Talk:Invasive species in Australia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a quality rating on the quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | |
 |
Invasive species in Australia is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota. | ||
|
Assessment comments
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
Prickly pear as a weed?--ZayZayEM 14:11, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- It is a weed, just not a weed of national significance, when I get the time I'd like to add info on weeds that are important in different states, like Patterson's Curse, the data is just more difficult to compile. Prickly pear is on the List of invasive species for Australia.--nixie 22:57, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Didn't someone successfully clear some fields of blackberry using goats to eat them? I'll have to research this and add the information. Also, by the way, blackberries are delicious :)
I couldn't believe Woolworths was selling fresh blackberries this Christmas for a whole $6 plus per small punnet!! Where are the farmed blackberries to bring the price down :( We used to pick blackberries for free in the bush when I lived in Victoria.
[edit] Section removed
this is propoganda, NPOV, and ranting - if this is a serious issue - please cite at least some newspaper articles about events/quotes from these biologists and ecologists etc.--ZayZayEM 09:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Concern over the watering down of Australia's quarantine regulations
Concern is mounting amongst ecologists, biologists, other scientists and environmentalists about an evident watering down of Australia's quarantine regulation. Much of this is due to Australia's membership of the World Trade Organisation, whose quarantine regulations are far weaker than Australia's and wholly inadequate for protecting Australia's unique flora and fauna. Due to Australia's membership of the World Trade Organisation, many forms of raw produce once banned from being imported are now being imported. A notable example is the important of raw salmon product from Canada, enforced on Australia after an appeal to the World Trade Organisation. From the point of view of any ecologists, biologists, other scientist, environmentalist or indeed any person concerned about Australia's unique and highly endemic and vulnerable flora and fauna, this is completely, utterly unacceptable and indefensable. Future ecological disasters are inevitable if these foolish practices continue. The devastating impacts of exotic Chytrid fungus in Australia, which has forced several Australian frog species to extinction, and is threatening numerous other Australian frog species with extinction, is an example of the devastating effects that will occur when exotic disease organisms inevitably enter the country with imported raw produce.
- It's hard to be relaxed when you are a scientist in the country who can see the threat. I'll water it down a bit. I'll make the usual Wikipedia for people not to mess with stuff they have little understanding on. You should be aware that what's happening with Australia's quarantine is a bloody disgrace. Codman 00:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
No, this section is clearly POV, there is no evidence to suggest that chytrids were introduced to Australia. The name of the setion was clearly a breach of NPOV.--Peta 02:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- I've rewritten it to be NPOV and removed the tag. Codman's contributions would be great if he could just drop the wild eyed greenie tone of his edits. I'm also getting weary of this view he is pushing that he is more knowledgable than everyone else when he is clearly a complete n00b when it comes to making encyclopedic contributions. Garglebutt / (talk) 05:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
