Threatened species & ecological communities

National recovery plan for the Christmas Island Pipistrelle Pipistrellus murrayi

Prepared by Martin Schulz and Linda F. Lumsden
Department of the Environment and Heritage, 2004
ISBN 0 642 55012 3

Part D: Objectives, criteria and actions

Recovery Objectives and Timelines

The overall objectives of this recovery plan are to:

Specific objectives for the five years of this Recovery Plan are listed below. Note that these objectives are not listed in order of priority.

Performance Criteria

Performance Criteria listed below match the corresponding Objectives and are to be achieved within the five-year duration of the plan:

Evaluation of Performance

The plan's performance is to be reviewed by an Island Recovery Team as proposed for avifauna by Garnett & Crowley (2000). This recovery team is to be established with the primary objective of developing and implementing island-wide conservation management and recovery plans, including for the Christmas Island Pipistrelle. The Recovery Team is to review and evaluate progress with respect to this Recovery Plan annually over the five-year period. This recovery team should comprise:

  1. on-island representatives, including Parks Australia North staff, a Shire of Christmas Island representative, and other local members as deemed appropriate, and
  2. off-island representatives, including, a scientific member of the Crazy Ant Steering Committee and one or two leading bat ecologists with first-hand knowledge of the island's ecology.

Actions

The EPBC Act requires that a Recovery Plan must provide for research and management actions necessary to halt the decline of, and support the recovery of, listed threatened species or ecological communities to maximise these species/communities chances of long-term survival. Therefore, some of the actions identified within this Plan are research actions that are essential to identify threatening processes and the cause of the decline and range contraction in the Christmas Island Pipistrelle.

Note: The identified actions have been divided into research and management actions and are not listed according to order of significance or impact.

A. Research and Monitoring Actions

Action 1: Assess population and distribution trends in the Christmas Island Pipistrelle and establish long-term monitoring programs (Obj. 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11; Perf. Crit. 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11)

Background Summary: Available evidence indicates that the species is in decline and its range is contracting westwards. As the last comprehensive study was undertaken in 1998, it is critical that a reassessment of the current status and distribution of the species is undertaken, and that changes in activity levels in areas that were formerly infested with the Yellow Crazy Ant supercolonies are investigated. A long-term monitoring program is required to assess the recovery of the species.

Threatening Process: Various, particularly threatening processes contributing to a decline and westward range contraction in the species.

Actions:

Action 2: Determine roosting requirements, investigating seasonal and distributional differences (Obj. 2, 3, 9 and 10; Perf. Crit. 2, 3, 9 and 10)

Background Summary: Only limited information is available on roosting requirements of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle, and this is all from within the dry season. No information is available on roosting requirements during the birthing and lactation periods in the late dry and wet season. Many insectivorous bats that utilise a range of diurnal roosts outside the breeding season display more specific maternity roost site selection, as a function of thermal properties, and protection from predators and adverse conditions (e.g. Kunz & Lumsden 2003). Roosts used during this period, particularly maternity sites which may be a limiting factor, are critical to the long-term maintenance of the population. There is also no information on roosts used at the eastern limit of the species' range. The identification of roosts in this area and a comparison of roost selection between the core of the species' distribution and the eastern edge may assist in understanding the reasons behind the contraction in the distribution of the species. The loss of roost suitability may be an important contributing factor to its decline and range contraction. The provision of artificial predator-proofed roosts may assist in re-colonisation of forested areas in the east that were formerly inhabited.

Threatening Process: Yellow Crazy Ant, introduced predators and possibly as yet unidentified threatening processes.

Actions:

Action 3: Determine the impact of the Common Wolf Snake on roosts, and if considered to impact on pipistrelles, develop management actions to reduce the predation risk (Obj. 2 and 3; Perf. Crit. 2 and 3)

Background Summary: The westward contraction in the distribution of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle corresponds with the westward expansion of the Common Wolf Snake. However, it is currently unknown whether this snake is able to access pipistrelle roosts within primary rainforest.

Threatening Process: Introduced predator.

Actions:

Action 4: Determine the impact of the Nankeen Kestrel, and if found to prey on pipistrelles, develop management actions to reduce the impact (Obj. 4; Perf. Crit. 4).

Background Summary: The absence of daytime foraging in recent years corresponds to an increase in the population of the naturalised Nankeen Kestrel.

Threatening Process: Naturalised predators.

Actions:

Action 5: Identify primary foraging sites away from ecotones and roads (Obj. 1, 5, 6, 9 and 10; Perf. Crit. 1, 5, 6, 9 and 10)

Background Summary: Primary foraging habitats have been poorly described for the species in rainforest away from roads, ecotones and drill lines. Many of the drill lines bulldozed in the 1960s have become overgrown. Bats were commonly observed using drill lines in 1984 (Tidemann 1985). However, by 1998 many drill lines were ill-defined and provided little 'edge' for this edge specialist to target (Lumsden et al. 1999). The importance of open drill lines to the pipistrelle requires understanding in a landscape context. Therefore, it is important to characterise foraging habitat used by pipistrelles away from classic edges, such as roads and ecotones.

Threatening Process: Habitat alteration and habitat loss.

Actions:

Action 6: Investigate dietary specialisation as a contributing factor to the current status of Christmas Island Pipistrelle (Obj. 5 and 6; Perf. Crit. 5 and 6)

Background Summary: The Christmas Island Pipistrelle forages on a variety of flying insects caught on the wing. However, it is not known whether the species is a specialist or generalist feeder. Changes in the primary rainforest ecosystem (e.g. through Yellow Crazy Ant supercolony infestation) may have altered the availability of prey items. If this resulted in prey being limited, it would impact on the status of the pipistrelle.

Threatening Process: Currently unknown, evidence suggests Yellow Crazy Ant supercolony infestation may have altered primary rainforest insect populations in terms of diversity and abundance.

Actions:

Action 7: Clarify the taxonomic status of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle (Obj. 7; Perf. Crit. 7)

Background Summary: The taxonomic status of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle requires clarification.

Actions:

B. Management Actions

Action 8: Continue active management for the control of Yellow Crazy Ant supercolonies (Obj. 8 and 9; Perf. Crit. 8 and 9)

Background Summary: The long-term viability of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle may be threatened by the presence and spread of Yellow Crazy Ant supercolonies. Parks Australia North in consultation with the Crazy Ant Steering Committee is undertaking surveys for the presence of Yellow Crazy Ant supercolonies in both infested and unaffected areas following a successful aerial baiting campaign. All supercolonies encountered will be eliminated through ground-baiting techniques where possible.

Threatening Process: Yellow Crazy Ant.

Actions:

Action 9: Increased protection of known and potential habitat outside the National Park (Obj. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 11; Perf. Crit. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 11)

Background Summary: The Christmas Island Pipistrelle was formerly widespread and common throughout the island. Extensive loss of habitat through clearfelling for phosphate mining has resulted in a reduction of suitable habitat available, particularly for diurnal and maternity roosting purposes. Some areas identified as having high and moderate bat activity in 1998 occurred outside or along roads delineating the boundary of the Christmas Island National Park (Lumsden et al. 1999):

  1. Off Dales Road, 0.3 km west of Winifred Beach Track turnoff (10o28'30", 105o34'16") (Site 7),
  2. Winifred Beach Track, 0.1 km south of Dales Road (10o28'40", 105o34'25") (Site 21),
  3. ML 106 area, on track heading west, 0.6 km from Blowholes Road (10o30'24", 105o38'35") (Site 34).

Threatening Process: Habitat loss.

Actions:

Action 10: Assess the impact of phosphate stockpile removal on the Christmas Island Pipistrelle (Obj. 9 and 10; Perf. Crit. 9 and 10)

Background Summary: The proposed removal of phosphate stockpiles within and abutting the Christmas Island National Park may adversely affect foraging, roosting and commuting habitat.

Threatening Process: Habitat loss.

Actions:

Action 11: Guidelines to reduce vehicle-related mortality (Obj. 1 and 11; Perf. Crit. 1 and 11)

Background Summary: The Christmas Island Pipistrelle commonly uses roadways passing through primary rainforest and secondary rainforest regrowth for foraging and commuting purposes. This species is particularly susceptible to vehicle-related mortality due to it commonly flying close to ground level.

Threatening Process: Vehicle-related mortality.

Actions:

Action 12: Review the conservation status of the species (Obj. 12; Perf. Crit. 12)

Background Summary: Recent evidence has indicated a continued decline in the species since the fieldwork of Lumsden et al. (1999). A summary of this information is provided in Appendix 4.

Actions: