Table Of Content

Letters to the Editor Dear Sir, of habitats, such as an ecologist might take, and there were few pictures of "scenery" that might I refer to a review of my book, Smuggled - have been interpreted for their biological or eco- The Underground Trade in Australialr Wildlife, logical information. In contrast, many of the published in Herpetology in Australia in December paintings were of landscapes and seemingly 1993. The Editor, Dan Lunney, has allowed me could, therefore, be used to interpret habitats to publish corrections on the strict basis that I and changes to habitats. As the historian (SR) do not exceed 200 words. On those terms I can- among us has pointed out, the caption for not correct all mistakes and defamatory comments Lewin's painting (written by HFR) illustrates made by the reviewer, Ms Shelley Burgin. that more care must be exercised by biologists Burgin demonstrated clear bias against the book when using paintings as a source of ecological by constantly using emotive terms such as "largely information. unsubstantiuted", "virtually all unsubstantiated" and Lewin's painting in 1815 was done when "ridiculous beyond belief' to describe the book. Yet Lewin accompanied Macquarie on the first official she was unable to factually contradict a single trip across the mountains on Cox's newly con- point in Smuggled. The reason was that Smuggkd structed road. Aside from the oxen associated had been checked as correct by three lawyers. with the construction works there had been no Burgin's review was factually in error and dishonest. cattle there and there were none at that time. With the exception of the road, what Lewin For example she stated "qfter printing so many painted is an Aboriginal-maintained landscape. allegatim against people capable of such crimes Lewin probably put in the cow (and a soldier in (NPWSINSW), how is it that he is still walking the a uniform not worn in New South Wales) because streets of Sydney in good health?" For the record 1 he thought it looked good artistically. It was also have lived in Melbourne for the last nine years! the kind of open woodland that Europeans That such emotive tripe could be printed in viewed as ideal grazing country and so he your publication demonstrates lack of editorial "stocked it", perhaps suggesting its potential discipline - particularly alarming when all use. material is supposedly reviewed at least twice In a way, this ecologist was right - it was an prior to printing. anthropogenic landscape. He just had the grazing Raymond Hoser herbivores and land managers wrong. Instead of cattle and Europeans, it was kangaroos and Aboriginal people. No doubt the latter made good use of fire to create and maintain the open Dear Sir, landscape. The confusion would have been The back cover of the Australian Zoologirt for avoided by closer consultation with the August 1993 (Volume 29, No. 1-2) is a painting historian. by John Lewin of the Cox's River, 1815. The caption for the painting refers to ". . . the marked Yours sincerely, changes that had already occurred to both the quatic Hany F. Recher and terrestrial habitatsf rom cattle grazing. . ." early Sue Rosen in the settlement of the Hawkesbury-Nepean Department of Ecosystem Management catchment. Historical paintings, such as Lewin's, University of New England and photographs are often the only clues avail- Armidale, New South Wales able to ecologists attempting to recreate past environments and thereby document the changes induced by European settlement. We used both in our interpretation of the changes (Editor's Note: Neither the editor nor the to the biota of the Hawkesbury-Nepeau catch- referees picked the problem because they are ment. Neither are without their biases and ecologists who had overlooked the now obvious errors. point that the illustrators of the day were not The photographs available to us were taken looking at the landscape with an ecological eye. as early as the 1880s, but for the earlier It is hard enough for contemporary Australians "pictures" we had to rely on paintings. The to recognize an original landscape from one that photographs were disappointing and provided is degraded. Hany, if you took up painting, remarkably little information because almost all what would be in your landscapes of the concentrated on human structures such as Hawkesbury? I have a back cover spot in reserve bridges, weirs and boats. None were pictures - Dan.) 238 Australian Zwlogisf, Vol. 29(34)