Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L01095:body:0:p25
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:F2024L01095
Segment Type: other
Provision Reference: 
Character Range: 64966–67949

a second fire or high grazing pressure may permanently remove mulga communities (Griffin & Friedel 1985).

Traditional burning practices in central Australia likely created a mosaic of different aged habitats which prevented the occurrence of very large fires, in most years of average rainfall, that would have been threatening to Malleefowl and Indigenous inhabitants. Whether such burning practices were also used in mallee habitats further south is uncertain. In central Australia, these burning practices were interrupted and discouraged by European pastoralists from the 20th century onwards, and this lack of traditional burning is implicated in the occurrence of numerous huge fires in the past century. An unfortunate sequence in the 1920s, of huge fires followed by drought and grazing by rabbits, may be responsible for the eradication of mulga woodlands over large areas in the Great Victoria Desert (Griffin & Friedel 1985). These areas include those around the Petermann, Musgrave and Mann Ranges where Malleefowl were once considered "plentiful" (Carruthers 1892 in Kimber 1985).

Fires with a high edge-to-area ratio, such as fire-breaks, are likely to do less harm to Malleefowl populations than fires of the same size but with less edge. Mosaics of habitat at various ages might also provide a balance between habitat requirements of Malleefowl and protection from fire, and the attributes of such beneficial mosaics should be investigated after the populations of the birds are mapped across the larger reserves (DSE, 2003).

Tjilpi Robin undertaking tjanpi (spinifex) burns, APY Lands ©Joe Benshemesh, NMRG.

4 Threats

Historical, known and potential threats to the Malleefowl are outlined below. Threat prevalence and severity vary regionally. Currently, there is no information to suggest that any particular population of Malleefowl can be confidently regarded as secure. While issues such as fire, predation and climate change threaten the species wherever it occurs, threats resulting from clearing, fragmentation and grazing tend to be more concentrated in the southern agricultural regions where Malleefowl typically occur at higher densities.

4.1 Historical causes of decline

Clearing of the mallee for wheat and sheep production has been the major factor in the decline of Malleefowl in southern Australia, and this was forewarned by some of the earliest writers on Malleefowl (Campbell 1884, Campbell 1901, Mattingley 1908, Bellchambers 1916, Bellchambers 1918, Barrett 1919, Chandler 1934). The best habitats for Malleefowl tended to be on the more fertile soils and received relatively high rainfall (Frith 1962a), but these have been almost entirely cleared. Overall, up to 80 % of the Wheatbelts in WA and the eastern states were cleared by the 1990s (Glanznig 1995). This clearing has not only removed Malleefowl habitat, but also threatens remaining habitat due to fragmentation and dryland salinity.

Habitat remnants, where they exist within