Draft Recovery Plan

Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) Recovery Plan

Draft for Public Comment

October 2002 © NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from NPWS. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service 43 Bridge Street (PO Box 1967) Hurstville NSW 2220 Tel: 02 95856444 www.npws.nsw.gov.au

For further information contact: Threatened Species Unit, Western Directorate. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service P.O. Box 2111 Dubbo NSW 2830 Tel (02) 6883 5330

Email [email protected] Cover illustration: David Baker-Gabb

This Plan should be cited as follows: NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002). Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) Draft Recovery Plan.

ISBN 07313 6416 3 NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service Recovery Planning Program

Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) Draft Recovery Plan

Prepared in accordance with the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

October 2002 Acknowledgments

Many landholders have generously permitted surveys and studies of Plains- wanderers on their properties over the past decade. David Baker-Gabb, Phil Maher and Rick Webster undertook much of the field work which underpins this Recovery Plan, supported by Birds Australia. Damon Oliver, Matt Cameron and Matt White of NSW NPWS provided assistance in the preparation of the Recovery Plan.

This Recovery Plan was compiled by David Baker-Gabb, Convenor of the Recovery Team. Revision of the draft Recovery Plan was assisted by Recovery Team members: Matt Cameron, Martin Driver, Jim Hermiston, Ross McDonnell, Phil Maher, Michael Mullins, John Nevinson, Damon Oliver, Roger Oxley, David Parker, Mark Rowe, Mark Sheahan, Bruce Simpson and Rick Webster.

ii Executive Summary Introduction Legislative context

The Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) is NSW’s most comprehensive attempt at establishing a legislative framework to protect and encourage the recovery of threatened species, populations and communities. Under the TSC Act, the Director-General of National Parks and Wildlife has certain responsibilities including the preparation of Recovery Plans for threatened species, populations and ecological communities. This draft Recovery Plan has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the TSC Act.

Preparation of Plan

This draft Recovery Plan has been prepared with the assistance of a Recovery Team, a non-statutory group of interested people with relevant expertise, established to discuss and resolve issues relating to the Plan. Components within the Plan do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions of all the individuals or agencies represented on the Recovery Team. The information in this draft Recovery Plan was accurate to the best of the NPWS’s knowledge on the date it was approved.

Current Species Status

The Plains-wanderer has been listed as an endangered species on Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

Recovery Objectives

The long-term objective of the NSW Plains-wanderer Recovery Plan is to improve the conservation status of the species from ‘Endangered’ to ‘Vulnerable’ within the next 10 years. This would be achieved by:

1. Establishing an effective Recovery Team to administer and organise the recovery effort.

2. Maintaining the extent and enhancing the quality of Plains-wanderer habitat.

3. Locating and protecting Plains-wanderer habitat in areas not yet surveyed.

4. Securing a key area(s) of native grassland biodiversity through the purchase of one or more large reserves of at least 20,000 ha, and containing not less than 5,000 ha of habitat suitable for Plains-wanderers.

iii 5. Halving the decline in Plains-wanderers in NSW due to overgrazing during droughts, and increasing numbers in 10,000 ha of habitat by enhanced management.

6. Assessing the relative impact of different management regimes and controlling threatening processes.

Recovery Criteria

1. Progress towards meeting Recovery Plan objectives and actions is achieved efficiently with high levels of community and Government stakeholder support and involvement.

2. Integration of this Recovery Plan into a Regional Vegetation Plan which helps bring a halt to inappropriate development of important native grasslands, and yet does not impede well-planned, integrated development that falls outside important areas.

3. ‘Core Areas’ and other sites with important Plains-wanderer habitat defined, mapped, included in Regional Vegetation Plans and protected by 2002. These areas to be protected through their incorporation into the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan and through the development and implementation of an appropriate DLWC policy relating to the consent process under the NVC Act and EP&A Act.

4. Establishment of a well-managed system of private reserves and refuge areas which, although small in size, have a major impact by halving the declines in the Plains-wanderer population during droughts, and contributes to increasing population numbers in the Riverina during average seasons through enhanced management.

5. A prime area(s) of native grassland initially supporting at least 400 breeding Plains-wanderers and other threatened flora and fauna to be added to the National Reserve System by 2001. With enhanced management the number of Plains-wanderers on the reserve(s) increases to 1,000 by 2005.

6. Targets are refined, management regimes modified, threatening processes reduced and Plains-wanderer numbers increase following implementation of new management actions derived from benchmarking and monitoring programs.

Recovery Actions

1.1. Establish landholder, Government and community stakeholder representation on the Recovery Team. iv 1.2. Employ a part-time Recovery Team Convenor to organise meetings, minutes and annual reviews of progress, to oversee surveys and monitoring, and to facilitate Recovery Team members fulfilling their agreed responsibilities.

2.1. Employ a half-time Wildlife Extension Officer to liaise with and provide information to landholders, Government agencies and other relevant Recovery Teams, and to undertake population monitoring.

2.2. Integrate all information on Plains-wanderer habitat and requirements into the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan, and ensure that such habitat is provided with a 2 km buffer (necessary to protect against the impacts of fox predation) from areas approved for cultivation.

2.3. Establish a register of areas of Plains-wanderer habitat lost to or degraded by cultivation, and areas included in reserves, and provide an annual report on changes.

2.4. Develop and provide management guidelines, in consultation with landholders, for broadacre properties, and conservation areas covered by Voluntary Conservation Agreements or Property Agreements.

2.5. Provide information and maps to ensure that agency representatives, including plague locust authorities, and landholders are aware of the location and relative importance of Plains-wanderer habitat under their control.

3.1. Conduct ground surveys in potential Plains-wanderer habitat areas that were not mapped in the NPWS/WRRVC Plains-wanderer habitat mapping project 1998- 2001.

4.1. Determine the importance of all Plains-wanderer habitat outside ‘Core Areas’.

4.2. Submit the map of ‘Core Areas’ as part of this Recovery Plan to the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee (WRRVC) for their inclusion in the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan.

5.1. Encourage and facilitate Whole Farm Plans with relatively small (eg 5% of property) areas fenced and lightly grazed under Voluntary Conservation Agreements, Property Agreements or other voluntary arrangements.

5.2. Negotiate fenced, lightly grazed areas with appropriate Fox controls under Property Agreements as a trade-off where landholders wish to undertake developments that will potentially impact Plains-wanderers in lesser conservation value areas. Ensure that such trade-offs mesh with the Regional Vegetation Plan, important habitat is conserved, and a net benefit to the long-term conservation of Plains-wanderers is achieved.

v 6.1. Collate scientific data documenting that the Riverine Plain is poorly represented in the National Reserve System and that a once-only opportunity exists to purchase one of several high conservation value properties, or parts thereof, which could soon be lost to fragmentation by cultivation.

7.1. Establish benchmark numbers and undertake monitoring of Plains-wanderers at a range of sites with different management regimes including: broad acre grazing properties, stud grazing properties, large reserves, small areas under Voluntary Conservation Agreements, and areas fragmented by cultivation.

7.2. Involve stakeholders and provide regular feed-back to land managers on improvements to management regimes.

Biodiversity Benefits

The Plains-wanderer has become a ‘flagship’ species in the effort to conserve ‘Riverine Plain’ native grasslands in NSW and Victoria. These native grasslands are listed as a threatened plant community under the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. Plains-wanderers commonly occur in the same areas as threatened plants, and lowland native grasslands contain a large number of threatened plants (Briggs and Leigh 1988). The second Atlas of Australian Birds indicates that a number of other grassland species have undergone national declines of 30-50% in the last 20 years, with greatest declines in south-eastern Australia. These species include the: Brown Songlark (Cinclorhamphus cruralis), Richard's Pipit (Anthus novaeseelandiae), Singing Bushlark (Miafra javanica), Banded Lapwing (Vanellus tricolor), Ground Cuckoo-shrike (Coracina maxima), Australian Bustard (Ardeotis australis), Emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae), Spotted Harrier (Circus assimilis) and Black Falcon (Falco subniger) (Barrett et al..2002). Plains-wanderers and other declining grassland birds can only be conserved if their habitat remains intact. Hence this Recovery Plan must also aim to conserve an adequate and representative component of the grasslands of the Riverine Plains.

Social and Economic Consequences

The main impact of the implementation of this Recovery Plan will be the restriction of some clearing and development of Plains-wanderer habitat. Plains-wanderer habitat generally occupies less than 5% of individual Riverina properties. These areas require a 2 km buffer. Developments within this buffer that lead to increased numbers of foxes will negatively impact upon the Plains-wanderer. The buffer is not a development exclusion zone, unless that Plains-wanderer habitat is in one of seven ‘Core Areas’ covering 14.9% of the NPWS Plains-wanderer mapping region. Outside ‘Core Areas’, inappropriate developments that may potentially impact Plains-wanderers which are on or near to Plains-wanderer habitat will still cause impacts which need to be taken into account during any ‘trade-offs’ and areas set aside for conservation. vi Inappropriate developments are defined hereafter as developments which directly remove Plains-wanderer habitat or otherwise negatively impact upon the Plains- wanderer and its habitat. For example, irrigated cereal cropping is known to increase fox numbers which can elevate the predation pressure on Plains-wanderers because of increased mice numbers attracted to such developments. Grazing practices and works associated with agricultural infrastructure are not considered to be inappropriate developments.

A socio-economic analysis by Hassall & Associates (2002) found that the Net Present Value (NPV) of this five-year Recovery Plan was $-13.8M. The majority of the costs were attributed to the purchase and running costs of Oolambeyan National Park ($-7.6M). The other main costs were lost opportunity costs to landholders restricted from developing land within the ‘Core Areas’ ($-6.5M). This assumes that 1% (3,385 ha) of the Core Areas could potentially be developed for irrigated agriculture if no clearing restrictions were applied. If the area of this potential irrigable land drops to 2,400 ha then the indicative Recovery Plan benefits outweigh the costs associated with the lost irrigation production.

The challenge before the Western Riverina Vegetation Committee and other authorities is to develop negotiated regional plans which ensure that high quality grasslands are not left isolated by cultivation, and at the same time to minimise negative economic impacts on landholders. Restrictions on clearing will have no economic impact on current, widespread traditional grazing activities, but may limit the aspirations of those landholders who wish to convert to cropping or introduced pastures. This Plan supports the concept of incentives and stewardship payments to reduce the economic impacts on landholders who are managing some of their land for the conservation of the Plains-wanderer.

Some of the benefits of native grasslands include their: low use of some inputs such as fertilisers, enhanced response to summer rain, improved animal health, reduced need for supplementary feeding, production of finer wool, reduced drought risk, reduced fire risk, enhanced land and water protection, improved human health through reduced use of chemicals and reduced stress, opportunities for new farming enterprises such as seed collection and native plant harvesting, and enhanced opportunities for recreation, tourism and personal satisfaction.

Some of the costs of retaining native grasslands include: lower output, lack of winter feed, under-employed resources, research and marketing needs to establish new enterprises, and the costs of operating recreation and tourism ventures.

vii BRIAN GILLIGAN Director-General Table of Contents

Acknowledgments...... ii

Executive Summary...... iii

Table of Contents...... 8

1 Current Conservation Status...... 1

2 Description...... 1 2.1 Taxonomic Significance ...... 2

3 Distribution...... 2 3.1 Current and historical distribution ...... 2 3.2 Tenure ...... 3

4 Ecology...... 4 4.1 Life Cycle...... 4 4.2 Behaviour...... 5 4.3 Disturbance Regimes...... 5 4.4 Population Structure ...... 6

5 Habitat ...... 7 5.1 Significant Habitat ...... 8

6 Relevant Legislation...... 9 6.1 NSW Legislation ...... 9 6.2. Commonwealth legislation ...... 10 6.3 Critical habitat...... 11

7 Management Issues...... 11 7.1 Threats and reasons for decline ...... 11 7.2 Social and economic consequences ...... 13 7.2.1 Socio-economic analysis...... 13 7.2.2 Social and Practical Considerations ...... 15 viii 7.2.3 Commercial and Social benefits...... 16 7.2.4 Community Involvement...... 16 7.3 Biodiversity benefits...... 17

8 Previous Actions Undertaken...... 17 8.1 Review of species distribution and status...... 17 8.2 Ecological research and surveys ...... 18 8.3 Plains-wanderer habitat mapping...... 18 8.4 Plains-wanderer ‘Core Areas’...... 18 8.5 Management and Action Plans ...... 19 8.6 Current Ex-situ programmes...... 19

9 Species ability to Recover...... 19

10 Recovery objectives and performance criteria...... 20 10.1 Objectives of the Recovery Plan...... 20 10.2 Recovery performance criteria...... 21

11 Recovery Actions...... 21 11.1 Recovery Team...... 21 11.2 Maintain and Enhance Habitat...... 23 11.3 Undertake Surveys...... 25 11.4 Regional Targets ...... 27 11.5 Reserves and Refuge Areas ...... 28 11.6 Purchase a Reserve ...... 30 11.7 Benchmarking, Monitoring and Feedback...... 32 11.8 Awareness, Involvement and Incentives...... 34

12 Implementation...... 37

13 Alternative Management Strategies ...... 38 13.1 Captive breeding and reintroduction...... 38 13.2 Widespread control of predators...... 38 13.3 Additional surveys ...... 38 13.4 No regional plans or reserves...... 38

14 Preparation details...... 39 2 14.1 Date of last amendment...... 39 14.2 Recovery Plan preparation...... 39 14.3 Review date ...... 40

References...... 41

Figure 1. Map of Plains-wanderer habitat and Core Areas on the NSW Riverine Plain...... 46

Appendix 1 – Calculating the Plains-wanderer population size ...... 47

Appendix 2 – Submission form for Draft Recovery Plan...49

3 1 Current Conservation Status

The Plains-wanderer has been listed as an endangered species on Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) as it is: · in a demonstrable state of decline which is likely to result in extinction; · significantly prone to future threats which are likely to result in extinction; and · very rare in terms of abundance and distribution.

Plains-wanderers are eaten by Foxes (Baker-Gabb 1995) and predation by the European Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) is listed on Schedule 3 of the TSC Act as a key threatening process.

The Plains-wanderer is also listed on the schedules of Acts administered by other authorities outside NSW:

Act Listing Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Vulnerable Victoria Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988: Threatened Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992: Vulnerable

The Plains-wanderer is likely to change status to nationally endangered under the EPBC Act 1999 following a review of the status of all Australian birds (Garnett and Crowley 2000). The Plains-wanderer is on the BirdLife International world list of globally threatened birds. BirdLife International used IUCN criteria to classify the Plains-wanderer as endangered (Stattersfield and Capper 2000).

2 Description

· Scientific nomenclature: Pedionomus torquatus (Gould 1840) · Family: Pedionomidae · Common name: Plains-wanderer · Other names: Collared Plains-wanderer, Turkey Quail

The Plains-wanderer is a small quail-like bird standing about 10 cm tall and weighing 40-95 g ( Marchant and Higgins 1993). Both sexes have straw-yellow legs and bills, and their plumage is mainly fawn with fine black rosettes. The larger female is easily distinguished by her prominent white-spotted black collar above a rich rufous breast patch.

The Plains-wanderer could be confused with other small ground-dwelling birds that occur in native grasslands such as Stubble Quail (Coturnix pectoralis) or Little

1 Button-quail (Turnix velox). The Plains-wanderer has a finer bill, much longer legs and lankier appearance than button-quail or quail.

2.1 Taxonomic Significance

The Plains-wanderer is of great taxonomic and scientific interest being the sole member of a family of birds found only in eastern Australia. The morphology of the Plains-wanderer does not vary across its range (Marchant and Higgins 1993). For over a century this unusual bird was thought to be distantly related to button- quail (Turnix spp), but it is now classified as a shorebird most closely related to seedsnipe (Thinocorus spp), which are South American inland shorebirds (Olsen and Steadman 1981, Sibley et al. 1988).

3 Distribution

3.1 Current and historical distribution

The Plains-wanderer has declined greatly since European settlement. Areas where the species was formerly common and is now so reduced in numbers that it is effectively extinct include eastern NSW, south-western Victoria, and south-eastern South Australia. Its current stronghold is the Riverina of south-western NSW. Areas of secondary importance include north-central Victoria and central-western Queensland (Baker-Gabb 1998).

Most records of Plains-wanderers in NSW over the past 20 years come from a 13,000 km2 area of the Riverina bounded by Hay and Narrandera on the Murrumbidgee River in the north, the Cobb Highway in the west, the Billabong Creek in the south, and Urana in the east (Baker-Gabb 1990a, Maher 1997). Even within its Riverina stronghold, the Plains-wanderer has a very patchy distribution. Surveys in the 1990s across 5,000km2 of the Riverina covering 37 properties found only 5% of the total area comprised suitable habitat. The amount of high quality habitat in the Riverina drops to 1-2% during very wet or dry years when grasslands become too dense or are grazed too bare for Plains-wanderers (Maher 1997). Recent Aerial Photo Interpretation (API) mapping for NSW NPWS and the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee (WRRVC) has confirmed the patchy distribution of the Plains-wanderer's habitat (Roberts and Roberts 2001). API mapping in the northern and central Riverina found that only 2.3 % of 2.28 million ha was primary habitat suitable for Plains-wanderers all year round. Such areas can be rendered temporarily unsuitable by overgrazing during droughts. This could be offset by a further 4.3 % of the 2.28 million ha which is comprised of denser, secondary habitat that may be periodically occupied by Plains-wanderers.

2 Within the 2.28 million ha surveyed and mapped on the Riverine Plain, the Recovery Team has identified seven ‘Core Areas’ (Figure 1). Core Areas are critical for the survival of the Plains-wanderer in NSW as they are areas where developments that remove or impact on Plains-wanderer habitat will be prohibited. These are also areas where conservation efforts must be concentrated. The Plains- wanderer Recovery Team established criteria for the identification of Core Areas. The principal objective was to secure approximately 80% of the existing population within Core Areas. As well, Core Areas were to be located across the mapping area in order to reduce the impact of catastrophic events such as bushfires. Ideally, Core Areas would be large enough to support approximately 50 pairs of birds. Core Areas were mapped by identifying all primary habitat more than 2 km from existing irrigation developments and more than 200 m from patches of woodland. Patches of primary habitat within 1 km of another patch were then aggregated. If only aggregations capable of supporting 50 pairs of birds were considered, then around 60% of the population was contained within Core Areas and a poor geographic spread of Core Areas was obtained. Accordingly, the Recovery Team determined that aggregations of primary habitat capable of supporting around 30 pairs of Plains- wanderers would be accepted as Core Areas. The seven Core Areas identified support around 72% of the population and are distributed across the mapping area. The seven ‘Core Areas’ cover 340,278 ha or 14.9% of the mapping area.

The main reason for the decline in the numbers and distribution of Plains-wanderers in all eastern States has been the conversion of native grasslands to dense introduced pasture or croplands (Bennett 1983). If native grasslands are not overgrazed or cultivated then Plains-wanderers are largely sedentary (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990).

Within NSW, the Plains-wanderer only occurs in good numbers in the Riverina in the NSW NPWS Western Directorate. The bird was formerly fairly common until about 1920 on the Slopes and Tablelands, and there are two earlier records of birds near Sydney. The following Local Government Areas have recent records of Plains-wanderer: Central Darling, Carrathool, Hay, Windouran, Conargo, Jerilderie, Murrumbidgee, and Urana.

No populations or individual Plains-wanderers occur in NSW as the result of translocations.

3.2 Tenure

During three separate surveys, fewer than ten Plains-wanderers were found in Willandra National Park. This National Park is about 170 km north of the species’ stronghold and is largely unsuitable for Plains-wanderers. A similarly small number of Plains-wanderers have been recorded on Morundah Station which is

3 Commonwealth land owned by the Royal Australian Navy. Morundah Station has some high quality native grasslands (Benson et al. 1997) which lie within the Plains- wanderer’s stronghold. An equally small number of Plains-wanderers have been recorded from Travelling Stock Reserves such as the one between Deniliquin and Hay. Travelling Stock Reserves are managed by the Rural Lands Protection Board. Some of those in the Riverina with Plains-wanderers were in the past used for agistment rather than travelling stock and were overgrazed to the detriment of the birds and other native fauna and flora. Recently, management of Travelling Stock Reserves has improved. Several important areas for threatened grassland plants occur on road reserves and Travelling Stock Reserves (Benson et al. 1997).

Over 95% of the more than 1,200 records of Plains-wanderers in the Riverina over the past 17 years (Maher 1997) have come from properties which are privately owned. With cultivation of native grasslands on some properties there will be ‘trade-offs’ which include appropriate covenants or Property Agreements. These agreements conform to the IUCN definition of reserves, even though they are not on public land.

4 Ecology

4.1 Life Cycle

Population turnover is moderate, and at least some birds are year-round residents in sparse native grasslands provided they are not forced out by overgrazing, fires or cultivation (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990). Breeding has been recorded in most months of the year but generally takes place in spring, with second and even third clutches laid in summer if sufficient rain falls. The normally solitary birds form pairs in late winter and may then be found 1-3 m apart. The larger, more colourful female dominates their courtship and the species can be serially polyandrous (females may have more than one mate in a single season) (Marchant and Higgins 1993). Neighbouring pairs live 250-400 m apart. Four eggs (range 2-5) are usually laid in a hollow in the ground that has been scratched out by the female and lined with grass. The male does most of the incubation which lasts for 23 days. The male does all of the chick rearing leaving the female free to pair with another male (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990).

The young are able to walk a few hours after hatching, are independent when about two months old, and capable of breeding in their first year (Crome and Rushton 1975, Ridley 1986). After the breeding season, the number of independent young seen in the Riverina outnumbers adults by 3:2 (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990). Breeding success can be low if heavy rains fall in spring. It is not known how long Plains- wanderers live in the wild, but they have lived for at least eight years in captivity.

4 4.2 Behaviour

Plains-wanderers feed on a wide range of seeds, insects and spiders. Insects comprise about 40% of the diet, except in spring, when the proportion of insects in the diet is slightly higher (Baker-Gabb 1988). Ants and beetles up to 15 mm long constitute the major insect foods that are eaten throughout the year. Sucking bugs and caterpillars, the next most important insect foods, are taken mainly in spring and autumn. Grasses, saltbushes and other plants provide seeds that comprise nearly 60% of the annual diet. In summer, grass seeds make up the main part of the seed intake. In autumn, the predominance shifts to seeds of saltbushes and other herbs. Native plants provide the majority of the seeds, while introduced plant species make only a minor contribution to the Plains-wanderer’s diet (Baker-Gabb 1988). Seeds and arthropods appear to be taken according to their relative availability and there are no known ‘key’ food species.

Foraging takes place during the day and at dusk. Birds peck up seeds and arthropods from the ground, and occasionally by gleaning ripe seeds from inflorescences. Arthropods may be exposed by the birds hammering on compacted soil with their bills.

Sparse native grasslands allow Plains-wanderers to forage for fallen seeds and ground-dwelling insects with ease and observe distant predators, while at the same time having sufficient cover to avoid detection by predators (Keartland 1901, Baker- Gabb 1988). Where the grass is sparse enough to see a Richard’s Pipit easily, Plains-wanderers are extremely cryptic. They rarely fly and so sparse vegetation is essential if Plains-wanderers are to see distant ground predators and move quickly and stealthily away. Plains-wanderers shun dense grass where foraging is difficult and they cannot run from predators. They avoid bare or overgrazed areas where they are more easily detected and vulnerable to predators (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990).

Within sparse native grasslands that are not overgrazed, Plains-wanderers occupy home ranges averaging 12 ha, which overlap extensively (55%) with that of their mate, but not with other Plains-wanderers (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990). This means that in the Riverina, the ecological requirements of Plains-wanderers are about 18 ha of suitable habitat per pair in average seasons. Home range size varies from year to year depending on seasonal conditions.

4.3 Disturbance Regimes

Widespread cultivation of lowland native grassland habitat for cropping and dense introduced pastures has been the single biggest factor in the near extinction of Plains-wanderer populations that once thrived in coastal and sub-coastal regions (Bennett 1983, Baker-Gabb 1990a). In the Riverina, there are land use changes

5 currently under way whereby some native pastures are being cultivated and irrigated for growing rice and other crops. Plains-wanderers will be extirpated by these inappropriate developments because their habitat is directly or indirectly impacted.

Pasture improvement practices such as the application of fertilisers and oversowing with introduced pasture species can lead to denser grasslands and the vigorous growth of environmental weeds. This can temporarily or permanently eliminate Plains-wanderers from an area, depending on the degree and permanency of the change in the structure of the grassland. Wet winters may also promote the growth of dense pastures and weeds, which are unsuitable for Plains-wanderers. Heavy rains in spring can lead to widespread breeding failures.

Overstocking led to removal of saltbush and widespread soil erosion in the late 1880s and 1940s. Stocking rates in the 1980s were 50-75% lower than those at the turn of the century (Maher 1997). The reduction in stocking levels and improved management by landholders led to a recovery of many native grasslands which provide habitat for the Plains-wanderer. In the last ten years there has been a further reduction in stocking rates. Under this scenario, overgrazing impacts are likely to be less during droughts than they were a decade ago. Stocking rates may increase to 1980s levels if seasonal conditions and wool prices improve.

Overgrazing and fires eliminate Plains-wanderers from paddocks until seasonal conditions improve and the vegetation cover returns. Widespread overgrazing such as occurs during a prolonged dry spell or a drought, can eliminate most of the Plains-wanderers from a region. Populations then recover when good conditions return. Some birds find refuge on a small number of relatively lightly grazed stud merino properties during droughts. Surveys over 15 years indicate that the numbers of birds encountered on the Riverine Plain can vary by a factor of ten (one bird per 2.2 - 20 km travelled), depending on seasonal conditions, stocking rates and the time of the year when the survey was conducted (Maher and Baker-Gabb 1993).

The introduced Red Fox eats Plains-wanderers and predation was thought to be a major problem (Llewellyn 1975), but no evidence could be found for this on extensive sheep grazing properties in the Riverina where Foxes were being culled routinely (Harrington et al. 1988). On the other hand, when Fox numbers increase in and around irrigated crops as a result of large increases in numbers of House Mice (Boonstra and Redhead 1994, Twigg and Kay 1995), Foxes pose a much greater threat to the species (see section 7.1).

4.4 Population Structure

An accurate total estimate of Plains-wanderer numbers is difficult to obtain for the whole of eastern Australia. Nevertheless, recent surveys (Webster 1996a, 1996b,

6 2000, Maher 1997) show that previous estimates (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990), though possibly accurate when they were made a decade ago, are now too optimistic. Habitat destruction has continued apace, and there are now fewer than 500 Plains- wanderers in north-central Victoria, and no viable populations in south-western Victoria and south-eastern South Australia (Maher and Baker-Gabb 1993, Webster 1996a, 1996b). These areas probably contained the greatest numbers of Plains- wanderers at the time of European settlement. While there have been no surveys for Plains-wanderers in south-west and central Queensland in the past decade, past and recent records are insufficient for optimism. Past records indicate that inland Queensland is now second to the Riverina in importance for the conservation of the Plains-wanderer.

Recent intensive ground surveys (Maher 1997) indicated that earlier estimates by Baker-Gabb et al. (1990) of 5,500 Plains-wanderers in the Riverina represented the maximum number after several years of ideal conditions. However, detailed API mapping (Roberts and Roberts 2001) indicates that previous estimates of the amount of suitable habitat, and hence numbers of birds, were too high. Current estimates for the number of Plains-wanderers in the Riverina are around 3,100 birds. In very dry years, when many birds disperse or perish, the number in the Riverina could drop to less than 1,000 mature individuals. One thousand animals is often considered to be a Minimum Viable Population which is defined as the smallest population unlikely to go extinct simply because of normal, random fluctuations of nature, genetic phenomena, changes in the environment, and other similar variables (Shaffer 1981). Australia-wide the number of birds must be revised down to a maximum of about 5,500 after several good seasons, and less than 2,000 in years of widespread drought. The potential impact of these population declines have been subjected to a Population Viability Analyses (PVA) which is reported on in section 7.1.

In the 17 years between 1981 and 1997, Plains-wanderers appeared to fail to breed in the spring and summer of two drought years (1982 and 1994) and bred with little success in three wet years (1990-92) (Maher 1997). Provided their habitat remains intact, Plains-wanderer populations can recover well from such setbacks and at the end of average breeding seasons the number of juvenile birds consistently outnumbered adults by 3:2 (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990). The number of adult male birds outnumbers females by 2:1 (Harrington et al. 1988) which fits with a serially polyandrous mating system, but limits the effective population size and hence the rate of recovery of populations.

5 Habitat

The native grasslands of the Riverina are the consequence of grazing by domestic stock and rabbits over the past 150 years (Moore 1953a, 1953b). The original plant 7 communities were open shrublands dominated by boree (Acacia pendula), old man saltbush (Atriplex nummularia) and bladder saltbush (Atriplex vesicaria), with grasses in between. Plains-wanderers were commonly found in this saltbush habitat in the 1800s (North 1913), indicating some flexibility in their habitat selection.

Plains-wanderers obtain all of their annual life cycle needs from sparse, lowland native grasslands. They do not require regular access to water, seeming to gain all they need from their food and by pecking up drops of dew and rain that accumulate on leaf tips (Baker-Gabb 1988). Sparse native grasslands favoured by Plains- wanderers typically occur on hard, red-brown soils. The most frequently recorded of 75 species of plants from such areas include: ringed wallaby grass or white top (Austrodanthonia caespitosa), pale beauty heads (Calocephalus sonderi), windmill grass (Chloris truncata), slender bluebush (Maireana pentagona), speargrass (Austrostipa ‘variablis’ complex), and barley grass (Hordeum leporinum) (Baker-Gabb 1990b). No plants occurred exclusively in areas with sparse rather than dense grass, but fairy grass (Sporobolus caroli) and chariot wheels (Maireana cheelii) occurred significantly more often in sparse grasslands (Baker-Gabb 1987). Areas of highest quality Plains-wanderer habitat often have lichens on some areas of bare ground, and numerous perennial plants such as yellow buttons (Chrysocephalum apiculatum). Benson et al. (1997) undertook detailed botanical surveys of selected sites in the Riverina, including some where Plains-wanderers had been recorded, and concluded that further work was required linking botanical data to Plains-wanderer habitat.

5.1 Significant Habitat

Of 37 Riverina properties surveyed by Maher (1997), 21 were classified as having native grasslands of high conservation value for Plains-wanderers, 12 were of medium conservation value, and five were of lesser conservation value. Only 2.3% of 2.28 million ha assessed using aerial photo interpretation was considered primary habitat for Plains-wanderers, with 72.5 % of this primary habitat included in seven ‘Core Areas’ (Roberts and Roberts 2001).

In the Riverina, Plains-wanderers live in sparse native grasslands containing about 50% bare ground and 10% fallen litter, with the remaining 40% made up of herbs and grasses. Grass tussocks are spaced 10-20 cm apart. Most of the vegetation is below 5 cm high, but some vegetation up to a maximum of 30 cm is important for concealment. The species of plants occurring in the sparse grasslands occupied by Plains-wanderers are very similar to those in the much larger areas of dense native grass that Plains-wanderers avoid (Baker-Gabb 1987). This indicates that grassland structure is more important than species composition for Plains-wanderers.

8 This Recovery Plan incorporates the "no net loss" (McCuskey et al. 1994) principle with respect to the carrying capacity of Plains-wanderers by native grasslands. "No net loss" of carrying capacity occurs where, over a specified period of time, losses of Plains-wanderer habitat, as measured by a combined quality-quantity measure (birds per hectare) are balanced by commensurate gains. A higher carrying capacity can be achieved by managing public reserves and habitat on private land specifically for Plains-wanderers, rather than for standard grazing objectives. This principle has been incorporated into the DLWC interim policy on Plains-wanderers.

6 Relevant Legislation

6.1 NSW Legislation

The Plains-wanderer is listed as an Endangered species under Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act). The TSC Act covers the listing of species, the preparation, revision and implementation of Recovery Plans, critical habitat, licences to harm threatened species, species impact statements and joint management agreements. Also listed under key threatening processes in Schedule 3 of the TSC Act is predation of native wildlife such as the Plains- wanderer by the introduced Fox. NPWS has prepared a draft Threat Abatement Plan for Fox predation which rates the Plains-wanderer as a high priority.

The Plains-wanderer is also covered by the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 which deals with threatened species and Voluntary Conservation Agreements.

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) has relevant sections for the Plains-wanderer concerning: significant effects on threatened species or their habitats, preparation of regional and local environmental plans, consideration of critical habitat and environmental impact, and activities for which an Environmental Impact Statement is required. The TSC Act amendments to the environmental assessment provisions of the EP&A Act require that consent and determining authorities consider relevant Recovery Plans when making a decision under the EP&A Act.

The Native Vegetation Conservation Act 1997 (NVC Act) provides for the conservation and management of native vegetation, including native grasslands. The NVC Act has three main functions: · The requirement for development consent for clearing of native vegetation (unless exempt) in accordance with the EP&A Act. · The development of Regional Vegetation Management Plans. The Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee is currently preparing such a plan. Matters relating to threatened species such as the Plains-wanderer, and their habitats, must be considered when preparing a Regional Vegetation Management 9 Plan. Moreover, a Regional Vegetation Management Plan must be consistent with a Recovery Plan. · The provision for Property Agreements with landholders to protect areas of native vegetation, including the ability to access the Native Vegetation Management Fund to carry out specified works in accordance with the agreement.

The NVC Act, in its transitional arrangements, also provided for the Regional Grassland Management Plans prepared under SEPP 46 to be in force until January 1, 2000, or until a Regional Vegetation Management Plan is in force.

The Rural Lands Protection Act 1989 provides for the management of Travelling Stock Reserves and Stock Routes by Rural Lands Protection Boards. Section 81(1) (h) provides for the protection and conservation of flora and fauna. Part 9 of the Act also gives Boards powers to deal with noxious animals, including Foxes.

From time to time other NSW Acts may be relevant to the conservation of the Plains-wanderer such as the Rural Fires Act 1997, and Acts covering Weeds, Crown Lands, Western Lands (eg Hillston, Mossgiel, Ivanhoe), and Local Governments. The latter Act provides for State of the Environment reporting by Councils, the preparation of management plans for Council-owned land, and for differential rating at Councils’ discretion.

6.2. Commonwealth legislation

The Plains-wanderer is listed as nationally Vulnerable under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. This Act protects the Plains-wanderer on all lands including Commonwealth areas such as Morundah Station in the Riverina which is owned and operated by the Royal Australian Navy. The Plains-wanderer is likely to be upgraded to Endangered under the Commonwealth EPBC Act (Garnett and Crowley 2000).

In 1979 the Plains-wanderer was listed on Appendix II of CITES, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. A proposal to delete the Plains-wanderer from this list has been recently put to IUCN because the Plains-wanderer is protected by legislation which prohibits the live export of native birds, the species has not been traded internationally in the past ten years, it is rarely kept by aviculturalists, there are no indications of domestic sale, very small numbers are likely to be held illegally at any one time, and there is no evidence of illegal trade.

10 6.3 Critical habitat

No area used by the Plains-wanderer has been declared critical habitat as defined in the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

7 Management Issues

7.1 Threats and reasons for decline

Cultivation of native grasslands and their conversion to dense introduced pastures or croplands has already brought about the near extinction of the Plains-wanderer in eastern NSW, south-western Victoria and south-eastern South Australia (Bennett 1983, Baker-Gabb 1998), and is currently a threat throughout the species’ range. After more than 150 years of extensive grazing, the last ten years have seen an increase in the amount of native pasture being converted to croplands in the Riverina of NSW, and more clearing is planned. Further widespread clearing of native grasslands will lead to a deterioration in the status of the Plains-wanderer in NSW, and a loss of associated biodiversity.

Cultivation and conversion of native grasslands to croplands can have additional unintended local and regional negative impacts on any Plains-wanderer habitat that remains intact. Cultivation that proceeds without a regional plan can lead to excessive habitat fragmentation and isolation of Plains-wanderer populations. Drifting fertilisers from croplands can lead to denser growth of local native grasslands rendering them unsuitable for Plains-wanderers. Increased salinity from cultivation and irrigation of croplands will have a negative impact on native grasslands.

Foxes eat Plains-wanderers but their density and hence impact on the birds was thought to be low on broad acre sheep grazing properties (Harrington et al. 1988). However, grain crops increase House Mouse (Mus domesticus) populations which in turn support denser populations of Foxes and aerial predators such as Black Falcons and Spotted Harriers which will take more ground-dwelling birds.

A potential threat about which little is known is the use of pesticides, such as fenitrothion, which are periodically sprayed from the air onto plague locusts over a large portion of the Plains-wanderer’s range (Symmons 1985, Baker-Gabb 1993, Story and Cox 2001). The concentrations of fenitrothion used could kill birds if they came into contact with the spray (Pearce 1971). Funding for the research necessary to establish whether or not fenitrothion has a major impact on non-target species in Australian grasslands has recently been obtained (APLC in litt).

11 Plains-wanderers co-exist with light to moderate grazing (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990, Deiz and Foreman 1996). Overgrazing eliminates Plains-wanderers from paddocks until seasonal conditions improve and the vegetation cover returns. Widespread overgrazing such as occurs during a prolonged dry spell or drought can temporarily eliminate most of the Plains-wanderers from a whole region. When this occurs, populations recover to previous levels slowly. Populations of Plains-wanderers that are protected from overgrazing during droughts do not decline (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990). An absence of grazing or low stocking densities, following widespread rains and prolific grass growth, also has deleterious impacts on Plains-wanderer populations.

Population Viability Analysis (PVA) can be used to show the susceptibility of species to declining numbers, but it is not without its limitations (Lacey et al. 1995) and should be used only as a guide to managers. A PVA of the Riverina population of the Plains-wanderer indicated that losses of up to 20% of their suitable habitat will reduce the number of birds, but will not of itself bring about the Plains- wanderer’s extinction in NSW. Losses greater than 20% of suitable habitat markedly increase the probability of extinction of the Plains-wanderer. Note also that since the PVA was conducted, latest estimates of the numbers of Plains- wanderers in the Riverina are significantly lower than the population estimate of Baker-Gabb et al. (1990) which was used in the PVA.

Many threats are compounded by another threat. For example, when the PVA modelled clearing of 20% of suitable habitat for cereal crops which led to an increase in House Mouse and Fox densities, and Foxes were modelled to eat an extra 200 Plains-wanderers per year (only 4% of the modelled population), then there was a much higher probability of extinction for the Plains-wanderer in NSW. This result indicated that Fox control is a wise precautionary management strategy, and that any actions that led to increased numbers of Foxes should be a serious management concern. Actions to reduce the impact of Foxes from cropping country should also be implemented. Wherever possible, crops should not be established within 2 km of high conservation areas for Plains-wanderers because the home ranges of Foxes in farmland are about 3-7 km2, and most young Foxes disperse 2 km or less (Coman et al. 1991).

The PVA indicated that the greatest area of concern for managers should be the fate of Plains-wanderers during droughts when overgrazing displaces up to 80% of birds which either disperse elsewhere or die. If more than half of these displaced birds die, then the Plains-wanderer is in serious trouble, and is likely to go extinct in NSW. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to gather direct information on the mortality rates of cryptic birds which do not return to their place of origin once a drought is over and grass cover has regrown. Indirect information can be obtained from monitoring programs. The PVA results and application of the precautionary 12 principle suggest that both a network of refuge areas from overgrazing and reserves on private land, and a large public reserve, are necessary for the long-term survival of the Plains-wanderer in NSW.

7.2 Social and economic consequences

7.2.1 Socio-economic analysis

A socio-economic analysis of Actions 11.2, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6 and 11.8 of this Recovery Plan (those that are likely to have the greatest socio-economic impacts) was conducted by Hassall &Associates (2002).

Direct Costs

Hassall & Associates (2002) found that there are direct costs associated with government implementation of this Plan, including the purchase and operating costs of Oolambeyan National Park and costs associated with monitoring, fox baiting and educational strategies. The Net Present Value (NPV) calculated for the direct costs to government for the five year period of this Recovery Plan was $-7.61M. This assumes that all costs associated with the purchase and management of Oolambeyan National Park are attributed to the conservation of Plains-wanderers.

Opportunity costs of conserving native grasslands and restricting irrigation

The economic aspects of conserving Plains-wanderer habitat are important because farms are primarily about providing a livelihood and an economic return. Restrictions on clearing will have no economic impact on current, widespread traditional grazing activities, but may limit the aspirations of some landholders who wish to convert to cropping or introduced pastures. Some landholders wish to make such changes because of the collapse of traditional markets for wool, and the perceived need to diversify into cultivation or irrigation. Moreover, landholders who have managed their properties soundly may now feel disadvantaged by recent legislation compared to people who cleared before 1995.

Hassall & Associates (2002) found that the major opportunity cost component of this Recovery Plan is the opportunity cost associated with the restriction of clearing and development within Plains-wanderer ‘Core Areas’. The opportunity costs calculated by Hassall & Associates (2002) were based on the assumption that 1% of the ‘Core Areas’ (3,385 ha) could potentially be developed for irrigation if no clearing restrictions were applied. The NPV analysis assumed a period of 5 years and used a discount rate of 7.0%.

13 The calculated NPV of the opportunity costs to landholders over five years was $- 6.48M for 3,385 ha of development

There may be some opportunity costs associated with restrictions upon potential irrigation developments within important areas of primary Plains-wanderer habitat outside of ‘Core Areas’. These were not able to be calculated in the study by Hassall & Associates (2002).

Total Net Present Value

Hassall & Associates (2002) calculated that the total NPV of this Recovery Plan is in the order of $-13.8M. The two major cost components are the Oolambeyan National Park purchase and upkeep and the opportunity costs associated with any potential irrigation development.

In this five-year period the majority of the costs are associated with the purchase and upkeep of Oolambeyan National Park ($-7.61M).

If effective fox control can be demonstrated at a regional level in the five-year timeframe of this Recovery Plan, then the 2 km buffer on habitat within Core Areas may be reviewed. This would reduce the total NPV of this Plan.

Willingness to pay

There have not been any studies of the community’s willingness to pay (WTP) for the improvement of the conservation status of the Plains-wanderer from endangered to vulnerable. Therefore, Hassall & Associates (2002) applied the benefit transfer method to provide some indicative estimates of potential community values for the Recovery Plan strategies. An estimate of the WTP for moving a species from ‘endangered’ to the less threatened state of ‘vulnerable’ is $11.39 per household per endangered species protected. However, this figure should be used as an indication of value only.

Comparison of Benefits and Costs

From an economic efficiency perspective, native vegetation conservation is desirable provided the incremental economic benefits of vegetation conservation exceed the economic costs (Hassall & Associates 2002). However, it should be recognised that economic efficiency is only one element of the public decision making process that has called for the recovery of a threatened species. The analysis by Hassall & Associates (2002) indicates that the total NPV over five years is much less than the WTP. However, this does not necessarily mean that the Recovery Plan benefits outweigh the costs associated with lost irrigation 14 production, because WTP is an indicative value of the public’s willingness to pay for a threatened species to be elevated from endangered to vulnerable over a time period that is much greater than the timeframe of this Plan. The costs of this Plan are also sensitive to the level of potential irrigation development within the ‘Core Areas’. Hassall & Associates (2002) indicate that if the area of potential irrigable land drops to below 2,400 ha then the indicative Recovery Plan benefits outweigh the costs associated with lost irrigation production.

7.2.2 Social and Practical Considerations

Crosthwaite (1997) gathered information on the values, attitudes and preferences of landowners with regard to native grasslands in the south of the Riverine Plain and assessed their capacity to respond to change. He found that native grasslands sometimes persist on farms at least partly due to chance and history and so there is no certainty that they will remain, particularly as even where landholders are sympathetic to nature conservation objectives, practical matters often take precedence.

Stocking at the very light rates needed to protect the few areas of highest quality native grasslands has high opportunity costs (Crosthwaite 1997), but these costs are not so high for native pastures where Plains-wanderers co-exist with sheep at moderate stocking rates. If high crop yields and prices are obtained, then there are very high returns to landholders from cropping areas of native grassland and under- sowing to pasture in the third year of cropping. However, this is a gamble as crop failure and reduced prices in just one or two years can reduce returns to below that of native grassland (Crosthwaite 1997). In the Riverina where rainfall is low and variable, this risk is removed by making a large capital investment in either deep bores to tap ground water or transporting water in channels for irrigation. The long- term sustainability of groundwater resources, and irrigation impacts on salinity levels, have yet to be established for the Riverina, but must be viewed with concern given the evidence from other parts of the Murray-Darling Basin.

Some of the costs of retaining native grasslands include: lower economic returns, a decrease in pasture production over winter, under-employed resources, research and marketing needs to establish new enterprises, and the costs of operating recreation and tourism ventures (Crosthwaite 1997). There needs to be scope for the whole of the community to help pay landholders for conservation services through funding and grant schemes, but also at a more local level through differential rating and other means (Binning and Young 1999). Consideration should be given to incentives and stewardship payment for landholders who are managing their lands for the conservation of Plains-wanderers.

15

7.2.3 Commercial and Social benefits

The economic benefits of Plains-wanderer habitat conservation comprise both use and non-use values. Use values involve people physically using or experiencing the native vegetation and the attributes it provides and deriving value from this use. These use values comprise both direct use and indirect use values (BDA Group and Gillespie Economics 2001).

Direct use values could include: the low use of some inputs such as fertilisers, enhanced response to summer rain, a more resilient pasture source, decreased wind erosion, habitat for animals to help control pests, improved animal health, reduced need for supplementary feeding, enhanced land and water protection, opportunities for new farming enterprises such as seed collection and native plant harvesting, enhanced opportunities for recreation, tourism, personal satisfaction and biodiversity conservation.

Direct use values may accrue to the landholder and/or some members of the wider community. For instance, the salinity use values from vegetation may accrue to the landholder undertaking the plantings/management action as well as neighbouring or downstream landholders (BDA Group and Gillespie Economics 2001). Persons visiting Oolambeyan National Park derive value from its existence. Birdwatchers from around the world have travelled to the region to see the Plains-wanderer. A few landholders have allowed birdwatchers to be guided around their properties at night to observe the elusive Plains-wanderer which is on every serious birdwatcher’s ‘must see’ list. These international and Australian birdwatchers generally stay in local accommodation and contribute to the regional economy.

Indirect use values include functional benefits derived from a reliance on natural ecosystems for life-support functions, through the provision of clean air, water and other resources. These values mainly accrue to the wider community (BDA Group and Gillespie Economics 2001).

7.2.4 Community Involvement

The community, particularly Birds Australia and its members, has undertaken most of the work to conserve the Plains-wanderer over the past two decades. This has included raising the funds from private sources and from the Federal Government to pay for studies of the biology of the Plains-wanderer, detailed surveys in three States, and publications for scientific and community audiences. Subsequently the NSW NPWS has commissioned a management report, management guidelines for distribution to landholders, and a Recovery Plan from Birds Australia. Hence the community has played a pivotal role in gathering and presenting the information in 16 this Recovery Plan. NPWS and the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee have also undertaken detailed mapping of Plains-wanderer habitat with the co-operation of many Riverina landholders.

Many landholders have been generous in allowing surveys to be conducted on their properties and have expressed an interest in the management requirements of the Plains-wanderer. The publications of Birds Australia, NSW NPWS and Greening Australia will assist landholders in this regard.

While community groups such Birds Australia and Greening Australia will help implement the Recovery Plan, landholders and particularly the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee with its strong landholder participation will be foremost among members of the community in its implementation. The latter groups will need to permit surveys, and to devise and implement whole farm and regional vegetation management plans.

7.3 Biodiversity benefits

Temperate lowland grasslands are among the most threatened ecosystems in Australia (Kirkpatrick et al. 1995). Plains-wanderers can only be conserved in the wild if most of their habitat remains intact. They commonly occur in areas, which also support threatened grassland communities and populations of threatened plants. As such, the Plains-wanderer has become a ‘flagship’ species in the effort to conserve native grasslands in NSW and Victoria. Moreover, the second Atlas of Australian Birds indicates that a number of other grassland species have undergone national declines of 30-50% in the last 20 years, with greatest declines in south- eastern Australia. These species include the: Brown Songlark, Richard's Pipit, Singing Bushlark, Banded Lapwing, Ground Cuckoo-shrike, Australian Bustard, Emu, Spotted Harrier and Black Falcon (Barrett et al. 2002). This Recovery Plan must aim to conserve an adequate and representative component of the native grassland communities of the Riverine Plain.

8 Previous Actions Undertaken 8.1 Review of species distribution and status

Bird watchers have published information about the decline of the Plains-wanderer for decades (Keartland 1901, D’Ombrain 1926, Hyett 1935, Wheeler 1974, Llewellyn 1975, Bennett 1983, Blakers et al. 1984). The review of the distribution, status and biology of the Plains-wanderer by Bennett (1983) highlighted the need for further work with a management focus.

17 8.2 Ecological research and surveys

The behaviour and ecology of the Plains-wanderer in the Riverina was the subject of an intensive three year study by Birds Australia and WWF aimed at identifying the habitat and management requirements of the species (Baker-Gabb 1987, 1988, 1990a, Baker-Gabb et al. 1990, Harrington et al. 1988).

Detailed surveys for Plains-wanderers and their habitat have been undertaken in NSW, Victoria and South Australia (Beardsell 1991, Maher and Baker-Gabb 1993, Webster 1996a, 1996b, Maher 1997). In north-central Victoria, one significant 1,400 ha grassland was purchased with Commonwealth assistance, and another 330 ha of crown land was added to a neighbouring reserve.

8.3 Plains-wanderer habitat mapping

Extensive Plains-wanderer surveys and associated habitat mapping were undertaken over a period of 20 years across 37 properties in the Riverina by Maher (1997). It was found that only 5% of the total area comprised suitable habitat. Furthermore, the amount of high quality habitat in the Riverina drops to 1-2% during very wet or dry years when grasslands become too dense or are grazed too bare for Plains- wanderers (Maher 1997).

To ensure that all Plains-wanderer habitat within the Riverina was identified on all properties, NSW NPWS and the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee undertook a large-scale Plains-wanderer habitat mapping project which employed aerial photographic interpretation (API) and ground-truthing methodologies. Between 1998 and 2001, nine 1:100,000 mapsheets (2.28 million ha) were mapped to identify Plains-wanderer primary and secondary habitat, as well as all other vegetation associations including woodlands, shrublands, wetlands and other native grasslands (Roberts and Roberts 2001).

Results from the Plains-wanderer habitat mapping project showed that only 2.3% of the 2.28 million ha was primary habitat suitable for the species all year round. A further 4.3% of the total area is comprised of secondary habitat that may be periodically occupied by Plains-wanderers.

8.4 Plains-wanderer ‘Core Areas’

To ensure the future survival of the Plains-wanderer large areas of primary habitat needed to be identified from the mapping project described above and protected with a 2km buffer from irrigation developments. Within these ‘Core Areas’, which incorporate the primary habitat plus the 2 km buffer, there is to be no irrigated cropping or other inappropriate developments that may impact the Plains-wanderer.

18 ‘Core Areas’ are where Plains-wanderer conservation efforts must be concentrated. From the mapping data, NPWS have identified seven ‘Core Areas’, each of which are capable of supporting around 30 pairs of Plains-wanderers (Figure 1). The seven ‘Core Areas’ cover 340,278 ha or 14.9% of the mapping region and comprise approximately 72% of the total Plains-wanderer primary habitat in the Riverina. Information currently available to NPWS suggests that approximately 60 properties may include lands identified as ‘Core Areas’.

8.5 Management and Action Plans

Management actions to recover the Plains-wanderer have been described for NSW and nationally (Baker-Gabb 1990b, 1993) and updated when required (Baker-Gabb 1998). Information on the management of some of these areas for threatened plants has been compiled by Deiz and Foreman (1996).

8.6 Current Ex-situ programmes

There are currently no Plains-wanderers known to be held in captivity. Plains- wanderers have in the past proved fairly easy to maintain and breed in captivity using established avicultural techniques (Crome and Rushton 1975, Ridley 1986, Baker-Gabb 1987). These programs have provided information on captive husbandry, incubation period, chick growth rates, plumage development, moult, habitat preferences and behaviour.

9 Species ability to Recover

Studies of the biology of the Plains-wanderer and assessments of population numbers over 17 years indicate that Plains-wanderers can recover from depletions caused by local overgrazing. Widespread overgrazing which occurs during droughts eliminates most Plains-wanderers from whole regions and then they have been much slower to repopulate suitable areas after good rains and recovery of the native grasslands. The NSW population of Plains-wanderers may be reduced by about 80% by overgrazing during a drought (Baker-Gabb 1998).

Cultivation eliminates Plains-wanderers from native grasslands. In a few cases where native grasslands have been ploughed and sown to dense introduced pastures, and then left for many years, they have eventually reverted to native pastures. These areas may then become sub-optimal habitat for Plains-wanderers. In most cases, cultivation has led to the permanent loss of Plains-wanderers from an area.

19 10 Recovery objectives and performance criteria

The objectives, criteria and actions of this Recovery Plan build on NSW NPWS Species Management Report Number 3 and Birds Australia Conservation Statement Number 1 (Baker-Gabb 1990b, 1998), and conform with and extend Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement Number 66, currently being implemented in Victoria (Baker-Gabb 1995). They are based on a thorough review of the biological and ecological information at the time of writing. Knowledge of the Plains- wanderers’ distribution in parts of the Riverina and in other range States is deficient. Also, there is a need to improve our understanding of the long-term impact of drought-induced population fluctuations, the effect of fragmentation of the Plains- wanderer’s habitat, the distribution and abundance of all remaining areas of habitat and optimum farm management regimes. The adequacy of the relevant actions in this Plan will be re-assessed as new information becomes available.

10.1 Objectives of the Recovery Plan

The long-term objective of the NSW Plains-wanderer Recovery Plan is:

1. To achieve an improvement in the conservation status of the species, from ‘Endangered’ to ‘Vulnerable’ within 10 years by: 1.1. halting loss of important habitat and population declines, 1.2. halving population fluctuations and declines during droughts, and 1.3. increasing numbers through improved management of 10,000 ha of habitat in new reserves and refuge areas.

Downlisting the Plains-wanderer from endangered to vulnerable in NSW requires an understanding of the species’ current classification and an appreciation of the dimensions of the recovery task to be undertaken. Using IUCN criteria, Collar et al. (1994) classified the Plains-wanderer as nationally vulnerable because there are fewer than 10,000 mature individuals, there is a continuing decline in extent of area and quality of habitat due to cultivation and overgrazing, and there are extreme fluctuations in the number of mature individuals due to overgrazing during droughts. In NSW, the Plains-wanderer is classified as endangered because they are subject to the same threats listed above, plus they face the additional problems of having no reserves or managed refuge areas, and the numbers of mature Plains- wanderers in NSW currently fluctuate by about 80% between 3,100 after several years of good conditions and less than 1,000 during droughts (Baker-Gabb 1998). For the Plains-wanderer to be downlisted to vulnerable in NSW, the described threats must be addressed, and numbers must not decline below 2,500 mature individuals during droughts, which occur on average about every six years. Achieving objectives 1.1-1.3 would see the Plains-wanderer downlisted in NSW to

20 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) category of vulnerable.

10.2 Recovery performance criteria

Recovery criteria are:

1. To establish an effective Recovery Team to administer and organise the recovery effort.

2. To maintain the extent and enhance the quality of Plains-wanderer habitat.

3. To locate and protect Plains-wanderer habitat in areas not yet surveyed

4. To secure a key area(s) of native grassland biodiversity through the purchase of one or more large reserve(s) of at least 20,000 ha, and containing not less than 5,000 ha of habitat suitable for Plains-wanderers.

5. To halve declines in Plains-wanderers in NSW due to overgrazing during droughts, and to increase the number of birds on 10,000 ha of managed habitat.

6. To establish benchmark population numbers and monitor the relative impact of different management regimes on them.

7. To control threatening processes.

11 Recovery Actions

11.1 Recovery Team

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

· To establish an effective Recovery Team to organise and administer the recovery effort.

2. Performance Criteria

· Progress towards meeting Recovery Plan objectives and actions is achieved efficiently with high levels of community and Government stakeholder support and involvement.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

21

· Establish landholder, Government and community stakeholder representation on the Recovery Team.

· Appoint a part-time Recovery Team Convenor to organise meetings, minutes and annual reviews of progress, to oversee surveys and monitoring, and to ensure that Recovery Team members fulfil their agreed responsibilities.

4. Outcomes

· Efficient and well coordinated implementation of tasks by Recovery Team members, Government agencies, landholders and community groups.

· Enhanced biodiversity conservation because of synergy in planning and implementation of tasks. 5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· NSW NPWS will establish the Recovery Team, invite representatives from other stakeholder groups, and supervise contracts.

· Stakeholders are likely to include representatives from: NSW NPWS, NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC), Rural Lands Protection Board (RLPB), Local Government Councils, Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee, landholders, Landcare groups, Birds Australia, Greening Australia, environmental consultants, naturalists and others.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Establish the Recovery Team and appoint members in early 1999.

· Appoint or let a contract for the role of Convenor in early 1999.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $2,000 per annum for NPWS to host four Recovery Team meetings per year and other meetings as necessary, commencing early 1999.

· $20,000 per year for Recovery Team Convenor’s salary for one day per week and all travel, accommodation and administration costs, commencing early 1999.

22 11.2 Maintain and Enhance Habitat

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

· To maintain the Plains-wanderer’s current distribution and all large, important areas of habitat.

· To enhance land managers’ abilities to identify and manage Plains-wanderer habitat effectively.

2. Performance Criteria

· Stakeholder support for the DLWC policy on the management of Plains- wanderer habitat and assessments of clearing applications.

· A halt to indiscriminate clearing of important native grasslands, with well- planned, integrated development outside of ‘Core Areas’ and at least 2 km from other important areas of Plains-wanderer habitat.

· Effective, informed management of Plains-wanderer habitat on reserves, refuge areas and broadacre properties.

· Integration of this Recovery Plan into the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

· Provide input into and support for the DLWC policy on the management of Plains-wanderer habitat, and the assessment of clearing applications.

· Establish a register of areas of Plains-wanderer habitat lost to or degraded by cultivation, and areas included in reserves, and provide an annual report on changes.

· Employ a half-time Wildlife Extension Officer whose main tasks are liaison, provision of information and population monitoring.

· Provide information on native grasslands that enables landholders and agency personnel to identify, classify, and map areas of Plains-wanderer habitat of different quality.

· Provide management guidelines in consultation with landholders for broadacre properties, and conservation areas covered by Voluntary Conservation 23 Agreements or Property Agreements and stewardship payments through Catchment Management Boards.

· Integrate all information on Plains-wanderer habitat and requirements into the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Plan.

· Provide information and maps to ensure that agency representatives, including plague locust authorities, and landholders are aware of the location and relative importance of Plains-wanderer habitat under their control.

4. Outcomes

· Long-term maintenance of the Plains-wanderer’s current distribution and all important areas of habitat.

· Long-term biodiversity conservation in native grasslands.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· The Recovery Team will have input into the DLWC policy on the management of Plains-wanderer habitat.

· DLWC will provide annually updated information and NPWS will maintain a register of habitat lost to or degraded by nearby cultivation, and areas placed in reserves, and report on the changes annually.

· The Recovery Team will liaise with the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Committee (WRRVC) and ensure that this Recovery Plan is integrated with the Regional Vegetation Plan.

· The Wildlife Extension Officer will provide advice to landholders concerning their responsibilities, the whereabouts of Plains-wanderer habitat, and management information.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Appoint a half-time Wildlife Extension Officer in 1999.

· Integrate this Recovery Plan with the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan in 2002.

24 · Wildlife Extension Officer to distribute upon request to landholders whose properties have been surveyed, a map of their important Plains-wanderer habitat and information on the Plains-wanderer.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $2,000 of contracted Wildlife Extension Officer’s time to provide property maps with Plains-wanderer habitat to landholders, along with the existing Plains- wanderer Conservation Statement and the NPWS management guidelines, commencing mid 2001.

· $2,000 for the Recovery Team to integrate the Recovery Plan with the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan. The Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan is costed outside this Recovery Plan, and is currently on exhibition.

· $10,000 for DLWC, NPWS and WRRVC to develop and print guidelines for the identification and classification of native grasslands for assessors of clearing applications, and to assist landholders who are aiming to maintain suitable grassland structure for Plains-wanderers through grazing.

· Note that the half-time Wildlife Extension Officer consultancy covers salary, travel and operating costs, commencing early 1999. This consultancy has been allocated across several tasks such as the first one listed on the funding schedule above.

11.3 Undertake Surveys

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

· To locate and protect Plains-wanderer habitat across the species' distribution in the Riverina.

2. Performance Criteria

· All important areas of Plains-wanderer habitat located and mapped by 2002. These areas to be protected through their inclusion within ‘Core Areas’, to be incorporated into Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan, and through the development and implementation of an appropriate DLWC policy relating to the consent process under the NVC Act and the EP&A Act.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

25 · Maintain and update the NPWS/WRRVC Plains-wanderer habitat mapping data from 1998-2001.

· Provide information and maps to landholders to ensure that they are aware of the location and relative importance of Plains-wanderer habitat under their control.

· Conduct further ground-truthing within the nine 1:100,000 mapsheets that were mapped by NPWS/WRRVC in areas that have not been previously ground- truthed.

· Conduct surveys and mapping in areas that have not been covered by the NPWS/WRRVC API mapping project, particularly to the east, west and north of the Gunbar 1: 100,000 map sheet.

· Integrate the results of these surveys with previous mapping and any surveys conducted for the WRRVC.

4. Outcomes

· All important areas of Plains-wanderer habitat located and mapped by 2002. These areas to be protected through their inclusion within ‘Core Areas’, to be incorporated into Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan, and through the development and implementation of an appropriate DLWC policy relating to the consent process under the NVC Act and the EP&A Act. · Landowners who might have been concerned about equity issues are aware that all properties have now been surveyed and landholders are in possession of information to assist their management.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· WRRVC to let contract for ground surveys to improve the accuracy of areas that were not ground-truthed on Gunbar and Moggumbill 1:100 000 mapsheets during the NPWS/WRRVC API mapping project.

· DLWC to endeavour to produce Plains-wanderer potential habitat derivative maps, based on DLWC native vegetation mapsheets that occur outside of the nine (Plains-wanderer habitat) NPWS/WRRVC mapsheets.

· NPWS to maintain and update the maps, and undertake additional mapping if DLWC mapping does not cover all relevant areas.

26 · Wildlife Extension Officer to distribute to landholders whose properties have been surveyed, a map of native vegetation on their properties, upon request, and information on the Plains-wanderer.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Incorporate additional ground-truthing results into NPWS/WRRVC mapping in October 2001.

· Information and maps to be distributed to landholders in 2002.

· DLWC vegetation mapping information to be available by mid 2002.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $30,000 for WRRVC to let contracts for ground-truthing surveys in 2001. · $2,000 costs and $3,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time to send out maps and information to landholders in mid 2001.

11.4 Regional Targets

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

· To use the NPWS/WRRVC API mapping information to define ‘Core Areas’ where conservation efforts will be focussed, and no inappropriate developments will occur. Other areas will be identified where developments will have the least conservation impact.

2. Performance Criteria

· No inappropriate developments to occur in ‘Core Areas’, where inappropriate developments are those that directly remove Plains-wanderer habitat or otherwise negatively impact on the Plains-wanderer and its habitat (e.g. developments that lead to elevated fox numbers).

· Sufficient number and dispersion of ‘Core Areas’ established so that all Plains- wanderer habitat could not be eliminated in a single catastrophe such as a major wildfire.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

· Submit the map of ‘Core Areas’ included in this Recovery Plan to the WRRVC for inclusion in the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan. 27 · Determine priority areas for management incentives, monitoring and predator control.

4. Outcomes

· All critical areas of Plains-wanderer habitat included in ‘Core Areas’ with biodiversity conservation, monitoring and management targets set.

· Areas of Plains-wanderer habitat outside ‘Core Areas’ mapped with biodiversity conservation, monitoring and management targets set.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· The Recovery Team will define and map ‘Core Areas’ and will put in priority order all other regions for conservation, management and monitoring of Plains- wanderers.

· The WRRVC will be requested to include the ‘Core Areas’ in the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Regional conservation targets to be set in 2002.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $2,000 to assist landholder input into Recovery Team deliberations.

· Most of the setting of priority conservation and development areas will be undertaken within agency operating budgets and without additional impost on Recovery Team or Regional Vegetation Committee budgets.

11.5 Reserves and Refuge Areas

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

28 · To halve the declines in Plains-wanderers in NSW due to overgrazing during droughts, and to increase the number of birds on 10,000 ha of managed habitat, about half of which is on private land.

· To establish reserves on private land under appropriate covenants or ‘in perpetuity’ Property Agreements as ‘trade-offs’ for development in other areas, and thereby contribute to increasing Plains-wanderer numbers.

2. Performance Criteria

· Establishment of a well-managed system of private reserves and refuge areas which, although small in size, has a major impact in buffering the Plains- wanderer population from the effects of cultivation and overgrazing by halving declines during droughts, and contributes to increasing population numbers in the Riverina during average seasons.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

· Encourage, and facilitate Whole Farm Plans with relatively small (eg 5% of property) areas fenced and lightly grazed under Voluntary Conservation Agreements, Property Agreements or other voluntary arrangements.

· Negotiate fenced, lightly grazed areas under appropriate covenants as a trade-off where landholders wish to develop lesser conservation value areas, so long as such trade-offs mesh with the Western Riverina Regional Vegetation Management Plan, important habitat is conserved, Fox numbers are controlled and a net benefit to the Plains-wanderer is achieved.

· Provide landholders with species information, a photographic guide, and information on available incentives so that they can best manage their native grassland refuge areas with Plains-wanderers.

4. Outcomes

· A strategically placed, well managed system of private reserves and refuge areas which helps buffer the Plains-wanderer population from the effects of overgrazing during droughts and from excessive Fox predation.

· The network of reserves and refuge areas also provides Plains-wanderers with enhanced breeding opportunities with minimal disturbance, and acts as a source of colonists for surrounding districts once good seasonal conditions return. 29

· Refuge areas and reserves buffer many other species from the impacts of overgrazing during droughts and help maintain biodiversity.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· DLWC and NPWS to negotiate appropriate covenants and Property Agreements with landholders who wish to cultivate native grasslands.

· Wildlife Extension Officer to encourage, facilitate and apply to the Natural Heritage Trust and other sources for funds to assist the establishment of Voluntary Conservation Agreements and Property Agreements.

· Wildlife Extension Officer to provide information to landholders.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Negotiation of covenants and Property Agreements on properties to be cultivated to commence in early 1999.

· Facilitation of covenants and Property Agreements to commence in mid 1999.

· Sending out information to landholders to commence in mid 1999.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $11,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time in 1999, rising to $14,000 per year during 2000-03 to facilitate the establishment of reserves and refuge areas, covenants and Property Agreements.

· Negotiations with landholders to be funded within agency operating budgets.

· $3,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time rising to $4,000 per year during 2000-03 to compile and send out information to landholders and managers.

11.6 Purchase a Reserve

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

30 · To secure a key area(s) of native grassland biodiversity through the purchase of one or more reserves totalling 20,000 ha, and containing at least 5,000 ha of Plains-wanderer habitat.

2. Performance Criteria

· A prime area or areas of native grassland which initially supports at least 400 breeding Plains-wanderers and other threatened flora and fauna has been added to the National Reserve System by 2001. With enhanced management the number of Plains-wanderers on the reserve(s) increases to 1,000 by 2005.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

· Scientific evidence to be collated showing that the Riverine Plain is poorly represented in the National Reserve System and that a once-only opportunity exists to purchase one of several high conservation value properties, or parts thereof, which could soon be lost to fragmentation by cultivation. When similar opportunities were not taken up in south-western Victoria and south-eastern South Australia, populations of the Plains-wanderer and several species of threatened grassland plant became extinct there.

· Senior members of the NSW and Federal Governments and agencies to receive written information and personal briefings which encourage them to support the purchase of a reserve.

· Negotiations to be undertaken with interested landholders.

· New management regimes are implemented which have the achievable target of doubling the new reserves’ carrying capacity for Plains-wanderers and increasing numbers of other threatened species.

4. Outcomes

· Long-term biodiversity conservation of native grasslands is achieved through better management of a significant addition to the National Reserve System.

· Enhanced ecotourism benefits flow to the region.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· NPWS will prepare the information concerning the need to purchase a reserve in the Riverina.

31 · State and Federal authorities will need to approve and negotiate the purchase.

· NPWS will undertake reserve management with advice from the Recovery Team and the Wildlife Extension Officer.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Reserve purchase background information prepared in 1999.

· Negotiations with interested landholders to take place in 1999, with purchase taking place in 2001.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Funding for reserve purchase to come from the NSW Government and the Federal National Reserve System budget.

· Management costs for the new reserve(s) borne by NPWS operating budgets. 11.7 Benchmarking, Monitoring and Feedback

1. Specific Conservation Objectives

· To improve baseline information, and to assess the relative impact of different management regimes and threatening processes.

2. Performance Criteria

· Data on Plains-wanderer numbers and distribution, and hence conservation targets are refined.

· Management regimes are modified, threatening processes are reduced and Plains-wanderer numbers increase following implementation of new advice from monitoring programs.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

· Use published data on Plains-wanderer density, and new information from NPWS/WRRVC API habitat mapping project and ground surveys to derive refined benchmark information on Plains-wanderer populations.

· Undertake surveys of Plains-wanderer numbers and breeding success at a range of sites with different management regimes including: extensive grazing properties, stud grazing properties, large reserves, small areas under Voluntary 32 Conservation Agreements, Fox control programs (with control sites), and areas fragmented by cultivation.

· Establish ten monitoring grids.

· Review the impact of Fox control measures on Plains-wanderers and assess the continuing need for 2 km buffers on Plains-wanderer habitat after five year's data have been collected and analysed.

· Test and monitor the impact of locust spraying operations on the Plains- wanderer in 2002.

· Provide regular feed-back to land managers on improvements to management regimes.

4. Outcomes

· More precise information on the conservation status of the Plains-wanderer. · A dynamic management review process leading to widespread adoption of the best practical management regimes and a reduction in the impact of threatening processes so that Plains-wanderer numbers on managed areas have increased by 2000 birds.

· Landholders are well informed and management of native grassland biodiversity is enhanced.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· Convenor to use published data, together with API and ground survey information to derive improved benchmark information on the numbers and dispersion of Plains-wanderers in the Riverina.

· Convenor to produce monitoring protocols and to establish ten monitoring grids with assistance from the Wildlife Extension Officer.

· APLC and Wollongong University to test and monitor of the impact of locust spraying on Plains-wanderers in 2002-2004 (Costs external to this Recovery Plan).

· Wildlife Extension Officer and NPWS staff to undertake routine monitoring of sites.

33 · Wildlife Extension Officer to produce a modest newsletter advising landholders and managers about optimum management regimes and other developments.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Benchmarking to commence in 1999-2000.

· Monitoring and provision of feed-back to commence in 2002.

7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Convenor to undertake benchmark calculations at no extra cost.

· $18,000 to establish ten monitoring grids.

· $3,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time (or NPWS staff) in 2001 rising to $7,000 per year in 2002-05 for monitoring sites and providing feed-back to landholders.

11.8 Awareness, Involvement and Incentives

1. Specific Conservation Objective

· To ensure that the Recovery Plan involves the community, incorporates equity issues, and can be readily understood.

· To inform, encourage and reward landholders who conserve Plains-wanderer habitat.

2. Performance Criteria

· Stakeholders, and particularly landholders, are aware of, and involved in, the recovery program.

· A register of areas under management for conservation is kept, and reserved areas are growing at a greater rate than areas being developed.

· Coordinated management and predator control is being undertaken by the community with assistance from agencies.

3. Tasks Required to Achieve the Action

34 · The Wildlife Extension Officer will be assisted and advised in their work in the community by the Recovery Team.

· Regular extension activities and media communication will take place.

· A list of incentives available to landholders will be produced.

· Landholders will be assisted with predator control that achieves both conservation and production goals.

4. Outcomes

· Increased levels of community involvement in the recovery program leading to enhanced conservation of the Plains-wanderer and other threatened species.

· Dissipation of community anxiety about the potential impact of threatened species legislation on their decision making and livelihoods.

5. Responsibilities for Implementation

· A public relations sub-committee of the Recovery Team will assist and advise the Wildlife Extension Officer in their work.

· The Wildlife Extension Officer will meet and discuss Plains-wanderer issues with individual landholders, organise field days and spotlighting tours for landholders and their families, and produce a newsletter and media information.

· DLWC, NPWS and Greening Australia will produce and advertise a combined list of incentives available to landholders.

· RLPB will assist landholders with predator control that enhances both Plains- wanderer conservation and lambing success.

6. Implementation Schedule for Individual Tasks

· Wildlife extension activities will begin in mid-1999 and be ongoing.

· Incentives available to landholders will be advertised in 1999.

· Regional predator control programs will commence in 2001 and be ongoing.

35 7. Funding Schedule for Individual Tasks

· $3,000 costs and $4,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s time to organise field days and tours for landholders and their families.

· $1,000 per year for production and postage of newsletter and $3,000 per year of the Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time.

· $4,000 of Wildlife Extension Officer’s contracted time in 1999 rising to $7,000 per year in 2000-03 for liaison with landholders.

· DLWC, NPWS and RLPB costs to be met from within own operating budgets.

36 12 Implementation

The following table allocates responsibility for the implementation of recovery actions specified in this plan for the period 2000-05.

Table 3: Implementation schedule

Section Description Priority Responsibility Cost estimate ($000's per year) 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Total Recovery Program 13.2.1 Recovery Team 1 NPWS 2 2 2 2 2 10 Convenor 1 NPWS/ 20 20 20 20 20 100 Consultant Maintain habitat 13.2.2 Provide maps 2 Wildlife EO 2 2 Integrate plans 1 Rec. Team 2 2 Develop guidelines . 2 WRRVC, 5 5 . DLWC, NPWS Undertake surveys 13.2.3 API mapping 1 API Consultant 197 197 Ground surveys 1 WRRVC 30 30 NPWS Produce farm maps 1 NPWS 2 2 Provide maps 1 Wildlife EO 5 5 Regional targets 13.2.4 Landholder input 1 Rec. Team 2 2 Reserves and refuge areas 13.2.5 Facilitate VCAs 1 Wildlife EO 11 14 14 14 14 67 Provide information 1 Wildlife EO 3 4 4 4 4 19 Purchase reserve 13.2.6 Purchase property 1 NPWS/NRS ? ? Monitoring and feedback 13.2.7 Monitoring grids 1 Convenor 8 7 15 Wildlife EO Monitor sites 1 Wildlife EO 3 7 7 7 7 31 Newsletter 1 Wildlife EO 4 4 4 4 4 20 Awareness and involvement 13.2.8 Liaison 1 Wildlife EO 4 7 7 7 7 32

Total land purchase ($000's) ? ? Total operating ($000's) 254 111 58 58 58 539

37 13 Alternative Management Strategies 13.1 Captive breeding and reintroduction

Captive breeding has been undertaken successfully in the past (Crome and Rushton 1975, Ridley 1986) and some important biological information was provided by this work. However, remaining key questions such as the location of some important habitat, and the long-term impact of fragmentation caused by cultivation, cannot be answered with studies of captive birds. Moreover, with up to 5,000 birds in NSW there is currently no need for a reintroduction program.

13.2 Widespread control of predators

Control of introduced predators such as Foxes throughout the Riverina was thought to be important for the conservation of Plains-wanderers (D’Ombrain 1926, Llewellyn 1975), but Harrington et al. (1988) could find no evidence to support the need for this management strategy where extensive grazing was the main land use and some Fox culling by landowners already took place. In areas with cropping, Fox populations may be much higher when supported by large numbers of House Mice. In this situation the need for Fox control increases markedly, but it is still not as important as appropriate habitat management. If land is well managed and not cleared for crops then Fox numbers are likely to remain within tolerable limits without special control operations.

13.3 Additional surveys

Another management strategy would be to undertake no further surveys for Plains- wanderers in the Riverina because several of the best regions have been surveyed already (Maher 1997). This alternative management strategy ignores the fact that there is still a considerable amount of survey work to be done to complete the task, and until the whole of the Riverina has been adequately surveyed, wildlife managers will not know the full extent of the resource. Moreover, there will be equity concerns from landowners who feel that their property has been unfairly singled out for surveying if their neighbours’ has not, and landholders need to be able to plan their future farm enterprises with all of the information in hand rather than having developments stalled or halted while they wait for surveys to be undertaken in appropriate seasons.

13.4 No regional plans or reserves

An ad hoc approach to the development of the Riverina’s native grasslands is not an acceptable management strategy because it will lead to violations of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and the Native Vegetation

38 Conservation Act 1997, among others. Continuing cultivation of native grasslands in the Riverina means that both a regional vegetation management plan and reservation of key areas of Plains-wanderer habitat are required now as critical components of the preferred management strategy if the species is to survive in NSW in the long term. A strong regional plan with landowner participation is a more effective long-term conservation tool than a disjointed approach wherein every last small area containing Plains-wanderers must be saved from cultivation, even if left completely isolated. Regional plans and whole farm plans may see the loss of some lesser priority areas for Plains-wanderers, in order to bring about a negotiated long-term conservation agreements with landowners. Support for negotiated regional and whole farm plans is likely to come from landholders who are keen to expand their croplands. The native grasslands of the Riverine Plain are poorly represented in the national reserve system (Thackway and Cresswell 1995).

14 Preparation details

This Recovery Plan was prepared by David Baker-Gabb of Elanus Pty Ltd in consultation with the Plains-wanderer Recovery Team. Members of the Recovery Team are listed in the Acknowledgements section.

14.1 Date of last amendment

October 2002

14.2 Recovery Plan preparation

This draft Recovery Plan will be placed on public exhibition and submissions invited from the public. To make your submission as effective as possible, please: · refer to the section or action of the Plan you wish to address; · briefly explain the reasons for your comments, providing source information or examples where possible; and · provide your name and address to enable receipt of your submission to be acknowledged. Submissions may be made as letters or other documents, or on the NPWS form ‘ Submission: Draft Recovery Plan’ in Appendix 1 of the Plan, or on the NPWS website. The NPWS will consider all submissions to this Recovery Plan received during the exhibition period and must provide a summary of those submissions to the NSW Minister for the Environment prior to final approval of the Plan. Submissions on this draft Plan may contain information that is defined as 'personal information'

39 under the NSW Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, which identifies the person providing the submission. Following adoption of the Recovery Plan by the Minister copies of all submissions, including personal details, will be available for public inspection. If any person wishing to prepare a submission does not want their personal details to become public, the submission needs to be clearly marked that personal details are to remain confidential. All submissions are stored in the NPWS record system.”

14.3 Review date

2007

40 References

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1987. The Conservation and Management of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus. World Wildlife Fund Report No. 49, 140 pp.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1988. The diet and foraging behaviour of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus. Emu: 115-118.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1990a. An annotated list of records of Plains-wanderers Pedionomus torquatus, 1980-1989. Australian Bird Watcher 13: 249-252.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1990b. The biology and management of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus in NSW. NSW NPWS Species Management Report No. 3. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Sydney.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1993. Managing grasslands to maintain biodiversity and conserve the Plains-wanderer. RAOU Conservation Statement No. 8. Wingspan 10. 8 pp.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1995. Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus. Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement No. 66. 7 pp.

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1998. Native grasslands and the Plains-wanderer. Birds Australia Conservation Statement No. 1. Wingspan 8(1): 8 pp.

Baker-Gabb, DJ., Benshemesh, J. and Maher, PN. 1990. A revision of the distribution, status and management of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus. Emu 90:161-168.

Barrett, G., Silcocks, A., Barry, S., Cunningham, R. and Poulter, R. (2002). The Atlas of Australian Birds (1998-2001). Environment Australia Natural Heritage Trust Fund, Canberra.

BDA Economics and Gillespie Economics (2001). Valuing Environmental Services at the Farm Level. Report for the NSW DLWC, Sydney.

Beardsell, C. 1990. Sites of faunal significance in the western region of Melbourne. Unpublished Report to DCNR, Melbourne. 261 pp.

Bennett, S. 1983. A review of the distribution, status and biology of the Plains- wanderer Pedionomus torquatus Gould Emu: 1-11.

Benson, JS., Ashby, EM. and Porteners, MF. 1997. The native grasslands of the Riverine Plain, New South Wales. Cunninghamia 5: 1-48. 41 Binning, C. and Young, M. 1999. Conservation Hindered: The impact of local government rates and State land taxes on the conservation of native vegetation. National R&D Program of Rehabilitation, Management and Conservation of Remnant Vegetation, Research Report 3/99. Environment Australia, Canberra.

Blakers, M., Davies, SJJF. and Reilly, PN. 1984. The Atlas of Australian Birds. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

Boonstra, R. and Redhead, TD. 1994. Population dynamics of an outbreak population of House Mice Mus domesticus in the irrigated rice-growing area of Australia. Wildlife Research 21: 583-598.

Briggs, JS. and Leigh, JH. 1988. Rare or Threatened Australian Plants. ANPWS, Canberra.

Collar, NJ., Crosby, MJ. and Stattersfield, AJ. 1994. Birds to Watch 2. BirdLife International, Cambridge.

Coman, BJ, Robinson, J and Beaumont, C. 1991. Home range, dispersal and density of Red Foxes Vulpes vulpes in central Victoria. Wildlife. Research 18: 215- 223.

Crome, FHH. and Rushton, DK. 1975. Development of plumage in the Plains- wanderer. Emu 75: 181-184.

Crosthwaite, J. 1997. Economic Benefits of Native Grassland on Farms. Environment Australia, Canberra.

DCE 1992. Draft Conservation Program for Native Grasslands and Grassy Woodlands in Victoria. DCE, Victoria.

Deiz, S. and Foreman, P. 1996. Practical guidelines for the management of native grasslands on the Riverine Plain of south-east Australia. DNRE, Bendigo.

D’Ombrain, EA. 1926. The vanishing Plain-Wanderer. Emu 26: 59.

Garnett, ST. and Crowley, GM. 2000. The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000. Environment Australia, Canberra.

Harrington, GN., Maher, PN. and Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1988. The biology of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus on the Riverine Plain of New South Wales during and after drought. Corella 12: 7-13.

42 Hassall and Associates (2002). Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) Socio- Economic Assessment of the Draft Recovery Plan. Hassall and Associates Pty Ltd, Sydney.

Hyett, J. 1935. The Plain-Wanderer. Lowan 1: 15.

Keartland, GA. 1901. Notes on the Plain-Wanderer. Victorian Naturalist 17: 167- 168.

Kirkpatrick, J.B., McDougall, K, and Hyde, M. 1995 Australia’s most threatened ecosystems: the southeastern lowland native grasslands. World Wide Fund for Nature, Australia. Surrey Beatty & Sons Pty Ltd.

Lacey, RC, Hughes, KA and Miller PS. 1995. VORTEX: a computer simulation of the extinction process. Version 7 User’s Manual. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Apple Valley, MN, USA

Llewellyn, LC. 1975. Recent observations of the Plains-wanderer with a review of its past and present status. Emu 75: 137-142.

McCluskey, SA, Conger, AW and Hillstead, HO. 1994. Design and implementation of wetland mitigation: case studies in Ohio and South Carolina. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 77: 513-532.

Maher, PN. 1997. A Survey of Plains-wanderers Pedionomus torquatus and native grasslands on the Riverine Plain, New South Wales. Unpublished Report to Birds Australia, Melbourne. 62 pp, 15 maps.

Maher, PN. and Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1993. Surveys and conservation of the Plains- wanderer in northern Victoria. ARI Technical Report No. 132. DCNR, Melbourne.

Marchant, S. and Higgins, PJ. 1993. Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume II, Raptors to Lapwings. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Moore, CWE. 1953a. The vegetation of the south-eastern Riverina, New South Wales. I. The climax communities. Australian Journal of Botany 1: 485-547.

Moore, CWE. 1953b The vegetation of the south-eastern Riverina, New South Wales. I. The disclimax communities. Australian Journal of Botany 1: 548-567.

North, AJ. 1913. Nests and Eggs of Birds found Breeding in Australia and Tasmania. Australian Museum, Sydney. 43 Olson, SL. and Steadman, DW. 1981. The relationships of the Pedionomidae (Aves: Charadriiformes). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 337: 1-25.

Pearce, PA. 1971. Side effects of forest spraying in New Brunswick. Transactions 36th North American Wildlife Conference pp 163-170.

Ridley, E. 1986. Plains-wanderer Project Report 1985. Bird Keeping in Australia 29: 115-118.

Roberts, I and Roberts, J. 2001. Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus) Habitat Mapping including Woody Vegetation and other Landscape Features. Riverina Plains, NSW. Unpublished report to NSW NPWS.

Shaffer, ML, 1981. Minimum population sizes for species conservation. BioScience 31: 131-134.

Sibley, GC., Ahlquist, JE. and Monroe, JR. 1988. A classification of the living birds of the world based on DNA-DNA hybridisation studies. Auk 105: 409-423.

Stattersfield, AJ and Capper, DR. 2000. Threatened Birds of the World. Lynx Editions and BirdLife International, Barcleona and Cambridge.

Story, P and Cox, M. 2001. Review of the effects of organophosphorus and carbamate insecticides on vertebrates. Are their management implications for locust control in Australia? Wildlife Research 28: 179-193.

Symmons, P. 1985. Locusts, the plague of ‘84. Australian Natural History 21: 327-330.

Thackway, R., and Cresswell, ID. 1995. An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia. ANCA, Canberra.

Twigg, LE. and Kay, BJ. 1995. The ecology of House Mice Mus domesticus in and around irrigated summer crops in western New South Wales. Wildlife Research 22: 717-731.

Webster, R. 1996a. Survey and conservation of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus on the Western Plains of Victoria. Unpublished report to RAOU, Melbourne. 14 pp, 11 maps.

44 Webster, R. 1996b. Survey and conservation of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus in south-east South Australia. Unpublished Report to RAOU, Melbourne. 18 pp, 13 maps.

Webster, R. 2000. Assessment of Plains-wanderer sites in the Birchip District. Unpublished Report to Birchip Landcare Group. 11 pp, 1 map.

Wheeler, WR. 1974. Victorian records of the Plains-wanderer. Geelong Naturalist 11: 2-35.

45 1:100 K mapsheets Secondary habitat Primary habitat N Irrigation 2km buffer W E Irrigation

S Core Areas 1

CARRATHOOL

Cop yright NSW Natio nal Parks an d Wil dli fe Se rvic e Au gust 2 002 HAY This map i s n ot gu ar antee d to b e fre e from err or o r o mission The NSW N atio na l Parks an d W ildlife Se rvice a nd i ts emplo yees disclaim l ia bil ity for any a ct do ne on th e i nformatio n in th e ma p an d a ny con seque nces o f s uch acts o r omissi ons

3

2

4

5 7 6 WANGANELLA

CONARGO URANA

DENILIQUIN 0 10 20 30 40 50 Kilometre

Figure 1. Map of Plains-wanderer habitat and Core Areas on the NSW Riverine Plain

46 Appendix 1 – Calculating the Plains-wanderer population size

Introduction All data presented below on Plains-wanderer home range size were published in the scientific literature following a full-time study in 1984-87 (Baker-Gabb et al. 1990, Baker-Gabb 1998), when 790 birds were encountered and 420 were banded during 5,330 km of surveys on 310 nights. Work was primarily conducted on The Ranch and Boonoke Station in the NSW Riverina.

Home range information was derived from three sources: radio-tracking, recaptures of banded birds, and encounter rates during nocturnal surveys. Of these, radio-tracking was by far the most accurate, but the other sources provided useful comparisons.

1. Radio-tracking

Three adult and one juvenile male and three adult female Plains-wanderers fitted with radio- transmitters were tracked simultaneously from four tracking towers over two weeks for an average of eight days per bird. Home ranges averaged 12 ha (range = 7-21 ha). Each bird's home range overlapped extensively (x = 55%, range = 35-75%) with that of one other bird of the opposite sex. Hence if Plains-wanderers range over 12 ha on average, but share about half of this area with a mate, then the population density estimate is about 18 ha per pair or 9 ha of suitable grassland per bird. This is illustrated below:

6 ha 6 ha 6 ha 6 + 6 + 6 = 18 ha per pair

Shared area 2. Recaptures

The distances between capture and recapture sites were measured and plotted on maps. These provided a measure of the spread of the distance of locations that forms the home range. A home range estimate could not be derived from the recapture data that was comparable to the more detailed radio-telemetry data, but the recapture and radio-telemetry data could be compared directly in terms of recapture distances. The mean and frequency distribution of the distances between locations for the radio-tracking and recapture data were similar. This indicates that home range estimates from the two weeks of radio-tracking data describe annual home range. Information from 64 recaptures of Plains-wanderers over four years indicated that they maintained the same home range, and stayed, on average, within 115m (range = 10 - 350m) of their capture site.

3. Encounter rates

Assuming that all birds that were present within a 10m width in front of the vehicle were located during surveys at night, an encounter rate of about one bird per 8ha was estimated. Encounter rates can vary, with substantially fewer birds located during droughts.

47 Conclusions from published data The measurement of 9ha of sparse Riverina grassland per Plains-wanderer or 18 ha1 per pair of birds, as derived from the radio-tracking data, is supported by the recapture data and the nocturnal survey encounter rates. These home range data are some of the most comprehensive for any wide-ranging threatened species in Australia. Nevertheless, more data are being collected in a series of 1 x 0.5 km monitoring grids on several grazing properties as part of the Recovery Plan actions.

Calculation of Plains-wanderer population size

Between 1998 and 2001, NPWS conducted a mapping project to identify Plains-wanderer habitat and other vegetation communities across 2.28 million hectares. This process involved aerial photographic interpretation and associated ground-truthing at a number of locations across the mapping area. Landholder support and participation was paramount to the success of this project. The mapping identified 52,783 ha of primary habitat or 2.3% of the mapping area. There were seven categories of mapped primary habitat. As well, primary habitat on ‘Boonoke’ Station that was mapped by Maher (1997) but was not able to be mapped during the NPWS mapping project constitutes an additional category. Most of the categories of primary habitat had the carrying capacity of 1 pair of birds per 18 ha1. However, there were several categories of primary habitat that were not pure primary habitat. Instead, they contained composites of primary and secondary. Therefore, the carrying capacity of these categories was reduced according to the proportion of primary habitat present.

To determine the Plains-wanderer population size, the following calculations were made for each of the categories of primary habitat:

Primary Habitat area (ha) carrying capacity pairs of birds categories “1” 11262 1 pair per 18 ha 626 “1c” 230 1 pair per 18 ha 13 “1/2” 4227 1 pair per 18 ha 235 “1/3” 1786 1 pair per 18 ha 99 “2/1” 12175 1 pair per 60 ha 203 “2c/1c” 222 1 pair per 60 ha 4 “2” 17157 1 pair per 240 ha 71 ‘Boonoke’ habitat 5724 1 pair per 18 ha 318

Total population size 1569 pairs or 3138 birds

References

Baker-Gabb, DJ. 1998. Native grasslands and the Plains-wanderer. Birds Australia Conservation Statement No. 1. Wingspan 8(1): 8 pp. Baker-Gabb, DJ., Benshemesh, J. and Maher, PN. 1990. A revision of the distribution, status and management of the Plains-wanderer Pedionomus torquatus. Emu 90:161-168. Maher, PN. 1997. A Survey of Plains-wanderers Pedionomus torquatus and native grasslands on the Riverine Plain, New South Wales. Unpublished Report to Birds Australia, Melbourne. 62 pp, 15 maps.

1 Earlier estimates of the Plains-wanderer population size by the Plains-wanderer Recovery Team were incorrectly based on the carrying capacity of 1 pair of birds per 12 ha. This error was a result of incorrectly interpreting the findings published in Baker-Gabb et al. (1990). 48 Appendix 2 – Submission form for Draft Recovery Plan

SUBMISSION DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN

Name Individual/Organisation:

Postal Address:

Postcode: Contact Number(s): Date:

Draft Recovery Plan:

The NPWS will consider all written submissions received during the period of public exhibition and must provide a summary report of those submissions to the Minister for the Environment prior to final approval of this Recovery Plan.

Please note, that for the purposes of the NSW Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 any comments on this draft Plan of management, including your personal details, will be a matter of public record and will be stored in NPWS’s records system. Following approval of the Plan by the Minister, copies of all submissions, unless marked “confidential”, will be available, by arrangement, for inspection at the NPWS Office responsible for the preparation of the Recovery Plan .

Should you not wish to have your personal details disclosed to members of the public once the Plan of management has been adopted, please indicate below whether you wish your personal details to remain confidential to NPWS and not available for public access. Further information on the Privacy and Personal Information Protection act 1998 may be obtained from any office of the NPWS or available from the website: www.npws.nsw.gov.au

p Yes, please keep my personal details confidential to NPWS

Submissions should be received no later than 20 December 2002. Submissions should be addressed to: The Director-General NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service 49 Western Directorate Threatened Species Unit PO Box 2111 Dubbo NSW 2830.

SUBMISSION:

50 51 43 Bridge Street Hurstville 2220 (02) 9585 6444

52