souther brown bandicoot recovery plan · better understanding of the ecology and conservation...

November 2006

Approved Recovery Plan

43 Bridge StreetHurstville 2220www.npws.nsw.gov.au

Department ofEnvironment andConservation (NSW)


Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus)Recovery Plan

© Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), 2006.This work is copyright however, material presented in this plan may be copied forpersonal use or published for educational purposes, providing that any extracts are fullyacknowledged. Apart from this and any other use as permitted under the Copyright Act1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from DEC.

Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW)43 Bridge Street(PO Box 1967)Hurstville NSW 2220Tel: 02 9585 6444www.environment.nsw.gov.au

Requests for information or comments regarding the recovery program for the SouthernBrown Bandicoot are best directed to the Recovery Planning Coordinators at either:

Biodiversity Conservation Section Biodiversity Conservation SectionDEC EPRD South DEC EPRD MetroPO Box 2115 PO Box 1967Queanbeyan HurstvilleNSW 2620 NSW 2220Phone: (02) 6298 9700 Phone: (02) 9595 6678

Cover illustration: The Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus)Photographer: Bert Lobert.

This plan should be cited as following:

Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) (2006) Southern Brown Bandicoot(Isoodon obesulus) Recovery Plan. NSW DEC, Hurstville NSW.

ISBN: 1 74137 334 4

Recovery Plan for Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus)

Department of Environment and Conservation Page i

Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) Recovery PlanExecutive SummaryThis document constitutes the NSW Recovery Plan for the Southern Brown Bandicoot Isoodonobesulus, and as such considers the conservation requirements of the species across its known rangewithin the State. It identifies actions to be undertaken to attempt to ensure the long-term viability of thespecies in nature and the parties who will carry out these actions.

The Southern Brown Bandicoot, listed as Endangered (Schedule 1, Part 1) on the NSW ThreatenedSpecies Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) and Endangered on the Commonwealth EnvironmentalProtection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, is a medium-sized (400-1600g) ground-dwellingmarsupial. Like other members of the bandicoot family (Peramelidae) it has a long tapering snout witha naked nose, a compact body and short tail with a pointed end. The head has small rounded earsand small eyes. The coarsely furred dorsal surface of the body is usually dark grey with golden-brownflecks, and the softer underbelly is creamy-white. While the forelegs are short with curved claws on thedigits, the hindlimbs are much longer resembling those of macropods. The hind feet are characterisedby the presence of syndactylus toes, formed by fusion of the second and third digits. These are usedfor grooming. As an omnivore with a broad-ranging palate, the Southern Brown Bandicoot consumes awide range of invertebrates, various plant material (leaves, fruits and seeds) and the fruit-bodies ofhypogeous (underground-fruiting) fungi.

In NSW, the species has a patchy distribution along the eastern coastline and adjacent lower foothillsin the southern part of the State, from the Hawkesbury River to the Victorian border. Records of thespecies are generally confined to heathlands or woodlands and forests with heathy understorey,typically on friable sandy soil. Current information suggests that there only two population strongholds,one within Ku-ring-gai Chase and Garigal National Parks in the Northern Sydney Metropolitan Area,the other in the far south-east corner of the State, encompassing Ben Boyd National Park, NadgeeNature Reserve and adjacent State Forests.Perceived short-term threats to survival of the Southern Brown Bandicoot in New South Wales includepredation by introduced carnivores such as dogs and foxes, inappropriate disturbance to its habitat,and in some areas vehicular traffic. The long-term viability of the species in the wild is made moretenuous by its patchy distribution and the consequent potential for localised population extinction.

This recovery plan aims to address threats to the Southern Brown Bandicoot and over the next fiveyears key recovery actions for the species will include:(i) establishing intensive introduced carnivore control programs around known populations;(ii) monitoring those populations to determine the success of introduced carnivore control

programs in reducing impacts on the species;(iii) monitoring the level of road-kill at trouble spots and erecting signs where necessary;(iv) implementing fire management regimes around known populations that promote favoured

habitat;(v) ensuring that future development is carried out in a way that does not impact significantly on

known populations through provision of environmental assessment guidelines;(vi) undertaking further survey, and(vii) raising community awareness of the species and involving public interest groups in various

aspects of the recovery program.

In addition to these key actions, the plan advocates a number of research activities that may lead to abetter understanding of the ecology and conservation requirements of the Southern Brown Bandicoot,its habitat and food resources. It is intended that the recovery plan will be implemented over a fiveyear period. The total cost to implement the plan is $555,870, of which $467,370 is attributed to NSWDepartment of Environment and Conservation (DEC) and $65,000 to State Forests of NSW for actionsapproved and partially funded under the Fox Threat Abatement Plan. Additional sources of funding willneed to be found for some research actions yet to be costed fully.

The Southern Brown Bandicoot Recovery Plan was prepared with the assistance of a recovery teamand two regional working groups comprising of relevant land management and research interests, andwas placed on public exhibition from 10 January to 4 March 2005. We thank these people for theirefforts to date and look forward to their continued involvement in the implementation of the recoveryactions identified in this plan.

Lisa Corbyn Bob Debus MPDirector General Minister for the Environment

Recovery Plan for Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obseulus)

Page ii Department of Environment and Conservation

Acknowledgments

Several people assisted in preparation of this recovery plan by providing information on thebiology and conservation management of the Southern Brown Bandicoot. In this regard, specialthanks are due to Meagan Ewings (DEC Threatened Species Unit, Central Directorate), DavidPaull (School of Geography and Oceanography, The Australian Defence Force Academy,Canberra), Graeme Newell (Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria),Damien Moloney (formerly Conservation Strategy Branch, Department of Environment,Queensland) and Dimitri Young (Shoalhaven City Council). Lorraine Oliver, Threatened SpeciesEducation Officer with the NSW DEC Southern Directorate, prepared Figure 1. Members of theState Recovery Team commented on earlier drafts of this document.


Department of Environment and Conservation Page iii

Table Of ContentsExecutive Summary .............................................................................................................................i

Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................... ii

1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1

2 Legislative Context...............................................................................................................1

2.1 Legal Status......................................................................................................... 1

2.2 Recovery Plan Preparation ................................................................................. 1

2.3 Recovery Plan Implementation ........................................................................... 1

2.4 Relationship to other legislation .......................................................................... 1

2.5 Critical Habitat ..................................................................................................... 2

2.6 Key Threatening Processes ................................................................................ 2

2.7 Environmental Assessment................................................................................. 2

3 Species Information .............................................................................................................2

3.1 Description........................................................................................................... 2

3.2 Distribution........................................................................................................... 3

3.3 Current Conservation Status ............................................................................... 4

3.4 Land Tenure ........................................................................................................ 5

3.5 Habitat ................................................................................................................. 5

3.6 Life History and Ecology...................................................................................... 7

3.7 Ability of Species to Recover............................................................................... 9

4 Management Issues...........................................................................................................10

4.1 Introduced Predators ......................................................................................... 10

4.2 Habitat Loss and Modification ........................................................................... 10

4.3 Inappropriate Fire Regime................................................................................. 10

4.4 Logging Regime ................................................................................................ 11

4.5 Roading ............................................................................................................. 11

4.6 Risks faced by small populations ...................................................................... 11

4.7 Community perceptions of bandicoots .............................................................. 12

5 Previous Recovery Actions................................................................................................12

5.1 Survey................................................................................................................ 12

5.2 Research and Monitoring .................................................................................. 14

5.3 Management of Habitat ..................................................................................... 14

5.4 Control of Introduced Predators ........................................................................ 15

5.5 State Recovery Process.................................................................................... 16

5.6 Public Education and Awareness...................................................................... 16

6 Proposed Recovery Objectives, Actions and Performance Criteria ..................................17

7 Implementation ..................................................................................................................23

8 Social and Economic Consequences ................................................................................23

9 Roles and Interests of Indigenous People.........................................................................23

10 Biodiversity Benefits...........................................................................................................23


Page iv Department of Environment and Conservation

11 Preparation Details............................................................................................................ 23

12 Review Date...................................................................................................................... 24

13 References........................................................................................................................ 24

Appendix 1: Summary of advice by NSW Scientific Committee ...................................................... 30

Table Of Figures:Figure 1: Map of the Northern Sydney Metropolitan Area illustrating sites at which the SouthernBrown Bandicoot has been recorded. ................................................................................................ 4

Figure 2: Map of the southern New South Wales illustrating sites at which the Southern BrownBandicoot has been recorded. ........................................................................................................... 6

Table of Plates:Plate 1: Damp Sclerophyll habitat (Claridge, 2001) ...................................................................... 5

Plate 2: Sydney Sandstone Ridgetop Woodland Cottage Point (Visser, 2004)............................ 7

Plate 3: Xanthorrhea nest habitat (Claridge, 2001)....................................................................... 7

Plate 4: Truffle-like fungal food, Zelleromyces daucinus (Claridge, 2001).................................... 9

Plate 5: Frequent Fire (Claridge, 2001)....................................................................................... 11

Plate 6: Roading (Claridge, 2001) ............................................................................................... 11


Department of Environment and Conservation Page 1

1 IntroductionBandicoots, like many of the small tomedium-sized marsupials of Australia, haveundergone several species extinctions andsignificant contractions in distribution sinceEuropean settlement. Of the estimated 12species of bandicoot present on the continentat that time, approximately half are now eitherextinct, threatened with extinction orextremely rare. The ongoing decline of aonce common species like the SouthernBrown Bandicoot, Isoodon obesulus, istherefore a cause for serious concern. Thisspecies was once widespread in southernNew South Wales, but now appears to berestricted to a few disjunct locations along thecoastal fringe of the State, south of theHawkesbury River to the Victorian border. Inview of its extremely limited distribution andlow abundance within the State, the SouthernBrown Bandicoot is considered endangeredand is listed on Schedule 1 of the ThreatenedSpecies Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act).The effect of the State listing is that arecovery plan may be prepared whichconsiders the conservation requirements ofthe species across its known range. The planmust also identify actions to be taken toensure the long-term viability of the species innature and the parties who will carry outthese actions.This document constitutes the formal NewSouth Wales State Recovery Plan for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot. The attainmentof this Recovery Plan’s objectives is subjectto budgetary and other constraints affectingthe parties involved. It may also benecessary to amend this Recovery Plan inthe event of new information or followingrecommended changes to the RecoveryProgram by an associated Recovery Team.

2 Legislative Context

2.1 Legal StatusIn view of its extremely limited distributionwithin the State, the Southern BrownBandicoot is considered endangered and islisted on Schedule 1 of the ThreatenedSpecies Conservation Act 1995 (the TSCAct). In addition, the south-easternmainland Australian sub-species, Isoodonobesulus obesulus, which is represented inNew South Wales, is listed as endangeredunder the Commonwealth EnvironmentalProtection and Biodiversity Conservation Act1999.Among the consequences of listing as athreatened species on the TSC Act are that

a recovery plan may be prepared, thatconsideration be given to the species inassessing the impacts of developments andactivities with the aim of minimising adverseimpacts, and that actions that are likely toresult in the harming or picking of thatspecies or damage its habitat are licensed.

2.2 Recovery Plan PreparationThe TSC Act enables the Director-Generalof Department of Conservation andEnvironment to prepare recovery plans forall species, populations and ecologicalcommunities listed as endangered orvulnerable on the TSC Act schedules. TheTSC Act includes specific requirements forboth the matters to be addressed byrecovery plans and the process forpreparing recovery plans. This plan satisfiesthese provisions.

2.3 Recovery Plan ImplementationThe TSC Act requires that a public authoritymust take any appropriate measuresavailable to implement actions included in arecovery plan for which they areresponsible. Public authorities and councilsidentified as responsible for theimplementation of Recovery Plan actionsare required by the TSC Act to report onmeasures taken to implement those actions.In addition, the TSC act specifies that publicauthorities must not make decisions that areinconsistent with the provisions of the plan.Public authorities currently relevant to thisplan are the New South Wales Departmentof Environment and Conservation (DEC),Roads Traffic Authority (RTA) and StateForests of New South Wales (SFNSW),together with the following councils:Baulkham Hills, Bega Valley Shire,Eurobodalla Shire, Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai,Pittwater, Shoalhaven and Warringah.Other public authorities may be included inthe future as surveys for the SouthernBrown Bandicoot are completed. Theactions outlined for each of the currentrelevant agencies must be implemented asdescribed in this plan.

2.4 Relationship to other legislationThe lands on which the Southern BrownBandicoot has been recorded include thosethat are owned or managed by the DEC,SFNSW, and also private land in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area.Relevant legislation includes:• National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974• Environmental Planning and Assessment

Act 1979• Local Government Act 1993


Page 2 Department of Environment and Conservation

• Rural Fires Act 1997• Forestry Act 1912The interaction of these Acts with the TSClegislation is varied. The most significantimplications are described in Section 2.7below.

2.5 Critical HabitatThe TSC Act makes provision for theidentification and declaration of CriticalHabitat for species, populations andecological communities listed asendangered. Once declared, it becomes anoffence to damage Critical Habitat (unlessthe TSC Act specifically exempts the action)and a Species Impact Statement ismandatory for all developments andactivities proposed within Critical Habitat.To date, Critical Habitat has not beendeclared for this species under the TSC Act.

2.6 Key Threatening ProcessesFive key threatening processes listed underSchedule 3 of the TSC Act are of directrelevance to the Southern Brown Bandicoot:(i) Predation by the European Red

Fox Vulpes vulpes (Linnaeus,1758),

(ii) Predation by the Feral Cat Feliscatus (Linnaeus, 1758),

(iii) High frequency fire resulting indisruption of life cycle processes inplants and animals and loss ofvegetation structure andcomposition

(iv) Clearing of native vegetation, and(v) Infection of native plants by

Phytophthora cinnamomi.This species is specifically mentioned in textrelating to the final determination of each ofthese processes.As identified in Section 4 of this plan, theRed Fox is a key predator of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot in its mainland Australianrange. So too, potentially, is the Feral Catbut data are limited. Also, too frequent firemay result in opening of dense understoreyvegetation, which the Southern BrownBandicoot requires for nesting andprotection from predators. The clearing ofnative vegetation clearly relates to the lossand modification of habitat for this species, athreat to all species. Phytophthora has beenlisted as an infectious disease that results inthe death of plants, the reduction of habitatcomplexity and potentially the loss ofhabitat. Particular species and communitiesimpacted are woodlands and heath habitatsand understorey species such asXanthorrhoea spp and Banksia ssp. which

are habitats characteristic of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot.

2.7 Environmental AssessmentThe TSC Act amendments to theenvironmental assessment provisions of theEnvironmental Planning and AssessmentAct 1979 (EP&A Act) require that consentand determining authorities and the Director-General of NSW DEC, as a concurrence ordetermining authority, consider relevantRecovery Plans when exercising a decisionmaking function under Parts 4 & 5 of theEP&A Act. Decision-makers must alsoconsider known and potential habitat,biological and ecological factors, and theregional significance of individualpopulations. Any other activity not requiringdevelopment consent under the EP&A Act,and which is likely to have a significantimpact on the Southern Brown Bandicoot,requires a Section 91 license from DECunder the provisions of the TSC Act. Inaddition, a scientific licence under s.132(c)of the NP&W Act is required to ‘harm’ thesouthern brown bandicoot or ‘damage’ it’shabitat for scientific, education orconservation purposes. Such licenses canbe issued with or without conditions, or canbe refused.The following public authorities are currentlyknown to have a decision making function inrelation to the Southern Brown Bandicoot:• NSW DEC, as manager of land which

has the species present, and where aconcurrence role under the EP&A Act isrequired or where a Section 91 Licence(under the TSC Act) is required;

• SFNSW, in relation to managing StateForests where the species has beenrecorded, and;

• Baulkham Hills, Bega Valley Shire,Eurobodalla Shire, Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai,Pittwater, Shoalhaven and Warringah.Councils, as consent authorities fordevelopment and/or as the owners of landwhich contain potential habitat for thespecies.

Additional public authorities may haveresponsibilities if the species is located inother areas in the future.

3 Species Information

3.1 DescriptionThe Southern Brown Bandicoot, Isoodonobesulus (Shaw and Nodder 1797), is amedium-sized (400-1600g) ground-dwellingmarsupial. Like other members of thebandicoot family (Peramelidae) the species



has a long tapering snout with a nakednose, a compact body and short tail with apointed end. The head has small roundedears and small eyes. The coarsely furreddorsal surface of the body is usually darkgrey with golden-brown flecks, and thesofter underbelly is creamy-white. While theforelegs are short with curved claws on thedigits, the hindlimbs are much longerresembling those of macropods. The hindfeet are characterised by the presence ofsyndactylus toes, formed by fusion of thesecond and third digits. These are used forgrooming.In southern New South Wales the SouthernBrown Bandicoot is most easily confusedwith the Long-nosed Bandicoot (Peramelesnasuta) and Long-nosed Potoroo (Potoroustridactylus), both of which may occur in thesame or similar habitats. However, theSouthern Brown Bandicoot is generallysmaller than the other two species and hasrelatively small ears, particularly comparedto the Long-nosed Bandicoot. In addition,the fur colour on the feet of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot is brown and that on theLong-nosed Bandicoot white. The Long-nosed Potoroo on the other hand can bedifferentiated from the two bandicootspecies mainly on the basis of it’s thick,‘wallaby-like’ tail.The closely related Northern BrownBandicoot (Isoodon macrourus) is verysimilar in appearance to the Southern BrownBandicoot, but the distribution of the twospecies is not thought to overlap: the formerspecies occurring north of the HawkesburyRiver and the latter species south.

3.2 DistributionThe Southern Brown Bandicoot is found insouth-eastern mainland Australia, south-western mainland Australia, Tasmania, CapeYork Peninsula, and a few islands in SouthAustralia. Strahan (1995) formally recognisesfive sub-species of I. obesulus, with eachsub-species being geographically distinct.While the validity of these taxonomicdistinctions is currently being questioned byrecent genetic studies (i.e. Pope et al. 2001),formal taxonomic revisions are yet to occur.That being the case, the sub-speciesbreakdown indicated by Strahan (1995) isused here.Within New South Wales Isoodon obesulusobesulus is apparently rare and almostexclusively restricted to the coastal fringe ofthe State, from the southern side of theHawkesbury River in the north to theVictorian border in the south. Morespecifically, the sub-species is considered tooccur primarily in two areas: (i) Ku-ring-gai

Chase and Garigal National Parks just northof Sydney, (Figure 1) and (ii) in the far southeast corner of the State including Ben BoydNational Park, East Boyd State Forest,Nadgee Nature Reserve, Nadgee StateForest, South East Forests National Park,Timbillica State Forest and Yambulla StateForest. In between these two areas thespecies has been found in a small number ofNational Parks (Blue Mountains andBudderoo) and State Forests (Maroota,Mumbulla, Nalbaugh, and Nullica) (Figure 2).Two records of I. obesulus obesulus alsohave been reported from private land in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area (Atkins1999).Isoodon obesulus obesulus is also primarilydistributed in coastal regions in Victoria,although isolated populations occur inland inthe Dandenong Ranges, the GrampianRanges and central western Victoria(Menkhorst and Seebeck 1990). The speciesappears to be more abundant in the south-west than in the east of the State. Menkhorstand Seebeck (1990) consider that thespecies is not under threat in Victoriabecause suitable habitat for it is wellrepresented in conservation reserves.

In South Australia both I. obesulus nauticusand I. obesulus obesulus occur (Kemper1990). Isoodon obesulus nauticus isreasonably common on Franklin Island butrare on St. Francis Island, in the Nuyts IslandArchipelago Conservation Park (Jones 1924;Kemper 1990). The sub-species isconsidered threatened because of its limitedand isolated distribution. Isoodon obesulusobesulus was once believed to be the mostcommon bandicoot in southern Australia(Krefft 1866), but by the 1920's it wasconsidered rare (Jones 1924). Today, thesub-species is patchily distributed anduncommon, being found on Kangaroo Island,in the Mount Lofty Ranges including theFleurieu Peninsula and in the lower south-eastern portion of the State (Kemper 1990;Paull 1995).Isoodon obesulus peninsulae is anuncommon inhabitant of eucalypt woodland,grassland and heathland on the Cape YorkPeninsula in Queensland (Gordon et al.1990). It does not appear to be under threatas extant populations occur primarily on landlisted for National Park inclusion.

In Tasmania I. obesulus affinus remainswidespread and abundant, and also occurson Bruny Island, Maria Island and a few smallBass Strait Islands (Rounsevell et al. 1991).However, Hocking (1990) considered thatpopulations of the sub-species werepotentially at risk because much of the land in



Tasmania containing suitable habitat occurs on private land.



#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

#####

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

###

#

#

#

#

# ##

##

#

##

#

#

###

#

##

#

##

##

####

#

#

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

%[

Ku-ring-gai Chase NP

Berowra Valley RP

Muogamarra NR

Marramarra NP

Garigal NP

Lane Cove NP

GalstonDuffys Forest

Terrey Hills

Berowra

Ku-ring-gai

Bayview

Avalon

NPWS Estate

RoadsMotorwayHighway /Major RoadMajor RoadMinor Road

SBB records#

%[ TownsN

0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers

Figure 1: Map of the Northern Sydney Metropolitan Area illustrating sites at which the SouthernBrown Bandicoot has been recorded.

Records of I. obesulus fusciventer in WesternAustralia are restricted to higher rainfall areasin the south-west of the State (Friend 1990),where the species may be sometimes locallycommon (ie. Nagy et al. 1991). Friend (1990)considered that this sub-species had notundergone severe decline in distribution sincesettlement by Europeans, havingdisappeared only from areas in which itsnative habitat had been totally removed.

3.3 Current Conservation StatusAvailable evidence suggests that theSouthern Brown Bandicoot has undergone amarked reduction in range and abundance,particularly in New South Wales. Prior to theturn of the century Gould (1845) (cited inAshby et al. 1990) described the species as‘one of the very commonest of Australianmammals’. At that time the species occurredwell inland within the State, occupying theMurray-Darling Basin (Krefft 1866). In theearly 1890’s the species was also apparentlyabundant in the Bega Valley on the southcoast, but has since disappeared from thatarea following broadscale clearing of habitatfor agricultural purposes (Lunney and Leary1988).

Road-kill records of the Southern BrownBandicoot within Ku-ring-gai Chase NationalPark, immediately north of Sydney, indicatethat the population there has persistedthrough at least the last three decades.However, these records provide no realindication for population numbers over time.A small number of juvenile animals haverecently been captured within the samegeographic area (Sutherland 1998),suggesting that a breeding population stillexists, but further long-term monitoring isrequired to establish population trends.Only one population of the Southern BrownBandicoot has ever been studied over anylength of time in New South Wales, withinYambulla State Forest in the south-eastcorner of the State. At the time of study thispopulation comprised less than a dozenindividuals, which were mainly adult maleanimals (Claridge et al. 1991). The currentstatus of this albeit small population isunclear since recent live-trapping surveysconducted in the same area failed to recordthe species (Mills 1999). In addition, thesame worker failed to trap the species atseveral other sites in south-eastern NewSouth Wales where the species had been



variously recorded in recent historic times.Despite this failure, live-trapping studiesconducted by SFNSW in the past two yearshave resulted in several new records of thespecies, from East Boyd, Timbillica andYambulla State Forests.Elsewhere in the State there are relativelyfew recent records of the species. Thosethat have been made are generally of singleor few animals, recorded at one location atone point in time (DEC Wildlife Atlas,unpublished data). These records arepatchily distributed and mainly occur alongthe eastern seaboard (see Ashby et al.1990).Given the above, the Southern BrownBandicoot can be considered as rarethroughout the State. No populationstrongholds for the species can currently benominated. It is clear that future survey toidentify remaining extant populations,protection of these populations and carefulmanagement of existing suitable habitat willbe necessary to reverse the situation.

3.4 Land TenureThe Southern Brown Bandicoot has so farbeen recorded from within six NationalParks, one Nature Reserve, eight StateForests and two private pieces of land (fordetails see sub-section 3.2 above).

3.5 HabitatThe Southern Brown Bandicoot occurs in avariety of habitats in south-eastern Australia,including heathland, shrubland, drysclerophyll forest with heathy understorey,sedgeland and woodland (Hocking 1990;Kemper 1990; Menkhorst and Seebeck1990; Rounsevell et al. 1991). In Tasmaniathe species has also been recorded intemperate rainforest (Green 1979).

Plate 1: Damp Sclerophyll habitat (Claridge,2001)

Many of the habitats occupied by thespecies are prone to fire (Braithwaite 1983;

Lobert 1990) and some authors havesuggested that the species prefers tooccupy early seral stages followingdisturbance (ie. Menkhorst and Seebeck1990). In heathland at Cranbourne, Victoria,a series of researchers (Braithwaite andGullan 1978; Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979;Opie 1980) found that animals favouredregenerating habitat of between 4-8 years ofage following bulldozing activity, relative toother available habitats of between 10-12and >25 years of age. This was particularlythe case for large, lactating female animalswith the greatest energetic requirements.The difference in preference was thought toreflect changes in habitat complexity, withmany bandicoots occupying youngerstructurally simple heathland rather thanolder structurally complex heathland(Braithwaite and Gullan 1978). In a studyundertaken at the same site some 15 yearslater, Lobert (1985) found no such pattern,with animals predominantly occupying older(14-18 years) rather than younger (3-4years) heath. Furthermore, this preferencewas consistent across the populationregardless of sex or age class.Despite these conflicting findings, Menkhorstand Seebeck (1990) considered that theSouthern Brown Bandicoot displayed a truepreference for newly regenerating heathlandhabitat, making the species amenable toactive ecological management. Theysuggested the use of controlled fires toproduce a mosaic of areas of different ages,such that favoured seral habitat wasconstantly being created. This variablemosaic not only would enable matureanimals to utilise high quality habitat as itbecomes available, but also allow newlyemerged pouch young the chance tosuccessfully disperse into new habitat,leading to population stability (Stoddart andBraithwaite 1979).The characteristics of early seral habitatsthat might favour the species are poorlyunderstood. They may be related to thehigh productivity of this type of habitat(Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979). Duringearly plant succession, plant diversity andnutrient availability can be relatively highand the vegetation is capable of sustainingan abundant and diverse invertebrate fauna(Braithwaite 1983; Lee and Cockburn 1985).Recently burned sites have also been foundto support large populations of beetle larvae,a preferred food item for the species (Opie1980).



Figure 2: Map of the southern New South Wales illustrating sites at which the Southern BrownBandicoot has been recorded.

In Tasmania it seems that habitat structureis more important in influencing habitat useby the species than habitat type or seralstage (Heinsohn 1966). Moloney (1982)believed that the close proximity of densevegetative cover was essential beforeanimals moved into open areas. Quin(1985) observed the species in a variety ofhabitats but all were generally in the vicinityof dense vegetation. These observationsare particularly interesting given the relativeabsence of foxes in Tasmania. Clearly,more research is needed on the habitatpreferences of the Southern Brown

Bandicoot in relation to fire and time sincedisturbance (Claridge et al. 1991).

Bandicoots usually nest in a shallowdepression in the ground covered by leaflitter, grass or other plant material (Rayment1954; Ride 1970; Gordon 1974). The uppersurface of this covering may be mixed withearth to waterproof the inside of the nest(Stodart 1983; Gordon 1983). Internally, thenest comprises a hollow chamber, oftenlined with grass and leaves with no distinctentrance or exit.



Plate 2: Sydney Sandstone Ridgetop WoodlandCottage Point (Visser, 2004)

There have been few studies of the nestinghabits of wild animals. In the most extensivestudy to date, Lobert (1990) found thatheathland-dwelling animals utilised a smallnumber of shelter sites, all under densevegetation. Nests usually comprised oval-shaped mounds of leaf litter and soil. Ateach end were openings which led into acentral chamber lined with twigs and leaves.In south-eastern New South Wales, McNeeet al. (1989) found that a single radio-tracked animal consistently sheltered in adense thicket of Acacia floribunda,surrounded by open vegetation. Unlikeother ecological studies of bandicoots,McNee et al. (1989) found that the animaldid not form nests, instead resting underdense clumps of vegetation or, in one case,within a hollow log.Finally, in the south-east of South Australia,Paull (1993) found that the majority of nestsof the Southern Brown Bandicoot werelocated under mature Xanthorrhoeaaustralis. The structure of these nests wassimilar to that reported by other studies. Inthe absence of Xanthorrea, other structuressuch as blackberry (Rubus spp.) thicketsand rabbit burrows offered alternativeshelter (Paull 1993).

Plate 3: Xanthorrhea nest habitat (Claridge,2001)

3.6 Life History and EcologyThe Southern Brown Bandicoot is thought tohave a gestation period of less than 15days, a remarkably short time (Lobert andLee 1990). Neonates have a pouch life ofapproximately two months (Stoddart andBraithwaite 1979), and it is during the latterstages of pouch life that juvenile mortality isgreatest (see Copley et al. 1990). If thepouch young survives the weaning period,the new emergent gains independencealmost immediately (Stodart 1966; Gordon1974). Lobert and Lee (1990) determinedthat the weight of young at this time isbetween 105-140g. Female bandicoots arecapable of resuming oestrus and becomingpregnant before the completion of sucklingof the previous litter (Lyne 1964; Close1977). This allows one litter to immediatelyfollow another in the pouch, affording apotentially high reproductive capacity.Although adult females are capable ofproducing up to 6 young per litter(Braithwaite 1983), the mean litter size istypically between 2-4 young (Heinsohn1966; Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979;Copley et al. 1990; Lobert and Lee 1990).Because the pouch has 8 teats the unusedteats allow one litter to immediately succeedanother without waiting for used andenlarged teats to revert to normal size(Stodart 1977; Hall 1983). Thus, bandicootshave the potential to produce multiple littersduring the year. The number of such littersdepends primarily on the duration of thebreeding season. In Tasmania, I. obesulusaffinus breeds for approximately eightmonths of the year with females capable ofproducing up to four litters per annum(Heinsohn 1966). The breeding seasoncorresponds well to the time of maximumfood abundance, usually following heavyrainfall. In Victoria the breeding season of I.obesulus obesulus is two to three monthsshorter than in Tasmania. While thebreeding season in New South Wales(Northern Sydney), is between the twoStates (Wilson, 2004). The onset ofbreeding has been found to be highlypredictable (Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979;Lobert and Lee 1990) with females enteringoestrus synchronously. This synchronicityhas been linked to predictableenvironmental factors such as photoperiod,rather than ephemeral factors such asrainfall and prey abundance (Stoddart andBraithwaite 1979). Similar findings havealso been made for the closely relatedNorthern Brown Bandicoot (Barnes andGemmell 1984). Lobert and Lee (1990)found that breeding season of I. obesulus



obesulus was correlated with the annualpeak in prey (soil invertebrate) abundance.In contrast to populations in Victoria andTasmania, populations of I. obesulusnauticus on the Franklin Islands, SouthAustralia, reproduce throughout the yearwith females capable of producing five littersper annum (Copley et al. 1990). Onset ofreproductive activity usually coincides withhigher rainfall and concomitant increases infood supply. Isoodon obesulus fusciventeris also thought to reproduce throughout theyear in Western Australia (Thomas 1987).The near absence of long-term populationstudies of the Southern Brown Bandicootmakes it difficult to estimate survivorship ofindividuals over time. On the FranklinIslands, Copley et al. (1990) found thatsurvivorship of individuals post-birth wasextremely low: approximately 20% of pouchyoung died before weaning, about 50%appeared to be lost as newly-independentjuveniles and few of the remaining 30%were later recorded as sexually matureanimals. On the mainland, recruitment ratesof locally-born young into populations of I.obesulus also appears to be low. Stoddartand Braithwaite (1979) found that between12-18% of young remained on theirheathland study site. Thus, about 80% ofnew animals entering the trappablepopulation came from elsewhere. On thesame site, only several years later, Lobert(1985) found slightly higher local recruitmentrates (36%).Heinsohn (1966) observed that newlyindependent animals rapidly establishedthemselves in home ranges removed fromtheir place of birth. This pattern of juveniledispersal is critical to the species being ableto exploit spatially and temporally ephemeralhabitats, such as those subject to episodicfire (Cockburn 1990). If local extinction ofbandicoot populations is inevitable ashabitat matures (Lee and Cockburn 1985),the survival of the species is enhanced bythe dispersal of offspring into adjacent,better quality habitat. High dispersal rateshave associated low survival rates, so thereproductive season is necessarilyprolonged in order to maximize thelikelihood of population survival (Cockburn1981; Lee and Cockburn 1985).Male bandicoots are highly pugnacious andmainly solitary from a young age (Moloney1982; Thomas 1990). Aggressive behaviouris normally expressed as visible threats,chases, or avoidance of one sort or another(Moloney 1982). Scarring is also typical(Claridge 1988). Individuals apparently nestalone supporting suggestions of socialintolerance (Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979).

Extensive home range overlap and a lack ofaggression between individual males hasbeen observed but this was attributed tohigh population densities (Watts 1974). Incontrast to male-male interactions, female-female and male-female interactions arerarely antagonistic. Interactions betweenmale and female animals appears to berestricted to that necessary for successfulreproduction (Moloney 1982).In Tasmania, I. obesulus affinus reachesreproductive maturity at a minimum of fourand six months of age for females andmales, respectively (Heinsohn 1966). Thiscompares to a minimum of seven months insome Victorian populations (Lobert 1985;Lobert and Lee 1990). Tasmanian animalsgrow faster and weigh more as adults(Heinsohn 1966; Moloney 1982) thanVictorian animals (Lobert and Lee 1990). Insouth-eastern New South Wales, it seemsthat forest-dwelling animals grow larger thanVictorian heathland animals, although datais limited (Claridge 1988).The average longevity of individuals in thewild is unknown. Using mark-recapturedata, Heinsohn (1966) estimated that mostbandicoots live for at least two yearsprovided they first reach sexual maturity.Individuals up to 3.5 years of age have beenreported from field-based studies (Lobertand Lee 1990).Home range studies of the Southern BrownBandicoot are limited and comparisons canbe tenuous due to methodological biases(see Lobert 1990). Ecological factors suchas site productivity and habitat structure mayalso influence home range size (Moloney1982). Despite these limitations, themajority of home range studies of thespecies have reported similar estimates,ranging from 0.5 to 9.0 ha (Heinsohn 1966;McKenzie 1967; Moloney 1982; Copley etal. 1990; Lobert 1990; Paull 1993, Ecotone2003, Wilson 2004). There is someevidence of differences in home range sizeaccording to gender and habitat use but theresults are inconclusive (eg. Heinsohn 1966;Lobert 1990, Ecotone 2003, Wilson 2004).The internal dynamics of home range ofanimals are not fully understood, althoughGordon (1974) identified two functional unitsfor the closely related Northern BrownBandicoot: areas of high food abundance,and nest sites. The local distribution ofSouthern Brown Bandicoots is thought tovary mainly with the distribution of food, withconcentrations of individuals coinciding withabundant food supply.It is unclear whether animals establishterritories. The results of Copley et al.(1990) and Lobert (1990), which



demonstrate overlap in home ranges ofanimals, are at odds with the findings ofHeinsohn (1966) and McKenzie (1967), whofound that home ranges of animals werenon-overlapping. Moloney (1982)postulated that if the Southern BrownBandicoot exhibits territoriality at all, it is inthe form of passive avoidance. Thepugnacious behaviour of the species (Jones1924; McKenzie 1976; Moloney 1982;Claridge 1988), and the overlap of homeranges observed in the studies of Copley etal. (1990) and Lobert (1990), are consistentwith this mode of spacing (Lobert 1985).Most studies of the activity cycle of thespecies have revealed a nocturnal habit.Heinsohn (1966) observed that wild animalsusually emerged from their nest after sunsetand suspected that animals returned to theirnest at or before sunrise. Theseobservations were corroborated by McNeeet al. (1989), who radio-tracked a singleanimal in dry sclerophyll forest in south-eastern New South Wales. Moloney (1982)noted that semi-captive animals were strictlynocturnal. In contrast, Lobert (1990) foundthat heathland-dwelling animals wereprimarily diurnal during the autumn andwinter. It was hypothesised that thisbehaviour was due to the almostimpenetrable vegetation where thebandicoots occurred, which affordedprotection from mammalian and avianpredators (Lobert 1990). Equally, it may alsohave been energetically advantageous foranimals to be diurnal during autumn andwinter when night time temperatures werelow (Lobert 1990).The Southern Brown Bandicoot isomnivorous, opportunistically exploiting awide variety of food resources such asinvertebrates, plant material and fungi(Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979; Lee andCockburn 1985; Lamont et al 1985).Bandicoots obtain food by either searchingand probing the litter and ground vegetation,or by digging in the soil (Stodart 1966;Gordon 1974). Food in the soil is located byolfactory means (Moloney 1982).

Plate 4: Truffle-like fungal food, Zelleromycesdaucinus (Claridge, 2001)

The foraging activity of the Southern BrownBandicoot is indicated by the presence ofcharacteristic scratch marks in the soil, oftenconical in shape and several centimetresdeep. These forage-diggings cannot bedistinguished from those made by otherbandicoot species such as the Long-nosedBandicoot. The holes are dug with theforefeet, and are usually large enough toaccommodate the animal's snout when it issearching for food (Stodart 1983). A singleanimal may dig multiple holes in a smallarea if food is locally concentrated resultingin the soil-litter cover being severely pock-marked.The subterranean food extracted by thespecies varies seasonally. In Tasmania,Heinsohn (1966) found that animals fedprimarily on earthworms in the winter andlepidopteran larvae and pupae during thesummer. Opie (1980) and Lobert (1985)reported that I. obesulus obesulus inSouthern Victoria mainly fed on a range ofinvertebrates during summer and autumnwhile during winter and spring the fruit-bodies of hypogeous (underground-fruiting)fungi were favoured. In other studies,invertebrates formed the most significantcomponent of the diet year-round, with someplant material also consumed (Watts 1974;Moloney 1982; Quin 1985).In south-eastern New South Wales, Claridgeet al. (1991) found that sympatricpopulations of Southern Brown and Long-nosed Bandicoots had very similar diets,feeding mainly on ants, beetle larvae andplant material. Seeds and the fruit-bodies ofhypogeous fungi were also consumed on aseasonal basis. There was somepartitioning of the fungal species eaten.The availability of free water does notinfluence habitat use by the species sinceanimals may occur large distances fromsuitable sources (Moloney 1982). Instead,bandicoots obtain sufficient water from dewand dietary items such as fungal fruit-bodies(Lobert 1985). Water in food maycompletely account for the total daily waterneeds of the species (Nagy et al. 1991).

3.7 Ability of Species to RecoverThe potential for the Southern BrownBandicoot to recover from low populationlevels is, in theory, high. The remarkablefecundity exhibited by the species suggeststhat it may be capable of rapid increases innumbers, given appropriate conditions. At abroad habitat scale these conditions appearto be absence of introduced predators, an



adequate supply of subterranean foodresources, dense understorey vegetationand sufficient area of contiguous habitat tocontain a mosaic of seral stages.An important consideration in the ability ofthe species to recover is the degree offragmentation of existing populations.Aspects of the species reproductive biologyand life history suggest that geneticbottlenecks are not as serious as for other,less fecund species. However, there iscurrently no information regarding therelationship between fragmentation andgenetic variation and viability of populationsof the species.

4 Management IssuesKey factors thought responsible for thedecline of the Southern Brown Bandicootacross parts of its historical range includepredation by introduced carnivores, habitatloss and, perhaps, inappropriate fire regimes(Braithwaite 1983). Each of these factors isdescribed in more detail immediately below.

Community perceptions of bandicoots alsoinfluence the management of this species.Two common misconceptions relating tobandicoots are: (i) they are identified aspests and (ii) they cause the spread of ticks.These misconceptions are also discussed.

4.1 Introduced PredatorsNatural predators of the Southern BrownBandicoot include quolls, snakes and avariety of diurnal and nocturnal raptors(Heinsohn 1966; Lobert 1985). The speciesis also preyed upon by Red Foxes and WildDogs, and presumably by cats (Claridge etal. 1991; Paull 1999). Domestic pests,particularly dogs, also prey upon thisspecies (Ecotone, 2003).

The relative absence of the Red Fox inTasmania is thought to be a factorcontributing to the widespread distributionand abundance of the species (Hocking1990), while in South Australia the presenceof this introduced predator coincided withthe disappearance of bandicoots fromseveral areas (Preiss 1966; Hornsby 1984).There is also some evidence to suggest thatfoxes affect the sex ratio of Southern BrownBandicoot populations, with female animalsbeing more susceptible to predation thanmale animals (Dickman 1988).

As stated previously, predation by the RedFox is listed as a threatening process for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot under the TSCAct. So too is predation by the Feral Cat,

although there are few data indicatinganimals having actually been preyed upon.

4.2 Habitat Loss and ModificationThe clearance of native habitat foragricultural and pastoral use has beenimplicated in the local extinction ofpopulations of the Southern BrownBandicoot across several States, includingVictoria (Seebeck 1977; Menkhorst andSeebeck 1990), Tasmania (Moloney 1982)and South Australia (Aitken 1983). Also, insouthern New South Wales, clearing of theBega Valley in the early part of this centuryled to massive decline in the number ofbandicoots, although there is some questionmark over whether these were SouthernBrown or Long-nosed Bandicoots (Lunneyand Leary 1988).

4.3 Inappropriate Fire RegimeThe effects of wildfire on the SouthernBrown Bandicoot are poorly known,although anecdotal information suggeststhat the species may respond positively tosuch disturbance in some instances. InTasmania, populations of the speciesrecovered well after wildfire (Hemsley 1967).Similarly, at Nadgee Nature Reserve insouthern New South Wales, bandicoots (I.obesulus and/or P. nasuta) were seen toincrease in numbers four to five years after asevere wildfire and then decrease (Catlingand Newsome 1981). In the same generalarea, following a repeat fire of similarintensity, bandicoots did not reach peakabundance until 14-15 years post-disturbance (Peter Catling, CSIRO Wildlifeand Ecology, pers. comm.). To someextent, the rapidity with which bandicootsrecover post-fire may depend on howquickly ground vegetation re-establishes. Insome cases ground cover does not developquickly enough, leading to the demise ofpopulations. For example in the Mount LoftyRanges in South Australia, wildfire caused along-term reduction in the area of denseground cover and localised extinctions of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot occurred (Anon.1989; Thompson et al. 1989).

Braithwaite (1983) has hypothesised that thedecrease in frequency of fire followingEuropean occupation of south-easternAustralia has led to an overall decline in thedistribution and abundance of the species.This hypothesis is at odds with the recentlisting of frequent fire as a threateningprocess for the Southern Brown Bandicootunder the TSC Act. The view put forward byBraithwaite stems largely from observations



made by Stoddart and Braithwaite (1979) ata single Victorian site, where animals werefound to preferentially occupy youngregenerating heathland. Research on thedistribution and habitat preferences of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot in SouthAustralia, conducted by Paull (1993; 1995),supports the observations of Stoddart andBraithwaite (1979), in so far as animals weremore likely to be found in areas with recent(5-7 year) evidence of fire. However, thisseral stage of habitat was by far the mostcommonly represented across study sites,and bandicoots were also present in veryrecently burnt (1-2 year) and long unburnt (>20 year) habitats. Although it appears thatthe species may be favoured by the carefuland strategic use of prescribed fire, moreinformation is required on the scale, intensityand timing of burning that might best suitanimals.

Plate 5: Frequent Fire (Claridge, 2001)

4.4 Logging RegimeIn south-eastern New South Wales, suitablehabitat for the Southern Brown Bandicoot issubject to intensive (integrated) loggingpractices. There have been no long-termstudies examining the effects of suchpractices on the species. Richards et al.(1990) considered that in the short-term thespecies was potentially at risk immediatelyfollowing logging through loss of groundcover and increased predation.Significantly, Claridge et al. (1991) notedanomalies in a population of the species inYambulla State Forest, in unlogged patchesof forest adjacent to recently logged coupes.At the time of their study, the populationmostly comprised old male animals andthere was no indication of breeding activityamong the only female sampled. This wasin contrast to observations of a range of sexand age classes of animals from the samepopulation made by the (then) ForestryCommission of New South Wales prior tologging. Later trapping at the same sitesfailed to record the presence of the species

(Mills 1999), although animals have recentlybeen detected elsewhere in Yambulla StateForest by SFNSW.

Other observations indicate that theSouthern Brown Bandicoot is capable ofsuccessfully recolonising previously loggedforest, leading some authors to suggest lackof deleterious impact (Recher et al. 1980;Fanning and Mills 1989; Fanning and Rice1989). In Tasmania, Green (1982) reportedthe species re-inhabiting five year oldregrowth forest. Significantly though,introduced predators were largely absent.

4.5 RoadingAs previously mentioned, there are severalroad-kill records of the Southern BrownBandicoot within Ku-ring-gai Chase NationalPark, immediately north of Sydney, and asmaller number from elsewhere in thesouthern part of the State. This indicatesthat where roading intersects suitablehabitat, animals may be harmed byvehicular traffic when moving around theirhome ranges. The level of road-kill of thespecies elsewhere throughout the greaterNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area isunknown since relevant mortality registershave not yet been kept. However, asindicated later in this plan, these will soon beimplemented.

Plate 6: Roading (Claridge, 2001)

4.6 Risks faced by small populationsSmall populations are at typically at greaterrisk of extinction than larger ones becausethey are more susceptible to unpredictableevents or changes to factors that influencepopulation dynamics. In small populations,



this greater sensitivity to stochasticprocesses can cause, among other matters,changes (sometimes irreversible) to agestructure and sex ratios of populations,which in turn can severely limit apopulation’s ability to recover from acatastrophic event.Habitat for the Southern Brown Bandicootwithin Garigal National Park is small in area,highly fragmented, fire-prone and withinclose proximity to residential development.When these attributes are taken together,the remaining habitat is potentiallythreatened by repeated habitat modificationin the form of hazard reduction burningand/or wildfire, or erosion through clearing.This population is also excluded frompredator control as part of the Fox ThreatAbatement Plan as discussed in section 5.4.In addition, animals within this population atare showing signs of inbreeding depression(Johnston et al 2002). Therefore, the GarigalNational Park population is considered athigh risk of extinction.The relative importance of factors potentiallycausing the decline of Southern BrownBandicoots in NSW remain to be defined.Furthermore, without a clear understandingof the species distribution and populationsize, it is difficult to assess with any degreeof rigour the viability of the species acrossthe State. Given this scenario, it isconsidered necessary to investigate thefeasibility of establishing a captive breedingprogram as potential insurance against therisk of catastrophic events leading toirreversible decline of the species.

4.7 Community perceptions ofbandicoots

Bandicoots, including the more commonLong-nosed Bandicoot (Parameles nasuta)and the endangered Southern BrownBandicoot (Isoodon obesulus), arecommonly mistaken for pest species and areoften described as a “rat like” animal. In arecent community survey of residents inNorth Turramurra and visitors to Ku-ring-gaiChase National Park, 18% of residentrespondents and 6% of park visitorrespondents identified the bandicoot as apest species (Vella, 2005).The bandicoot’s foraging behaviour is alsounpopular with certain members of thecommunity as they make conical diggings inlawns and gardens in search of food such asinvertebrates, fungi fruiting bodies and otherplant material. Another common communitycomplaint links bandicoots with the presence

and spread of ticks within bushland andsuburban backyards.The local media, Council and DEC officersoften deal with the issue of ticks and theirmanagement, particularly in northernSydney (M. Hall, pers. comm.). Ticks,particularly the more common paralysis tick(Ixodes holocyclus), often cause healthproblems to both humans and animals,including pets when they attach themselveson hosts for a blood meal. There has beensome suggestion that the paralysis tick ishost to Lymes disease, however thepresence of this disease in Australia has notbeen confirmed (Doggett et al 1997).These misconceptions and negative imagesof this species hinders the conservation andmanagement of the species and its habitat.One objective for the education andcommunity awareness campaign for thisspecies is to address and dispel themisconceptions about this species to ensurethat the recovery program is successful.

5 Previous Recovery Actions

5.1 SurveyFew targeted surveys have been conductedfor the Southern Brown Bandicoot in NewSouth Wales. In the first such study,undertaken during the mid-1970’s, Dixon(1978) attempted to live-capture the speciesin several National Parks and NatureReserves on the eastern seaboard south ofSydney to the Victorian border. Despiteconsiderable trapping effort no captures ofthe species were made, although the Long-nosed Bandicoot was recorded in severallocations.McNee et al. (1989) surveyed for thespecies using cage trapping across a broadarea within Yambulla State Forest south-west of Eden. Although animals weredetected at the same sites used by Claridgeet al. (1991) as part of an ecologicalinvestigation of the species, individuals werenot captured elsewhere. Atkins (1998)surveyed for bandicoots in 16 forestremnants of varying size (3-18000 ha) in theGreater Sydney Metropolitan Area using acombination of hair-tubing and cagetrapping. The Southern Brown Bandicootwas recorded in hair-tubes located in threeof eight large remnants (Garigal East andWest National Parks and Ku-ring-gai ChaseNational Park), but in none of the smaller (<40 ha) remnants. In contrast, the Long-nosed Bandicoot was recorded in eight ofthe 16 remnants, including the smallest one.These results were paralleled by less



intensive cage trapping work undertaken atthe same study sites.Mills (1999) recently revisited knownhistorical localities for the species in thesouth-east corner of the State. Despitecage trapping at these sites the species wasnot detected, although the Long-nosedBandicoot and Long-nosed Potoroo werecaptured in a few localities, most notablywithin Nadgee Nature Reserve. Noevidence of the Southern Brown Bandicootwas found in Yambulla State Forest where asmall population had been the subject ofecological research a decade earlier(Claridge et al. 1991).Under broad-area licensing conditions fortimber harvesting in State Forests of theSouth-East and South Coast Regions,SFNSW are required to carry out hair-tubingsurveys for the Southern Brown Bandicootwithin a 2 km radius of existing records ofthe species and/or where apparentlysuitable habitat occurs. While theseconditions have been operating for severalyears, only a few additional records of thespecies have been obtained from thesesurveys, all from the far south-easterncorner of the State. In addition toundertaking hair-tubing surveys, SFNSWhave more recently used wire cage traps,with greater success, to record the SouthernBrown Bandicoot at a number of newlocalities south and south-west of thetownship of Eden (SFNSW unpublisheddata).There have been a number of generalsurveys for ground-dwelling mammals insouth-eastern New South Wales, some ofwhich have covered part of the potentialrange of the species. Three samplingtechniques have been variously used in thiswork: live-trapping, hair analysis frompredator scats and hair analysis from hair-sampling tubes. Summaries are providedbelow for some of the more relevant studies.In the early 1980’s, CSIRO Division ofWildlife and Ecology (CSIRO DWE)undertook a survey of vertebrate faunaacross Yambulla State Forest, south-west ofEden. Some cage trapping was conductedas part of this work, resulting in the captureof a single animal (Braithwaite et al. 1984).Lunney and Barker (1986, 1987) furtherdemonstrated in the intensive five forestsstudy to the north of Eden, near Bega, thatthe species was virtually absent fromforested habitat in the local area. Despiteusing a variety of survey techniques,including trapping, collection of road killsand scat analysis, the Southern BrownBandicoot was only recorded once from

hairs in a Spotted-tailed Quoll (Dasyurusmaculatus) scat.In 1986, DEC undertook a survey of ground-dwelling mammals in foothill and montaneforests in the Eden Region using predator-scat analysis. Although the Long-nosedBandicoot was frequently recorded in dogand fox scats, no positive evidence for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot was found,although two scats contained material frombandicoot which could not be assigned tospecies status (NSW National Parks andWildlife Service 1986).During a flora and fauna survey of theRockton section of Bondi State Forest,Fanning and Mills (1989) and Fanning andRice (1989) recorded the widespreadpresence of characteristic bandicootdiggings, but were unable to distinguishwhether they were made by Long-nosed orSouthern Brown Bandicoots. Of interest,neither species was positively recorded frompredator scats or hair samples from hairtubes collected during their survey. In thesame general area, however, the (then)Forestry Commission of New South Walesrecorded the presence of the latter speciesin a section of Yambulla State Forest usinglive-trapping techniques. Over severaltrapping sessions, a small population wasrecorded as occupying a dry sclerophylleucalypt community with a mainly heathyunderstorey. McNee et al. (1989) andClaridge et al. (1991) later studied thispopulation in order to get ecologicalinformation on the species, but they haddifficulty trapping animals.During the early 1990’s intensive hair-tubingsurveys were conducted for the Long-footedPotoroo (Potorous longipes) across a rangeof State Forests and National Parks in theSouth East Forests Region of New SouthWales (Saxon and Noble 1993). While thesurvey was successful at recording a largerange of ground-dwelling fauna, includingthat potoroo at several localities, theSouthern Brown Bandicoot was onlyrecorded at a single hair-tube site. It shouldbe noted that in this survey sampling effortfocussed on wetter forest types and gullieswhere the latter species was less likely tooccur.Also in the early-1990’s CSIRO DWEsurveyed for ground-dwelling fauna in avariety of vegetation types in the BatemansBay area. They found that bandicoots wererare, as adjudged by the very low frequencyof tracks left behind in soil plots by theseanimals (P. Catling, pers. comm. 1992).The soil track technique is limited, becauseit is unable to discriminate whether tracksare made by Long-nosed or Southern Brown



Bandicoots. Other records of bandicootsfrom tracks left in soil plots were made bythe Division during its long-terminvestigation of the recovery of ground-dwelling mammals after wildfire in NadgeeNature Reserve in the far south-east cornerof the State (see Catling and Newsome1981). Within the reserve, bandicoots areconsidered to be well distributed andreasonably common. Recent live-trappingand predator scat analysis work conductedthere indicates the presence of Long-nosedbut not Southern Brown Bandicoots (Mills1999).Chapman (1995) undertook surveys forcritical-weight-range ground-dwellingmammals in Ben Boyd National Park, justnorth of Eden. Cage traps and Elliot trapswere utilised. Although the survey effortwas relatively low (200 cage-trap-nights and516 Elliot-trap-nights), there were nocaptures of Southern Brown Bandicoots.Abundant diggings were recorded, but thesewere attributed to Long-nosed Bandicootsand Long-nosed Potoroos which werecaught in cage traps.Recently, as part of the Commonwealth-State Regional Forest Agreement (RFA)process, hair-tube, live-trapping andincidental predator scat surveys wereconducted at several hundred sitesdistributed across southern New SouthWales, from the coast to the tablelands. Atleast some of these sites covered habitattypes potentially suitable for the species.Despite this major effort no live SouthernBrown Bandicoots were recorded. Thespecies was detected at a single locationfrom grooming hairs found in bandicootscats collected in Ben Boyd National Park inthe far south-east of the State (DEC WildlifeAtlas, unpublished data).Finally, in a study of the effects of fire onsmall mammal population dynamics in Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park, Sutherland(1998) incidentally captured several juvenileSouthern Brown Bandicoots in Elliot traps.A single adult animal was also live-capturedin a wire cage trap in the same general area.

5.2 Research and MonitoringLittle ecological research has beenconducted on the Southern BrownBandicoot in New South Wales. That whichhas been undertaken was on a singlepopulation occurring within Yambulla StateForest, south-west of Eden. This populationwas first located in the late 1980’s by the(then) Forestry Commission of New SouthWales, who were examining the impact oflogging and burning practices on variousfauna and flora. Claridge et al. (1991)

studied the general ecology of animalswithin this population immediately afterdisturbance treatments were applied,comparing habitat utilisation patterns anddiet with that of sympatric Long-nosedBandicoots. At that site, the SouthernBrown Bandicoot was found to occur morefrequently on slopes and ridges, while theLong-nosed Bandicoot was found morecommonly in gullies. Both species differedslightly in the range of dietary itemsconsumed, particularly the types ofhypogeous fungi eaten.McNee et al. (1989) radio-tracked a singleanimal from the same population as thatstudied above, recording activity and nestingpatterns. The animal was found to bestrictly nocturnal and occupied several nestsites, including under thickets of vegetativeground cover and within a hollow log.Recent research on the species has beenundertaken in south-east South Australia(Paull 1993, 1995, 1999) and south-westernVictoria (Rees 1997). These investigationshave mainly focussed on locating extantpopulations of the species and identifyingwhat environmental factors are responsiblefor the presence, absence and abundanceof animals. Results from this set of studies,which are continuing at the time of writing ofthis plan (D. Paull, School of Geography,Australian Defence Force Academy,Canberra, pers. comm.), may help providedirection for conservation management ofthe species in New South Wales.Until recently there were no formal programsestablished to monitor long-term trends inpopulation numbers of the Southern BrownBandicoot in New South Wales. Thissituation has now changed with intendedlong-term trapping programs beingestablished during early 2000 in Ku-ring-gaiChase and Garigal National Parks in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area, and inBen Boyd National Park and East BoydState Forest in the far south-east of theState. In both areas, population numbers ofthe species are being closely monitored inrelation to intensive fox and dog control(1080 poison-baiting) work (see sub-section5.4 below).

5.3 Management of HabitatNational Parks and Nature Reserves containboth occupied and potentially suitablehabitat for the Southern Brown Bandicoot.The principal means by which DECconserve fauna within these lands is throughreservation of habitat, as opposed to formalprescriptions for the management of wildlife(Ashby et al. 1990). Conservation of



bandicoots has never been the primary aimfor management in any reserve in the State.Fire Management Plans, either formal or indraft stage, have been written for themajority of National Parks and NatureReserves which contain suitable habitat forthe Southern Brown Bandicoot in New SouthWales. These plans generally call for thestrategic use of prescribed (controlled)burning to reduce the potential for severewildfire, with the intention of protectingneighbourhood life and property and helpingto conserve biodiversity values. In limitedcases fire is used to manipulate habitat tocreate patches of varying regeneration age(ie. Ben Boyd and Ku-ring-gai ChaseNational Parks and Muogamara NatureReserve): these are thought to promote thediversity of plant species and vegetationstructures over the broader area, andpotentially might benefit the Southern BrownBandicoot. At this stage none are appliedwith the habitat requirements of the speciesin mind.State Forest land managed by SFNSW alsocontains sites where the species has beenrecorded as well as potentially suitablehabitat. These forests are managed formultiple uses including timber harvesting,recreational use and wildlife conservation.The arrangement of management units orcoupes within these forests is such thatlogged areas are bordered by areas ofunlogged habitat. This unlogged habitat isdesigned to act as a refuge for fauna whilethe logged area regenerates. In time theregenerating forest may also serve assuitable habitat for many species. SFNSWalso utilise other means to enhance thepersistence of wildlife populations withinmultiple-use forests. Current harvestingsystems retain an extensive network ofcorridors and streamside filter strips whichlink to unlogged coupes and larger protectedareas such as National Parks and NatureReserves. Other areas deemed as havingsignificant values, such as rare orendangered taxa, are variously set asidefrom logging or are subject to specialprescriptions that minimise impact duringand after harvesting.Prescribed burning is carried out routinelyacross State Forests in south-east NewSouth Wales. This is undertaken to: (i)reduce the risk of wildfire in unlogged andregrowth forest, (ii) aid harvesting, (iii)promote seedling regeneration in loggedcoupes, and (iv) protect life and property. Itis not currently used as a management toolto create habitat for any species of fauna.Many of the management strategiesundertaken by SFNSW to help conserve

wildlife, including retention of habitat treesand streamside filter strips, are aimed at theconservation of arboreal mammals (Claridgeet al. 1991). Recently, however, as part ofbroad area licence conditions for harvestingin the South-East Region, SFNSW wererequired to protect habitat for a 200 ha areaaround locality records for the SouthernBrown Bandicoot (New South WalesGovernment 2000). This prescriptionoriginally applied until 15 such managementzones were identified, a number at whichwas exceeded during 2001. Having reachedthat trigger point, SFNSW and DEC arecurrently reviewing the strategy. Similarprescriptions have been jointly agreed to inthe adjacent South Coast Region, where sofar no exclusion zones have beendetermined.Historically, vehicular traffic has beenresponsible for mortality of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot on several of the majorpublic access roads within Ku-ring-gaiChase National Park. These road-killspecimens have occurred, variously, over anumber of decades. In view of the potentialfor continued impact, DEC have recentlyerected high visibility bandicoot signs on theside of roads in key locations within thePark. The major purpose of these signs isto alert public travelling by vehicle about thepresence of bandicoots, hopefully reducingroad-kill mortality in the future. The signsare based on those currently used at NorthHead to promote awareness of theendangered population of Long-nosedBandicoots.

5.4 Control of Introduced PredatorsControl of introduced predators using thetoxic compound sodium fluoroacetate(Compound 1080) is routinely undertakenthroughout most of the State Forests andNational Parks where the Southern BrownBandicoot has been recorded. The primarypurpose of this activity is to: (i) reducenumbers of wild dogs and foxes so as tobenefit native fauna that fall prey to theseintroduced carnivores, and (ii) reduce kills ofdomestic stock on adjoining private property.While the duration, intensity and frequencyof baiting varies across the landscape, thereare general consistencies in what baits areused and the way in which baits aredeployed. Firstly, 1080-laced baits tend tobe either fresh meat or the manufacturedanimal-based product ‘FOXOFF’ (AnimalControl Agencies Pty Ltd, Brooklyn,Victoria). Secondly, current programs usethe ‘mound-baiting technique’, in which baitsare buried at depth in mounds of soil or finesand. This is done to reduce possibilities for



consumption of baits by non-target faunasuch as the Spotted-tailed Quoll which arethought less likely to excavate soil whensearching for food. To further decrease therisk of poisoning non-target fauna a periodof ‘free-feeding’ is undertaken beforehand,during which non-poisoned baits are buriedin the same mounds. This enables earlieridentification of tracks left behind by visitinganimals. Poison baits are then laid onlywhen it can be demonstrated that dogsand/or foxes are responsible for removingbaits. The consumption of one poisonedbait is usually considered lethal for thesetarget fauna. Once this is achieved ‘free-feeding’ is resumed until further evidence ofvisitation is obtained. Other methods arealso utilised to reduce introduced predatorpopulations. These include live-trappingwhere problem animals do not eat baits, aswell as the opportunistic shooting ofanimals. Although these various introducedpredator control strategies are thought tobenefit native fauna, empirical evidence tosupport the notion is largely absent. Thefrequency of ‘bait takes’ over time by thetarget predators is the usual performanceindicator in most such programs, but veryfew regimes have included monitoring theresponse of the native fauna as the numberof introduced predators decreases.Until recently there were no introducedpredator control programs specificallydirected toward protecting populations of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot anywhere in theState. This situation has recently changedin Ku-ring-gai Chase and Garigal NationalParks, where remnant populations of thespecies are thought to be under threat fromwild dogs and foxes. There, an intensivebaiting program has been underway sinceearly 2000 and plans are to continue thiseffort for the foreseeable future. Thisprogram is linked to other baiting programson adjacent Council Lands, some of whichcontain potentially suitable habitat for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot. That workbeing conducted on National Park Estate isbeing funded primarily through the FoxThreat Abatement Planning Process(hereafter Fox TAP).Similar targeted efforts have also beenundertaken in Ben Boyd National Park andEast Boyd State Forest in the far south-eastof the State. This program, a collaborativeeffort between DEC and SFNSW in an areawith very recent live-trapping records of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot, is part-fundedthrough the Fox TAP. In the future, targetedpoison baiting of foxes and dogs may occurelsewhere if new populations of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot are found.

5.5 State Recovery ProcessA recovery team for the Southern BrownBandicoot was established in April 1999.Current members include staff from theDEC, SFNSW, Local Government, relevantconservation organisations and the broaderscientific community. Collectively, therecovery team comprises a non-statutorygroup of interested parties with relevantexpertise, established to discuss issuesrelating to the formulation andimplementation of the plan. Componentswithin the plan do not necessarily representthe views or the official position of all theindividuals or agencies represented on therecovery team.

5.6 Public Education and AwarenessAn interpretive display featuring aspects ofthe ecology and conservation managementof the Southern Brown Bandicoot wasdeveloped in the first half of 2000, usingfunds from the DEC Threatened SpeciesBudget. This display is exhibited at theKalkari Visitors Centre, Ku-ring-gai ChaseNational Park, Sydney. An associatedinformation pamphlet has also beenprepared. This pamphlet has beendisseminated to all landholders on theboundary of Ku-ring-gai Chase and GarigalNational Parks. It includes a record sheetfor members of the public to fill-in in theevent of sighting an animal. It is hoped thatthis sheet will provide a means ofdocumenting the distribution of the speciesoutside of the conservation reserve systemin the Northern Sydney Metropolitan Area.Conservation of the species has also beenpromoted through education and training ofstaff in various land management agenciesand local government. This training hasfocussed on identifying habitat, appropriatesurvey techniques and assessing likelyimpact of proposed activities ordevelopments on the species.There has been considerable mediaattention on the species in recent times,particularly on remnant populations in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Areaincluding the one occurring in the Ku-ring-gai Chase National Park. This has resultedin special features appearing on ABCNational Television as well as in the printmedia, including an article in the SydneyMorning Herald. The primary focus of thismedia effort has been to highlight theconservation requirements of the species,together with current efforts by DEC tomanage its habitat.As previously mentioned in section 4.7, acommunity survey was recently conducted



in northern Sydney (Vella 2005). This surveyinvestigated levels of community awarenessof DEC management of the Southern BrownBandicoot of visitors to Ku-ring-gai ChaseNational Park and residents on NorthTurramurra. The survey noted a certainportion of the community, particularly localresidents, are poorly informed with regardsto the management of bandicoots. Thereport also recommended that the currenteducation and community awarenessprogram could be diversified to reachdifferent audiences to further dispel mythsand misconceptions. Two issues ofparticularly importance where theidentification of bandicoots as a pest animaland a vector for the spread of ticks.

6 Proposed Recovery Objectives,Actions and PerformanceCriteria

The overall objective of this recovery plan isto improve the conservation status of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot and maximisethe opportunity for viability of this species inthe wild in New South Wales. In order toachieve this a number of actions will need tobe carried out. Each of these actions isdescribed immediately below.

Specific Objective 1: To ContinueState-Wide Recovery Team andEstablish Regional Groups to EnableEfficient Implementation of RecoveryProgram.

Action 1.1: Continuation of State-WideRecovery Team for the Southern BrownBandicoot (Priority 1).

This plan advocates continuation of theexisting State-wide Recovery Team for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot to enableefficient implementation of the recoveryprogram. However, the State-wideRecovery Team will be streamlined to onlyinclude representatives from DEC andSFNSW. Representatives from LocalGovernment and public interest groups willalready have input into the recovery processthrough representation on each of the twoRegional Working Groups indicated below(Action 1.2). DEC will be responsible foradministrative matters relating to the State-wide recovery effort, including the issue ofcontracts for components of the program,and obtaining relevant permits to enablework to proceed. Major costs formanagement of the recovery program willalso be met by DEC.

Action 1.2: Establish Regional WorkingGroups for the Southern Brown Bandicootin Key Areas of the State (Priority 1).

Based on current information, extantpopulations of the Southern BrownBandicoot are distributed patchily along theeast coast of New South Wales, south of theHawkesbury River to the Victorian border.Two key areas for active management havebeen identified in this plan: (i) in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area, mainlywithin Ku-ring-gai Chase and GarigalNational Parks, and also in adjacent CouncilLands, and (ii) the far south-east corner ofthe State, encompassing Ben Boyd NationalPark, Nadgee Nature Reserve and adjacentState Forests.

Given the large geographic distancebetween these two areas it is prudent toestablish separate Regional WorkingGroups to better co-ordinate recoveryactions at a local level. This plan advocatesthe establishment of these two groups. TheNorthern Sydney Metropolitan AreaRegional Working Group will ultimatelycomprise members from DEC, RTA, each ofBaulkham Hills, Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai,Pittwater and Warringah Councils, and otherinterested parties. The South CoastRegional Working Group will ultimatelycomprise members from DEC, SFNSW,each of Bega Shire, Eurobodalla Shire andShoalhaven Councils, as well as otherinterested parties. One delegate from eachof these groups will report directly back tothe State-wide Recovery Team to facilitatethe broader process. DEC will beresponsible for coordinating each of thesetwo groups.

Performance Criterion 1

Actions identified in this recovery plan areeffectively implemented by the responsibleparties, as coordinated by the State-wideRecovery Team and Regional WorkingGroups.

Specific Objective 2: To Identify andImplement Land Management PracticesThat Assist in the Recovery of theSpecies.

Action 2.1: Undertake Intensive Control ofIntroduced Predators around ExtantPopulations of the Southern BrownBandicoot (Priority 1).

The greatest threat to persistence ofremaining populations of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot may be predation byintroduced carnivores such as foxes, wild



dogs and feral cats. Where populations ofthe species are identified, intensive controlof introduced predators using Compound1080 and the mound baiting technique willbe conducted. The duration, frequency andconcentration of baiting around bandicootpopulations will be determined by theRecovery Team, in conjunction withappropriate specialist consultants ifnecessary.At this point in time only two populations ofthe Southern Brown Bandicoot can bedefined: one in Ku-ring-gai Chase andGarigal National Parks in the NorthernSydney Metropolitan Area, the other in thefar south-east corner of the State,encompassing Ben Boyd National Park,Nadgee Nature Reserve and adjacent StateForests.

Intensive control of introduced predators isalready underway across both of theseareas, with programs being concurrently runby DEC, some of the Councils in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area listedabove and SFNSW. Costs associated withthese programs are covered by recurrentfunding from each of the collaboratingorganisations with additional financialassistance through the Fox ThreatAbatement planning process (hereafterreferred to as Fox TAP). Costing forprotection of other (as yet unknown)populations will need to be factored into therecovery process for the species if and whenthe situation arises.In addition to these more targetedmeasures, this plan advocates continuationof existing broadscale introduced predatorcontrol programs undertaken by DEC andSFNSW, among others. While recognisingthat these programs may not be specificallydirected toward protecting the SouthernBrown Bandicoot, they nonetheless havepotential flow-on benefits for the species.

Action 2.2: Monitor the Response ofSouthern Brown Bandicoot Populations toIntensive Control of Introduced Predators(Priority 1).

The response of the Southern BrownBandicoot to intensive control of introducedpredators will be monitored in both of theareas identified in Action 2.1 above. Thiswill be to establish whether the predatorcontrol being applied is benefiting localbandicoot populations. For Ku-ring-gaiChase and Garigal National Parks, live-trapping grids have been established andwill continue to be monitored for the lifetimeof this recovery plan. DEC will beresponsible for maintaining these monitoringactivities. For the far south-east corner of

the State, encompassing Ben Boyd NationalPark, Nadgee Nature Reserve and adjacentState Forests, a combination of techniqueswill continue to be used to monitor thebandicoot population, as well as that of theintroduced predator population. This willcontinue to involve live-trapping of animals,as well as measuring the frequency ofoccurrence of tracks of these animals onsand plots situated across minor roads andtrails across the baited area (as per Catlingand Newsome 1981). For both areas,control sites in which no poison baiting isundertaken will be established. This willenable the effectiveness of the baitingprograms to be quantitatively examined.Financial assistance for each monitoringprogram will be provided through the FoxTAP and existing (recurrent) resources.


Intensive control of introduced predators isundertaken for the lifetime of this recoveryplan around all known populations of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot and the efficacyof this measure is assessed through a long-term monitoring program.

Action 2.3: Establish Mortality Register forRoads within Ku-ring-gai Chase NationalPark to Assess Whether Signage isReducing Level of Road-Kill of SouthernBrown Bandicoot (Priority 1).

To assess the effectiveness of the signsestablished as part of Action 2.4 above,DEC will develop and maintain a road-killmortality register for the Southern BrownBandicoot in Ku-ring-gai Chase NationalPark. This register will be maintained for thelifetime of this recovery plan, in order toestablish the usefulness or otherwise of thismeasure over the longer-term. If, afterestablishing these signs, road-kill mortalitypersists in some areas, DEC may considerother means of addressing the problem suchas speed bumps or reduced speed zones.

Action 2.4: Establish Mortality Register forPublic Roads in the Northern SydneyMetropolitan Area to Assess Current Levelof Impact on Southern Brown Bandicootoutside of National Parks (Priority 1).

Several public roads bisect known andapparently suitable habitat of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot in the Northern SydneyMetropolitan Area. This is particularly thecase for Garigal National Park, which isdivided by a series of major arterial roads.At this stage nothing is known about thelevel of impact, if any, of vehicular traffic onbandicoots attempting to disperse from onepatch of habitat to another. DEC willnegotiate with the RTA, as a matter of high



priority, to establish a road-kill mortalityregister for the Southern Brown Bandicoot insuch areas. In the first instance this willprovide information on the distribution andpossible movement patterns of the species.Over time, it may pinpoint trouble spotswhere the level of road-kill on the species isunacceptably high and other ameliorativemeasures may need to be put in place.Other relevant organisations will also becontacted to provide additional informationon the distribution of the species outside ofconservation reserves. These will includeLocal Councils, through the Wildlife WatchProgram, and WIRES.


The level of road-kill mortality of bandicootsin known trouble areas is reduced, while thelevel of road-kill in potential trouble areas isdefined.


Additional information on the distribution ofthe species, outside the conservationreserve system in the Northern SydneyMetropolitan Area, is provided throughliaison with relevant organisations.

Action 2.5: Ensure Fire ManagementActivities are Sympathetic to ConservationRequirements of the Southern BrownBandicoot (Priority 1).

Fire, whether wild or deliberately applied,potentially plays a significant role in creationof suitable habitat for the Southern BrownBandicoot. Inappropriate use of prescribedfire, in particular, may lead to habitatdegradation for the species.The DEC will liaise with and the NSW RuralFire Service and State Forests NSW todevelop appropriate fire managementregimes around known Southern BrownBandicoot populations. In all cases theoverall objective of fire management inareas occupied by the species should be tomaintain and/or enhance plant speciesdiversity and provide an abundance ofground cover. Fire management regimes willbe developed in accord with other legislativerequirements, such as asset protection.When new populations or sightings for thisspecies are identified, the DEC will updatethe Atlas of NSW Wildlife with preciserecords (<=100m). The DEC will ensurethese records are available to approval andcertifying authorities (including Departmentof Lands, RFS and relevant Councils) andincorporated into relevant databases andmanagement plans. The DEC will ensurethat this information is presented toappropriate inter-agency committees suchas the relevant Bush Fire ManagementCommittee.

In addition approval and certifyingauthorities (including authorities that issue orcertify bush fire hazard reductioncertificates) will regularly (every 4-6 months)obtain Altas of NSW Wildlife data forincorporation it into relevant databases andmanagement plans.


Fire management activities in areas ofknown habitat for the Southern BrownBandicoot are carried out in a way that issympathetic within the conservationrequirements of the species.Precise locations for the Atlas of NSWWildlife are made available to relevantauthorities within four months of verificationor discovery.Updated Atlas of NSW Wildlife data isobtained every 4-6 months and used byapproval and certifying authorities.

Action 2.6: Ensure Informed EnvironmentalAssessment and Planning Decisions areMade (Priority 1).

Consent and determining authorities willassess developments and activities, and willprepare environmental planning instrumentsthat avoid and minimise impacts on thespecies. In order to give this effect, consentand determining authorities will ensure that:(i) developments and activities are assessedwith reference to this recovery plan,environmental assessment guidelines andany future advice from DEC regarding thedistribution, threats, biology and ecology ofthe Southern Brown Bandicoot, (ii)development consent issued on land in thevicinity of known populations, is sensitive tothe species, given knowledge of threats, and(iii) any relevant environmental policies,management plans and EnvironmentalPlanning Instruments are prepared orreviewed with reference to the recovery planand any future advice from DEC regardingthe distribution and ecology of the species.This action is to be carried out by Councilsand the Department Planning in consultationwith the DEC.


Conservation of the Southern BrownBandicoot is facilitated through appropriateplanning and management decisions.

Action 2.7: Improved control of companionanimals, particularly dogs.

Southern Brown Bandicoot populationswithin close proximity to urban developmentare also vulnerable to predation ordisturbance from domestic pets such asdogs and cats. Dogs have been reportedattacking bandicoots (Ecotone 2003) androaming off leash within identified habitat,



including within conservation reserves (Hall,2005 pers comm). In addition bandicoot hairhas turned up in dog scats (Hall 2005 perscomm). To minimise this threat DEC andrelevant local government authorities willimprove enforcement of regulations relatingto responsible domestic/companion animalownership and control.Local government authorities in accordancewith the NSW Companion Animals Act 1998govern responsible dog and cat ownership.This legislation states that owners must beable to contain their dogs within their ownproperty and when in public they must bekept on a leash except within a designatedarea. Similar restrictions do not apply tocats.In addition, dogs and cats are excluded from“wildlife protection areas”. This restrictionreflects s4 of the Act, which declares that anobjective of the Act is to protect native birdsand animals as an animal welfare issue. TheAct also encourages Council to produceLocal Companion Animal ManagementPlans, which set out strategies for themanagement of companion animals inindividual council areas.Council will investigate mechanisms toimprove control of companion animalsthrough either the development of aCompanion Animal Management Plan or viathe integration of companion animalmanagement issues within existingmanagement plans, local environment plansand into local order policies. Actions forconsideration:• Improved enforcement of responsible

companion animal control on private andpublic property (eg. roaming and offleash animals) targeting areas of SBBhabitat and bushland;

• Promote and facilitate the housing andcontainment of companion animals;

• Develop education strategies to promotethe environmental benefits of containingcompanion animals;

• introduction of Section 88E(Conveyancing Act year) instruments torequire animal containment inenvironmentally sensitive areas (eg SBBhabitat or adjacent to SBB habitat); and

• exclusion of companion animals (dogsand cats) from new residentialdevelopments adjacent to areas of highconservation values (eg SBB habitat);

Under s9 of the National Parks and WildlifeRegulations 2002, dogs (and cats) areprohibited within National Parks and NatureReserves although they are permitted on aleash within Regional Parks. However, aspreviously noted unleashed and roamingdogs have been reported attacking

individual SBBs and are regularly beingreported on sand pads within SBB habitatduring fox monitoring in Northern Sydney.DEC will investigate mechanisms to enforceunauthorised access of animals, especiallydogs, within DEC reserves. Actions forconsideration:• Improved enforcement of unauthorised

animal access, targeting areas of SBBhabitat.

• Consideration of exclusion of dogswithin known and/or likely SBB habitatwithin Regional Parks (Berowra Valley)

• Work with Local Government in thedevelopment of education strategies topromote the environmental benefits ofcontaining animals;

• Improved signage identifying parkboundaries, exclusion of dogs andidentification/notification of threatenedspecies habitats

Specific Objective 3: Clarify the Statusof the Species by Better Defining itsDistribution and Relative Abundance.

Action 3.1: Continued Survey in NationalParks and Other Tenures (Priority 1).

Further targeted survey work for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot is required insouthern New South Wales, particularly inunder-sampled coastal environments. Suchsurvey will better define the distribution ofthe species, and may locate otherpopulations requiring active management.For National Park Estate, DEC will continueongoing survey for the species using acombination of predator scat analysis, hair-tube sampling and live-trapping. Apredictive distribution model for the species,developed during the recent ComprehensiveRegional Assessment (CRA) Process forsouthern NSW, will be used initially to helpidentify potential sampling areas. Surveysmay focus on predicted areas that have notbeen sampled and contain apparentlysuitable habitat based on floristic andstructural attributes of the vegetation.Outside of National Park Estate, DEC willseek ways to encourage other agencies andorganisations to conduct surveys for theSouthern Brown Bandicoot in areascontaining suitable habitat. To some extent,these additional surveys are already beingcarried out through existing obligations. Forexample, on State Forest land, SFNSWSouth Coast and South East Regions arerequired under Broad Area LicensingConditions to survey for the species in likelyhabitats or where indirect signs of animals(i.e. conical shaped forage-diggings) arefound as part of pre-logging fauna



assessments. Similarly, information on thedistribution of the species may also beobtained on private tenures duringenvironmental assessment as part ofdevelopment application processes.

Action 3.2: Conduct Postal Survey inNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area (Priority1).

Further information is required on the likelydistribution of the Southern Brown Bandicootin the Northern Sydney Metropolitan Area,particularly in sites outside of majorconservation reserves such as Ku-ring-gaiChase and Garigal National Parks. A cost-effective approach to acquiring suchinformation is to conduct a postal survey, inwhich members of the public are provided awritten questionnaire and asked to providevarious details in relation to sighting of aparticular threatened species.Such postal surveys have been successfullyconducted in the past by DEC and othergovernment agencies, including LocalCouncils, for high profile species such as theKoala. This approach would work equallywell for the Southern Brown Bandicoot.Accordingly, DEC will liaise with the relevantCouncils in developing an appropriatesurvey questionnaire, targeting the species,and identify the best way to disseminate it.Responses will then be collated by DEC. Allcosts for the questionairre will be born byDEC. Depending on the outcome of thiswork, follow-up survey may then berequired.


The distribution and relative abundance ofthe Southern Brown Bandicoot in New SouthWales is clarified through a combination oftargeted survey work by relevantgovernment agencies, and by postal surveyto the public in the Northern SydneyMetropolitan Area.

Specific Objective 4: UndertakeResearch to Broaden the KnowledgeBase on the Species, Gathering CriticalInformation to Assist in its Recovery.In reviewing relevant literature on theSouthern Brown Bandicoot, this plan hashighlighted several gaps in knowledge ofthis species. Foremost among these is lackof understanding of impacts of disturbanceon the species, its habitat and major foodresources. As far as is practicable, DEC willseek ways to foster and encourage relevantresearch on the Southern Brown Bandicoot,through financial, logistic or other forms ofsupport. Key areas of research that need tobe addressed in the first instance areidentified immediately below.

Action 4.1: Examine Response of SouthernBrown Bandicoot to Fire (Priority 2).

The response of the Southern BrownBandicoot to successional stage ofvegetation following fire needs to beexamined, either: (i) retrospectively, bysurveying for the species across habitats ofvarying regeneration age post-fire, or (ii)opportunistically, as habitats known to beoccupied by the species are subject to fire,either by deliberate (ie. prescribed burning)or natural (ie. wildfire) means. Whilerelevant data could be collected as part ofthe monitoring programs identified in Action2.2 identified above, further work across thebroader landscape is required. DEC willdetermine ways to encourage and fostersuch research, either through seekingexpressions of interest from students inacademic institutions, or via specialistconsultants. Either way, additional fundingto conduct such work would need to besourced.

Action 4.2: Identify Genetic Structure ofExtant Populations (Priority 2).

Various genetic studies are needed toclarify: (i) the northernmost extent of thedistribution of the Southern Brown Bandicootin New South Wales, and (ii) the degree ofgenetic variation between extant populationsof the species both within the State andelsewhere across mainland south-easternAustralia. Resolving the first matter isessential because at present there isconfusion over where the boundary betweenthe Southern Brown Bandicoot and itscommon congenor, the Northern BrownBandicoot, lies. Once this boundary isestablished, recovery efforts can be betterfocussed. The southern shoreline of theHawkesbury River has been historicallyviewed as the demarcation point for themost northerly distributed populations of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot (Ashby et al.1990), but recent bandicoot records fromareas immediately to the north have throwndoubt over this viewpoint. Also, there areunconfirmed records of the Southern BrownBandicoot from Woy Woy (AustralianMuseum, unpublished records) and MyallLakes (DEC Wildlife Atlas, unpublisheddata), both of which are well to the north ofthe Hawkesbury River. To clarify the issuethis plan recommends that bandicoots belive-trapped from this general location andtissue (ear biopsy) samples taken for furtherDNA analysis. Samples can be obtainedfrom animals captured during the monitoringand survey activities identified elsewhere inthis plan. Samples from bandicoots north ofthe Hawkesbury River will be primarily



obtained fortuitously from road killspecimens (which in the recent past havebeen forwarded to the Australian Museum)and from animals live-trapped during faunaassessments undertaken as part of routinedevelopment application processes. DECwill notify relevant environmental consultantsand help facilitate permits to allow collectionof tissue samples.Genetic studies are also critical forestablishing the distinctiveness of individualof populations of the Southern BrownBandicoot in south-eastern mainlandAustralia. Existing records suggest thatthese populations are highly disjunct.Resolving their genetic make-up will helpguide management of the species and itshabitat, not only within New South Wales butalso cross-border. This information will alsobe useful when considering where to sourceanimals for translocation and/or captivebreeding programs, should this becomenecessary in the future. This planrecommends that the genetic structure ofpopulations identified during implementationof Actions 2.2 and 3.1 be resolved, togetherwith that of several populations in Victoriaand South Australia. While not discussedfurther here, the arrangements for and costsassociated with sampling of animals outsideof New South Wales will need to beconsidered by the existing Recovery Team.

Action 4.3: Collect Basic Information on LifeHistory Attributes of Southern BrownBandicoot (Priority 2).

Basic information on various life historyattributes of the Southern Brown Bandicootneeds to be collected from populations inNSW to better guide management activities.This includes measures such as populationdensity and structure, fecundity andreproductive success, juvenile dispersal,home range requirements, diet and nestingbehaviour, and micro-habitat preferences.Much of this data could be readily collectedas part of the monitoring programs identifiedin Action 2.2, therefore minimising costs.However, some aspects of the biology of thespecies, such as home range requirements,could only be determined by specificresearch programs outside the scope of thenormal monitoring activities. DEC will seekways to encourage and foster suchresearch, either through seekingexpressions of interest from students inacademic institutions, or via specialistconsultants. Either way, additional fundingto conduct such work would need to besourced.


Informed management actions areimplemented as a result of knowledge of thebiology and ecology of the species.

Action 4.4: Investigate the feasibility ofestablishing a captive breeding program.(Priority 2).

NSW populations of the Southern BrownBandicoot are small and highly disjunct, andtherefore at a high risk of extinction.Establishment of a captive breeding program maypotentially provide an insurance against the lossof populations in the wild. The establishment ofsuch a program would be consistent with NSWgovernment priority for the establishment ofsanctuaries and captive populations as a meansfor threatened species conservation.


Options for the establishment of a SBBcaptive breeding are investigated andreported on and were practical established.

Specific Objective 5: ImproveCommunity Awareness ofConservation Significance of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot.To raise community awareness of theconservation significance of the SouthernBrown Bandicoot, this plan recommendsthat promotion of the species be undertakenthrough: (i) high profile media avenues, (ii)providing specific information to relevantlocal communities, and (iii) involving publicinterest groups in survey and monitoringactivities.

Action 5.1: Media Publicity Campaign(Priority 3).

High profile media publicity will be sought asthe recovery program is implemented.


Within two years, at least three high profilemedia-related activities are undertaken.

Action 5.2: Inform Local Communities ofConservation Significance of SouthernBrown Bandicoot (Priority 2).

In areas where the Southern BrownBandicoot is known to occur, DEC and anyother relevant public authority will inform thelocal community of the conservationsignificance of the species. This will beachieved through a variety of means,including the postal survey identified inAction 3.2 above. Other mechanisms suchas the Companion Animals EducationProgram, involving local councils in theNorthern Sydney Metropolitan Area, will alsobe used to raise the profile of the species inthe local setting. There, the focus will be onresponsible domestic pet ownership in and



adjacent to areas where the Southern BrownBandicoot occurs.


Relevant local communities are betterinformed about the distribution, status andconservation management of the species.

Action 5.3: Involve Local CommunityGroups in Survey and Monitoring forSouthern Brown Bandicoot (Priority 2).

The involvement of volunteer conservationgroups in survey and monitoring activitiesrelating to the Southern Brown Bandicootwill be encouraged. Such groups regularlyconduct surveys for a range of threatenedspecies across the State. Predator scatsearches are particularly valuable forestablishing the presence of the speciesalong with other native ground-dwellingmammals that are preyed upon by exoticpredators. This type of surveying wouldrequire some coordination with DEC staff asscat samples need to be systematicallycollected and collated for expert analysis.These organisations could also be trainedby appropriate staff within the DEC toidentify characteristic forage-diggings ofbandicoots to better target surveys.


Relevant community groups are involved insurvey and monitoring activities relating tothe species.

7 ImplementationTable 1 allocates responsibility for theimplementation of recovery actions specifiedin this plan to relevant government agenciesand/or parties for a period of five years fromthe time this recovery plan is adopted, andidentifies costs associated with eachrecovery action. The total estimated cost forthe implementation of these actions is $585870.

8 Social and EconomicConsequences

Since the Southern Brown Bandicoot isknown to occur across a range of differentland tenures, there may be some social andeconomic impacts associated with itsongoing conservation. Such impacts aremost likely to be felt on private land wheredevelopment proposals are likely to impactsignificantly on the species. These costscannot be currently quantified. There willalso be economic costs associated withcarrying out of actions identified in thisrecovery plan. These costs have alreadybeen outlined in Section 7 immediatelyabove and are detailed in Table 1.

The recovery plan could have social benefitsfor the general public, increasing awarenessof the natural heritage values of areas wherethe species has been recorded, such asNational Park Estate. This wouldparticularly be the case for recreationalusers of the relevant Parks and adjacentlocal communities.

9 Roles and Interests ofIndigenous People

The Local Land Councils, Elders and othergroups representing indigenous people inthe areas where the Southern BrownBandicoot occurs have been identified and acopy of the draft Recovery Plan sent tothem. Their comments on the draft of thisRecovery Plan have been sought. Inaddition it is the intention of the RecoveryTeam to consider the role and interests ofthese indigenous communities in theimplementation of the recovery actionsidentified in this plan.

10 Biodiversity BenefitsUnderstanding factors limiting SouthernBrown Bandicoot populations, together withprotection and appropriate management ofhabitat for the species, will assist in theconservation of a range of ground-dwellingmammals in New South Wales, some ofwhich are also threatened. Such speciesinclude the Long-nosed Bandicoot, Long-nosed Potoroo, Long-footed Potoroo, SmokyMouse (Pseudomys fumeus) and White-footed Dunnart (Sminthopsis leucopus).In distributing the spores of mycorrhiza-forming fungi in its faeces, the SouthernBrown Bandicoot may inadvertently play animportant role in maintaining forest health(Claridge et al. 1992). Loss of this speciesfrom forests may reduce dispersal chancesfor these beneficial fungi. Theconsequences of this for long-termecosystem productivity are unknown.Finally, through awareness of the fate of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot the profile of allthreatened species will be raised in thegeneral community. This in turn will lead togreater opportunities for the conservation ofspecies and increased protection ofbiodiversity.

11 Preparation DetailsThis Recovery Plan was prepared by AndrewClaridge, Senior Threatened Species Officer,Southern Directorate (DEC), and DouglasMills, Consultant/Wildlife Biologist. MichaelSaxon and Rob Humphries, respective



Managers of the Threatened Species Units inSouthern and Central Directorates, reviewedand had editorial input into this plan.

12 Review DateThis recovery plan is to be formally reviewedand updated by the by the Department ofEnvironment and Conservation (NSW) fiveyears from the date of its publication.

13 ReferencesAitken, P.F. (1983). Mammals. In 'Natural

History of the South-East.' (Tyler, M.J.,Twidale, C.R., Ling, J.K. and Holmes, J.W.eds), pp 127-133. Royal Society of SouthAustralia, Adelaide.

Anon (1989). Bandicoot Populations at UpperSturt. South Australian Naturalist 63, 94.

Ashby, E., Lunney, D., Robertshaw, J. andHarden, R. (1990). Distribution and statusof bandicoots in New South Wales. In'Bandicoots and Bilbies' (Seebeck, J.H.,Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L. and Kemper, C.M.eds), pp 43-50. Surrey Beatty and Sons,Sydney.

Atkins, K. (1998). Habitat and distribution ofPerameles nasuta and Isoodon obesulus inBushland Remnants in Sydney. MScThesis, School of Biological Sciences,Macquarie University.

Atkins, K. (1999). Review of the distributionand abundance of the Southern BrownBandicoot Isoodon obesulus in northernSydney. A consultancy report prepared forthe New South Wales National Parks andWildlife Service, Sydney Zone. July 1999.

Barnes, A. and R. T. Gemmell (1984).Correlations between the breeding activityin the marsupial bandicoots and someenvironmental variables. Australian Journalof Zoology 32, 219-226.

Braithwaite, L.W., Dudzinski, M.L. and Turner,J. (1984). Studies on the arborealmarsupial fauna of eucalypt forests beingharvested for woodpulp at Eden, N.S.W. II:Relationship between the fauna density,richness and diversity, and measuredvariables of the habitat. Australian WildlifeResearch 10, 231-247.

Braithwaite, R.W. (1983). Southern BrownBandicoot, Isoodon obesulus. In 'TheAustralian Museums Complete Book ofAustralian Mammals' (Strahan, R. ed) p94.Angus and Robertson, Sydney.

Braithwaite, R.W. and Gullan, P.K. (1978).Habitat selection in a Victorian heathland.Australian Journal of Ecology 3, 423-445.

Catling, P.C. and Newsome, A.E. (1981).Responses of the Australian vertebratefauna to fire: an evolutionary approach. In'Fire and the Australian Biota' (Gill, A.M.,Groves, R.H. and Noble, I.R. eds), pp 273-310. Australian Academy of Science,Canberra.

Chapman, P.J. (1995). Mycophagousmammals of Ben Boyd National Park:distribution and abundance of diggings.Hons Thesis, Division of Botany andZoology, School of Life Sciences, TheAustralian National University, Canberra.

Claridge, A.W. (1988). Diet and ecology ofthe Southern Brown and Long-nosedBandicoots in South-eastern New SouthWales. Hons Thesis, Department ofForestry, The Australian NationalUniversity, Canberra.

Claridge, A.W., McNee, A., Tanton, M.T. andDavey, S.M. (1991). Ecology of Bandicootsin undisturbed forest adjacent to recentlyfelled logging coupes: a case study from theEden woodchip agreement area. In'Conservation of Australia's Forest Fauna'(Lunney, D. ed), pp. 331-345. Published bythe Royal Zoological Society of N.S.W.,Mosman.

Claridge, A.W., Tanton, M.T., Seebeck, J.H.,Cork, S.J. and Cunningham, R.B. (1992).Establishment of ectomycorrhizae on theroots of two species of Eucalyptus fromfungal spores contained in the faeces of thelong-nosed potoroo (Potorous tridactylus).Australian Journal of Ecology 17, 207-217.

Close, R.L. (1977). The recurrence ofbreeding after cessation of suckling in themarsupial Perameles nasuta. AustralianJournal of Zoology 25, 641-645.

Cockburn, A. (1981). Population regulationand dispersion of the smoky mouse,Pseudomys fumeus. Part I: Dietarydeterminants of microhabitat preference.Australian Journal of Ecology 6, 231-254.

Cockburn, A. (1990). Life history of thebandicoots: developmental rigidity andphenotypic plasticity. In 'Bandicoots andBilbies' (Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis,R.L. and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 285-292.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Copley, P.B., Read, V.T., Robinson, A.C. andWatts, C.H.S. (1990). Preliminary studiesof the Nuyts Archipelago bandicoot Isoodonobesulus nauticus on the Franklin Islands,



South Australia. In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies'(Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L.and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp. 345-356.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Dickman, C.R. (1988). Detection of physicalcontact interactions among free-livingmammals. Journal of Mammalogy 69, 865-868.

Dixon, J.M. (1978). Long-nosed bandicootselude searchers. Forest and Timber 14, 13-17.

Doggett S., Russell R, Lawrence R, & Dickson(1997) DDepartment of MedicalEntomology, University of Sydney andWestmead Hospital “Lyme Disease Webpage athttp://medent.usyd.edu.au/fact/lyme%20disease.htm

Ecotone Ecological Consultants (2003)Species Impact Statement “Bibbenluke”Proposed 8 Lot Rural ResidentialSubdivision Lot 447 in DP 489649Bibbenluke Ave & Wyong Rd, DuffysForest. Final report prepared for SimonMaxwell and Mal Corbett.

Fanning, F.D. and Mills, K. (1989). NaturalResource Survey of the Southern Portion ofRockton Section, Bondi State Forest.Forest Resources Series No. 6. ForestryCommission of N.S.W.

Fanning, F.D. and Rice, B. (1989). NaturalResource Survey of the Northern Portion ofRockton Section, Bondi State Forest.Forest Resources Series No. 7. ForestryCommission of N.S.W.

Friend, J.A. (1990). Status of bandicoots inWestern Australia. In 'Bandicoots andBilbies' (Seebeck, J.H., Wallis, R.L., Brown,P.R. and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 73-84.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Gordon, G. (1974). Movements and activity ofthe short-nosed Bandicoot (Isoodonmacrourus) Gould (Marsupialia). Mammalia38, 405-431.

Gordon, G. (1983). Northern BrownBandicoot, Isoodon macrourus. In 'TheAustralian Museums Complete Book ofAustralian Mammals' (Strahan, R. ed), p96.Angus and Robertson, Sydney.

Gordon, G., Hall, L.S. and Atherton, R.G.(1990). Status of bandicoots inQueensland. In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies'(Seebeck, J.H., Wallis, R.L., Brown, P.R.and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 37-42. SurreyBeatty and Sons, Sydney.

Gould, J. (1845). The mammals of Australia.Volume 1. The author: London.

Green, R.H. (1979). A survey of thevertebrate fauna of the Sumac Forest, andDempster Plains, North-West Tasmania.Records of the Queen Victoria Museum 65,1-9.

Green, R.H. (1982). The activity andmovement of fauna in Compartment 2,Maggs Mountain, Tasmania, in the first fiveyears of forest regeneration. Records ofthe Queen Victoria Museum 75, 1-24.

Hall, L.S. (1983). Observations on bodyweights, and breeding of the northernbrown bandicoot, Isoodon macrourus,trapped in south-east Queensland.Australian Wildlife Research 10, 467-476.

Hall M. (2005) pers comm.

Heinsohn, G.E. (1966). Ecology andreproduction of the Tasmanian bandicoots(Perameles gunnii and Isoodon obesulus).University of California Publications inZoology 80, 1-96.

Hemsley, J.H. (1967). Bushfires - South-eastTasmania 7th February 1967. SomeAspects of the Fire in relation to Animal andPlant Life. Report to the TasmanianForestry Commission.

Hocking, G.J. (1990). Status of bandicoots inTasmania. In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies'(Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L.and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 61-66. SurreyBeatty and Sons, Sydney.

Hornsby, P.E. (1984). Fauna survey ofDouglas Scrub. South Australian Naturalist59, 14-17.

Jones, F. Wood (1924). 'The Mammals ofSouth Australia: Part II. The Bandicootsand Herbivorous Marsupials’. GovernmentPrinter, Adelaide.

Johnston, P.G, Zenger K.R, & Eldridge M. D.B(2002) “Genetic Variation in SouthernBrown Bandicoot Populations and a RapidMolecular Technique for IdentifyingBandicoot Species in New South Wales”

Kemper, C.M. (1990). Status of bandicoots inSouth Australia. In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies'(Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L.and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 67-72. SurreyBeatty and Sons, Sydney.

Krefft, G. (1866). On the vertebrated animalsof the Lower Murray and Darling, theirhabits, economy and geographicaldistribution. Transactions of thePhilosophical Society of New South Wales1862-1865, 1-33.



Lamont, B.B., Ralph, C.S. and Christensen,P.E.S. (1985). Mycophagous marsupials asagents for ectomycorrhizal fungi onEucalyptus calophylla and Gastrolobiumbilobum. New Phytologist 101, 651-656.

Lee, A.K. and Cockburn, A. (1985).'Evolutionary Ecology of Marsupials'.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Lobert, B. (1985). The Ecology of theSouthern Brown Bandicoot in South-easternAustralian Heathland. MSc Thesis,Department of Botany and Zoology,Monash University.

Lobert, B. (1990). Home range and activityperiod of the southern brown bandicoot(Isoodon obesulus) in a Victorian heathland.In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies' (Seebeck, J.H.,Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L. and Kemper, C.M.eds), pp 319-325. Surrey Beatty and Sons,Sydney.

Lobert, B. and Lee, A.K. (1990). Reproductionand life history of Isoodon obesulus inVictorian heathland. In 'Bandicoots andBilbies' (Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis,R.L. and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 311-318.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Lunney, D. and Barker, J. (1986). Mammalsof the coastal forests near Bega, NewSouth Wales. Part 1: survey. AustralianZoologist 23, 19-28.

Lunney, D. and Barker, J. (1987). Mammalsof the coastal forests near Bega, NewSouth Wales. Part 2: annotated checklist.Australian Zoologist 23, 41-49.

Lunney, D. and Leary, T. (1988). Effect ofEuropean Man on Fauna in the South-eastof New South Wales. Australian Journal ofEcology 25, 100-116.

Lyne, A.G. (1964). Observations on thebreeding and growth of the marsupialPerameles nasuta (Geoffroy), with notes onother bandicoots. Australian Journal ofZoology 12, 332-339.

McKenzie, N.L. (1967). Some EcologicalAspects of the Behaviour of the Short-nosed Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus). Honsthesis, Department of Zoology, MonashUniversity, Melbourne.

McKenzie, N.L. (1976). Behaviour Units andFunctional Communication in Isoodonobesulus (Marsupialia: Peramelidae). MScThesis, Department of Zoology, MonashUniversity, Melbourne.

McNee, A., Claridge, A.W. and Davey, S.M.(1989). Isoodon obesulus (Marsupialia:Peramelidae) in south-eastern New South

Wales: discussion and results of a pilotstudy into their behaviour and ecology. AConsultancy Report to Harris-Daishowa(Australia) Pty. Ltd.

Menkhorst, P.W. and Seebeck, J.H. (1990).Distribution and conservation status ofbandicoots in Victoria. In 'Bandicoots andBilbies' (Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis,R.L. and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 51-60.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Mills, D.J. (1999). Distribution andconservation status of the Southern BrownBandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) in the EdenRegion, south-east New South Wales: apreliminary investigation. Unpublishedconsultancy report to the NSW NationalParks and Wildlife Service. 41 pp.

Moloney, D.J. (1982). A Comparison of theBehaviour and Ecology of the TasmanianBandicoots, Perameles gunnii (Gray 1838)and Isoodon obesulus (Shaw and Nodder1797). Hons Thesis, University ofTasmania, Hobart.

Nagy, K.A., Bradshaw, S.D. and Clay, B.T.(1991). Field metabolic rate, water flux, andfood requirements of short-nosedbandicoots, Isoodon obesulus (Marsupialia:Peramelidae). Australian Journal of Zoology39, 299-305.

New South Wales Government (2000).Integrated Forestry Approval. Appendix B:Terms of the Threatened Species Licencefor the Eden Region. January 2000.

New South Wales National Parks and WildlifeService (1986). Eden (N.S.W.) ExportWoodchip Operation 1989-2009:Environmental Impact Statement (Draft)Harris-Daishowa (Aust.) Pty.Ltd.Submission by the NSW National Parks andWildlife Service.

Opie, A.M. (1980). Habitat selection and dietof Isoodon obesulus. Australian MammalSociety Bulletin 6(2): 56.

Paull, D. J. (1993). The Distribution, Ecologyand Conservation of the Southern BrownBandicoot (Isoodon obesulus obesulus) inSouth Australia. MA Thesis, Department ofGeography, University of Adelaide,Adelaide.

Paull, D. J. (1995). The distribution of thesouthern brown bandicoot (Isoodonobesulus obesulus) in South Australia.Wildlife Research 22, 585-600.

Paull, D.J. (1999). A survey of the distributionand abundance of the southern brownbandicoot in the south east of SouthAustralia. School of Geography and



Oceanography, The University of NewSouth Wales Australian Defence ForceAcademy, Canberra. Working Paper1999/1.

Pope, L., Storch, D., Adams, M., Moritz, C.and Gordon, G. (2001). A phylogeny for thegenus Isoodon and a range extension for I.obesulus peninsulae based on mtDNAcontrol region and morphology. AustralianJournal of Zoology 49, 411-434.

Preiss, K. (1966). The Manning Fauna andFlora Reserve. South Australian Naturalist41, 5-19.

Quin, D.G. (1985). Observations on the dietof the southern brown bandicoot, Isoodonobesulus (Marsupialia: Peramelidae), insouthern Tasmania. AustralianMammalogy 11, 15-25.

Rayment, T. (1954). Australia's bandicoots.The Victorian Naturalist 70, 195-197.

Recher, H. F., Rohan-Jones, W. and Smith, P.(1980). Effects of the Eden woodchipindustry on terrestrial vertebrates withrecommendations for management.Forestry Commission (NSW) ResearchNote No. 42.

Rees, M. (1997). Habitat Suitability Map forthe Southern Brown Bandicoot in South-Western Victoria. Hons Thesis, Universityof New South Wales Australian DefenceForce Academy, Canberra.

Richards, B.N., Bridges, R.G., Curtin, R.A.,Nix, H.A., Shepherd, K.R. and Turner, J.(1990). Biological Conservation of theSouth-East Forests. Report of the JointScientific Committee to the Hon. AlanGriffiths, M.P. (Minister for ResourcesCommonwealth of Australia) and the Hon.Ian Causley M.L.A. (Minister for NaturalResources State of New South Wales).Australian Government Publishing Service:Canberra.

Ride, W.D.L. (1970). 'A Guide to the NativeMammals of Australia'. Oxford UniversityPress, Melbourne.

Rounsevell, D.E., Taylor, R.J. and Hocking,G.J. (1991). Distribution records of nativeterrestrial mammals in Tasmania. WildlifeResearch 18, 699-717.

Saxon, M.J. and Noble, W.K. (1993). A reportof intensive surveys for Potorous longipesconducted in south-east NSW betweenAugust 1991-August 1992. New SouthWales Department of Environment andConservation, South East Forests WorkingDraft No. 1.

Seebeck, J.H. (1977). Mammals in theMelbourne Metropolitan area. The VictorianNaturalist 94, 165-171.

Stodart, E. (1966). Management andbehaviour of breeding groups of themarsupial Perameles nasuta Geoffroy incaptivity. Australian Journal of Zoology 14,611-623.

Stodart, E. (1977). Breeding and behaviour ofAustralian bandicoots. In 'The Biology ofMarsupials' (Stonehouse, B. and Gilmore,D. eds). University Park Press, London.

Stodart, E. (1983). Long-nosed Bandicoot,Perameles nasuta. In 'The AustralianMuseums Complete Book of AustralianMammals' (Strahan, R. ed), p 99. Angusand Robertson, Sydney.

Stoddart, D.M. and Braithwaite, R.W. (1979).A strategy for utilization of regeneratingheathland by the brown bandicoot (Isoodonobesulus). Journal of Animal Ecology 48,165-179.

Strahan, R. (1995). The Mammals ofAustralia. Reed Books, Sydney.

Sutherland, E.F. (1998). Fire, ResourceLimitation and Small Mammal Populationsin Coastal Eucalypt Forest. PhD Thesis,School of Biological Sciences, University ofSydney, Sydney.

Thomas, L.N. (1987). The effects of stress onsome aspects of the demography andphysiology of Isoodon obesulus (Shaw andNodder). MSc Thesis, University ofWestern Australia, Perth.

Thomas, L.N. (1990). Stress and populationregulation in Isoodon obesulus (Shaw andNodder). In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies'(Seebeck, J.H., Wallis, R.L., Brown, P.R.and Kemper, C.M. eds), pp 335-343.Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney.

Thompson, M.B., Medlin, G., Hutchinson, R.and West, N. (1989). Short-term effects offuel reduction burning on populations ofsmall ground-dwelling mammals.Australian Wildlife Research 16, 117-129.

Vella (2005) ISL Analysis Document Issue:useof community education as a part of themanagement of the Southern BrownBanditoocts in the Sydney North Region.

Watts, C.H.S. (1974). The Nuyts Islandbandicoot (Isoodon obesulus nauticus).South Australian Naturalist 49, 20-24.

Wilson, R. (2004) “Habitat selection anddemography of the endangered SouthernBrown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) in



northern Sydney.” Masters Thesis to theUniversity of New South Wales.

Dep

artm

ent o

f Env

ironm

ent a

nd C

onse

rvat

ion

Pag

e 29

Dra

ft R

ecov

ery

Plan

for t

he S

outh

ern

Bro

wn

Ban

dico

ot

Tabl

e 1:

Impl

emen

tatio

n an

d C

ostin

g Ta

ble.

Allo

catio

n of

resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

of re

cove

ry a

ctio

ns s

peci

fied

in th

is p

lan

to re

leva

nt a

genc

ies.

Cos

ting

for e

ach

actio

n ar

e al

so id

entif

ied.

Prio

rity

is c

ateg

oris

ed a

s 1

(Ess

entia

l),2

(Hig

hly

Des

irabl

e) o

r 3 (D

esira

ble)

. In

the

fund

sou

rce

colu

mn

‘in

kind

’ ind

icat

es th

e va

lue

of c

ontri

butio

ns o

ffere

d in

var

ious

form

s by

gov

ernm

ent a

genc

ies

and

othe

r gro

ups

to im

plem

ent

reco

very

act

ions

– in

clud

ing

fund

s fro

m re

curr

ent s

ourc

es.

Actio

nN

o.Ac

tion

Des

crip

tion

Prio

rity

Res

pons

ible

Part

yFu

ndin

gSo

urce

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Yr 5

Tota

lC

ost

1.1

Con

tinua

tion

of S

tate

-Wid

e R

ecov

ery

Team

1D

EC

SFN

SW

in-k

ind

in-k

ind

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

2500

2500

1.2

Est

ablis

h R

egio

nal W

orki

ng G

roup

s1

DE

CS

FNS

WR

elev

ant

Cou

ncils

*

in-k

ind

in-k

ind

in-k

ind

500

500

1200

500

500

1200

500

500

1200

500

500

1200

500

500

1200

2500

2500

6000

2.1

Und

erta

ke

Inte

nsiv

e C

ontro

l of

In

trodu

ced

Pre

dato

rs a

roun

d K

now

n E

xtan

t Pop

ulat

ions

1D

EC

SFN

SW

in-k

ind

in-k

ind

2830

010

000

3041

510

000

3258

510

000

3481

510

000

3610

510

000

1622

2050

000

2.2

Mon

itor

the

Res

pons

e of

S

outh

ern

Bro

wn

Ban

dico

ot P

opul

atio

ns t

o In

tens

ive

Con

trol o

fIn

trodu

ced

Pre

dato

rs

1D

EC

SFN

SW

in-k

ind

in-k

ind

5650

030

0058

650

3000

6090

030

0063

300

3000

6580

030

0030

5150

1500

0

2.3

Est

ablis

h M

orta

lity

Reg

iste

r fo

r R

oads

with

inK

u-rin

g-ga

i Cha

se N

atio

nal P

ark

1D

EC

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

Ψ

2.4

DE

C n

egot

iate

with

RTA

to E

stab

lish

Mor

talit

yR

egis

ter

for

Pub

lic R

oads

in N

orth

ern

Syd

ney

Met

ropo

litan

Are

a

1D

EC

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

Ψ

2.5

Dev

elop

S

ympa

thet

ic

Fire

M

anag

emen

tP

rogr

ams

1D

EC

SFN

SW

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

Ψ

2.6

Ens

ure

Info

rmed

Env

ironm

enta

l A

sses

smen

tan

d P

lann

ing

Dec

isio

ns a

re M

ade

1R

elev

ant

Cou

ncils

**Ψ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

2.7

Impr

oved

con

trol o

f com

pani

on a

nim

als

1R

elev

ant C

ounc

ilΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

3.1

Sur

vey

in N

atio

nal P

arks

and

Oth

er T

enur

es1

DE

Cin

-kin

d10

0010

0010

0010

0010

0050

003.

2P

osta

l S

urve

y in

N

orth

ern

Syd

ney

Met

ropo

litan

Are

a1

DE

Cin

-kin

d-

1000

--

-10

00

4.1

Exa

min

e R

espo

nse

of

Sou

ther

n B

row

nB

andi

coot

to F

ire2

DE

CΦ

ΦΦ

ΦΦ

ΦΦ

4.2

Iden

tify

Gen

etic

S

truct

ure

of

Ext

ant

Pop

ulat

ions

2D

EC

ΦΦ

ΦΦ

ΦΦ

Φ

4.3

Col

lect

B

asic

Li

fe-H

isto

ry

Info

rmat

ion

onS

outh

ern

Bro

wn

Ban

dico

ot**

*2

DE

CΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

4.4

Inve

stig

ate

the

feas

ibili

ty

of

esta

blis

hing

a

capt

ive

bree

ding

pro

gram

.2

DE

CΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

5.1

Med

ia P

ublic

ity C

ampa

ign

3D

EC

in-k

ind

300

300

300

300

300

1500

5.2

Info

rm

Com

mun

ity

of

Con

serv

atio

nS

igni

fican

ce o

f Sou

ther

n B

row

n B

andi

coot

2D

EC

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

Ψ

5.3

Invo

lve

Com

mun

ity i

n S

urve

y an

d M

onito

ring

Pro

gram

s fo

r Sou

ther

n B

row

n B

andi

coot

2D

EC

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

ΨΨ

Ψ

Tota

lG

rand

Tot

al55

5870

Key

: *

= co

stin

gs b

ased

on

thos

e C

ounc

ils w

ho h

ave

com

mitt

ed t

o at

tend

ing

Reg

iona

l W

orki

ng G

roup

Mee

tings

. **

act

ion

a ro

utin

e re

quire

men

t un

der

the

Env

ironm

enta

l P

lann

ing

and

Ass

essm

ent A

ct 1

979.

***

= d

ata

will

be

colle

cted

dur

ing

mon

itorin

g an

d su

rvey

act

iviti

es. Ψ

= n

o di

rect

cos

t, ho

wev

er a

ctio

n m

ust b

e co

nsid

ered

by

rele

vant

aut

horit

y. Φ

= a

ctio

n ye

t to

beco

sted

and

will

requ

ire e

xter

nal f

undi

ng s

ourc

e.


Page 30 Dep

Appendix 1: Summary of advice by NSW Scientific Committee

Under Section 66A of the TSC Act 1995 (NSW), a recovery plan approved by the Ministermust include a summary of any advice given by the NSW Scientific Committee, details of theamendments made to the plan to take into account of that advice and statement for anydeparture from that advice.

Advice and comment was provided by the Scientific Committee with respect to:Comment: Preliminary nature of population assessments and additional sources of speciesdistribution and abundance data.

The recovery plan is only intended to provide a snapshot of the species’ distribution (Section3.2) and current conservation status (Section 3.3) at the time of plan preparation. It is notintended to provide population estimates, particularly as little information is available toprovide such estimates. Liaison with NSW State Forests and other landholders with regardsto gaps within the species distribution and abundance data is on-going. Additional data,particularly new records, will be entered into the NSW Wildlife Atlas and be made available asnecessary. It is noted that the recent data mentioned from NSW State Forests for the farsouth-east of NSW has been included with in the plan on sections 3.3 and 5.1.

Comment: Acknowledgment of level of current knowledge and links with research prioritiesand funding.

Although the Southern Brown Bandicoot is relatively well researched compared to some otherthreatened species, it is not extensively researched. Research actions have been identifiedas highly desirable in the plan or as contributing actions within the Priority Actions Statementfor this species. This reflects the importance of these actions for the recovery of the species.

Comment: Recommendation for consideration of relative importance of identified threats.

Section 4 of the recovery plan identifies different management issues or threats facing thisspecies. Ranking of these management issues was not considered appropriate given thelack of evidence to quantify the relative impact of each of these issues to this species inNSW. However, it is noted this actions are prioritised and links are made with listed “KeyThreatening Processes” (under the TSC Act) relevant to this species. This includes“Predation by the European Red Fox”, “High frequency fire” and to a lesser extent historical“Clearing of native vegetation”. Within the Fox Threat Abatement Plan, this species is subjectto experimental fox control to quantify its response to specific threat management.

Comment: Allocation of resources and need to seek funding from external sources.

Although external funding is essential for currently unfunded actions, the recovery plan doesnot have any power to direct funds from external sources to these actions. However the DECpromotes the implementation of these recovery actions to external funding bodies, researchinstitutions and other stakeholders, particularly where actions can be incorporated intobroader projects such biodiversity surveys or research programs.

November 2006

Approved Recovery Plan

43 Bridge StreetHurstville 2220www.environment.nsw.gov.au



Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus)Recovery Plan

souther brown bandicoot recovery plan · better understanding of the ecology and conservation...

Documents