STDP Annual Program Report 2013-14

Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

2013-14 Annual Program ReportDepartment of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

i

The 2013-14 Annual Program Report

The Annual Program Report is produced by the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program (the Program) to report on activities over the past financial year. This edition, however, covers the period 1 July 2013–31 December 2014, a period of 18 months, in order to align future reporting with the calendar year.

The Report outlines how, with guidance from national and international specialists and support from funding partners, the Program is working towards the vision of an enduring and ecologically functional population of devils in the wild in Tasmania.

The Annual Program Report is produced by the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE). The report also features contributions from the wide range of organisations that are part of, or work closely with, the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program.

ISSN 1839-1907 (Print) ISSN 1839-1915 (Online)

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Program Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Insurance Population Sub-program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

FOCUS ON: Contraception Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Monitoring and Management Sub-program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Wild Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

FOCUS ON: Mine shafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Research and Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

FOCUS ON: Bio Archive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Case Study: Professor Kathy Belov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Publications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Performance of the Program to Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Devil Dollars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

Where to from here? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Devil Directory (as at 31 December 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

1

The past 18 months has been a period of transition for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program (STDP, the Program). At the beginning of this period a five-year phase was completed. That phase had a strong focus on establishing an Insurance Population, improving knowledge of the presence of Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) in the wild and establishing the Maria Island devil population.

With the completion of this period, the conservation actions of the Program have been considerably broadened. The Program’s strategic direction is now focused on establishing disease-free devil populations in Tasmania and developing strategies to maintain viable populations in the wild across Tasmania.

Along with this substantial development in the strategic direction of the Program, a number of initiatives have also been advanced. These include:

• significant progress in knowledge of the disease and steps towards immunising against it

• implementing the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program

• opening the fourth Devil Island

• welcoming new member institutions into the Insurance Population

• monitoring devils and other fauna on Maria Island, and

• working to secure a DFTD-free population of devils on the Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas

It has been gratifying to see the Program’s performance and achievements favourably recognised in a recent review commissioned by the Federal Government. The aims of the review were to evaluate the impacts and achievements of the Program, and to identify potential legacy contributions to the longer-term Program goals. The final report, which provides the performance assessment along with a series of recommendations, was finalised in July 2013. A copy, as well as a summary table showing the Program’s responses to the report’s recommendations, is available to download from the Program website at www.tassiedevil.com.au

The review, conducted by independent expert group Environmental Evidence Australia, identified the establishment of the Insurance Population as a major achievement. It also commended the Program as “exemplary in active adaptive management in the scientific process”, stating that “the Program architecture, flexibility, governance and collaborative agenda enabled understanding of the threat and management options to be continually informed as the science in many research areas matured”.

Recognition of the strong collaborative nature of the Program is important. The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program has succeeded in building very productive partnerships between governments, the conservation breeding community (zoos and wildlife parks), research groups and the community.

Much of the work undertaken over the past 18 months could not have been done without the support and guidance of collaborators, colleagues and the community. The stories of lucky devils Savage and Larry, (Pp. 19-21) are just two of the many that make this abundantly clear. The Program is proud of relationships forged and maintained with national and international research institutions, with zoos across the nation and across the globe, with community volunteers, with Tasmanian businesses and with colleagues in all three tiers of Government.

I hope you enjoy reading about the Program’s achievements. I encourage you to keep up to date with all the activities of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program throughout the year at www.tassiedevil.com.au and on our Facebook page.

Alistair Scott

Chair, Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Steering Committee

Introduction

2013-14 Annual Program Report

2

The 2012–13 Annual Program Report made the statement that “This species and its disease are creating a unique management issue never before faced: how to protect an endangered species which is still relatively common but which has a virulent, transmissible and invariably fatal cancer and how to manage the concomitant ecosystem impacts”.

Work undertaken over the past 18 months has tackled these unique issues head-on. The innovative Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program was developed in this period, and exciting progress was made in immunisation research. Concurrently the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program, in partnership with the Australian Government, moved closer to finalising the strategic document the Recovery Plan for the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), which identifies the key threats, options and actions required to ensure the recovery of the Tasmanian devil into the future. During the development of the Recovery Plan, Program activities have been aligned with the actions identified as necessary for the recovery of the species.

The final draft of the Recovery Plan specifies eight key actions which have guided Program activities over the past 18 months, and will continue to do so into the future:

1. Manage devils and DFTD in the wild

2. Manage threats in the wild

3. Maintain and manage the Insurance Population

4. Monitor Tasmanian devils

5. Improve knowledge of the disease and translate that knowledge to management actions

6. Research and measure habitat variables

7. Manage the recovery program

8. Communicate with the community and stakeholders

These actions, beneath which lie a suite of activities, help provide a picture of how the Program has progressed towards saving the Tasmanian devil over the past 18 months; and how the activities conducted by one part of the Program link with and contribute to the activities carried out by other areas. For example, work to consolidate the Insurance Population has

allowed the Program to turn its focus towards the wild. Releasing devils that are well represented genetically within the Insurance Population will enable the Program to supplement existing wild populations and bolster them both numerically and genetically. Additionally, the opportunity to release devils into the wild while DFTD is still present has created an opportunity for immunisation work to progress to trials in the Tasmanian landscape.

With 610 devils in the Insurance Population, including 132 joeys born in 2013–14, efforts to secure the species in captivity have well and truly succeeded. Helping to manage this outstandingly successful program is a new Captive Management Plan (CPM) for 2014–18, which addresses a priority one Recovery Plan activity: Develop and implement integrated management plans for all captive Tasmanian devils held at different locations. The CMP covers devils held in intensive management, in free range enclosures, on Maria Island, within the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program and soon, those devils that will be released as part of the Peninsula Devil Conservation Project (formerly known as the Tasman Isolation Project).

The establishment of the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program was also made possible by the success of the Insurance Population. Ambassador devils are sourced from a subset of the Insurance Population containing genetically well-represented animals not required for breeding. These animals are being used for advocacy through their public display at five zoos: three in New Zealand and two in the USA. This initiative delivers significant benefits for the conservation of the Tasmanian devil by raising public awareness of the fight against DFTD outside Australia, and by building on-ground support for activities being undertaken within Australia.

The success of the initial 12-month trial has seen this pilot program approved by the Tasmanian Minister for Environment, Parks and Heritage to become a permanent part of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program. During 2015 it is likely that more zoos in North America will receive Ambassador devils.

The population of devils on Maria Island continues to grow, with numbers at the end of 2014 estimated to be around 90 animals. The STDP and its partners in the

Overview: 1 July 2013–31 December 2014


3

Parks and Wildlife Service continue to monitor the health of the devils and any impact they may have on other fauna on the island. The world media continues to take an active interest in the project with a highlight being the production of a six-part mini-series, Devil Island, on the introduction of devils to Maria Island.

The imminent completion of a buffer zone at Dunalley will see the release of DFTD-free devils back onto the Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas in 2015, as part of the Peninsula Devil Conservation Project. These devils will include descendants of the devils depopulated from the Forestier Peninsula in 2012, as well as devils from the Insurance Population that have appropriate genetic

profiles. Constant monitoring of the Forestier Peninsula since the depopulation has not detected the presence of any devils. While a population still exists on the Tasman Peninsula, monitoring over the past 18 months has found no sign of Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD).

Work to understand how DFTD is impacting wild populations continued throughout the past 18 months. A monitoring program has been established to gain an understanding of the status of populations across the state. Annual monitoring will continue for five years to provide information to guide management actions for the recovery of the devil in the wild.

Work to establish the western-most locations of the disease also continued. Data from 2014 shows DFTD has reached the west coast of Tasmania in the Henty River region.

As always, the Program worked hard to moderate other hazards to devils. Road kill continues to be a major threat to devils across the state. Over 400 road-killed devils were reported to the Devil Mobile phone

number in 2013–14. The Program worked closely with government at state and local level to introduce warning signage, and to apply ‘ripple strips’ and other mitigations to attempt to reduce this threat. This work is ongoing. A new product known as Virtual Fencing was trialled in north-west Tasmania over the past year and has had significant success in reducing road kill.

The Program has also begun to work closely with mining companies to capitalise on the advantages these sites can offer to devils. Being controlled environments that often contain highly suitable habitats, mine sites can be surprisingly safe locations for devils.

During 2014 a bold new direction for the Program was announced by the Tasmanian Government. Known as Wild Devil Recovery, this new project will involve a number of key initiatives including field work to trap and monitor the movement of devils and to test ways of augmenting the wild population. This population monitoring initiative will focus on better understanding the impact of the disease in Tasmania’s north east and include field trials to test a new immunisation technique.

The outcome of all this hard work will be the return of the devil to the wild – sooner than first expected. It comes as a result of ten years of hard work in the field, in zoo facilities, and in the laboratory. The work undertaken during the past 18 months has provided the opportunity and capacity for this next step to be taken.


4

Funding partners

The Tasmanian Government

The Tasmanian Government, through the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE), provided the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program with $2.54 million across the 2013–14 financial year. For 2014–15 the Tasmanian Government has committed $2.4 million to the Program.

Australian Government – Department of the Environment (DoE)

The Australian Government provides project funding to the STDP through the Caring for our Country fund. In January 2013 it was announced by Environment Minister Greg Hunt that $3.3 million in funding would be provided to the task of saving the Tasmanian devil. This will consist of $2.8 million in project funding to the Program, with a further $0.5 million provided to a separately managed project.

Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA) and participating zoos and wildlife parks

The Zoo and Aquarium Association is the peak body representing the zoo and aquarium community throughout Australasia. ZAA manages the coordination of breeding programs and sets the level of professional standards and practice for its members. It also provides general support and advice where required to its members and governments on a range of issues such as biosecurity, wildlife disease and species knowledge.

The Program receives significant indirect and in-kind funding from zoos and wildlife parks associated with ZAA, estimated at over $13 million for the past five years. Zoos and wildlife parks also play an important role raising public awareness of the threat to the Tasmanian devil and helping to advocate for recovery action for the species.

The Program also maintains a service agreement with ZAA for the delivery of the Species Coordinator role and a range of services supporting the Insurance Population. This contribution from ZAA allows the STDP to meet the Recovery Plan priority one activity: Ensure adequate wild and captive potential founders to meet insurance population goals, and breed and move insurance population members as appropriate, to maximise genetic representation by wild source devils and maintain genetic diversity.

ZAA also provides support to the management of the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program. (See p. 10)

The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal

Outside of the core funding partners, a wide range of individuals and organisations contribute to the recovery actions for the Tasmanian devil. Generous donations from the public, corporate partners and other conservation funds contribute significantly to the Program and are managed through the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal (the Appeal). The Appeal operates within the structure of the University of Tasmania Foundation.

Over the past 18 months, the Appeal has harnessed considerable public support to fund a range of projects via the Tasmanian Devil Grant and Scholarship process. In 2013, 19 grants were allocated, and for applications submitted in 2014 it is anticipated that a further 16 will be supported. In this way public support is being translated into real progress on the ground.

Program Management

Nicole Willcox and Rebecca Cuthill of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal.


5

Funded projects range from vaccine research, genotyping the Tasmanian devil, contraception trials in the Insurance Population, construction of monitoring stations, determining the habit utilisation of wild devils, and a volunteer project to build humane ‘retirement’ enclosures. In addition, young researchers have been supported in their work via Honours scholarships and PhD top-up grants.

This has all been made possible due to the record funds raised during this period – a total of $508,595 raised in 2014.

The Appeal maintains an active presence in both traditional and social media. This profile was in particular evidence during the innovative social media campaign run during the second devil transfer to Maria Island, which raised significant funds.

With clear fundraising strategies being implemented into 2015, funding for a range of projects looks set to continue, with donors invited to be part of the exciting vision to secure a future for the devil.

You can support the Appeal by visiting their website www.tassiedevil.com.au or by contacting them at [email protected]

Governance

STDP Steering Committee

The Steering Committee is responsible for the strategy and oversight of the Program. It also performs the role of a Recovery Team by reviewing progress towards implementation of the Recovery Plan, assessing changing priorities and emerging issues. The Committee ensures technical advice, used in determining priorities, is sought from appropriate experts. The Committee includes members from the Tasmanian Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE), the Australian Government Department of the Environment (DoE), and the Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA). It includes a representative of the science community and a representative of the conservation community. The Steering Committee meets biannually and has two sub-committees:

Strategic Implementation Group

The Strategic Implementation Group provides oversight of the Program components in the Business Plan, as well as implementation and coordination of projects. It meets quarterly and is comprised of the Director, the Program Manager, and a representative from ZAA.

Meta-population Advisory Committee (MAC)

The MAC provides oversight of the management of the


6

Insurance Population, including the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program. The MAC has members drawn from DPIPWE, DoE, ZAA and an independent expert in small population management. It is chaired by the Program Director. The MAC has one sub-committee:

Captive Research Advisory Group (CRAG)

The CRAG was established in 2011 to keep the Program up to date on existing research, and to prioritise and support, or guide, proposed research. The CRAG met six times between December 2013 and September 2014. There are currently 13 active projects with the CRAG.

At the operational level, governance is provided by the:

Program Management Group (PMG)

The PMG provides coordination and planning for the operational management of the Program. It meets fortnightly and is comprised of the Program Director, Program Manager and Sub-program Leaders. Reporting to the PMG is the:

Molecular Research Advisory Panel (MRAP)

The MRAP evaluates research applications that involve access to the archive of biological material collected by the Program. More information about the work of the MRAP can be found on page 22.

Communications

Over the reporting period, communication plans were prepared and implemented for major projects including the Peninsula Devil Conservation, Roadkill, and Maria Island Translocation projects.

The Program continued to provide information updates to the community via the production of several hard copy periodicals, including the Annual Program Report 2012–13 and the Program’s newsletter. The more detailed news bulletin, Speak of the Devil, was also produced electronically and emailed to key stakeholders three times over the past 18 months.

The Program’s dedicated website at www.tassiedevil.com.au was maintained as the key source of authoritative information on the status of the devil and the Program’s activities. During the reporting period, 27 news articles were published detailing progress with research, monitoring and management strategies; and 41 articles were published on behalf of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal. The Program also worked with the Appeal on joint promotions and public events to raise awareness and funds to support the Program.


Governance Structure for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program (STDP)

Program bodies are shown in blue, Program activities in green, core funding partners in red and other major partners in yellow

7

Further news and awareness promotion was undertaken via the Program’s Facebook page. From 1 July 2013 to the end of December 2014, there were 74 posts, including videos and photos, and the number of page ‘likes’ increased from 8,719 to 10,414.

The Program responded to a significant number of inquiries from local, national and international media, covering a range of general and special interest stories. It also coordinated and managed several significant media events including news coverage of the release of devils on Maria Island and the launch of the Ambassador Devil program. The placement of devils at San Diego Zoo and Albuquerque BioPark in North America, and Wellington Zoo, Auckland Zoo and Orana Wildlife Park in New Zealand, also sparked national and international interest.

The Program participated in the filming of several international documentaries which screened in France, the UK, Australia, Holland and Japan. The most significant of these with respect to the Program’s investment of staff time, was the filming of a six-part mini-series for the ABC on the introduction of devils to Maria Island, Devil Island. The series screened in the UK and France in late 2013 where it was watched by an estimated 11 million viewers, and then on ABC TV in Australia in early 2014 before being released for sale on DVD.

The Program also assisted in the filming and production of a Japanese science documentary on the plight of the Tasmanian devil. The documentary was screened in Japan in 2014 and viewed by over 10 million people. The devil also featured significantly an episode of the Dutch nature-based TV series Freek Vonk in Australia in January 2014. The series aired on the Dutch public channel in September 2014 and was viewed by half a million viewers.

The partnership with the zoo community was strengthened by the Program’s attendance at the Australasian Zoo and Aquarium Association AGM and Symposium in New Zealand. Scientific staff attended a range of national and international conferences including the International Mammalogical Society Conference, Belfast, UK; the Australasian Wildlife Management Society Annual Conference, NZ; the National Island Arks Symposium, Hobart; the Australian Wildlife Rehabilitation Conference, Hobart; the National NRM Conference, Launceston; and the World Parks Congress in Sydney.

Finally, the Program and ZAA facilitated an industry forum in October 2014 targeting zoo keepers and captive devil researchers. Support was also provided to industry partners through the provision of resources and collateral to support separate zoo-based programs throughout Australia and overseas.


8

The work of the Insurance Population (IP) sub-Program addresses Action 3 of the Recovery Plan: Maintain and manage the insurance population. This sub-Program continues to be a vital component of the efforts to save the Tasmanian devil.

An updated Tasmanian Devil Captive Management Plan 2014–18 was finalised in 2014. The IP is managed under this strategy which is endorsed by the STDP and all ZAA members who participate in the program. The Annual Report and Recommendations, which is issued in December each year, reports against the goals of the captive management plan. In addition the Tasmanian Devil Husbandry Guidelines were revised and finalised in 2013. These guidelines underpin the husbandry management of all devils in the Insurance Population, including the animals held in overseas institutions as part of the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program.

The outstanding success of the Insurance Population sub-program continues. IP managers are working towards reliable and consistent breeding within space limitations, capacity having been reached in 2012. The Program no longer needs to hold every devil in a breeding scenario and so the goal over the coming 12 months is to ensure that those animals that have not bred before and are three years of age, and those individuals whose genetics are most required, are given breeding opportunities. The meta-population, which includes devils on Maria Island and those held in institutions overseas, has grown to 702 individuals – with 610 of these animals in the Insurance Population itself. Contributing to this growth were the 132 joeys

born in the 2013–14 breeding season.

There are currently 31 zoos and fauna parks in Australia which are part of the IP, and a further five zoos and wildlife parks overseas that participate in the Ambassador Program. The Program is grateful for the support the institutions listed on page 9 provide by managing IP devils at their facilities

Tasmanian Captive Management Update

Program staff involved in the captive management of devils held as part of the Insurance Population in both the north and south of the state were kept busy over the past 18 months, implementing integrated management plans for all captive Tasmanian devils – a priority one activity under the Recovery Plan for the species.

Expansion

Further expansion of the Cressy Intensive Management site is planned for early 2015. The expanded site will include a new quarantine area comprising an additional 14 animal pens.

The main area of the Cressy site will also receive an upgrade with eight temporary animal pens being replaced with permanent structures. Overall, the Cressy site will have the potential to house a population of around 100 devils compared to the current 60.

Insurance Population sub-program


9

At Taroona, expansion works were undertaken in September 2014. These included completion of a new food preparation area and a new designated vet area.

Free Range Enclosures (FREs)

A priority one activity from the Tasmanian devil Recovery Plan is to: Establish disease-free devil groups in large free-range enclosures on mainland Australia and in Tasmania, and on islands and isolated peninsulas in Tasmania. With a significant

contribution from the Tasmanian Government, Devil Island Project Inc. co-funded the construction of four Free Range Enclosures (FREs), also known as ‘Devil Islands’. The STDP manages these enclosures, the first of which was built in 2008, with the remaining three constructed between 2011 and 2014. The FREs are located on the Freycinet Peninsula, at Bicheno, Bridport and in Launceston.

The 2013–14 breeding season was successful at the two FREs in which breeding was attempted. At the Freycinet FRE seven juveniles were born from three mothers. At the Bicheno FRE seven juveniles were born from three mothers, with six of the babies being female.

From the 2014–15 breeding season there were only three pouch young from two mothers at Freycinet, with 15 babies detected in the pouches of five females at Bicheno. At the Bridport FRE, four of the 13 adult females trapped were recorded with pouch young in April 2014; by July the team was able to identify seven of the 14 adult females as having pouch young – 19 pouch young in total. This number was confirmed in the last trip of this period.


Zoos and Wildlife Parks in Australia

Altina Wildlife Park Featherdale Wildlife Park Symbio Wildlife Park

Australia Zoo Gorge Wildlife Park TCSA - Taronga Western Plains Zoo

Australian Reptile Park Halls Gap Zoo TCSA - Taronga Zoo

Australian Walkabout Wildlife Park Hunter Valley Zoo Trowunna Wildlife Park

Ballarat Wildlife Park Kyabram Fauna Park WILD LIFE Sydney Zoo

Caversham Wildlife Park Lone Pine Koala Sanctuary Zoos SA - Adelaide Zoo

Cleland Wildlife Park Moonlit Sanctuary Zoos SA - Monarto Zoological Park

Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary National Zoo and Aquarium Zoos Vic - Healesville Sanctuary

Devil Ark Peel Zoo Zoos Vic - Melbourne Zoo

Devils@Cradle Perth Zoo

Dreamworld Rainforestation Nature Park

Zoos and Wildlife Parks Overseas

Albuquerque BioPark USA

San Diego Zoo USA

Auckland Zoo NZ

Wellington Zoo NZ

Orana Wildlife Park NZ

10

Trapping activities in January 2015 will provide further information of numbers of weaned young at all FREs.

Quarterly trapping trips were also conducted in the FREs to establish and review the health status of devils, to record any physical changes (distinctive features) that could assist with identifying devils during camera reviews.

The fourth FRE (also known as Tasmania Zoo Devil Island Four) just outside of Launceston began operations with the arrival of seven male devils in December 2014. The group of males will be held until mid-2015 when it is intended they will be translocated into the wild.

Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program

A priority one activity from the Recovery Plan for the Tasmanian devil is: Maintain and if necessary recruit and increase the capacity of suitable existing facilities in Tasmanian wildlife parks and ZAA zoos, and if required export (on loan) captive devils to suitable overseas facilities.

With the successful establishment of the Insurance Population, the Program has been able to investigate opportunities for helping with the care of animals not genetically critical to the Program, while also contributing to the conservation effort for Tasmanian devils within Australia.

Over 2013–14 a pilot project was conducted to look at the feasibility of placing suitable animals in world-class zoos as ‘ambassadors’. The Tasmanian Devil Ambassador Program is based on international best

practice and designed to ensure that:

• the benefit to the recovery activities for Tasmanian devils is maximised

• only animals not required for the genetic needs of the Insurance Population are involved

• ownership of the devils remains with the Tasmanian Government

• husbandry and facilities are excellent and that only world-class zoos with a commitment to conservation programs are involved, and

• the intention of the placement is for advocacy and awareness, not breeding

The Ambassador Program was developed in close consultation with ZAA, and the Association played a central role in providing the program’s day-to-day management.

The pilot project was limited to the North American and Australasian regions, with 20 devils from the Insurance Population being available for placement. Applications were assessed by an expert panel, with two facilities in North America selected (San Diego Zoo and Albuquerque BioPark) and three in New Zealand (Wellington Zoo, Auckland Zoo and Orana Wildlife Park).

The devils involved will be provided with the best care possible, which is also a significant resource support for the conservation effort in Australia, allowing the Insurance Population to be run with greater efficiency.

The pilot was endorsed as a success and the Ambassador Program is being implemented as a permanent program. During 2014–15 the Ambassador Program is being expanded to include other regions (Europe) as well as exploring further opportunities in North America.


11

The zoo breeding program for Tasmanian devils has formed a significant component of the species Recovery Plan. Paradoxically, breeding success has meant the Program now faces the challenge of how to effectively manage devils to prevent over-population within the Insurance Population.

A pilot contraception project was approved by the Meta-population Advisory Committee (MAC) in May 2013. Work commenced in December 2013 and was completed in August 2014, and was undertaken in collaboration with a team led by the University of Sydney’s Dr. Cathy Herbert (see p.24). The aim of the pilot was to determine the potential use of a long-acting contraceptive implant to manage breeding in captive/ intensively managed female devils. Devils were chosen based on their genetic profile so that diversity was maximised even though reproductive output was reduced. Trials involved comparisons of the relative efficiency of two contraceptive dosages, while behavioural impacts, if any, on treated animals were also assessed.

For male devils, there was an additional aim of determining if contraceptives could facilitate group housing of male devils no longer required for breeding.

Two sites were used for this pilot: females were contracepted at Taronga Western Plains Zoo at Dubbo, and males at the DPIPWE facility at Taroona, Hobart.

The pilot project showed that contraception was effective in female Tasmanian devils, although questions remain about minimum dosage. Unexpectedly, the contraceptive implants caused an increase in testosterone in male Tasmanian devils, and so are not suitable for the ongoing management of males.

The project is continuing in 2015 with the aim of assessing the effectiveness of contraception implants in female Tasmanian devils in FREs and on Maria Island. The long-term aim is to develop a standard operating procedure for the management of breeding within the Insurance and introduced populations, especially in free-living populations in which there is no other way to control which animals breed.

FOCUS ON: Contraception Project

2013/14 Annual Program Report

12

Directly addressing Recovery Plan Action 2: Manage threats in the wild, as well as Action 4: Monitor Tasmanian devils, this sub-program provides for management of Tasmanian devil populations in the wild and the monitoring of those populations. Some of the specific activities undertaken by this busy area of the Program during the past 18 months include:

Annual Monitoring

An Annual Monitoring program was started in 2014. Ten sites around the state will be trapped over the next five years to determine the status of the devil population at each and whether the trend of that population is towards extinction, stabilisation or recovery. The sites were chosen to provide good representation – to cover sites for which there is historical data to compare the trend across time, and to gain information from sites which have been diseased for different lengths of time. This includes two sites that are currently not diseased.

The ten sites being monitored are:

• Bronte Park

• Buckland

• Fentonbury

• Freycinet

• Granville Harbour

• Kempton

• Mt William

• Narawntapu

• Takone

• Woolnorth

Of these ten sites, the Program monitors eight, and researchers from the University of Tasmania monitor two. The eight sites monitored by the Program were trapped between April and August 2014 and the two sites monitored by the University of Tasmania were trapped in November and December 2014.

All sites were trapped for seven nights using 40 trap sites that mirrored historical sites to allow a direct comparison from year to year.

Location of Annual Monitoring sites around Tasmania

If the non-diseased and recently diseased sites are removed from analysis, there is a remarkably similar trend in abundance and disease prevalence in the other sites (see below). Most of these sites have been diseased for some time and seem to have settled into a level of stability suggesting persistence.

Monitoring and Management sub-Program


13

Number of devils and number of diseased devils caught at each of the eight sites trapped by the Program.

Data is currently being analysed to ensure that the Program is collecting the information required to answer questions which may be posed over the next five years.

Disease-Front Monitoring

Due to the limited knowledge gained from annual disease-front trapping trips, the knowledge available from other projects trapping on the disease front quarterly, and the availability of University students trapping devils and providing data on disease presence, in 2013 the Program made the decision to conduct disease-front trapping trips only every second year, rather than annually.

The Program’s one disease-front trapping trip for the 2013–14 period was undertaken in November 2013 and was conducted ahead of the last known disease case, which at that time was west of Lileah. Two teams of three people undertook the trapping at Togari and Christmas Hills. A total of 131 individual devils were trapped across the two sites over the seven days of trapping. Both populations appeared to be healthy, with full age complement, high abundance, good reproductive output and with the animals caught found to be in very good condition. No clinical signs of DFTD were found in either population.

A secondary form of disease-front monitoring has developed with the expanded use of the Devil Mobile. With greater awareness of the issue, members of the

public frequently report not only of road-killed devils, but also diseased devils. The presence of DFTD on the west coast in the Little Henty area was detected through this method.

Maria Island Update

Following the successful establishment and breeding of devils released in 2012, a second release was undertaken in October and November 2013. ZAA recommended the animals to be released include a mix of devils from the Insurance Population, from mainland Australia and Tasmania. Veterinary officers from the Program worked with vets and keepers from the various facilities to conduct behaviour and health tests on the shortlisted animals.

Tasmanian-sourced devils came from Trowunna Wildlife Park and the Program’s FREs.

Mainland animals were sourced from Healesville Sanctuary in Victoria and Monarto Zoo in South Australia, and then transported to Halls Gap Zoo in Victoria where they spent a month in quarantine.

Thirteen animals were finally released in two stages on Maria Island in 2013. The first release was conducted in late October 2013 with the assistance of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Appeal and donors, who were lucky enough to participate in the release of a Tasmanian-sourced animal. Funds raised from this event covered the cost of the flight to bring mainland-sourced devils animals to the island, which occurred a week later in early November 2013.


14

The release site at Four Mile Creek was chosen by Parks and Wildlife staff in consultation with the Program to provide a shorter transit time from the airstrip, thus minimising stress on the animals. The site has a clear flowing stream and supplementary food was provided for the first couple of months. Monitoring indicated that most animals were maintaining good body condition in the early weeks after release, with the exception of one smaller second-release animal, which was given a week in the pens at Darlington to feed and gain condition before being re-released.

With very high breeding rates achieved, the establishment of devils on Maria Island can be judged a success. Depending on the survival of new individuals in the population, the total number of devils on Maria Island as of late 2014 is likely to be between 80–90 animals. The November 2014 trapping trip caught and micro-chipped a total of eight second-generation animals, representing devils from both releases as well as first-generation animals.

Various monitoring surveys focusing on vulnerable species were established prior to the original devil introduction. These have continued during the devil establishment phase with island-wide camera surveys, Cape Barren goose and Tasmanian native hen counts, eagle breeding surveys and little penguin and short-tailed shearwater colony survey work. In addition, analysis of fur, bone and feather remains from over 100 devil scats indicates that a variety of prey species, both native and introduced, have been used by the devils.

Camera data, which includes one year pre-release and one year post-release, is currently being analysed to determine site occupancy and detection probability of selected species.

Impacts on the introduced Cape Barren goose population have been significant, with no successful breeding detected in 2014. This was a predicted outcome, and monitoring is ongoing, with planning being undertaken should mitigation be required. Importantly, Cape Barren goose populations across areas of Tasmania (where they exist naturally) are considered stable.

Management of the devil population will be ongoing and will include contraception of selected females in 2015 to balance genetic diversity within the population. If successful, this tool may be used to slow breeding rates on the island in the future. In addition, as the population increases towards carrying capacity, individuals are likely to be selected for ‘wild to wild’ introduction on mainland Tasmania. Triggers for any such removal would be based on either a noted decline in devil body condition across the population or of individual devils, unacceptable ecological impacts on Maria Island fauna, or negative interactions with tourists. The information which will allow assessment of these factors will be provided by ongoing monitoring by the Program, and through engagement with partners and park users.

Monitoring and Management staff are also key contributors to activities undertaken as part of the Wild Management program (see below).


15

Wild Devil Recovery Project

On 23 November 2014 the Tasmanian Minister for Environment, Parks and Heritage Matthew Groom, announced a refocusing of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program towards population monitoring, field research, and research and development into possible immunisation techniques. This initiative is to be supported with funding from the Australian Government.

The work will require a better understanding of the status and condition of wild devil populations, development of options to reduce other threats to Tasmanian devils (such as road kill), engagement with community groups and key stakeholders to mitigate threats, and the development of techniques to successfully reintroduce devils into existing wild populations.

This project directly addresses key actions 1, 2, 4 and 5 in the Recovery Plan, through the development of techniques to manage diseased populations of devils in the wild in Tasmania and a significant trial of

immunisation strategies for use in wild population management. The project is comprised of four main elements:

• North-east devil population assessment

• Strategies to rebuild wild populations

• Field trials of immunisation viability in devils, and

• Wild devil management

The North-east devil population assessment will provide a detailed evaluation of the status and condition of the wild devil populations in north-east Tasmania, as well as critical information to inform future management decisions for this area and other compromised wild devil populations.

Strategies to rebuild wild populations will investigate approaches to bolster diseased devil populations, including augmenting long-term diseased populations.

Field trials of immunisation viability in devils, undertaken in collaboration with the Menzies Institute for Medical Research, will provide a ‘proof of principle’ for a vaccine developed to provide Tasmanian devils with immunity to DFTD. The project will involve the assessment of the performance of immunised devils released into a well-known wild population; in an environment that has few other threats, such as road kill.

The Wild devil management project will bring the findings of the other projects together, and apply them to a pilot scale demonstration of a Wild Devil Recovery Zone at Mt William National Park (wukalina). The

Wild Management


16

project will develop strategies to protect, augment and rebuild the devil population of the pilot site. Threats to devils will be identified and relevant community groups will be engaged to support mitigation efforts.

At the completion of the project knowledge from the Program will be applied to establish Wild Devil Recovery Zones across Tasmania, with the objective of establishing a sustainable and ecologically functional population of Tasmanian devils in the wild.

Peninsula Devil Conservation Project

The Program’s Peninsula Devil Conservation Project (previously known as the Tasman Isolation Project) is working to secure a DFTD-free population of devils on the Forestier and Tasman Peninsulas in south-east Tasmania. The project directly addresses the Recovery Plan activity: Establish disease-free devil groups in large free-range enclosures on mainland Australia and in Tasmania, and on islands and isolated peninsulas in Tasmania. The population will be managed as part of the DFTD-free insurance meta-population, and once established will become the first wild-living population within their natural range that are bio-secured from DFTD.

During 2014 two infrared camera surveys, with a combined survey effort of 3580 ‘camera nights’, were conducted to look for devils on the Forestier Peninsula (depopulated by the Program in 2012). The surveys detected no devils. Although still requiring verification through additional surveys using cameras and other

techniques, this data indicates it is very unlikely that devils persist on the peninsula. The original devil population residing on the Forestier Peninsula was heavily infected with DFTD; therefore, if there are no devils left, there is no DFTD either.

An infrared camera survey at the end of 2013 indicated that a small population of devils (around 19) resided on the Tasman Peninsula. During 2014 monitoring staff conducted eight trapping surveys on the peninsula; 18 adults and 2 juveniles of the estimated 23 adults and 20 juveniles were trapped (typically on multiple occasions) and on examination exhibited no signs of DFTD. This indicates that the small population of devils on the Tasman Peninsula is likely to be DFTD-free and will provide the nucleus for establishing a larger population.

In an effort to reduce the risk of diseased devils re-infecting these peninsulas, the Program has installed approximately 800 m of devil-deterrent fencing along Annie Street, Dunalley. This replaces fencing destroyed in the 2013 bushfire, and so has also contributed to the local recovery effort. Program staff are designing and testing other barriers and deterrents to devils for installation on the highway and intertidal zones. These deterrents include road grids, animal activated lights, and other features that will not dramatically impinge on the use of the area. The planned completion of this buffer zone is July 2015.


17

An infrared camera survey of devils in the Dunalley and Copping area (north of the buffer zone) from August–September 2014 found that devils are widely distributed across the area, albeit at very low density as a result of the DFTD-induced population decline. Nineteen individual devils were identified in 230 km2, including two devils with symptoms indicative of DFTD infection. The Program is currently considering management options to reduce the risk that this diseased devil population poses to establishing a DFTD-free population on the Peninsula.

Program staff have been engaging with the community on the Peninsula and in the Dunalley area. Activities have included attending or presenting at the Bream Creek Show, Dunalley Science (Week) Expo, Tasman University of the Third Age, the Tasman Wildlife Expo, Nubeena High School, the Port Arthur Talks series and Tasman Council. The Program has also given opportunities to several local volunteers, and to volunteers further afield, through WildCare’s Friends of the Tasmanian Devil group. Details of the reintroduction project were also presented at the Australasian Wildlife Management Society’s annual conference in November 2013, and were enthusiastically received.

The Roadkill Project

The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Roadkill Project was implemented in 2009. The number of devils killed on roads is a statewide problem and can be a key (additional) threatening process for devil populations already under threat from DFTD. As such mitigation of this threat is a particularly important tool for use in supporting the Wild Devil Recovery project. Members of the community are encouraged to report Tasmanian devils killed on roads through a number of options including reply-paid forms, email, phone and SMS services to the Devil Mobile (0427 733 511), and an online report form (see www.tassiedevil.com.au).

In 2013 the use of the Devil Mobile was significantly expanded to incorporate reporting (and potential response) to other devil interactions (see Pp. 18-19 Devil Interactions). To support this activity the Program is very thankful for assistance from colleagues in the Parks and Wildlife Service, Bonorong Wildlife Sanctuary and community-based wildlife carers and volunteers.


18

The Program received 448 reports of individual road-killed devils in the 18 months to 31 December 2014. The highest number of reports were received over the months of December– March, (combined 2013–14 data), a consistent annual trend which aligns with seasonal peaks in juvenile dispersal and an increase in traffic volume over the summer months. Of the total individual road-killed devils reported, 57 per cent of these occurred over these five months during the 18 month reporting period.

Virtual Fencing

Mitigating other threats, such as roadkill, is an identified activity from the Recovery Plan: Conduct specific research into the extent and magnitude of impact of non-disease threats and effectiveness of mitigation methods as required. Mitigating roadkill in high incidence areas can be a difficult task, with few options available – until recently. In early 2014 the Sydney-based company Wildlife Safety Solutions began a trial of a product known as Virtual Fencing, which had shown great success in mitigating wildlife roadkill in Europe and in the USA. A trial site was chosen in north-west Tasmania, selected for the high levels of reports of roadkill from the area. The trial involved

monitoring roadkill along ten km of road, with the Virtual Fencing devices protecting four km of road within the test area. Monitoring began in November 2013, before Virtual Fencing devices were installed. Following the installation of Virtual Fencing devices in February, a dramatic drop in roadkill was recorded, with early results showing the effectiveness of the Virtual Fencing product on all wildlife, not only devils. With funding support from Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Appeal, Virtual Fencing will soon be trialled at other sites around the state.

Devil Interactions

In addition to reports of road-killed devils, many other calls were made to the Devil Mobile. These often involved the discovery of devils living under houses in semi-urban areas, most frequently during summer when females are denning and weaning their young. Just one example of a happy outcome for home owner and devil can be seen in a story the Program calls the Accidental Conservationist.


19

In September 2014 Robert from Cygnet contacted the Devil Mobile to report strange noises under his floor. The Program installed cameras at strategic locations and checked the footage after a week, revealing a healthy mother devil and her three playful young. The devils were regularly using the underfloor area of Robert’s house as a den and another adult devil also visited the entrance whilst the cameras were active. Of particular note was that the young devils were fairly advanced for the time of year, possibly indicating an

earlier than usual birth period. After identifying the source of the noises, Robert was happy to allow the devil family to stay until dispersal.

Other calls were more serious but likewise have had happy outcomes for the devils involved. One such is the tale of ‘Savage’ the devil, which occurred in May 2014. A worker from the Savage River Mine called the Devil Mobile late one evening after being notified by a member of the public of an injured devil nearby. The worker and a colleague immediately went out to find the animal and managed to trap it. The injured devil was identified as DFTD-free, but was an old male that had seen a hard bush life. As photos were later to prove, the devil (soon to be christened Savage) was indeed missing one eye (an old injury) and was quite grizzled.

One of the mine managers drove Savage to the vet at Wynyard – a trip of several hours, late at night. The next morning the vet advised that the only injury to Savage was a dislocated hip, which was put back into place under anaesthetic. Savage was also cleared of any obvious DFTD symptoms. Savage’s post-operative care was provided by Central North Wildlife Care and Rescue at Forthside, where he was driven to by staff


Results over one year with Virtual Fencing in place on Arthur River Rd, north-west Tasmania

20

from the PWS Ulverstone Field Centre. After a week of rehabilitation, Savage was chauffeured home by staff from Grange Resources (which runs the Savage River Mine). This incident is noteworthy for the help freely provided by the large group of people involved – miners, managers, veterinarians, carers, and staff from the Parks and Wildlife Service and the STDP, who all worked together to find a positive solution for an old devil.

Following this incident, and that of “Larry” in July 2014 (see Focus On, p. 21), the STDP, in collaboration with the Tasmanian Minerals and Energy Council coordinated a workshop for Tasmanian mining companies about how their operations and devils can co-exist.

Mining Workshop

Held on 26–27 August 2014, the purpose of the workshop was to engage with mining companies and to discuss how they can contribute to devil management on and near mine sites. Attendees from seven different companies heard presentations and participated in demonstrations on topics such as the biology of the devil (demography, ecology, dens), devil tracks and traces, monitoring techniques, an explanation of what DFTD is and how it affects devils, other diseases to which devils are susceptible, roadkill and other threats, and how to process camera data. Workshop attendees

also had the opportunity to discuss how prescriptions around mining developments, as they relate to devils, can be managed.

A video camera which was set in the area of the mine during this workshop picked up footage of a fit looking Savage (identifiable by his one eye) feasting on a carcase – a great conclusion to the incident for all involved.


Savage the devil being released by Savage River Mine employees. Nick Mooney with devil and devil trap at the workshop.

Savage the devil feasts on a carcase.

21

In July 2014 a young Tasmanian devil was rescued by Parks and Wildlife Service field staff from a derelict mining pit at the Warrawee Conservation Area south of Latrobe. The devil had fallen about five metres into the muddy pit and was looking very bedraggled when discovered by a field officer who was recording the location of the remnants of decades-old mining activity.

After contacting the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program, PWS Leven Field Centre staff responded with a ladder, ropes and harness and rescued the lucky devil that came to be known as ‘Larry’. After being rescued Larry was immediately taken into care by the Central North Wildlife Care and Rescue Group and responded well to treatment, despite having some minor medical problems.

After nearly two weeks in care, Larry had put on weight and appeared to be recovering from his ordeal. He was released after being given a clean bill of health from a vet and microchipped, so that if he is ever trapped by the Program in the future his history and background will be known.

Since that time, the Program and PWS have been working closely with Environmental Assessment Officers from Mineral Resources Tasmania (MRT), investigating how to make mine ventilation shafts and sub-surface pits in key locations around the state safer for animals. Funding has been secured by MRT for this work and planning is progressing to develop an assessment method for each site. The assessment will include a scoring system to establish the likelihood that wildlife could fall in to a pit based on terrain, habitat and other factors; the chance a fallen animal could get out, which will vary from species to species; the chance of injury; feasibility for mitigation at the site; the establishment of the scale of works required to undertake such mitigation; and the need for mitigation when the risk to humans is also factored in. The heritage value of individual sites will also be considered.

As with the cooperative effort to save Savage, the rescue of Larry and the ensuing work undertaken to begin to make mine shafts safer for animals has revealed the enthusiasm and support the Program frequently receives from colleagues and the community.

FOCUS ON: Mine shafts


22

Research into the disease and potential methods of managing it directly address the threatening process for Tasmanian devils in the wild, and is a key action from the Recovery Plan: Improve knowledge of the disease and translate to management actions.

A number of institutions are engaged in significant research programs, all of which support collaborative research with the Program. This group includes the Animal Health Laboratory at Mt Pleasant in Launceston which has a key role in providing diagnostic support to the Program and external collaborators, monitoring the evolution of DFTD, providing laboratory support for collaborative research, and conducting research into disease prevention and treatment (see Animal Health Laboratory, below).

The Program provides some direct financial support to major projects conducted by the Menzies Institute for Medical Research and the University of Sydney, and significant in-kind support to all research partners. In addition, the Program enables collaborative research with any suitable institution that can demonstrate relevance and justify access to its resources. The STDP website outlines opportunities for researchers, facilitated through the Captive Research Advisory Group (for access to the Insurance Population) and the Molecular Research Advisory Panel (for access to archived biological material).

Animal Health Laboratory (Mt Pleasant)

DPIPWE’s Animal Health Laboratory team at Mt Pleasant examines samples such as blood, faeces and tissue from wild and captive devils, and devil carcasses including those killed on roads. Over 70 samples were analysed in the reporting period, the results of which have informed the overall health and DFTD status of devils. The team has continued their investigations into the chromosomal arrangement and gene sequence of devils and DFTD, and into development of a pre-clinical diagnostic test. Both areas of research will contribute to devil recovery by informing genetic management of the species, and providing a means to diagnose the disease before it becomes visible and contagious, a priority activity in the Recovery Plan.

During the reporting period, the Program supported 19 external researchers by providing biological material such as blood, DNA and tissue. Samples are stored in the Tasmanian Devil Bio Archive (see Focus On, below) and access is granted via the Molecular Research Advisory Panel (MRAP). The principal criterion used by the MRAP to assess applications is the project’s potential to contribute to devil recovery. In line with this, researchers using material from the Bio Archive contributed information and developed tools for managing wild and captive devils. Areas of research included avenues for making the disease recognisable to the devil’s immune system, which is an important step in developing a vaccine; and understanding how the disease affects the population genetic diversity of wild devils and potential mitigation strategies.

Menzies Institute of Medical Research

A part of the University of Tasmania, the Menzies Institute has a centre for studies into DFTD and vaccine research led by Professor Greg Woods.

Research and Collaboration


23

The research to date strongly supports that under the right conditions, Tasmanian devils can produce an immune response against DFTD cells. The challenge is to use this to produce a vaccine. Part of this research will be trialled in the Wild Devil Recovery Project.

The Menzies Institute also supports the Program by providing much needed veterinary and tumour analysis work, as well as providing a crucial link with international scientists working in the field of DFTD research.

San Diego Zoo Global (SDZG)

San Diego Zoo Global is a conservation organisation dedicated to the science of saving endangered species worldwide. San Diego Zoo Global operates three facilities: the San Diego Zoo, the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, and the San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research.

SDGZ is partnering with the Program, the University of Sydney, and the Zoo and Aquarium Association to develop the first landscape-scale management action designed to save the Tasmanian devil in the wild. The aim is to ensure that the research discovered one day in the lab can be applied directly in the field the next.

Using the latest monitoring tools and next-generation technologies, this project will develop a series of applied management actions. These will be integrated with standard operating procedures to establish Tasmanian devil reserves across Tasmania, including landscape isolation projects on peninsulas and insurance populations on islands and in zoos.

Each collaborator brings a wealth of expertise to the project – SDZG being internationally renowned for their work on reintroductions, translocations and management of small populations.

Further, in 2015 SDZG is also providing support for an intern to work with STDP for 18 months, contributing to the Wild Devil Recovery project. This support is the result of the relationship established with the San Diego Zoo through the Tasmanian Devil Ambassador

Program. University of Sydney researcher Catherine Grueber (see below, p. 24) is also supported by the SDZG.

University of Tasmania

In addition to the collaborations formed with scientists at the Menzies Institute, researchers at the University of Tasmania’s School of Biological Sciences also contribute to knowledge of devils and of DFTD through studies on co-evolution of the devil and the disease, ecological research, as well as the contribution of field data. Research undertaken by Dr Menna Jones and her collaborators include a project to determine whether rapid evolution is occurring in the wild, and a project to assess the impacts of DFTD on nuclear genetic diversity in the Tasmanian devil.

The team led by Professor Chris Johnson and Dr Menna Jones has also contributed to work undertaken by Professor Kathy Belov of the University of Sydney. (See Pp. 27-28 Case Study)

Devil Island Project Inc.

Devil Island Project Inc. has worked with the Program to deliver projects of direct benefit to the conservation of Tasmanian devils. The Tasmanian Government and Devil Island Project Inc. co-funded the construction of four Free Range Enclosures (FREs), also known as ‘Devil Islands’. With the last Devil Island to be opened in the near future, Devil Island Project Inc. is working on developing further projects of benefit.


24

Researchers

Individual researchers, some affiliated with partner institutions, have contributed greatly to the advancement of knowledge about devils and DFTD. Just a few of the contributors in the area of scientific research are listed below.

Catherine Grueber

Dr Catherine Grueber joined the Faculty of Veterinary Science at the University of Sydney in February 2014 as a San Diego Zoo Global post-doctoral fellow. Broadly, Catherine’s work reveals how evolutionary and population processes affect individual and population level genetic diversity of threatened species. Catherine aims to develop new techniques for measuring and mitigating loss of diversity in conservation. In her current position, Catherine is working with San Diego Zoo Global in collaboration with the ZAA and the STDP in a project targeted toward applied conservation management of the Tasmanian devil.

The project uses the latest next-generation sequencing technologies to learn how patterns of genetic diversity can be best maintained in the Insurance Population. Catherine will focus on understanding founder relationships, comparing Insurance Population diversity to wild animals, and combining molecular and pedigree-based captive breeding protocols to retain maximal diversity of released animals.

Catherine Herbert

Dr Catherine Herbert is a member of the Faculty of Veterinary Science at the University of Sydney and has researched the role of contraceptive implants to help

manage highly valued Australian animals over many years. Catherine manages the contraception trials on Tasmanian devils in the Insurance Population (see Focus On, p. 11).

Tracy Rogers

Associate Professor Tracey Rogers from the University of New South Wales specialises in predator-prey interactions. The common thread of her diverse areas of research is the attempt to understand how mammals respond to change. Tracey has recently co-authored a paper about the devils on Maria Island, Survival success and foraging behaviour of captive-raised Tasmanian devil founders two years post release of assisted colonisation program, which will be published in 2015.

Elizabeth Murchison

Dr Elizabeth Murchison is a Reader in Comparative Oncology and Genetics at Cambridge University working in the area of genetics, evolution and host interactions of clonally transmissible cancers, in particular the devil facial tumour disease. Elizabeth has worked for several years with the Program to catalogue the genetic changes that have accumulated in tumours collected from geographically diverse locations. Her talk titled “Fighting a contagious cancer”, given as part of the popular TEDx series, may be viewed at https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_murchison

Hannah Siddle

Dr Hannah Siddle received her PhD in genetics and evolutionary genomics under Professor Kathy Belov at the University of Sydney. She is now a lecturer


25

in Molecular Biology at the Centre for Biological Sciences, University of Southampton and has worked on a number of research projects related to DFTD. From 2009–11 Hannah was an NHMRC Overseas post-doctoral research fellow in the Department of Pathology at the University of Cambridge, researching MHC molecule expression by Devil Facial Tumour Disease and is the co-author of more than a dozen papers, including Reversible epigenetic down-regulation of MHC molecules by devil facial tumour disease illustrates immune escape by a contagious cancer (2013). Hannah continues to work with Professor Belov – (see below on p.27, Case Study).

Kathy Belov

When Professor Kathy Belov, from the Faculty of Veterinary Science at the University of Sydney, read Anne-Maree Pearse and Kate Swift’s pivotal paper Allograft theory: Transmission of Devil Facial Tumour Disease in Nature in 2006 she didn’t know that her career trajectory was about to shift. Kathy was immediately captivated by this article as it seemed this disease didn’t make sense: a clonal tumour was being passed from animal to animal without invoking an immune response.

Kathy had a hunch that the answer could lie within the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) so immediately contacted Dr Stephen Pyecroft who was then heading up the Diagnostics section of DPIPWE’s Animal Health Laboratory at Mt Pleasant. This was the beginning of a collaboration between DPIPWE and the University of Sydney which has been in place for eight years, and is still going strong.

Kathy’s work is discussed in detail as a Case Study on pages 27-28.

Internships and volunteers

Over the past 18 months the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program has taken advantage of highly skilled graduates and undergraduates wishing to donate their time and knowledge to work with the Program and contribute to saving the Tasmanian devil. There have been a significant number of volunteers and work experience students across 2013–14, and the following students contributed noteworthy amounts of time and effort to the Program. As part of their work, some volunteers also undertook projects and produced papers on their findings, again supporting knowledge and understanding of DFTD and Tasmanian devils.

Jacob van der Ploeg

Jacob is studying for a BSc in Wildlife Management at Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands and volunteered with the Program from September 2013–February 2014. During his time with the Program, Jacob assisted with trapping, infrared camera and scat surveys of devils and carnivores as part of the Peninsula Devil Conservation project, and also assisted with an infrared camera survey of fauna on Maria Island, Cape Barren goose counts in the Furneaux Group, and the servicing of the FREs. Jacob analysed data collected from infrared camera surveys on the Tasman Peninsula to calculate minimum home range size estimates of devils in the area and to evaluate the efficacy of using cameras as a method for doing this. This resulted in an internal report, Minimum home range of Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) on Tasman Peninsula as determined by camera trapping.

Jackson Fraeunfelder

Jackson is studying for a BSc in Environmental Management at the University of Queensland and joined the Program for a placement from July–October 2014. Jackson assisted with infrared camera surveys on Maria Island and for the Peninsula Devil Conservation project, with trapping surveys on the Tasman Peninsula, and with the servicing of the Freycinet FRE. Jackson collated and analysed all the images and data from an infrared camera survey of devils in the Dunalley–Copping area and summarised this in an internal report, Infrared camera survey to determine the


26

distribution of Tasmanian devils and feral cats in the Dunalley area, Tasmania. During his time in Tasmania Jackson also volunteered on a vegetation survey in the Vale of Belvoir with Tasmanian Land Conservancy.

Dennis Lefterink

Dennis, who volunteered with the Program from September–December 2014, has a bachelor’s degree in Life Sciences obtained at the University of Groningen (Netherlands). Dennis also has a master’s degree in molecular neurosciences, specialising in multiple sclerosis, in which he hopes to obtain a PhD. Dennis became interested in DFTD and devils while working on his bachelor’s degree. He assisted with numerous trapping and infrared camera surveys, as well as helping out with servicing of the FREs. Dennis also spent a week at Melaleuca monitoring orange-bellied parrots with WildCare and the Parks and Wildlife Service.

The Save the Tasmanian Devil Program and its collaborators (principally the University of Tasmania) have been collecting devil blood and tissue samples since 1986, and DFTD samples since the late 1990s. This material is maintained in a number of collections. The collections continue to receive samples through the work of the Program and other activities under permit from the Tasmanian Government.

Recognising the significance of the material and the value of research that could be made possible by facilitating access to this unique collection, the Program established the position of curator for the collection and is working with partners to secure and optimise the management of the collection.

The archive is comprised of collections of:

• Devil tissue, sera, blood – 15,500 samples

• Tumour cell culture – 2052 samples

• Other cell culture (blood, fibroblasts) – 328 samples

• Ear biopsy and tumour samples – 15,000 samples

• Bacterial Artificial Chromosome (BAC) library – the entire genome of two devils

These collections represent extremely valuable archives that are used in a wide variety of molecular research. The Program shares these samples with collaborators who use the material for molecular research that has the potential to deliver significant conservation outcomes for Tasmanian devils.

FOCUS ON: Bio Archive


Jackson Frauenfelder.

27

Since 2007, Kathy and her team at the University of Sydney have had the good fortune to work with a variety of people involved in the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program and have branched out from immunogenetics to more applied conservation biology.

An important early collaboration was with Stephen Pyecroft and Anne-Maree Pearce of DPIPWE, and Greg Woods’ team at the Menzies Institute of Medical Research, to establish that genetic diversity in key immune genes, called MHC genes, was extremely low in devils. The proposal was that this lack of genetic diversity could explain how the tumour could cross - affect unrelated devils. Team member Hannah Siddle then went on to work at the University of Cambridge to show that lack of genetic diversity alone did not explain the spread. In addition, the tumour had evolved a strategy to down-regulate cell surface MHC to slip ‘under the radar’ of the devil’s immune system.

In addition to characterising devil immune genes and immune gene diversity, Kathy’s team (and their DPIPWE collaborators) have also worked on tumour evolution with Tony Papenfuss from the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Menna Jones’ team at the University of Tasmania, and Janine Deakin’s team from the University of Canberra; with Jeremy Austin from the University of Adelaide on MHC diversity in ancient devil samples; and with Chris Amemiya’s team from the Benaroya Institute in Seattle on construction of genetic libraries.

Now Kathy’s team is focused on two key projects. First, they are looking at how the immune system of devils changes from the “pouch to the grave”. All marsupials are born at a very early stage in development and

their immune system develops while they are in the pouch. Immunological factors in the milk and in pouch secretions play key roles in protecting immunologically naïve pouch young. The team have already identified a repertoire of powerful novel antimicrobial peptides in the pouch that have the potential to be commercially developed into antibiotics against multi-drug resistant bacteria affecting humans.

By working with the team at Devil Ark, Kathy’s team can carefully study changes in immunity in a large group of healthy animals. They perform CT scans, blood tests, molecular genetic tests and hormone assays, and plan to prepare an online encyclopaedia of devil development, as well as documenting the development and ultimate senescence of the immune system.

The second area of focus is a large collaborative project known as ‘Tools and Tech’ with DPIPWE, the Zoo and Aquarium Association and San Diego Zoo. Kathy’s team are using the latest sequencing technologies to provide genetics data for the Insurance Meta-population – that is, all devils managed by the Program and their partners, including those on Maria Island. The Program is leading the way in using the latest technologies to assist with captive breeding. Kathy shamelessly admits that her favourite part of the job is visiting the wonderful zoos and wildlife parks that are part of the Program and meeting the new devil pups!

A new aspect of Kathy’s work relates to the Wild Devil Recovery project. Kathy’s team has analysed the genetic characteristics of the devil populations at the proposed reintroduction sites. These analyses will allow the Program to determine which devils

Case Study: Professor Kathy Belov


28

would be best suited for reintroduction, with the aim to improve the genetics of the existing populations. In addition, Kathy’s team is able to advise on allele retention rates, which provide information on the rate of reintroductions required to retain genetic diversity.

Since 2007 Kathy’s team has included Dr Hannah Siddle, Dr Claire Sanderson, Dr Yuanyuan Cheng, Dr Katrina Morris, Dr Amanda Lane, Dr Catherine Grueber, Dr Emily Wong, Dr Beata Ujvari, Jolanta Marzec, Belinda Wright, Jian Cui, Lauren van der Kraan, Tracey Russell, Emma Peel, Liz Jones, Bec Gooley, Rehana Hawavisenti plus countless vets, Honours students, Masters students and volunteers. This group works tirelessly and its members are all passionate about contributing to saving the Tasmanian devil.

Their research is supported by the Australian Research Council, the Save the Tasmanian Devil Appeal and San Diego Zoo Global.


29

Nineteen peer-reviewed papers relating to devils were published in the 18 months prior to January 2015. These covered a diverse range of areas including the devil’s immune system (Howson et al. 2014) and how it interacts with DFTD (Pinfold et al. 2014, Siddle and Kauffman 2013); molecular genetics (Cheng and Belov 2014, Kraan et al. 2013, Lane et al. 2013, Ujvari et al. 2014a); ecology (Hamede et al. 2013, Hollings et al. 2014); population genetics (Brüniche-Olsen et al. 2014); the Insurance Population (Chuang et al. 2013, Hogg 2013, Scheelings et al. 2014, Sinn et al. 2014) and management of wild devils (Buckmaster et al. 2014, Ujvari et al. 2014). Three review papers were published which summarised knowledge of the disease (Bender et al. 2014, Morris and Belov 2015, Siddle and Kaufman 2015). A preliminary internal report was also produced for the Program which outlined a model for estimating the confidence of absence of devils from the Forestier Peninsula in relation to survey and removal effort (Van Rossum and Rout 2013).

The scientific community, in collaboration with the STDP, has broadly contributed to five recovery actions for the Tasmanian devil within the 2013–14 period. Over half of the peer-reviewed publications for this period have informed recovery Action 5, which aims to improve knowledge of the disease and translate this knowledge to management actions. The overarching translation of the research contributing to Action 5 into management is development of a vaccine.

References

Bender, H. S., Marshall Graves, J. A., & Deakin, J. E. (2014). Pathogenesis and Molecular Biology of a Transmissible Tumour in the Tasmanian devil. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci., 2(1), 165-187.

Brüniche-Olsen, A., Jones, M. E., Austin, J. J., Burridge, C. P., & Holland, B. R. (2014). Extensive population decline in the Tasmanian devil predates European settlement and devil facial tumour disease. Biology letters, 10(11), 20140619.

Buckmaster, T., Dickman, C. R., & Johnston, M. J. (2014). Assessing Risks to Non-Target Species during Poison Baiting Programs for Feral Cats. PloS one, 9(9), e107788.

Cheng, Y., & Belov, K. (2014). Characterisation of non-classical MHC class I genes in the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii). Immunogenetics, 66(12), 727-735.

Chuang, L. T., Pinfold, T. L., Hu, H. Y., Chen, Y. S., Schulze, J., Presley, J. M., ... & Glew, R. H. (2013). Fatty-acid, amino-acid and mineral composition of two milk replacers for marsupials. International Zoo Yearbook, 47(1), 190-199.

Hamede, R. K., McCallum, H., & Jones, M. (2013). Biting injuries and transmission of Tasmanian devil facial tumour disease. Journal of Animal Ecology, 82(1), 182-190.

Hogg, C. J. (2013). Preserving Australian native fauna: zoo-based breeding programs as part of a more unified strategic approach. Australian Journal of Zoology, 61(1), 101-108.

Hollings, T., Jones, M., Mooney, N., & McCallum, H. (2014). Trophic Cascades Following the Disease-Induced Decline of an Apex Predator, the Tasmanian devil. Conservation Biology, 28(1), 63-75.

Howson, L. J., Morris, K. M., Kobayashi, T., Tovar, C., Kreiss, A., Papenfuss, A. T., ... & Woods, G. M. (2014). Identification of dendritic cells, B cell and T cell subsets in Tasmanian devil lymphoid tissue; evidence for poor immune cell infiltration into devil facial tumours. The Anatomical Record, 297(5), 925-938.

Publications


30

Kraan, L. E., Wong, E. S., Lo, N., Ujvari, B., & Belov, K. (2013). Identification of natural killer cell receptor genes in the genome of the marsupial Tasmanian devil (). Immunogenetics, 65(1), 25-35.

Lane, A., Wright, B., Hamede Ross, R. K., Cheng, Y., Levan, L., Jones, M., ... & Belov, K. (2013). Healthy and tumour-afflicted Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus harrisii) do not differ at a key immune-genetic region (MHC class I). PLoS-One.

Morris, K. M., & Belov, K. (2015). Cancer Immunology of Transmissible Cancers. In Cancer Immunology (pp. 419-428). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Pinfold, T. L., Brown, G. K., Bettiol, S. S., & Woods, G. M. (2014). Mouse Model of Devil Facial Tumour Disease Establishes That an Effective Immune Response Can be Generated Against the Cancer Cells. Frontiers in Immunology, 5.

Scheelings, T. F., Dobson, E. C., & Hooper, C. (2014). CUTANEOUS T-CELL LYMPHOMA IN TWO CAPTIVE TASMANIAN DEVILS (SARCOPHILUS HARRISII). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 45(2), 367-371.

Siddle, H. V., & Kaufman, J. (2015). Immunology of naturally transmissible tumours. Immunology, 144(1), 11-20.

Siddle, H. V., & Kaufman, J. (2013). How the devil facial tumour disease escapes host immune responses. OncoImmunology, 2(8), e25235.

Sinn, D. L., Cawthen, L., Jones, S. M., Pukk, C., & Jones, M. E. (2014). Boldness towards novelty and translocation success in captive-raised, orphaned Tasmanian devils. Zoo biology, 33(1), 36-48.

Ujvari, B., Piddington, L., Pearse, A. M., Peck, S., Harmsen, C., Taylor, R., ... & Belov, K. (2014a). Devil Facial Tumour Disease, A Potential Model of the Cancer Stem-Cell Process?. Journal of Veterinary Science (JVet), 1(1).

Ujvari, B., Pearse, A. M., Swift, K., Hodson, P., Hua, B., Pyecroft, S., ... & Madsen, T. (2014b). Anthropogenic selection enhances cancer evolution in Tasmanian devil tumours. Evolutionary applications, 7(2), 260-265.

Van Rossum, C., & Rout, T. (2013). Depopulation of Tasmanian Devil Habitats. Internal report to the Save The Devil Program.


31

In July 2013 the previous Business Plan for the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program expired. Due to uncertainty in funding, a new Business Plan was not adopted until November 2014. As a result of this there are no formal performance targets established for the period of the Report. The Program has taken the performance measures established for the new Business Plan (2014–2019) and calculated target measures for the reporting period.

Performance of the Program to Targets

Recovery Action (Action number) Metric 2013–14 target*

2013–14 actual

2014–15 target

2015–16 target

… implement … landscape isolation projects …. (1a)

N of repopulations implemented 0 0 0 1

… trial … measures to manage DFTD and other threats … through … landscape management practices (1b)

N of Wild Devil Recovery zones started in year

0 0 0 0

[update] guidelines on … habitat requirements … and provide to all agencies regulating activities … related to high and very high threats (2c)

Guidelines and proscriptions are current (Y/N)

Y Y Y Y

… integrated management plans for all captive Tasmanian devils held at different locations (3a)

ARR is current (Y/N) Y Y Y Y

… adequate … founders to meet insurance population goals, and … maintain genetic diversity (3b)

N of founders added% genetic diversity retained

0>95 99.25

0>95

0>95

Maintain … [appropriate] … capacity of suitable … facilities … and if required export captive devils ... (3c)

N of animals in the IP in Australia*N of zoos in Ambassador Program

5505

6105

55010

55015

Establish disease-free devil groups … on islands and isolated peninsulas in Tasmania (3d)

N of animals on Maria IslandN of animals on Tasman PeninsulaN of animals on Forestier Peninsula

80~20

0

90~20

0

80~20

0

100~2020

… determine relatedness in devils (3g) Inbreeding coef <0.125 <0.125 0.0061 <0.125 <0.125Survey for DFTD at appropriate locations … (4a)

Long Term Monitoring sites surveyed in year

10 10 10

Study the … devil’s immune system … including vaccine feasibility ... (5d)

N of immunised devils rewilded per year 0 0 0 30

Investigate the spatial use of habitat by Tasmanian devils (6a)

% rewilded devils surviving first year >50 96† >50 >50

… appropriate oversight of expenditure on recovery plan actions (7a)

$m committed by Tasmanian Government$m committed by Australian Government$m committed by ZAA institutions

2.4

3.31.2

2.4

3.3††

1.2

2.4

1.2

2.4

1.2… recovery team … regularly assess[es] the effectiveness of the recovery program ... (7b)

Biennial review conducted (Y/N)Triennial review of tasks and priorities (Y/N)

‡ Y

Raise awareness of the threats to the Tasmanian devil ... (8a)

$K contributed by fundraisers (Appeal/DIP) ‡‡

500 470 500 500

… develop community roadkill monitoring and … apply … results (8f)

N areas with mitigation implemented in year

1 1 1 2

* figure includes animals in zoos and wildlife parks in Australia but not IP animals in translocations, landscape isolation projects or the ambassador program† figures derived from Maria Island translocation †† funding provided over a three year period‡ the recovery plan has yet to be finalised ‡‡ figures provided are for the Appeal only


32

The following table shows how funds received from the State and Federal Governments were invested across the Program in the last two financial years.

Sub-Program 2012–13 ($’000s) 2013–14 ($’000s)

Program Management 882 634

Monitoring and Management (includes Tasman Isolation and Wild Devil Recovery)

1 130 771

Insurance Population 1 884 1 194

Diagnostics Services and Research 780 347

Total 4 676 2 946

Devil Dollars


33

Work aimed at maintaining Tasmanian devils in the wild in Tasmania has been the major directional change for the Program over the past eighteen months. To date this has been through the establishment of DFTD-free populations, and the management of diseased devil populations to ensure that they are more resilient and sustainable. The Insurance Population has been established and is now able to provide a source for repopulation. The Program has developed skills and facilities that can be used to prepare devils for release into the wild to give the best chance of adapting to wild conditions.

The Maria Island translocation has succeeded and the Program is now managing this for the long term. Contraception techniques are being trialled on devils on the island in order to control the genetic input to this closed population.

The re-wilding of the Tasman and Forestier Peninsulas relies on the protection of the DFTD-free population from contact with diseased devils. The physical barrier already provided by the township of Dunalley and the Denison Canal is being enhanced with a ‘devil-proof’ fence. In addition, deterrents such as sounds (devils, dog barks) and high pressure air ‘guns’ are been trialled for installation on the main road. Devils are very adept at getting around, under, over and through obstacles but the series of buffers will reduce the risk of incursions.

Planning is underway for the re-wilding of devils into the north east of Tasmania, an initiative announced by the Tasmanian Environment Minister in late 2014. This bold and exciting move is supported by immunisation trials undertaken in collaboration with the Menzies

Institute for Medical Research. The devils chosen will also play a key role in a project, supported by San Diego Zoo Global, to develop tools to “dampen” the dispersal of released devils.

The necessity for wild devil management has been highlighted by the Annual Monitoring program, which has confirmed the persistence of devils at all long-term monitoring sites. The Devil Mobile has also contributed to our knowledge of disease presence with the confirmation that DFTD has arrived on the west coast of Tasmania, in the Henty area north of Strahan, coming through a “roadkill report”.

The next year will see a substantial effort by the Program to trial the efficacy of Wild Devil Recovery. This will include renewed efforts to reduce the number of road-killed devils, to mitigate the risks posed by mine shafts and to engage with land developers to help developments remain safe areas for devils. Progress has been made with the support of Mineral Resources Tasmania to map, inspect and mitigate the threat of disused mine shafts.

Through the Insurance Population and the Monitoring and Management sub-programs the STDP is well placed to tackle the challenge of Wild Devil Recovery. This action will deliver on the three key objectives of the Save the Tasmania Devil Program: retaining genetic diversity, managing wild devils, and reducing the ecosystem impacts of the loss of devils. The key goal for 2015 is to develop further techniques to achieve Wild Devil Recovery.

We look forward to reporting against progress in 12 months’ time.

Where to from here?


34

Steering Committee

Alistair Scott (Chair), General Manager, Resource Management and Conservation, DPIPWE

Chris Hibbard, Zoo & Aquarium Association

Peter Latch, Department of Environment (DoE)

Nick Mooney, Conservation community member

Prof Elissa Cameron, Science community member

Dr Howel Williams, Program Director, Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

Dr David Pemberton, Program Manager, Save the Tasmanian Devil Program

Meta-population Advisory Committee

Dr Howel Williams (Chair), Program Director, STDP, DPIPWE

Amanda Embury - Australasian Species Management Program

Dr Carolyn Hogg - STDP Species Coordinator (ZAA)

Drew Lee - STDP Captive Management (DPIPWE)

Dr Catherine Grueber - Independent scientific expert (University of Sydney)

Peter Latch, Director, Department of Environment (Australian Government)

Save the Tasmanian Devil Program Management Group

Dr Howel Williams (Chair), Program Director, STDP, DPIPWE

Gary Davies, Manager, Wildlife Management Branch, DPIPWE

Dr David Pemberton, Program Manager, STDP, DPIPWE

Dr Billie Lazenby, Science Coordinator, STDP, DPIPWE

Drew Lee, Sub-Program Leader, Insurance Population

Sam Fox, Sub-Program Leader, Monitoring and Management

Sarah Graham, Senior Communications Consultant

Devil Directory (as at 31 December 2014)


35


36


WANTED INFORMATION ON TASMANIAN DEVILS CALL OR TEXT THE DEVIL MOBILE

0427 733 511 Report road-killed devil

Help us investigate the impact on devils!

Report nuisance devils on your propert Let us relocate these devils if necessary!

Report devils under your house or sh We can monitor devils by remote camera!

Report unusual sightings or movement Let us know what the devils are up to!

Be our eyes and ears, and help us help Tasmanian devils recover in your area!

Signage for the Peninsula Devil Conservation Project (See p.16).

Design by the Land Tasmania Design Unit, DPIPWE

All photos courtesy of the Save the Tasmanian Devil Program.

Documents

STDP Annual Program Report 2013-14