Biodiversity

Species Profile and Threats Database


For information to assist proponents in referral, environmental assessments and compliance issues, refer to the Policy Statements and Guidelines (where available), the Conservation Advice (where available) or the Listing Advice (where available).
 
In addition, proponents and land managers should refer to the Recovery Plan (where available) or the Conservation Advice (where available) for recovery, mitigation and conservation information.

EPBC Act Listing Status Listed as Vulnerable
Listing and Conservation Advices Commonwealth Listing Advice on Pteropus conspicullatus (Spectacled Flying-fox) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2002) [Listing Advice].
 
Recovery Plan Decision Recovery Plan required, included on the Commenced List (1/11/2009).
 
Adopted/Made Recovery Plans National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
 
Policy Statements and Guidelines Survey Guidelines for Australia's Threatened Bats. EPBC Act survey guidelines 6.1 (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), 2010m) [Admin Guideline].
 
Federal Register of
    Legislative Instruments
Inclusion of species in the list of threatened species under section 178 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (02/08/2001) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2001f) [Legislative Instrument].
 
Non-statutory Listing Status
IUCN: Listed as Least Concern (Global Status: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: 2013.1 list)
Scientific name Pteropus conspicillatus [185]
Family Pteropodidae:Chiroptera:Mammalia:Chordata:Animalia
Species author Gould, 1850
Infraspecies author  
Reference  
Distribution map Species Distribution Map

This is an indicative distribution map of the present distribution of the species based on best available knowledge. See map caveat for more information.

Illustrations Google Images

The Spectacled Flying-fox has distinctive straw-coloured fur which surrounds the eyes. The species can also have varying amounts of the same pale fur on the shoulders and the head. Eye-rings of some individuals can be indistinct, making them look similar to Black Flying-foxes (Pteropus alecto) (Hall & Richards 2000). The head and body ranges between 220-240 mm in length. Forearm length and weight range is 160-180 mm and 580-850 g for males, and 155-175 mm and 500-650 g for females (Richards & Spencer 1998).

The Spectacled Flying-fox occurs in north-eastern Queensland, north of Cardwell with past records from Brisbane and Chillagoe (Hall & Richards 2000; Richards 1990). It is restricted to tropical rainforest areas (Webb & Tidemann 1996), most specifically, the species occurs between Ingham and Cooktown, and between the McIlwrait and Iron Ranges of Cape York. The species also occurs on Torres Strait islands. The largest population in Australia is known from the Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area between Townsville and Cooktown (DEH 2003d).

During recent census, the Spectacled Flying-fox has been recorded from the following localities.

Cairns Area: Yorkeys Knob, Cairns City, Cairns Central Swamp, Edmonton and Gordonvale (Freeman 2003).
Cassowary Coast: Paronella Park, Tully Valley and El Arish (Freeman 2003).
Mossman - Cooktown: Newell Beach, Daintree, Bloomfield and Rossville (Garnett et al. 1999).
Atherton Tableland: Powley Road, Tolga, Whiteing Road, Topaz and Kuranda (Garnett et al. 1999).
Mulgrave River - Innisfail: Fishery Falls and Russell River (Garnett et al. 1999).

The Spectacled Flying-fox occurs in Papua New Guinea and nearby islands (including Woodlark, Alcester, Kiriwana and Halmahera Islands), parts of Indonesia, and also the Solomon Islands (Duncan et al. 1999; Garnett et al. 1999).

Throughout the Wet Tropics, Whybird and colleagues (2000 cited in McIlwee & Martin 2002) noted a loss of 15 permanent camps (a total population of 610 000 individuals) between 1985 and 2000. The Spectacled Flying-fox population declined from an estimated 820 000 in 1985 to 80 000 in November 2000 (Whybird 2001, pers. comm. cited in McIlwee and Martin 2002). This indicates an approximate 78% population decline over the fifteen-year period between 1985 and 2000 (Whybird et al. 2000 cited in McIlwee & Martin 2002). The population was recorded as having declined by 35% over the two years between 1998 and 2000 (DEH 2003d).

According to Garnett and colleagues (1999), the generation length for this species is assumed to be four years.

The largest population of the Spectacled Flying-fox is known from the Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area between Townsville and Cooktown (DEH 2003d).

Roosting habitat

One study showed that the Spectacled Flying-fox roosts within 6.5 km of rainforest (Richards 1990), although a roost 16 km from rainforest has also been observed (Shilton et al. 2008).

Foraging habitat

The species was long assumed assumed to feed primarily on rainforest species (Richards 1990) but individuals regularly feed on a wide variety of non-rainforest species, including eucalypts (Eucalyptus spp., Corymbia spp.) in tall open forests adjoining rainforest communities and in tropical woodland and savanna ecosystems (Parsons et al. 2006). The Mabi Forest (Complex Notophyll Vine Forest 5b) is considered a key habitat for the Spectacled Flying-fox (WWF 2003).

The foraging range of the species is less well understood and further research will provide a better understanding of the foraging distribution of this bat. Telemetry and resource use results from the Wet Tropics indicate that foraging individuals range widely across the Wet Tropics bioregion and extensively into drier forests, including those to the west of the Wet Tropics Region

The Spectacled Flying-fox has been demonstrated to have the greatest tolerance to ranges of ambient temperature of any mammal. Air temperatures from freezing to up to 40 °C cause almost no change in the species' metabolic rate. Their ability to use their wings to control heat loss is a major factor in this ability (Richards & Spencer 1998).

Sexual maturity
Spectacled Flying-foxes give birth to one pup annually. Females are capable of breeding at one year of age but in captivity few of these young survive (Garnett et al. 1999). Maclean (2001, pers. comm. cited in McIlwee & Martin 2002), describes occasional orphaned, human-reared individuals in Queensland delivering young when only two years old, but believes only a minority of two-year-olds do so. Several wildlife carers also note that many two-year-old mothers drop their young, and do not rear them to independence (H. Luckoff, L. Collins, J. Maclean 2001. pers. comms. cited in McIlwee & Martin 2002).

Males probably do not breed until three to four years of age and are suspected to be polygamous, as are Grey-headed Flying-foxes (P. poliocephalus). There is a sex ratio of at least 2:1 in favour of female Spectacled Flying-foxes (C. Tidemann undated, pers. comm. cited in Garnett et al. 1999).

Life expectancy
The natural lifespan is not known although one captive individual reached 17 years of age (Hall 1995; Flannery 1995). It is assumed most wild flying-foxes live much shorter lives (Garnett et al. 1999).

Conception occurs in April to May, but sexual activity is continuous from about January to June. As with other flying-foxes, the females give birth to one young per year, in the October to December period. Juveniles are nursed for over five months and, on weaning, congregate in nursery trees in the colony. The juveniles fly out for increasing distances with the colony at night and are 'parked' in nursery trees, often kilometres distant from the colony, and are brought back to the colony in the morning (Richards & Spencer 1998).

The Spectacled Flying-fox feeds on fruits and blossom, primarily in the canopy vegetation of a wide range of vegetation communities, including closed forest, gallery forest, eucalypt open forest and woodland, Melaleuca thickets, coastal swamps, mangroves, vegetation in urban settings, and commercial fruit crops. These foraging activities result in dispersal of pollen and seeds, thereby contributing to the reproductive and evolutionary processes of species and ecological communities (Qld DERM 2010).

The species roosts in large aggregations, called camps or colonies, in the exposed branches of canopy trees. Throughout the year an unknown proportion of animals roost away from camps, either solitarily or in small groups (Qld DERM 2010). Spectacled Flying-foxes are highly mobile and have complex and irregular movement patterns primarily determined by seasonal nectar flows (TSSC 2002).

Shilton and colleagues (2006) counted Spectacled Flying-foxes at multiple camps (colonies) in different parts of the species' range at the same time, and followed individual flying foxes using radiotracking and satellite tracking. They found that the composition of camps is constantly changing as individuals switch camps, use several camps each, and sometimes temporarily abandon camps. The number of Spectacled Flying-foxes in particular sites varied five-fold through the year, and the location of a substantial proportion of the population was unknown, especially during winter.

A review of survey guidelines is being undertaken by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts in 2009.

The Australian Museum Business Services (2004a) recommends the following survey techniques for the Spectacled Flying-fox:

Survey techniques
The primary method for surveying is to conduct visual searches for day roosts and night feeding sites. The locations of over 100 camps have been recorded and location information is available through the Queensland Environment Protection Agency (EPA). Population counts have been conducted and there is a network of people with knowledge about camp location and seasonal movements, including local people, orchardists, Queensland EPA officers, flying-fox carer networks and traditional land owners.

Flying-foxes are easily seen at a distance as they roost or while they are flying. Flying-foxes have distinctive audible calls as well as distinctive odour and droppings.

In addition, a vegetation survey of the project area should be conducted to establish if significant stands of Spectacled Flying-fox food plants are present. Food plants are listed in Hall and Richards (2000).

Surveys should be conducted as follows:

Day surveys: searching for day roosts or presence of feeding activity:

  • Conduct walking transects (100 m apart) looking, listening and smelling for the presence of roosting bats.
  • Examine ground and foliage for flying-fox scats. Some project areas may require access by boat. Note that this species rarely vocalises during rain or during some periods of the day.
  • For very large and/or very inaccessible project areas, it may be necessary to conduct aerial survey for camps from a light aircraft.
  • A food plant survey should be conducted by a qualified botanist.

Presence of feeding activity in fruit trees can be identified by looking for large compressed pieces of fruit skin and flesh on the ground under a tree. These fragments are known as "spats" and are made by flying-foxes when they compress fruit between their tongue and hard palate to extract the juice, then spit out the remains. Spats are about the size of a ten cent piece and are a clear sign of flying-fox feeding activity. Other signs of feeding activity include: broken leaders (new season's shoots) at the top of a tree, tooth marks on fruit under a tree, and stones from fruit under a tree (DNRE 2002).

Night survey: looking for feeding and flying bats:

Conduct walking transects (100 m apart) looking, listening and smelling for the presence of feeding or flying bats. Alternative methods may include night-time audio recording at selected sites or fruiting food plants within the project area.

Survey effort guide
Small project areas can be surveyed easily within a day. Several repeat surveys throughout the year should be conducted, especially if known camps occur in the project area.

Minimum effort required in addition to food plant survey:

Project Area < 10 ha 10–50 ha > 50 ha
Day survey 2 hours 6 hours 6 hours per 50 ha
Night survey 3 hours 5 hours 5 hours per 50 ha/night

Seasonal considerations
Occupation of camps is highly seasonal. Camp movements are dependant upon seasonal fruiting and flowering of food plants.

Dusk fly-out counts
A census for Spectacled Flying-foxes was conducted in 1998 at all known camps in the wet tropics between Daintree in the north, the Russell River in the south and the Atherton Tableland to the west. The census was undertaken by counting the number of bats leaving camps at dusk using hand counters. Counters assembled at camps before evening fly-out and stopped counting when animals were no longer seen leaving the colony or it became too dark to observe them. Bats were tallied in groups of up to 50 as they crossed a fixed point, usually a road verge or a powerline (Garnett et al. 1999).

Habitat loss
Habitat loss has occurred as a result of large-scale clearing of both coastal and upland habitats for sugar, grazing and urban development (Duncan et al. 1999).

Tick paralysis
Since at least 1990, Spectacled Flying-foxes on the Atherton Tablelands have suffered from paralysis caused by the Australian Paralysis Tick (Ixodes holocyclus) (Brice 1998). The Spectacled Flying-fox shows little resistance to the Paralysis Tick toxin, and single ticks are capable of causing paralysis, even when barely distended. Paralysed individuals fall to the ground where they are vulnerable to fly strike and predation by dingoes, pythons and Pied Currawongs (Stepera graculina) (Garnett et al. 1999). Large number of individuals (as much as several thousand) have been directly affected by tick paralysis and large numbers of dependent young have been orphaned each year (Brice 1998). A high percentage will respond to treatment with antivenene (Johnson 1994) and at least some immature bats are known to survive to maturity after release (Williamson & Williamson 1995).

The epidemic in tick paralysis coincides with a switch in diet by the Spectacled Flying-fox to Wild Tobacco (Solanum mauritianum) (Eggert 1994; Spencer et al. 1992) however the relationship between Wild Tobacco, paralysis ticks and flying-foxes is unclear. Wild Tobacco, often standing six feet tall, provides an ideal height for paralysis ticks to climb and wait for their next host. Spencer (cited in Van Tassel 1995) has suggested that as a flying-fox forages, ticks attach themselves to the bat, which then returns to the colony (Van Tassel 1995).

Disturbance of camps
Disturbance of maternity camps during the breeding season is thought to result in the death of dependent juveniles. Camps at Admiralty Island, Barron River, Edmonton, Banana Island and Paronella Park appear to have been abandoned altogether as a result of shooting (Garnett et al. 1999).

Competition
Competition from the Black Flying-fox (P. alecto) for nectar, particularly in woodland trees, may by occurring in the southern part of the range of the Spectacled Flying-fox. The Little Red Flying-fox sometimes displaces it from camps at Whiteing Road, Tolga, Cairns Central Swamp and Daintree (Ratcliffe 1931; Richards 1980, pers. obs. cited in Garnett et al. 1999; Spencer 1992, pers. obs. cited in Garnett et al. 1999).

Environmental stress
Heat-related deaths in Australian Flying-foxes have been documented repeatedly since European settlement. For example, a heatwave in 2004, where the ambient temperature exceeded 45 °C, resulted in the death of 5000–7000 Grey-headed Flying-foxes, most of which were less than four months of age (94.3%) (Eby et al. 2004).

Smoke from bushfires seems to disorient flying-foxes causing them to fly aimlessly around their camp. Many flying-foxes are killed when a bushfire goes through their camp site, but it is not known if deaths occur from smoke inhalation or directly from the heat of the fire (Hall & Richards 2000).

High mortality may also occur when weather conditions are wet, windy and cold at the end of winter. During this period there is a lack of natural food and the available nectar is greatly diluted by rain and flying-foxes seem to be too weak to fly to areas where more food is available (Hall & Richards 2000).

Cyclones
Cyclones occur most years within the range of the Spectacled Flying-fox and can strip fruit from trees over substantial areas. Cyclones can be particularly devastating for island populations because such a large percentage of available habitat can be affected (Pierson et al. 1996). However, observations in the Innisfail area after Cyclone Winifred crossed the coast in 1986 suggest that flying-foxes are able to both weather the storm and find food afterwards (Richards 1990), possibly by foraging beyond the impact zone (Trenarry undated, pers. comm. cited in Garnett et al. 1999). Cyclone Larry, which passed through far north Queensland in the Atherton region in March 2006, saw a mass exodus of Spectacled Flying-foxes from the area (CSIRO 2006a) and also caused extensive damage in the Mabi Forest (Complex Notophyll Vine Forest 5b) that is considered a key habitat for the Spectacled Flying-fox.

Man-made obstacles
Electrocution on powerlines, collisions with barbed wire, and traffic deaths are all recorded causes of mortality. When a bat is electrocuted on a power line, it short-circuits electricity wires but usually does not disturb supply so the electrical authority has no record of the bats death. As a higher proportion of flying-foxes become resident in urban areas, the significance of deaths from this cause is increasing (Garnett et al. 1999).

Human activities
There has been conflict between flying-foxes and fruit growers since European settlement in Australia (Tidemann et al. 1997). In the past, the two most common methods of controlling Spectacled Flying-foxes at fruit orchards have been shooting and electrocution (McHold & Spencer 1998).

Unlike ground-dwelling mammals whose populations are isolated and restricted by geographical barriers, flying-foxes have the potential to travel large distances in search of food (Pierson & Rainey 1992). This means that animals feeding at a given orchard cannot be regarded as a separate population. While there are benefits in the movement of animals between populations (e.g., a decline in one geographic area may be offset by immigration from others), there is the danger that culling in a certain area can become a perpetual vacuum that continually draws animals from far afield. Such vacuums are capable of sustaining artificially high mortality rates that would otherwise drive a local colony to extinction. A high cull rate by one orchard, in the absence of any large colonies that could sustain a high rate of mortality (for example, > 200 000 animals) would suggest that this may be happening. Therefore, excessive culling at one orchard may have the potential to exterminate a very large proportion of the estimated number of Spectacled Flying-foxes remaining in the Wet Tropics area (McIlwee & Martin 2002).

The use of electric grids to kill flying-foxes as a way of preventing them from damaging fruit crops has been prohibited in Queensland since 2001. However, grids are not required to be dismantled, and illegal electrocution of Spectacled Flying-foxes continues (Booth 2006).

Inappropriate netting practices
Thin, loose nylon (monofilament) netting can cause a flying-fox to become entangled. Once entangled, flying-foxes become stressed and can break bones and tear wing membranes as they attempt to get free. The monofilament line can cut into the animal causing deep wounds and possibly stopping circulation. These injuries can lead to shock and death, particularly if the individual is trapped in the net for a long period of time. Entangled flying-foxes may be mothers nursing young that are waiting at a nursery roost. These young will starve if the parent cannot return to the roost within a day (Queensland EPA 2005).

Cleft palate syndrome
Cleft palate syndrome involves a large midline defect that extends to the throat, missing or rudimentary thumb and toe claws, general low muscle tone and a whiskery face. The young present their mothers with difficulties in feeding as well as hanging on. Most are abandoned shortly after birth and still have the cord attached and sometimes also the placenta (TBRRI 2006).

While the killing of any threatened species is undesirable, state agencies may permit or license limited shooting of flying-foxes to protect crops.

In 2003–2004, consultations between the Australian Government and Queensland resulted in agreement that the total number of Spectacled Flying-foxes to be killed in the 2003–2004 fruit-growing season would not exceed 1.5% of the agreed national population estimate for the species. This level of authorised shooting was deemed to be unlikely to prejudice the long-term survival or recovery of the Spectacled Flying-fox (DEH 2003d).

In September 2008, the Queensland Government ceased issuing permits to shoot Spectacled and Grey-headed Flying-foxes on the grounds of animal welfare.

The use of non-lethal crop protection, such as netting or the use of deterrents, would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the species under the EPBC Act (DEH 2003d).

Appropriate Netting Practices
The Queensland Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2005) recommends netting with a knitted mesh and a maximum mesh size of 40 mm. White netting is recommended as it stands out against the foliage of the fruit tree, which makes it easier for flying-foxes to see and avoid. The net should be kept taut by building a frame over the tree to support the netting. The Queensland EPA (2005) suggest either the "teepee" or the "frame" methods.

Project: Abating threats to Spectacled Flying-foxes and Mabi habitat
A project funded in 2003 by the Natural Heritage Trust under the Threatened Species Network Community Grants Program was aimed toward the recovery of a critically endangered ecological community, the Mabi forest 'remnant' at Tolga in Far North Queensland; and the Spectacled Flying-fox for which the Mabi forest is key habitat (WWF 2003).

At the commencement of the project, this remnant had been home to the only known maternity colony of Spectacled Flying-foxes on the Atherton tableland for the past six years. Tolga Bat Rescue and Research Inc. worked collaboratively with the local community, landholders and the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Services, and focussed on strategic replanting of canopy species, important for Spectacled Flying-fox roosting, and comprehensive weed control (WWF 2003).

Recommended Recovery Actions
The following recovery information has been reproduced from The Action Plan for Australian Bats (Duncan et al. 1999).

  • Validate methods for estimating population size and demographics.
  • Develop and implement a population monitoring program.
  • Seek funding from orchard industry and relevant government agencies to develop practical and cost effective non-destructive methods for on-crop control.
  • Contingent on the success of the above action, negotiate phasing out of lethal crop protection techniques.
  • Determine the cause of the paralysis tick problem and develop control techniques.
  • Determine efficacy of the care of orphans and their release to the wild as a technique for conservation management.
  • Negotiate conservation agreements for regularly used colonies on private land.

The Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland received $9554 of funding through the Threatened Species Network Community Grants in 2000–01 for the survey of populations to confirm declines in numbers, and to assist in the determination of conservation status to allow for adequate protection.

The Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland received $18 500 of funding through the Threatened Species Network Community Grants in 2001–02 for population census and examination of ways to locate colonies.

Tolga Bat Rescue and Research Inc received $21 000 of funding through the Threatened Species Network Community Grants in 2003–04 for involvement of the community in recovery of this species and abatement of threats.

Wild Tobacco Study
A project partnership between Tolga Bat Rescue and Research Inc. (TBRRI), CSIRO, Tablelands National Park Volunteers, and Queensland National Parks and Wildlife Service, with funding from the Natural Heritage Trust and the Environmental Protection Authority, was undertaken to investigate the occurrence of tick paralysis within Spectacled Flying-foxes and the relationship with the Wild Tobacco plant (TBRRI 2006).

Molecular Modelling
A PhD student from James Cook University (JCU) has completed research on molecular modelling. The project investigated the use of genetic fingerprinting to trace the movements of the Spectacled Flying-fox. Micro-satellite and Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) genetic markers were used to identify individual flying-foxes killed by tick paralysis or in some cases killed in orchards. Some wild-caught bats were also used in the study (TBRRI 2006).

Micro-chipping
The TBRRI began micro-chipping all Spectacled Flying-foxes released back into the wild in December 2002. As of October 2004, 320 bats have been chipped, using bulk ISO chips. Micro-chipping has provided the TBRRI with feedback on the release programme it runs for orphaned bats (TBRRI 2006).

Satellite and Radio-tracking
CSIRO and TBRRI have undertaken work in the Atherton region to trial satellite and radio-tracking collars on Spectacled Flying-foxes (CSIRO 2006; TBRRI 2006), with the aim of improving knowledge on movements and behaviour of the species, and to better comprehend commercial damage done by the species and possible mitigation approaches.

The Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage (2003d) released Administrative Guidelines on Significance - Supplement for the Spectacled Flying-fox, for the 2003–2004 fruit-growing season.

The Department has also published The Action Plan for Australian Bats (Duncan et al. 1999) to assist in the protection of the Spectacled Flying-fox, along with other bat species.

There is a draft national recovery plan in preparation for the Spectacled Flying-fox.

The following table lists known and perceived threats to this species. Threats are based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) threat classification version 1.1.

Threat Class Threatening Species References
Agriculture and Aquaculture:Agriculture and Aquaculture:Land clearing, habitat fragmentation and/or habitat degradation National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Climate Change and Severe Weather:Climate Change and Severe Weather:Habitat changes caused by climate change National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Climate Change and Severe Weather:Habitat Shifting and Alteration:Habitat loss, modification and/or degradation National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Climate Change and Severe Weather:Habitat Shifting and Alteration:Habitat modification, destruction and alteration due to changes in land use patterns National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Climate Change and Severe Weather:Storms and Flooding:Natural events such as storms and cyclones leading to habitat destruction and flora/fauna mortality National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Pteropus conspicillatus in Species Profile and Threats (SPRAT) database (Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH), 2006sz) [Internet].
Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Human induced disturbance due to unspecified activities National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Mechanical disturbance during construction, maintanance or recreational activities National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Human Intrusions and Disturbance:inappropriate conservation measures National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation Solanum mauritianum (Wild Tobacco Tree, Wild Tobacco Bush, Tobacco Tree) National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Infection by parasites National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Presence of pathogens and resulting disease National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:pest animal control Pteropus conspicillatus in Species Profile and Threats (SPRAT) database (Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH), 2006sz) [Internet].
Pollution:Agricultural Effluents:Pesticide application National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Species Stresses:Indirect Species Effects:Low fecundity, reproductive rate and/or poor recruitment Pteropus conspicillatus in Species Profile and Threats (SPRAT) database (Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH), 2006sz) [Internet].
Species Stresses:Species Mortality:Death of vegetation National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Transportation and Service Corridors:Roads and Railroads:Vehicle related mortality National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Transportation and Service Corridors:Utility and Service Lines:Collision with human infrastructure National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Transportation and Service Corridors:Utility and Service Lines:Powerline easement maintenance and construction; mortality due to collision with powerlines National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus (Department of Environment and Resource Management, 2010) [Recovery Plan].
Pteropus conspicillatus in Species Profile and Threats (SPRAT) database (Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH), 2006sz) [Internet].

Australian Museum Business Services (AMBS) (2004a). The Provision of Data for Draft National Fauna Survey Standards: Bats Draft Report to the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage.

Booth, C. (2006). Shocking Queensland: an electric grids update. Australasian Bat Society Newsletter. 26. Australasian Bat Society.

Brice (1998). Is wild tobacco really the source of ticks for Spectacled Flying Foxes?. In: 8th Australasian Bat Conference, Program, Abstracts and Lists of Delegates. Australasian Bat Society.

CSIRO (2006a). Life After Larry-CSIRO searching for missing flying foxes. [Online]. Available from: http://www.csiro.au/news/ps29x.html.

CSIRO - Tropical Forest Research Centre (2006). Spectacled Flying Foxes: Solutions for Management. [Online]. Available from: http://www.tfrc.csiro.au/research/flyingfox/index.html.

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010). National recovery plan for the spectacled flying fox Pteropus conspicillatus. [Online]. Brisbane, Queensland: Department of Environment and Resource Management. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/pteropus-conspicillatus.html.

Department of Natural Rescources and Environment (DNRE) (2002). Bird and Flying-fox Bat Damage to Orchard Fruit: An identification guide.

Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH) (2003d). EPBC Act administrative guidelines on significance supplement for the Spectacled Flying-fox 2003-2004. [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/spectacled-flying-fox.html.

Duncan, A., G.B. Baker & N. Montgomery (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. [Online]. Canberra: Environment Australia. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/action/bats/index.html.

Eby, P., V. Jones, M. Fisher, M. Grahan & M. Smith (2004). The impact of high ambient temperatures on a maternity roost of Grey-headed flying foxes Pteropus poliocephalus. In: Lumsden, L. & G. Ford, eds. 11th Australasian Bat Conference Toowoomba 13th - 16th April 2004. Australasian Bat Society.

Eggert, C. (1994). Is tick paralysis in the Spectacled Flying Fox, Pteropus conspicillatus, related to a change in the foraging behaviour of P. conspicillatus Honours thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore. Hons. Thesis. Lismore: Southern Cross University.

Flannery, T.F. (1995). The mammals of New Guinea. Revised and updated edition. Page(s) 568 pp. Chatswood, N.S.W: Reed Books.

Freeman, A. (2003). Monitoring Report on the Annual Spectacled Flying Fox Census 2003. Atherton, Queensland: Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service.

Garnett, S.T., O.A. Whybird & H.G. Spencer (1999). Conservation status of the Spectacled Flying-fox Pteropus conspicillatus. Australian Zoologist. 31:38-54.

Hall, L. & G. Richards (2000). Flying foxes: Fruit and Blosson Bats of Australia. Sydney, NSW: University of NSW.

Hall, L.S. (1995). Bare-backed Fruit-bat Dobsonia moluccensis. In: Strahan, R, ed. The Mammals of Australia. Page(s) 430-431. Chatswood, NSW: Reed Books.

Johnson, A. (1994). Flying Foxes in Coolite Boxes. Newsletter of North Queensland Naturalists Club. 197:18-21.

McHold, M. & H. Spencer (1998). Assessment of control measures employed by exotic fruit farmers against crop attack by flying foxes. In: Australian Tropical Research Foundation Publication. 10. Australian Tropical Research Foundation.

McIlwee, A.P. & I.L. Martin (2002). On the intrinsic capacity for increase of Australian flying-foxes. Australian Zoologist. 32(1).

Parsons J., A. Cairns, C. Johnson, S. Robson, L.A. Shilton & D.A. Westcott (2006). Diet variation in Spectacled Flying Foxes (Pteropus conspicillatus) in the Wet Tropics of Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology. 54:417-26.

Pierson, E.D. & W.E. Rainey (1992). The biology of flying foxes of the genus Pteropus: A Review. In: Wilson, D.E & G.L Graham, eds. Pacific Island Flying Foxes: Proceedings of an International Conservation Conference. Page(s) 1-17. US Department of the Interior- Biological Report no. 90.

Pierson, E.D., T. Elmqvist, W. E. Rainey & P. A. Cox (1996). Effects of Tropical Cyclonic Storms on Flying Fox Populations on the South Pacific Islands of Samoa. Conservation Biology. 10(2): 438-451.

Queensland Environment protection Agency (Queensland EPA) (2005). Living with Wildlife. Flying-foxes - netting fruit trees. [Online]. Available from: http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_conservation/wildlife/living_with_wildlife/flyingfoxes/netting_fruit_trees/.

Ratcliffe, F.N. (1931). The flying fox (Pteropus) in Australia. CSIRO Bulletin. 52:1-133.

Richards, G.C. (1987). Aspects of the Ecology of Spectacled Flying-foxes, Pteropus conspicillatus (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae) in Tropical Queensland. Australian Mammalogy. 10 (2):87-88.

Richards, G.C. (1990). The Spectacled Flying-fox, Pteropus conspicillatus (Chiroptera: Pteropididae), in north Queensland, 1.Roost sites and distribution patterns. Australian Mammalogy. 13:1-22.

Richards, GC & HJ Spencer (1998). Spectacled Flying-fox, Pteropus conspicillatus (Gould, 1850). In: Strahan, R, ed. The Mammals of Australia.

Shilton, L.A., P.J. Latch, A. McKeown, P. Pert & D.A. Westcott (2008). Landscape-scale redistribution of a highly mobile threatened species, Pteropus conspicillatus (Chiroptera, Pteropodidae), in response to Tropical Cyclone Larry. Austral Ecology. 33:549-561.

Spencer, H.J., B.H. Flick & A. Johnson (1992). Infestation of a spectacled flying fox (Pteropus conscpicillatus) colony by paralysis ticks (Ixodes holocylus) in far north Queensland. In: 22nd Annual North American Symposium on Bat Research, Quebec, Canada, 1992.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2002). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Pteropus conspicullatus (Spectacled Flying-fox). [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/p-conspicillatus.html.

Tidemann, C.R., S.L. Nelson & G.Jamieson (1997). Flying-fox damage to orchard fruit in Australia-incidence, extent and economic impact. Australian Biologist. 10:179-186.

Tolga Bat Rescue and Research Inc. (TBRRI) (2006). Flying Fox Research Projects. Viewed 16 March 2006. [Online]. Available from: http://www.tolgabathospital.org/research_home.htm.

Van Tassel, T. (1995). To save the spectacled flying fox. Bats. 1:13-15.

Webb, N.J. & C. R. Tidemann (1996). Mobility of Australian Flying-Foxes, Pteropus spp. (Megachiroptera): Evidence from Genetic Variation. Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 263 (1369):497-502.

Williamson, A. & C. Williamson (1995). The story of 071-83111. Newsletter of Friends of the Far North Flying Foxes. 3:4-5.

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) (2003). TSN - Community Grants Examples, Queensland: Abating threats to spectacled flying foxes and Mabi habitat. Viewed 14th March 2006. [Online]. Available from: http://www.wwf.org.au/ourwork/species/tsngrantsexamples/.

EPBC Act email updates can be received via the Communities for Communities newsletter and the EPBC Act newsletter.

This database is designed to provide statutory, biological and ecological information on species and ecological communities, migratory species, marine species, and species and species products subject to international trade and commercial use protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). It has been compiled from a range of sources including listing advice, recovery plans, published literature and individual experts. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of the information, no guarantee is given, nor responsibility taken, by the Commonwealth for its accuracy, currency or completeness. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this database. The information contained in this database does not necessarily represent the views of the Commonwealth. This database is not intended to be a complete source of information on the matters it deals with. Individuals and organisations should consider all the available information, including that available from other sources, in deciding whether there is a need to make a referral or apply for a permit or exemption under the EPBC Act.

Citation: Department of the Environment (2014). Pteropus conspicillatus in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Sun, 13 Jul 2014 16:05:49 +1000.