Preliminary feasibility and risk assessment study for the translocation of the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee

Prepared by Sarah Brown and BirdLife Australia for the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia July 2014

Report produced by BirdLife Australia Suite 2-05 60 Leicester Street Carlton VIC 3053 T (03) 9347 0757 W www.birdlife.org.au

© BirdLife Australia. This report is copyright. Apart from any fair dealings for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without prior written permission. Enquiries to BirdLife Australia.

Notwithstanding the above, the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia have permission to use this report for any reasonable use associated with the purpose for which the report was commissioned.

This report is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en).

Recommended citation Brown, SM (2014). Preliminary feasibility and risk assessment study for the introduction of the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee. Report for Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia. BirdLife Australia, Melbourne.

Disclaimers Every effort has been undertaken to ensure that the information presented within this publication is accurate. BirdLife Australia does not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from relying on any information in this publication.

The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of BirdLife Australia and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia.

While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, BirdLife Australia does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication.

Acknowledgments Jenny Lau and Golo Maurer provided editorial comments. Chris Hedger, Blair Pellegrino, Greg Smith, Karina Mercer and Marcus Pickett provided unpublished reports and theses. Jemima Connell kindly provided an unpublished Maxent probability distribution map. I am grateful to Simon Watson, Jemima Connell, Rohan Clarke, Andrew Bennett, Mike Clarke and Natasha Schedvin, Paul Sunnucks and Katherine Harrisson for contributions and discussion on the conservation of the Mallee Emu- wren in Victoria. Chris Hedger, David Paton, Jody Gates, Peter Cale and other agency staff, students and volunteers have made significant contributions to the knowledge of Mallee Emu-wrens in South Australia. Thanks to the many unnamed volunteers, scientists and interested parties that have contributed over the years to conserve this species.

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Scope and Intent of Report 1 1.2 Strategic Context 2 1.3 Legislative and Ethical Considerations 4 1.4 Guidelines for Translocation 4 2 TRANSLOCATION IN AVIAN CONSERVATION 5 2.1 Purposes of Translocations 5 2.2 Translocation and the Mallee Emu-wren 6 3 THE MALLEE EMU-WREN 7 3.1 Taxonomy and description 7 3.2 Distribution 7 3.3 Habitat 8 3.4 Threats 10 3.5 Status 11 4 FEASIBILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT 13 4.1 Metapopulation Assessment 13 4.2 Genetic assessment 16 4.3 Source and Recipient populations 17 4.4 Short-term climate influences on population numbers 19 4.5 Threats at release sites 19 4.6 Biological assessment 20 4.7 Animal welfare 22 4.8 Transportation and logistics 23 4.9 Exit strategy 24 5 POTENTIAL SOURCE POPULATIONS AND RELEASE SITES 25 5.1 Multi-scale habitat requirements 25 5.2 Landscape and patch-scale habitat preference 25 5.3 Fine-scale habitat selection 29 5.4 Potential source populations 29 5.5 Potential release sites 31 6 METHODS FOR ASSESSING SOURCE POPULATIONS AND RELEASE SITES 34 6.1 Modelling multi-scale habitat requirements 34 6.2 Population density and size 37 6.3 Population viability analysis 38 7 STAKEHOLDERS AND EXPERTISE 40 8 TIMELINE 42 9 PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTIMATE 43 10 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES 48 REFERENCES 49 APPENDICIES Appendix I ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN TRANSLOCATION 56 Appendix II INDICATORS OF SUCCESS AND CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING 58 TRANSLOCATION OUTCOMES Appendix III PROTOCOL FOR CATCHING MALLEE EMU-WRENS USING HAND NETS 61

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In response to wildfires in the Murray Mallee region during the 2013-14 summer, an ‘Emergency Summit for Threatened Mallee Birds’ concluded that substantial intervention such as translocation and captive breeding need to be considered as a priority action for the long term conservation of the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee.

SCOPE OF REPORT

This purpose of this report is to provide a preliminary assessment on the feasibility and risk of translocating Mallee Emu-wrens. Specifically to:

 assess the feasibility of key factors pertaining to the species’ population structure, biology, ecology and habitat requirements  identify the magnitude of risks associated with translocation where possible  identify potential source populations for translocation  identify potential release sites  outline methods and criteria required to further assess the potential source populations and release sites identified in this report  provide a guide for an adaptive management approach in Mallee Emu-wren translocation for evaluation of translocation success or failure  outline ethical and legal requirements  identify stakeholders and other interests integral to a translocation program  provide budget estimates, timelines and funding opportunities

It is beyond the scope of this report to complete a comprehensive risk assessment, so a subset of crucial factors has been selected on the basis they are considered important towards assessing overall feasibility and whether indeed, pursuing a translocation program is justified.

GENERAL ASSESSMENT

Since the early 1960s the Mallee Emu-wren has successively disappeared from seven of nine major conservation reserves. Evaluation of the risk posed to the remaining Mallee Emu-wren populations by fire and climate change, indicate that translocation into geographically distant reserves is required. Furthermore, translocation among and within reserves must be established as an on-going management tool if the species is to persist long-term (more than one hundred years). Establishment of new populations will spread the risk of losing more populations to fire, re-establish metapopulation processes and potentially provide new sources of individuals for future translocations.

Based on current estimates of global population numbers, it is possible that the Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne National Parks contain an adequate number of Mallee Emu-wrens for translocation, although there is a degree of uncertainty with respect to current global population numbers. Populations of the Mallee Emu-wren are patchily distributed throughout these parks and at least six locations are identified as potential sources of individuals for translocation. Surveys need to be undertaken to establish the size of these potential source populations (and the proportion of the global population) so that specific evaluation and risk assessment can be conducted.

Ngarkat Conservation Park and Annuello Fauna and Flora Reserve are potential sites for establishing new populations given the current extent and fire-age of suitable vegetation types. However, little data exists on the suitability at patch and fine scales, and this requires further exploration to identify specific release sites of high quality.

Billiatt Conservation Park contains no potential release sites, but in about 20 years (2024) the vegetation across most of park will be of suitable age (precluding large fires). To date, no broad- scale predictive distribution models exist for the Mallee Emu-wren in the Wyperfeld, Big Desert, Wathe and Bronzewing reserves, so it was not possible to make a confident evaluation of potential suitable release sites across this large area. Wathe and Bronzewing Fauna and Flora reserves have

i

been recently burnt and no vegetation of suitable age currently exists, precluding these reserves as potential release sites in the near future.

It is beyond the scope of this report to make specific risk assessments on source and recipient populations because data is lacking. Conceptually, overharvesting is a risk, particularly if populations are declining and small populations will be most vulnerable. Establishing new populations is inherently high risk because translocated populations tend to be small and vulnerable to stochastic environmental, genetic and demographic processes.

Short-term climate fluctuations will significantly influence the probability of establishing new populations. Favourable environmental conditions associated with above average rainfall are most suited for establishing new populations. Translocations undertaken during periods of below average rainfall have a high probability of failure and a translocation should be postponed until conditions improve.

Fire, population isolation and climate change are the main threats at potential release sites and it is difficult, if not impossible to address these threats. An adaptive management approach to translocation should detect any other threats (e.g. predators) should they occur.

The Mallee Emu-wren can be considered for management purposes as a single genetic unit with little risk of outbreeding depression. Translocation for recolonisation or supplementation of populations would restore, albeit on a limited scale, historic metapopulation genetic connectivity. Evaluation of population estimates and population genetic structure indicate that potential founders need to be sourced from among several populations and take into consideration social relationships to avoid inbreeding depression.

Evaluation of the biological and ecological feasibility for translocation is moderately favourable. Adult Maluridae have a relatively high adult survival rate, but reproductive success is variable depending on habitat quality and prevailing environmental conditions associated with rainfall. The Mallee Emu-wren is a specialist species adapted to life in dense understory and they have extreme physiological requirements that make them susceptible to starvation and dehydration over very short periods. As such, it is crucial that release sites are of high quality with respect to invertebrate abundance and protective cover.

The social relationships among Mallee Emu-wrens are poorly understood, but it is probable they comprise of complex neighbourhood associations, where males are close kin. To maximise the success of translocation, the composition of translocated groups should be considered. The inappropriate selection of group composition may impact on source populations and founders by creating social dysfunction and consequently limiting population viability. However, this is an unquantifiable impact (if it exists) and the selection of social group composition could be incorporated as a management treatment. Non-breeding familial groups, rather than unrelated male/female pairs may be a suitable core unit for translocation.

Catching Mallee Emu-wrens is very time consuming and difficult due to their rarity and relative inaccessibility. Only experienced personnel should be drawn on when catching Mallee Emu-wrens as there are nuances in the capture technique. Experience suggests the overall stress on individuals when caught and handled is no different to that experienced by other bird species, although they do not handle cold weather particularly well. It is recommended that birds are not banded as there is a high risk they will be caught on vegetation.

The risk of mortality during transportation is unquantifiable as there is no precedence for this species. Experience with the translocation of Southern Emu-wrens indicate a small proportion of birds may die if held overnight. Zoological institutes are well placed to provide animal husbandry advice and assistance in the development of a transfer protocol, including the design of customised boxes, provision of roosting and food resources and monitoring.

SCIENTIFIC INPUT AND KNOWLEDGE GAPS

Information within this report is a resource for the development of a comprehensive translocation proposal, however the report has identified major gaps in knowledge.

ii

The scientific input required for the development of a translocation proposal makes up a significant, stand-alone component. This phase also provides the opportunity to develop a priori questions and models that can objectively evaluate translocation management.

Identification of source populations, release sites and monitoring will require significant inputs in terms of scientific design, data collection and modelling and must be undertaken prior to submission of a comprehensive translocation proposal. This is expected to be a resource intensive and expensive component of a translocation proposal. Key activities include:

1. Identification of potential source populations and release sites using spatial landscape modelling based on the latest vegetation and fire mapping, and Mallee Emu-wren distribution data. 2. Identification of potential source populations and release sites using spatial patch-scale modelling based on aerial photography or similar high resolution imagery. 3. Site-specific evaluation of population densities and size of potential source populations (and release populations, if applicable) from field data. 4. Site-specific evaluation of release site suitability using field data and patch-scale and fine- scale models. 5. Population viability and genetic modelling to assess: a. the number of individuals to be harvested from source populations b. the risk of impact on harvested populations c. the probability of establishing a new population and, d. if applicable, genetic modelling to guide the number of introduced individuals required to mitigate inbreeding depression.

OVERALL ASSESSMENT

Translocation of the Mallee Emu-wren must be part of a long-term approach to management if the species is to persist in the long-term. Based on this assessment of the biology and ecology of the species, it is feasible that translocation can work, however as there is no precedence for Mallee Emu-wren translocation, it is impossible to make a quantifiable judgment on its likely success. Establishing new populations is inherently high risk. Factors that are crucial to success are transferring enough individuals to minimise the impact of stochastic processes (environmental and biological) and identifying high quality habitat with sufficient invertebrate resources and protective cover to maximise reproductive success and minimise adult mortality.

The paucity of data on potential source populations, release sites and monitoring mean that there is a need to undertake a significant scientific component prior to submission of a comprehensive translocation proposal. This phase provides the opportunity to develop an adaptive management approach to translocation, were translocation to occur.

It is important to have an exit strategy at several points in any proposed Mallee Emu-wren translocation program. On a short-term time-frame (a year or more), below average rainfall will temporarily reduce habitat quality and the risk of failure in translocation is high. Under these conditions a translocation needs to be postponed and funding availability needs to be flexible to take this into account; this may mean postponement for several years.

iii

1 INTRODUCTION

In response to the wildfires in the Mallee region during the 2013-14, an ‘Emergency Summit for Threatened Mallee Birds’ was held in the offices of BirdLife Australia in Melbourne on May 13, 2014. Over 30 experts from agencies and NGO’s of South Australia, Victoria, New South Wales and the Federal government attended to discuss actions required to facilitate species’ recovery.

The summit identified dramatic bird habitat and population losses across the Mallee region. These recent losses were especially devastating for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee in South Australia, and it is highly likely that the species is now close to extinction in this state.

A review of the distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren made it clear that the remaining populations are equally at risk from wildfires as those lost in the recent fires, placing the species at a very real risk of global extinction. The Summit concluded that substantial intervention such as translocation and captive breeding need to be considered as priority actions for the long term conservation of the Mallee Emu-wren.

1.1 Scope and Intent of Report

The aim of this report is to provide a preliminary risk assessment of key factors pertaining to the feasibility of translocations of Mallee Emu-wrens to re-establish additional populations within its former range. These outputs will inform the South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR), the Victorian Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) and Parks Victoria, the federal Department of Environment as well as other state agencies about the potential translocation of Mallee Emu-wren. Specifically, this report will guide downstream development of a complete translocation proposal, including a comprehensive risk assessment, scientific design, practical implementation and component cost.

This report presents information on aspects of the Mallee Emu-wren biology, habitat requirements and metapopulation in the context of assessing the species suitability for translocation. It is beyond the scope of this report to complete a comprehensive risk assessment, so this subset of crucial factors has been selected on the basis they are considered important towards assessing overall feasibility of a translocation program and whether such a program is justified.

The report highlights major gaps in scientific knowledge. The scientific input into the development of a translocation proposal makes up a significant, stand-alone component. It also provides the opportunity to develop a priori questions and scientific design into a translocation proposal so that that translocation management can be objectively evaluated.

A second aim of this report is to present technical information as a resource to guide a recovery team and conservation managers for developing downstream actions and a comprehensive translocation proposal. The information presented includes discussion of methods for identifying source populations and release sites, and monitoring.

 Sections 1-3 introduces the report, provides legislative and policy context and a general overview of the Mallee Emu-wren.

 Section 4 presents feasibility and risk assessment on key elements.

 Sections 5-6 details technical back-ground information on potential source populations and release sites based on current knowledge. These sections identify knowledge gaps and present scientific approaches that may be employed to address gaps.

 Sections 7-10 provide information on expertise, stakeholders, a budget estimate and timeline.

 Appendices I-III provides further technical information and resource material on relevant topics. These sections are intended to provide a priori questions and discussion points for a recovery team and conservation managers to consider for integration into an adaptive management approach into a translocation proposal.

1

1.2 Strategic Context

Action Plans and Biodiversity Strategies

The objective to conserve and re-establish Mallee Emu-wrens to their former distribution is consistent with several State and Federal Action Plans and Biodiversity Strategies (listed below). These provide detailed strategies for implementing recovery actions. Other relevant plans include catchment biodiversity strategies, fire management plans and reserve management plans. At the time of writing, a National Recovery Action Plan for Mallee Birds, including the Mallee Emu-wren, was in draft form and close to approval.

As details on current conservation actions and alternative management actions can be found in these plans they will not be discussed here. Figure 1.2 provides an overview of a translocation proposal within the context of a decision-making approach to Mallee Emu-wren management. Elements covered within this report, fully or partially, are highlighted.

Federal Baker-Gabb (2011) Draft Recovery Plan for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee, Red-lored Whistler Pachycephala rufogularis, Western Whipbird Psophodes nigrogularis leucogaster. Draft recovery plan for the Department of Environment, Commonwealth of Australia. Sets out specific actions to improve the long-term conservation status of the Mallee Emu-wren and other mallee birds. The aims are to retain all existing subpopulations, reduce the rate of decline for these species, to expand their core populations in larger remnants, and to initiate longer-term measures designed to ensure their persistence in south-eastern Australia.

Relevant Actions: • 7.2 Determine translocation needs and develop translocation strategy if necessary, particularly for Mallee Emu-wrens and Western Whipbirds in the Murray Mallee.

Department of Environment (2010) Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2010-2030. Commonwealth of Australia.

Victoria Department of Environment and Sustainability (2007) Draft Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee.

South Australia Clarke (2005a) Regional Recovery Plan for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee, Strated Grasswren Amytornis striatus, Western Whipbird Psophodes nigragularis leucagaster and Red-lored Whistler Pachycephala rufogularis in the South Australian Murray Darling Basin, Adelaide, South Australia. Department for Environment and Heritage, Government of South Australia.

Department for Environment and Heritage (2007) No Species Loss. A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007-2017. Government of South Australia.

Department for Environment and Heritage (2009) Fire management plan. Ngarkat District, 2009-2019. Government of South Australia.

Non-government Garnett et al. (2011) Action Plan for Australian Birds.

Relevant Actions: • 2. Determine the need for population translocations, and develop a re- introduction program if necessary.

2

Translocation Proposal

Action Plans Goal and objectives (State and Federal) Possible scenarios (reinforcement, translocation, assisted colonisation)

Feasibility and risk assessment considering: Biological feasibility Habitat and climate Metapopulation Alternative Selecting source and release sites Genetics management strategies Population demographics Source and recipient populations Habitat suitability Animal welfare (fluctuates, depending on year) Unacceptable risk Threats

Disease and parasites Social feasibility Resource availability Regulatory compliance and support Alternatives to translocation Exit strategy “Do nothing”

Acceptable risk, translocation justified, supported with adequate funding

Monitoring – pre-release Expert scientific design, methods and criteria

Procedure protocol for capture and release Detailed protocol (numbers, sex ratio etc) Release strategy Logistics and equipment Captive breeding program Personnel Timing Animal welfare Exit strategy

Monitoring – post release Reporting

Assessment Adaptive management Dissemination of information

Figure 1.2 Overview of a translocation proposal within the context of a decision-making framework to Mallee Emu-wren management. Elements covered in the report, fully or partially, are highlighted in olive green.

3

1.3 Legislative and Ethical Considerations

There are many key state and federal legislative requirements, translocation policies and codes of practice in relation to the translocation of Mallee Emu-wrens. They include, but are not limited to:

National Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) – Translocation of Listed Threatened Species: Assessment under Chapter 4 of the EPBC Act. Proposals to translocate species listed under the EPBC Act may trigger the requirement for a formal referral under the Act. The translocation of a listed species needs to be an endorsed action within a formal species recovery plan.

National Health and Medical Research Council ( 2013) Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes 8th Edition– Outlines principals and guidelines for the care and use of wildlife for scientific purposes. Approval by relevant animal ethics committees must be sought where the translocation project is conducted in association with a university or other research body.

Victoria Fauna and Flora Guarantee Act 1988 –Victoria’s key legislation for the conservation of threatened species and communities and for the management of potentially threatening processes. Crown Lands (Reserves) Act 1978 Forest Act 1958 Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act 1986 Wildlife Act 1975

South Australia National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 – Sections 53 and 55 require that permits be obtained from the Minister before taking and releasing protected animals in South Australia. Section 59 pertains to the import from another state. Nature Vegetation Act 1991 Animal Welfare Act 1985 Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act 1985

1.4 Guidelines for Translocation

Victoria and South Australia have, or are developing translocation policy documents to guide translocation proposals. There are several sets of guidelines of relevance to Mallee Emu-wren translocation:

• Victorian Government Guidelines and Template for Translocation. In Victoria all proposals to translocate threatened vertebrate fauna must be assessed by the Translocation Evaluation Panel which then advises the Executive Director, Environment and Landscape Performance on whether or not the proposal should be supported. • South Australian Government Translocations of Native Fauna Procedure (Note: The translocation proposal applications for Victoria and South Australia are near to identical). Following a preliminary assessment and discussions with DEWNR, a submitted translocation proposal will be assessed by review staff for revision and endorcement. • IUCN/SSC (2013). Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations. Version 1.0. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Species Survival Commission, viiii + 57 pp. • IUCN (1987) The IUCN Position Statement on Translocation of Living Organisms. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

4

2 TRANSLOCATION IN AVIAN CONSERVATION

Translocation, often in conjunction with captive breeding, is a widely used approach to re-establish or supplement populations in the conservation of threatened avian species (IUCN 1987, Griffiths et al. 1989).

Despite the widespread adoption of translocations in species conservation, many of the elements contributing to success or failure are not clearly understood (Griffiths et al. 1989, Fischer and Lindenmayer 2000). It is difficult to assess the success of translocations, as reporting tends to be poorly defined or disseminated, however Australia and New Zealand have a high failure rate (57%) compared with the USA (10%). Success tends to be greater when: • translocated animals are wild caught; • the total numbers of translocated animals is about 100 or more and; • threats are addressed (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2000).

Several reviews highlight the need to improve the integration of scientific design into translocation programs to help evaluate these elements and facilitate the success (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2000, Armstrong et al. 2007, Ewen et al. 2011). With this in mind, this report has included a set of a priori questions as an integral component of a potential translocation program so that the translocation actions can be appropriately managed and goals objectively evaluated (Appendix I and II).

Translocation and a captive breeding program have been central in the conservation management of the Black-eared Miner Manorian melanotis, an endangered species that is also endemic to the Murray Mallee (Clarke et al. 2002, Baker-Gabb 2003). Translocation of five complete colonies from Bookmark Biosphere Reserve in South Australia to the Murray-Sunset NP in Victoria was deemed successful with site fidelity, breeding and integration with local birds observed. Exploiting the presence of dependent young to enhance social cohesion and establish site fidelity in the program was thought to be a contributing factor to the success of the translocation (Clarke et al. 2002). The translocation of Southern Emu-wrens, into the Mount Lofty Ranges has had limited success. Numerous confounding factors such as drought, habitat quality and wide dispersal made it difficult to identify the factors contributing to poor population performance. Nevertheless, founders bred successfully for several years, with the population persisting for six years (Pickett 2007a).

Translocations are expensive, costing multiple millions in many cases (e.g. $1 million annually for the Californian Condor Gymnogyps californianus (Fisher and Lindenmayer 2000). The cost of translocating 18 colonies (about 350 individuals) of the Black-eared Miner was about $600,000 over 5 years, with the total recovery effort costing $2 million (Baker-Gabb 2003), whilst the translocation of 120-250 Noisy Scrub birds Atrichornis clamosus was estimated to cost $196,000 over nine years (Danks et al. 1996). The translocation of forty Southern Emu-wrens Stipiturus malachurus intermedius, a close relative of the Mallee Emu-wren, cost $96,000 over three years (Pickett 2007b). The cost of a single translocation of about 200 birds and a five-year monitoring program for the Mallee Emu-wren is comparatively moderate; excluding captive breeding, it is estimated to cost about $1.5 million (section 9). In relative terms, this approximates the cost of 25 cm of a major freeway.

2.1 Purposes of Translocations

The goals of a Translocation Program will vary according to desirable goals defined by Action Plans and conservation policies. The goals of a translocation may fall within any one of the following:

• Introduction: the intentional dispersal by humans of threatened fauna outside its historically known native range. Assisted colonisation is a conservation action increasingly used for the long-term persistence of a species in face of climate change. • Re-introduction: the movement of threatened fauna into a part of its known or presumed native range from which it has disappeared or become extirpated in historic times. • Supplementation or Reinforcement: the addition of individuals to a population with the intent of increasing their number or to increase genetic or demographic diversity.

5

• Removal: the movement of threatened fauna from places where they are threatening human health and safety, amenity, built assets or natural or other values. • Salvage: the movement of threatened fauna from places subject to habitat disturbance or loss. This may be an emergency translocation where individuals are removed because they may otherwise perish following a natural event such as fire, flood or disease. • Experimental translocations: the translocation of selected threatened fauna for research.

2.2 Translocation and the Mallee Emu-wren

Specific goals and actions for the recovery of the Mallee Emu-wren that involves a translocation program would be decided and defined by a formal recovery team in line with State and Federal Action Plans and policies.

In the case of the Mallee Emu-wren, four potential translocation goals are identified here:

1. Supplementation or Reinforcement - the genetic and population supplementation of small isolated populations in Ngarkat and Billiatt CPs. It is probable that these populations are now extinct and the goal would in fact be re-introduction. Supplementation may also include the removal of individuals for a captive breeding program with the aim of building up numbers.

2. Re-introduction - Annuello FFR may be suited in size and habitat for Mallee Emu-wrens. Despite close proximaty to potential immigration sites in Hattah-Kulkyne NP, the species has failed to re-colonise this reserve.

3. Emergency translocation – fires in recent years have left small numbers of animals in patches that do not have enough resources (e.g. nest sites, foraging resources) to sustain them, making the population inevitably unviable.

4. Salvage – the removal of individuals where their habitat is lost due to fuel reduction actions or other actions that destroy habitat.

Any of the above goals may be implemented in conjunction with a captive breeding program. Furthermore, as part of a long-term management strategy, multiple translocations may be appropriate. For example, to genetically augment or supplement a small population, the introduction of a small number of animals periodically, especially during good reproductive years, may be a cost-effective and appropriate strategy.

6

3 THE MALLEE EMU-WREN

3.1 Taxonomy and description

The Mallee Emu-wren is one of the smallest members of a distinctive element of the Australasian bird fauna, the family Maluridae, endemic to southern Murray Mallee region of south-eastern Australia (Figure 3.1) (Schodde 1982, Menkhorst and Bennett 1990, Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001). The species is monotypic and does not vary geographically (Schodde 1982, Higgins et al. 2001). The relationship within the Emu-wren genus has been debated since its discovery in 1908 (Schodde 1982), but recent studies accept the Mallee Emu-wren as a full species (Schodde 1982, Christidis and Boles 2008).

The Mallee Emu-wren is very inconspicuous due to its small size (4-6.5 g), its weak high-frequency call and their manner of living in dense understorey (Schodde 1982, Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001, Brown 2011). The species’ morphology make them notoriously poor flyers, and they are adapted to scurrying through dense undergrowth, typically containing the hummock grass Triodia scariosa (hereafter referred to as Triodia) (Schodde 1982, Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001, Brown 2011).

The Mallee Emu-wren is sexually dimorphic. The male has a rufous crown, an olive-brown upper body, short-rounded wings with diffuse blackish streaking, a distinctive sky-blue bib leading from the upper breast to chin, and dusky ear-coverts with coarse sky-blue streaking. The under body is generally orange-buff merging to white at the centre belly. The iris is black-brown, bill black, and feet and legs are light pinkish-brown. They have short-rounded wings and six long distinctive filamentous tail feathers – the latter giving the genus their name. Females are duller and lack the sky-blue bib (Schodde 1982, Higgins et al. 2001).

3.2 Distribution

Early 20th Century records show that the Mallee Emu-wren once occupied a region extending from the Annuello Fauna and Flora Reserve (FFR) in the north-west of Victoria to eastern South Australia where its distribution was bounded by Billiatt Conservation Park (CP), Nadda, Peebinga and Pinnaroo and Comet Bore (Ngarkat CP) (Howe and Burgess 1942, McGilp 1943, Eckert 1977, Carpenter and Mathews 1986, Garnett 1992). Its northern range limit was the northern Sunset Country (Murray-Sunset National Park (NP)) and in the south it extended to the south of the Big Desert at the township of Yanac (Howe 1933, Howe and Burgess 1942, Chisholm 1946) (Figure 3.1).

Wide-scale vegetation clearance in the 1920s-60s (Harris 1990) resulted in the extinction of Mallee Emu-wrens from agricultural areas and restricted the species’ distribution within the extensive reserve systems in north-western Victoria and South Australia (Silveira 1993, Menkhorst and Bennett 1990, Brown et al. 2009) (Figure 3.1).

In recent decades, large wildfires (>10 000 ha), exacerbated by drought, have caused a precipitous reduction in numbers and distribution and the extinction of populations the Mallee Emu-wren. The species is now thought to have disappeared from seven of the nine major reserves known once to have supported them. Between 1989 and 2014 a series of large fires in Billiatt WPA and the contiguous Ngarkat, Big Desert/Wyperfeld conservation areas has resulted in near local extinction of the Mallee Emu-wren in their south-west and western distribution (Gates 2003, Clarke 2004, Clarke 2005a, Paton and Rogers 2007, Brown et al. 2009, Paton et al. 2009, Allan and Hedger unpublished data). No Mallee Emu-wrens have been recorded in Bronzewing and Wathe FFR since the 1960s and 1970s (Silveira 1993, Clarke and Brown 2007, Brown et al. 2009) and there have been only three records in Wyperfeld NP since 1999 (Clarke and Brown 2007, Brown et al. 2009). In Annuello FFR, they were observed during back-burning operations in 1998 when a large fire burned much of the reserve (Phil Murdoch, pers. comm.), although a subsequent survey in 2009 failed to locate any Mallee Emu-wrens (Watson 2011). Geographic contraction has occurred such that just two reserves in north-west Victoria (i.e. Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs), comprising less than half of their former range, now support the remaining global population. Landscape-scale models and density data suggest that the western end of the Murray-Sunset NP supports the greatest areas of high quality Mallee Emu-wren habitat (Watson 2011). 7

Figure 3.1 The reserve system within the southern portion of the Murray Mallee and Wimmera region, south-east Australia. The reserves in the northern distribution of their former range are; Billiatt CP (S.A.), Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs and Annuello FFR (Vic.). Reserves within the bounds of the southern distribution are; Ngarkat CP (S.A.) which is contiguous with the Big Desert/Wyperfled reserve complex in Victoria, and the relatively isolated reserves Bronzewing and Wathe FFRs. Grey hatching shows the approximate historical occurrence of Mallee Emu-wrens, Solid Grey shows the major reserves, FFR= Fauna and Flora Reserve, Vic. = Victoria, S.A.= South Australia, N.S.W. = New South Wales

3.3 Habitat

The distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren traverses two major landforms comprised of sandy dunefields; the Woorinen Formation in the northern range of distribution and the Lowan Sands in the south (Wasson 1989). Each landform contains floristically and structurally variable vegetation communities, reflecting the complex origins of the soils and overlaying sands, the topology of the dunefield systems and fire history (Cheal and Parkes 1989, Wasson 1989, Menkhorst and Bennett 1990). Within the Woorinen Formation, in which the northern reserves predominantly lie, the vegetation community pertinent to the Mallee Emu-wren is open Eucalyptus mallee (3-10m tall, multi-stemmed Eucalyptus spp.) with an understorey comprised of a mix of sclerophyllous shrubs including Callitris, Melaleuca, Leptospermum and Acacia spp. and Triodia (Triodia-mallee) (Figure. 3.3a). Triodia is a sclerophyllous grass which forms large hummocks up to several metres in diameter. These hummocks grow outward as they mature, leaving dead or dying material in the centre, creating a characteristic concentric ring (Specht 1981) (Figure 3.3c). In some locations continuous swathes of Triodia dominate the understorey (Figure 3.3b).

Lowan Sands is the dominant landform in the southern part of the species' range, although it also intrudes into areas of the Woorinen Formation in the north. The vegetation communities in the Lowan Sands are mallee-heath and heath-like communities. They have a structurally dense, sclerophyllous shrub-layer, with or without scattered Triodia. The heath-like communities, typically found on the plains and swales, are dominated by Banksia ornate and Allocasuarina pusilla, and typically lack a mallee eucalypt overstorey (Figure 3.3d). In some areas Xanthorrhoea caespitose is dominant. The mallee-heath communities are mostly associated with the dunes and support sparse overstorey of Eucalyptus spp. The shrub layer is taller and often denser than found in heath and is characterised by Baeckea behrii, Leptospermum coriaceum, Allocasuarina muellerianna among other species and Triodia (Cheal and Parks 1989, Menkhorst and Bennett 1990, Smith 2004).

8

a) b)

Figure 3.3 a and b Vegetation of the Woorinen Formation, Triodia- mallee vegetation type; a) showing a mix of sclerophyllous understorey and Triodia, and b) continuous swathes of Triodia.

c) d)

Figure 3.3 c and d c) Concentric ring form of a mature Triodia plant, and d) mallee-heath, Ngarkat Conservation Park, South Australia. Note the absence of mallee eucalypt overstorey.

9

The Mallee Emu-wren has a patchy distribution across these two vegetation systems. Multi-scale studies of the habitat requirements in the north of the species’ range show that its fine-scale distribution is strongly influenced by the post-fire age of vegetation, as a consequence of seral changes in the structure of ground-storey Triodia, which dominates (Brown 2010, Brown 2011, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011). In the south of the species’ range, there is a shift in the habitat use. In Ngarkat CP, which is dominated by mallee-heath with scattered Triodia, Mallee Emu-wrens prefer sites that have relatively greater cover of Triodia (Mercer 1998, Smith 2004), although they have also been recorded in dense numbers in heath-like communities lacking Triodia, and dominated by Xanthorrhoea and Allocasaurina (C Hedger pers. comm.).

Fire plays a major role in fine-scale distribution. In the northern area of the Mallee Emu-wren distribution (i.e. Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs), the species inhabits mallee-Triodia vegetation older than 15 years since last burnt (Brown et al. 2009) with a preference for Woorinen Sands mallee aged 20-30 years (Watson 2011). However, Mallee Emu-wrens have also been recorded in younger habitat; birds have been recorded in vegetation three to six years post-fire in the Murray-Sunset NP (Clarke 2005b), and eight to 15 years after fire (Brouwer and Garnett 1990). In Ngarkat CP Mallee Emu-wrens were associated with mallee -Triodia and heath containing Triodia in vegetation aged 10-29 years (Clarke 2005b). These discrepancies are attributed to the variable soils and rainfall that influence vegetation growth and most likely represent the underlying dependence of the Mallee Emu-wren on dense undergrowth (typically containing Triodia or Xanthorrhoea), rather than fire age per se (Brown 2011). Further details on the variable fine-scale habitat requirements across the two systems are described in detail in sections 5 and 6.

3.4 Threats

The major threats to the Mallee Emu-wren are inappropriate fire regimes (frequency, extent and intensity) and extensive fires, habitat fragmentation, population isolation, declining habitat quality, and climate change.

Habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation

The initial reduction in the abundance and distribution of birds and other fauna in the Murray Mallee region have been attributed to the reduction in the quality of habitat by the introduction of grazing stock and feral animals, exacerbated by the plague invasion in 1880 of the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)(LCC 1987, Harris 1990, Menkhorst and Bennett 1990, Schodde 1990). Subsequent widespread clearing of millions of hectares of vegetation on the most productive soils for agricultural settlement in the early 20th century has compounded the declines (LCC 1987, Woinarski 1987, Silveira 1993, Harris 1990, Garnett et al. 2011).

Habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation have consequences for species' population dynamics, dispersal patterns, abundance and distribution (Andrén 1994, Fahrig and Merriam 1994, Wiegand et al. 2004). Some species benefit from landscape change and flourish, although most frequently landscape modification leads to population declines among species and the potential for local extinction, especially among habitat specialists like the Mallee Emu-wren (Caughley and Gunn 1996, Lindenmayer and Fischer 2006). The Mallee Emu-wren is now largely secure from further habitat loss and fragmentation caused by agricultural activities. Nevertheless, the pervasive impacts of past clearing on regional biophysical processes, together with the decline in habitat quality, will continue into the future and may result in the ongoing demise of species in what is referred to as ‘extinction debt’ (Tilman et al. 1994).

Fire and population processes

Fire is an integral component of mallee ecosystems (Heislers et al. 1981, Bradstock 1990, Bradstock and Cohn 2002, Haslem et al. 2011) and is a major driver of plant structure and function (Bradstock 1989, Turner et al. 2008, Haslem et al. 2011) which in turn influences the fauna of these ecosystems (Friend 1993, Kelly et al. 2010). However large fires and inappropriate fire regimes pose a significant risk to threatened birds (Garnett et al. 2011). Large fires directly kill birds and reduce population numbers, and reduce the amount of habitat of suitable age available (Baker-Gabb 2011, Brown et al. 2009, Brown 2011, Garnett et al. 2011). Fires also increase the isolation of remaining populations by creating a temporarily impermeable matrix, especially for species such as the Mallee Emu-wren which is wholly dependent on dense vegetation for protection

10

and movement (Brown 2011). The conundrum for parks managers is that in attempting to prevent a catastrophic fire by reducing fuel loads through prescription burning or clearing, these activities also reduce the total amount of available habitat to Mallee Emu-wrens, increase population isolation and may adversely impact remaining populations in numerous indirect ways (Driscoll et al. 2010) (see below and section 4.1 and 4.2). The threat posed by fire to the Mallee Emu-wren relates to the extent and frequency of fire, whether natural or prescribed in origin, and its impact on population processes. Analysis of fire over 35 years from 1972-2007 in the Murray Mallee show at a landscape-scale, fire is relatively common but it is infrequent at any one location. Some areas may remain unburnt for more than 100 years (Bennett et al. 2010). Fires and time create a shifting mosaic of different aged vegetation. Species dependent on specific-aged vegetation habitat track this shifting mosaic as the seral age of vegetation progresses. In the case of the Mallee Emu-wren, this has resulted in serial extinction and recolonisation events (Brown et al. 2013). Although researchers have made progress in identifying habitat requirements of the Mallee Emu-wren (Brown et al. 2009, Brown 2011, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011), there remains a poor understanding of the impact of fire regimes on population processes.

Today, the total area of suitable habitat available for Mallee Emu-wrens has been greatly reduced and fragmented by past clearing. Within this fragmented landscape large fires exacerbate population loss and isolation because the intervening agricultural matrix is impermeable to the Mallee Emu-wren, making natural recolonisation and supplementation impossible at the reserve scale. Even within reserves, a mosaic of largely unsuitable vegetation may isolate populations of Mallee Emu-wrens for many generations. These isolated populations are typically small, and especially vulnerable to extinction through stochastic demographic and environmental processes (Caughley 1994, With and King 2001) (see section 4.1 and 4.2 for further discussion).

Climate change

Climate change adds a further degree of complexity to species’ persistence (Mac Nally et al. 2009, Steffen et al. 2009). Relatively minor temperature changes, together with reduced rainfall, are predicted to lead to severe contraction in the geographical ranges and the possible extinction of habitat specialists such as the Mallee Emu-wren and other mallee species (Brereton et al. 1995).

The Mallee and Wimmera region of south-eastern Australia is predicted to warm slightly faster than the global average. Annual rainfall totals are also expected to decrease and evaporation to increase, exacerbating the overall drying trend and increase the intensity and frequency of fire (Hennessy et al. 2005, Steffen et al. 2009). Periods of reduced rainfall are linked to reduced bird numbers because dry spells reduce food resources such as insects and nectar (White 2008, Mac Nally et al. 2009, Paton et al. 2009). Presumably the Mallee Emu-wren has a short life span (6-10 years) similar to that of other Maluridae (Rowley and Russell 1997) and prolonged and severe drought would predictably reduce local population number, possibly even cause local extinction, as individuals within populations fail to replace themselves because they forgo breeding to maximise individual survival. Indeed, the severe population decline in Ngarkat CP in the past two decades has been attributed to the combination of drought and fire (Paton and Rogers 2007, Paton et al. 2009).

3.5 Status

A survey of the Mallee Emu-wren estimated the global population size to be about 17 000 individuals (range 8 607 to 39 280), with the Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs containing the majority (92%) of the global population (Brown et. al. 2009). However subsequent refinement in modelling (Watson 2011, J Connell unpublished data) and changes in the total amount of suitable habitat available would indicate that these figures are over-estimates and more probable towards the lower range (see section 5.1 and 6.1 for further discussion). For consistency, figures used in this report are based on the assessment of Brown et al. (2009) with qualifications with respect to their uncertainty, and a large degree of caution should be exercised in using these estimates.

The high risk of continued population loss due to wildfire and drought, warranted recent reclassification of the Mallee Emu-wren from Vulnerable to Endangered, according to IUCN Red List categories and criteria (Brown et al. 2009). International, federal and state government agencies variously define the status of the Mallee Emu-wren as Threatened or Endangered.

11

Statutory Federal: Listed as Endangered (Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999), 2007 Victoria: Listed as Threatened (Fauna and Flora Guarantee Act 1988), February 2014 South Australia: Listed as Endangered (National Parks and Wildlife Act 1992), June 2011

Non-statutory IUCN: Endangered (Global status: Red List of Threatened Species 2013.1 List) Victoria: Endangered (Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria, 2013 List) Non-government: Endangered (The Action Plan for Australian Birds, 2011)

12

4 FEASIBILITY AND RISK ASSESSMENT

Feasibility assessment is essential in evaluating the conservation benefits of a translocation program against the cost and risks of both the translocation and alternative management actions. Any translocation program will be subject to opportunities and constraints. Risk assessment identifies the probability of a risk factor arising, and the potential severity of the impact. The following section discusses key elements important in a proposed translocation. This is not exhaustive; some additional factors and discussion are better placed in a comprehensive translocation proposal and data is lacking to make any risk assessment for some elements on populations and release sites.

4.1 Metapopulation Assessment

Definitions (based on Hanski and Simberloff 1997):

Metapopulation: Set of populations within some larger area, where typically migration from one local population to at least some other patches is possible. Historically (prior to land clearing) the Mallee Emu-wren most likely comprised of a single metapopulation.

Population: Synonyms; sub-population, local population, deme. Set of individuals that live in the same habitat patch and therefore interact with each other.

Patch: A continuous area of space with all necessary resources for the persistence of a local population and separated by unsuitable habitat from other patches. A patch may be occupied or unoccupied.

Note: The term ‘self-sustaining population’ is rarely appropriately qualified in policy and translocation documents. A self-sustaining population in the true sense contains the demographic and genetic adaptive potential to persist into the long-term (a hundred to thousands of years). The use of the term should be defined at least by the area of occupancy and time-frame of persistence.

In many species populations tend to have short life-spans, and hence the long-term persistence of species cannot be understood without taking into account ongoing extinction and colonisation (Hanski 1998). This concept is especially important for the effective conservation of species occupying mallee systems, where fire is a major driver of population processes.

The patchy distribution characteristic of the Mallee Emu-wren, together with a turnover of local populations, local extinctions and recolonisation driven by fire (Brown et al. 2013), is consistent with that of a metapopulation (Hanski and Simberloff 1997). Metapopulation theory predicts that species occupying dynamic landscapes are at risk of extinction where large-scale recurrent disturbances (e.g. fire) occur over relatively short time-frames (Kallimanis et al, 2003, Wilcox et al. 2006, Vuilleumier et al. 2007) and habitat specialists with patchy distributions are particularly vulnerable (Simberloff 1995). Indeed, recent history demonstrates that frequent habitat perturbations caused by fire have been the main contributing factor in the decline of the Mallee Emu-wren in the south-west and west of their distribution (Gates 2003, Paton and Rogers 2007, Brown et al. 2009, Paton et al. 2009).

At the landscape-scale, metapopulation processes are influenced by the complex interaction of the landscape mosaic and species dispersal ability (i.e. the permeability of the landscape mosaic) (Wiens 1997, Cale 2003). Prior to land-clearing in the region, patches of suitably aged vegetation would have provided routes for recolonising unoccupied habitat and maintaining population connectivity (metapopulation processes) over a vast landscape (i.e. the southern Mallee and Wimmera region), even in the presence of extraordinary large fires. Habitat fragmentation and loss have disrupted historic metapopulation processes in the Mallee Emu-wren, preventing dispersal of individuals between reserves and importantly, the genes they carry (Brown et al. 2013).

Maintaining metapopulation processes are important as they provide individuals for breeding and increasing population size, and establishing new populations in unoccupied patches of suitable habitat. These processes also provide a mechanism for introducing and exchanging alleles among populations (genetic connectivity). Genetic connectivity mitigates the loss of genetic diversity. There is a strong case for the potential benefits of genetic diversity for the evolutionary potential and population viability. Larger populations contain more potentially adaptive genetic variation to track long-term ecological change (Reed 2010). Isolated populations are prone to loss of genetic diversity due to genetic drift, increased inbreeding and the accumulation of deleterious alleles 13

resulting in inbreeding depression (Charlesworth and Charlesworth 1999, Frankham 2005). These adverse genetic effects have consequences for individual fitness and population viability (Crnokrak and Roff 1999, Reed and Frankham 2003, Reed 2005) and small isolated populations (even as many as a thousand individuals) are susceptible to these effects (Jamieson et al. 2007, O'Grady et al. 2006).

Recent population declines

The decline of the Mallee Emu-wren has been most precipitous among the reserves making up their southern distribution (i.e. Ngarkat CP in South Australia and Big Desert/ Wyperfeld reserve area, Wathe and Bronzewing FFRs in Victoria). A series of fires in 1998, 2002/2003 and 2005, razed 287 400 ha of vegetation in the contiguous Ngarkat, Big Desert/ Wyperfeld reserves, destroying large tracks of Mallee Emu-wren habitat (Figure 3.1). Following these fires, a small population of fewer than 100 birds was known to persist in Ngarkat CP in South Australia (Paton and Rogers 2007, Brown et al. 2009). Although this population appeared to be recovering and expanding into younger fire-age classes up until 2012, a survey of this population following the extensive 2014 fire has so far failed to find any survivors (Allan and Hedger unpublished data).

The 2002/03 fire burnt about half the Big Desert/Wyperfeld reserve area in Victoria (181 400 ha). Despite a large survey effort in Wyperfeld NP in 2006, only one group of Mallee Emu-wrens was found (Brown et al. 2009). Given that only two additional records have been obtained for this region between 1999 and early 2000s (Barrett et al. 2003), it seems likely that the Mallee Emu-wren is now extremely rare, if not extinct, within the Big Desert/Wyperfeld reserve area.

The Mallee Emu-wren was purported to occur in the relatively isolated Wathe and Bronzewing FFRs prior to the 1970s. In 2006 an extensive survey of Wathe FFR failed to detect Mallee Emu-wrens. Likewise, no Mallee Emu-wrens have been observed in Bronzewing FFR despite frequent surveys by experienced ornithologists during the period 1997-2006 (Brown et. al. 2009). Both these reserves have subsequently been razed by large wildfires and there is no doubt that the Mallee Emu-wren is now extinct within these reserves.

Four major reserves make up the northern Mallee Emu-wren distribution; the isolated Billiatt CP in South Australia, the largely contiguous Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs (and Crown lands) in Victoria and nearby Annuello FFR. In 1989 a reserve-scale fire (60 000 ha) was thought to have brought about the extinction of Mallee Emu-wrens from Billiatt CP in South Australia (Gates 2003), though a small number of individuals persisted in a heritage agreement block on the northern edge of the park in 2005 (Clarke 2005a). This area was subsequently burned in 2014 and it appears no Mallee Emu-wrens have survived (Allan and Hedger unpublished data).

The last known Mallee Emu-wrens in Annuello Fauna and Flora reserve were observed in 1998 during back-burning operations in response to a major fire in the reserve (P Murdoch pers. comm.). An extensive survey of suitably aged vegetation in 2009 failed to locate any Mallee Emu-wrens, despite the occurrence of highly suitable habitat and relatively close proximity to extant Mallee Emu-wren sub-populations (e.g. Lenbrook Plain, Hattah-Kulkyne NP) (Watson 2011).

The vast majority (>92%), if not all, of the global population now appears to be confined to two reserves in the species northern distribution; the Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs (Brown et. al. 2009), although it is possible other, small, isolated populations remain elsewhere and have not been detected.

Small population paradigm

The direct and devastating impact of large fires on Mallee Emu-wren populations in Ngarkat, Billiatt and the Big Desert/Wyperfeld reserve areas is unambiguous. Less clear is the cause of extinction from Bronzewing and Wathe FFRs. The decline within these reserves, and possibly Annuello FFR following the extensive fire in 1998, is consistent with the paradigm that small isolated populations are vulnerable to extinction through stochastic, demographic (inbreeding depression, skewed sex ratios) and/or environmental processes (vegetation succession and drought) (Caughley 1994, With and King 2001). It is evident the Mallee Emu-wren, with their characteristic poor flying ability is unable to disperse and recolonise at the reserve scale. We can therefore infer that the extinction of populations from these isolated reserves may have been the result of adverse intrinsic population processes, together with environmental characteristics of the reserves (Brown et al. 2009). In the

14

case of Bronzweing FFR, the vegetation was very old and structurally unsuitable for Mallee Emu- wrens (i.e. little to no dense understory). The final extinction of the Mallee Emu-wren from Annuello FFR may have been due to the impact of the severe drought that followed the 1998 fires, although this is speculative. Drought, together with fire, has certainly contributed to the contraction in the extent of occurrence of the Mallee Emu-wren in Ngarkat CP (Paton et al. 2009).

Future population trends

The risk of landscape-scale wildfires destroying a large proportion of the global Mallee Emu-wren population was the basis for the re-listing of this species from Vulnerable to Endangered under the IUCN Red List criterion (www.environment.gov.au). Climate warming is predicted to increase the intensity and frequency of fires and drought in this region (Hennessy et al. 2005, Steffen et al. 2009), further exacerbating this risk. Recognising this, the state government of Victoria uses prescribed burning as a tool in the Victorian reserve system to reduce the risk of wildfire burning extensive areas and homogenising the landscape (Sandell et al. 2006). Nevertheless, fire suppression actions can fail, and there is also a risk that irreversible changes to the system may lead to the loss of local populations or even to species' extinctions because of an inadequate understanding of species' responses to fire regimes (Russell and Rowley 1998, Whelan 2002, Clarke 2008, Driscoll et al. 2010). Findings from major research projects (e.g. the Mallee Fire and Biodiversity Project, Deakin and La Trobe Universities) are making progress towards understanding the impact of fire regimes on mallee biota for management.

Benefits and risks of translocations as a component of Mallee Emu-wren recovery

As recent history demonstrates, remaining Mallee Emu-wren populations are highly vulnerable to catastrophic declines due to large wildfires and/or inappropriate fire regimes. The establishment of a new population (or supplementation of an existing small population) in areas geographically distant from current populations has several benefits. Additional populations:

• spread the risk of population loss due to fires; • if managed appropriately, expand the metapopulation function and mitigate the loss of the genetic diversity required for long-term persistence; • are potentially source populations should current populations be lost in the future; and • are a less expensive and/or resource intensive alternative to captive breeding.

An on-going translocation program that manages the species as a single metapopulation across disconnected reserves must be implemented to ensure that the Mallee Emu-wren is able to persist in the long-term and that it retains as much of its adaptive potential as possible. If managed strategically (precluding a series of catastrophic fires and/or drought across all reserves), translocation programs may only need to be implemented periodically, perhaps once every 20 years.

The introduction of a new population or supplementation of a small population with the goal of establishing a self-sustaining, genetically adaptable population capable of persisting unaided for hundreds of years) is futile because of the high number of individuals needed (many thousands) and the dynamic nature of the mallee. A realistic goal is to establish a new population (even if small) as a managed functional unit of the entire metapopulation. The identification of socially and biologically acceptable goals (e.g. 80% probability of establishing a population for 20 generations), forms part of a comprehensive translocation protocol (section 6.1 and Appendix I).

No major risk is identified from a metapopulation perspective. The risk associated with translocating populations relates to that of intrinsic population impacts (e.g. overharvesting) (section 4.3). There is a risk of inadvertently introducing disease and pathogens into a release site. However as no data exists on the pathology of the Mallee Emu-wren and this remains unquantified.

Since the early 1960s the Mallee Emu-wren has successively disappeared from seven of nine major conservation reserves. A series of devastating fires among multiple reserves in the late 1990s and 2000s, compounded by drought and stochastic demographic processes, has resulted in precipitous population declines and a contraction in the species former distribution by more than a half.

15

In the face of increasing climate extremes, it is highly probable that the remaining two reserves that support Mallee Emu-wrens will be, at some time in the future, substantially impacted by landscape-scale fires.

Given this, and the inability of the Mallee Emu-wren to recolonise suitable unoccupied reserves, translocation into geographically distant reserves is recommended to mitigate the high risk of global extinction.

Furthermore, translocation among and within reserves should be established as an on-going metapopulation management tool for the Mallee Emu-wren.

4.2 Genetic assessment

A genetic study to examine population structure and processes across the global range of the Mallee Emu-wren found they exhibited a low to moderate level of genetic diversity and evidence of bottlenecks and genetic drift. The species also exhibited weak population genetic structure (Brown et al. 2013).

The implications of these findings for population management are two-fold:

1. The lack of marked population structure implies that the Mallee Emu-wren appears to have maintained long-term genetic connectivity across all populations, possibly mediated by temporally and spatially shifting habitat caused by fire and vegetation succession (Brown et al. 2013).

A key question from a metapopulation perspective is, ‘where should the translocated population be sourced from?’ The presence of weak genetic structure means that the species is relatively homogenous across its range and it is unlikely that populations have evolved unique genetic adaptations to their local environments. Mixing individuals for breeding from geographically distant populations is unlikely to disrupt locally adapted gene complexes that could adversely influence population viability; a processes known as outbreeding depression (Lowe et al. 2004). On the contrary, movement of individuals between populations would help restore, albeit in a limited capacity, historic metapopulation genetic connectivity.

The Mallee Emu-wren can be considered for management purposes as a single genetic unit with little risk of outbreeding depression. Translocation for recolonisation or supplementation of populations would restore, albeit on a limited scale, historic metapopulation genetic connectivity.

2. The evidence of genetic drift, homosygosity and bottlenecks implies that over a shorter time frame (generations), the Mallee Emu-wren has been subject to severe population declines, possibly resulting from serial local extinctions and recolonisation events caused by fire and drought (Brown et al. 2013).

These results are very important in the fine-scale selection of source individuals for both genetic augmentation (i.e. supplementing a small isolated population) or the establishment of a new population. The overarching genetic goal of a translocation program is to maximise genetic diversity in order to minimise the risk of extinction caused by adverse genetic processes (Reed 2008). Small, isolated populations are subject to increased homozygosity that may lead to the accumulation of deleterious alleles, inbreeding depression, with consequences for individual fitness and population-level viability (Charlesworth and Charlesworth 1999, Jamieson et al. 2007, O'Grady et al. 2006). Numerous studies have shown a strong case for the importance of genetic diversity in maintaining population viability (Jamieson et al. 2007, Reed 2010), and genetic augmentation has been shown to improve population viability in highly inbred populations (Hedrick and Fedrickson 2010).

Additional genetic analysis of Mallee Emu-wrens shows individuals separated by less than 2 km are on average more related than to more distant animals, indicating local kin associations. Furthermore, females are more likely to be immigrants, indicating females are more likely to 16

disperse than males (Brown 2011). These findings are consistent with known Maluridae biology, where males exhibit male natal philopatry, female-based dispersal and distance-restricted dispersal (Russell and Rowley 1997, Double et al 2005). The implication of selecting individuals within a patch for translocation, is that males are more likely to be related or of similar genetic ancestry. Females, on the other hand are less likely to be related, but it is unlikely they have originated from any substantial distance.

Selection of individuals from source populations should be carefully considered with respect to their intrinsic genetic make-up. There is a risk that founders may comprise of demographically and genetically related individuals if sourced from geographically close locations.

Nevertheless, this is manageable; to avoid selecting too many related individuals and minimise the risk of adverse genetic outcomes in a founder population, attempts should be made to source individuals (e.g. male/female pairs of adults or social groups) from among several patches.

The above recommendation is only guidance in the absence of dispersal data based on individuals. The conundrum is that is that females from nearby patches may in fact be related, whilst males may be more likely unrelated. Given the breeding ecology of the species (section 4.6), any male/female adult pair encountered is presumably unrelated. However, groups of Mallee Emu-wrens within a patch may be a functionally social group, with males of close kin. It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to carry out relatedness analysis using genetic markers because of the high prevalence of monomorphic loci (i.e. alleles are identical). A trade-off may need to be considered as part of an adaptive management approach to any potential translocation proposal.

4.3 Source and Recipient populations

When assessing the risk of translocation on source and recipient populations (or newly established populations) many interdependent factors need to be considered. They include:

• biologically and socially defined goals • the proportion of animals harvested from the global population and the impact • the number of animals harvested from source population(s) and the impact • the number of animals required for a founder population or supplemented populations • short-term climatic fluctuations (section 4.4) • logistical requirements and constraints (section 4.8) • the demographic composition of source and founder populations (i.e. the proportion of males, females, juveniles and their relationships) (section 4.6) • genetic composition (section 4.2) • identifying quality habitat at release sites (section 5 and 6) • screening for disease and parasites (section 4.1)

No data exists on specific source populations to allow a conclusive risk assessment on the total numbers of birds to harvest, population sources and impacts. Potential source populations and release sites are discussed in section 5, within the context of the current knowledge of their distribution and habitat requirements. With this constraint, this section assesses potential risks based on general principles of population ecology, within the bounds of the current knowledge of Mallee Emu-wren population ecology and distribution.

Source populations

The principles of population ecology and wildlife harvesting are well understood. Modelling harvesting and its impact on source populations depends on population trends (whether they are stable, increasing, decreasing or fluctuating), limitation on resources, whether resources are renewable, intrinsic characteristics of the focal species, environmental influences and the various interactions. The risk of adverse impacts on source populations is lowest when rates of population growth are increasing. Conversely the risk will be greatest when populations are declining and the smallest populations will be most vulnerable to impacts (Caughley and Sinclair 1994).

17

The main risk to a source population is the impact of overharvesting. Mallee Emu-wrens tend to congregate within small areas of a patch, even when much suitable habitat appears to be available nearby (Smith 2004, S Brown pers. obs.). This makes it difficult to determine total population numbers within a patch, and increases the potential to erroneously overharvest a source population. If this were to occur, the remaining population may be too small to remain viable. Appropriate scientific evaluation and monitoring of source populations prior to harvesting is required to make reliable population estimates (section 6.2). Once population and patch-level data is available, population viability analysis can be used to predict the likely future status of populations under different scenarios, enabling conservation managers to identify risk factors and their magnitude of impact (section 6.3).

Another potential risk is that the removal of individuals may lead to socially dysfunctional groups in both the source population and the founders, limiting reproductive success. Little is known of the breeding ecology of the Mallee Emu-wren; they appear to be monogamous pairs, and unlike other species of Maluridae, cooperative breeding has not been observed (Higgins et al. 2001, Schodde 1982). However, anecdotal observations suggest that pockets of Mallee Emu-wrens comprise of individuals familiar to one-another (S Brown pers. obs., section 4.6), and it is probable that like other Maluridae species, individuals, especially males, are related (Rowley and Russell 1997). Territories left vacant by removal of birds are likely to be filled (Russell and Rowley 1997), but this may be at the expense of lower reproductive success in birds left behind if they have to adjust to unfamiliar neighbours. Recipient Populations

The justification for establishing new populations of Mallee Emu-wrens as outlined in section 4.1, is mainly related to spreading the risk of the species’ extinction and population loss due to fire. However, the establishment of a new population (or supplementation of existing small populations) is inherently high risk because translocation populations tend to be small and subject to the small population paradigm (section 4.1) and other unexpected factors that may cause a translocation to fail. Nevertheless, population translocations using a small number of founders have been successful (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2000, references therein), and careful design, planning and adaptive management will increase the probability of success (Armstrong and Sedden 2008, Ewen et al. 2011) (Appendix I).

Population viability analysis will provide guidelines for the actual number of individuals and genetic diversity required to establish a founder population (section 6.3). Conceptually, maximising the number of founders will increase the probability of population growth and survival through Allee effects (Allee et. al. 1949) and reduce the risk of potentially adverse outcomes through the small population paradigm (Caughley 1994) and inbreeding depression (Hedrick and Kalinowski 2000, Kelly and Walter 2002) (section 4.1). As explained elsewhere (section 4.2), isolated populations fewer than one thousand individuals may be vulnerable to inbreeding depression (O’Grady et al., 2009), and with the disruption of natural dispersal, small Mallee Emu-wren populations ideally need to be periodically supplemented with genetically diverse individuals from other populations. New individuals mitigate adverse genetic effects such as genetic drift, homozygosity and inbreeding depression by introducing new genes into the population (Hedrick and Kalinowski 2000, Frankham 2005). This may be especially so for the Mallee Emu-wren, because the species tends to have low genetic diversity (Brown et. al. 2013) and it is improbable that a founder population will comprise of many hundreds or thousands of individuals. Although genetic simulations modelling would guide the number of animals required, it is important that fitness remains a primary measure for population viability analysis and for population viability estimates not be driven solely by analysis of neutral genetic information (Reed 2010).

As discussed above and in section 4.6, the demographic and relatedness of social groups of the founding population, may influence translocation success. The social system of the Mallee Emu- wren is poorly understood, however it is likely that groups of Mallee Emu-wrens within a small area are familiar with one another and possibly close kin (Brown 2011). There is a risk that the inappropriate selection of social groups (e.g. only juveniles or only adult pairs) may create social dysfunction among founders, which may limit population viability and also increase dispersal from the release site. Individuals may move from the area seeking familiar birds or to avoid aggressive individuals. The translocation of socially familiar groups, rather than randomly selected individuals or breeding pairs, may increase reproductive success and the likelihood of a successful translocation. Manipulations and selection of variable social groups could be incorporated as a treatment in a translocation program.

18

It is beyond the scope of this report to make specific risk assessments on source and recipient populations because data is lacking. Substantial field work and modelling of potential populations need to be undertaken prior to translocation. Once data is available, population viability analyses will assist in the evaluation of suitable numbers and source populations to harvest and identify potential risk factors and their impacts.

Conceptually, overharvesting is a risk, particularly if populations are declining and small populations will be most vulnerable.

Establishing new populations is inherently high risk because translocated populations tend to be small and vulnerable to stochastic environmental, genetic and demographic processes.

The inappropriate selection of group composition may impact on source populations and founders by creating social dysfunction and limiting population viability. However, this is an unquantifiable impact (if it exists) and the selection of social group composition could be incorporated as a management treatment.

4.4 Short-term climate influences on population numbers

Environmental variability is a feature of arid and semi-arid zones of Australia. Pulsed rainfall, prolonged drought periods and frequent fires result in marked population fluctuations in vertebrates (Paton et al. 2009, Kelly et al. 2010, Letnic and Dickson 2010). The Fairy-wrens and Emu-wrens (Maluridae) of the arid and semi-arid zones experience unpredictable environmental conditions and are known to exploit favourable conditions, often raising several broods (Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al., 2001). Conversely below average rainfall is known to prevent breeding attempts and it significantly reduces breeding success (Rowley and Russell 1997). As expected, overall density within any given year has been found to vary markedly in the Mallee Emu-wren in response to rainfall (Brown 2010).

The implication for the timing of a translocation is that the risk of failure may be significant when rainfall has been below average, and especially if drought is prolonged and severe. The probability of establishing a new population is considerably lower because intrinsic population growth rates are likely to be negative due to lower recruitment and increased adult mortality. For the same reasons, the risk of adverse impacts on harvested populations will be relatively higher. Under these environmental conditions a translocation should be postponed until conditions improve.

At the other end of the environmental spectrum, years of high rainfall would provide the opportunity to exploit expanding populations, and would be the ideal time to maximise the success of establishing a new population, or supplementing existing small populations.

Short-term climate fluctuations will significantly influence the probability of establishing new populations. Translocations undertaken during periods of below average rainfall would have a high probability of failure, especially if drought conditions have prevailed for several consecutive years, and should be postponed. Conversely, periods of average to above average rainfall provides ideal opportunities to establish new populations when local productivity at release sites is also high.

4.5 Threats at release sites

The adequate management or removal of threats at release sites needs to be identified and addressed where possible. The major ongoing threats with respect to the species’ persistence relate to population loss by fire, population isolation and the impact of climate change (section 3.4). To a large degree, these threats are beyond the control of managers. Although strategic fire breaks can assist in preventing fire burning large areas (Sandell et al. 2006), catastrophic bushfires of the magnitude experienced on Black Saturday in 2009 are impossible to control, and the largest strategic fire breaks are likely to fail. Strategically placed ecological burning may assist in increasing the area of available habitat of suitable fire age (Sandell et al. 2006), but because of the dynamic

19

nature of the mallee, any benefits may never be realised. Little can be done in-situ to mitigate against climate warming.

During the course of three years of field work on the Mallee Emu-wren, no other threats to the Mallee Emu-wren were identified (Brown 2011). Predators such as feral cats, foxes, birds of prey and snakes have not been flagged as possible threats although they commonly predate on other Maluridae species (Rowley and Russell 1997). The spiny cover of Triodia probably provides good cover and protection from larger mammalian predators and birds of prey. However, it would be reasonable to presume that small predators such as ningowi, rats, lizards and snakes, and possibly even invertebrates, predate on nestlings. Predation by snakes has been identified as a main cause of nest failure in Southern Emu-wrens and other Maluridae (Rowley and Russell 1997, Maguire 2006). Brood parasitism by several species of cuckoos, is a significant cause of nest failure in Maluridae (Rowley and Russell 1997, Maguire 2006), but has not been recorded for the Mallee Emu- wren.

Indirect threats that reduce the quality of vegetation structure, such as grazing by feral goats or kangaroos may occur (Watson 2011). Direct competition for resources by a species of similar niche, is another possibility, but a likely candidate, the Striated Grasswren appears to co-exist with the Mallee Emu-wren (Brown 2011). In fact the presence of Striated Grasswrens at a site is an indication that Mallee Emu-wrens are also likely to be present (S Brown pers. obs.).

Monitoring as part of an adaptive management approach to the translocation of Mallee Emu-wrens (Appendix I) should detect any threats should they arise.

Fire, population isolation and climate change are the main threats at potential release sites. No other threats are identified. An adaptive management approach to translocation should detect any previously unidentified threats should they occur.

4.6 Biological assessment

Current knowledge of the Mallee Emu-wren is mostly related to distribution (Brown et al. 2009, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011), genetic structure (Brown et al. 2013) and habitat requirements (Mercer 1989, Smith 2004, Brown et al. 2009, Brown 2011, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011). There have been no detailed studies of marked birds, and very little is known of their breeding biology and life history characteristics (Schodde 1982, Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001). Nevertheless anecdotal observations indicate they are probably similar to other Maluridae species (Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001) on which inferences can be made.

Exemplary long-term studies have been undertaken on several species of Maluridae providing detailed insights into life history cycles, dispersal, genetics, social systems, and population dynamics in response to environmental fluctuation. Traits across Maluridae species are relatively congruous (see Schodde 1982, Rowley and Russell 1997 for extensive description and discussion) and data from these studies may be of use as surrogates where information is lacking for the Mallee Emu-wren. Two small studies of individually marked Southern Emu-wrens indicate similar life history traits to that of other Maluridae (Maguire and Mulder 2004, Maguire 2006, Pickett 2007a, Maguire and Mulder 2008), and presumably Mallee Emu-wrens are also similar in many respects.

Life history and social organisation

In Maluridae species that have been studied, adults are found to be resident all year round, living in pairs or groups defending territories (Rowley and Russell 1997, Maguire and Mulder 2004), characteristics consistent with anecdotal observations recorded elsewhere for Mallee Emu-wrens (Higgins et al. 2001). Unlike other members of the Maluridae family, including the Southern Emu- wren (Maguire and Mulder 2004, 2008), there is no evidence of co-operative breeding in this species (Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001, S Brown pers. obs.). Maluridae are renowned for high levels of promiscuity, although divorce is rare and social pairs remain in their territories as long as they both survive (Mulder 1995, Rowley and Russell 1997, Double et al. 2005). The social relationships among neighbourhood groups or clans are complex; males tend to remain where they were hatched and are close kin, whilst females disperse from their natal territories, although this is not always the case (Rowley and Russell 1997).

20

Data collected on a small number of colour-banded and unbanded Mallee Emu-wrens in Hattah- Kulkyne NP has found groups of up to eight individuals congregate and forage together through autumn and winter, with overlapping territories established by monogamous breeding pairs in late July. During the breeding and fledging season (August to mid-summer), pairs travel over an area of up to about 0.3 ha (n=24) (S Brown unpublished data). When these breeding pairs that originated from the same winter group encountered one another during the breeding season, no demonstrable aggressive behaviour was observed. Observations on other unbanded adult pairs (hence non- breeding relationships were unknown), males were seen to be aggressive toward one another, chasing and calling until intruders moved away. These behaviours are consistent with those observed for other Fairy-wren species (Rowley and Russell 1997). The social familiarity and relatedness of neighbourhood groups or clans in Maluridae may make the non-breeding groups as suitable units to target for translocation as their cohesion may facilitate the establishment of site fidelity, and mitigate the dispersal of individuals seeking familiar mates and avoiding aggressive strangers.

Mallee Emu-wrens build dome-shaped nests in Triodia and are known to produce a clutch size of three (rarely two) (Schodde 1982). They probably exploit favourable environmental conditions, with an extended breeding season, and like other members of the Maluridae, may even raise several broods (Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001). Adult breeding pairs observed towards the end of the last drought (2005-2009) were rarely accompanied by offspring (S Brown pers. obs.), indicating adults forgo breeding during unfavourable conditions to enhance their own survival until favourable conditions return.

Maluridae species have characteristically low annual fecundity and fairy low breeding success (percentage of eggs that produce fledglings) which is largely influenced by environmental conditions, predation and parasitism (Rowley and Russell 1997, Maguire 2006). Long-term studies of the breeding success of the Splendid Fairy-wren over a 17 year period was found to range from 25-76%; for other studies breeding success has been recorded as low as 32.6% for Splendid Fairy- wrens and as high as 80.6% for White-winged Fairy-wrens. Survival of fledglings to one year of age is generally higher, and species occupying the least variable environments with regular and moderate rainfall are the most successful (Rowley and Russell 1997).

Intensely studied species of the Maluridae show relatively high adult survival; about 70% or greater proportion of breeding adults survive from one breeding season to the next. Some individuals have attained ages of more than 10 years, but as a proportion of the total population, the largest cohorts are younger than six years (Rowley and Russell 1997).

The high survival rate of adult Maluridaes suggests that adults are suited for translocation, although fecundity and breeding success is generally low to moderate in this family of birds.

The core breeding unit of Mallee Emu-wrens comprises a single adult male and female pair. It is likely that during the non-breeding season, pairs join neighbours to form socially cohesive groups that forage collectively over larger areas. These groups may be suitable units to target for translocation.

Morphology, physiology and foraging behaviour

Foraging behaviour, physiology and morphology are closely related. The Mallee Emu-wren forages close to the ground in dense undergrowth and its small rounded body with short rounded wings is adapted for this mode of foraging (Schodde 1982, Rowley and Russell 1997, Higgins et al. 2001). In fact, the ability of the Mallee Emu-wren to scurry through dense Triodia, makes them difficult to catch in conventional mist-nets.

The short rounded wings of the Mallee Emu-wren provide lift for flitting between dense undergrowth, but they do not enable them to undertake long flights (Rowely and Russel 1997, Higgins et al. 2001). It is this lack of capacity of prolonged flight and their dependence on dense ground cover for protection that inhibits their ability to traverse open areas and ultimately recolonise unoccupied reserves or isolated patches of suitable habitat.

21

Passerines have among the highest metabolic rates of any group of vertebrates (Dawson and Hulbert 1970, Nagy et al. 1999) and need to forage intensively to meet daily metabolic requirements (Gibb 1954). Small passerines have a high mass-specific rate of energy expenditure and also a limited capacity to store energy (Gibb 1954, Brodin 2007), and as such have elevated energetic requirements during cold periods and following overnight fasting (Buttemer 1985). At about 4-6.5 g, the Mallee Emu-wren is one of the world's smallest birds, placing them at the extreme spectrum of these physiological requirements. Moreover, the Mallee Emu-wren requires invertebrates as a source of water (Redford and Dorea 1984) to counterbalance evaporative water loss (Wolf and Wlasberg 1996) during hot, dry spells that are characteristic of the semi-arid zone. To meet their metabolic requirements, the Mallee Emu-wren predictably needs to forage intensively. Indeed, aggressive engagement between territorial individuals is frequently interrupted by foraging (S Brown, pers. obs.) such that feeding takes priority over aggression.

A non-breeding individual may consume up to 69% of its body weight in 1.5 hours during early morning foraging (S Brown, unpublished data, inferred from a mass increase from 4.05 to 6.75 g) (Brown 2011). These observations are consistent with studies on the energetic requirements of several species of Maluridae that show they consume about their own body weight of invertebrates daily, and double this when feeding young (Tidemann and Schodde 1989).

There are no detailed studies on the diet of Mallee Emu-wrens, but they are probably exclusively insectivorous. A study of the micro-selection of habitat found that Mallee Emu-wrens spent most of their time flitting between Triodia plants and selected growing Triodia (green) of mature growth- phase of large volume. It was presumed that the Mallee Emu-wren foraged for insects within the Triodia (Brown 2011). There may be strong selective pressure on choice of Triodia; a wide range of invertebrates are associated with Triodia hummocks (LCC 1987, Greenslade and Greenslade 1989) and thus are potentially available to Mallee Emu-wrens as potential prey. Invertebrates collected in Triodia hummocks (S Brown unpublished data) included taxa favoured by nesting adult Southern Emu-wrens, such as Hemiptera, Diptera, Colepotera, Lepidoptera and larvae (Maguire 2006); and presumably these also form a major component of the diet of the Mallee Emu-wren.

The quality of Mallee Emu-wren habitat is especially important with respect to invertebrate productivity. Given their high energetic requirement and the need to counterbalance evaporative water loss, a shortfall in food would place Mallee Emu-wrens at imminent risk of death from starvation or dehydration. Furthermore, the availability of invertebrates for food influences the fecundity (Pearce-Higgins and Yalden 2004, Lindstrom et al. 2005, Nagy and Holmes 2005) and the growth rate, weight and survival of fledglings (Buse et al. 1999, Visser et al. 2006), resulting in significant effects on reproductive success (Jones 1987, Zannette et al. 2000) and ultimately with consequences on population viability.

The Mallee Emu-wren is a specialist species adapted to life in dense understory. Their physiological requirements make them susceptible to starvation and dehydration over very short periods. Consequently selection of high quality habitat with respect to vegetation structure and invertebrate mass is crucial to individual survival, reproductive success and population viability.

4.7 Animal welfare

In the translocation of Mallee Emu-wrens, animal welfare considerations are associated with capture, holding, transfer and release of animals. All activities involving the handling of Mallee Emu- wrens must follow animal welfare guidelines and legislative requirements (i.e. Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes, Animal Welfare Acts, and the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Acts).

Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens

Catching Mallee Emu-wrens incorporates play-back recording, mist-netting and the use of hand- nets made from mosquito netting. Catching is difficult because of the many hours spent seeking birds due to their low density, and once located, the remote and scrubby terrain in which they occur makes quickly erecting conventional mist-nets difficult. In addition to mist-netting, a method uses hand-nets to catch Mallee Emu-wrens within Triodia plants when opportunities present themselves (Brown 2011). There are many nuances in the success of capturing this inconspicuous species and

22

only experienced bird handlers should undertake catching (see Appendix III for details on capture procedures).

Conventional 25 mm mist-nets have proved relatively ineffective in capturing Mallee Emu-wrens, however old-style fine 35 mm monofilament nets are better. The Mallee Emu-wren is adapted to flying among the small spaces of dense Triodia needles and is never (or rarely) caught in mist-nets for more than a few seconds. Consequently they are never subject to periods of entanglement where they are at risk from predators, nor do they acquire injuries whilst struggling to escape.

Experience from the catching and handling of 98 Mallee Emu-wrens for genetic sampling and banding found birds generally remained alert, feisty and called as long as conditions were warm or hot. They did not shock moult as often occurs with some species (e.g. Striated Grasswrens). However, they did not handle cold conditions very well, being inactive and required warming (S Brown pers. comm.). This may be because they undergo torpor to conserve energy (usually overnight) and take some time to increase their metabolism during the early morning period when mist-netting is typically employed. Thus it is recommended that on mornings where the temperature is particularly cool (<8oC) birds are captured a few hours after dawn when they have foraged for food to meet their energetic requirements. On cool days, birds may require access to warmth (e.g. insulated box with warm water bottle) during a capture, transfer and release procedure.

It is recommended that Mallee Emu-wrens are not banded. Metal bands fit snuggly, but the smallest colour bands are loose. There is a high risk that birds may become caught on vegetation and because they are so small, they probably do not have the strength to release themselves.

Catching Mallee Emu-wrens is very time consuming and difficult due to their rarity and relative inaccessibility. Experienced personnel should be drawn on when catching Mallee Emu-wrens as there are nuances in the capture technique. Mallee Emu-wrens appear to handle capture and handling well when conditions are warm or hot, but not when they are cold. Experience suggests the overall stress on individuals when caught and handled is no different to that experienced by other bird species. It is recommended that birds are not banded as there is a high risk they will be caught on vegetation.

4.8 Transportation and logistics

Mallee Emu-wrens have never been transported nor released into a new environment and the risk of mortality is unquantifiable. An exit strategy needs to be carefully considered and planned for this phase if a translocation were to proceed.

The translocation procedure developed for the Southern Emu-wren for the re-introduction from Mount Lofty Ranges to Cox Scrub Conservation Park in South Australia provides some indicators on survival (Pickett 2007a). In this translocation, Southern Emu-wrens were caught using conventional mist-netting techniques and transferred to purpose built wooden boxes, supplied with live insects, water and vegetation. Adults, presumed to be male and female breeding pairs, were kept together in the same box. Southern Emu-wrens were transferred and released at the new site on either on the same day of capture or early the following morning. No animals died when transferred on the same day of capture (n=24), and two of 22 animals died when kept overnight (Pickett 2007a).

Catching Mallee Emu-wrens is difficult, with a six-person team expected to catch between 9-18 birds on any given day where birds are relatively numerous (Brown 2011). Their low densities mean that searching for birds is time consuming, and together with the difficult terrain, a lot of time and effort is required to catch birds. With this in mind, the proximity between source and release sites are important for animal welfare.

Given logistical constraints it is likely that all Mallee Emu-wrens will need to be held overnight in an appropriately constructed box, with food and vegetation. This will place the birds under stress and increase the risk of death. All practical attempts need to be made to minimise disturbance and stress.

23

Three main factors in the transfer phase that need to be addressed are:

i) Ensuring birds are comfortable enough to eat provided insects so that energetic and water requirements are met. Experience with the capture of Mallee Emu-wrens found that even whilst birds were held in the hand, and hence stressed, they ate insects presented to them as long as the insects were moving (e.g. buzzing flies).

ii) Ensuring that temperature conditions remain at a level that is comfortable for birds. Experience indicates that Mallee Emu-wrens probably reduce their metabolic rate when cold. This may place them at risk of death.

iii) The transfer of birds will require driving over rugged sand-dunes for prolonged periods of time and it will be difficult to provide a “smooth ride”. Although the risk of death whilst travelling over rough terrain is unquantifiable, common sense suggests that sharp movements would shock the birds. Enclosure boxes and their placement within a vehicle will need to be designed with this in mind. Routes will need to be planned to minimise rough patches within constraints of available routes and time.

Zoological institutions that specialise in the movement and husbandry of Australian passerines are well placed to provide advice and assistance in this phase of a translocation protocol. They are familiar with the suitability of boxes for transfer and have expertise in monitoring animals during transfer procedures.

The risk of mortality during transport is unquantifiable as there is no precedence for the transport of this species. Experience with translocation of Southern Emu-wrens indicate a small proportion of birds may die if held overnight.

Zoological institutes are well placed to provide animal husbandry advice and assistance in the development of a transfer protocol, including the design of customised boxes, provision of roosting and food resources and monitoring.

4.9 Exit strategy

The risk assessment provided here has identified two main phases in a translocation program that require an exit strategy to ensure the wellbeing of transferred Mallee Emu-wrens. The first relates to short-term climate fluctuations and the high risk of translocation failure during unfavourable conditions. The second relates to animal welfare issues during transfer.

As stated in section 4.4, drought and below average rainfall will significantly reduce the likelihood of establishing a new population because of increased mortality and reduced reproductive success. A translocation should not proceed under these conditions and a planned translocation should be postponed until favourable conditions return. This may be many years if a prolonged and severe drought occurs. Funding arrangements need to take this into account.

The transfer of Mallee Emu-wrens is unprecedented and there is a risk that birds may become stressed and die during the transfer stage or the founder population may suffer high rates of mortality immediately following release. The exact cause of mortality will need to be identified if possible and addressed. If the cause cannot be addressed and mortality is socially unacceptable (this will be defined in the translocation proposal, Appendix I and II), the translocation will need to be stopped and re-assessed.

An exit strategy needs to be incorporated into a translocation program. Two main phases identified are: i) animal welfare during the transfer and release phase; and ii) short-term adverse climatic conditions prior to a planned translocation.

24

5 POTENTIAL SOURCE POPULATIONS AND RELEASE SITES

The purpose of this section is to detail the habitat requirements influencing the distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren which forms the basis of identifying potential source populations. Due to the lack of data with respect to density and size of populations, only preliminary evaluations can be made. Likewise, gaps in knowledge preclude specific assessment of release sites, and preliminary evaluations are provided for further scientific assessment (section 6).

5.1 Multi-scale habitat requirements

Habitat selection by species is a hierarchical behavioural process resulting in a disproportionate use of a particular component of the environment (Johnson 1980, Jones 2001). At one end of the hierarchical spectrum, organisms select habitat at the geographical regional scale (Suorsa et al. 2005) and are restricted by aspects of their physiology, ecology, morphology, behaviour and evolutionary origins (Wiens 1989). At an intermediate landscape-scale, more proximal factors are at work and individuals select suitable patches of habitat within the landscape (Luck 2002a, Suorsa et al. 2005). At an even finer scale, specific resources required to meet daily living requirements are selected by individuals (Luck 2002b, Rowley and Russell 2002). Studies at the fine scale are important as they are more likely to identify factors that infer habitat quality (Austin 2002, Klar et al. 2008).

The habitat requirement of the Mallee Emu-wren has been studied at multiple-scales identifying factors influencing their distribution at the landscape-scale (fire-age and vegetation types) (Brown et al. 2009, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011) at an intermediate scale (e.g. patch size and composition) (Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011) and at fine-scales where specific resources such as foraging and nesting sites are selected by individuals (Mercer 1989, Smith 2004, Brown 2011). All these studies relate to fire, vegetation structure and composition. However knowledge pertaining to invertebrate productivity, a factor highlighted elsewhere as crucial in terms of habitat quality for the Mallee Emu-wren (section 4.6 and 5.3), is lacking.

5.2 Landscape and patch-scale habitat preference

Brown (2011), Pellegrino (2011) and Watson (2011) have examined habitat requirements of the Mallee Emu-wren in their northern distribution, comprising mainly the Woorinen Sands formation dominated by Triodia-mallee and chenopod mallee. These studies employed predictive mapping (Figure 5.2abc), and although the studies used different approaches (see section 6.1), results are relatively congruent. Using Ecological Niche Factor Analysis, Brown et al. (2009) found the Mallee Emu-wren prefer Woorinen Sands Mallee older than 15 years. Watson (2011) employed Maxent to produce a probability distribution model (Figure 5.2b(top)) based on predictive post-fire age model and vegetation types and found a preference for 20-30 years. A recently refined Maxent model is also given here (Figure 5.2b(bottom), J Connell unpublished data), and illustrates differences in the models and the patchiness of potential Mallee Emu-wren distribution. This model indicates a much smaller total area of high probability of Mallee Emu-wren occurrence.

Pellegrino (2011) developed a spatial model of Billiatt CP, using ultra-high resolution aerial imagery (Figure 5.2c). This technique identified suitable patches across the landscape, but in addition, it had the resolution to infer patch quality relating to Triodia cover and growth-phase composition (see below).

To date no landscape modelling has been done for the species’ southern distribution (i.e. Ngarkat, Wyperfeld/Big Desert, Bronzewing and Wathe reserves), but up-to-date spatial data exists on fire and vegetation. This simpler, but not necessarily less effective, spatial information is used for Mallee Emu-wren conservation management in South Australia. As detailed below, Mallee Emu- wrens are found in two main vegetation types in Ngarkat CP, mallee-heath and heath-like communities. They have also been recorded in mixed wet heath (C Hedger pers. comm.). Fires within the southern reserves are more frequent than that of the north (Pausas and Bradstock 2007), and due to the diversity of vegetation composition, the habitat suitability life-span of vegetation for Mallee Emu-wrens is highly variable and generally younger (ranging from eight to about 50 years) (Silveira 1993, Clarke 2005b, Brouwer and Garnett 1990, C Hedger pers. com.).

25

Figure 5.2a Habitat suitability map using Ecological Niche Factor Analysis based on 1999-2004 Mallee Emu-wren records. Here, the darkest-shaded (black) areas represent the inner core habitat (from Brown et al. 2009)

26

Figure 5.2b (Top) Map of the predicted probability of occurrence of Mallee Emu-wren on the basis of post-fire age (source: Mallee Fire and Biodiversity Team, Avitabile et al. in prep) and EVC type (source: EVC_BSC100 data layer, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria). Warm colours represent areas of higher predicted probability of occurrence. Predicted probabilities were determined through a maximum entropy model built in the program Maxent. Note the large areas of high predicted probability of occurrence in western Murray-Sunset National Park (from Watson 2011). (Bottom) A refined model of the relative predicted probability of occurrence of the Mallee Emu-wren (J Connell, unpublished data). Note the differences in patch distribution and overall, few areas have high scores.

27

Figure 5.2c. Habitat suitability map for the Mallee Emu-wren in a central section of Billiatt CP. Results are based on a maximum likelihood supervised classification using WorldView-2 satellite imagery. Sites with habitat scores greater than 0.50 (excluding the area containing the current population) are circled and labelled A-G (from Pellegrino 2011).

28

5.3 Fine-scale habitat selection

Several studies have examined fine-scale habitat requirements of the Mallee Emu-wren in mallee- Triodia and mallee-heath (Mercer 1989, Smith 2004, Clarke 2005b, Brown et al. 2009, Pellegrino 2011, Watson 2011). Collectively these studies have identified crucial indicators of fine-scale habitat quality, especially with respect to Triodia.

Brown (2011) examined the habitat preference of Mallee Emu-wrens (and Striated Grasswrens) in Hattah-Kulkyne NP, a landscape dominated by mallee-Triodia. Mallee Emu-wrens preferred sites supporting high cover of Triodia hummocks, containing mature growth-phases (i.e. large volume) of living Triodia. Observations on free living Mallee Emu-wrens found strong selection by individuals for these Triodia growth-phases for most daily activities (i.e. movement, as an activity post, vocalising and probably foraging).

Incorporating fine-scale data with a landscape-scale study, Watson (2011) found habitat containing a high cover of living mature growth-phase Triodia (>50%) was associated with areas supporting the greatest number of Mallee Emu-wrens. Pellegrino (2011) employed ultra-high spatial resolution aerial photography to identify both the floristic and structural characteristics of Mallee Emu-wren habitat in Billiatt CP. Congruent with findings by Brown (2011) and Watson (2011), modelling revealed Mallee Emu-wrens were associated with greater cover of Triodia containing mature growth-stages. The study also found Triodia cover peaking at 26 years following fire, results consistent with Haslem et al. (2011) and the greatest density of Mallee Emu-wrens in vegetation aged 20-30 years (Brown et al. 2009, Watson 2011).

These findings are highly consistent with studies of Mallee Emu-wren occupancy in mallee-heath, in Ngarkat CP, in the south of their distribution. Mallee Emu-wrens preferred sites that had a taller and greater cover of Triodia than unoccupied sites (Mercer 1998, Smith 2004). In both regions, the Mallee Emu-wren selected habitat with high structural density at less than 1 m height (Mercer 1988, Smith 2004, Brown 2011). Interestingly, in the south-west of Ngarkat CP, Mallee Emu-wrens recently occurred in heath and Xanthorrhoea and Allocasaurina mixes lacking Triodia, and presumably these species provided dense nesting sites and protection in place of Triodia (C Hedger pers. comm.).

Since 1990, there have been 5 drought periods, and large areas of Ngarkat CP show evidence of extensive die-back in the dominant heath species of plant. The reduction in leaf production associated with drought provides less surface substrate for invertebrates, which in turn has impacted bird communities dependant on insects (Ward and Paton 2004ab, Paton et al. 2009). Smith (2004) suggests that the south and south-eastern facing dunes in Ngarkat CP provide the most favourable micro-climates for plant and insect productivity, and this probably accounts for the contraction of the Mallee Emu-wren to these small refuge areas during drought. The observation that the Mallee Emu-wren selects large Triodia that is green over smaller and dead Triodia (Brown 2011) is consistent with the notion that the selection of habitat with adequate invertebrate productivity is crucial for this species.

5.4 Potential source populations

The Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs are the only remaining reserves with relatively moderate numbers of Mallee Emu-wrens that are potential sources of individuals for translocation. The Murray-Sunset NP was estimated to contain most of the population 15,709 (range 7,939- 35,702), with a much smaller proportion of the population in Hattah-Kulkyne NP, 526 (range 238- 1776) (Brown et al. 2009). As stated elsewhere, these figures have a high uncertainty and are now out-dated. There is a need to refine knowledge on the distribution and abundance of the Mallee Emu-wren in these parks and, at the best, the true estimate probably lies toward the lower range.

At the patch level, little is known of Mallee Emu-wren population size or density and targeted surveys need to be conducted for population viability analysis prior to any translocation. Some areas are known to be biodiversity ‘hot spots’ with respect to the range of threatened avian species found within a locality and densities (Brown 2009, Watson 2011). Nevertheless, these areas are not expansive and therefore total numbers will be relatively low or moderate at the best.

Murray-Sunset NP

29

The relative size of the total population in the Murray-Sunset NP makes populations within this park ideal for the heaviest harvesting. It is not the purpose of this report to provide specific numbers, but as an example the removal of 200 individuals may represent between 2.5 – 0.6% of the total population (based on 7,939-35,702 estimated individuals) (Brown et. al. 2009). Harvesting individuals from among several source populations (as recommended for genetic considerations, section 4.2), means that more populations will be impacted, but the magnitude of adverse impacts, should they occur, may be reduced.

The refined spatial probability distribution model for the Murray-Sunset, Hattah-Kulkyne and Annuello reserves shows areas of moderate index of relative habitat suitability (greens) are patchily scattered across the region. Areas that score a high index of relative habitat suitability (yellow, orange and red) are very small (Figure 5.2b (bottom), J Connell unpublished data). The blue and much of the pale green areas are most probably unsuitable. Areas that are known to support Mallee Emu-wrens are concentrated in the central-west of the Murray-Sunset NP, scattered areas in the centre of the park, and the western strip of Hattah-Kulkyne NP (Watson 2011) (green in Figure 5.2b (bottom)). It is important to note that these figures are a spatial model of probable distribution and not actual population distribution. Areas that Maxent models predict should support Mallee Emu- wrens in fact don’t (Watson 2011). This means other factors not related to soil or vegetation influence distribution. Refinement of models using additional data on Mallee Emu-wren occurrence and environmental factors are ongoing.

Specific locations that appear to support relatively good numbers of Mallee Emu-wrens are; the southern section of the South Bore Track and south of Pheenys Track in the western end of the Murray-Sunset NP. Smaller populations occur in the North-South Settlement Road, and on the north section of the Millewa South-Bore Track (Watson 2011). The proximity of these populations to South Australia, make them suitable for translocation to South Australia. Other potential target localities include the eastern end of Pheenys Track and sections along Last Hope Track (Brown 2010). Some areas are unlikely to support numbers that can sustain harvesting. For example, Pink Lakes supported few Mallee Emu-wrens in 2008 (S Brown pers. obs.), and would be at a high risk of overharvesting, precluding this population as a source unless this population has since increased significantly.

Hattah-Kulkyne NP

The southern end of the Nowingi Track is known nationally and internationally by the birding community as a place to easily locate Mallee Emu-wrens. The relatively high density of Mallee Emu-wrens here (during good years) and the size of the patch mean that this location is a potential site for source animals (S Brown unpublished data). Large patches along the Old Calder Highway and Lenbrook Plain also support Mallee Emu-wrens. However, as a proportion of the global population, the entire reserve only supports a little over 3% 526 (range 238-1776) (Brown et al. 2009). Sourcing animals from this reserve would be logistically ideal for re-introducing animals to nearby Annuello FFR, however caution needs to be employed when considering the total numbers drawn from the Hattah-Kulkyne NP populations.

The Murray-Sunset and Hattah-Kulkyne NPs contain patches or localities that are known to support high quality habitat and some also have relatively good densities of Mallee Emu-wren, although none could be considered high. Removal of several hundred individuals from across the distribution of the extant population (about 2.5%) should have minimal impact on the global population numbers, should a translocation fail. However current estimates are uncertain. Further surveys and scientific evaluation are required to refine knowledge of distribution, global population number and to select specific source populations (if indeed an adequate population size is found to exist).

Given the relatively low densities and potential fluctuations in population numbers, caution needs to be exercised in the total number of individuals harvested from any one patch to: i) minimising the impact on source patch population, (section 4.3) and ii) maximise the selection of genetically unrelated individuals (section 4.2)

Thus, an optimal approach would be to source individuals from several patches. Logistics and animal welfare considerations (section 4.7 and 4.8) may also dictate that populations selected should lie within a given area of a park.

30

5.5 Potential release sites

Annuello FFR and Ngarkat CP are potential suitable reserves that merit further evaluation for reintroduction. They both contain large areas of vegetation of suitable fire-age (Figures 5.2b and 5.5). Discriminative models have been developed (see section 6.1 for further details) and site data can be used to identify whether, at the patch and fine-scales, areas of a suitable size with high quality habitat exist for translocation.

Figure 5.5 Areas in Ngarkat CP containing habitat ca. 10 years post fire. Blue lines represent major tracks. (Allan and Hedger, unpublished data)

Annuello FFR

Landscape modelling of Annuello FFR reserve by Watson (2011) identified a considerable sized area at the eastern end of the reserve as having a high probability of supporting Mallee Emu-wrens, although surveys failed to find any (Figure 5.2b(top)). Other threatened species were found in this location including Red-lored Whistlers and Striated Grasswrens (Watson 2011), indicating the location is productive and possibly of high quality at fine scales. It is also adjacent to the site reputedly to have supported Mallee Emu-wrens in 1998 during back burning operations (P Murdoch pers. comm.). Vegetation in a large burn to the central, south-west of the reserve (burnt in 1998) will be of suitable age by 2018, based on fine-scale models for Hattah-Kulkyne NP (Brown 2011). This means any population established within Annuello today would be able to habitat-track into suitable aged vegetation in the future. Precluding large fires or massive changes to the age structure by planned burning, this reserve could potentially support Mallee Emu-wrens for over forty years. However, the refined model produced by Connell (Figure 5.2b(bottom)) throws this assessment into doubt, as this model indicates the western side of the reserve, rather than the east, contains areas of moderate suitability. This model more closely reflects the Ecological Niche Factor map (Figure 5.2a) (Brown et al. 2009). The disparity between the Maxent modelling by Watson (2011) and Connell (unpublished data) (Figure 5.2b), demonstrates the need to undertake patch-level modelling and ground truthing of vegetation attributes to determine the quality of release sites.

31

Ngarkat CP

The recurrent fires in the past few decades, combined with drought are attributed to the decline of the Mallee Emu-wren in Ngarkat CP (Paton and Rogers 2007, Brown et al. 2009, Paton et al. 2009) and the remaining small population of about 100 birds (Paton and Rogers 2007) is thought to have been extirpated by the 2014 fire (Allan and Hedger unpublished data). Despite the loss of the Ngarkat CP population, a review of the size and fire age-class of vegetation indicates that the park contains patches with the potential carrying capacity to support a population (Figure 5.5). However, as described below, the vegetation communities within the park (and presumably Wyperfeld/Big Desert reserves) are complex; each with different structural responses to fire and drought, and hence different habitat suitability life-spans.

In the north-east of the park, mallee-Triodia vegetation types are common and similar to that found in the northern reserves. Although large patches of suitable vegetation age exist (Figure 5.5), the overall general condition of Triodia is poor with much senescence. It is unclear why Triodia condition is poorer here, but it is possible that the capacity of the underlying soils to hold moisture is lower (C Hedger pers. comm.).

Much of the park is Triodia dominated heath (mallee-heath), where gentle east-west sand dunes, together with small amphitheatre arrangements of dunes facing south, provide pockets of suitable habitat for the Mallee Emu-wren (Smith 2004). These areas once supported large densities of Mallee Emu-wrens (Paton and Rogers 2007, Paton et al. 2009). Paton et al. (2009) reports extensive areas of die-back across the park in this vegetation community due to serial drought between 1990 and 2009; A. pusilla and Leptospermum myrsinoides are especially sensitive, showing significant levels of canopy dieback. It is thought that these effects are long lasting as these species are unlikely to re-sprout when good conditions return. Thus drought may have the potential to affect habitat quality of the Mallee Emu-wren and other dependent species long after the end of a drought (Paton et al. 2009). Since the early 1990s, the Mallee Emu-wren contracted to the amphitheatre pocket areas, where it is probable that the microclimate provides relatively more favourable habitat (Smith 2004, Paton et al. 2009). Recovery of burnt habitat in Ngarkat CP appears to be highly variable, and influenced by post-fire climate conditions. The habitat suitability life-span for these communities is about eight to 25-30 years (Paton and Rogers 2007, C Hedger pers. comm.), younger than that recorded for Woorinen Sands Mallee that dominate the northern landscapes (i.e. > 15 years) (Brown et. al. 2009).

In the south-west corner and the southern end of the park, Xanthorrhoea flats and Allocasuarina flats respectively dominate the landscape. Interestingly, in the absence of Triodia, these areas supported good densities of Mallee Emu-wrens in local pockets. The Xanthorrhoea flats in particular were noted for supporting much higher densities of birds than any other known habitats in Ngarkat CP. Xanthorrhoea flats support Mallee Emu-wrens at about 10 years post-fire– similar to that of mallee-heath, but their suitability persists over a much longer time-frame, possibly upwards of 50 years. Allocasuarina flats appear to be of suitable age at about 20 years, and also appear to be suitable for a longer period of time than mallee-heath, perhaps 30-40 years. Mallee Emu-wrens have also been recorded in mixed wet-heath, and although the habitat suitability life-span is unknown, it is probably also long (C Hedger pers. comm.).

Generally population persistence and recovery has been greatest in the more southerly areas of the park, where fine-scale habitat conditions, probably associated with invertebrate productivity, appear to be higher. It is evident that the Ngarkat CP (and by inference the Wyperfeld/Big Desert reserve complex and Bronzewing and Wathe FFRs) vegetation systems are complex with respect to the interaction of fire and seral changes in the structural elements of vegetation.

Summary

Identifying suitable patches for reintroduction of Mallee Emu-wrens into the southern reserves would benefit from broad-scale modelling such as those carried out by Pellegrino (2011) and Watson (2011). The fine-scale models developed by Smith (2004), Brown (2011) and Watson (2011) that identify suitable structural habitat are similar in many respects and can be modified and adapted into a generic method that is applicable to all vegetation types. It is important that quantitative assessment of invertebrate productivity is also included. The methods required to undertake further scientific evaluation are described in detail in the section 6.

32

The habitat preference of the Mallee Emu-wren has been well studied, although gaps in knowledge remain with respect to identifying high quality habitat at the patch and fine-scale. Annuello FFR and Ngarkat CP are potential reserves suitable for the reintroduction of Mallee Emu-wren, however further evaluation of habitat suitability is required to identify whether potential large patches of high quality habitat exist for reintroduction.

33

6 METHODS FOR ASSESSING SOURCE POPULATIONS AND RELEASE SITES

Scientific evaluation of source populations and release sites requires habitat modelling at landscape, patch and fine-scales, using on-ground data. On-ground assessment at fine-scales is especially important for identifying habitat quality (Austin 2002, Klar et al. 2008). Data collected from source populations, together with life history traits of Maluridae, and environmental elements need to be incorporated into population viability and genetic modelling to evaluate potential risks and population viability.

To reiterate, this aspect of a translocation assessment requires new data and analysis. Identifying suitable source populations and release sites ideally should be undertaken shortly prior to the implementation of a translocation program as environmental conditions in the mallee are highly dynamic, where fire and drought may cause fluctuations in population density and distribution over a relatively short period.

Evaluation of source populations and release sites can be broken-down into five components;

1. Identifying potential source populations and release sites using spatial landscape modelling based on the latest vegetation and fire mapping, and Mallee Emu-wren distribution data. 2. Identification of potential source populations and release sites using spatial patch-scale modelling based on aerial photography or similar high resolution imagery. 3. Site-specific evaluation of population densities and size of potential source population (and release populations, if applicable) from survey data. 4. Site-specific evaluation of release site suitability using field data, patch-scale and fine-scale models. 5. Population viability and genetic modelling to assess: a. the number of individuals to be harvested from source populations b. the risk of impact on harvested populations c. the probability of establishing a new population and, d. if applicable, genetic modelling to guide the number of introduced individuals required to mitigate inbreeding depression.

Substantial efforts and different techniques in surveying Mallee Emu-wrens have been undertaken by research and agency staff in both Victoria and South Australia. The purpose of this section is to provide background information and guidance for a standardised protocol on the methods used to identify multi-scale habitat models for the Mallee Emu-wren. These methods can, and should be, refined or altered in the future as additional data, and improvement in modelling and statistical techniques becomes available.

For both states, little data exists on extant population densities and sizes, especially at the patch level. The influence of attributes not associated with vegetation, soil or fire on Mallee Emu-wren distribution are poorly understood, limiting understanding of actual population distribution (as opposed to probability distributions based on habitat suitability).

6.1 Modelling multi-scale habitat requirements

Landscape-scale modelling

The La Trobe and Deakin Universities Mallee Fire Team have developed a predictive, post-fire spatial map across the Murray Mallee region that is available for use in conservation (Avitabile et al. in prep). However this work is limited to the northern Mallee Emu-wren distribution (i.e. Billiatt, Murray-Sunset, Hattah-Kulkyne and Annuello reserves).

Two methods have been employed to produce broad-scale predictive maps of Mallee Emu-wren distribution across the northern reserves (excluding Billitt CP). Ecological Niche Factor Analysis was first used to identify core Mallee Emu-wren areas and to estimate global population numbers (Clarke 2005b, Brown et al. 2009)(Figure 5.2a). Using additional Mallee Emu-wren data Watson (2011) and Connell (unpublished data) employed Maxent modelling to develop a probability distribution map across the same region. These spatial models have placed different emphasis on probabilities for Mallee Emu-wren distribution. The Maxent model has a finer grain, and shows a much patchier distribution (Figure 5.2b) more realistic of their actual distribution. Note that these 34

models are a probability of distribution based on environmental attributes and not actual population distribution; factors unrelated to soil, fire and vegetation also influence population distribution.

It is important to re-iterate that the northern distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren traverses largely Woorinen Sands soil types, while their southern distribution traverses largely Lowan Sands soils. Differences in climate, vegetation growth and composition in these two areas make it largely inappropriate to extrapolate vegetation and fire and population modelling across both areas.

No landscape modelling has been done across the southern distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren (i.e. Ngarkat, Wyperfeld/big Desert and Wathe and Bronzewing FFRs), but up-to-date spatial data exists on fire and vegetation. Developing a Maxent (or similar) model for the Ngarkat, Wyperfeld/Big Desert reserve system would require collation of historical Mallee Emu-wren data and the development of a consensus GIS vegetation layer (i.e. Victoria and South Australia have different categories for vegetation types). This aspect is time consuming and experience shows that this can take many months of work. These data are then incorporated into refined spatial models. Researches based at La Trobe University have developed Maxent models for several species of the mallee and have refined these models to maximise their discriminative power; that is, to develop the most probable models based on the available data.

Patch-scale modelling

Pellegrino (2011) employed ultra-high spatial resolution aerial photography from across the northern distribution of the Mallee Emu-wren to produce a spatial model of habitat quality of Billiatt CP. In order to accurately assess floristic and structural habitat variables, a pixel resolution in the order of 5-7 cm was analysed. Congruent with findings by Brown (2011) and Watson (2011), modelling revealed Mallee Emu-wrens were associated with greater cover of Triodia containing mature growth-stages. The study also found Triodia cover peaking at 26 years following fire, results consistent with Haslem et al. (2011) and the greatest density of Mallee Emu-wrens in vegetation aged 16-29 years (Brown et al. 2009, Watson 2011). Assessment of Billiatt CP (about 60,000 ha) found seven sites predicted to contain suitable habitat (0.14 – 29.75 ha in size) of which only two sites of about 7 ha were potentially of high quality. It was estimated the largest patch (29.75 ha) would carry only 12 birds (based on 2.1 birds per 5 ha, by Brown et al. 2009) (Pellegrino 2011).

The method employed by Pellegrino (2011) has several advantages. It enabled spatial modelling of habitat quality over large areas, much of which is inaccessible. Second, because the method also discriminates between different growth stages of Triodia, it has the potential to identify future projections of suitable habitat that can assist with long-term population management and fire control plans. There were limitations with the method because light conditions and the density of ground-storey vegetation obscured young Triodia. This may be a major issue if this was employed in the southern sections of Ngkart CP, where vegetation is very dense. Another draw-back to the method was the preparation of imagery proved to be time consuming. However, this is also the case for the collection of fine-scale vegetation data. Aerial photography data exists for modelling the southern areas of Ngarkat CP, although this was not undertaken by Pellegrino due to time constraints.

The use of high quality aerial images is important because it can assess the potential patch size (and quality) that landscape and fine-scale models cannot. The potential carrying capacity of patches (and nearby patches) in which birds are released is needed to assess the long-term population viability of release sites. This level of habitat suitability assessment may assist the understanding of population processes within a connected landscape which is poorly understood.

Many new analytical techniques and algorithms are constantly being developed in this GIS space making stitching together photographs and georeferencing more efficient. Adelaide University has an active research group in this area.

Fine-scale modelling

Brown (2011), Pellegrino (2011) and Watson (2011) have examined the fine-scale habitat requirements of the Mallee Emu-wren in mainly the Woorinen Sands formation comprised of Triodia-mallee. Although using different approaches, results are relatively congruent. Mercer (1988) and Smith (2004) have examined fine-scale attributes in Ngarkat CP, which comprises of mainly mallee-heath. Collectively these studies have identified crucial indicators of fine-scale

35

habitat quality, especially with respect to Triodia. These methods mostly relate to vegetation attributes and do not directly assess the quality of sites with respect to invertebrate productivity.

Brown (2011) examined the habitat preference of Mallee Emu-wrens (and Striated Grasswrens) in Hattah-Kulkyne NP. Fine-scale vegetation attributes were collected using transect and quadrat methods within a 30 x 10 m. In this study the per cent cover of Triodia and small shrubs (<2 m) were determined along each 30 m transect. Shrubs were identified and structural density recorded to 2 m. Each Triodia plant touching the 30 m transect line was assigned a growth-phase and percentage of new growth. The total volume of Triodia along the 30 m transect was calculated. Attributes of canopy cover and type, litter, bare ground and fire-age class were also included. Mallee Emu-wrens were found to prefer sites supporting high cover of Triodia hummocks, containing mature growth-phases (i.e. large volume) of living (green) Triodia.

Watson (2011) used similar vegetation attributes to identify factors associated with Mallee Emu- wrens across the Murray-Sunset NP. Ordinal measures of Triodia cover, growth-phase and quality (alive) were collected within a 50 x 50 m quadrat. Measures of shrub and canopy cover, and stem diameter and canopy height were also collected. Habitat containing high cover of living mature growth-phase Triodia was associated with areas supporting the greatest number of Mallee Emu- wrens.

Smith (2004) collected data on vegetation and topological attributes associated with Mallee Emu- wrens in mallee-heath in a 14 year-old fire footprint in Ngarkat CP. Data on vegetation cover and the vertical structure of shrubs along six 10 m line transects within a 5 x 10 m quadrat were collected. Seven categorical attributes relating to topographical and vegetation attributes were also collected. Mallee Emu-wrens were found to be associated with typically higher cover (>25%) and height of Triodia (equal to the mature growth-phase identified elsewhere), which were strongly associated with the southern and east facing side of dunes. Combined cover of Triodia and other structurally dense low shrubs (<70 cm), especially Allocasauirna pusilla were important. Smith concluded that the southern and east facing sides of sand dunes may be more productive due to a greater capacity to retain moisture due to their orientation away from the afternoon sun and act as refuges in times of drought.

The condition (i.e. new growth) of Triodia and dominant heath plants appear have a bearing on the fine-scale habitat selection of the Mallee Emu-wren (Brown 2011, Watson 2011, Smith 2004, Paton et al. 2009). The influence of drought on plant condition and vertebrate productivity (Ward and Paton 2004ab, Paton et al. 2009), together with the the Mallee Emu-wren’s dependence on invertebrates for food , warrant the inclusion of a productivity assessment as a component of fine- scale habitat assessment.

Summary

Maxent modelling and modelling based on ultra-high spatial resolution aerial photography provide two methods for identifying patches of potentially suitable habitat. The latter has the advantage of also providing an assessment of important fine-scale vegetation attributes (i.e. Triodia) required for evaluating patch size of high quality. The size and quality of patches is important for identifying the potential population carrying capacity, the more expansive of which will maximise the successful establishment and growth of new populations.

The assessment of Triodia by Smith (2004), Brown (2011) and Watson (2011) generally differ in the scale over which the data was collected (30- 60 m transects), but are similar in many respects. These methods provide a means of ground-truthing habitat suitability at potential release sites.

Invertebrate productivity is an important component of habitat quality and should be included in fine-scale habitat quality assessment.

Protocol guide for fine-scale assessment

Collecting data for fine-scale analysis of habitat quality is very time consuming. Based on the methods of Smith (2004), Brown (2011) and Watson (2011), and the results of Pellingrino (2011) a modified and simpler protocol that includes all factors identified with Mallee Emu-wrens (and Striated Grasswrens) is suggested below. In addition, incorporation of a productivity index needs to be included.

36

A simple generic method for identifying habitat suitability at fine-scales should include the following: i) A transect assessment over 30 m within a patch identified as a potentially suitable release site ii) Collection of Triodia/Xanthorrhoea/Allocausarina attributes: a. cover (continuous), b. growth-phases (standardized measurements need to be determined)(categorical and/or continuous), c. height (continuous) and d. condition (continuous or categorical). Where Triodia is lacking, attributes of Xanthorrhoea, Allocausarina or other similarly dense shrubs that provides a structure for nesting should be included. iii) Cover of all shrubs (continuous); the listing of species (categorical) restricted only to dominant species that are associated with the Mallee Emu-wren (e.g. Allocasuarina, Leptospermum, Callitris), unless also assigning a vegetation type to the site. iv) A vertical density assessment every 5 cm between 0-1m (continuous) v) Orientation of site on sand-dune (categorical) (important in southern reserves but not especially important in the northern reserves). vi) Invertebrate productivity index, using a standard method, targeting species used by Maluridae

Vegetation attributes that can be ignored: vii) Overhead canopy and the diameter of trees, unless trying to assess fire age of Triodia- mallee sites or assign a vegetation type to the site viii) Too much detail on the species of shrubs, except where shrubs in combination with Triodia form dominant cover (tends to occur in Triodia-heath or heath only associations (e.g. Xanthorrhoea and Allocasaurina). ix) Cover less than 20 cm tall, which tends to include grasses and chenopods x) Structural vertical density greater than 1 m xi) Litter cover, course woody debris and bare ground

6.2 Population density and size

The aim of measuring local population density and size of populations is to detect trends in population growth. This is important for determining the impact of harvesting on source populations and the population trend of the released population.

A widely used method employed in Mallee Emu-wren surveys incorporates observers traversing a series of 500 m transects and a MP3 recording of Mallee emu-wren alarm calls played at the beginning of each transect to improve the detection of birds (Clarke 2005b). This method was developed for determining Mallee Emu-wren distribution and densities over very large areas and major vegetation types. However, the scale is not appropriate for determining changes in densities within small localities or patches.

This report proposes that a pilot study be undertaken to determine the variance in estimating population density at a given site(s). This will require determining the optimal survey regime (i.e. sampling regime) so that the level of variance can be teased out from actual population trends. For example, a survey of a local population on three consecutive days may record 10, 12 and 20 birds. A year later, 8, 11 and 12 birds are recorded over three consecutive days. Estimating the variance will assist in determining if the average lower number in the second year is a real trend or an artefact of sampling bias. The advantage of introducing a known number of Mallee Emu-wrens into an otherwise unoccupied site, is that a detectability index could be incorporated into future density estimates and old estimates adjusted accordingly (including qualifications with respect to vegetation types etc.).

Behavioural and environmental considerations

Mallee Emu-wrens respond to play-back recording at any time of the year, and usually respond within moments if present (Smith 2004, Brown 2011). They are inconspicuous because of their mode of travelling in dense understory and play-back methods are suited to detecting this species.

37

Detectability issues relate to their soft high-pitched call, the ability of a person to hear their call, wind conditions and the density of vegetation. Many people (usually older) cannot hear them, and any person involved with monitoring Mallee Emu-wrens must demonstrate they are capable of hearing their call from 50 m.

Birds move in towards the source of the play-back recording when near, so the location of first sighting needs to be recorded. This also provides the opportunity to locate and observe all birds in a group and record numbers, sex and age of individuals present. If birds remain inconspicuous, a repeat of the play-back recording usually brings them onto perches. On occasions they do not show themselves which may be because they are nesting adults, chicks or young fledglings.

Group composition of Mallee Emu-wrens varies throughout the year depending on the time of breeding. Between January and early July, birds appear to move around in small groups (up to eight have been observed). With the onset of the breeding season these groups tend to establish neighbouring overlapping breeding territories of up to 0.3 ha (S Brown pers. obs.). Any one breeding pair may forage over an area as small as 0.1 ha over the course of many hours (S Brown unpublished data). Based on this information, the onset of the breeding season (early August), just prior to nest building, is when birds are most evenly distributed and most reactive to intrusions (play-back recording) on their territories. It is usually easy to determine the number of birds calling at this time (being only two birds). Typically the male can be expected to call from an activity post, and the female flits around inconspicuously near the male.

Protocol guidelines

The following protocol (with rationale) provides some guidance for a final design; two people can effectively traverse a small patch over a three hour period. Wind can mask their call, and conditions greater than 5 knots are considered unsuitable.

• All surveys are conducted between one hour after dawn to 11 am, under no wind or very mild wind conditions (<5 knots). • Two people (or more if possible) spaced 100 m apart traverse a set of consecutive 100 m transects, set parallel to one another, with an MP3 recording of the Mallee Emu-wren played at the beginning of every transect. OR, • All survey points are at least 100 m apart and are considered independent points (i.e. so the same individuals are not counted twice). (Note: A pilot survey using consecutive 100 m transects with play-back at the start of each transect was conducted on a perfectly still day. Mallee Emu-wrens could be heard from about 60 m and it could be easily determined if they moved towards the next play-back point (which they didn’t) so individuals were not counted twice.) • At each point the observer listens for calls from the target species for 30 seconds. Then, a single round (about 1 min) recording of contact and alarm calls (©David Stewart/Nature Sound) of the Mallee Emu-wren is played through an MP3 player and amplified speaker system. The volume of the play-back system is set so that it is audible from about 50 m and no further so that it does not attract Mallee Emu-wrens in from afar. This is followed by a 30 second listening period. Repeat play-back may be used to identify numbers, age and sex of birds if present. • The survey is repeated at the same site over a number of consecutive days or by multiple observers to determine the optimal sampling regime (postponed when wind conditions are unsuitable).

6.3 Population viability analysis

Population viability analysis is a tool used to predict the likely future status of a population under different scenarios, enabling conservation mangers to identify risk factors, their magnitude of impact, and to compare different management options (Boyce 1992). Population viability analysis will be integral to developing a comprehensive translocation proposal.

Modelling population viability using known population densities and size (see above), life history traits of the Mallee Emu-wren (or closely allied species) will assist in selecting the size and composition of the founder group (e.g. using Vortex or similar population modelling program). It is important that biological and socially acceptable goals are defined (e.g. 90% probability of

38

existence for 20 generations) and appropriate environmental risk factors are included (e.g. fire and population isolation). Furthermore it is important to include genetic factors in population viability analysis to reduce the risk of significantly underestimating the probability of extinction (O’Grady et al., 2006).

Unfortunately data is lacking for many of the life history traits of the Mallee Emu-wren for population modelling. Although Maguire (2004, 2006, 2008) has done extensive work on Southern Emu-wrens that may be used to draw on for data, the environmental pressures experienced by this species is not relevant and careful consideration must be given to traits selected for substitution. Life history traits from well studied Maluridae species occupying similar arid environments (e.g. Splendid, Variegated, Blue-breasted and White-winged Fairy-wrens) are more likely to be relevant, and carefully considered data from these species could be used as surrogates (see section 4.6 for more detailed discussion). Russell and Rowley (1997) provide summaries of many exemplary studies of Maluridae.

During dry years, Mallee Emu-wrens were rarely accompanied by fledglings (S Brown pers. obs.). Dispersal data is lacking for Mallee Emu-wrens, but it is probable that they are incapable of dispersing beyond several kilometres as they avoid open areas (S Brown pers. obs.). Given this information, modelling scenarios should err on the side of high mortality, low dispersal capacity and low reproductive success.

39

7 STAKEHOLDERS AND EXPERTISE

Stakeholders

The stakeholders associated with the translocation of Mallee Emu-wrens include government agencies, non-government organisations, individuals and groups from the general public, funding providers and scientists. Stakeholders and their interest in listed below. This list should not be considered exhaustive.

Stakeholder Interest or input Department of Environment Water Agency responsible for the protection and management of and Natural Resources, South Mallee Emu-wrens in South Australia Australia Department of Environment and Agency jointly responsible for the protection and Primary Industries, Victoria management of Mallee Emu-wrens in Victoria Parks Victoria Agency jointly responsible for the protection and management of Mallee Emu-wrens in Victoria Department of Environment Federal agency jointly responsible for Nationally listed species BirdLife Australia Non-government organisation with interest in birds Victorian National Parks Association Non-government organisation concerned with the conservation of biodiversity in Victorian Parks La Trobe, Deakin, Adelaide and Collaborative partners in scientific research on fire and Monash Universities conservation ecology in the mallee region Mallee Catchment Management Agency responsible for catchment health within the Murray Authority Mallee region. Collaborate partners in the scientific research and conservation within the region. Local Government Interested parties concerned with the conservation of birds in the mallee region. May have local authority over vegetation management (e.g. roadsides) Research Scientists Unidentified. Interested collaborators. Funding providers Unidentified. Interested parties concerned with the conservation of birds in the mallee region. Private landholders, leaseholders Interested parties concerned with the conservation of birds in and Landcare Groups with blocks of the mallee region. mallee Zoos Victoria and Zoos South In-situ and ex-situ conservation and animal husbandry Australia

40

Expertise

Expertise in specific areas that may be required for advice pertain mainly to: • Bird ecology and fire ecology (scientific design, modelling and management) • Environmental management • Those experienced with the capture of Mallee Emu-wrens. Individuals listed can provide guidance on the nuances on locating and catching Mallee Emu-wrens and may be interested in being part of a capture team.

Individual Area of expertise Contact agency Dr. Sarah Brown Mallee Emu-wren ecology Via BirdLife Australia Fire ecology, Genetics Conservation management Chris Hedger Mallee bird ecology DEWNR Fire ecology, Conservation management Dr. David Paton Mallee bird ecology University of Adelaide Fire ecology Conservation management Dr. Rohan Clarke Mallee bird ecology Monash University Fire ecology Conservation management Dr. Mike Clarke Mallee bird ecology La Trobe University Fire ecology Conservation management Dr. Simon Watson Mallee bird ecology La Trobe University Fire ecology Conservation management Dr. Peter Copley Conservation management DEWNR Mallee ecology Dr. Peter Cale Mallee bird ecology Calperum Fire ecology Conservation management Dr. Natasha Mallee bird ecology DEPI Schedvin Fire ecology Conservation management Victorian Environmental Policy Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens Dr. Victor Hurley Mallee bird ecology DEPI Fire ecology Conservation management Victorian Environmental Policy Dr. Rebecca Boulton Mallee bird ecology BirdLife Australia Fire ecology Conservation management Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens Charles Silviera Mallee bird ecology and survey Blair Pellegrino Spatial modelling ? Jemima Connell Maxent modelling La Trobe University Ashley Herrod Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens Monash University (highly experienced) Dr. Tanya Pyk Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens BirdLife Australia Claire Treilibs Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens ? formerly DEWNR Jody Gates Mallee bird ecology DEWNR Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens Leanne Mladovan Capture of Mallee Emu-wrens ? formerly DEWNR

41

8 TIMELINE The below translocation program time-frame approximates a potential catch and release program with follow-up monitoring for a single translocation. This is intended only as a guide. A detailed transfer protocol and translocation program must be planned by a recovery team. Pre-translocation • Establish a recovery team for expert input and planning • Acceptable total annual rainfall (average to above) prior to translocation

-2 -2 • Identify potential populations for sourcing individuals (refer to latest fire mapping information) • BirdLife Australia feasibility report • Complete pilot projects • Adequate resources and funding secured Year 0 to to 0 Year • Commence Translocation Proposal and develop a detailed Translocation Procedure Source Population(s) Release Site(s) Control Population(s) Jan Desktop identification of Desktop identification of Desktop identification of control Feb potential source populations potential release sites sites (not harvested and sites of Mar similar quality) Apr May Landscape modelling Landscape modelling Landscape modelling Jun Patch-scale modelling Patch-scale modelling Patch-scale modelling

Jul

Aug Population survey (Adults) Veg. data collection Population survey (Adults) (wk1- Veg. data collection Productivity survey Veg. data collection Year1 2) Productivity survey Productivity survey Sep Oct Productivity assessment Productivity assessment Productivity assessment (wk1- PVA Fine-scale modelling 2) Nov Breeding season Dec Jan PVA risk assessment completed Feb Source and release sites identified

Complete Translocation Protocol Obtain appropriate permits Mar Apr Catch Release and Monitor May Monitor

Jun Jul

Year2 Aug Population survey (Adults) Population a survey (Adults) Population survey (Adults) (wk1- Productivity survey Productivity survey Productivity survey 2) Sep Oct Population survey (Breeding) Population survey (Breeding) Population survey (Breeding) (wk1- Breeding Breeding Breeding 2) Nov

Breeding season Dec Population survey Population survey Population survey Fledglings Fledglings Fledglings Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Population survey (Adults) Population survey (Adults) Population survey (Adults)

s 3-5 3-5 s (wk1- Productivity survey Productivity survey Productivity survey 2)

Year Sep Oct Population survey (Breeding) Population survey (Breeding) Population survey (Breeding) (wk1- 2) Nov

Breeding season Dec Population survey Population survey Population survey Fledglings Fledglings Fledglings Year 6 Evaluation of population trends, habitat quality and success of program Information dissemination and publication

42

9 PRELIMINARY BUDGET ESTIMATE

Given the absence of finalised scientific inputs required and the details of a translocation design, the following budget estimate can only be considered preliminary. The budget components have been based on the expectation that about 200 birds from multiple source populations are caught and released over a 4-6 week period, and monitored for 5 years.

The risk of a translocation failing is high if short-term climate conditions are unfavourable, therefore it is recommended that flexible arrangements are arranged within a Trust Fund so that funding can be held earning interest until favourable climate conditions return. It is possible that this period may be for several years. BirdLife Australia and Zoological Foundations are well placed for this type of arrangement.

An overall budget for a Translocation Program can be divided into four main components; i) Completion of a Translocation Proposal, excluding site specific assessment of source populations and release sites ii) Identification and assessment of specific source populations and release site assessment. This work is based on habitat and population monitoring and modelling using up-to-date data. iii) Translocation procedure iv) Post-release monitoring (long-term), assessment and information dissemination (see timeline)

The costing provided below, assumes no ‘in-kind’ support.

A proportion of the total costs could be reduced through assistance and in-kind support from government agencies (e.g. vehicle access, GIS support and equipment supplies), a small proportion of volunteer assistance and synergistic savings through agency staff undertaking some tasks (e.g. the coordinator could participate in some surveys, write protocols, undertake statistical analysis).

Small components of the program may be integrated into university research honours programs.

Potential synergies

The Mallee Emu-wren distribution traverses two major vegetation systems that are common to both South Australia and Victoria. As such, the underlying scientific data required to appropriately manage reserves in both states is almost identical and provides the opportunity for collaborative partnerships between the states. This report highlighted the need to develop a habitat and distribution model for the southern reserves. Pooling of resources and/or expertise in GIS from both South Australia and Victoria could benefit the management of all these southern reserves. Successful partnerships have underpinned the highly successful Mallee Fire and Biodiversity Project in the northern region of the Mallee.

A suite of threatened mallee birds traverse these systems and at present there is a lack of resourcing to adequately manage them. There are individuals that contribute significant expertise across several species of threatened birds – perhaps a more formal collaborative arrangement could be made with additional, with appropriate expertise, working in a coordinated effort across all states. Alternatively, or in addition, each environment agency could provide a proportion of staff time dedicated to the translocation of the Mallee Emu-wren.

43

Total estimate

The following estimates are based on a single release over a six month period. The details of a translocation program would be decided by a recovery team, and as a consequence a more detailed analysis of budget requirements may differ substantially from that outlined below. Based on current knowledge, it is difficult to assess the amount of monitoring required when an absolute number of source populations have not been identified. Modelling may be more expensive than that estimated here and multiple translocations may be decided on. The break-down of these estimated costs are found in the following pages.

Component Cost Principal coordinator (2 years, full time) $240,000** Translocation Proposal $21,600 Source and release assessment (6 $322,260 months) Catch and release (two months) $199,570 Monitoring (5 years) $587,400 Yearly analysis and reporting (5 years) $46,000 TOTAL $1,416,830 Including synergistic savings $915,710- $1,416,830

** State environmental agencies could provide an appropriate proportion of staff time dedicated to the translocation of the Mallee Emu-wren

Significant savings could be made: i) In-kind support borrowing equipment (est. saving : $ 8,500) ii) In-kind support vehicles (est. saving (1/4 cost) $20,000) iii) Principal coordinator with an appropriate range of skills (research design and analysis and practical skills), replacing 1 staff contractor on most field work and small project components (est. saving $ 117,420) iv) Lower projection of monitoring (4 sites, for 3 days each) (est. saving $315,100) v) Collaboration with university researchers: a few small honours projects could be included in the monitoring, productivity assessment, evaluation of translocation management (est. cost sharing $40,000) vi) Total savings $501,120

44

Translocation Proposal and Scientific Evaluation

A Translocation Proposal is likely to involve both the Victorian and South Australian governments. Two similar proposals will need to be completed to meet both the requirements, unless only one state is involved. The Victorian and South Australian government have a standard template for proposals, and much of the relevant material required is contained within this report.

Expertise: Ecology Spatial modelling Population modelling Ability to detect the high-frequency call of Mallee Emu-wren (many people cannot hear them which raises detectability issues)

*1 person VPS 4 = $120,000 (inclusive of on costs) #Contractors based on proportion of $80 per hour ^Expert contractors based on $150 per hour § Principal scientist or project manager could do these jobs if appropriately skilled

Action Unit Cost Timeframe Responsibility Total Cost Planning and coordination One principal scientist/project manager to $120,000 2 year Agency officer or $240,000* coordinate program coordinating principal scientist

Translocation Proposal $21,600 Four weeks Contractor or $21,600^§ coordinating principal scientist

Source and release site assessment (assessed prior to completion of translocation proposal) Habitat modelling to identify potential Data collation Two months Consultant or $64,600^ source populations and release sites ($43,000)^ university i) Maxent modelling Modelling One month collaborator, agency ($21,600)^ officers Habitat modelling to identify potential Aircraft 7 days Consultant or $91,600^ source populations and release sites ($8400) university ii) High resolution patch modelling Data collation Four months collaborator, agency (64,800)^ officers Modelling Two months ($18,400)^ On-ground assessment of potential source Staff Three weeks Consultant or $98,360 populations and habitat $89,600# university (data collection) Car and fuel, collaborator, agency 4 staff for 20 days food officers [8 sites assessed, 5 repeated surveys] ($8260) Equipment ($500) Population modelling $21,600^§ Four weeks Consultant or $21,600^ (source and release sites) university collaborator, agency officers Fine-scale assessment of release sites Staff Two weeks Consultant or $24,500 (data collection and analysis) $15,360# university 2 staff for 12 days Car and fuel, collaborator, agency [20 sites] food officers iii) Fine-scale modelling ($2,740) Two weeks Analysis ($6,400)^ §

Compilation of data and final selection of $21,600^ Four weeks Expert in $21,600^§ sites based on risk assessment conservation ecology, principal scientist Recovery team TOTAL $322,260

45

Translocation Procedure

Expertise: Principal scientist/project manager to co-ordinate Capture teams: 3 teams of two staff, with an experienced leader for each team; additional volunteers can assist, especially in the time consuming search for Mallee Emu-wrens Monitoring team: Two people to monitor released birds for 6 weeks Ability to detect the high-frequency call of Mallee Emu-wren and have quick reflexes (many people cannot hear them which raises detectability issues) Transfer team: Two people, at least one staff trained in animal husbandry

*1 person VPS 4 = $120,000 (inclusive of on costs) #Contractors based on proportion of $80 per hour. ^Expert contractors based on $150 per hour § Principal scientist or project manager could do these jobs if appropriately skilled

Average of 10 birds caught per day, for a total of 200 birds. One release site.

Action Unit Cost Timeframe Responsibility Cost Capture team Staff: 6 people for 4 weeks (240 hrs) $14,400 per 4x5 days Experienced mist-net $59,400*§ week staff and coordinator 2 x 4WD twin cab, estimated 2,500 km $1200 per week 4 weeks Hire car or in-kind $11,200 and fuel support from agencies Food for 6 staff over 4 weeks $80 per week 4 weeks $1,920 Satellite phone hire and EPIRBs $100 per week 4 weeks Hire $400 Equipment: Purchase or in-kind Mist-nets (6) $800 support Hand-nets (6) $200 Radio/GPS units (3) $1,200 Miscellaneous equipment $1000 $3,300

Transfer Team 2 staff for 4 weeks (240 hrs) $14,400 per 4x5 days Zoological husbandry $59,400* week 2 x 4WD twin cab, estimated 2,500 km $1200 per week 4 weeks Hire car or in-kind $11,200 and fuel support from agencies Food for 2 staff over 4 weeks $80 per week 4 weeks $640 Satellite phone hire and EPIRBs $100 per week 4 weeks Hire $400 Equipment: Purchase or in-kind Radio/GPS units (3) $1,200 support Miscellaneous equipment $1000 Transfer boxes $500 Food for birds (tiny crickets) $100 Insect trapping equipment (Townes $250 each Purchase or in-kind Malaise) x 2 support $3,300

Release team Staff: 2 people for 6 weeks (448 hrs) $4,800 per week 6 weeks Consultant or $36,400* contractor or agency officer 1 x 4WD twin cab, estimated 1,000 km $900 per week 6 weeks Hire car or in-kind $5,400 and fuel support from agencies Food for 2-3 staff $80 per week 6 weeks $960 Satellite phone hire and EPIRBs $100 per week 6 weeks Hire $600 Equipment: Purchase or in-kind $5,050 Cloth fencing (100m per group of birds, $500 per hard 6 sets support $3.50/ m mosquito netting) release Poles ($10/20bamboo), pegs($1) and rope $250 each Insect trapping equipment (Townes $800 4 sets Malaise) $1000 Radio/GPS units (2) Miscellaneous equipment TOTAL $199,570

46

Post-release monitoring and assessment (5 years)

Expertise: Ability to detect the high-frequency call of Mallee Emu-wren (many people cannot hear them which raises detectability issues)

The number of sites to be monitored and frequency is unknown. The following estimate is based on a team of 4 people, monitoring 3 sites each (6 sites), for 5 days each, plus two travel days. Three monitoring trips per year.

*1 person VPS 4 = $120,000 (inclusive of on costs) #Contractors based on proportion of $80 per hour. ^Expert contractors based on $150 per hour § Principal scientist or project manager could do these jobs if appropriately skilled

Action Unit Cost Timeframe Responsibility Cost (5 years) Monitoring Monitoring source, control and release $35,840 per trip 3 x 2 week Consultant or $537,600# sites (4 staff) § trips for 5 contractor or agency years officer Car, equipment, fuel, food $1660 per week 3 x 2 week Hire $49,800 trips for 5 years Yearly analysis and reporting § $2300 per week Four weeks Principal manager or $46,000* agency officer

47

10 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Funding opportunities are limited under current economic and political conditions and efforts to obtain sufficient funding will need to be joint collaborative partnerships from a mix of public and non-public sources. As stated elsewhere, the need to postpone any potential translocation program if conditions are unfavourable requires flexibility in funding arrangements. This type of arrangement is not typical of government funding cycles, where outcomes are expected within yearly time- frames. BirdLife Australia has the flexibility to transcend funding cycles and jurisdictions while leveraging in-kind support and external funding a lower cost than government and commercial operators.

The Murray Mallee region is a vibrant business hub based around intensive agricultural production and tourism and may provide opportunities for local sponsorship and support. The Mallee Emu-wren is familiar to many people in the region; in the past, the plight of the Mallee Emu-wren made local headlines in Mildura, and it was suggested the species be made the city’s emblem.

A number of high profile businesses may be amenable to co-sponsoring this charismatic and high profile species. For example, Iluka Resources have a prominent local profile through their sand mining activities south of Ouyen and Annuello FFR. Many mining companies support conservation projects as offsets for their mining activities. Other national businesses that may be able to provide equipment include Rays Outdoors, Kathmandu, Spotlight fabrics.

Potential sources of financial, collaborative and in-kind support include:

Government authorities • Mallee Catchment Management Authority • Department of Environment Water and Natural Resources, South Australia • Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Victoria • Parks Victoria • Commonwealth of Australia

Australian Research National Funding • A small component of the translocation program may lend itself to scientific research (i.e. an Honours project) and funding opportunities in collaboration with CRC on fire or conservation management based within Australian Universities.

Zoos Victoria and Zoo South Australia • for husbandry expertise • Promote the in-situ conservation of the Mallee Emu-wren through their foundations • Specific fund-raising and education on the Mallee Emu-wren as one of their flagship projects

Philanthropic Foundations • Ian Potter Foundation • Myer Foundation • ANZ foundation/Winifred Violet Scott Foundation (This foundation supported the genetic work on the Mallee Emu-wren)

Non-government conservation organisations • BirdLife Australia • Australian Wildlife Conservancy (Specific fund-raising activities and education on the Mallee Emu-wren)

Crowd Funding, targeting the birding community

Corporate sponsorship

48

REFERENCES

Allee W, Emerson A, Park O, Park T, Schmidt K (1949) Principles of Animal Ecology: W.B. Saunders, London. Andrén H. (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat - a review. Oikos 71, 355-366. Armstrong DP, Castro I, Griffiths R (2007) Using adaptive management to determine requirements of re-introduced populations: the case of the New Zealand hihi. Journal of Applied Ecology 44: 953- 962. Armstrong D. P. & Seddon P. J. (2008) Directions in reintroduction biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23, 20-25. Austin M. P. (2002) Case studies of the use of environmental gradients in vegetation and fauna modelling: theory and practice in Australia and New Zealand. In: Predicting Species Occurrences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale (eds J. M. Scott, P. J. Heglund, M. L. Morrison, J. B. Haufler, M. G. Raphael, W. A. Wall and F. B. Samson) pp. 64-73. Island Press, Washington. Avitabile S. C., Callister K. E., Kelly L. T., Fraser L., Haslem A., Nimmo D. G., Watson S. J., Kenny S. A., Taylor R. S., Spence-Bailey L. M., Bennett A. F. & Clarke M. J. (in prep) Spatially and temporally consistent fire mapping provides insights into fire regimes of the semi-arid Murray Mallee, south-eastern Australia. Baker-Gabb D (2003) Recovery plan for the Black-eared Miner (Manorina melanotis). Conservation of old-growth dependent mallee fauna. Commonwealth of Australia for the Black-eared Miner recovery team. Baker-Gabb (2011) Draft Recovery Plan for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee, Red-lored Whistler Pachycephala rufogularis, Western Whipbird Psophodes nigrogularis leucogaster and other Threatened Mallee Birds. Department of Environment, Canberra. Barrett G., Silcocks A., Poulter R., Barry S. & Cunningham R. (2003) Australian Bird Atlas 1998- 2001: Main Report to Environment Australia. Birds Australia, Melbourne. Bennett, A., Clarke, M., Avitable, S., Brown, L., Callister, K., Haslem, A., Kelly, L., Kenny, S., Nimmo, D., Spence-Bailey, L., Taylor, R., Watson, S. and Holland, G. (2010). Fire and Wildlife in the Mallee. Insights for Conservation and Management. La Trobe and Deakin Universities, Melbourne.

Boyce M (1992) Population viability analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23, 481- 506 Bradstock R. A. (1989) Dynamics of a perennial understorey. In: Mediterranean Landscapes in Australia. Mallee Ecosystems and their Management (eds J. C. Noble and R. A. Bradstock) pp. 141- 54. CSIRO, Australia. Bradstock R. A. (1990) Relationships between fire regimes, plant species and fuels in mallee communities. In: The Mallee Lands. A Conservation Perspective (eds J. C. Noble, P. J. Joss and G. K. Jones) pp. 218-23. CSIRO, Melbourne. Bradstock R. A. & Cohn J. S. (2002) Fire regimes and biodiversity in semi-arid mallee ecosystems. In: Flammable Australia. The Fire Regimes and Biodiversity of a Continent (eds R. A. Bradstock, J. E. Williams and A. M. Gill) pp. 238-58. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, Australia. Brereton R., Bennett S. & Mansergh I. (1995) Enhanced greenhouse climate change and its potential effect on selected fauna of south-eastern Australia: A trend analysis. Biological Conservation 72, 339-354. Brodin A. (2007) Theoretical models of adaptive energy management in small wintering birds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 362, 1857-1871. Brouwer J &Garnett S (1990) Threatened birds of Australia. Royal Australian Ornithologist Union and the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service. RAOU report 68. Brown SM (2010) Survey of the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee within Murray Sunset National Park and Hattah-Kulkyne National Park in October 2009. Department of Life Sciences, Deakin University, for the Mallee Catchment Management Authority. Brown SM (2011) Mallee Emu-wren (Stipiturus mallee): multi-scale habitat requirements and population structure. Melbourne: Deakin University. 49

Brown S., Clarke M. & Clarke R. (2009) Fire is a key element in the landscape-scale habitat requirements and global population status of a threatened bird: The Mallee Emu-wren (Stipiturus mallee). Biological Conservation 142, 432-445. Brown SM, Harrisson KA, Clarke RH, Bennett AF, Sunnucks P (2013) Limited population structure, genetic drift and bottlenecks characterise an endangered bird species in a dynamic, fire-prone ecosystem PLOS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059732 Buse A., Dury S. J., Woodburn R. J. W., Perrins C. M. & Good J. E. G. (1999) Effects of elevated temperature on multi-species interactions: the case of Pedunculate Oak, Winter Moth and Tits. Functional Ecology 13, 74-82. Buttemer W. A. (1985) Energy relations of winter roost-site utilization by American goldfinches (Carduelis tristis). Oecologia 68, 126-132. Cale P. (2003) The influence of social behaviour, dispersal and landscape fragmentation on population structure in a sedentary bird. Biological Conservation 109, 237-248. Carpenter G. & Matthew J. S. (1986) The birds of Billiatt Conservation Park. South Australian Ornithologist 30, 29-37. Caughley G. (1994) Directions in Conservation Biology. The Journal of Animal Ecology 63, 215-244. Caughley G. & Gunn A. (1996) Conservation Biology in Theory and Practice. Blackwell Science, Inc, U.S.A. Caughley G. & Sinclair ARE (1994) Wildlife Ecology and Management. Blackwell Science. Charlesworth B. & Charlesworth D. (1999) The genetic basis of inbreeding depression. Genetical Research 74, 329-340. Cheal P. D. & Parkes D. M. (1989) Mallee vegetation in Victoria. In: Mediterranean Landscapes in Australia. Mallee Ecosystems and their Management (eds J. C. Noble and R. A. Bradstock) pp. 125- 140. CSIRO, Australia. Chisholm A. H. (1946) Observations and reflections on birds of the Victorian mallee. Emu 46, 168- 186. Christidis L. & Boles W. E. (2008) The Taxonomy and Species of Birds of Australia and its Territories. CSIRO publishing. Clarke M. F. (2008) Catering for the needs of fauna in fire management: science or just wishful thinking? Wildlife Research 35, 385-394. Clarke M. F., Avitabile S. C., Brown L., Callister K. E., Haslem A., Holland G. J., Kelly L. T., Kenny S. A., Nimmo D. G., Spence-Bailey L. M., Taylor R. S., Watson S. J. & Bennett A. F. (2010) Ageing mallee eucalypt vegetation after fire: insights for successional trajectories in semi-arid mallee ecosystems. Australian Journal of Botany 58, 363-372. Clarke R (2004) Threatened bird species recorded within the Billiatt and Ngarkat Conservation Park complexes, South Australia, spring 2003. Unpublished report to the Department of Environment and Heritage, Adelaide. Clarke RH, Boulton RL, Clarke MF (2002) Translocation of socially complex Black-eared Miner Manorina melanotis: a trial using hard and soft release techniques. Pacific Conservation Biology 8: 223-234. Clarke R. (2005a) Recovery plan for the Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee, Striated Grasswren Amytornis striatus, Red-lored whistler Pachycephala rufogularis and western whipbird Psophodes nigrogularis leucogaster, South Australian Murray Darling Basin. Department of Environment and Heritage, Adelaide. Clarke R. (2005b) Ecological requirements of birds specialising in mallee habitats. Unpublished La Trobe University report to Department of Environment and Heritage, Adelaide. Clarke R. H., Boulton R. L. & Clarke M. F. (2005) Estimating population size of the Black-eared Miner, with an assessment of landscape-scale habitat requirements. Pacific Conservation Biology 11, 174-188. Clarke R. & Brown S.M. (2007) The Mallee Emu-wren in Victoria: recent surveys and an assessment of habitat preferences and population densities. Report to the Department of Sustainability and Environment, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Melbourne.

50

Chisholm AH (1946) Observations and reflections on birds of the Victorian mallee. Emu 46: 168- 186. Crnokrak P. & Roff D. A. (1999) Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 83, 260-270. Danks A, Burbidge AA, Burbidge A, Smith G (1996) Noise Scrub-bird Recovery Plan. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Como, W.A. Dawson T. J. & Hulbert A. J. (1970) Standard metabolism, body temperature, and surface areas of Australian marsupials. American Journal of Physiology 218, 1233. Department of Environment (2010) Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2010-2030. Commonwealth of Australia. Department for Environment and Heritage (2007) No Species Loss. A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007-2017. Government of South Australia. Department for Environment and Heritage (2009) Fire management plan. Ngarkat District, 2009- 2019. Government of South Australia. Department of Sustainability and Environment (2004) Victorian Geospatial Data. EVC Bioregional Conservation Status at 1:100,000 (EVC_BCS100/). Available from www.dse.vic.gov.au Double M. C., Peakall R., Beck N. R. & Cockburn A. (2005) Dispersal, philopatry, and infidelity: Dissecting local genetic structure in superb fairy-wrens (Malurus cyaneus). Evolution 59, 625-635. Driscoll D. A., Lindenmayer D. B., Bennett A. F., Bode M., Bradstock R. A., Cary G. J., Clarke M. F., Dexter N., Fensham R., Friend G., Gill M., James S., Kay G., Keith D. A., MacGregor C., Russell- Smith J., Salt D., Watson J. E. M., Williams R. J. & York A. (2010) Fire management for biodiversity conservation: Key research questions and our capacity to answer them. Biological Conservation 143, 1928-1939. Eckert J. (1977) The distribution of the Emu-wrens Stipiturus malachurus and S. ruficeps mallee in South Australia. South Australian Ornithologist 26, 38-39. Ewen J. G. & Armstrong D. P. (2007) Strategic monitoring of reintroductions in ecological restoration programmes. Ecoscience 14, 401-409. Ewen JG, Armstrong DP, Parker KA, Sedden PA (2011) Reintroduction Biology: Integrating Science and Management. John Wiley and Sons. Fahrig L. & Merriam G. (1994) Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology 1, 50- 99. Fischer J. and Lindenmayer D B. 2000 An assessment of the published results of animal reclocations. Biological Conservation 96, 1-11. Frankel O. H. & Soulé M. E. (1981) Conservation and Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Frankham R. (2005) Genetics and extinction. Biological Conservation 126, 131-140. Friend G. R. (1993) Impact of fire on small vertebrates in mallee woodlands and heathlands of temperate Australia: a review. Biological Conservation 65, 99-114. Garnett S, Szabo J & Dutson G (2011) Action Plan for Australian Birds. CSIRO Publishing. Gates J. A. (2003) Ecology of threatened mallee birds in Billiatt Conservation Park: baseline distribution and abundance surveys, 2003. Unpublished report to the Wildlife Conservation Fund, Adelaide. Gibb J. A. (1954) The feeding ecology of tits, with notes on the treecreeper and goldcrest. Ibis 96, 513-543. Greenslade P. J. M. & Greenslade P. (1989) Ground Layer Invertebrate Fauna. In: Mediterranean Landscapes in Australia. Mallee Ecosystems and their Management (eds J. C. Noble and R. A. Bradstock). CSIRO, Melbourne. Griffiths B, Scott JM, Carpenter JW & Reed C (1989) Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245, 477-480 Hanski I. (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396, 41-49. Hanski I, Simberloff D (1997) The Metapopulation approach, its history, conceptual domain, and application to conservation. In: Hanski I, Gilipin ME, editors. Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution. Sydney: Academic Press. pp. 5-26.

51

Harris C. R. (1990) The history of mallee land use: Aboriginal and European. In: The Mallee Lands: A Conservation Perspective (eds J. C. Noble, P. J. Joss and G. K. Jones) pp. 147-51. CSIRO, Australia. Haslem A., Kelly L.T., Nimmo D.G., Watson S.J., Kenny S.A., Taylor R.S., Avitabile S.C., Callister K.E., Spence-Bailey L.M., Bennett A.F. & Clarke M.F. (2011) Habitat or fuel? Implications of long- term, post-fire dynamics for the development of key resources for fauna and fire. Applied Ecology 48, 247-256 Hedrick P. W. & Fredrickson R. (2010) Genetic rescue guidelines with examples from Mexican wolves and Florida panthers. Conservation Genetics 11, 615-626. Hedrick P.W. & Kalinowski S.T. (2000) Inbreeding depression in conservation biology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 31, 139-162. Heislers A, Lynch P, Walters B (1981) Fire Ecology in Semi-arid Lands. Rangelands Research Centre, CSIRO, Deniliquin, NSW: Proceedings of a workshop, Mildura, Victoria. National Parks Service, Victoria. Hennessy K. J., Lucas C., Nicholls N., Bathols J. M., Suppiah R. & Ricketts J. (2005) Climate Change Impacts on Fire-weather in South-east Australia, Report C/1061. CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Bushfire CRC and Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne. Higgins P. J., Peter J. M. & Steele W. K. (2001) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 5. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Howe FE (1933) The mallee emu-wren (Stipiturus mallee). Emu 32: 266-269. Howe F. E. & Burgess W. (1942) Ornithologists in the mallee. Emu 42, 65-73. Huey R. B. (1991) Physiological consequences of habitat selection. The American Naturalist 137, S91-S115. IUCN (1987) The IUCN Position Statement on Translocation of Living Organisms. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland IUCN/SSC (2013) Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations. Version 1.0. Gland, Switzerland. Jamieson I. G., Tracy L. N., Fletcher D. & Armstrong D. P. (2007) Moderate inbreeding depression in a reintroduced population of North Island robins. Animal Conservation 10, 95-102. Johnson D. H. (1980) The Comparison of Usage and Availability Measurements for Evaluating Resource Preference. Ecology 61, 65-71. Jones G. (1987) Time and energy constraints during incubation in free-living swallows (Hirundo rustica): an experimental study using precision electronic balances. Journal of Animal Ecology 56, 229-245. Jones J. (2001) Habitat selection studies in avian ecology: A critical review. Auk 118, 557-562. Kallimanis A. S., Kunin W. E., Halley J. M. & Sgardelis S. P. (2005) Metapopulation extinction risk under spatially autocorrelated disturbance. Conservation Biology 19, 534-546. Kelly L.F. & Waller D.M. (2002) Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17, 230-241. Kelly L. T., Nimmo D. G., Spence-Bailey L. M., Haslem A., Watson S. J., Clarke M. F. & Bennett A. F. (2010) Influence of fire history on small mammal distributions: insights from a 100-year post-fire chronosequence. Diversity and Distributions 17, 462-473. Klar N., Fernandez N., Kramer-Schadt S., Herrmann M., Trinzen M., Buttner I. & Niemitz C. (2008) Habitat selection models for European wildcat conservation. Biological Conservation 141, 308-319. Land Conservation Council (1987) Report on the Mallee Review Area. Land Conservation Council, Melbourne. State Government of Victoria. Letnic M. & Dickman C. R. (2010) Resource pulses and mammalian dynamics: conceptual models for hummock grasslands and other Australian desert habitats. Biological Reviews 85, 501-521. Lindenmayer D. & Fischer J. (2006) Habitat Fragmentation and Landscape Change: An Ecological and Conservation Synthesis. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood. Lindstrom A., Enemar A., Andersson G., von Proschwitz T. & Nyholm N. E. I. (2005) Density- dependent reproductive output in relation to a drastically varying food supply: getting the density measure right. Oikos 110, 155-163. 52

Lowe A., Harris S & Ashton P (2004) Ecological Genetics. Design, Analysis, and Application. Blackwell publishing. Luck G. W. (2002a) The dynamics and conservation of a spatially subdivided avian population in a fragmented landscape. Pacific Conservation Biology 8, 159-169. Luck G. W. (2002b) Determining habitat quality for the cooperatively breeding Rufous Treecreeper, Climacteris rufa. Austral Ecology 27, 229-237. Mac Nally R., Bennett A. F., Thomson J. R., Radford J. Q., Unmack G., Horrocks G. & Vesk P. A. (2009) Collapse of an avifauna: climate change appears to exacerbate habitat loss and degradation. Diversity and Distributions 15, 720-730. Maguire G. S. (2006) Territory quality, survival and reproductive success in Southern Emu-wrens (Stipiturus malachurus). Journal of Avian Biology 37, 579-593. Maguire G. S. & Mulder R. A. (2004) Breeding biology and demography of the Southern Emu-wren (Stipiturus malachurus). Australian Journal of Zoology 52, 583-604. Maguire G. S. & Mulder R. A. (2008) Low levels of extra-pair paternity in southern emu-wrens (Aves:Maluridae). Australian Journal of Zoology 56, 79-84. McGilip J. N. (1943) The Murray Mallee and its birds. South Australian Ornithologist 16, 2-4. Menkhorst P. W. & Bennett A. F. (1990) Vertebrate fauna of Mallee vegetation in southern Australia. In: The Mallee Lands. A Conservation Perspective (eds J. C. Noble, P. J. Joss and G. K. Jones) pp. 39-53. CSIRO, Melbourne. Mercer K. J. (1998) Habitat Selection of the Mallee Emu-wren (Stipiturus mallee) in Fire Prone Ngarkat Conservation Park with Suggestions for Management. Masters Thesis. Department of Zoology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide. Mulder R. A. (1995) Natal and breeding dispersal in a co-operative, extra-group-mating bird. Journal of Avian Biology 26, 234-240. Mulder R. A., Dunn P. O., Cockburn A., Lazenby-Cohen K. A. and Howell M. J. (1994) Helpers liberate female fairy-wrens from constraints on extra-pair mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B 255, 223-229. Nagy K. A., Girard I. A. & Brown T. K. (1999) Energetics of free-ranging mammals, reptiles, and birds. Annual Review of Nutrition 19, 247-277. Nagy L. R. & Holmes R. T. (2005) Food limits annual fecundity of a migratory songbird: An experimental study. Ecology 86, 675-681. National Health and Medical Research Council (2013) Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes 8th Edition. O'Grady J. J., Brook B. W., Reed D. H., Ballou J. D., Tonkyn D. W. & Frankham R. (2006) Realistic levels of inbreeding depression strongly effect extinction risk in wild populations. Biological Conservation 133, 42-51. Paton D, Rogers DJ (2007) Status of Mallee Emu-wrens (Stipiturus mallee) in the Ngarkat Complex of Parks.'. School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide. Paton D, Rogers DJ, Cale P, Willoughby N, Gates J (2009) Birds. In: Jennings J, editor. Natural history of the Riverland and Murraylands. Adelaide: Royal Society of South Australia Inc. Pausas J. G. & Bradstock R. A. (2007) Fire persistence traits of plants along a productivity and disturbance gradient in mediterranean shrublands of south-east Australia. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16, 330-340. Pearce-Higgins J. W. & Yalden D. W. (2004) Habitat selection, diet, arthropod availability and growth of a moorland wader: the ecology of European Golden Plover Pluvialis apricaria chicks. Ibis 146, 335-346. Pellegrino B (2011) Habitat modelling for the endangered Mallee Emu-wren using ultra-high spatial resolution aerial photography: potential for a translocation program in Billiatt Conservation Park: The University of Adelaide. Pickett M (2007a) Reintroduction of the Mount Lofty Ranges Southern Emu-wren Stipiturus malachurus intermedius to Cox Scrub Conservation Park, South Australia. Unpublished report. Conservation Council of South Australia.

53

Pickett M (2007b) Review of the potential role of translocation in Mount Lofty Ranges Southern Emu-wren recovery. Unpublished report. Conservation Council of South Australia Redford K. H. & Dorea J. G. (1984) The nutritional-value of invertebrates with emphasis on ants and termites as food for mammals. Journal of Zoology 203, 385-395. Reed D. H. (2005) Relationship between population size and fitness. Conservation Biology 19, 563- 568. Reed D. H. (2008) Effects of population size on population viability: from mutation to environmental catastrophes. In: Conservation biology: evolution in action (eds S. P. Carroll and C. W. Fox). Oxford Univeristy Press, Inc., Oxford. Reed D. H. (2010) Albatrosses, eagles and newts, Oh My!: exceptions to the prevailing paradigm concerning genetic diversity and population viability? Animal Conservation 13, 448-457. Reed D. H. & Frankham R. (2003) Correlation between fitness and genetic diversity. Conservation Biology 17, 230-237. Rowley I. & Russell E. (1997) Fairy-wrens and Grasswrens. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Rowley I. & Russell E. (2002) A population study of the Blue-breasted Fairy-wren, Malurus pulcherrimus, at Dryandra, Western Australia. Emu 102, 127-135. Russell E. & Rowley I. (1998) The effects of fire on a population of Red-winged Fairy-wrens Malurus elegans in Karri forest in southwestern Australia. Pacific Conservation Biology 4, 197-208. Sandell P., Tolhurst K., Dalton J., Scott B. & Smith M. (2006) Fire management prescriptions for the Victorian mallee parks. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria 118, 395-412. Schodde R. (1982) The Fairy-wrens. A Monograph of the Maluridae. Landsdowne Editions, Melbourne. Schodde R. (1990) The bird fauna of the Mallee - Its biogeography and future. In: The Mallee Lands. A Conservation Perspective (eds J. C. Noble, P. J. Joss and G. K. Jones) pp. 61-70. CSIRO, Australia. Silveira CE (1993) The recovery plan for Australia's threatened mallee birds - addressing fire as a threatening process: research phase. Melbourne: Report to the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, Royal Australasian Ornithologist Union. Simberloff D. (1995) Habitat fragmentation and population extinction of birds. Ibis 137, s105-s11. Smith G. (2004) Distribution and habitat requirements of Mallee Emu-wren (Stipiturus mallee) within the 1990 fire scar of Ngarkat Conservation Park: towards a habitat suitability model. Honours thesis. School of Earth and Environmental Sciences. Adelaide University, Adelaide. Specht R. L. (1981) Mallee ecosystems in Southern Australia. In: Ecosystems of the World II. Mediterranean-type Shrublands (eds F. di Castti, D. W. Goodall and R. L. Specht). Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Oxford, New York. Steffen W., Burbidge A. A., Hughes L., Kitching R., Lindenmayer D., Musgrave W., Stafford Smith M. & Werner P. (2009) Australia's Biodiversity and Climate Change; a strategic assessment of the vulnerability of Australia's biodiversity to climate change. Technical Synthesis. Technical synthesis of a report to the Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council commissioned by the Department of Climate Change, Canberra. Suorsa P., Huhta E., Jantii A., Nikula A., Helle H., Kuitunen M., Koivunen V. & Hakkarainen H. (2005) Thresholds in selection of breeding habitat by the Eurasian treecreeper (Certhina familiaris). Biological Conservation 121, 443-452. Tidemann S. C. & Schodde R. (1989) A test for character displacement among 3 species of fairy- wrens (Maluridae, Malurus). Emu 89, 79-82. Tilman D, May R, Lehman C, Nowak M (1994) Habitat destruction and extinction debt. Nature 371: 65-66. Turner D, Ostendorf B, Lewis M (2008) An introduction to patterns of fire in arid and semi-arid Australia. The Rangeland Journal 30: 95-107. Visser M. E., Holleman L. J. M. & Gienapp P. (2006) Shifts in caterpillar biomass phenology due to climate change and its impact on the breeding biology of an insectivorous bird. Oecologia 147, 164- 172. Vuilleumier S., Wilcox C., Cairns B. & Possingham H. P. (2007) How patch configuration affects the impact of disturbances on metapopulation persistence. Theoretical Population Biology 72, 77-85. 54

Ward, M.J. & Paton, D.C. (2004a) Responses to fire of Slender-billed Thornbills Acanthiza iredalei hedleyi in Ngarkat Conservation Park, South Australia. 1. Densities, group sizes, distribution and management issues. Emu 104, 157–168. Ward, M.J. & Paton, D.C. (2004b) Responses to fire of Slender-billed Thornbills Acanthiza iredalei hedleyi in Ngarkat Conservation Park, South Australia. 2. Foraging behaviour. Emu 104, 169–176. Wasson R. J. (1989) Landforms. In: Mediterranean Landscapes in Australia. Mallee Ecosystems and their Management (eds J. C. Noble and R. A. Bradstock) pp. 13-34. CSIRO, Australia. Watson JEM (2011) Research survey of Mallee Emu-wren Stipiturus mallee at Murray Sunset National Park and Annuello Flora and Fauna Reserve. for the Mallee Catchment Management Authority: School of Life and Environmental Science, Deakin University. Whelan R. J. (2002) Managing fire regimes for conservation and property protection: an Australian response. Conservation Biology 16, 1659-1661. White T. C. R. (2008) The role of food, weather and climate in limiting the abundance of animals. Biological Reviews 83, 227-248. Wiegand T., Revilla E. & Moloney K. A. (2005) Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population dynamics. Conservation Biology 19, 108-121. Wiens J. A. (1989) The Ecology of Bird Communities. Volume 2 Patterns and Variation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Wiens J. A. (1997) Metapopulation dynamics and landscape ecology. In: Metapopulation Biology: Ecology, Genetics and Evolution (eds I. Hanski and M. E. Gilipin) pp. 43-68. Academic Press, Sydney. Wilcox C., Cairns B. J. & Possingham H. P. (2006) The role of habitat disturbance and recovery in metapopulation persistence. Ecology 87, 855-863. With K. A. & King A. W. (2001) Analysis of landscape sources and sinks: the effect of spatial pattern on avian demography. Biological Conservation 100, 75-88. Woinarski JCZ (1987) The vertebrate fauna of broombush Melaleuca uncinata vegetation in north- eastern Victoria, with reference to effects of broombush harvesting. Australian Wildlife Research 16: 217-238. Wolf B. O. & Walsberg G. E. (1996a) Respiratory and cutaneous evaporative water loss at high environmental temperatures in a small bird. Journal of Experimental Biology 199, 451-457. Zanette L. (2001) Indicators of habitat quality and the reproductive output of a forest songbird in small and large fragments. Journal of Avian Biology 32, 38-46.

55

APPENDIX I

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN TRANSLOCATION

This purpose of this Appendix is to highlight the potential questions that can be incorporated a priori into a Mallee Emu-wren translocation program. Incorporating experimental design into translocation programs enables objective evaluation of the translocation treatments, thereby improving the success of future translocation populations through adaptive management (Armstrong and Sedden 2008, Clarke et. al., 2002, Ewen et al. 2011). Incorporating experimental design will also clarify the indicators of success and criteria required for developing a translocation proposal and reporting (Appendix II).

Many questions lend themselves to larger scientific research problems in conservation management. This section is intended as a guide to the range of elements that might be considered and should not be seen as exhaustive. A workshop comprising of a recovery team and scientific experts is the most appropriate medium for nutting out details.

Q1. What is the optimal number of individuals required to establish a new population i) population growth, or ii) genetic augmentation? Q2. How is establishment probability affected by the size and composition of the founder group? Q3. What is the impact on the source population?

Population viability modelling can assist in identifying the number of individuals required to establish a population. Although there is a lack of data specifically for the Mallee Emu-wren, their reproductive biology is similar to that of several very well studied species such as Fairy-wrens and Southern Emu-wrens. Initial modelling could substitute demographic data from these species and models can be refined for subsequent release events as data become available post-monitoring release.

Harvesting provides density manipulation, and this lends itself to asking specific research questions and adaptive management. Controlled and measured harvesting (particularly if repeated) and monitoring can be used to further understand the Mallee Emu-wrens’ population regulatory mechanisms.

Q4. What is the optimal social kin associations or composition of founders required to establish a persisting population? What intrinsic demographic factors determine the success of re- introductions?

Are i) socially cohesive groups (i.e. groups that forage together in the non-breeding season) more likely to translocate successfully and establish new populations than, ii) randomly selected individuals or, iii) adult pairs, or iv) juveniles that have not established breeding territories (groups of juveniles often found together with adult pairs in late summer)?

Q5. What is the post-release mortality rate? Q6. Do male and females have different post-release survival rates? Q7. What is the post-release dispersal rate? How far? Q8. Do males and females disperse differently following release?

Post-release monitoring will collect data on male and female survival and dispersal. If differential survival is observed, the ratio of male and females should be adjusted accordingly for subsequent translocation events. Population modelling should also be adjusted to improve model predictions.

Q9. What is the optimal time of year or season to establish a new population or to supplement a population? Q10. What genetic factors determine the success of re-introductions? Q11. Where the goal is population supplementation or genetic augmentation: Do birds better integrate during different seasons? Do birds better integrate if they are juveniles rather than adults? Do birds better integrate if introduced to unoccupied adjacent territories?

Q12. Does a soft or hard release improve the success of establishing a persisting population?

56

The fate of animals immediately following release will depend on their ability to avoid predation and find resources including food and suitable roosting sites. Despite identifying high quality sites for release, it may be that individuals become disorientated when released to an unfamiliar environment and disperse widely seeking familiar home ranges. If individuals disperse widely, the translocation could fail.

In order to establish a sense of a familiar core evening roost site and foraging area, confining released individuals to a small area may assist in establishing site fidelity. In the case of the Mallee Emu-wren, a cheap method may be to establish a 2 metre high fence with a lightweight material (e.g. cloth) around a small area that contains a high proportion of large Triodia. It is unlikely (though not guaranteed) the birds will fly over the fence. However, available food within the area would be limited and such a trial should only last for a small number of days unless food is supplemented.

Q13. What habitat conditions (fire, vegetation type and area, productivity) determine the success of re-introduced population? This can be considered at i) landscape scale, ii) patch-scale and iii) fine- scale.

Q 14. What genetic make-up affects the persistence of the population? i) Re-introduction. What is the trajectory between the genetic diversity of the founder population and the make-up of the population following X years? Does the founder population require further genetic augmentation due to genetic drift? ii) Genetic augmentation. Has the recipient population incorporated new alleles and frequencies into its population? Has the intrinsic genetic structure of the population changed, and if so in what manner? Does the recipient population require periodically introduced individuals to mitigate inbreeding? iii) There is the opportunity here to ask research questions into the relationship between genetic diversity and survival, reproduction and population persistence.

57

APPENDIX II

INDICATORS OF SUCCESS AND CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING TRANSLOCATION OUTCOMES

The purpose of this section is to assist the development of indicators of success and specific criteria within the constraints of monitoring Mallee Emu-wrens in the short and long-term. Population viability analysis and life history traits from Maluridae species will guide specific criteria. This section approximates a template for evaluating the success of a translocation proposal. It is not intended to be a final template.

Limitations with respect to monitoring Mallee Emu-wrens

Key indicators of success or operation targets with respect to the release animals are:

i) short-term (days to weeks) and associated with immediate post-release survival and behaviour of transferred animals; and ii) long-term (months to years) and associated with indictors of dispersal, breeding and population trends.

The potential to develop indicators and criteria for the Mallee Emu-wren is limited; individuals cannot be marked with metal and colour bands for collecting long-term movement and survival data, and their habitat makes the task of following birds very time consuming and difficult. Radio- tracking birds may be fraught with problems as the antennae would need to be shortened, reducing the effective tracking distance and the birds are at the limit of animal to transmitter size ratio. Colour bands are too large and there is a high risk individuals will be trapped by their bands on the Triodia’s needle-like leaves. However temporary marking may be possible using colour dyes on chests. This would assist with temporary tracking of the fate of individuals after release.

Given these limitations, the following monitoring parameters may be achieved: i) Short-term (associated with post-release and individual fates over a period of days to weeks) • Survival • Fidelity to the release site and dispersal • Pairing or social cohesion • Use of fine-scale habitat • Densities

ii) Long-term (birds will no longer be individually recognisable after a month) • Evidence of breeding • Proportion of breeding adults • Proportion of fledglings and juveniles • Densities • Dispersal (where the site is formerly unoccupied) • Population trends • Use of fine-scale habitat and area of patch occupied • Population genetic changes

Translocation Procedure

Mallee Emu-wrens tolerate handling when conditions are warm or hot, but require warming-up when conditions are cold or when they have just emerged from their overnight roost in winter. The transfer of Mallee Emu-wrens is unprecedented and therefore the mortality risk is unquantified. However experience with the Southern Emu-wren translocations can provide some indicators (Pickett 2007a).

In a translocation of Southern Emu-wrens in South Australia, no animals died when transferred on the same day of capture (n=24), and two of 22 animals died when kept overnight (Pickett 2007a). Given logistical constraints it is likely that all Mallee Emu-wrens will have to be held overnight in an appropriately constructed box, with food and vegetation. This will place the birds under stress although all practical attempts will be made to minimise disturbance.

58

The success indicators for pre-release and transfer: i) No more than XX% of animals die during capture and transfer ii) All birds appear to be in good condition, with no obvious parasite load or poor feather condition iii) On release the body weight is no less than Xg if an adult iv) On release the body weight is no less than Xg if a juvenile

Post-release survival (up to one month)

Details on post-release treatments need to be designed, however the options are likely to be: a) a soft release, with individuals confined within a small area with suitable roosting sites for one or two days b) a hard release, where birds are released following overnight/immediate transfer

The success indicators for post-release survival: i) a soft release: XX% of birds survive one/two consecutive nights in the release site and XX% of the of birds are sighted within one week of release ii) a hard release: XX% of birds are sighted within one week of release iii) XX% of all released birds are sighted within two to four weeks of release

Population establishment

As discussed in section 4.4, climate conditions will greatly influence population trends. As such, long-term indicators need to be assessed against control populations that have not been harvested (i.e. adjusting for seasonal variation) to assess whether the translocation itself or adverse climate conditions are responsible for the success or failure. It is important to note that it may be difficult to match controls for quality and population density factors.

The success indicators for long-term survival and population persistence (precluding loss of release site because of fire): i) The density/total number of birds is XX% of the density/total number determined at one month post-release ii) The male to female sex ratio remains about parity or is comparable to control sites of similar environmental quality in the three years following release iii) The proportion of birds showing evidence of breeding is comparable to control site of similar environmental quality in the first breeding season following release iv) The trend of population growth over X years is equal to that of control sites of similar environmental quality v) Dispersal beyond the release site in any given year is observed in conjunction with evidence of newly established home ranges and breeding by pairs or groups of Mallee Emu-wrens

Impacts on source population

Key indicators of success or operation targets with respect to the source populations is;

i) long-term (months to years) and associated with reoccupation of territories breeding and population trends.

The success indicators for long-term survival and population persistence (precluding loss of release site because of fire): i) The density/total number of birds is XX% of the original population estimate prior to the removal of birds ii) The male to female sex ratio remains about parity or is comparable to control sites of similar environmental quality in the three years following release iii) The proportion of birds showing evidence of breeding is comparable to control site of similar environmental quality in the first breeding season following release iv) The trend of population growth over X years is equal to that of control sites of similar environmental quality

59

Metapopulation establishment

The success indicators for population establishment in an unoccupied reserve (precluding loss of population due to fire): i) At least XX% of the original number of birds persists in the release site/patch, 5 years after release ii) The area occupied by Mallee Emu-wrens in greater than the release site/patch by at least X %

Genetic augmentation

The success of genetic augmentation should be measured against criteria relating to increased individual reproductive output in subsequent generations, translating to increased population growth rates. The indicators below, presume a generation span of 4 years for an individual.

The success indicator for genetic augmentation: i) Long-term: greater proportion of breeding success (i.e. a greater proportion of chicks) of adult birds when compared to previous generations (adjusted for seasonal variation) or compared to a matched control site (probably impossible to find). ii) Long-term: greater population growth rate compared to previous generations (adjusted for seasonal variation). iii) Long-term: no evidence of increased genetic drift, homozygosity or genetic loss

60

APPENDIX III

PROTOCOL FOR CATCHING MALLEE EMU-WRENS USING HAND NETS

The following protocol was developed by Sarah Brown (Brown 2011). It is important to note that this method is not suited to dense vegetation, especially heaths.

Materials

Standard black nylon mosquito netting and lead beading (conventionally used to weight curtains), available from material suppliers, are used to make nets. Netting was sewn together to create a single 3 m x 2 m or larger sheet; the size required to adequately cover large Triodia plants. Fifteen centimetres in from the edge, a continuous run of lead beading was sewn onto the mosquito netting in the manner of upholstery piping (Figure 1a). The lead beading ensured that the mosquito netting was weighted on the ground to prevent birds from escaping under the netting. The components for each net cost approximately AUD$60 ($15 for netting and $45 for lead beading).

Catching technique

Groups of Mallee Emu-wrens are located and, if necessary, enticed to more favourable vegetation nearby by using playback recording of contact and alarm calls (©David Stewart/Nature Sound) played through an MP3 player (iRiver T30MX) and amplified speaker system (JBL OnTour). Most individuals became accustomed to the presence of humans after 10-15 mins, but generally remained at least 10-20 m distant. Whilst the observer used the playback recording intermittently to maintain a visual fix on the group's location, Mallee Emu-wrens continued foraging in the Triodia with frequent contact calls and singing from low shrubs or upper Triodia leaf-blades. When individuals were seen to enter deep into a large Triodia plant that was not obstructed by shrubs or fallen Eucalypt stems, the throw net(s) were quickly dropped over the plant, trapping the bird. It was essential that the Triodia was large enough (minimum of 1.5 m diameter) that the bird felt more secure by remaining within the Triodia when the observer approached than flying out, otherwise birds flew out before the opportunity to drop the net was completed. This technique was most effective when two observers approached the bird and dropped nets from opposing directions. The net edge was quickly laid to prevent birds escaping through small gaps between the netting and the ground, and then pockets of loose netting were created to trap the bird (Figure 1b). Once the netting was in place, a short pole was used to flush the bird from the Triodia into the loose netting.

Figure 1a and b. Diagrammatical representation of a) the design of nets, and b) their use in trapping a Mallee Emu-wren in Triodia

Tips

Practice first. Try a plant with some branches around and you will understand the difficulties you may encounter.

Mallee Emu-wrens will find the smallest escape hole. Be patient before trying to catch them from the plant. Check that the entire circumference of the netting is on the ground and be sure that the pockets are loose and any areas that cannot form a pocket are held down with sand.

61

Ideally try to catch the more elusive female first. She can then be suspended in a holding bag near a suitable isolated large Triodia, and the male tends to flit into the Triodia, enabling an easy catch. The same goes if using conventional mist-nets.

Keep nets free of debris at all times. The smallest piece of debris will catch the netting, preventing free fall of it over the Triodia and the bird will escape and you will curse yourself! Carefully store the net in a long gathered bunch for easy throwing of net, rather than folding.

If approaching a Triodia plant with only one net, attempt to throw the net cleanly onto the far side and work your way back towards yourself. The bird will stay away from your legs (briefly).

If the Triodia is too big, the bird will just fly to the edge and back in. Best abandoned.

Stay away from Triodia that have branches at the base. Be patient and wait until the target birds enter an appropriately sized and isolated plant – it will happen.

If there are groups of birds, mist-netting is probably more efficient. At each end of the erected net, an observer must be ready to move directly to the net once the birds are caught as they often escape within moments. Keep a hand net ready to throw over any bird momentarily trapped in the mist-net. They may escape before you have a chance to get yourself positioned to secure the bird in your hand.

Yellow-plumed honeyeaters are sometimes your friend. They will attack Mallee Emu-wrens, which retreat into Triodia.

Netting technique used to capture Mallee Emu-wrens, Murray-Sunset National Park. This was a particularly large Triodia and two nets were used by a team. Note the minimum debris around the base of the net.

62

63