Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

Swift Lathamus discolour

Key Findings

Swift breed in and migrate to woodlands across south- east mainland states for the rest of the year. Population declines are due to clearing of high quality breeding and foraging habitat, as well as nest predation by Sugar Gliders and habitat degradation from altered fire regimes, timber harvesting and changing climate. Recovery efforts have focused on habitat improvement and attempts to reduce the impacts of Sugar Gliders, these are beneficial but will need to be amplified to reverse negative population trends. Photo: Dejan Stojanovic Significant trajectory change from 2005-15 to 2015-18? No, ongoing marked decline.

Priority future actions

• Nest boxes effectively protected against glider predation before breeding begins • Strict control on timber harvesting in both breeding and non-breeding habitats • Strict control on habitat clearance across a diversity of habitats and regions • Extensive plantings of future parrot habitat aross many parts of the species’ former range

Full assessment information Background information 2018 population trajectory assessment

1. and 8. Expert elicitation for population 2. Conservation history and prospects trends 3. Past and current trends 9. Immediate priorities from 2019 4. Key threats 10. Contributors 5. Past and current management 11. Legislative documents 6. Support from the Australian Government 12. References 7. Measuring progress towards conservation 13. Citation

The primary purpose of this scorecard is to assess progress against the year three targets outlined in the Australian Government’s Threatened Species Strategy, including estimating the change in population trajectory of 20 species. It has been prepared by experts from the National Environmental Science Program’s Threatened Species Recovery Hub, with input from a number of taxon experts, a range of stakeholders and staff from the Office of the Threatened Species Commissioner, for the information of the Australian Government and is non-statutory. It has been informed by statutory planning documents that guide recovery of the species, such as Recovery Plans and/or Conservation Advices (see Section 11). The descriptive information in this scorecard is drawn from Threatened Species Scientific Committee (2016) unless otherwise noted by additional citations.

The background information aims to provide context for estimation of progress in research and management (Section 7) and estimation of population size and trajectories (Section 8).

1 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

1. Conservation status and taxonomy

Conservation status 2018 Taxonomy: IUCN Critically Endangered Monotypic: no infraspecific taxa recognised.

EPBC Critically Endangered

ACT Vulnerable

NSW Endangered QLD Endangered

SA Endangered

TAS Endangered

VIC Threatened

2. Conservation history and prospects Swift Parrots are one of the few migratory bird species that are nomadic during both the breeding and non-breeding seasons. They nest only in Tasmania with the entire population travelling to the woodlands of mainland during the non-breeding season. The relative availability of feeding and nesting habitats varies each year depending on flowering conditions within both their breeding area across eastern Tasmania (Webb et al. 2018) and their wintering area across south-eastern mainland Australia (Saunders and Heinsohn 2008). If nesting is on the Tasmanian mainland, predation by introduced sugar gliders is a major source of mortality with habitat loss increasing glider predation rates. If they nest on predator free Bruny and Maria Islands, reproductive success is very high but intermittent island nesting is insufficient to prevent extinction. Natural tree-hollows suitable for nesting, occurring largely in large trees more than 150 years old, are rare. Both timber harvesting and wildfires contribute to the loss of breeding habitat (Webb et al. 2018), with fire frequency likely to increase with climate change (Grose et al. 2014). On the mainland although the occur across a broad winter range, they depend on different combinations of feeding habitat each year in response to their highly variable winter-flowering habitats (Saunders and Heinsohn 2008). These habitats have been subject to such extensive clearing historically that many of their habitats are also listed as Endangered Ecological Communities. Despite a recovery program being in place for 23 years, habitats throughout the species’ range continue to be cleared on a regular basis as a result of forestry practices, approvals for mining, suburban and industrial developments, as well as for agricultural purposes (Saunders and Russell 2016). Active intervention to improve nesting success by predicting where birds will nest and providing predator proof nest boxes is currently being trialled (Stojanovic et al. in press). While there are efforts under way to restore habitat, the rate at which habitat is cleared far exceeds the gains through habitat restoration efforts, resulting in a net loss of area as well as quality of habitat.

2 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

3. Past and current trends The Swift Parrot occurs as a single, migratory population. Significant declines were observed in the late 1980s to mid-1990s (from an estimated 1320 pairs in 1988, to 940 pairs in 1995). Garnett et al. (2011) derived an estimate of approximately 2000 mature individuals as part of the Action Plan for Australian Birds and considered the population to be declining; however there are no recent estimates of the number of Swift Parrots in the wild. Population Viability Analysis (Heinsohn et al. 2015) projected that Swift Parrots would undergo substantial declines within three generations (based on modelled scenarios that considered impacts of predation). Monitoring (existing programs): A population monitoring program was established in grassy Blue Gum of eastern Tasmania in 1995, in response to declines in population. This program was implemented for several years to monitor density of Swift Parrots. Throughout the species’ winter range, volunteer surveys have been conducted twice a year (in May and August) since 1995, involving hundreds of volunteers and community groups. As a result of this survey effort, volunteer experience and knowledge of habitat requirements have increased substantially (Saunders et al. 2007; BirdLife Australia) and there are now thousands of records of the species, as well as nil records, from across their winter range. These surveys also form part of the NSW Environmental Trust Saving Our Species Swift Parrot project together with habitat restoration and protection monitoring. Nesting habitat has been surveyed repeatedly by researchers from the Australian National University and as part of forestry operations (Webb et al. 2018). Population trends: Tables 1 and 2 summarise the overall trend and status of the Swift Parrot. The information provided in these tables is derived from the Conservation Advice (Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2016), with some amendments made by contributing experts based on new information. Table 1. Summary of the available information on Swift Parrot distribution and population size, and (where possible) trend estimates between 2015 and 2018 for each parameter. Population parameters Published baseline 2015 Estimate 2018 Estimate Confidence in estimates

WILD

Extent of Occurrence 57,000 km2 57,000 km2 57,000 km2 Low

Area of Occupancy 1400 km2 High Dates of records and methods used As per Bird Action Plan No. mature individuals 2000 Medium No. of subpopulations 1 1 1 High

No. of locations >10 >10 >10 High Based on global modelling Generation time 3.4 n/a n/a by BirdLife International CAPTIVE BREEDING No. mature individuals 258* 258 258 Low

No. locations 36 36 36 Low *From Saunders (2010). None of these captive birds are in a formal captive breeding program.

3 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

Table 2. Estimated recent (2005-2015) and current (2015-2018) population trend for the Swift Parrot.

Sub- Estimated % 2005-2015 Confidence in 2015-2018 Confidence in Details population of population trend 2005-2015 trend trend 2015-2018 trend

Monitoring of breeding Whole 100 Medium Medium suggest no population recent improvements

KEY: Improving Stable Deteriorating Unknown Confidence Description High Trend documented Medium Trend considered likely based on documentation

? Low Trend suspected but evidence indirect or equivocal

4. Key threats The threats listed here are derived from Threatened Species Scientific Committee (2016), with some adjustments from consulted experts based on new information. Note that this is not a list of all plausible threats, but a subset of the threats that are likely to have the largest impact on populations.

Habitat loss Throughout the species’ range high quality feeding habitat has been cleared for agriculture and urban development, with the threat of critical habitat loss continuing despite some gains (Saunders et al. 2007, Webb et al. 2018). The most extensive loss happened during colonial times but continues due to various land management policies and practices, including forestry practices, approvals for mining, suburban and industrial developments, as well as for agricultural purposes (Saunders and Russell 2016). The extent and quality of Swift Parrot wintering and breeding habitat continues to be greatly reduced by timber harvesting, despite numerous attempts to develop and integrate policies to reduce the impact (Webb et al. 2017, 2018, Saunders and Heinsohn 2010).

Sugar Glider Petaurus breviceps Sugar gliders, which in Tasmania are introduced from mainland Australia, take eggs and young from the nest site and commonly kill the female parrot as well (Heinsohn et al. 2015). Predation rates are highest when the parrots nest in more fragmented and degraded areas (Stojanovic et al. 2014).

Inappropriate fire regimes Wildfire impacts Swift Parrot habitat by altering tree flowering phenology and tree cavity availability. At one known nesting location, greater than 60% of nest trees collapsed within one year after a wildfire (Stojanovic et al. 2016).

Climate change Models predict warmer drier conditions in south-east Tasmania which will increase the frequency of fire in the breeding habitat (Grose et al. 2014). There is increasing evidence of shifts in the species use of winter habitats as the flowering phenology of their key feed tree species is changing (D. Saunders

4 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018) pers.comm.). Some climate models suggest the species’ winter range is contracting south into key climate refugia (OEH 2018) but these models do not currently account for the species’ annually variable use of habitats, nor how climate change is influencing their key feed tree species (D. Saunders pers.comm.). Further work is required to develop more relevant models that more accurately reflect the species’ migratory and nomadic behaviours.

Gender bias Loss of females to sugar gliders has led to altered adult sex ratios (up to 73% male). While Swift Parrots remain socially monogamous, over half of sampled nests now have shared paternity, suggesting increased harassment of females by unpaired males which may also interfere with nesting. Under the highest rates of shared paternity, the ongoing decline in Swift Parrots increases from 89.4% over three generations to 94.9% (Heinsohn et al. 2018).

The impacts of the major threats are summarised in Table 3.

Table 3. The major threats facing the Swift Parrot and their associated impact scores.

CURRENT THREAT IMPACT (five greatest threats)

Threat Timing Extent Severity

1. Sugar gliders Continuing/ongoing 50-90% of range 50-100%

2. Habitat loss Continuing/ongoing 50-90% of range 50-100%

3. Changed fire regime Continuing/ongoing 50-90% of range 50-100%

4. Climate change Continuing/ongoing 50-90% of range 50-100%

5. Gender bias Continuing/ongoing 50-90% of range Not negligible but <20%

Timing: continuing/ongoing; near future: any occurrence probable within one generation (includes former threat no longer causing impact but could readily recur); distant future: any occurrence likely to be further than one generation into the future (includes former threat no longer causing impact and unlikely to recur). Extent: <1% of range; 1-50%; 50-90%; >90%. Severity: (over three generations or 10 years, whichever is sooner) Causing no decline; Negligible declines (<1%); Not negligible but <20%; 20-29%; 30-49%; 50-100%; Causing/could cause order of magnitude fluctuations.

5 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

5. Past and current management Recent and current management that supports the conservation of Swift Parrots are summarised in Table 4. A Recovery Plan (2012) and Conservation Advice (2016) are in place, guiding recovery action (see Section 11). Table 4. Management actions that support the conservation of the Swift Parrot Est. % Action Location Timing Contributors and partners pop’n

South-east Australian National University, Australian Nest box program in Tasmania 2014- 100 Tasmania Government (via NESP)

Victoria, 20 Million Trees Programme has 6 projects specific 2014- Habitat restoration NSW, Tas, 100 to Swift Parrots and another 4 projects that include 18 Qld some habitat but do not mention parrots

Central Habitat rehabilitation and Coast, 2016- restoration across two priority 25 NSW Environmental Trust, ANU Riverina current regions (NSW)

6. Actions undertaken or supported by the Australian Government resulting from inclusion in the Threatened Species Strategy The Australian Government has secured over $3 million for projects that support recovery of the Swift Parrot. Ten projects through the 20 Million Trees Programme are restoring Swift Parrot habitat. The Australian Government is also funding a dedicated research project through the NESP program to address predation by sugar gliders during nesting and improve understanding of low rates of population recruitment by Swift Parrots.

6 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

7. Measuring progress towards conservation Table 5. Progress towards management understanding and management implementation for each of the major threats affecting the Swift Parrot in 2015 (i.e. timing of TSS implementation) and 2018, using the progress framework developed by Garnett et al. 2018.

PROGRESS IN MANAGING THREATS (five greatest threats)

Threat Year Understanding of how to manage threat Extent to which threat being managed

5. Trial management is providing clear evidence 2015 0. No management 1. Sugar that it can deliver objectives gliders 5. Trial management is providing clear evidence 2018 1. Management limited to trials that it can deliver objectives 2. Research has provided strong direction on 2015 1. Management limited to trials how to manage threat 2. Habitat loss 2. Research has provided strong direction on 2018 1. Management limited to trials how to manage threat 1. Research being undertaken or completed but 2015 0. No management 3. Changed limited understanding on how to manage threat fire regimes 1. Research being undertaken or completed but 2018 0. No management limited understanding on how to manage threat 1. Research being undertaken or completed but 2015 0. No management 4. Climate limited understanding on how to manage threat change 1. Research being undertaken or completed but 2018 0. No management limited understanding on how to manage threat 2015 0. No knowledge and no research 0. No management 5. Gender 1. Research being undertaken or completed but bias 2018 0. No management limited understanding on how to manage threat > Green shading indicates an improvement in our understanding or management of threats between years 2015 and 2018, while red shading indicates deterioration in our understanding or management of threats. KEY Score Understanding of how to manage threat Extent to which threat is being managed 0 No knowledge and no research No management Research being undertaken or completed but 1 Management limited to trials limited understanding on how to manage threat Research has provided strong direction on how to Work has been initiated to roll out solutions where 2 manage threat threat applies across the taxon’s range Solutions being trialled but work only initiated Solutions have been adopted but too early to 3 recently demonstrate success Trial management under way but not yet clear Solutions are enabling achievement but only with 4 evidence that it can deliver objectives continued conservation intervention Good evidence available that solutions are enabling Trial management is providing clear evidence that it 5 achievement with little or no conservation can deliver objectives intervention Research complete and being applied OR ongoing 6 research associated with adaptive management of The threat no longer needs management threat

7 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

8. Expert elicitation for population trends An expert elicitation process was undertaken to assess population trends for the period 2005-2015 and post-2015 under the following management scenarios. Please note that differences between Management Scenarios 2 and 3 (Fig. 1) are difficult to attribute, as it can be difficult to determine whether actions undertaken after 2015 were influenced by the Threatened Species Strategy or were independent of it (see Summary Report for details of methods). Management Scenario 1 (red line): no conservation management undertaken since 2015, and no new actions implemented.

• Controls on logging cease both in Tasmania and on the mainland • Attempts to prevent sugar glider predation are abandoned • Clearing of habitat trees continues unabated • Revegetation ends Under this scenario, threats to the parrot remain at their current or at increased intensity as climate change has greater impacts Management Scenario 2 (blue line): continuation of existing conservation management (i.e. actions undertaken before implementation of the Threatened Species Strategy or independent of the Threatened Species Strategy).

• Some controls on logging in place, particularly on • Continued refinement and application of sugar glider protection mechanisms • Limited controls on logging and land clearance within winter habitats • Individual projects continue working on habitat protection and restoration efforts within priority regions • Offset funding from habitat loss being used to support conservation work. Under this scenario to adaptive management within the breeding and non-breeding habitat conducted by the Australian National University continues as do various projects to restore and protect habitat, particularly on private land. Management Scenario 3 (green line): continuation of existing management, augmented by support mobilised by the Australian Government under the Threatened Species Strategy.

• Some controls on logging in place, particularly on Bruny Island • Continued refinement and application of sugar glider protection mechanisms • Limited controls on logging and land clearance within winter habitats • Individual projects continue working on habitat protection and restoration efforts within priority regions • Offset funding from habitat loss being used to support conservation work. • Plantings for Swift Parrots start to provide some food after 20 years, although young trees don’t provide an equivalent quantity of food resources compared to old growth habitat. • Research on contemporary winter mainland habitat use undertaken to assess changes in usage patterns over past decade

8 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

This scenario resembles Scenario 2 except that there are additional tree plantings and new research into contemporary winter mainland habitat use. Overall estimated population trajectories subject to management scenarios considered The Swift Parrot is currently being managed under Scenario 3 (green line) as plantings have occurred and will mature in several decades.

Figure 1. Estimated relative percentage change in population under each of the management scenarios described above. Data derived from 7 expert assessments of Swift Parrot expected response to management, using four-step elicitation and the IDEA protocol (Hemming et al. 2017), where experts are asked to provide best estimates, lowest and highest plausible estimates, and an associated level of confidence. The dashed line represents the baseline value (i.e. as at 2015, standardised to 100). Values above this line indicate a relative increase in population size, while values below this line indicate a relative decrease in population size. Shading indicates confidence bounds (i.e. the lowest and highest plausible estimates).

Population size projections based on expert elicitation are extended here to 2025, 2035 and 2045 (i.e. 10, 20 and 30 years after the establishment of the Threatened Species Strategy) on the grounds that some priority conservation management actions may take many years to achieve substantial

9 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018) conservation outcomes. However, we note also that there will be greater uncertainty around estimates of population size into the more distant future because, for example, novel threats may affect the species, managers may develop new and more efficient conservation options, and the impacts of climate change may be challenging to predict.

Improved trajectory (Threatened Species Strategy Year 3 target):

The primary purpose of this scorecard is to assess progress against achieving the year three targets outlined in the Australian Government’s Threatened Species Strategy, i.e. a demonstrated improved trajectory for at least half of the priority species (10 birds and 10 mammals). To assess this, we first use the expert-derived trend between 2005-15 (i.e. 10 years prior to implementation of the TSS) as a baseline for assessing whether there has been an improvement in trajectory in the time since implementation of the TSS (i.e. 2015-18). Table 6 below summarises this information, where negative values indicate a declining population, and positive values indicate an increasing population. We used Wilcoxon match-paired tests to compare trajectories for these two periods; a significant result (probability <0.05) indicates that there was a high concordance amongst experts that their trajectory estimates for 2005-15 were different to their estimates for 2015-18.

Table 6. A comparison of the relative annual percentage population change for the periods 2005-2015 and 2015-2018.

Post-TSS Year 3 Pre-TSS trend Significant concordance among trend target (2005-2015) elicitors? (2015-2018) met? Annual The trajectory improved slightly after 2015, percentage -5.45 -4.69 but with insufficient concordance among population  elicitors to reach significance. change

Additional actions that could improve trajectory The potential impact of carrying out specific additional conservation measures on the population trajectory of the Swift Parrot was also evaluated through expert elicitation. Current management includes some controls on logging, particularly on Bruny Island; continued refinement and application of sugar glider protection mechanisms; limited controls on logging and land clearance within winter habitats; individual projects are continuing to work on habitat protection and restoration efforts within priority regions; offset funding from habitat loss being used to support conservation work; plantings for swift parrots that will start to provide some food after 20 years, although young trees don’t provide an equivalent quantity of food resources compared to old growth habitat.

Additional actions that could further improve the population trajectory include:

• Nest boxes effectively protected against glider predation delivered in a timely manner before breeding begins • Strict control on timber harvesting in both breeding and non-breeding habitats

10 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

• Strict control on habitat clearance across a diversity of habitats and regions to ensure that in any one year there are sufficient food resources for the species for successful return migration. • Extensive plantings of future parrot habitat aross many parts of the species former range These actions would mean that a concerted effort is made to ensure that not only is breeding success increased and loss of breeding females substantially reduced, but that feeding habitat is protected or restored across a broad swathe of south-east Australia to accommodate both natural climatic variation and impending intensification of climate change.

9. Immediate priorities from 2019 The priorities listed here are derived from Threatened Species Scientific Committee (2016) with modest amendments made by contributing experts based on new information. Identification of these priorities in this document is for information and is non-statutory. For statutory conservation planning documents, such as Recovery Plans or Conservation Advices, please see Section 11. Data collection: • Develop and apply techniques to measure changes in population trajectory in order to measure the success of recovery actions • Develop a strategy for reducing mixed paternity at nests • Improve understanding of the impacts of climate change that incorporate the spatially and temporally dynamic nature of habitat use by the species and it’s food sources • Better understand movements within and between different areas of the species range since this is a major knowledge gap involving a large part of the species’ annual migration cycle and that has implications for policy and conservation management • Monitor other sources of mortality

Management actions: • Manage and protect existing mature Swift Parrot breeding and foraging habitat at the landscape scale and across all tenure based on the many years of existing data on the bird’s need at a landscape scale that has not yet been incorporated effectively into policy • Improve relevant land management policy documents to reflect the current state of knowledge of the species across all sectors (forestry, residential/industrial/ infrastructure, agricultural land management controls) • Reduce impacts from Sugar Gliders at key breeding sites • Manage other sources of mortality • Engage community and stakeholders in Swift Parrot conservation

11 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

10. Contributors Debbie Saunders, ACT Government, Dean Ingwersen, Stephen Garnett, John Woinarski, Sarah Legge, Hayley Geyle, Guy Dutson, Richard Loyn, Peter Menkhorst, Nicholas MacGregor.

11. Legislative documents SPRAT profile: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=744 Threatened Species Scientific Committee (2016). Conservation Advice Lathamus discolor Swift Parrot. Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/744-conservation-advice- 05052016.pdf. In effect under the EPBC Act from 05-May-2016. Saunders, D.L. & C.L. Tzaros (2011). National Recovery Plan for the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor). Birds Australia, Melbourne. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery-plans/national-recovery-plan- swift-parrot-lathamus-discolor. In effect under the EPBC Act from 10-Feb-2012.

12. References BirdLife Australia (2018). Regent Honeyeater and Swift Parrot surveys. http://www.birdlife.org.au/projects/woodland-birds-for-biodiversity/latest-news-wl. Grose, M. R., Fox-Hughes, P. Harris, R. M. B., and Bindoff, N. L. (2014). Changes to the drivers of fire weather with a warming climate – a case study of southeast Tasmania. Climate Change 124, 255-269. Garnett S.T., Butchart S.H.M., Baker G.B., Bayraktarov E., Buchanan K.L., Burbidge A.A., Chauvenet A.L.M., Christidis L., Ehmke G., Grace M., Hoccom D.G., Legge S.M., Leiper I., Lindenmayer D.B., Loyn R.H., Maron M., McDonald P., Menkhorst P., Possingham H.P., Radford J., Reside A.E., Watson D.M., Watson J.E.M., Wintle B., Woinarski J.C.Z., and Geyle H.M. (2018) Metrics of progress in the understanding and management of threats to Australian Birds. Conservation Biology https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13220. Heinsohn R, Webb M, Lacy R, Terauds A, Alderman R, Stojanovic D. (2015). A severe predator-induced population decline predicted for endangered, migratory Swift Parrots (Lathamus discolor). Biological Conservation 186, 75-82. Heinsohn, R., Olah, G., Webb, M., Peakall, R. and Stojanovic, D. (2018) Sex ratio bias and shared paternity reduce individual fitness and population viability in a critically endangered parrot. Journal of Ecology. Hemming, V., Burgman, M.A., Hanea, A.M., McBride, M.F., and Wintle B.C. (2017) A practical guide to structured expert elicitation using the IDEA protocol. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9, 169- 180. OEH (2018) Climate Refugia http://nswclimaterefugia.net/methods.php Oliver, C., Saunders, D. and Fitch, R. (2018) Robotic Ecology: Tracking Small Dynamic with an Autonomous Aerial Vehicle. Science Robotics Vol. 3, Issue 23, eaat8409. Saunders, D. (2017) Radio-tracking movements of critically endangered Swift Parrots (Lathamus discolor) within the Riverina, . Scientific Report prepared for the NSW Government, Riverina Local Land Services Project RV01221.

12 Information current to December 2018 Threatened Species Strategy – Year 3 Priority Species Scorecard (2018)

Saunders, D. and Heinsohn, R. (2010) Review of NSW Agreements and Integrated Forestry Operations Approvals. Submission to the NSW Forest Agreement Review, 17 November 2010. Saunders, D. and Russell, T. (2016). Settlement and Swift Parrots - historic and ongoing habitat loss for a critically (1788-2016). Papers and proceedings - Royal Society of Tasmania, December 2016. Saunders, D. et al. (2016) Responses of Critically Endangered migratory Swift Parrots to variable winter drought. Emu, 116 (4), 350-359 Saunders, D., Brereton, R., Tzaros, C., Holdsworth, M. and Price, R. (2007). Conservation of the Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor management lessons for a threatened migratory species. Pacific Conservation Biology, 13, 111-119. Saunders, D.L. (2008). Ecology and conservation of the Swift Parrot - an endangered austral migrant. PhD thesis, ANU. Saunders, D.L. and Heinsohn, R. (2008). Winter habitat use by the endangered, migratory Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor) in New South Wales. Emu-Austral Ornithology, 108, 81-89. Saunders, D.L. and Tzaros, C. (2012) National Recovery Plan for the Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor. Birdlife Australia, Melbourne. Stojanovic D, Voogdt, J., Webb M, Cook, H. and Heinsohn, R. (2016). Loss of habitat for a secondary cavity nesting bird after wildfire. Forest Ecology and Management, 360, 235-241. Stojanovic, D., Cook, H.C., Sato, C., Alves, F., Harris, G., McKernan, A., Rayner, L., Webb, M.H., Sutherland, W.J. and Heinsohn, R. (in press). Pre‐emptive action as a measure for conserving nomadic species. The Journal of Wildlife Management. Stojanovic, D., Webb, M., Alderman, R., Porfirio, L. L., and Heinsohn R. (2014). Discovery of a novel predator reveals extreme but highly variable mortality for an endangered migratory bird. Diversity and Distributions 20, 1200-1207. Webb, M.H., Stojanovic, D. and Heinsohn, R., (in press). Policy failure and conservation paralysis for the critically endangered Swift Parrot. Pacific Conservation Biology.

13. Citation Please cite this document as:

National Environmental Science Program Threatened Species Research Hub (2019) Threatened Species Strategy Year 3 Scorecard – Swift Parrot. Australian Government, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/20-birds-by-2020/swift- parrot

13 Information current to December 2018