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 Endangered as Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri
Listing and Conservation Advices Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
 
Recovery Plan Decision Recovery Plan required, included on the Commenced List (1/11/2009).
 
Adopted/Made Recovery Plans Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species and Ecological Communities of Adelaide and the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009) [Recovery Plan] as Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri.
 
Policy Statements and Guidelines Survey Guidelines for Australia's Threatened Birds. EPBC Act survey guidelines 6.2 (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), 2010l) [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 (02/09/2005) (Commonwealth of Australia, 2005c) [Legislative Instrument] as Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri.
 
State Listing Status
SA: Listed as Endangered (National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (South Australia): June 2011 list) as Calamanthus pyrrhopygius parkeri
Non-statutory Listing Status
NGO: Listed as Endangered (The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010)
Scientific name Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri [67071]
Family Acanthizidae:Passeriformes:Aves:Chordata:Animalia
Species author (Vigors and Horsfield,1827)
Infraspecies author (Schodde & Mason, 1999)
Reference  
Other names Calamanthus pyrrhopygius parkeri [80826]
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

Scientific name: Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri.

Common name: Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges).

Other names: At the species level, the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren has also been known as the Chestnut-rumped Hylacola, Chestnut-rumped Groundwren, Chestnut-tailed Hylacola, Chestnut-tailed Groundwren, Heathwren, Chestnut-tailed Heathwren, Groundwren, Geelong Groundwren, Large Groundwren, Charleville Scrubwren, Scrub Warbler, and Red-rumped Scrub-warbler (Higgins & Peter 2002).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is a conventionally accepted subspecies of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Schodde & Mason 1999).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren is a small bird about 13 to 16 cm long. It has a wingspan of about 16 to 19 cm, and a mass of about 13 to 20 g (Higgins & Peter 2002). The adults are mainly brown or brownish-grey on the upperbody, and mainly white (in males) or buff (in females) with brown streaks on the underbody. Both sexes have a chestnut patch on the rump; a grey tip to the tail; a narrow off-white (in males) or buff (in females) stripe above each eye; reddish-brown, brownish-yellow or cream irides; and pink or pinkish-brown legs and feet. Immature birds can not be distinguished from the adults, but juveniles can be separated on the basis of their unstreaked and pale buff to cream underbody, and the less prominent markings on the face (Higgins & Peter 2002).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) occurs singly, in pairs and in small groups (Paton & Paton 1980; Reid 1976).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is confined to the Fleurieu Peninsula and the southern Mount Lofty Ranges in South Australia (Barrett et al. 2003; Blakers et al. 1984; Schodde & Mason 1999). It is currently known to occur at Deep Creek Conservation Park, Newland Head Conservation Park, Spring Mount Conservation Park, Scott Conservation Park, Mount Billy Conservation Park, Cox Scrub Conservation Park (and neighbouring tracts of suitable habitat), Mount Magnificent Conservation Park, Mount Bold Reservoir, Scott Creek Conservation Park, Biggs Flat, Cherry Gardens, and at a number of sites in the Adelaide Hills (including Cleland Conservation Park, Horsnell Gully Conservation Park, Kenneth Stirling Conservation Park, Norton Summit, Morialta Conservation Park and Black Hill Conservation Park) (Atlas of Australian Birds 2006b; Barrett et al. 2003; Carpenter et al. 2003; Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

Two estimates have been made for the extent of occurrence of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges). Garnett and Crowley (2000) estimated the extent of occurrence, with medium reliability, to be 5 000 km². A second estimate, based on an analysis of records submitted to the Atlas of Australian Birds from 1998 to 2004 (and derived from the application of a minimum convex polygon to these records), put the extent of occurrence at 1 700 km² (TSSC 2005bk). The reliability of this latter estimate is unknown.

The information that is available suggests that the extent of occurrence is currently likely to be decreasing (Garnett & Crowley 2000). An analysis of records from the Atlas of Australian Birds suggests that the extent of occurrence declined from approximately 2 000 km² during the first atlas period (1977 to 1981) to approximately 1 700 km² km during the second atlas period (1998 to 2004) (TSSC 2005bk). There have not been any recent records of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) from former sites at Tanunda or in the Mount Barker-Wistow area (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk), which lie at the limit of the known distribution.

The area of occupancy is estimated, with medium reliability, to be 250 km² (Garnett & Crowley 2000). A second estimate, based on an analysis of records submitted to the Atlas of Australian Birds from 1998 to 2004 (and derived from the number of 1 km² squares that contained records of the subspecies) put the area of occupancy at 26 km² (TSSC 2005bk). The reliability of the latter estimate is unknown.

The area of occupancy is currently suspected to be decreasing in size (Garnett & Crowley 2000). The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) was recorded in 13 grid-squares (each approximately 83.6 km² in area) during a widespread survey in the Adelaide region in 1974-1975 (SAOA 1977), but in only seven grid-squares of the same size during a subsequent survey in the same area in 1984-1985 (although it should be noted that the second survey period followed extensive bushfires in 1983, and some sites that were occupied in 1974-1975 but not in 1984-1985 have since been re-colonised) (Paton et al. 1994). Furthermore, there have not been any recent records of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) from former sites at Tanunda, Mount Compass or in the Mount Barker-Wistow area (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is estimated to occur at eight locations: Deep Creek Conservation Park, Newland Head Conservation Park, Spring Mount Conservation Park, Cox Scrub Conservation Park, Mount Bold Reservoir, the Ackland Hill-Cherry Gardens area, Kenneth Stirling Conservation Park and the central Mount Lofty Ranges (TSSC 2005bk). It is possible that this figure might underestimate the actual number of locations, but a detailed analysis of records is needed before a more accurate assessment can be made (Pickett 2007).

The habitat of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has been subject to extensive clearing, and the isolated patches that remain mean that subpopulations of this species are severely fragmented (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has been poorly surveyed. The distribution has been framed during four separate bird atlassing projects, but there have not been any published, targeted surveys for this subspecies (Barrett et al. 2003; Blakers et al. 1984; Paton et al. 1994; SAOA 1977; Stove 1994). The proximity of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) populations to Adelaide, the ready accessibility of many known sites, and the small amount of suitable habitat available suggests that there is a good likelihood that all populations of the Heathwren have been discovered (TSSC 2005bk). However, because the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is rare (the population is estimated to consist of 2 000 mature birds [Garnett & Crowley 2000]) and somewhat difficult to detect (Pickett 2007), the possibility that other, as-yet-unknown populations exist can not be excluded.

The population size of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has been estimated, with low reliability, at 2 000 mature birds (Garnett & Crowley 2000).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is thought to occur in at least seven or eight subpopulations (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk), but this figure requires confirmation. The largest subpopulation is estimated, with low reliability, to consist of 500 mature birds (Garnett & Crowley 2000). Most of the subpopulations (and, indeed, most known sites of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren [Mount Lofty Ranges]) occur within conservation reserves (Atlas of Australian Birds 2006b; Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

The population size of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is suspected to be declining. There is no quantitative data to confirm this, but a decline in population size does seem likely based on an apparent decline in the extent of occurrence and area of occupancy of the subspecies (including its disappearance from former sites at Tanunda, Mount Compass, and in the Mount Barker-Wistow area [TSSC 2005bk]), and the clearance of approximately 90% of native vegetation from the Fleurieu Peninsula and southern Mount Lofty Ranges (Paton et al. 1994).

The generation length of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is estimated to be four years, although no reliable life history data are available for this subspecies (Garnett & Crowley 2000).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is currently known to occur in Deep Creek Conservation Park, Newland Head Conservation Park, Spring Mount Conservation Park, Scott Conservation Park, Mount Billy Conservation Park, Cox Scrub Conservation Park, Mount Magnificent Conservation Park, Scott Creek Conservation Park, Cleland Conservation Park, Horsnell Gully Conservation Park, Kenneth Stirling Conservation Park, Morialta Conservation Park and Black Hill Conservation Park (Atlas of Australian Birds 2006; Barrett et al. 2003; Carpenter et al. 2003; Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

There is little published information available on the habitat of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges). It occurs in dense heathland and undergrowth in Eucalyptus forests and woodlands, and is most commonly found in rocky areas (such as those that occur on hillsides) (Garnett & Crowley 2000; Paton & Paton 1980; Possingham et al. 2004; Rix 1939; SAOA 1947). The vegetation in these areas consists of a mixture of dense shrubs (such as Banksia, Hakea and Leptospermum), grass trees Xanthorrhoea and ferns Pteridium, beneath a canopy of Eucalyptus trees (including E. obliqua and E. odorata) and (in at least some sites) scattered Allocasuarina trees (Rix 1939). The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) was once recorded in a patch of shrubs (Banksia and Olearia) and grass trees Xanthorrhoea that had been cut (but not burnt) approximately 12 months earlier (Rix 1942).

There are historical records of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) in swampland in the Mount Compass region (Ragless 1958; SAOA 1923). The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has been recorded at Square Waterhole, one of the Swamps of the Fleurieu Peninsula that are listed as Critically Endangered under the EPBC Act 1999.

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) often occurs in dry-heathland habitat that is also inhabited by the Southern Emu-wren (Fleurieu Peninsula) Stipiturus malachurus intermedius (Pickett 2007), which is listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act 1999.

No information is available on the ages of sexual maturity, life expectancy or natural mortality of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges). However, the related Shy Heathwren Hylacola cauta is capable of surviving for more than nine years in the wild (ABBBS 1997), and it is probable that the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has a similar life expectancy.

There are no published records of breeding in the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges). There is single unpublished record of a nest with three eggs in it in September and some unpublished records of juveniles (Pickett 2007). These anecdotal records of breeding activity are consistent with the breeding season of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren H. pyrrhopygia, and it is probable that other aspects of the breeding behaviour of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) are similar to those observed in Chestnut-rumped Heathwren H. pyrrhopygia (Picket 2007).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren H. pyrrhopygia breeds from June to December (Higgins & Peter 2002). It constructs a dome-shaped nest of grass and bark that is placed on or very close to the ground, in or at the base of a grass tussock or low shrub, at the base of a tree, or beneath fallen timber (Bourke 1959; Chaffer 1931; Eddy 1959; Gilbert 1919; Higgins & Peter 2002; North 1901-1904; Ryan 1979).

It lays a clutch of two or three eggs that are generally whitish or buffish in colour and have spots and blotches of brown, these sometimes forming a cap or zone at the broader end (Chaffer 1931; Eddy 1959; Gilbert 1919; North 1901-1904). The eggs are incubated by the female for a period of approximately 14 to 16 days (Bourke 1959; Eddy 1959; Ryan 1979). The nestlings are fed by both parents (Bourke 1959; Eddy 1959; Higgins & Peter 2002). The fledging period has not been determined precisely, but records suggest that its duration is somewhere between seven and 18 days (Eddy 1959; Higgins & Peter 2002). The fledged young accompany their parents for up to eight weeks after leaving the nest (Eddy 1959; Ryan 1979).

Little quantative information is available on breeding success, but pairs generally rear two broods per year (Eddy 1959; Ryan 1979), and the success of first broods is said to be greater than that of second broods (Eddy 1959). Nests of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren are sometimes parasitised by Fan-tailed Cuckoos Cacomantis flabelliformis or Horsfield's Bronze-Cuckoos Chrysococcyx basalis (Brooker & Brooker 1989a; Higgins 1999), both of which occur within the range of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) (Higgins 1999).

The diet of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) consists of insects (including beetles and ants) and the seeds of grasses and sedges (Lea & Gray 1935).

The foraging behaviour of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren is poorly known. It is said to fly between shrubs when foraging, rather than moving across the ground, because of the density of the vegetation in the Mount Lofty Ranges (Rix 1939). However, it has been observed moving across the ground at some sites (Pickett 2007) and the description of foraging behaviour provided by Rix (1939) is somewhat at odds with the foraging behaviour of the nominate subspecies H. p. pyrrhopygia, which forages on the ground beneath dense vegetation, or in low shrubs, or very occasionally in low trees (Eddy 1959; Emison et al. 1987).

The movements of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) are essentially unknown. It is probably resident (Paton & Paton 1980), as has been recorded for the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren H. pyrrhopgygia at many sites throughout its range (Higgins & Peter 2002). It does not appear to undertake any long-distance movements (Blakers et al. 1984).

No specific information is available on the home range or territories of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges). However, at the species level, the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren is said to be territorial during the breeding season (McGill 1970).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) could potentially be confused with the Shy Heathwren Hylacola cauta, which has been recorded in the Mount Lofty Ranges, and is similar in appearance to the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) (Higgins & Peter 2002). However, the two birds usually occupy different habitats (Chestnut-rumped in heath understorey of dry sclerophyll forests and woodlands, Shy in heath understorey of mallee woodland). The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) can be distinguished reasonably easily from the Shy Heathwren, given good views, on the basis of characters including its duller colouring and less prominent markings (Haywood 2006; Higgins & Peter 2002).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) can be detected by sight or by call (Pickett 2007; Rix 1939). It is shy (McGilp 1965; Pickett 2007), and relatively quiet during the non-breeding period (Pickett 2007), although it is also inquisitive (McGilp 1965), and will tolerate close approach (to within about 3 m) when calling (Rix 1939).

The recommended method for surveying populations of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is to conduct area searches or transect surveys in patches of suitable habitat. Surveys should incorporate the use of call-broadcasting to solicit responses from the birds, and be conducted in the breeding season, when the birds call most frequently (Pickett 2007).

The current major threat to the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is the loss and degradation of its habitat. The sources (or potential sources) of habitat loss and degradation are the expansion of residential development in rural areas, the invasion of habitats by woody weeds, wildfire, changing fire regimes, and possibly grazing (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

The Mount Lofty Ranges were subject to extensive land clearance in the past and today only about 10% of the native vegetation remains intact. Broad-scale land clearance ceased in the mid-1980s (Paton et al. 1994), but incremental loss and degradation is still occurring due to the expansion of residential zones in rural areas (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk). Furthermore, the increase in rural development in some areas might exacerbate some forms of habitat degradation, such as weed invasion, and might also expose the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) to increased levels of disturbance or predation by domestic and feral animals (TSSC 2005bk).

Because of the extensive past clearance of native vegetation, the remaining habitat of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is present in small and isolated fragments that are subject to habitat degradation (due to weed invasion, wildfire and grazing). Furthermore, the fragmented nature of the habitat may provide a barrier to dispersal, and thus increase the risk of local extinction due to catastrophic events (such as wildfire or drought) or inbreeding depression (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk).

The potential for extensive wildfire to impact on the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) and its habitat was demonstrated during the Ash Wednesday fires of February 1983. These fires burnt out 33 000 ha of native vegetation in the Mount Lofty Ranges and eliminated the Heathwren from several formerly-occupied areas. However, the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) has since re-colonised some of these former sites (including Cox Scrub Conservation Park) (Paton et al. 1994). The ability to re-colonise burnt areas suggests that wildfire might be a less significant threat than first thought (Garnett & Crowley 2000), although if the Heathwren exhibits a preference for vegetation that has recently been burnt, it is possible that unsuitable fire regimes may have an adverse effect on the long-term survival of the subspecies (TSSC 2005bk).

The Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) is thought to nest on or close to the ground, making it vulnerable to nest predation and trampling (Pickett 2007b, pers. comm.).

It is possible that the cumulative effects of the threats listed above may cause the extinction of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren in the foreseeable future (Ford & Howe 1980; Possingham & Field 2000).

The long-term survival of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) mainly depends on maintaining the extent and quality of its habitat (Garnett & Crowley 2000).

No specific recovery actions have been completed, but the Department for Environment and Heritage (South Australia) recently initiated a project to assess the distribution, habitat requirements and conservation needs of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) (Pickett 2007).

In addition to the conservation advice recommended by the Threatened Species Scientific Committee, the following recovery actions have been recommended (Garnett & Crowley 2000; TSSC 2005bk):

  • Protect and enhance known habitat, including the active management of Heathwren populations in existing conservation reserves, and the acquisition of additional sites for conservation.

  • Use vegetation analysis to maximise the benefit of revegetation programs.

  • Liaise with land managers to encourage their involvement in the recovery process.

  • Introduce programs to promote community awareness.

  • Monitor important parameters including population size, breeding success and vegetation condition, and monitor the effectiveness of management strategies.

  • Determine if a population translocation is feasible.

  • Co-ordinate the recovery program of the Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mount Lofty Ranges) with the Southern Emu-wren (Fleurieu Peninsula) Stipiturus malachurus intermedius recovery team.

A major project on the distribution, habitat requirements and status of the subspecies was recently initiated by the Department for Environment and Heritage (South Australia) (Pickett 2007).

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 The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000 (Garnett, S.T. & G.M. Crowley, 2000) [Cwlth Action Plan].
Commonwealth Listing Advice on Land clearance (Threatened Species Scientific Committee, 2001w) [Listing Advice].
Agriculture and Aquaculture:Livestock Farming and Grazing:Grazing pressures and associated habitat changes Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Climate Change and Severe Weather:Climate Change and Severe Weather:Climate change altering atmosphere/hydrosphere temperatures, rainfall patterns and/or frequency of severe weather events Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Ecosystem/Community Stresses:Ecosystem Degradation:Decline in habitat quality Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
Ecosystem/Community Stresses:Indirect Ecosystem Effects:Loss and/or fragmentation of habitat and/or subpopulations Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
Ecosystem/Community Stresses:Indirect Ecosystem Effects:Restricted geographical distribution (area of occupancy and extent of occurrence) Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
Energy Production and Mining:Mining and Quarrying:Habitat modification through open cut mining/quarrying activities Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Human Intrusions and Disturbance:Recreational Activities:Disturbance, especially from human recreational activities and development Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation Oryctolagus cuniculus (Rabbit, European Rabbit) Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation by weeds Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or predation Vulpes vulpes (Red Fox, Fox) Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or predation Felis catus (Cat, House Cat, Domestic Cat) Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Natural System Modifications:Fire and Fire Suppression:Inappropriate and/or changed fire regimes (frequency, timing, intensity) Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].
Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Natural System Modifications:Fire and Fire Suppression:Inappropriate prescribed regimes and/or vegetation management to control fire regimes Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species & Ecological Communities of Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges 2009-2014 (Willson, A. & J. Bignall, 2009a) [State Recovery Plan].
Residential and Commercial Development:Housing and Urban Areas:Habitat clearance for rural, peri-urban and urban development Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri) (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005bk) [Listing Advice].

Atlas of Australian Birds (2006b). Database of records to November 2006.

Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme (ABBBS) (1997). Recovery round-up. Corella. 21:99-100.

Barrett, G., A. Silcocks, S. Barry, R. Cunningham & R. Poulter (2003). The New Atlas of Australian Birds. Melbourne, Victoria: Birds Australia.

Blakers, M., S.J.J.F. Davies & P.N. Reilly (1984). The Atlas of Australian Birds. Melbourne, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.

Bourke, P.A. (1959). Notes on the heath-wren. Australian Bird Watcher. 1:56-58.

Brooker, M.G. & L.C. Brooker (1989a). Cuckoo hosts in Australia. Australian Zoological Reviews. 2:1-67.

Carpenter, G., A. Black, D. Harper & P. Horton (2003). Bird Report, 1982-1999. South Australian Ornithologist. 34:93-151.

Chaffer, N. (1931). A singer of the heath country. Emu. 30:212-213.

Eddy, R.J. (1959). Heath-wrens in central Victoria. Australian Bird Watcher. 1:36-44.

Emison,W.B., C.M. Beardsell, F.I. Norman, R.H. Loyn & S.C. Bennett (1987). Atlas of Victorian Birds. Melbourne: Department of Conservation (Forest & Lands) & Royal Australian Ornithological Union.

Ford, H. & R. Howe (1980). The future of birds in the Mount Lofty Ranges. South Australian Ornithologist. 28:85-89.

Garnett, S.T. & G.M. Crowley (2000). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000. [Online]. Canberra, ACT: Environment Australia and Birds Australia. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/action/birds2000/index.html.

Gilbert, P.A. (1919). Notes on Chestnut-rumped Ground-Wren Hylacola pyrrhopygia, Vigors and Horsfield. Emu. 18:292-295.

Haywood, B. (2006). Distribution of the Black-chinned Honeyeater Melithreptus gularis and Chestnut-rumped Heathwren Hylacola pyrrhopygius in the south east of South Australia. South Australian Ornithologist. 35:1-14.

Higgins, P.J., ed. (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds Volume 4: Parrots to Dollarbird. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Higgins, P.J. & J.M. Peter, eds. (2002). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds Volume 6: Pardalotes to Shrike-thrushes. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Lea, A.H. & J.T. Gray (1935). The food of Australian birds. Emu. 35:145-178.

McGill, A.R. (1970). Australian Warblers. Bird Observers Club, Melbourne.

McGilp, J.N. (1965). Birds of the Mount Lofty Ranges.

North, A.J. (1901-1904). Nests and Eggs of Birds Found Breeding in Australia and Tasmania Special Catalogue 1. Volume 1. Sydney: Australian Museum.

Paton, D.C. & J.B. Paton (1980). The birds of Scott Conservation Park. South Australian Ornithologist. 28:120-126.

Paton, D.C., G. Carpenter & R.G. Sinclair (1994). A second bird atlas of the Adelaide region. Part 1: Changes in the distributions of birds: 1974-75 versus 1984-85. South Australian Ornithologist. 31:151-193.

Pickett, M. (2007b). Personal communication. February 2007.

Possingham, H.P. & S.A. Field (2000). Regional bird extinctions and their implications for vegetation clearance policy. Lifelines. 7:15-16.

Possingham, M.L., S.A. Field & H.P. Possingham (2004). Species richness and abundance of birds in Mount Lofty Ranges stringybark habitat: 1999-2000 survey. South Australian Ornithologist. 34:153-169.

Ragless, G.B. (1958). Some notes on the Black-shouldered Kite. South Australian Ornithologist. 22:73-75.

Reid, N. (1976). Bird Report, 1975. South Australian Ornithologist. 27:147-158.

Rix, C.E. (1939). The Chestnut-tailed Ground-Wren, Hylacola pyrrhopygia, in the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia. South Australian Ornithologist. 15:35-38.

Rix, C.E. (1942). Additions to the birds of the Happy Valley district with a further record of Hylacola pyrrhopygia. South Australian Ornithologist. 16:40-41.

Ryan, J.V. (1979). Nearly forty years with Hylacola species. Australian Bird Watcher. 8:42-7.

Schodde, R. & I.J. Mason (1999). The Directory of Australian Birds: Passerines. Melbourne, Victoria: CSIRO.

South Australian Ornithological Association (SAOA) (1923). Monthly proceedings. South Australian Ornithologist. 7:89-92.

South Australian Ornithological Association (SAOA) (1947). Bird notes. South Australian Ornithologist. 18:61.

South Australian Ornithological Association (SAOA) (1977). A Bird Atlas of the Adelaide Region. South Australian Ornithological Association, Adelaide.

Stove, K. (1994). A Second Bird Atlas of the Adelaide Region. Part 2. South Australian Ornithologist. 31:195-265.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2005bk). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Chestnut-rumped Heathwren (Mt Lofty Ranges) (Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri). [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/chestnut-rumped-heathwren.html.

Willson, A. & J. Bignall (2009). Regional Recovery Plan for Threatened Species and Ecological Communities of Adelaide and the Mount Lofty Ranges, South Australia. [Online]. Adelaide, South Australia: Department for Environment and Heritage. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/adelaide-and-mount-lofty-ranges.html.

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). Hylacola pyrrhopygia parkeri in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:03:52 +1000.