Reevaluating suitable habitat for reintroductions: lessons learnt from the eastern barred bandicoot recovery program
-
Published source details
Cook C.N., Morgan D.G. & Marshall D.J. (2010) Reevaluating suitable habitat for reintroductions: lessons learnt from the eastern barred bandicoot recovery program. Animal Conservation, 13, 184-195.
Published source details Cook C.N., Morgan D.G. & Marshall D.J. (2010) Reevaluating suitable habitat for reintroductions: lessons learnt from the eastern barred bandicoot recovery program. Animal Conservation, 13, 184-195.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Release captive-bred mammals into fenced areas Action Link |
 |
|
|
Release translocated/captive-bred mammals in areas with invasive/problematic species eradication/control Action Link |
|
-
Release captive-bred mammals into fenced areas
A replicated study in 1990–2001 in seven grassland, wetland and forest sites in Victoria, Australia (Cook et al. 2010) found that using predator-proof fencing alongside regular predator control increased abundance of captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots Perameles gunnii released into the wild and that bandicoots were recorded at five of seven sites up to three years after the last release. Greater amounts of predator control had a positive influence on the number of bandicoot signs found at each site (Sites with 0-2 methods of regular predator control: 0 bandicoots/site; sites with 3+ methods, including predator-proof fencing: 0.3-2 bandicoots/site). Bandicoot signs were found in five of the seven release sites (average 0.3–2 signs/quadrat) but no signs were detected in two sites. At each of seven sites (88–500 ha), 50–129 captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots were released between 1990 and 1999. Combinations of regular predator control methods were employed (e.g. poisoning, shooting, destruction of red fox Vulpes vulpes dens) differed between the sites (1 site: no predator control; 1 site: 2 methods used; 2 sites: 3 methods used (including 1 site with partial fencing); 3 sites: 4 methods used (including 1 site with full predator-proof fencing). Bandicoot signs (fresh diggings and scats) were collected at 10 randomly distributed 5-m2 quadrats/site on two occasions in 2000–2001.
(Summarised by: Ricardo Rocha)
-
Release translocated/captive-bred mammals in areas with invasive/problematic species eradication/control
A replicated study in 1990–2001 in seven grassland, wetland and forest sites in Victoria, Australia (Cook et al. 2010) found that increasing amounts of regular predator control increased population numbers of released captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots Perameles gunnii,and bandicoots were recorded at five of seven sites up to three years after the last release. Greater amounts of predator control had a positive influence on the number of bandicoot signs found at each site (Sites with 0-2 methods of regular predator control: 0 bandicoots/site; sites with 3+ methods: 0.3-2 bandicoots/site). Bandicoot signs were found in five of the seven release sites (average 0.3–2 signs/quadrat) but no signs were detected in two sites. At each of seven sites (88–500 ha), 50–129 captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots were released between 1990 and 1999. Combinations of regular predator control methods employed (e.g. poisoning, shooting, destruction of red fox Vulpes vulpes dens) differed between the sites (1 site: no predator control; 1 site: 2 methods used; 2 sites: 3 methods used (including 1 site with partial fencing); 3 sites: 4 methods used (including 1 site with full predator-proof fencing). Bandicoot signs (fresh diggings and scats) were collected at 10 randomly distributed 5-m2 quadrats/site on two occasions in 2000–2001.
(Summarised by: Ricardo Rocha)
)_2023.JPG)
