Talking Turkey Final Report

8/12/2019 Talking Turkey Final Report

1/29

Brush-Turkeys of Bingaratheir habitat, threats

and management.

Stringybark EcologicalDecember 2013


2/29

2

Author: David Carr, Tim Collins - Stringybark

Ecological and Sam Doak - landholder

[email protected]

02 6772 4841

0418 651 263

Versions: 1.3.2

Scientific licence for collection of

specimens:

S13246

Original records and voucher

specimens stored at:

7 Taylor St, Armidale, 2350.

Client: Upper Gwydir Landcare Association

and Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment

Management Authority

While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this report to ensure theinformation is true and correct, the author gives no assurance as to the accuracy of

any information in this report.

The author expressly disclaims, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all

responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or

omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on

the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part

of the author.


3/29

3

INTRODUCTION 4

Methods 4

Camera surveys 5

Awareness Raising Brush-turkey Field Days 5

Site Visits 5

Data Collection 6

Results 6

Locations 11

Discussion 11

Conclusion and Recommendations 14

References 15

APPENDIX 1REPORT SUMMARY FOR LANDOWNERS 17

Brush-Turkeys of Bingara their habitat, threats and management. 17

Distribution 18

Western Population as a Threatened Population and difference from coastal/urban

population 19

Local action 19

Local habitat preference 20

Threats 20

What can you do? 21

If you have turkeys on your property 22

1. Did you see a live turkey (or turkeys)? 23

2.Did you find a mound? 23

APPENDIX 3: PHOTOS 26


4/29

4

IntroductionUnlike in the backyards of Sydney and Brisbane, Brush-turkeys are not a

common sight in Bingara and Warialda. There is the occasional fleeting glimpse

of a bird flying or running across the road, the occasional chick turning up in a

paddock or old mounds found in the rough country at the back of some farms.These limited experiences with this mound-building bird have aroused the

interest of many local people, who have been curious enough to use remote

cameras to learn more about them. A year of observations revealed some

interesting things about the birds and the mounds they build. These

observations also raised many questions: about why the birds live and survive

here; about the number of birds; about the existence of old mounds and active

mounds; and about the threats to adults and chicks.

This report on the western population of the Australian Brush-turkey (Alectura

lathami) aims to examine the habitat preferences and vegetation types where the

incubation mounds occur. Through an understanding of the habitatrequirements for breeding, landowners and land-managers may gain a better

understanding of the threats that the population faces and develop management

actions to address these threats. Many aspects of the eastern population have

been extensively studied (Birks, 1999; Eiby and Booth, 2008; Fleay, 1937; Goth

and Proctor, 2002; Goth, and Vogel, 2002; Goth and Vogel, 2003; Goth et al, 2006;

Jones, 1979; Jones, 1988; Jones, 1987; Jones et al, 1995; Keys, 1990; Seymour

and Bradford, 1992), but substantially little research has focussed on the

western population. Whilst the eastern population typically is associated with

closed forest types of rainforest and wet sclerophyll forests (Jones et al, 1995),

the western population inhabits a region vegetated by much drier, open forest

types, woodlands and grasslands (NSW Scientific Committee, 2005; McDonald,

2010). Large areas of the distribution of western population have been cleared

or modified to support agriculture and pastoral production (McDonald, 2010).

Introduced animals have naturalised, or become feral, and introduced plants

continue to spread into natural vegetation changing the physical characteristics

through competition and altered fire intensities and regimes.

The NSW Scientific Committee on 21/10/05 gazetted the western population of

Brush-turkeys as a Threatened Population. A number of factors were considered

to place the western population at high risk of extinction. These included the

limited and specialised habitat requirements for survival and breeding, and thepossibility that the population was disjunct from the eastern population and

near the limit of its geographical range (NSW Scientific Committee, 2005).

Methods

Study area

The study area is within the Gwydir Shire Council area in NSW, on the northwest

slopes of the Great Dividing Range, around the towns of Warialda and Bingara

(Bingara coordinates: 2952 S, 15034 E). The Gwydir Shire has a climate of

warm summers and cold winters, (BOM, 2013). The mean annual rainfall is

750mm with a summer maximum.


5/29


6/29

6

Data Collection

Brush-turkey mounds were assessed using a Bird and Mound Spotting Record

Sheet, designed for landholders (see Appendix 2), with additional information

collected at some sites. Data was collected on the presence or absence of Brush-

turkeys and the location description of the mound or bird. Mounds were

assessed as active or inactive depending upon evidence of scratching of leaf litter

around the immediate area.

Vegetation characteristics were assessed in a 20 x 20m quadrat at each Brush-

turkey mound site. To assist landholders, four distinctive local tree and shrub

species were presented in photos on the form and recorded if present: Red Olive

Plum (Elaeodendron australe), Native Grape or Currant Bush (Carissa ovata), Red

Ash (Alphitonia excelsa) and Holly-leaved Birdseye (Alectryon subdentatus). Any

other plant species within 20 metres of the mound were recorded if their names

were known.

Brush-turkey mound site topography was recorded by measuring the slope using

a clinometer. Aspect of the site was recorded using a handheld compass, and theBrush-turkey mound slope position was assessed as lower or creek flats, middle,

upper, or crest or ridge.

Canopy cover was assessed for the tree, shrub and ground layers using the

Canopy Cover Assessment method (NCST, 2009). Dominant plant species in each

vegetation layer were recorded.

The physical aspects of the Brush-turkey mound such as height and width,

presence or absence of rocks in the Brush-turkey mound, and the presence of

saplings or trees growing out of the mound were recorded. Proximity of the

nearest track or road and the nearest water source was estimated by thelandowner/manager. Extra notes such as evidence of disturbance by other

animals was recorded.

Soils were described based upon the colour and texture of the soils and the

parent rock type.

Results

Table 1 contains mean monthly rainfall recorded at Bingara Post Office and the

2013 rainfall from January to October.

Table 1: Mean monthly rainfall for Bingara Post Office. (Source: BOM 2013)Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Mean (mm 93.2 88.6 61.3 41.3 49 50.3 51.2 43.6 46.5 65.6 71.8 81.2 746

2013157.1 52.4 100.3 7.2 29.2 83.5 32.6 13.3 38.4 13.5

Results of field surveys are presented in Table 2 below. A total of 32 Brush-turkey

mounds were mapped, comprising 6 active mounds and 26 inactive mounds.

Table 2: Survey results of 32 Brush-turkey incubation mounds in the Gwydir Shire.


7/29

7

Site number Easting Northing Altitude(metres)

Aspect (degrees) Slope(degrees)

Slopeposition

Soil type % canopy cover &dominant species

% shrub cover &dominant species

% ground-cover &dominantspecies

Moundstatus

Plant species present % Litter % bareground

Moundwidth(metres)

DerraDerra156J0373055 6625001 487 30 14 Mid Red basalt 40, Eucalyptus albens

70, Geijeraparviflora

60, Carissaovata Inactive

Brachychiton populneus, Notelaea

microcarpa, Austrostipa verticillata.Breynia oblonga, Beyeria viscosa, Oleariaelliptica, Pandorea pandorana, Dodonaeaviscosa, Acacia deanei, Alectryonsubdentatus, Acacia cheelii, Acacia decora,

Acacia salicina, Callitris glaucophylla,Cassinia quinquefaria, Elaeodendronaustrale, Abutilon leucopetalum, Aristida

personata

DerraDerra256J0253504 6691633 547 240 16 Lower Red basalt

10, Angopherafloribunda

60, Notelaeamicrocarpa


Eucalyptus albens, Geijera parviflora,Alectryon subdentatus, Elaeodendronaustrale, Dodonaea viscosa, Gahnia aspera,

Austrostipa verticillata, Acacia cheelii,Acacia salicina, Aristida personata

DerraDerra356J0253775 6694607 463 180 6 Lower

Red basaltloam

15, Eucalyptusmelanophloia

80,Elaeodendronaustrale


Callitris glaucophylla, Angopherafloribunda, Alectryon subdentatus, Acaciasalicina, Beyeria viscosa, Leucopogon

muticus, Austrostipa verticillata, Lomandralongifolia, Olearia elliptica, Pandorea

pandorana, Desmodium brachypodum,Cymbidium canaliculatum, Gahnia aspera,Aristida personata

DerraDerra4

56J

0254030 6694718 545 45 5 Upper

Stony red

basalt 1, Callitris glaucophylla

90, Alectryon

subdentatus

90, Aristida

personata

Inactive but

recent

Notelaea microcarpa, Alstonia constricta,Elaeodendron australe, Brachychiton

populneus, Capparis mitchellii, Beyeriaviscosa, Pandorea pandorana, Oleariaelliptica, Austrostipa verticillata,Spartothamnella juncea, Parsonsia

eucalyptophylla

DerraDerra556J0254072 6694725 541 45 5 Upper

Stony redbasalt -

50, Notelaeamicrocarpa

90, Beyeriaviscosa

Inactive butrecent

Geijera parviflora, Alectryon subdentatus,

Alphitonia excelsa, Carissa ovata, Oleariaelliptica, Austrostipa verticillata, Aristida

personata,

DerraDerra656J0254384 6693522 620 100 1 Crest

Stony redbasalt 70, Eucalyptus albens


30, Oleariaelliptica Inactive

Callitris glaucophylla, Elaeodendronaustrale, Acacia decora, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Alphitonia excelsa, Psydrax

oleifolium, Carissa ovata, Beyeria viscosa,Austrostipa verticillata, Aristida personata

DerraDerra756J0254346 6692598 626 315 5 Upper Red basalt 2, Eucalyptus albens

80, Alectryonsubdentatus


Callitris glaucophylla, Brachychitonpopulneus, Elaeodendron australe, Acaciasalicina, Alstonia constricta, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Aristida personata, Beyeria

viscosa, Pandorea pandorana, Parsonsiaeucalyptophylla

Windi156J0264594 6706714 225 2 Lower Red basalt

40, Eucalyptusmoluccana

75,

Elaeodendronaustrale

40, Carissaovata Active

Alphitonia excelsa, Geijera parviflora,Psydrax odoratum, Clematis microphylla,Beyeria viscosa, Dodonaea viscosa,

Notelaea microcarpa, Callitrisglaucophylla, Eucalyptus melanophloia,

Hovea lanceolata, Olearia elliptica, Acacialeiocalyx, Desmodium brachypodum 6

Windi2 17556J0264422 6706245 480 180 5 Lower Red basalt Eucalyptus moluccana

Elaeodendronaustrale Carissa ovata


8/29

8

Windi3 17656J0264594 6706714 481 235 3 Mid Red basalt Eucalyptus moluccana

Dodonaeaviscosa

Windi4 17756J0264685 6706852 495 45 6 Mid Red basalt 25, Eucalyptus albens

40,Elaeodendronaustrale/Geijera

parviflora

80, Carissaovata/Austrostipaverticillata Inactive

Callitris glaucophylla, Eucalyptusmelanophloia, Notelaea microcarpa,Beyeria viscosa, Spartothamnella juncea,Alphitonia excelsa, Cynanchum viminale, 60 25

Windi5 17856J0264683 6706898 490 90 1 Upper Red basalt

25, Eucalyptusmelanophloia/Eucalyptusalbens

50,

Elaeodendronaustrale/Notelaeamicrocarpa

80, Carissaovata/Beyeriaviscosa Inactive Callitris glaucophylla, Alphitonia excelsa

Grass onmound,

Treesaround baseof mound

Windi6 17956J0264815 6706988 465 45 2 Mid Red basalt

35, Brachychiton

populneus/ Eucalyptusmelanophloia

20, Notelaeamicrocarpa /

Elaeodendronaustrale


Callitris glaucophylla, Olearia elliptica,

Acacia deanei, Acacia decora, Acacialeiocalyx 50 30

Sunnyside1 30956J0270749 6693793 383 135 6 Upper

Red sandyclay 5, Eucalyptus albens

80,Elaeodendron

australe /Dodonaeaviscosa


9/29

9

0257948 microcarpa ovata sideroxylon, Carissa ovata

StoneHenge1 49756J0267303 6728201 355 180 7 Lower

Red sandyloam 20, Eucalyptus albens

15, Notelaeamicrocarpa 30 Active

Dodonaea viscosa, Eucalyptusmelanophloia, Eucalyptus albens, Callitrisglaucophylla, Notelaea microcarpa,

Styphelia viridis, Bursaria spinosa, Acacialeucoclada 7

Betts1 499

56J

0268199 6694955 456 150 11 Upper

Gravelly

loam, Basalt

70, Brachychiton

populneus

20, Beyeria

viscosa 90 Inactive

Brachychiton populneus, Callitrisglaucophylla, Eucalyptus melanophloia,

Notelaea microcarpa, Beyeria viscosa,Bursaria spinosa, Aristida spp., Carissa

ovata, Alphitonia excelsa 6

Betts2 50156J0268160 6694958 459 180 13 Upper

Gravellyloam, Basalt

60, Brachychitonpopulneus

70, Beyeriaviscosa 80 Active

Psydrax spp., Brachychiton populneus,Callitris glaucophylla, Eucalyptusmelanophloia, Beyeria viscosa, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Eucalyptus albens, Carissaovata 4

Betts3 50256J0268319 6694992 419 180 15 Middle

Gravellyloam, Basalt 70, Eucalyptus albens

80, Dodonaeaviscosa


Eucalyptus albens, Brachychiton

populneus, Notelaea microcarpa,Eucalyptus melanophloia, Callitrisglaucophylla, Dodonaea viscosa, Carissaovata, Elaeodendron australe 5

Betts4 50356J0268520 6694557 383 180 15 Middle

Gravellyloam, Basalt


80, Dodonaeaviscosa,

10, Carissaovata Active

Eucalyptus melanophloia, Beyeria viscosa,Dodonaea viscosa, Geijera parviflora,Olearia elliptica, Beyeria viscosa, Carissaovata, Elaeodendron australe 7

Rob1 506

56J

0251848 6727678 479 45 4 Upper

Brown loam,

Basalt 50, Eucalyptus albens

60, Notelaea

microcarpa 30

Long

inactive

Notelaea microcarpa, Geijera parviflora,

Eucalyptus albens, Elaeodendron australe 6

Rob2 50756J0251948 6727692 474 180 1 Crest

Brown loam,Basalt 70, Eucalyptus albens

80, Beyeriaviscosa 50

Inactive butrecent

Eucalyptus albens, Beyeria viscosa, Oleariaelliptica, Geijera parviflora, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Carissa ovata 6

Rob3 50856J0252128 6727524 476 180 1 Crest

Brown loam,Basalt



15, Oleariaelliptica Inactive

Brachychiton populneus, Eucalyptusmelanophloia, Psydrax spp., Geijera

parviflora, Olearia elliptica, Eucalyptusalbens, Elaeodendron australe, Alectryonsubdentatus 7

Iona1

56J

0298010 6688418 0 Mod Middle

Granite,sandy,

gravelly

60, Eucalyptus

melanophloia

60, Dodonaea

viscosa 20 Inactive

Ficus rubiginosa, Eucalyptus melanophloia,Callitris glaucophylla, Acacia spp.,Alectryon subdentatus, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Dodonaea viscosa, Alphitonia

excelsa 4

Iona256J0298643 6689140 180 Mod Middle

Granite,sandy,gravelly


60, Dodonaeaviscosa 20 Inactive

Eucalyptus melanophloia, Callitrisglaucophylla, Dodonaea viscosa, Notelaeamicrocarpa, Aristida spp. 3

Iona356J0298780 6689323 0 Mod Upper

Granite,sandy,gravelly


60, Dodonaeaviscosa 30 Inactive

Callitris glaucophylla, Eucalyptus

melanophloia, Aristida spp., Domi, Beyeriaviscosa, Notelaea microcarpa, Cassiniaquinquefaria, Ficus rubiginosa, Alectryonsubdentatus 4


10/29

10

Brush-turkey mound aspect

Figure 6 below, shows the number of mounds with aspect at particular compass

points - the measurement of mound aspect. Of the 32 mounds found, 30 moundaspects were recorded. The highest number of mounds was found with a

southerly aspect (8/30; 27%), the next highest occurring at a northeasterly

aspect (7/30; 23%). Of the 30 Brush-turkey mounds with aspect recorded, 23out of 30, or 77% had an aspect between the compass points of northeast and

south.

Figure 6: Brush-turkey incubation mound aspect, cumulatively plotted on a compass graph.

Degrees from magnetic north are arranged around the outside of the graph. The number of

mounds recorded at each compass point is measured from the centre with increments of two

mounds. n=30

Vegetation

Dominant canopy species varied between sites, and consisted of one of three

Eucalyptusspp., Callitris glaucophyllaand Brachychiton populneus, sometimes

with mixed stands of these trees. Percentage canopy cover was recorded in a

range of 1% to 85% with 12 sites recorded as having percentage canopy cover

greater than 50%. Shrub cover species recorded at sites was dominated by six

species of shrubs. Percentage shrub cover ranged from 15% to 90%, with 26sites recorded as having percentage canopy cover greater than 50%. Dominant

ground-cover species was also variable between sites and consisted of two

tussock grasses and three species of small woody shrubs. Percentage ground-

cover ranged from 5% to 100% cover, with 16 sites recorded as having

percentage ground-cover greater than 50%.

At all but two mounds, canopy cover exceeded 50% in either the ground layer or

mid-level strata.

All plant species identified at the incubation mound sites are listed in Table 1,

above.


11/29

11

Locations

Figure 7: Location of Brush-turkey mounds surveyed in the Gwydir Shire, 2013. The NPWS

estates in the western part of the map area were not surveyed but are assumed to contain

suitable habitat.

DiscussionThis study focuses on the vegetation characteristics of each site, with an aim to

develop an understanding of the habitat preferences that can guide future

surveys and land management for Brush-turkey conservation. Identification of

the emergent tree species, the understorey shrub and groundcover species

permits the vegetation to be classified according to structure and speciescomposition. The vegetation at 28 of the 32 sites surveyed falls into the category

of Semi-evergreen Vine Thicket (SEVT), a type of dry rainforest (McDonald

1996). SEVT in the Gwydir Shire is characterised by the prominence of trees with

microphyll-sized leaves (i.e. leaves usually 2.57.6 cm long) such as Red Olive

Plum (Elaeodendron australe), Native Grape or Currant Bush (Carissa ovata), Red

Ash (Alphitonia excelsa) and Holly-leaved Birdseye (Alectryon subdentatus).

The preferred habitat of the eastern population is rainforest and wet sclerophyll

forest, both characterised by a dense canopy and shady conditions (Jones, 1988;

Goth et al, 2006). These habitat conditions provide a cool humid environment

reducing the desiccation of the incubation mound and allowing the Brush-turkeyto control mound temperature. SEVT has physical characteristics such as thickets


12/29

12

and dense shade similar to rainforest and wet sclerophyll forest, that is rare or

absent from the open forest or woodlands in the Gwydir Shire. In the region of

the western population, SEVT produces the necessary shady microclimate for

Brush-turkey incubation mound moisture and temperature control.

SEVT is mostly restricted to the steeper slopes and ridges in the Gwydir Shire

due to land clearing for agriculture. Many of the sites surveyed containedevidence of past commercial logging activities. At least one inactive site was

noted to have a large logged stump on the northern side of the mound. Logging

activities potentially could radically alter the forest structure, increasing light

levels and temperature, thereby reducing humidity and rendering the habitat

unsuitable for Brush-turkeys. The three sites at Iona and the Stonehenge site

have a history of commercial logging, and although they all contain some SEVT

species, the vegetation is primarily Callitris Pine and Eucalypt regrowth. This

regrowth vegetation has a less dense canopy and middle layer and is likely to

have higher temperature and light levels, although temperature and light were

not directly measured. Regrowth vegetation may not provide the same quality of

conditions for egg incubation and chick survival as intact SEVT. Further researchcomparing regrowth to intact SEVT would help broaden understanding of these

sites.

We speculate that the Brush-turkeys prefer the SEVT community, with its denser

shade, abundant leaf litter and assortment of fleshy-fruited plants to other

communities, but past dispersal has forced some individuals into sub-optimal

areas.

None of the sites surveyed had introduced plant species, although Coolatai Grass

was nearby some of the sites. Weeds such as Coolatai Grass change the

composition of native vegetation by out-competing natives and by changing fireintensity and regime.

Patch size

All of the mounds surveyed were found in large patches of vegetation with very

good connectivity to other patches. The hillsides around Bingara and Warialda

are well-vegetated and there is almost continuous connectivity over many tens

of kilometres. Most mounds occur in patches of continuous vegetation of at least

1000ha in size.

This study did not survey mounds west of the Horton River, or in KaputarNational Park and the surrounding ranges, although Brush-turkeys are known to

occur there. These populations are in very large areas of bushland, but are

isolated from populations around Bingara and Warialda by cleared valley floors

in the Rocky Creek and Horton River areas. The population in the area of Derra

Derra Nature Reserve and the Benbraggie State Forest are not connected to

either the Kaputar or the Bingara-Warialda populations.

While this isolation is not critical at present, future climate changes may force

migration across climatic gradients, thus putting these populations at risk.

Mounds


13/29

13

Brush-turkey mounds can incubate many more eggs than a typical birds nest due

to the massive size and energy output from microbial decomposition of leaf-litter

(Seymour and Bradford, 1992). Seymour and Bradford, (1992), also found that

the siting of the mound was advantageous. Building on top of old mounds

provided an insulated base for the new mound. Also, building mounds near

thickets reduced convective heat losses. Thickets also provide a protective

habitat for dispersing chicks, reducing predation from raptors, cats, dogs andfoxes (Goth, and Vogel, 2002; Goth, and Vogel, 2003).

Almost all of the mounds surveyed, active and inactive, had regenerating trees

and shrubs growing out of the mounds. Whilst microbial decomposition can be

an effective means for killing the seeds of plants, the concentration of leaf-litter

and raked topsoil in incubation mounds does provide light, friable soil conditions

for seed germination. There is a limited amount of research on the germination

ecology of SEVT (McDonald, 2010) and further examination of the species

composition of plants regenerating in Brush-turkey mounds would assist

understanding the inter-relationships between Brush-turkey and SEVT.

Motion capture cameras showed that both native and introduced fauna were

attracted to Brush-turkey mounds. Jones (1987) found evidence of native

wildlife utilising mounds for food and shelter without predating the Brush-

turkey eggs or chicks. Lace monitors were photographed digging into active

mounds, presumably searching for Brush-turkey eggs and chicks, as were feral

pigs, and foxes and cats were also recorded at mounds.

Figure 8: Goannas are natural predators of Brush-turkey eggs and chicks. (Photo: UGLA)

Effect of recent dry conditions

The study area was experiencing a dry spell during the period of mound surveys(BOM, 2013) with the 2012 rainfall being just below average. Brush-turkey


14/29

14

incubation mound construction is usually preceded by rainfall of at least 50mm

in eastern populations (Jones, 1988). This rainfall ensures that leaf-litter has a

high moisture content to facilitate microbial decomposition within the

incubation mound. Observations have been made of Brush-turkey opening the

top of the incubation mound to assist rainfall penetration (Fleay, 1937). Rainfall

has been shown to have no effect on mound temperature (Seymour and

Bradford, 1992) except in the instance of prolonged heavy rain causing moundwaterlogging that causes microbial activity to fall, cooling the mound (Eiby and

Booth, 2008). In general mounds with lower water content tend to be built larger

to compensate for lower levels of decomposition (Seymour and Bradford, 1992).

The recent dry conditions may have affected both mound size, as well as

reducing the number of mounds being built for this year.

The recent dry weather has also increased the risk of fire, with a fire covering

approximately 300ha on one property known to have Brush-turkeys occurring in

October 2013. A second major fire occurred in November on one of the

properties surveyed. The effect on the Brush-turkeys on this site is not known.

Long absence of fire

All of the sites surveyed had in common a long absence of wildfire. Many SEVT

species are known to be able to tolerate fire and re-sprout (McDonald 1996).

Many rainforest communities are somewhat resistant to the spread of fire

because of high turnover of leaf litter, lack of bark-shedding species, a high

proportion of species with mesophyllous leaves and lower density of grasses in

the understory. Absence of fire at the surveyed sites may reflect the desire of

landowners to exclude fire so as to maintain feed for sheep and cattle on other

parts of the property.

Impacts of feral fauna

The use of the motion capture cameras enabled identification of a number of

feral predators attracted to the Brush-turkey mounds (Middlemiss, 2013).

Several inactive mounds showed digging disturbance, in some cases causing

considerable damage to the mound structure. Foxes, pigs, cats and dogs were

recorded on and around the mounds. While there was evidence of digging by

echidnas and goannas, the digging by pigs causes major disturbance, which

demolishes and spreads part or all of the mound. This impact will be quickly

rectified by Brush-turkeys re-building the mound during the breeding season,

but would be catastrophic while there are eggs or chicks in the mound.

Conclusion and RecommendationsIt appears that Brush-turkeys in the Gwydir Shire prefer to build their mounds in

Semi-evergreen vine thicket with a dense layer of tall shrubs or a dense ground

cover layer. The mounds are found from ridge-tops to gullies, but not in areas

where floods occur. All the mounds we surveyed were found in large areas of

native vegetation (>1000ha). The majority of mounds were found with an aspect

from south to north-east.


15/29

15

This report has identified several threats to the survival of the western

population of Brush-turkeys in the Gwydir Shire.

Threats identified are: feral animal predation by wild dogs, foxes, cats and pigs;

weed incursion into Brush-turkey habitat and associated changes to SEVT

vegetation structure and diversity; wildfire-induced changes to Brush-turkey

habitat; habitat loss and fragmentation.

In order to ensure the long-term survival of Brush-turkeys in the Gwydir Shire

and surrounding areas, we recommend:

1) Regional scale coordinated fox and pig control program to relievepressure on Brush-turkey adults, chicks and incubation mounds. A

combination of pest animal control methods, such as baiting, trapping and

shooting should be implemented.

2) Support for landowners and managers to maintain Brush-turkey habitatin good condition at known sites identified in this report. Support should

include regular site visits to monitor feral pests and weeds, weed andferal pest management and control.

3) Protect and further develop and enhance wildlife corridors betweenvegetated ridges of SEVT Brush-turkey habitat (eg: Derra Derra ridge).

Create regional-scale corridors linking the large populations in the region.

4) Raise the awareness of the community about Brush-turkeys. Encouragelandholders, town residents and school students to learn more about

them.

5) Support continued community monitoring and mapping of Brush-turkeysightings and incubation mounds to build a better picture of the

distribution of Brush-turkeys in the western population.

6) Supported scientific research into genetic diversity and variation in thewestern population of Brush-turkey, identification of population extent

and areas of suitable habitat where Brush-turkey no longer occur.

We recommend that the local landholders who have led the ongoing research

into the local Brush-turkeys, continue to lead the implementation of these

recommendations, calling on external expertise if and when it is required.

References

Birks, S. M. (1999). Unusual timing of copulations in the Australian Brush-

Turkey. The Auk, 116, 1, pp169-177.

Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). Downloaded on 30/10/2013 from:

http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=13

9&p_display_type=dataFile&p_startYear=&p_c=583447947&p_stn_num=05

4004

Eiby, Y. and Booth, D. (2008). Embryonic thermal tolerance and temperature

variation in mounds of the Australian brush-turkey (Alectura lathami). The

Auk, 125, 3 pp.594-599.

Fleay, D. H. (1937). Nesting habits of the Brush-turkey. The Emu, 36, pp153-163.

Goth, A. and Vogel, U. (2002). Chick survival in the megapodeAlectura lathami(Australian brush-turkey). Wildlife Research, 29, 503-511.


16/29

16

Goth, A. and Vogel, U. (2003). Juvenile dispersal and habitat selectivity in the

megapodeAlectura lathami(Australian brush-turkey). Wildlife Research,

30, pp69-74.

Goth, A., Nicol, K. P., Ross, G. and Shields, J. J. (2006). Present and past

distribution of Australian Brush-turkeysAlectura lathamiin New South

Wales implications for management. Pacific Conservation Biology, 12,pp22-30.

Jones, D. (1979). Notes on the breeding habits of the Brush Turkey. The Sunbird,

10, 1, pp.8-10.

Jones, D. (1987). Animals using the incubation mounds of the Australian Brush-

turkey. The Sunbird, 17, 2, pp.32-35.

Jones, D. N. (1988). Construction and maintenance of the incubation mounds of

the Australian Brush-turkeyAlectura lathami. Emu, 88, pp.210-218.

Jones, D. N., Dekker, R. W. R. J. and Roselaar, C. S. (1995) The Megapodes. OxfordUniversity press, New York.

Keys, M. G. (1990). Relocation of Australian Brush-Turkeys. The Sunbird, 20, 2,

pp.33-36.

McDonald, W.J.F. (1996). Spatial and temporal patterns in the dry seasonal

subtropical rainforests of eastern Australia, with particular reference to the

vine thickets of central and southern Queensland. PhD thesis, Botany

Department, University of New England, Armidale.

McDonald, W.J.F. (2010). National recovery plan for the Semi-evergreen vinethickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregionsecological community. Report to Department of the Environment, Water,

Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Queensland Department of Environment

and Resource Management, Brisbane.

Middlemiss, B. (2013). The Australian Brush Turkey In Gwydir Region NSW.

Report for the Upper Gwydir Landcare Association.

NSW Scientific Committee (2005). Australian brush-turkey population,

Nandewar and Brigalow Belt South bioregions - endangered population

listing. Downloaded on 29/10/2013 from:

www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/AustralianBrushTurkeyNa

ndewarBrigalowEndSpListing.htm

Seymour, R. S. and Bradford, D. F. (1992). Temperature regulation in the

incubation mounds of the Australian Brush-turkey. The Condor, 94, 1,

pp134-150.

The National Committee on Soil and Terrain (NCST). (2009)Australian Soil and

Land Survey Handbook, 3rd Edn.CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Vic.


17/29

17

Appendix 1Report summary for landowners

Brush-Turkeys of Bingaratheir habitat, threats and

management.The Australian Brush-turkey (Alectura lathamii), also known as the Scrub Turkey

or Bush Turkey belongs to the mound-building bird-family Megapodiidae, which

includes Malleefowl and Orange-footed Scrubfowl. Adult Brush-turkey are large

black birds 60cm to 70cm in height (Figure 1). The neck and head of both sexes

is bare of feathers and red in colour with a bright yellow wattle, or yellow foldsof skin, on the neck. Breeding male birds develop a larger and more prominent

wattle compared to female birds.

Figure 1: Male Australian Brush-turkey. (Photo: UGLA)

Male Brush-turkey scratch and rake leaf-litter and soil to build large incubation

mounds several metres wide and around one metre tall. The heat generated by

microbial decomposition of the leaf-litter in the mound, is monitored and

regulated by the male, and provides the warmth necessary to incubate the eggs.

Female birds visit the mound to mate and lay eggs, with each mound potentially

attracting more than one female bird. This reproductive strategy enables a single

male bird and his mound to incubate from 20 to 50 eggs each breeding season.

Brush-turkey chicks are covered with brown downy feathers and are 12 to 15cm

in height. They are able to fly, feed and fend for themselves within days of

hatching. Whilst there is some anecdotal evidence that parent birds assist in the


18/29

18

chicks escape from the incubation mound, there is no further parental care once

the chicks have left the mound.

DistributionHistorically Australian Brush-turkeys have been recorded in NSW from the NSW

south coast to the Border Ranges, and from Jindabyne, the Pilliga Forest and

Moree in the west. Land-clearing for agriculture and the introduction of cats,wild dogs, foxes and pigs led to a decline in the southern and western

populations.

Current knowledge of Brush-turkey distribution in NSW indicates that they

commonly occur on the eastern slopes of the Great Dividing Range (GDR) from

around the Shoalhaven River in the south to the Border Ranges in the north,

forming an eastern population. A smaller western population occurs in Mount

Kaputar National Park near Narrabri to around the towns of Bingara and

northeast of Warialda, on the western slopes of the GDR.


19/29

19

Western Population as a Threatened Population and difference from

coastal/urban populationThe western population of the Brush-turkey inhabits a type of dryland rainforest

called semi-evergreen vine thicket (SEVT), which is hotter and drier than the

rainforests of the eastern population. The NSW Scientific Committee has listed

the western population of Brush-turkey as a Threatened Population,, due to the

high risk of extinction. The western population has limited suitable habitat dueto land clearing. Areas of suitable habitat connecting the eastern and western

populations are fragmented and possibly incomplete, isolating the western

population. Lack of connectivity of the western population with the larger

eastern population increases the risk of inbreeding and extinction.

Local actionThere has recently been considerable community interest in Brush-turkeys in

the Gwydir region (Figure 2). From the initial use of a few motion detection

cameras on a small number of Brush-turkey mounds, landowners and the Upper

Gwydir Landcare Association (UGLA) have purchased and utilised more camerasand have aroused greater community awareness of biodiversity in the region.

Figure 2: Inspecting an inactive mound that has been damaged by pigs. (Photo: D. Carr)

A small survey of Brush-turkey mounds in the Derra Derra Nature Reserve found

7 inactive mounds, and sparked interest in the vegetation and habitat

characteristics that are favoured by Brush-turkeys in the Gwydir Shire.

UGLA, with support from the Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment Management

Authority, have supported the community by providing resources and advice to

monitor Brush-turkey mounds. The information gathered from the use of motion

detection cameras, observations by landowners and details of the flora and

habitat preferences collected by Stringybark Ecological, form the basis of this

report.


20/29

20

A second survey of Brush-turkey mounds on private properties has recorded an

additional 25 mounds and used information from landowners to guide the

search, as well as collecting measurements and observations of the vegetation

preferences gathered in the initial survey.

Increased awareness amongst local Turkey Spotters has been key to the

identification of new Brush-turkey mounds. Most of the Brush-turkey moundssurveyed have been found well off the beaten track, by informed locals

exchanging knowledge through the UGLA.

Local habitat preferenceFrom the observations of active and inactive mounds in the Gwydir Shire the

common characteristics are that Brush-turkey mounds are most likely to be

found in large patches of bush, with Semi-evergreen Vine-thicket (SEVT) in a

southerly to northeasterly aspect. Mounds were routinely sited on the southern

side of large trees or under closely spaced patches of trees so that they were

shaded in the hotter parts of the day.

Incubation mounds may be built on steeply sloping sites to flat sites, with no

clear relationship between altitude and position on slope. Mounds were found on

ridge tops, mid-slope, and in gullies beside creek beds. Soil type was also variable

across sites, with basalt, granite, metasediment (trap) and sandstone derived

soils.

At both active and inactive mounds across most sites there was evidence of other

animal species, native and introduced, being attracted to the mounds. This

supports the idea that the mounds are important sites of biological activity

providing food and shelter to other species such as lizards, birds and native

mammals. Long inactive mounds are recognized by the remaining mound of soiland several were still attracting wildlife looking for food, evidenced by small

feeding diggings. Most mounds surveyed had regenerating trees and shrubs

growing out of the mounds.

Threats

The western population is threatened with extinction by the combined effects of

introduced predators such as pigs, foxes, cats and wild dogs with extra pressure

from habitat loss and fragmentation.

Pigs disturb incubation mounds searching for eggs and chicks to eat (Figure 3).

Rooting through the mounds destroys the structure, releases heat and requiresthe male Brush-turkey to expend more energy on mound reconstruction.


21/29

21

Figure 3: Pig digging into an active mound. (Photo: UGLA)

Foxes eat and destroy eggs by digging into the mound and eat chicks after they

have hatched and dispersed into the bush (Figure 4).

Cats kill and eat chicks and can often penetrate thick scrub where chicks might

otherwise be safe from birds of prey, dogs and foxes. Chicks are much more

vulnerable to predation than adult birds, which are larger. Habitat fragmentation

restricts the dispersal of birds and favours predation by birds of prey hunting

around habitat edges.

Weeds, particularly perennial grasses, can change the Brush-turkey habitat by

competing with native plants and changing fire intensities.

Fire reduces available leaf-litter and promotes fire-tolerant plant species at the

expense of other plant species that may provide food and shelter sources.

Habitat loss reduces the available area to live and reproduce in thereby limiting

the number of Brush-turkey in a population. This can lead to inbreeding in thelong term.

What can you do?

Feral animal control programs can reduce pressures on Brush-turkey living on

your property. Controlling feral animals will increase the survival of both adults

and chicks, and ensure more successful breeding each year. Control programs

must be coordinated among neighbours in order to be effective.


22/29


23/29

23

Appendix 2: Talking TurkeyBird and Mound Spotting Record

Sheet

Have you seen a brush turkey or its mound in the Bingara,

Warialda, Back Creek, Pallal, Gravesend or surrounding area? Brush

turkeys in this area are part of a rare population, separated from

their cousins on the coast. We would like to know more aboutwhere brush turkeys live or used to live so we can make better

decisions to ensure their survival in this area. Can you help by

recording some information about your sighting on this sheet and

sending it to: Upper Gwydir Landcare Bingara, PO Box 108, NSW 2404

1. Did you see a live turkey (or turkeys)?

No.Go to 2 Yes. How many.._________? What was it doing?

_________________________________________________

Was it on or near a mound? Go to 2.2.Did you find a mound?( A brush turkey mound is a roughly dome-shaped pile of dirt, leaf litter, twigs and rocks

up to 2m high and 8m wide.)

Location(lat/long, map reference and map name)Describe location (e.g. 250m south of Keera Rd near River Rd turnoff)

Is the mound active (freshly scratched leaf litter) or inactive?

Are any of these plants present within 20m of the mound?


24/29

24

Red Olive Plum (small tree) Native grape or currant bush (low growing,

spiny shrub)

Red Ash (small tree, bottom of leaves

are white)

Holly-leaved birdseye. (small tree with

toothed leaves)


25/29

25

Can you name any other trees, shrubs or plants nearby?

Slope

Flat or near flat Moderate Steep

Aspect (which direction are you facing when your feet point downhill?)

N NE E SE S SW W NW

Slope Position

Lower or creek

flats

Middle Upper Crest or Ridge

Canopy cover

Tree layer (trees and shrubs taller than 6m)

Dense (shady) Moderate Light

Middle layer (shrubs and small trees 1 to 6m tall)

Dense (shady) Moderate Light

Ground layer (grasses and shrubs less than 1m tall)

Dense Moderate Light

How big is the patch of bushland where the mound is?

100ha

How big is the mound?

Width Height

Distance to nearest track or road

Distance to nearest water

Are there rocks in the mound?Are there saplings or trees growing out of

the mound?


26/29

26

Appendix 3: Photos

Photo 1: Inactive Brush-turkey mound illustrating shady habitat features, abundant leaf-litter

and SEVT. (Photo: D. Carr)

Photo 2: Native Grape; Wait-a-while: Carissa ovata: potentially an important part of the

vegetation for Brush-turkey chick survival. (Photo: D. Carr)

Photo 3: Large mound shaded by trees on northern side. (Photo: D. Carr)


27/29

27

Photo 4: Local landowners examine a large inactive Brush-turkey mound. (Photo: D. Carr)

Photo 5: Long inactive mound with numerous SEVT trees established. (Photo: D. Carr)


28/29

28

Long inactive mound now almost completely destroyed by pigs and goats. (Photo: T. Collins)

Photo 6: Long inactive mound in good quality SEVT. Numerous small diggings indicate this

mound still attracts wildlife. (Photo: T. Collins)


29/29

Talking Turkey Final Report

Documents

Transcript of Talking Turkey Final Report