I've been tasked to take care of two Squirrels....

[oaken]

images.jpg

Why us!? - I can think of other rodents that breed faster, are more sustainable, and have far more meat on them...

That may be the case, but I follow an Australian adage - If it's feral, it's in peril. It's just that I prefer to utilise the 'ferals' if possible.

Or looking at it another way, if humans are the cause of the the problem then we should fix it - even if it means the alien species is removed permanently from it's non-native habitat. There is or should be a balance between prey and predator in nature - if the prey species has no natural predator then we as those responsible for the imbalance must fulfil that role.

I once got quite a telling off for feeding feral cats at a campsite in WA ( ) ...but I totally agree with their stance on invasive species...

...don't forget though that much of Australia and it's wildlife is the same as it was thousands of years ago...whereas in the same timescale, the UK has completely changed.

We should of course be concerned about other invasive species but squirrels we can do something about in our own localities. I have had quite an impact around here. We do get walnuts now, so it follows that the local flora and fauna is benefitting too.

If you were in the Leeuwin-Naturaliste National Park, or any of the others in WA for that matter, I'm surprised you weren't thrown out for feeding the ferrals. What were you thinking :cool2:
Australia is in deep strife with its destructive alien species. Primarily human with fox, cat, rabbit, pig, feral goats, camel and of course the cane toad. Also an extensive list of plant species like the Singapore daisy and yellow burrhead are significantly upsetting the ecological balance in many areas, in particular, across the tropical North.
Things are certainly changing out there now.

Some. 15 years ago, I was involved in a program that attempted to reduce the pig numbers in the Daintree area of North Queensland by dropping explosive baits through the rainforest canopy. When a pig bites into the bait the noise makes the locals raise a glass to one less hog. Not very PC but desperate measures are required when a population reaches epidemic proportions making coexistence with existing species, almost impossible.
I also spent several months as a team volunteer in the same area with a knapsack sprayer trying to eradicate a 35km strip of Singapore daisy before it spread too far into the bush beyond the highway margins. I believe it is now completely cleared from that area, so a positive and very satisfying result.

Please shoot both the Squirrels and the "apparently scary" magpies, it will significantly help the population of songbirds in your locality. Saying the battle is already lost is childish nonsense. So grow some and do something about it!
Rup
Btw. Do not shoot critters in trees with a rimfire! That would be stupid

[Dougan]

I once got quite a telling off for feeding feral cats at a campsite in WA ( ) ...but I totally agree with their stance on invasive species...

...don't forget though that much of Australia and it's wildlife is the same as it was thousands of years ago...whereas in the same timescale, the UK has completely changed.

That's irrelevant. Grey Squirrels have been in the UK for about the same time as rabbits, foxes and other ferals have been in Australia - the difference is we don't see them as cute and cuddly. We see them as invasive species that the damage the environment and destroy our native species; so we try like hell to get rid of them and rectify our mistakes in releasing them.

I wouldn't say 'irrelevant' - Maybe I didn't make the point very well as we're comparing apples to oranges...

...the point I was trying to make (without endless detail and caveat), is that Australia still has large areas of wilderness and many unique endemic species that may be worth trying to preserve...

...where as, here in southern England, there is very little pristine countryside left (let alone wilderness), so I think it's not only a waste of effort to try and reverse the damage done, but I also think it's very unfair to blame one or two species for the minor damage they do to an environment that we have already all but destroyed...

...though, as much as I still think it's unfair, I do agree with controling grey squirrels in parts of the UK (mainly pockets in Scotland) to preserve the reds, as in those circumstances it can actually make a difference.

And when you look at Australia...who brought all the rabbits, camels and cats?...which makes Badger's previous comment quite relevant.

[Dougan]

Please shoot both the Squirrels and the "apparently scary" magpies, it will significantly help the population of songbirds in your locality. Saying the battle is already lost is childish nonsense. So grow some and do something about it!

Please don't dismiss my opinions so rudely - I have been involved with animal rights and environmental issues for nearly 30 years; and in that time my beliefs and opinions have evolved - In the past, when I was young and idealistic I was quite active with Greenpeace (including working for them in Australia) and have take part in actions that have put myself at risk (so don't tell me to 'grow some')...

...unfortunately, none of it seemed to make any difference (with the one exception of some significant policy changes by McDonalds)...

...more recently I completed a degree in Environmental Studies (which took 6 years as I was working full time)...but instead of inspiring me to take more action, it's made me feel like we are now 'pi$$ing in the wind'...

...in the next 50 to 100 years our exponential growth and consumption of natural resourses, combined with a 2 to 3 degree rise in temperature, will see environmental destruction and extinctions on an underrepresented scale (man made change that is)...which would make controlling a few weeds in the outback a bit insignificant....

...I could dismiss your opinions as those of an ignorant and idealistic person with no real understanding of the true scale of the issue...but I won't as that would be rude

As for the first part of what you said - I have an ethical problem with killing magpies to save songbirds...both were here originally, and we have done more to damage song bird populations already than magpies ever will...so I think it's hypocritical, to start 'playing god' now...

...if you really want to 'do something about it', why don't you knock your house down and return it to the wild, get rid of your car, and stop shopping at supermarkets (something that 99.9% of people, including me, won't do)...but if you feel that killing the animals you don't like is 'doing something' then that's up to you...

[Sandgroper]

I wouldn't say 'irrelevant' - Maybe I didn't make the point very well as we're comparing apples to oranges...

...the point I was trying to make (without endless detail and caveat), is that Australia still has large areas of wilderness and many unique endemic species that may be worth trying to preserve...

...where as, here in southern England, there is very little pristine countryside left (let alone wilderness), so I think it's not only a waste of effort to try and reverse the damage done, but I also think it's very unfair to blame one or two species for the minor damage they do to an environment that we have already all but destroyed...

...though, as much as I still think it's unfair, I do agree with controling grey squirrels in parts of the UK (mainly pockets in Scotland) to preserve the reds, as in those circumstances it can actually make a difference.

And when you look at Australia...who brought all the rabbits, camels and cats?...which makes Badger's previous comment quite relevant.

Disagree. The only difference between Humans and any other animal that has the right conditions to thrive and expand their territory (like grey squirrels here or cane toads in Australia) is that we have the reasoning and ability to reverse (or contain) the damage we have caused. In any case it was a throwaway line by Badger that offered nothing to the discussion.

I find it disturbing that you imply that the environment in Southern England is less worthy of attention because "there is very little pristine countryside left (let alone wilderness)" - it might not be original but it is still an ecosystem that supports plant and animal life. In some respects Southern England is no different from any other ecosystem that has undergone change and diversity. Just because it isn't a virgin rainforest doesn't mean it or the flora and fauna present there are any less worthy of our care and attention.

The Red Squirrel was endemic to the UK until the Grey arrived so, why isn't worth the effort to try and restore it to it's rightful place in the UK environment? If you're going to down that route I would argue that it's a waste of time and effort to try and save a flagship species like the Giant Panda when the money spent could be better used in projects aimed at umbrella or keystone species.

We will have to agree to disagree on this but to improve your credentials, you should really change your avatar to that of a Red Squirrel!

[Dougan]

If you're going to down that route I would argue that it's a waste of time and effort to try and save a flagship species like the Giant Panda when the money spent could be better used in projects aimed at umbrella or keystone species.

We will have to agree to disagree on this but to improve your credentials, you should really change your avatar to that of a Red Squirrel!

Surely the giant panda IS a perfect 'umbrella' species; in that it's cute and cuddly, so easy to sell to people...and by saving the habitat needed for the panda, you save everything else in that ecosystem...

Anyway, I'm happy to 'agree to disagree' on this - It's such a huge discussion with so many off-shoots, that it's hard to discuss on a forum 'here and there' (in-between everything else I'm trying to get done)...I know you have a lot of knowledge in this area, and I'm more than willing to listen and learn...but it'd be a lot easier as a live discussion...

...as for my avatar, I'm happy with the credentials it pertains to...that of the unfairly persecuted and oppressed

[Sandgroper]

Surely the giant panda IS a perfect 'umbrella' species; in that it's cute and cuddly, so easy to sell to people...and by saving the habitat needed for the panda, you save everything else in that ecosystem...

Anyway, I'm happy to 'agree to disagree' on this - It's such a huge discussion with so many off-shoots, that it's hard to discuss on a forum 'here and there' (in-between everything else I'm trying to get done)...I know you have a lot of knowledge in this area, and I'm more than willing to listen and learn...but it'd be a lot easier as a live discussion...

...as for my avatar, I'm happy with the credentials it pertains to...that of the unfairly persecuted and oppressed

Or that of an invasive coloniser that bullies, oppresses and displaces the natives!

I suppose you could class the GP as an umbrella species, but it is more a flagship one because of the 'bambi effect' it engenders, however, because of it's low breeding rate (as well other environmental factors) it does beg the question are we just prolonging the inevitable?

But you are right in that it is a huge topic that neither of us could do justice too via this format.

:cheers: