Commonwealth of Australia
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
Making of a Threat Abatement Plan – Section 270B
I, JOSH FRYDENBERG, Minister for the Environment and Energy, pursuant to section 270B of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, make the Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits (2016) for the purpose of reducing the effect of the key threatening process as specified below:
Key Threatening Process | Threat Abatement Plan |
Competition and land degradation by rabbits | Department of the Environment (2016). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits |
The Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits (2016) will come into force on the day after the plan is registered on the Federal Register of Legislation.
Dated this 15 day of December 2016
JOSH FRYDENBERG
Minister for the Environment and Energy
Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits
The Department acknowledges the traditional owners of country throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, sea and community. We pay our respects to them and their cultures and to their elders both past and present.
© Copyright Commonwealth of Australia, 2016.
The Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits is licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Australia licence with the exception of the Coat of Arms of the Commonwealth of Australia, the logo of the agency responsible for publishing the report, content supplied by third parties, and any images depicting people. For licence conditions see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
This report should be attributed as ‘Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits, Commonwealth of Australia 2016’.
The Commonwealth of Australia has made all reasonable efforts to identify content supplied by third parties.
The contents of this document have been compiled using a range of source materials and is valid as at September 2016.
While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that the contents of this publication are factually correct, the Commonwealth does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents, and shall not be liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this publication.
Contents
Threat abatement plan for rabbits
Objective 3 – Improve the effectiveness of rabbit control programs
EPBC Act listed species and ecological communities affected by rabbits
Introduction
This Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits establishes a national framework to guide and coordinate Australia’s response to the impacts of European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) on biodiversity. It identifies the research, management and other actions needed to ensure the long-term survival of native species and ecological communities affected by competition and land degradation caused by rabbits. It builds on the achievements to date and replaces the previous threat abatement plan for rabbits published in 2008 (DEWHA 2008).
While this threat abatement plan aims primarily to abate the threat to key environmental assets (threatened species and ecological communities listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and other matters of national environmental significance), it also recognises that rabbits have wider environmental impacts as well as social, cultural and economic impacts.
This plan should be read in conjunction with the publication Background document for the threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a). The background document provides information on:
- rabbit characteristics, biology and distribution
- impacts on environmental, economic, social and cultural values, and
- current management practices and research.
Threat abatement plans
The EPBC Act provides for the identification and listing of key threatening processes. At the commencement of the EPBC Act, competition and land degradation by rabbits was listed as a key threatening process and a threat abatement plan was developed.
The Australian Government develops threat abatement plans with assistance from other Australian, state and territory government agencies, natural resource managers and scientific experts, and facilitates their implementation. To progress the main strategic actions within the threat abatement plan, the Department of the Environment and Energy relies on partnerships and co-investment with other government agencies, industry and other stakeholders. An important part of implementation of the threat abatement plan is ensuring that knowledge of improved abatement methods is disseminated to, and adopted by, potential users.
Mitigating the threat and impact of invasive species is a matter of developing, applying and integrating a number of control methods, not relying on one method. It also requires understanding and addressing social and economic factors; for example, through supporting the efforts of private landholders, leaseholders and volunteers to manage invasive species on their lands to achieve the desired outcomes for biodiversity conservation and primary production. In addition, research and development programs for managing pest species need to integrate the interests of both primary production and environmental conservation.
Regional natural resource management plans and site-based plans provide the best scale and context for developing operational plans to control invasive species. They allow primary production and environmental considerations to be jointly addressed and allow management to be integrated across the local priority vertebrate pests within the scope of other natural resource management priorities.
Review of the 2008 TAP
The EPBC Act requires that a threat abatement plan be reviewed by the Minister at intervals of no longer than five years. The 2008 Threat Abatement Plan for the competition and land degradation by rabbits was reviewed by the Department of the Environment in 2013. The review assessed the progress and effectiveness of the threat abatement plan in: reducing the impacts of rabbits on biodiversity, specifically nationally listed threatened species and ecological communities; and preventing further species and communities from becoming threatened, through research, management and other actions. The review can be accessed at: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/competition-and-land-degradation-rabbits. In summary, the review found that:
- the issues and objectives outlined in the 2008 TAP were still valid and are likely to remain so into the future
- rabbits have reached their ecological limit within Australia; threat abatement should therefore focus on minimising their impact rather than preventing further spread
- there have been several successful eradications of rabbits on offshore islands in the last five years, most notably the eradication from Macquarie Island
- exclosures have been useful in quantifying the impacts of rabbits on native flora and fauna
- rabbits inhibit the regeneration of plants at densities as low as 0.5 rabbits per hectare
- rabbit control programs have often been ad hoc, lacked strategic prioritisation, and have rarely been initiated in order to promote threatened species or ecological community recovery
- information on the effects of rabbit abundance on pest predators, including prey switching, is limited
- rabbit control research over the last five years has predominantly focussed on increasing the effectiveness of Rabbit Haemorrhagic Disease, with several new strains identified, and
- new approaches and educational tools e.g. online manuals, guidelines, factsheets and economic decision models, have been produced to assist land managers implement integrated control programs.
This new TAP incorporates the knowledge gained since the 2008 TAP and the new objectives and actions have been written in line with the recommendations of the review.
Involvement of stakeholders
The successful implementation of this TAP will depend on a high level of cooperation between landholders, community groups, non-government conservation organisations, local government, state and territory conservation and pest management agencies, and the Australian Government. Success will depend on all participants allocating adequate resources to achieve effective on-ground control of rabbits at critical sites, improving the effectiveness of control programs, and measuring and assessing outcomes. It is acknowledged that there have been declines in the number of people working on rabbit issues at a various levels of government, and this may add to the challenge of allocating adequate resources. However, programs in natural resource management, at national, state and regional levels, can make significant contributions to implementing the plan.
Threat abatement plan for rabbits
This section provides an overview of the threat and management of competition and land degradation by rabbits. The background document (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a) should be referred to for further information.
The threat
The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) was deliberately released onto the Australian mainland in the mid to late 1800s. Rabbits dominated two-thirds or 70% of the continent within 70 years (equivalent to approximately 5.3 million square kilometres) (Cox et al. 2013; Bengsen & Cox 2014). With the exception of the feral cat in Australia, this is considered to be the fastest rate of any colonizing mammal anywhere in the world (cited in Williams et al. 1995; McLeod 2004) — with colonisation greatly aided by the use of warrens (which protect them against predators and climatic extremes), their high reproductive rates, and their ability to survive in a wide range of habitats (Williams et al. 1995). They are now one of the most widely distributed and abundant mammals in Australia (Williams et al. 1995); found in all states and territories and many offshore islands, with only the most northerly regions of the mainland being rabbit free. Their exact abundance is unknown and cannot be readily quantified as population sizes frequently fluctuate through factors such as breeding events, mortality caused from biocontrol agents or drought, and availability of resources.
Rabbits inflict substantial damage upon both agricultural and environmental assets (e.g. native flora and fauna, vegetation communities, landforms, geomorphic processes and sensitive sites, and crops) and have been described as Australia’s most costly vertebrate pest (Cooke et al. 2013). For agricultural commodities, this damage has been estimated at exceeding $200 million annually (Gong et al. 2009); for environmental commodities, the value of the damage has not been quantified. The introduction of rabbit biocontrol agents (myxoma and rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus) have helped to reduce environmental impacts of rabbits in Australia and provided an economic benefit, although even at lower densities (e.g. more than 0.5 rabbits per hectare), their impact still continues to be severe (Bird et al. 2012; Cooke et al. 2010; Cooke 2012b; cited in Cooke et al. 2013). Direct impacts of rabbits include:
- competition with native wildlife for resources (food and shelter)
- preventing plant regeneration
- overgrazing and general damage to plant species
- reversing the normal processes of plant succession
- altering ecological communities and changing soil structure and nutrient cycling, leading to significant erosion, and
- removal of critical habitat for arboreal mammals and birds, leading to increased predation and reduced reproduction.
Rabbits also have indirect impacts on native flora and fauna, including:
- supporting elevated population densities of pest predators such as foxes and feral cats. They can also support wild dogs (wild dogs are not a problem across all parts of Australia, and indeed can play an important ecological role), and
- promoting growth of introduced and unpalatable species such as weeds.
Rabbits impact over 300 EPBC Act listed threatened species and nine ecological communities. This includes 44 species of fauna (15 birds, 20 mammals, 6 reptiles, 1 invertebrate, 1 fish and 1 amphibian) and 260 listed plant species (Department of the Environment 2015b). A full list of these species is at Appendix A.
Managing the threat
Rabbits are widely established and abundant in Australia and, with any current or foreseeable techniques, are not able to be eradicated. Given the current resources and techniques available, the focus of management is generally on abating their impacts rather than eradication. However, eradication may be achievable in isolated areas such as small reserves, exclosures, and offshore islands.
Sustained control of rabbits is feasible and has been achieved in some large areas using well planned and timely integrated control measures, particularly after rabbits have been reduced by drought or disease (Cooke 1993; Cooke 2012a). Integrated control measures must seek to: use a range of control techniques (e.g. poisoning and warren destruction); target a range of pest species (e.g. rabbit control activities should also focus on the reduction in foxes, feral cats and weeds); and seek to control rabbits across neighbouring land tenures.
In order to effectively manage rabbits and maximise control efforts, control efforts should be:
- targeted to protect sites where rabbits pose the greatest threat to biodiversity
- undertaken in a strategic manner to take advantage of the environmental conditions and other complementary activities, and
- monitored to ensure that objectives are met, and allow management options to be adapted to changing circumstances.
There are a range of control measures available for the management of rabbits. These include poison baiting, biological control agents, warren ripping and fumigation, fencing, harbour removal, and shooting. None of these techniques should be relied upon in isolation.
Research is continuing into improved control measures including biocontrol technology, particularly through three projects run by the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre (Invasive Animals CRC) — the RHD Boost, RHD Accelerator and Bioprospecting projects (Cox et al. 2013). Further information on control measures and the Invasive Animals CRC projects can be found in the supporting Background document (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a).
Objectives and actions
The goal of this TAP is to minimise the impact of rabbit competition and land degradation on biodiversity in Australia and its territories by:
- protecting affected threatened species and ecological communities, and
- preventing further species and ecological communities from becoming threatened.
To achieve this goal, the plan has four main objectives:
- Strategically manage rabbits at the landscape scale and suppress rabbit populations to densities below threshold levels in identified priority areas
2. Improve knowledge and understanding of the impact of rabbits and their interactions with other species and ecological processes
3. Improve the effectiveness of rabbit control programs, and
4. Increase engagement of, and awareness by, the community of the environmental impacts of rabbits and the need for integrated control.
Each objective is accompanied by a set of actions, which, when implemented, will help to achieve the goal of the plan. Performance indicators have been established for each objective. Progress will be assessed by determining the extent to which the performance indicators have been met.
The sections below provide background on each objective, followed by a table listing the actions required to meet the objective. Nineteen actions have been developed to meet the four objectives.
Priorities for each action are categorised as ‘very high’, ‘high’ or ‘medium’. Also, each action has been assigned a timeframe within which the outcome could be achieved once the action has commenced. Timeframes are categorised as short term (i.e. within three years), medium term (i.e. within three to five years) or long term (i.e. five years or beyond).
Objective 1 – Strategically manage rabbits at the landscape scale and suppress rabbit populations to densities below threshold levels in identified priority areas
As the eradication of rabbits from all of mainland Australia and Tasmania is not feasible, attention needs to be directed to the management and control of populations to reduce their impact on biodiversity. However, in order to efficiently and effectively manage rabbits, control programs need to be strategically designed and implemented. This includes the consideration of a number of different factors which can influence the success or failure, the effort required, and costs of control programs. The factors may include (among others):
- identification of threatened species and habitats for which rabbit control activities can provide the most benefit
- wider, community-based coordination of actions, including on-ground control on private properties, public land and in urban areas to provide control across wider areas to slow re-invasion. Noting that, for the purposes of this threat abatement plan, a greater focus should be on sites of higher conservation value
- incorporation of economic decision-model analyses to maximise cost-benefit outcomes of control programs
- identification of other land management activities such as pest animal control and weed management programs for integrated control and to reduce unintended consequences, and
- environmental site conditions including topography, land type, vegetation and climatic conditions; and their potential influence on control activities.
Control programs also need to take into account the number of rabbits per hectare. Several studies have found that if there are more than 0.5 rabbits per hectare, native species can be severely impacted (Mutze et al. 2008; Bird et al. 2012; Cooke 2012a). For example, when rabbit numbers are greater than 0.5 rabbits per hectare, the recruitment and regeneration of plants are inhibited, causing many of these species to become locally extinct (Mutze et al. 2008; Bird et al. 2012; Cooke 2012a).
The identification and consideration of threatened species and habitats is another critical consideration to ensure the survival of the species in that area. Removal of invasive species such as rabbits has been found to have significant benefits for native species such as reversing local population declines (Mutze et al. 2008; Bird et al. 2012; Pedler et al. 2016). Management actions for invasive species should therefore focus on removing these threats, as well as other threats to the threatened species or ecosystems, to enable the persistence of threatened native species and to support well-functioning ecosystems. Species identified (as at 2016) as being impacted by rabbits are outlined in Appendix A.
In addition to the above factors, prioritisation of control for pest species such as rabbits has been found to be more useful at regional scales e.g. catchment or national resource management levels. Planning at this level enables a more holistic approach to rabbit management across regions, particularly in dividing and allocating resources (Murray et al. 2014). Regional areas are also likely to share the same or similar threatened species and ecological communities.
The actions under this objective therefore seek to assist land managers with information to support strategic rabbit management programs and to focus abatement on priority areas. The actions are envisaged to not only lead to better environmental outcomes such as species and ecological community protection, but to a more efficient and effective use of limited resources.
Key actions for Objective 1 include identifying priority areas for rabbit control on a regional scale, implementing and supporting regional control programs, and promoting and maintaining control programs in areas adjacent to priority areas. In particular, actions will seek to support control of rabbits to threshold levels of less than 0.5 rabbits per hectare.
Action 1.1 seeks to determine regional priority areas for rabbit control by focussing effort on areas where rabbits have the greatest impact on threatened species and/or ecological communities. This includes identifying priority islands for eradication efforts in each state. It also focuses on determining areas where the regeneration capacity of plants and the recovery of threatened species show the greatest potential. This will help obtain the greatest benefit for the amount of effort and resources put in. Aerial surveying using videos and GPS can be a cost-effective method for surveying and mapping regional areas to assist with prioritisation of management activities across a landscape. Economic decision models will also be useful to help determine how these efforts can be prioritised and the best combination of control methods (see background document for further information on economic decision models (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a)). Control programs need to be implemented or continued in the identified priority areas.
Action 1.2 follows on from action 1.1 by ensuring that control efforts are focused on a wider and more holistic landscape-scale, rather than on small patches of land and including all land tenures such as private land and urban areas. By focusing efforts in this way, control activities can be planned in a strategic manner to take advantage of environmental conditions and other complementary activities in the area.
Action 1.3 relates to action 1.2, by using incentives for land managers to undertake more strategic and landscape-scale approaches to control programs. This should include coordination of control activities across neighbouring properties, including adjacent public and private land. It should be noted that incentives can include non-cash benefits such as training or community facilitation.
Both action 1.3 and 1.2 help to maximise effectiveness and minimise costs by avoiding a piece-meal approach to rabbit control which facilitates immigration from adjoining or adjacent land where no control has been undertaken.
Action 1.4 focuses on assessing the implementation of regional and state and territory based control programs via regular and coordinated monitoring and reporting mechanisms. Monitoring rabbit control programs is critical to assist in determining whether a management program has been successful or not and what the failure points might be. This is particularly important at the regional and state/territory level where funding and effort are put into very similar activities and under similar environmental conditions, but by a range of different groups and individuals. By making program reports readily available, this will help ensure that any future control activities are as effective as possible by allowing management programs to be adapted and avoiding duplication or the implementation of actions that are unlikely to succeed. Where possible, a common and best practice approach to rabbit monitoring should be undertaken to enable comparisons to be made between control activities. Further information on monitoring approaches for rabbits can be found in the background document (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a).
Action 1.5 focuses on targeted eradication efforts on high priority islands identified through action 1.1. Eradications of rabbits from islands may be feasible, particularly if the risk of new arrivals can be mitigated against. The use of integrated and well-thought out management plans will be critical in such eradication programs to avoid unexpected consequences and to ensure their success.
Performance indicators
- Regional priority areas for rabbit control are determined.
- Rabbits maintained at or below threshold (0.5 rabbits per hectare) levels in identified priority areas.
- Landscape scale control programs are implemented and monitored at regional levels.
- Eradication of rabbits on islands is successful where this is attempted.
Action | Priority and timeframe | Outcome | Output | Responsibility |
1.1. Prioritise areas on a regional scale (NRM, catchment level), including islands, for: a) their conservation value b) the potential for successful regeneration or rehabilitation of the species, and c) the degree of threat from rabbits. Undertake management action in these areas. *Prioritisation should consider a range of factors (examples in the text above), including economic decision models. | High priority, short term | Key species and ecological communities are prioritised and protected from the impacts of rabbits. Linkages made to recovery plans (where available). | List of priority areas. Management actions undertaken with a measured reduction in the impact of rabbits on key species and ecological communities.
| State governments, NRM and catchment groups. Consultation should include local land managers and friends groups. |
1.2. Continue to develop and implement cost effective and coordinated management programs across all land tenures, including urban areas. | High priority, medium term | Coordinated and targeted action by land managers. Measurable recovery in threatened species and ecological communities. | Landscape scale management plans are adopted and implemented. Rabbit numbers are reduced to less than 0.5 rabbits per hectare in priority areas.
| State governments, NRM and catchment groups, land managers and friends groups |
1.3. Create incentives for coordinated and strategic control across adjacent properties in all areas occupied by rabbits. | Medium priority, long term | Coordinated and strategic rabbit control resulting in slower reinvasion and more effective control. | Rabbit control is shared amongst adjoining land managers. Strategic control is undertaken across all adjoining land tenures. | State/territory governments and local councils |
1.4. Develop regular and coordinated monitoring and reporting mechanisms at a regional and state scale to assess progress and apply adaptive management. | High priority, short, medium and long term (this will be an ongoing activity) | Land managers apply the most effective management actions to control rabbits. | Adaptive management practices are adopted and information is shared. | State governments, NRM and catchment groups, and land managers |
1.5. Eradicate rabbits from identified islands | Very high priority, long term | Measurable recovery in threatened species and ecological communities on identified islands. | Rabbits are eradicated or under sustained control on high priority islands. | State/territory governments and land managers |
Objective 2 – Improve knowledge and understanding of the impact of rabbits and their interactions with other species and ecological processes
The biology and ecology of rabbits has been extensively studied throughout Australia, but the interactions between rabbits and other fauna, as well as their contribution to a range of environmental processes, is still not well understood. Many studies describe economic losses to agriculture, but for the environment, very little information on the value and extent of these losses has been quantified. Further, many land managers consider rabbits to be under control through the use of biocontrol agents, but there generally is a poor understanding by some managers of how even one rabbit can significantly impact native vegetation and how integrated control measures can enhance outcomes.
There is a paucity of research about the exact contribution of rabbits to the diet of native or introduced predators and the potential trophic-cascade effect that rabbit control, or even introduced predator control, may cause (e.g. increase in rabbit numbers, augmentation in resource competition with native herbivores, increase of predation on native prey species). For example, in semi-arid Australia, rabbits have been reported as a staple (and in some cases, primary) prey species for introduced species such as feral cats and foxes, and are thought to directly influence the abundance of these predators (Read & Bowen 2001; Holden & Mutze 2002; Glen & Dickman 2005). The abundance, survival and breeding of eagles, such as the wedge-tailed eagle (Aquila audax), had been thought to be directly related to rabbit abundance, but some recent research is proving otherwise (see Olsen et al. 2014). It is therefore imperative that more conclusive information on potential impacts is garnered.
Key actions for Objective 2 focus on improving our understanding of the impacts of rabbits and the interaction of rabbits with other species, in order to use this information to optimise integrated rabbit control measures.
Action 2.1 seeks to further investigate the interactions between rabbits, feral cats, foxes and wild dogs to enable more effective integration of control activities for these species. Research is envisaged to focus on how predator abundance fluctuates in response to rabbit control, the nature of the shift in predation to native species in response to rabbit control, and any variability in these interactions with different habitats across Australia. This research is expected to help land managers to determine and anticipate any unexpected consequences (direct and/or indirect) of proposed control actions. Such assessments may save land managers considerable flow-on remedial management costs, and help to ensure the previous control actions have a positive outcome (Bergstrom et al. 2009).
Action 2.2 seeks to further investigate the correlation between rabbits and weed species and increase our understanding of the benefits of integrated management. Previous research has suggested that high levels of grazing and soil disturbance by rabbits around warrens is likely to promote the growth of introduced plant species, especially invasive weeds (Williams et al. 1995; Cooke 2012b). By understanding the correlation of rabbits and weeds, land managers should be able to respond more cost-effectively and efficiently.
Action 2.3 aims to continue research into whether or not rabbits sustain populations of native species (i.e. act as a main component of their diet), and whether rabbit control has any implications for the survival of these populations. In particular, research should aim to create a greater understanding of how native predators respond to a sudden and widespread reduction in rabbit numbers.
Performance indicators
- Control program planning demonstrates consideration of unintended consequences of proposed actions.
- Control programs demonstrate use of integrated control measures for pest species that interact with rabbits and for weed species promoted by rabbits.
- Research papers are published that inform whether rabbit control is detrimental or beneficial to the survival of native species.
Action | Priority and timeframe | Outcome | Output | Responsibility |
2.1 Continue research into understanding the contribution of rabbits to the diet and abundance of feral cats, foxes and wild dogs in different landscapes, and any potential effects of modifying pest predator populations (e.g. prey switching, decline in native species) | High priority, medium term | A clear and greater understanding of how management programs can influence rabbit and pest predator populations. Land managers are able to implement more integrated management programs for rabbits and other pest species which don’t deliver perverse environmental outcomes.
| Research papers and reports on the interaction between rabbits and pest predators are published.
| Researchers, Government and land managers |
2.2 Increase understanding of the correlation between rabbits and weed species and the benefits of integrating their management | Medium priority, medium term | A greater understanding of correlations between rabbit and weed control. Land managers are able to implement more effective pest management. | Research papers and reports on correlations between rabbits and weeds are published.
| Researchers, Government and land managers |
2.3 Continue research into understanding the contribution of rabbits to the diet and abundance of native species. | High priority, medium term | A clear and greater understanding of whether rabbit management programs affect the abundance of native species – predators and herbivores. Land managers are able to implement more effective pest management. | Research papers and reports on the role or rabbits in maintaining populations of native species, including predators, are published.
| Researchers, Government and land managers |
Objective 3 – Improve the effectiveness of rabbit control programs
In order to reduce the impact of rabbits on native biodiversity and ecosystems, the use, improvement and development of control tools and programs is of high importance. However, as improving the effectiveness of control programs and control methods (particularly biocontrol agents) or developing new tools can take many years, it is imperative that strategic research and development of more effective and efficient or new techniques is begun prior to any significant increases in rabbit numbers (Saunders et al. 2010; Cox et al. 2013).
In order to improve the effectiveness of rabbit control programs, we also need to understand the impact that control activities are having in the field. As such, surveillance and monitoring of control activities and their effect on rabbits, including abundance, will be critical in providing information for future management actions. This will include research into, and the development of, additional control measures and use of new biocontrol agents. The research should include the goal of improving the animal welfare of the rabbits with the control tools.
Key actions for Objective 3 therefore include: improving conventional control options and tools for land managers; improving the coordination of monitoring and surveillance of rabbit control programs; continuing research into new biocontrol and other novel control options; and increasing the adoption of standard operating procedures.
Action 3.1 seeks to support ongoing research to ensure conventional management options are effective, target specific and humane. This includes supporting the development of more humane baits and conventional control methods — for example, the development of a humane carbon monoxide warren fumigator by the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre. The development of further control tools is expected to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency and humaneness of control programs. It may also reduce potential impacts on both the environment and non-target species.
Actions 3.2 to 3.5 focus on maximising the effectiveness of rabbit biocontrol programs through understanding interactions and evolutions of rabbit viruses, their optimal use, investigating the use of new viruses, and developing and registering new biocontrol agents/products. This includes increasing our understanding of how, and under what circumstances, the endemic RHD virus (RCV-A1) — which is found in cool and wet areas of Australia — interacts with the current RHDV strains and helps provide immunity. Given the effectiveness of biocontrol agents in reducing rabbit numbers and in helping to protect threatened species, these actions are considered of high priority and will require a long-term and ongoing commitment. Through developing a greater understanding of the rabbit biocontrol viruses, including behaviours and evolutions, and increasing their effectiveness in the field, Australia will be better placed to respond to any future increase in rabbit numbers. It will also allow land managers to counteract any decrease in the effectiveness of existing strains by having new and effective biocontrol tools. Research being undertaken through Invasive Animals CRC programs such as the RHD Boost and Acceleration programs (see background document for further information on these programs (Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a)) will be of benefit to these actions. Other research institutes including universities and the CSIRO are also well placed to conduct novel research programs into control of rabbits based on their genetics, neurology and other physiological processes.
Actions 3.6 focuses on ensuring there is adequate monitoring and surveillance throughout Australia to determine whether or not rabbit pathogens continue to be effective in reducing rabbit numbers. Monitoring and surveillance is also critical to understanding the prevalence, seasonal fluctuations and interactions with the current biocontrol agents (Cox et al. 2013) and contributes to the outcomes of actions 3.3 to 3.5. Research under this action should include pre and post monitoring for any new release of a pathogen to track its performance and to better estimate the return on investment. This will help inform and define how successful future releases of biocontrol agents in the field might be and how they might complement or reduce the effects of existing measures (Saunders et al. 2010; Cox et al. 2013).
Action 3.7 aims to provide further tools for land managers to improve their ability to predict and forecast optimal rabbit control methods in order to effectively reduce the number of rabbits and their impact on various landscapes. At present, very few tools exist to estimate the various costs of using different control measures and how inaction may affect numbers of rabbits, impacts on the environment, and costs over time. In addition, existing tools are limited to certain regions and habitat types and have not yet been extrapolated for use in all habitat types. Expanding the applicability of these tools would assist land managers to design more effective control programs and gain a better understanding of the potential impact of their choice of control activities.
Action 3.8 follows on from action 3.7 by aiming to develop further economic assessment methods to determine the environmental benefits of rabbit control. At present, a model has been developed by Cooke et al. (2010) for the control of rabbits across south-eastern Australia with values assigned to native vegetation. Further native vegetation models need to be developed for use across all areas of Australia. Also of importance, values need to be assigned to the protection of native fauna, particularly those that are listed as threatened under the EPBC Act. Such values are likely to support management actions for native species and ecological communities, rather than only for agriculture where monetary values (and hence losses) can be more readily quantified.
For all of these actions, the outputs need to be made readily available and understandable for land managers so that they are able to translate the findings into improved control of rabbits.
Performance indicators
- Current control tools are refined (where possible) to improve effectiveness and humaneness.
- Additional effective and humane control tools, including biological control agents, are developed. Research papers are published on the biology of rabbit viruses, including their behaviour, evolution and impediments.
- Research papers and general information is published on the interactions of RHDV strains, their long term evolution and the development of genetic resistance by rabbits.
- Forecasting tools to predict the impact of changes in rabbit numbers and effectiveness of control methods in different landscapes developed and promoted.
- Monetary values are able to be assigned to the impact of rabbits on environmental assets.
- Pre and post monitoring is undertaken for the release of any new biocontrol agents.
Action | Priority and timeframe | Outcome | Output | Responsibility |
3.1 Develop new methods and refine current methods for rabbit control that are effective, target specific and humane. | High priority, long term and ongoing | New humane and effective tools for control of rabbits are available to land managers | Measurable reduction in the number of rabbits. Reduced impacts on non-target species and the environment. | Researchers and product manufacturers |
3.2 Continue research to maximise the effectiveness of existing biocontrol tools and investigate new biocontrol agents or other novel control tools. | High priority, long term and ongoing | Biocontrol agents improved or new agents identified to ultimately delivery more effective rabbit control | Research papers and reports on biocontrols are published. More effective or new biocontrol agents developed/identified. | Researchers |
3.3 Develop and register new biocontrol agents and products, and other novel control tools identified. | High priority, long term and ongoing | Measurable and continued reduction in the number and impacts of rabbits through use of biocontrol agents. | Additional biocontrol agents are available to registered land managers. | Government and product manufacturers. |
3.4 Increase understanding of the seasonal patterns of RCV-A1 and its interaction with RHDV strains. | High priority, long term | A clear understanding of the interaction between all the strains of RHDV. Land managers able to time releases of RHDV strains for maximum impact. | Research papers and reports on RCV-A1 and its interaction with RHDV strains are published. Future biocontrol research takes into account, and aims to reduce interactions of RCV-A1 with RHDV strains. | Researchers and Government |
3.5 Increase understanding of the long term effect of evolution and genetic resistance to biocontrol agents. | Medium priority, long term | A clear understanding of the virus’ evolution and role in genetic resistance. Future biocontrol programs are strengthened by taking account of the rate of evolution and development of genetic resistance. | Research papers and reports on virus evolution and its role in genetic resistance are published.
| Researchers |
3.6 Conduct pre and post monitoring to determine success of biocontrol releases across a range of landscapes | High priority, medium term | A clear understanding of the effectiveness, or otherwise, of each biocontrol agent release, and its environmental impacts.
| Monitoring results for biocontrol reported of the reduction in rabbit numbers and environmental outcomes. | Government, researchers, community groups and land managers |
3.7 Further develop user-friendly models to predict and forecast the impact of changes in rabbit numbers and effectiveness of control methods in a range of different landscapes | Medium priority, medium term | Land managers are able to implement the most cost effective and optimal rabbit control activities. | Forecasting tools are developed for use by land managers. Training provided to land managers in the use of the models. | Researchers and Government |
3.8 Further develop economic assessment methods to determine the environmental benefits of rabbit control | Medium priority, medium term | Land managers are able to apply an economic assessment to the value of managing environmental assets. | Economic assessment tools are available to land managers | Researchers and Government |
Objective 4 – Increase engagement of, and awareness by, the community of the impacts caused by rabbits, and the need for integrated control
The success of previous rabbit control, predominantly due to the effectiveness of biocontrol agents, has resulted in rabbits losing some of their profile in the community as a major pest species (Williams et al. 1995; Cox et al. 2013). This has reduced the general awareness of rabbits as a problem, which has often resulted in diminished support in the community for ongoing rabbit research and control (Williams et al. 1995; Cox et al. 2013). Fewer government officials with rabbit control responsibilities has also reduced the opportunities for direct public engagement and awareness raising.
As a step towards engaging stakeholders and raising their awareness of the impacts caused by rabbits, educational material (e.g. manuals and videos on monitoring impacts and control techniques) has been developed. However, effectively collaborating with the community so that land managers get the skills necessary to recognise environmental impacts of rabbits (particularly at low levels) and be able to undertake effective management still needs further development and ongoing effort. This should include learning from communication techniques used by effective local groups. In addition to this, different audiences will need to be engaged via different methods and emphasis will need to be placed on the benefits of individual and group contributions.
Williams et al. (1995) and Adams (2014) found that for groups to successfully engage in the management of rabbit control, there needs to be:
- a high degree of local community understanding of the nature and extent of rabbit damage
- a respected rabbit expert for the local community to go to
- group reinforcement through peer pressure and good communication
- clear, identifiable and shared goals
- synchronisation of control efforts, and
- strong support from local and state pest management authorities.
Key actions for Objective 4 include ensuring better communication, engagement and awareness with and between land managers on the threat of rabbits to native species and other ecological processes, and how the use of integrated management methods can further reduce rabbit numbers. Successful rabbit management relies heavily on community understanding and adoption of best practice rabbit management principles. Achieving successful rabbit management relies heavily on community engagement and, to bring about any level of change, authorities need to engage with the particular community to understand the underlying values and behaviours of those land managers. Only then will they be able to stimulate change. Experienced community groups can assist others in this process.
Action 4.1 seeks to develop further training programs to help land managers (particularly supervisors and those planning local and regional programs) to evaluate and adopt control methods appropriate for local/regional conditions, and determine in what circumstances and when they should be used. This should include an assessment of any unintended consequences of a control program, such as predators switching from taking rabbits to native animals. These training programs should provide land managers with the skills to recognise an increase in rabbit populations, prior to substantial damage being caused (see Cooke 2012a). Training should also focus on providing contractors with specialised skills to operate machinery to conduct control activities more cost-effectively over a range of properties. Train-the-trainer approaches may be useful and will allow knowledge and experience to be passed on to other land managers.
Action 4.2 focuses on engaging with the community, raising general awareness of the impact of rabbits, and garnering support for the use of control tools. This should include:
- raising awareness that more than 0.5 rabbit per hectare can significantly reduce the recruitment and regeneration ability of many native plants
- aiming to reduce community reliance on biocontrol agents as the only control tool for reducing rabbit numbers, and
- promoting the use of new biocontrol agents and humane control tools.
As part of action 4.2, specific communication campaigns will need to be developed for any new biocontrol agents proposed for release, or other new control methods. By bringing the community onboard with proposed actions, there is a greater chance of achieving effective and coordinated rabbit control within these areas. It will also help reinforce how their contributions are valued and the benefit these actions can bring to their community and surrounding environment.
Action 4.3 seeks to promote the adoption of model codes of practice and standard operating procedures for the effective and humane management of rabbits (Sharp & Saunders 2012). This helps to ensure that rabbit management follows best practice and is undertaken humanely by land managers through adequate consideration of available control methods. In undertaking this action, it will be important for those promoting these codes of practice and standard operating procedures to acknowledge that relevant state and territory and occupational health and safety legislation must also be adhered to. Model codes of practice and standard operating procedures should be developed for management tools as they are developed. Updating these documents will be necessary when new information is available.
Action 4.4 aims to determine the barriers to uptake of conventional and integrated control methods by land managers and how best to increase uptake of best practice control methods. This will involve understanding a wide range of perceptions and motivations for rabbit control activities, including limiting factors which may need to be overcome. This action has linkages to action 4.2 and 4.1.
Performance indicators
- Land managers are able to recognise damage from an increasing number of rabbits and implement best-practice control methods at the most effective time.
- Contractors have skills to operate specialised machinery and undertake rabbit control activities.
- The general community has an increased interest in the control of rabbits.
- There is an increased use of standard operating procedures and codes of practice for the effective and humane management of rabbits.
Action | Priority and timeframe | Outcome | Output | Responsibility |
4.1 Develop further training programs to help land managers adopt locally appropriate monitoring and control methods. | Very high priority, long term - ongoing | Land managers implement the most effective monitoring and control programs and pass on knowledge and information to other land managers. | Further education/ training materials are developed and utilised.
| Government, NRM groups and local councils |
4.2 Promote and seek engagement by all people in the community in: • understanding the threat to biodiversity posed by rabbits • supporting rabbit management and the control actions used, including development of new control techniques • supporting the use of best practice, humane, cost-effective and integrated rabbit control methods. | High priority, long term - ongoing | Community support for the management of rabbits.
| Further education materials developed and utilised. Community groups, land managers and government assisting each other to improve rabbit management.
| Government, land managers, community groups, members of the general public |
4.3 Continue to promote the adoption of the model codes of practice and standard operating procedures for effective and humane management of rabbits. | High priority, long term | Rabbits are not subjected to unacceptable suffering during control operations. Rabbit control actions undertaken are humane and effective, while showing a measurable reduction in the number of rabbits. | Further education materials to promote the codes and procedures developed and utilised. Model codes of practice and standard operating procedures developed for new management tools. | Government and land managers |
4.4 Undertake research into the barriers to uptake of best practice control methods, and how this may be addressed. | High priority, short term. | An increase in land managers adopting best practice rabbit control. | Research papers on social and behavioural aspects of rabbit control are published. Research is translated into actions that address the barriers to uptake by land managers. | Researchers and Government. |
This plan reflects the ongoing nature of the threat abatement process, given that there is no likelihood of national rabbit eradication in the near future. In general, most rabbit control programs aim for long-term suppression of rabbit populations, and a reduction in damage to the environment and agricultural assets in the most cost-efficient manner.
This TAP provides a framework for undertaking targeted priority actions. Budgetary and other constraints may affect the achievement of the objectives of this plan, and as knowledge changes, proposed actions may be modified over the life of the plan. The Commonwealth is committed, via the EPBC Act, to implement the threat abatement plan to the extent to which it applies in Commonwealth areas. However, it should be noted that the Australian Government is unable to provide funding to cover all actions in this threat abatement plan across all of Australia and requires financial and implementation support from stakeholders. Partnerships amongst and between governments, non-government organisations, industry, community groups and individuals will be key to successfully delivering significant reductions in the threats posed by rabbits.
Investment in many of the TAP actions will be determined by the level of resources that stakeholders commit to management of the problem.
Given the extent of rabbits across Australia, an indicative estimate of the costs involved to undertake control actions outlined in this plan are provided below. It is important to note that the cost of controlling rabbits will continue to rise if rabbit populations are not continually managed and are allowed to increase due to favourable environment conditions and increasing resistance to RHD. The costs provided will also be highly variable depending on the location (including habitat and soil type), and availability of skilled contractors or persons able to assist with control activities. An indicative site size has been chosen as 300 hectares; however, site sizes may range from less than a hectare (e.g. a small cemetery with a single warren) to thousands of hectares on a rangeland station. Anyone looking to implement an action is strongly recommended to undertake their own budget exercise for their particular circumstances and outcomes sought.
Action | Costs anticipated or known at the time of TAP development for action items | Estimated total cost across TAP |
Poison baiting | $52 per hectare using 1080 oat baits (Cooke 2012a) | Annual cost of $7,800,000 at 500 sites of 300 hectares each across Australia. |
Ground shooting | $5000–10,000 per week for ground shooting at a single site using professional shooters. Use of appropriately trained and assessed volunteer shooters (e.g. SSAA National) would cost considerably less than this.
| Annual cost of $400,000 – $800,000 for 8 weeks of control at 10 sites across Australia. Less if volunteers are utilised. |
Trapping | $3000-4000 per week for trapping at a single site.
| Annual cost of $240,000 - $320,000 for 8 weeks over 10 sites across Australia. |
Fumigation of warrens | $56 per hectare using aluminium phosphide tablets (Cooke 2012a). Contractors typically charge $70 per hour and would require >1 hr to treat warrens in a moderate to high density over 1 hectare. Two-three visits may be required.
| Annual cost of $1,680,000 for fumigating 100 sites of 300 hectares across Australia for aluminium phosphate tablets. Annual cost of approximately $6,000,000 for contractors for 100 sites of 300 hectares. |
Warren destruction | $40 per hectare where there is a moderate infestation of rabbits (Cooke 2012a); $69 per hectare using a bobcat backhoe at steep sand hills with dense scrub: (Cooke 2012a)
| Annual cost of $6,000,000 - $10,350,000 at 500 sites of 300 hectares across Australia.
|
Exclusion fencing (using 30mm or smaller mesh) | $5000 per kilometre to construct (Lowe et al. 2003).
$10,000 per year for maintenance and monitoring of a 10 km2 site. | $1,000,000 for construction of fences around 5 sites of 10 km2 across Australia.
$250,000 for ongoing maintenance of these 5 sites for 5 years. |
Monitoring and surveillance activities. | Costs will be dependent on the type of monitoring used i.e. camera traps may be less expensive than physical monitoring.
On average, $4000 per site.
Aerial survey using a helicopter and video cost 90 cents per hectare on the Hay Plains, NSW. | Monitoring repeated every 3 months at 50 sites $600,000. |
Release of biocontrol agents | $52 per hectare using oat/carrot baits | Annual cost of $1,560,000 across 100 sites of 300 hectares in Australia. |
Island eradications | $210 per hectare (based on using a combination of control methods). This does not involve integrated control for other pest species. | Dependent on size of island. Per island: $210,000 for smaller islands (approx. 1,000 hectares) to $2,730,000 for larger islands (approx. 13,000 hectares). |
Research projects, including development of new control tools and models. | $250,000 annually per researcher
Additional costs for registrations and production of the product/biological control agent. Note: these costs will be dependent on the complexity and number of registrations required, and costs to produce the product/agent.
| To be determined for each project, model or control tool.
|
Social research into barriers for rabbit control. | $200,000 including community engagement. | $200,000. |
Prioritisation of rabbit control areas | $100,000 for initial regional reviews of areas per state/territory | $800,000 plus additional funding for finer scale prioritisation. |
Development of coordinated reporting mechanisms | $50,000 per state/territory | $400,000. |
Development of management plans | $10,000 for each regional plan | $200,000 for 20 regions. |
Community education | $200,000 per state/territory for general promotion per year. This amount may decline as material can be reused and education levels rise.
Additional $200,000 per state/territory for releases of new biocontrol agents. | $1.2 million per state/territory over 5 years. |
Training | $10,000 to $100,000 to develop different materials and programs.
$2000 to $100,000 for delivery.
| $20,000 to $200,000 over 5 years.
$500,000 over 5 years. |
Implementing the plan
The Department of the Environment and Energy will work with other Australian Government agencies, state and territory governments and national and regional industry, non-government organisations managing land for conservation, and community groups, to facilitate the implementation of the plan. Specific recovery plans for threatened species and other action plans will need to be taken into account when prioritising areas for management. There are also many different stakeholder interests and perspectives to take into account in managing rabbits and it will be important to consult and involve the range of stakeholders in implementing the actions in this plan. Greater integration between agricultural/pastoral and other control efforts will be encouraged.
The Australian Government will implement the plan as it applies to Commonwealth land.
References
Brown, A 2012, Glovebox Guide for Managing Rabbits, PestSmart Toolkit publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, ACT.
Cooke, BD 1993, Integrated control of rabbits, In: Australian rabbit control conference, Cooke BD (ed), Australian Rabbit Control Conference, Adelaide, 2-3 April 1993, Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation of Australia, 14-17.
Cooke, BD, Chudleigh, P, Simpson, S & Saunders, G 2013, The Economic Benefits of the Biological Control of Rabbits in Australia, 1950–2011, Australian Economic History Review 53, 91-107.
Cooke, BD 2012a, Planning landscape-scale rabbit control. PestSmart Toolkit publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, Australia.
Cooke, BD, McPhee S & Hart Q 2008, Rabbits: a Threat to Conservation and Natural Resource Management: How to rapidly assess a rabbit problem and take action, Bureau of Resource Sciences, Canberra.
Cox, T, Strive, T, Mutze, G, West, P & Saunders, G 2013, Benefits of rabbit biocontrol in Australia, PestSmart Toolkit publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra.
Department of the Environment and Energy 2016a, Background document: Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits, Commonwealth of Australia. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/threat-abatement-plans/approved.
Department of the Environment 2015b, Species Profile and Threats Database. Commonwealth of Australia, Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl.
Glen, AS & Dickman, CR 2005, Complex interactions among mammalian carnivores in Australia, and their implications for wildlife management, Biological Review 80, 387-401.
Gong, W, Sinden, J, Braysher, M, Jones, R & Wales, NS 2009, The economic impacts of vertebrate pests in Australia, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre Canberra.
Invasive Animals CRC 2012a. Fumigation for Rabbit Control, PestSmart Factsheet publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, Australia.
Invasive Animals CRC 2012b. Poison Baiting for Rabbit Control, PestSmart Factsheet publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, Australia.
Lowe, TJ, Wheeler, SH &Twigg, LE 2003, Impact of rabbits on native bush remnants, Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 86: 97-105.
McLeod, SR 2004, Counting the cost: impact of invasive animals in Australia, 2004, Cooperative Research Centre for Pest Animal Control Canberra.
Mitchell, B & Balogh, S 2007, Monitoring Techniques for Vertebrate Pests – Rabbits, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Orange, NSW.
Murray, JV, Berman, DM & van Klinken, RD 2014, Predictive modelling to aid the regional-scale management of a vertebrate pest, Biological Invasions 16(11), pp 2403-2425.
Mutze, G, Bird, P, Cooke, BD, & Henzell, R 2008, Geographic and seasonal variation in the impact of rabbit haemorrhagic disease on European rabbits, Oryctolagus cuniculus, and rabbit damage in Australia, in: C. Alves, N.F.a.K.H. (Ed.), Lagomorph Biology: Evolution, Ecology and Conservation, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 279-293.
Pedler, RD, Brandle, R, Read JL, Southgate R, Bird P and Moseby KE 2016, Rabbit biocontrol and landscape-scale recovery of threatened desert mammals, Conservation Biology 30, 774-782.
Read, J & Bowen, Z 2001, Population dynamics, diet and aspects of the biology of feral cats and foxes in arid South Australia, Wildlife Research 28, 195–203.
Sharp, T & Saunders, G 2012, Model Code of Practice for the Humane Control of Rabbits. PestSmart Toolkit publication, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra, Australia.
Williams, CK, Parer, I, Coman, BJ, Burley, J & Braysher, ML 1995, Managing Vertebrate Pests: Rabbits Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Woinarski, J, Burbidge, A & Harrison, P 2014, The Action Plan for Australian Mammals 2012, Collingwood: CSIRO Publishing.