I agree with Stephen, and having fought fires in the area while employed by NPWS (1989-1998), I wonder would we be reintroducing a species with limiting capacity to survive in the future if fire activity remains a significant factor for the communities represented in "Royal". I wonder if computer modelling by fire experts would show any correllation to climate change as to (a) Fire Frequency and (b) Fire intensity, especially as understorey species composition changes due to more intermittence in hazard reduction opportunities?? Are there enough habitat areas suitable for reintroduction if the aforementioned changes are significant, or is the habitat suitability compromised by formation of less continuity in connective vegetation corridors due to the fire pattern changes?? Sorry I cant give more thinking points on this subject, Deryk

Hi Stephen thanks for your response.

I wonder if the ecolgoy of the Royal has really changed that much in 7 years. Allowing for several years for revegetation to occur and the vegetation communities to get back to a semblance of their post fire nature, would there be sufficient time between then and now for predators to change their feeding habits to target a new prey speices, or would the lack of foraging resources cause the local displacement/extinction/migration out of the area of the predators? If the predator speices have dispersed/left the area due to lack of resources, wouldn't this be a good time to introduce the Gliders back as there would not be as much "predator pressure" on the released animals.

I think if "we"/person kind has caused the extinction of a species and removed it from an ecosystem, arent we obliged to mitigate this impact? And as the speices was removed from that area, wouldnt it be the most logical place for it to be returned to?

The thoughts/comments from a Glider expert  or fire ecologist would be intersting.

I think this is a complex question with no easy answer.

I suspect the ecology of Royal NP has changed a great deal since the 2001 fires. One question that I'd be asking is what ecological changes have occurred in Royal NP as a result of the disappearance of Greater Gliders? Would the new ecological balance that has been established be upset if Greater Gliders were reintroduced? Are there enough resources in the NP currently available to sustain a reintroduced population of Greater Gliders along with competitor species that are already there?

The other question I would be asking is, if there is a proposed translocation of Greater Gliders from an area to be developed, are there other areas better suited than Royal NP for supporting the translocated population?

It would be interesting to hear other points of view from glider experts.

Royal National Park has been repeatedly hammered by wildfires, most of them diliberately lite. The "fires of 2001" were the last straw for the Park's Great Glider population, this speices becoming extinct after that event. I doubt the impact on this on those plants and animals that are dependant on this arboreal speices is really known, therefore the flow on effects of the extinction of the Glider are also unknown. To mitigate this impact, I throw the question out there, why hasn't DECC/NPWS collected Greater Gliders from sites that are to be cleared (e.g. forestry areas) and reintroduced them into the Park? "You" could sight genetic differences between the extinct population and introduced one, but in the end, as the "resident population is extint" does that really matter? Due to the surrounding landuses, Royal is essentially a "closed system", one where migration into this Park by this speices is unlikey to occur. Without active reintroduction/managment, the Greater Glider will never again be present in this conservation reserve. Wouldnt the reintrodcution of this speices, particualrly from sites where individuals will be destroyed/affected by habitat loss, be in line with the NSW Biodiversity Strategy? Thoughts??