Mini Safe Havens for population recovery and reintroductions 'beyond-the-fence'

In response to the ongoing decline of fauna worldwide, there has been growing interest in the rewilding of whole ecosystems outside of fenced sanctuaries or offshore islands. This interest will inevitably result in attempts to restore species where eliminating threats from predators and competitors is extremely challenging or impossible, or reintroductions of predators that will increase predation risk for extant prey (i.e., coexistence conservation). We propose 'Mini Safe Havens' (MSHs) as a potential tool for managing these threats. Mini Safe Havens are refuges that are permanently permeable to the focal species; allowing the emigration of individuals while maintaining gene flow through the boundary. Crucial to the effectiveness of the approach is the ongoing maintenance and monitoring required to preserve a low-to-zero risk of key threats within the MSH; facilitating in-situ learning and adaptation by focal species to these threats, at a rate and intensity of exposure determined by the animals themselves. We trialled the MSH approach for a pilot reintroduction of the Australian native New Holland mouse (Pseudomys novaehollandiae), in the context of a trophic rewilding project to address potential naïveté to a reintroduced native mammalian predator. We found that mice released into a MSH maintained their weight and continued to use the release site beyond 17 months (525 days) post-release. In contrast, individuals in temporary soft-release enclosures tended to lose weight and became undetectable approximately 1-month post-release. We discuss the broad applicability of MSHs for population recovery and reintroductions 'beyond-the-fence' and recommend avenues for further refinement of the approach.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10531-022-02495-6.

Assisted colonisation trial of the eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) to a fox-free island

Context Assisted colonisation has the potential to protect species from intractable threats within their historical ranges. The Australian mainland subspecies of the eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) is extinct in the wild, with surviving populations restricted to small sites protected by predator–barrier fences. PVA modelling shows that a self-sustaining bandicoot population would require an area free of the introduced red fox (Vulpes vulpes) of at least 2500ha. French Island is outside the historic range of the species, but is fox-free and contains around 9000ha of potentially suitable habitat. Aims This study will assess the suitability of French Island as a potential site for a self-sustaining eastern barred bandicoot population by conducting a 1-year assisted colonisation trial to assess habitat use, body condition and survival. Methods Between July and September 2012, 18 adult bandicoots were released. We radio-tracked bandicoots using intraperitoneal radio-transmitters for up to 122 days and trapped fortnightly. Key results The release group met the three measures of success: (1) appropriate habitat use; (2) recovery of post-release bodyweight; and (3) founder survival exceeding 100 days. Habitat use and body condition throughout the trial reflected that of mainland populations, and seven bandicoots survived longer than 100 days. Mortality was greatest in the first month, with veterinary investigations confirming two deaths due to cat predation, two deaths from toxoplasmosis and one unknown cause of death. Bandicoots that survived longer than 100 days occupied higher, drier ground than those that did not. Toxoplasmosis cases were associated with lower topographic position on the site. Conclusions Our results suggest that French Island provides suitable habitat for the establishment of a population of eastern barred bandicoots. On French Island, toxoplasmosis was identified as an important source of mortality in addition to cat predation, and warrants further investigation. Implications Given the costs and challenges of predator control and the maintenance of predator exclusion fences, assisted colonisation to one or more fox-free islands remains the most viable option to establish self-sustaining bandicoot populations. Our results highlight the value in conducting trial releases ahead of major translocations.

Soft-release versus hard-release for reintroduction of an endangered species: an experimental comparison using eastern barred bandicoots (Perameles gunnii)

Context Reintroduction is a popular tool for conserving endangered species, yet many attempts fail. Soft-release measures, including acclimatisation, have been used for many species around the world, based on the reasoning that gradual and supported reintroductions should improve the success of animals released into an unfamiliar wild environment. However, experimental testing of soft-release methods is rare. Aims To experimentally test the effect of a soft-release method versus a hard-release method on the initial reintroduction success of the eastern barred bandicoot (Perameles gunnii). Methods We released 12 captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots into a predator-proof reserve using two methods: soft-release (7 days of on-site acclimatisation with supplementary food before release) and hard-release (no acclimatisation and no supplementary food). We monitored the bandicoots intensively via radio-tracking and live-trapping for 4 weeks after release. Compared with hard-release bandicoots, we predicted that soft-release bandicoots would have (1) reduced movement (first night dispersal, site fidelity and activity range), (2) more directed patterns of habitat selection, (3) improved bodyweights and (4) improved survival. Key results There was no detectable difference in habitat selection, overall weight change and survival between the soft-release and hard-release groups. There was moderate evidence that, compared with the hard-release group, soft-release bandicoots moved less, demonstrated lower individual variation in all measures of movement, and lost weight more gradually after release. In most cases, effect sizes were moderate to large but had large standard errors owing to both small sample size and high variance. Consequently, statistical testing failed to detect significant differences at the 5% level. Conclusions Despite evidence that the release method influenced some of the monitored behaviours, soft-release did not confer a consistent and substantive advantage for captive-bred eastern barred bandicoots at our site. We conclude that soft-release is unlikely to improve overall reintroduction success for this species at fenced predator-free sites. Implications The present study suggests that the preferred option for reintroductions of eastern barred bandicoots to fenced sites is a hard-release, information that is now being used to guide reintroductions of this species. Similar experiments should be undertaken to improve reintroduction practice for other endangered species.