Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intensive monitoring, the key to identifying cat predation as a major threat to native carnivore (Dasyurus geoffroii) reintroduction

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Successful fauna reintroductions occur when the original causes of decline are addressed. When these causes are unclear, intensive post-release monitoring could help identify unknown threats and new management actions. We present an Australian case study involving a reintroduction of the threatened western quoll (Dasyurus geoffroii), a species whose decline was thought to have been caused primarily by predation from introduced foxes and habitat alteration. Intensive post-release monitoring occurred for 5 years after releasing 93 quolls into a semi-arid environment where foxes (Vulpes vulpes) were controlled but quolls had been absent for 130 years. Radiotracking and trapping results indicated that breeding occurred in all years after reintroduction, sufficient shelter sites were present and home ranges (245 ha for females, 2778 ha for males) were similar to other sites. Although cats (Felis catus) were previously considered a threat mainly to juveniles, they were a major threat to population establishment, responsible for the majority of adult quoll deaths recorded after each of three annual releases. Predation impacts were higher in smaller female quolls and quolls living in open habitats. Evidence for selective hunting was supported by the increasing male bias and declining population recorded during trapping. Monitoring results led to an intensification of cat control and suggested that feral cat predation was likely a significant contributor to the historical decline of the western quoll and previous reintroduction failures. This threat would not have been identified without intensive post-release monitoring. Quolls are still extant 7 years after release suggesting that reintroductions can be successful without identifying all causes of decline. Our intensive monitoring program and flexible management strategy were essential for understanding the factors influencing reintroduction success and implementing appropriate mitigation methods. Although logistically challenging and expensive, we urge other practitioners to conduct intensive post-release monitoring and flexible management for reintroductions of formerly widespread species where the original causes of decline are unclear.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Data availability

Data is available upon request with appropriate involvement and acknowledgement of authors.

Code availability

Publically available on request.

References

  • Abbott I (2013) Extending the application of Aboriginal names to Australian biota: “Dasyurus” (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae) species. Vic Na 130:109–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong DP, Seddon PJ (2008) Directions in reintroduction biology. Trends Ecol Evol 23:20–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bates DM, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S, Christensen RHB, Singmann H, Dai B, Grothendieck G, Green P (2016) lme4: linear mixed effects models using 'Eigen' and S4. CRAN.

  • Brandle R (2001) A biological survey of the Flinders Ranges South Australia 1997–1999. Biological Survey and Monitoring, National Parks and Wildlife South Australia, Department for Environment and Heritage, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandle R, Mooney T, De Preu N (2018) Broadscale feral predator and herbivore control for yellow-footed rock-wallabies Petrogale xanthopus ssp. xanthopus: improved resilience for plants and animals = Bounceback. In: Garnett S, Latch P, Lindenmayer D, Woinarski J (eds) Recovering Australian threatened species: a book of hope. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 135–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Burbidge AA, Johnson KA, Fuller PJ, Southgate RI (1988) Aboriginal knowledge of the mammals of the central deserts of Australia. Aust Wildl Res 15:9–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag, New York, p 488

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Environment and Conservation (2012). Chuditch Dasyurus geoffroii Recovery Plan. Wildlife Management Program No. 54. Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, Western Australia.

  • Davis MH (1983) Post-release movements of introduced marten. J Wildl Manag 47:59–66

    Google Scholar 

  • de Preu N, Pearce D (2006) Bounceback progress report. Adelaide, Department for Environment and Heritage

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Environment and Water (2016). Herbivore Browse and Grass Assessment, Ikara-Flinders Ranges National Park, Vulkathunha-Gammon Ranges National Park, Bimbowrie Conservation Park, Plumbago Station. Unpublished Report by Acacia Park Consultants, Quorn.

  • Finlayson HH (1961) On central Australian mammals. IV. The distribution and status of central Australian species. Rec South Aust Mus 41:141–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2000) An assessment of the published results of animal relocations. Biol Conserv 96:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske I, Chandler R (2011) unmarked: An R package for fitting hierarchical models of wildlife occurrence and abundance. Journal of Statistical Software 43:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaikhorst G (2008) Chuditch animal management guidelines. Perth Zoo, Perth

    Google Scholar 

  • Gedeon CI, Váczi O, Koósz B, Altbäcker V (2011) Morning release into artificial burrows with retention caps facilitates success of European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) translocations. Eur J Wildl Res 57:1101–1105

    Google Scholar 

  • Glen AS, de Tores PJ, Sutherland DR, Morris K (2009) Interactions between chuditch (Dayurus geoffroii) and introduction predators: a review. Australian Journal of Zoology 57:347–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Glen AS, Berry O, Sutherland DR, Garretson S, Robinson T, de Tores PJ (2010) Forensic DNA confirms intraguild killing of a chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) by a feral cat (Felis catus). Conserv Genet 11:1099–1101

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gorini L, Linnell JDC, May R, Panzacchi M, Boitani L, Odden M, Nilsen EB (2012) Habitat heterogeneity and mammalian predator-prey interactions. Mammal Rev 42:55–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Grueber CE, Nakagawa S, Laws RJ, Jamieson IG (2011) Multimodel inference in ecology and evolution: challenges and solutions. Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 24:699–711

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hardman B, Moro D, Calver M (2016) Direct evidence implicates feral cat predation as the primary cause of failure of a mammal reintroduction programme. Ecol Manag Restor 17:152–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Henzell RP, Cooke BD, Mutze GJ (2008) The future biological control of pest populations of European rabbits, Oryctolagus cuniculus. Wildl Res 35:633–650

    Google Scholar 

  • Hohnen R, Ashby J, Tuft K, McGregor H (2013) Individual identification of northern quolls (Dasyurus hallucatus) using remote cameras. Aust Mammal 35:131–135

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN/SSC (2013) Guidelines for reintroductions and other conservation translocations. Version 10. Gland, IUCN Species Survival Commission, p viiii + 57

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson B (2009) Report on a visit to assess the potential on the Flinders Ranges, South Australia for chuditch (western quoll) translocation, February 2009.

  • Johnson KA, Roff AD (1982) The western quoll, Dasyurus geoffroii (Dasyuridae, Marsupialia), in the Northern Territory: historical sources from venerable sources. In: Archer M (ed) Carnivorous Marsupials, vol 1. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Sydney, pp 221–226

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Knutson MG, Franklin AB (2003) Estimating site occupancy, colonization, and local extinction when a species is detected imperfectly. Ecology 84:2200–2207

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod KJ, Krebs CJ, Boonstra R, Sheriff MJ (2018) Fear and lethality in snowshoe hares: the deadly effects of non-consumptive predation risk. Oikos 127:375–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Marlow NJ, Thomas ND, Williams AAE, Macmahon B, Lawson J, Hitchen Y, Angus J, Berry O (2015) Cats (Felis catus) are more abundant and are the dominant predator of woylies (Bettongia penicillata) after sustained fox (Vulpes vulpes) control. Aust J Zool 16:18–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazerolle MJ (2017) AICcmodavg: Model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q)AIC(c). R package version 2.1-1

  • McGregor HW, Legge S, Jones ME, Johnson CN (2015) Feral cats are better killers in open habitats, revealed by animal-borne video. PLoS ONE 10:e0133915

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Medlin G (1993) Field guide to Chambers Gorge, Flinders Ranges. South Australian Museum, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Meek PD, Ballard AG, Fleming PJS (2012) An introduction to camera trapping for wildlife surveys in Australia. Invasive Animals CRC, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Mincham H (1996) History of exploration and settlement. In: Davies M, Twidale CR, Tyler MJ (eds) Natural history of the Flinders Ranges. Royal Society of South Australia, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris K, Johnson B, Orell P, Gaikhorst G, Wayne A, Moro D (2003) Recovery of the threatened chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii): a case study. In: Jones M, Dickman C, Archer M (eds) Predators with pouches: the biology of carnivorous Marsupials. Melbourne, CSIRO Publishing, pp 435–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Peacock D (2013) Reintroduction of the idnya (Dasyurus geoffroii) to the central Finders Ranges, South Australia. South Australian Department for Environment, Water and Natural Resources, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Read JL, Paton DC, Copley P, Hill BM, Crisp HM (2011) Predation determines the outcome of 11 reintroduction attempts in arid Australia. Biol Conserv 144:2863–2872

    Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Hill BM, Lavery TH (2014) Tailoring release protocols to individual species and sites: one size does not fit all. PLoS ONE 9(6):e99753. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099753

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Peacock DE, Read JL (2015) Catastrophic cat predation: a call for predator profiling in wildlife protection programs. Biol Conserv 191:331–340

    Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Hill C, Mooney T, Peacock D, Morris K, Brandle R (2016) Trial reintroduction of the western quoll (Dasyurus geoffroii) into the Flinders Ranges National Park, South Australia. In: Soorae PS (ed) Global re-introduction Perspectives: 2016. More case studies from around the globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group and Abu Dhabi, UAE: Environment Agency-Abu Dhabi, Gland, pp 228–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Moseby KE, Brandle R, Hodgens P, Bannister H (2020) Can reintroductions to degraded habitat succeed? A test using the common brushtail possum. Aust Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.12880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutze G, Cooke B, Jennings S (2016) Density-dependent grazing impacts of introduced European rabbits and sympatric kangaroos on Australian native pastures. Biol Invasions 18:2365–2376

    Google Scholar 

  • Orell P, Morris K (1994) Western Australian Wildlife Management Program No. 13. Chuditch Recovery Plan 1992–2000. Western Australian Department of Conservation and Land Management, Wanneroo.

  • Otis DL, Burnham KP, White GC, Anderson DR (1978) Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations. Wildl Monogr 62:3–135

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock D, Abbott I (2013) The role of quoll (Dasyurus) predation in the outcome of pre-1900 introductions of rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) to the mainland and islands of Australia. Aust J Zool 61:206–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Peacock D, Abbott I (2014) When the ‘native cat’ would ‘plague’: historical hyperabundance in the quoll (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae) and an assessment of the role of disease, cats and foxes in its curtailment. Aust J Zool 62:294–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettorelli N, Hiborn A, Duncan C, Duran SM (2015) Individual variability: the missing component to our understanding of predator-prey interactions. Adv Ecol Res 52:19–44

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2015) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner K, Chambers B, Johnson B, Morris KD, Mills HR (2011) Spatial and dietary requirements of the chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) in a semiarid climatic zone. Aust Mammal 34:59–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Read JL, Bowen Z (2001) Population dynamics, diet and aspects of the biology of feral cats and foxes in arid South Australia. Wildl Res 28:195–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Read JL, Peacock D, Wayne AF, Moseby KE (2016) Toxic Trojans: can feral cat predation be mitigated by making their prey poisonous? Wildl Res 42:689–696

    Google Scholar 

  • Read JR, Moseby KE, Dagg E (2018) Prey selectivity by feral cats at central Australian rock wallaby colonies. Aust Mammal 41:132–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, A. C. (2012) Flinders Ranges National Park management plan discussion paper. In: W. A. N. R. (ed) Prepared for the Department for Environment. Department for Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia.

  • Saul WC, Jeschke JM (2015) Eco-evolutionary experience in novel species interactions. Ecol Lett 18:236–245

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Serena M, Soderquist T (1988) Growth and development of pouch young of wild and captive Dasyurus geoffroii (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae). Aust J Zool 36:533–543

    Google Scholar 

  • Serena M, Soderquist TR (1989) Spatial organisation of a riparian population of the carnivorous marsupial Dasyurus geoffroii. J Zool 219:273–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Short J (2009) The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith MJ, Medlin GC (1982) Dasyurids of the northern Flinders Ranges before pastoral development. In: Archer M (ed) Carnivorous Marsupials, vol 2. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Sydney, pp 563–572

    Google Scholar 

  • Soderquist TR (1988) The ecology of Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) in the Jarrah forest: a summary of facts relevant to management. Unpublished document.

  • Stobo-Wilson A (2014) Management of invasive mesopredators in the Flinders Ranges, South Australia: effectiveness and implications. Honours Thesis, University of Tasmania.

  • Symonds MRE, Moussalli A (2011) A brief guide to model selection, multimodel inference and model averaging in behavioural ecology using Akaike’s information criterion. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology. 65:13–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Therneau T (2020) ‘Survival’. A package for survival analysis in R. R package version 3.1–11. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival.

  • Tunbridge D (1991) The story of the Flinders Ranges mammals. Kangaroo Press, Kenthurst, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • West R, Tilley L, Moseby K (2019) A trial reintroduction of the western quoll to a fenced conservation reserve; implications of returning native predators. Aust Mammal. https://doi.org/10.1071/AM19041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White GC, Burnham KP (1999) Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46(Sup 1):120–138

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research was conducted under approval by the South Australian Wildlife Ethics Committee approval numbers 52/2013 and 42/2016. Funding for this project was provided by FAME, the Foundation for Australia’s Most Endangered species, and their generous donors, with assistance from the SA Department for Environment and Water. Additional funding was provided by Nature Foundation SA and the Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment. This project would not have been possible without the support of the Adnyamathanha people, traditional custodians of the land. We thank the Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, particularly, K. Morris, B. Johnson, M. Page and K. Rayner for their assistance with the translocations, and the support of the Chuditch Recovery Team. We thank the Native Animal Rescue Centre in Perth for temporary housing of quolls, Zoos SA staff for caring for injured and orphaned quolls and conducting necropsies, and the Conservation and Wildlife Management Branch of Sporting Shooters SA for cat control. Thanks to DEW staff D. McKenzie and A. Coulthard for logistical assistance, F. Bernhardt and D. Armstrong for cat control, B. Arnold for building the release pens, J. Jansen for comments on the manuscript and T. Schroeder for field assistance. We are indebted to the volunteers who assisted with trapping, and the interns who provided many hours of assistance in the field often under trying conditions, namely C. Mills, C. Holt, H. Bannister, S. Robinson, R. Ladd, T. Moyle, P. Mitchell, M. Henderson, S. Dorries, K. Smith, M. Le Pla and B. Philp. G. Lollback kindly assisted with statistical analysis. The World Wildlife Fund is thanked for their 2008 Quoll Workshop (Sydney, NSW) and D. Taggart, D. Schultz and the late D. Pearce for their subsequent support and encouragement.

Funding

Funding for this project was provided by FAME, the Foundation for Australia’s Most Endangered species, the SA Department for Environment and Water, Nature Foundation SA and the Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Centre for Ecosystem Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, 2035, Australia

    K. E. Moseby & R. West

  2. Ecological Horizons, P. O. Box 207, Kimba, 5641, Australia

    K. E. Moseby & P. Hodgens

  3. School of Biological Sciences, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia

    D. Peacock, H. Bannister & M. A. Jensen

  4. Department for Environment and Water, Adelaide, 5000, Australia

    P. Mooney, R. Brandle, C. Lynch & P. Copley

  5. School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 7005, Australia

    C. M. Young

Authors
  1. K. E. Moseby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Hodgens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Peacock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Mooney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. Brandle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. Lynch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. R. West
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. C. M. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. H. Bannister
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. P. Copley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. M. A. Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. E. Moseby.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

Research was conducted under approval by the South Australian Wildlife Ethics Committee approval numbers 52/2013 and 42/2016.

Consent to participate

All authors give their consent.

Consent for publication

All authors give their consent to publication.

Additional information

Communicated by Karen E. Hodges.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moseby, K.E., Hodgens, P., Peacock, D. et al. Intensive monitoring, the key to identifying cat predation as a major threat to native carnivore (Dasyurus geoffroii) reintroduction. Biodivers Conserv 30, 1547–1571 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02157-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02157-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation