Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Region Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, Phase 1: Regional Species Status Assessments July 2014 Technical Report 2014/12 www.environment.sa.gov.au
172
Embed
Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, · 2015. 4. 27. · Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report: Regional Species Status Assessments, Adelaide
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Department of
Environment,
Water and
Natural Resources
Adelaide and Mount Lofty
Ranges NRM Region
Regional Species
Conservation
Assessment Project,
Phase 1:
Regional Species
Status Assessments
July 2014
Technical Report 2014/12
www.environment.sa.gov.au
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 i
Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project,
Phase 1 Report:
Regional Species Status Assessments,
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Region
S Gillam and R Urban
July 2014
DEWNR Technical Report 2014/12
This publication may be cited as: Gillam, S. and Urban, R. (2014) Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report: Regional Species Status Assessments, Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Region. Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia. Cover Photographs: Species occurring within the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (from top): Purple Cockatoo Glossodia major; Buff-banded Rail Gallirallus philippensis; Western Pygmy-possum Cercartetus concinnus (photo: Tony Robinson); Weeping Emubush Eremophila longifolia; Rainbow Bee-eater Merops ornatus; Pale Fanflower Scaevola albida; Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus; Milkmaids Burchardia umbellata; Banjo Frog Lymnodynastes dumerilii (photo: Tony Robinson); Tate’s Grass-tree Xanthorrhoea semiplana ssp tateana (photo: Tony Robinson); Pink Swamp-heath Sprengelia incarnata (photo: Peter Lang); Bynoe’s gecko Heteronotia binoei (photo: Tony Robinson); – all photos: Sharon Gillam, unless otherwise stated.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 v
Acknowledgements The completion of Phase 1 of the Regional Species Status Assessment Project for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Region would not have been possible without the invaluable expertise, information, time and support given by many people. Many thanks to the following for their significant contribution in workshops and the consultation process: Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources staff: Dave Armstrong, Doug Bickerton, Graham Carpenter, Peter Copley, Dan Duval, Doug Fotheringham, Jeff Foulkes, Jody Gates, Kate Graham, Peter Lang, Martin O’Leary, Robyn Molsher, Helen Owens, Joe Quarmby, Luke Price, Dan Rogers, Ron Sandercock, Wendy Stubbs, Jo Sullivan, Jason van Weenen, Helen Vonow. Community members: Bob Bates, Chris Baxter, Ken & Barbara Bayley, Andrew Black, Phil & Thelma Bridle, Clive Chesson, Peter Gower, Tim Croft, Cathy & Malcolm Houston, Peter Matejcic, June Niejalke, Ron Taylor. South Australian Museum: Mark Hutchinson, Catherine Kemper, Terry Reardon. Other agencies/organisations: Peri Coleman (Delta Environmental), Tim Jury (Nature Conservation Society of SA), Ben McCallum (EAC Ecological Evaluation Pty Ltd), Penny Paton (private consultant), Ann Prescott (consultant botanist), David Schmarr (SARDI), Ben Simon (Goolwa to Wellington Local Action Planning Association Inc), Nick Whiterod (Aquasave). Acknowledgement is given to the following people who provided their highly valued knowledge and expertise outside of the workshop process: Bill Barker (State Herbarium of SA), Dean Cunningham (State Herbarium), Jeurgen Kellerman (State Herbarium), David Stemmer (SA Museum), Rosemary Taplin (State Herbarium), Helmutt Toelken (State Herbarium). Special thanks to Ellen Krahnert (Ecological Directions) for her assistance with GIS and data-related applications and queries throughout workshops. Thanks also to Roman Urban (DEWNR) for helping out with GIS support when needed. The support provided by those assisting with data capture during workshops is very much appreciated, including Amy Anderson, Doug Bickerton, Henry Rutherford, Erin Sautter, Christina Son, Thai Te. The authors are sincerely grateful to those who travelled to attend workshops. Many thanks to Felicity Smith and Helen Owens (of DEWNR) for their continued support with Biological Database of SA queries; and to Tim Croft for his ongoing and very much appreciated help and advice throughout the project. Thanks to DEWNR staff: Jason van Weenen and Simon Sherriff for providing valuable comments on an earlier version of this report; to Matt Miles for completing a data systems review; and to Colin Cichon for assistance with final formatting and copy editing.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 vi
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 vii
Executive Summary In South Australia (SA), a Regional Species Conservation Assessment framework was developed to contribute to the knowledge base and management of threatened species and ecological communities, at a regional level. The aim is to provide a standardised approach to assessing and prioritising South Australia’s native species to guide species conservation and recovery, in each of the Natural Resources Management (NRM) regions across the state. This is the first time an assessment of species’ conservation status for all native vertebrate fauna and vascular flora has been undertaken at a NRM regional, not to mention Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) subregional/ Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia (IMCRA) regional level, in South Australia. The extensive body of data gathered from the project can inform regional as well as statewide, national and global species conservation strategies. The Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, Phase 1 was conducted for the set project area within the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges (AMLR) NRM Region between June 2013 and June 2014. The assessment process was completed, using:
Quantitative data obtained from the Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) Biological Databases of SA, and
Qualitative data and information gathered from panels of experts during workshops. Outcomes of the assessment process include:
An expert-based assignment of conservation status and population trend to all native vertebrate fauna and flora species occurring within each IBRA subregion (and IMCRA region) within the defined project area, using International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) categories and criteria
The assessment of 374 native vertebrate fauna
The assessment of 1410 native vascular plant species. Assessments at the regional scale provide a range of valuable information, including:
Documented regional benchmarks (when known) for area of occupancy, population size estimates and population trends on a species by species basis
Identification of significant knowledge gaps where data are limited
A significantly improved basis for assessing conservation priorities and to address targets within No Species Loss: A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007 – 2017 and regional NRM Plans, that focus on assessing the status of biodiversity at the regional level.
The project facilitates a systematic and standardised approach to the setting of conservation and recovery targets within any region. Conducting detailed status assessments at the regional level should:
Enhance ownership, awareness and clarity with regard to regional priority setting for threatened species;
Result in better decision making capacity when conducting state-wide status reviews (“region-up” approach);
Result in an improvement in the quality (through record validation) and quantity (through inclusion of significant old/new data) of records within the biological databases of SA.;
Vastly improve DEWNR’s capacity to effectively deliver the No Species Loss strategy at a state level; and
Provide a benchmark against which the success of future management strategies (and the impacts of trends such as climate change) can be evaluated.
Across the project area within the AMLR NRM Region, 33% (34% fauna, 32% flora) of all species were considered highly threatened (that is, Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered). If species classed as “Rare” and “Near Threatened” are included in the
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 viii
analysis, then the percentage of “species at risk” rises to an average of 69% (65% fauna, 73% flora). In addition, an average of 36% of all species (41% fauna, 31% flora) were believed to be in a state of decline. In the Data Deficient category, 2% (6) of fauna species were not rated and 7% (27) were not given a trend, as there was insufficient knowledge of those species. Similarly, 3% (47) of flora species were not rated and 16% (225) of species were not allocated a trend. Data Deficient species indicate knowledge gaps for potential further research and survey work. An examination of the spatial distribution of threatened species suggests the existence of “threatened species hotspots”. Areas showing the highest threatened species richness include Newland Head Conservation Park (CP), Inman and Hindmarsh River inlets, Mount Billy CP and surrounds, Aldinga Scrub CP, Cox Scrub CP and surrounds (including the Fleurieu Swamp systems), and Onkaparinga Recreation Park (RP)/estuary. These areas, together with Para Wirra RP and three surrounding Reservoir Reserves, Kaiserstuhl CP, the large reserves of the Hills Face Zone, Mount Bold Reservoir and Scott Creek CP, have emerged as significant hotspots for threatened species. These reserves and reserves surrounding water courses/bodies preserve a considerable portion of the remaining native vegetation and habitats in the project area and are therefore highly important to biodiversity conservation. See Section 4.4 Threatened Species Richness for further information on hotspot areas for both fauna and flora. The AMLR region comprises a diverse range of environmental associations, which provide an important area for biodiversity conservation in the higher rainfall areas of SA. The region has been extensively cleared for grazing, horticulture, dryland agriculture and urbanisation, with the remaining native vegetation existing mainly as isolated patches of various sizes and conditions, situated amongst urban and agricultural land uses. Around 90% of these remnants are less than 31 hectares in size and 45% of those are less than six hectares. Remnant vegetation communities are disproportionally represented due to past selective clearance patterns, with the most dominant vegetation type in the region now heathy woodland. Despite this, the region still comprises a wide range of ecological communities and ecosystems, which in turn supports a broad range of flora and fauna. As such, the Mount Lofty Ranges, along with Kangaroo Island, is recognised as one of 15 national biodiversity hotspots in Australia. Threatened species in these ecosystems and habitats are, however, subject to a range of impacts which are collectively contributing to species decline. Whilst the historical action of extensive native vegetation clearance has negatively impacted many species, there are many ongoing actions which continue to place stress on threatened native flora and fauna in the region. Residential and commercial development; habitat fragmentation; competition and land degradation by both feral and overabundant native herbivores; predation by feral cats and the European Red Fox; the plant pathogen Phytophthora; weed invasion; inappropriate fire regimes; disruption of water regimes and water contamination; disease (e.g. chytrid fungus in amphibians; and beak and feather disease in threatened bird species) all present as considerable threats, as well as the implications of climate change. Many of the suggested hotspots are concentrated around existing protected areas mentioned above. There are, however, still threatened species with little to no formal habitat protection (listed in Tables 8 and 9) and a range of other species-rich areas, such as road reserves, which are subject to a range of threatening processes. This highlights an apparent need to identify and effectively manage the threatening processes in these significant areas, to safeguard the species they contain. This correlates with Goal 1 under the state’s No Species Loss Strategy, which is to maintain, improve and reconstruct habitats to prevent the further loss of species in SA.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 1
1. Introduction Biodiversity is continuing to decline across Australia, with calls for a much more targeted effort and a strategic move towards determining cost effective approaches to biodiversity conservation (Joseph et al. 2009; Lindenmayer et al. 2002; Mace et al. 2006; Marsh et al. 2007; McCarthy et al. 2008; Morton et al. 2009; Wilson et al. 2006). To address biodiversity decline, there is an urgent need for conservation programs and other national initiatives to focus on biodiversity priorities which are clearly defined, and at a regional scale. In South Australia (SA), a Regional Species Conservation Assessment framework was developed in two phases to contribute to the knowledge base and management of threatened species and ecological communities at a regional level. The aim was to provide a standardised approach to assessing and prioritising SA’s native species to guide species conservation and recovery, in each of the Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions across the state. Each region was assessed according to the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) subregions falling within or across the regional boundary. For the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges (AMLR) NRM Region, the actual project area covered the Mount Lofty Ranges and Fleurieu IBRA subregions (see Section 2.1 for project area description). The northern section of the AMLR NRM Region was assessed with the Northern and Yorke NRM Region (Gillam and Urban 2008). In the first phase of the project, a repeatable Species Status Assessment process was employed to assign a conservation status (using IUCN 2001 Categories and Criteria) and population trend to all native flora and fauna at a regional level. The process was based on both quantitative and qualitative material, making use of the best available biological data, and the expertise and knowledge of skilled and competent persons in various specialist fields. This phase of the project contributes to the development of an ecological information system to establish baseline biodiversity benchmarks. The second phase of the project (that follows this work) is a process whereby a panel of experts assess species according to a range of different criteria, building on the information obtained from Phase 1. Criteria for the prioritisation of species include (i) probability of extinction (determined by status ratings), (ii) consequences of extinction (ecological values, evolutionary values, social values, taxonomic uniqueness), and (iii) potential for successful recovery (knowledge of threatening processes, capacity to affect recovery, need for ongoing management). The aim of this secondary phase is to enhance the strategic nature of any species conservation programs. Refer to A Regional Species Conservation Assessment Process for South Australia - Phase 2 Report: Species Prioritisation (Gillam 2009). The outcome of the Regional Species Conservation Assessment project is a process to roll out Phases 1 and 2 across all NRM Regions, and ultimately, the development of a Regional Biodiversity Action Plan for the strategic conservation of threatened species in each NRM Region. A Regional Biodiversity Action Plan will aim to assist in improving the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of the regional management of threatened species, by providing detailed actions and priorities, and making better use of limited resources. Phases 1 and 2 have been completed for the Northern and Yorke, Eyre Peninsula, Alinytjara Wilurara, SA Murray-Darling Basin and South East NRM regions. Phase 1 has been completed for South Australian Arid Lands (SAAL), AMLR and Kangaroo Island NRM regions, and it is envisaged that Phase 2 for these regions will be completed by late 2014, providing a complete assessment for South Australia. This project makes a major contribution to the objectives under the South Australian Government initiative: No Species Loss: A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007 – 2017 (DEH 2007), and is aligned with biodiversity targets in regional Natural Resources Management (NRM) Plans. In particular, the results of regional species assessments will be crucial to the assessment of the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM Plan (2014) Regional Targets:
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 2
T 7 Condition and function of ecosystems (terrestrial, riparian) recovered from current levels
T 8 Extent of functional ecosystems (coastal, estuarine, terrestrial, riparian) increased to 30% of the region (excluding urban areas)
T 9 Improvement in conservation prospects of native species (terrestrial, aquatic, marine) from current levels.
The results will directly inform T 9 because of the threatened species focus, as well as indirectly informing T 7, T 8 and a range of other Regional Targets. All of these targets align closely with Goal 3 in the State NRM Plan (Government of South Australia 2012): Improved condition and resilience of natural systems, with the corresponding Guiding Targets:
8. Increase extent and improve condition of native vegetation
9. Improve condition of terrestrial aquatic ecosystems
10. Improve condition of coastal and marine ecosystems
12. Improve the conservation status of species and ecological communities. The results of this assessment process aid in achieving these targets. This regional assessment process provides the first status review of all known native flora and fauna at an IBRA subregional scale. This report provides details of the methodology used, data limitations and summarised results of the assessment process. Appendices provide supplementary information to the assessment process and further analyses of results, plus complete lists of species with status ratings and trends for the AMLR project area and adjoining IMCRA (Interim Marine and Coastal Regionalisation for Australia) regions. 2. Methodology 2.1 Project area The project area was defined by the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) V6.2 subregions that fell within or across the AMLR NRM Regional boundary (Fig. 1), and which had not been covered in the assessment process for other regions. This includes the Mount Lofty Ranges and Fleurieu Peninsula. The region supports a mosaic of vegetation remnants, urban development, farmland and rolling hills and plains, plus more than 200 km of coastline and surrounding coastal and marine environments. The eastern part of the study area encompassed a portion of the SA Murray-Darling Basin NRM Region, while the northern part of the AMLR NRM Region was assessed with the Northern and Yorke NRM Region (Fig. 1). Refer to the Northern and Yorke project report (Gillam and Urban 2008) for results of species assessed in the St Vincent and Broughton IBRA subregions. IBRA is the National Reserve System’s planning framework, and was developed as a tool for identifying reservation targets towards developing a comprehensive and representative reserve system in Australia. The IBRA system represents a landscape-based approach to classifying the land surface of Australia, using a range of environmental variables, and divides the Australian continent into 85 bioregions, which are further divided into 403 sub-regions. The IBRA system is used by nature conservation agencies Australia-wide. Similarly, the IMCRA system was developed as a regional framework for planning resource development and biodiversity conservation to protect marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystems. There are 17 bioregions, or IBRA regions, in SA, which are broad-scale regions with characteristic natural features and environmental processes. The IBRA regions are further divided into 65 IBRA subregions, which are defined based on fine-scale differences in geology, lithology, landforms, climate and vegetation type. These are related systems within each IBRA region. IBRA subregions are further divided into IBRA associations, which pickup local soil patterns, topography and vegetation. For the purpose of conservation of biodiversity, the IBRA subregion boundaries were chosen as the regional assessment boundaries as they were considered to be more ecologically meaningful than political/administrative boundaries such as currently represented by
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 3
Fig. 1. Map showing location of IBRA subregions and IMCRA regions within the project area. The Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges NRM regional boundary is shown, along with the surrounding two IMCRA regions and other IBRA subregions.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 4
Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) and NRM regions. The use of IBRA subregions allowed the assessment of all currently identified flora and fauna within the AMLR project area to be made at a relatively fine scale. Similarly, IMCRA regions were used to include species living/visiting offshore islands and inhabiting marine and coastal areas. This in turn provides a similar fine scale of assessment for offshore species, including cetaceans (whales and dolphins), seals, sea lions and seagrasses. The two IMCRA regions bordering Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges were not included in the project area as they were previously assessed with two other NRM regions with coastline (Northern and Yorke, and South East). There are two IBRA subregions in the project area: Mount Lofty Ranges (MLR) and Fleurieu, together covering a total area of 6695 km2 (Fig. 1, Table 1). The project area is bounded on the west by the St Vincent Gulf IMCRA, and on the north by the St Vincent and Broughton IBRA subregions. The eastern boundary is covered by the eastern flank of the Mount Lofty Ranges, joining the Murray Mallee IBRA subregion. The Coorong IMCRA forms the southern boundary of the project area (Fig. 1). The list of species that were assessed in the two surrounding IMCRA regions, including status ratings, trends and comments, have been included as separate tables in Appendices 13a and 13b, for reference. The Mount Lofty Ranges IBRA subregion occurs at the southern extent of the broader Flinders Lofty Block IBRA Region, which includes the Flinders Ranges and the Olary Plain, while the Fleurieu IBRA subregion is encompassed within the Kanmantoo IBRA Region, which covers Kangaroo Island and the Fleurieu Peninsula, extending up the eastern side of the Mount Lofty Ranges to the Truro area. Table 1. IBRA subregion areas in km2, within the AMLR project area
# IBRA Region IBRA Subregion No. Sections in Subregion Area km2
1 Flinders Lofty Block Mount Lofty Ranges 1 3699
2 Kanmantoo Fleurieu 1 2997
Total 6695
The Mount Lofty Ranges IBRA subregion covers the area north from Yankalilla up to the Barossa Valley, including a greater part of the Adelaide metropolitan area, the Hills Face Zone, the foothills and the spine of the Mount Lofty Ranges. The Barossa Valley is the lowest area in this subregion, forming a structural basin, with the rest of the subregion characterised by undulating low hills, with some steeper ranges, hills and plains. Mount Lofty is the highest peak, at 720 m. The Fleurieu IBRA subregion broadly covers the Fleurieu Peninsula, and stretches from Cape Jervis along the southern and eastern parts of the Mount Lofty Ranges system, up to the Truro area in the north. This IBRA subregion is comprised mainly of undulating, low hilly uplands, also with several steeper hills and ranges. The Inman Valley is the lowest lying area. The southern Fleurieu Peninsula can be described as a plateau with an average altitude of 350 m above sea level, divided by sharply descending creeks (Armstrong et al. 2003). Coastal landscapes include cliffs, dunes and tidal zones. Much of the remnant vegetation in the project area has been extensively cleared. In both of the subregions, low open woodland and shrubland dominate the vegetation structure, with grassy and grassy woodland systems also found on the western and northern fringes and eastern slopes of the ranges, in the project area. The higher rainfall areas tend toward deep, lateritic soils; the northern part of both subregions comprise shallow or sandy soils; while podsolised soils are found in the lower rainfall areas (Armstrong et al. 2003). Watercourses in the region are both permanent and ephemeral, draining from the hilly uplands onto the plains.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 5
There are also ten large reservoirs in the region, supplying drinking water to Adelaide and surrounding suburbs and towns. The climate of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges can be described as temperate, with cool, wet winters and hot, dry summers. The rainfall in the region varies considerably, due to topography and altitude, and ranges from an average of 300 mm in the Barossa Valley to 1000 mm on the highest ridges of the Mount Lofty Ranges (Armstrong et al. 2003). See Appendix 1 for a comprehensive landscape description of each IBRA subregion. 2.2 Data preparation The project included all species in the project area listed in the DEWNR Biological Databases of South Australia (BDBSA), plus any extra species/datasets that were available and considered important to include. BDBSA is comprised of a range of databases, including: data collected at native vegetation and vertebrate survey sites in SA, using the Biological Survey of SA methodology; records of opportune individual species sightings; Reserves data, which consists of historic flora species lists where the spatial location is usually a centroid for the block or Reserve; and Plant Populations data. External datasets are also incorporated into BDBSA, with key sources including BirdLife Australia (1996–2006); Birds SA (SA Ornithological Association, various up to March 2008); SA Museum (Herpetology up to August 2004, Birds up to May 2005, Mammals up to May 2012); State Herbarium of SA (ADHERB, updated weekly); and others. All South Australian freshwater fish data collated by Michael Hammer for the Action Plan for South Australian Freshwater Fishes: 2007-2012 were also used. The project encompassed all known native terrestrial vascular flora and vertebrate fauna (as well as freshwater fish), including those listed under the EPBC Act 1999, and National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972. The Green Carpenter Bee Xylocopa aeratus was also included and was the first insect to be assessed within the entire regional status assessment project. This species was of interest because it has become extinct elsewhere in SA and Victoria, with the Kangaroo Island population being the last foothold in southern Australia. Surveys over the past two years indicate that this species, which is recognised as an important pollinator of numerous native flora species, is declining. All data occurring within the IBRA subregions of the project area for fauna were extracted in April 2013, and data for flora extracted in May 2013. The final data collated from BDBSA included records with both valid coordinates and valid taxonomy. To ensure that only reliable records were displayed (i.e. to remove unreliable records), the following filters were applied: Fauna
records were maintained where Species Reliability Code = Y (reliable), A (accepted), P (presumed) or Null;
records flagged as planted/released = Y were removed Flora
records were maintained where Species Reliability Code = Y (reliable), A (accepted), P (presumed) or Null, or 1 (vouchered), 2 (ID by herbarium staff or taxonomist), 3 (ID by experienced field botanist), 4 (unconfirmed field sighting);
records flagged as planted/released = Y were removed. Non-indigenous species and any species identified only to genus level, as well as hybrids and complexes, were removed. Records with a spatial reliability greater than 25km (flora and fauna) were also not included. All records listed as Non Current (NC) were cross-referenced to make sure those species were represented in the final species list within a current taxonomic entity. If not, the Non Current species was assessed. Subfossil records were included in order to produce maps for potentially extinct species (AMLR = 8 records). Preliminary flora and fauna lists were then manually checked by experts, and any apparent introduced or vagrant species were also removed. For the final fauna (443 spp) and flora (1563 spp) lists, there were almost 570,000 fauna records and 232,609 flora records. Fauna were then divided into five groups: Mammals (plus one insect); Reptiles & Amphibians; Land
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 6
Birds; Water Birds; and Freshwater Fish. Flora were divided into significant groups and then life forms, which included: Aquatic; Chenopods; Daisies; Ferns; Grasses; Herbs & Forbs; Legumes; Myrtles; Orchids; Sedges; Shrubs; Trees; and Vines. This aided in selecting panels of experts on various species for workshops. Extra data sets appended to the main data set included additional records from ADHERB (4,027) and Non Current records (26,743). BirdLife Australia (BA) records were extracted from The Atlas of Living Australia (ALA) database for the period 2006–2013 (93,266 records) and were also included on the fauna maps. These data have not all been verified and hence are not always accurate in terms of species or location, and were therefore only used as a guide. All of these records/datasets were included to aid in producing maps and to assist the panels of experts in assessing species. Spreadsheets were developed for both fauna and flora, incorporating a range of data extracted from BDBSA. Further fields were created to allow for the capture of specific information during workshops. A distribution map was produced for each species, showing the geographic range of the species within each IBRA subregion in the project area, including the distribution in areas adjacent to the project area, within the map extent. Records were shown in three temporal groups: Recent (1994–2013); Historic (1964–1993); and Pre–1964 (all records prior to 1964), to assist in identifying possible trends. In addition, all flora maps showed the records as either BDBSA records or Herbarium SA records, easily distinguishing biological survey and opportune (sighting) records from records with vouchered herbarium specimens. See Appendix 2 for an example map. Using IUCN methodology, the extent of occurrence (EO) of a species was defined as the area contained within the shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be drawn to include all known, inferred or projected sites of present occurrence of a species. The EO was calculated using 10 km squared grid squares laid over the project area, using ESRI® GIS ArcView® V9.3.1 software. Similarly, the area of occupancy (AO) of a species was defined as the area within its Extent of Occurrence which is occupied by a species (IUCN 2012b). The AO was calculated using 1 km squared grid squares. Both the EO and AO were calculated to aid in allocating status in the assessment process. However, in many cases the size of the grids used to estimate the EO and AO, particularly EO, tended to overestimate species’ areas of extent/occurrence, keeping in mind the scale of the IBRA subregions. These data have been retained for future reference, but the EO and AO data were not included in the final data sheets. 2.3 Assessment criteria The World Conservation Union (IUCN 2001; 2012a; 2012b) categories and criteria were applied to assess the risk of extinction. Categories were applied according to IUCN V10.1 Guidelines (2013). The threatened categories (Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable) were assigned to species on the basis of quantitative criteria, designed to reflect varying levels of threat of extinction. See Guidelines for further details (IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee 2013). The IUCN (2001; 2012b) categories and criteria were initially used to assign a preliminary rating to each species occurring within the subregion, followed by the use of further IUCN Guidelines (2012a), to make adjustments for regional populations. The main changes to this methodology were the inclusion of the category Regionally Extinct, and the consideration of conspecific populations outside of the region which may affect the regional extinction risk, and hence influence the final rating. This ruling was particularly applicable to bird populations within the project area, as well as bats. Refer to Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: V4.0 (2012a). The category of ‘Rare’, used in SA under the National Parks and Wildlife (NPW) Act 1972, was added so that small and scattered or localised populations could be recognised, i.e. those that did not fit the risk associated with species listed as Vulnerable, but were more at risk than the Near Threatened category. Tables 2a and 2b show the status categories and
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 7
trends used in the assessments, including the abbreviations/symbols commonly used and the weighted scores used later in the analysis of results. Appendix 3a lists the criteria for the threatened categories (CR, EN, VU) plus Rare, and Appendix 3b gives an outline of each category. The category of Data Deficient was used for status and/or trend if experts did not feel there was enough information and/or knowledge to rate a species. Not Evaluated (NE) was assigned to flora that were not rated due to taxonomic issues. A trend was allocated to a species according to current knowledge of the trajectory of that species within an IBRA subregion. The trend categories were: stable or no change; probable decline or definite decline; probable increase or definite increase; and data deficient (Table 2b). Trend categories were applicable based on the last 10 years or three generations, whichever was longer, and could also include a future projection over the next 10 years or three generations. Table 2 a). Status categories and abbreviations used in assessments. Status score was later used
in analysis.
Abbreviation Status Category Score
RE Regionally Extinct 7
CR Critically Endangered 6
EN Endangered 5
VU Vulnerable 4
RA Rare 3
NT Near Threatened 2
LC Least Concern 1
DD Data Deficient 0
NE Not Evaluated n/a
Table 2 b). Trend categories and symbols used in assessments. Trend score was later used in
analysis.
Symbol Trend Category Score
-- Definite Decline 0.5
- Probable Decline 0.4
0 Stable/No Change 0.3
+ Probable Increase 0.2
++ Definite Increase 0.1
DD Data Deficient 0 2.4 Consultation process Through workshops, panels of experts were called upon to rate species according to their perceived risk of extinction within each subregion using IUCN categories and criteria, and to allocate a trend to species’ populations. Panels were made up of persons known to have expertise in certain fields relating to flora and fauna, such as herpetology, ornithology, orchids, etc, including field naturalists, consultants, persons from specialist groups and staff from the SA Museum, DEWNR and other agencies. Those with expert knowledge of the flora and fauna pertaining to the project area were particularly sought after. Every attempt was made to include no less than three experts in workshops, to minimise any bias in expertise, with at least one DEWNR expert present. All workshops were attended by a range of relevant experts, providing a reasonable level of confidence in the results. The assessment of Eucalypts in the region was aided by Dean Nicolle’s latest edition of Native Eucalypts of South Australia (2013), where Dean has provided a preliminary assessment of the status for AMLR species. Nineteen experts were involved in the consultation process for fauna, and 28 experts for flora. Other people involved included those assisting with data capture and GIS support. See Appendix 4.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 8
During workshops, all native species occurring within the project area were assessed against the criteria and then rated accordingly. All categories, criteria, trends and any relevant comments were recorded for each species, and later collated into a spreadsheet. Species were removed from the project area if the panels of experts found records of that species to be: vagrant; introduced; not occurring in the project area but mapped due to inaccurate location or identification, and/or highly doubtful (see Appendices 14a and 14b). New species identified by the panel that had been formally published and were known to occur in the project area were included, as were accidentally omitted species, or species where no data had been entered into BDBSA. Records that were dubious, incorrectly identified, or found to be in the wrong location were flagged for further vetting, and if necessary, removed from the project data set. These records (41 fauna and 574 flora records), were listed and given to the relevant database personnel for validation/correction. 2.5 Data Analysis A range of information may be extracted from the final datasets, whether it be per species, per taxonomic group, etc., based on ratings and/or trends, depending on the information required. All status ratings and trends allocated to species at an IBRA subregional level were assigned a score in accordance with the level of threat, and then averaged across the two IBRA subregions, to establish a broader project area rating and trend (Tables 2a and 2b). Scores were totalled across subregions per species, then divided by the number of subregions the species occurred in. Ratings of Regionally Extinct or Not Evaluated in a subregion were not counted, as were ratings and/or trends of Data Deficient species. All final scores were manually checked for discrepancies, and corrected. Scores given to trends were divided by 10 to produce a value of less than 1, so they could be added to regional status ratings, to establish groups with particular ratings and trends (Appendix 5). For example, all species classified as regionally Critically Endangered with a Definite Decline were given a score of 6.5 (i.e. 6+0.5=6.5). Existing information contained within the DEWNR GIS layer Conservation: Protected Areas Statistics Analysis allowed further extraction of data to analyse the percentage of records for each species occurring within protected and unprotected areas. In this analysis, species were deemed to have been afforded some protection if, on the basis of database records, 15% or more of records occurred in a protected area (Figures 2 and 3; Appendices 10a and 10b). This 15% figure was chosen as it was felt to provide a reasonable indication of what species to target. Protected areas include all land under formal conservation agreements, which are: national parks, conservation parks and reserves, recreation parks, heritage agreements, sanctuaries, wilderness protection areas, native forest reserves, Ramsar reserves, aquatic reserves and water reserves managed for conservation. Sanctuaries were also included in this category, although not formally protected. As widespread land clearance occurred throughout SA before the implementation of clearance controls under the Planning Act 1983, later replaced in 1985 by the Native Vegetation Management Act, only records from the ‘Recent’ time period (1994–2013) were used in this analysis, to better reflect the location of species today. This period was also considered relevant for the project area due to the relatively continuous reporting of species in the region. Fifteen flora species without records were not included in this analysis. Threatened species richness was calculated, firstly by filtering out all except Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable species’ records. Using 1 km2 grid cells over the project area, the number of individual threatened species (not records) within each grid cell was counted, from all BDBSA records. Using ESRI® GIS ArcInfo software, the Spatial Analyst Extension ‘Kernel Density’ was employed to calculate the density of threatened species richness, which was then presented on maps in raster and contour form (Figures 4, 5 and 6). The patterns shown in the results are to some extent influenced by survey effort, however, high levels of patch scale richness are also indicated by unique ecosystems.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 9
3. Data limitations A number of limitations to the data were identified during this phase of the project. Spatial inaccuracy of records was a common problem (particularly older/historical SA Herbarium and SA Museum records). The small scale of the IBRA subregions caused any spatially incorrect records occurring near the boundary of a subregion to often occur in an adjacent region, giving a false indication of occurrence of that particular species in the IBRA subregion. Whilst this was of little importance for common and/or wide-ranging species, it was significant for all other species, especially those occurring in and/or restricted to protected areas (e.g. Reserves or Heritage Agreements). As ratings were allocated to species occurring within each subregion, great care was taken to identify incorrectly located records, to avoid incorrectly rating species. Whilst every effort was taken to identify incorrectly located records, particularly those occurring in the wrong region, it was not within the scope of the project to assess all records for their accuracy. Thousands of records in BDBSA are recorded to genus level only and noted as ‘sp.’, particularly flora species, precluding these species/records from assessment, as the individual species was not known. Similarly, there are thousands of flora records listed as Non Current (NC) in BDBSA, which means that the taxonomy is not current, and that these species are in the process of being/or have since been renamed or split into subspecies. As stated in Section 2.2, NC records/species were included in the assessment process, either with the closest current taxonomic entity or as a NC species. Numerous flora specimens have not yet been data-based because specimens are out on loan to other Herbaria, and other datasets are known to exist from past projects, which were not (yet) made available to BDBSA. This lack of captured data under-represented the distribution and knowledge we have of certain species, particularly flora, and made the assessment of status and often trends, more difficult, or at times, not possible, with Data Deficient as the resultant classification. Flora species in a state of taxonomic flux were recorded to have ‘taxonomic issues’ and were not assessed, but were given the status of Not Evaluated (NE). All preliminary statistics were calculated on the location of records within subregions. These figures should only be used as an estimation of the occurrence of species within subregions during the assessment process, as many records were removed or moved, hence altering the initial calculations of number and percentage of species within each region. It should also be stated that the data within BDBSA are largely a reflection of many biological and scientific surveys that have taken place over a considerable period of time, and hence records are heavily biased towards areas where those surveys have occurred. There are 204 fauna survey sites and 1971 flora survey sites in the AMLR NRM Region, with the first surveys beginning in 1977. Many of the survey sites were concentrated in the western two-thirds of the project area, due to past vegetation clearance patterns (Armstrong et al. 2003) which may not always give an accurate indication of the overall geographic distribution and/or abundance of a species. This issue, however, was taken into consideration whilst evaluating species, through the knowledge and expert opinion of those attending the workshops. 4. Results The Regional Species assessments saw the review of 443 fauna and 1563 flora species in the project area. Six fauna workshops were conducted, and 14 workshops were held to assess flora (see Appendices 4a and 4b). Table 3 shows the number of species per group that were reviewed, assessed and removed, with a total of 374 native fauna species and 1410 native vascular plant species evaluated. The results will form a biodiversity baseline for the project area from which to build future assessments, and also inform Phase 2 of the project (see Section 5.1).
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 10
Table 3. Number of species per group that were reviewed, assessed and removed, including totals
Group Reviewed Removed* Assessed
Fauna Birds (land) 178 10 168
Birds (w ater) 110 37 73
Mammals 51 6 45
Reptiles/Amphibians 78 14 64
Freshw ater Fish 26 2 24
Insect 1 0 1
Total Fauna 444 69 375
Flora Aquatic 35 0 35
Chenopods 62 12 50
Daisies 174 19 155
Ferns 36 0 36
Grasses 143 13 130
Herbs & Forbs 284 18 266
Legumes 115 24 91
Myrtles 65 5 60
Orchids 160 8 152
Seagrasses 12 7 5
Sedges 132 5 127
Shrubs 318 38 280
Trees 16 4 12
Vines 11 0 11
Total Flora 1563 153 1410 *’Removed’ refers to species where records were found to be wrongly identified and/or located, vagrant, introduced or other reason (see Appendix 14), in the project area, during the workshop process (see Section 2.4).
4.1 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges project area Across the AMLR project area, 33% (34% fauna, 32% flora) of all species were considered highly threatened (that is, Vulnerable, Endangered or Critically Endangered). If species classed as “Rare” and “Near Threatened” are included in the analysis, then the percentage of “species at risk” rises to an average of 69% (65% fauna, 73% flora; Tables 4 and 6). In addition, an average of 36% of all species (41% fauna, 31% flora) were believed to be in a state of decline (Table 5 and 7). Conversely, 24% of fauna and 18% of flora were rated as Least Concern (Tables 4 and 6), inferring that they were widespread and/or abundant, with 35% of fauna and almost half (46%) of flora considered to be Stable in terms of trend (Tables 5 and 7). Refer to Section 2.5 for methods used to derive these figures. In the Data Deficient category, 2% (6) of fauna species were not rated and 7% (27) were not given a trend, as there was insufficient knowledge of those species (Tables 4-5). Similarly, 3% (47) of flora species were not rated and 16% (225) of species were not allocated a trend (Tables 6-7). The major fauna group presenting as Data Deficient, particularly in trend, was Mammals, with no trend allocated to 36% (16) of species (Table 5). Of the 16 mammals, nine of those were bat species. The ephemeral nature of particular plant life in the region also made assessing trends somewhat difficult. Data Deficient species indicate knowledge gaps and should be targeted for further research and survey work. Three percent (46) of flora species were Not Evaluated due to current changes in taxonomy (Table 6). A total of 37 fauna (13 mammal, 13 bird, 6 reptile/amphibian, 4 freshwater fish, 1 insect) species (10%) were considered to have become regionally extinct in the AMLR Region. This indicates that there have been no recorded sightings of these species for at least 50 years, or, that they failed to be located after appropriate surveys for the species were conducted (Table 4). Likewise, there are considered to have been 38 (3%) flora species extinctions in the region (Table 6).
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 11
Table 4. Number and percentage of fauna species per status category, All (shaded) and per Class, for the project area
Total species (incl. Extinct) 375 100 45 100 241 100 64 100 24 100 1 100
Overall Adelaide &
Mount Lofty Ranges
Regional Trend
All Fauna Mammals Birds
Reptiles/
Amphibians
Freshwater
Fish Insect
Table 6. Number and percentage of flora species per status category for the project area
Overall Adelaide & Mount Lofty
Ranges Regional Status Total %
Regionally Extinct 38 3
Critically Endangered 54 4
Endangered 124 9
Vulnerable 267 19
Rare 382 27
Near Threatened 195 14
Least Concern 257 18
Data Deficient 47 3
Not Evaluated 46 3
Total species (incl. Extinct) 1410 100
Total extant species 1372 97 Table 7. Number and percentage of flora species per trend category for the project area
Overall Adelaide & Mount Lofty
Ranges Regional Trend Total %
Definite Decline 31 2
Probable Decline 407 29
Stable/No Change 654 46
Probable Increase 9 1
Definite Increase 0 0
Data Deficient 225 16
(Regionally Extinct) 38 3
(Not Evaluated) 46 3
Total species (incl. Extinct) 1410 100
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 12
4.2 IBRA Subregions / IMCRA Regions Appendices 6–9 display the numbers and percentages of species per status rating and trend, per subregion. Both IBRA subregions showed similar percentages of species in most status categories, for both flora and fauna (Appendices 6 and 8). There were relatively minor differences with fauna in the Regionally Extinct category, with 11% (36 spp) in the Mount Lofty Ranges (MLR) IBRA, and 7% (24 spp) in the Fleurieu. Twelve fauna species (4%) were rated as Data Deficient in the Fleurieu, while only 3 species (1%) were Data Deficient in the MLR (Appendix 6). With flora status, minor differences were apparent in the Rare and Data Deficient categories; 28% (355 spp) were Rare in the Fleurieu, while 23% (275 spp) were Rare in the MLR; 5% (58) of species were Data Deficient in the MLR, while 2% (28 spp) were Data Deficient in the Fleurieu (Appendix 8). Likewise, the trend categories were very similar across both IBRA subregions for flora and fauna, with no category showing a difference of greater than 3% (Appendices 7 and 9). Appendices 13a and 13b display the species lists, including ratings, trends and comments, for the two IMCRA Regions that border the AMLR Region – St Vincent Gulf and Coorong. The species assessments for these IMCRA regions can be found in the following Regional Species Conservation Assessment reports: Northern & Yorke (2008) – St Vincent Gulf IMCRA; and South East (2011) – Coorong IMCRA. 4.3 Species in protected and unprotected areas Species were deemed to be protected if 15% or more records fell within protected areas. This highlights records that fall into areas that have been established for conservation purposes, and therefore deal with a range of species protection issues. However, it is critical to recognise that there are numerous threats to species that operate across all land tenures including protected areas. To better represent the protected status of a species, frequency distributions of the percentage of all flora and fauna records occurring within protected areas were calculated, and shown alongside the same for threatened (CR, EN, VU) species (Figures 2 and 3). For example, results in Figure 2 show that 112 flora species in the project area had between 21 and 30% of their records (from 1994 – 2013) in protected areas. Records that did not occur in protected areas were shown as 0%. This gave a better indication of how well protected species actually were. Appendices 10a and 10b show the number of AMLR regionally rated flora and fauna species per status rating in protected and unprotected areas, based on data records classified as ‘Recent’ (1994-2013). Overall, the majority of all flora species records (82%, 1008 spp) occur within the reserve system, as do 72% (274 spp) of threatened flora species records. By the same token, 18% (214 spp) of flora records occur outside of this system, as do 28% (109 spp) of threatened flora species records (Fig. 2, Appendix 10a). Flora species poorly represented in protected areas, with less than 15% (used for the purpose of this project) of their records in the reserve system in the AMLR project area, are listed in Table 8. Within the fauna species groups, 82% (185 spp) of bird records and 75% of reptile and amphibian records occur within the protected area network, with a similarly high percentage for threatened bird and reptile/amphibian records – 80% protected for both groups. Mammal species’ records showed 68% (19 spp) to be within the reserve system, with 100% (2 spp) of threatened mammal species. Freshwater fish showed only 29% (5 spp) of species records in protected areas, leaving 71% (12 spp) unprotected. Of the eight threatened freshwater fish species, only 25% (2) occur in reserves, while 75% (6) do not (Fig. 3, Appendix 10b). Table 9 shows which threatened fauna species have less than 15% of their records occurring in protected areas, in the AMLR project area. Similar lists could also be extracted for ‘unprotected’ species listed as Rare. The results show that the majority of both flora and fauna records fall within the reserve system, highlighting the importance of managing risks to species within this system.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 13
Percentage of Records in Protected Areas (1994 - 2013)
All Species
Threatened Species
Fig. 2. Frequency distributions of the percentage of All Flora records (black bars) and Threatened (VU, EN, CR) flora records (grey bars) from 1994-2013 occurring within protected areas Flora (1222/383). Numbers in brackets denote number of species for all/threatened records.
Note that records of species in the 0 % column do not occur in protected areas. Regionally extinct (38) and species with no records (15) are not included in this analysis.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 14
Percentage of Records in Protected Areas (1994 - 2013)
Fig. 3. Frequency distributions of the percentage of all fauna records (black bars) and threatened (VU, EN, CR) fauna records (grey bars) from 1994-2013 occurring within protected areas, showing Mammals (28/2), Birds (226/101), Reptiles & Amphibians (56/10) and Freshwater Fish (17/8). Numbers in brackets denote number of species for all/threatened records. Note that
records of species in the 0 % column do not occur in protected areas (i.e. all of the records of seven bird species occur in unprotected areas). Regionally extinct species (37) are not included in this analysis.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 15
Table 8. Threatened flora species with less than 15% of their records occurring in protected areas in the AMLR project area. CR = Critically Endangered, EN = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable.
Teucrium sessiliflorum Mallee Germander VU 3 0 100
Thelymitra peniculata Blue Star Sun-orchid VU 13 8 92
Trithuria submersa Trithuria VU 3 0 100
Trymalium wayi Grey Trymalium VU 38 5 95
Vallisneria australis River Eel-grass VU 1 0 100
Villarsia reniformis Running Marsh-flow er VU 1 0 100
Walwhalleya proluta Rigid Panic VU 9 11 89
Westringia rigida Stiff Westringia VU 1 0 100
Wilsonia rotundifolia Round-leaf Wilsonia VU 1 0 100
Zygophyllum confluens Forked Tw inleaf VU 8 0 100 4.4 Threatened species richness Species richness is the number of species at a given site, habitat or defined geographic region (Burgman and Lindenmayer 1998). Species richness for all species in the project area classified as either regionally Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable, was mapped to show ‘hotspots’, or concentrations of threatened species (Figures 4, 5 and 6). The woodland and shrubland habitats of the region form a virtual island, surrounded by ocean on the western and southern sides, and the drier more open woodland and mallee habitats on the plains to the east and north. Since European settlement around 87% of the native vegetation in the region has been cleared, largely for grazing, agriculture, forestry and urban development, with around 13% remaining (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board 2014; Armstrong et al. 2003). The remaining native vegetation is mostly on poor quality soils or in steep and inaccessible areas, and is now fragmented into many small islands, around 22% of which is protected within conservation agreements (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board 2014). Despite the extensive vegetation clearance and relatively small size, the region is an area of high biodiversity, supporting a large number of native flora and fauna species. Many taxa in the region exist as outliers or isolated populations from the greater extent of their
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 17
Table 9. Threatened fauna species with less than 15% of their records occurring in protected areas in the AMLR project area. CR = Critically Endangered, EN = Endangered, VU = Vulnerable.
OSTEICHTHYES Gadopsis marmoratus River Blackfish CR 31 10 90
OSTEICHTHYES Nannoperca australis Southern Pygmy Perch EN 99 6 94
OSTEICHTHYES Tandanus tandanus Freshw ater Catfish EN 4 0 100
OSTEICHTHYES Galaxias brevipinnis Climbing Galaxias VU 50 12 88
OSTEICHTHYES Galaxias olidus Mountain Galaxias VU 268 8 92 natural distribution in the south-east of Australia, resulting in a number of endemic species and subspecies (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board 2008; Armstrong et al. 2003). The region supports a range of important vegetation communities and habitats including grasslands; grassy woodlands; heathy woodlands; heathy open forests; shrublands; and mallee. Other significant ecosystems comprise coastal systems such as cliffs, dunes and estuaries; and inland water systems including swamps, wetlands, water courses and constructed water bodies (e.g. reservoirs and dams). At first glance, the richness of threatened fauna and flora species in the project area appears to be quite widespread, with the main exception being the upper half of the Fleurieu IBRA subregion, in the vicinity of Eden Valley and Mount Pleasant (Figures 4, 5 and 6). On closer inspection, however, the hotspots appear to be centred mostly on existing protected areas and some artificial systems (e.g. constructed wetland systems), potentially indicating specific and highly significant habitats. For threatened fauna species hotspots include the coastal regions around Port Elliot, Victor Harbor (including the Inman and Hindmarsh River inlets), Newland Head Conservation Park (CP), Aldinga Scrub CP and the Onkaparinga River National Park (NP) and estuary. These areas are heavily influenced by threatened wader and wetland bird species, which make up 34% (43 spp) all threatened fauna. Inland, threatened fauna hotspots comprise Scott CP and the Finniss River area; Cox Scrub CP and adjoining Kuitpo Forest area; Monarto area; Mt Barker wetlands and summit; Mount Bold Reservoir Reserve and Scott Creek CP; large reserves on the Hills Face Zone including Belair NP, Cleland CP, Black Hill CP and Ansteys Hill Recreation Park (RP); Kangaroo Creek and Millbrook Reservoir Reserves; Para Wirra RP; Barossa, South Para and Warren Reservoir Reserves; Sandy Creek CP and Kaiserstuhl CP. Threatened flora species hotspots also include Newland Head CP and the Inman and Hindmarsh River inlets on the southern Fleurieu coast, plus Deep Creek CP. Inland on the Fleurieu Peninsula, Mt Billy CP, Spring Mount CP, Myponga Reservoir area, Mount Compass area (which includes the Fleurieu Swamp systems) and Cox Scrub all present as significant threatened flora hotspots, as well as the Monarto area. In the MLR IBRA subregion, major
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 18
threatened flora species richness is shown once again around the Hills Face Zone, plus the Para Wirra RP, and the Barossa, South Para and Warren Reservoir Reserve complex, and Kaiserstuhl CP. All of these reserves and reserves surrounding water courses/bodies (Fig. 6) preserve a considerable portion of the remaining native vegetation and habitats in the project area and are therefore highly important to biodiversity conservation. For fauna and even more so for flora, there is a general decrease or absence in the number of threatened species in the upper two thirds of the Fleurieu IBRA subregion, shown as the whiter area in Figures 4, 5 and 6. This is due largely to broad-scale clearance and alteration of habitat for agricultural and pastoral purposes, and also the probable lack of surveys and recognition of grassy ecosystems in this sector of the Fleurieu subregion. The AMLR Region comprises a diverse range of environmental associations which provide an important area for biodiversity conservation in the higher rainfall areas of South Australia. The region has been extensively cleared for grazing and dryland agriculture, with the remaining native vegetation existing generally as isolated patches of various sizes and conditions, situated amongst urban and agricultural land uses. Around 90% of these remnants are less than 31 hectares in size and 45% of those are less than six hectares (Willson and Bignall 2009). The largest tracts of remnant native vegetation in the AMLR region include the Scott Creek CP/Mount Bold Reservoir complex, Deep Creek CP, Morialta CP/Black Hill CP complex, and the Para Wirra RP and adjoining Reservoir Reserves including South Para, Barossa and Warren. Remnant vegetation communities are disproportionally represented due to past selective clearance patterns, with the most dominant vegetation type in the region now heathy woodland (Willson and Bignall 2009). Despite this, the region still comprises a wide range of vegetation types, ecological communities and ecosystems, which in turn supports a broad range of flora and fauna. As such, the Mount Lofty Ranges, along with Kangaroo Island, is recognised as one of 15 national biodiversity hotspots in Australia (Department of the Environment 2014). Threatened species in these ecosystems and habitats are, however, subject to a range of impacts which are collectively contributing to species decline (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board 2014; Willson and Bignall 2009). Whilst the historical action of extensive native vegetation clearance has negatively impacted many species, there are many ongoing actions which continue to place stress on threatened native flora and fauna in the region. Residential and commercial development; habitat fragmentation; competition and land degradation by feral goats and rabbits; predation by feral cats and the European Red Fox; the plant pathogen Phytophthora; weed invasion; inappropriate fire regimes; disruption of water regimes and water contamination; disease (e.g. chytrid fungus in amphibians; and beak and feather disease in threatened bird species) all present as considerable threats, as well as the implications of climate change (Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board 2008; Willson and Bignall 2009). Many of the hotspots identified are concentrated around existing protected areas, mentioned above. There are, however, still threatened species with little to no formal habitat protection (listed in Tables 8 and 9) and a range of other species-rich areas, such as road reserves, which are subject to a range of threatening processes. This highlights the need to identify and effectively manage the threatening processes in these significant areas, to safeguard the species they contain. This correlates with Goal 1 under the state’s No Species Loss Strategy (DEH 2007), which is to maintain, improve and reconstruct habitats to prevent the further loss of species in South Australia.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 19
Fig. 4. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges project area threatened fauna species richness. The number of
Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable fauna species were calculated within 1 km2 grid cells over the project area, from all BDBSA records. Using ESRI® ArcGIS software, the Spatial Analyst Extension ‘Kernel Density’ was employed to calculate the density of threatened species richness, and presented in raster and contour form. *NB: BDBSA records are largely a reflection of biological and scientific surveys that have occurred over the last 30 years and are biased towards areas
where those surveys have occurred.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 20
Fig. 5. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges project area threatened flora species richness. The number of Critically
Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable flora species were calculated within 1 km2 grid cells over the project area, from all BDBSA records. Using ESRI® ArcGIS software, the Spatial Analyst Extension ‘Kernel Density’ was employed to
calculate the density of threatened species richness, and presented in raster and contour form. *NB: BDBSA records are largely a reflection of biological and scientific surveys that have occurred over the last 30 years and are biased towards areas
where those surveys have occurred.
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014 21
Fig. 6. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges project area threatened species richness. The number of Critically
Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable fauna and flora species were calculated within 1 km2 grid cells over the project area, from all BDBSA records. Using ESRI® ArcGIS software, the Spatial Analyst Extension ‘Kernel Density’ was employed to calculate the density of threatened species richness, and presented in raster and contour form. *NB: BDBSA records are largely a reflection of biological and scientific surveys that have occurred over the last 30 years and are biased towards areas
where those surveys have occurred.
22 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
4.5 Species lists and data availability Complete lists of the assessed fauna and flora for the AMLR project area are incorporated in Appendices 7 and 8, which include the regional rating and trend for each species. Also included are the current Environmental Protection & Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 and National Parks & Wildlife (NPW) Act 1972 status ratings. Comments from expert panels are included in Appendices 7a and 8a. The full list of criteria and comments is also available through the following web link: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/managing-natural-
Conservation_Assessment_Project, and on CD-Rom, as well as all distribution maps used in the assessment process. Species lists according to DEWNR Regions, IBRA subregions and/or IMCRA regions may also be extracted through EnvMaps: http://maps.env.sa.gov.au/index.html (DEWNR Staff access only), and NatureMaps: http://www.naturemaps.sa.gov.au/ (public website). Species data are accessible through the layers that are available in the “Flora and Fauna > Regional / Subregional Status” folder. Tabular and map summaries of project outputs (conservation ratings by Region and IBRA subregion) are accessible under “CONSERVATION.RSCA…” on the corporate spatial data engine (SDE) at: egisdata.deh.sa.gov.au.sde. A record of species removed after workshops is also included in Appendices 14a and 14b. Species lists have been presented in a user-friendly format, with the fauna list provided in two formats:
1) in order of most to least threatened per Regional Rating (Status plus Trend), per Class
2) in taxonomic sequence, as per A List of the Vertebrates of South Australia (Robinson et al. 2000).
Similarly, the flora list is provided in two formats: 1) in order of most to least threatened per Regional Rating (Status plus Trend) 2) in alphabetical order of Scientific Name.
As stated in Section 4.2, IUCN status ratings, criteria, trends and comments are listed for species in the adjoining IMCRA regions – Coorong IMCRA and St Vincent Gulf IMCRA – in Appendices 13a and 13b. 5. Summary The Status Assessment Process (Phase 1) of the Regional Species Conservation Assessment project has developed a rigorous and repeatable process, whereby all data-based fauna and flora species in South Australia can be assessed at a fine spatial scale, based on the best available science and information, and using the expertise and knowledge of skilled and competent persons from various specialist fields. Whilst recognising that the data have limitations, status ratings, trends and any other worthwhile information captured at workshops provides valuable regional baseline data on biodiversity, from which informed management and policy decisions can be made. This is the first time an assessment of species’ conservation status for all native vertebrate fauna and vascular flora has been undertaken at a NRM regional, not to mention IBRA subregional/IMCRA regional level, in South Australia. Applications of data captured in Phase 1 include:
1) Identifying gaps in knowledge where information on particular species is poor 2) Identifying a range of regionally threatened and declining species not previously
identified 3) Informing DEWNR Protected Areas systems on a wide range of matters 4) Informing DEWNR Regional Fire Management plans and operations 5) Assisting in the identification of threatening processes affecting a range of species,
supporting a multi-species and landscape-scale management approach
23 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
6) Increasing awareness and interest in a broader range of threatened species, among other applications.
It is envisaged that the data be incorporated into and advise species’ management and recovery plans, and landscape assessments and projects for the AMLR NRM Region. This technical report and data are also provided to be used as a tool and guiding document to inform Regional Targets in the AMLR Regional NRM Plan. 5.1 Next steps The information captured in Phase 1 provides information regarding the status and trend of species in the landscape of the AMLR NRM Region as derived from an expert model. This information can be used to inform conservation planning frameworks that are currently being developed by DEWNR-NRM Board partnerships, to identify both the systemic conservation issues operating at a landscape scale and tending to influence biodiversity at ecosystem or ecological community scales (‘coarse-filters’). This Phase 1 information can also inform additional idiosyncratic issues (‘fine-filters’) affecting species of concern that have specific or unusual habitat or life-history requirements. From a conservation planning perspective, a highly valuable next step would be to obtain information (particularly from experts but including by undertaking analyses where possible) regarding:
the ecological processes that are responsible for the suggested declines (e.g. loss of particular habitats, weed invasion, introduced predators), and
the ecological conservation requirements of species that are thought to be declining. In addition, the AMLR Phase 1 data provides material for the second phase of the project. Phase 2, or the Prioritisation Process, seeks to use multiple criteria to identify a priority list of species most in need of conservation management and which have the greatest chance of recovery. Criteria for species to be assessed against include:
Probability of extinction (determined by regional status ratings and trend)
Consequences of extinction (ecological values, evolutionary values, social values, taxonomic uniqueness)
Potential for successful recovery (knowledge of threatening processes, capacity to affect recovery, need for ongoing management).
Once a priority list of species is established (Phase 2), it is envisaged that this information will then be used to inform decisions by identifying common threats and actions, and to inform resource allocation to deliver the greatest conservation benefit. With this additional information, assessments of landscapes can be undertaken to inform the development of goals, targets and activities to meet the conservation requirements of these landscapes.
24 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
References
Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board (2008) 'Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Plan. Volume A - State of the Region Report.' Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board, South Australia. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board (2014) 'Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Plan. Volume 1 - Part 1. Strategic Plan 2014-15 to 2023-24.' Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural Resources Management Board, South Australia. Armstrong D., Croft S., and Foulkes J. (Eds) (2003) 'A Biological Survey of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia, 2000-2001.' (Department for Environment and Heritage: South Australia) Burgman M.A., and Lindenmayer D.B. (1998) 'Conservation Biology for the Australian Environment.' (Surrey Beatty & Sons: Chipping Norton, NSW) DEH (2007) 'No Species Loss: A Nature Conservation Strategy for South Australia 2007-2017.' Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide. Department of the Environment (2014) Australia's 15 National Biodiversity Hotspots. Australian Government. Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/biodiversity/biodiversity-conservation/biodiversity-hotspots/national-biodiversity-hotspots: (accessed 20th May 2014). Gillam S. (2009) 'A Regional Species Conservation Assessment Process for South Australia - Phase 2 Report: Species Prioritisation.' Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. Gillam S., and Urban R. (2008) 'Species Risk Assessment Pilot Project Phase 1 Report: Regional Species Conservation Assessments, Northern and Yorke Region.' Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. Gillam S., and Urban R. (2011) 'Regional Species Conservation Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report: Regional Species Status Assessments, South East Region.' Department of Environment and Natural Resources, South Australia. Government of South Australia (2012) 'Our Place. Our Future. State Natural Resources Management Plan. South Australia 2012 - 2017.' Adelaide. IUCN (2001) 'IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1.' IUCN Species Survival Commission., IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN (2012a) 'Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: Version 4.0.' IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN (2012b) 'IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1 Second edition.' IUCN., Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee (2013) 'Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 10.1.' IUCN., Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN Standards and Petitions Working Group (2008) 'Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 7.0.' IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Joseph L.N., Maloney R.F., and Possingham H.P. (2009) Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: a project prioritization protocol. Conservation Biology 23, 328-338.
Lindenmayer D.B., Manning A.D., Smith P.L., Possingham H.P., Fischer J., Oliver I., and McCarthy M.A. (2002) The Focal-Species Approach and Landscape Restoration: a Critique. Conservation Biology 16,
338-345. Mace G.M., Possingham H.P., and Leader-Williams N. (2006) Prioritizing choices in conservation. Conservation Biology 20, 17-34.
Marsh H., Dennis A., Hines H., Kutt A., McDonald K., Weber E., Williams S., and Winter J. (2007) Optimizing Allocation of Management Resources for Wildlife. Conservation Biology 21, 387-399.
25 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
McCarthy M.A., Thompson C.J., and Garnett S.T. (2008) Optimal investment in conservation of species. Applied Ecology 45, 1428-1435.
Morton S.R., Hoegh-Guldberg O., et al. (2009) The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia. Austral Ecology 34, 1-9.
Nicolle D. (2013) 'Native Eucalypts of South Australia.' (Adelaide, South Australia) Owens H., and Graham A. (Eds) (2009) 'Census of South Australian Vertebrates (Fourth edn).' (Department of Environment & Natural Resources: South Australia) Robinson A., Casperson K., and Hutchinson M. (Eds) (2000) 'A List of the Vertebrates of South Australia (Third edn).' (Department for Environment and Heritage: Adelaide) Willson A., and Bignall J. (2009) 'Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species and Ecological Communities of Adelaide and the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia.' Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia. Wilson K.A., McBride M.F., Bode M., and Possingham H.P. (2006) Prioritizing global conservation efforts. Nature 440, 337-340.
26 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 1. Landscape description for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges IBRA subregions
(Source: DEWNR).
IBRA Subregion
Code
IBRA Subregion
Name Description
FLB1 Mount Lofty
Ranges
This subregion extends from north of the Fleurieu Peninsula to the Barossa Valley, and is predominantly an undulating to low hilly upland with steeper marginal ranges and hills. The Barossa Valley is the lowest area in this subregion and represents a structural basin. The rest of the subregion consists of hilly uplands on sandstone and shale with northerly trending strike ridges and dissected lateritic tableland remnants. Low open woodland commonly dominated by Eucalyptus obliqua and E. baxteri are found in higher rainfall areas on deep, lateritic soils. Shallower or sandy soils support E. fasciculosa, E cosmophylla and in the northern part of the region E. goniocalyx. E leucoxylon dominates the woodlands on podzolised soils in the lower rainfall areas, E. viminalis ssp. cygnetensis dominate the wetter and cooler woodlands and E. odorata characterises drier sites. Eucalypts give way to drooping sheoak (Allocasuarina verticillata) in the most arid woodlands and in coastal situations on shallow rocky soils.
KAN2 Fleurieu
This subregion is predominantly an undulating to low hilly upland with steeper marginal ranges and hills. A lateritized surface occurs on the Fleurieu Peninsula and becomes increasingly dissected northward to where only a few remnants survive as rounded crests and summits with mottled -yellow duplex soils. The lowest lying areas are within the Inman Valley where soft glacial and fluvio-glacial deposits have been lowered more quickly than the surrounding sedimentary rocks. Much of the native vegetation has been cleared, however some remains in reserves and small isolated inaccessible areas. Low open woodland commonly dominated by Eucalyptus obliqua and E. baxteri are found in higher rainfall areas on deep, lateritic soils. Shallower or sandy soils support E. fasciculosa, E cosmophylla and in the northern part of the region E. goniocalyx. E leucoxylon dominates the woodlands on podzolised soils in the lower rainfall areas, E. viminalis ssp. cygnetensis dominates the wetter and cooler woodlands and E. odorata characterises drier sites. Eucalypts give way to drooping sheoak (Allocasuarina verticillata) in the most arid woodlands and in coastal situations on shallow rocky soils.
27 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 2. Example of distribution map created for each species, showing the geographic range of the
species within the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges IBRA subregions, including the distribution in areas adjacent to the project area, within the map extent. Records were shown in three temporal groups: Recent (1994–2013); Historic (1964–1993); and Pre 1964 (all records prior to 1964), to assist in identifying possible trends. All flora maps showed the records as either BDBSA records or Herbarium SA (AD) records, easily distinguishing biological survey and opportune (sighting) records from records with vouchered herbarium specimens.
28 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 3a). Criteria for the threatened categories (CR, EN, VU) (source: IUCN 2001) plus Rare (Source: National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1972)
IUCN 2001 CATEGORIES AND CRITERIA
Criteria *Critically
Endangered CR
*Endangered EN
*Vulnerable VU
A. Reduction in population size based on any of the following:
1. An observed, estimated, inferred or suspected population size reduction over the last 10 years or three generations, whichever is the longer, where the causes of the reduction are clearly reversible AND understood AND ceased, based on (and specifying) any of the following:
(a) direct observation (b) an index of abundance appropriate to the taxon (c) a decline in area of occupancy, extent of occurrence and/or
quality of habitat (d) actual or potential levels of exploitation (e) the effects of introduced taxa, hybridization, pathogens,
pollutants, competitors or parasites.
2. An observed, estimated, inferred or suspected population size reduction over the last 10 years or three generations, whichever is the longer, where the reduction or its causes may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible, based on (and specifying) any of (a) to (e) under A1.
3. A population size reduction projected or suspected to be met within the next 10 years or three generations, whichever is the longer (up to a maximum of 100 years), based on (and specifying) any of (b) to (e) under A1.
4. An observed, estimated, inferred, projected or suspected population size reduction over any 10 year or three generation period, whichever is longer (up to a maximum of 100 years), where the time period includes both the past and the future, and where the reduction or its causes may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible, based on (and specifying) any of (a) to (e) under A1.
> 90%
> 80%
> 80%
> 80%
> 70%
> 50%
> 50%
> 50%
> 50%
> 30%
> 30%
> 30%
B. Geographic range in the form of either B1 (extent of occurrence) OR B2 (area of occupancy) OR both:
1. Estimated extent of occurrence (km2) and estimates indicating at least two of a-c:
a. Severely fragmented or # locations. b. Continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in any of
the following: (i) extent of occurrence (ii) area of occupancy (iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat (iv) number of locations or subpopulations (v) number of mature individuals.
c. Extreme fluctuations in any of the following: (i) extent of occurrence (ii) area of occupancy (iii) number of locations or subpopulations (iv) number of mature individuals.
2. Estimated area of occupancy (km2), and estimates indicating at least two of a-c:
a. Severely fragmented or # locations. b. Continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in any of
the following: (i) extent of occurrence (ii) area of occupancy (iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat (iv) number of locations or subpopulations (v) number of mature individuals. c. Extreme fluctuations in any of the following: (i) extent of occurrence (ii) area of occupancy (iii) number of locations or subpopulations
(iv) number of mature individuals.
<100 km2
= 1
<10km2
= 1
<5000 km2
≤ 5
<500km2
≤ 5
<20,000 km2
≤ 10
<2,000km2
≤ 10
29 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Criteria *Critically
Endangered CR
*Endangered EN
*Vulnerable VU
C. Population size estimated (# mature individuals) and either: 1. An estimated continuing decline, whichever is longer, (up to a maximum of 100 years in the future) OR 2. A continuing decline, observed, projected, or inferred, in numbers of mature individuals AND at least one of the following (a-b): (a) Population structure in the form of one of the following: (b) Extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals.
<250
25% in 3yr
or 1 generation
(i) no subpopn >50 mature individuals
or (ii) 90-100%
mature individuals in one subpopn
<2,500
20% in 5yr
or 2 generations
(i) no subpopn >250 mature individuals
or (ii) 95-100%
mature individuals in one subpopn
<10,000
10% in 10yr
or 3 generations
(i) no subpopn >1,000 mature
individuals or
(ii) 100% mature
individuals in one subpopn
D. Estimated population size ( # mature individuals).
<50
<250
1. <1,000
or 2. AoO <20km2 or # locations ≤5
E. Quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild (up to a maximum of 100 years).
>50% within
10yr or 3 generations
>20% within
20yr or 5 generations
>10% within
100yr
RARE CATEGORY AND CRITERIA Rare (RA) a. Reduced area of occupancy and/or extent of occurrence: Taxa that have disappeared
from >50% of their former area of occupancy and/or extent of occurrence and it is observed, estimated, inferred or suspected that further decline is continuing.
b. Declined in abundance: Taxa that have experienced a significant decline in abundance in >50% of their former area of occupancy and/or extent of occurrence and it is observed, estimated, inferred or suspected that further decline is continuing.
c. Small populations: Taxa where it is observed, estimated, inferred or suspected that the total population size numbers <3000 mature individuals and specifying any of the following:
i) Resident population ii) Regular visitors to the state (e.g. migratory taxa) iii) Irregular visitors to the state (e.g. in response to episodic rainfall events) iv) Taxa that are experiencing range extensions into SA, with data for other
areas showing that they are increasing in range and abundance.
d. Restricted extent of occurrence or area of occupancy: Taxa with either i) or ii)
i) Relatively limited extent of occurrence (e.g. approximately 10% or <20,000 km2 of area assessed)
ii) Relatively limited area of occupancy (e.g. approximately 1% or <2,000 km2 of area assessed) that is highly fragmented.
30 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 3b). Outline of each Status Category used in workshops (adapted from: Guidelines for
Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria V7.0 (2008) – all categories except Regionally Extinct and Rare; Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels V4.0 (IUCN 2012a) - Regionally Extinct category; National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1972 – Rare category).
Status Category Definition / Use
RE Regionally
Extinct
A taxon is Regionally Extinct when there is no reasonable doubt that the
last individual potentially capable of reproduction within the region has
died or disappeared from the region, or, in the case of a former visiting
taxon, individuals no longer visit the region.
CR Critically
Endangered
A taxon is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence
indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to E for Critically Endangered,
and it is therefore considered to be facing an extremely high risk of
extinction in the wild.
EN Endangered
A taxon is Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that
it meets any of the criteria A to E for Endangered, and it is therefore
considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild.
VU Vulnerable
A taxon is Vulnerable when the best available evidence indicates that it
meets any of the criteria A to E for Vulnerable, and it is therefore
considered to be facing a high risk of extinction in the wild.
RA Rare
A taxon is Rare if it occurs in small numbers, and the best available
evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to D for Rare, and it
is at some risk due to low numbers. Taxa in this category are usually
localised within restricted geographical areas or are thinly scattered
over a more extensive range. This may include taxa which are
perceived to be at risk for which there is insufficient information available
to assign them any other category, and taxa that are considered to be
dependent on ongoing conservation programs to prevent them moving
into the Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable categories.
NT Near
Threatened
A taxon is Near Threatened when it has been evaluated against the
criteria but does not qualify for Critically Endangered, Endangered,
Vulnerable or Rare now, but could qualify for a threatened category in
the future. This category is applied to taxa where populations are
‘uncommon’, i.e. if it occurs in relatively low numbers, and does not
meet the criteria for Rare.
LC Least
Concern
A taxon is Least Concern when it has been evaluated against the criteria
and does not qualify for Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable,
Rare or Near Threatened. Widespread and abundant taxa are included
in this category.
DD Data Deficient
A taxon is Data Deficient when there is inadequate information to make
a direct, or indirect, assessment of its risk of extinction based on its
distribution and/or population status. Listing of taxa in this category
indicates that more information is required and acknowledges the
possibility that future research will show that a threatened classification
may be appropriate. It is important to make positive use of whatever
data are available. In many cases great care should be taken in
choosing between DD and a threatened status. If the range of a taxon
is suspected to be relatively restricted, and/or if a considerable period of
time has elapsed since the last record of the taxon, threatened status
may be well justified.
NE Not Evaluated
A taxon is Not Evaluated when it has not been evaluated against the
criteria. (Used for flora with taxonomic issues and not rated.)
31 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 4a). Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Fauna workshops conducted
Workshop
Time spent
(hours)
# Species
reviewed
# Persons at
workshops
Birds (Land) 8.50 112 11
Birds (cont) 3.50 66 8
Birds (Water) 6.00 110 9
Reptiles & Amphibians 3.00 78 9
Mammals / Insect 8.00 52 15
Freshw ater Fish 3.00 26 9
Totals 32.00 444 b). Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Flora workshops conducted
32 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 5. Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region Overall Status and Trend Categories derived from weighted scores, showing number and percentage of fauna and flora species per category.
6.0 Critically Endangered + Data Deficient 3 0.8 7 0.5
5.5 Endangered + Definite Decline 7 1.9 12 0.9
5.4 Endangered + Probable Decline 18 4.8 86 6.1
5.3 Endangered + Stable 7 1.9 8 0.6
5.2 Endangered + Probable Increase - - - -
5.0 Endangered + Data Deficient 1 0.3 18 1.3
4.5 Vulnerable + Definite Decline 11 2.9 3 0.2
4.4 Vulnerable + Probable Decline 26 7.0 140 9.9
4.3 Vulnerable + Stable 20 5.3 59 4.2
4.2 Vulnerable + Probable Increase 1 0.3 - -
4.1 Vulnerable + Definite Increase - - - -
4.0 Vulnerable + Data Deficient 3 0.8 65 4.6
3.5 Rare + Definite Decline 4 1.1 3 0.2
3.4 Rare + Probable Decline 33 8.8 109 7.7
3.3 Rare + Stable 37 9.9 184 13.0
3.2 Rare + Probable Increase 4 1.1 2 0.1
3.1 Rare + Definite Increase 1 0.3 - -
3.0 Rare + Data Deficient 6 1.6 84 6.0
2.5 Near Threatened + Definite Decline 3 0.8 - -
2.4 Near Threatened + Probable Decline 17 4.5 38 2.7
2.3 Near Threatened + Stable 7 1.9 150 10.6
2.2 Near Threatened + Probable Increase 1 0.3 3 0.2
2.1 Near Threatened + Definite Increase - - - -
2.0 Near Threatened + Data Deficient 1 0.3 4 0.3
1.4 Least Concern + Probable Decline 8 2.1 2 0.1
1.3 Least Concern + Stable 56 15.0 251 17.8
1.2 Least Concern + Probable Increase 14 3.7 4 0.3
1.1 Least Concern + Definite Increase 6 1.6 - -
1.0 Least Concern + Data Deficient 7 1.9 - -
0.4 Data Deficient + Probable Decline - - - -
0.3 Data Deficient + Stable - - - -
0.0 Data Deficient + Data Deficient 6 1.6 47 3.3
- Not Evaluated - - 46 3.3
Total 375 100 1410 100
Overall Adelaide &
Mt Lofty Ranges
Score
(Status + Trend) Category (Status + Trend)
Fauna Flora
33 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 6. Number and percentage of fauna species per status rating per subregion. Fauna comprises Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians, Freshwater Fish and 1 Insect.
# % # %
RE Regionally Extinct 36 11 24 7
CR Critically Endangered 28 8 26 8
EN Endangered 24 7 31 9
VU Vulnerable 49 15 53 16
RA Rare 78 24 78 23
NT Near Threatened 22 7 25 7
LC Least Concern 91 27 91 27
DD Data Deficient 3 1 12 4
Total species (incl. Extinct) 331 100 340 100
Total extant species 295 89 316 93
Ab
bre
via
tio
nRegional Status
Mount
Lofty
Ranges
Fauna Species/Status
rating/Subregion
Fleurieu
Appendix 7. Number and percentage of fauna species per trend per subregion. Fauna comprises Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians, Freshwater Fish and 1 Insect.
# % # %
-- Definite Decline 35 12 33 10
- Probable Decline 90 31 105 33
0 Stable/No Change 124 42 128 41
+ Probable Increase 15 5 12 4
++ Definite Increase 9 3 6 2
DD Data Deficient 22 7 32 10
Total extant species 295 100 316 100
Sym
bo
l
Regional Trend
Mount
Lofty
Ranges
Fauna Species/Trend/
Subregion
Fleurieu
34 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 8. Number and percentage of flora species per status rating per subregion.
# % # %
RE Regionally Extinct 40 3 24 2
CR Critically Endangered 30 3 37 3
EN Endangered 86 7 84 7
VU Vulnerable 176 15 187 15
RA Rare 275 23 355 28
NT Near Threatened 176 15 216 17
LC Least Concern 305 26 301 24
DD Data Deficient 58 5 28 2
NE Not Evaluated 32 3 34 3
Total species (incl. Extinct) 1178 100 1266 100
Total extant species 1138 97 1242 98
Flora Species/Status
rating/Subregion
Fleurieu
Ab
bre
via
tio
nRegional Status
Mount
Lofty
Ranges
Appendix 9. Number and percentage of flora species per trend per subregion.
# % # %
-- Definite Decline 16 1 21 2
- Probable Decline 288 25 271 22
0 Stable/No Change 568 50 659 53
+ Probable Increase 8 1 4 0
++ Definite Increase 0 0 0 0
DD Data Deficient 226 20 253 20
(NE) (Not Evaluated) 32 3 34 3
Total extant species 1138 100 1242 100
Flora Species/Trend/
Subregion
Sym
bo
l
Regional Trend
Mount
Lofty
Ranges Fleurieu
35 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 10a). Number of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges flora species per status rating in protected and unprotected areas (1994-2013). All species records from 1994-2013 are shown (less
species without records (15)). Flora = 1222 spp. Species were deemed protected if 15% or more records fell within protected areas. Protected areas included National Parks, Conservation Parks and Reserves, Recreation Parks, Heritage Agreements, Sanctuaries, Wilderness Protection Areas, Native Forest Reserves, Ramsar Reserves, Aquatic Reserves and Water Reserves managed for conservation. Black bars denote protected species, grey bars denote unprotected species.
27
72
175
267
184
253
6
2412
35
6272
8 4 10 11
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
CR EN VU RA NT LC DD NE
Nu
mb
er
of
Spe
cie
s
Status of Adelaide & Mt Lofty Ranges Flora Species in Protected & Unprotected Areas (1994 - 2013)
Protected
Unprotected
36 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 Report July 2014
Appendix 10b). Number of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges fauna species per status rating in protected and unprotected areas (1994-2013). All species records from 1994-2013 are shown.
Mammals = 28 spp., Birds = 226 spp., Reptiles & Amphibians = 56 spp., Freshwater Fish = 17 spp. Species were deemed protected if 15% or more records fell within protected areas. Protected areas included National Parks, Conservation Parks and Reserves, Recreation Parks, Heritage Agreements, Sanctuaries, Wilderness Protection Areas, Native Forest Reserves, Ramsar Reserves, Aquatic Reserves and Water Reserves managed for conservation. Black bars denote protected species, grey bars denote unprotected species.
1 15 2
9
15
1 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
CR EN VU RA NT LC DD
Nu
mb
er
of
Mam
mal
sp
p.
Protected
Unprotected
1722
4235
21
48
5 69 9
1
11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
CR EN VU RA NT LC DD
Nu
mb
er
of
Bir
d s
pp
.
2 15
17
4
13
1 1 4 71
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
CR EN VU RA NT LC DDNu
mb
er
of
Re
pti
le &
A
mp
hib
sp
p.
2 32 2 2 3 1 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
CR EN VU RA NT LC DD
Nu
mb
er
of
Fre
shw
ate
r Fi
sh s
pp
.
Status of AMLR Fauna Species in Protected & Unprotected Areas(1994 - 2013)
37 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the project area, from most to least threatened. Status ratings and trends are shown for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (shaded), and each IBRA subregion, including IUCN status and criteria. Current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed. Species are listed per Class (Mammalia, Aves, Reptilia, Amphibia, Osteichthyes, Insecta), from most to least threatened per regional rating (status and trend), then in alphabetical order of Family Name, then Scientific Name.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient.
EPBC Status Codes: EX = extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable.
NPW Status Codes: X = extinct, E = endangered; V = vulnerable, R = rare.
Where status is listed as “ssp”, the status applies to a sub-specific level, but the resolution of the record in BDBSA is at a species level. Expert interpretation is required to resolve sub-specific taxonomy.
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
MAMMALIA ACROBATIDAE Acrobates pygmaeus Feathertail Glider E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA CANIDAE Canis lupus Feral Dog, Dingo RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Dasyurus viverrinus Eastern Quoll E RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Phascogale calura Red-tailed Phascogale EN E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Phascogale tapoatafa Brush-tailed Phascogale E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Lagostrophus fasciatus Banded Hare-w allaby EX RE RE RE
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus eugenii decres Tammar Wallaby RE RE RE
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus eugenii eugenii Tammar Wallaby EX E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA ORNITHORHYNCHIDAE Ornithorhynchus anatinus Platypus E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA PERAMELIDAE Perameles bougainville fasciata Western Barred Bandicoot (mainland) EX RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA POTORIDAE Bettongia lesueur Burrow ing Bettong EX E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA POTORIDAE Bettongia penicilliata Brush-tailed Bettong ssp ssp RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA THYLACOMYIDAE Macrotis lagotis Greater Bilby (Bilby) VU V RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA BURRAMYIDAE Cercartetus concinnus Western Pygmy-possum CR -- CR -- CR B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v) EN - EN B2ab(i,iii)
MAMMALIA PERAMELIDAE Isoodon obesulus obesulus Southern Brow n Bandicoot (SA and KI ssp) EN V EN - EN - EN B2ab(iii) EN - EN B2ab(iii)
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Antechinus flavipes Yellow -footed Antechinus V RA - RA - RA a NT - NT
MAMMALIA PHALANGERIDAE Trichosurus vulpecula Common Brushtail Possum R RA - RA - RA b RA - RA b
MAMMALIA PSEUDOCHEIRIDAE Pseudocheirus peregrinus Common Ringtail Possum RA - RA - RA b RA - RA b
MAMMALIA EMBALLONURIDAE Saccolaimus flaviventris Yellow -bellied Sheath-tailed Bat R RA 0 RA 0 RA c(iii)
MAMMALIA MURIDAE Rattus lutreolus Sw amp Rat R RA 0 RA 0 RA d(i,ii) NT DD NT
MAMMALIA OTARIIDAE Neophoca cinerea Australian Sea Lion VU V RA 0 RA 0 RA c(iii) RA 0 RA c(ii)
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus robustus Euro RA + RA + RA c(iv) RA DD RA c(i)
MAMMALIA OTARIIDAE Arctocephalus tropicalis Subantarctic Fur-seal VU E RA + RA + RA c(ii, iv)
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
38 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
MAMMALIA VOMBATIDAE Lasiorhinus latifrons Southern Hairy-nosed Wombat RA + RA + RA c(iv)
MAMMALIA PTEROPODIDAE Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying-fox VU R RA ++ RA ++ VU D1+2 - RA c(i,iv)
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo RA DD RA DD RA c(iii)
MAMMALIA MURIDAE Hydromys chrysogaster Water-rat RA DD RA DD RA d(i) RA DD RA d(i)
MAMMALIA VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat RA DD RA DD RA d(i)
MAMMALIA MURIDAE Rattus fuscipes Bush Rat NT 0 RA DD RA d(i) LC 0 LC
MAMMALIA TACHYGLOSSIDAE Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna NT DD NT DD NT NT DD NT
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface EN -- CR -- CR D VU - VU D1AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Calamanthus pyrrhopygius parkeri Chestnut-rumped Heathw ren (MLR ssp) E EN -- EN - EN D EN -- EN D
AVES CHARADRIIDAE Charadrius ruficapillus Red-capped Plover EN -- EN -- CR D - EN D EN -- CR D - EN D
AVES CHARADRIIDAE Vanellus tricolor Banded Lapw ing EN -- EN -- CR D - EN D EN -- CR D - EN D
AVES CLIMACTERIDAE Climacteris picumnus Brow n Treecreeper EN -- CR -- CR C2a(i) VU -- EN D - VU D1
AVES ESTRILDIDAE Stagonopleura guttata Diamond Firetail V EN -- EN -- EN D VU -- VU D1
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
40 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper R EN -- EN - CR D - EN D EN -- CR D - EN D
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Calamanthus (Hylacola) cautus Shy Heathw ren R EN - EN - CR D - EN D
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle E EN - EN - EN D EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle EN - EN - CR D - EN D EN - CR D - EN D
AVES CUCULIDAE Chalcites osculans Black-eared Cuckoo EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES HAEMATOPODIDAE Haematopus fuliginosus Sooty Oystercatcher R EN - EN 0 CR D - EN D EN - CR D - EN D
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Gliciphila melanops Taw ny-crow ned Honeyeater EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES PACHYCEPHALIDAE Falcunculus frontatus Crested Shriketit R EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES POMATOSTOMIDAE Pomatostomus superciliosus White-brow ed Babbler EN - EN - EN C2a(i) EN - EN C2a(i)
AVES RALLIDAE Lewinia pectoralis Lew in's Rail V EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES RALLIDAE Porzana tabuensis Spotless Crake R EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone R EN - EN - CR D - EN D EN - CR D - EN D
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Gallinago hardwickii Latham's Snipe R EN - EN - CR D - EN D EN - CR D - EN D
AVES TURDIDAE Zoothera lunulata Bassian Thrush R EN - EN - EN D EN - EN D
AVES CHARADRIIDAE Thinornis rubricollis Hooded Plover V EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES MEGAPODIIDAE Leipoa ocellata Malleefow l VU V EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Lichenostomus cratitius Purple-gaped Honeyeater ssp EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES PSITTACIDAE Neophema petrophila Rock Parrot R EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES ROSTRATULIDAE Rostratula australis Australian Painted Snipe VU V EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper R EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper EN 0 EN 0 CR D - EN D
AVES PETROICIDAE Drymodes brunneopygia Southern Scrub Robin EN DD EN DD EN D
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza pusilla Brow n Thornbill VU -- VU -- VU A2ab VU -- VU A2ab
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza uropygialis Chestnut-rumped Thornbill VU -- RE RE VU -- VU D1
AVES ANATIDAE Biziura lobata Musk Duck R VU -- VU - EN D - VU D1 VU -- EN D - VU D1
AVES ARDEIDAE Ardea ibis Cattle Egret R VU -- VU -- EN D - VU D1 VU -- EN D - VU D1
AVES ARTAMIDAE Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird VU -- VU -- EN D - VU D1 VU -- EN D - VU D1
AVES ESTRILDIDAE Taeniopygia guttata Zebra Finch VU -- VU -- EN D - VU D1 VU -- EN D - VU D1
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Epthianura albifrons White-fronted Chat VU -- VU -- VU D1 VU -- VU D1
AVES NEOSITTIDAE Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella VU -- VU -- VU D1 VU -- VU D1
AVES PETROICIDAE Petroica boodang Scarlet Robin ssp VU -- VU -- VU A2b; C1 VU -- VU C1; D1
AVES TIMALIIDAE Zosterops lateralis Silvereye VU -- VU -- VU A2b VU -- VU A2b
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
41 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza apicalis Inland Thornbill VU - VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Circus approximans Sw amp Harrier VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite VU - EN - EN D VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Pandion haliaetus Osprey E VU - VU - VU B2ab(iii) RA 0 RA c(iii)
AVES ALAUDIDAE Mirafra javanica Horsfield's Bush Lark VU - CR - CR D RA - VU D1 - RA c(iii)
AVES ANATIDAE Anas superciliosa Pacif ic Black Duck VU - VU - VU A1e RA - VU A1e - RA b
AVES ANATIDAE Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck R VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES CISTICOLIDAE Cisticola exilis Golden-headed Cisticola VU - VU 0 VU D1 VU - VU D1
AVES LARIDAE Hydroprogne caspia Caspian Tern VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES LARIDAE Thalasseus bergii Greater Crested Tern VU - RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) VU - EN B2ab(iii) -VU B2ab(iii)
AVES LOCUSTELLIDAE Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark VU - VU - VU D1 VU - VU D1
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Melithreptus lunatus White-naped Honeyeater VU - VU - VU A2bc RA - RA c(i)
AVES MEROPIDAE Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater VU - VU - VU D1 VU - VU D1
AVES PSITTACIDAE Neophema chrysostoma Blue-w inged Parrot V VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES PSITTACIDAE Northiella haematogaster Bluebonnet ssp VU - VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES PSITTACIDAE Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot VU - VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Calidris ruficollis Red-necked Stint VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES TURNICIDAE Turnix varius Painted Buttonquail R VU - VU - VU D1 VU - VU D1
AVES ANATIDAE Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck V VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ANATIDAE Tadorna tadornoides Australian Shelduck VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ANHINGIDAE Anhinga novaehollandiae Australasian Darter R VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ARDEIDAE Ardea alba Great Egret VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ARDEIDAE Ardea pacifica White-necked Heron VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ARDEIDAE Egretta garzetta Little Egret R VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ARDEIDAE Nycticorax caledonicus Nankeen Night Heron VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES CHARADRIIDAE Erythrogonys cinctus Red-kneed Dotterel VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES COLUMBIDAE Geopelia placida Peaceful Dove VU 0 VU 0 VU D1 VU 0 VU D1
AVES LARIDAE Chlidonias hybrida Whiskered Tern VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES LARIDAE Larus pacificus Pacif ic Gull VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES PODICIPEDIDAE Podiceps cristatus Great Crested Grebe R VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
42 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES RALLIDAE Porzana pusilla Baillon's Crake VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES RECURVIROSTRIDAE Himantopus himantopus Black-w inged Stilt VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES SCOLOPACIDAE Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Platalea flavipes Yellow -billed Spoonbill VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Platalea regia Royal Spoonbill VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES CASUARIIDAE Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu VU + VU + VU D1
AVES CACATUIDAE Calyptorhynchus funereus Yellow -tailed Black Cockatoo V VU DD VU DD VU D1 VU DD VU D1
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Nesoptilotis leucotis White-eared Honeyeater VU DD VU DD EN D - VU D1
AVES PSITTACIDAE Neophema elegans Elegant Parrot R VU DD VU DD VU D1 VU DD VU D1
AVES APODIDAE Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Sw ift RA -- RA -- RA c(ii) RA -- RA c(ii)
AVES ARTAMIDAE Artamus cyanopterus Dusky Woodsw allow RA -- RA -- RA c(i) RA -- RA c(i)
AVES CAMPEPHAGIDAE Lalage tricolor White-w inged Triller RA -- RA -- VU D1 - RA c(ii) RA -- VU D1 - RA c(ii)
AVES GLAREOLIDAE Stiltia isabella Australian Pratincole RA -- RA -- RA c(iii) RA -- RA c(iii)
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Circus assimilis Spotted Harrier RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES AEGOTHELIDAE Aegotheles cristatus Australian Ow let-nightjar RA - RA - RA c(i) RA - RA c(i)
AVES ANATIDAE Anas rhynchotis Australasian Shoveler R RA - RA - VU C1; D1 - RA c(i,iii) RA - VU C1; D1 - RA c(i,iii)
AVES ARTAMIDAE Artamus personatus Masked Woodsw allow RA - RA - RA c(ii) RA - RA c(ii)
AVES ARTAMIDAE Artamus superciliosus White-brow ed Woodsw allow RA - RA - RA c(ii) RA - RA c(ii)
AVES CACATUIDAE Nymphicus hollandicus Cockatiel RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES CAPRIMULGIDAE Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar RA - RA DD RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES COLUMBIDAE Phaps elegans Brush Bronzew ing RA - RA - RA c(i) RA - RA c(i)
AVES CUCULIDAE Cacomantis pallidus Pallid Cuckoo RA - RA - VU D1 - RA c(ii) RA - VU D1 - RA c(ii)
AVES FALCONIDAE Falco subniger Black Falcon RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES HIRUNDINIDAE Petrochelidon ariel Fairy Martin RA - RA 0 RA c(ii) RA - RA c(ii)
AVES LOCUSTELLIDAE Cincloramphus cruralis Brow n Songlark RA - RA - RA c(ii) RA - RA c(ii)
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Plectorhyncha lanceolata Striped Honeyeater R RA - RA - RA c(iii)
AVES ORIOLIDAE Oriolus sagittatus Olive-backed Oriole ssp RA - RA - RA c(iii)
AVES PHASIANIDAE Coturnix ypsilophora Brow n Quail V RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES PSITTACIDAE Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck RA - RE RE RA - VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES PSITTACIDAE Melopsittacus undulatus Budgerigar RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES TURNICIDAE Turnix velox Little Buttonquail RA - RA - RA c(iii) RA - RA c(iii)
AVES ACCIPITRIDAE Milvus migrans Black Kite RA 0 RA 0 RA c(iv)
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
43 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES ANATIDAE Cereopsis novaehollandiae Cape Barren Goose R RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(ii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(ii)
AVES ANATIDAE Cygnus atratus Black Sw an RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii)AVES ANATIDAE Malacorhynchus membranaceus Pink-eared Duck RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(iii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(iii)
AVES CHARADRIIDAE Elseyornis melanops Black-fronted Dotterel RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES CUCULIDAE Chalcites lucidus Shining Bronze Cuckoo RA 0 RA 0 RA c(ii) RA 0 RA c(ii)
AVES FALCONIDAE Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon R RA 0 RA 0 RA c(i) RA 0 RA c(i)
AVES MALURIDAE Malurus lamberti Variegated Fairyw ren RA 0 RA 0 RA c(i)
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Manorina flavigula Yellow -throated Miner RA 0 RA 0 RA d(ii)
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Ptilotula ornata Yellow -plumed Honeyeater RA 0 RA 0 RA c(iii) RA 0 RA c(iii)
AVES PELECANIDAE Pelecanus conspicillatus Australian Pelican RA 0 VU 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) VU 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES PETROICIDAE Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin RA 0 RA 0 RA c(iii) RA 0 RA c(i)
AVES PETROICIDAE Petroica rosea Rose Robin RA 0 RA 0 RA c(ii) RA 0 RA c(ii)AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Phalacrocorax fuscescens Black-faced Cormorant RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES RALLIDAE Gallirallus philippensis Buff-banded Rail RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,iii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,iii)
AVES RALLIDAE Porzana fluminea Australian Spotted Crake RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii)
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis R RA 0 RA 0 RA c(ii)
AVES TYTONIDAE Tyto delicatula Eastern Barn Ow l RA 0 RA 0 RA c(ii,iii) RA 0 RA c(ii,iii)
AVES CORCORACIDAE Corcorax melanoramphos White-w inged Chough R RA + RA + RA c(i) RA 0 RA c(i)
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Gerygone olivacea White-throated Gerygone R RA DD RA DD RA c(iii)
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Purnella albifrons White-fronted Honeyeater RA DD RA DD RA c(iii) RA DD RA c(iii)
AVES STERCORARIIDAE Stercorarius parasiticus Parasitic Jaeger (Arctic Jaeger) RA DD RA DD RA c(iii)
AVES HIRUNDINIDAE Petrochelidon nigricans Tree Martin NT -- NT -- NT NT - NT
AVES PSITTACIDAE Psephotus haematonotus Red-rumped Parrot NT -- NT -- NT NT - NT
AVES RHIPIDURIDAE Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail NT -- NT -- NT NT -- NT
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Yellow -rumped Thornbill NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza reguloides Buff-rumped Thornbill NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES CUCULIDAE Cacomantis flabelliformis Fan-tailed Cuckoo NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES CUCULIDAE Chalcites basalis Horsfield's Bronze Cuckoo NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES ESTRILDIDAE Neochmia temporalis Red-brow ed Finch NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES HALCYONIDAE Todiramphus sanctus Sacred Kingfisher NT - NT - NT RA - RA c(ii)
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Melithreptus brevirostris Brow n-headed Honeyeater NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES MOTACILLIDAE Anthus australis Australian Pipit NT - RA - RA c(i) LC 0 LC
Appendix 11a). Fauna species list for the entire project area, from most to least threatened (cont.)
44 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES PACHYCEPHALIDAE Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES PHASIANIDAE Coturnix pectoralis Stubble Quail NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES PODARGIDAE Podargus strigoides Taw ny Frogmouth NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES PSITTACIDAE Glossopsitta porphyrocephala Purple-crow ned Lorikeet NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES STRIGIDAE Ninox boobook Southern Boobook NT - NT - NT NT - NT
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Threskiornis spinicollis Straw -necked Ibis NT - NT - RA c(ii) - NT NT - RA c(ii) - NT
AVES ACANTHIZIDAE Acanthiza nana Yellow Thornbill NT 0 NT 0 NT NT 0 NT
AVES CLIMACTERIDAE Cormobates leucophaea White-throated Treecreeper NT 0 NT 0 NT NT 0 NT
AVES MELIPHAGIDAE Acanthagenys rufogularis Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater NT 0 RA 0 RA c(iii) LC 0 LC
AVES PARDALOTIDAE Pardalotus punctatus Spotted Pardalote NT 0 NT 0 NT NT 0 NT
AVES PODICIPEDIDAE Poliocephalus poliocephalus Hoary-headed Grebe NT 0 NT 0 RAc(iii) - NT NT 0 RAc(iii) - NT
INSECTA APIDAE Xylocopa aeratus Green Carpenter Bee RE RE RE RE RE
49 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 11b). Fauna species list for the project area, in taxonomic sequence. Status ratings and trends are shown for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (grey) and each IBRA subregion, including IUCN status and criteria. Current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed. Species are listed per Class (Mammalia, Aves, Reptilia, Amphibia, Osteichthyes), as listed in Census of South Australian Vertebrates (Owens and Graham 2009), and Insecta.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient.
EPBC Status Codes: EX = extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable.
NPW Status Codes: X = extinct, E = endangered; V = vulnerable, R = rare.
Where status is listed as “ssp”, the status applies to a sub-specific level, but the resolution of the record in BDBSA is at a species level. Expert interpretation is required to resolve sub-specific taxonomy.
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
MAMMALIA ORNITHORHYNCHIDAE Ornithorhynchus anatinus Platypus E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA TACHYGLOSSIDAE Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna NT DD NT DD NT NT DD NT
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Dasyurus viverrinus Eastern Quoll E RE RE RE RE RE
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Antechinus flavipes Yellow -footed Antechinus V RA - RA - RA a NT - NT
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Phascogale calura Red-tailed Phascogale EN E RE RE RE
MAMMALIA DASYURIDAE Phascogale tapoatafa Brush-tailed Phascogale E RE RE RE
AVES ANATIDAE Cygnus atratus Black Sw an RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i,ii)AVES ANATIDAE Malacorhynchus membranaceus Pink-eared Duck RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(iii) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(iii)
AVES ANATIDAE Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck R VU - VU - EN D - VU D1 VU - EN D - VU D1
AVES ANATIDAE Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck V VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES ANATIDAE Tadorna tadornoides Australian Shelduck VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES SPHENISCIDAE Eudyptula minor Little Penguin CR -- CR -- CR A1a; D
AVES PODICIPEDIDAE Podiceps cristatus Great Crested Grebe R VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES PODICIPEDIDAE Poliocephalus poliocephalus Hoary-headed Grebe NT 0 NT 0 RAc(iii) - NT NT 0 RAc(iii) - NT
AVES ARDEIDAE Egretta sacra Eastern Reef Egret R CR 0 CR 0 CR D CR 0 CR D
AVES ARDEIDAE Nycticorax caledonicus Nankeen Night Heron VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Platalea flavipes Yellow -billed Spoonbill VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Platalea regia Royal Spoonbill VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1 VU 0 EN D - VU D1
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis R RA 0 RA 0 RA c(ii)
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Threskiornis moluccus Australian White Ibis LC + LC ++ LC LC - LC
AVES THRESKIORNITHIDAE Threskiornis spinicollis Straw -necked Ibis NT - NT - RA c(ii) - NT NT - RA c(ii) - NT
AVES ANHINGIDAE Anhinga novaehollandiae Australasian Darter R VU 0 VU 0 EN D - VU D1AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Microcarbo melanoleucos Little Pied Cormorant LC 0 LC 0 LC LC 0 LC
Appendix 11b). Fauna species list for the entire project area, in taxonomic sequence (cont.)
57 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Phalacrocorax fuscescens Black-faced Cormorant RA 0 RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i) RA 0 VU D1 - RA c(i)
AVES PHALACROCORACIDAE Phalacrocorax sulcirostris Little Black Cormorant LC 0 LC 0 LC LC 0 LC
AMPHIBIA MYOBATRACHIDAE Neobatrachus pictus Burrow ing frog RA 0 RA 0 RA d(ii) RA 0 RA d(ii)AMPHIBIA MYOBATRACHIDAE Pseudophryne bibronii Brow n Toadlet R VU - VU - VU C2a(i) VU - VU C2a(i)
OSTEICHTHYES GALAXIIDAE Galaxias olidus Mountain Galaxias VU - VU - VU B2ab(iii,iv) VU - VU B2ab(iii,iv)
OSTEICHTHYES RETROPINNIDAE Retropinna semoni Australian Smelt RA 0 RA 0 RA d(ii)OSTEICHTHYES PLOTOSIDAE Tandanus tandanus Freshw ater Catfish EN - EN - EN A2bc
INSECTA APIDAE Xylocopa aeratus Green Carpenter Bee RE RE RE RE RE
61 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 12a). Flora species list for the project area, from most to least threatened. Status ratings and trends are shown for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (grey) and each IBRA subregion, including IUCN status and criteria. Current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed. Species are listed from most to least threatened per regional rating (status and trend), then in alphabetical order of Scientific Name.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient, NE = Not Evaluated.
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum aurantiacum ssp. aurantiacum Shrubby Tw inleaf DD DD RE RE DD DD DD
GRAMINEAE Aristida australis R NE NE NE NE NE
GRAMINEAE Aristida personata Purple Wire-grass NE NE NE
PITTOSPORACEAE Billardiera cymosa ssp. pseudocymosa Sw eet Apple-berry NE NE NE
COMPOSITAE Brachyscome ciliaris var. subintegrifolia R NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Caladenia fuscata Dusky Caladenia NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Caladenia pusilla Pigmy Caladenia R NE NE NE NE NE
CONVOLVULACEAE Calystegia sepium ssp. roseata Large Bindw eed NE NE NE NE NE
COMPOSITAE Cassinia uncata NE NE NE
COMPOSITAE Chrysocephalum vitellinum Common Everlasting NE NE NE
RANUNCULACEAE Clematis decipiens Old Man's Beard NE NE NE
RANUNCULACEAE Clematis microphylla Old Man's Beard NE NE NE NE NE
CONVOLVULACEAE Convolvulus crispifolius Silver Bindw eed NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Corybas dentatus Finniss Helmet-orchid VU E NE NE NE NE NE
DROSERACEAE Drosera gracilis Pale Sundew NE NE NE
DROSERACEAE Drosera hookeri Pale Sundew NE NE NE NE NE
DROSERACEAE Drosera peltata Pale Sundew NE NE NE NE NE
MYRTACEAE Eucalyptus angulosa Coast Ridge-fruited Mallee NE NE NE
MYRTACEAE Eucalyptus arenacea Dune Stringybark NE NE NE
MYRTACEAE Eucalyptus oleosa ssp. oleosa Red Mallee NE NE NE
FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia foliosa Leafy Sea-heath NE NE NE
FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia pauciflora var. fruticulosa Southern Sea-heath NE NE NE
FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia pauciflora var. gunnii Southern Sea-heath NE NE NE NE NE
Appendix 12a). Flora species list for the project area, in order of most to least threatened (Regional Status + Trend), then Scientific Name (cont).
106 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Family Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al S
tatu
s
AM
LR
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es S
tatu
s
Mo
un
t L
oft
y R
ang
es T
ren
d
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Mount Lofty Ranges) Fle
uri
eu
Sta
tus
Fle
uri
eu
Tre
nd
IUCN Status & Criteria
(Fleurieu)
FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia serpyllifolia Thyme Sea-heath NE NE NE
FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia sessilis Small-leaf Sea-heath NE NE NE
RUBIACEAE Galium gaudichaudii ssp. parviflorum Rough Bedstraw NE NE NE
RUBIACEAE Galium leptogonium Reflexed Bedstraw NE NE NE
PROTEACEAE Grevillea dilatata Holly-leaf Grevillea NE NE NE
HALORAGACEAE Haloragis acutangula f. acutangula Smooth Raspw ort NE NE NE
HALORAGACEAE Haloragis acutangula f. tetraptera Smooth Raspw ort NE NE NE
DILLENIACEAE Hibbertia glebosa ssp. glebosa Stalked Guinea-flow er NE NE NE
DILLENIACEAE Hibbertia villifera NE NE NE NE NE
CYPERACEAE Lepidosperma sp. Narrow leaf (R.L.Taplin 709) NE NE NE
MYRTACEAE Melaleuca gibbosa Slender Honey-myrtle NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Prasophyllum validum Mount Remarkable Leek-orchid VU V NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Pterostylis alata Tall Shell-orchid NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Pterostylis nana Dw arf Greenhood NE NE NE NE NE
AIZOACEAE Sarcozona bicarinata Ridged Noon-flow er V NE NE NE
COMPOSITAE Senecio pinnatifolius var. lanceolatus Variable Groundsel NE NE NE
CARYOPHYLLACEAE Spergularia brevifolia Salt Sand-spurrey NE NE NE NE NE
CARYOPHYLLACEAE Spergularia marina Salt Sand-spurrey NE NE NE NE NE
STYLIDIACEAE Stylidium graminifolium Grass Trigger-plant NE NE NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Thelymitra hiemalis NE NE NE
ORCHIDACEAE Thelymitra ixioides Spotted Sun-orchid E* NE NE NE NE NE
JUNCAGINACEAE Triglochin isingiana Spurred Arrow grass NE NE NE NE NE
COMPOSITAE Vittadinia cuneata var. murrayensis Murray New Holland Daisy NE NE NE NE NE
CAMPANULACEAE Wahlenbergia littoricola Coast Bluebell NE NE NE NE NE
107 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 12b). Flora species list for the project area, in alphabetical order of Scientific Name. Status ratings and trends are shown for the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Region (grey) and each IBRA subregion, including IUCN status and criteria. Current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed. Species are listed in alphabetical order of Scientific Name.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient; NE = not evaluated.
UMBELLIFERAE Xanthosia leiophylla Cut-leaf Xanthosia VU - VU - VU B2ab(i,ii,iii); D2
UMBELLIFERAE Xanthosia tasmanica Southern Xanthosia R RA - VU - VU B2ab(i,ii,iii); D2 NT 0 NT
COMPOSITAE Xerochrysum bracteatum Golden Everlasting RA - RA - RA d(ii) RA 0 RA d(ii)
XYRIDACEAE Xyris operculata Tall Yellow -eye R RA - DD DD DD RA - RA d(ii)
RUTACEAE Zieria veronicea ssp. veronicea Pink Zieria R VU - VU - VU B2ab(i,ii,iii); D2 RA 0 RA d(ii)
ZOSTERACEAE Zostera tasmanica Tasman Grass-w rack RA - RA - RA d(i,ii) RA - RA d(i,ii)
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum apiculatum Pointed Tw inleaf RE RE RE
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum aurantiacum ssp. aurantiacum Shrubby Tw inleaf DD DD RE RE DD DD DD
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum billardierei Coast Tw inleaf EN - DD DD DD EN - EN B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v); D
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum confluens Forked Tw inleaf VU - VU - VU B2ab(i,ii,iii); D2 VU - VU B2ab(i,ii,iii); D2
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum crenatum Notched Tw inleaf RA DD RA DD RA d(ii)
ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum glaucum Pale Tw inleaf RA DD RA DD RA d(ii) RA DD RA d(i,ii)
153 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 13a). Fauna species list for 2 IMCRA Regions surrounding AMLR Status ratings and trends are shown for the St Vincent Gulf (SVG) IMCRA and Coorong IMCRA regions; IUCN status and criteria are listed, as are comments captured from experts in workshops. Current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient.
EPBC Status Codes: EX = extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable.
NPW Status Codes: X = extinct, E = endangered; V = vulnerable, R = rare.
Where status is listed as “ssp”, the status applies to a sub-specific level, but the resolution of the record in BDBSA is at a species level. Expert interpretation is required to resolve sub-specific taxonomy.
Class Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
IU
CN
Sta
tus &
Cri
teri
a
(SV
G IM
CR
A)
St
Vin
cen
t G
ulf
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (St Vincent Gulf IMCRA) IUC
N S
tatu
s &
Cri
teri
a
(Co
oro
ng
IM
CR
A)
Co
rro
ng
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (Coorong IMCRA)
MAMMALIA Arctocephalus forsteri New Zealand Fur-seal RA c(iii) ++ LC +
S Bryars & C Kemper - least concern, increasing, hunting now
banned so increase
MAMMALIA Arctocephalus pusillus Australian Fur-seal R RA c(iii) 0
S Bryars - breeding colony Baudin Rocks, hunting now
banned; C Kemper - probably increasing
MAMMALIA Neophoca cinerea Australian Sea-lion VU V RA c(ii) - not containing core breeding areas VU D1 DD S Bryars & C Kemper: offshore shark nets/f ishing a threat.
MAMMALIA Hydrurga leptonyx Leopard Seal R RA c(ii) DD Cath Kemper: a small number seen each year
MAMMALIA Eubalaena australis Southern Right Whale EN V VU D1 ++ Definite increase VU D1 +
Increasing 6-7%/year. Lots of sightings. Threats: ship strikes
& entanglements
MAMMALIA Balaenoptera bonaerensis Southern Minke Whale DD DD Comes around occasionally
MAMMALIA Balaenoptera musculus Blue Whale EN E VU D1 DD
2 subspecies (Blue Whale & Py gmy Blue Whale). Py gmy Blue VU D1,
probably stable, DD trend. Regular v isitors. Threatened by ship strikes.
Bonney upw elling v ery important for this spp betw een Nov - May .
MAMMALIA Balaenoptera omurai Omura's Whale DD DD Taxonomic issues. Museum has only 1 specimen.
MAMMALIA Balaenoptera physalus Fin Whale VU V RA c(iii) DD Deep w ater w hale. No records in SA
MAMMALIA Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback Whale VU V VU D1 ++ Lots of recent sightings . Regulars. VU D1 +
Many sightings around Victor H, Pt Lincoln, gulfs, Pt Augusta.
Increasing by 10%/year Aust. w ide. Seen regularly each
year.
MAMMALIA Caperea marginata Pygmy Right Whale R DD DD LC 0
2 hotspots - off KI & low er EP. Come in on upw ellings in some
years. No estimates of numbers. Never w haled.
MAMMALIA Delphinus delphis Short-beaked Common Dolphin LC - Impacted by pilchard industry LC 0
No evidence that they are threatened. Possible threats:
entanglements, competition for resources w ith f isheries.
MAMMALIA Globicephala melas Long-finned Pilot Whale LC 0
No estimates of numbers, believed to be common. Colder
w ater w hale (than short-f inned). Should be more SA Museum
records
MAMMALIA Orcinus orca Killer Whale (Orca) RA c(ii) DD
Hotspot near Streaky Bay . Sightings of up to 100 in a pod. Not many
strandings. No pop. estimates done. Sometimes killed by fishermen.
Regular v isitors due to narrow continental shelf here
Appendix 13a). Fauna species list for 3 IMCRA Regions surrounding KI (cont).
154 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
IU
CN
Sta
tus &
Cri
teri
a
(SV
G IM
CR
A)
St
Vin
cen
t G
ulf
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (St Vincent Gulf IMCRA) IUC
N S
tatu
s &
Cri
teri
a
(Co
oro
ng
IM
CR
A)
Co
rro
ng
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (Coorong IMCRA)
MAMMALIA Tursiops aduncus Indo-Pacif ic Bottlenose Dolphin VU A4ce -
Quality of habitat in decline. Heavy metal (Zn, Cd) impacts in
gulfs. Entanglements - could be King f ish farms.
MAMMALIA Tursiops truncatus Bottlenose Dolphin LC DD North coast of KI.
MAMMALIA Phocoena dioptrica Spectacled Porpoise RA c(iii) DD
close to Port Elliott, 1 stranding in SA; should be in BDBSA,
1997 record
MAMMALIA Physeter macrocephalus Sperm Whale R RA c(ii) DD
Regularly seen off continental shelf; quite a few w ashed up
bodies; threats: long lines, ship strikes
MAMMALIA Kogia breviceps Pygmy Sperm Whale R DD DD RA c(ii) DD Very little know n on this spp.
MAMMALIA Kogia sima Dw arf Sperm Whale R RA c(iii) DD Strandings
hang around ships; often seen in f locks of 1,000's; seen all
year
AVES Puffinus huttoni Hutton's Shearw ater RA c(ii) DD
can be confused w ith f luttering s/w ; NZ breeder; hard to ID,
w inters in Aust
AVES Eudyptula minor Little Penguin VU C2a(i) -
declining due to NZ Fur Seal increase; threatened by pilchard
virus
AVES Morus serrator Australasian Gannet RA c(i) - NT 0
AVES Microcarbo melanoleucos Little Pied Cormorant LC 0
AVES Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant LC 0
AVES Phalacrocorax fuscescens Black-faced Cormorant NT DD
less common than other cormorants; SA is important breeding
site for this spp.
AVES Phalacrocorax varius Pied Cormorant LC 0
AVES Pelecanus conspicillatus Australian Pelican LC 0
AVES Haematopus fuliginosus Sooty Oystercatcher R VU D1 0
AVES Haematopus longirostris Australian Pied Oystercatcher R VU D1 0
AVES Cladorhynchus leucocephalus Banded Stilt V VU B2ab(iii)c(ii,iv) -
regular visitor; opportunistic breeder; f lock movements need
monitoring
AVES Recurvirostra novaehollandiae Red-necked Avocet NT +
AVES Charadrius bicinctus Double-banded Plover RA c(ii) - migratory birds from NZ
AVES Charadrius ruficapillus Red-capped Plover RA b -
AVES Elseyornis melanops Black-fronted Dotterel RA c(i) -
AVES Pluvialis fulva Pacif ic Golden Plover R RA c(ii) -
AVES Pluvialis squatarola Grey Plover RA c(iii) -
AVES Thinornis rubricollis Hooded Plover V EN D 0
threats: predators, seagulls, w eeds, sea-w heat grass,
change of habitat
AVES Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper R RA c(iii); d(ii) DD migratory; solitary birds
AVES Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone R RA c(ii) DD regular visitor
AVES Calidris ruficollis Red-necked Stint NT -
AVES Numenius minutus Little Curlew RA c(iii) DD
AVES Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank NT - migratory
AVES Stercorarius antarcticus Brow n Skua RA c(ii) DD taxonomic issues; relatively common in w inter
AVES Stercorarius parasiticus Arctic Jaeger LC 0 common summer visitor
AVES Stercorarius pomarinus Pomarine Jaeger LC 0 should be more records; pelagic spp.
AVES Chlidonias hybrida Whiskered Tern LC 0
AVES Chroicocephalus novaehollandiae Silver Gull LC ++ pest spp; expanding
AVES Larus pacificus Pacif ic Gull LC 0
Appendix 13a). Fauna species list for 3 IMCRA Regions surrounding KI (cont).
156 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Class Name Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
IU
CN
Sta
tus &
Cri
teri
a
(SV
G IM
CR
A)
St
Vin
cen
t G
ulf
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (St Vincent Gulf IMCRA) IUC
N S
tatu
s &
Cri
teri
a
(Co
oro
ng
IM
CR
A)
Co
rro
ng
IM
CR
A
Reg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (Coorong IMCRA)
AVES Sterna striata White-fronted Tern RA c(ii) DD
AVES Sternula nereis Fairy Tern E EN C2a(i) -- documented declines
AVES Thalasseus bergii Crested Tern LC 0
REPTILIA Dermochelys coriacea Leathery Turtle EN V CR A2ce --
no records. M Hutchinson - go w ith Red Book rating; high death rates
amongst adults; v ery small numbers; slow to mature
157 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 13b). Flora species list for 2 IMCRA Regions surrounding AMLR, in alphabetical order of scientific name. Status ratings and trends are shown for the St Vincent Gulf (SVG) IMCRA and Coorong IMCRA regions; IUCN status and criteria are listed, as are comments captured from experts in workshops. Any current ratings under the EPBC Act 1999 and NPW Act 1972 are also listed.
Regional Status Codes: RE = regionally extinct; CR = critically endangered; EN = endangered; VU = vulnerable; RA = rare; NT = near threatened; LC = least concern; DD = data deficient.
Family Name Plant Form Scientific Name Common Name EP
BC
Act
Sta
tus
NP
W A
ct
Sta
tus
IU
CN
Sta
tus &
Cri
teri
a (
SV
G IM
CR
A)
St
Vin
cen
t G
ulf
IM
CR
A R
eg
ion
al
Tre
nd
Comments (St Vincent Gulf IMCRA) IUC
N S
tatu
s &
Cri
teri
a (
Co
oro
ng
IMC
RA
)
Co
rro
ng
IM
CR
A R
eg
ion
al T
ren
d
Comments (Coorong IMCRA)
CYMODOCEACEAE seagrass Amphibolis antarctica Sea Nymph NT - Threatened by discharge/eff luent & development LC 0 occurs in sheltered bays
CYMODOCEACEAE seagrass Amphibolis griffithii Griff ith's Sea Nymph DD DD (no records) eastw ard range stops around V Harbor
HYDROCHARITACEAE seagrass Halophila australis Paddle Weed LC 0 Perennial, short lived, fast grow ing LC 0 common; perennial; freshw ater spp
POSIDONIACEAE seagrass Posidonia angustifolia Narrow -leaf Tapew eed LC - Threatened by coastal development & sand-blow outs LC 0
POSIDONIACEAE seagrass Posidonia australis Southern Tapew eed LC DD Threatened by coastal development & sand-blow outs LC 0
POSIDONIACEAE seagrass Posidonia coriacea Leathery Tapew eed DD DD (no records) needs more monitoring/survey w ork
POSIDONIACEAE seagrass Posidonia denhartogii Denhartogs Tapew eed DD DD Grow s in patches, needs w ave action DD DD (no records) needs more monitoring/survey w ork
POSIDONIACEAE seagrass Posidonia sinuosa Narrow -leaf Tapew eed LC DD Threatened by coastal development & sand-blow outs LC 0 range stops around Kingston
Needs intertidal mudflats, could be w idespread. Taxo issues w ith
Z. Muelleri ssp mucronata
158 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 14a). Fauna species removed* from Project Area. *’removed’ refers to species where records were found to be wrongly identified and/or located, vagrant, introduced or other reason (see below), in the project area, during the workshop process (see Section 2.4).
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name
Reason for Removal from Project
Area
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus eugenii (NC) Tammar Wallaby non current
MAMMALIA MACROPODIDAE Macropus giganteus Eastern Grey Kangaroo w rong record
159 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 14a). Fauna species removed from Project Area (cont.)
Class Name Family Name Scientific Name Common Name
Reason for Removal from Project
Area
REPTILIA CHELONIIDAE Caretta caretta Loggerhead Turtle vagrant for SA w aters
REPTILIA CHELONIIDAE Chelonia mydas Green Turtle vagrant
REPTILIA DERMOCHELYIDAE Dermochelys coriacea Leathery Turtle regular migrant; terrestrial records are carcasses
REPTILIA GEKKONIDAE Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella not in region; inaccurate location
REPTILIA DIPLODACTYLIDAE Diplodactylus vittatus complex (NC) Stone Geckos should all be D. furcosus ; duplicate record
REPTILIA PYGOPODIDAE Lialis burtonis Burton's Legless Lizard not in region; unreliable record
REPTILIA SCINCIDAE Cryptoblepharus cf plagiocephalus (NC) Desert Wall skink non current
REPTILIA SCINCIDAE Eremiascincus richardsonii Broad-banded Sandsw immer not in region; displaced record
REPTILIA VARANIDAE Varanus varius Lace Monitor not in region
REPTILIA ELAPIDAE Pseudonaja aspidorhyncha Patch-nosed Brow n Snake not in region
REPTILIA ELAPIDAE Pseudonaja nuchalis (NC) Western Brow n Snake dodgy record
AMPHIBIA MYOBATRACHIDAE Crinia parinsignifera Murray Valley Froglet not in region - unreliable record
AMPHIBIA MYOBATRACHIDAE Limnodynastes fletcheri Long-thumbed Frog not in region
AMPHIBIA MYOBATRACHIDAE Limnodynastes peronii Striped Marsh Frog not in region
OSTEICHTHYES CLUPEIDAE Nematalosa erebi Bony Bream not in region
OSTEICHTHYES GALAXIIDAE Galaxias rostratus Murray Jollytail at Murray Bridge; not in region
160 Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Species Status Assessment Project, Phase 1 July 2014
Appendix 14b). Flora species removed* from Project Area. *’removed’ refers to species where records were found to be wrongly identified and/or located, vagrant, introduced or other reason (see below), in the project area, during the workshop process (see Section 2.4).
Plant Form Family Name Scientific Name Common Name