New research shows that the population size of swift parrots could be less than 300 individuals.
Using genetics, a research team from the Australian National University showed how decades of deforestation in Tasmania and introduced predators have badly affected the parrot population.
One of the key predators is the sugar glider, not native to Tasmania.
“This is considerably lower than the published estimates derived from expert elicitation, and accords with modelled estimates of extinction risk in this species,” the researchers say in the abstract of Comparison of three techniques for genetic estimation of effective population size in a critically endangered parrot.
“Our study has important implications for other threatened species with unknown population sizes and demonstrates that by utilising available genetic data, reasonable estimates of Ne (effective population size) can be derived.”
The paper was published yesterday in the journal Animal Conservation. It is available here (paywalled).
https://youtu.be/8K_f9PsGyPA
Media release – Rosalie Woodruff MP | Greens Environment spokesperson, 2 December 2020
Swift Parrot Report Confirms Urgent Need to Protect Habitat
Today’s swift parrot population report is horrifying. This precious bird is teetering on the brink of extinction.
The numbers reported are sadly not surprising, given the Liberals’ insatiable appetite for forest destruction. If this beautiful bird is to survive, that must stop now.
For all their spin and mistruths the Liberals can’t change the cold hard facts – logging swift parrot habitat is pushing this iconic species towards extinction.
In a climate and biodiversity emergency, there is no justification for logging or destroying swift parrot habitat.
The government should be looking to far stronger protections for native wildlife. Instead, critical habitat is being torn down with reckless abandon across lutruwita/Tasmania.
While habitat loss through native forest logging is the greatest threat this tiny bird faces, the overarching problem is the Liberals’ obvious view that threatened species are little more than an inconvenience.
Another example of the Liberals’ disregard for the critically endangered swift parrot is the planned removal of six old trees containing breeding hollows, as part of a road-widening project near St Helens.
Despite department and ecologist warnings that removing these trees would have a damaging impact on breeding, the Liberals intend to push on regardless. Information received today confirms they even refused to refer this project to the federal government for a threatened species impact assessment.
While the Gutwein Government continues to log native forests, threatened species like the swift parrot will be pushed further towards extinction. It’s an undeniable and shameful truth.
If this government doesn’t want to be responsible for the swift parrot suffering the same fate as the thylacine, they have to act now. The only way to protect unique Tasmanian wildlife is to protect their habitat – and that means to end native forest logging.
Media release – Bob Brown Foundation, 2 December 2020
Rafferty’s Rule in Forests
The Bob Brown Foundation’s challenge to the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement in the Federal Court concluded this afternoon. “In view of the onrush to extinction caused by the destruction of Australia’s forests and woodlands, this is a huge test of whether the national government’s stated aim to have ‘ecologically sustainable forest management’ is real or a farce,” Bob Brown said.
The news today is that Swift parrots are in a spiral dive towards extinction, ANU experts recorded there are just 300 Swift parrots left in the wild. The BBF maintains that the RFA Act terms ‘ecological sustainable forest management’ and ‘Comprehensive Adequate Reserve’ provisions should mean what they say.
‘Instead, we have the onrush of extinctions because of forest habitats being destroyed, needlessly, day by day in Australia’s forests and woodlands’ Bob Brown said. In the Great Forest Case taken by the Bob Brown Foundation the defence – Commonwealth, State and Sustainable Timber Tasmania – maintained that the Tasmanian RFA contains ‘non enforceable legal obligations’.
Mr Ron Merkel QC, acting for the BBF, said that leaving Tasmanian authorities to have unconditional ‘discretion’ in forest management, as in the RFA Act amended in 2017, was not what the federal statutory regime intended. He said the Commonwealth law either required real protection to be delivered by the RFA, or it required nothing more than a piece of paper called an RFA. Mr Merkel said the position was clear: the RFA was to deliver real protection.
