Consultation Document on Listing Eligibility and Conservation Actions
Notoryctescaurinus(Kakarratul)
You are invited to provide your views, and reasons supporting them,related to:
1)the eligibility of Notoryctescaurinus(Kakarratul) for inclusion on the EPBC Act threatened species list; and
2)the necessary conservation actions for the above species.
Note: The information contained in this conservation advice was primarily sourced from ‘The Action Plan for Australian Mammals 2012’ (Woinarski et al., 2014).Any substantive additions obtained during the consultation on the draft will be cited within the advice. Readers may note that conservation advices resulting from the Action Plan for Australian Mammals show minor differences in formatting relative to other conservation advices. These are reflective of the desire to achieve efficiency over preparation of a large number of advices by adopting the approach of the Action Plan for Australian Mammals in presentation of information and do not reflect any difference in the evidence used to develop the recommendation.
Evidence provided by experts, stakeholders and the general public are welcome. Responses can be provided by any interested person.
Anyone may nominate a native species, ecological community or threatening process for listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or for a transfer of an item already on the list to a new listing category. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) undertakes the assessment of species to determine eligibility for inclusion in the list of threatened species and provides its recommendation to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment.
Responses are to be provided in writing either by email to:
or by mail to:
The Director
Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section
Wildlife, Heritage and Marine Division
Department of the Environment
PO Box 787
Canberra ACT 2601
Responses are required to be submitted by 8 May 2015.
Contents of this information package / PageGeneral background information about listing threatened species / 2
Information about this consultation process / 2
Draft information about the Kakarratuland its eligibility for listing / 3
Conservation actions for the species / 8
References cited / 10
Consultation questions / 11
General background information about listing threatened species
The Australian Government helps protect species at risk of extinction by listing them as threatened under Part 13 of the EPBC Act. Once listed under the EPBC Act, the species becomes a Matter of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and must be protected from significant impacts through the assessment and approval provisions of the EPBC Act. More information about threatened species is available on the department’s website at:
Public nominations to list threatened species under the EPBC Act are received annually by the department. In order to determine if a species is eligible for listing as threatened under the EPBC Act, the Threatened Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) undertakes a rigorous scientific assessment of its status to determine if the species is eligible for listing against a set of criteria. These criteria are available on the Department’s website at:
As part of the assessment process, the Committee consults with the public and stakeholders to obtain specific details about the species, as well as advice on what conservation actions might be appropriate. Information provided through the consultation process is considered by the Committee in its assessment. The Committee provides its advice on the assessment (together with comments received) to the Minister regarding the eligibility of the species for listing under a particular category and what conservation actions might be appropriate. The Minister decides to add, or not to add, the species to the list of threatened species under the EPBC Act.More detailed information about the listing process is at:
To promote the recovery of listed threatened species and ecological communities, conservation advices and where required, recovery plans are made or adopted in accordance with Part 13 of the EPBC Act. Conservation advices provide guidance at the time of listing on known threats and priority recovery actions that can be undertaken at a local and regional level. Recovery plans describe key threats and identify specific recovery actions that can be undertaken to enable recovery activities to occur within a planned and logical national framework. Information about recovery plans is available on the department’s website at:
Information about this consultation process
Responses to this consultation can be provided electronically or in hard copy to the contact addresses provided on Page 1. All responses received will be provided in full to the Committee and then to theAustralian Government Minister for the Environment.
In providing comments, please provide references to published data where possible. Should the Committee use the information you provide in formulating its advice, the information will be attributed to you and referenced as a ‘personal communication’ unless you provide references or otherwise attribute this information (please specify if your organisation requires that this information is attributed to your organisation instead of yourself).The final advice by the Committee will be published on the department’s website following the listing decision by the Minister.
Information provided through consultation may be subject to freedom of information legislation and court processes. It is also important to note that under the EPBC Act,the deliberations and recommendations of the Committee are confidential until the Minister has made a final decision on the nomination, unless otherwise determined by the Minister.
Notoryctescaurinus
Kakarratul
Taxonomy
Conventionally accepted asNotoryctescaurinus (Thomas, 1920).
Marsupial moles comprise their own marsupial order, the Notoryctemorphia, which may have branched off from other lineages as much as 64 million years ago (Kirsch et al., 1997). For some time it was thought that there was a single species of marsupial mole. Two species of Notoryctes are now recognised (possibly with two ‘forms’ of the Itjaritjari) but recent morphological and genetic research is yet to be published.
Species Information
Description
The Kakarratul is blind and shows the typical characteristics of other highly fossorial (adapted to living underground) mammals, including a tubular body shape, an absence of ear pinnae (external visible part of the ear), heavily keratinised skin on the snout, a reduced tail and dense fur. In common with most burrowing marsupials, the pouch opens posteriorly as a protection against the entry of soil (Benshemesh, 2004).
The Kakarratul’sbody is covered with dense, silky, golden-brown to pale cream fur which is often coloured by oxides in the soil. The fur also covers the ear openings. The short and powerful front limbs have large, spade-like claws on the third and fourth digits of the forepaw.The species has a head and body length of 86-93 mm and a tail length of 16-18 mm. It is similar to, but slightly smaller than, the related Itjaritjari (Notoryctestyphlops) and has a relatively narrower and shorter snout (Benshemesh & Johnson, 2003;Cronin, 1991; BenshemeshAplin, 2008).
Distribution
The Kakarratul occurs in the Great Sandy, Little Sandy and the northern Gibson Deserts of Western Australia, and probably in the western Tanami Desert of Western Australia and western Northern Territory. Its distribution follows that of the sand dune habitat it prefers. Connectivity of dunes appears importantin determining the distribution, i.e. mole signs are less common where there is low dune connectivity, and isolated areas of dunes may not be inhabited. The Kakarratulmay be sympatric with the Itjaritjari(N. typhlops) in the eastern and southern parts of its range.
Relevant Biology/Ecology
Kakarratul inhabit sand dunes and, to a lesser extent, adjacent swales where there is suitable deep, loose sand. Trenching surveys have shown that potential habitat appears to be simply described as aeolian dunes. They spend almost their entire life underground, only very occasionally coming to the surface, and only remaining on the surface for a short time. Most specimens and sightings come from animals found on the surface. However, it appears they rarely come to the surface, which makes them less prone to predation.
When underground, marsupial moles virtually swim through the soil. The sand is packed in behind the animal as it progresses and no empty tunnel is formed. Nevertheless, where one has passed through a soil profile, an oval shaped differentiation in soil texture and colour can be seen (Johnson and Walton, 1989). Evidence of 80 kilometres of backfilled tunnel per hectare is averaged in areas where Kakarratul occur (Benshemesh and Mann, 2009; Benshemesh and Schulz, 2009), representing up to 1% of the soil within one metre of the surface.
Kakarratul, likeItjaritjari, are insectivorous and capture their prey while underground (Paveyet al., 2012). There have been no analyses of gut contents but the diet is probably similar to the Itjaritjari’s, comprising mainly insects, particularly ants and some beetle larvae.
Marsupial moles may be common prey items of larger mammalian predators, especially the introduced red fox (Vulpesvulpes). In the known range of Kakarratul, Benshemeshet al. (2010) found remains of marsupial moles in 8% of predator scats, especially foxes, although differences in incidence in scats between foxes and dingos (and cats) were not significant. Signs of marsupial moles were found in approximately 5% of predator scats collected from 2008 to 2012 in the Martu native title determination in Western Australia (A. McGilvraypers. comm., cited in Woinarski et al., 2014).It is uncertain whether these predators take marsupial moles on the surface or dig them up, or indeed whether they are actually killing moles or taking dead animals. Dead or severely debilitated moles have been recorded on the surface on several occasions (Benshemesh, 2004), but it seems most likely that these predators prey upon living moles that are on or just under the surface. R. T. Maurice, who travelled widely in the Great Victoria Desert between 1897 and 1903, reported that local Aboriginal people were able to capture Itjaritjari after hearing them when they were under the surface (Gara, 1996, cited in Benshemesh, 2004), and larger mammalian predators may do likewise. Benshemeshet al. (2010) found some evidence that dingoes (Canis lupus dingo), at least, hunted Kakarratul in northern areas where it was common to find the remains of more than one marsupial mole in each dingo scat. On the surface, marsupial moles are vulnerable to a wide range of predators including birds of prey, snakes and goannas.
Almost nothing is known of reproduction or longevity in marsupial moles (Benshemesh Johnson, 2003). Single and twin pouch young have been recorded but pouch young appear very rarely in museum collections. No marsupial moles have survived in captivity for more than a few months. Generation time cannot be estimated.
Threats
Threats to the Kakarratulare outlined in the table below (Woinarski et al., 2014).
Threat factor / Consequence rating / Extent over which threat may operate / Evidence basePredation by red foxes / minor / entire / high proportion (c. 8%) of introduced predator scats in the Great Sandy and Little Sandy Deserts contained marsupial mole remains (Benshemesh et al., 2010)
Predation by feral cats / minor / entire / high proportion (c. 8%) of introduced predator scats in the Great Sandy and Little Sandy Deserts contained marsupial-mole remains (Benshemesh et al., 2010)
Predation by dingoes and wild dogs / minor / entire / high proportion of dingo scats in north-west Western Australia contained marsupial-mole remains with some scats containing several individuals (Benshemeshet al., 2010); however no evidence to indicate that this pressure may have increased since European settlement
Inappropriate fire regimes / unknown / entire / large, hot fires may reduce food availability; however, trenching surveys suggest that fire is not a limiting factor
Flooding / unknown / minor / prolonged periods of rain and flooding, saturating the soil profile, may lead to increased mortality rates
Noise pollution / unknown / minor (near developments especially mines, roads and railways) / intense or frequent underground sounds may damage animals or interfere with foraging and/or reproduction
Assessment of available information in relation to the EPBC Act Criteria and Regulations
Criterion 1. Population size reduction (reduction in total numbers)Population reduction (measured over the longer of 10 years or 3 generations) based on any of A1 to A4
Critically Endangered
Very severe reduction / Endangered
Severe reduction / Vulnerable
Substantial reduction
A1 / ≥ 90% / ≥ 70% / ≥ 50%
A2, A3, A4 / ≥ 80% / ≥ 50% / ≥ 30%
A1Population reduction observed, estimated, inferred or suspected in the past and the causes of the reduction are clearly reversible AND understood AND ceased.
A2Population reduction observed, estimated, inferred or suspected in the past where the causes of the reduction may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible.
A3Population reduction, projected or suspected to be met in the future (up to a maximum of 100 years) [(a) cannot be used for A3]
A4An observed, estimated, inferred, projected or suspected population reduction where the time period must include both the past and the future (up to a max. of 100 years in future), and where the causes of reduction may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible. / (a)direct observation [except A3]
(b)an index of abundance appropriate to the taxon
(c)a decline in area of occupancy, extent of occurrence and/or quality of habitat
(d)actual or potential levels of exploitation
(e)the effects of introduced taxa, hybridization, pathogens, pollutants, competitors or parasites
Evidence:
Maxwell et al. (1996) assessed this species to Endangered A1c,2c using a precautionary approach because it lies within the ‘critical weight range’ (Burbidge and McKenzie ,1989) (90% of arid zone species within this weight range have become extinct or declined significantly), and because of the apparent high predation rate by introduced red foxes. At that time, it was impossible to know whether the low rate of sightings and specimen acquisition was due to increasing rarity or to a relatively common species that is infrequently observed because of its fossorial behaviour.
Recent surveys show that Kararratul are widespread and common throughout much of their known range, and there is no evidence of an ongoing decline (Woinarski et al, 2014).
The data presented above appear to demonstrate the species is not eligible for listing under this criterion. However, the purpose of this consultation document is to elicit additional information to better understand the species’ status. This conclusion should therefore be considered to be tentative at this stage, as it may be changed as a result of responses to this consultation process.
Criterion 2.Geographic distribution is precarious for either extent of occurrence AND/OR area of occupancyCritically Endangered
Very restricted / Endangered
Restricted / Vulnerable
Limited
B1.Extent of occurrence (EOO) / < 100 km2 / < 5,000 km2 / < 20,000 km2
B2.Area of occupancy (AOO) / < 10 km2 / < 500 km2 / < 2,000 km2
AND at least 2 of the following 3 conditions:
(a)Severely fragmented OR Number of locations / = 1 / ≤ 5 / ≤ 10
(b)Continuing decline observed, estimated, inferred or projected in any of: (i) extent of occurrence; (ii) area of occupancy; (iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat; (iv) number of locations or subpopulations; (v) number of mature individuals
(c)Extreme fluctuations in any of: (i) extent of occurrence; (ii) area of occupancy; (iii) number of locations or subpopulations;( iv) number of mature individuals
Evidence:
The extent of occurrence is estimated to be290 000 km2; however, this is likely to be an underestimate due to the lack of survey and misidentification of the two species of marsupial moles. Evidence of the Kakarratul has been found in most areas of suitable habitat (dunes) within the distribution. The area of occupancyis unknown but is likely to be > 2000 km2(Woinarski et al., 2014).
The data presented above appear to demonstrate that the species is not eligible for listing under this criterion. However, the purpose of this consultation document is to elicit additional information to better understand the species’ status. This conclusion should therefore be considered to be tentative at this stage, as it may be changed as a result of responses to this consultation process.
Criterion 3.Small population size and declineCritically Endangered
Very low / Endangered
Low / Vulnerable
Limited
Estimated number of mature individuals / < 250 / < 2,500 / < 10,000
AND either (C1) or (C2) is true
C1An observed, estimated or projected continuing decline of at least (up to a max. of 100 years in future) / Very high rate
25% in 3 years or 1 generation
(whichever is longer) / High rate
20% in 5 years or 2 generations
(whichever is longer) / Substantial rate
10% in 10 years or 3 generations
(whichever is longer)
C2An observed, estimated, projected or inferred continuing decline AND its geographic distribution is precarious for its survival based on at least 1 of the following 3 conditions:
(a) / (i)Number of mature individuals in each subpopulation / ≤ 50 / ≤ 250 / ≤ 1,000
(ii) % of mature individuals in one subpopulation = / 90 – 100% / 95 – 100% / 100%
(b)Extreme fluctuations in the number of mature individuals
Abundance is unknown, but evidence of the species has been found in most areas of suitable habitat (dunes) within the distribution. Woinarski et al. (2014) consider that the population size is likely to be >10 000 mature individuals.
There are insufficient data to demonstrate if the species is eligible for listing under this criterion. However, the purpose of this consultation document is to elicit additional information to better understand the species’ status. This conclusion should therefore be considered to be tentative at this stage, as it may be changed as a result of responses to this consultation process.
Criterion 4.Very small populationCritically Endangered
Extremely low / Endangered
Very Low / Vulnerable
Low
Number of mature individuals / 50 / < 250 / < 1,000
Evidence:
Woinarski et al. (2014) consider that the population size is likely to be > 10 000 mature individuals.
The data presented above appear to demonstrate that the species is not eligible for listing under this criterion. However, the purpose of this consultation document is to elicit additional information to better understand the species’ status. This conclusion should therefore be considered to be tentative at this stage, as it may be changed as a result of responses to this consultation process.
Criterion 5.Quantitative AnalysisCritically Endangered
Immediate future / Endangered
Near future / Vulnerable
Medium-term future
Indicating the probability of extinction in the wild to be: / ≥ 50% in 10 years or 3 generations, whichever is longer (100 years max.) / ≥ 20% in 20 years or 5 generations, whichever is longer (100 years max.) / ≥ 10% in 100 years
Evidence: