Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L00482:reg:2:p5
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L00482
Segment Type: reg
Provision Reference: reg 2 (pt 5/7)
Character Range: 64271–67272

showed that survival of Swift Parrot nests was a function of modelled mature forest cover in the surrounding landscape and the likelihood of Sugar Glider predation decreased with increasing forest cover.
While a species native to the Australian mainland, Sugar Gliders were likely introduced to mainland Tasmania around 1835 (Campbell et al. 2018). The Tasmanian Government subsequently amended Schedule 2 of the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulations 2021 to remove Sugar Gliders in 2018. Maria and Bruny Islands are free of Sugar Gliders and it is important to remain vigilant to possible incursions. Maintaining the Sugar Glider-free status of these two islands is critical for the conservation of Swift Parrots in Tasmania.
Control of the impacts of Sugar Gliders on Swift Parrots has proven very challenging. Although automated doors fitted to nest boxes are effective at protecting individual nests from predation (Stojanovic et al. 2019), there remains major uncertainty about how to protect nests in tree hollows. An attempt to use fear-based approaches to reduce predation impacts was ineffective (Owens et al. 2020). Early attempts to control Sugar Gliders by culling them have proven unsuccessful to date (Stojanovic et al. in review) although further efforts are underway to evaluate different techniques. Nevertheless, the weight of evidence suggests that if controlling Sugar Glider predation on Swift Parrots is possible, deploying these approaches at large enough scales to benefit the population as a whole is an ambitious aspiration. This challenge is made harder because Sugar Gliders are widespread in Swift Parrot nesting habitat (Allen et al. 2018) and tolerate landscapes with a high degree of forest disturbance.

2.2.4 Collision mortality
Collisions with wire netting, mesh fences, windows and cars cause mortality to Swift Parrots in urban areas throughout the species' range (Pfennigwerth 2008; Hingston 2019) in Tasmania and mainland eastern Australia. Continuing urban encroachment into breeding and foraging habitat is likely to exacerbate this problem. Swift Parrots are sometimes found injured or dead from collisions during the breeding season, with few birds released back into the wild. The threat is exacerbated in years when foraging resources are concentrated in or near to urban areas.
The construction of wind energy turbines and associated energy infrastructure (i.e. powerlines) in south-eastern Australia may also have implications for the conservation of the Swift Parrot where infrastructure is poorly situated (Barrios and Rodriguez 2004). Parrots may be killed through collision, or their behaviour may be modified by the presence of these structures leading to avoidance of suitable habitat. The potential impacts of these structures may be greatest where they are situated along migration routes where a large proportion of the population may be exposed to the threat. Wind turbines and associated energy infrastructure are located, and continue to