I have just read your description, we have these birds nesting on our property and see them often but have never seen a them impaling their prey. Have you actually seen them eating something in this way?

Thanks for that info Peter

With all respect you need to educate yourself a little bit more on this. Firstly the bird was not truly free to come and go, because it had developmental issues brought about by the way it was raised - it will always be reliant on people and cannot freely survive in the wild, as it would have been able to had it been brought up by actual wildlife carers. Just because it's not in a cage doesn't mean it is free. When these people found it they should have contacted a vet or trained wildlife carer. They're clearly out of their depth and at one stage were letting it drink milk from one of their dogs. That would have a bad effect nutritionally as well as teaching it that mammals and dogs can be trusted. Why didn't some natural instinct tell them that alone was wrong, and not in the bird's best interest? It really annoys me that they could invest all this time in marketing the bird and making money from it, and not researching how to look after it properly, or how to get in touch with someone who can. One of the biggest dangers to this, apart from the damage to the bird, is the example it sets. There are already people taking magpies from the bush trying to imitate this ( see facebook.com/photo/?fbid=839410041561088&set=a.638816824953745) There's no ornithologist or real wildlife carer that I know of that is endorsing what these people did, or what the government did in returning the bird to them. This is purely a triumph of opinion and politics over facts and science. In fact most of the comments I've seen in favour of the bird going back are based on emotion with no consideration for what the knock on effects of this will be; or they're based on people's own gripes with the government so they identify with these people. None of it is a rational or considered approach to the situation. And of course the bird should not be euthanised it should be kept in a wildlife reserve. My prediction is that dog will kill it, based on the way it knocks it around in some of their "play" sessions.

With all respect you need to educate yourself a little bit more on this. Firstly the bird was not truly free to come and go, because it had developmental issues brought about by the way it was raised - it will always be reliant on people and cannot freely survive in the wild, as it would have been able to had it been brought up by actual wildlife carers. Just because it's not in a cage doesn't mean it is free. When these people found it they should have contacted a vet or trained wildlife carer. They're clearly out of their depth, and at one stage were letting it drink milk from one of their dogs. That would have a bad effect nutritionally as well as teaching it that mammals and dogs can be trusted. Why didn't some natural instinct tell them that alone was wrong, and not in the birds best interest? It really annoys me that they could invest all this time in marketing the bird and making money from it, and not researching how to look after it properly, or how to get in touch with someone who can. One of the biggest dangers to this, apart from the damage to the bird, is the example it sets. There are already people taking magpies from the bush trying to imitate this ( see facebook.com/photo/?fbid=839410041561088&set=a.638816824953745) There's no ornithologist or real wildlife carer that I know of that is endorsing what these people did, or what the government did in returning the bird to them. This is purely a triumph of opinion and politics over facts and science. In fact most of the comments I've seen in favour of the bird going back are based on emotion with no consideration for what the knock on effects of this will be; or they're based on people's own gripes with the government so they identify with these people. None of it is a rational or considered approach to the situation. And of course the bird should not be euthanised it should be kept in a wildlife reserve.

Yeah don't worry I soon changed my mind about doing that

Agree. They fixed that with the compact guide though

I believe so, yes and they will use nests from other birds. But don't worry they'll rebuild! At least it didn't look like it was in use at the time

thanks, very kind of you. And yes koalas get all the press (which is okay) but I agree ALL of our wildlife is just as important

Thanks Rob, much appreciated. Hopefully I'll get in, but if I don't we've got the environment and clearing issue clearly on the table

It's just silly isn't it, because pro environment is the sensible position

Obrigado - gostei muito do seu vídeo

That's great Rod - what a lovely yard you must have!

Thanks Letitia :-)

I never really thought if they were or weren't - have you got water inside yours?

Thanks, very kind of you

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it :-)

Thanks Geoff. Yes they are amazing birds aren't they. That's about the only call I can imitate accurately too. I used to confuse one of our dogs no end!

@@birdbitesI have only ever seen one in Darwin in 1970 and one in Katherine NT in 2011. I find them intriguing. They are'nt local to South Australia.

@@pembridgehouse yes we're lucky that they're common around here

indeed.@@birdbites

Yep our pollies are prone to do the same thing too :-(

That's so funny (but probably not that good for him!)

Yes they are fascinating, I didn't know about the intelligence

Yes, sparrows I've seen and of course pigeons - but never one of these

That's cool!

Thanks Frank! :-)

Thanks - went looking again tonight and couldn't find him -- but he'll be around ~ or she

Thanks for that Tyler - how funny this should randomly show up on your feed! Have a great day mate and thanks for the well-wishes

I don't think they should be scrapped - but they're certainly over done and should only be used on really important occasions. Over doing them just cheapens what they're about and they become meaningless

I know Nathan Essex wants to do that.

The problem is Vicki we don't have vegetation protection laws in the Toowoomba Regional Council at the moment and we don't have protections for green spaces. The Green Infrastructure Strategy hasn't even been implemented after 4 years, let alone the postponing of the planning scheme. As I said in my video at 2:10 we need development, but it has to be in a way that preserves many of the things you are actually calling for. Right now we don't have the framework to ensure those things that you want will happen, and recent events like the clearing of mature trees in Reis Road, Aphra Street and the site where the Avenues is, is proof of that. All I am calling for is development laws comparable to those that other councils in SE Queensland have. Builders and developers still function and make a profit in those councils, just as they will be able to here when we do get those reforms. If anyone is telling you otherwise they are either mistaken or deceiving you. I do think I have the balance right in my perspective on it all, but I respect that you don't see it that way.