Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius.

Biome5 Environmental Consultants

Biome5 pty ltd abn 41 121 306 769 PO Box 1200 Atherton Qld 4883 m: 0407 996953 e: [email protected]

Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius

Prepared for:

Queensland Department of Environment & Resource Management, Cape York Peninsula Biodiversity Technical Advisory Group

Project Number: CY TBIO 01

Prepared by:

Dr Noel Preece, Mrs Sue Shephard, Mr Tom Shephard, Prof Stephen Garnett

Biome5 Environmental Consultants

Biome5 pty ltd abn 41 121 306 769 PO Box 1200 Atherton Qld 4883 m: 0407 996953 e: [email protected]

Attention: Kelly Flower Queensland Regional Liaison Officer

Queensland Department of Environment & Resource Management GPO Box 2454, Brisbane Qld, 4001

[email protected]

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Our Project number:

CfOC0801-CYP_GSP

File ref:

Rep_GSP_Survey_2009-v3.docx

Report by: Noel Preece

Date:

Revision Status: Reviewed by:

Document distribution:

24 August 2009 Version 3 Stephen Garnett Qld DERM

RELIANCE STATEMENT, USES & LIMITATIONS This report is copyright and to be used only for its intended purpose by the intended recipient. It is not to be copied or used in any other way. The report may be relied upon for its intended purpose within the limits of the following disclaimer. This work has been based on the information available at the time of the work. We do not take responsibility for errors and omissions due to incorrect information or information not available at the time of the work. © Biome5 Pty Ltd 2009

Report – Status of Golden-shouldered Parrot 2009.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 5

1.1 Previous reports ..................................................................................................................................... 6

2 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................ 7

2.1 Re-sampling of nesting habitat ............................................................................................................. 7

2.2 Assessment of population trends and implications for conservation status and management ....... 7

2.3 Field survey ............................................................................................................................................ 7

2.4 Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.5 Investigators ........................................................................................................................................... 9

2.6 Permissions from relevant landholders ............................................................................................... 9

3 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................ 10

3.1 Surveys ................................................................................................................................................. 10

3.2 Population estimate ............................................................................................................................. 13

3.3 Comparison between years ................................................................................................................. 14

3.4 Observations of habitat changes between surveys ............................................................................ 14

4 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 17

4.1 Range .................................................................................................................................................... 17

4.2 Data anomalies ..................................................................................................................................... 17

4.3 2009 Survey .......................................................................................................................................... 20

4.4 Extent of occurrence & Area of occupancy, Areas surveyed ........................................................... 20

4.5 Population anomaly determination .................................................................................................... 20

4.6 Detectability and extrapolations ......................................................................................................... 21

4.7 Population Trend Estimate ................................................................................................................. 22

4.8 Predation and nest damage ................................................................................................................. 22

4.9 Habitat change ..................................................................................................................................... 22

4.10 Conclusions and recommendations .................................................................................................... 23

Table 1 - Nesting prognosis Table 2 - Nest eggs and young Table 3 – Observations of nest damage and predation Table 4 - Morehead population 2009 - Survey area 650 sq km Table 5 – Comparison between years Table 6 – Differences between subsequent reports in reported ranges Table 7 – Differences among reports in population estimates Table 8 – Recalculation of Morehead R 2002/2001 population Table 9 – Historic survey summary of nest records


Figure 1 – Distribution of the Golden-shouldered Parrot in 2001 Map 1 – Transects and areas surveyed 2009 Map 2 – Nests found during surveys 2009 Map 3 – Nests on Artemis/Dixie 2001 & 2009 Appendix 1 – Prospectus for Golden-shouldered Parrot survey 2009 Appendix 2 – Survey maps from 1996 Appendix 3 - Nest records 2009 Appendix 4 – Historic Nest data 1992-2008


1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

The Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius is listed as an Endangered species under Schedule 2 of the Queensland Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 1994, and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The species fits the criteria of endangered under IUCN Red List categories (IUCN SSC 2001):

Category B1a,b(i)(ii)(iii)(iv) (extent of occurrence <5000 sq.km, occurs at fewer than five locations, continuing projected decline in extent of occurrence, area of occupancy, quality of habitat, number of mature individuals; (Garnett & Crowley 2000)).

It is listed under Appendix I of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) (Garnett & Crowley 2002). The species occurs only on Cape York Peninsula in two areas totalling less than 2000 km2 area of occupancy and ranging over less than 3,000 km2 extent of occurrence. The northern population is centred around Morehead River in an area of around 1,380 km2, and the southern one around the Staaten River in an area of around 400 km2 (Fig 1). The population of adults is in the order of 2,000 to 2,300 birds, increasing possibly to 3,600 adult and juvenile birds after the breeding season and declining back to the core population during the later dry season and wet season each year. Due to limited surveys and data, it is not clear whether or not the population is increasing, stable or declining. A Recovery Plan for the golden-shouldered parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius 2003-2007 (Garnett & Crowley 2002) was prepared in 2002 and included a number of objectives. This report responds to:

Specific Objective 3: Determine population trends.

A Prospectus for the study, ‘Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius’, prepared for the Caring for Our Country grants provided the scope of the study (Appendix 1). Anticipated outcomes of the study were expected to be:

A report documenting trends in the Morehead population of Golden-shouldered Parrots enabling a comparison to be made with population estimates in 1996 and 2001 and a reassessment of conservation status. GPS locations of all located nest sites for the 2009 breeding season.

The work undertaken complies with this scope, and is described below. The contract (CY TBIO 01) for the study included two milestones:

• A nest survey of the Morehead population during the late breeding season between March and May 2009 to ascertain whether the apparent reversal in the decline of the Morehead population has been maintained;

• Observations of predation and nest damage, of flock sizes, sex ratios, number of juveniles together with presence/absence of Pied Butcherbirds and/or Black-faced Woodswallows.

The survey was urgent as the previous survey was conducted about 8 years ago (2001) and should have been conducted within 5 years of the previous one. This project was funded by the Federal Government’s Caring for Our Country program, and managed by the Queensland Government Dept of Environment & Natural Resource Management.


Figure 1 – Distribution of the Golden-shouldered Parrot in 2001 (from p14, Garnett & Crowley 2002)

1.1 Previous reports A number of reports have been produced on the Golden-shouldered Parrot since about 1993. These are listed in the references list. One significant report is missing – the report on the re-survey of the Golden-shouldered Parrot 2001, on which this re-survey depends for comparison of populations and trends. Despite extensive searches of the records in DEWHA in Canberra, DERM in Brisbane and Cairns, and consultation with around a dozen people who have been involved in the studies of the Golden-shouldered Parrot, the report could not be recovered. The data obtained from the survey had been retained by Stephen Garnett, and are reported below. The 2001 survey was the last survey of the remote parts of the Morehead River population.


2 METHODS

The Prospectus provided the scope of the re-survey. The following two tasks were required.

2.1 Re-sampling of nesting habitat The first element of the work was a re-sampling of known and previously surveyed nesting habitat of the Morehead population of the Golden-shouldered Parrot for the 2009 breeding season. This population is one of two known populations, and represents at least two thirds of the total population of the Golden-shouldered Parrot. The other population is found at Staaten River, to the south. The survey of the population was conducted on motorcycle and 4-wheeler bike, by at least two people, Sue and Tom Shephard, who have conducted all the surveys for the past 17 years and live at Artemis Station. Hand-held GPS receivers (a Garmin GPS 12, and a Garmin GPSmap 76CSx) were used to track the survey transects and record the locations of the nests observed during the survey. The GPS’s were set to GDA 94, and set up to record tracks. Surveys were conducted systematically to achieve optimum coverage of the known breeding areas. The process consists of riding/driving through nesting habitat checking every termite mound of a size that could support a nest of the Golden-shouldered Parrot for signs of digging and for chambers. Experience is needed to distinguish marks left by parrots from marks left by other species and to recognise potential nesting habitat. Photos and measurements were taken of all nests and the location of all parrots, black-faced woodswallows and associated species were also recorded. Data from GPS and cameras were downloaded to a computer using Garmin’s Mapsource program each night and written to a USB storage stick to ensure that no data were lost. Surveys were conducted on five of the Morehead River area properties known to hold breeding populations of the parrot, including Artemis, Mary Valley, Killarney, Dixie and Kalinga. Each survey took about 5 days for two surveyors. Noel Preece accompanied the survey team for the first few days to ensure that the data acquisition protocols were established and operating properly, and to assist with the first transects and monitoring techniques. Data collected included:

• Coordinates of all nests (GDA94 or WGS84) in lat/long or UTM • Standard measurements of nests • Observations of predation and nest damage • Observations of flock sizes, proportions of males to females, number of juveniles • Presence/absence of Pied Butcherbirds, Black-faced Woodswallows

Other observations were made where possible, including structure of breeding habitat.

2.2 Assessment of population trends and implications for conservation status and management

The second element was an assessment of population trends and implications for the conservation status and management of the Golden-shouldered Parrot, based on the findings of the study of the Morehead population. This assessment therefore can be indicative only of the Morehead population, as the Staaten population lies several hundred kilometres south of the Morehead one. This was last surveyed in 2004, when it was found to be smaller than previously thought.

2.3 Field survey The field work outlined was performed in the breeding season for Golden-shouldered Parrots, which occurs from March to June, but depends on the duration of the wet season and availability of green seed (Garnett & Crowley 2002). Field surveys commenced on 14 April 2009 and finished on 20 June


2009. Total length of transects was greater than 1,500 km, although this is probably an underestimate because the GPS receivers were not always tracking.

2.4 Analysis Data analysis and report writing were undertaken after the field surveys were completed. Data were collated and analysed using spreadsheet program Excel®. Mapping and analysis of the nest sites and transects were done using ArcGIS® 9.3 (ESRI). The report was prepared using Microsoft Word® 2007. The field survey data were compared with previous survey data and trends. The report includes the field survey data, and an assessment of the population, population trends and implications for the conservation status and management of the Morehead population. The report includes maps showing the observation locations and traverse routes prepared using ArcGIS 9.3. The survey data were entered into Excel for manipulation and use. Shape files can be made available if required. The report complements the Management Guidelines and the Recovery Plan (Crowley et al. 2004; Garnett & Crowley 2002), and updates the observations and data from these plans. Survey transects were plotted from the track functions in the Garmin GPS receivers. It appears that tracking was not always working, but the results show that most were recorded. From the plotted transects, we were able to plot the survey areas as convex polygons, following previous methods (Stephen Garnett, unpublished data). The rules for drawing the polygons were to join outer points of the obviously higher densities of nest and transect records. We followed the general contours of the transects so that the areas surveyed were not inflated. Likewise, several polygons were drawn to reflect the areas intensively surveyed. Access routes to known nesting areas, such as those shown to the east of the central polygon and the main road past Artemis to the west were excluded where it was known that nests do not occur. Population size in the survey area was estimated on the basis of the number of birds estimated to be alive during the breeding season based on assumptions derived from intensive studies of the species from 1992-1995. The northern population breeds at a high density in a few areas and a lower density elsewhere. Density in the high density area is based on the discovery of 67 nests or chambers in an area of about 120 km2 (Garnett and Crowley 1995). Assuming about half the nests were found and that some of the nests were re-nesting attempts, the density was estimated at about 1 nesting pair per km2. About 10% of these nests had immature males associated with them. The low density areas studied had 9 nests in 95 km2. Assuming such a density for the remainder of the distribution, the density of pairs in this area was about 1 per 5 km2. Though this method of estimation is full of reasonable assumptions, the actual number found is lower and the estimate must necessarily be considered as a working maximum. In the 2002 report, of about 620 km2 surveyed in detail, 250 km2 had an estimated density of one pair/ km2 (Garnett & Crowley 2002). We have assumed that the same ratio of high density to low density is applicable over the entire assumed range of the Morehead population. The densities were then used to estimate the total population of the species based on previous measures of total range. The IUCN uses two measures of range against which to assess trends under the Red List criteria: extent of occurrence and area of occupancy (IUCN 2001):

Extent of occurrence Extent of occurrence is defined as the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be drawn to encompass all the known, inferred or projected sites of present occurrence of a taxon, excluding cases of vagrancy. This measure may exclude discontinuities or disjunctions within the overall distributions of taxa (e.g. large areas of obviously unsuitable habitat). Extent of occurrence can often be measured by a minimum convex polygon (the smallest polygon in which no internal angle exceeds 180 degrees and which contains all the sites of occurrence).


Area of occupancy Area of occupancy is defined as the area within its 'extent of occurrence' which is occupied by a taxon, excluding cases of vagrancy. The measure reflects the fact that a taxon will not usually occur throughout the area of its extent of occurrence, which may contain unsuitable or unoccupied habitats. In some cases (e.g. irreplaceable colonial nesting sites, crucial feeding sites for migratory taxa) the area of occupancy is the smallest area essential at any stage to the survival of existing populations of a taxon. The size of the area of occupancy will be a function of the scale at which it is measured, and should be at a scale appropriate to relevant biological aspects of the taxon, the nature of threats and the available data. To avoid inconsistencies and bias in assessments caused by estimating area of occupancy at different scales, it may be necessary to standardize estimates by applying a scale-correction factor. It is difficult to give strict guidance on how standardization should be done because different types of taxa have different scale-area relationships.

Because there has been no previous account which adequately describes the way in which these two parameters have been assessed for the Golden-shouldered Parrot, the issue is encompassed in the results and discussion, which also discusses discrepancies between reports. For the purposes of this report we assume an Extent of Occurrence of 3000 km2 and an Area of Occupancy of 1,340 km2.

2.5 Investigators The Principal Investigator for this proposal was Dr Noel Preece, Senior Ecologist with Biome5 Pty Ltd, and an Adjunct Research Fellow with Charles Darwin University. The field work, which is the bulk of the work, was conducted by Sue and Tom Shephard of Artemis Station, which is within the population range of Golden-shouldered Parrots with the occasional assistance of Dr Noel Preece. Dr Preece set up the survey methods and GPS technology with Sue and Tom Shephard to ensure quality data were obtained. Professor Stephen Garnett (Charles Darwin University) provided expertise on the Golden-shouldered Parrot as Principal Advisor, provided the original survey data from 2001, and peer reviewed the data and analyses.

2.6 Permissions from relevant landholders The properties on which the habitat for Golden-shouldered Parrots is found are all well known to the Shephards. Permission from each landholder was obtained by Sue and Tom Shephard prior to the field season. There were no objections to the surveys.


3 RESULTS

3.1 Surveys The survey transects are shown in Map 1, and the areas surveyed are plotted using a convex polygon as shown in blue. The surveys detected 126 nests within the Morehead population range (Table 1). These were plotted and shown in Map 2. Sixty four nests contained eggs, chicks or fledglings, or evidence of recent fledging. Eight of these nests had eggs and chicks, leaving 56 active nests in total (Table 2). Not all were considered successful, as some contained dead chicks or obviously dead eggs. The assessed success or failure of the nests, based on the expertise of Tom and Sue Shephard, is summarised below. Fifty six nests (not necessarily the same 56 ‘active’ nests mentioned) were considered to be successful on the grounds of live chicks, active adults at or near the nest, healthy clutches of eggs, or, if vacant, then evidence of wear due to chick and adult activity, and no evidence of dead chicks or carrion feathers (feathers torn from chicks by predators). Table 1 - Nesting prognosis Successful 56 Uncertain 26 Failed 44 Total 126

Table 2 - Nest eggs and young

Eggs Chicks alive

Chicks dead Fledged

Total 73 43 18 16 Nest Count 26 19 9 10

Forty seven adults were seen during the surveys, including 32 males (one flock of 10 males) and 15 females. Only three Pied Butcher-birds Cracticus nigrogularis were seen during the surveys. Nest damage and predation were observed in only a few cases. The records from the field survey are provided in Appendix 2. Table 3 summarises the records of nest damage and predation. Table 3 – Observations of nest damage and predation Nest number Date Zone Easting Northing Station Observations

ART23 19-May-09 54 L 764887 8334476 Artemis Old Dixie bullock paddock, Frith Flat top; found 1 chick outside nest, bits of it, mud on its foot and tail feathers, can't see any grub but could be there

ART27 21-May-09 54 L 769233 8338547 Artemis nest dug out by goanna, 8m from ART26

DIX01 12-May-09 54 L 747111 8320348 Dixie Nest at top of flat, tea-tree, quinine; failed or some did, meat ants in nest, lots of little feathers at entrance hole, hard to see, too many ants

KMA28 9-May-09 54 L 763958 8298727 Killarney Edge of flat open flat ridge country, fire grass, nest has been dug out probably by goanna, burnt grass

KMA40 11-May-09 54 L 763986 8303612 Killarney Up same flat as KMA39; nest has had big chicks and could have flown, but lot of scratch marks around; goanna may have got them


Map 1 – Transects and areas surveyed 2009


Map 2 – Nests found during surveys 2009


3.2 Population estimate On the assumption that half the nests are found within surveyed areas (see section 2.4), there were possibly 250 nests within the intensively surveyed areas. Population estimates are calculated below (Table 4), based on the ratio of high-density to low density nesting areas in the 2002 report (for consistency) and the ratio of found to non-found nests. Table 4 - Morehead population 2009 - Survey area 650 sq km

Area (sq

km)

Proportion of area high:low

density Area surveyed intensively (sq km) 650 Area (sq. km.) with Dense nesting pairs (1 per sq km) 262 0.40 Area (sq. Km) with Sparse pairs (1 per 5 sq km) 388 0.60 Total estimated range (sq km) 1380 Extrapolated high‐density nesting (sq km) 556 Extrapolated low‐density nesting (sq km) 824 Bird populations High density Low density Totals Pairs of birds (based on 2 x numbers of nests) 252 78 Numbers of birds in surveyed nesting areas (incl. 10% of pairs with additional males) 529 163 Numbers males in surveyed nesting areas 277 85

Numbers females in surveyed nesting areas 250 78 Total numbers of birds (proportion extrapolated from surveyed area to total range) 1124 346 Total birds over range 1469 Males 589 181 770 Females 531 165 695

The population is therefore estimated at 1,469 birds. The complete data set is provided in Appendix 2.


3.3 Comparison between years It is possible to compare the number of nests in three of the properties surveyed intensively in 1996, 2001 and 2009 (Table 5). In each case the principal surveyors were Tom and Sue Shephard and in each case they tried to find all nests within the surveyed areas over a relatively short period of time. The areas surveyed in 1996 are shown in Appendix 3. Maps of the areas surveyed in 2001 cannot be found. Table 5 – Comparison between years

Station 1996 2001 2009 Mary Valley 6 2 1

Kalinga 11 31 23 Killarney 13 12 47

Nest Count 28 45 71 The comparison with Artemis and Dixie is much more difficult. While the other properties were surveyed in three similar snapshot surveys in 1996, 2001 and 2009, monitoring of Artemis in years other than 2009 has always been gradual from about April through to as late as August. This can result in more nests being found because very early nests that, in wet years, can be closed over by termites within a season, are likely to be encountered as are repeat nests. Also only in the last five years has access been easy to the upper reaches of Emu and Eel creeks, southward flowing tributaries of the Morehead River that have their headwaters in the Great Dividing Range where it runs east-west in the south-western part of Artemis Station. This has meant that, in 2009, several nests were found in these upper reaches in areas never surveyed in previous years. However, very few nests were found during the current survey in the lower reaches of these catchments north of the road between Artemis and Dixie Stations (Map 2). On the other hand nests continue to be found east of the Great Dividing Range on Artemis Station. In 2008 this included a nest near South Five Mile Creek in an area that appeared to have been deserted after 1993. They also continue to be found within 5 km of the Artemis homestead. From 1993-1996 this area had a diminishing number of nests and a regime was instituted of feeding parrots during the early wet season. Nesting resumed in the vicinity the following year and has continued each year since, as has the feeding.

3.4 Observations of habitat changes between surveys Because the survey team visited the surveys areas at discrete intervals gradual changes that might have been overlooked through constant visitation could be detected and, in lieu of objective measurement, are recorded here. Mary Valley: A small flock of about 20 parrots with a flock of Black-faced Woodswallows was first detected on Mary Valley near Corbett Swamp in 1994, although there had been earlier anecdotal records of the species there. There was a high density of suitable mounds on poorly-drained flats dominated by broad-leaved ti-tree. In 1996 four nests were detected on these flats. In 2001 only two nests were found and the area seemed to have a higher density of ti-tree. The discovery of a nest in 2009 was a little surprising as it had been expected in 2001 that this small population would disappear over the ensuing time. The habitat, however, was thought to have opened up since the previous visit with few small trees around the termite mounds. Killarney: Parrots have been known from Killarney Station since the 1970s, particularly near Maryanne Bore. Visits and surveys in 1993-1996 found the country had numerous suitable termite mounds with a vegetation structure that suggested that woody thickening was not occurring. The situation was the same in both 2001 and 2009. Kalinga: Parrots have been known on Kalinga since the 1960s when they were known to be present at Tobacco Yard. Tom Shephard remembers mustering in the area at that time. The country was open woodland and easy to ride a horse through with good visibility. In 1996 some areas were thickening up with wattle and ti-tree though a hot fire in October 1992 had also opened areas up. In 2001 the country


showed evidence of thickening. In 2009 the area had Acacia holosericea and Grevillea pteridifolia at such densities that it was difficult to ride bikes across most of it. There have been no hot fires in the area for many years. Artemis: Parrots have been known on these stations since the 1950s, at which time the birds nested throughout the property and on Violetvale to the north-east. They were last seen on Violetvale and anywhere north of South Five Mile Creek on Artemis in the 1970s, and were last recorded nesting in the north-eastern part of Artemis north of the Great Dividing Range (Kalkah) in 1992. From 1996 onwards Artemis has been progressively fenced with the aim of having sufficient fencing to allow rotational grazing. However, until sufficient fencing has occurred to allow spelling of paddocks, grazing pressure has increased above background levels in the new paddocks. This has seen a marked increase in woody thickening in the paddocks, particularly in the Emu-Eel creek catchments. Dixie: Parrots have been known from Dixie since the 1950s, but only ever from east of the Dixie homestead and south Mountain Yard. Intensive surveys have only ever been undertaken on Dixie in the area east of Sugarloaf Creek on the eastern edge of the property. Visits to other areas have been infrequent and there was a time in the late 1990s when surveys elsewhere on the property were discouraged. Most observations have been incidental during mustering, including observations down the Alice River (see Map 3). No great change has been noted to the habitat on Dixie although some areas within paddocks have become thicker.


Map 3 – Nests on Artemis/Dixie 2001 & 2009


4 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

4.1 Range Area of Occupancy can be measured by counting the number of kilometre grid squares from which the species has been recorded. However, in the case of the Golden-shouldered Parrot this is inappropriate for two reasons. First the parrots nest in different places in different years so that an empty grid one year has a reasonable probability of being occupied in later years. Secondly nest detectability is known to be no better than 50% so that many apparently empty squares are likely to be occupied. However in the north and east of the parrot’s current known range within the Morehead population there have now been extensive surveys that have failed to detect nests. Thus it is assumed here that the parrots have a reasonable chance of occupying any of the grid squares within their known range, as described in Map 1, but a very low probability of occupying areas beyond it, though there is still uncertainty about the western part of their range. Based on the 2002 report, we have assumed therefore that the Area of Occupancy is approximately 1,380 km2. This is larger than the area surveyed during the current contract. In particular it includes areas known to be occupied by the species on the western fall of the Great Dividing Range, particularly in the north-west corner of Imooya Station and adjacent areas of Dixie Station extending down the Alice River. These areas have never been the subject of intensive surveys but the parrots are still known to be present on the basis of observations in recent years by local pastoralists. They are also known to be present in the area between Dixie Station homestead and the surveyed areas on Killarney and Kalinga Stations to the south and east. Thus the current survey is used to estimate whether there has been a change in the density of parrot nests not the range. The Extent of Occurrence can exclude areas of unsuitable habitat between disjunct populations. However there are incidental reports of Golden-shouldered Parrots having been seen between the Morehead and Staaten River populations and insufficient genetic data has been gathered to determine whether the two populations are genetically isolated. Therefore the Extent of Occurrence is assumed to encompass both populations and to be approximately 3000 km2.

4.2 Data anomalies While researching the background to this study, we picked up several unexplained inconsistencies between reports on populations and range of the Golden-shouldered Parrot. These anomalies need to be explained so that future population and range estimates are more accurate. The anomalies are documented in Tables 6 and 7 below. Much of the differences between reports can be explained by increased understanding of the limits to the more remote parts of the breeding range. The differences between the periods 1992-1998 and 1999-2002 were reported as actual declines in the range of the Morehead population on the basis of annual surveys of Artemis Station from which it was possible to determine absence as well as presence. Thus the 2004 estimates of area of occupancy of 1,340 km2 was the best available. Discovery of nests in areas thought vacated after 2008 restores the range estimate to 1,380 km2, the value used in this report.


Table 6 – Differences among reports in range estimates

Population Year of report Period

Extent of Occurrence (km2)

Area of Occupancy (or Range) (km2) Notes

Morehead River (northern popn.)

1999a 1050 Total range was first estimated in 1999 when thought to extend no further south‐west than Mountain Yard. It was extended in 2002 by inclusion of known nesting population along Alice River.A contraction in range was believed to have occurred after 1998 on the north‐east limits of distribution on Artemis Station.

2002b 1380

2004c 1992‐1998 1380

2004d 1999‐2002 1340 Staaten River (southern popn.)

1999a 450 The western and southern limits to population extent were always estimated with a high degree of uncertainty until surveys in 2004. In 1999 the northern limit was thought to extend further than proved true in 2002. In 2004 the southern and western limits were explored.

2002b 300

2004c 1992‐1998 400

2004c 1999‐2002 400

Refs:

a. Garnett & Crowley 1999 (Recovery Plan v2) b. Garnett & Crowley 2002 (Recovery Plan 2003‐2007) c. Crowley, Garnett & Shephard 2004 (Guidelines) d. Garnett & Crowley 2000 Action Plan

The reported populations of the Golden-shouldered Parrot show anomalies that cannot be explained as readily. Table 7 documents the reported populations and explanations for the variation.


Table 7 – Differences among reports in population estimates

Population

Year of report Period

Population ests ‐ number of breeding birds

Extrapolated popn. after breeding Anomalies

Female Male Total Morehead River (northern popn.)

1995a 1000 1200 2200 Based on very rough estimate of range of 50 x 75 km

1999b 540 610 1150 Estimate based on estimated range

2002c 500 570 1070 Two population estimates in 2002 report. 1070 is probably appropriate for the level of knowledge at the time; the other is an error

2002c 1500

2004d 1992‐1998 3900f

1992‐1998 2900 2‐3 times population of 2002 with no survey data to support change. This was a transcription error – an earlier draft of the same document estimated 1300 individuals.

2004d 1999‐2002 3800f

1999‐2002 2800

Recalculations using original data (2002)

2009 721 793 1514 Actual calculated population from 2002 report

Staaten River (southern popn.)

1999b 450 550 1000

2002c 600 700 1300 Two population estimates, 500 in 2002 report; is probably appropriate for the level of knowledge at the time; the other is an error

2002c 500

2004d 1992‐1998 1000 Transcription error (see above), probably assuming individuals in previous report were in fact pairs.

2004d 1999‐2002 1000

Refs: a. Garnett & Crowley 1995 (Recovery Plan v1) b. Garnett & Crowley 1999 (Recovery Plan v2) c. Garnett & Crowley 2002 (Recovery Plan 2003‐2007) d. Crowley, Garnett & Shephard 2004 (Guidelines) e. Garnett & Crowley 2000 Action Plan f. 3900 in Morehead population table in 2004 report, but G Crowley correction of 17 Oct 2008 reported it as 2900 birds


4.3 2009 Survey The results of the 2009 survey of the Morehead population of the Golden-shouldered Parrot suggest that the population is probably stable with around 1,500 birds. The numbers of nests found with similar effort to the 2001 survey was only marginally different (26 more nests in the areas that can be compared directly), but this is likely to be within the margin of error given the difficulty in finding nests, slight differences in the area surveyed and potential differences between years. The detectability of nests within the known range of the bird is probably low, and perhaps only half the nests are found with great variation between areas. Extrapolating from survey data of nest sightings to whole populations is also fraught with uncertainties.

4.4 Extent of occurrence & Area of occupancy, Areas surveyed The total area surveyed in 2009 was approximately 650 km2, consisting of four separate areas of 333, 149, 148 and 20 km2, as shown in Map 1 above. The areas for both range and areas surveyed were calculated in 1996 and 2001 were based on hand-drawn boundaries and areas counted by the number of 1 km squares intersected. The benefits of reliable GPS receivers, satellite images and GIS software were not available at the time of the early surveys, in contrast to the present survey. As the total surveyed area is consistent with the previously reported survey area and the survey was undertaken by the same people who undertook the previous surveys, we have assumed that approximately the same areas have been surveyed. Therefore, the populations of nests counted are of the survey area of about 650 km2. The area of occupancy is difficult to determine for reasons stated in the IUCN Red List Criteria, so we have assumed that it remains at around 1,380 km2 estimated in 2002 based on all surveys and other incidental records to that date. No estimates of extent of occurrence for each of the Morehead and Staaten River populations were reported in previous survey reports, but the total extent of occurrence was considered to be 3,000 km2 (see Table 1). Observations by local observers, including this survey team, suggest that it probably has not changed since 2002.

4.5 Population anomaly determination The population reported for 1995, at around 2200, shown in Table 7 above, was adjusted in the 1999 Recovery Plan (Garnett & Crowley 1999/ p4) to 1150 individuals, 540 of which were females: “This is about half the estimate made in 1995 (Garnett & Crowley 1995) and is the result of more extensive surveys that have more closely defined the range and density of the species.” The subsequently reported population estimates must be seen in the context of this re-evaluation, and in the absence of contrary evidence and to be on the conservative side of population estimates of this endangered species, the conservative population estimates should be relied upon. Therefore, we have assumed that the more conservative estimate of population in 2002, of 1070 birds (as shown in Table 7 above), is more likely to be correct. The report of 3,900 birds in 2004 was a transcription error between draft and final editions for reasons that have not been recorded (S. Garnett, personal records).


Table 8 – Recalculation of Morehead R 2002/2001 population Morehead population 2002

Re‐calculations from report (from Garnett & Crowley 2002 report)

Area (sq km)

Proportion of area high:low

density Area surveyed intensively (sq km) 620 Area (sq. km.) with Dense nesting pairs (1 per sq km) 250 0.40 Area (sq. Km) with Sparse pairs (1 per 5 sq km) 370 0.60 Total range (sq km) 1380 Extrapolated high‐density nesting (sq km) 556 Extrapolated low‐density nesting (sq km) 824 Bird populations High density Low density Totals Pairs of birds (based on numbers of nests – 1 nest/sq km or 1/5 sq km) 250 74 Numbers of birds in surveyed nesting areas (incl. 10% of pairs with additional males) 525 155 Numbers males in surveyed nesting areas 275 81

Numbers females in surveyed nesting areas 250 74

Total numbers of birds (proportion extrapolated from surveyed area to total range) 1169 346 Total birds over range 1514 Males 612 181 793 Females 556 165 721

From the foregoing analyses, the population in 2001/2002 was probably in the vicinity of 1,500 birds. The nest count for 2001 was 103 nests in the surveyed areas. The data for the 2001 surveys are included in Appendix 4.

4.6 Detectability and extrapolations Detectability of nests is dependent mostly on the skill and calibration of the observers. The surveyors (Sue and Tom Shephard) have been undertaking surveys of Golden-shouldered Parrot nests and birds since before 1992. Since the last full survey in 2001, surveys have been conducted every year in the vicinity of Artemis and Dixie. The estimates based on the surveys are therefore considered reliable. The second factor in estimating populations accurately from detected nests is the between periods differences in methods used to survey and the accuracy of recording methods. The early studies relied mostly on hard-copy maps and hand-located nest records on those maps. Areal extents of range and occupancy were drawn using the same methods. The 2009 surveys were all recorded using current GPS technology, which is accurate to around ± 5 metres. Direct exchange of field data between the GPS receivers and the computer software ensures a high level of reliability and removes most transposition errors. So, comparing between periods is subject to inherent errors and uncertainty. The area of survey, for instance, reported for the 1996 survey was 620 km2. The area of survey for 2009 was mapped using GIS technology, which gives a more accurate representation because the actual transects were recorded and used to determine the boundaries of the areas surveyed, and the calculations are done by the software with a high degree of accuracy. So the uncertainty which arises is whether or not the areas surveyed are the same or different. This is important because more area surveyed increases the accuracy of the results as more area is covered. This is an unresolvable uncertainty in the absence of more reliable historic data and reports.


4.7 Population Trend Estimate The populations determined from previous surveys have been discussed in sections 1.2 and 4.2. Analysis of population trends between 1996, 2001 and 2009 were required in the Prospectus. We have no reliable data on populations in 1996, and from the data we hold and which is reproduced in Appendix 4, the population studies have been variable over the years. A summary is provided in Table 9 below. Table 9 – Historic survey summary of nest records

Year No of nests Stations surveyed 1992 23 Artemis, Dixie 1993 38 Artemis, Dixie 1994 77 Artemis, Dixie 1995 102 Artemis, Dixie 1996 77 Artemis, Dixie 1997 71 Artemis, Dixie 1998 72 Artemis, Dixie, Kalinga 1999 96 Artemis, Dixie, Kalinga, Killarney 2000 105 Artemis, Dixie, Kalinga, Staaten R 2001 103 Artemis, Dixie, Kalinga, Killarney,

Staaten R 2002 18 Artemis, Dixie 2003 23 Artemis, Dixie 2004 24 Artemis, Dixie

2005 17 Artemis 2006 21 Artemis, Dixie

2007 17 Artemis, Dixie

2008 13 Artemis, Dixie The earliest full population analysis is 1995, based on 102 nests found, and with correction was considered to be around 1500 birds. The population estimates of 2001 are probably more reliable, at around 1500 birds (see section 4.2 and table 7 and discussion). Using the same approach to estimating the population for 2009, it is likely that there are still around 1,500 birds (see table 4) given the error around estimates. This suggests that the population is probably stable. We urge caution in this interpretation because of the difference in survey methods, and the differences in accuracy of recording and reporting.

4.8 Predation and nest damage As shown in table 3, predation and nest damage were minor, with only five records of nest damage (by goanna only) and bird predation by unknown causes. Pied Butcher-birds were recorded on only three occasions.

4.9 Habitat change The observations of the survey team, who have 90 years of experience in the region between them, are significant. Many years of observation suggests that thickening of habitat leads to lower survival of nesting Golden-shouldered Parrots. Thickening was observed on Kalinga and in the Emu-Eel catchments on Artemis Station. While nesting persists in these areas it may now be that they are sinks from sources in open habitat elsewhere in the range, particularly Killarney Station. Improved fire management and completion of fencing on Artemis Station to enable more conservative stocking rates within paddocks could remedy these trends.


4.10 Conclusions and recommendations The re-survey of the Morehead River population of the endangered Golden-shouldered Parrot in the 2009 breeding season resulted in 126 nests being detected, about half of which were probably successful. Analysis of the data and estimates of populations and population trends suggest that the population is probably about 1,500 birds, and that the population has remained steady since 1996. The surveys show that nest density has changed little in the surveyed areas. However at least part of the surveyed area showed signs of having deteriorated in condition since the last survey. This may prove detrimental to the population in the future. It is recommended that surveys are conducted again in 2014 but that a survey of the southern population around the Staaten River be conducted as soon as possible. We would not recommend a change in the conservation status of the species without a resurvey of the Staaten River population and without evidence of recovery of habitat condition within the Morehead population. This is in line with the ‘precautionary attitude’ recommended by the IUCN Criteria (IUCN 2001).


References Crowley G. M., Garnett S. T. & Shephard S. (2004) Management guidelines for golden-shouldered parrot conservation. pp. 74. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane. Garnett S. & Crowley G. (2000) The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Environment Australia, Canberra. Garnett S. T. & Crowley G. M. (1999) Recovery Plan for the golden-shouldered parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius 1999-2002. Queensland Environment Protection Agency, Brisbane. Garnett S. T. & Crowley G. M. (2002) Recovery Plan for the golden-shouldered parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius 2003-2007. Report to Environment Australia, Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane. IUCN (2001) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species - Categories and Criteria (Version 3.1) IUCN Species Survival Commission., Gland, Switzerland.


Appendix 1 – Prospectus for Golden-shouldered Parrot survey 2009

Caring for our Country Grants - Cape York Peninsula threatened species and communities TITLE: Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius. BACKGROUND AND REASON FOR SELECTION: The Golden-shouldered Parrot is listed as

Endangered by both the Commonwealth EPBC and State NCA legislation, and is listed as of ‘Critical Priority’ in Queensland’s Cape York Peninsula ‘Back on Track’ Biodiversity Action Plan. Previous studies of the parrot have determined its modern range, habitat requirements, threats and means of abating the threats (Garnett and Crowley 2002; Crowley et al.2004). The population is probably fewer than 2000 individuals and its range contracted by 2.6% between 1992 and 1998. There was no measurable contraction in the following three years, but short-term stability is not necessarily indicative of long-term trends.

In the recovery plan for the parrot (Garnett and Crowley 2002), it was proposed that a population survey be undertaken of the known nesting habitat every five years, as this was identified as the most effective method to establish trends in the population. It is seven years since such a nest survey was undertaken, so it is time for a reassessment to be made, particularly to ascertain whether the apparent reversal in the decline of the Morehead population has been maintained.

OUTLINE OF EXPECTED PROCEDURE: A re-sampling of known and previously surveyed nesting habitat of the Morehead population of the Golden-shouldered Parrot for the 2009 breeding season, together with an assessment of population trends and implications for conservation status and management.

ANTICIPATED ONGROUND OUTCOMES: A report documenting trends in the Morehead population of Golden-shouldered Parrots enabling a comparison to be made with population estimates in 1996 and 2001 and a reassessment of conservation status. GPS locations of all located nest sites for the 2009 breeding season.

Crowley GM, Garnett ST and Shephard S (2004) 'Management guidelines for Golden-shouldered Parrot conservation.' Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane.

Garnett ST and Crowley GM (2002) 'Recovery plan for the Golden-shouldered Parrot (Psephotus chrysopterygius) 2003-2007.' Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane.

For technical advice you may contact: Dr Gabriele Crowley, Tropical Savanna CRC, Charles Darwin University – phone 08 8995 5005, email

[email protected]


Appendix 2 – Survey maps from 1996


Appendix 3 – Data from 2009 surveys Data are attached as an Excel file: Nest_records_2009.xls Appendix 4 – Historic Nest data Data are attached as an Excel file: Nest locations_1992-2008.xls

Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius.

Documents

Transcript of Re-assessment of the status of the Golden-shouldered Parrot Psephotus chrysopterygius.