Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2011L01416:body:0:p11
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2011L01416
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 28401–31692

in the length of the toads' breeding season have been predicted for 2050. The southern border of cane toad distribution is predicted to move further south by approximately 100 km and be limited by the opposing influences of increasing air temperature and decreasing humidity on the core body temperature of cane toads. In this scenario, further ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act would fall within the range of cane toads.

Native species and ecological communities on off-shore islands may need to be protected from cane toads. Quarantine or emergency management measures to protect these islands may result in the preservation of endemic island species and ecological communities. Further, it may be possible, under particular circumstances, to protect populations of those species identified as highly impacted on the mainland (Table 3) by preserving populations already present on islands or relocating species from the mainland to islands. Islands known to be free of cane toads and which support populations of species highly impacted by cane toads on the mainland, have been identified (Appendices 1, 2 and 3).

Species
Although many individual animals may succumb to lethal toxic ingestion of cane toads, particularly when toads first appear in a new area, the number of species known to be negatively affected at a population level is small. It is this group that forms the highest priority for action under this TAP. Research is currently being undertaken by several groups (e.g. the University of Sydney, Australian National University) to clarify the impact of toads on certain species such as the northern quoll and goanna species. This research may provide insights into priority species for protection over the life of this TAP.

The ecological impact of invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) in Australia
(Shine 2009a) provides an extensive scientific assessment of the impacts of cane toads on native species. A summary of this assessment, listing those native species for which the level of negative population impact by cane toads is high or moderate is provided (Table 3). This provides an initial assessment of priority for species requiring population level protection. Research is continuing in this area, and the lists may need to be adapted as understanding improves.

       Table 3: Current state of knowledge of identified high or moderate negative population level threats to Australian native fauna from the cane toad (modified from Shine 2009a). Lethal toxic ingestion is the most common pathway of impact.

Species                                          Degree of impact           Authority                                                                            Pathway for impact
Proteocephalid Tapeworm*                         High                       Freeland 1993, 2004                                                                  Toads destabilise host / parasite equilibrium
Crocodiles
Freshwater crocodile (in semi-arid landscapes)   High (location dependent)  Letnic et al. 2008                                                                   Lethal toxic ingestion
Crocodylus johnstoni
Goannas
Varanus spp.                                     High                       Freeland 2004; Griffiths and McKay 2007; Doody et al.