Observations of the large earth bumblebee, Bombus terrestris (L.), in native vegetation were collated to determine the extent to which this exotic species has invaded Tasmanian native vegetation during the first 9 years after its introduction. The range of B. terrestris now encompasses all of Tasmania's major vegetation types, altitudes from sea level to 1260m a.s.L, and the entire breadth of annual precipitation in the state from more than 3200 mm to less than 600 mm. Observations of workers carrying pollen, together with the presence of large numbers of bumblebees at many localities across this range indicate that colonies are frequently established in native vegetation. Evidence that colonies are often successful was obtained from repeated observations of the species during more than 1 year at particular sites. Unequivocal evidence of colonies was obtained from six National Parks, including four of the five in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area (WHA). Indeed, the species has been present in the WHA for at least as long as it has in the city of Hobart, where it was first recorded. In southwestern Tasmania, evidence of colonies was obtained up to 40km from gardens, 61 km from small towns and 93 km from large towns. Hence, contrary to previous suggestions, the species is established in the most remote parts of Tasmania and is not dependent on introduced garden plants. Given their strong record of invasion, it is likely that B. terrestris will form feral populations on the mainland of Australia and in many other parts of the world if introduced. Because of their likely negative impacts on native animals and plants, and potential to enhance seed production in weeds, the spread of bumblebees should be avoided.

stephen.mallick@dpiwe.tas.go7.au]).

The technique for extracting floral nectar using micropipettes is often unsuited to flowers where nectar is produced in very small volumes and/or where nectar is highly viscous. An alternative technique for washing the viscous nectar from the flowers of Tasmanian leatherwood, Eucryphia lucida (Labill.) is described. Here, two washes with a known volume of distilled water removed 95% of total floral sugar. Using such a washing technique on exposed and bagged E. lucida flowers provided information on nectar production in this species that could not have been obtained using a standard micropipette extraction method.

The value of road-kill counts in monitoring changes in numbers of the eastern barred bandicoot, Perameles gunnii, was investigated in the Huon Valley, south-eastern Tasmania, by comparing population trends on two trapping grids with trends in road-kills on adjacent segments of highway. Between 1992 and 1996, both the number of P. gunnii on the trapping grids and the number of road-kills on the adjacent highway underwent a significant decline. While our data are preliminary, we suggest that road-kills may provide a useful index of gross, long-term trends in numbers of P. gunni. Such an index could be used to track long-term trends in local populations adjacent to a segment of highway, as in the present study. Alternatively, by considering a highway as a continuous ‘chain’ of such segments, road-kills may provide an index of trends over a larger (i.e. regional) scale.

Summary  We investigated attitudes of the visiting public to feeding wildlife and the effectiveness of the ‘Keep Wildlife Wild’ signs in Tasmania's National Parks. We surveyed visitors to three visitor nodes in two National Parks for their opinions regarding the feeding of wildlife. Participants were asked whether they had seen a ‘Keep Wildlife Wild’ sign, and the role played by the sign in determining their opinions. A total of 118 visitors were interviewed. The majority of respondents (92.2%) were against feeding wildlife. Only 3.5% of respondents were in favour of feeding wildlife, while 4.3% had no opinion on the subject. The most commonly cited reason against feeding wildlife was that it caused harm to the animal. The majority of respondents (69.6%) had sighted a ‘Keep Wildlife Wild’ sign posted in Tasmania's National Parks since 1996, 84.6% of which said that the sign had reinforced a pre‐existing opinion against feeding. Only 3.9% of respondents who had seen the sign said that the sign had formed their opinion against feeding. We also observed a total of 68 people interacting with wildlife while they were eating lunch. A total of 70 interactions between visitors (n = 68) and wildlife were recorded. Thirty‐seven (52.9%) of these interactions involved feeding an animal, although this feeding activity was carried out by only five people (7.4% of total). Numerous examples of inadvertent feeding were also observed in which Black Currawongs (Strepera fuliginosa) scavenged for food scraps once visitors had left.