Tasmanian Bird Report 37

December 2015

BirdLife Tasmania, a branch of BirdLife Australia Editor, Wynne Webber

TASMANIA The Tasmanian Bird Report is published by BirdLife Tasmania, a regional branch of BirdLife Australia

Number 37 © 2015

BirdLife Tasmania, GPO Box 68, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia 7001

ISSN 0156-4935

This publication is copyright. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may, except for the purposes of study or research, be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of BirdLife Tasmania or the respective paper’s author(s). Contents

Editorial iv Wynne Webber

Interim checklist of King Island birds 1 July 2015 Margaret Bennett, Nigel Burgess and Eric Woehler

Potential predation by raptors and other predators on Orange-bellied Parrots 5 in Tasmania Nick Mooney

High tide roosts and nest sites 8 South Arm shorebirds run out of options Mike Newman

Coexisting with Noisy Miners 10 The Common Bronzewing’s strategy Mike Newman

Retention of native vegetation provides valuable habitat in 12 acreage developments Mike Newman

Huon Island surveys, 2014–15 20 Eric Woehler and Peter Vertigan

Resident and migratory shorebirds of the Moulting Lagoon 24 Game Reserve Ramsar site Eric Woehler and Valeria Ruoppolo

Inventory and monitoring of the birds of Tasmanian saltmarsh wetlands 39 Vishnu Prahalad, Eric Woehler, Adelina Latinovic and Peter McQuillan

Summer and winter wader counts 53 2015 Eric Woehler and Sue Drake Editorial

In this edition of the Tasmanian Bird Report two papers, one by Mike Newman and one by Vishnu Prahalad, Eric Woehler, Adelina Latinovic and Peter McQuillan, inventory birds found in particular habitats within Tasmania. These papers both show that, in many areas, data on the array of species and their abundance are lacking. Quite a few dedicated citizen scientists survey birds for the Atlas of Australian Birds, but more are needed so that most of Tasmania is covered and surveyed regularly. So many studies are hampered by a lack of knowledge of the status of a particular species in a particular place. Was the bird found there historically, or has it moved into the area recently as a result of natural or anthropogenic factors? Is the bird’s population increasing, decreasing or stable? What factors are threatening species? How can such threats be removed? To find out, reliable population records are needed. Anyone who can begin surveying can participate through Birdata (www.birdata.com.au) where new data is entered and feedback is given. The Bird Report is a vehicle for publication of papers by researchers and citizen scientists from around the state, as well as for releasing reports that have been completed for various interests, governmental, NGO and commercial. We strongly encourage members and researchers to submit papers. BirdLife Tasmania also publishes data from Summer and Winter Wader Counts so that members have access to them. We would very much like to include an annual Tasmanian systematic list, but, to do so, we must find a compiler. Please volunteer if you have the requisite skill. Wynne Webber Editor Tasmanian Bird Report Interim checklist of King Island birds, July 2015

Margaret Bennett, Nigel Burgess* and Eric J. Woehler, BirdLife Tasmania

An initial list of the birds of King Island was prepared that extend to 3 Nautical Miles or approximately 5.5 km by BirdLife Tasmania in August 2013. The list was from shore. A number of species have been recorded on derived from Green and McGarvie (1971), records in the island since 2013, including an observation of a the BirdLife Tasmania database that reflect more than Scarlet Honeyeater, Myzomela sanguinolenta, which was 20,000 records from the island, and the authors’ the first record for Tasmania. observations on the islands. The interim list follows The codes: END[angered], EN[demic], BR[eeding], BirdLife Australia’s Working List of Australian Birds V[agrant], M[igrant], EX[tinct], IN[troduced], R[are]. (version 1.2, available at http://birdlife.org.au/ We extend our thanks to Mavis Burgess*, and Graeme conservation/science/taxonomy) but does not use and Margaret Batey for their comments and assistance trinomials. (* deceased). The interim list (follows) currently notes 180 species that have been recorded from King Island, Christmas Reference and New Year Islands off the north-west coast, and Green, R.H. and McGarvie, A. M. 1971. ‘The birds of King Councillor Island off the north-east coast. The list also Island’. Records of the Queen Victoria Museum 40. 43 pp. Queen includes seabirds seen within Tasmanian State Waters Victoria Museum, Launceston.

Common name Scienfic name King Island status Emu Dromaius novaehollandiae IN King Island Emu Dromaius ater EX Helmeted Guineafowl Numida meleagris IN California Quail Callipepla californica IN BR Stubble Quail Coturnix pectoralis BR Brown Quail Coturnix ypsilophora BR King Quail Excalfactoria chinensis BR Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus IN BR Common Pheasant Phasianus colchicus IN BR Wild Turkey Meleagris galloparvo IN BR Musk Duck Biziura lobata BR Freckled Duck Stictonetta naevosa V Cape Barren Goose Cereopsis novaehollandiae IN BR Black Swan Cygnus atratus BR Australian Shelduck Tadorna tadornoides BR Australian Wood Duck Chenonetta jubata BR Pink-eared Duck Malacorhynchus membranaceus BR Greylag Goose Anser anser IN BR Australasian Shoveler Anas rhynchotis BR Grey Teal Anas gracilis BR Chestnut Teal Anas castanea BR Northern Mallard Anas platyrhynchos IN BR Pacific Black Duck Anas superciliosa BR Hardhead Aythya australis BR Blue-billed Duck Oxyura australis BR 1 Australasian Grebe Tachybaptus novaehollandiae BR Hoary-headed Grebe Poliocephalus poliocephalus BR Great Crested Grebe Podiceps cristatus BR Rock Dove Columba livia IN BR Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis IN BR Common Bronzewing Phaps chalcoptera BR Brush Bronzewing Phaps elegans BR White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus M Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus V White-faced Storm-Petrel Pelagodroma marina V Shy Albatross Thalassarche cauta V Fairy Prion Pachyptila turtur BR Short-tailed Shearwater Ardenna tenuirostris M BR King Penguin Aptenodytes patagonicus V Little Penguin Eudyptula minor BR Australasian Gannet Morus serrator V Little Pied Cormorant Microcarbo melanoleucos BR Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo BR Little Black Cormorant Phalacrocorax sulcirostris V Black-faced Cormorant Phalacrocorax fuscescens BR Australian Pelican Pelecanus conspicillatus V Australasian Bittern Botaurus poiciloptilus BR White-necked Heron Ardea pacifica V Eastern Great Egret Ardea modesta M Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia V Cattle Egret Ardea ibis M White-faced Heron Egretta novaehollandiae BR Nankeen Night-Heron Nycticorax caledonicus BR Australian White Ibis Threskiornis molucca V Straw-necked Ibis Threskiornis spinicollis V Royal Spoonbill Platalea regia V Yellow-billed Spoonbill Platalea flavipes V Eastern Osprey Pandion cristatus R Black-shouldered Kite Elanus axillaris V White-bellied Sea-Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster BR Whistling Kite Haliastur sphenurus V Brown Goshawk Accipiter fasciatus V Collared Sparrowhawk Accipiter cirrocephalus V Grey Goshawk Accipiter novaehollandiae V Swamp Harrier Circus approximans BR Wedge-tailed Eagle Aquila audax V Nankeen Kestrel Falco cenchroides BR Brown Falcon Falco berigora BR Australian Hobby Falco longipennis BR Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus V Purple Swamphen Porphyrio porphyrio BR Lewin’s Rail Lewinia pectoralis BR Buff-banded Rail Gallirallus philippensis V Australian Spotted Crake Porzana fluminea BR Spotless Crake Porzana tabuensis BR Black-tailed Native-hen Tribonyx ventralis V Dusky Moorhen Gallinula tenebrosa BR Eurasian Coot Fulica atra BR Australian Pied Oystercatcher Haematopus longirostris BR Sooty Oystercatcher Haematopus fuliginosus BR Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus V Banded Stilt Cladorhynchus leucocephalus V 2 Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva M Red-capped Plover Charadrius ruficapillus BR Double-banded Plover Charadrius bicinctus M Lesser Sand Plover Charadrius mongolus M Oriental Plover Charadrius veredus V Black-fronted Dotterel Elseyornis melanops BR Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis BR Red-kneed Dotterel Erythrogonys cinctus V Banded Lapwing Vanellus tricolor BR Masked Lapwing Vanellus miles BR Latham’s Snipe Gallinago hardwickii M Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica M Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus M Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis M Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos V Grey-tailed Tattler Tringa brevipes M Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia M Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis V Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres M Red Knot Calidris canutus M Sanderling Calidris alba M Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis M Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata M Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea M Painted Button-quail Turnix varius BR Arctic Jaeger Stercorarius parasiticus V Little Tern Sternula albifrons BR Fairy Tern Sternula nereis BR Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia BR Crested Tern Thalasseus bergii BR Pacific Gull Larus pacificus BR Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus V Silver Gull Chroicocephalus novaehollandiae BR Yellow-tailed Black-Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus funereus BR Galah Eolophus roseicapillus V Sulphur-crested Cockatoo Cacatua galerita BR Rainbow Lorikeet Trichoglossus haematodus V Green Rosella Platycercus caledonicus EN Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor V Blue-winged Parrot Neophema chrysostoma V Orange-bellied Parrot Neophema chrysogaster M Eastern Koel Eudynamys orientalis V Horsfield’s Bronze-Cuckoo Chalcites basalis BR Shining Bronze-Cuckoo Chalcites lucidus BR Pallid Cuckoo Cacomantis pallidus BR Fan-tailed Cuckoo Cacomantis flabelliformis BR Southern Boobook Ninox novaeseelandiae BR Barn Owl Tyto alba BR Azure Kingfisher Ceyx azureus V Dollarbird Eurystomus orientalis V Superb Fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus BR Tasmanian Scrubwren Sericornis humilis BR King Island Scrubtit Acanthornis magna greenianus EN White-throated Gerygone Gerygone albogularis V Tasmanian Thornbill Acanthiza ewingii EN King Island Brown Thornbill Acanthiza pusilla archibaldi END Spotted Pardalote Pardalotus punctatus BR 3 Striated Pardalote Pardalotus striatus BR Eastern Spinebill Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris V Yellow-throated Honeyeater Lichenostomus flavicollis EN Yellow Wattlebird Anthochaera paradoxa EN White-fronted Chat Epthianura albifrons BR Scarlet Honeyeater Myzomela sanguinolenta V Crescent Honeyeater Phylidonyris pyrrhopterus BR New Holland Honeyeater Phylidonyris novaehollandiae BR Strong-billed Honeyeater Melithreptus validirostris EN Black-headed Honeyeater Melithreptus affinis EN Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike Coracina novaehollandiae BR White-winged triller Lalage sueurii M Olive Whistler Pachycephala olivacea BR Golden Whistler Pachycephala pectoralis BR Grey Shrike-thrush Colluricincla harmonica BR Dusky Woodswallow Artamus cyanopterus V Australian Magpie Cracticus tibicen IN BR Black Currawong Strepera fuliginosa EN Grey Fantail Rhipidura albiscapa BR Willie Wagtail Rhipidura leucophrys V Forest Raven Corvus tasmanicus BR Little Raven Corvus mellori BR Satin Flycatcher Myiagra cyanoleuca BR Magpie-lark Grallina cyanoleuca V Scarlet Robin Petroica boodang V Flame Robin Petroica phoenicea BR Pink Robin Petroica rodinogaster BR Dusky Robin Melanodryas vittata EN Eurasian Skylark Alauda arvensis IN BR Golden-headed Cisticola Cisticola exilis BR Little Grassbird Megalurus gramineus BR Silvereye Zosterops lateralis BR Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena BR Tree Martin Petrochelidon nigricans BR Bassian Thrush Zoothera lunulata BR Common Blackbird Turdus merula IN BR Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris IN BR House Sparrow Passer domesticus IN BR Australasian Pipit Anthus novaeseelandiae BR European Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis IN BR Greenfinch Carduelis chloris IN BR

4 Potential predation by raptors and other predators on Orange-bellied Parrots in Tasmania

Nick Mooney, 2 Torrens Street, Richmond 7025

Background generally, including the south-west and far north-west. A few months ago there was a burst of enthusiasm These generalisations come from exhaustive surveys for (including comment from the federal minister) for nests (e.g. Mooney and Brothers 1987) and from road controlling predators to help critically endangered counts and other records of individuals (Barrett et al. Orange-bellied Parrots, Neophema chrysogaster (OBPs). In a 2003, Blakers et al. 1984, Mooney in prep., Natural Values risk-assessment calculation, the species’ Recovery Plan Atlas). At least for peregrines, breeding and individual (OBPRT 2014) rates the evidence of impact from densities coincide spatially. A great advantage of competitors and predators as moderate and the risk of surveying breeding peregrines is that nests (the vast impact as very high. Amongst predators, Cats, Felis catus, majority are on cliffs) tend to be very long term (Ratcliff Red Foxes, Vulpes vulpes, rats, Rattus spp., and Sugar 1980); Tasmania actually has the oldest record of any Gliders, Petaurus breviceps, were specifically mentioned as bird nest anywhere, a now collapsed peregrine nest potentials, as were raptors: ‘raptors may present a ledge used from at least 19,600 years ago until com- predation risk throughout the range’. I thought to try paratively recently, which was aged from a series of and flesh this out; what impact might raptors be having mummified carcases (Bowdler 1984). on free-flying OBPs in Tasmania? In doing this I would There are few (if any) peregrine nests on western Bass like to compare the potential impacts from an Strait islandsdespite intensive searches (Brothers et al. uncommon bird-catching specialist (the Peregrine 2001). The historic example on Albatross Island has not Falcon, Falco peregrinus, aka the peregrine) to a common operated since before albatross research visits started in generalist (the Brown Falcon, F. berigora) and a very the 1970s, and no nests are known from King, Hunter common opportunist (the Forest Raven, Corvus or any other nearby island, nor even on Cape Grim, tasmanicus), all capable of catching OBPs in some despite much attention by bird observers. This suggests circumstance or other. Another excuse is the renewed Tasmanian coastal peregrines are not particularly keyed push by pigeon fanciers in the UK and Australia to be to the migration of land birds, otherwise those islands allowed to ‘control’ peregrines and other raptors and would be speckled with peregrine nests (some species of the inclusion in their arguments of fanciful calculations Australian land birds migrate south to Tasmania to on the danger to native birds that raptors present. breed; see Blakers et al. 1984). Indeed, Tasmanian pigeon fanciers have quoted the risk The nearest known Tasmanian Peregrine Falcon nest to OBPs that peregrines supposedly present as one of to the OBP migration route is on The Nut (a many reasons fanciers should be allowed to control this spectacular volcanic plug) at Stanley on the very eastern raptor. edge of the recent migration route. While monitoring this site in late spring 1979 (contributing to Mooney and The Peregrine Falcon Brothers 1987), we saw a flock of at least four OBPs on Let us first consider the coincidence of Orange-bellied The Nut and at that same visit found feathers from one Parrots and peregrines in Tasmania. Orange-bellied OBP (confirmed by OBP experts Wilson and Brown Parrots arguably use about 10% of the state, migrating pers. comm.) in the peregrine nest. We never again saw down the western coastal strip. On the other hand, OBPs near there. In those days there were hundreds of peregrines use all of Tasmania, albeit at very different migrating OBPs, but this appearance at The Nut was an densities. The highest peregrine breeding densities are unusual event, even for those times (Blakers et al. 1984, east of the western tiers, parts of the lower midlands OBPRT 2014). and the south-east; the lowest densities are in the west Overwhelmingly, the diet, as taken from 210 prey 5 items identified from The Nut peregrine nest and 420 kg for the 150 odd days OBPs are in Tasmania. associated roosts over a number of years, was local land The total 6 chicks that would usually be fledged from birds (notably Common Starlings, Sturnus vulgaris), with a the 4 nests eat about 4 kg each before fledging few lapwings, gulls, terns and shearwaters, and the odd (Newgrain et al. 1993); a total of 24 kg. The total bandicoot and snake, the latter two probably pirated annual food consumption of those peregrines in from local Swamp Harriers, Circus approximans, or Brown Tasmania’s OBP habitat while OBPs are in Tasmania is Falcons (Mooney et al. in prep.). therefore about 444 kg. Considering wastage (parts that Now, let us put this 1 in 210 (0.47%) in perspective. can’t be eaten) makes up about 0.33 of prey items, then Unless each and every scrap is dutifully collected, the total weight of birds caught is about 444 + (444 ☓ identification of remains at nests is typically biased 0.33) = 590.5 kg. The average prey weight is about 80 g toward large or outstandingly coloured items (OBP (Mooney in prep.): thus 590.5 kg translates into about plumage being toward the latter), but, even then, a 7,381 birds. windswept place might create a bias toward heavy To continue the argument, 0.00016% of this number items. In reality, it is rare that all scraps can be carefully (7,381) is 1.18. We can therefore argue that peregrines and systematically collected in a brief visit in the eat maybe 1 OBP per year in Tasmania. This may even breeding season. For one thing, visits are as short as be too high because no peregrine nests are known from possible to limit disturbance and typically there is a areas close to where OBPs spend most of their time frantic collection of everything noticed at the nest and (Melaleuca and the west coast strip) and peregrines are at associated perches amongst ropes, other equipment very rarely seen there despite the many very experi- and chicks. Comparison of prey delivered to the nest enced observers. (The nearest nest record is about from in-nest cameras with that derived from collections 20 km to the west in Port Davey.) The reality might be of prey remains over the same period suggests this bias that, these days, an OBP is taken by a peregrine in in Tasmania is about a factor of 5; i.e., a brightly Tasmania every few years. coloured item may be 5 times as likely to be noticed in a quick visit as a similarly sized dull item (Mooney in Brown Falcons prep.). It follows that the likely proportion OBPs made This common generalist provides an interesting contrast of total prey in those early years was 1 in about 1050 or to that specialist, the peregrine. From road counts and about 0.001% by numbers. I would expect the current local estimates of nesting densities (Mooney in prep.), I proportion to be even smaller by a degree commen- estimate the statewide population at up to 15,000 surate with the reduction in numbers of OBPs arriving individuals, about 4% (about 600) being in the 10% of in very recent years, say 1/6 of the above or about Tasmania frequented by OBPs. At an average weight of 0.00016% (OBPRT 2014). about 550 g and eating about 15% of their weight per If we accept that the proportion of OBPs in day in the wild (projected from 8–10% in captivity, peregrines’ breeding diet is about this, how does that Mooney unpublished data, and from data in Newgrain translate to possible numbers of OBPs eaten (always et al. 1993), these 600 ‘brownies’ eat about 50 kg per day remembering we are projecting from 1 example)? To do or about 7425 kg in the 150 days OBPs are in this we must estimate how much a peregrine eats, how Tasmania. Although rarely regarded as a bird-catching many birds that represents and how many peregrines raptor, I have seen a Brown Falcon catch a Blue-winged there are in OBP areas while those parrots are present. Parrot, a bird that seems to have similar flight perform- The statewide peregrine population can be estimated ance to the OBP, and some Brown Falcons regularly from numbers of breeding pairs and known mortality catch birds (Cade 1982). In Tasmania about 2% (by rates at different ages (Mooney and Brothers 1987, weight) of this species’ prey is birds (Mooney 1993) at 600–800 individuals depending on the time of unpublished data), equating to about 186 kg (ingested) year. Ongoing monitoring shows the population is in that period or 247 kg corrected for wastage. The remarkably stable since recovering from the days of average bird they take is about 35 g so maybe they take heavy persecution and pesticide damage (Mooney in about 7053 birds where and while OBPs are in prep., Mooney 2013). Due to its generally low quality Tasmania, comparable to what I calculate is likely to be habitat, I estimate the 10% of Tasmania that OBPs use taken by the far fewer peregrines in that same place over contains about 2.5% of Tasmania’s peregrines; say that time. Perhaps between them, those 600 odd Brown about 20 birds, perhaps representing 4 nests. Falcons manage to take an OBP every few years. Amounts eaten Forest Ravens If we assign Tasmanian peregrines a weight of 700 g (small males are 500 g and large females 900 g) and To expand the consideration of the potential impact of each of these peregrines eats about 20% of its weight common predators, individuals of which might take few per day (12–15% in captivity but more in the wild birds, but collectively may take many, let us now because of greater exercise, Ratcliffe 1980), then those consider the Forest Raven. For some years I have been 20 peregrines together eat about 2.8 kg per day or about trying to monitor abundance of ravens in regard to the 6 disease driven change in Tasmanian Devil, Sarcophilus The most vulnerable time for OBPs may well be pre- harrisii, abundance (e.g. Hawkins et al. 2006). In doing so migratory flocking in the far north-west of Tasmania. In I have been doing point counts in various habitats, the days when there were enough OBPs for easy including some away from roads, in part to try and observation, there were occasional observations of reduce the influence of roadkill on counts (Mooney in attacks by raptors on mixed flocks of Blue-winged prep.). By my calculations, there may be 200,000 ravens Parrots, Neophema chrysostoma, and OBPs at Woolnorth at in Tasmania with about 3% (6,000) in the 10% of the that phase. Many of those parrots getting ready to leave state that OBPs currently use. Tasmania would be young and perhaps somewhat The usual ‘loafing’ style of ravens is very deceptive: inexperienced, but so would be many of the raptors they can leap into action given a realistic opportunity at hunting them. predation, and they do catch free-flying birds. (Several The net result is obvious; yes, a few ‘free-flying’ OBPs times I have seen ravens attacking flocks of starlings in a are likely taken by raptors in Tasmania each year, but persistent falcon-style attack, and twice have seen pairs the impact is likely to be so dispersed that management flying down Eastern Rosellas, Platycercus eximius, showing would be impossible even if it was deemed important skill, speed and persistence in doing so.) I do not have for the conservation of this very hard-pressed species. In reliable data on the proportion of their diet that is live addition, while predation events are so few, monitoring caught, free-flying birds, but, from prey remains at nests, for reduction in mortality as a consequence of manage- non-nestling birds seem to make up about 0.5% of their ment actions would be virtually impossible. OBPs are diet by weight, from observations of local pairs at now rarer than ever and I suggest that consequently Richmond, Tasmania, I suspect about half caught. fewer free-flying individuals than ever are taken by Ravens likely need about 15% of their body weight predators, perhaps even less than my calculations. (about 700 g) per day, which translates to about 105 g. An important take-home message for risk assessment Applying the 0.25% we get 0.262 g of bird per day or is that predation varies through time, space and species 0.35 g corrected for wastage. Therefore the 6,000 ravens (and probably individuals), and very common, oppor- using OBP range in Tasmania would catch about 3000 tunistic generalists can have a similar or even greater ☓ 150 ☓ 0.7 = 315 kg of birds each year during the impact to less common specialists. time that OBPs were present. By my calculations, free- flying bird prey of ravens averages about 25 g and, References therefore, this 315 kg translates into about 12,600 birds, Barrett, G., Silcocks, A., Barry, S., Cunningham, R. and well in excess of even specialist raptors and probably Poulter, R. 2003. New Atlas of Australian Birds. Birds Australia, Melbourne. more than all raptors combined!. We see that even a Blakers, M., Davies, S.J.J.F. and Davies, P.N. 1984. Atlas of very modest bird diet can translate into lots of birds if Australian Birds. RAOU, Melbourne. the predator is very common. Cade, T. 1982. Falcons of the World. Collins Press. Bowdler, S. 1984. ‘Hunter Hill, Hunter Island—Archeological Discussion and conclusion investigations of Prehistoric Tasmanian Sites’. Dep. We could of course apply this rationale to all raptors Prehistory Res.Sch. Prac. Stud. ANU, Canberra. that at least occasionally catch birds such as OBPs; Brothers, N., Pemberton, D., Pryor, H. and Halley V. 2001. Swamp Harrier, Collared Sparrowhawk, Accipiter cirro- Tasmania’s Offshore Islands: Seabirds and other Natural Features. cephalus, Brown Goshawks, A. fasciatus, Grey Goshawks, TMAG, Hobart. A. novaehollandiae, Australian Hobby, Falco longipennis, Mooney, N.J. and Brothers, N.P. 1987. ‘The Peregrine Falcon, Falco peregrinus macropus S, in Tasmania’. 1. Distribution, Nankeen Kestrel, F. c e n c h ro i d e s , Southern Boobook, Ninox abundance and physical characteristics of nests. Australian novaeseelandiae, and Masked Owl, Tyto novaehollandiae. We Wildlife Research. CSIRO Publishing. 14(1), pp. 81–93. can also attempt the calculation for every potential Mooney, N. and Brothers, N. 1990. ‘Dispersion, nest and pair predator of free-flying OBPs in Tasmania, including fidelity of peregrine falcons in Tasmania’. Tasmanian Bird both species of currawong, butcher-birds, kookaburras Report.19. Bird Observers’ Association of Tasmania (now and gulls, through to rats, cats and quolls, but for most BirdLife Tasmania). pp. 4–15. Mooney, N. 2013. ‘The Falcon Wars’. Wildlife Australia. species the result would be too speculative to be useful. Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland. Summer Like any model, such arguments are very vulnerable 2013, pp. 9–12. to small changes in input numbers, but I believe the Newgrain, K., Olsen P., Green B., Mooney N., Brothers R. above calculations and scale of results realistic. I know and Bartos, R. 1993. ‘Food consumption of free-living of no physical attribute or behaviour of OBPs that makes raptor nestlings’. Australian Raptor Studies. 1. RAOU. them especially vulnerable to diurnal raptors, although, OBPRT. 2014. National Recovery Plan for the Orange-bellied Parrot Neophema chrysogaster. Department of Environment and for all we know, a critical minimum flock size for OBP Primary Industries, East Melbourne. anti-predator behaviour to be fully effective may exist. Ratcliffe, D. 1980. The Peregrine Falcon. T & A.D. Poyser Ltd, Even so, such birds often join flocks of other species. UK.

7 High tide roosts and nest sites: South Arm shorebirds run out of options

Mike Newman, 72 Axiom Way, Acton Park 7170

Ferocious winds and peak tides at Lauderdale on 25 and flagged female (Yellow 8D, banded as a 4-year-old at 26 November 2015 highlighted the ongoing problem Corner Inlet in Victoria on 18 August 2006) laid near confronting our south-east Tasmanian shorebird the high-tide level on the beach immediately to the population with respect to finding roosting and breeding north of the spit. High tide on 25 November reached sites. Since regular shorebird counting began in the this point and the egg was resting in wet sand. The early 1960s (Thomas 1968) the main roost at the higher storm-driven tide on 26 November completely Lauderdale spit, to the north of the canal, has been submerged the nest site, resulting in breeding failure. progressively eroded. On 26 November, the spit was The lack of suitable nest sites at Lauderdale is completely under water. highlighted by the persistent use of a site immediately The Australian Pied Oystercatcher, Haematopus adjacent to the road opposite the BP garage at longirostris, has become the iconic shorebird species of Lauderdale. The female of this pair was killed on the the South Arm area. Between 2000 and 2005, numbers road on 24 October (Newman 2015). The male appears increased to around 800 (Fletcher and Newman 2010). to have a new partner, and on 26 November a pair was At that time, high tides periodically forced roosting and roosting at the former nest site within 1 m of moving breeding birds onto the road across the South Arm peak hour traffic. Neck causing road kills. At Lauderdale, where up to 400 The flagged female oystercatcher that bred at the feed at low tide (Fletcher and Newman 2010), oyster- point of the Lauderdale spit in 2014 was killed on the catchers had superior roost options. These included the road in almost the same spot on 15 May 2015. The aforementioned spit and the northern side of an area circumstances eventuating in this fatality are unknown, known as East Marsh Lagoon on the eastern side of the but it can be surmised that the bird had been displaced, Lauderdale causeway. possibly by high tides, from its normal roost site at the Recently the oystercatchers have also used an area of spit, which is about 30 m from the road. saltmarsh adjacent to Dixon Point Road as a preferred The reasons why Australian Pied Oystercatchers try to roost, although at very high tides this roost floods and roost on roads rather than moving to paddocks when the birds are forced to move to other areas like the side displaced by high tides is unclear. In contrast, Masked of East Marsh Lagoon. However, the flat East Marsh Lapwings appear to move directly to paddocks rather Lagoon roost is very exposed, making it sub-optimal than using the road as a staging point before moving to under gale force conditions. Consequently, on 25 paddocks. However, this conclusion is based on limited November, 25 oystercatchers alighted on Dixon Point observation and requires further investigation. Both Road, which was sheltered from the north-west winds; species will alight on roads and display when they have these birds were then reluctant to move. On 26 young. November at high tide, 3 oystercatchers were on the The Lauderdale spit roost is used by other species Dixon Point Road and they eventually joined a flock of including migratory Red-necked Stint, Calidris ruficollis, 110 oystercatchers roosting with Masked Lapwings, and Double-banded Plover, Charadrius bicinctus. Recently, Vanellus miles, on the adjacent hillside. these species have predominantly roosted on the beach The Lauderdale spit has provided annual breeding to the north of the spit and at the adjacent base of the opportunities for one or two pairs of Australian Pied spit, both of which sites would be impossible during Oystercatcher (Newman 2013) with nests located near storm conditions similar to those on 26 November 2015. the point. However, following persistent erosion, It is unclear what alternative roost is used under breeding sites at the spit are no longer viable and extreme conditions, but recently a roost in a small bay at although a pair laid there in the 2014–15 season, the the extreme end of the South Arm has been used as a eggs were washed out of the nest. In 2015 a pair that roost for up to 300 Red-necked Stint that presumably involved a new female partner following the loss of the have been displaced from roosts in their feeding areas at 8 Ralphs Bay and Lauderdale. There is no feeding area in because of a lack of high-tide roosts. In the case of the the bay containing this recently identified roost site. It is resident breeding shorebirds, this situation is exacer- probable that the stints usually come from nearby bated by the loss of breeding sites, and, in the case of Ralphs Bay. However, it is possible that under extreme the Australian Pied Oystercatcher, by behavioural conditions stints from Lauderdale may also use that roosting traits that result in increased adult mortality. location, which involves a movement of approximately 9 km. This possibility is given credence by the References occasional occurrence of an orange-flagged stint at Fletcher, A. and Newman, M. 2010. ‘Studies of the Australian Lauderdale and the roost location at the end of South Pied Oystercatcher in South-east Tasmania, 1964–2009’. Arm, but observations of the flagged bird were not Stilt. 58, pp. 24–33. synchronised. This new roost location, although not Newman, M. 2013. ‘Brood-capture by Australian Pied visited regularly in the past, is not thought to have been Oystercatchers’. Stilt. 63–64, pp. 16–21. used by migratory shorebirds. Hence its present use is Newman, M. 2015. ‘Why incubating oystercatchers dice with seen as a reflection of the extent to which the death at Lauderdale’. Yellow Throat. 84, pp. 7–8. historically important roosts have been degraded, Thomas, D.G. 1968. ‘Waders of Hobart’. Emu. 68, pp. 95– requiring the birds to adopt sub-optimal strategies. 126. In recent decades, the migratory wader populations of Clemens, R.S., Rogers, D.I., Hansen, B.D., Gosbell, K., south-east Tasmania have suffered severe decreases Minton, C.D.T., Straw, P., Bamford, M., Woehler, E.J., Milton, D.A., Weston, M.A., Venables, W., Weller, D., including local extinctions (Clemens et al. in press). Hassell, C., Rutherford, W., Onton, K., Herrod, A., Studds, Although these decreases have causes largely external to C.E., Choi C-Y, Dhanjal-Adams, K.L., Skilleter, G. and Tasmania, it is of extreme concern if roosts at their Fuller, R.A. In press. ‘Continental-scale decreases in local feeding grounds become unsuitable or unavailable shorebird populations in Australia’. Emu.

9 Coexisting with Noisy Miners: The Common Bronzewing’s strategy

Mike Newman, 72 Axiom Way, Acton Park, Tasmania 7170

The aggression of Noisy Miners, Manorina melanocephala, either the Common Bronzewing or the Brush Bronze- to other species is well known, as is highlighted in a wing, P. elegans, raising the wings as an agonistic display recent overview (Low 2014). Indeed, their role in (Higgins and Davies 1996). Indeed, both in the wild and keeping small birds out of vast areas of drier eucalypt in captivity, bronzewings appear non-aggressive. Wings forests and remnant woodlands in eastern Australia has are raised during breeding, but primarily after, rather resulted in nomination under federal law as a Key than as a prelude to, copulation. On the first occasion Threatening Process. However, some species like the that this behaviour was observed, raising the wing might Grey Butcherbird, Cracticus torquatis, and Eastern be attributed to a defence mechanism, with the pigeon Rosella, Platycercus eximius, have developed strategies for defending its head from attack. However, this was coexisting, sometimes advantageously, with Noisy clearly not the case on 11 April when the bronzewing Miners (Higgins et al. 2001; Newman 2013). The follow- advanced towards the Noisy Miner and contributed to ing observations suggest that, when necessary, the the confrontation. The effectiveness of this display Common Bronzewing, Phaps chalcoptera, has an effective suggests that Noisy Miners are perturbed by the bright strategy for combating aggressive Noisy Miners. russet colouration of the underwing, which is a feature The first observation occurred while I was using a of the Australian bronzewing species. However, raising ride-on mower in my garden. A Common Bronzewing wings as a threat display is said to be particularly that was standing on the grass raised a wing over its prominent in the Emerald Dove, Chalcophaps indica, body as a Noisy Miner flew at it. The bronzewing which also has a russet coloured underwing (Higgins subsequently flew off. It was not clear whether its depar- and Davies 1996). In the Acton Park area of Tasmania, ture was caused by my presence or by the aggressive Common Bronzewings regularly feed in lightly wooded behaviour of the Noisy Miner. My immediate reaction and even open areas, and interactions with Noisy was that the brilliant display of colour when the wing Miners must occur regularly, suggesting the observed was lifted was a defence response to the Noisy Miner’s behaviour probably occurs commonly. However, Acton attack. However, the observation was unexpected and Park is highly modified, creating a landscape in which the full context of the interaction between the two the despotic Noisy Miner thrives. Under natural circum- species was unclear. stances where understorey vegetation provides shelter Then, on 11 April 2015, a Common Bronzewing was for bronzewings, interactions with Noisy Miners would walking across grass near a birdbath towards our small be infrequent. Assuming the agonistic behaviour pond. A Noisy Miner on the ground between the described above is innate, it probably evolved in relation bronzewing and the birdbath adopted an aggressive to interactions between bronzewings and species other stance, thrusting its head and beak forward. The than Noisy Miners. This suggests much remains to be bronzewing responded by raising both wings and discovered about the behaviour of bronzewing pigeons. arching them above its back. As it passed the miner it orientated its direction so the miner was confronted by References the whole wing, which effectively provided a brightly Higgins, P.J. and Davies, S.J.J.E. 1996. (Eds) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 3: Snipe to coloured shield. The miner backed off. However, the Pigeons. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. bronzewing did not go to the birdbath but marched Higgins, P.J., Peter, M. and Steele, W.K. 2001. (Eds) Handbook about 15 m across the grass to the pond with the wings of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 5: raised above its back. When a second Noisy Miner flew Tyrant-flycatchers to Chats. Oxford University Press, at the bronzewing from behind the bronzewing Melbourne. appeared unconcerned; possibly it was unaware of the Low, T. 2014. Where Song Began. Penguin Group, Australia. Newman, M. 2013. ‘Association between breeding Noisy second miner’s presence. Miners and Grey Butcherbirds and the adverse impact of It is surprising that there is no previous mention of understorey’. The Whistler. Hunter Bird Observers. 7, 55. 10 Common Bronzewing, Phaps chalcoptera, Bowra Staon, Queensland. Image courtesy of Rod Warnock Footnote Since submitting this note I have observed many similar confrontations between Common Bronzewings and Noisy Miners in which wing raising occurred. The preceding photograph, taken in Queensland, shows the bright colouration of the underwing. In this instance, according to Rod Warnock the photographer (who I thank for supplying the image), there was no agonistic interaction with another species, but the birds may well feel under threat when they approach a waterhole.

11 Retention of native vegetation provides valuable bird habitat in acreage developments

Mike Newman, 72 Axiom Way, Acton Park, Tasmania 7170

Background properties retain native vegetation that provides Surveys at two sites on the Tangara Trail in Acton Park important bird habitat. near Hobart, Tasmania, revealed surprisingly high bird Two sites, named Five Ways and Black Peppermint, diversity in remnant native vegetation located within a were selected for bird surveys, both within a short highly fragmented landscape. Forty-three woodland bird walking distance of the author’s home. The survey sites species were recorded over a 15-month period, which were in areas where substantial amounts of native slightly exceeded the maximum number of 41 species vegetation had been retained either on the Tangara that was previously found within any of the local wood- Trail or in adjacent acreage gardens. The purpose of lands. The very high bird diversity at the Acton Park this paper, which covers the first 15 months of an study area is attributed to the interfacial nature of the ongoing study, is to determine the extent to which the remnant habitat, which provided birds with various remnant native vegetation provides habitat for native foraging options and shelter from aggressive Noisy bird species. The longer term objective is to monitor Miners, which dominated adjacent open areas. changes in the local bird population, both at these sites Relatively low frequency of occurrence (reporting and on a landscape scale, by feeding into BirdLife rate) at the survey sites suggests that most species are Australia’s (BLA) national bird monitoring atlas using the study area opportunistically for short periods. database (Birdata) and publications like BLA’s State of It would appear that the remnant native vegetation of Australia’s Birds series. the Tangara Trail facilitates movement of birds between Methods the remaining patches of continuous woodland in the Surveys began in April 2014 at Five Ways and in May area. Unfortunately, clearing on acreage properties 2014 at Black Peppermint, continuing at a frequency of continues to remove native vegetation, so increasing the between two and three surveys each month until the end isolation of the remaining woodlands. Native plantings of June 2015. The BLA 2 ha survey method was used, in gardens and on the Tangara Trail may offset ongoing which involves recording the presence of all bird species habitat loss, but restoration is a slow process and must during a 20-minute period, both seen and heard in, and have the shrub and groundcover structure to provide including species flying over, the 2 ha survey site. Care shelter from Noisy Miners if it is to support the was taken to avoid over-reporting of species calling movement of native birds through the landscape. outside the survey area, particularly Forest Ravens, Introducon Corvus tasmanicus, which were often heard beyond the About 25 years ago an area of tea-tree scrub with heath limits of the 2 ha sites. Typically surveys began between understorey that lay between Acton Road and Single one and three hours after sunrise. Hill, near Hobart in south-east Tasmania, was Both survey sites involved approximately 200 m of the developed by extending Axiom Way and establishing a Tangara Trail with birds recorded in adjacent gardens number of acreage blocks, typically between one and up to 50 m either side of the track. Results of the five hectares in size. Throughout this subdivision and surveys were submitted to Birdata (Five Ways survey site the rest of Acton Park, a network of horse trails was ID 320601, coordinates 42.878°S 147.487°E; Black established by the Clarence Council, collectively known Peppermint survey site ID 321312, coordinates as the Tangara Trail. These tracks extend from the 42.875°S 147.487°E). Seven Mile Beach area to the neck of the South Arm Habitat peninsula. Some of these horse trails and adjacent Superficially the habitat at the two survey sites was 12 similar, involving a combination of some blocks that had been cleared and others with extensive stands of tea- tree and banksia shrubs as well as heath-dominated groundcover vegetation. There were similar numbers of scattered mature trees at both sites. The main difference between the two sites was that the Tangara Trail was broader at the Five Ways; it has an extensive central strip of dense tea-tree and banksia scrub (figure 1). In contrast, the track at Black Peppermint was narrower with the shrub layer removed and the heath ground- cover vegetation periodically slashed. However, two adjacent blocks at Black Peppermint were dominated by native vegetation; one was virtually unmodified tea-tree scrub. The adjoining block was dominated by heath groundcover with a few banksia shrubs, which had been established by the removal of tea-tree and bracken Figure 2: Herb garden with banksias and flowering Common (figure 2). At both survey sites some properties had open Heath, aracve to Eastern Spinebills during winter, at Black chicken pens that attracted introduced species of bird. Peppermint survey site. © Mike Newman At Five Ways, shrub and groundcover vegetation was removed from two blocks during the study, and this Results converted them to grassy paddock. There was a small Overall 45 species were recorded with a list of 41 dam on one of these blocks. species at both sites. The mean numbers of species per survey were 10.1 (standard deviation 2.9; range 3–16) at Five Ways and 11 (standard deviation 3.8; range 3–17) at Black Peppermint. The full species lists and reporting rates are shown in the Appendix (page 19). The ten most frequently observed species for each site and for the combined sites are shown in table 1 (page 14), where they are ranked according to their reporting rate. At Black Peppermint, nine species had a reporting rate that exceeded 50%, and a similar number had a reporting rate that exceeded 40% at the Five Ways. Six species were common to both lists (table 1). Four species, Grey Fantail, Rhipidura fuliginosa, Superb Fairy-wren, Malurus cyaneus, Little Wattlebird, Anthochaera chrysoptera, and Brown Thornbill, Acanthiza pusilla, were among the six most frequently reported species at both sites. The Noisy Miner, Manorina melanocephala, occurred more Figure 1: Tea-tree and banksia scrub with emergent tree regularly at Five Ways, where it was ranked as the fifth canopy bordered by recently cleared paddock on Tangara most frequently observed species. Three introduced Trail at Five Ways survey site. © Mike Newman species were ranked in the top ten at Black Peppermint, Interpretation of results with two species, Common Blackbird, Turdus merula, and Reporting rates (RR%) were used to compare the Spotted Dove, Streptopelia chinensis, being equal second frequency of occurrence of bird species at the two and fifth most frequently recorded species respectively. survey sites. This measure adjusted for the bias At Five Ways there were two introduced species among associated with the slightly larger number of surveys the ten most frequently recorded: the Common Starling, (36) conducted at Five Ways compared with Black Sturnus vulgaris, and Common Blackbird, ranked eighth Peppermint (31). In addition, there were more autumn and tenth respectively. Spotted Doves appeared to have and winter surveys than spring and summer because the colonised the area during the study. During the first six study covered a 15-month period. In making the months there occurred just three records, all at Black seasonal comparisons of reporting rates, results were Peppermint (overall RR 11.5%). Subsequently, they pooled into two-month periods to obtain statistically were recorded regularly at both sites (overall RR meaningful sample sizes. 70.7%), particularly at Black Peppermint where a flock The χ² test with a Yates correction for 1 degree of of more than ten regularly fed in a chicken enclosure freedom was used to test the statistical difference and roosted on a nearby house and outbuildings. The between the occurrences of species at the two survey increase in occurrence after the first six months was sites (Fowler and Cohen 1987). highly significant statistically (χ²=10.5, p=0.0012). 13 Introduced House Sparrows, Passer domesticus, were also half the complete species list of 45 (Appendix, page 19), recorded more frequently at Black Peppermint than at had a reporting rate of less than 20%. Five Ways. The rates at which the number of species accumu- lated at the two sites are shown in figure 4. At both sites Black Peppermint Combined sites RR Rank* Five Ways RR (%) the list reached a plateau after about 25 surveys, which RR (%) (%) Grey Fantail Superb Fairy-wren Lile Walebird corresponded to the end of summer. The continued 1 (88.9%) (81.7%) (79.1%)** high rate of accumulation of new species during the 10- Brown Thornbill Lile Walebird Brown Thornbill and 20-survey intervals is partly associated with the 2 (88.3%) (77.4%) (79.1%)** arrival of summer migrants. Lile Walebird Common Blackbird Grey Fantail 3 (80.6%) (77.4%)** (76.1%) Superb Fairy-wren Brown Thornbill Superb Fairy-wren 4 (63.9%) (74.2%) (74.6%) Noisy Miner Spoed Dove Common Blackbird 5 (52.8%) (67.7%) (55.2%) Green Rosella Grey Fantail Green Rosella 6 (50.0%) (61.3%)** (50.7%) Forest Raven Eastern Spinebill Spoed Dove 7 (47.2%) (61.3%)** (47.8%) Common Starling House Sparrow Noisy Miner 8 (44.4%) (54.8%) (41.8%)** Golden Whistler Green Rosella Common Starling 9 (41.7%) (51.6%) (41.8%)** Common Blackbird Spoed Pardalote Forest Raven 10 (36.1%) (41.8%) (40.3%) Figure 4: Variaon in the number of species records at survey sites with the number of surveys conducted. Table 1: The ten most frequently recorded bird species at the two survey sites. Seasonal variaons *Species ranked in decreasing order of frequency of It was only possibly to draw meaningful conclusions occurrence (i.e. reporng rate). about the seasonal variations of species if they occurred ** Species ranked equal. regularly at a site for part of the year. The following No attempt was made to adjust the reporting rates of species were selected for discussion because they migrant species (e.g. Dusky Woodswallow, Artamus provided either unexpected results or exemplified typical cyanopterus, Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike, Coracina novae- types of seasonal occurrence. hollandiae, and the Cuckoos, Cuculidae) to account for the The seasonal occurrence of Eastern Spinebills, Acan- limited period they spend in southern Tasmania. thorhynchus tenuirostris, recorded at the Black Peppermint However, none of these species would approach the site (overall RR 61.3%) is shown in figure 5. It was less frequency of occurrence of the top 10 species in table 1, frequent at Five Ways (RR 11.2%). even if their reporting rates were doubled to account for their seasonal presence.

Figure 5: Seasonal Variaon in the occurrence of Eastern Spinebills at the Black Peppermint survey site between April Figure 3: Variaon in the Reporng Rate (%) for the species 2014 and Jun 2015 (minimum of 4 surveys for each two- observed at the Five Ways and Black Peppermint survey sites month period). (results combined). The seasonal variation of the Grey Fantail, which was Figure 3 shows that most of the species were observed among the six most frequently recorded species at both relatively infrequently. Twenty-five species, or more than survey sites (table 1) is shown in figure 6. 14 Trail to forage on open ground in the recently cleared blocks. These results highlight the importance of shrub- layer vegetation to small native birds. This habitat attribute can be rapidly removed, as occurred at Five Ways, but the shrub layer then takes a number of years to regenerate. Another aggressive species, the Little Wattlebird, was among the four most frequently recorded species at both sites, predominantly feeding on the banksias in the shrub vegetation. Because the habitat types preferred by Noisy Miners and Little Wattlebirds are different, their interaction was limited, and hence conflict was reduced, but both species were Figure 6: Seasonal Variaon of the occurrence of Grey aggressive to other honeyeaters such as the Eastern Fantails for the combined results of surveys at Five Ways and Spinebill and the New Holland Honeyeater, Phylidonyris Black Peppermint between April 2014 and Jun 2015 novaehollandiae, which were competing for the nectar (minimum of 8 surveys for each two-month period). sources of the banksias and heath plants, particularly at Black Peppermint. Discussion The native vegetation complex to which the Five Ways and Black Peppermint sites formed a central hub The combined species list for the two survey sites, which was surrounded by park-like open ground ideally suited involved 4 ha of habitat in a locality mainly comprising to Noisy Miners. Smaller species moving through these small acreage lots, was 45. All of the blocks surrounding areas to the survey sites, like honeyeaters and Spotted the site had dwellings, mostly located at or beyond the Pardalotes, Pardalotus punctatus, were actively pursued as extremities of the area surveyed. The observed species they crossed open areas to reach the sanctuary of the diversity was surprising given that two aggressive honey- native vegetation. Species that characteristically coexist eaters, the Little Wattlebird and the Noisy Miner, were with Noisy Miners, such as Eastern Rosellas, Platycercus among the most frequently observed species at both sites eximius, Grey Butcherbirds, Cracticus torquatus, and the (table 1). The Little Wattlebird (RR 79.1%) was one of Australian Magpie, Cracticus tibicen, were, like the Noisy the two most frequently recorded species: it ranked Miner, relatively infrequently recorded at the survey equally with the Brown Thornbill. There was also an sites (table 1 and the Appendix) considering their abun- interesting mix of native and introduced species at both dance close to the survey sites. The enhancement of sites. As discussed in more detail later, it is proposed that these three species in the presence of Noisy Miners has the retention of native vegetation, including ground- been noted previously (MacDonald and Kirkpatrick cover, shrub layer and trees, coupled with anthropogenic 2003). food sources, fosters the high diversity and the perhaps Rosellas unusual mix of native and introduced avian species. Both Green Rosellas, Platycercus caledonicus (combined Noisy Miner impact sites RR 50.7%), and Eastern Rosellas (combined site Noisy Miners were among the ten most frequently RR 30.9%) were recorded with similar frequencies at recorded species (table 1) and were the fifth most the two survey sites. The Green Rosella favoured the frequently reported species at Five Ways (RR 52.8%). remnant native vegetation and usually avoided open They occurred less frequently at Black Peppermint (RR areas where understorey vegetation had been removed. 28.1%), but this difference was not statistically Eastern Rosellas were the dominant species in the areas significant (χ²=1.94, p=0.16). At both sites the Noisy surrounding the survey sites, which, as discussed before, Miner colonies were located at extremities of the survey had a park-like vegetation structure involving isolated sites where there were properties from which all shrubs trees and extensive grassy areas that were dominated by and groundcover vegetation had been removed. The colonies of Noisy Miners. The more frequent obser- Noisy Miners mainly avoided areas within the survey vation of Green Rosellas (table 1) during the study was sites where native vegetation had been retained, even consistent with their favoured habitat being the native when there was tree canopy above the shrub layer. The vegetation at the survey sites. However, to reach this ongoing clearing at Five Ways progressively increased habitat island, Green Rosellas must move through that site’s suitability to the miners. However, sufficient unsuitable park-like habitat. Grey Butcherbirds were lower vegetation remained to provide both food and recorded at both sites, but very infrequently (RR 5.9%). shelter for small native species like the Brown Thornbill, However, they were frequently heard calling in the Grey Fantail and Superb Fairy-wren, all of which were vicinity of the survey sites, which is consistent with the among the four most frequently recorded species. At known tendency for butcherbirds to be embedded in Five Ways, the Superb Fairy-wrens were often noted Noisy Miner colonies (Newman 2013, MacDonald and emerging from the dense remnant scrub onto Tangara Kirkpatrick 2003). 15 Site preferences and seasonal variation duration (one year) to this, and typically involved 10–12 Eastern Spinebills favoured Black Peppermint (RR surveys timed at approximately monthly intervals along 61.3%) compared with Five Ways (RR 11.1%). This transects that were selected to avoid woodland edge statistically highly significant difference (χ²=10.1, effects. Species accumulation curves similar to that p=0.001) was primarily attributed to prolific flowering of shown in figure 4 indicated that, with the exception of heath and other groundcover plants in a bush garden one location, few species were being accumulated beside the track at Black Peppermint. Spinebills were towards the end of one year, which suggested that the most abundant between May and August, which species list reflected the bird diversity of the woodland. corresponds with the peak flowering of the heath, and The exception was woodland at Mt Rumney, where, after were absent in November and December (figure 5). The 12 visits, the species list was still increasing, which Five Ways site had limited groundcover floristic values. suggested there had been insufficient survey effort. The In contrast, Crescent Honeyeaters, which migrate decreased rate of species accumulation (figure 4) after altitudinally (Watts 1999) in winter, were only recorded around 25 surveys at both sites in this study suggests that at Five Ways (RR 19.4%). Causes for this statistically the diversity of 45 species for the combined sites was significant difference between the survey sites (χ²=4.4, representative of the local bird population and could be p=0.04) were unclear because banksias, a favoured food used to compare species diversity with LeFort’s values source, were present at both sites. However, differences for woodlands in the Clarence area. In LeFort’s study in vegetation structure between the sites may have been the highest species diversity was 41 for 800 ha of important (MacDonald and Kirkpatrick 2003). woodland on Mt Rumney. Removal of non-woodland Although the Grey Fantail was slightly more species (e.g. Australian Wood Duck, Chenonetta jubata) frequently recorded at Five Ways (RR 88.9%) than at decreased the diversity in this study to 43 species, which Black Peppermint (RR 76.1%), this difference was not was slightly greater than that found in any woodland statistically significantly. Grey Fantails were recorded in habitats in the surrounding area. This is remarkably every month, as is indicated by the seasonal variation for diverse, even if the survey sites are deemed to be part of the combined sites shown in figure 6. Grey Fantails were 10 ha of generally similar habitat. Various studies, recorded at both survey sites during the July–August including LeFort’s, have shown that species diversity period when there were four records. This suggests that increases with woodland size. Indeed, the present study’s the Grey Fantail’s current winter status is more common diversity compares well with the total of 56 species than indicated in the literature: e.g. ‘a common summer recorded across all eight woodland locations in LeFort’s migrant although a few may over-winter’ (Watts 1999). study. Possible explanations of the high diversity found The Grey Fantail was recorded at many other sheltered in this study include: locations through the Acton and South Arm peninsula 1. Differences in the vegetation of the survey sites from areas during the winters of 2014 and 2015 (Newman that of the woodland sites in LeFort’s study, which unpublished results). It is possible that the extent to predominantly involved dry sclerophyll forest with which Grey Fantails migrate has decreased consequent some wet gullies. At the Acton Park study location, on climate change. vegetation comprised a combination of coastal heath- Introduced species land and dry sclerophyll woodland, perhaps more The Common Blackbird was the only introduced typical of the adjacent South Arm peninsula. species that was regularly recorded in the remnant 2. LeFort’s selection of transects away in the centre of native vegetation; it probably uses the cover to limit the remnant woodlands in order to avoid edge effects. harassment by Little Wattlebirds and Noisy Miners Many bird species thrive on habitat edges, which (Alan Fletcher personal comment). However, the Grey provide varied foraging options, as demonstrated in Butcherbird may be a more potent threat: the author this study by the observation of Superb Fairy-wrens recently observed one dragging a dead male blackbird feeding in open areas and sheltering in the adjacent to a bird bath in Acton Park and commencing to eat it. native shrub layer. Three of the four introduced species, Spotted Dove, 3. Differences in survey effort in terms of both the total Common Starling and House Sparrow, appeared to be amount of time spent at the survey sites and the attracted by available anthropogenic food sources and frequency of the visits. As will be discussed further, structures. It is uncertain whether changes to the feeding more than half the species observed at the Acton of chickens at Black Peppermint made food more Park sites had a RR of <20% and were probably available and thus resulted in the apparent colonisation only temporally using the site, either as a conduit for of the area by Spotted Doves during the study. moving through fragmented landscape or in nomadic Comparison with other studies manner. LeFort (2002) carried out a comparative study of The 56 species record by LeFort included a number of woodland birds at eight locations that included urban wet sclerophyll species that were found in wet habitat remnants and the fringe areas of Clarence jurisdiction embedded within predominantly dry sclerophyll in which Acton Park is located. His study was of similar vegetation. The wet gullies that provide this mosaic of 16 habitat types are absent in the Acton Park area and intermittently recorded at both sites (RR 17.9%). The consequently the guild of species that prefer wetter Beautiful Firetail has declined to the verge of local woodland (Ridpath and Moreau 1966) were not seen extinction on the South Arm peninsula where it was (e.g. Tasmanian Thornbill, Acanthiza ewingii, Strong- formerly plentiful. It appears to be a species that is billed Honeyeater, Melithreptus validirostris, and Pink Robin, severely impacted by urbanisation and was not detected Petroica rodinogaster). The Tasmanian Scrubwren, Sericornis in LeFort’s woodland study, although it still occurs at a humilis, was also absent, in keeping with its status on the number of locations in the Meehan Range. adjacent South Arm peninsula. This species, although LeFort (2002) also surveyed a number of urban streets primarily found in wet woodland, occurs in surrounding within 100 m of remnant woodland edges in the drier woodland where there is dense undergrowth. Clarence area. Species richness at these sites was The Black-headed Honeyeater, Melithreptus affinis, the typically in the range 8–13 species, much lower than Dusky Robin, Melanodryas vittata, and Tree Martin, found at the Acton Park survey sites, which at least Petrochelidon nigricans, were not recorded in the present superficially resemble the diverse habitats of woodland surveys. All three of these species favour dry sclerophyll as opposed to urban bird habitat. woodland and coastal scrub (LeFort 2002, Ridpath and Importance of the Acton sites Moreau 1966) and occur on the adjacent South Arm As indicated previously, few species were permanently peninsula and the nearby Mt Rumney Range. The present at the survey sites, only six species having RRs Yellow Wattlebird, Anthochaera paradoxa, was only in excess of 50% (table 1). The survey methodology was recorded on one occasion and even the Yellow-throated not effective in detecting breeding activity. It is unlikely Honeyeater, Lichenostomus flavicollis, the most ubiquitous that many species were resident in the vicinity of the of the honeyeater species that feed in the tree canopy, survey sites. Also as indicated previously, many species’ was infrequently recorded (RR 20.9%) suggesting that occurrence was transient, either to opportunistically the Acton Park sites provided limited attraction to this exploit a temporary food resource or for shelter while group of species. LeFort (2002) only found the Dusky passing through a relatively open landscape dominated Robin in the two largest patches of woodland and they by aggressive Noisy Miners. Thus the network of were absent in remnants smaller than 200 ha. The retained native vegetation along the Tangara Trails and closely related Hooded Robin, Melanodryas cucullata, of in the adjacent gardens, both in Acton Park and in other mainland Australia has been found to be susceptible to areas, appears to facilitate the movement of native bird habitat fragmentation and, once lost from a remnant species between woodland remnants, which thus allows woodland, is unlikely to recolonise without assistance the existing diversity of the smaller woodlands to be (Garnett and Crowley 2000). LeFort’s results suggest sustained. similar conclusions apply to the Dusky Robin and it is Many residents of Acton Park own horses and, as thus unsurprising that it is absent from the highly experienced during this study, there is ongoing removal fragmented habitat of the Acton Park area. The Tree of native vegetation, particularly shrubs and ground- Martin is expected to occur at the Acton Park sites with cover, which increases the influence of the despotic ongoing survey effort. Other aerial feeders such as the Noisy Miner. However, other residents garden keenly Welcome Swallow, Hirundo neoxena (5.9%), and Dusky and, provided that native plantings with extensive shrub Woodswallow, Artamus cyanopterus (RR 4.5%), were also cover are encouraged, it is possible that ongoing scarce. White-throated Needletail, Hirundapus caudacutus, vegetation losses will be offset as gardens become were seen over the survey sites, but not during the established. Clarence Council is also revegetating parts surveys. of the Tangara Trail. If these plantings are to facilitate Horsfield’s Bronze-Cuckoo, Chalcites basalis, and the the movement of native species throughout the area, Beautiful Firetail, Stagonopleura bella, are two other species they must have an approximate structure that involves a that would have been expected to occur in the area shrub layer which provides shelter for the smaller bird historically. However, the lack of records in this study is species like thornbills and fairy-wrens. Many native not unexpected. Horsfield’s Bronze-Cuckoo has become plants are marketed as bird attracting, but in a highly very scarce in the Hobart area recently (Alan Fletcher fragmented area like Acton Park the attraction of many personal comment). The reasons for this decline are bird species will only occur if a mosaic of suitable unknown, but the author has noticed a similar decline in vegetation is created to facilitate the movement of native its presence in coastal New South Wales, suggesting that birds and negate the impact of the Noisy Miners. its coastal range may have contracted, possibly Unfortunately, destruction of habitat is a much faster associated with wetter conditions in the interior of process than restoration and regeneration, which Australia. It is also possible that the local decline is in typically take five or ten years before the vegetation mix part a consequence in the reduction of numbers of and structure provides shelter for smaller bird species. Yellow-rumped Thornbills, Acanthiza chrysorrhoa (Alan Unless these can be achieved, increasing numbers of Fletcher personal comment), which is a host for this native birds will be alienated from the Acton Park area brood parasite. Yellow-rumped Thornbills were and the health of the bird populations in the smaller 17 remnant woods will decrease as the birds become more reasons that are unclear, it and its mainland relative the and more isolated. Hooded Robin (Garnett 2000) have difficulty moving through fragmented landscapes like Acton Park, and Conclusions their distribution becomes restricted to large areas of The bird diversity at two 2 ha survey sites in Acton Park woodland. In Clarence they are absent from remnant on the Tangara Trail was surprisingly high, with 41 woodlands less than 200 ha in area (LeFort 2002). This species recorded at both sites and a combined species exemplifies the imperative to prevent further list of 45, including 43 woodland birds. This is higher fragmentation and gradually restore the connectivity of than the maximum diversity of 41 found at Mt Rumney native vegetation to protect near-urban bird population during a study of birds in eight woodlands, including diversity. isolated remnants, in the Clarence area (LeFort 2002). The Acton Park survey sites were selected at a location Acknowledgments where native shrub layer vegetation had been retained The results of this paper are a tribute to those people both on the Tangara Trail and in adjacent acreage who had the vision to establish the Tangara Trail and to gardens. The shrub layer and groundcover vegetation the wisdom of Acton Park residents who have retained provided both food resources and shelter for bird native vegetation on their properties. species. The vegetation mix and structure is particularly I would like to thank Andrew Silcocks of BirdLife important because much of the surrounding Acton Park Australia for his assistance with the extraction of results area has been cleared, resulting in a park-like landscape from Birdata. Alan Fletcher, as always, freely provided with grassy paddocks, scattered trees and no shrub his insights into the birds of Hobart’s eastern shore undergrowth. Under these conditions, aggressive Noisy region and the long-term trends in their status. His Miners are the dominant species and bird diversity is wisdom provided a sanity check for many of the low. Noisy Miner colonies were present at the edges of inferences drawn in this paper. Eric Woehler and Glen both survey sites, but they had little impact on small Bain pointed me in the direction of highly relevant species like Brown Thornbills and Superb Fairy-wrens previous studies. that were present at the interface between the native vegetation and cleared areas. Indeed, the high bird References diversity at the survey sites may stem from their inter- Fowler, J. and Cohen, L. 1987. BTO Guide No. 22. Statistics facial nature, which provides more diverse foraging for Ornithologists. British Trust for Ornithology, Tring. options than are available within continuous woodland. Garnett, S.T. and Crowley, G.M. 2000. The Action Plan for It is suspected that most bird species’ use of the Acton Australian Birds 2000. Environment Australia. Park study sites was transient and that relatively few LeFort, P. 2002. ‘The relationship between woodland species were breeding residents. On this basis it is remnant size and bird diversity in an urban landscape in concluded that small remnant vegetation hubs like those southern Tasmania’. Master of Environmental Manage- ment Thesis. Centre of Environmental Studies, University around the survey sites facilitate native birds’ movement of Tasmania. through the highly fragmented Acton Park landscape. MacDonald, M.A. and Kirkpatrick J.B. 2003. ‘Explaining Unfortunately, clearing of this scarce vegetation resource bird species composition and richness in eucalypt-dominated is ongoing. Native plantings, both on the Tangara Trail remnants in subhumid Tasmania’. Journal of Biogeography. 30, and within the gardens, may offset this loss provided pp. 1415–26. that such plantings have appropriate structure in terms Newman, M. 2013. ‘Association between breeding Noisy of shrub and ground layer plants that provide both food Miners and Grey Butcherbirds and the adverse impact of understorey’. The Whistler. 7, p. 55. Hunter Bird Observers. and shelter for small species. Ridpath, M.G. and Moreau R.E. 1966. ‘The birds of During a 15-month period, all the commoner species Tasmania: ecology and evolution’. Ibis. 108, pp. 348–93. of dry sclerophyll woodland in the Hobart area were Watts, D. 1999. Field Guide to Tasmanian Birds. Reed New recorded with the exception of the Dusky Robin. For Holland.

18 Appendix

Summary of survey results

Five Ways Black Peppermint Combined Common name Scienfic name RR (%) RR (%) RR (%) Australian Wood Duck Chenonea jubata 5.6 0.0 3.0 Spoed Dove Streptopelia chinensis 30.6 67.7 47.8 Common Bronzewing Phaps chalcoptera 13.9 9.7 12.0 White-faced Heron Egrea novaehollandiae 2.8 3.2 3.0 Brown Goshawk Accipiter fasciatus 5.6 3.2 4.5 Brown Falcon Falco berigora 2.8 0.0 1.5 Masked Lapwing Vanellus miles 11.1 6.5 9.0 Galah Eolophus roseicapillus 2.8 6.5 4.5 Long-billed Corella Cacatua tenuirostris 0.0 3.2 1.5 Sulphur-crested Cockatoo Cacatua galerita 2.8 6.5 4.5 Musk Lorikeet Glossopsia concinna 30.6 22.6 26.9 Green Rosella Platycercus caledonicus 50.0 51.6 50.7 Eastern Rosella Platycercus eximius 27.8 35.5 31.4 Shining Bronze-Cuckoo Chalcites lucidus 11.1 6.5 9.0 Pallid Cuckoo Cacomans pallidus 11.1 3.2 7.4 Fan-tailed Cuckoo Cacomans flabelliformis 0.0 3.2 1.5 Laughing Kookaburra Dacelo novaeguineae 16.7 19.4 17.9 Superb Fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus 63.9 87.1 74.6 Yellow-rumped Thornbill Acanthiza chrysorrhoa 19.4 16.1 17.9 Brown Thornbill Acanthiza pusilla 83.3 74.2 79.1 Spoed Pardalote Pardalotus punctatus 33.3 41.9 37.3 Striated Pardalote Pardalotus striatus 16.7 29.0 22.4 Eastern Spinebill Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris 11.1 61.3 34.3 Yellow-throated Honeyeater Lichenostomus flavicollis 16.7 25.8 20.9 Noisy Miner Manorina melanocephala 52.8 29.0 41.8 Lile Walebird Anthochaera chrysoptera 80.6 77.4 79.1 Yellow Walebird Anthochaera paradoxa 0.0 3.2 1.5 Crescent Honeyeater Phylidonyris pyrrhopterus 19.4 0.0 10.4 New Holland Honeyeater Phylidonyris novaehollandiae 22.2 29.0 25.3 Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike Coracina novaehollandiae 2.8 19.4 10.5 Golden Whistler Pachycephala pectoralis 41.7 19.4 31.4 Grey Shrike-thrush Colluricincla harmonica 33.3 16.1 25.3 Dusky Woodswallow Artamus cyanopterus 0.0 9.7 4.5 Grey Butcherbird Craccus torquatus 5.6 6.5 6.0 Australian Magpie Craccus bicen 11.1 22.6 16.4 Grey Currawong Strepera versicolor 8.3 9.7 8.9 Grey Fantail Rhipidura fuliginosa 88.9 61.3 76.1 Forest Raven Corvus tasmanicus 47.2 32.3 40.3 Scarlet Robin Petroica mulcolor 27.8 6.5 17.9 Silvereye Zosterops lateralis 2.8 6.5 4.5 Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena 8.3 3.2 5.9 Common Blackbird Turdus merula 36.1 77.4 55.2 Common Starling Sturnus vulgaris 44.4 38.7 41.8 House Sparrow Passer domescus 2.8 54.8 26.9 European Goldfinch Carduelis carduelis 2.8 0.0 1.5 Number of species 41 41 45 19 Huon Island surveys 2014–15

Eric Woehler and Peter Vertigan, BirdLife Tasmania

Execuve summary Tasmania. Further, the findings reported here, and those Two brief visits to Huon Island in the 2014–15 summer from proposed surveys in 2015–16, will be fundamental confirmed the presence of Little Penguin and Short- to future management efforts on the island. tailed Shearwater breeding colonies on Huon Island. A breeding colony of Kelp Gull was also present, and a breeding territory of Sooty Oystercatcher was located. Surveys were confined to the Coastal Reserve, and extensive colonies of penguins and shearwaters were identified on private property inland of the reserve. Significant changes to the distribution and abundance of nesting seabirds relative to earlier surveys were identified, and this highlights the need for more frequent surveys and greater effort to estimate breeding popu- lations. The bird list for the island comprises at least 36 species. Further surveys in 2015–16 are planned so that improved data for Huon Island will support manage- ment and conservation efforts. Introducon Huon Island is roughly triangular in shape, oriented north-east to south-west along its longest axis. The island is approximately 1.1 km long and 800 m wide, rising to more than 30 m ASL and covering approx- imately 47 ha (figure 1). The island is known to support breeding colonies of Little Penguin, Eudyptula minor, and Short-tailed Shearwater, Ardenna tenuirostris (Brothers et al. 2001), figure 2. Figure 1: SPOT image of Huon Island. In 2014 the Huon Valley Council and the Friends of Huon Island (FOHI) care group invited BirdLife Tas- mania to undertake surveys for nesting Little Penguin and Short-tailed Shearwater. The surveys were needed to inform proposed habitat restoration and revegetation efforts on the island by FOHI. The aims of the 2014–15 survey were to: • obtain GPS data on the locations of breeding colonies and nests within the Coastal Reserve; • update the bird list for Huon Island; and • provide preliminary advice to FOHI regarding proposed rehabilitation efforts on the island. This report presents preliminary findings based on two brief inspection visits that were undertaken to inform future survey planning and efforts by BirdLife Figure 2: Seabird colonies on Huon Island (Brothers et al. 2001). 20 Methods foreshore rocks or in the nearby vegetation immediately Field surveys inland. Surveys were conducted during the 2014–15 breeding A breeding colony of Black-faced Cormorant, season on 28 December 2014 and 15 April 2015 (figure Phalacrocorax fuscescens, was present at the navigation 3). The visit on 28 December 2014 comprised a near- beacon on the south coast. As with the Kelp Gulls, the circumnavigation of the island on foot and an initial colony was not mapped in order to prevent disturbance inspection of locations of the penguin and shearwater to the nesting adults and large chicks; however, it was colonies shown in Brothers et al. (2001). estimated to support a minimum of 40 nests. All field surveys for mapping burrowing seabirds and nesting shorebirds followed methods used previously by BirdLife Tasmania elsewhere (e.g. Vertigan and Woehler 2013, 2014; Woehler and Ruoppolo 2014). The initial 2014–15 surveys were confined to the Coastal Reserve on the periphery of the island, with nil survey effort for burrowing seabirds on private property. All GPS data were captured with a Garmin eTrex 30 12-channel GPS receiver in real time. The coordinates of breeding territories’ centroids and any nests encoun- tered were recorded as UTM coordinates using WGS 84 datum. Linear distances surveyed and other metrics were calculated by Garmin software. Weather conditions during the surveys were recorded at the start of each survey, and any change in conditions during a survey was also recorded when observed (e.g., changes in wind strength or direction). Bird list for Huon Island All previous records in the BirdLife Tasmania database for birds recorded from Huon Island and surrounding waters were extracted. In addition, the DPIPWE Natural Values Atlas was searched for all bird records from Huon Island. All observations made during the 2014–15 survey were included to generate a preliminary list of Figure 3: Survey tracks, 28 December 2014 (light blue and bird species recorded from Huon Island. orange), and 15 April 2015 (light green), Huon Island.

Results Huon Island bird list A total of 36 bird species have been recorded on Huon Field surveys Island, and they comprise almost 80 records (BirdLife The visit on 28 December 2014 comprised a near- Tasmania unpublished data), table 1. circumnavigation of the island, on foot, and an initial The species list is considerably greater than that of inspection of the penguin and shearwater colony locations Brothers et al. (2001), who reported just two species on a shown in Brothers et al. (2001), figure 3. The surveys single visit in January 1988 (Little Penguin and Short- confirmed the presence of breeding Little Penguin and tailed Shearwater, both breeding). The list is also Short-tailed Shearwater on Huon Island in the 2014–15 considerably greater than the records for the island on season, but estimates of breeding population numbers the Natural Values Atlas: were not made due to the timing of the visits. https://www.naturalvaluesatlas.tas.gov.au/. A medium-sized Kelp Gull (Larus dominicanus) colony It is noteworthy that the NVA lists Sooty Shearwater, of between 300 and 400 nests was located on the A. grisea, from Huon Island (in addition to Sooty Oyster- island’s south-western flanks and foreshore. The colony catcher, Little Penguin, Black-faced Cormorant and was not mapped to prevent disturbance to nesting birds Short-tailed Shearwater). The two shearwater species and the high number of large, non-flying chicks that are known to occur sympatrically, so further effort is were present in and around the colony. Most chicks required to determine if Sooty Shearwater are present observed were between 3 and 6 weeks of age. on Huon Island. One Sooty Oystercatcher (Haematopus fuliginosus) breeding territory was located on the south-west shore Table 1 (page 22): Bird species recorded from Huon Island (figure 4), with three very vocal adults actively defending and adjacent waters (BirdLife Tasmania unpublished data) for the territory. Their behaviour and calls suggested one or the period 1987–2006, with addional records from 2014–15 more chicks were present, likely hiding amongst the surveys. ‘B’ indicates breeding recorded on Huon Island. Note 21 that the NVA record of Sooty Shearwater has not been included in this list, but the four other species listed in the NVA for Huon Island have been included (see the text on the preceding page for details).

Species Breeding/nonbreeding Australasian Gannet Black Swan Black-faced Cormorant B Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike Black-headed Honeyeater Bronze-Cuckoo sp. Brown Falcon Brown Quail Common Blackbird Crescent Honeyeater Dusky Robin Dusky Woodswallow Figure 4: GPS data for Huon Island collected in 2014–15. European Goldfinch Yellow symbols show penguin and/or shearwater burrows (≥1 European Greenfinch per symbol), green symbols show acve shearwater burrows and the red symbol shows the locaon of a nesng territory Forest Raven of Sooty Oystercatcher. Goshawk sp. Discussion Grey Fantail Limitations to current survey House Marn Given the island’s size and the diverse native and non- Kelp Gull B native vegetation on it, it was impossible to establish the landward extent of penguin and shearwater colonies Laughing Kookaburra and nests on Huon Island in the 2014–15 surveys. Lewin’s Rail Despite being confined to two brief visits to the Lile Penguin B Coastal Reserve, the 2014–15 surveys confirmed that breeding colonies of Little Penguin and Short-tailed Nankeen Night-Heron Shearwater were present on Huon Island (figure 4). New Holland Honeyeater However, the timing and brevity of the visits pre- vented estimates of the breeding populations of Little Pacific Gull B Penguin and Short-tailed Shearwater from being Pallid Cuckoo obtained during the 2014–15 breeding season, and it is Scarlet Robin likely that island-wide estimates for both species’ breeding populations may not be possible (see ‘future Short-tailed Shearwater B surveys’, page 23). Silver Gull B Comparison with previous surveys Silvereye Skira et al. (1996) reported a small population of 400 burrows (range 300–500) occupying 0.25 ha on Huon Sooty Oystercatcher B Island. No further details were provided. Common Starling Based on a visit to the island on 4 January 1988, Brothers et al. (2001) report 200 pairs of Little Penguin, Swamp Harrier ‘all along the eastern shore in rock crevices at the Wedge-tailed Eagle shoreline and in burrows’ and, ‘an estimated 1000’ pairs of Short-tailed Shearwater. The main shearwater White-faced Heron colony is described as being, ‘on the east side of a gentle White-bellied Sea-Eagle slope to the rocky shore’ with, ‘scattered burrows in 22 dense bracken’ with burrows ‘generally within 30 m of entire breeding populations of these two species can not shore rocks on slopes’. Figure 2 shows the colonies be surveyed accurately, reference breeding areas with mapped by Brothers et al. (2001), who reported, ‘no fixed transects should be established to monitor the other bird species recorded’. breeding populations of shearwaters and penguins on We believe that our observations are broadly Huon Island. consistent with those mapped and reported by Brothers The 2014–15 surveys confirmed breeding colonies of et al. but we note that Little Penguin are considerably penguins and shearwaters were present, and identified more widely distributed on Huon Island than is shown the presence of a medium sized Kelp Gull colony. The in figure 2, in particular on the western slopes. Penguin regional (south-eastern Tasmania) population of Kelp burrows are also present on the south-west foreshore on Gulls is monitored by BirdLife Tasmania in the long- either side of the navigation light. term Winter Gull Count program that began in 1980 It is appropriate to believe that the entire island was (Woehler et al. 2014). An attempt will be made to surveyed in 1988, so we interpret the differences establish a more precise estimate of the breeding between our results and those reported in Skira et al. population of Kelp Gull on Huon Island during the (1996) and Brothers et al. (2001) as explained by the 2015–16 season. penguin and shearwater colonies having expanded since the earlier surveys, sometime in the period 1988–2015. Acknowledgments The regional (south-eastern Tasmania) population of We thank Mike Foley for his encouragement and Kelp Gulls is estimated at more than 5000 birds, and support for these surveys, and for all logistical support as has continued to increase during BirdLife Tasmania’s we travelled to and from Huon Island. We also thank winter surveys since 1980 (Woehler et al. 2014). Brothers Nepelle Crane (Huon Valley Council) for her support. et al. (2001) did not report Kelp Gull from Huon Island, The Friends of Huon Island supported the surveys and so the colony of 300 or more nests present in 2014–15 is allowed access to private property on the island. All believed to have established sometime after 1988, but surveys were conducted under DPIPWE Permit TFA there are no data available as to when, or its growth to 13916 ‘Population status and conservation of coastal date. birds in Tasmania’ and AEC Permit 23/2012–13. These changes between early surveys and our preliminary and brief surveys highlight the need for References more frequent surveys of longer duration to record Brothers N., Pemberton D., Pryor H. and Halley V. 2001. accurately the distribution and abundance of burrowing Tasmania’s Offshore Islands: Seabirds and Other Natural Features. Hobart, Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery. 643 pp. seabirds on Huon Island. Skira I.J., Brothers N.P. and Pemberton D. 1996. ‘Distri- Future surveys bution, abundance and conservation status of short-tailed Further surveys in 2015–16 will map the approximate shearwaters Puffinus tenuirostris in Tasmania, Australia’. boundaries of the Short-tailed Shearwater and Little Marine Ornithology. 24, pp. 1–14. Vertigan P. and Woehler E.J. 2013. Survey for Little Penguins Penguin breeding colonies on Huon Island, and Eudyptula minor along the d’Entrecasteaux Coast, Verona Sands to undertake burrow assessments for estimating breeding Kettering, November 2012–January 2013. BirdLife Tasmania populations in selected areas. These surveys will map Technical Report 2012-02. 9 pp. the colonies and nests on private property inland of the Vertigan P. and Woehler E.J. 2014. Survey of Little Penguins in Coastal Reserve. Kingborough, 2013–14. Confidential report to Kingborough Council, November 2014. BirdLife Tasmania Technical The 2014–15 survey was confined to the Coastal Report 2014-01. 29 pp. Reserve, and it is clear that extensive areas of private Woehler E.J. and Ruoppolo V. 2014. Resident and Migratory land support breeding colonies of shearwaters and Shorebirds of the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar Site. penguins. Until all colonies are mapped (where it is Report to NRM South and PWS, May 2014. BirdLife possible), more precise estimates of contemporary Tasmania Technical Report 2014-04. 29 pp. breeding populations can not be made. Woehler E., Patterson T.A., Bravington M.V., Hobday A.J. and Chambers L.E. 2014. ‘Climate and competition in It is likely that the vegetation cover and the use of abundance trends in native and invasive Tasmanian gulls’. artificial structures by nesting penguins may prevent Marine Ecology. Progress Series, 511. pp. 249–63. island-wide population estimates. In the event that the doi: 10.3354/meps10886.

23 Resident and migratory shorebirds of the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site

Eric Woehler and Valeria Ruoppolo, BirdLife Tasmania

Execuve summary Database/SearchforRamsarsites/tabid/765/ Internationally significant numbers of Australian Pied Default.aspx. Management of Long Point is undertaken Oystercatcher are present within the Moulting Lagoon by the Tasmanian Land Conservancy, which has Game Reserve Ramsar site, in addition to Pacific Gull prepared a draft management plan for their Long Point and Black Swan. A highly diverse bird community of Reserve (TLC 2007). resident and migratory shorebirds is present at the site Three species of bird have been recorded as meeting year round, which complements the resident population the criterion of counts of or above 1% of their global of waterfowl and seabirds. Identified threats to these populations, which is the threshold for a site of inter- breeding species include the presence of unfenced live- national significance. These species are Black Swan, stock on foreshores and vehicles damaging roosting and Cygnus atratus, Pacific Gull, Larus pacificus and Australian breeding habitats. Relatively few historical data on the Pied Oystercatcher, Haematopus longirostris. distribution and abundance of resident shorebirds are Twenty-five species of resident and migratory available for the survey area, so the present survey shorebirds have been recorded in the MLGR establishes important baseline data for future surveys (DSEWPC 2011, Appendix 1). Many of the waterbird and monitoring efforts. Control of vehicles and livestock and shorebird species present in the MLGR are listed on private property adjacent to Little Bay would under the EPBC Act (1999), as is the recently listed contribute to an improvement in the conservation and threatened community of Subtropical and Temperate Coastal management of important feeding and roosting habitats Saltmarsh (http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/ for resident and migratory shorebirds. sprat/public/publicshowcommunity.pl?id=118). Biannual waterbird counts have been undertaken in Introducon the MLGR since 1992, with coordinated summer and Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve is an estuarine wetland winter counts made of birds in defined count zones. of international significance (Box 1, page 25) with exten- The counts are coordinated by the PWS. While the sive waterbird populations that use the lagoon for some focus of these counts has been waterfowl, other species or all of the year. The site was nominated as a Ramsar such as resident and migratory shorebirds, gulls and Wetland of International Importance in 1982, and is terns have been included in count reports. approximately 4507 ha in size. The Moulting Lagoon The reporting of non-waterfowl species has increased Game Reserve was proclaimed in December 1988, with over time, varies inter-annually and provides an initial some minor boundary adjustments to the wetlands, and indication of the numbers of resident and migratory it includes some adjacent Crown foreshore. The Game shorebirds, albeit with some limitations (see ‘discussion’, Reserve is 4760 ha. page 32). These counts do not identify breeding and Management responsibility for the Lagoon is with the non-breeding individuals of resident species observed. Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service (PWS) of Few shorebird-specific surveys have been undertaken DPIPWE (Parks and Wildlife Service 2007). Full details in the MLGR (but see Wakefield 1984, Schokman of the known values and of the management regime for 1991), and a dedicated and broad-scale survey of the wetlands is in DSEWPC (2011). A map of the nesting sites of resident shorebirds has not been Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve (hereafter MLGR) undertaken due to highly limited access because nesting Ramsar site is shown in figure 1 (page 25). Additional sites have to be accessed either by boat or through details, maps and materials of the MLGR Ramsar site private land. A low number of reports based on brief can be obtained from http://ramsar.wetlands.org/ visits provide limited data. 24 The aims of the current project are to: Methods • address the major data gap on the presence of nesting All mapping data were collected using a Garmin sites of resident shorebirds in the Moulting Lagoon eTrex-30 12-channel hand-held unit based on the Game Reserve Ramsar site by the provision of fine- WGS-84 datum and recorded as UTM coordinates. scale GPS data for nesting territories; During the boat surveys, the locations of nesting birds • assess and identify the significance of values associated and breeding territories were marked on a small-scale with these breeding populations; (approximately 1:20,000) map while in the field. The • identify observed threats to the resident shorebirds; UTM coordinates of these locations were derived from • provide baselines to monitor changes in conditions Google Earth. The bird surveys report both the number of and values, and the efficacy of any management breeding pairs for each species, and the total number of actions targeted at coastal habitats and bird values; individuals observed for each species. No assessment of and vegetation was undertaken during surveys. • collate and review all available data on resident and migratory shorebirds found within the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site, and assess their significance.

Box 1: Summary of the Moulng Lagoon Ramsar site Australia 5AU003 Site: Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve

Designation date: 16 November 1982 Sabinas Island Coordinates: 42º02' 00S 148º11'00E Grassy Point Kittys Watsons Bay Mistake Elevation: 0–20 m Moulting Lagoon Area: 4,507 ha Bottom Bank Long Point White Rock Summary description: Moulting Lagoon Nature Bay Reserve. 16/11/82; Tasmania; Little Bay 42º02' 00S 148º11'00E. Crown Land, Game Wards Bay

Reserve. A large estuary at the mouths of the Swan King Bay and Apsley rivers adjacent to, and contiguous with, Pelican Bay the Apsley Marshes Ramsar site. The lagoon, plus Dolphin Sands several sections of coastal reserve surrounding it, and Swanwick Bay an additional area of dry land 1 km north, comprise the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve. Moulting Lagoon is an excellent example of a large estuary formed behind a bayhead sand spit and is one of onlt Figure 1: Map of the Moulng Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar two such areas in the Tasmanian Drainage Division; Site (from hp://maps.thelist.tas.gov.au/listmap/app/list/ furthermore, the estuary is recognised as one of high map). The adjacent Apsley Marshes Ramsar site is also conservation significance for Tasmania. The site shown. The boundaries of the two Ramsar sites are enclosed provides an important resting and breeding ground by the dark green line. Selected place names are shown. and an important drought refuge for about 100 (a) Resident shorebirds (boat and ground- resident and migratory bird species such as Australian based surveys) Shelduck (Tador na tador noides) and Black Swan (Cygnus Extensive areas of the MLGR foreshore are inaccessible atratus). The site is used for recreational shooting, on foot because of expansive areas of marshland: this fishing and boating, aquaculture and off-road driving. ensured that almost the entire foreshore survey was The surrounding area is used for grazing, residential water-based (figure 2, page 26). Foreshore areas were development, mining, aquaculture and recreation. surveyed from a small dinghy using 10 ☓ 40 binoculars Both the site and the surrounding area have to scan the foreshore and identify nesting shorebirds on Aboriginal and European cultural significance. their breeding territories. The shallow depths and the Ramsar site no. 251. extensive areas of marine vegetation in the MLGR Source: https://rsis.ramsar.org/ris/251 frequently ensured approaches were no closer than 50 m or so offshore. Resident shorebirds were typically The establishment of baseline data on resident observed as pairs, and the survey assumed that these shorebirds will increase the knowledge available on the pairs occupied a breeding territory. values of the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar Ground-based surveys were undertaken where access site and will provide critical information for future to the foreshore was possible and where the vegetation management actions. and substrate allowed foot travel. These surveys were 25 conducted in a manner identical to shorebird mapping counts’ shorebird data and that obtained from the surveys elsewhere in Tasmania (Woehler and Ruoppolo BirdLife Tasmania database because some members of 2013a, 2013b) to provide comparable GPS and BirdLife Tasmania have been, and continue to be, population data. involved in the biannual PWS counts. Records with matching dates and species’ numbers were deemed to be identical records. (c) Incidental breeding observations Any observations of breeding, or evidence suggestive of breeding, were documented during the surveys as per resident shorebirds. Several instances of nesting or attempted nesting by Caspian Tern, Sterna caspia, and White-bellied Sea-Eagle, Haliaeetus leucogaster, were observed and mapped. (d) Waterbirds and other observations General observations of birds were made during all survey days. The list of bird species observed and, where appropriate, estimates of numbers are detailed. Observations and/or evidence of threats to shorebird and seabird values that were made during the surveys were collated and mapped where useful or relevant. This included, but was not limited to, observations of destructive vehicular activities and unfenced livestock on the foreshores. (e) Estimations of populations’ significance There are presently no official guidelines for assessing the level of significance of resident (i.e. non-migratory) Figure 2: Survey effort (red lines) in the Moulng Lagoon shorebird populations in Australia at a national level, Game Reserve Ramsar site, 2013–14. The site’s extent is beyond their inclusion for sites through the application shown in pale blue. The Apsley Marshes Ramsar site is shown of Ramsar criteria. These criteria use a mixture of in pale green; the 10 km UTM grid is shown in pink; roads are percentages of populations and absolute numbers to shown in grey. The surveys at Bagot Point and on Sandpiper identify sites that are of international significance and Beach, outside the Ramsar site, were undertaken in January that hold populations that meet the criteria, including 2012 and are not included in the analyses reported here. supporting 1% or more of the global population. Shorebird species whose estimated resident or migratory (b) Resident and migratory shorebirds — populations within the MLGR exceed 0.1% of their historical data global populations are highlighted as being of national Historical records of resident and migratory shorebirds significance. All current global population estimates were obtained from three sources. First were any were obtained from Wetlands International (2014). published reports, narratives and accounts. In all, just six such publications were found (see ‘results’, next Results column). Second, the waterbird count dataset was Surveys were conducted on five days, with a sixth day provided by PWS, which includes data on all birds washed out due to a sudden downpour (table 1). Surveys observed during the biannual waterbird counts. Third, were predominantly undertaken by boat due to the the BirdLife Tasmania database was searched for all vegetated foreshore. Approximately 98 km of surveys records in and around the MLGR. were conducted from the water, and 21.4 km on foot, a There was some overlap between the PWS waterbird total survey effort of 119.4 km (figure 2).

Date Area(s) surveyed Survey (km) Method 21 December 2013 Watsons Bay to Long Point, Swan Nook, King Bay & Great Swanport 49.1 Boat 8 January 2014 North of Long Point to Sherbourne Bay, Bulls Head to Boom Bank 48.9 Boat 29 January 2014 Saltpans, western shore of Lile Bay 4.1 On foot 7 February 2014 Lile Bay 6.6 On foot 21 February 2014 Saltpans and wetlands, eastern shore of Little Bay (Long Point) 10.7 On foot Table 1: Survey effort, Moulng Lagoon Game Reserve, 2013–14. 26 Breeding Common name Scienfic name Birds Comments EPBC Act 1999 pairs Australian Pied Haematopus longirostris 33 185 No nests north of White Rock Bay — Oystercatcher

Sooty Oystercatcher H. fuliginosis 1 1 Swanwick Bay —

Dense populaon on saltpans and ponds, western shore of Lile Bay, Red-capped Plover Charadrius ruficapillus 11 27 Marine likely to be an underesmate for Ramsar site Likely to have more than 2 breeding Marine, Caspian Tern Sterna Caspia 2 50 pairs migratory Table 2: Esmated total breeding populaons, shorebirds and seabirds, MLGR 2013–14, with total numbers seen per species, addional comments and species’status under the EPBC Act 1999.

Breeding species accounts Ramsar site to be nationally significant for breeding Australian Pied Oystercatcher. The 185 oystercatcher Australian Pied Oystercatcher observed during the survey represents 1.7% of the A total of 33 breeding territories of Australian Pied estimated global population of 11,000 birds (Wetlands Oystercatcher was identified during the survey (figure 3). International 2014), exceeding the 1% threshold and All were in the southern half of the Lagoon, and none confirming the MLGR Ramsar site to be internationally were north of White Rock Bay. The highest concen- significant for Australian Pied Oystercatcher. tration was on the foreshores between Barkstand Point and Swanwick Bay. In total, 185 Pied Oystercatcher were seen during the survey, and it is likely that an unknown proportion of these were nonbreeding birds. There are no previous records of breeding numbers. Bryant (1933) did not mention oystercatcher in his brief account of a visit in 1932. Thomas (1965) makes no mention of oystercatcher in his account of a visit in 1964. Wall and Thomas (1965) observed 67 Pied Oystercatcher at the Swan River estuary in King Bay in March 1965. Wall (1971) recorded ‘nests’ of Australian Pied Oystercatcher at Moulting Lagoon in 1969, but gave no numbers. Wakefield (1984) reviewed numbers of resident and migratory shorebirds at Moulting Lagoon for the period 1978 to 1983, and reported a maximum count of 97 individuals, and noted some seasonal differences in their presence in the lagoon. There is no indication as to what was the breeding status of the oystercatchers reported by Wakefield. Schokman (1991) detailed observations from the Pelican Rocks to Pelican Bay area in the south-east of the lagoon close to Swanwick Bay. His data showed winter peaks, corresponding to winter roosting flocks, with a maximum of 109 in the winter of 1988. Figure 3: Breeding territories of Australian Pied The Ecological Character Description (ECD) for the Oystercatcher, MLGR Ramsar site, 2013–14. The nests at the MLGR Ramsar site (DSEWPC 2011) draws on the mouth of the Meredith River, at Bagot Point and on PWS biannual waterbird counts, and shows that the Sandpiper Beach, outside the Ramsar site, were surveyed in numbers of oystercatcher recorded during these counts January 2012 and are not included in the populaon have exceeded the 1% threshold in 14 of the 19 years esmates reported here. between 1992 and 2010 (Appendix 2, page 37). Sooty Oystercatcher The 33 breeding territories located during the current survey corresponds with 66 breeding adults, which is Just one probable breeding territory of a Sooty Oyster- 0.6% of the estimated global population of 11,000 birds catcher was observed during the survey, located at a (Wetlands International 2014), identifying the MLGR small rocky outcrop and associated rock face at the 27 north-west end of Swanwick Bay (figure 4). The habitat the breeding status of the individuals. inside the MLGR Ramsar site is generally unsuitable for Sooty Oystercatchers, but the habitat and location of the observed Sooty Oystercatcher is potentially suitable breeding habitat.

Figure 5: Breeding territories of Red-capped Plover, MLGR Ramsar site, 2013–14. The nests on Nine Mile and Sandpiper Beaches, outside the Ramsar site, were surveyed in January 2012 and are not included in the populaon esmates Figure 4: Probable breeding territory (1) of Sooty reported here. Oystercatcher (black symbol) and two nests of Caspian Terns Schokman (1991) recorded a maximum of 32 Red- (red symbols), MLGR Ramsar site, 2013–14. capped Plover in the Pelican Rocks–Pelican Bay area in As with Australian Pied Oystercatcher, there are no the south-east of the lagoon close to Swanwick Bay. His previous records of breeding numbers for Sooty data showed a general decrease in the numbers present Oystercatcher. Wakefield (1984) reported no birds at six in the period 1987–90 inclusive, and noted one instance areas around the lagoon. The ECD for the MLGR of breeding failure that he attributed to human distur- Ramsar site (DSEWPC 2011) lists Sooty Oystercatcher, bance. Lloyd (2008) noted Red-capped Plover at Little and the PWS biannual waterbird counts have recorded Bay. them in 16 of 21 years, albeit in low numbers. Numbers It is likely that the local population of Red-capped of Sooty Oystercatcher are higher in winter months in Plover is larger than that reported here. The survey the MLGR (Appendix 2). effort was confined to the MLGR Ramsar site, and Red-capped Plover located Red-capped Plover on foreshore saltpans around A total of 11 breeding territories of Red-capped Plover the lagoon. Extensive areas of saltpans are visible on was located during the survey (figure 5). All were private property around the lagoon in satellite imagery, associated with saltpans on the western shores of Little and it is likely that these saltpans also support breeding Bay and a saltpan on Long Point. In total, 27 birds were populations of Red-capped Plover. Lagoons are located seen, including fledged chicks that indicated breeding to the west and north-west of Flacks Road, around had occurred. Serpentine Lagoon, Big and Little Punchbowl, and There are few previous records of breeding or non- Cherry Tree lagoons, and consideration should be given breeding numbers. Bryant (1933) did not mention Red- to gaining access to survey these areas in the future. capped Plover in his brief account of a visit in 1932. The 11 breeding territories located during the current Thomas (1965) makes no mention of Red-capped survey corresponds with 22 breeding adults, which is Plover in his brief account of a visit in 1964. Wakefield <0.1% of the estimated global population of 95,000 (1984) reviewed numbers of resident and migratory birds (Wetlands International 2014). The 27 Red- shorebirds at Moulting Lagoon for the period 1978 to capped Plover observed during the survey represents 1983, and reported a maximum count of 16 Red- 0.03% of the the estimated global population of 95,000 capped Plover at Little Bay, but gave no indication as to birds (Wetlands International 2014). 28 It is important to note that there are some likely errors prevented potential nest sites from being identified from in the PWS Waterbird Count dataset for Red-capped the water. A total of 50 Caspian Tern was recorded Plover at MLGR (Appendix 2). Counts of 150 (July from all parts of the MLGR, well below the 1% 1997), 255 (July 1996) and 401 (February 1992) are criterion for this species (1000 birds). A flock of 11 was either transcription or data entry errors or misidenti- observed roosting on the saltpans beside Little Bay on fication errors, as the numbers reported are excessive. 29 January. The counts from this survey are consistent It is noteworthy that 255 Red-kneed Dotterel were with the numbers of Caspian Tern recorded during the also recorded in the PWS Waterbird Count for July PWS Waterbird Counts in summer months over the last 1996, reinforcing the suggestion of transcription or data decade. Thomas (1965) observed one pair at Moulting entry errors. All records of anything other than single Lagoon attacking a Swamp Harrier, Circus approximans. Red-kneed Dotterel from MLGR are highly suspect and also likely to be misidentification, data entry or Nonbreeding (migratory) shorebird species transcription errors. Given the numbers involved, the accounts likely candidate species might be Red-necked Stint, but A flock of 19 Pacific Golden Plover, Pluvialis fulva, was in the absence of any evidence, these probably spurious observed on the saltpans on the western shore of Little records should be disregarded. Bay on 29 January 2014. The birds were relatively Other resident shorebird species nervous and were not approached. The highest count in the PWS Waterbird Count dataset is of 76 Pacific There were no breeding Hooded Plover, Thinornis Golden Plover in February 2003, but lower numbers rubricollis, within the MLGR Ramsar site during the and many null counts have been recorded since then 2013–14 survey. This is due to the absence of suitable (Appendix 3, page 38). nesting habitat (oceanic sandy beaches) inside the There is a record of 34 Pacific Golden Plover from MLGR site. King Bay in February 1983 (BirdLife Tasmania, unpubl. One pair of Black-fronted Dotterel, Elseyornis melanops, data), 12 from Pelican Bay (Wakefield 1984), and of 35 was observed on the shores of a farm dam adjacent to a at Pelican Rocks in February 1987 and in March 1991 vehicular track to Little Bay on 29 January, and at the (Schokman 1991). Lloyd (2008) observed 71 Pacific same site on 21 February. The extensive farm dams and Golden Plover at Long Point. All available records from creeks feeding into Moulting Lagoon are likely to the MLGR fail to meet the 0.1% threshold for the support other breeding pairs of Black-fronted Dotterels. species (100 birds), so the Ramsar Site is not nationally Few records of Black-fronted Dotterel are present in the important for this species. PWS Waterbird Count dataset, but it is noteworthy that A flock of 14 Bar-tailed Godwit, Limosa lapponica, was the July 2009 count (15) approached the threshold for observed on a sandbar in Swanwick Bay on 21 national significance (16) for the species (Appendix 2). It December 2013 (figure 6). The birds were actively is highly likely that MLGR is nationally-significant for feeding at the water’s edge. The highest count in the Black-fronted Dotterel. PWS Waterbird Count data set is of 101 Bar-tailed A flock of 8–12 Banded Lapwing, Vanellus tricolor, were Godwit in February 2006 (Appendix 3). observed on the hill slopes overlooking Little Bay on 7 February. The birds were disturbed by the vehicle, flushed and flew away before inspection of the flock could be undertaken for the presence of juveniles. Other flocks are likely to be present in the pastures and open grasslands surrounding Moulting Lagoon. Caspian Tern Two nest sites of Caspian Tern were located during the survey, and the potential remains of other nests were observed in the MLGR. One of the two nest sites was at the south-western end of King Bay near a series of small pools into which the adults were diving to feed, and the other was at the water’s edge on the north-west Figure 6: Bar-tailed Godwit feeding on the water’s edge of a foreshore of Long Point (figure 4). During ground sandbar, Swanwick Bay. © Eric J. Woehler surveys around Little Bay, a number of old nests were observed; these appeared to be Caspian Tern nests that The earliest record is of 20 Bar-tailed Godwit in Sep- had been used earlier in the season. tember 1961 (Wall and Thomas 1965), while Wakefield High numbers of Caspian Tern were observed reported 32 (1984) and Schokman 12 (1991). All throughout the MLGR during the current survey, with available records from the MLGR fail to meet the 0.1% adults seen feeding and flying back to presumed nests threshold for the species (279 birds), so the Ramsar site with fish in their bills. The dense foreshore vegetation is not nationally important for this species. 29 A single Eastern Curlew, Numenius madagascarensis, was counts exceeding 10 birds in the last 10 years (Appendix observed on 21 December 2013 close to Pelican Rocks. 3). The ECD (DSEWPC 2011) noted that the MLGR The highest count in the PWS Waterbird Count dataset supports the largest flock of Common Greenshank in is of 47 Eastern Curlew in February 1994, but the Tasmania, citing Wakefield (1984). numbers reported since then have decreased, with many Earlier counts of Common Greenshank in the MLGR null counts reported in the last few years and only four were of 115 birds in King Bay in February 1981 counts exceeding ten birds in the last 10 years (see (BirdLife Tasmania unpubl. data) and Schokman(1991) Appendix 3). reported 13 at Pelican Rocks in September 1989. Eastern Curlew have been observed feeding on Wakefield (1984) describes the importance of a long line exposed mud flats at the Swan River estuary in King of stakes on the margin of The Cut in King Bay, on Bay, with 27–30 in November 1964 and March 1965, which the Common Greenshank roost at high tide. respectively (Thomas 1965, Wall and Thomas 1965). A These stakes have largely disappeared since the late count of 100 Eastern Curlew was made from Pelican 1970s and early 1980s (figure 8) and the Common Bay in September 1961 (reported as ‘Swan River’, Greenshank now use poles associated with marine farm which is now known as King Bay in Wall and Thomas leases (figure 7). All records from the MLGR since 1995 (1965), and counts of 15 and 13 were reported from are below the 0.1% threshold for the species (100 birds), 1981 and 1983, respectively, from King Bay (BirdLife so the Ramsar site is no longer nationally important for Tasmania unpubl. data). Wakefield (1984) reported 100 this species. Eastern Curlew at King Bay between 1978 and 1983, and Schokman (1991) reported 18 in Pelican Bay in January and March 1988. Eastern Curlew numbers throughout Tasmania have decreased by between 50 and 90%, depending on location, and the decrease in numbers reported from Moulting Lagoon are consistent with the trends around Tasmania (BirdLife Tasmania unpubl. data). The current threshold for national importance is 32 Eastern Curlew, so the February 1994 count (47) was the last time the threshold was met for this species in the MLGR Ramsar site. Figure 8: Remains of the wooden stakes at The Cut, Swan River estuary, King Bay, 2013.© Eric J. Woehler Wall (1971) observed a ‘large flock’ of Curlew Sand- piper, Calidris ferruginea, ‘fewer’ Red-necked Stint and ‘some’ Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, C. acuminata, on the east side of Moulting Lagoon in October or November 1969. Approximately 40 Sharp-tailed Sandpiper were reported from King Bay in February 1981 (BirdLife Tasmania unpubl. data) and Wakefield (1984) reported 27 from King Bay between 1978 and 1983. Schokman (1991) did not observe any Sharp-tailed Sandpiper from Pelican Rocks. All available records from the MLGR fail to meet the 0.1% threshold for the species (160 birds), so the Ramsar Site is not nationally important for this species. Figure 7: Common Greenshanks roosng on wooden poles Two flocks of Red-necked Stint, C. ruficollis, were associated with marine farm infrastructure. © Eric J. Woehler observed during the survey. The first was of 100 birds on the saltpans on the western foreshore of Little Bay, A flock of 16 Common Greenshank, Tringa nebularia, close to the flock of Pacific Golden Plover, on 29 was observed on 21 December 2013. The birds were January 2014 (figure 9a, page 31). A second flock of roosting on wooden poles used for marine farm racks approximately 200 was observed actively feeding in a (figure 7). The highest count in the PWS Waterbird muddy pool on the north to north-east foreshore of Count dataset is of 164 Common Greenshank in Little Bay on 7 February 2014 (figure 9b, page 31). It is February 1994, which is the highest number ever possible that the increased numbers reflect early recorded for the species in the MLGR Ramsar site, but northward movements of Red-necked Stint from farther the numbers reported since then have decreased, with south in south-east Tasmania where they spend the many null counts reported since 2007, and only six summer months. There is no way of determining if the 30 stints recorded on 29 January were part of the flock in King Bay on 21 December 2013, while between 2400 seen on the second occasion, so it has been conserva- and 2800 were present between Long Point and tively assumed that the 200 stints observed included all Watsons Bay on the same day. There were approx- of the birds seen earlier. imately 3000 Black Swan present between Watsons Bay Red-necked Stint have been seen regularly in the PWS and Sabinas Island, giving a total of between 7400 and Waterbird Count dataset, with the highest count of 362 7800 swans on 21 December. recorded in February 1994 (Appendix 3). A similar count of 355 in February 2005 was the last time more than 300 were recorded in the MLGR. The counts since 2008 have been very low compared to early counts of 250 in October 1969 and 224 in October 1981 (BirdLife Tasmania, unpubl. data).

Figure 9a: Part of the roosng flock of Red-necked Snts on the saltpans on the western foreshore of Lile Bay. © Eric J. Woehler

Figure 10: Map of waterfowl concentraons observed during the 2013–14 survey (yellow areas). The survey effort in the Moulng Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site, 2013–14, is shown by the red lines; MLGR Ramsar site is shown in pale Figure 9b: Feeding Red-necked Snt, February 2014. blue; Apsley Marshes Ramsar site is shown in pale green; the © Eric J. Woehler 10 km UTM grid is shown in pink; roads are shown in grey. Wakefield (1984) reported a minimum of 160 in the Sabinas Island was briefly visited on 21 December period 1978–83, and Schokman (1991) reported 126 in 2013, and several hundred swan nests were present with November 1987 and 104 in January 1988. Schokman’s between 1 and 8 eggs. There were approximately 1200– data show seasonal patterns in Red-necked Stint 1500 Australian Shelduck, Tador na tador noides, sitting on observed at Pelican Rocks consistent with the migratory the water west and north-west of the island. Many were behaviour of this species. All records from the MLGR moulting and unable to fly. A flock of approximately since Winter 2005 are below the 0.1% threshold for the 250 Chestnut Teal, Anas castanea, were seen in Swanwick species (315 birds), so the Ramsar Site is no longer Bay later in the day. nationally important for it. There were approximately 300 Eurasian Coot, Fulica A solitary Sharp-tailed Sandpiper was observed at the atra, close to Sabinas Island on 8 January 2014, and northern entrance of Little Bay on 21 February 2014. 500–600 Chestnut Teal east of Cockatoo Island on the The bird was roosting behind some vegetation and was same day. A further 120 Chestnut Teal were present off not approached due to its nervous behaviour. Sharp- Kittys Mistake and 200 off Bottom Bank Island later tailed Sandpipers have been reported infrequently in the that day. Figure 10 shows the approximate areas of the PWS Waterbird Count dataset, with the highest count large flocks of waterfowl observed on Moulting Lagoon of 31 recorded in February 2005 (Appendix 3). during the survey. Selected waterfowl species accounts Other significant sighngs Limited opportunities were available during the current One active White-bellied Sea-Eagle, Haliaeetus leucogaster, survey to assess numbers of waterfowl on Moulting nest was observed during the survey on the northern Lagoon. Approximately 2000 Black Swan were present shore of Wards Bay on 21 December 2013. A second 31 nest, previously observed north-east of Grassy Point (N. establishes a baseline for future surveys of nesting Castle personal communication), was not located shorebirds, and a useful basis for comparison with the because it was believed the tree had fallen over. A third ongoing PWS Waterbird Counts. nest is reported to be present close to Serpentine Comparison with previous counts of shorebirds Lagoon (N. Castle personal communication). Several The survey has confirmed the international significance White-bellied Sea-Eagles were seen during the survey, of the MLGR to Australian Pied Oystercatcher, either flying overhead or perched in trees on the exceeding the 1% threshold (see ‘results’, page 26). The foreshores of the lagoon (figure 11). survey also confirmed that other nesting species failed to meet their respective thresholds for international or national significance. The migratory shorebirds observed in the current survey are broadly consistent with the PWS Waterbird Counts, with the caveats regarding the possible mis- identification or data entry errors noted previously (see Results). A record of 35 Great Knot, Calidris tenuirostris, from the February 2007 PWS count is almost certainly incorrect, and likely to have been Red Knot, C. canutus, or another species of shorebird altogether. The survey has broadly confirmed the significant sites for migratory shorebirds around the MLGR as identified by Wakefield (1984) and Schokman (1991). The survey results are consistent with observed broad- Figure 11: White-bellied Sea-eagle, Moulng Lagoon. scale and long-term decreases in the numbers of © Eric J. Woehler migratory shorebirds in the MLGR (PWS Waterbird Counts) and elsewhere in Tasmania, most notably Observed threats to shorebirds in Moulng Eastern Curlew but also other species such as Red- Lagoon necked Stint and Bar-tailed Godwit (BirdLife Tasmania, A large flock of sheep was observed on the foreshore in unpubl. data). Watsons Bay on 8 January. Extensive vehicle tracks Increased levels of human disturbance from could be found in the saltpans and in the vegetation on recreational boating and changes in the feeding and the western foreshore of Little Bay on all visits to the roosting habitats in MLGR, such as the loss of some of area. The vehicle tracks were well established, and deep the stakes in The Cut in King Bay, will have contributed wheel ruts were observed in some areas. The areas to the long-term decreases in migratory shorebird where vehicle tracks were seen were on private property. numbers in MLGR. There is also the potential disturbance to feeding and breeding shorebirds from Discussion aquaculture operators working their leases (figure 12, Limitations to the survey page 33), and this should be investigated in terms of the The vegetated foreshore and extensive areas of shallows frequency and intensity of activities, and their potential restricted access to some foreshore areas of the to disturb shorebirds. Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve during the survey. It is Two species of migratory shorebirds not encountered possible that potential foreshore breeding sites may have in the current survey and previously recorded from the been missed from the boat surveys; however, all the MLGR are Curlew Sandpiper, Calidris ferruginea, and previously identified significant sites for shorebirds in Double-banded Plover, Charadrius bicinctus. Curlew MLGR (e.g. Wakefield 1984, Schokman 1991) were Sandpiper are Palaearctic migrants, breeding at high visited and surveyed. northern latitudes before spending the summer months The estimates reported here are absolute minima for in Australia. Their numbers in Tasmania have the breeding species. The species most likely to have decreased by more than 90% since the mid-1980s been underestimated are Red-capped Plover, Black- (BirdLife Tasmania unpubl. data) and there are very few fronted Dotterel and Caspian Tern. However, it is records from south-east Tasmania in recent years. highly unlikely that breeding or total population Curlew Sandpiper have been reported during PWS estimates for these species would meet national or Waterbird Counts (Appendix 3) but the count of 100 international thresholds, even if unsurveyed birds that Curlew Sandpiper in the July 2013 PWS count is may have been missed were included. believed to be another error in the PWS Waterbird The estimate for the breeding population of Count dataset. Australian Pied Oystercatcher in the MLGR (33 pairs) is Double-banded Plover migrate to south-east Australia considered accurate for 2013–14. The survey is the first from New Zealand, spending the winter months in GPS mapping of resident shorebirds in the MLGR, and south-east Australia and Tasmania. The timing of the 32 current survey is outside the period of peak numbers for saltpans from vehicles around Little Bay were on private the species in Tasmania. Surveys in late winter and early property. spring will obtain contemporary data for the species in As well as vehicular tracks, there was evidence of the MLGR. stock present in this area, with sheep tracks on many saltpans. Flocks of sheep moving through these areas during the summer would also potentially disturb breeding effort, and crush nests, eggs and chicks of Red- capped Plover. A flock of sheep was also seen on the foreshore of Watsons Bay, but there was no evidence of shorebirds breeding in this area.

Figure 12: Marine farming leases (pale orange) in the Figure 13: Map of Lile Bay and Long Point showing areas of Moulng Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site and in Great Crown Land (pale yellow) and Tidal Crown Land (blue). Roads Oyster Bay. and tracks are shown in black and the survey routes in red. A 1 km grid is shown (pink). Breeding territories of Pied Management of threats to shorebirds in the Oystercatchers are shown in black symbols, Caspian Tern MLGR (white) and Red-capped Plover (bright yellow). Few direct threats to shorebirds and their habitats were observed during the survey; this was due largely to most Prevention of vehicles and livestock on the saltpans on of the survey being conducted from the water looking private property on the western foreshore of Little Bay onshore. The ground-based surveys around Little Bay would provide immediate protection to nesting and provided evidence of the two serious threats to shore- roosting Red-capped Plover and to migratory shorebirds birds and their breeding and roosting habitats in MLGR. such as Red-necked Stint, Pacific Golden Plover and The extensive network of saltpans and low coastal Sharp-tailed Sandpiper that roost in this area. Fencing vegetation is used for roosting by resident and migratory these areas of private property would prevent vehicle shorebirds, and this network was damaged by numerous and livestock access to the saltpans and foreshores vehicle tracks, in many cases resulting in deep ruts in the between Watsons Bay and the Tasmanian Land Conser- substrate. The area also supported a significant breeding vancy’s property around eastern Little Bay: this could be population of Red-capped Plovers, with the numbers achieved with support from Glamorgan Spring Bay and spacing involved suggesting that there is a loose Council, NRM South and PWS. PWS manage vehicles colonial population resident in this area (figures 5 and and livestock on their property. 13). Management and conservation considerations From the extensive network of tracks it is clear that It is important to recognise the connectivity of the there is considerable vehicle usage in this area. If MLGR Ramsar site with surrounding shorebird habitats vehicles are present in the breeding season (September such as Bagot Point at the mouth of Moulting Lagoon, to March), the potential exists for them to disturb Belmont Lagoon and the mouth of the Meredith River. breeding efforts, and to crush nests, eggs and chicks of Each of these sites is known to support migratory Red-capped Plover breeding in the area. It is assumed shorebirds (Wakefield 1984), and it is likely that they are that the area is accessed by shooters to provide ready used if shorebirds are disturbed in MLGR, or if adverse access to their hides. All of the damage observed to weather conditions or high tides prevail at roost sites, 33 thus preventing the birds from using these sites. Moulting Lagoon IBA (details of extent and significant Bagot Point and Sandpiper Beach are used for species present are at www.birdata.com.au/iba.vm, roosting and breeding by small terns (E.J. Woehler and figure 14). Explicit recognition of the existence of the V. Ruoppolo unpubl. data) and for breeding by Hooded IBA and creation of a regional management framework and Red-capped Plover. Breeding populations of for the IBA and its associated bird values will serve as a Australian Pied Oystercatcher on Nine Mile Beach, much-needed model for similar site networks elsewhere Sandpiper Beach at Swanwick, Bagot Point and the in Tasmania (e.g. the Robbins Passage–Boullanger Bay Friendly Beaches should also be considered as regional wetlands in the north-west and the Derwent–Pitt Water populations for the species. network in south-east Tasmania). Concluding comments The Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site is a wetland of national and international significance for waterfowl, shorebirds and seabirds. The wetlands provide critical feeding and roosting habitat for migratory shorebirds. The shorebird and seabird communities present managers with the responsibility of conserving nationally and internationally significant bird values. Appropriate management frameworks that recognise the regional-scale network of sites and enforce conservation measures are fundamental to the survival of these values. Long-term population trends are needed to provide managers and the community with critical feedback on the efficacy of conservation and management efforts. Recommendaons 1. Prevention of vehicles and livestock on the saltpans of the western foreshore of Little Bay. This would protect nesting and roosting Red- capped Plover and migratory shorebirds that roost in this area, such as Red-necked Stint, Pacific Golden Plover and Sharp-tailed Sandpiper. Fencing to prevent vehicle and livestock access to the saltpans Figure 14: The Moulng Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site and foreshores between Watsons Bay and the and the Apsley Marshes Ramsar site are within the Moulng Tasmanian Land Conservancy’s property around Lagoon Important Bird Area (IBA). eastern Little Bay could be achieved with support It is appropriate to consider future management of from Glamorgan Spring Bay Council, NRM South the MLGR Ramsar site and these associated sites as a and PWS. single management unit, connected as they are by the All of the fencing required is on private property. resident and migratory shorebirds that move amongst Control of vehicles and livestock on private property them. Such integrated management would incorporate beside Little Bay would help improve the conser- recognition of the potential for threats to adversely vation and management of important feeding and affect Ramsar shorebird values outside the MLGR roosting habitats for resident and migratory shore- Ramsar site boundary. birds. One approach that addresses the need for conserva- 2. Repeat surveys of resident shorebirds in tion at broader, regional scales (and which contributes to Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site. national and international conservation needs) is the Repeated surveys at approximately 4–6 year intervals Important Bird Areas (IBAs) program of BirdLife will provide a time series of population data useful for International. IBA criteria are internationally agreed, PWS as managers responsible for the site. BirdLife standardised, quantitative and scientifically defensible; Tasmania should continue to undertake these surveys an IBA is an internationally agreed upon priority for for continuity in the research and data analyses. Such conservation action. Further details of the program and counts would complement the biannual PWS IBA criteria are available at http://www.birdlife.org/ Waterbird Counts by providing a regional context for action/science/sites/index.html the counts inside the MLGR. The Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar site 3. Collaboration with PWS staff and volunteers and the Apsley Marshes Ramsar site are part of the involved in Waterbird Counts. Collaboration 34 such as provision of shorebird identification materials Land Conservancy) provided a bird list for Long Point would help reduce the likelihood of errors in shore- and permission to access the property for this survey. bird identification during the biannual Waterbird James Fitzsimons provided Wall and Thomas (1965). Counts. BirdLife Tasmania should approach PWS staff who coordinate volunteer counters to discuss References appropriate approach(es). Bryant, C.E. 1933. ‘The camp-out at Coles Bay and the birds observed’. Emu 32, pp. 163–68. Acknowledgments Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, This report was prepared for NRM South by BirdLife Populations and Communities. 2011. Moulting Lagoon Ecological Character Description. Canberra ACT. Tasmania, with support from PWS, Glamorgan Spring Lloyd, S. 2008. Fauna at Long Point Reserve. Report to Bay Council, DPIPWE, TLC, and individual Tasmanian Land Conservancy. February 2008. landholders, through funding from the Australian Parks and Wildlife Service. 2007. Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Government. (Ramsar Site) Management Plan 2003. Department of We wish to convey our thanks to the following Tourism, Arts and the Environment, Hobart. Schokman, F.C.M. 1991. ‘Some observations on the birds of individuals who have contributed to the project. Robbie Moulting Lagoon’. Tasmanian Bird Report 21, pp. 4–17. Gaffney provided the PWS Waterbird Count data. Tasmanian Land Conservancy. 2007. Long Point Reserve Draft Stewart Blackhall, DPIPWE (retired), for his discussion Management Plan, December 2007. TLC. and advice about all aspects of Moulting Lagoon, and Thomas, D.G. 1965. ‘Birds of the R.A.O.U. 1964 field outing, for his valuable comments on an earlier draft. Bicheno district, Tasmania’. Emu 64, pp. 220–28. Comments from Sue Drake, Alan Fletcher and Priscilla Wakefield, W.C. 1984. ‘The wader habitats of Moulting Lagoon, Tasmania’. An Occasional Stint 3, pp. 26–33. Park OAM improved the draft. Wall, L.E. 1971. ‘RAOU field-outing, Campbell Town, The survey could not have been undertaken without Tasmania, 1969’. Emu 71, pp. 39–40. the remarkable contribution of Norm Castle, who Wall, L.E. and Thomas, D.G. 1965. ‘Recent visits to wader willingly provided his boat and extensive local grounds on the east coast of Tasmania’. Australian Bird knowledge of the lagoon for the surveys. Terry Higgs Watcher 2, pp. 182–87. Wetlands International. 2014. Waterbird Population Estimates. (Glamorgan Spring Bay Council) accompanied us On-line database at wpe.wetlands.org searched on during the surveys, and Mel Kelly (Glamorgan Spring Wednesday 16 Apr 2014. Bay Council), Lyndel Wilson and Donald Coventry Woehler, E.J. and Ruoppolo, V. 2013a. Shorebird and Small Tern (NRM South) provided financial, logistical and Surveys 2012–13. Report to Cradle Coast NRM, May 2013. enthusiastic support for the survey. Lyndel and Donald BirdLife Tasmania Technical Report 2013-03. spent a brief period surveying shorebirds on Long Point Woehler, E.J. and Ruoppolo, V. 2103b. Distribution and Abundance of Shorebirds of the NRM North Region, 2012–13, with before a sudden downpour ended all survey efforts. Estimates of Regional Breeding Populations. Report to NRM Mick Graham provided access to Moulting Lagoon North, May 2013. BirdLife Tasmania Technical Report through The Grange. Denna Kingdom (Tasmanian 2013-04.

35 Appendix 1

Updated list of resident and migratory shorebirds recorded from the Moulting Lagoon Game Reserve Ramsar Site, based on DSEWPC (2011), with updated and revised scientific names, and additional species based on BirdLife Tasmania records. Resident shorebird species • Pied Oystercatcher, Haematopus longirostris • Sooty Oystercatcher, Haematopus fuliginosus • Black-fronted Dotterel, Elseyornis melanops • Red-capped Plover, Charadrius ruficapillus • Hooded Plover, Thinornis rubricollis • Red-kneed Dotterel, Erythrogonis cinctus • Banded Lapwing, Vanellus tricolor • Masked Lapwing, Vanellus miles Migratory shorebird species • Banded Stilt, Cladorhynchus leucocephalus • Pacific Golden Plover, Pluvialis fulva • Double-banded Plover, Charadrius bicinctus • Lesser Sand Plover, Charadrius mongolus • Bar-tailed Godwit, Limosa lapponica • Whimbrel, Numenius phaeopus • Eastern Curlew, Numenius madagascariensis • Grey-tailed Tattler, Tringa brevipes • Common Greenshank, Tringa nebularia • Marsh Sandpiper, Tringa stagnatilis • Ruddy Turnstone, Arenaria interpres • Great Knot, Calidris tenuirostris * • Red Knot, Calidris canutus • Little Stint Calidris minuta • Red-necked Stint, Calidris ruficollis • Long-toed Stint, Calidris subminuta • Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, Calidris acuminata • Curlew Sandpiper, Calidris ferruginea * unconfirmed record, PWS Waterbird Counts

36 Appendix 2

PWS Waterbird Count data for resident shorebirds, MLGR 1992–2013, with species thresholds for National and International Significance. Figures in bold italic type are considered errors (see Results). Numbers observed during the current survey are shown at the bottom of the table.

Species significance thresholds Pied Sooty Hooded Red-capped Black-fronted Masked and survey dates Oystercatcher Oystercatcher Plover Plover Doerel Lapwing Internaonal (1%) 110 115 375 950 100 1000 Naonal (0.1%) 11 12 38 95 10 100

February 1992 108 401 35 July 1992 74 26 38 February 1993 103 18 38 July 1993 101 12 27 February 1994 142 19 9 68 July 1994 74 4 27 2 24 February 1995 44 4 20 July 1995 56 13 9 30 February 1996 75 0 28 July 1996 119 3 255 48 February 1997 84 6 43 July 1997 232 9 150 1 91 February 1998 78 4 60 July 1998 183 6 22 1 33 February 1999 147 14 59 July 1999 118 4 19 February 2000 107 1 5 36 July 2000 No count undertaken February 2001 193 6 30 July 2001 131 72 10 35 February 2002 107 8 70 July 2002 67 10 15 47 February 2003 113 15 15 July 2003 114 45 February 2004 138 28 July 2004 75 5 8 2 54 February 2005 202 1 6 56 July 2005 210 1 26 6 63 February 2006 123 4 2 20 86 July 2006 191 5 10 148 February 2007 173 6 1 18 0 128 July 2007 149 0 0 0 0 121 February 2008 188 2 0 27 0 69 July 2008 229 3 0 34 0 27 February 2009 206 1 0 29 0 84 July 2009 75 0 0 8 15 57 February 2010 327 0 0 13 0 52 July 2010 108 6 0 23 61 February 2011 173 0 0 8 0 47 July 2011 48 2 0 14 6 53 February 2012 249 2 4 8 0 43 July 2012 97 0 0 94 0 72 February 2013 214 6 0 1 0 65 July 2013 98 7 0 0 0 93 December 2013–January 2014 185 1 0 27 2 >100

37 Appendix 3 PWS Waterbird Count data for migratory shorebirds, MLGR 1992–2013, with species’ thresholds for National and International Significance. Figures in bold italic type are considered errors (see Results). Numbers observed during the current survey are shown at the bottom of the table. Codes used: Bar-tailed Godwit (BTGO), Whimbrel (WHIM), Eastern Curlew (EACU), Common Greenshank (COGR), Red-necked Stint (RNST), Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (STSA), Curlew Sandpiper (CUSA), Banded Stilt (BAST), Pacific Golden Plover (PGPL) and Double- banded Plover (DBPL). Species significance thresholds BTGO WHIM EACU COGR GRKN RNST STSA CUSA BAST PGPL DBPL and survey dates Internaonal (1%) 2790 5500 320 1000 2900 3150 1600 1350 1000 500 Naonal (0.1%) 279 55 32 100 290 315 160 135 100 50

February 1992 14 July 1992 2 6 19 February 1993 26 115 July 1993 February 1994 1 6 47 164 362 1 July 1994 2 81 February 1995 1 2 July 1995 February 1996 24 30 July 1996 100 34 February 1997 14 95 8 July 1997 1 12 28 10 152 February 1998 16 118 20 July 1998 20 7 February 1999 2 19 79 July 1999 36 February 2000 16 10 24 July 2000 No count undertaken February 2001 22 65 112 1 July 2001 February 2002 17 52 165 106 July 2002 1 16 February 2003 3 11 3 33 3 76 2 July 2003 15? February 2004 69 62 16 July 2004 82 14? February 2005 19 16 86 355 31 25 July 2005 58 1 9 47 February 2006 101 17 41 284 3 19 July 2006 45 18 80 2? 61 February 2007 8 0 1 1 35 269 0 0 2 0 July 2007 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 February 2008 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 July 2008 24 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 February 2009 12 0 9 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 July 2009 13 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 February 2010 10 0 12 24 0 22 2 0 0 0 July 2010 15 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 54 February 2011 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 18 0 July 2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 February 2012 9 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 July 2012 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 February 2013 10 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 340 16 8 July 2013 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 250 5 15 December 2013–January 2014 14? 0 1 16 0 ≥200 1 0 19 0 38 Inventory and monitoring of the birds of Tasmanian saltmarsh wetlands

Vishnu Prahalad*, Eric Woehler**, Adelina Latinovic* and Peter McQuillan* *Discipline of Geography and Spatial Sciences, School of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 78, Hobart, Tasmania 7001; **BirdLife Tasmania, GPO Box 68, Hobart, Tasmania 7001

Introducon environments associated with large estuaries, creek The ongoing decrease in the extent and health of salt- mouths, lagoons and embayments (extent ≈5,000 ha, marsh wetlands from direct human impacts, which is figure 1). They are known to provide important services exacerbated by climate change and sea level rise, has that support native bird populations including recently seen Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Salt- provisioning services (direct benefits such as nesting, marsh listed as a ‘threatened ecological commun- feeding and roosting habitats), and regulating services ity’ (category: vulnerable) under the Commonwealth (indirect benefits such as improving water quality, food Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 resources, and shelter from predators and disturbance) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2013, (Hughes 2004, Laegdsgaard 2006, Greenberg et al. Prahalad et al. 2011, Prahalad 2014a, Prahalad 2014b). 2014). The loss of these wetlands is therefore likely to Tasmanian coastal saltmarsh wetlands are thus have a detrimental impact on the birds that rely on recognised as vulnerable under this listing. them and their services (Saintilan and Rogers 2013). In light of the continuing loss of saltmarshes and their associated fauna, there is an urgent need to improve our understanding of the reliance of birds on saltmarshes, and to continue to monitor their use by birds to be able to detect any signs of change. The aim of this paper is to provide background data and some tools that might assist in this endeavour. Bird use of saltmarsh wetlands Faunal studies on Australian saltmarsh wetlands have focused variously on fish, invertebrates (including mosquitoes) and a few mammals (especially bats), with comparably fewer studies on birds in relation to saltmarsh habitats (see Australian Saltmarsh Ecology by Saintilan 2009). Spencer et al. (2009) was the only dedicated summary we could find of bird use of Australian saltmarshes, albeit focused largely on shore- birds and lacking a strategic synthesis. As part of that summary, the following birds and bird groups were noted to be of direct importance in saltmarsh habitats (excludes non-native birds): Figure 1: Distribuon and extent of Tasmanian coastal • Waterfowl: Black Swan (Cygnus atratus), Chestnut saltmarshes (data sourced from Prahalad 2014a and 2014b, Teal (Anas castanea), Australian Shelduck (Tador na tador- Prahalad and Pearson 2012, Mount et al. 2011 and TASVEG noides), Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis) ver 3.0 theLIST, © State of Tasmania). The areas shown here • (Resident) shorebirds: Black-fronted Dotterel also include dal freshwater marshes of the Derwent, Huon (Elseyornis melanops), Black-winged Stilt (Himantopus and Tamar estuaries and the Apsley Marshes. himantopus), Masked Lapwing (Vanellus miles), Red- Saltmarsh wetlands form an important part of the capped Plover (Charadrius ruficapillus) Tasmanian coastline, found in sheltered low-energy • Migratory shorebirds: Pacific Golden Plover 39 (Pluvialis fulva), Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Calidris acumin- <2 m high), either fresh or saline, as in figure 2. ata), Curlew Sandpiper (C. ferruginea), Red-necked Stint We therefore conducted a review of both the habitat (C. ruficollis), Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii), Bar- requirements and usage of Tasmanian birds, and tailed Godwit (Limosa lapponica), Black-tailed Godwit document the known links between and among various (L. limosa), Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis), stages of the life cycle of birds, saltmarsh habitats and Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia), Marsh ecosystem services. We then suggest how this inventory Sandpiper (T. stagnatilis) can be further enlarged and validated with field-based • Birds of prey: Whistling Kite (Haliastur sphenurus), monitoring of bird use of saltmarsh habitat. Swamp Harrier (Circus approximans) Methods • Small passerines: Golden-headed Cisticola (Cisti- Habitat usage of all Tasmanian birds was initially cola exilis), Little Grassbird (Megalurus gramineus), sourced from four popular bird guides (Pizzey and Richard’s Pipit (Anthus novaeseelandiae), White-fronted Knight 2012, Simpson and Day 2010, Thomas et al. Chat (Epthianura albifrons) 2011, Watts 2011), selected on the basis that Watts • Other threatened species: Orange-bellied Parrot (2011) is by far the highest selling local bird guide (Neophema chrysogaster), Lewin’s Rail (Rallus pectoralis) (Fullers Bookshop staff, pers. comm.), followed by A recent global overview of birds using saltmarsh Simpson and Day (2010) and Pizzey and Knight (2012), habitats by Greenberg et al. (2014) listed 41 birds, which are the two highest selling national bird guides (a including 21 species of bird that are known from distant second to Watts in terms of sales in Tasmania); Tasmania, and organised them within three broad and Thomas et al. (2011) as a popular guide to locating groups (the four bird species highlighted in bold were birds in Australia. recognised as ‘saltmarsh specialists’ while the others use All Tasmanian birds that are likely to use saltmarshes saltmarsh often): were identified and listed taxonomically in four groups: waterbirds, shorebirds, birds of prey, and land birds • Waterbirds: Australian Shelduck, Eastern Curlew (Appendix, page 49). Pelagic seabirds such as alba- • Land birds other than insectivores: Swamp trosses, petrels and shearwaters (Procellariiformes) and Harrier, Silvereye (Zosterops lateralis), Blue-winged penguins (Sphenisciiformes) were excluded. Parrot (Neophema chrysostoma), Orange-bellied Based on the habitat usage information in these Parrot, Ground Parrot (Pezoporus wallicus), House guides, an interim ‘saltmarsh habitat usage rating’ of Sparrow (Passer domesticus), European Goldfinch high, medium and low was assigned to all birds on the (Carduelis carduelis) following criteria: • Insectivorous land birds: Welcome Swallow • high = habitat that involves saltmarsh, marshes, (Hirundo neoxena), Horsfield’s Bronze-cuckoo (Chalcites intertidal, tidal flats, mudflats, estuaries, tidal inlets, basalis), Brown Thornbill (Acanthiza pusilla), Striated lagoons, bays Fieldwren (Calamanthus fuliginosus), White-fronted • medium = habitat that involves coasts, waterways, Chat, Little Grassbird, Richard’s Pipit, Superb Fairy- wetlands, swamps, farm dams, beaches, less saline, wren (Malurus cyaneus), Yellow-rumped Thornbill brackish (Acanthiza chrysorrhoa), Australian Magpie (Cracticus • low = least associated with saltmarsh-like habitats, tibicen), Flame Robin (Petroica phoenicea), Eurasian e.g., closed forests, gardens, ponds, rocky islands etc. Skylark (Alauda arvensis) (see Appendix) The divergence between these two lists and contrasting The results from this analysis were then reviewed in emphasis on shorebirds by Spencer et al. (2009) and land light of extensive field observations that were made by birds by Greenberg et al. (2014) highlights a need for a the authors (VP has visited about 70% of Tasmanian more systematic and complete process for identification coastal saltmarshes; EJW has undertaken extensive of the avifauna of Tasmanian saltmarshes. research on birds in Tasmanian coastal wetlands and Recent guides to Tasmanian birds (Simpson and Day saltmarshes). 2010, Thomas et al. 2011, Watts 2011) cannot be used The review also considered records in the literature effectively to identify saltmarsh avifauna because many (e.g., Keast 1995, Bryant 2002, Spencer et al. 2009, (barring Pizzey and Knight 2012) confuse ‘marshes’ Greenberg et al. 2014, and other references). We with ‘swamps’ and their attribution of habitat seldom additionally considered observational records archived includes saltmarshes explicitly (see figure 2, page 41). on Birdline Tasmania (2006–15) and locally relevant Swamps are vegetated by trees (>6 m high) and woody records of birds pictured in typical saltmarsh habitat scrub or shrubs (2–6 m high, Cowardin et al. 1979), and through Google Images and Flickr. Through this are hence unsuitable for many birds listed in the guides process, the ratings were adjusted for many bird species as using swamps (e.g. dabbling ducks). Marshes are on the principle that a rating of ‘high’ indicated salt- emergent wetlands vegetated by persistent herbs, low marsh specialists, ‘medium’ for saltmarsh generalists or ‘low’ succulent shrubs, grasses and grass-like plants (usually for saltmarsh vagrants (table 1, page 41). 40 Figure 2: Typical cross-secon of coastal saltmarsh habitat and the coastal landscape, and the use by bird groups of these habitats; illustraon by M. Helman. (See discussion secon for further details.)

Bird group Order High Medium Low Total Waterbirds 9 21 7 37 Waterfowl — Geese, Swans, Ducks Anseriformes 4 5 6 15 Grebes Podicipediformes 1 2 0 3 Pelicans, Herons, Egrets Pelecaniformes 4 3 0 7 Cormorants Suliformes 0 3 1 4 Rails, Crakes, Hen, Coot Gruiformes 0 8 0 8 Shorebirds 20 13 3 36 Waders, Gulls, Terns Charadriiformes 20 13 3 36 Birds of prey 1 7 3 11 Kites, Hawks, Harriers, Eagles Accipitriformes 1 4 2 7 Falcons, Hobbies, Kestrels Falconiformes 0 3 1 4 Land birds 3 14 10 27 Quails Galliformes 0 1 1 2 Parrots Psiaciformes 2 0 0 2 Cuckoos Cuculiformes 0 0 2 2 Perching birds — various Passeriformes 1 15 7 23 Four groups 12 orders 33 57 23 113

Table 1: Summary of birds assessed and their inial rankings.

This coding permits an initial assessment of the graphical range includes other mutually exclusive relative importance of saltmarsh wetlands for all the habitats. In other words, generalist species do not four groups of birds in Tasmania, in providing them depend on saltmarsh sensu stricto to complete their life with a range of both direct and indirect benefits. cycle, but their population abundance and diversity (at Accordingly, a bird species is considered here to be a the genetic level) can be negatively influenced by the loss saltmarsh specialist where the species is dependent on of saltmarshes. Finally, saltmarsh vagrants (mostly non- saltmarsh wetlands directly to fulfil a key aspect of its breeding) are species that can be found in saltmarshes life cycle (Lockwood and Maslo 2014). Meanwhile, less frequently than generalists. The important saltmarsh generalists are species that can be regularly distinction between the two is that the vagrants are found in saltmarshes (both breeding and nonbreeding, unlikely to be affected at their population level by the Greenberg et al. 2014), although their entire geo- loss of saltmarshes. 41 Results marsh pools and channels (figure 3). The roost sites are A total of 113 species was assessed (see the Appendix), typically on the seaward margins (preferring spits), representing 12 orders and about 30 families, including where they often co-occur with shorebirds (Greenberg et 6 introduced species (table 1, preceding page). al. 2014). Egrets and herons in particular feed regularly in low saltmarshes and marsh pools. Among these, the Discussion White-faced Heron is the most widely and regularly Preliminary assessment indicates 113 bird species make recorded in Tasmanian saltmarshes (VP pers. obs., some use of Tasmanian coastal saltmarsh wetland. This Recher et al. 1983, Keast 1995). is within the range of 148 species reported as using salt- marsh and (inland) chenopod shrubland across Australia (Greenberg et al. 2014). Of the Tasmanian subset, local saltmarshes provide habitat for 33 species identified as saltmarsh specialists, 57 species of saltmarsh generalists, and 23 species of vagrant bird species that occasionally venture into saltmarshes. (For survey forms and link to forthcoming app, contact VP [email protected].) Waterbirds Waterbirds are one of the two most prominent groups of birds (after shorebirds, see page 43) to use coastal saltmarshes in Tasmania. A total of 37 species were listed, spanning five orders and seven families, and are therefore the most diverse and abundant group of birds using coastal saltmarsh in Tasmania (cf. Houston et al. 2006). Nine birds were ranked as specialists in terms of their use of saltmarsh habitat, comprising: Black Swan, Australian Shelduck, Grey Teal, Chestnut Teal, Hoary- headed Grebe, Australian Pelican, White-faced Heron, Little Egret and Great Egret.

Figure 4: Black Swan using Derwent dal freshwater marshes (dominated by Phragmites australis), as breeding areas (top), and moving to coastal saltmarsh wetlands for feeding, roosng and moulng (above). © V. Prahalad The largest proportion of waterbirds (21 species, 60%) was ranked as generalists, comprising bitterns, rails, crakes, hens, coot and a few ducks. They can be seen periodically in saltmarshes, although they are primarily dependent on brackish to freshwater marshes and water bodies due in part to their preference for suitably dense vegetative cover (e.g. bitterns, spotless crake and swamphens, Halse et al. 1993, Murray et al. 2013), and physiological limitations to salinity (e.g. Pacific Black Duck require a more regular intake of fresh water compared with Grey and Chestnut teal: Norman 1983). Figure 3: Grey Teal roosng (top) and White-faced Heron In several instances, especially in larger estuaries and feeding (above) on saltmarsh. © A. Fletcher embayments, these brackish to freshwater marshes co- These species generally use the open aquatic habitat occur as a habitat complex organised along an average adjoining the saltmarsh (estuaries, tidal inlets, lagoons, annual salinity gradient of <0.5 ppt (parts per thousand) and bays), tending to roost and feed on low marsh areas, for freshwater marshes, 0.5–18 ppt for brackish marshes 42 and 18–35 ppt for saltmarshes (Odum 1988, figure 2). Godwit, ‘over-winter’ in Tasmania and can be seen Waterbirds move between these habitats, depending during the colder months (May–September). A notable chiefly on food and water availability. It is also notable exception is the Double-banded Plover, where some that most waterbirds prefer less saline habitat for populations that breed in New Zealand migrate to breeding (Goodsell 1990), using saltmarshes and Australia to spend the colder months on tidal flats, salt- associated waterways as nonbreeding habitat for feeding marshes and beaches (Dann 1991, BirdLife Tasmania and roosting (figure 4). In this context, saltmarshes are unpubl. data). Apart from these three migratory waders, important both for their provisioning (direct) and others commonly seen in saltmarsh roosting sites are regulating (indirect) services (Hughes 2004). Eastern Curlew, Common Greenshank and Pacific Shorebirds Golden Plover. Two other migratory waders, Ruddy A total of 36 shorebird species was listed, spanning five Turnstone and Sanderling, which are recorded in high families, all in the order Charadriiformes. Of these, 20 numbers in Tasmania, are ranked as medium because species (56%) were ranked as specialists and another 13 they are largely found on beaches and rocky shores. species (36%) were ranked as generalists. Shorebirds, particularly waders (excluding gulls and terns), are the most important group of birds in Tasmania that rely on saltmarsh both directly and indirectly (Bryant 2002, Spencer et al. 2009).

Figure 6: Red-capped Plover roosng (top); Pied Oystercatcher nesng on saltmarsh (above). © A. Fletcher The most diverse and abundant migratory waders can Figure 5: Bar-tailed Godwits and a Whimbrel roosng (top, © be seen in far north-west Tasmania in the Boullanger A. Fletcher); several species of migratory waders roosng on Bay–Robbins Passage Wetlands (Dunn 2000). With over saltmarsh in Boullanger Bay (above, © V. Prahalad). 20,000 waders recorded in 2006–07 (Britton 2007), and Several species of waders use saltmarshes for roosting counts often in excess of 15,000 birds, the area supports on low marsh areas during high tides when their feeding more waders than the rest of the state combined areas (tidal flats) are submerged and for nesting, while (Woehler 2007, Woehler et al. 2014). some waders also feed in the low marsh areas, marsh All of the 17 non-migratory (i.e. resident) shorebirds pools and in the seaward margins (figure 5, Laegdsgaard are observed in saltmarshes. The four most prominent 2006). Shorebirds also rely on the indirect services of these are Pied Oystercatcher, Masked Lapwing, Red- provided by saltmarshes, such as de-nitrification and capped Plover and Black-fronted Dotterel, known to primary production (Hughes 2004). roost, feed and nest in low marsh areas and marsh pools Among the waders, 19 species were migratory and (Bryant 2002, figure 6). Both Black-winged and Banded used the saltmarshes only during the warmer months Stilts are relatively uncommon in Tasmania, although (October–April), migrating to the northern hemisphere Banded Stilts have recently been seen around salt- for breeding in the Arctic summer. A few migratory marshes and in higher numbers at Logan Lagoon on waders, especially Red-necked Stint and Bar-tailed Flinders Island (Fletcher 2013), and Black-winged Stilts 43 breed at Lake Dulverton, Oatlands, in some years (S. the most threatened species, currently listed as Critically Fish, unpubl. obs.). Endangered under the EPBC Act with fewer than 70 All other resident shorebird species are ranked as individuals remaining in the wild. It is known to use low generalists as they are largely found on beaches, rocky saltmarshes for feeding on the far north-west coast, shores or inland areas, occasionally venturing into salt- including on King Island, along its migratory route to marshes. A notable example here is the large breeding mainland Australia where the birds spend the winter colony of approximately 250–300 pairs of Kelp Gull in months in saltmarshes on the coasts of Victoria and Orielton Lagoon saltmarsh (EJW unpubl. data). South Australia. Another colony of Kelp Gull is present in the saltmarsh at ‘West Bay’ (unofficial place name) at South Arm; this comprises ≈25 pairs (BirdLife Tasmania unpubl. data). It is believed both colonies are presently increasing. Birds of prey Of the four groups of birds using saltmarshes, birds of prey are at the top of the food chain. A total of 11 species was listed within two families. Of these, only the Swamp Harrier is ranked as ‘high’, as harriers (Circus spp.) generally are considered to rely on saltmarshes to a greater extent than other raptors (Pizzey and Knight 2012, Greenberg et al. 2014). They can be regularly observed flying low over saltmarsh and nearby wetlands, and may also breed in saltmarshes (e.g. Tasmanian Land Conservancy 2015). Swamp Harriers are a migratory species to mainland Australia, but some remain year- round in Tasmania. Several other species have been ranked as generalists as they can be seen relatively regularly around saltmarsh habitat (flying low, hovering or perching on a vantage point, e.g. Nankeen Kestrel perching on a power line over a saltmarsh, VP pers. obs.). The use of saltmarsh habitat by birds of prey is perhaps the least studied and least understood topic about saltmarsh-related bird groups in Tasmania. The use of saltmarshes by owls and allies is also poorly known. Figure 7: European Skylark, an introduced passerine (top); Striated Pardalote (above). © A. Fletcher Land birds Although land birds are by far the most diverse and The Orange-bellied Parrot’s close relative, the Blue- abundant group of birds in general, their relative winged Parrot, is considered a ‘seasonal saltmarsh representation in Tasmanian coastal saltmarshes is specialist’ feeding in low marshes (Greenberg et al. limited; only 29 species are known to use saltmarshes, 2014). It is more abundant and more often recorded in representing four orders and more than 15 families. Of saltmarshes across the state, especially in the far north- these, only three species of land bird are ranked as west and on the west coast, where flocks congregate specialists: Orange-bellied Parrot, Blue-winged Parrot before their seasonal migration to mainland Australia and White-fronted Chat. Of the remaining land birds, (Fletcher 2010, EJW pers. obs.). Given the importance 17 were ranked as generalists (figure 7) and 9 were of saltmarshes in far north-west Tasmania for these two ranked as vagrants, while several other birds were parrot species and the ongoing loss of such habitats in marginally excluded from our list (e.g. kingfishers, the area (see Prahalad 2014), the need to conserve and pigeons, a few honeyeaters), due to lack of reliable manage saltmarsh areas appropriately is critical and written accounts and limited observations. As an immediate. example of the likely use of saltmarshes by birds we Among the many passerines (Passeriformes) that use have omitted, a rare record of the White-winged Triller coastal saltmarsh (see Keast 1995 for a rare detailed (Lalage tricolor) in Tasmania has been reported from a account from around Sydney), the White-fronted Chat saltmarsh on Maria Island (Birdline Tasmania 2006– has been ranked ‘high’ given its widespread use of the 15). Hence, land birds in particular may qualify for habitat across Tasmania (figure 3). It is decreasing in higher rankings with further research on the nature and mainland Australia and listed as vulnerable in New extent of their use of saltmarsh habitat. South Wales owing mainly to loss of saltmarsh habitat Of all land birds, the Orange-bellied Parrot is by far (Jenner et al. 2011, Ashcroft and Major 2013). 44 The case of the White-fronted Chat typifies the bird in core saltmarsh habitat. On the other hand, the general oversight of the importance of listing saltmarsh presence of nearby coastal heathlands and scrub seems as a key habitat for the species in three of the bird to favour Scrubwrens and Thornbills. The Striated guides we examined. Indeed, Ashcroft and Major (2013) Fieldwren, which looks similar to the Little Grassbird, in their study of the habitat preferences of the White- seems to frequent saltmarshes based on the incidence of fronted Chat, identify that ‘the present distribution of photos on Flickr of the bird in core saltmarsh habitat white-fronted chats in coastal NSW is closely linked to (also recorded by VP on Samphire Island, Coal River). the distribution of saltmarsh … and preventing the Various small passerines using saltmarsh seem to further loss of saltmarsh appears to be fundamental for depend on the presence of Tecticornia arbuscula shrubs, the conservation of the white-fronted chat in coastal with White-fronted Chat, Superb Fairy-wren, Little NSW, as saltmarsh provides their core nesting and Grassbird and Striated Fieldwren all closely linked with foraging resources.’ In this context, secure Tasmanian these shrubs (figure 8, pers. obs. and online photos). populations of White-fronted Chat can be linked to the This could be explained both by the nesting habitat relative extent and health of coastal saltmarsh, and the provided by the structural heterogeneity of large shrubs bird can be used as a flagship species for saltmarsh (as for White-fronted Chat, Keast 1995), and the ample promotion and conservation efforts (e.g. Connies availability of insects and other small arthropods in Collectables 2012). saltmarsh that these small insect-eating (insectivorous) Other native passerines encountered commonly in birds feed upon (Laegdsgaard 2006). Tasmania’s saltmarshes are Richard’s Pipit, Superb Of the four introduced passerines that are in Tas- Fairy-wren, Welcome Swallow and Forest Raven (VP mania, European Goldfinch are most commonly seen in pers. obs.). The occurrence of other native passerines is saltmarshes and are an example of a granivorous bird sporadic and seems to depend on the type of nearby species feeding on the seeds of Gahnia spp. sedges and adjacent habitats. (Greenberg et al. 2014, VP pers. obs.).

Future work and bird monitoring The bird inventory and the preliminary ratings presented here are a foundation view of the use of coastal saltmarsh wetlands by Tasmanian birds that can be refined with further quantitative data. Suitable data can be derived from existing databases such as the Atlas of Australian Birds and can be augmented with expert feedback (cf. Koch and Woehler 2007). The atlas represents more than 40 years of observational data on birds, developed through public participation via an online interface called Birdata (www.birdata.com.au) that provides a platform for entering new data and seeking feedback. The limitation, however, of using existing data from the atlas is that the data are not cross- referenced to habitats; i.e., they are not habitat-specific. This limitation has been noted by other authors who have proposed a habitat-specific monitoring program for saltmarsh wetlands (e.g. Keast 1995). Such a program would involve targeted surveys of specified saltmarsh wetlands through repeatable standardised monitoring mechanisms to record bird species diversity and abundance (Neckles et al. 2002, Shriver and Greenberg 2012). It is possible then to transfer data recorded through these surveys on to the Birdata portal thereby fulfilling the dual role of Figure 8: Superb Fairy-wren (top) and White-fronted Chat collecting bird data in general and, importantly here, (above) on Teccornia arbuscula shrubs. © A. Fletcher relating it to saltmarsh habitat management for birds. The nature of nearby habitat can influence saltmarsh We propose a field-based monitoring program that birds. Freshwater marshes favour old world warblers would provide a stronger quantitative basis for updating that periodically venture into the neighbouring salt- the preliminary ratings presented here. The monitoring marshes (Keast 1995). The Little Grassbird in particular program would involve BirdLife Tasmania members, seems to frequent saltmarshes more than do the other University of Tasmania students and trained volunteers old world warblers: several photos in Flickr show the to develop a statewide database towards this effort. 45 We also envisage that engagement of community can be recorded) and another during low tide (for stakeholders in the monitoring program will confer the sake of comparison). benefits of science communication that are usually 6. The surveys should be done between dawn and attributed to such ‘citizen science’ projects (Cohn 2008, 1200 h on days with lower than average wind speeds Bonney et al. 2009). (about 15 km/h or less) and, at most, a light rain (i.e., The following survey methods have been included as weather conditions are not windy with rain). part of the monitoring program, based on BirdLife 7. Binoculars of 8 ☓ 32s or 10 ☓ 42s are recommended Australia (n.d.), Neckles et al. (2002), DeLuca et al. (2004) (which provide a field of view of about 100–150 m and Shriver et al. (2004), and listed here in order of from suitable vantage points). preference: Transect-based fixed-route monitoring: Point-based 2-ha area search: 1. This method is suitable for larger marshes where a 1. Identify the saltmarsh cluster and determine the suitable walking route (or formed track in some cases) component saltmarsh sites (spatially separated that covers over 50% of the marsh area can be areas mapped as individual polygons), their areas established. (estimated spatial extent in hectares) and accessibility 2. All birds seen along the route must be counted, with (land tenure, physical access). surveys done between dawn and 1200 h on days with 2. Depending on the number of sites within the cluster, lower than average wind speeds (about 15 km/h or their relative areas and accessibility, select sites and less) and, at most, a light rain (i.e., weather conditions point locations within the sites based on: are not windy with rain). (a) firstly, the principle that at least 50% of the sites 3. A minimum of two counts must be conducted within each saltmarsh cluster is accessible and separated by 14 days or more; both are done in the surveyed; warmer months when birds migrate to Tasmania (b) secondly, survey points that are selected being (October–April), one count to be done during maxi- representative of the vegetative diversity in the mum high tide and another during low tide. cluster (either low succulent saltmarsh, high 4. Binoculars of 8 ☓ 32s or 10 ☓ 42s are recommended shrubby saltmarsh, or grassy saltmarsh); (which provide a field of view of about 100–150 m). (c) thirdly, each survey point being predominantly Incidental search: made up of one of the three vegetation types 1. This method is suitable for one-off sightings of birds (>50% of the 2 ha area is occupied by either that do not follow one of the two methods discussed low succulent saltmarsh, high shrubby saltmarsh above (including bi-annual wader surveys conducted or grassy saltmarsh); and, by BirdLife Tasmania, where birds are recorded both (d) finally, each saltmarsh site having the number of within and outside saltmarshes, e.g. on nearby tidal survey points dependent on the size of the flats, lagoons or embayments). marsh area and the diversity in the vegetation 2. When a bird is recorded on nearby tidal flats, lagoons types (where possible at least 50% of the area or embayments, a comment must be made to identify must be covered and all three vegetation types this. represented). 3. Any birds seen are reported as incidental sightings 3. At each saltmarsh site, either survey the entire site with notes in the comments section that may be of where the area occupied is below 2 ha, or in the case interest (e.g. unusual species or behaviour). of larger marshes (above 2 ha) or marshes with low The recommended survey method is the ‘Point-based accessibility (e.g. due to creeks), select one or more 2-ha area search’ that records the number of bird representative areas to survey, each survey lasting a species at each point location (diversity), numbers of minimum of 20 minutes and scanning an area of at each species (abundance), and notes on bird behaviour least 2 ha (e.g. a rectangle of 100 ☓ 200 m or a circle (e.g., feeding, roosting, breeding, preening, nesting; of 80 m radius), including birds flying over. Neckles et al. 2002). Sightings of other bird species of 4. Where two or more survey points are used in a large interest (small passerines and other cryptic species such site, they must be separated from each other by a as rails and bitterns) can be recorded separately as minimum of 300 m, and placed away from upland incidental searches. Even where ‘Transect-based fixed- vegetation boundaries by a minimum of 50 m (a note route monitoring’ is done, it is recommended that point must be made in the comments section if this buffer locations be surveyed along the transect such that is not available). consistent survey data becomes available for all regions 5. A minimum of two counts must be conducted across the state. separated by 14 days or more, both done during the warmer months when birds migrate to Tasmania Conclusions (October–April), one count to be done during maxi- Improving our currently limited understanding of the mum high tide (so the use of saltmarsh by shorebirds linkages between conservation management of 46 saltmarshes and dependent birdlife must be a priority in Nomination. Report of Natural Heritage Trust Project: NWP light of the threats faced by coastal saltmarshes from 13028. Natural Heritage Trust, Birds Tasmania. human activities such as draining and clearing, and Fletcher, A. 2010. Birds in Tasmania: Year of the Blue-winged Parrot. Accessed online, May 2015, via: http:// from the effects of climate change and sea-level rise. tassiebirds.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/year-of-blue-winged- The ever-decreasing capacity of managers to collect parrot.html. scientific data and to undertake long-term monitoring of Fletcher, A. 2013. ‘Birds in Tasmania: togetherness ... Banded habitats can be mitigated in some situations by Stilt’, accessed online, May 2015 via: http:// community efforts under the auspices of ‘citizen tassiebirds.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/togethernessbanded- stilt.html. science’. We propose that this preliminary inventory and Goodsell, J.T. 1990. ‘Distribution of waterbird broods relative monitoring methodology could form the basis for such to wetland salinity and pH in south-western Australia’. an effort in Tasmania. In conjunction with managers Wildlife Research. 17, pp. 219–29. and government agencies, the collection and analyses of Greenberg, R., Cardoni, A., Ens, B., Gan, X., Isacch, J., saltmarsh bird data will increase our understanding of Koffijberg, K. and Loyn, R. 2014. ‘The distribution and the relationships between and among saltmarsh bird conservation of birds of coastal salt marshes’. pp. 180–238. Coastal Conservation. eds B. Maslo and J. L. Lockwood. species, and provide feedback on the efficacy or Cambridge University Press. otherwise of the actions of land managers tasked with Halse, S.A., Williams, M.R., Jaensch, R.P. and Lane, J.A.K. responsibility over Tasmania’s saltmarshes. 1993. ‘Wetland characteristics and waterbird use of wetlands in south-western Australia’. Wildlife Research. 20, Acknowledgments pp. 103–25. Thank you to Jamie Kirkpatrick, Alan Fletcher, Nic Houston, W., Elder, R., Black, R. and McCabe, J. 2006. Jansen and John Aalders for reviewing and providing ‘Conservation significance of coastal wetland habitats for useful feedback to improve this article. Michael Helman birds at Twelve Mile Creek, Fitzroy River, central Queensland’. The Sunbird: Journal of the Queensland prepared the saltmarsh habitat graphic (figure 2). Alan Ornithological Society. 36, pp. 20–36. Fletcher provided photos used in figure 3, part of figures Hughes, R.G. 2004. ‘Climate change and loss of saltmarshes: 5 and 6, and for figures 7 and 8. Natural Resource consequences for birds’. Ibis. 146, pp. 21–8. Management North and Emma Williams assisted by Jenner, B., French, K., Oxenham, K. and Major, R. 2011. providing funding and support for this project. ‘Population decline of the White-fronted Chat (Epthianura albifrons) in New South Wales, Australia’. Emu. 111, pp.84– References 91. Ashcroft, M.B., and Major, R.E. 2013. ‘Importance of matrix Keast, A. 1995. ‘Habitat loss and species loss: the birds of permeability and quantity of core habitat for persistence of Sydney 50 years ago and now’. Australian Zoologist. 30, pp. a threatened saltmarsh bird’. Austral Ecology. 38, pp. 326–37. 3–25. BirdLife Austrlaia (n.d.) Atlas of Australian Birds. ‘Everything Koch, A. and Woehler, E. 2007. ‘Results of a survey to gather you need to know to get started’. Available online May information on the use of tree hollows by birds in 2015 via: http://www.birdlife.org.au/documents/ATL- Tasmania’. The Tasmanian Naturalist. 129, pp. 37–64. Starter-Kit-2012.pdf. Laegdsgaard, P. 2006. ‘Ecology, disturbance and restoration Birdline Tasmania. 2006–15. Archive, accessed online on of coastal saltmarsh in Australia: a review’. Wetlands Ecolog y May 2015 via: http://www.eremaea.com/ and Management. 14, pp. 379–99. BirdlineArchives.aspx?Birdline=3. Lindsay, K.J., Allen, A.P. and Major, R.E. 2015. ‘Can spatial Bonney, R., Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, and temporal food variability explain the winter foraging T., Rosenberg, K.V. and Shirk, J. 2009. ‘Citizen science: a movements of a threatened saltmarsh insectivore?’ Austral developing tool for expanding science knowledge and Ecology. 40, pp. 160–69. scientific literacy. BioScience. 59, pp. 977–84. Lockwood, J.L. and Maslo, B. 2014. ‘The conservation of Britton, P. 2007. ‘The 2006 summer and winter wader counts’. coastal biodiversity’. pp 1–10. Coastal Conservation. eds B. Tasmanian Bird Report. 33, pp. 16–22. Maslo and J.L. Lockwood. Cambridge University Press. Bryant, S. 2002. ‘Conservation assessment of beach nesting Mount, R.E., Prahalad, V., Sharples, C., Tilden, J., Morrison, and migratory shorebirds in Tasmania’. Natural Heritage B.V.R., Lacey, M.J., Ellison, J.C., Helman, M.P. and Trust Project No NWP 11990. Newton, J.B. 2010. Circular Head Region Coastal Foreshore Cohn, J.P. 2008. ‘Citizen science: can volunteers do real Habitats: Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment. Cradle Coast research?’ BioScience. 58, pp. 192–97. NRM and Cradle Coast Authority, Tasmania. Connies Collectables. 2012. White-fronted Chat. Murray, C.G., Kasel, S., Loyn, R.H., Hepworth, G. and Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V., Golet, F.C. and LaRoe, E.T. Hamilton, A.J. 2013. ‘Waterbird use of artificial wetlands in 1979. ‘Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of an Australian urban landscape’. Hydrobiologia. 716, pp. the United States’. Washington, D.C, U.S. Department of 131–46. the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: 79. Neckles, H.A., Dionne, M., Burdick, D.M., Roman, C.T., Dann, P. 1991. ‘Feeding-behavior and diet of Double-banded Buchsbaum, R. and Hutchins, E. 2002. ‘A monitoring Plovers Charadrius bicinctus in Western Port, Victoria’. Emu. protocol to assess tidal restoration of salt marshes on local 91, pp. 179–84. and regional scales’. Restoration Ecology. 10, pp. 556–63. DeLuca, W.V., Studds, C.E., Rockwood, L.L. and Marra, P.P. Norman, F.I. 1983. ‘Grey teal, chestnut teal and Pacific black 2004. ‘Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird duck at a saline habitat in Victoria’. Emu. 83, pp. 262–71. communities of Chesapeake Bay, USA’. Wetlands. 24, pp. Odum, W.E. 1988. ‘Comparative ecology of tidal freshwater 837–47. and salt marshes’. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 19, Dunn, H. 2000. Boullanger Bay–Robbins Passage Ramsar pp. 147–76. 47 Orange-bellied Parrot Recovery Team. 2006. National Recovery responses to tidal restoration along the North Atlantic coast Plan for the Orange-bellied Parrot (Neophema chrysogaster). of North America’. Tidal Marsh Restoration: A Synthesis of Department of Primary Industries and Water (TAS), Science and Management. pp. 119–25. eds C.T. Roman and D. Hobart. M. Burdick. Island Press, Washington DC. Pizzey, G. and Knight, F. 2012. Birds of Australia. 9th ed. Simpson, K. and Day, N. 2010. Field Guide to the Birds of Harper Collins Publishers, Australia. Australia. 7th ed. CSIRO Publishing, Australia. Prahalad, V., Kirkpatrick, J. and Mount, R. 2011. ‘Tasmanian Spencer, J., Monamy, V. and Breitfuss, M. 2009. ‘Saltmarsh as coastal salt marsh community transitions associated with habitat for birds and other vertebrates’. Australian Saltmarsh climate change and relative sea level rise 1975–2009’. Ecology. pp. 149–65. Ed N. Saintilan. CSIRO Publishing. Australian Journal of Botany. 59, pp. 741–48. Prahalad, V. and Pearson, J. 2012. Tasmanian Southern Coastal Tasmanian Land Conservancy. 2015. Lutregala Marsh. Accessed Saltmarsh Future: A Preliminary Strategic Assessment. NRM online, May 2015, via: http://www.tasland.org.au/ South, Tasmania. permanent/lutregala. Prahalad, V. 2014a. ‘Human impacts and saltmarsh loss in Thomas, R., Thomas, S., Andrew, D. and McBridge, I. 2011. the Circular Head coast, north-west Tasmania, 1952–2006: The Complete Guide to Finding the Birds of Australia. 2nd ed. implications for management’. Pacific Conservation Biology. 20, CSIRO Publishing, Australia. pp. 272–85. Threatened Species Scientific Committee. 2013. Subtropical Prahalad, V. 2014b. Mapping and Inventory of NRM North Coastal and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh Conservation Advice. Report to Saltmarshes. Natural Resource Management Northern the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Tasmania. Population and Communities, Canberra. Recher, H. F., Holmes, R. T., Davis Jr, W. E. and Morton, S. Watts, D. 2002. Field Guide to Tasmanian Birds. 2nd ed. New 1983. ‘Foraging behavior of Australian herons’. Colonial Holland Publishers, Australia. Waterbirds. 6, pp. 1–10. Woehler, E. 2007. Inventory of Shorebird Sites in the Cradle-Coast Saintilan, N. 2009. Australian Saltmarsh Ecology. CSIRO NRM Region, Including King Island, 2006–07. Report to Publishing, Australia. Cradle-Coast NRM and DPIW, Tasmania. Saintilan, N. and Rogers, K. 2013. ‘The significance and Woehler E.J., Drake S. and Park P. 2014. ‘Summer and winter vulnerability of Australian saltmarshes: implications for wader counts: 2007 and 2008, and 2010–14’. Tasmanian Bird management in a changing climate’. Marine and Freshwater Report. 36, pp. 61–103. Research. 64, pp. 66–79. Shriver, W. G. and Greenberg, R. 2012. ‘Avian community

48 Appendix

Inventory of birds of Tasmanian saltmarsh wetlands (* introduced species; ~ migratory shorebirds), with the preliminary ratings of habitat usage.

Order Bird Group 1: WATERBIRDS Habitat usage WATERFOWL: GEESE, SWANS, DUCKS (Order Anseriformes Family Anadae) 1 Cape Barren Goose Medium 2 Black Swan High 3 Blue-billed Duck Low 4 Musk Duck Medium 5 Australian Shelduck High 6 Australian Wood Duck Low 7 Mallard* Low 8 Pacific Black Duck Medium 9 Australasian Shoveler Medium 10 Grey Teal High 11 Chestnut Teal High 12 Hardhead Low 13 Plumed Whistling Duck Low 14 Freckled Duck Low 15 Pink-eared Duck Medium GREBES (Order Podicipediformes Family Podicipedidae) 1 Australasian Grebe Medium 2 Hoary-headed Grebe High 3 Great-crested Grebe Medium PELICANS (Order Pelecaniformes Family Pelecanidae) 1 Australian Pelican High HERONS, EGRETS, BITTERNS (Order Pelecaniformes Family Ardeidae) 1 White-faced Heron High 2 Nankeen Night Heron Medium 3 Lile Egret High 4 Great Egret High 5 Cale Egret Medium 6 Australasian Biern Medium CORMORANTS (Order Suliformes Family Phalacrocoracidae) 1 Lile Pied Cormorant Medium 2 Black-faced Cormorant Low 3 Lile Black Cormorant Medium 4 Great Cormorant Medium RAILS, CRAKES, HENS, COOT (Order Gruiformes Family Rallidae) 1 Lewin’s Rail Medium 2 Australian Spoed Crake Medium 3 Spotless Crake Medium 4 Baillon’s Crake Medium 5 Purple Swamphen Medium 6 Dusky Moorhen Medium 7 Tasmanian Nave-hen Medium

49 8 Eurasian Coot Medium Bird Group 2: SHOREBIRDS/WADERS CURLEWS, SANDPIPERS, SNIPES, GODWITS (Order Charadriiformes Family Scolopacidae) 1 Latham's Snipe~ High 2 Bar-tailed Godwit~ High 3 Whimbrel~ High 4 Eastern Curlew~ High 5 Common Greenshank~ High 6 Grey-tailed Taler~ High 7 Ruddy Turnstone~ Medium 8 Sanderling~ Medium 9 Red-necked Snt~ High 10 Curlew Sandpiper~ High 11 Sharp-tailed Sandpiper~ Medium 12 Common Sandpiper~ Medium 13 Terek Sandpiper~ Medium 14 Red Knot~ High 15 Great Knot~ High OYSTERCATCHERS (Order Charadriiformes Family Haematopodidae) 1 Pied Oystercatcher High 2 Sooty Oystercatcher Medium LAPWINGS, PLOVERS, DOTTERELS (Order Charadriiformes Family Charadriidae) 1 Pacific Golden Plover~ High 2 Grey Plover~ High 3 Lesser Sand Plover~ High 4 Red-capped Plover High 5 Double-banded Plover~ High 6 Hooded Plover Medium 7 Black-fronted Doerel High 8 Banded Lapwing Medium 9 Masked Lapwing High STILTS (Order Charadriiformes Family Recurvirostridae) 1 Black-winged Slt High 2 Banded Slt High GULLS, TERNS (Order Charadriiformes Family Laridae) 1 Pacific Gull Medium 2 Kelp Gull Medium 3 Silver Gull Medium 4 Caspian Tern Medium 5 Crested Tern Medium 6 White-fronted Tern Low 7 Lile Tern Low 8 Fairy Tern Low Bird Group 3: BIRDS OF PREY KITES, HAWKS, HARRIERS, EAGLES (Order Accipitriformes Family Accipitridae) 1 Whistling Kite Medium 2 Brown Goshawk Medium

50 3 Grey Goshawk Low 4 Collared Sparrowhawk Low 5 Swamp Harrier High 6 White-bellied Sea-Eagle Medium 7 Wedge-tailed Eagle Medium FALCONS, HOBBIES, KESTRELS (Order Falconiformes Family Falconidae) 1 Peregrine Falcon Medium 2 Brown Falcon Medium 3 Australian Hobby Low 4 Nankeen Kestrel Medium Bird Group 4: LANDBIRDS QUAILS (Order Galliformes Family Phasianidae) 1 Brown Quail Medium 2 Stubble Quail Low PARROTS (Order Psiaciformes Family Psiacidae) 1 Orange-bellied Parrot High 2 Blue-winged Parrot High CUCKOOS (Order Cuculiformes Family Cuculidae) 1 Horsfield’s Bronze-Cuckoo Medium 2 Shining Bronze-Cuckoo Low SWALLOWS, MARTINS (Order Passeriformes Family Hirundinidae) 1 Welcome Swallow Medium 2 Tree Marn Low RAVENS (Order Passeriformes Family Corvidae) 1 Forest Raven Medium FAIRY-WRENS (Order Passeriformes Family Maluridae) 1 Superb Fairy-wren Medium 2 Southern Emu-wren Medium PARDALOTES (Order Passeriformes Family Pardalodae) 1 Striated Pardalote Medium SCRUBWRENS, THORNBILLS (Order Passeriformes Family Acanthizidae) 1 Tasmanian Scrubwren Medium 2 Striated Fieldwren Medium 3 Brown Thornbill Low 4 Yellow-rumped Thornbill Low CHATS, HONEYEATERS (Order Passeriformes Family Meliphagidae) 1 White-fronted Chat High ROBINS (Order Passeriformes Family Petroicidae) 1 Scarlet Robin Low 2 Flame Robin Low PIPITS (Order Passeriformes Family Motacillidae) 1 Richard’s Pipit Medium WHITE-EYES (Order Passeriformes Family Zosteropidae) 1 Silvereye Low OLD WORLD WARBLERS (Order Passeriformes Family — various) 1 Clamorous Reed-warbler Medium 2 Golden-headed Ciscola Medium

51 3 Lile Grassbird Medium INTRODUCED PASSERINES (Order Passeriformes Family — various) 1 Eurasian Skylark* Medium 2 House Sparrow* Low 3 European Goldfinch* Medium 4 European Greenfinch* Medium 5 Common Starling* Medium

52 Summer and winter wader counts, 2015

Eric Woehler and Sue Drake, BirdLife Tasmania, GPO Box 68, Hobart, Tasmania 7001

Monitoring of migratory shorebirds at roosts in south- the Federal Government. The significant and rapid east Tasmania began with David Thomas’ efforts in the decrease in the numbers of Eastern Curlew, Numenius years 1964–68. These counts served to establish a madagascariensis, and Curlew Sandpiper, Calidris ferruginea, valuable and remarkably early baseline for all sub- throughout Australia resulted in these species being sequent efforts, which now span more than 50 years. listed as Critically Endangered under the Environmental Counts in the south-east resumed in 1973 (summer) and Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) 1999. 1980 (winter) and have continued since then. A similar assessment under the EPBC Act for another Counts in the north-east began in 1975 (summer) and group of six species of migratory shorebirds is presently 1976 (winter) by Ralph Cooper and have continued underway, and BirdLife Tasmania has made a since then. Counts in the north-west began in 1996 submission for two species, Bar-tailed Godwit, Limosa (summer and winter) and have continued since then by lapponica, and Red Knot, C. canutus. The results of the large teams of counters under the coordination of assessments for these species, and the others under Hazel Britton and Richard Ashby. These sites comprise consideration, will be known next year. the Tasmanian ‘core’ sites for the current national Shorebirds 2020 program organised by BirdLife Acknowledgments Australia. We thank the ongoing efforts of our other regional A number of other sites around the state are also coordinators: Hazel Britton and Richard Ashby (north- surveyed, sometimes in summer and in winter, west), Ralph Cooper (north and north-east), Liz sometimes opportunistically as logistics and capacity Znidersic (east) and Sue Drake and Eric Woehler (south- allow. These data are recorded as ‘non-core’ sites and east). Their efforts over many years to organise are published in separate tables here. This distinction volunteers twice a year to undertake these counts have between core and non-core sites simply identifies the resulted in the long-term datasets that are available from long-term sites from more recent sites added during the around Tasmania. Shorebirds 2020 project and following; the data from We also thank the numerous counters who have non-core sites are equal in value and contribution to contributed to these counts. In some cases, counters those data from core sites. have participated for more than 30 years. We thank These long-term data from Tasmania were included them all for their efforts. Our apologies if anyone in the recent assessment of the conservation status of involved in any count is not listed in the data tables that several species of migratory shorebirds in Australia by follow.

53 Totals forsites>> Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> BirdLife Tasmania Shorebird StudyGroup. Summer2015wadercount AD DA CH BL AR EJW DK 222 190 540

Sunny, calm 21/02/15 MN, NR 86 35 Lauderdale 5 1 1 A Darby D Abbott C Harris B Longmore A Richardson E Woehler D Knowler Fine, scattered cloud, light- 21/02/15 CH Clear Lagoon

moderate wind, 27° 0 Core Shorebirds 2020(AWSG) Areas 138 105

Sunny, calm 25° 21/02/15 MN, NR 32 Mortimer Bay 1 GD JG IF GR GM JR KW 117 122 451 Fine, scattered cloud, light- 159

21/02/15 CH 22 31 Pipeclay Lagoon moderate wind, 27° G Davis J Graham I Fletcher G Rakers G Masoero J Richardon K Westwood Fine, scattered cloud, light- 21/02/15 CH Calverts Lagoon

moderate wind, 27° 0 208 578 335 13 falling tide, sunny 24deg C 21/02/15 SD, BL, IF 16 South Arm Neck 6 MH PM NS NR MN SD 54 Clear, sunny, light NE 224 10 60 66 19 21/02/15 AR, JR 69 Barilla Bay breeze M Hills P Michael N Sommer N Ramshaw M Newman S Drake 126 Hot 27C, wind NE 20- DA, GR, GD, AD, PM, KW, JG, 433 55 13 74 82 21/02/15 79 Orielton Lagoon / Sorell

30km NS, MH 4 110 22 37 Fine, sunny 26° 21/02/15 DK 51 Iron Ck - Carlton 18 18 Five Mile Beach - Milford

NOT COUNTED Seven Mile Beach 2492 870 795 515 55 68 13 75 77 19 TOTAL DERWENT 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 171 380 691 80 24 12 Sunny, humid, 27° 20/02/15 EJW, GM 20 Marion Bay + Little Boomer 4 1041 1175 3183 148 101 535 55 13 75 12 19 TOTAL SOUTHEAST 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals forsites>> 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> AD HB GW FW EW CM AR AP AF

Light SE wind, warm and 129 28 18 44 1/02/15 FW, LW 39 Montagu I sunny Andrew Darby Hazel Britton Garry Watts Frank Wilson Els Wakefield Col Meyers Alastair Richardson Alison Parks Anthea Fergusson 1000 1526 105 Warm and 210 72 67 1/02/15 MB, PM, PW, RM, RW, Tbu 67 Kangaroo I 1 Sunny,E.wind<20knts 4 1511 2077 218 Warn and sunny, E.wind< 183 17 15 20 35 1/02/15 AR, JR, CM, RR, MH 70 Shipwreck Pt, Perkins I

11 knts 3 4 1 Core Shorebirds 2020(AWSG) Areas Fine, Sunny . Wind SW 15- 26 1/02/15 AF, SJ 35 Wallaby I 7 20 kph. 2 JH PB PA MH MB LW JS JR JoH S.wind<20 knts. Clear and 1/02/15 PB, EW Anthony Beach West 1 4 sunny. 5 Jim Hunter Paul Brooks Peter Atkinson Michael Hyland Mike Brakey Lennice Wilson Julie Serafin Jean Richardson John Hunter 155 210 455 28 Fine, sunny, SE breeze 1/02/15 AP, TB 30 30 Anthony Beach East 2 55 246 Fine, sunny, S wind <11 303

1/02/15 AD, RA 37 "Bird Pt" 1 2 4 1 3 knts. 9

NOT COUNTED Mosquito Inlet PM Tbu TB SJ SG RW RR RM RA 345 270 Fine, sunny, S wind <11 837 38 30 72 1/02/15 JoH, GW 77 "5 Islets"

knts. 5 Peter Marmion Tom Burke Tony Britz Sue Jennings Simon Gates Rodger Willows Robert Read Robyn Marmion Richard Ashby 2000 2323

Fine, sunny, S wind <11 180 82 10 1/02/15 JH, PA 37 "Knot Point" 2 2 3 knts. 7 5312 7690 553 149 280 280 337 454 48 72 47 59 37 44 TOTAL NORTHWEST 1 0 0 0 0 3 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 13 15 19/01/15 RC 41 Tamar / George Town 3 1 9 RC 503 339 41 23 15 12 16 1/03/15 RC 39 Cape Portland, Little Musselroe 6 6 4 2 Ralph Cooper 144 251 630 86 51 57 15/01/15 RC 36 Kelso 5 1174 140 198 590 77 73 12 20 36 TOTAL NORTH/NORTHEAST 0 6 9 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 12047 7077 1734 155 781 505 100 233 341 341 454 76 13 25 79 37 36 44 TOTAL TASMANIA 0 1 0 3 9 0 0 0 1 0 2 Totals forsites>> Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> EZ DW CdL C+G BH BH AP AA 107 Fine 25/01/15 JH, JoH 112 Moorland Pt, Devonport 2 3 E Znidersic D Wingfield C deLittle CG Gunson B Hansberry B Hansberry A Parks A Astley 162 Warm and Sunny. SE 171 6/02/15 AP, HB, PE, JH, SL, RN Narawntapu NP (NE Arm) Wind <10kts. 2 7

ESE wind 15km/h, 57 12 12/02/15 BH, AA 69 Georges Bay, Horseshoe Sands overcast PE NW LB Jo JK JH IM HB

ESE wind 15km/h, 104

12/02/15 IM 98 Georges Bay, Medeas Cove 5 overcast 1 Pat Ellison N Walter L Biggs H JHunter J King J Hunter I May H Britton BirdLife Tasmania Shorebird StudyGroup. Summer2015wadercount

ESE wind 15km/h, 184 68 20 12/02/15 EZ 94 Georges Bay, Sewage mudflats

overcast 2 352 ESE wind 15km/h, 457 57 14 12/02/15 DW 29 Georges Bay, Barway S side Pelican Pt

overcast 5 EW TT SW SP SL SF RN PB ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 NW, SB Beerbarrel Beach Non-Core Shorebirds 2020/AWSG areas 3 5 1 overcast 9 E Wakefield T Thornley S Walsh S Pike S Lloyd S Fish R Nagorka P Brooks ESE wind 15km/h, 13 12/02/15 EZ 15 Maurouard Beach N

overcast 2

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 EZ Maurouard Beach S 1 3 overcast 4

56 ESE wind 15km/h, 30 20 12/02/15 TT, JK 58 Scamander Spit / Barway 1 overcast 7

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 TT, JK Dianas Basin

overcast 0

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 NW, SB Blanche Beach 1 2 overcast 3

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 LB, C+CG Falmouth 2 2 2 overcast 6

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 DW Binalong Bay 1 overcast 1

ESE wind 15km/h, 12/02/15 DW Jeanneret Beach 2 2 overcast 4

Very hot, cloudless, calm 21/02/15 CdL 24 Southport Lagoon NW 4 2 3 6 9

Fine, warm, light breeze 21/02/15 SW 16 Roaring Beach - Narrows, Southport 6 2 6 2

Very hot, cloudless, calm 21/02/15 CdL Southport Bluff Beach 4 4

Fine, warm, light breeze 21/02/15 SW Hastings Bay (Lune River ) 2 2 400 15/02/15 SF 403 Lake Dulverton 3 476 254 S.wind<20 knts. Clear and 911 27 63 51 16 1/02/15 PB, EW 19 Kingston Pt Perkins I 3 sunny. 2

East Inlet, Stanley 0

Howie I 0 Totals forsites>> Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 999 BandedStilt 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> BirdLife Tasmania Shorebird StudyGroup. Winter2015wader count AW CB CH CW DA EW DK 303 164 56 31 17 Bright, cold and calm 20/06/15 MN + NR 29 Lauderdale 6 Andrew Walter Christine Bowling Christine Harris Christine Wilson Denis Abbott Eric Woehler Don Knowler

Excellent 20/06/15 MN + NR Clear Lagoon 0 Core Shorebirds 2020(AWSG) Areas 62 Fine, sunny, low wind 20/06/15 MN + NR 62 Mortimer Bay

Fine, partly cloudy, 1 - 206 10 60 30 20/06/15 CH 99 Pipeclay Lagoon 6 11°C, light winds 1

Fine, partly cloudy, 1 - 20/06/15 CH Calverts Lagoon 7 11°C, light winds 7 GR JH MH MK MLS MN MM 306 Fine with light NW wind, 202

20/06/15 AW + PH 32 36 24 South Arm Neck 6 3 excellent visibility. 3 Geoff Rakers Jill Harris Mel Hills Marlon Key Mona LoofsSamorzewski Mike Newman Maggie McKerracher 57 55 Fine, calm 20/06/15 SL + RV 32 10 Barilla Bay 4 9

10°C, clear and sunny,

MLS, CW, PT, MK, MM, CB, MH, 211

WNW-NW wind 20- 20/06/15 70 50 72 Orielton Lagoon / Sorell 8 GR, DA 1 2 1 2 3 2 30kmh, cool 94 20 51 Fine, sunny, 2 - 11°C 20/06/15 DK 23 Iron Ck - Carlton

10°C, clear and sunny, MLS, CW, PT, MK, MM, CB, MH, 63 32 WNW-NW wind 20- 20/06/15 15 Five Mile Beach - Milford 4 3 7 GR, DA 2 30kmh, cool NR PH PT RV SL NOT COUNTED Seven Mile Beach Nick Ramshaw Pamela Hinsby Paul Tildesley Rex Viney Stuart Lester 1307 173 692 145 100 134 33 10 10 TOTAL DERWENT 1 3 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2/8 cloud cover, sunny, 253 76 27 31 22 20/06/15 EW + JH 89 Marion Bay + Little Boomer 7 NW 5-10kn, cool 1 1560 781 173 109 172 131 156 10 10 11 TOTAL SOUTHEAST 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals forsites>> Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 999 BandedStilt 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> JoH JH JE GW FW CM AP BirdLife Tasmania Shorebird StudyGroup. Winter2015wader count NOT COUNTED Montagu I John Hunter Jim Hunter John Ewington Garry Watts Frank Wilson Col Meyers Alison Parks

Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 113 48 15/06/15 JE, MB, PM 10 35 20 Kangaroo I 29 mph 208 530 Overcast, wind Easterly 144 28 10 45 15/06/15 RA, JR 10 84 Shipwreck Pt, Perkins I

25mph 1 Core Shorebirds 2020(AWSG) Areas Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 18 50 11 15/06/15 FW, MH 19 Wallaby I

29 mph 2 RA PM PH MH MB JT JR Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 47 15/06/15 JT,ST 49 Anthony Beach West

29 mph 2 Richard Ashby Peter Marmion Peter Hefferon Michael Hyland Mike Brakey John Tongue June Risdon 625 Overcast, shower, 300 175 40 50 15/06/15 AP, TB 30 20 Anthony Beach East

moderate E wind. 6 1 1 2 58

Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 133 52 27 15/06/15 CM, RC 43 "Bird Pt" 5 4 29 mph 2 30 Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 29

15/06/15 PH 59 Mosquito Inlet 29 mph 148 Overcast, Moderate 219

15/06/15 GW, 59 "5 Islets" 8 Easterly wind 4 TB ST RCo RCa Overcast, wind Easterly 21- 15/06/15 JH, JoH "Knot Point"

29 mph 0 Tony Britz Shirley Tongue Ralph Cooper Rees Campbell 1778 457 496 295 349 80 49 40 TOTAL NORTHWEST 8 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 18 46 14/06/15 RC 17 Tamar / George Town 3 7 7 7 1 43 12 39 323 176 25 18/06/15 RC 12 13 Cape Portland, Little Musselroe 3 101 26 24 145 309

13/06/15 RC 13 Kelso 738 162 177 235 68 12 13 53 TOTAL NORTH/NORTHEAST 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 4076 1400 358 903 411 533 304 20 10 50 12 63 TOTAL TASMANIA 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 6 Totals forsites>> Unidentifiedsmallwaders 133 MaskedLapwing 135 BandedLapwing 138 HoodedPlover 144 Black-fronted Dotterel 141 Greater Sandplover 139 LesserSandPlover 140 Double-bandedPlover 143 Red-cappedPlover 136 Grey Plover 137 PacificGoldenPlover 999 BandedStilt 131 SootyOystercatcher 130 PiedOystercatcher 161 CurlewSandpiper 163 Sharp-tailedSandpiper 978 PectoralSandpiper 162 Red-neckedStint 166 Sanderling 164 RedKnot 165 Great Knot 129 RuddyTurnstone 155 Grey-tailed Tattler 160 Terek Sandpiper 158 CommonGreenshank Curlew 149 Eastern 150 Whimbrel 153 Bar-tailed Godwit 168 Latham'sSnipe Weather>>> Observer>> Observers: Dates >> AA JT JS JH HB ES DW 50 Sunny, cold SE wind. 18/06/15 HB,JS 66 Moorland Pt, Devonport 3 2 2 9 Adrian Ashley John Tongue Julie Serafin Jim Hunter Hazel Britton Evelyn Stinson Des Wingfield 231 38 Sunny, cool, no wind 19/06/15 HB, JH, JS, PE 80 96 10 Narawntapu NP (NE Arm) 7

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 AA Georges Bay, Horseshoe Sands 2 2 45 Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 NW, SP 47 Georges Bay, Medeas Cove 2 BirdLife Tasmania Shorebird StudyGroup. Winter2015wadercount 172

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 LZ 22 55 67 22 Georges Bay, Sewage mudflats 2 4 LZ ST SS SP SF PE NW 192

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 DW 20 20 56 94 Georges Bay, Barway S side Pelican Pt 2 Liz Znidersic Shirley Tongue Stinson Sharna Sybil Pike Shirley Fish Pat Ellinson Natalie Walter

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 NW, SP 10 Beerbarrel Beach Non-Core Shorebirds 2020/AWSG areas 5 2 1 2

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 LZ 21 Maurouard Beach N 8 8 5

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 LZ 14 Maurouard Beach S 2 5 3 4

NOT COUNTED Scamander Spit / Barway 0 59 SW

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 AA 14 Dianas Basin 2 5 5 2 Stephen Walsh

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 NW, SP Blanche Beach 1 2 3

NOT COUNTED Falmouth 0

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 DW Binalong Bay 2 2

Sunny 5-10 km/h SW wind 17/06/15 DW Jeanneret Beach 2 2

NOT COUNTED Southport Lagoon NW

Part cloud, frosty, very 12 20/06/15 SW + SS + ES 18 Roaring Beach - Narrows, Southport

light wind 4 2

NOT COUNTED Southport Bluff Beach

Part cloud, cold 20/06/15 SW + SS + ES Hastings Bay (Lune River ) 5 5 123 71 13 Light wind, showers 18/06/15 SF 39 Lake Dulverton 135 113 391 Overcast, wind Easterly 773 10 90 15/06/15 JT, ST 25 Kingston Pt Perkins I 8 25mph 1 Completely Overcast, 210 110 446 12 35 Showers, moderate E 15/06/15 HB,JS 61 East Inlet, Stanley 3 4 2 wind 9

NOT COUNTED Howie I