Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697636606889.pdf (Australia)
Submission to the Senate Inquiry on Australia’s faunal extinction crisis Summary of recommendations AWC submits that ‘business as usual’ in conservation will not halt Australia’s faunal extinction crisis.

Instead, we suggest that effective conservation requires that:    conservation actions are directed towards key threats – for mammals, this primarily means that feral predators are effectively controlled.
At present, this requires additional establishment of feral predator- free islands and fenced areas.

Investment in novel technologies such as gene drives is required for long- term, landscape-scale control of feral predators.

funding for conservation actions should be based on the delivery of outcomes for threatened species.

Private-sector conservation organisations should be able to bid for funding to deliver conservation work across a range of tenures including National Parks.
reintroduction programs should be supported, where feasible, to address regional extinctions of threatened species and restore their ecological functions Australian Wildlife Conservancy (AWC) AWC’s mission is the effective conservation of all Australian animal species and the habitats in which they live.

We are developing and implementing a new model for conservation to reverse the decline in our wildlife.
Our strategy is simple:  establish sanctuaries by acquiring land and through partnerships with landholders; and  implement practical land management – feral animal control and fire management – informed by good science.

We manage more than 4.6 million hectares across Australia, including iconic regions such as the Kimberley, Cape York, Lake Eyre and the Top End (www.australianwildlife.org).
The land managed by AWC includes properties which are owned or leased by AWC; indigenous owned or controlled land where AWC works with the indigenous owners; as well as National Parks, Commonwealth Defence, and private property where AWC provides conservation management services to State, Commonwealth and private landholders.
AWC sanctuaries contain an extraordinary diversity of habitats, and support a high proportion of Australia’s terrestrial biodiversity including 72% of native mammal species, 88% of native birds, and over 50% of native reptile and frogs; of these, over 60 species are nationally threatened.

Our approach is to identify and manage key threats to wildlife, including predation by feral cats and foxes, grazing by feral herbivores and mis-managed fire.
The scale at which AWC undertakes practical land management activities such as fire management and feral animal control is unique within Australia, covering more land than any other non‐government organisation in Australia, and we employ over 50 professional scientists to ensure our conservation efforts are informed by good science.

AWC is the leading proponent of the reintroduction of native mammals to fenced feral predator-free areas in Australia.
To date, AWC has successfully reintroduced a total of 12 threatened mammal species to five fenced areas on the mainland covering a total area of over 17,000 ha, and one island (5000 ha).

These sanctuaries support significant populations of threatened mammals, including an estimated 10% of Greater Bilbies, 20% of Burrowing Bettongs, 30% of Numbats and 90% of Bridled Nailtail Wallabies.
An additional three large fenced areas (covering a total area over 24,000 ha) are currently under construction or advanced planning.
Australian Wildlife Conservancy | ABN 36 068 572 556 | www.australianwildlife.org | E: info@australianwildlife.org Head Office: PO Box 8070 Subiaco East, WA 6008 | P: 08 9380 9633 | F: 08 9380 9631 Australia’s faunal extinction crisisSubmission 55 AWC wishes to address the following terms of reference for the inquiry: (a) (b) (f) (h) (i) the ongoing decline in the population and conservation status of Australia's nearly 500 threatened fauna species; the wider ecological impact of faunal extinction; the management and extent of the National Reserve System the adequacy of funding for threatened species recovery the adequacy of existing monitoring practices in relation to threatened fauna (a) The ongoing decline in the population and conservation status of Australia's nearly 500 threatened fauna species Key issues Australia’s wildlife is in decline, due to a range of threats.
Detailed analysis demonstrates that certain threats are particularly important: for example, the Mammal Action Plan (Woinarski et al.

2014) concluded that feral cats and foxes had been the primary drivers of mammal extinctions, and that feral cats were the primary cause of ongoing declines.

To be effective, conservation actions need to be directed towards key threats.
At present, the exclusion of feral cats and foxes from islands and fenced areas is one of the few demonstrably effective management interventions for threatened mammals (Woinarski et al.

2014).

There is a lack of landscape-scale control measures for feral predators, but new technologies (in particular, gene drive technology) offer a potential solution.
Effective conservation measures have often been implemented by private sector conservation organisations, for two reasons: first, these organisations are flexible enough to attempt novel solutions to key threats, and second, the funding model for private sector conservation organisations is predicated on achieving outcomes.

Recommendations Expert analysis of the key threats causing the decline of Australia’s wildlife (as per the Mammal Action Plan) is required to inform effective conservation actions.
For mammals, additional feral predator-free areas (islands of fenced areas) are required to help conserve species vulnerable to feral cats and foxes.

Investment in novel technologies such as gene drives is required to provide a landscape-scale solution to predation by feral cats and foxes.

The funding of conservation actions should be based on their outcomes for threatened species.
Private sector conservation organisations should be able to bid for required work across a range of tenures, including on National Parks.

(b) The wider ecological impact of faunal extinctions Key issues Wildlife species participate in multiple ecological processes: for example, many extinct and threatened mammals acted as ‘ecosystem engineers’, constructing borrows and foraging pits that trap nutrients and water and facilitate regeneration (e.g.

Fleming et al.

2014).


These processes have been part of Australian ecosystems over evolutionary time.

Consequently, effective conservation of Australian ecosystems requires more than the reservation of land – it often requires the reintroduction of locally-extinct mammals.
Page 2 of 5 Australia’s faunal extinction crisisSubmission 55 In AWC’s experience, the importance of reintroductions is well understood by communities where native species are still culturally important or have only recently gone extinct (e.g., in central Australia).
In contrast, in jurisdictions where wildlife has been regionally extinct for generations (as is the case for much of eastern Australia), the conservation value of reintroductions is less well understood, and less supported by government conservation agencies.

Recommendations Where feasible, the restoration of locally-extinct native wildlife should be an objective for conservation reserves in Australia, to help restore ecological processes that have developed over evolutionary time.
Government policies should support well-managed reintroduction programs, and facilitate their implementation by competent proponents, including private sector conservation organisations, on a range of tenures including National Parks.

(f) The management and extent of the National Reserve System Key issues Historically, Australia has primarily relied on the allocation of land to the National Reserve System (NRS) to deliver nature conservation.
State-managed lands (National Parks, etc) comprise just under half the NRS; an equivalent area of land is now managed as Indigenous Protected Areas; while privately-managed conservation areas account for 6% of the NRS (c. 9 M ha) (www.environment.gov.au/land/nrs).
While allocation of land to the NRS reduces the likelihood of conversion to exploitative uses, reservation alone does nothing to address pervasive, tenure-blind threats to wildlife such as predation by feral cats and foxes, or degradation of habitat by feral herbivores and weeds.

Catastrophic declines in wildlife due to the action of these threats have occurred in some of Australia’s highest profile conservation reserves in recent times (e.g., Woinarski et al.

2010).
2010).

Effective management of pervasive threats is fundamental to achieving conservation outcomes on the NRS estate.

Effective conservation management is predicated on robust knowledge of the status and trend of key conservation assets and threats, an understanding of the key drivers of decline, and the capacity to implement appropriate and timely management action.

In AWC’s view, some governance models increase the risk of under-investment in conservation management.
In particular, where reserves are funded on a recurrent basis without primary regard to conservation outcomes (as typically the case in the public sector), there is no fundamental incentive for managers to achieve conservation outcomes, or to undertake the monitoring and research activities that are required to underpin effective management.

In contrast, private-sector conservation is inherently outcomes-driven: without success, projects and organisations cannot attract ongoing funding.
Furthermore, to determine outcomes, private-sector conservation organisations must invest in robust monitoring.

Leading private-nature conservation organisations such as AWC also invest in scientific research to understand the drivers of extinction and decline, to better inform conservation management.
Recommendations Addressing Australia’s extinction crisis requires an increased emphasis on effective conservation management - for example, actions to reduce and ultimately eliminate predation by feral cats and foxes.

Reservation alone is insufficient.

In cases where reservation results in reduced management of threats (for example, less effective management of fire or feral predators), allocation of land to the NRS may be counterproductive.
The delivery of conservation management on the NRS should be outcomes-driven, with private sector conservation organisations able to bid for work across a range of tenures, including National Parks.

Page 3 of 5 Australia’s faunal extinction crisisSubmission 55 (h) The adequacy of funding for threatened species recovery Key issues Recovery plans have only been written for a subset of threatened species.

Where recovery plans have been developed, their quality varies widely.
To be useful, plans need to clearly identify necessary conservation actions, engage stakeholders responsible for or capable of implementing required actions, and the cost of those actions.

Adequate funding for threatened species recovery is a moot point until evidence-based recovery plans are developed.

Nevertheless, only a fraction of recovery plans are adequately funded at present.
Furthermore, there are few mechanisms to ensure that actions identified in recovery plans are implemented by responsible parties.

Recommendations Threat listing should require the development of a recovery plan.

Recovery plans should be developed around a coherent, evidence-based framework by competent, independent experts.

All significant stakeholders should be included in the development of recovery plans; the plans should not represent the narrow agenda of a particular agency.
An expert review should be conducted of recovery plans.

Once developed, funding for recovery actions should be available around an outcomes-based model.

Private sector conservation organisations should be able to bid to undertake actions.

Adequate funding should be sought for priority actions.

Progress against actions should be reported by stakeholders on a regular basis.
(i) The adequacy of existing monitoring practices in relation to threatened fauna Key issues As noted, Australia’s conservation system relies primarily on the reservation of land in the NRS.

In this model of conservation, there is little incentive to adequately monitor the status of threatened fauna, because information on the status/ trend of threatened fauna does not fundamentally alter funding for the model.
In contrast, an outcomes-based conservation model is predicated on robust knowledge of the status of threatened species which are the focus of conservation actions.

For example, AWC has implemented a monitoring program (‘ecohealth’) to measure the status and trend of key conservation assets and threats (Kanowski et al.

2018).

The program requires the allocation of sufficient resources to planning, implementing, analysing and reporting the required surveys.
Recommendations Adequate monitoring should be a component of all recovery and conservation plans and programs developed for threatened species.

Page 4 of 5 Australia’s faunal extinction crisisSubmission 55 References Fleming P, Anderson H, Prendergast A, Bretz M, Valentine L, Hardy G (2014) Is the loss of Australian digging mammals contributing to a deterioration in ecosystem function?

Mammal Review 44, 94-108.


Kanowski J, Joseph L, Kavanagh R, Fleming (2018) Designing a monitoring framework for Australian Wildlife Conservancy, a national conservation organisation.

In: Monitoring Threatened Species and Ecological Communities.

(Eds S Legge, DB Lindenmayer, NM Robinson, BC Scheele, DM Southwell, BA Wintle).

pp 241- 253.

CSIRO, Melbourne.

Woinarski JCZ et al.

(2010) Monitoring indicates rapid and severe decline of native small mammals in Kakadu National Park, northern Australia.
Wildlife Research 37, 116–126.

Woinarski JCZ, Burbidge AA, Harrison PH (2014) The Action Plan for Australian Mammals 2012.

CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

Page 5 of 5 Australia’s faunal extinction crisisSubmission 55