paper to COP document UNEP/CMS/COP12/Doc.25.3 on Taxonomy and Nomenclature UNEP/CMS/ScC-Sc2/Inf.3 DISAGGREGATION OF BIRD FAMILIES LISTED ON CMS APPENDIX II 1. Through Resolution 11.19, the Conference of Parties adopted as the standard reference for bird taxonomy and nomenclature for Non-Passerine species the Handbook of the Birds of the World/BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, Volume 1: Non-Passerines, by Josep del Hoyo and Nigel J. Collar (2014); 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Macquarie River Bird Trail
    Bird Watching Trail Guide Acknowledgements RiverSmart Australia Limited would like to thank the following for their assistance in making this trail and publication a reality. Tim and Janis Hosking, and the other members of the Dubbo Field Naturalists and Conservation Society, who assisted with technical information about the various sites, the bird list and with some of the photos. Thanks also to Jim Dutton for providing bird list details for the Burrendong Arboretum. Photographers. Photographs were kindly provided by Brian O’Leary, Neil Zoglauer, Julian Robinson, Lisa Minner, Debbie Love, Tim Hosking, Dione Carter, Dan Giselsson, Tim Ralph and Bill Phillips. This project received financial support from the Australian Bird Environment Foundation of Sacred kingfisher photo: Dan Giselsson BirdLife Australia. Thanks to Warren Shire Council, Sarah Derrett and Ashley Wielinga in particular, for their assistance in relation to the Tiger Bay site. Thanks also to Philippa Lawrence, Sprout Design and Mapping Services Australia. THE MACQuarIE RIVER TraILS First published 2014 The Macquarie valley, in the heart of NSW is one of the The preparation of this guide was coordinated by the not-for-profit organisation Riversmart State’s — and indeed Australia’s — best kept secrets, until now. Australia Ltd. Please consider making a tax deductible donation to our blue bucket fund so we can keep doing our work in the interests of healthy and sustainable rivers. Macquarie River Trails (www.rivertrails.com.au), launched in late 2011, is designed to let you explore the many attractions www.riversmart.org.au and wonders of this rich farming region, one that is blessed See outside back cover for more about our work with a vibrant river, the iconic Maquarie Marshes, friendly people and a laid back lifestyle.
    [Show full text]
  • Spotted Tailed Quoll (Dasyurus Maculatus)
    Husbandry Guidelines for the SPOTTED-TAILED QUOLL (Tiger Quoll) (Photo: J. Marten) Dasyurus maculatus (MAMMALIA: DASYURIDAE) Author: Julie Marten Date of Preparation: February 2013 – June 2014 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Course Name and Number: Captive Animals Certificate III (18913) Lecturers: Graeme Phipps, Jacki Salkeld, Brad Walker DISCLAIMER Please note that this information is just a guide. It is not a definitive set of rules on how the care of Spotted- Tailed Quolls must be conducted. Information provided may vary for: • Individual Spotted-Tailed Quolls • Spotted-Tailed Quolls from different regions of Australia • Spotted-Tailed Quolls kept in zoos versus Spotted-Tailed Quolls from the wild • Spotted-Tailed Quolls kept in different zoos Additionally different zoos have their own set of rules and guidelines on how to provide husbandry for their Spotted-Tailed Quolls. Even though I researched from many sources and consulted various people, there are zoos and individual keepers, researchers etc. that have more knowledge than myself and additional research should always be conducted before partaking any new activity. Legislations are regularly changing and therefore it is recommended to research policies set out by national and state government and associations such as ARAZPA, ZAA etc. Any incident resulting from the misuse of this document will not be recognised as the responsibility of the author. Please use at the participants discretion. Any enhancements to this document to increase animal care standards and husbandry techniques are appreciated. Otherwise I hope this manual provides some helpful information. Julie Marten Picture J.Marten 2 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS It is important before conducting any work that all hazards are identified.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia's Biodiversity and Climate Change
    Australia’s Biodiversity and Climate Change A strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia’s biodiversity to climate change A report to the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council commissioned by the Australian Government. Prepared by the Biodiversity and Climate Change Expert Advisory Group: Will Steffen, Andrew A Burbidge, Lesley Hughes, Roger Kitching, David Lindenmayer, Warren Musgrave, Mark Stafford Smith and Patricia A Werner © Commonwealth of Australia 2009 ISBN 978-1-921298-67-7 Published in pre-publication form as a non-printable PDF at www.climatechange.gov.au by the Department of Climate Change. It will be published in hard copy by CSIRO publishing. For more information please email [email protected] This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the: Commonwealth Copyright Administration Attorney-General's Department 3-5 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 Email: [email protected] Or online at: http://www.ag.gov.au Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Australian Government or the Minister for Climate Change and Water and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts. Citation The book should be cited as: Steffen W, Burbidge AA, Hughes L, Kitching R, Lindenmayer D, Musgrave W, Stafford Smith M and Werner PA (2009) Australia’s biodiversity and climate change: a strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia’s biodiversity to climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Craig Bullen - Resume
    Craig Bullen - Resume FILM / TV CREDITS (recent years only) PRODUCTION YEAR POSITION Eden 2020 Trainer Foxtel Cannonball Run TVC 2020 Animal Coordinator The Last Zombie 2020 Head Trainer Buckley’s Chance 2019 Animal Trainer Storm Boy 2017 Pelican Trainer Wake in Fright 2017 Dog Trainer Left Overs - Series 2 2016 Lion Trainer Red Dog: True Blue 2015 Dog Trainer/Horse Trainer War Horse 2010 Liberty Horse Trainer H2O Just Add Water 2008 Trainer Tostitos TVC 2008 Animal Trainer Heartbeat 2008 Horse Wrangler Mr. Bones II (South Africa) 2008 Animal Trainer Nicotinell (South Africa) 2008 Animal Trainer The Ruins 2007 Horse Wrangler Australia 2007 Animal Wrangler H2O, Just Add Water 2006 Horse Wrangler Elephant Tales (South Africa) 2005 Animal Trainer Charlotte’s Web 2005 Animal Trainer The Mask of Zorro (Mexico) 2004 Assistant Horse Trainer/Stunts Racing Stripes (South Africa) 2003 Zebra Trainer Mc Donald’s TVC 2002 Animal Trainer Singapore Airlines TVC 2002 Animal Trainer Mc Donald’s TVC 2002 Animal Trainer DHL Couriers TVC 2002 Animal Trainer Beast master - Series I & II 1999/2000 Animal Trainer Web www.animalsallaround.com | Email [email protected] LIVE SHOW CREDITS PRODUCTION YEAR POSITION Mogo Zoo Feb-Mar 2020 Animal Trainer/Presenter Mogo Zoo Christmas 2019 Animal Trainer/Presenter Paradise Country 2019 Animal Trainer/Presenter Australian Outback Spectacular 2015/2016 Circus Pony Trainer Private Function 2015 Elephant & Monkey Handler Australian Outback Spectacular 2014/2015 Liberty Pony Trainer Circus Joseph Ashton 2012 Liberty
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Bird Monitoring Annual Report 2018-2019
    BirdLife Australia BirdLife Australia (Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union) was founded in 1901 and works to conserve native birds and biological diversity in Australasia and Antarctica, through the study and management of birds and their habitats, and the education and involvement of the community. BirdLife Australia produces a range of publications, including Emu, a quarterly scientific journal; Wingspan, a quarterly magazine for all members; Conservation Statements; BirdLife Australia Monographs; the BirdLife Australia Report series; and the Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. It also maintains a comprehensive ornithological library and several scientific databases covering bird distribution and biology. Membership of BirdLife Australia is open to anyone interested in birds and their habitats, and concerned about the future of our avifauna. For further information about membership, subscriptions and database access, contact BirdLife Australia 60 Leicester Street, Suite 2-05 Carlton VIC 3053 Australia Tel: (Australia): (03) 9347 0757 Fax: (03) 9347 9323 (Overseas): +613 9347 0757 Fax: +613 9347 9323 E-mail: [email protected] Recommended citation: BirdLife Australia (2020). Melbourne Water Regional Bird Monitoring Project. Annual Report 2018-19. Unpublished report prepared by D.G. Quin, B. Clarke-Wood, C. Purnell, A. Silcocks and K. Herman for Melbourne Water by (BirdLife Australia, Carlton) This report was prepared by BirdLife Australia under contract to Melbourne Water. Disclaimers This publication may be of assistance to you and every effort has been undertaken to ensure that the information presented within is accurate. BirdLife Australia does not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • SPOTTED-TAILED QUOLL (Tiger Quoll)
    Husbandry Guidelines for the SPOTTED-TAILED QUOLL (Tiger Quoll) (Photo: J. Marten) Dasyurus maculatus (MAMMALIA: DASYURIDAE) Date By From Version 2014 Julie Marten WSI Richmond v 1 DISCLAIMER Please note that this information is just a guide. It is not a definitive set of rules on how the care of Spotted- Tailed Quolls must be conducted. Information provided may vary for: Individual Spotted-Tailed Quolls Spotted-Tailed Quolls from different regions of Australia Spotted-Tailed Quolls kept in zoos versus Spotted-Tailed Quolls from the wild Spotted-Tailed Quolls kept in different zoos Additionally different zoos have their own set of rules and guidelines on how to provide husbandry for their Spotted-Tailed Quolls. Even though I researched from many sources and consulted various people, there are zoos and individual keepers, researchers etc. that have more knowledge than myself and additional research should always be conducted before partaking any new activity. Legislations are regularly changing and therefore it is recommended to research policies set out by national and state government and associations such as ARAZPA, ZAA etc. Any incident resulting from the misuse of this document will not be recognised as the responsibility of the author. Please use at the participants discretion. Any enhancements to this document to increase anima l care standards and husbandry techniques are appreciated. Otherwise I hope this manual provides some helpful information. Julie Marten Picture J.Marten 2 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS It is important before conducting any work that all hazards are identified. This includes working with the animal and maintaining the enclosure.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Types
    Habitat Types The following section features ten predominant habitat types on the West Coast of the Eyre Peninsula, South Australia. It provides a description of each habitat type and the native plant and fauna species that commonly occur there. The fauna species lists in this section are not limited to the species included in this publication and include other coastal fauna species. Fauna species included in this publication are printed in bold. Information is also provided on specific threats and reference sites for each habitat type. The habitat types presented are generally either characteristic of high-energy exposed coastline or low-energy sheltered coastline. Open sandy beaches, non-vegetated dunefields, coastal cliffs and cliff tops are all typically found along high energy, exposed coastline, while mangroves, sand flats and saltmarsh/samphire are characteristic of low energy, sheltered coastline. Habitat Types Coastal Dune Shrublands NATURAL DISTRIBUTION shrublands of larger vegetation occur on more stable dunes and Found throughout the coastal environment, from low beachfront cliff-top dunes with deep stable sand. Most large dune shrublands locations to elevated clifftops, wherever sand can accumulate. will be composed of a mosaic of transitional vegetation patches ranging from bare sand to dense shrub cover. DESCRIPTION This habitat type is associated with sandy coastal dunes occurring The understory generally consists of moderate to high diversity of along exposed and sometimes more sheltered coastline. Dunes are low shrubs, sedges and groundcovers. Understory diversity is often created by the deposition of dry sand particles from the beach by driven by the position and aspect of the dune slope.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2015–2016
    120 ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016 Appendices JOURNEY TO THE FUTURE 121 ContentsAppendix 1 Functions of the Taronga Conservation Society Australia ........................................................................................................................................................122 Appendix 2 Privacy Management ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................122 Appendix 3 Conservation Programs and Population Management Programs ........................................................................................................................................123 Appendix 4 Animal transactions relating to Conservation Programs and Population Management Programs ....................................................................124 Appendix 5 Research projects and conservation programs ...............................................................................................................................................................................126 Appendix 6 Post-mortem and clinical samples supplied for research and teaching purposes .........................................................................................................133 Appendix 7 Scientific associates .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................134
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Habitat Variability and Interactions Around Nesting Cavities in Shaping Urban Bird Communities
    The role of habitat variability and interactions around nesting cavities in shaping urban bird communities Andrew Munro Rogers BSc, MSc Photo: A. Rogers A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2018 School of Biological Sciences Andrew Rogers PhD Thesis Thesis Abstract Inter-specific interactions around resources, such as nesting sites, are an important factor by which invasive species impact native communities. As resource availability varies across different environments, competition for resources and invasive species impacts around those resources change. In urban environments, changes in habitat structure and the addition of introduced species has led to significant changes in species composition and abundance, but the extent to which such changes have altered competition over resources is not well understood. Australia’s cities are relatively recent, many of them located in coastal and biodiversity-rich areas, where conservation efforts have the opportunity to benefit many species. Australia hosts a very large diversity of cavity-nesting species, across multiple families of birds and mammals. Of particular interest are cavity-breeding species that have been significantly impacted by the loss of available nesting resources in large, old, hollow- bearing trees. Cavity-breeding species have also been impacted by the addition of cavity- breeding invasive species, increasing the competition for the remaining nesting sites. The results of this additional competition have not been quantified in most cavity breeding communities in Australia. Our understanding of the importance of inter-specific interactions in shaping the outcomes of urbanization and invasion remains very limited across Australian communities. This has led to significant gaps in the understanding of the drivers of inter- specific interactions and how such interactions shape resource use in highly modified environments.
    [Show full text]