Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Conservation status and management of the Gove Crow Euploea alcathoe enastri (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), a threatened tropical butterfly from the indigenous Aboriginal lands of north-eastern Arnhem Land, Australia

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Insect Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Gove Crow butterfly, Euploea alcathoe enastri Fenner, 1991, is restricted to Gove Peninsula of north-eastern Arnhem Land, a remote area of northern Australia. The subspecies has been listed as an Endangered taxon under federal and Northern Territory legislation, and represents one of only a few cases in the Australian Region in which a tropical butterfly has been targeted for species-orientated conservation. However, accurate status evaluation and conservation management have been hampered by lack of detailed information on spatial distribution, critical habitat, and the extent and severity of threatening processes. Surveys carried out during 2006–2008 indicate that the subspecies has a limited geographical range (extent of occurrence approximately 6,700 km2) within which it is recorded from 11 locations or subpopulations embracing a total of 21 sites. Most sites comprise discrete habitat patches that are relatively small in area (<10 ha) within which adults are localised and occur in low abundance (<15 h−1). Of the four major habitat types in which E. alcathoe enastri was detected, only mixed paperbark tall open forest with rainforest elements in the understorey and rainforest edge (i.e. the ecotone between evergreen monsoon vine-forest and eucalypt/paperbark woodland) comprise breeding habitats. These habitat patches were always associated with permanent creeks or perennial groundwater seepages or springs that form swamplands, usually along drainage lines or flood plains in coastal or near coastal lowland areas. Major threats identified at the site level are habitat modification through altered fire regime and habitat disturbance by feral animals (buffalo, pig); potential threats at the landscape level include habitat loss through invasive species (grassy weeds, tramp ants) and global climate change. However, since critical breeding areas are subject to natural disturbance by both fire and flood, and occasionally cyclonic events, an optimal balance in disturbance regime is probably required to sustain breeding populations. Although E. alcathoe enastri is a narrow-range endemic that is ecologically specialised, there is no evidence of decline. Accordingly, the conservation status of the subspecies should be regarded as Near Threatened (‘Conservation Dependent’) under IUCN criteria. Components for an effective long-term conservation management plan of the butterfly and its habitat, which largely depend on the cooperation of traditional landowners and involvement of local indigenous ranger groups, are briefly discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackery PA, Vane-Wright RI (1984) Milkweed butterflies: their cladistics and biology. British Museum (Natural History), London

    Google Scholar 

  • Banfai DS, Bowman DMJS (2006) Forty years of lowland monsoon forest expansion in Kakadu National Park, Northern Australia. Biol Conserv 131:553–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banfai DS, Bowman DMJS (2007) Drivers of rain-forest boundary dynamics in Kakadu National Park, northern Australia: a field assessment. J Trop Ecol 23:73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF (2000) Butterflies of Australia: their identification, biology and distribution. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF (2006) National Recovery Plan for the Gove Crow Butterfly, Euploea alcathoe enastri. A report prepared for the Australian Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Heritage. Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, Darwin

  • Braby MF (2007) Collecting biological specimens in the Northern Territory with particular reference to terrestrial invertebrates: guidelines to current legislation and permits. North Territory Nat 19:35–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF (2008) Biogeography of butterflies in the Australian monsoon tropics. Aust J Zool 56:41–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF (2009) The life history and biology of Euploea alcathoe enastri Fenner, 1991 (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) from northeastern Arnhem Land, Northern Territory, Australia. Aust Entomol 36:51–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF, Douglas F (2004) The taxonomy, ecology and conservation status of the Golden-rayed Blue, a threatened butterfly endemic to western Victoria, Australia. Biol J Linn Soc 81:275–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braby MF, Douglas F (2008) The nomenclature, taxonomy and conservation status of Ogyris waterhouseri (Bethune-Baker, 1905) stat. nov. (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a threatened butterfly from southern Australia. Aust J Entomol 47:315–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite RW, Dudzinski ML, Ridpath MG, Parker BS (1984) The impact of water buffalo on the monsoon forest ecosystem in Kakadu National Park. Aust J Ecol 9:309–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Antonio CM, Vitousek PM (1992) Biological invasions by exotic grasses, the grass/fire cycle, and global change. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 23:63–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn KL, Kitching RL, Dexter EM (1994) The conservation status of Australian Butterflies. Unpublished report to Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, Canberra

  • Eastwood RG, Braby MF, Schmidt D, Hughes JM (2008) Taxonomy, ecology, genetics and conservation status of the pale imperial hairstreak (Jalmenus eubulus) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a threatened butterfly from the Brigalow Belt, Australia. Invertebr Syst 22:407–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenner TL (1991) A new subspecies of Euploea alcathoe (Godart) (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) from the Northern Territory, Australia. Aust Entomol Mag 18:149–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenner TL (1992) Correction and addendum. Aust Entomol Mag 19:93

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin DC, Brocklehurst PS, Lynch D, Bowman DMJS (2007) Niche differentiation and regeneration in the seasonally flooded Melaleuca forests of northern Australia. J Trop Ecol 23:457–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy KJ (2004) Climate change in the Northern Territory: consultancy report for the Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment. CSIRO, Division of Atmospheric Research, Climate Impact Group, Aspendale, Victoria

  • Hoffman BD (2004) Pest ants and their management on Aboriginal lands in the Northern Territory. A consultancy report prepared for the Northern Land Council. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Darwin

  • IUCN (2001) IUCN red list categories: version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • Kean L, Price O (2003) The extent of Mission grasses and Gamba Grass in the Darwin region of Australia’s Northern Territory. Pac Conserv Biol 8:281–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambkin TA (2001) The life history of Euploea alcathoe monilifera (Moore) and its relationship to E. a. eichhorni Staudinger (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Danainae). Aust Entomol 28:129–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis OT, Basset Y (2007) Insect conservation in tropical forests. In: Stewart AJA, New TR, Lewis OT (eds) Insect conservation biology. Proceedings of the royal entomological society’s 23rd symposium. CABI, Wallingford, pp 34–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Liddle DT, Russell-Smith J, Brock J, Leach GJ, Connors GT (1994) Atlas of the vascular rainforest plants of the northern territory. Australian Biological Resources Study, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1991) Butterfly conservation. Oxford University Press, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1992) Conservation of butterflies in Australia. J Res Lepid 29:237–253

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1995) Butterfly conservation in Australasia—an emerging awareness and an increasing need. In: Pullin AS (ed) Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 304–315

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1996) Evaluating the status of butterflies for conservation. In: Ae SA, Hirowatari T, Ishii M, Brower LP (eds) Decline and conservation of butterflies in Japan III. Lepidopterological Society of Japan, Osaka, pp 4–21

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR (1997) Are lepidoptera an effective ‘umbrella group’ for biodiversity conservation? J Insect Conserv 1:5–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR (2008) Conserving narrow range endemic insects in the face of climate change: options for some Australian butterflies. J Insect Conserv 12:585–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Sands DPA (1996) Progress in butterfly conservation in Australia. In: Ae SA, Hirowatari T, Ishii M, Brower LP (eds) Decline and conservation of butterflies in Japan III. Lepidopterological Society of Japan, Osaka, pp 116–127

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Sands DPA (2002) Narrow-range endemicity and conservation status: interpretations for Australian butterflies. Invertebr Syst 16:665–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Sands DPA (2003) The listing and de-listing of invertebrate species for conservation in Australia. J Insect Conserv 7:199–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Sands DPA (2004) Management of threatened insect species in Australia, with particular reference to butterflies. Aust J Entomol 43:258–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Yen AL (1995) Species management and recovery plans for butterflies (Insecta: Lepidoptera) in Australia. In: Bennett A, Backhouse G, Clark T (eds) People and nature conservation. Transactions of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Sydney, pp 15–21

    Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Pyle RM, Thomas JA, Thomas CD, Hammond PC (1995) Butterfly conservation management. Annu Rev Entomol 40:57–83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • New TR, Field RP, Sands DPA (2007) Victoria’s butterflies in a national conservation context. Vic Nat 124:243–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Panton WJ (1993) Changes in post World War 2 distribution and status of monsoon rainforests in the Darwin area. Aust Geogr 24:50–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MJ (1984) The biology and conservation of Ornithoptera alexandrae. In: Ackery PA, Vane-Wright RI (eds) The biology of butterflies. Symposium of the royal entomological society of London, number 11. Academic Press, London, pp 327–331

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MJ (1992a) The butterfly farming and trading industry in the Indo-Australian region and its role in tropical forest conservation. Trop Lepid 3(suppl 1):1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons MJ (1992b) The world’s largest butterfly endangered: the ecology, status and conservation of Ornithoptera alexandrae (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Trop Lepid 3(suppl 1):33–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter NA, Setterfield AA, Douglas MM, Hutley LB (2003) Testing the grass-fire cycle: alien grass invasion in the tropical savannas of northern Australia. Divers Distrib 9:169–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell-Smith J (1991) Classification, species richness, and environmental relations of monsoon rain forest in northern Australia. J Veg Sci 2:259–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell-Smith J, Bowman DMJS (1992) Conservation of monsoonal vine-forest isolates in the Northern Territory, Australia. Biol Conserv 59:51–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samways MJ (2005) Insect diversity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sands DPA (1999) Conservation status of Lepidoptera: assessment, threatening processes and recovery actions. In: Ponder W, Lunney D (eds) The other 99%. The conservation and biodiversity of invertebrates. Transactions of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman, pp 382–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Sands DPA, New TR (2002) The action plan for Australian butterflies. Environment Australia, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Skeat AJ, East TJ, Corbett LK (1996) Impact of feral water buffalo. In: Finlayson CM, von Oertzen I (eds) Landscape and vegetation ecology of the Kakadu region, northern Australia. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp 155–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Standards and Petitions Working Group (2006) Guidelines for using the IUCN red list categories and criteria: version 6.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren MS, Bourn N, Brereton T, Fox R, Middlebrook I, Parsons MS (2007) What have red lists done for us? The values and limitations of protected species listing for invertebrates. In: Stewart AJA, New TR, Lewis OT (eds) Insect conservation biology. Proceedings of the royal entomological society’s 23 symposium. CABI, Wallingford, pp 76–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson C (2003) Carn the crows! Working with an Aboriginal community to protect an endangered butterfly. 34th Australian entomological society and 6th invertebrate biodiversity and conservation combined conference, Hobart

  • Wilson BA, Brocklehurst PS, Clark MJ, Dickinson KJM (1990) Vegetation survey of the northern Territory. Technical report number 49. Land Conservation Unit, Conservation Commission of the Northern Territory, Palmerston

  • Woinarski JCZ, Mackey B, Nix HA, Traill B (2007) The nature of northern Australia: its natural values, ecological processes and future prospects. ANU E Press, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen AL, Butcher RJ (1997) An overview of the conservation of non-marine invertebrates in Australia. Environment Australia, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Young GR, Bellis GA, Brown GR, Smith ESC (2001) The crazy ant Anoplolepis gracilipes (Smith) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in east Arnhem Land, Australia. Aust Entomol 28:97–104

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Dieter Hinz, Ben Hoffman, Geoff Martin, Ian Morris, Phil Wise, Colin Wilson and Lyndsay Wilson for biological information on the distribution, habitats and threats of the Gove Crow butterfly and/or its habitat, and to Steve Roeger, Djawa Yunupingu, Phil Wise, David Preece, Daniel Barrow and Wanyubi Marika for logistical support. The Yolngu traditional owners Bundi Bundi, Dhaukal Wirrpanda and Mulayarpa Mununggurr, the Dhimurru indigenous rangers Banula Marika, Balupalu Yunupingu and Mandaka Marika, and the Laynhapuy indigenous rangers Yalapuru Gumana, Yinimala Gumana, Gadarri Mununggurr, Djudawit Mununggurr, Bandumul Munyarryun, Yalpi Yunupingu, Gamanara Wunungmurra, Rrumbi Wunungmurra and Bandarr Wirrpanda provided assistance with field work and access to their lands. Ian Morris, Phil Wise, David Preece, Lyndsay Wilson and Steven Gregg also assisted with field work. I thank John Woinarski and Chris Pavey for critically reading earlier drafts of the manuscript and for their perceptive comments. Funding for this work was provided for by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael F. Braby.

Appendix

Appendix

Priority conservation management actions for Euploea alcathoe enastri.

  1. 1.

    Development and involvement of local indigenous rangers. All sites of E. alcathoe enastri occur on private lands owned by the Yolngu Aboriginal people of north-eastern Arnhem Land. Indeed, some sites surveyed were classed as ‘sacred sites’ that can only be accessed in the presence of senior traditional owners. Much of the range of the butterfly lies within the Indigenous Protected Areas: subpopulations 6–8 occur on lands managed by Dhimurru Land Management Aboriginal Corporation (DLMAC), while subpopulations 3–5 and 9–11 fall under the management of the Yirralka Laynhapuy Rangers. Subpopulations 1 and 2 occur in non-protected areas and fall within the jurisdiction of the Gapuwiyak Aboriginal Community, which currently does not have a local indigenous ranger group. Successful long-term conservation management of the butterfly and its critical habitat is thus dependent on cooperation of traditional landowners and involvement of the two local indigenous ranger groups.

  2. 2.

    Education, community awareness and fire management. The wet monsoon forest patches on Gove Peninsula contain a suite of resources that are of cultural and spiritual significance to the Yolngu community. These resources include food, timber, fibre, medicine and spears, but the forests also comprise an important place for dreaming stories and spirits. There is an urgent need to ensure that customary knowledge is not lost but passed on from senior traditional owners to the next generation. A program needs to be established in which elders and community leaders are employed to gather, teach, disseminate and transfer cultural skills and knowledge. Such a program would include traditional burning practices, ethnobotany, hunting techniques and traditional dances, as well as the conservation needs of E. alcathoe enastri and its critical habitat. This may be the only way to ensure that the overall burning pattern is not disrupted because there is evidence that severe habitat modification is already occurring at some sites through altered fire regime.

  3. 3.

    Monitoring to assess threats. Although habitat disturbance by feral animals (buffalo, pig) is currently not significant, monitoring of known sites is recommended to detect possible changes in severity by these animals, as well as to detect potential threats such as invasion of grassy weeds and Yellow Crazy Ants. In addition, the butterfly has the potential to be used as an indicator taxon to assess general environmental health because of its ecological specialisation. Adults of E. alcathoe enastri are large, spectacular and readily identified in the field. Therefore, changes in its occurrence and abundance may reflect adverse changes to the general health of its critical habitat as a whole. Such a monitoring programme could be achieved by visually assessing and digitally recording habitat condition within selected sites on an annual basis by two rangers. Because of the low topographic relief of Gove Peninsula, monitoring is also needed to assess possible long-term environmental changes in sea-level, temperature and water table brought about by global climate change.

  4. 4.

    Control of exotic species. At present there is no control program of water buffalo and feral pig on Gove Peninsula. Should these threats become significant, a feral animal control strategy will be needed, which should be undertaken by the indigenous ranger groups with support from the Northern Territory Parks and Wildlife Service (P&WS). Perennial Mission Grass and Gamba Grass have the potential to invade and become serious weed problems on Gove Peninsula, and control and eradication of known infestations and the need to maintain vigilance against new outbreaks are therefore high priorities. Survey, monitoring and control of Yellow Crazy Ant is currently been undertaken on Gove Peninsula by the Crazy Ant Management Group coordinated by CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Tropical Ecosystems Research Centre, DLMAC, P&WS of the Northern Territory Government, the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and Northern Land Council, with funding from the Natural Heritage Trust. Due to the size and extent of the infestation the program has now shifted its focus from eradication to methods for control and containment (B. Hoffman, pers. comm.).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Braby, M.F. Conservation status and management of the Gove Crow Euploea alcathoe enastri (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae), a threatened tropical butterfly from the indigenous Aboriginal lands of north-eastern Arnhem Land, Australia. J Insect Conserv 14, 535–554 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9282-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-010-9282-6

Keywords

Navigation