Unfortunately there are also people who will not put the effort into "preserving and maintaining."
And there are those who will - depending, of course, on what one means by "preserving and maintaining". Some breeds, as you have pointed out, can be maintained with the existing Australian gene pool. Some can't. Those _are_ the facts. Poultry in Australia isn't just one big homogenous group.
But if some don't put in "that effort" - what of it? Who are we to judge, rather than to support?
I guess WE are now all living in a "disposable society"!
I honestly don't know what you mean by this. I am, however, getting the feeling that you're one of those against the concept of importing new blood because it implies that people are too lazy to improve what they've got here, and are looking for the easy way out.
Given that ARPIS1 took a decade and hundreds of thousands of dollars, that's an odd definition of "easy".
Given that lack of genetic diversity is a well-known issue that causes unthriftiness in breeds, and yet people persist in maintaining the breed, instead of just letting it drop and concentrate on something - well, easier - that's an odd definition of easy.
If some want to import - excellent. What might it mean for utility breeds in Australia when an importation finally succeeds? I prefer to look on the positive side and say it'll be BRILLIANT. I would be interested in hearing how the importation will adversely affect development and improvement of utility traits in backyard (not commercial, which is a different thing all together) poultry.
And just to re-iterate - "utility", in the context of this thread, means "meat, eggs, ability to reproduce". Some breeds are better for various of these things than others.
Even though personally I think "aesthetically pleasing" is just as practical a purpose as egglaying capacity. What's the point of life if you can't stop and appreciate beauty along the way?