Modeling the distribution of a wide-ranging invasive species using the sampling efforts of expert and citizen scientists

1- Results for the models calibrated with <i>Weigted Pts</i> pseudo-absences for the paper 'Modelling the distribution of a wide-ranging invasive species using the sampling efforts of expert and citizen scientists'.<div>2- Final figure of the probability of distribution of rabbits in black and white.</div><div>3- Final figure of the probability of distribution of rabbits in ASC format.<br></div

Draft Tasmanian wilderness world heritage area management plan

Encompassing over 1.58 million hectares, the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (TWWHA) occupies almost a quarter of Tasmania and is one of the largest temperate natural areas in the southern hemisphere.&nbsp; The area is formally recognised as a World Heritage property through the World Heritage Convention on the basis of three cultural heritage and four natural heritage criteria and is one of only two properties listed under the Convention for this many criteria.&nbsp; The World Heritage Convention aims to promote cooperation among nations to protect heritage around the world that is of such outstanding universal value on a global scale that its conservation is important for current and future generations. As a participating nation in the Convention, Australia has agreed to identify, protect, conserve, present and transmit the cultural and natural heritage of the TWWHA and to ensure an appropriate management system is in place for the property. The stunning and diverse range of landforms, the unique biodiversity, and aesthetic qualities of the area are enriched by the long occupation by Tasmanian Aboriginal people.&nbsp; The TWWHA has significant value in terms of its contribution to the social and economic wellbeing of all Tasmanians.&nbsp; It has important recreational, health, educational and aesthetic values as well as providing highly valuable ecosystem services and is a significant contributor to the Tasmanian economy, in particular through tourism and energy generation. The property was first inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1982 and has been subsequently expanded several times with a major extension in 1989 and minor boundary modifications in 2010, 2012 and 2013.&nbsp; The June 2013 minor boundary modification added approximately 170 000 hectares to the TWWHA including additional areas of tall eucalypt forest. Since inscription on the World Heritage List, the TWWHA has been managed under a partnership arrangement between the Australian and Tasmanian Governments which ensures the protection of its outstanding natural and cultural heritage.&nbsp; Day-to-day management of the area is the responsibility of the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service in the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE), although some smaller areas are managed by other entities, for example Hydro Tasmania.&nbsp; Currently, the majority of the area is managed in accord with the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Management Plan 1999 (Plan). This Plan is a revision of, and replaced the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area Management Plan 1992.&nbsp; The Plan is now outdated and does not cover the extensions made to the TWWHA in 2012 and 2013.&nbsp; The Tasmanian Government, supported by the Commonwealth Government, has committed to the development of a contemporary management plan for the TWWHA. A Project Team within DPIPWE has been established to oversee the formulation of the new management plan. The Process The first stage of the development of the new plan has been completed with the development and release of a draft management plan.&nbsp; This followed an informal period of community and stakeholder consultation.&nbsp; The results of the consultation informed the development of the draft plan.&nbsp; The content of the plan also reflects contemporary understanding of management issues.&nbsp; The formulation of the draft management plan is a statutory process set out in the National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002 (the Act).&nbsp; The Act required that the draft plan be made publically available to allow for representations to be made. The representation period is an important part of the process of developing an effective management plan for the TWWHA. The minimum representation period required is 30 days. However, to provide a greater opportunity for thorough consideration by interested members of the public, this period was extended to 63 days.&nbsp; To help members of the public to understand the content of the draft Plan, the representation process and the process for developing the final approved plan, the Project Team held a series of information sessions across the State during March. Specific information sessions focussing on the Tasmanian Aboriginal cultural management content of the draft plan were also held. The representation period commenced Monday 19 January 2015 and closed on Sunday 22 March 2015, as such the Project Team will not be able to accept any further representations. A large number of representations have been received reflecting the level of community interest in the management of the TWWHA. On behalf of the Director of National Parks and Wildlife, the Project Team wishes to thank all those organisations and individuals who provided a representation. The next step in the development of the plan is the consideration of the representations. To provide for transparency and accountability in finalising management plans the Act establishes a process for review of public representations involving the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC).&nbsp; The Director of National Parks and Wildlife (the Director) will review all representations received and prepare a report which includes a summary of all representations, the Director’s opinion on the merit of each representation and whether modification of the management plan is required. As a general guide, and depending on all the circumstances, the draft plan may be altered if a representation: provides new information relevant to planning and management; indicates proposed policies and actions are misunderstood and need clarification; clarifies or proposes policies and actions that would better achieve the management objectives; identifies a lack of policies or actions for particular issues; or corrects errors, omissions or lack of clarity. &nbsp; Similarly, the draft plan may not necessarily be amended if a representation: contradicts planning proposals for which there is widespread support; conflicts with government policy; is contrary to the intention of relevant legislation or national or international conventions and agreements; addresses issues beyond the scope of the plan; or ignores or contradicts relevant established facts. The Director will forward copies of all representations received, together with the Director’s report, to the TPC who will advertise the representations and the Director’s report for public viewing.&nbsp; The TPC may hold hearings on the representations.&nbsp; The TPC will review the representations and the Director’s report and the results of any public hearings held and will prepare a report to the Minister. The TPC’s report to the Minister will be published. The Minister will consider: the public representations; the Director’s report; the TPC report; any representation provided to the Minister by the National Parks and Wildlife Advisory Committee; and the purposes of reservation and the management objectives for any reserved land subject to the plan. The Minister will make such alterations to the management plan considered appropriate and recommend the final management plan to the Governor for approval

Occupancy and density of a habitat specialist and a sympatric generalist songbird species in Tasmania

Patterns of distribution and abundance of species are dependent on their particular ecological requirements. Taking specialisation into account is important for interpreting population parameters. Here, we evaluate population parameters of an endangered habitat specialist, the forty‐spotted pardalote (Pardalotus quadragintus; dependent on white gum Eucalyptus viminalis in south‐eastern Tasmania), and a sympatric congeneric habitat generalist, the striated pardalote (Pardalotus striatus). We used occupancy models to estimate occupancy of both species, and distance sampling models to estimate population density and size on North Bruny Island. Within their shared habitat (i.e. white gum forest), we also fitted hierarchical distance sampling models to estimate density in relation to fine‐scale habitat features. We show that forty‐spotted pardalotes only occurred in forests where white gums were present, with a mean density of 2.7 birds per hectare. The density of forty‐spotted pardalotes decreased in areas with abundant small trees and trees with dead crowns, but they increased in areas where larger white gums were abundant. The striated pardalote was widespread, but where white gums were present, they occurred at 2.1 birds per hectare, compared to 0.6 birds per hectare in forests where white gums were absent. Within white gum habitat, the relative abundance of forty‐spotted pardalotes and dead trees had a positive effect on the density of striated pardalotes while small trees had a negative effect. Our study reveals that although widespread, the generalist is most abundant in the limited areas of habitat suitable for the specialist, and this indicates the need of future research to look at whether this pattern of occurrence exacerbates competition in resource depleted habitats