Ah, pacman. It's always easy to be taken in by a pretty face. To make an informed decision about what to do about the pretty face perhaps it's helpful to see the face in context.
We have a pair of mating bulbuls who have made a nest and laid 3 eggs in a plant on top of my fish pond. We live in Penrith NSW. Does anyone know how long before the eggs hatch - been there a week now
No, it wasn't me, Peter. Fortunately, we don't have this feral species where I live. However, I've been busy eradicating several black bird nests in order to improve conditions for the potential recolonization of our area by the native Bassian thrush.
Hi, Could anyone tell me where I could find BulBuls. I live in Eastern Subs of Sydney but will drive- would love to see one up close.
(Sorry, also not bothered about "introduced" - very superficial and arbitrary concept in my opinion, everything and everyone came from somewhere at some time or other over millions of years - nothing in the environment is static or written in stone.)
I used to live in Casula, and had them in the backyard. But I would recommend going to Lake Moore, accessing from Bankstown side as I've seen them there too.
nothing in the environment is static or written in stone.)
Maybe, but do we let aspects of our environment (eg. specific species) die out, knowing that we could save them, because of this ever-changing environment?
Just because a species is introduced doesn't necessarily mean it's having a detrimental effect on native species (in these cases typically the introduced species is commensal with humans, unable to exist in natural intact ecosystems and so doesn't come into contact with native species -sometimes occupying a niche unclaimed by natives, providing birdlife where there would otherwise be none-) i don't know whether this applies to the bulbul.
Firstly I would suggest that the vast majority of aspects of environment that are everchanging and dying out are directly due to the impact of the human species -
and yes, we most definitely should try to save everything as we are the ones that are causing so much of the destruction.
I dont know where you live, but in my suburb and my city it didnt take more than a couple of hundred of years to completely change the environment. Any chance of convincing humans to restore back to way it was? Good luck with that one.
Hmmm. Still a risk, I reckon, zosterops. Often we don't foresee the calamaties which occur due to the introduction of species from elsewhere.
Nevertheless, gilliander, you make a good point about the environment being ever changing. However, most environmental changes occur over aeons of time. This gives the native species time to evolve & adapt.
With human technology having the potential to be ever more environmentally ruinous (coal fired power stations, for example) environmental change occurs at an ever increasing pace so I think it behoves us to protect the natural environment as much as we can. Besides, so many introduced species change ecosystems so much that the ecosystems trend towards being monocultures. E.g., domination of Noisy Miners because humans have used their technology (chainsaws, bulldozers) to clear understorey thus making for more open woodlands preferred by Noisy Miners. Then there are plants which are almost totally successful in out-competing native species. E.g., prickly pear.
The result of these sorts of processes is that we lose an enormous array of biodiversity. In turn, this threatens our very existence because of the diminishing biological checks & balances operating in healthy ecosystems with high quality biodiversity. E.g., vast swathes of grain fields are vulnerable to just one predator bug if there is no biological check on that predator. The result is no bread.
Some would argue that human technology overcomes this problem by providing, for example, insecticides, tractors & spray equipment. The problem with this is that we're so often unaware of the long term effects of changing the environment through the introduction of toxins to the food chain.
Rather than opting for environmental radicalism (e.g., introduction of Bulbuls & Indian Mynahs) I would suggest that the more conservative cautionary principle is the go.
i was not encouraging the introduction of more species, only stating that the experience has been that many introduced species are benign (and in many cases dependent on humans and would die out if humans were to) some may even be beneficial as weed control etc.
new zealand has an array of introduced finches that are regarded as ecologically harmless by their own conservation authorities. the birds feed on exotic weeds controlling them to some extent, are found only in exotic pastures filling a niche unoccupied by native species and they are incapable of surviving in natural native landscapes). i.e. if the birds had been liberated in pre-settlement new zealand they would not have survived.
examples in australia might include the song thrush and possibly eurasian tree sparrow. also i don't think there are impacts attributed to skylarks either (incidentally all these species are in serious decline and risk of extinction in the wild in coming decades, the introduced species might actually come to have significant conservation value as the only populations remaining).
They are pretty reliable along the path/cycleway running beside the paramatta river at ermington between Wharf Rd boat ramp and George Kendell reserve.
Points taken, zosterops, but I still think it's a risk to allow introduced species to exist even though they seem benign or may seem confined to the one location. Long term effects are often not considered or can't be predicted.
However, as you imply, the fortuitous survival of introduced species in unnatural locations could provide stock for reintroduction to their natural ranges where they have become or are in danger of becoming extinct.
Just remembered I have a 2009 edition of a book about sydney birds and where to find them ... for the RW Bulbul it says Hyde Park and Botanic Gardens, which might be more handy for you.
Points taken, zosterops, but I still think it's a risk to allow introduced species to exist even though they seem benign
so you think we should eradicate crops of peaches, cabbages and bananas etc. for fear of them becoming invasive species? what do you propose we subsist on as an alternative?
I'm also curious what you think of the presence of Homo sapiens, in particular populations residing outside its native african range, especially considering studies seem to suggest it is not exactly benign?
Woko wrote:
However, as you imply, the fortuitous survival of introduced species in unnatural locations could provide stock for reintroduction to their natural ranges where they have become or are in danger of becoming extinct.
i believe british wildlife authorities have expressed interest in the introduced populations of skylarks in new zealand as candidates for re-introduction back into its native range where pastures are now devoid of its song
incidentally i once showed a visiting british birder a eurasian tree sparrow in victoria, he was thrilled to see it as the bird was by now so rare in its native britain that he'd never even seen one before!
This is where it gets very difficult to establish clear boundaries. Like life generally there are grey areas here. An important part of the problem is human population & how much do we continue to accommodate an ever- increasing one. The logical extension of continuing to do what we do now is that we won't have any natural habitats or wildlife left. Homo sapiens will be the last species standing. Questions arise such as Do we continue wrecking the natural environment until there's nothing left to sustain Homo sapiens? At what point do we call a halt to environmental destruction? Or will the lack of natural environment put a stop to Homo sapiens? What controls, if any, need to be exerted on humans' environmental destruction or do we allow unfettered market forces to hold sway? Will humans slowly become aware that they've reached a point where their very existence is threatened & thereby moderate or cease their environmental destruction?
Homo sapiens is a unique species in that it seems to be the only species with sufficient technological prowess to bring about its own demise in an almost deliberate fashion. Whether it has the capacity to reverse this process remains to be seen. Perhaps eradicating ferals is part of this reversal.
Hi gnapthine. It’s good to report sightings of feral species such as the Red-
Hi gnapthine. It’s good to report sightings of feral species such as the Red-whispered Bulbul so that we can see the extend of their spread. This may then alert local people as well as motivated authorities to institute eradication programmes.
Nice photo peter,I have always wanted to see one of these
Beautiful! We have three that regularly visit, but I've never been able to see them as close as your photo.
never seen one either, thanks Peter. Good work place
/great photo.
M-L
Great shot ,I kept them as a child and saw them flying around the Japanese gardens in Sydney a few years back,glad to see there still about.
thanks all, I should have said at my Erina, Gosford workplace
Peter
I was at Windsor, NSW on Saturday and got another Bulbul sighting
this pic also shows the red colour on the under tail
Peter
Wow, interesting bird. How proud he looks. Good job, Peter.
Wendy
Mandurah, WA
Peel-Yalgorup System Ramsar Site
http://www.flickr.com/photos/girlinoz/
A very attractive bird but to put a different perspective on things it wouldn't be welcome here as it's an introduced species.
thanks Woko
I usually rail against introduced species
does this show that I am shallow and taken in because it is a good looking bird?
Peter
Ah, pacman. It's always easy to be taken in by a pretty face. To make an informed decision about what to do about the pretty face perhaps it's helpful to see the face in context.
We have a pair of mating bulbuls who have made a nest and laid 3 eggs in a plant on top of my fish pond. We live in Penrith NSW. Does anyone know how long before the eggs hatch - been there a week now
Incbation is 12 days they start to sit when the last egg is laid.
Oops Incubation
thanks for your info. Will probably have chicks by the end of next week. Only two eggs left now. Something took one of them
Peter
Here are pictures of bulbul eggs (3) and chicks (2) which hatched today
oh my look at those eggs! and babies!! how sweet!
Pacman, lovely bulbul pictures! I just logged on to upload some myself. :)
I've just moved to Western Sydney, and I sit at my table and study all day and am constantly distracted with their beautiful call!
I got a video of one singing today, I'll upload that too. :)
No, it wasn't me, Peter. Fortunately, we don't have this feral species where I live. However, I've been busy eradicating several black bird nests in order to improve conditions for the potential recolonization of our area by the native Bassian thrush.
New photos of two baby red whiskered bulbuls now 7 days old
Hi, Could anyone tell me where I could find BulBuls. I live in Eastern Subs of Sydney but will drive- would love to see one up close.
(Sorry, also not bothered about "introduced" - very superficial and arbitrary concept in my opinion, everything and everyone came from somewhere at some time or other over millions of years - nothing in the environment is static or written in stone.)
Love it, fantastic photo, beautiful birds
I used to live in Casula, and had them in the backyard. But I would recommend going to Lake Moore, accessing from Bankstown side as I've seen them there too.
Thank you so much
And would appreciate any more suggestions from other people as well.
Maybe, but do we let aspects of our environment (eg. specific species) die out, knowing that we could save them, because of this ever-changing environment?
soakes
Olinda, Victoria, Australia
Just because a species is introduced doesn't necessarily mean it's having a detrimental effect on native species (in these cases typically the introduced species is commensal with humans, unable to exist in natural intact ecosystems and so doesn't come into contact with native species -sometimes occupying a niche unclaimed by natives, providing birdlife where there would otherwise be none-) i don't know whether this applies to the bulbul.
Firstly I would suggest that the vast majority of aspects of environment that are everchanging and dying out are directly due to the impact of the human species -
and yes, we most definitely should try to save everything as we are the ones that are causing so much of the destruction.
I dont know where you live, but in my suburb and my city it didnt take more than a couple of hundred of years to completely change the environment. Any chance of convincing humans to restore back to way it was? Good luck with that one.
Hmmm. Still a risk, I reckon, zosterops. Often we don't foresee the calamaties which occur due to the introduction of species from elsewhere.
Nevertheless, gilliander, you make a good point about the environment being ever changing. However, most environmental changes occur over aeons of time. This gives the native species time to evolve & adapt.
With human technology having the potential to be ever more environmentally ruinous (coal fired power stations, for example) environmental change occurs at an ever increasing pace so I think it behoves us to protect the natural environment as much as we can. Besides, so many introduced species change ecosystems so much that the ecosystems trend towards being monocultures. E.g., domination of Noisy Miners because humans have used their technology (chainsaws, bulldozers) to clear understorey thus making for more open woodlands preferred by Noisy Miners. Then there are plants which are almost totally successful in out-competing native species. E.g., prickly pear.
The result of these sorts of processes is that we lose an enormous array of biodiversity. In turn, this threatens our very existence because of the diminishing biological checks & balances operating in healthy ecosystems with high quality biodiversity. E.g., vast swathes of grain fields are vulnerable to just one predator bug if there is no biological check on that predator. The result is no bread.
Some would argue that human technology overcomes this problem by providing, for example, insecticides, tractors & spray equipment. The problem with this is that we're so often unaware of the long term effects of changing the environment through the introduction of toxins to the food chain.
Rather than opting for environmental radicalism (e.g., introduction of Bulbuls & Indian Mynahs) I would suggest that the more conservative cautionary principle is the go.
i was not encouraging the introduction of more species, only stating that the experience has been that many introduced species are benign (and in many cases dependent on humans and would die out if humans were to) some may even be beneficial as weed control etc.
new zealand has an array of introduced finches that are regarded as ecologically harmless by their own conservation authorities. the birds feed on exotic weeds controlling them to some extent, are found only in exotic pastures filling a niche unoccupied by native species and they are incapable of surviving in natural native landscapes). i.e. if the birds had been liberated in pre-settlement new zealand they would not have survived.
examples in australia might include the song thrush and possibly eurasian tree sparrow. also i don't think there are impacts attributed to skylarks either (incidentally all these species are in serious decline and risk of extinction in the wild in coming decades, the introduced species might actually come to have significant conservation value as the only populations remaining).
the bulbul does not seem to be regarded as much of a scourge:
http://birdlife.org.au/bird-profile/red-whiskered-bulbul
the feeding on privet etc. seeds might be cause for concern but
a) the species is sedentary and found only in urban environments not the bush
b) privet is already widespread in nearby areas (which can hardly be blamed on the bulbul as it does not exist there)
interestingly the melbourne population died out naturally.
They are pretty reliable along the path/cycleway running beside the paramatta river at ermington between Wharf Rd boat ramp and George Kendell reserve.
Points taken, zosterops, but I still think it's a risk to allow introduced species to exist even though they seem benign or may seem confined to the one location. Long term effects are often not considered or can't be predicted.
However, as you imply, the fortuitous survival of introduced species in unnatural locations could provide stock for reintroduction to their natural ranges where they have become or are in danger of becoming extinct.
Just remembered I have a 2009 edition of a book about sydney birds and where to find them ... for the RW Bulbul it says Hyde Park and Botanic Gardens, which might be more handy for you.
Great Pics Peter. I would also love to see one in the wild. Intersting discussion as well.
so you think we should eradicate crops of peaches, cabbages and bananas etc. for fear of them becoming invasive species? what do you propose we subsist on as an alternative?
I'm also curious what you think of the presence of Homo sapiens, in particular populations residing outside its native african range, especially considering studies seem to suggest it is not exactly benign?
i believe british wildlife authorities have expressed interest in the introduced populations of skylarks in new zealand as candidates for re-introduction back into its native range where pastures are now devoid of its song
incidentally i once showed a visiting british birder a eurasian tree sparrow in victoria, he was thrilled to see it as the bird was by now so rare in its native britain that he'd never even seen one before!
I have seen RWB at Erina, NSW (post #1); Argyle Reach Road, Wilberforce, NSW and Mackay Gardens Qld
If you opted for Mackay you could do a quick drive to Engella to see the Eungella Honeyeater
Peter
This is where it gets very difficult to establish clear boundaries. Like life generally there are grey areas here. An important part of the problem is human population & how much do we continue to accommodate an ever- increasing one. The logical extension of continuing to do what we do now is that we won't have any natural habitats or wildlife left. Homo sapiens will be the last species standing. Questions arise such as Do we continue wrecking the natural environment until there's nothing left to sustain Homo sapiens? At what point do we call a halt to environmental destruction? Or will the lack of natural environment put a stop to Homo sapiens? What controls, if any, need to be exerted on humans' environmental destruction or do we allow unfettered market forces to hold sway? Will humans slowly become aware that they've reached a point where their very existence is threatened & thereby moderate or cease their environmental destruction?
Homo sapiens is a unique species in that it seems to be the only species with sufficient technological prowess to bring about its own demise in an almost deliberate fashion. Whether it has the capacity to reverse this process remains to be seen. Perhaps eradicating ferals is part of this reversal.
Spotted (for the first time) an adult and juvenile at 'The Gap' beach car park, Waratah Bay, Victoria this morning 16/6/19.
Hi gnapthine. It’s good to report sightings of feral species such as the Red-
Hi gnapthine. It’s good to report sightings of feral species such as the Red-whispered Bulbul so that we can see the extend of their spread. This may then alert local people as well as motivated authorities to institute eradication programmes.