Mammals – Looking Backwards, Looking Forward

Moving mammals – looking backwards, looking forward

Sarah Legge, Uni Qld and ANU; on behalf of large author team

Mike Bode, Andrew Burbidge, Nicki Mitchell, Jim Radford, Jeremy Ringma, Brendan Wintle, John Woinarski

Adrian Manning, Australian National University, Woodlands Trust Joss Bentley, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Andrew Burbidge Katherine Moseby, Ecological Horizons / Arid Recovery Annika Everaardt, Tasmania DPIPWE Katherine Tuft, Arid Recovery Brendan Wintle, University of Melbourne Keith Morris, WA DBCA Brydie Hill, NT Dept Environment and Natural Resources Manda Page, WA DBCA Chris Dickman, University of Sydney Marcus Baseler, Dept of the Environment, ERIN Chris Johnson, University of Tasmania Michael Bode, University of Melbourne David Pannell, University of Western Australia Mike Letnic, University of NSW Erin McCreless, UQ Nick Dexter, Parks Australia (Booderee National Park) Graeme Gillespie , NT Dept Environment and Natural Resources Nicki Mitchell, University of Western Australia Jeremy Ringma, University of Queensland Peter Copley, SA Dept of Environment, Water and Natural Resources Jim Radford, Bush Heritage Australia Peter Latch, Dept of the Environment John Kanowski , Australian Wildlife Conservancy Peter Menkhorst, Artur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research John Woinarski, Charles Darwin University Russell Palmer, WA DBCA Moving mammals – looking backwards, looking forward

Looking backwards: • Brief history of translocations • Why do we need to move mammals? • Development of the ‘ark’ or ‘haven’ concept for threatened mammals

Looking forwards: Strategic planning for future translocations to havens • Which species need havens? • How well are they currently protected? • Where should the next havens go?

Comparisons between plant and animal translocations Ancestral being and dingo, Laura Animal translocations Fillios and Tacon 2016

• Translocations is an ancient practice (eg cuscus, dingo); for food, ceremony, medicine, mind- altering…hunting aid and companionship

• Colonising Europeans also moved animals around (eg The Snake Destroyer, the Laughing Jackass rabbits, foxes, cats) Illustrated Australian News, 27 December 1876.

• Early settlers formalised this tradition with acclimatisation societies (eg kookaburras: …“merit, as vermin-destroying animals”… …“robust, jovial humour of their merry pleasant notes and quaint manners”…) Animal translocations for conservation

Conservation translocations to islands began late 1800s: • Koalas to French Is; late 1800s • Tammars to Greenly Is, SA; 1905 • Red-bellied Pademelon to Wilsons Prom; 1911 • Lyrebirds to Tasmania; 1934-49

Conservation translocations increased from c. 1960s Lyrebird; Gould British Museum Animal translocations for conservation

Translocations have increased over time Most animal translocations involve mammals 180

160

140

120 mammals 100

80 frogs 60 reptiles 40 birds

number ofnumber vertebrate translocations 0 pre 1970 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-17

Short 2009 ‘The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia’ Legge et al 2018 Wildlife Research Why do we need to move mammals?

Australian mammal extinction rate worst in world • >35 taxa extinct, representing • 35% of all global mammalian extinctions since 1500

• Woinarski JCZ, Burbidge AA, Harrison PL (2015) PNAS 112, 4531-40. • Johnson C (2006) Australia's Mammal Extinctions. Cambridge University Press, New York. Cats and foxes are main drivers, exacerbated by habitat change from fire, grazing, other ferals (eg. rabbits)

Evidence • The timing of fox/cat arrival vs population decline • Correspondence between cat/fox prey with severity of population decline • Correspondence of ecological and life history attributes with severity of decline • Contrast in translocation success to sites with/without cats/foxes • Some pops of some species only Photos: wiki CC survived where cats/foxes remained absent Some species only survived because they occurred on islands that remained free of cats/foxes

Greater stick-nest rats Boodies were became extinct on extirpated on the the mainland, mainland, surviving surviving only on the only on three islands WA DBCA Franklin Islands off the WA coast H. McGregor, Arid Recovery

Natural Island Arks Natural island arks were augmented by deliberate translocations to islands…

…first using islands that were naturally cat and fox free, and later using islands from which cats/foxes were eradicated

Dirk Hartog Is, 628 km2; Largest island in world for cat eradication

Total area of islands projected to increase substantially over coming years:

French, Bruny, Christmas, Kangaroo, Phillip Islands add 5184 km2

Cumulative increase in island number and area used for mammal translocations Cat/fox fence at Extending the island concept - Mulligan’s Flat, mainland islands Canberra (A. Manning)

First mainland islands created by Earth Sanctuaries Limited (Wamsley) from 1980s Extending the island concept - Total areas of fences Wandiyali-Environa, mainland islands projected to increase Tiverton, Mallee Refuge, substantially over coming Pilliga, Goorooyarroo, years Newhaven, Mallee Cliffs, Wild Desert add 914 km2

New fence currently being constructed at Wandiyali-Environa (C. Larcombe)

Cumulative increase in number and area of fenced exclosures used for mammal translocations Strategic planning for mammal translocations

1. Which species need complete protection from cats and foxes? 2. Where are the existing island and fenced havens? 3. Which species do they protect? 4. Where should the next island and fenced havens go?

H. McGregor/Arid Recovery Wildlife Centre 1. Which species need protection from cats and foxes? Extreme

• Assessed 246 mammal taxa (excluding bats) • Categorised by ~30 experts according to H. McGregor susceptibility to cats/foxes High

EXTREME = Don’t persist with cats/foxes Wiki CC Low HIGH = May just persist, but heavily reduced pop size or viability; or only if cat/fox density is much reduced

Wiki CC LOW = persists, but with some reduction in pop size or viability Not NO = pop size and/or viability unaffected by cats/foxes

Zoos Vic Predator susceptibility of all terrestrial mammal species 52

Wiki CC

112 37

Radford et al. (2018) Wildlife Research Taxa that are more susceptible to cats and foxes show the greatest level of decline

Radford et al. (2018) Wildlife Research Digression – cats and faunal attrition

McKenzie et al 2007 Legge et al (2017) Bio Cons 1. Which mammals need protection from cats and foxes?

53 taxa (40 species) 52 14 taxa (12 species) 112 37

42 Strategic planning for mammal translocations 1. Which species need complete protection from cats and foxes? 2. Where are the existing island and fenced havens? 3. Which species do they protect? 4. Where should the next island and fenced havens go?

Kimberley islands, Wiki CC H. McGregor, Arid Recovery

Used ERIN Island database, DEWHA feral animals on islands database, Mammal Action Plan, additional references, pers comms from agencies, NGOs Where are the existing island and fenced havens?

Island havens – cat/fox-free Number of islands 590 islands cat/fox- 2 5442 islands > 1 ha (32,969 km ) ABSENT free

PRESENT 100 3000 % with UNKNOWN 2500 Cats/foxes # islands 80

2000 60 Area of islands 1500 40 2 1000 UNKNOWN Covering 5468 km , Number of islands % islands with cats 20 500 ABSENT or 16% island area, or

0 0 0.06% of Australia’s PRESENT land area

1 to 10 km2 >10 000 km2 0.1 to 1 km2 Island size 2 10 to 100 km2 0.01 to 0.1 km2 (range 1 ha – 628 km ) 100 to 1 000 km2 1000 to 10 000 km2 Cat and fox-free islands Cat/fox-free with susceptible taxa Commonwealth 89 0/21 24/89 21 27%

160 66/160 94 41% 0/94

12 79 0/12 10/79 29 13% 1/29 0/106 106 3%

• 101 islands, covering 2152 km2 • Range 1 ha – 235 km2 (Barrow) and now 628 km2 (DHI) • Median = 6 km2 In situ, or natural pops vs translocated island pops

‘Natural’ havens • Concentrated in the north

Havens by translocation • More common south of tropics • WA and SA govs most active • 22 islands; 30 translocations

Golden-backed tree-rats occur on at least 10 islands (A. Hartsthorne) Mainland havens (fenced areas)

• 19 fenced areas • 17 with threatened mammal taxa susceptible to cats/foxes • Cover 346 km2 • Range 0.5-123 km2 • Median 4 km2

Wandiyali-Environa

Woylie release at Perup fenced reserve, WA. (O’Rourkes/Dept. Biodiversity, Conservation, Attractions) Excludes small fenced areas with pops maintained by supplementary feeding, or constant restocking Islands and fences – some vital stats

Islands reach much larger areas: • Median fence area = 4 km2, max = 123 km2 2 2 number area • Median island area = 6 km , max = 628 km

101 2152 346 17 Island havens outnumber fences, and cover much larger total area islands fences both taxa populations Islands protect more populations, but not more 12 taxa… 11 139 15 49 Greater redundancy of pops (per taxa) across islands Islands and fences – some vital stats Numbers of taxa within havens 0.8

fenceisland islandfence 0.6

Compared to islands, fenced areas are more likely to have 0.4 multiple taxa relative proportion relative

0.2

0.0 1 2 3 4 5 number of taxa in the haven Islands and fences – some vital stats In situ pops vs translocated populations

• Islands have played an important role in protecting in situ pops • Fenced areas are important havens for translocated pops

140 translocations in situ 120

100

40 number of populations number 20

0 island fence The eastern barred bandicoot exists only within three haven fenced areas and two islands Photo: Wiki CC Islands and fences - success rates

Haven Short 2009 Legge et al 2018 Open site Ranges from 0% to <<50% Island 82% (n = 17) 86% (n = 35) Fence 59% (n = 41) 70% (n = 60) Time periods 1880-2009 1980-2017

• Success rates are probably increasing; island translocations more successful than to fences • Translocation success overwhelming influenced by cat/fox predation (habitat quality, disease, animal husbandry, small founder number much less important) • Most failures to fenced areas were from cat/fox incursion, but also small area in some cases • Without adequate investment in construction & ongoing maintenance, security of fenced areas is inevitably compromised

Short J (2009) The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia. Legge et al (2018) Wildlife Research Progress so far - representation across havens

islands 30 fences 25 Bilby, in 6 havens,

20 with 5 more planned Central rockrat in the West Macs. (P. McDonald/NT Dept in near future Environment and Natural Resources) 15

5 Number of populations in havens in populations Number of

0 Zyzomys mainii Zyzomys Macrotislagotis Notomys fuscus Notomys Notomys aquilo aquilo Notomys Isoodonauratus Potorous gilbertii Potorousgilbertii Pseudomys fieldii Pseudomys tropica Bettongia Burramysparvus Zyzomys palatalis Zyzomys Phascogalepirata Potorouslongipes Dasyurus geoffroii Dasyurus Leporillus conditor Leporillus Pseudomys oralis Pseudomys Phascogalecalura Bettongia gaimardi Bettongia Sminthopsisaitkeni Dasyurus viverrinus Dasyurus Setonix brachyurus brachyurus Setonix Bettongia penicillata Bettongia Dasyurus hallucatus Dasyurus Pseudomys fumeus Pseudomys Pseudomys australis Pseudomys Petrogale penicillata penicillata Petrogale Dasyuroides byrnei byrnei Dasyuroides Onychogalea fraenata Onychogalea Rattus tunneyi tunneyi tunneyi tunneyi Rattus Pseudomys shortridgei Pseudomys Myrmecobius fasciatus Myrmecobius Lagostrophusfasciatus Peramelesbougainville Zyzomys pedunculatus Zyzomys Parantechinus apicalis Mesembriomysmacrurus Bettongia lesueur lesueur Bettongia Petrogale lateralis lateralis lateralis lateralis Petrogale Petrogale lateralis hacketti lateralis Petrogale Petrogale lateralis pearsoni lateralis Petrogale Pseudocheirusoccidentalis Petrogale xanthopus Petrogale celeris Pseudomys novaehollandiae Pseudomys Mesembriomysgouldii gouldii Mastacomys fuscus Mastacomys mordicus Petrogale concinna Petrogale monastria Peramelessubsp gunnii (Vic) Lagorchesteshirsutus ('mala') Conilurus penicillatus melibius Coniluruspenicillatus Lagorchesteshirsutus bernieri Potorous tridactylus tridactylus tridactylus Potoroustridactylus Potorous tridactylus trisulcatus Potoroustridactylus Petrogale concinna Petrogale canescens Petrogale xanthopus Petrogale xanthopus Mesembriomysrattoides gouldii Phascogaletapoatafa tapoatafa Conilurus penicillatus penicillatus Coniluruspenicillatus Phascogaletapoatafa wambenger Mesembriomys melvillensis gouldii Petrogale lateralis (MacDonnell Ra) (MacDonnell lateralis Petrogale Trichosurusarnhemensis vulpecula Petrogale lateralis (West lateralis Petrogale Kimberley) Bettongia lesueur (Barrow-Boodie Is) Bettongia Phascogaletapoatafa kimberleyensis Isoodonobesulus obesulus (SEAust) Lagorchestesconspicillatus leichardti Taxon Isoodonobesulus obesulus (Sth Aust)

Lagorchestesconspicillatus conspicillatus Legge et al. (2018) Wildlife Research Progress so far - representation across havens

The last 10 haven areas have increased protection for some species, but have not added any new species to the haven network

Many players create havens (state gov, local gov, NGO, community groups, private individuals). Decentralisation: • Creates resilience • Improves community buy-in • Challenges national coordination

Ringma et al. (2017), Nature Ecol Evol 2: 410-411 Strategic planning for mammal translocations 1. Which species need complete protection from cats and foxes? 2. Where are the existing island and fenced havens? 3. Which species do they protect? 4. Where should the next island and fenced havens go?

Kimberley islands, Wiki CC H. McGregor, Arid Recovery Systematic planning for future havens

Aim: How should we expand the haven network to reduce extinction riak for mammal taxa threatened by cats and foxes • 67 taxa • Historical distribution to guide where each taxon could be protected • Weighted taxa according to their existing protection • Prioritised subregions by iteratively re-weighted taxa

Compared performance of this approach with • ‘Random’ – subregions selected at random • ‘Business as usual’ - extrapolate from past network growth Systematic planning for future havens

Determined the minimum number of new havens required for different levels of population redundancy • At least one pop of every taxa • To at least 6 pops of every taxa

To achieve one or more pops…we need as few as 12 new havens.

Ringma et al. (2018) Cons Letts “Systematic planning can rapidly close the protection gap in Australian mammal havens.” The next 12 havens…to achieve protection for at least one pop of every mammal taxon susceptible to cat/fox predation Performance with systematic planning

Objective: to reduce extinction risk across all 67 taxa susceptible to predation by cats and foxes

Strategic planning outperforms other approaches.

Random selection of future sites outperforms Business-As-Usual

Ringma et al. (2018) Cons Letts “Systematic planning can rapidly close the protection gap in Australian mammal havens.” Supporting national coordination for future haven expansion

Support partnerships: • Funded species, even multi-species, recovery teams • Brokered partnerships, even tied to government investment

Whilst recognising that locally-focussed groups have immense value! Desert rat-kangaroo Broad-faced potoroo White-footed rabbit-rat Lesser Stick-nest rat

Lesser Bilby Pig-footed Bandicoot Crescent nailtail wallaby Long-tailed Hopping Mouse

Eastern Hare-wallaby Short-tailed Large-eared Hopping Mouse Darling Downs Hopping Hopping Mouse Mouse

Gould’s Mouse Desert bandicoot Some of the mammals Broad-cheeked sent extinct by cats Hopping Mouse and foxes 13 taxa have avoided extinction because of natural or ‘created’ havens Shark Bay Mouse Boodie (2 subspecies) Banded Hare-wallaby

Eastern Barred Bandicoot

Greater Stick-nest rat Spectacled Hare-wallaby (Barrow Is)

Rufous Hare- wallaby Rock-wallaby (2 subspecies) (2 island subspecies) Western Barred Bandicoot

Gilbert’s Potoroo

Photos: H. McGregor; Wiki CC; R. Francis; D. Walker; Parks Australia; DBCA; J. Lochman This is what avoided extinction looks like ….

H. McGregor

WA DBCA

H. McGregor, Arid Recovery

Even with multiple havens, distribution and ecological roles have collapsed ….and could make return to open landscapes harder • Loss of local adaptation • Loss of predator recognition and response

• Northern quolls translocated in 2003 to NT island without cats or dingoes • After 13 generations, island quolls and their captive born offspring lost recognition of cats/dingoes, compared with mainland quolls and their captive-born offspring Jonno Webb

Jolly et al 2018 Biol Letters 14: 20180222 • The existence of mammal pops on offshore islands prevented extinctions

• Islands and fenced areas continue to play a critical role in conservation of mammals highly susceptible to cats/foxes

• But they are a stop-gap…

Feral cat with bandicoot; WA DEC Mammal versus plant translocations (Courtesy Jen Silcock et al)

Animals translocations began ramping up about a decade earlier than plants, but are fewer, and involve fewer species

180 90

160 80

140 70

120 60

100 50

80 40

60 30

40 20

20 10 number ofnumber vertebrate translocations 0 0

pre 1970 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-17 1976 1977 1980 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

All animals: >400 translocations involving >230 taxa >1000 translocations involving >375 taxa Mammals: >310 translocations involving > 50 taxa Mammal versus plant translocations (Courtesy Jen Silcock et al)

Mammals Plants Green Stars = conservation translocations

Red Crosses = development mitigation translocations

Mostly to less populated areas Mostly near most populated areas

Mostly reintroductions (within known range) 65% Mostly introductions (but within known range) 80%

DRIVER = PREDATION FROM CATS/FOXES DRIVER = HABITAT LOSS FROM DEVELOPMENT

Main reason for failure = predation Main reason for failure = small founder size Moving mammals – looking backwards, looking forward

Sarah Legge, Uni Qld and ANU; on behalf of large author team

Mike Bode, Andrew Burbidge, Nicki Mitchell, Jim Radford, Jeremy Ringma, Brendan Wintle, John Woinarski

Adrian Manning, Australian National University, Woodlands TrustJoss Bentley, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Andrew Burbidge Katherine Moseby, Ecological Horizons / Arid Recovery Annika Everaardt, Tasmania DPIPWE Katherine Tuft, Arid Recovery Brendan Wintle, University of Melbourne Keith Morris, WA DBCA Brydie Hill, NT Dept Environment and Natural Resources Manda Page, WA DBCA Chris Dickman, University of Sydney Marcus Baseler, Dept of the Environment, ERIN Chris Johnson, University of Tasmania Michael Bode, University of Melbourne David Pannell, University of Western Australia Mike Letnic, University of NSW Erin McCreless, UQ Nick Dexter, Parks Australia (Booderee National Park) Graeme Gillespie , NT Dept Environment and Natural Resources Nicki Mitchell, University of Western Australia Jeremy Ringma, University of Queensland Peter Copley, SA Dept of Environment, Water and Natural Resources Jim Radford, Bush Heritage Australia Peter Latch, Dept of the Environment John Kanowski , Australian Wildlife Conservancy Peter Menkhorst, Artur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research John Woinarski, Charles Darwin University Russell Palmer, WA DBCA