STDP Annual Program Report 2013-14

Transcription

Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program
2013-14 Annual Program Report
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
The 2013-14 Annual Program Report
The Annual Program Report is produced by the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program
(the Program) to report on activities over the past financial year. This edition, however,
covers the period 1 July 2013–31 December 2014, a period of 18 months, in order to
align future reporting with the calendar year.
The Report outlines how, with guidance from national and international specialists
and support from funding partners, the Program is working towards the vision of an
enduring and ecologically functional population of devils in the wild in Tasmania.
The Annual Program Report is produced by the Department of Primary Industries,
Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE). The report also features contributions from
the wide range of organisations that are part of, or work closely with, the Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program.
ISSN 1839-1907 (Print)
ISSN 1839-1915 (Online)
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Program Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Insurance Population Sub-program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
FOCUS ON: Contraception Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Monitoring and Management Sub-program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Wild Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
FOCUS ON: Mine shafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Research and Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
FOCUS ON: Bio Archive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Case Study: Professor Kathy Belov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Performance of the Program to Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Devil Dollars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Where to from here? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Devil Directory (as at 31 December 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
i
Introduction
The past 18 months has been a period of transition
for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program (STDP, the
Program). At the beginning of this period a five-year
phase was completed. That phase had a strong focus
on establishing an Insurance Population, improving
knowledge of the presence of Devil Facial Tumour
Disease (DFTD) in the wild and establishing the Maria
Island devil population.
With the completion of this period, the conservation
actions of the Program have been considerably
broadened. The Program’s strategic direction is now
focused on establishing disease-free devil populations
in Tasmania and developing strategies to maintain
viable populations in the wild across Tasmania.
Along with this substantial development in the
strategic direction of the Program, a number of
initiatives have also been advanced. These include:
• significant progress in knowledge of the disease
and steps towards immunising against it
• implementing the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador
Program
• opening the fourth Devil Island
• welcoming new member institutions into the
Insurance Population
• monitoring devils and other fauna on Maria
Island, and
• working to secure a DFTD-free population of
devils on the Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas
It has been gratifying to see the Program’s performance
and achievements favourably recognised in a recent
review commissioned by the Federal Government. The
aims of the review were to evaluate the impacts and
achievements of the Program, and to identify potential
legacy contributions to the longer-term Program goals.
The final report, which provides the performance
assessment along with a series of recommendations,
was finalised in July 2013. A copy, as well as a summary
table showing the Program’s responses to the report’s
recommendations, is available to download from the
Program website at www.tassiedevil.com.au
The review, conducted by independent expert group
Environmental Evidence Australia, identified the
establishment of the Insurance Population as a
major achievement. It also commended the Program
as “exemplary in active adaptive management in
the scientific process”, stating that “the Program
architecture, flexibility, governance and collaborative
agenda enabled understanding of the threat and
management options to be continually informed as the
science in many research areas matured”.
Recognition of the strong collaborative nature of the
Program is important. The Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program has succeeded in building very productive
partnerships between governments, the conservation
breeding community (zoos and wildlife parks), research
groups and the community.
Much of the work undertaken over the past 18
months could not have been done without the support
and guidance of collaborators, colleagues and the
community. The stories of lucky devils Savage and
Larry, (Pp. 19-21) are just two of the many that
make this abundantly clear. The Program is proud of
relationships forged and maintained with national and
international research institutions, with zoos across
the nation and across the globe, with community
volunteers, with Tasmanian businesses and with
colleagues in all three tiers of Government.
I hope you enjoy reading about the Program’s
achievements. I encourage you to keep up to date with all
the activities of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program
throughout the year at www.tassiedevil.com.au and on
our Facebook page.
Alistair Scott
Chair, Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Steering
Committee
1
Overview: 1 July 2013–31 December 2014
The 2012–13 Annual Program Report made the
statement that “This species and its disease are creating
a unique management issue never before faced: how to
protect an endangered species which is still relatively
common but which has a virulent, transmissible
and invariably fatal cancer and how to manage the
concomitant ecosystem impacts”.
Work undertaken over the past 18 months has
tackled these unique issues head-on. The innovative
Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program was developed
in this period, and exciting progress was made in
immunisation research. Concurrently the Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program, in partnership with the
Australian Government, moved closer to finalising
the strategic document the Recovery Plan for the
Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), which identifies
the key threats, options and actions required to ensure
the recovery of the Tasmanian devil into the future.
During the development of the Recovery Plan, Program
activities have been aligned with the actions identified
as necessary for the recovery of the species.
The final draft of the Recovery Plan specifies eight key
actions which have guided Program activities over the
past 18 months, and will continue to do so into the
future:
1. Manage devils and DFTD in the wild
2. Manage threats in the wild
3. Maintain and manage the Insurance Population
4. Monitor Tasmanian devils
5. Improve knowledge of the disease and translate
that knowledge to management actions
6. Research and measure habitat variables
7. Manage the recovery program
8. Communicate with the community and
stakeholders
These actions, beneath which lie a suite of activities,
help provide a picture of how the Program has
progressed towards saving the Tasmanian devil over
the past 18 months; and how the activities conducted
by one part of the Program link with and contribute to
the activities carried out by other areas. For example,
work to consolidate the Insurance Population has
allowed the Program to turn its focus towards the wild.
Releasing devils that are well represented genetically
within the Insurance Population will enable the
Program to supplement existing wild populations
and bolster them both numerically and genetically.
Additionally, the opportunity to release devils into
the wild while DFTD is still present has created an
opportunity for immunisation work to progress to trials
in the Tasmanian landscape.
With 610 devils in the Insurance Population, including
132 joeys born in 2013–14, efforts to secure the species
in captivity have well and truly succeeded. Helping to
manage this outstandingly successful program is a new
Captive Management Plan (CPM) for 2014–18, which
addresses a priority one Recovery Plan activity: Develop
and implement integrated management plans for all
captive Tasmanian devils held at different locations.
The CMP covers devils held in intensive management,
in free range enclosures, on Maria Island, within the
Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program and soon, those
devils that will be released as part of the Peninsula
Devil Conservation Project (formerly known as the
Tasman Isolation Project).
The establishment of the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador
Program was also made possible by the success of the
Insurance Population. Ambassador devils are sourced
from a subset of the Insurance Population containing
genetically well-represented animals not required for
breeding. These animals are being used for advocacy
through their public display at five zoos: three in
New Zealand and two in the USA. This initiative
delivers significant benefits for the conservation of the
Tasmanian devil by raising public awareness of the
fight against DFTD outside Australia, and by building
on-ground support for activities being undertaken
within Australia.
The success of the initial 12-month trial has seen this
pilot program approved by the Tasmanian Minister
for Environment, Parks and Heritage to become a
permanent part of the Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program. During 2015 it is likely that more zoos in
North America will receive Ambassador devils.
The population of devils on Maria Island continues to
grow, with numbers at the end of 2014 estimated to be
around 90 animals. The STDP and its partners in the
Save the Tasmanian Devil Program
2
Parks and Wildlife Service continue to monitor the
health of the devils and any impact they may have on
other fauna on the island. The world media continues
to take an active interest in the project with a highlight
being the production of a six-part mini-series, Devil
Island, on the introduction of devils to Maria Island.
The imminent completion of a buffer zone at Dunalley
will see the release of DFTD-free devils back onto the
Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas in 2015, as part of
the Peninsula Devil Conservation Project. These devils
will include descendants of the devils depopulated from
the Forestier Peninsula in 2012, as well as devils from
the Insurance Population that have appropriate genetic
profiles. Constant
monitoring of
the Forestier
Peninsula since
the depopulation
has not detected
the presence of
any devils. While
a population still
exists on the
Tasman Peninsula,
monitoring over
the past 18 months
has found no sign
of Devil Facial
Tumour Disease
(DFTD).
Work to understand how DFTD is impacting wild
populations continued throughout the past 18 months.
A monitoring program has been established to gain an
understanding of the status of populations across the
state. Annual monitoring will continue for five years to
provide information to guide management actions for
the recovery of the devil in the wild.
Work to establish the western-most locations of the
disease also continued. Data from 2014 shows DFTD
has reached the west coast of Tasmania in the Henty
River region.
As always, the Program worked hard to moderate
other hazards to devils. Road kill continues to be a
major threat to devils across the state. Over 400 roadkilled devils were reported to the Devil Mobile phone
number in 2013–14. The Program worked closely
with government at state and local level to introduce
warning signage, and to apply ‘ripple strips’ and other
mitigations to attempt to reduce this threat. This work
is ongoing. A new product known as Virtual Fencing
was trialled in north-west Tasmania over the past year
and has had significant success in reducing road kill.
The Program has also begun to work closely with
mining companies to capitalise on the advantages these
sites can offer to devils. Being controlled environments
that often contain highly suitable habitats, mine sites
can be surprisingly safe locations for devils.
During 2014 a
bold new direction
for the Program
was announced
by the Tasmanian
Government.
Known as Wild Devil
Recovery, this new
project will involve
a number of key
initiatives including
field work to trap
and monitor the
movement of devils
and to test ways of
augmenting the
wild population.
This population
monitoring initiative
will focus on better
understanding the
impact of the disease
in Tasmania’s north east and include field trials to test
a new immunisation technique.
The outcome of all this hard work will be the return
of the devil to the wild – sooner than first expected.
It comes as a result of ten years of hard work in the
field, in zoo facilities, and in the laboratory. The work
undertaken during the past 18 months has provided the
opportunity and capacity for this next step to be taken.
3
Program Management
Funding partners
The Tasmanian Government
The Tasmanian Government, through the Department
of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
(DPIPWE), provided the Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program with $2.54 million across the 2013–14
financial year. For 2014–15 the Tasmanian Government
has committed $2.4 million to the Program.
Australian Government – Department of the
Environment (DoE)
The Australian Government provides project funding
to the STDP through the Caring for our Country fund.
In January 2013 it was announced by Environment
Minister Greg Hunt that $3.3 million in funding would
be provided to the task of saving the Tasmanian devil.
This will consist of $2.8 million in project funding to
the Program, with a further $0.5 million provided to a
separately managed project.
Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA) and
participating zoos and wildlife parks
The Zoo and Aquarium Association is the peak body
representing the zoo and aquarium community
throughout Australasia. ZAA manages the coordination
of breeding programs and sets the level of professional
standards and practice for its members. It also provides
general support and advice where required to its
members and governments on a range of issues such as
biosecurity, wildlife disease and species knowledge.
The Program also maintains a service agreement
with ZAA for the delivery of the Species Coordinator
role and a range of services supporting the Insurance
Population. This contribution from ZAA allows the
STDP to meet the Recovery Plan priority one activity:
Ensure adequate wild and captive potential founders
to meet insurance population goals, and breed and
move insurance population members as appropriate, to
maximise genetic representation by wild source devils
and maintain genetic diversity.
ZAA also provides support to the management of the
Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program. (See p. 10)
The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal
Outside of the core funding partners, a wide range
of individuals and organisations contribute to the
recovery actions for the Tasmanian devil. Generous
donations from the public, corporate partners and
other conservation funds contribute significantly to
the Program and are managed through the Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal (the Appeal). The
Appeal operates within the structure of the University
of Tasmania Foundation.
Over the past 18 months, the Appeal has harnessed
considerable public support to fund a range of projects
via the Tasmanian Devil Grant and Scholarship process.
In 2013, 19 grants were allocated, and for applications
submitted in 2014 it is anticipated that a further 16
will be supported. In this way public support is being
translated into real progress on the ground.
The Program receives significant indirect and in-kind
funding from zoos and wildlife parks associated with
ZAA, estimated at over $13 million for the past five
years. Zoos and wildlife parks also play an important
role raising public awareness of the threat to the
Tasmanian devil and helping to advocate for recovery
action for the species.
Nicole Willcox and Rebecca Cuthill of the Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal.
4
Funded projects range from vaccine research,
genotyping the Tasmanian devil, contraception
trials in the Insurance Population, construction of
monitoring stations, determining the habit utilisation
of wild devils, and a volunteer project to build humane
‘retirement’ enclosures. In addition, young researchers
have been supported in their work via Honours
scholarships and PhD top-up grants.
This has all been made possible due to the record funds
raised during this period – a total of $508,595 raised in
2014.
The Appeal maintains an active presence in both
traditional and social media. This profile was in
particular evidence during the innovative social media
campaign run during the second devil transfer to Maria
Island, which raised significant funds.
With clear fundraising strategies being implemented
into 2015, funding for a range of projects looks set to
continue, with donors invited to be part of the exciting
vision to secure a future for the devil.
You can support the Appeal by visiting their website
www.tassiedevil.com.au or by contacting them at
[email protected]
Governance
STDP Steering Committee
The Steering Committee is responsible for the strategy
and oversight of the Program. It also performs
the role of a Recovery Team by reviewing progress
towards implementation of the Recovery Plan,
assessing changing priorities and emerging issues.
The Committee ensures technical advice, used in
determining priorities, is sought from appropriate
experts. The Committee includes members from the
Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks,
Water and Environment (DPIPWE), the Australian
Government Department of the Environment (DoE),
and the Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA). It
includes a representative of the science community and
a representative of the conservation community. The
Steering Committee meets biannually and has two subcommittees:
Strategic Implementation Group
The Strategic Implementation Group provides oversight
of the Program components in the Business Plan, as
well as implementation and coordination of projects. It
meets quarterly and is comprised of the Director, the
Program Manager, and a representative from ZAA.
Meta-population Advisory Committee (MAC)
The MAC provides oversight of the management of the
5
Insurance Population, including the Tasmanian Devil
Ambassador Program. The MAC has members drawn
from DPIPWE, DoE, ZAA and an independent expert
in small population management. It is chaired by the
Program Director. The MAC has one sub-committee:
Captive Research Advisory Group (CRAG)
The CRAG was established in 2011 to keep the Program
up to date on existing research, and to prioritise and
support, or guide, proposed research. The CRAG met
six times between December 2013 and September 2014.
There are currently 13 active projects with the CRAG.
At the operational level, governance is provided by the:
Program Management Group (PMG)
The PMG provides coordination and planning for
the operational management of the Program. It
meets fortnightly and is comprised of the Program
Director, Program Manager and Sub-program Leaders.
Reporting to the PMG is the:
Molecular Research Advisory Panel (MRAP)
The MRAP evaluates research applications that involve
access to the archive of biological material collected by
the Program. More information about the work of the
MRAP can be found on page 22.
Communications
Over the reporting period, communication plans were
prepared and implemented for major projects including
the Peninsula Devil Conservation, Roadkill, and Maria
Island Translocation projects.
The Program continued to provide information updates
to the community via the production of several hard
copy periodicals, including the Annual Program Report
2012–13 and the Program’s newsletter. The more
detailed news bulletin, Speak of the Devil, was also
produced electronically and emailed to key stakeholders
three times over the past 18 months.
The Program’s dedicated website at
www.tassiedevil.com.au was maintained as the key
source of authoritative information on the status of the
devil and the Program’s activities. During the reporting
period, 27 news articles were published detailing
progress with research, monitoring and management
strategies; and 41 articles were published on behalf
of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal.
The Program also worked with the Appeal on joint
promotions and public events to raise awareness and
funds to support the Program.
Governance Structure for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program (STDP)
Program bodies are shown in blue, Program activities in green, core funding partners in red and other major partners in yellow
6
The Program also assisted in the filming and
production of a Japanese science documentary on
the plight of the Tasmanian devil. The documentary
was screened in Japan in 2014 and viewed by over 10
million people. The devil also featured significantly
an episode of the Dutch nature-based TV series Freek
Vonk in Australia in January 2014. The series aired on
the Dutch public channel in September 2014 and was
viewed by half a million viewers.
Further news and awareness promotion was
undertaken via the Program’s Facebook page. From 1
July 2013 to the end of December 2014, there were 74
posts, including videos and photos, and the number of
page ‘likes’ increased from 8,719 to 10,414.
The Program responded to a significant number of
inquiries from local, national and international media,
covering a range of general and special interest stories.
It also coordinated and managed several significant
media events including news coverage of the release
of devils on Maria Island and the launch of the
Ambassador Devil program. The placement of devils
at San Diego Zoo and Albuquerque BioPark in North
America, and Wellington Zoo, Auckland Zoo and Orana
Wildlife Park in New Zealand, also sparked national and
international interest.
The Program participated in the filming of several
international documentaries which screened in France,
the UK, Australia, Holland
and Japan. The most
significant of these with
respect to the Program’s
investment of staff time,
was the filming of a six-part
mini-series for the ABC on
the introduction of devils to
Maria Island, Devil Island.
The series screened in the
UK and France in late 2013
where it was watched by an
estimated 11 million viewers,
and then on ABC TV in
Australia in early 2014 before
being released for sale on
DVD.
The partnership with the zoo community was
strengthened by the Program’s attendance at the
Australasian Zoo and Aquarium Association AGM and
Symposium in New Zealand. Scientific staff attended
a range of national and international conferences
including the International Mammalogical Society
Conference, Belfast, UK; the Australasian Wildlife
Management Society Annual Conference, NZ; the
National Island Arks Symposium, Hobart; the
Australian Wildlife Rehabilitation Conference, Hobart;
the National NRM Conference, Launceston; and the
World Parks Congress in Sydney.
Finally, the Program and ZAA facilitated an industry
forum in October 2014 targeting zoo keepers and
captive devil researchers. Support was also provided to
industry partners through the provision of resources
and collateral to support separate zoo-based programs
throughout Australia and overseas.
7
Insurance Population sub-program
The work of the Insurance Population (IP) sub-Program
addresses Action 3 of the Recovery Plan: Maintain and
manage the insurance population. This sub-Program
continues to be a vital component of the efforts to save
the Tasmanian devil.
An updated Tasmanian Devil Captive Management
Plan 2014–18 was finalised in 2014. The IP is managed
under this strategy which is endorsed by the STDP and
all ZAA members who participate in the program. The
Annual Report and Recommendations, which is issued
in December each year, reports against the goals of the
captive management plan. In addition the Tasmanian
Devil Husbandry Guidelines were revised and finalised
in 2013. These guidelines underpin the husbandry
management of all devils in the Insurance Population,
including the animals held in overseas institutions as
part of the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program.
born in the 2013–14 breeding season.
There are currently 31 zoos and fauna parks in
Australia which are part of the IP, and a further five
zoos and wildlife parks overseas that participate in the
Ambassador Program. The Program is grateful for the
support the institutions listed on page 9 provide by
managing IP devils at their facilities
Tasmanian Captive Management
Update
The outstanding success of the Insurance Population
sub-program continues. IP managers are working
towards reliable and consistent breeding within space
limitations, capacity having been reached in 2012.
The Program no longer needs to hold every devil in
a breeding scenario and so the goal over the coming
12 months is to ensure that those animals that have
not bred before and are three years of age, and those
individuals whose genetics are most required, are
given breeding opportunities. The meta-population,
which includes devils on Maria Island and those held
in institutions overseas, has grown to 702 individuals –
with 610 of these animals in the Insurance Population
itself. Contributing to this growth were the 132 joeys
Program staff involved in the captive management
of devils held as part of the Insurance Population in
both the north and south of the state were kept busy
over the past 18 months, implementing integrated
management plans for all captive Tasmanian devils – a
priority one activity under the Recovery Plan for the
species.
Expansion
Further expansion of the Cressy Intensive Management
site is planned for early 2015. The expanded site will
include a new quarantine area comprising an additional
14 animal pens.
The main area of the Cressy site will also receive an
upgrade with eight temporary animal pens being
replaced with permanent structures. Overall, the Cressy
site will have the potential to house a population of
around 100 devils compared to the current 60.
8
At Taroona, expansion works were undertaken in
September 2014. These included completion of a new
food preparation area and a new designated vet area.
contribution from the Tasmanian Government, Devil
Island Project Inc. co-funded the construction of four
Free Range Enclosures (FREs), also known as ‘Devil
Islands’. The STDP manages these enclosures, the
first of which was built in 2008, with the remaining
three constructed between 2011 and 2014. The FREs
are located on the Freycinet Peninsula, at Bicheno,
Bridport and in Launceston.
The 2013–14 breeding season was successful at the
two FREs in which breeding was attempted. At the
Freycinet FRE seven juveniles were born from three
mothers. At the Bicheno FRE seven juveniles were born
from three mothers, with six of the babies being female.
Free Range Enclosures (FREs)
A priority one activity from the Tasmanian devil
Recovery Plan is to: Establish disease-free devil
groups in large free-range enclosures on mainland
Australia and in Tasmania, and on islands and
isolated peninsulas in Tasmania. With a significant
From the 2014–15 breeding season there were only
three pouch young from two mothers at Freycinet,
with 15 babies detected in the pouches of five females
at Bicheno. At the Bridport FRE, four of the 13 adult
females trapped were recorded with pouch young in
April 2014; by July the team was able to identify seven
of the 14 adult females as having pouch young – 19
pouch young in total. This number was confirmed in
the last trip of this period.
Zoos and Wildlife Parks in Australia
Altina Wildlife Park
Featherdale Wildlife Park
Symbio Wildlife Park
Australia Zoo
Gorge Wildlife Park
TCSA - Taronga Western Plains Zoo
Australian Reptile Park
Halls Gap Zoo
TCSA - Taronga Zoo
Australian Walkabout Wildlife Park
Hunter Valley Zoo
Trowunna Wildlife Park
Ballarat Wildlife Park
Kyabram Fauna Park
WILD LIFE Sydney Zoo
Caversham Wildlife Park
Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary
Zoos SA - Adelaide Zoo
Cleland Wildlife Park
Moonlit Sanctuary
Zoos SA - Monarto Zoological Park
Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary
National Zoo and Aquarium
Zoos Vic - Healesville Sanctuary
Devil Ark
Peel Zoo
Zoos Vic - Melbourne Zoo
Devils@Cradle
Perth Zoo
Dreamworld
Rainforestation Nature Park
Zoos and Wildlife Parks Overseas
Albuquerque BioPark
USA
San Diego Zoo
USA
Auckland Zoo
NZ
Wellington Zoo
NZ
Orana Wildlife Park
NZ
9
Trapping activities in January 2015 will provide further
information of numbers of weaned young at all FREs.
Quarterly trapping trips were also conducted in the FREs
to establish and review the health status of devils, to
record any physical changes (distinctive features) that
could assist with identifying devils during camera reviews.
practice and designed to ensure that:
• the benefit to the recovery activities for
Tasmanian devils is maximised
• only animals not required for the genetic needs
of the Insurance Population are involved
• ownership of the devils remains with the
Tasmanian Government
• husbandry and facilities are excellent and that
only world-class zoos with a commitment to
conservation programs are involved, and
• the intention of the placement is for advocacy
and awareness, not breeding
The Ambassador Program was developed in close
consultation with ZAA, and the Association played
a central role in providing the program’s day-to-day
management.
The fourth FRE (also known as Tasmania Zoo Devil
Island Four) just outside of Launceston began
operations with the arrival of seven male devils in
December 2014. The group of males will be held until
mid-2015 when it is intended they will be translocated
into the wild.
The pilot project was limited to the North American and
Australasian regions, with 20 devils from the Insurance
Population being available for placement. Applications
were assessed by an expert panel, with two facilities in
North America selected (San Diego Zoo and Albuquerque
BioPark) and three in New Zealand (Wellington Zoo,
Auckland Zoo and Orana Wildlife Park).
Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program
A priority one activity from the Recovery Plan for the
Tasmanian devil is: Maintain and if necessary recruit
and increase the capacity of suitable existing facilities
in Tasmanian wildlife parks and ZAA zoos, and if
required export (on loan) captive devils to suitable
overseas facilities.
With the successful establishment of the Insurance
Population, the Program has been able to investigate
opportunities for helping with the care of animals
not genetically critical to the Program, while also
contributing to the conservation effort for Tasmanian
devils within Australia.
Over 2013–14 a pilot project was conducted to look
at the feasibility of placing suitable animals in worldclass zoos as ‘ambassadors’. The Tasmanian Devil
Ambassador Program is based on international best
The devils involved will be provided with the best care
possible, which is also a significant resource support
for the conservation effort in Australia, allowing the
Insurance Population to be run with greater efficiency.
The pilot was endorsed as a success and the
Ambassador Program is being implemented as a
permanent program. During 2014–15 the Ambassador
Program is being expanded to include other regions
(Europe) as well as exploring further opportunities in
North America.
10
FOCUS ON: Contraception Project
The zoo breeding program for Tasmanian devils has
formed a significant component of the species Recovery
Plan. Paradoxically, breeding success has meant the
Program now faces the challenge of how to effectively
manage devils to prevent over-population within the
Insurance Population.
A pilot contraception project was approved by the
Meta-population Advisory Committee (MAC) in May
2013. Work commenced in December 2013 and was
completed in August 2014, and was undertaken in
collaboration with a team led by the University of
Sydney’s Dr. Cathy Herbert (see p.24). The aim of the
pilot was to determine the potential use of a longacting contraceptive implant to manage breeding
in captive/ intensively managed female devils. Devils
were chosen based on their genetic profile so that
diversity was maximised even though reproductive
output was reduced. Trials involved comparisons of the
relative efficiency of two contraceptive dosages, while
behavioural impacts, if any, on treated animals were
also assessed.
For male devils, there was an additional aim of
determining if contraceptives could facilitate group
housing of male devils no longer required for breeding.
Two sites were used for this pilot: females were
contracepted at Taronga Western Plains Zoo at Dubbo,
and males at the DPIPWE facility at Taroona, Hobart.
The pilot project showed that contraception was
effective in female Tasmanian devils, although
questions remain about minimum dosage.
Unexpectedly, the contraceptive implants caused an
increase in testosterone in male Tasmanian devils, and
so are not suitable for the ongoing management of
males.
The project is continuing in 2015 with the aim of
assessing the effectiveness of contraception implants in
female Tasmanian devils in FREs and on Maria Island.
The long-term aim is to develop a standard operating
procedure for the management of breeding within the
Insurance and introduced populations, especially in
free-living populations in which there is no other way
to control which animals breed.
2013/14 Annual Program Report
11
Monitoring and Management sub-Program
Directly addressing Recovery Plan Action 2: Manage
threats in the wild, as well as Action 4: Monitor
Tasmanian devils, this sub-program provides for
management of Tasmanian devil populations in the
wild and the monitoring of those populations. Some of
the specific activities undertaken by this busy area of
the Program during the past 18 months include:
Annual Monitoring
Of these ten sites, the Program monitors eight, and
researchers from the University of Tasmania monitor
two. The eight sites monitored by the Program were
trapped between April and August 2014 and the two
sites monitored by the University of Tasmania were
trapped in November and December 2014.
All sites were trapped for seven nights using 40 trap
sites that mirrored historical sites to allow a direct
comparison from year to year.
An Annual Monitoring program was started in 2014.
Ten sites around the state will be trapped over the
next five years to determine the status of the devil
population at each and whether the trend of that
population is towards extinction, stabilisation or
recovery. The sites were chosen to provide good
representation – to cover sites for which there is
historical data to compare the trend across time, and to
gain information from sites which have been diseased
for different lengths of time. This includes two sites
that are currently not diseased.
Location of Annual Monitoring sites around Tasmania
The ten sites being monitored are:
• Bronte Park
• Buckland
• Fentonbury
If the non-diseased and recently diseased sites are
removed from analysis, there is a remarkably similar
trend in abundance and disease prevalence in the other
sites (see below). Most of these sites have been diseased
for some time and seem to have settled into a level of
stability suggesting persistence.
• Freycinet
• Granville Harbour
• Kempton
• Mt William
• Narawntapu
• Takone
• Woolnorth
12
public frequently report not only of road-killed devils,
but also diseased devils. The presence of DFTD on
the west coast in the Little Henty area was detected
through this method.
Number of devils and number of diseased devils caught at
each of the eight sites trapped by the Program.
Data is currently being analysed to ensure that the
Program is collecting the information required to
answer questions which may be posed over the next five
years.
Maria Island Update
Disease-Front Monitoring
Due to the limited knowledge gained from annual
disease-front trapping trips, the knowledge available
from other projects trapping on the disease front
quarterly, and the availability of University students
trapping devils and providing data on disease presence,
in 2013 the Program made the decision to conduct
disease-front trapping trips only every second year,
rather than annually.
The Program’s one disease-front trapping trip for the
2013–14 period was undertaken in November 2013
and was conducted ahead of the last known disease
case, which at that time was west of Lileah. Two teams
of three people undertook the trapping at Togari and
Christmas Hills. A total of 131 individual devils were
trapped across the two sites over the seven days of
trapping. Both populations appeared to be healthy,
with full age complement, high abundance, good
reproductive output and with the animals caught found
to be in very good condition. No clinical signs of DFTD
were found in either population.
A secondary form of disease-front monitoring has
developed with the expanded use of the Devil Mobile.
With greater awareness of the issue, members of the
Following the successful establishment and breeding
of devils released in 2012, a second release was
undertaken in October and November 2013. ZAA
recommended the animals to be released include a mix
of devils from the Insurance Population, from mainland
Australia and Tasmania. Veterinary officers from the
Program worked with vets and keepers from the various
facilities to conduct behaviour and health tests on the
shortlisted animals.
Tasmanian-sourced devils came from Trowunna
Wildlife Park and the Program’s FREs.
Mainland animals were sourced from Healesville
Sanctuary in Victoria and Monarto Zoo in South
Australia, and then transported to Halls Gap Zoo in
Victoria where they spent a month in quarantine.
Thirteen animals were finally released in two stages on
Maria Island in 2013. The first release was conducted
in late October 2013 with the assistance of the Save the
Tasmanian Devil Appeal and donors, who were lucky
enough to participate in the release of a Tasmaniansourced animal. Funds raised from this event covered
the cost of the flight to bring mainland-sourced devils
animals to the island, which occurred a week later in
early November 2013.
13
The release site at Four Mile Creek was chosen by Parks
and Wildlife staff in consultation with the Program
to provide a shorter transit time from the airstrip,
thus minimising stress on the animals. The site has
a clear flowing stream and supplementary food was
provided for the first couple of months. Monitoring
indicated that most animals were maintaining good
body condition in the early weeks after release, with the
exception of one smaller second-release animal, which
was given a week in the pens at Darlington to feed and
gain condition before being re-released.
With very high breeding rates achieved, the
establishment of devils on Maria Island can be judged a
success. Depending on the survival of new individuals
in the population, the total number of devils on Maria
Island as of late 2014 is likely to be between 80–90
animals. The November 2014 trapping trip caught
and micro-chipped a total of eight second-generation
animals, representing devils from both releases as well
as first-generation animals.
Various monitoring surveys focusing
on vulnerable species were established
prior to the original devil introduction.
These have continued during the devil
establishment phase with island-wide
camera surveys, Cape Barren goose
and Tasmanian native hen counts,
eagle breeding surveys and little
penguin and short-tailed shearwater
colony survey work. In addition,
analysis of fur, bone and feather
remains from over 100 devil scats
indicates that a variety of prey species,
both native and introduced, have been
used by the devils.
Camera data, which includes one year pre-release and
one year post-release, is currently being analysed to
determine site occupancy and detection probability of
selected species.
Impacts on the introduced Cape Barren goose
population have been significant, with no successful
breeding detected in 2014. This was a predicted
outcome, and monitoring is ongoing, with planning
being undertaken should mitigation be required.
Importantly, Cape Barren goose populations across
areas of Tasmania (where they exist naturally) are
considered stable.
Management of the devil population will be ongoing
and will include contraception of selected females in
2015 to balance genetic diversity within the population.
If successful, this tool may be used to slow breeding
rates on the island in the future. In addition, as the
population increases towards carrying capacity,
individuals are likely to be selected for ‘wild to wild’
introduction on mainland Tasmania. Triggers for any
such removal would be based on either a noted decline
in devil body condition across the population or of
individual devils, unacceptable ecological impacts
on Maria Island fauna, or negative interactions with
tourists. The information which will allow assessment
of these factors will be provided by ongoing monitoring
by the Program, and through engagement with
partners and park users.
Monitoring and Management staff are also key
contributors to activities undertaken as part of the Wild
Management program (see below).
14
Wild Management
Wild Devil Recovery Project
On 23 November 2014 the Tasmanian Minister for
Environment, Parks and Heritage Matthew Groom,
announced a refocusing of the Save the Tasmanian
Devil Program towards population monitoring,
field research, and research and development into
possible immunisation techniques. This initiative is
to be supported with funding from the Australian
Government.
The work will require a better understanding of
the status and condition of wild devil populations,
development of options to reduce other threats to
Tasmanian devils (such as road kill), engagement
with community groups and key stakeholders to
mitigate threats, and the development of techniques
to successfully reintroduce devils into existing wild
populations.
immunisation strategies for use in wild population
management. The project is comprised of four main
elements:
• North-east devil population assessment
• Strategies to rebuild wild populations
• Field trials of immunisation viability in devils,
and
• Wild devil management
The North-east devil population assessment will
provide a detailed evaluation of the status and
condition of the wild devil populations in north-east
Tasmania, as well as critical information to inform
future management decisions for this area and other
compromised wild devil populations.
Strategies to rebuild wild populations will investigate
approaches to bolster diseased devil populations,
including augmenting long-term diseased populations.
Field trials of immunisation viability in devils,
undertaken in collaboration with the Menzies Institute
for Medical Research, will provide a ‘proof of principle’
for a vaccine developed to provide Tasmanian devils
with immunity to DFTD. The project will involve the
assessment of the performance of immunised devils
released into a well-known wild population; in an
environment that has few other threats, such as road
kill.
This project directly addresses key actions 1, 2, 4 and
5 in the Recovery Plan, through the development of
techniques to manage diseased populations of devils
in the wild in Tasmania and a significant trial of
The Wild devil management project will bring the
findings of the other projects together, and apply them
to a pilot scale demonstration of a Wild Devil Recovery
Zone at Mt William National Park (wukalina). The
15
project will develop strategies to protect, augment and
rebuild the devil population of the pilot site. Threats to
devils will be identified and relevant community groups
will be engaged to support mitigation efforts.
At the completion of the project knowledge from
the Program will be applied to establish Wild Devil
Recovery Zones across Tasmania, with the objective of
establishing a sustainable and ecologically functional
population of Tasmanian devils in the wild.
Peninsula Devil Conservation Project
The Program’s Peninsula Devil Conservation Project
(previously known as the Tasman Isolation Project) is
working to secure a DFTD-free population of devils
on the Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas in south-east
Tasmania. The project directly addresses the Recovery
Plan activity: Establish disease-free devil groups in
large free-range enclosures on mainland Australia and
in Tasmania, and on islands and isolated peninsulas
in Tasmania. The population will be managed as part
of the DFTD-free insurance meta-population, and once
established will become the first wild-living population
within their natural range that are bio-secured from
DFTD.
techniques, this data indicates it is very unlikely that
devils persist on the peninsula. The original devil
population residing on the Forestier Peninsula was
heavily infected with DFTD; therefore, if there are no
devils left, there is no DFTD either.
An infrared camera survey at the end of 2013 indicated
that a small population of devils (around 19) resided on
the Tasman Peninsula. During 2014 monitoring staff
conducted eight trapping surveys on the peninsula; 18
adults and 2 juveniles of the estimated 23 adults and 20
juveniles were trapped (typically on multiple occasions)
and on examination exhibited no signs of DFTD. This
indicates that the small population of devils on the
Tasman Peninsula is likely to be DFTD-free and will
provide the nucleus for establishing a larger population.
In an effort to reduce the risk of diseased devils reinfecting these peninsulas, the Program has installed
approximately 800 m of devil-deterrent fencing along
Annie Street, Dunalley. This replaces fencing destroyed
in the 2013 bushfire, and so has also contributed to
the local recovery effort. Program staff are designing
and testing other barriers and deterrents to devils for
installation on the highway and intertidal zones. These
deterrents include road grids, animal activated lights,
and other features that will not dramatically impinge
on the use of the area. The planned completion of this
buffer zone is July 2015.
During 2014 two infrared camera surveys, with a
combined survey effort of 3580 ‘camera nights’, were
conducted to look for devils on the Forestier Peninsula
(depopulated by the Program in 2012). The surveys
detected no devils. Although still requiring verification
through additional surveys using cameras and other
16
An infrared camera survey of devils in the Dunalley
and Copping area (north of the buffer zone) from
August–September 2014 found that devils are widely
distributed across the area, albeit at very low density
as a result of the DFTD-induced population decline.
Nineteen individual devils were identified in 230 km2,
including two devils with symptoms indicative of
DFTD infection. The Program is currently considering
management options to reduce the risk that this
diseased devil population poses to establishing a DFTDfree population on the Peninsula.
Program staff have been engaging with the community
on the Peninsula and in the Dunalley area. Activities
have included attending or presenting at the Bream
Creek Show, Dunalley Science (Week) Expo, Tasman
University of the Third Age, the Tasman Wildlife
Expo, Nubeena High School, the Port Arthur Talks
series and Tasman Council. The Program has also
given opportunities to several local volunteers, and
to volunteers further afield, through WildCare’s
Friends of the Tasmanian Devil group. Details of
the reintroduction project were also presented at
the Australasian Wildlife Management Society’s
annual conference in November 2013, and were
enthusiastically received.
The Roadkill Project
The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Roadkill
Project was implemented in 2009. The number of devils
killed on roads is a statewide problem and can be a key
(additional) threatening process for devil populations
already under threat from DFTD. As such mitigation
of this threat is a particularly important tool for use in
supporting the Wild Devil Recovery project. Members
of the community are encouraged to report Tasmanian
devils killed on roads through a number of options
including reply-paid forms, email, phone and SMS
services to the Devil Mobile (0427 733 511), and an
online report form (see www.tassiedevil.com.au).
In 2013 the use of the Devil Mobile was significantly
expanded to incorporate reporting (and potential
response) to other devil interactions (see Pp. 1819 Devil Interactions). To support this activity the
Program is very thankful for assistance from colleagues
in the Parks and Wildlife Service, Bonorong Wildlife
Sanctuary and community-based wildlife carers and
volunteers.
17
The Program received 448 reports of individual roadkilled devils in the 18 months to 31 December 2014.
The highest number of reports were received over the
months of December– March, (combined 2013–14
data), a consistent annual trend which aligns with
seasonal peaks in juvenile dispersal and an increase in
traffic volume over the summer months. Of the total
individual road-killed devils reported, 57 per cent of
these occurred over these five months during the 18
month reporting period.
Virtual Fencing
Mitigating other threats, such as roadkill, is an
identified activity from the Recovery Plan: Conduct
specific research into the extent and magnitude of
impact of non-disease threats and effectiveness of
mitigation methods as required. Mitigating roadkill in
high incidence areas can be a difficult task, with few
options available – until recently. In early 2014 the
Sydney-based company Wildlife Safety Solutions began
a trial of a product known as Virtual Fencing, which
had shown great success in mitigating wildlife roadkill
in Europe and in the USA. A trial site was chosen in
north-west Tasmania, selected for the high levels of
reports of roadkill from the area. The trial involved
monitoring roadkill along ten km of road, with the
Virtual Fencing devices protecting four km of road
within the test area. Monitoring began in November
2013, before Virtual Fencing devices were installed.
Following the installation of Virtual Fencing devices
in February, a dramatic drop in roadkill was recorded,
with early results showing the effectiveness of the
Virtual Fencing product on all wildlife, not only devils.
With funding support from Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program Appeal, Virtual Fencing will soon be trialled at
other sites around the state.
Devil Interactions
In addition to reports of road-killed devils, many
other calls were made to the Devil Mobile. These often
involved the discovery of devils living under houses
in semi-urban areas, most frequently during summer
when females are denning and weaning their young.
Just one example of a happy outcome for home owner
and devil can be seen in a story the Program calls the
Accidental Conservationist.
18
Results over one year with Virtual Fencing in place on Arthur River Rd, north-west Tasmania
In September 2014 Robert from Cygnet contacted the
Devil Mobile to report strange noises under his floor.
The Program installed cameras at strategic locations
and checked the footage after a week, revealing a
healthy mother devil and her three playful young.
The devils were regularly using the underfloor area of
Robert’s house as a den and another adult devil also
visited the entrance whilst the cameras were active. Of
particular note was that the young devils were fairly
advanced for the time of year, possibly indicating an
earlier than usual birth period. After identifying the
source of the noises, Robert was happy to allow the
devil family to stay until dispersal.
Other calls were more serious but likewise have had
happy outcomes for the devils involved. One such is
the tale of ‘Savage’ the devil, which occurred in May
2014. A worker from the Savage River Mine called the
Devil Mobile late one evening after being notified by a
member of the public of an injured devil nearby. The
worker and a colleague immediately went out to find
the animal and managed to trap it. The injured devil
was identified as DFTD-free, but was an old male that
had seen a hard bush life. As photos were later to prove,
the devil (soon to be christened Savage) was indeed
missing one eye (an old injury) and was quite grizzled.
One of the mine managers drove Savage to the vet at
Wynyard – a trip of several hours, late at night. The
next morning the vet advised that the only injury to
Savage was a dislocated hip, which was put back into
place under anaesthetic. Savage was also cleared of
any obvious DFTD symptoms. Savage’s post-operative
care was provided by Central North Wildlife Care and
Rescue at Forthside, where he was driven to by staff
19
from the PWS Ulverstone Field Centre. After a week of
rehabilitation, Savage was chauffeured home by staff
from Grange Resources (which runs the Savage River
Mine). This incident is noteworthy for the help freely
provided by the large group of people involved – miners,
managers, veterinarians, carers, and staff from the
Parks and Wildlife Service and the STDP, who all worked
together to find a positive solution for an old devil.
Savage the devil being released by Savage River Mine
employees.
Following this incident, and that of “Larry” in July
2014 (see Focus On, p. 21), the STDP, in collaboration
with the Tasmanian Minerals and Energy Council
coordinated a workshop for Tasmanian mining
companies about how their operations and devils can
co-exist.
Mining Workshop
Held on 26–27 August 2014, the purpose of the
workshop was to engage with mining companies and to
discuss how they can contribute to devil management
on and near mine sites. Attendees from seven different
companies heard presentations and participated in
demonstrations on topics such as the biology of the
devil (demography, ecology, dens), devil tracks and
traces, monitoring techniques, an explanation of what
DFTD is and how it affects devils, other diseases to
which devils are susceptible, roadkill and other threats,
and how to process camera data. Workshop attendees
Nick Mooney with devil and devil trap at the workshop.
also had the opportunity to discuss how prescriptions
around mining developments, as they relate to devils,
can be managed.
A video camera which was set in the area of the mine
during this workshop picked up footage of a fit looking
Savage (identifiable by his one eye) feasting on a
carcase – a great conclusion to the incident for all
involved.
Savage the devil feasts on a carcase.
20
FOCUS ON: Mine shafts
In July 2014 a young Tasmanian devil was rescued by
Parks and Wildlife Service field staff from a derelict
mining pit at the Warrawee Conservation Area south
of Latrobe. The devil had fallen about five metres into
the muddy pit and was looking very bedraggled when
discovered by a field officer who was recording the
location of the remnants of decades-old mining activity.
After contacting the Save the Tasmanian Devil
Program, PWS Leven Field Centre staff responded with
a ladder, ropes and harness and rescued the lucky devil
that came to be known as ‘Larry’. After being rescued
Larry was immediately taken into care by the Central
North Wildlife Care and Rescue Group and responded
well to treatment, despite having some minor medical
problems.
After nearly two weeks in care, Larry had put on weight
and appeared to be recovering from his ordeal. He was
released after being given a clean bill of health from a
vet and microchipped, so that if he is ever trapped by
the Program in the future his history and background
will be known.
Since that time, the Program and PWS have been
working closely with Environmental Assessment
Officers from Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT),
investigating how to make mine ventilation shafts
and sub-surface pits in key locations around the state
safer for animals. Funding has been secured by MRT
for this work and planning is progressing to develop
an assessment method for each site. The assessment
will include a scoring system to establish the likelihood
that wildlife could fall in to a pit based on terrain,
habitat and other factors; the chance a fallen animal
could get out, which will vary from species to species;
the chance of injury; feasibility for mitigation at the
site; the establishment of the scale of works required to
undertake such mitigation; and the need for mitigation
when the risk to humans is also factored in. The
heritage value of individual sites will also be considered.
As with the cooperative effort to save Savage, the rescue
of Larry and the ensuing work undertaken to begin
to make mine shafts safer for animals has revealed
the enthusiasm and support the Program frequently
receives from colleagues and the community.
21
Research and Collaboration
Research into the disease and potential methods of
managing it directly address the threatening process
for Tasmanian devils in the wild, and is a key action
from the Recovery Plan: Improve knowledge of the
disease and translate to management actions.
A number of institutions are engaged in significant
research programs, all of which support collaborative
research with the Program. This group includes the
Animal Health Laboratory at Mt Pleasant in Launceston
which has a key role in providing diagnostic support
to the Program and external collaborators, monitoring
the evolution of DFTD, providing laboratory support for
collaborative research, and conducting research into
disease prevention and treatment (see Animal Health
Laboratory, below).
The Program provides some direct financial support
to major projects conducted by the Menzies Institute
for Medical Research and the University of Sydney, and
significant in-kind support to all research partners. In
addition, the Program enables collaborative research
with any suitable institution that can demonstrate
relevance and justify access to its resources. The
STDP website outlines opportunities for researchers,
facilitated through the Captive Research Advisory
Group (for access to the Insurance Population) and
the Molecular Research Advisory Panel (for access to
archived biological material).
During the reporting period, the Program supported
19 external researchers by providing biological material
such as blood, DNA and tissue. Samples are stored in
the Tasmanian Devil Bio Archive (see Focus On, below)
and access is granted via the Molecular Research
Advisory Panel (MRAP). The principal criterion used
by the MRAP to assess applications is the project’s
potential to contribute to devil recovery. In line with
this, researchers using material from the Bio Archive
contributed information and developed tools for
managing wild and captive devils. Areas of research
included avenues for making the disease recognisable
to the devil’s immune system, which is an important
step in developing a vaccine; and understanding how
the disease affects the population genetic diversity of
wild devils and potential mitigation strategies.
Menzies Institute of Medical Research
A part of the University of Tasmania, the Menzies
Institute has a centre for studies into DFTD and vaccine
research led by Professor Greg Woods.
Animal Health Laboratory
(Mt Pleasant)
DPIPWE’s Animal Health Laboratory team at Mt
Pleasant examines samples such as blood, faeces and
tissue from wild and captive devils, and devil carcasses
including those killed on roads. Over 70 samples were
analysed in the reporting period, the results of which
have informed the overall health and DFTD status of
devils. The team has continued their investigations into
the chromosomal arrangement and gene sequence of
devils and DFTD, and into development of a pre-clinical
diagnostic test. Both areas of research will contribute
to devil recovery by informing genetic management
of the species, and providing a means to diagnose the
disease before it becomes visible and contagious, a
priority activity in the Recovery Plan.
22
The research to date strongly supports that under the
right conditions, Tasmanian devils can produce an
immune response against DFTD cells. The challenge is
to use this to produce a vaccine. Part of this research
will be trialled in the Wild Devil Recovery Project.
The Menzies Institute also supports the Program
by providing much needed veterinary and tumour
analysis work, as well as providing a crucial link with
international scientists working in the field of DFTD
research.
San Diego Zoo
Global (SDZG)
San Diego Zoo Global
is a conservation
organisation dedicated
to the science of saving endangered species worldwide.
San Diego Zoo Global operates three facilities: the San
Diego Zoo, the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, and the San
Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research.
SDGZ is partnering with the Program, the University
of Sydney, and the Zoo and Aquarium Association to
develop the first landscape-scale management action
designed to save the Tasmanian devil in the wild. The
aim is to ensure that the research discovered one day in
the lab can be applied directly in the field the next.
Using the latest monitoring tools and next-generation
technologies, this project will develop a series of applied
management actions. These will be integrated with
standard operating procedures to establish Tasmanian
devil reserves across Tasmania, including landscape
isolation projects on peninsulas and insurance
populations on islands and in zoos.
Each collaborator brings a wealth of expertise to the
project – SDZG being internationally renowned for
their work on reintroductions, translocations and
management of small populations.
Further, in 2015 SDZG is also providing support for an
intern to work with STDP for 18 months, contributing
to the Wild Devil Recovery project. This support is
the result of the relationship established with the San
Diego Zoo through the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador
Program. University of Sydney researcher Catherine
Grueber (see below, p. 24) is also supported by the
SDZG.
University of
Tasmania
In addition to the
collaborations formed with
scientists at the Menzies
Institute, researchers at the
University of Tasmania’s
School of Biological Sciences also contribute to
knowledge of devils and of DFTD through studies on
co-evolution of the devil and the disease, ecological
research, as well as the contribution of field data.
Research undertaken by Dr Menna Jones and her
collaborators include a project to determine whether
rapid evolution is occurring in the wild, and a project to
assess the impacts of DFTD on nuclear genetic diversity
in the Tasmanian devil.
The team led by Professor Chris Johnson and Dr Menna
Jones has also contributed to work undertaken by
Professor Kathy Belov of the University of Sydney. (See
Pp. 27-28 Case Study)
Devil Island Project
Inc.
Devil Island Project Inc. has
worked with the Program
to deliver projects of direct
benefit to the conservation
of Tasmanian devils. The
Tasmanian Government and
Devil Island Project Inc. co-funded the construction
of four Free Range Enclosures (FREs), also known as
‘Devil Islands’. With the last Devil Island to be opened
in the near future, Devil Island Project Inc. is working
on developing further projects of benefit.
23
Researchers
Individual researchers, some affiliated with partner
institutions, have contributed greatly to the
advancement of knowledge about devils and DFTD.
Just a few of the contributors in the area of scientific
research are listed below.
Catherine Grueber
Dr Catherine Grueber joined the Faculty of Veterinary
Science at the University of Sydney in February
2014 as a San Diego Zoo Global post-doctoral fellow.
Broadly, Catherine’s work reveals how evolutionary and
population processes affect individual and population
level genetic diversity of threatened species. Catherine
aims to develop new techniques for measuring and
mitigating loss of diversity in conservation. In her
current position, Catherine is working with San Diego
Zoo Global in collaboration with the ZAA and the
STDP in a project targeted toward applied conservation
management of the Tasmanian devil.
manage highly valued Australian animals over many
years. Catherine manages the contraception trials on
Tasmanian devils in the Insurance Population (see
Focus On, p. 11).
Tracy Rogers
Associate Professor Tracey Rogers from the University
of New South Wales specialises in predator-prey
interactions. The common thread of her diverse areas
of research is the attempt to understand how mammals
respond to change. Tracey has recently co-authored a
paper about the devils on Maria Island, Survival success
and foraging behaviour of captive-raised Tasmanian
devil founders two years post release of assisted
colonisation program, which will be published in 2015.
Elizabeth Murchison
Dr Elizabeth Murchison is a Reader in Comparative
Oncology and Genetics at Cambridge University
working in the area of genetics, evolution and host
interactions of clonally transmissible cancers, in
particular the devil facial tumour disease. Elizabeth has
worked for several years with the Program to catalogue
the genetic changes that have accumulated in tumours
collected from geographically diverse locations. Her
talk titled “Fighting a contagious cancer”, given as part
of the popular TEDx series, may be viewed at
https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_murchison
The project uses the latest next-generation sequencing
technologies to learn how patterns of genetic diversity
can be best maintained in the Insurance Population.
Catherine will focus on understanding founder
relationships, comparing Insurance Population
diversity to wild animals, and combining molecular
and pedigree-based captive breeding protocols to retain
maximal diversity of released animals.
Catherine Herbert
Hannah Siddle
Dr Catherine Herbert is a member of the Faculty of
Veterinary Science at the University of Sydney and has
researched the role of contraceptive implants to help
Dr Hannah Siddle received her PhD in genetics and
evolutionary genomics under Professor Kathy Belov
at the University of Sydney. She is now a lecturer
24
in Molecular Biology at the Centre for Biological
Sciences, University of Southampton and has worked
on a number of research projects related to DFTD.
From 2009–11 Hannah was an NHMRC Overseas
post-doctoral research fellow in the Department of
Pathology at the University of Cambridge, researching
MHC molecule expression by Devil Facial Tumour
Disease and is the co-author of more than a dozen
papers, including Reversible epigenetic downregulation of MHC molecules by devil facial tumour
disease illustrates immune escape by a contagious
cancer (2013). Hannah continues to work with
Professor Belov – (see below on p.27, Case Study).
Kathy Belov
When Professor Kathy Belov, from the Faculty of
Veterinary Science at the University of Sydney, read
Anne-Maree Pearse and Kate Swift’s pivotal paper
Allograft theory: Transmission of Devil Facial Tumour
Disease in Nature in 2006 she didn’t know that
her career trajectory was about to shift. Kathy was
immediately captivated by this article as it seemed this
disease didn’t make sense: a clonal tumour was being
passed from animal to animal without invoking an
immune response.
Internships and volunteers
Over the past 18 months the Save the Tasmanian
Devil Program has taken advantage of highly skilled
graduates and undergraduates wishing to donate their
time and knowledge to work with the Program and
contribute to saving the Tasmanian devil. There have
been a significant number of volunteers and work
experience students across 2013–14, and the following
students contributed noteworthy amounts of time
and effort to the Program. As part of their work, some
volunteers also undertook projects and produced papers
on their findings, again supporting knowledge and
understanding of DFTD and Tasmanian devils.
Jacob van der Ploeg
Jacob is studying for a BSc in Wildlife Management
at Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences,
Netherlands and volunteered with the Program from
September 2013–February 2014. During his time with
the Program, Jacob assisted with trapping, infrared
camera and scat surveys of devils and carnivores as
part of the Peninsula Devil Conservation project, and
also assisted with an infrared camera survey of fauna
on Maria Island, Cape Barren goose counts in the
Furneaux Group, and the servicing of the FREs. Jacob
analysed data collected from infrared camera surveys
on the Tasman Peninsula to calculate minimum
home range size estimates of devils in the area and
to evaluate the efficacy of using cameras as a method
for doing this. This resulted in an internal report,
Minimum home range of Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus
harrisii) on Tasman Peninsula as determined by
camera trapping.
Jackson Fraeunfelder
Kathy had a hunch that the answer could lie within
the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) so
immediately contacted Dr Stephen Pyecroft who was
then heading up the Diagnostics section of DPIPWE’s
Animal Health Laboratory at Mt Pleasant. This was the
beginning of a collaboration between DPIPWE and the
University of Sydney which has been in place for eight
years, and is still going strong.
Kathy’s work is discussed in detail as a Case Study on
pages 27-28.
Jackson is studying for a BSc in Environmental
Management at the University of Queensland and joined
the Program for a placement from July–October 2014.
Jackson assisted with infrared camera surveys on Maria
Island and for the Peninsula Devil Conservation project,
with trapping surveys on the Tasman Peninsula, and
with the servicing of the Freycinet FRE. Jackson
collated and analysed all the images and data from
an infrared camera survey of devils in the Dunalley–
Copping area and summarised this in an internal
report, Infrared camera survey to determine the
25
FOCUS ON: Bio Archive
distribution of Tasmanian devils and feral cats in the
Dunalley area, Tasmania. During his time in Tasmania
Jackson also volunteered on a vegetation survey in the
Vale of Belvoir with Tasmanian Land Conservancy.
The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program and its
collaborators (principally the University of Tasmania)
have been collecting devil blood and tissue samples
since 1986, and DFTD samples since the late 1990s.
This material is maintained in a number of collections.
The collections continue to receive samples through
the work of the Program and other activities under
permit from the Tasmanian Government.
Recognising the significance of the material and
the value of research that could be made possible
by facilitating access to this unique collection, the
Program established the position of curator for the
collection and is working with partners to secure and
optimise the management of the collection.
The archive is comprised of collections of:
• Devil tissue, sera, blood – 15,500 samples
• Tumour cell culture – 2052 samples
• Other cell culture (blood, fibroblasts) – 328
samples
• Ear biopsy and tumour samples – 15,000
samples
Jackson Frauenfelder.
Dennis Lefterink
Dennis, who volunteered with the Program from
September–December 2014, has a bachelor’s degree in
Life Sciences obtained at the University of Groningen
(Netherlands). Dennis also has a master’s degree in
molecular neurosciences, specialising in multiple
sclerosis, in which he hopes to obtain a PhD. Dennis
became interested in DFTD and devils while working
on his bachelor’s degree. He assisted with numerous
trapping and infrared camera surveys, as well as
helping out with servicing of the FREs. Dennis also
spent a week at Melaleuca monitoring orange-bellied
parrots with WildCare and the Parks and Wildlife
Service.
• Bacterial Artificial Chromosome (BAC) library –
the entire genome of two devils
These collections represent extremely valuable archives
that are used in a wide variety of molecular research.
The Program shares these samples with collaborators
who use the material for molecular research that
has the potential to deliver significant conservation
outcomes for Tasmanian devils.
26
Case Study: Professor Kathy Belov
Since 2007, Kathy and her team at the University
of Sydney have had the good fortune to work with a
variety of people involved in the Save the Tasmanian
Devil Program and have branched out from
immunogenetics to more applied conservation biology.
their immune system develops while they are in the
pouch. Immunological factors in the milk and in pouch
secretions play key roles in protecting immunologically
naïve pouch young. The team have already identified a
repertoire of powerful novel antimicrobial peptides in
the pouch that have the potential to be commercially
developed into antibiotics against multi-drug resistant
bacteria affecting humans.
By working with the team at Devil Ark, Kathy’s team
can carefully study changes in immunity in a large
group of healthy animals. They perform CT scans,
blood tests, molecular genetic tests and hormone
assays, and plan to prepare an online encyclopaedia
of devil development, as well as documenting the
development and ultimate senescence of the immune
system.
An important early collaboration was with Stephen
Pyecroft and Anne-Maree Pearce of DPIPWE, and
Greg Woods’ team at the Menzies Institute of Medical
Research, to establish that genetic diversity in key
immune genes, called MHC genes, was extremely low
in devils. The proposal was that this lack of genetic
diversity could explain how the tumour could cross affect unrelated devils. Team member Hannah Siddle
then went on to work at the University of Cambridge
to show that lack of genetic diversity alone did not
explain the spread. In addition, the tumour had evolved
a strategy to down-regulate cell surface MHC to slip
‘under the radar’ of the devil’s immune system.
In addition to characterising devil immune genes
and immune gene diversity, Kathy’s team (and their
DPIPWE collaborators) have also worked on tumour
evolution with Tony Papenfuss from the Walter
and Eliza Hall Institute, Menna Jones’ team at the
University of Tasmania, and Janine Deakin’s team from
the University of Canberra; with Jeremy Austin from
the University of Adelaide on MHC diversity in ancient
devil samples; and with Chris Amemiya’s team from the
Benaroya Institute in Seattle on construction of genetic
libraries.
Now Kathy’s team is focused on two key projects. First,
they are looking at how the immune system of devils
changes from the “pouch to the grave”. All marsupials
are born at a very early stage in development and
The second area of focus is a large collaborative project
known as ‘Tools and Tech’ with DPIPWE, the Zoo and
Aquarium Association and San Diego Zoo. Kathy’s team
are using the latest sequencing technologies to provide
genetics data for the Insurance Meta-population –
that is, all devils managed by the Program and their
partners, including those on Maria Island. The Program
is leading the way in using the latest technologies
to assist with captive breeding. Kathy shamelessly
admits that her favourite part of the job is visiting the
wonderful zoos and wildlife parks that are part of the
Program and meeting the new devil pups!
A new aspect of
Kathy’s work
relates to the Wild
Devil Recovery
project. Kathy’s
team has analysed
the genetic
characteristics
of the devil
populations at
the proposed
reintroduction
sites. These
analyses will allow
the Program
to determine
which devils
27
would be best suited for reintroduction, with the aim
to improve the genetics of the existing populations.
In addition, Kathy’s team is able to advise on allele
retention rates, which provide information on the rate
of reintroductions required to retain genetic diversity.
Since 2007 Kathy’s team has included Dr Hannah
Siddle, Dr Claire Sanderson, Dr Yuanyuan Cheng, Dr
Katrina Morris, Dr Amanda Lane, Dr Catherine Grueber,
Dr Emily Wong, Dr Beata Ujvari, Jolanta Marzec, Belinda
Wright, Jian Cui, Lauren van der Kraan, Tracey Russell,
Emma Peel, Liz Jones, Bec Gooley, Rehana Hawavisenti
plus countless vets, Honours students, Masters students
and volunteers. This group works tirelessly and its
members are all passionate about contributing to saving
the Tasmanian devil.
Their research is supported by the Australian Research
Council, the Save the Tasmanian Devil Appeal and San
Diego Zoo Global.
28
Publications
Nineteen peer-reviewed papers relating to devils were
published in the 18 months prior to January 2015.
These covered a diverse range of areas including the
devil’s immune system (Howson et al. 2014) and how
it interacts with DFTD (Pinfold et al. 2014, Siddle
and Kauffman 2013); molecular genetics (Cheng and
Belov 2014, Kraan et al. 2013, Lane et al. 2013, Ujvari
et al. 2014a); ecology (Hamede et al. 2013, Hollings et
al. 2014); population genetics (Brüniche-Olsen et al.
2014); the Insurance Population (Chuang et al. 2013,
Hogg 2013, Scheelings et al. 2014, Sinn et al. 2014) and
management of wild devils (Buckmaster et al. 2014,
Ujvari et al. 2014). Three review papers were published
which summarised knowledge of the disease (Bender
et al. 2014, Morris and Belov 2015, Siddle and Kaufman
2015). A preliminary internal report was also produced
for the Program which outlined a model for estimating
the confidence of absence of devils from the Forestier
Peninsula in relation to survey and removal effort (Van
Rossum and Rout 2013).
References
The scientific community, in collaboration with the
STDP, has broadly contributed to five recovery actions
for the Tasmanian devil within the 2013–14 period.
Over half of the peer-reviewed publications for this
period have informed recovery Action 5, which aims
to improve knowledge of the disease and translate this
knowledge to management actions. The overarching
translation of the research contributing to Action 5
into management is development of a vaccine.
Chuang, L. T., Pinfold, T. L., Hu, H. Y., Chen, Y. S.,
Schulze, J., Presley, J. M., ... & Glew, R. H. (2013). Fattyacid, amino-acid and mineral composition of two milk
replacers for marsupials. International Zoo Yearbook,
47(1), 190-199.
Bender, H. S., Marshall Graves, J. A., & Deakin, J.
E. (2014). Pathogenesis and Molecular Biology of a
Transmissible Tumour in the Tasmanian devil. Annu.
Rev. Anim. Biosci., 2(1), 165-187.
Brüniche-Olsen, A., Jones, M. E., Austin, J. J., Burridge,
C. P., & Holland, B. R. (2014). Extensive population
decline in the Tasmanian devil predates European
settlement and devil facial tumour disease. Biology
letters, 10(11), 20140619.
Buckmaster, T., Dickman, C. R., & Johnston, M. J.
(2014). Assessing Risks to Non-Target Species during
Poison Baiting Programs for Feral Cats. PloS one, 9(9),
e107788.
Cheng, Y., & Belov, K. (2014). Characterisation of
non-classical MHC class I genes in the Tasmanian
devil (Sarcophilus harrisii). Immunogenetics, 66(12),
727-735.
Hamede, R. K., McCallum, H., & Jones, M. (2013).
Biting injuries and transmission of Tasmanian devil
facial tumour disease. Journal of Animal Ecology, 82(1),
182-190.
Hogg, C. J. (2013). Preserving Australian native fauna:
zoo-based breeding programs as part of a more unified
strategic approach. Australian Journal of Zoology, 61(1),
101-108.
Hollings, T., Jones, M., Mooney, N., & McCallum, H.
(2014). Trophic Cascades Following the Disease-Induced
Decline of an Apex Predator, the Tasmanian devil.
Conservation Biology, 28(1), 63-75.
Howson, L. J., Morris, K. M., Kobayashi, T., Tovar, C.,
Kreiss, A., Papenfuss, A. T., ... & Woods, G. M. (2014).
Identification of dendritic cells, B cell and T cell subsets
in Tasmanian devil lymphoid tissue; evidence for poor
immune cell infiltration into devil facial tumours. The
Anatomical Record, 297(5), 925-938.
29
Kraan, L. E., Wong, E. S., Lo, N., Ujvari, B., & Belov,
K. (2013). Identification of natural killer cell receptor
genes in the genome of the marsupial Tasmanian devil
(). Immunogenetics, 65(1), 25-35.
Lane, A., Wright, B., Hamede Ross, R. K., Cheng, Y.,
Levan, L., Jones, M., ... & Belov, K. (2013). Healthy
and tumour-afflicted Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus
harrisii) do not differ at a key immune-genetic region
(MHC class I). PLoS-One.
Morris, K. M., & Belov, K. (2015). Cancer Immunology
of Transmissible Cancers. In Cancer Immunology (pp.
419-428). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Pinfold, T. L., Brown, G. K., Bettiol, S. S., & Woods, G.
M. (2014). Mouse Model of Devil Facial Tumour Disease
Establishes That an Effective Immune Response Can
be Generated Against the Cancer Cells. Frontiers in
Immunology, 5.
Scheelings, T. F., Dobson, E. C., & Hooper, C. (2014).
CUTANEOUS T-CELL LYMPHOMA IN TWO CAPTIVE
TASMANIAN DEVILS (SARCOPHILUS HARRISII).
Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 45(2), 367-371.
Siddle, H. V., & Kaufman, J. (2015). Immunology of
naturally transmissible tumours. Immunology, 144(1),
11-20.
Siddle, H. V., & Kaufman, J. (2013). How the devil
facial tumour disease escapes host immune responses.
OncoImmunology, 2(8), e25235.
Sinn, D. L., Cawthen, L., Jones, S. M., Pukk, C., &
Jones, M. E. (2014). Boldness towards novelty and
translocation success in captive-raised, orphaned
Tasmanian devils. Zoo biology, 33(1), 36-48.
Ujvari, B., Piddington, L., Pearse, A. M., Peck, S.,
Harmsen, C., Taylor, R., ... & Belov, K. (2014a). Devil
Facial Tumour Disease, A Potential Model of the Cancer
Stem-Cell Process?. Journal of Veterinary Science
(JVet), 1(1).
Ujvari, B., Pearse, A. M., Swift, K., Hodson, P., Hua, B.,
Pyecroft, S., ... & Madsen, T. (2014b). Anthropogenic
selection enhances cancer evolution in Tasmanian devil
tumours. Evolutionary applications, 7(2), 260-265.
Van Rossum, C., & Rout, T. (2013). Depopulation of
Tasmanian Devil Habitats. Internal report to the Save
The Devil Program.
30
Performance of the Program to Targets
In July 2013 the previous Business Plan for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program expired. Due to uncertainty
in funding, a new Business Plan was not adopted until November 2014. As a result of this there are no formal
performance targets established for the period of the Report. The Program has taken the performance measures
established for the new Business Plan (2014–2019) and calculated target measures for the reporting period.
Recovery Action (Action number)
Metric
… implement … landscape isolation
projects …. (1a)
… trial … measures to manage DFTD
and other threats … through …
landscape management practices (1b)
[update] guidelines on … habitat
requirements … and provide to all
agencies regulating activities … related
to high and very high threats (2c)
… integrated management plans for
all captive Tasmanian devils held at
different locations (3a)
… adequate … founders to meet
insurance population goals, and …
maintain genetic diversity (3b)
Maintain … [appropriate] … capacity of
suitable … facilities … and if required
export captive devils ... (3c)
Establish disease-free devil groups …
on islands and isolated peninsulas in
Tasmania (3d)
N of repopulations implemented
… determine relatedness in devils (3g)
Survey for DFTD at appropriate
locations … (4a)
Study the … devil’s immune system …
including vaccine feasibility ... (5d)
Investigate the spatial use of habitat by
Tasmanian devils (6a)
… appropriate oversight of expenditure
on recovery plan actions (7a)
2013–14
target*
0
2013–14
actual
0
2014–15
target
0
2015–16
target
1
N of Wild Devil Recovery zones started
in year
0
0
0
0
Guidelines and proscriptions are current
(Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
ARR is current (Y/N)
Y
Y
Y
Y
N of founders added
% genetic diversity retained
0
>95
99.25
0
>95
0
>95
N of animals in the IP in Australia*
N of zoos in Ambassador Program
550
5
610
5
550
10
550
15
80
~20
0
<0.125
10
90
~20
0
0.0061
80
~20
0
<0.125
10
100
~20
20
<0.125
10
0
0
0
30
>50
96†
>50
>50
2.4
2.4
2.4
2.4
3.3
1.2
3.3††
1.2
‡
1.2
1.2
500
470
500
Y
500
1
1
1
2
N of animals on Maria Island
N of animals on Tasman Peninsula
N of animals on Forestier Peninsula
Inbreeding coef <0.125
Long Term Monitoring sites surveyed
in year
N of immunised devils rewilded per year
% rewilded devils surviving first year
$m committed by Tasmanian
Government
$m committed by Australian
Government
$m committed by ZAA institutions
… recovery team … regularly assess[es] Biennial review conducted (Y/N)
the effectiveness of the recovery
Triennial review of tasks and priorities
program ... (7b)
(Y/N)
Raise awareness of the threats to the
$K contributed by fundraisers (Appeal/
Tasmanian devil ... (8a)
DIP) ‡‡
… develop community roadkill
N areas with mitigation implemented
monitoring and … apply … results (8f) in year
* figure includes animals in zoos and wildlife parks in Australia but not IP animals in translocations, landscape
isolation projects or the ambassador program
† figures derived from Maria Island translocation
†† funding provided over a three year period
‡ the recovery plan has yet to be finalised
‡‡ figures provided are for the Appeal only
31
Devil Dollars
The following table shows how funds received from the State and Federal Governments were invested across the
Program in the last two financial years.
Sub-Program
2012–13 ($’000s)
2013–14 ($’000s)
882
634
Monitoring and Management (includes Tasman Isolation
and Wild Devil Recovery)
1 130
771
Insurance Population
1 884
1 194
780
347
4 676
2 946
Program Management
Diagnostics Services and Research
Total
32
Where to from here?
Work aimed at maintaining Tasmanian devils in the
wild in Tasmania has been the major directional
change for the Program over the past eighteen months.
To date this has been through the establishment
of DFTD-free populations, and the management of
diseased devil populations to ensure that they are more
resilient and sustainable. The Insurance Population has
been established and is now able to provide a source
for repopulation. The Program has developed skills and
facilities that can be used to prepare devils for release
into the wild to give the best chance of adapting to wild
conditions.
The Maria Island translocation has succeeded and
the Program is now managing this for the long term.
Contraception techniques are being trialled on devils
on the island in order to control the genetic input to
this closed population.
The re-wilding of the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas
relies on the protection of the DFTD-free population
from contact with diseased devils. The physical barrier
already provided by the township of Dunalley and the
Denison Canal is being enhanced with a ‘devil-proof’
fence. In addition, deterrents such as sounds (devils,
dog barks) and high pressure air ‘guns’ are been
trialled for installation on the main road. Devils are
very adept at getting around, under, over and through
obstacles but the series of buffers will reduce the risk of
incursions.
Planning is underway for the re-wilding of devils into
the north east of Tasmania, an initiative announced by
the Tasmanian Environment Minister in late 2014. This
bold and exciting move is supported by immunisation
trials undertaken in collaboration with the Menzies
Institute for Medical Research. The devils chosen will
also play a key role in a project, supported by San Diego
Zoo Global, to develop tools to “dampen” the dispersal
of released devils.
The necessity for wild devil management has been
highlighted by the Annual Monitoring program,
which has confirmed the persistence of devils at all
long-term monitoring sites. The Devil Mobile has also
contributed to our knowledge of disease presence with
the confirmation that DFTD has arrived on the west
coast of Tasmania, in the Henty area north of Strahan,
coming through a “roadkill report”.
The next year will see a substantial effort by the
Program to trial the efficacy of Wild Devil Recovery.
This will include renewed efforts to reduce the number
of road-killed devils, to mitigate the risks posed by
mine shafts and to engage with land developers to help
developments remain safe areas for devils. Progress
has been made with the support of Mineral Resources
Tasmania to map, inspect and mitigate the threat of
disused mine shafts.
Through the Insurance Population and the Monitoring
and Management sub-programs the STDP is well placed
to tackle the challenge of Wild Devil Recovery. This
action will deliver on the three key objectives of the
Save the Tasmania Devil Program: retaining genetic
diversity, managing wild devils, and reducing the
ecosystem impacts of the loss of devils. The key goal for
2015 is to develop further techniques to achieve Wild
Devil Recovery.
We look forward to reporting against progress in 12
months’ time.
33
Devil Directory (as at 31 December 2014)
Steering Committee
Alistair Scott (Chair), General Manager, Resource
Management and Conservation, DPIPWE
Chris Hibbard, Zoo & Aquarium Association
Peter Latch, Department of Environment (DoE)
Nick Mooney, Conservation community member
Management Group
Dr Howel Williams (Chair), Program Director, STDP,
DPIPWE
Gary Davies, Manager, Wildlife Management Branch,
DPIPWE
Prof Elissa Cameron, Science community member
Dr David Pemberton, Program Manager, STDP,
DPIPWE
Dr Howel Williams, Program Director, Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program
Dr Billie Lazenby, Science Coordinator, STDP, DPIPWE
Dr David Pemberton, Program Manager, Save the
Tasmanian Devil Program
Drew Lee, Sub-Program Leader, Insurance Population
Sam Fox, Sub-Program Leader, Monitoring and
Management
Sarah Graham, Senior Communications Consultant
Meta-population Advisory Committee
Dr Howel Williams (Chair), Program Director, STDP,
DPIPWE
Amanda Embury - Australasian Species Management
Program
Dr Carolyn Hogg - STDP Species Coordinator (ZAA)
Drew Lee - STDP Captive Management (DPIPWE)
Dr Catherine Grueber - Independent scientific expert
(University of Sydney)
Peter Latch, Director, Department of Environment
(Australian Government)
34
35
WANTED INFORMATION
ON TASMANIAN DEVILS
CALL OR TEXT THE DEVIL MOBILE
0427 733 511
Report road-killed devil
Help us investigate the impact on devils!
Report nuisance devils on your propert
Let us relocate these devils if necessary!
Report devils under your house or sh
We can monitor devils by remote camera!
Report unusual sightings or movement
Let us know what the devils are up to!
Be our eyes and ears, and help us help
Tasmanian devils recover in your area!
Signage for the Peninsula Devil Conservation Project (See p.16).
36
All photos courtesy of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program.
Design by the Land Tasmania Design Unit, DPIPWE

STDP Annual Program Report 2013-14

Transcription

Similar documents

Sales Sheet for Sardo Numspa

Overview of the Devil`s Advocate Group

tasmanian devil - Latter

Disturbed Guarded

Newsletter - NJ Dare Devils

1988: The Tasmanian devil in Arnhem Land rock art

FROM THE GOAL - NJ Dare Devils

Bob REEHM - Core Singles Fellowship

May 2012 - Chicago Mountaineering Club

Botany of the Good Lord