Funding for species conservation is insufficient to meet the current challenges facing global biodiversity, yet many programs use expensive single-species recovery actions and neglect broader management that addresses threatening processes. Arid Australia has the world's worst modern mammalian extinction record, largely attributable to competition from introduced herbivores, particularly European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) and predation by feral cats (Felis catus) and foxes (Vulpes vulpes). The biological control agent rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV) was introduced to Australia in 1995 and resulted in dramatic, widespread rabbit suppression. We compared the area of occupancy and extent of occurrence of 4 extant species of small mammals before and after RHDV outbreak, relative to rainfall, sampling effort, and rabbit and predator populations. Despite low rainfall during the first 14 years after RHDV, 2 native rodents listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the dusky hopping-mouse (Notomys fuscus) and plains mouse (Pseudomys australis), increased their extent of occurrence by 241-365%. A threatened marsupial micropredator, the crest-tailed mulgara (Dasycercus cristicauda), underwent a 70-fold increase in extent of occurrence and a 20-fold increase in area of occupancy. Both bottom-up and top-down trophic effects were attributed to RHDV, namely decreased competition for food resources and declines in rabbit-dependent predators. Based on these sustained increases, these 3 previously threatened species now qualify for threat-category downgrading on the IUCN Red List. These recoveries are on a scale rarely documented in mammals and give impetus to programs aimed at targeted use of RHDV in Australia, rather than simply employing top-down threat-based management of arid ecosystems. Conservation programs that take big-picture approaches to addressing threatening processes over large spatial scales should be prioritized to maximize return from scarce conservation funding. Further, these should be coupled with long-term ecological monitoring, a critical tool in detecting and understanding complex ecosystem change.

No abstract

ContextSignificant resources have been devoted to the control of introduced mesopredators in Australia. However, the control or removal of one pest species, such as, for example, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), may inadvertently benefit other invasive species, namely feral cats (Felis catus) and rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), potentially jeopardising native-species recovery. AimsTo (1) investigate the impact of a large-scale, long-term fox-baiting program on the abundance of foxes, feral cats and introduced and native prey species in the Flinders Ranges, South Australia, and (2) determine the effectiveness of a short time period of cat removal in immediately reducing feral cat abundance where foxes are absent. MethodsWe conducted an initial camera-trap survey in fox-baited and unbaited sites in the Flinders Ranges, to quantify the impact of fox baiting on the relative abundance of foxes, feral cats and their prey. We then conducted a secondary survey in sites where foxes were absent, following an intensive, but short, time period of cat removal, in which 40 cats were shot and killed. Key resultsNo foxes were detected within baited sites, but were frequently detected in unbaited sites. We found a corresponding and significant increase in several native prey species in fox-baited sites where foxes were absent. Feral cats and rabbits were also more frequently detected within baited sites, but fox baiting did not singularly predict the abundance of either species. Rather, feral cats were less abundant in open habitat where foxes were present (unbaited), and rabbits were more abundant within one predominantly open-habitat site, where foxes were absent (fox-baited). We found no effect of short-term cat removal in reducing the local abundance of feral cats. In both camera-trap surveys, feral cat detections were positively associated with rabbits. ConclusionsLong-term fox baiting was effective in fox removal and was associated with a greater abundance of native and introduced prey species in the Flinders Ranges. To continue to recover and conserve regional biodiversity, effective cat control is required. ImplicationsOur study showed fox removal has likely resulted in the local release of rabbits and an associated increase in cats. Because feral cat abundance seemingly fluctuated with rabbits, we suggest rabbit control may provide an alternative and more effective means to reduce local feral cat populations than short-term removal programs.

Habitat degradation contributes to species decline, and habitat quality is an important factor influencing reintroduction success globally. Habitat quality can include a range of physical resources such as nest sites and food resources but also anything that can restrict the use of these resources such as predation risk or competition. In arid Australia, introduced predators are thought to be the primary cause of mammal extinction and reintroduction failure although habitat clearance and alteration are also major causes of population decline. Common brushtail possums are one arid Australian marsupial close to regional extinction. To understand whether habitat quality was limiting their recovery, we reintroduced 148 possums into an area where introduced red foxes were controlled but historic overgrazing had degraded the habitat. We measured both direct (hollow availability, midstorey cover and high‐quality plant foods) and indirect (survival, condition, reproduction, movement) measures of habitat quality. Sixty‐seven released possums and 26 post‐release recruits were radiocollared for up to 2 years after release. Post‐release survival of radiocollared possums was high after 12 months (0.70), and there were no deaths from starvation. Predation by feral cats was the most common cause of mortality, and the open, degraded habitat may have exacerbated predation risk. Continuous breeding, good body condition and comparative home ranges with other sites suggested that food resources were not limiting. Possums used natural tree hollows in Eucalyptus spp. with no use of artificial nest boxes. Results suggest that historically degraded habitat was not a barrier to short‐term reintroduction success when foxes were controlled and natural tree hollows were plentiful. However, demographic data on hollow‐bearing tree species suggest a possible future decline in availability of hollows. These factors, combined with the unknown effects of drought, and synergistic effects of predation and poor quality habitat, suggest long‐term reintroduction success may require improved habitat and cat control.

Release methods can influence the outcome of reintroductions. We tested the effect of delayed, immediate and supplementary food/shelter release treatments on the reintroduction of brushtail possums Trichosurus vulpecula to an environment in which introduced predators, particularly foxes, were subject to control. Monitoring of 48 radio-collared possums over 3 months revealed that immediate release possums settled into a stable range significantly faster than other groups, but there were no differences in survival, dispersal distance, reproduction or body condition. Ten days after release possums from all treatment groups had lost body mass, but by day 60 most were heavier than at the time of translocation. After release, possums sometimes used shelter sites easily accessible to predators, but within 3 weeks they regularly selected safer shelter. Risky shelter selection and loss of condition immediately after release suggests that supplementary food and shelter could be beneficial, but supportive measures were rarely used or did not have the desired effect. In an environment with higher predator densities, risky shelter selection could lead to high post-release predation, and mass loss could encourage animals to forage in riskier ways, further increasing vulnerability. In these environments effective uptake of supplementary food and shelter could reduce predation risk, but supplementary measures would need to be presented in a way that maximises uptake. In contrast, if post-release predation risk is low then supportive measures may not be required. Innovative methods for providing post-release support should continue to be developed for reintroductions to areas where supportive measures are needed.