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 Neophoca cinerea (Australian Sea-lion) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2012ab) [Listing Advice].
|Recovery Plan Decision||
Recovery Plan required, included on the Commenced List (1/11/2009).
|Adopted/Made Recovery Plans||
Recovery Plan for the Australian Sea Lion (Neophoca cinerea) (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC), 2013h) [Recovery Plan].
|Other EPBC Act Plans||
Threat abatement plan for the impacts of marine debris on vertebrate marine life (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), 2009t) [Threat Abatement Plan].
|Policy Statements and Guidelines||
Marine bioregional plan for the South-west Marine Region (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC), 2012z) [Admin Guideline].
Australian Sea Lion Management Strategy. Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF) (Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA), 2010) [Information Sheet].
National Strategy to Address Interactions between Humans and Seals: Fisheries, Aquaculture and Tourism (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 2007a) [Information Sheet].
National Assessment of Interactions between Humans and Seals: Fisheries, Aquaculture and Tourism (Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF), 2007b) [Information Sheet].
Effectiveness of the Great Australian Bight Marine Park in protecting the Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) from by-catch mortality in shark gillnets (Hamer, D.J., T.M. Ward, S.D. Goldworthy & P.D. Shaughnessy, 2009) [Information Sheet].
Science for Decision Makers: Managing Interactions between Humans and Seals (Stevenson, C., N. Bensley & R. Tilzey, 2008) [Information Sheet].
Federal Register of
Declaration under section 248 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 - List of Marine Species (Commonwealth of Australia, 2000c) [Legislative Instrument].
Inclusion of species in the list of threatened species under section 178 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (31/01/2005) (Australian Sea-lion) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2005k) [Legislative Instrument].
|State Listing Status||
|Non-statutory Listing Status||
|Scientific name||Neophoca cinerea |
This is an indicative distribution map of the present distribution of the species based on best available knowledge. See map caveat for more information.
Scientific name: Neophoca cinerea
Common name: Australian Sea-lion
This species is conventionally accepted as Neophoca cinerea Péron (AFD 2008).
Neophoca is a monospecific genus (only one species within the genus). A review of the systematics of all fur-seals and sea-lions based on cranial characters indicated that the nearest relative of the Australian Sea-lion is the New Zealand Sea-lion Phocarctos hookeri (Brunner 2000).
The Australian Sea-lion has a blunt snout, with small tightly rolled external ears. Males have dark blackish to chocolate brown fur with a whitish crown of the head and nape of the neck, whilst females are more silvery-grey above and yellow to cream below. Males can become very large, 185–225 cm in length and weighing 180–250 kg. Females are smaller, 130–185 cm at in length and weighing 65–100 kg. Pups are chocolate brown in colour with a pale fawn crown until they moult at about two months of age. After moulting, a juvenile's coat is similar to that of an adult female (Van Dyck & Strahan 2008).
The Australian Sea-lion is the only pinniped endemic to Australia (Strahan 1983). The breeding range extends from Houtman Abrolhos, Western Australia (WA), to The Pages Island, east of Kangaroo Island, South Australia (SA). The species has also been recorded at Shark Bay, WA; the New South Wales coast; southern Tasmania; and Victoria (Kirkwood et al. 1992, 1999; Ling 1992; Llewellyn et al. 1994; Warneke 1995b).
Breeding colonies occur on islands or remote sections of coastline. Lone or small numbers of animals will regularly visit known haul-out sites and occasionally visit other locations. The widespread distribution of small colonies may offer the advantage of minimising competition in areas for limited trophic resources (Shaughnessy 1999). Overall, 66 breeding colonies have been recorded to date: 28 in WA and 38 in SA (Shaughnessy 1999).
The Australian Sea-lion exhibits high site fidelity and little movement of females between colonies has been observed. There is little or no interchange of females between breeding colonies, even between those separated by short distances (Campbell et al. 2008). Also, it has been suggested that each breeding colony on the west coast of Australia could be considered a distinct management unit due to the low gene flow between even quite closely located colonies (Campbell 2003, 2005). Site fidelity has implications to the risk of local extinction, especially at sites with low population numbers.
Historical records indicate that the former range of the species extended to Bass Strait, particularly Clarke Island and adjacent islands in the Furneaux Group (Warneke 1982). The small population on the Abrolhos Island off the west coast of WA is thought to have been more extensive before the arrival of Europeans. Also, the north and east coasts of Kangaroo Island, SA, and islands near Perth and Albany, WA, previously had breeding sites (Flinders 1814; Gales et al. 1994).
Surveys of known breeding sites of the Australian Sea-lion between 1987–1995 by Gales and colleagues (1994) and Dennis and Shaughnessy (1996) estimate an overall population of between 9900 to 12 500 animals with a mean of 11 200. Of these, 2590 were pups. The estimated population numbers make the Australian Sea-lion the rarest pinniped in the world (Campbell et al. 2008). About 30% of the population occurs at sites in WA and 70% in SA. Forty-two percent of the total known population occurs at the three largest colonies east of Port Lincoln, at the eastern limit of the species known range (Gales et al. 1994).
The Australian Sea-lion is neither increasing in population numbers or expanding its range (DAFF 2007b). Due to the species long breeding cycle (17.6 months) the time required to increase population size is longer than for species with shorter breeding cycles (Orsini & Newsome 2005). In addition, there is evidence of a reduction in the numbers of breeding sites along the greater Perth metropolitan coastline area (Campbell 2005), and along Victorian annd Tasmanian coastline (Campbell et al. 2008).
An analysis of pup production at the Seal Bay colony on Kangaroo Island, SA, indicates a rate of decrease of 0.77% per year (12% decline between 1985–2003) (Shaughnessy et al. 2006). There is also evidence of declining pup production at some of the smaller colonies in WA and SA (Shaughnessy et al. 2005), though the extent of decline is unknown. It is recorded that at 60% of the breeding sites, fewer than 25 pups are produced annually. This figure is indicative of the historical subpopulation declines (DEWHA 2010p).
Smaller populations are highly vulnerable to extinction especially in the context of loss to fisheries bycatch and the high site fidelity of females (Goldsworthy et al. 2010).
Australian Sea-lions use a wide variety of habitats (Gales et al.1994) for breeding sites (called rookeries) and, during the non-breeding season, for haul-out sites (rest stops, which are also useful for predator avoidance, thermal regulation and social activity) (Campbell 2005). Onshore habitats used include exposed islands and reefs, rocky terrain, sandy beaches and vegetated fore dunes and swales. They also use caves and deep cliff overhangs as haul-out sites or breeding habitat (Dennis & Shaughnessy 1996, 1999).
Most colonies occur on islands, however several small colonies occur on the mainland, including:
- Point Labatt, SA (King & Marlow 1979)
- Baxter Cliffs, west of Twilight Cove, WA (referred to as Thundulda by Warneke 1982)
- Bunda Cliffs, Great Australian Bight, SA and WA borders (nine small breeding colonies discovered at the base) (Dennis & Shaughnessy 1996).
Australian Sea-lions prefers the sheltered side of islands and avoids exposed rocky headlands that are preferred by the New Zealand Fur Seal (Arctocephalus forsteri). Islands used on the southern coast of WA and SA are comprised either of igneous or metamorphic rock, or of igneous platforms below limestone caps. An important feature of colony sites used for breeding are shallow, protected pools in which pups congregate. On the west coast of WA they breed on low-lying limestone islands which are well protected by perimeter reefs (Gales et al. 1994).
Shelter, in the form of holes in rock or vegetation, is important for adult females to hide their pups. Bushes such as Nitraria schoberi are preferred if available (Gales et al. 1994). However, the largest colonies (Dangerous Reef and The Pages Island) occur where there is little protection available and where most pups are born on open ground.
Over much of the Australian Sea-lion's range, the marine environment is characterised by shallow on-shelf waters (less than 200 m deep) of low productivity. It is primarily influenced by the Leeuwin Current which feeds warm, nutrient impoverished waters southwards along the west coast of Australia and then eastward along the south coast. This current acts as a barrier to the rich subantarctic waters and the region has been described as one of the most nutrient poor marine environments in the world (Gales et al. 1994). During winter, the prevailing winds along southern Australia are westerly and enhances the strength of the Leeuwin Current, allowing it to reach its eastern extremity. During summer, the high pressure weather systems that dominate the southern coast of Australia cause consistent south-east winds that have the effect of blocking, and in some cases reversing, the flow of the eastward moving Leeuwin Current. This blocking and reversing of flow facilitates minor upwellings of relatively nutrient rich, cool water. These influences of seasonal changes in current result in more productive waters in the eastern part of the sea-lion's range. The bias in population density of the sea-lion towards the east is also seen in the New Zealand Fur Seal, which has a similar overall range in Australia (Shaughnessy et al. 1994).
Australian Sea-lions commonly reach 8–9 years of age, with a maximum age of 12+ years (Stirling 1972). Females show a high level of natal site fidelity, only breeding at the site where they were born (DEWHA 2010p). In captivity, females first enter oestrus and mate when 4–5 years old (Langdon 1987) and a male has been recorded as successfully mating at 3–3.5 years old (Ling & Guy 2007).
The species has an asynchronous 17.5 month breeding cycle across its known range (Campbell 2003). The pupping season can extend for between five and seven months (Gales et al. 1992b; Shaughnessy et al. 2006). Associated with the longer pupping interval present in this species is a longer period of embryonic diapause of four to five months, and a prolonged post-implantation period of up to 14 months (Gales et al. 1997). Adult females haul-out a day or two before giving birth and leave 10 days later to forage at sea (Higgins & Gass 1993). They have their first pups on an average of 4.5 years of age (Higgins 1990).
A strong bond is established between a female and her pup, sometimes lasting from a year (Strahan 1983) to 40 months (Higgins & Gass 1993). Both males and females are very territorial during the breeding season, often becoming aggressive. When this aggression is directed towards pups it can contribute significantly to their mortality (Strahan 1983).
At birth, pups weigh between 6.4–7.9 kg, and are 62–68 cm long (King 1983; Walker & Ling 1981). Females nurse pups for approximately 15–18 months until the next pup is born. If however, a pup is not born in consecutive breeding seasons, many females will nurse existing pups for longer. Females forage for up to two days away from pups, and foraging trips increase in frequency gradually during lactation. Shore attendance bouts were about 1.5 days. This pattern continues until pups are weaned (Higgins & Gass 1993).
Mortality of pups
Mortality of pups can be high and is related to environmental conditions at colonies, attacks by males of the species, nutritional stress (malnutrition), disease or illness (Campbell 2005). For pups on islands on the west coast of WA, the mortality rate for the first five months varied from 7.1% to 24.3%, depending on whether pupping occurred in summer or winter, respectively. It has been suggested that this higher winter mortality rate is linked to the Leeuwin Current, as the flow is strongest during winter and brings warmer water and less food supply (Gales et al. 1992b). At Seal Bay, attacks on pups by territorial bulls accounted for 19% of pup mortality during two breeding seasons (Higgins & Tedman 1990). In the first two years of life, mortality is estimated at 40–50% for Australian Sea-lion pups (Higgins 1990).
Adult male behaviour
Some male Australian Sea-lions congregate in bachelor colonies on islands adjacent to the Perth metropolitan region during the non-breeding season and migrate up to 280 km north each breeding season (Gales et al. 1992b). There is little or no movement of females between breeding colonies. Males defend harems of a few females at high density breeding sites, but only one at a time at less dense colonies (Van Dyck & Strahan 2008). The location of all-male or ‘bachelor’ haul-out sites are known.
Australian Sea-lions feed on a wide variety of prey, including cephalopods, fish, sharks, rock lobsters and sea birds (Gales & Cheal 1992; Ling 1992). There is little quantitative information on their diet as only a few hard parts are normally found in the faeces of this species (Gales & Cheal 1992), although the species is known to 'feed' at fishing boats on scraps or by taking fish off lines. Australian Sea-lions in western WA spend more time foraging compared to those in SA due to the less productive conditions of the Leeuwin Current (Lowther et al. 2013).
Radio transmitter and time-depth recorder studies of Australian Sea-lions at Seal Bay found that nursing females were benthic feeders on the continental shelf approximately 20–30 km offshore, in depths less than 150 m (Costa et al. 1988, 1990). While at sea, females and juveniles dive almost continually through the day and night. Young sea lions (approximately 7–18 months old) have been recorded foraging in depths up to 60 m and range up to 10 km from their birth colony (Fowler & Costa 2004 cited in Campbell 2005). Less is known about males’ feeding behaviour, but they are recorded to dive deeper. The inshore breeding and foraging habitat of this species is responsible for interactions with fisheries and aquaculture (Gales 2008).
Dispersal of young appears to be self limited in this species, as females show strong natal site fidelity to maximise breeding potential due to the asynchronous nature of their breeding cycles (Campbell et al. 2008). Females' movements appear to be no greater than 60 km from their natal site (Campbell et al. 2008). Males disperse approximately 200 km from natal sites (Campbell 2003). Dispersal mode is reflected in the high levels of genetic differentiation found in colonies of Australian Sea-lions over relatively short distances (Campbell 2003).
Adult females have been recorded to move pups away from the natal area to other haul-out areas to continue nursing when pups, at approximately 2–3 months of age, can make short distance movements (Higgins & Gass 1993).
Migration of adult and juvenile males has been recorded on the west coast of WA between breeding colonies in the Jurien Bay area and non-breeding sites on islands near Perth (Gales et al. 1992b).
Historic hunting and sealing
Historically, the main anthropogenic threat to the Australian Sea-lion was hunting and overharvest through sealing activities (AFMA 2010). Although this activity was stopped in the 1920s, the sea lion population has not recovered to pre-exploitation levels (AFMA 2010). Early sealers left few records of the identity, distribution and abundance of sea lion colonies from which to draw comparisons with the sea lion colonies today (Ling 2002 cited in AFMA 2010).
Commercial fishing impacts
Interaction with bottom-set gillnet fisheries
South Australian populations of the Australian Sea-lion occur entirely in the Gillnet and Shark Hook Sector of the Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF). Detailed ecological risk assessments have been undertaken in the SESSF to assess the risks that fishing poses on ecological sustainability of the marine environment (AFMA 2010). It was found that of the seal species in the SESSF, the Australian Sea-lion was at greatest risk due to its small population size, complex breeding and high mortality rate of populations (AFMA 2010).
Evidence that supports the bycatch mortality of Australian Sea-lions in the SESSF gillnet fishery, includes (Goldsworthy et al. 2010):
- anecdotal reports from fishers of bycatch
- high incidence of Australian Sea-lion entanglement in gillnetting material at Seal Bay
- overlap between historic and current fishing effort with modeled Australian Sea-lion foraging distributions
- the very limited ability of Australian Sea-lion subpopulations to withstand additional mortality rates
- a detailed assessment of the potential risk posed by Australian Sea-lion populations from bycatch in gillnet fisheries
- increasing pup production and population recovery at Dangerous Reef that coincides with the closure of the Commonwealth gillnet fishery in southern Spencer Gulf in 2001.
Goldsworthy and colleagues (2010) completed an assessment of the risks to the Australian Sea-lion from the gillnet sector of the SESSF. The study estimated that approximately 374 Australian Sea-lions are removed as bycatch each breeding cycle. Population viability analysis indicated that the capacity for the species to recover would increase if the bycatch of adult females was reduced (Goldsworthy et al. 2010). This mortality rate was modelled from an observed 12 mortalities (AFMA 2010). The majority of observed interactions within the gillnet sector (73%) occurred within a 12.5 km range of the colonies, however modelling predicted that most interactions would be within a 60 km range with some interactions occurring as far as 130 km from colonies (Goldsworth et al 2010).
The Australian Fisheries Management Authority's (AFMA) Shark Resource Assessment Group have raised concerns regarding the modelling that underpinned the bycatch estimates that Goldsworthy and colleagues produced (AFMA 2010). There were particular concerns about observer effort occurring in low fishing effort areas, rather than the high fishing effort areas (AFMA 2010). Similarly, an AFMA observer program recorded substantially lower rates of 0.004 sea lions per kilometre net set compared to a 0.013 rate observed by Goldsworthy and colleagues (2010) (AFMA 2010).
Drowning in lobster pots
Young sea-lions have been recorded to drown in Southern Rock Lobster (Jasus edwardsii) pots (Gales et al. 1992b) and are attracted to bait, caught lobsters and discarded bait (Goldsworthy et al. 2010). There is limited quantitative data on the level of mortality of Australian Sea-lions through entrapment (Goldsworthy et al. 2010). Published reports suggest that most incidental mortality occurs around breeding colonies, haul-out sites and breeding colonies, particularly in shallow water (Campbell 2005; Goldsworthy et al. 2010).
Entanglement in fishing gear
Entanglement in fishing gear (and in other man-made debris) can cause drowning. In a review of the problem in SA, Robinson and Dennis (1988) refer particularly to entanglement in monofilament netting of 150 mm mesh, which is used in the bottom-set gill-net shark fishery. Australian Sea-lions (and New Zealand Fur-seals) also interact with nets at tuna farms near Port Lincoln, where some become entangled in nets. Modifications to existing nets, including increasing tension on them, and adding bottom nets and top nets were suggested as methods to alleviate this impact (Pemberton 1996b). Page and colleagues (2004) found that industry and government attempts to reduce the problem did not succeed, and calculated that annually between 64 and 146 Australian Sea-lions died from entanglement, though this figure could be much higher due to observational methodology limitations (Page et al. 2004).
Due to the broad diet of Australian Sea-lions, direct competition with commercial fishers is probably limited. However, Australian Sea-lions rob lobster pots and nets set for schooling shark, and take Australian salmon and herring from nets set from shore on the south coast of WA (Shaughnessy 1999). This can lead to illegal shooting of "trouble" seals by commercial fishers (Campbell 2005).
Other threats to the Australian Sea-lion include:
- Tourism, centered on nine known haul-out sites in SA and WA, was found to increase the state of vigilance in Australian Sea-lions and to invoke a retreat from sites with increased human disturbance (Orsini 2004). Long-term effects of human disturbance include physiological stress, excessive time spent at sea, and possible abandonment of the haul-out sites. These effects have been displayed in other pinnipeds (Orsini 2004).
- The White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) viewing industry attracts sharks to known colonies with the potential to increase the mortality of Australian Sea-lions (Shaughnessy 1999).
- Occasional epidemics (i.e. morbillivirus) have occurred where up to 50% of an entire pinniped population has died (for example, European Harbour Seals (Phoca vitulina)) (Dietz et al. 1989 cited in Campbell 2005; Jensen et al. 2002 cited in Campbell 2005).
- Large scale mortality events have also occurred in populations of Galapagos Islands pinnipeds during El Niño weather conditions, due to increased water temperature and decreased prey abundance, although it is unknown what climate conditions would impact the Australian Sea-lion (Trillmich & Limberger 1985 cited in Campbell 2005).
- While the population size of the Australia Sea-lion is stationary or possibly decreasing, the New Zealand Fur-seal has been increasing (Shaughnessy et al. 1994), thus indicating potential competition of resources.
- Pollution from oil spills, sewage, land run-off and toxic contaminants that may bioaccumulate
Australian Sea-lion Management Strategy
The Australian Sea-lion Management Strategy (AFMA 2010) has been developed to reduce and monitor interactions between Australian Sea-lions and gillnets used by Commonwealth shark fishers in the SESSF. A number of actions have been identified to reduce the impact of fishing on Australian Sea-lions, including (AFMA 2010):
- fishing effort reductions (60% reduction since the peak in 1987, although current levels are 40% greater than effort in 1983)
- area closures (27 of the 48 SA colonies are in closed areas; minimum closures around all colonies and enhanced protection of higher vulnerability colonies were scheduled to be implemented in 2010)
- gear restrictions (smaller mesh sizes and investigation into increased hook effort)
- bycatch and discard work plan developed
- identification guides
- increased observer coverage
- electronic monitoring programs.
Australian Southern Rock Lobster industry
Australian Sea-lion exclusion devices have been installed in WA and SA lobster grounds. These devices consist of a collar around the neck of the pot that prevents entry of Australian Sea-lions, but does not impede the target species (Goldsworthy et al. 2010). Other devices include a steel spike attached to the base of the pot that rises to the neck of the pot (Goldsworthy et al. 2010).
SA marine parks
In 2009, the SA government declared the boundaries of 19 multiple use marine parks. These parks occur throughout SA's State waters and include a number of zones, including sanctuaries, that will encompass Australian Sea-lion feeding areas (Government of South Australian 2009). Public consultation is ongoing to finalise the boundaries of sanctuaries and other zones (Government of South Australia 2011a).
Commonwealth Conservation Advice
The Commonwealth Conservation Advice (TSSC 2005bw) identifies the development of a recovery plan as a high priority for the Australian Sea-lion, as the full range of threats to the species requires investigation. The Advice suggests that the greatest benefit to the Australian Sea-lion, in the short term, will be achieved through an expeditious reduction of mortality caused by fisheries operations and entanglement with marine debris (TSSC 2005bw).
Priority recovery and threat abatement actions identified in the Advice (TSSC 2005bw) include:
- Conduct further research and monitoring of the species to clarify the key threats.
- Protect existing breeding habitats.
- Minimise the interactions between Australian Sea-lions and fishing operations (e.g. gill net, long line, drop line and lobster and cray pot fisheries).
- Collect mandatory reporting data.
- Identify populations most affected.
- Utilise Seal Exclusion Devices, or other modified gear to exclude Australian Sea-lions.
- Use plastic-free bait boxes.
- Minimise the interactions between Australian Sea-lions and aquaculture operations.
- Establish reporting protocols for interaction between Australian Sea-lions and aquaculture in co-operation with States and Industry.
- Avoid Australian Sea-lion colonies when siting new fishing operations.
- Use enclosures which cannot be breached by sea-lions or seals.
- Monitor recruitment, entanglement and mortality of the species to determine effectiveness of management policies.
Marine Bioregional Plans
Marine Bioregional Plans outline priority conservation measures for large areas of offshore marine zones. The plans identify biodiversity values of the region and goals for establishing marine protected areas. Areas relevant to the Australian Sea-lion, that have had Marine Bioregional Plans developed, include the North (DEWHA 2008), North-west (DEWHA 2008b), East (DEWHA 2008m) and South-west (DEWHA 2008a) areas.
National Seal Strategy
A National Seal Strategy (DAFF 2007a) has been developed that aims to address issues arising from interactions between pinnipeds and humans (fisheries and tourism). The main focus of the strategy outlines objectives and actions for the minimisation and mitigation of impacts between pinnipeds and humans. The strategy (DAFF 2007a) also has a background document (DAFF 2007b) that is an assessment of interactions between pinnipeds and humans, and there is also a fact sheet that summarises the strategy and the assessment (Stevenson et al. 2008).
Marine bioregional plans have been developed for four of Australia's marine regions - South-west, North-west, North and Temperate East. Marine Bioregional Plans will help improve the way decisions are made under the EPBC Act, particularly in relation to the protection of marine biodiversity and the sustainable use of our oceans and their resources by our marine-based industries. Marine Bioregional Plans improve our understanding of Australia's oceans by presenting a consolidated picture of the biophysical characteristics and diversity of marine life. They describe the marine environment and conservation values of each marine region, set out broad biodiversity objectives, identify regional priorities and outline strategies and actions to address these priorities. Click here for more information about marine bioregional plans.
The Australian Sea Lion has been identified as a conservation value in the South-west Marine Region. See Schedule 2 of the South-west Marine Bioregional Plan (DSEWPaC 2012z) for regional advice. Maps of Biologically Important Areas have been developed for Australian sea lion in the South-west Marine Region and may provide additional relevant information. Go to the conservation values atlas to view the locations of these Biologically Important Areas. The "species group report card - pinnipeds" for the South-west Marine Region provides additional information.
Management documentation for the Australian Sea-lion includes:
- Australian Sea Lion Management Strategy (AFMA 2010)
- National Strategy to Address Interactions between Humans and Seals (DAFF 2007a, 2007b)
- North-West Marine Bioregional Plan (DEWHA 2008b)
- South-West Marine Bioregional Plan (DEWHA 2008a)
- East Marine Bioregional Plan (DEWHA 2009m)
- North Marine Bioregional Plan (DEWHA 2008)
- The Action Plan for Australian Seals (Shaughnessy 1999).
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|
|Biological Resource Use:Fishing and Harvesting Aquatic Resources:Overfishing, competition with fishing operations and overfishing of prey fishing||Commonwealth Listing Advice on Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bx) [Listing Advice].|
|Pollution:Garbage and Solid Waste:Ingestion and entanglement with marine debris||Commonwealth Listing Advice on Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bx) [Listing Advice].|
|Species Stresses:Indirect Species Effects:Low numbers of individuals||Commonwealth Listing Advice on Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bx) [Listing Advice].|
Australian Faunal Directory (AFD) (2008). Neophoca cinerea (Péron, 1816) Australian Sea Lion. [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/abrs/online-resources/fauna/afd/taxa/Neophoca_cinerea. [Accessed: 11-May-2010].
Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) (2010). Australian Sea Lion Management Strategy. Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Fishery (SESSF). [Online]. Canberra: AFMA. Available from: http://www.afma.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/sea_lion_management_strategy_2010.pdf.
Brunner, S. (2000). Cranial morphometrics of fur seals and sea lions (Family: Otariidae) - systematics, geographic variation and growth. Ph.D. Thesis. Sydney: University of Sydney.
Campbell, R. (2005). Historical distribution and abundance of the Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea) on the west coast of Western Australia. Fisheries Research Report no. 148. Department of Fisheries, Western Australia.
Campbell, R.A. (2003). Demography and genetic population structure of the Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea). Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Zoology, University of Western Australia.
Campbell, R.A., N.J. Gales, G.M. Lento & C.S. Baker (2008). Islands in the sea: extreme female natal site fidelity in the Australian sea lion, Neophoca cinerea. Biology Letters. 23:139-142.
Costa, D.P., L.D. Rea, M. Kretzmann & P.H. Thorson (1990). Seasonal changes in the diving pattern and energetics of the Australian sea lion, Neophoca cinerea. Page(s) 10. South Australia, Department of the Environment.
Costa, D.P., M. Kretzmann, P. Thorson & L. Higgins (1988). At-sea energetics, diving behavior and milk composition of Australian sea lions, Neophoca cinerea, at Seal Bay, Kangaroo Island, South Australia: report of activities carried out during July and August 1988. Page(s) 14. South Australia, Department of the Environment.
Dennis, T.E. & P.D. Shaughnessy (1996). Status of the Australian sea lion, Neophoca cinerea, in the Great Australian Bight. Wildlife Research. 23:741-754.
Dennis, T.E. & P.D. Shaughnessy (1999). Seal survey in the Great Australian Bight region of Western Australia. Wildlife Research. 26:383-388.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) (2007a). National Strategy to Address Interactions between Humans and Seals: Fisheries, Aquaculture and Tourism. [Online]. Canberra: DAFF. Available from: http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/544284/seal-strategy.pdf.
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) (2007b). National Assessment of Interactions between Humans and Seals: Fisheries, Aquaculture and Tourism. [Online]. Canberra: DAFF. Available from: http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/159381/sealassessment.pdf.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008). The North Marine Bioregional Plan: Bioregional Profile: A Description of the Ecosystems, Conservation Values and Uses of the North Marine Region. [Online]. Canberra: DEWHA. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/north-marine-bioregional-plan-bioregional-profile-description-ecosystems-conservation.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008a). The South-West Marine Bioregional Plan: Bioregional Profile: A Description of the Ecosystems, Conservation Values and Uses of the South-West Marine Region. [Online]. Canberra: DEWHA. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/south-west-marine-bioregional-plan-bioregional-profile-description-ecosystems-conservation.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008b). North-West Marine Bioregional Plan: Bioregional Profile: A Description of the Ecosystems, Conservation Values and Uses of the North-West Marine Region. [Online]. Canberra: DEWHA. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/publications/north-west/bioregional-profile.html.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2009m). The East Marine Bioregional Plan, Bioregional Profile: A Description of the Ecosystems, Conservation Values and Uses of the East Marine Region. [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/publications/east/pubs/bioregional-profile.pdf.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2010p). Draft Recovery Plan for the Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea). [Online]. DEWHA, Commonwealth of Australia. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/pubs/sea-lion-draft-recovery-plan.pdf.
Flinders, M. (1814). A voyage to Terra Australis. London: Nicol.
Gales, N.J. & Cheal, A.J. (1992). Estimating diet composition of the Australian sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) from scat analysis: an unreliable technique. Wildlife Research. 19:447-456.
Gales, N.J., A.J. Cheal, G.J. Pobar & P. Williamson (1992b). Breeding biology and movements of Australian sea-lions, Neophoca cinerea, off the west coast of Western Australia. Wildlife Research. 19:405-416.
Gales, N.J., P. Williamson, L.V. Higgins, M.A. Blackberry & I. James (1997). Evidence for a prolonged post-implantation period in the Australian sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea). Journal of Reproduction and Fertility. 111:159-63.
Gales, N.J., P.D. Shaughnessy & T.E. Dennis (1994). Distribution, abundance and breeding cycle of the Australian sea lion Neophoca cinerea (Mammalia: Pinnipedia). Journal of Zoology, London. 234:353-370.
Goldsworthy, S.D., B. Page, P.D. Shaughnessy & A. Linnae (2010). Mitigating Seal Interactions in the SRLF and the Gillnet Sector SESSF in South Australia. FRDC Project Number: 2007/041. Final Report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation.
Government of South Australia (2009). South Australia's Marine Parks Network. Marine Parks.
Government of South Australia (2011a). Government Submission to the Marine Parks Select Committee.
Hamer, D.J., T.M. Ward, S.D. Goldworthy & P.D. Shaughnessy (2009). Effectiveness of the Great Australian Bight Marine Park in protecting the Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea) from by-catch mortality in shark gillnets. [Online]. Report to Great Australian Bight Marine Park Steering Committee. SARDI Aquatic Sciences. Publication No. F2009/000227-1, SARDI Research Report Series No. 357. West Beach, South Australia: SARDI. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/gab/sea-lion.html.
Higgins, L.V. (1990). Reproductive behavior and maternal investment of Australian sea lions. Ph.D. Thesis. Santa Cruz: University of California.
Higgins, L.V. & L. Gass (1993). Birth to weaning: parturition, duration of lactation, and attendance cycles of Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinerea). Canadian Journal of Zoology. 71:2047-2055.
Higgins, L.V. & R.A. Tedman (1990). Effect of attacks by male Australian sea lions, Neophoca cinerea, on mortality of pups. Journal of Mammalogy. 71: 617-619.
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (2010). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. [Online]. Available from: http://www.iucnredlist.org.
King, J.B. & B.J. Marlow (1979). Australian sea lion. In: Mammals in the seas, FAO Fisheries Series, No. 5, Vol. 2. Page(s) 13-15. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.
King, J.E. (1983). Seals of the World. Page(s) 240. London: British Museum (Natural History).
Kirkwood, R., D. Pemberton & G. Copson (1992). The conservation and management of seals in Tasmania. Page(s) 48. Hobart: Department of Parks, Wildlife and Heritage.
Kirkwood, R., J. Hibble & I. Jerret (1999). An Australian sea lion on Phillip Island, Victoria. Victorian Naturalist. 116: 98-101.
Langdon, D. (1987). Captive breeding of the Australian sea-lion at Adelaide Zoo. In: Marine Mammal Symposium, Sydney, August 1987.
Ling, J.K. (1992). Neophoca cinerea. Mammalian Species. 392:1-7.
Ling, J.K. & M. Guy (2007). Breeding age of a captive male Australian sea lion, Neophoca cinera at the Adelaide Zoo. Australian Mammalogy. 29:101-2.
Llewellyn, L., M. Ellis, J. Martin & A. Ferguson (1994). Atlas of New South Wales wildlife: marine mammals and reptiles. Page(s) 26. Hurstville: NSW NPWS.
Lowther, A.D., R.G. Harcourt & S.D. Goldsworthy (2013). Regional variation in trophic ecology of adult female Australian sea lions inferred from stable isotopes in whiskers. Wildlife Research. 40:303-311.
Orsini, J-P. (2004). Human Impacts on Australian Sea-lions, Neophoca cinerea, hauled out on Carnac Island (Perth:Western Australia):implications for wildlife and tourism management. Ph.D. Thesis. School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University.
Orsini, J-P. & D. Newsome (2005). Human perception of hauled out Australian sea lions (Neophoca cinera) and implications for management: A case study from Carnac Island, Western Australia. Tourism in Marine Environments. 2:23-37.
Page, B., J. McKenzie, R. McIntosh, A. Baylis, A. Morrissey, N. Calvert, T. Haase, M. Berris, D. Dowie, P.D. Shaughnessy & S.D. Goldsworthy (2004). Entanglement of Australian sea lions and New Zealand fur seals in lost fishing gear and other marine debris before and after Government and industry attempts to reduce the problem. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 49 (1-2):33-42.
Pemberton, D. (1996b). Port Lincoln tuna farms; dolphins, seals, sharks and seabirds. Page(s) 8. Hobart: Parks and Wildlife Service.
Robinson, A.C. & T.E. Dennis (1988). The status and management of seal populations in South Australia. In: Augee, M.L., ed. Marine mammals of Australasia - field biology and captive management. Page(s) 87-104. Sydney: Royal Zoological Society of NSW.
Shaughnessy, P.D. (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Seals. [Online]. Canberra: Environment Australia. Available from: http://www.deh.gov.au/coasts/publications/seals-action-plan.html.
Shaughnessy, P.D., N.J. Gales, T.E. Dennis & S.D. Goldsworthy (1994). Distribution and abundance of New Zealand fur seals, Arctocephalus forsteri, in South Australia and Western Australia. Wildlife Research. 21:667-695.
Shaughnessy, P.D., R.R. McIntosh, S.D. Goldsworthy, T.E. Dennis & M. Berris (2006). Trends in abundance of Australian sea lions, Neophoca cinerea, at Seal Bay, Kangaroo Island, South Australia. In: Sea Lions of the World. Page(s) 37-63. Fairbanks, Alaska: Alaska Sea Grant College Program. University of Alaska.
Stevenson, C., N. Bensley & R. Tilzey (2008). Science for Decision Makers: Managing Interactions between Humans and Seals. [Online]. Canberra: Bureau of Rural Sciences, Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Available from: http://www.daff.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/567223/SFDM-interact-seals.pdf.
Strahan, R. (1983). The Australian Museum Complete Book of Australian Mammals. London, United Kingdom: Angus and Robertson.
Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2005bw). NON-APPROVED Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea). [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/neophoca-cinerea.html#conservation.
Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2005bx). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Australian Sea-lion (Neophoca cinerea). [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/neophoca-cinerea.html.
Van Dyck, S. & R. Strahan (2008). The Mammals of Australia, Third Edition. Page(s) 880. Sydney: Reed New Holland.
Walker, G. E. & J.K. Ling (1981). Australian sea lion Neophoca cinerea (Peron, 1816). In: Ridgway, S. H. & R.J. Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals, vol. 1; the walrus, sea lions, fur seals and sea otter. Page(s) 99-118. London: Academic Press.
Warneke, R.M. (1982). The distribution and abundance of seals in the Australasian region, with summaries of biology and current research. In: Mammals in the seas, FAO Fisheries Series, No. 5, Vol. 4. Page(s) 431-475. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Warneke, R.M. (1995b). Family Otariidae. In: Mammals of Victoria; distribution, ecology and conservation. Page(s) 251-256.
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). Neophoca cinerea in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Sun, 21 Sep 2014 12:18:43 +1000.