Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program

Appendix N. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program

Phoenix Environmental Sciences, February 2011. Southern Brown Bandicoot Monitoring Program for Roe Highway Extension Project. Unpublished report prepared for South Metro Connect, Perth, WA.

Southern Brown Bandicoot Monitoring Program for Roe Highway Extension Project

Prepared South Metro Connect

Final Report

February 2011

Southern Brown Bandicoot Monitoring Program for the Roe Highway Extension Project South Metro Connect

Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd i

Southern Brown Bandicoot Monitoring Program for the Roe Highway Extension Project

Prepared for South Metro Connect

Final Report

Authors: Mary-Anne Clunies-Ross and Jarrad Clark

Reviewers: Melanie White and Karen Crews

Date: February 2011

Submitted to: Jamie Shaw and Peter Magaro (AECOM Australia Ltd)

© Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd 2011.

The use of this report is solely for the Client for the purpose in which it was prepared. Phoenix Environmental Sciences accepts no

responsibility for use beyond this purpose.

All rights are reserved and no part of this publication may be reproduced or copied in any form without the written permission of Phoenix

Environmental Sciences or South Metro Connect Pty Ltd.

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd

1/511 Wanneroo Road

BALCATTA WA 6023

P: 08 9345 1608

F: 08 6313 0680

E: [email protected]

Project code: 956-ROE-AEC-FAU


Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. iv

1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 6

1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 6

1.2 Scope of Work and Survey Objectives .......................................................................................... 6

2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................................. 9

2.1 Climate ......................................................................................................................................... 9

3 LIFE HISTORY AND ECOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Habitat ........................................................................................................................................ 12

3.2 Diet ............................................................................................................................................ 12

3.3 Home Range Size ...................................................................................................................... 13

3.4 Breeding ..................................................................................................................................... 13

3.5 Threatening Processes ............................................................................................................... 13

4 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Consultation ............................................................................................................................... 15

4.2 Habitat Assessment and Site Selection ....................................................................................... 15

4.3 Survey Effort .............................................................................................................................. 21

4.4 Biological Parameters Recorded ................................................................................................. 21

4.5 Statistical Analyses ..................................................................................................................... 22 4.5.1 Population estimates ........................................................................................................... 22 4.5.2 Diversity Indices .................................................................................................................. 22 4.5.3 Correlation Coefficient Analyses .......................................................................................... 22

4.6 Limitations .................................................................................................................................. 23

5 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................... 25

5.1 Local Distribution ........................................................................................................................ 25

5.2 Population Density Estimates ..................................................................................................... 25

5.3 Population Dynamics and Structure ............................................................................................ 26 5.3.1 Breeding and Reproduction ................................................................................................. 27 5.3.2 Morphology ......................................................................................................................... 28 5.3.3 Recapture Rates ................................................................................................................. 29 5.3.4 Trap Success ...................................................................................................................... 30 5.3.5 Movements ......................................................................................................................... 30

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 31

7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 33

APPENDIX 1 SOUTHERN BROWN BANDICOOT PHYSIOLOGICAL RECORDS FOR SITE CAPTURES OVER THE 2010 MONITORING PERIOD (MAY, JUNE ,JULY, SEPTEMBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2010 .......................................................................................................................................................... 35

APPENDIX 2 SOUTHERN BROWN BANDICOOT RECAPTURE RECORDS OVER THE 2010 MONITORING PERIOD (MAY, JUNE ,JULY, SEPTEMBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2010................... 41

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4-1 Location of Southern Brown Bandicoot survey sites. ............................................................... 16

Table 4-2 Habitat descriptions of the Southern Brown Bandicoot survey sites. ........................................ 16


Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd iii

Table 4-3 Limitations of the Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program. .......................................... 23

Table 5-1 Total Southern Brown Bandicoot individuals captured over the monitoring period (May, June, July, September, November, December 2010) within the project area. .................................... 26

Table 5-2 Correlation co-efficient (r) of Species Richness, Diversity (Shannon Weiner Index and Margalef) and Vegetation Cover in comparison to Southern Brown Bandicoot population estimates across all sites ................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 5-3 Sexed population structure of Southern Brown Bandicoots over the monitoring period within the project area. ........................................................................................................................... 27

Table 5-4 Total number of individuals caught per trap night over the 2010 monitoring period of the project area. ....................................................................................................................................... 30

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Location of the Roe Highway Extension Project ........................................................................ 8

Figure 2-1 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the May survey (03 May-08 May 2010) ........................................................................................................................... 9

Figure 2-2 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the June survey (31 May-05 June 2010). ................................................................................................................ 10

Figure 2-3 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the July survey (28 June–03 July 2010) ................................................................................................................ 10

Figure 2-4 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the September survey (27 September to 02 October 2010) ............................................................................. 11

Figure 2-5 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the November survey (01 to 06 November 2010) ...................................................................................................... 11

Figure 2-6 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the December survey (28 November to 03 December 2010) ..................................................................................... 12

Figure 4-1 Southern Brown Bandicoot survey site locations ..................................................................... 20

Figure 5-1 Sex ratio of Southern Brown Bandicoots over the monitoring period within the project area ..... 27

Figure 5-2 Breeding and reproductive status of the Southern Brown Bandicoot throughout the 2010 monitoring period .................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 5-3 Mean weight of Southern Brown Bandicoots throughout the 2010 monitoring period of the project area ............................................................................................................................ 29

Figure 5-4 Mean morphological measurements of Southern Brown Bandicoots throughout the 2010 monitoring period of the project area ....................................................................................... 29

LIST OF PLATES

Plate 1-1 A Southern Brown Bandicoot (southwestern subspecies) in a calico bag prior to release. .......... 6


Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

South Metro Connect commissioned Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd (Phoenix) to undertake a

monitoring program for the Southern Brown Bandicoot, subspecies Isoodon obesulus fusciventer (herein

referred to as the ‘Southern Brown Bandicoot’), within the project area (‘the project area’) of the Roe

Highway Extension Project (‘the proposed project’).

The Southern Brown Bandicoot is listed by the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) in

Western Australia as a Priority 5 species of conservation significance: taxa in need of research or monitoring.

The program aims to collect baseline information on the Southern Brown Bandicoot populations within the

project area, specifically key habitats, population density and dynamics, and movement. This information will

inform the assessment of potential impacts to the Southern Brown Bandicoot from the proposed project.

The 2010 monitoring program recorded a total of 107 individual Southern Brown Bandicoots within the project area. These individuals were recorded from all habitat types:Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea, Eucalyptus/Banksia and Eucalyptus/Melaleuca Woodlands with no habitat preference being evident. Results indicate a male to female bandicoot ratio of approximately 1:1 in the project area. Of the 107 individuals trapped, 48 were males, 46 were females and thirteen were unsexed (as they escaped before they could be sexed). Eleven juveniles were captured, comprising seven females and four males.

The population of the project area appears to be breeding successfully. The proportion of females with

pouch young was 36.9% and pre-birthing females constituted 8.6%. Therefore, almost 50% of the mature

female population was recorded in varying states of breeding at any given time. The high percentage of

females with pouch young only recorded in July (64.7%) corresponds to the general onset of the preferred

birthing period (September) for the species. Females with pouch young were recorded throughout all survey

months except June. This confirms the dynamic breeding strategy employed by the Southern Brown

Bandicoot, which coincides with more favourable environmental and habitat conditions, ensuring the most

successful recruitment and rearing.

The July survey period recorded the highest number of individuals compared to other survey months. A

relatively large number of males were trapped in July (24 individuals or 54.5%) in comparison to other survey

months . These results may be partly due to the onset of sexual maturity (primarily in April to May) and the

associated increased search effort undertaken for mates at this time.

One of the key survey objectives of the program was to investigate the level of movement of individuals

within the study area. Four long distance movements were recorded. The largest movement recorded was

by a male (854-950m). Long distance movements from this baseline data set suggests that males in the

study area are capable of travelling long distances and that in certain circumstances their movements are not

inhibited by existing man-made barriers (e.g. major roads). Two other less-significant male movements were

recorded and a single female (with pouch young) movement was recorded.

The dataset demonstrated a high recapture rate (173 recaptures of 52 individuals) and limited travel

distances by individuals within a site (an average of 90m). Within a site, males generally travelled larger

distances (78.9m) in comparison to females (65.4m). The data suggest that the Southern Brown Bandicoot populations within the project area have a small home range or territory, generally less than one hectare.

Population estimates were based on mark and recapture data for Sites 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6. The average

estimated population density across the study area therefore was twenty-eight animals per hectare (28/ha).

Site 3 recorded only a single individual and has therefore been classified as an outlier that was excluded

from the analysis. Population estimates from this monitoring program were adequate to determine the

minimum number of individuals (107) present within the project area.

Weak positive correlations (r) between bandicoot population density and species richness, Shannon diversity

index, mean and total vegetation cover were evident. All correlations were based on vegetation data

provided by South Metro Connect. The weak correlation coefficients produced similar Southern Brown

Bandicoot densities at Sites 1, 2, 5 and 6, the relatively low bandicoot density recorded at Site 4 and the very

low bandicoot density recorded at Site 3 (outlier site). This suggests that there may be certain habitat


Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd v

conditions/requirements driving bandicoot density that were not captured by the botanical investigations.

Population densities per hectare were also greater (24-29%) in comparison to other bandicoots surveys

surrounding the project area. This may be attributed to a number of factors/habitat attributes and generally

larger area surveyed (ha) however, based on our analysis this factor(s) cannot be adequately determined.

This was most apparent at Site 3, which recorded a similar species richness/assemblage and Shannon

diversity index to Sites 2 and 6, yet only recorded one single individual.

External factors such as human activity (Site 3 being located alongside a popular walking trail), or the

feeding of Southern Brown Bandicoots by local residents leading to artificial maintenance of population

density, may partially account for the differences in density.

The calculation of population density was based on a simple method because the Southern Brown Bandicoot

populations of the project area appear capable of immigration and emigration in some sites (Site 1-4) and

are isolated by physical barriers (fences, Kwinana Freeway) at other sites (Site 5 and 6). As such, both open

and closed populations exist for the species in the project area.

Threatening processes such as land clearing, habitat fragmentation (without the use of adequate

conservation management practices) and associated edge effects have the potential to impact this species

within the project area. Habitat loss may cause populations in the project area to become restricted to only

the best quality habitat fragments available. This could disrupt juvenile dispersal and interchange (gene

flow) mechanisms, which already appear to be limited at present. That being said, the flora and vegetation

data collected (according to requirements of Guidance Statement 51) was inadequate for use in correlation

analyses, to identify key habitat attributes (e.g. the presence of particular floral species required for ‘nesting’,

habitat structure, presence and density of weed species, density of predators, bandicoot prey item density)

required to determine ‘quality’ habitat that supports maximum Southern Brown Bandicoot density.

Southern Brown Bandicoot populations of the project area on the whole appear to be consistent in density

over time and to have home ranges less than 1ha. Therefore, the most appropriate impact mitigation

strategy would be to focus on reconnecting and rehabilitating habitats and minimising impacts on sites where

the highest densities and potentially the best quality habitats are found. This is likely to result in an increase

in the density and movement (gene flow) of Southern Brown Bandicoots in the project area.


Final Report

Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd 6

1 INTRODUCTION

South Metro Connect commissioned Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd (Phoenix) to undertake a

monitoring program for the Southern Brown Bandicoot, subspecies Isoodon obesulus fusciventer (herein

referred to as the ‘Southern Brown Bandicoot’), within the project area (‘the project area’) of the Roe

Highway Extension Project (‘the proposed project’) (Figure 1-1).

1.1 Background

The Government of Western Australia (Main Roads WA) is planning to extend Roe Highway from its

current connection with Kwinana Freeway in Jandakot to Stock Road in Coolbellup. The proposed

alignment for the highway between the Kwinana Freeway and North Lake Road is within the existing

Primary Regional Roads Metropolitan Regional Scheme (MRS) boundary that divides the Beeliar

Regional Park between Bibra Lake and North Lake (Figure 1-1).

The project area is considered to be of high environmental value and as such, extensive biological

surveys are required as part of the environmental impact assessment for the proposed project.

The Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) is a small to medium sized mammal (400-2,500g) that

was once abundant across southern Australia (Plate 1-1). It now exists only in a fragmented, disjunct

distribution within its former range (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008). A subspecies of this group, Isoodon

obesulus fusciventer, only occurs in the south-west of Western Australia and is a common inhabitant of

remnant bushland areas across Perth, often associated with wetlands (DEC 2006a; Nastov 2009).

This subspecies has been internationally listed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature

(IUCN) 2000 Red List of Threatened Species as Lower Risk (Near Threatened). It is also State-listed in

the Department of Environment and Conservation’s Priority species list as Priority 5; taxa in need of

research or monitoring.

Plate 1-1 A Southern Brown Bandicoot (southwestern subspecies) in a calico bag prior to

release

1.2 Scope of Work and Survey Objectives

Survey designs for this monitoring program are consistent with the Environmental Protection Authority’s

(EPA) Guidance Statement No. 56: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in

Western Australia (EPA 2004) and EPA Position Statement No. 3: Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an

Element of Biodiversity Protection (EPA 2002).


Final Report


The aim of this project was to implement a monitoring program for the North Lake/Bibra Lake Southern

Brown Bandicoot population. The specific objectives of the monitoring program include:

Collecting baseline information on population density and population dynamics of the Southern

Brown Bandicoot;

Identifying key habitats; and

Identifying the potential impacts of the project on this Southern Brown Bandicoot population.

The monitoring program was developed in response to a specific request from the DEC. The DEC’s

objectives were for South Metro Connect to develop of a monitoring program that enabled a contribution

to the local knowledge of the Southern Brown Bandicoot (in the broader context of the Swan Coastal

Plain) due to ongoing threats faced by this species, specifically from land clearing and land development.

Further, the data derived from the monitoring program were considered essential to qualify the

effectiveness of any management and mitigation measures enacted in the context of the proposed

project.

The industry standard ‘mark and recapture’ program was advised by the DEC. Accordingly, this system

was enacted. However it was also run concurrently with the development of a remote, Radio Frequency

Identification Device (RFID) system entirely funded by Phoenix Environmental Sciences. The RFID

system is still being trialled, but if successful, will enable the efficient use of time and resources by

facilitating remote monitoring of animal movement, health and longevity.

Datum: GDA94 Projection: MGA z50

Figure 1-1Location of theRoe Highway

Extension Project

Swan River

BooragoonLake

North Lake

Bibra Lake

South Lake

Little Rush Lake

Yangebup Lake

Kogolup Lake

ThomsonsLake

Market GardenSwamp

Manning Lake

Canning River

K w

i n

a n

a F

w y

S o u t h S t

C o

c k

b u

r n

R d

C a n n i n g H w y

L e a c h H w y

N o r t h

L a k eR d

S to

ck

Rd

R o e

H w y

Ka

r e l

Av

S o u t hS t

M a n n i n g R d

!!

!!

!!

!!

!! !!

!!

!!

Perth

Morley MidlandStirling

Armadale

Fremantle

Cannington

Rockingham

0 1 2 3

Kilometres

Project Area

Date Modified: 15/02/2011Author: unknown J:\Client_Data\Main_Roads\60100953_Roe_Extension\Workspaces\#2011\Technical_Reports\SRE and Inverts Baseline Survey\Figure 1-1 - Location of the Roe Highway Extension Project.mxd

°°°


Final Report


2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

General information pertaining to the project area specifically, its location in the Swan Coastal Plain IBRA

subregion (SWA2), landforms and associated vegetation complexes and land use are described in the

Vertebrate Fauna Surveys for the Roe Highway Extension Project – Baseline Report (2010) prepared by

Phoenix Environmental Sciences.

2.1 Climate

Climate conditions for the proposed project and survey periods (May, June, July, September, November

and December 2010) can be surmised from recordings at Jandakot Airport, approximately 3km to the

east of the project area (BOM 2010) (long term data not shown).

The mean daily maximum temperature of 31.3°C occurs in February, along with the highest minimum of

16.8°C. July is the coldest month on average, reaching a maximum temperature of 17.8°C. The lowest

minimum is shared between July and August, both of which average 6.9°C. Rainfall occurs mainly during

the cooler winter months between May and August, peaking in July with an average rainfall of 180.3mm.

Annual rainfall is 837mm.

Climate data for the monitoring program has been compiled for each survey period. In summary, the

lowest temperatures were recorded in the July survey (-0.1°C) which was also the only month that

recorded rainfall (0.4mm and 0.2mm respectively) during the monitoring program. The December survey

period recorded the highest temperatures (37.8°C).

During the May survey, the lowest maximum temperature was 21.6°C (04 May) and the highest was

28.5°C (07 May) (Figure 2-1). Minimum temperatures ranged from a low of 5.3°C (05 May) to a high of

9°C (03 May). The average minimum and maximum temperatures for the May survey were 6.5°C and

24.6°C respectively. No rainfall was recorded during the May survey.

Figure 2-1 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the May

survey (03 May-08 May 2010)

In the June 2010 survey, temperatures ranged from the lowest maximum of 18.7°C (01 June) to the

highest maximum of 21.7°C (05 June) (Figure 2-2). Minimum temperatures ranged from a low of 2.7°C

(02 June) to a high of 14.2°C (05 June). The average minimum and maximum temperatures for the June

survey were 6.2°C and 20.7°C respectively. No rainfall was recorded during the June survey.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

re (°

C)

May 2010 Survey

Minimum (°C) Maximum (°C) Rainfall (mm)


Final Report


Figure 2-2 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the June

survey (31 May-05 June 2010).

During the July survey period, the maximum temperature ranged from 15.0°C (03 July) to 17.3°C (30

July) (Figure 2-3). Minimum temperature ranged from 0.1°C (30 July) to 3.9°C (02 July). Average

minimum and maximum temperatures for the July survey period were 0.8°C and 16.4°C, respectively.

Rainfall was recorded on 02 and 03 July 2010 (0.4mm and 0.2mm respectively).

Figure 2-3 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the July

survey (28 June–03 July 2010)

In the September 2010 survey period, maximum temperatures ranged from 20.7°C (02 October) to

29.3°C (29 September)(Figure 2-4). Minimum temperatures ranged from 9.0°C (27 September) to 18.5°C

(30 September). The average minimum and maximum temperatures for the survey were 12.46°C and

25.3°C, respectively. No rainfall was recorded during this survey.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

re (°

C)

June 2010 Survey

Minimum (°C) Maximum (°C) Rainfall (mm)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

-5

0

5

10

15

20

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

r e

(°C

)

July 2010 Survey

Rainfall (mm) Maximum (°C) Minimum (°C)


Final Report


Figure 2-4 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the September survey (27 September to 02 October 2010)

During the November 2010 survey period, maximum temperatures ranged from 22.4°C (05 November) to

34.2°C (02 November) (Figure 2-5). Minimum temperatures ranged from a low of 7.6°C (06 November)

to a high of 13.4°C (03 November). The average minimum and maximum temperatures for the survey

period were 10.2°C and 28.8°C, respectively. No rainfall was recorded during this survey.

Figure 2-5 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the November survey (01 to 06 November 2010)

In the December 2010 survey period, maximum temperatures ranged from a low of 22.1°C (03

December) to a high of 37.8°C (30 November) (Figure 2-6). Minimum temperatures ranged from a low of

9.2°C (03 December) to a high of 18.8°C (29 November). The average minimum and maximum

temperatures for the survey period were 14.9°C and 30.8°C, respectively. No rainfall was recorded

during this survey.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

re (°

C)

September 2010 Survey

Min (°C) Max (°C) Rainfall (mm)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

re (°

C)

November 2010 Survey



Final Report


Figure 2-6 Daily minimum and maximum temperatures at Jandakot Airport during the December survey (28 November to 03 December 2010)

3 LIFE HISTORY AND ECOLOGY

The Southern Brown Bandicoot subspecies Isoodon obesulus fusciventer is broadly confined to the

south-west of Western Australia. The range of the subspecies extends from Guilderton in the north,

south-east to Esperance and inland to Hyden, mainly through Jarrah and Karri forest. According to

current knowledge, It has a patchy distribution on the Swan Coastal Plain (DEC 2006b) where it is largely

dependent on habitat provided by parks and reserves of reasonable size (P. Orell 2009 pers. comm., 23

December).

3.1 Habitat

The Southern Brown Bandicoot is known to be a common resident of actively managed remnant

bushland areas across Perth and is often associated with wetlands (DEC 2006b; Nastov 2009). This

species inhabits densely-covered, scrubby, often swampy vegetation up to one metre high. However, it

will also occupy disturbed areas, such as recently burnt sites, or open paddocks or cleared areas that

provide an increased food supply, e.g. insects (Nastov 2009). Male bandicoots have been known to

numerically dominate the best available habitats (Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979; DEC 2006b).

Dome-shaped nests are constructed from plant leaf litter and debris (sometimes mixed with earth) in

shallow depressions at the base of dense scrub (e.g. Xanthorrhea sp.) (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008).

Internally, the nest comprises a hollow chamber, often lined with grass and leaves and with no distinct

entrance or exit (DEC (NSW) 2006). These nests also often serve as refuge areas offering protection

from predators. Rabbit burrows may also be used for shelter (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008).

3.2 Diet

This species has been known to forage for food during both day and night, searching within the topsoil or

beneath the ground surface and often leaving distinctive, conical-shaped holes or ‘diggings’ several

centimeters deep (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008). Food preferences include beetle larvae and other

invertebrates, fungal material, grasses, seeds and plant roots. The Southern Brown Bandicoot will feed in

open woodland and forest depending on the availability of food resources within these areas (Nastov

2009).

The availability of water does not appear to influence habitat use, as populations of the species have

been recorded at large distances from suitable water sources (Moloney 1982). This species is likely to

obtain sufficient water from dew and food sources such as fungal fruit-bodies to provide for their total

daily water need (Lobert and Lee 1990; Nagy et al 1991).

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Rain

fall (mm

)

Tem

pe

ratu

re (°

C)

December 2010 Survey



Final Report


3.3 Home Range Size

Studies into the home range size of this species are limited. Ecological factors such as site productivity,

habitat structure and population density are all likely to influence home range size (Moloney 1982; DEC

2006b). Home ranges may vary between 0.5 – 5 hectares (ha). Females and juveniles generally occupy

smaller areas (1-3ha) compared to the large, mature males (DEC 2006b; Van Dyck and Strahan 2008).

Previous studies of territory are inconclusive. Two studies (Copley et al 1990; Lobert and Lee 1990)

found an overlap in home ranges, while two others (Heinsohn 1966); (McKenzie 1967), found that home

ranges were non-overlapping. It is thought that this species is largely solitary and may not actively

defend its ‘territory’, but has a tendency to become aggressive and fight when other bandicoots are

present in its area (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008).

Population density has also been studied. At Jandakot bushland, densities were found to be between

0.61 and 1.48 animals per hectare with an average of 0.96 per hectare (Craven 1981). More recently at

Piney Lakes Reserve (approximately 3.7km north of the project area) the estimated population density

was found to be 1.15 animals per hectare (Cairnes 2007).

Juvenile bandicoots have been known to rapidly establish themselves outside of their original birth place

(Heinsohn 1966). This pattern of rapid juvenile dispersal is critical to the species’ survival, and enables it

to exploit spatial and temporal diversity in habitat (Heinsohn 1966).

3.4 Breeding

This species has a dynamic breeding strategy with the potential to vary the length of the breeding season

and produce multiple litters and litter sizes during the year ((Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979)), with the

peak generally occurring in spring, depending on environmental and habitat conditions (DEC (NSW)

2006). Therefore, bandicoots are able to populate an area relatively quickly, particularly where and when

conditions are favorable (Heinsohn 1966; Stoddart and Braithwaite 1979; Copley et al 1990; Lobert and

Lee 1990; Thackway and Cresswell 1995). This species generally has a high reproductive output with

gestation being less than 14 days and weaning occurring in approximately 60 days (Van Dyck and

Strahan 2008). Female bandicoots have the capacity to resume oestrus and become pregnant before

they have completed suckling the previous litter (Lyne 1964; Close 1977). This allows one litter to

immediately follow another in the pouch, resulting in a potentially high reproductive capacity (DEC (NSW)

2006). Adult females are capable of producing up to six young per litter with the average litter size from

two to four young (Heinsohn 1966).

Sexual maturity for males and females is reached at approximately four to six months of age, at a

bodyweight of approximately 600 grams (Heinsohn 1966; Van Dyck and Strahan 2008). In the south-

west of Western Australia, research suggests that sexual activity typically occurs from April through to

May. This timing was found to coincide directly with increased use of underpasses by bandicoots, as

males went in search of mates (Heinsohn 1966; Harris et al 2010).

Female bandicoots have been recorded giving birth from July to September (Thomas 1987) and young

are weaned 60–70 days later (Braithwaite 1995; Harris et al 2010). The dispersal of weaned juveniles in

October to December may also be recorded as an increase in the activity and movement of bandicoots, in

certain areas (Harris et al 2010).

3.5 Threatening Processes

The Swan Coastal Plain lies within the Southwest Ecoregion - internationally recognised as one of the

world’s 34 biodiversity hotspots. Biodiversity hotspots are characterized by high levels of endemism, i.e.

the presence of plant and animal species found nowhere else in the world (Conservation International

2007). Eucalypt Woodlands within this ecoregion, specifically those that contain Marri (Corymbia

calophylla) and Jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) support a range of endemic mammals, including the

Southern Brown Bandicoot (WWF 2001).

Key threatening processes to biodiversity that have been identified in woodland habitats on the Swan

Coastal Plain (Gole 2006) include:

Clearing or modification for urban development,


Final Report


Predation by foxes, dogs and cats;

Dieback disease caused by Phytophthora cinnamomi;

Increased ‘edge effects’ through progressive land clearing for urban and industrial development;

and

Inappropriate fire regimes.

In relation to wetlands, more than 75% of permanent wetlands on the Swan Coastal Plain have been in-

filled or significantly modified (Gole 2006).

Urbanisation can also have dramatic effects on native mammal species. Across the Swan Coastal Plain

in Western Australia, land clearing for urban and industrial development has caused habitat fragmentation

and the subsequent population decline of a number of mammal/marsupial species (Del Marco et al 2004).

Existing threats to the Southern Brown Bandicoot within the project area include:

Clearing and increased fragmentation of Eucalyptus/Banksia and Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea

woodland habitat;

Decline in habitat condition and complexity due to increased ‘edge effect’;

Road mortality;

Predation by foxes, dogs and cats;

Increased susceptibility to disease;

Inbreeding (loss of genetic diversity);

Inappropriate use of fire (vandalism) in remnant habitats which may lead to the permanent local

extinction of fauna where recolonisation from other remnants is not possible; and

An effect of bandicoot population decline may include reduced ecosystem functioning and integrity.

These could result due to changes in microhabitat conditions as a result of reduced soil turnover by

bandicoots.


Final Report


4 METHODOLOGY

4.1 Consultation

Consultation between Phoenix and the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) (Brad

Durrant, Mark Wohling and Peter Orel) was held on 27 November 2009. Key outcomes of this meeting

specifically relating to the Southern Brown Bandicoot were as follows:

Systematic trapping (using micro-chipping) should be undertaken quarterly (three to four sites) to

assess the movement patterns of the local population. A minimum of four trapping events is

required to produce a robust dataset; and

Elliot and other traps must be cleared twice per day in order to prevent in-situ predation by cats,

dogs and foxes within the urban landscape of the project area.

In pursuit of providing significant additional data on Southern Brown Bandicoot movement in relation to

ecological linkages, Phoenix attempted to develop a wireless RFID tracking system, in addition to the

standard micro-chipping routinely undertaken in such studies. Due to limited availability of materials and

technical constraints, the system could not be properly tested and operational in time for inclusion in the

monitoring program.

As a result, further consultation with the DEC (Peter Orell) was sought on 14 and 22 July 2010 in order to

determine whether the original requirement for quarterly trapping was related to biological attributes of the

species, or simply in regard to achieving a certain sample size. The DEC provided the following

guidance, which suggests that sample size was more important:

“The change of methodologies for the monitoring program from initial mark and recapture

combined with RFID tagging systems (in May and June 2010) to an intensive standard mark

and recapture study (July 2010) was deemed a satisfactory sampling regime.

Moreover, a reduction in the initial 12 month monitoring program (with four trapping events)

to an eight month monitoring program (with six trapping events) was also seen as a more

viable option in obtaining a more substantial data set on population dynamics for the

Southern Brown Bandicoot.

4.2 Habitat Assessment and Site Selection

Previous survey reports, aerial photographs, vegetation reports and maps were used to identify potential

habitats for Southern Brown Bandicoot within the project area. The defined habitat types were relatively

similar and largely consisted of Jarrah-Marri-Banksia associations (Table 4-1). Representative survey

sites and monitoring transects were established in these habitats (Table 4-2)(Figure 4-1), with sites being

chosen:

On the basis of habitat condition and suitability for supporting Southern Brown Bandicoot

populations; and

In relation to bandicoot movements in east-west and north-south directions with respect to the

four monitoring (movement) transects.


Final Report


Table 4-1 Location of Southern Brown Bandicoot survey sites

Site Habitat Zone

Datum (WGS 84)

Easting Northing

1 Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea Woodland 50H 386735 6449263

2 Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea Woodland 50H 388724 6449606

3 Eucalyptus/Banksia Woodland 50H 390090 6449911

4 Eucalyptus/Melaleuca Woodland 50H 389789 6449764



Monitoring Transect 1 Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea Woodland 50H 386634 6449082



Monitoring Transect 4 Eucalyptus/Banksia Woodland 50H 389709 6449455

Table 4-2 Habitat descriptions of the Southern Brown Bandicoot survey sites

Habitat Description Site photos

Site 1 - Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea

Woodland

Open Woodland of Eucalyptus marginata

and Corymbia calophylla over a Low

Open Shrubland of Xanthorrhoea

preissii, Macrozamia riedlei, Daviesia

divaricata and Hibbertia hypericoides

over an Open Grassland of *Ehrharta

calycina on grey sand over yellow sand.

Site 2 - Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea

Woodland

Open Woodland of Eucalyptus marginata

and Corymbia calophylla over a Low

Open Shrubland of Xanthorrhoea

preissii, Macrozamia riedlei, Daviesia

divaricata and Hibbertia hypericoides

over an Open Grassland of *Ehrharta

calycina on grey sand over yellow sand.


Final Report



Site 3 - Eucalyptus/Banksia Woodland

Open Woodland with Jarrah, Banksia,

Marri and Sheoak over low shrubland to

low open shrubland, with grass trees

common. Densities of various tree

species varied across the site; some

groves of Sheoak. Substrate of sandy

soil.

Site 4 - Eucalyptus/Melaleuca

Woodland

Low Open Forest of Eucalyptus rudis and

Melaleuca preissiana over a Tall Open

Shrubland of Astartea fascicularis and

Kunzea glabrescens over an Open

Shrubland of *Pteridium esculentum over

a Sedgeland of Lepidosperma

angustifolium on brown clayey-loam flats.


Open Woodland of occasional

Eucalyptus marginata over a Low Open

Woodland of Banksia attenuata and

Banksia menziesii over an Open-heath of

Allocasuarina humilis, Conostephium

minus and Eremaea pauciflora over an

Open Grassland/Sedgeland of

Amphipogon turbinatus and

Mesomelaena pseudostygia on grey

sand.


Final Report







Banksia menziesii over an Open-heath of

Allocasuarina humilis, Conostephium


Open Grassland/Sedgeland of



sand.

Monitoring Transect 1 -

Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea Woodland

Open Woodland of Eucalyptus

marginata and Corymbia calophylla

over a Low Open Shrubland of

Xanthorrhoea preissii, Macrozamia

riedlei, Daviesia divaricata and

Hibbertia hypericoides over an Open

Grassland of *Ehrharta calycina on grey

sand over yellow sand.












Final Report














Eucalyptus/Banksia Woodland




Banksia menziesii over an Open-heath

of Allocasuarina humilis, Conostephium


Open Grassland/ Sedgeland of



sand.

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(2

1

34

6

5

34

2

1

°0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Kilometres1:35,000 (A4)

Datum: GDA94 Projection: MGA z50

!(Southern BrownBandicoot Trap Sites

Monitoring Transects

Project Area

Southern BrownBandicoot Survey

Site LocationsFigure 4-1

Date Modified: 22/02/2011Author: unknown J:\Client_Data\Main_Roads\60100953_Roe_Extension\Workspaces\#2011\Technical_Reports\Verts Fauna Survey Report\Figure 4-1 - Southern Brown Bandicoot Survey Site Locations.mxd


Final Report


4.3 Survey Effort

Six systematic trapping sites (quadrats) and four monitoring (movement) transects were established

within the project area. Monitoring transects were established adjacent to the four trapping sites (Sites 1,

2, 3, 4) to record any movements by Southern Brown Bandicoot in east-west and/or north-south

directions through the Metropolitan Region Scheme (MRS) and crossroads such as Hope Road.

Trapping was undertaken in May (03 to 08 May), late May/June (31 May to 05 June), late June/July (28

June to 03 July), late September/October (27 September to 02 October), November (01 to 06 November)

and late November/December (28 November to 03 December) hereafter referred to as the ‘May’, ‘June’,

‘July’ ‘September’, ‘November’ and ’December’ surveys.

In the May and June surveys, trapping only occurred at two sites (Sites 5 and 6). In July and November,

trapping occurred at four sites (Sites 1, 2, 3, 4). The increase in trapping intensity in July and November

occurred due to a change in sampling efforts intensity (see Section 4.1). Surveys in September and

December occurred in all six sites (Sites 1-6). Trapping occurred over five consecutive nights, in each of

the three surveys.

A trapping grid design was used to capture Southern Brown Bandicoots. Each grid site consisted of 25

large Elliot box traps (15cm x 15.5cm x 46cm) placed in a 25m interval arrangement (100m x 100m).

Each grid ‘site’ therefore covered an area of 1ha. Traps were left open overnight and checked twice per

day as per DEC regulation 17 permit requirements (SF007624) (i.e. in the early morning and mid-late

afternoon). Two Sheffield cage traps (60cm x 20cm x 20cm) were also positioned at each site and

cleared twice per day. Trapping sites were used to determine Southern Brown Bandicoot densities at

each site.

The monitoring transects consisted of either 10 or 20 large Elliot box traps (depending on the length of

the vegetation corridor) with two cage traps placed at either end of each transect. Monitoring transects

were used to capture any movements between and around trap sites.

Elliot traps were placed under vegetation to shade the traps and therefore protect animals from heat

stress, and cage traps were similarly shaded with an open rectangle made of reflective insulation for the

same purpose. Universal bait consisting of oats, peanut butter and sardines was used in both types of

trapping sites.

The total trapping effort for the monitoring period over all sites and transects was 3,500 trap nights, where

one trap-night is defined as one trap remaining open for one night.

4.4 Biological Parameters Recorded

In order to investigate and interpret population dynamics, health and breeding conditions, the following

measurements were taken:

Weight (grams);

Snout-vent length (mm);

Base of tail width (mm);

Pes (Latin for hind foot) (mm);

Skull length (mm);

Sex;

Sexual condition; and

Number of pouch young.

All captured individuals were also micro-chipped and the unique identification number (10 digits) recorded

in order to facilitate ease of identification of individuals through time and in different areas (in order to

investigate movement throughout the MRS corridor).


Final Report


4.5 Statistical Analyses

A range of different statistical techniques and operations were used in this study using basic excel functions and PRIMER.

4.5.1 Population estimates

Bandicoot population estimates and density (bandicoots/ha) were calculated using the following formula:

P = T x R/M

Where:

P = Population estimate for a site,

T = total number captured,

R = total number of recaptures,

M = total number marked.

The included data were derived from all sample periods and from five Southern Brown Bandicoot quadrat sites (Site 3 being removed from the data analysis as an outlier). Data derived from transects was not included as they were only used to assess movements between sites.

More in-depth methods to calculate population estimates are available (e.g. Jolly Seeber and Schnabel method), however these are only appropriate where a population can be confidently classified as either ‘open’ or ‘closed’. In this study that was not possible, nor was it appropriate as some populations were considered likely to be closed (Sites 5 and 6) and others open (Sites 1-4), so such techniques could not be applied uniformly across the project area.

4.5.2 Diversity Indices

Vegetation data supplied by AECOM (2010) were used to generate two indices to describe vegetation/habitat conditions relevant to bandicoots and to enable the investigation of relationships between these parameters and bandicoot population density.

Species richness (Margalef) {d = (S-1)/Log(N)} and Shannon Diversity {H’ = -SUM(Pi*Log(Pi))} indices were calculated based on a presence/absence transformation of the vegetation cover (%) data, derived from 10m x 10m quadrats assessed within the immediately vicinity of the six Southern Brown Bandicoot quadrat sites.

4.5.3 Correlation Coefficient Analyses

The strength and direction of any relationships between bandicoot density (dependent variable)

and four habitat parameters (the independent variables) were examined using a correlation

coefficient (r).


Final Report


4.6 Limitations

Limitations of the Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program are outlined in Table 4-3.

Table 4-3 Limitations of the Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program

Limitations Relevant? Comments

Competency / experience of the consultant carrying

out the survey.

No All personnel involved in the field surveys are

competent, experienced zoologists.

Scope (what faunal groups were sampled and were

some sampling methods not able to be employed

because of constraints such as weather conditions,

e.g. pitfall trapping in waterlogged soils or inability to

use pitfall traps.)

No Scope was adequate. Urban related constraints

determined upfront and worked around. This was

a species-specific targeted survey.

Proportion of fauna identified, recorded and/or

collected.

No These surveys recorded a high proportion of

Southern Brown Bandicoots (72 individuals)

compared with other monitoring programs

conducted in the nearby vicinity. Ongoing surveys

are likely to support this finding.

Sources of information e.g. previously available

information (whether historic or recent) as distinct

from new data.

No Several monitoring programs have been

undertaken within and in the near vicinity of the

project area (Roe Highway Stage 7, Piney Lakes).

Findings from these surveys have supplemented

this monitoring program.

Timing/weather/season/cycle. No The timing of field surveys to date has delivered

satisfactory results, with no seasonal fluctuations

in population numbers, sex ratios evident.

The proportion of the task achieved and further work

which might be needed.

No The program was implemented later than initially

planned, but it is envisaged that the final results

will be more than sufficient.

Disturbances (e.g. fire, flood, accidental human

intervention etc.) which affected results of survey.

No No disturbance occurred during the surveys.

However the project area is located in an urban

bushland, which is subject to numerous ongoing

pressures and historic degradation.

Intensity (in retrospect, was the intensity adequate?) No Survey intensity is adequate in investigating the

baseline information on the resident Southern

Brown Bandicoot population within the project area

and its location within a significant urban regional

park. A total of four trapping events will be

undertaken across the project area, including

additional transects to gauge movement beyond

‘territories’.

Completeness (was relevant area fully surveyed?) No All habitat areas specific to the Southern Brown

Bandicoot were sampled. The changes in survey

strategy and the relatively small (incomplete) data

set collected at present limit the results and

subsequent interpretations presented in this

interim draft report. Any data fluctuations may be

the result of basic demographic processes such as

reproduction, survival, mortality, rainfall,

temperature and food availability. It is anticipated

that the full survey data set for June to December

2010 will result in a much more robust dataset.


Final Report


Limitations Relevant? Comments

Remoteness and/or access problems. No n/a

Availability of contextual (e.g. biogeographic)

information on the region.

No Adequate information exists.


Final Report


5 RESULTS

5.1 Local Distribution

There are many previous records of the Southern Brown Bandicoot within the project area and within the

adjacent Fiona Stanley Health Precinct (GHD 2006). More broadly, its distribution extends east to the

base of the Darling scarp at Brookdale (ATA 2006; GHD 2006). During the monitoring program, records

were collected from all monitoring sites except Site 3, where only one individual was recorded.

These results, as well as additional captures from vertebrate fauna surveys conducted by Phoenix in

spring 2009 and autumn 2010 for the proposed project, indicate that the Southern Brown Bandicoot is an

abundant and widespread resident within the project area. Further, anecdotal evidence suggests that

bandicoots appear to be extending their distribution from bushland in the Beeliar Regional Park into

neighbouring residential properties.

5.2 Population Density Estimates

A total of 107 individuals were captured over the monitoring program, with Sites 2 and 5 recording the

most individuals (21 and 23 individuals) (Table 5-1). Only one bandicoot was recorded at Site 3. The

July survey of Sites 1 to 4 and monitoring transects recorded the most individuals (49), which may be

attributed to the larger survey effort (750 trap nights) compared to the May and June surveys (500 trap

nights total). However, other factors such as being nearer to the ‘preferred’ breeding season (e.g. more

males looking for females, therefore more likely to be captured) may have contributed to the higher

numbers in July. Four individuals were recaptured after having moved significant distances from adjacent

sites (Section 5.3.5).

Simple population estimates were calculated using mark and recapture data for each site. The mean

estimated population density and correlation coefficient was calculated using data from Sites 1, 2, 4, 5

and 6. Site 3 data was considered an outlier and was hence excluded from the analysis, having recorded

only one individual. The mean estimated population density of the project area was therefore calculated

at 28 animals per hectare.

The strength and direction of relationships between population density and Shannon Weiner Diversity

Index, Margalef Richness Index, mean vegetation cover (%) and total vegetation cover was investigated

using correlation analyses. All habitat data in the correlation analyses were derived from vegetation data

collected in 10x10m metre quadrants (AECOM 2010). Vegetation surveys and data collected were

pursuant to EPA Guidance Statement 51 - Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental

Impact Assessment in Western Australia.

All correlation coefficients suggested that very weak, positive relationships existed between bandicoot

density and the four habitat parameters (Table 5-2). The density at Sites 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 were all similar,

however Site 3, which was comparable with the four habitat parameters, recorded only a single individual

during the entire survey period. Site 3 was therefore excluded from the analysis.


Final Report


Table 5-1 Total Southern Brown Bandicoot individuals captured over the monitoring period

(May, June, July, September, November, December 2010) within the project area

Survey

Systematic Grid Sites Monitoring Transect

Total

1 2 3 4 5 6 MT1 MT2 MT3 MT4

May - - - - 7 6 - - - - 13

June - - - - 6 5 - - - - 11

July 7 12 - 7 - - 8 7 7 (1*) 1 49

September 2 3 - 1 4 2 - - - - 12

November - 3 1* - - - 1 1 (1*) - - 5

December 3 3 (1*) 1 1 6 3 - - - - 17

Total 12 21 (1*) 1 (1*) 9 23 16 9 8 (1*) 7 (1*) 1 107

NS = Not Sampled

* Individual recaptured from another adjacent site

Table 5-2 Correlation co-efficient (r) results with respect to bandicoot density and,

vegetation Species Richness (Margalef index), vegetation diversity (Shannon

Weiner Index), mean vegetation cover (%) and total vegetation cover

Species Richness* (margalef)

Shannon Weiner (H’) (log base e)*

Mean Vegetation Cover (%)

Total Vegetation

Cover

Flora Species

Richness

Total # individual

Plants

Southern Brown Bandicoot Population Density Estimates

0.172 0.135 0.233 0.281 0.181 0.181

* As calculated with Primer 5.0, based on Presence/Absence transformed data set

5.3 Population Dynamics and Structure

Of the 107 individuals captured, 48 were males (44.8%), 46 were females (42.9%) and 13 individuals

(12.1%) were unsexed (escaped) (Figure 5-1). In the female population, 39.1% had inactive pouches,

while 36.9% had pouch young and 8.6% were pre-birthing (engorged nipples, moist pouch) (Table 5-3).

Of the total sexed population, mature adults comprised 88.2% whilst juveniles (11 individuals) accounted

for 11.9%. The proportion of males and females captured in May, June, July, September and December

was similar. In November, only females were captured.


Final Report


Figure 5-1 Sex ratio of Southern Brown Bandicoots over the monitoring period within the

project area

Table 5-3 Sexed population structure of Southern Brown Bandicoots over the monitoring

period within the project area

Population structure May June July September November December Total

Female (inactive) 6 4 5 1 0 2 18

Female(pouch young) 1 0 11 1 3 1 17

Female(pre-birthing) 0 0 4 0 0 0 4

Juvenile Female 0 1 0 3 0 3 7

Juvenile Male 0 1 0 1 0 2 4

Male 6 3 24 5 1 5 44

Total 13 9 44 11 4 13 94

Females (% of total captures) 53.8 55.5 45.4 45.4 75 46.1 48.9

Males (% of total captures) 46.1 44.4 54.5 54.5 25 53.8 51.1

5.3.1 Breeding and Reproduction

The higher quantity of males captured in July (24 individuals) compared with May and June may coincide

with the late onset of sexual maturity (primarily April-May) when male bandicoots more actively roam in

search of mates, and could therefore be more readily captured. Females with pouch young were

recorded throughout all survey months except June. Throughout May, June and July, over half of all

sexually-mature females (51.6%) were in a state of breeding, with females with pouch young accounting

for 38.7% and, pre-birthing females constituting 12.9% of all females recorded. The higher percentage of

females with pouch young recorded in July (64.7%) compared with other months corresponds with the

general onset of sexual maturity, gestation and ‘preferred birthing time’ (September) for this species.

The entire reproductive cycles of two females were recorded during the program. The first recorded an

inactive pouch in May, was pre-birthing in June, had pouch young in September and returned to an

inactive pouch condition in December. The cycle of the second individual occurred a month later, where

she was observed to be in pre-birthing condition in July, had pouch young in September and recorded

inactive pouch conditions in November and December.

Records of females with pouch young in May, November and December (Figure 5-2) suggest that birthing may take place earlier where and when conditions are favourable and as such, reproduction may be irregular and opportunistic.

46

48

13

AbundanceFemales

Males

Unsexed


Final Report


Figure 5-2 Breeding and reproductive status of the Southern Brown Bandicoot throughout the

2010 monitoring period

5.3.2 Morphology

The growth, development and general health of the Southern Brown Bandicoot subspecies can be

determined by assessing several different attributes including weight, snout-vent length, base-of-skull,

PES (hind foot length) and base-of-tail (Figure 5-3;Figure 5-4).

When the sexes are compared it is apparent that adult males weighed the most (x = 989.2g) followed by

females containing pouch young (x = average 851.5g).

The average weight for females varied according to their reproductive condition with females containing

pouch young generally weighing the most and juvenile females weighing the least (X = 356.8g). Weights

of females generally ranged from 425.0g to 2397.0g with the exception of a single female juvenile

weighing 177.0g.

Adult males weighed considerably more than juvenile males, being on average 989.2g, compared with an

average of 329.0g, respectively. The weight of males ranged from 217.0g to 1,717.0g with two juvenile

males weighing 217.0g.

In regards to snout-vent length, adult males and females with pouch young recorded the greatest lengths

(x = 364.8 and 329.5mm, respectively). As expected, juvenile males and females recorded the smallest

measurements for this parameter (180mm and 120mm, respectively). Adult males had the greatest

range in snout-vent lengths (250mm to 460mm). Similarly for males, the smallest snout-vent length

measurements came from juveniles (x = 180mm).

Low standard deviations in the ‘base-of-skull’ measurements for all population classes suggests that the

head size of bandicoots in the study area shows little variation, apart from a few outliers (Figure 5-4

Figure 5-4). Juveniles of both sexes had the smallest measurements, as expected.

The mean PES of males and females were identical (51mm). The PES range in females (34-60mm) was

relatively limited compared to the range for males, which was much greater (37 to 84mm). Low standard

deviations for this measurement (between 3 to 8µm) suggest little variation overall, with very few outliers.

The mean base-of-tail results were similar for both sexes throughout all population classes (average of

8mm). Juveniles of both sexes generally had the smallest measurements (average of 6mm). As for other

data, small standard deviations from the mean (between 0.83 to 2µm) were recorded, suggesting little

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24A

bu

nd

an

ce

(n

o.

of

ind

ivid

ua

ls)

Survey period

Female (inactive)

Female(pouch young)

Female(pre-birthing)

Juvenile Female

Juvenile Male

Male


Final Report


variation in size and few outliers.

Figure 5-3 Mean weight of Southern Brown Bandicoots throughout the 2010 monitoring

period of the project area

Figure 5-4 Mean morphological measurements of Southern Brown Bandicoots throughout the 2010 monitoring period of the project area

5.3.3 Recapture Rates

During the 2010 monitoring period, 173 recaptures were recorded of which a total of 52 individuals were

recaptured. The average number of recaptures per individual was 3.3 and represent 48.5% of the total

captured number of individuals.

Recaptures were most common in September (23.1%). The number of recaptures in June, July and

November were consistent (16.7%). May had the least number of recaptures (6.9%). Sites 5 and 2

recorded the highest number of recaptures (28.3% and 26.5%).

747.0

851.5

635.5

356.8 329.0

989.3

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

1000.0

1200.0

We

igh

t (g

ram

s)

Population Structure

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Ave

rag

e S

no

ut

Ve

nt

(mm

)

Ave

rag

e l

en

gth

(m

m)

Population Structure

PES Base of Tail Base of Skull Snout Vent


Final Report


Monitoring Transects 3 and Site 1 recorded a similar number of recaptures at each site/transect (5.1%

and 4.5% respectively). Of the sexed individuals, males and inactive females constituted the majority of

recaptures (38.4% and 32.6%), with juvenile females having the least (3.8%). Two females were

recaptured more frequently than other animals, with one being recaptured fourteen times (Site 5) and

another eleven times (Site 2). The average number of days between recaptures over the monitoring

period was 4.4 (range of 1 to 28 days).

5.3.4 Trap Success

Trap success over the monitoring period was 20.4% with July recording the highest trap success (6.5%).

Trap success in May and June was similar (5.2 and 4.4% respectively) (Table 5-4). Trap success was

significantly greater with the large Elliot Box traps (80% of individuals were caught in Elliot Box traps),

than Sheffield Cages. This difference is entirely attributed to the much larger number of Elliot traps

deployed, rather than the effectiveness of Elliot traps compared to to Cage traps.

Table 5-4 Total number of individuals caught per trap night over the 2010 monitoring period

of the project area

Survey No. of individuals No. of trap nights Trap success (%)

May 13 250 5.2

June 11 250 4.4

July 49 750 6.5

September 12 750 1.6

November 5 750 0.5

December 17 750 2.2

Total 107 3500 20.4

5.3.5 Movements

The average distance between recaptures within sites over the monitoring period was 81m, with a range

of 25m to 307m. Within a trapping site, males travelled an average distance of 97m (ranging from 25m to

307m) and females an average of 67.6m (ranging from 25m to 175m). Overall, females with pouch

young, and males, travelled the greatest distances (average of 86m and 102m respectively). Inactive

females and juvenile males travelled the least distance (average of 52m). No movements of juvenile

females were recorded.

Four significant, long distance movements were captured of which three were adult males.

One male (I.D 1378) had the largest movement recorded. I.D 1378 was recorded moving in November

from MT3 (02 November) to MT2 (950m) (04 November), then recorded again at MT3 (854m) (05

November). This male was then recaptured again in December at Site 2, approximately 247m from his

last capture at MT3 (being recaptured a total of four times).

Another male (I.D 3934) was first captured in July at Site 4 then recaptured in September and November

in Site 3 (movement of 502m).

In the July survey period one male (I.D 5252) was captured at Site 2 then recaptured two days later at

MT3, approximately 307m away.

One female with pouch young (I.D 0479) was first recorded in September in Site 2 and recaptured in

November in MT3 (a distance of 274m).


Final Report


6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

A total of 107 Southern Brown Bandicoots were captured during the 2010 monitoring period (May, June,

July, September, November and December). Southern Brown Bandicoots have been recorded in all

fauna habitats Eucalyptus/Xanthorrhoea, Eucalyptus/Banksia and Eucalyptus/Melaleuca Woodlands

found within the project area. Of those captured, 48 were males (44.8%), 46 were females (42.9%) and

13 individuals remained unsexed as they escaped before their sex could be confirmed.

In terms of reproductive activity, the population appears to be breeding successfully and at times

dynamically (i.e. taking advantage of favourable seasonal conditions). Throughout May, June and July,

over half of all sexually-mature females of the population were in a state of breeding. Females with

pouch young accounted for 38.7% and pre-birthing females constituted 12.9% of all females recorded

during this period. The high percentage of females with pouch young recorded in July (64.7%) compared

to other months corresponds to the general onset of the preferred birthing period (September) for the

species. Females with pouch young were recorded in May, November and December, suggesting that

this species has a dynamic and opportunistic breeding strategy that takes advantage of favourable

conditions to ensure successful recruitment.

Given that bandicoots have been recorded breeding year-round, the capture of just two juveniles in the

months leading up to their general ‘preferred breeding period’ (September) in three trapping events,

strongly suggests that very limited breeding has occurred since spring 2009.

The sex ratio of essentially 1:1 and the early breeding of over half of all captured females indicates that

22% of the total population were in varying stages of reproduction over the monitoring period.

Four significant movements were captured throughout the monitoring period of which the majority were

adult males. The largest movements were by a male (854 -950m) suggesting that males can roam long

distances when motivated and are not always inhibited in their movements by man-made barriers, in this

instance crossing North Lake Road. Factors such as site female reproductive condition, productivity/food

availability, habitat condition and population density may have influenced these large (albeit limited

number of) movements.

Only a single bandicoot was recorded at Site 3, despite the presence of similar habitat parameters to

other sites which recorded bandicoot densities of 24-33 individuals per hectare. The reasons for this

extreme outlier in the data set are unclear. The site resides close to a track frequented by recreational

walkers, often with dogs, yet so do many of the other sites and in general the project area is a popular

recreational area. There is more likely some habitat attribute absent from this site that could not be or

was not determined by either this study or the vegetation data.

The relatively high recapture rates (173 captures of which 52 individuals were recaptured) and the limited

travel distances within a site (an average of 90m) strongly suggest that bandicoots in the project area

typically have small home ranges (< 1ha). These data suggest that the project area and surrounds

provide some ecological linkages for the species and that home ranges of 0.5 – 5ha are possible within

the project area. Genetic analyses of individuals from the project area and beyond could be employed to

further test this assumption.

Population estimates were based on mark and recapture at each of the quadrat sites with densities only

comparable at Sites 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6. Site 3 was considered an outlier, having only one individual

captured at this site, and was therefore removed from the correlation analyses. Overall, population

estimates collected from this monitoring program was sufficient in determining the minimum number of

individuals (107) present within the project area.

The average, estimated population density across the project area was calculated at 28 animals per

hectare and was very similar between Sites 1, 2, 5 and 6. The varied nature of the project area (fenced

and un-fenced) and the ability of individuals to move between sites/transects and adjacent bushland in

some sections suggests that the Southern Brown Bandicoot population is capable of

immigration/emigration at some sites (Site 1-4) and isolated by physical barriers (fences, Kwinana

Freeway) at other sites (Site 5 and 6). As such, both open and closed populations exist for this species in

the project area.


Final Report


Weak positive correlations in relation to bandicoot density and vegetation Species Richness, Shannon

diversity, mean vegetation cover (%) and total vegetation cover (%) suggest that there are likely to be

habitat attributes that are important to determining bandicoot density in the project area, that were not

captured by the botanical studies.

Population densities (28 animals per hectare across the project area) were also significantly greater (24-

29 times greater) in comparison to other bandicoots surveys surrounding the project area, for example

surveys undertaken in Jandakot bushland and Piney Lakes Reserve. This may be attributed to a number

of factors such as habitat attributes however there is currently inadequate information to definitively

identify these factor(s) or their contribution to the result.

Land clearing and associated habitat fragmentation (without adequate conservation management

practices) are the greatest threatening processes to this species in the context of the proposed project.

While bandicoot densities were very highly consistent at four sites, one site in particular displayed

markedly reduced densities, the reasons for which remain unclear. Further, the home ranges of

bandicoots within the project area are small (<1ha) and movement between these sub-populations

appears limited, therefore impacts of the proposed project are likely to be highly localised and, with

effective remediation, temporary.

There will be a net loss in the area of habitat available during the construction phase however, this can be

offset through the removal of barriers such as Hope Road and through coordinated rehabilitation of areas

such as around Horse Paddock Swamp and east of the Wetlands centre where the bushland is

particularly degraded.

Lastly, bandicoots are one of the more robust native mammal species regularly seen feeding and nesting

in the front gardens of Bibra Lake residents. This suggests that this species adapts well to the

surrounding and ever expanding urban environment.


Final Report


7 REFERENCES

AECOM (2010). Roe Highway Extension Kwinana Freeway to Stock Road: Vegetation and Flora Assessment. Report prepared for South Metro Connect. ATA (2006). Vertebrate Fauna Assessment Brookdale Redevelopment Area. Unpublished report for Armadale Redevelopment Authority. BOM (2010). Climate Statistics for Australian locations: Perth Commonwealth of Australia Bureau of Meteorology Braithwaite, R. W. (1995). In ‘The Mammals of Australia’. (Ed. R. Strahan.) pp. 176-177 New Holland Publishers, Sydney. Cairnes, J. M. (2007). Translocating the Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus fusciventer) into an urban area of remnant bushland is successful in the short-term. Perth, University of Western Australia. . Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences. Nedlands, University of Western Australia. Honors: 52. Close, R. L. (1977). The recurrence of breeding after cessation of suckling in the marsupial Perameles nasuta. Australian Journal of Zoology 25: 641-645. Conservation International (2007) Biodiversity Hotspots. 16 August 2010). from http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/hotspots_by_region/Pages/default.aspx Copley, P. B., Read, V. T., Robinson, A. C. and and Watts, C. H. S. (1990). Preliminary studies of the Nuyts Archipelago bandicoot Isoodon obesulus nauticus on the Franklin Islands,Department of Environment and Conservation Page 25 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. Craven, L. N. (1981). Ecology of a population of southern brown bandicoots Isoodon obesulus Zoology Perth, University of Western Australia. Masters. DEC (2006a). "Quenda (or southern brown bandicoot) ". Retrieved 16 August 2010, from http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_details/Itemid,/gid,130/. DEC (2006b) Quenda (or southern brown bandicoot) 16 August 2010). from http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_details/Itemid,/gid,130/ DEC (NSW) (2006). Southern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) Recovery Plan. [Online]. Hurstville, NSW, New South Wales Department of Environment of Conservation. Del Marco, A., Taylor, R., Clarke, K., Savage, K., Cullity, J. and Miles, C. (2004). Perth Biodiversity Project Regional Ecological Linkages for the Perth Metropolitan Region: Criteria for Determination in Local Government Biodiversity Planning Guidelines for the Perth Metropolitan Region, Western Australian Local Government Association, Perth. EPA (2002). Position Statement No. 3 Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an element of Biodiversity Protection. Perth, Environmental Protection Authority. EPA (2004). Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors No. 56: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia. Perth, Environmental Protection Authority: 40. GHD (2006). Fiona Stanley Health Precinct Site Investigation: Fauna Assessment. Unpublished report for Department of Housing and Works. Gole, C. (2006). The Southwest Australia Ecoregion: Jewel of the Australian Continent, Southwest Australia Ecoregion Initiative.

http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/hotspots/hotspots_by_region/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_details/Itemid,/gid,130/

http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_details/Itemid,/gid,130/


Final Report


Harris, I. M., Mills, H. R. and and Bencini, R. (2010). Multiple individual southern brown bandicoots (Isoodon obesulus fusciventer) and foxes (Vulpes vulpes) use underpasses installed at a new highway in Perth, Western Australia. Australia Wildlife Research 37(2): 127-133. Heinsohn, G. E. (1966). Ecology and reproduction of the Tasmanian bandicoots (Perameles gunnii and Isoodon obesulus). University of California Publications in 80, University of Western Australia, Perth Zoology 80: 1-107. Lobert, B. and Lee, A. K. (1990). Reproduction and life history of Isoodon obesulus in Victorian heathland. In 'Bandicoots and Bilbies' (Seebeck, J.H., Brown, P.R., Wallis, R.L. and Kemper, C.M. eds). Sydney, Surrey Beatty and Sons: pp 311-318. Lyne, A. G. (1964). Observations on the breeding and growth of the marsupial Perameles nasuta (Geoffroy), with notes on other bandicoots. . Australian Journal of Zoology 12: 332-339. McKenzie, N. L. (1967). Some Ecological Aspects of the Behaviour of the Shortnosed Bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus). Department of Zoology. Melbourne, Monash University. Honors. Moloney, D. J. (1982). A Comparison of the Behaviour and Ecology of the Tasmanian Bandicoots, Perameles gunnii (Gray 1838) and Isoodon obesulus (Shaw and Nodder 1797) Hobart, University of Tasmania. Honors. 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 Zoology 39: 299-305. Nastov, K. (2009). Investigating the success of translocating quenda (Isoodon obesulus fusciventer) into occupied habitats, Murdoch University. Honors Thesis. Stoddart, D. M. and Braithwaite, R. W. (1979). A strategy for utilisation of regenerating heathland habitat by the brown bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus; Marsupialia, Peramelidae). . Animal Ecology 48. 165179. doi:10.2307/4107 Thackway, R. and Cresswell, I. D. (1995). An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia, Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Reserve System Unit,Canberra. Thomas, L. N. (1987). The effects of stress on some aspects of the demography and physiology of Isoodon obesulus (Shaw and Nodder) Perth, University of Western Australia. MSc. Van Dyck, S. and Strahan, R. (2008). The Mammals of Australia New Holland Publishers, Sydney. WWF (2001). "Southwest Australia woodlands (AA1210)." Retrieved August 18 2010, from http://www.worldwildlife.org/wildworld/profiles/terrestrial/aa/aa1210_full.html.

http://www.worldwildlife.org/wildworld/profiles/terrestrial/aa/aa1210_full.html


Final Report


APPENDIX 1 SOUTHERN BRWON BANDICOOT PHYSIOLOGOCAL RECORDS FOR SITE CAPTURES OVER 2010 MONITORING PERIOD (MAY, JUNE, JULY, SEPTEMBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2010)


Final Report


Site Trap Trap no.

Date Survey period ID Weight (grams)

Base of Tail

(mm)

PES (mm)

Base of skull (mm)

Snout vent (mm)

Sex (F = Female, M= Male; I=inactive; PY=pouch young; Uk=unknown; PB=pre-birthing; J=juvenile)

Comments

1 E E3 1-Jul-10 July 4474 447 7.28 51.27 65.99 310 Male

1 C A1 2-Jul-10 July 0556 1589 11.02 63.36 88.05 390 Male

1 E B2 29-Jun-10 July 5710 1110 11.08 58.53 85.53 430 Male

1 E C3 30-Jun-10 July 5729 435 50.47 72.93 295 Female (inactive) no tail, inactive pouch

1 E D5 29-Jun-10 July 5745 863 9.95 52.7 83.1 330 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 30-50

1 E E1 3-Jul-10 July No ID Female (inactive)

1 E A2 2-Jul-10 July No ID 1062 84.8 360 unknown escaped 1

1 C A1 30-Sep-10 September 5884 1217 10.47 56.73 85.17 Male

1 E C5 29-Sep-10 September 8009 217 5.94 37.38 55.72 Juvenile Female too small to microchip

1 E A5 30-Nov-10 December 3471 435 8.07 52.61 71.29 225 Juvenile Female

1 E B2 29-Nov-10 December No ID unknown escaped 4

1 C C1 29-Nov-10 December No ID unknown escaped 5

2 E A1 1-Jul-10 July 3791 897 8.13 50.58 37.04 330 Male 1/2 tail only

2 E A2 1-Jul-10 July 3905 467 8.7 45.14 69.68 275 Female (pre-birthing) NPY, clean pouch

2 E C5 1-Jul-10 July

4940 737 9.7 53.97 81.41 360 Female (inactive)

1/2 tail, NPY, pouch inactive

2 C A1 2-Jul-10 July 6776 1017 10.85 56.21 88.63 350 Male 1/2 tail

2 E A4 2-Jul-10 July 7087 1077 10.12 54.73 83.69 390 Male

2 C A1 29-Jun-10 July 5171 987 11.19 58.97 89.24 420 Male

2 E B2 29-Jun-10 July 5252 1077 66.56 81.48 370 Male no tail

2 E C4 29-Jun-10 July 5322 936 10.53 54.41 76.66 320 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 60-70

2 E E1 29-Jun-10 July 5990 782 10.34 55.45 86.75 290 Female (pre-birthing) NPY, clean pouch

2 E D2 2-Jul-10 July 6031 827 8.08 57.5 79.96 350 Female (pouch young) 1/2 tail, 2PY @ 60-70

2 E A2 29-Jun-10 July 6152 857 10.23 60.41 80.78 360 Male

2 E D5 29-Jun-10 July 0000 854 81.71 unknown escaped


Final Report


Site Trap Trap no.


Base of Tail

(mm)

PES (mm)

Base of skull (mm)

Snout vent (mm)


Comments

2 E B5 29-Sep-10 September 2362 507 7.38 49.37 67.44 Female (inactive)

2 C A1 29-Sep-10 September 5537 1517 11.58 62.95 83.61 Male

2 E A4 29-Sep-10 September 0479 817 9.67 52.45 75.93 Female (pouch young)

2 E A5 2-Nov-10 November 8001 Female (pouch young)

2 E E1 5-Nov-10 November

0000 Female (pouch young)

released-female with young

2 E C3 4-Nov-10 November 0000 unknown released-too small

2 E A2 29-Nov-10 December 7585 235 5.23 37.04 57.14 200 Juvenile Male

2 E C1 30-Nov-10 December 5423 425 9.2 46.75 67.25 330 Female (Inactive)

2 C C1 1-Dec-10 December

8003 1120 82.93 Female (pouch young)

no.i.d taken, 2 pouch young

3 C C2 2-Dec-10 December 4362 1140 9.78 61.03 92.2 380 Male

4 E E3 30-Jun-10 July 3934 774 60.35 81.98 340 Male

4 E B1 30-Jun-10 July 5347 677 10.01 56.28 75.33 320 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 30-40

4 E A1 2-Jul-10 July 5358 457 7.82 54.74 73.6 300 Male

4 C E1 1-Jul-10 July 5373 1317 13.04 59.38 95.82 400 Male

4 C E1 2-Jul-10 July No ID unknown escape 51

4 E A1 1-Jul-10 July Male

4 E E2 29-Jun-10 July 0001 667 8.97 55.51 80.45 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 30

4 E C1

30-Sep-10 September

5355

712 6.71 44.53 61.46 Male

4 E B1 29-Nov-10 December 0633 790 8.66 58.3 62.82 350 Male Lice present

5 E 5-May-10 May 4505 657 8.49 84.86 87.15 280 Male

5 E 6-May-10 May 5184 697 9.39 51.15 89.6 275 Female (inactive)



Final Report


Site Trap Trap no.


Base of Tail

(mm)

PES (mm)

Base of skull (mm)

Snout vent (mm)


Comments

5 E 5-May-10 May 0323 657 8.49 54.89 50.28 Male



5 E 4-May-10 May

1199 937 10.87 52.74 Female (pouch young)

Female 1 pouch young (1 cm)

5 E A2 2-Jun-10 June 0001 177 5.51 40.32 61.1 120 Juvenile Female too little to microchip

5 E B5 2-Jun-10 June 0002 217 6.09 40.25 60.81 180 Juvenile Male too little to microchip

5 C C2 2-Jun-10 June 0003 1717 11.74 62.31 430 Male

5 C C2 3-Jun-10 June 0006 2397 10.96 56.92 385 Female (inactive) 2 pouch young (3cm)

5 C C1 1-Jun-10 June 7594 1137 12.13 59.84 94.36 270 Female (inactive) 2 nipples engorged

5 C C1 2-Jun-10 June 0000 unknown escaped very large

5 E D4 30-Sep-10 September 0000 5.05 41.78 55.5 unknown too small to microchio

5 E D5 30-Sep-10 September 8004 497 7.61 50.56 72.62 Juvenile Female too small to microchio

5 E D4 2-Oct-10 September 8006 Juvenile Male too small to microchip

5 E E2 2-Oct-10 September 8005 Juvenile Female too small to microchip

5 E D4 1-Dec-10 December

0077 260 6.03 44.23 59.47 Male

5 E D2 2-Dec-10 December 0078 425 6.38 47.01 61.6 260 Juvenile Female

5 E E3 29-Nov-10 December 0391 390 6.67 47.48 63.1 275 Juvenile Female

5 E D4 2-Dec-10 December 8008 6.66 47.46 61.07 250 Male escaped

5 E D5 30-Nov-10 December No ID unknown Escaped 2

5 E D3 30-Nov-10 December No ID unknown Escaped 3

6 C 5-May-10 May 0324 817 9.73 58 81.84 305 Male

6 C 6-May-10 May 0471 1517 12.96 63.09 310 Male


6 C 7-May-10 May 1388 857 11.42 54.21 83.3 Male


Final Report


Site Trap Trap no.


Base of Tail

(mm)

PES (mm)

Base of skull (mm)

Snout vent (mm)


Comments

6 C 8-May-10 May 6043 1517 11.99 63.44 Male

6 E 4-May-10 May 6521 817 10.63 55.96 Female (inactive) Femalepouchinactive

6 E E5 1-Jun-10 June 0004 657 8.82 52.58 240 Female (inactive) Undeveloped pouch

6 E C4 3-Jun-10 June 0005 1057 11.61 61.32 385 Male

6 E D3 5-Jun-10 June 0007 437 9.52 50.23 25.22 265 Female (inactive) Undeveloped pouch

6 E A5 1-Jun-10 June 6073 757 9.82 53.68 Male

6 E A3 5-Jun-10 June

0000 unknown

Very large recapture with tag - escaped

6 E B5 29-Sep-10 September 5497 1037 10.51 59.2 84.32 Male

6 E D5 29-Sep-10 September 8007 217 5.78 38.84 68.34 Male too small to microchip

6 E B4 2-Dec-10 December 1178 615 8.75 54.41 75.21 escaped Female (inactive) Teats enlarged

6 E A5 30-Nov-10 December 9543 535 7.77 53.64 67.17 300 Juvenile Male

6 E C3 29-Nov-10 December 8010 560 7.93 51.9 69.32 Male Lice present

MT1 E MT9 30-Jun-10 July 0289 638 9.09 51.97 72.92 315 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 50

MT1 C MT10 30-Jun-10 July 0576 942 10 57.68 88.05 460 Male

MT1 C MT10 1-Jul-10 July 5772 1487 12.42 66.71 90.31 370 Male

MT1 E MT5 2-Jul-10 July 0499 871 10.13 61.13 92.65 360 Male

MT1 C MT1 2-Jul-10 July

5330 808 10.82 54.14 81.69 370 Female (pre-birthing)

NPY, clean pouch, erect nipples x3

MT1 C MT1 29-Jun-10 July 5837 917 9.49 55.25 72.88 unknown

MT1 E MT7 29-Jun-10 July 5910 897 10.04 57.98 73.11 310 Female (pouch young) 2PY @ 60


MT1 E 4 3-Nov-10 November 6651 8.49 57.15 65.3 Male

MT2 E MT21 1-Jul-10 July

5618 584 8.62 55.46 67.3 315 Female (inactive)

3/4 tail, NPY, inactive pouch



Final Report


Site Trap Trap no.


Base of Tail

(mm)

PES (mm)

Base of skull (mm)

Snout vent (mm)


Comments

MT2 E MT29 30-Jun-10 July 5224 995 10.68 60.18 87.69 400 Female (pouch young) 4PY @ 30-40

MT2 E MT27 29-Jun-10 July 5317 817 7.11 50.87 70.76 280 Female (inactive) NPY


MT2 E MT13 29-Jun-10 July 5788 847 10.72 61.98 75.67 380 Male

MT2 C MT30 30-Jun-10 July unknown escape 3

MT3 E MT37 30-Jun-10 July 1194 895 11.61 61.33 92.51 370 Male

MT3 E MT32 29-Jun-10 July 1378 1117 10.16 61.56 83.93 340 Male 1/2 tail

MT3 C MT30 2-Jul-10 July 6991 805 8.52 53 81.58 320 Female (pouch young) 1PY @ 60-70


MT3 E MT35 3-Jul-10 July 5200 945 9.84 34.92 82.9 310 Female (pouch young) 2PY


MT3 E MT38 30-Jun-10 July 7170 485 6.94 55.06 72.09 290 Female (pre-birthing) NPY, clean pouch

MT4 C MT50 2-Jul-10 July 5486 797 9.37 58.23 79.82 320 Female (pouch young) 4PY @ 10-15


Final Report


APPENDIX 2 SOUTHERN BRWON BANDICOOT RECAPTURE RECORDS OVER THE 2010 MONITORING PERIOD (MAY, JUNE, JULY, SEPTEMBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER 2010)


Final Report


Site Trap Trap no. Date Survey ID Recapture

within phase

Recapture between phases

Days between recapture

Distance between

captures (m)

1 E E4 2-Jul-10 July 5729 Y 1 111

1 E A2 1-Jul-10 July 5729 Y 1 56

1 C A1 2-Oct-10 September 0556

1 E E5 29-Sep-10 September 4474 Y

1 E A5 30-Sep-10 September 4474 Y

1 E A1 6-Nov-10 November 4474

1 E C5 2-Dec-10 December 3471 Y


2 C A1 3-Jul-10 July 6776 Y 1 0

2 E D5 2-Jul-10 July 3905 Y 1 106

2 E A3 3-Jul-10 July 5322 Y 4 56

2 E D2 1-Jul-10 July 5990 Y 2 35

2 E D2 3-Jul-10 July 5990 Y 2 0

2 E D3 3-Jul-10 July 6031 Y 1 25

2 E D3 2-Jul-10 July 6152 Y 3 79

2 E E3 3-Jul-10 July 6152 Y 1 25

2 C E1 30-Sep-10 September 5990 Y

2 E B5 2-Oct-10 September 2362 Y


2 E B3 30-Sep-10 September 3791 Y


2 E E5 1-Oct-10 September 3791

2 E D2 30-Sep-10 September 3905 Y


2 E A4 3-Oct-10 September 3905 Y

2 E D4 3-Oct-10 September 5322 Y

2 E A5 1-Oct-10 September 6152


2 C D1 6-Nov-10 November 5537

2 E C2 4-Nov-10 November 2362 Y

2 E D4 4-Nov-10 November 2362 Y


2 E A5 3-Nov-10 November 3905 Y




2 E B5 2-Nov-10 November 5322





2 C C1 2-Dec-10 December 5537

2 E B5 1-Dec-10 December 1378

2 E D3 29-Nov-10 December 2362



Final Report



within phase



Distance between

captures (m)

2 E A5 29-Nov-10 December 3905

2 E D3 2-Dec-10 December 3905 Y

2 E A3 1-Dec-10 December 3905 Y

2 E B5 30-Nov-10 December 5322

2 E B4 2-Dec-10 December 5322 Y

2 E D3 30-Nov-10 December 5423 Y

2 E D1 2-Dec-10 December 5423 Y


2 E E1 1-Dec-10 December 7585 Y

3 E C3 2-Oct-10 September 3934 Y

3 E E4 4-Nov-10 November 3934

4 C A1 2-Jul-10 July 5347 Y 2 25

4 C E1 3-Jul-10 July 5358 Y 1 100

4 C A1 3-Jul-10 July 5373 Y 2 100

4 E C2 3-Jul-10 July 5347 Y 1 56





4 C E5 6-Nov-10 November 5373

4 E D1 3-Nov-10 November 5347



5 E 5-May-10 May 0483 Y 1

5 E 7-May-10 May 0483 Y 2

5 E 8-May-10 May 0872 Y 1

5 E 5-May-10 May 1078 Y 1

5 E 6-May-10 May 1078 Y 1

5 E 5-May-10 May 1199 Y 1

5 E 6-May-10 May 1199 Y 1

5 E 7-May-10 May 4505 Y 2

5 E 8-May-10 May 4505 Y 1

5 E 7-May-10 May 5184 Y 1

5 C C1 5-Jun-10 June 4505 Y 2 50

5 C C1 4-Jun-10 June 7594 Y 3 0

5 E D5 5-Jun-10 June 0001 Y 3 106

5 E D4 5-Jun-10 June 0002 Y 2 79

5 E A5 3-Jun-10 June 0002 Y 1 25

5 E C4 4-Jun-10 June 0006 Y 1 56

5 E C1 4-Jun-10 June 0483 Y 3 70

5 E A3 1-Jun-10 June 0483 Y 25

5 E D4 4-Jun-10 June 1078 Y 1 56

5 E B2 5-Jun-10 June 1078 Y 1 56

5 E E2 3-Jun-10 June 1078 Y 1 35

5 E D3 2-Jun-10 June 1078 Y 1 25

5 E E3 1-Jun-10 June 1078 Y 26


Final Report



within phase



Distance between

captures (m)

5 E D2 3-Jun-10 June 1199 Y 28

5 E C2 3-Jun-10 June 4505 Y 2 56

5 E D4 1-Jun-10 June 4505 Y 24

5 E E3 4-Jun-10 June 5184 Y 3 56

5 E C3 5-Jun-10 June 5184 Y 1 50

5 E D5 1-Jun-10 June 5184 Y 25

5 E A4 1-Oct-10 September 0483


5 E C4 30-Sep-10 September 0483 Y

5 E D4 29-Sep-10 September 1078 Y





5 E E3 1-Oct-10 September 1199 Y



5 E E5 3-Oct-10 September 5184 Y

5 C C1 29-Nov-10 December 4505




5 E D5 29-Nov-10 December 1078




6 C 8-May-10 May 0324 Y 3

6 E 7-May-10 May 0505 Y 3

6 C C1 2-Jun-10 June 0324 Y 1 111

6 C C1 5-Jun-10 June 0324 Y 3 0

6 C C1 1-Jun-10 June 1388 Y 1 50

6 C C2 1-Jun-10 June 6043 Y 24

6 C C1 3-Jun-10 June 6073 Y 2 100

6 E D5 3-Jun-10 June 0004 Y 2 25

6 E E3 1-Jun-10 June 0324 Y 24

6 E B2 4-Jun-10 June 1388 Y 3 25

6 E A3 31-May-10 June 1388 Y 24

6 E A3 4-Jun-10 June 6073 Y 1 50

6 C A1 29-Sep-10 September 0324 Y

6 C E1 29-Sep-10 September 1388 Y








Final Report



within phase



Distance between

captures (m)


6 C C1 30-Nov-10 December 6521 Y

6 E E3 30-Nov-10 December 0505

6 E D3 1-Dec-10 December 0505





6 E 1-Dec-10 December 9543 Y


MT1 C MT10 3-Jul-10 July 0576 Y 3 0

MT1 E MT2 2-Jul-10 July 0289 Y 2 175

MT1 E MT3 3-Jul-10 July 5910 Y 2 150

MT1 E MT9 1-Jul-10 July 5910 Y 2 50

MT1 E 6 5-Nov-10 November 5330

MT2 E MT23 3-Jul-10 July 5224 Y 3 150

MT2 E MT27 2-Jul-10 July 5317 Y 3 0

MT2 E MT20 3-Jul-10 July 5618 Y 2 25

MT2 E MT22 1-Jul-10 July 5788 Y 2 225

MT2 E MT24 3-Jul-10 July 5788 Y 2 50

MT2 C 20 5-Nov-10 November 5317

MT2 E 13 4-Nov-10 November 1378 Y






MT3 C MT40 30-Jun-10 July 1378 Y 1 200

MT3 C MT31 1-Jul-10 July 5252 Y 2 307

MT3 E MT32 1-Jul-10 July 1194 Y 1 125

MT3 E MT39 3-Jul-10 July 1194 Y 1 125

MT3 E MT34 2-Jul-10 July 1194 Y 1 50

MT3 E MT38 3-Jul-10 July 7170 Y 3 0

MT3 C 10 2-Nov-10 November 0479



Documents

Southern Brown Bandicoot monitoring program