Jan-Paul Charteris
Sussex birder and budding moth enthusiast
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, because it's not something I'm entirely clear on, but whereas any thread on reintroductions, and a lot of threads on conservations seem to lead to (I'm not saying wrongly) "money/resources would be better spent on such and such"...is it actually as simple as there being a given budget, and there being a choice what to spend it on? Or as was touched upon, among a million other things, in the Great Bustard thread, is it a case of various governments or departments have been given a list of responsibilities (in our case by the EU) and we have to show we are meeting each of those? The one touched upon in the Great Bustard thread was that apparently we have a responsibility to re-introduce formerly native species where it's considered viable. If this is the case, maybe even if conservation of existing species is an issue, we still have to use some of whatever budget there is to meet other responsibilities anyway?
Not trying to start, or add to an argument (though that seems hard to avoid sometimes on Birdforum ), but I would be interested to know, as it seems a bit of a recurring direction that most such threads take, usually somewhere prior to some wild tangent or other
Not trying to start, or add to an argument (though that seems hard to avoid sometimes on Birdforum ), but I would be interested to know, as it seems a bit of a recurring direction that most such threads take, usually somewhere prior to some wild tangent or other