"Researchers found that sites with the highest abundance of the native animals had the lowest shrub layer vegetation cover and a lower number of birds."
Really? I mean REALLY? ...... I wonder how much that 'research' cost. Looking at the reported field site locations I also wonder how they can be sure the shrub layer reduction is solely attributable to Roe.
I think you need to read the paper rather than the press interpretation of the paper.
The press are pretty good at getting it wrong and will just take comments without the context. Some of the fisheries stuff is a perfect example of this.
I'll try and get a copy when I'm in work tomorrow....
This is not to say that I won't agree with what everyone says on here, and I think there are pretty big problems with the sampling and also the data sets themselves, I'd be very interested in comparing these data with other sets (SCL have some) and seeing if there is more interesting patterns to be found.
Also I don't think (as she states) this is the first single species study to have been done. Pretty punchy statement that one!