Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00287:reg:3:p184
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2025L00287
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 3 (pt 184/276)
Character Range: 680820–685100

is shown in Table 69.
Table 69 Risk assessment for Critically Endangered herbs/grasses as a grouping
Risk                                                                                                               Likelihood of exposure    Consequence  Threat rating
1. Loss and fragmentation of native vegetation through past land clearing                                          Almost certain (91–100%)  Extreme      Extreme
2. Loss and fragmentation of native vegetation through current or future land clearing                             Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
3. Degradation of native vegetation through past grazing or loss of nutrients                                      Almost certain (91–100%)  Extreme      Extreme
4. Degradation of native vegetation through current or future grazing                                              Possible (26–50%)         Moderate     Medium
6. Predation by rodents                                                                                            Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
7. Predation by cats                                                                                               Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
8. Predation or damage by chickens                                                                                 Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
9. Predation by swamphens                                                                                          Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
10. Predation by Argentine ant                                                                                     Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
11. Competition from/change of habitat because of weed invasion                                                    Almost certain (91–100%)  Major        Extreme
12. Infection by pathogens already present                                                                         Rare (0–10%)              Negligible   Negligible
13. Impacts of potential new invasive species or pathogens                                                         Unlikely (11–25%)         Minor        Low
14. Changes to vegetation, increased fire risk and/or direct physiological stress as a result of climatic changes  Possible (26–50%)         Moderate     Medium
15. Problems caused by small populations, including lack of genetic diversity                                      Almost certain (91–100%)  Major        Extreme

Management actions
Undertake surveys to search for individuals and conduct research to better understand the ecology of the species. Map distribution and determine conditions for successful germination. Monitor populations during late spring. Propagate on Phillip Island for use in rehabilitation work. Propagate on Norfolk Island and use to establish further populations in coastal habitat. Exclude grazing from any new populations established on Norfolk Island. Implement targeted weed control and maintenance.
The Lord Howe Island Biodiversity Management Plan covers the recovery needs of this species on the Lord Howe Island group. Possible future actions may need to be undertaken in collaboration with the NSW Government as appropriate.

Recovery target
The recovery target is shown in Table 70.
Table 70 Recovery target for Anthosachne kingiana kingiana
EPBC Act status        Estimated population (2023)  Where known populations occur  2034 target
Critically Endangered  5 groups of plants           100% within the national park  100 groups of plants

Relevant literature
Connor HE (1990) Elymus (Gramineae) on Norfolk Island. Kew Bulletin 45, 680.
Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH) (2003) What the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) means for Norfolk Island. Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra.
Mills K (2009b) The Vegetation of Phillip Island, Norfolk Island Group. Envirofund 2007/2008. Kevin Mills & Associates, Jamberoo, NSW.
Orchard A (ed) (1994) Flora of Australia. Vol. 49. Oceanic Islands 1. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Sykes W & Atkinson I (1988) Rare and Endangered Plants of Norfolk Island. Unpublished report