{"id":"F2011L00854","name":"National Recovery Plan for Threatened Albatrosses and Giant Petrels 2011-2016","slug":"national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"repealed","isInForce":false,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":86563,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2011L00854-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"Repealed","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"Introduction","sectionType":"part","heading":"Introduction","content":"# Introduction\n\nThe first Recovery Plan for albatrosses and giant petrels was released in October 2001 in recognition of the need to develop a co\\-ordinated conservation strategy for albatrosses and giant petrels listed threatened under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). Under s279 (2) of the Act, the Environment Minister must review a recovery plan at intervals of not longer than 5 years. This 2011\\-2016 Recovery Plan includes the results of that review process.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"Species covered by the recovery plan","sectionType":"part","heading":"Species covered by the recovery plan","content":"# Species covered by the recovery plan\n\nTwenty-one species (nineteen albatross species and two giant petrel species) are covered by this recovery plan. These have been categorised as:\n\n(i) ‘Breeding species’: species that breed on islands in areas under Australian jurisdiction (seven species); and\n\n(ii) ‘Foraging species’: species that forage (or potentially forage), but do not breed, within areas under Australian jurisdiction (fourteen species).\n\nThis plan, and the accompanying Background Paper, were prepared for the species (see Table 1, column 2) as gazetted under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). The three additional species in the Table, while not listed as threatened under the Act, are included in this Plan because they occur in essentially the same areas, face the same conservation threats, require the same conservation actions, some are similarly endangered (as recognised on the IUCN Red List 2010) as the listed species, and their inclusion makes the Recovery Plan a more cogent document.\n\nThe taxonomy of albatrosses and petrels has been controversial for many years; it remains a work in progress and continued further development is expected. While a significant amount of new taxonomic information has become available since the 2001 Recovery Plan was finalised, including from genetic studies, this has not resulted in a resolution of the differing views on what is the most appropriate taxonomy. For a variety of reasons – including its international standing, use of the most recent data and review processes – and without wishing to stimulate unproductive taxonomic debate, this Plan uses the taxonomy adopted by the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP). The ACAP taxonomy is the same as that currently used by the IUCN Red List and Birdlife International; additionally, the Scientific Council of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) has recently recommended CMS adopt it too. Columns 2 and 4 of Table 1 show how to \"translate\" the taxonomy used in the EPBC Act gazettals and the 2001 Recovery Plan to the ACAP taxonomy. The influential taxonomic work of Christidis and Boles 2008 was considered carefully during the development of this Plan, however the albatross and petrel taxonomy they advocate has not been widely accepted and is significantly different to that used by the above organisations. The use of the ACAP taxonomy does not substantially or practically alter the conservation actions and management priorities contained in this Plan.\n\n \nTable 1: Albatross and giant-petrel species considered in this report, their EPBC Act listing status and scientific names, and their scientific names as used throughout this Recovery Plan.\n\n```html\n

Common Name

Scientific Name used in EPBC Act listing and 2001 Recovery Plan

EPBC Act status

Scientific Name used in this Recovery Plan

Breeding in Australian jurisdiction

Wandering albatross

Diomedea exulans

Vu

Diomedea exulans

Black browed albatross

Thalassarche melanophris

Vu

Thalassarche melanophris

Shy albatross

Thalassarche cauta

Vu

Thalassarche cauta1

Grey headed albatross

Thalassarche chrysostoma

En

Thalassarche chrysostoma

Light mantled albatross

Phoebetria palpebrata

Not Listed

Phoebetria palpebrata

Northern giant petrel

Macronectes halli

Vu

Macronectes halli

Southern giant petrel

Macronectes giganteus

En

Macronectes giganteus

Foraging in Australian jurisdiction

Tristan albatross *

Diomedea dabbenena

En

Diomedea dabbenena

Antipodean albatross

Diomedea antipodensis

Vu

Diomedea antipodensis2

Gibson's albatross

Diomedea gibsoni

Vu

Diomedea antipodensis2

Northern royal albatross

Diomedea sanfordi

En

Diomedea sanfordi

Southern royal albatross

Diomedea epomophora

Vu

Diomedea epomophora

Amsterdam albatross *

Diomedea amsterdamensis

En

Diomedea amsterdamensis

Laysan albatross *

Phoebastria immutabilis

Not Listed

Phoebastria immutabilis

Campbell albatross

Thalassarche impavida

Vu

Thalassarche impavida

White capped albatross

Thalassarche steadi

Vu

Thalassarche steadi1

Chatham albatross *

Thalassarche eremita

En

Thalassarche eremita

Salvin’s albatross *

Thalassarche salvini

Vu

Thalassarche salvini

Atlantic yellow nosed albatross *

Thalassarche chlororhynchos

Not Listed

Thalassarche chlororhynchos

Indian yellow nosed albatross

Thalassarche carteri

Vu

Thalassarche carteri

Buller’s albatross

Thalassarche bulleri

Vu

Thalassarche bulleri2

Pacific albatross

Thalassarche nov. sp. (platei)

Vu

Thalassarche bulleri2

Sooty albatross

Phoebetria fusca

Vu

Phoebetria fusca

\n```\n\n1 This change accords with the taxonomy adopted by Parties to ACAP; ACAP Resolution 2.5 noted that data warrant the recognition of Shy Albatross (Thalassarche cauta) and White-capped Albatross (Thalassarche steadi) as divergent and diagnosable species.\n\n2 This change accords with the taxonomy adopted by Parties to the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP); ACAP Resolution 2.5 noted that data did not warrant the recognition of Antipodean albatross (Diomedea antipodensis) and Gibson's albatross (Diomedea gibsoni), and Buller's albatross (Thalassarche bulleri) and Pacific albatross (Thalassarche nov. sp. (platei)) at the specific level.\n\n\\* Denotes vagrant in Australian waters.\n\nSee also Appendix C for further information on scientific names according to Christidis and Boles (Systematics and Taxonomy of Australian Birds, 2008)\n\n# Distribution and Populations\n\nThere are ten separate breeding locations for albatrosses and giant petrels under Australian jurisdiction (Table 2 and Figure 1).\n\nTable 2: Breeding populations of albatrosses and giant petrels within Australian jurisdiction.\n\n```html\n

Breeding location

Species

Estimated annual breeding population

Most recent survey date

Population trend

Trend assessment based on

Macquarie Island

Black browed albatross

57

2010

Stable

Annual data 1995-2010

Light mantled albatross*

~12001

2005

Stable

Data 1994 and 2005

Grey headed albatross*

108

2010

Stable

Annual data 1995-2010

Wandering albatross*

4

2010

Stable/ Decreasing?

Annual data 1963-2010

Northern giant petrel

1689

2009

Stable/ Increasing?

Annual data 1995-2010

Southern giant petrel

2534

2010

Stable

Data 1996-2004 and 2006-2010

Bishop and Clerk

Black browed albatross

~140

1993

Unknown

Very few data available due to difficulty of access

Heard Island

Black browed albatross

~600

2000

Unknown

Few data available due to limited access; 1954, 1955, 1980, 1987, 2001

Light mantled albatross*

200-500

1954

Unknown

Very few data (only 1954)

Southern giant petrel

~3000

1988

Unknown

Very few data: 1952, 1988, 2004

McDonald Island

Light mantled albatross*

Unknown

Na

Unknown

Not visited since extensive seismic activity began in late 1990s; visits not permitted by Management Plan

Black browed albatross

~80

1981

Unknown

Southern giant petrel

~1400

1979

Unknown

Giganteus Island

Southern giant petrel

3

2007

Stable

Few comparable data

Hawker Island

Southern giant petrel

~452

2010

Stable?

As above

Frazier Islands

Southern giant petrel

~170

1990

Stable?

As above

Albatross Island

Shy albatross

5233

2009

Stable

Data 1989, 2000, 2002 and 2004-2010

Mewstone

Shy albatross

9000-11000

2005

Unknown

Very few data available

Pedra Branca

Shy albatross

~220

2007

Decreasing

Data 1991, 1993, 1995-1997 and 1999-2007

\n```\n\n\\* Denotes biennial breeding species. Breeding population estimates represent annual census, not the total breeding population.\n\n1 Annual monitoring continues at 9 breeding sites. Light mantled albatross breed at intervals of 2 to 4 years and not all sites are accessible, total breeding population probably ranges from around 1,000 to 2,000 annual breeding pairs. Population trends were determined from monitored sites which were largely stable.\n\n2 Preliminary figure based on a count of occupied nests using photographs taken by automated cameras during 2009/10.\n\n![](image.003.png)\n\nFigure 1: Location of albatross and giant petrel breeding colonies within Australian jurisdiction.\n\n# Habitat critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels\n\nBreeding Habitat\n\nAlbatrosses and giant petrels breed at only six localities under Australian jurisdiction. These are:\n\n- Macquarie Island (including Bishop and Clerk Islets);\n- Albatross Island;\n- Pedra Branca;\n- the Mewstone;\n- Heard and McDonald Islands; and\n- the Australian Antarctic Territory (Giganteus Island, Hawker Island and the Frazier Islands).\n\nThese remote islands constitute the only suitable breeding habitat under Australian jurisdiction and should be regarded as habitat that is critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels in Australian waters. Shy albatrosses breed only within Australia, and hence the breeding habitats of this species (Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone) comprise its entire breeding habitat. Macquarie Island, Heard and McDonald Islands and the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) host several species of albatrosses and giant petrels. There are no other islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction that are considered to be potential or former breeding habitat for albatrosses or giant petrels.\n\nForaging Habitat\n\nAlbatross and giant petrel species exhibit a broad range of diets and foraging behaviours, and hence their at-sea distributions are diverse. Combined with their ability to cover vast oceanic distances, all waters within Australian jurisdiction can be considered foraging habitat, however the most critical foraging habitat is considered to be those waters south of 25 degrees where most species spend the majority of their foraging time. This assessment is supported by a range of research, including extensive albatross tracking studies (see summary map at Appendix B).\n\n# Key threats\n\nThere are numerous threats to albatrosses and giant petrels both on terrestrial breeding sites and at-sea in their foraging habitat. These are listed below and summarised in the background paper available at ([www.antarctica.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.antarctica.gov.au) and [www.environment.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.environment.gov.au)). Land based threats are specific to Australian populations whereas threats faced at sea may affect individuals from any population that spends some part of their life foraging in waters under Australian jurisdiction.\n\nTable 3: Summary of threats to albatrosses and giant-petrels\n\n| At-sea threats | Land-based threats |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Incidental catch resulting from fishing operationsCompetition with fisheries for marine resourcesDependence on discardsMarine pollutionClimate changeIntentional shooting/killing | Feral pest speciesHuman disturbance at the nestParasites and diseasesLoss of nesting habitatCompetition for nest spaceClimate change |\n\nThe most pervasive threat to albatross and giant petrel survival is the accidental mortality and injury arising from interactions with human fishing activities. These interactions have been implicated in the dramatic population declines witnessed around the globe and are the focus of conservation efforts. While additional threats to albatrosses and giant petrels, whether on land or in the marine environment, are generally less devastating, they compound the problem of fishing related mortality.\n\nThe magnitude and temporal and spatial extent of fishing related mortality in the southern hemisphere to date has been such that it potentially renders other conservation actions ineffective. For example, for some albatross colonies subject to serious unmanageable threats to breeding habitat (e.g. from volcanic activity), it has been suggested that translocation of breeding colonies (i.e. encouraging birds to breed in a new, more favourable location) might be appropriate. Notwithstanding the inherent difficulties of such an action (e.g. the very high degree of philopatry exhibited by albatrosses, the limited success and resource-intensive nature of translocations), fishing mortality has been so pervasive in the southern hemisphere, at least, that it would potentially continue to cause population declines in a translocated population.\n\nClimate change is emerging as an important factor in understanding the threats and recovery of albatross and giant petrel populations. Through modifications to marine and terrestrial environments, climate change is likely to cause fundamental changes to aspects of the breeding biology and foraging ecology of albatross and giant petrel species. Changes in abundance and distribution of fish species leads to continual changes in fishing methods and spatial and temporal distribution of fishing effort – which has direct implications for albatross and giant petrel conservation. Climate change may also influence the scale and severity of other threats, in turn directly influencing survival and breeding parameters.\n\nSpecific impacts of climate change predicted for albatross and giant petrel species are:\n\n- altered reproductive success;\n\n- changes to prey species abundance, distribution and availability;\n- changes to breeding phenology; and\n- loss or alteration of breeding and feeding habitats due to sea level rise and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.\n\nActions relating to the effect of climate change on albatrosses and giant petrels focus on identifying information gaps and developing research and monitoring protocols to detect and measure impacts of change. Strategic actions to build resilience to climate change, such as ensuring major food sources and associated trophic pathways are maintained and that mortality associated with human activity is minimised, are also important.\n\nThe ultimate responsibility for threats facing albatrosses and giant petrels breeding and foraging within Australian jurisdiction varies. Threats may be exclusive to Australia and involve dedicated management or mitigation strategies. They may also involve other nations, in which case Australia has to engage with those nations to promote and assist seabird conservation. The threatening process may be a phenomenon that cannot practically be reversed, i.e. climate change and regime shifts. In this case Australia should understand the changes and consider compensating or active interventions as appropriate.\n\nAs the nature of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels is constantly changing, an adaptive, flexible management approach for conservation must incorporate prediction and information collection, feedback and re-assessment.\n\n# Evaluation of Performance of Previous Plan\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan nominated four recovery criteria against which to judge the success of the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan. None of those four criteria can be judged to have been fully met (Table 4).\n\nTable 4: Assessment of recovery criteria in 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Recovery Criteria | Status |\n| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ |\n| Incidental bycatch during longline fishing operations is consistent with the criteria specified in the longline fishing threat abatement plan for all albatross and giant petrel species within the AFZ. | Not achieved |\n| All human induced threats to albatrosses and giant petrels have been minimised or eliminated. | Not achieved |\n| No breeding population within areas under Australian jurisdiction declines due to human activities. | Unknown |\n| All albatross and giant petrel breeding populations within areas under Australian jurisdiction that have declined, exhibit a sustained increase in population size. | Not achieved |\n\nThe poor outcome of these recovery criteria is due to one or a combination of the following:\n\n- the criteria operate on a time scale beyond the life of the recovery plan;\n- the criteria were not practical, e.g. many human induced threats are outside Australian control; and\n- longline fishing is no longer the sole major threat facing albatrosses and giant petrels. Land-based threats, as well as other forms of fishing, such as trawl fishing operations, also threaten these species.\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan identified six specific objectives and a total of forty associated recovery actions. As part of the performance evaluation, each recovery action was assessed according to the performance indicator and scored between 0-3 using the following criteria:\n\n0 No progress / cannot be assessed\n\n1 Insufficient action to meet criteria\n\n2 Action underway – most elements of action met or it is anticipated they will be\n\n3 Criteria met – further action may or may not be required\n\nThe individual assessments for each of the forty recovery actions are contained in the background document. The results for the specific objectives are summarised in Table 5.\n\nTable 5: Evaluation of achievement against specific objectives of 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Specific Objective | Score | Comments |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (11 Actions)45% achieved | Good achievement where recovery actions are aligned with Threat Abatement Plan (i.e. longlining) and for investigation into the foraging ranges of albatrosses and giant petrels has been comprehensive. Lack of actions relating to all other threats, particularly other fishing methods, is responsible for poor achievement. Note that priority was intentionally given to longlining as it posed the greatest immediate threat. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (13 Actions)72% achieved | Most of the actions relating to land based threats have been partially or completely implemented.Threats at sea require quantification. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the foraging habitat of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (3 Actions)11% achieved | Lower priority in the case of marine pollution. Dietary requirements not directly accounted for in AFMA's fisheries management regime although they indirectly form part of the ecosystem-based management framework being implemented. |\n| a) Maintain existing population monitoring programs for albatrosses and giant petrels breeding on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone; andb) Develop population monitoring programs for other representative breeding populations under Australian jurisdiction | (8 Actions)63% achieved | All monitoring and demographic programs that were in existence at the start of the 2001 recovery plan have been maintained. Few new reliable data have been obtained for other breeding populations for which the population level and trend were unknown when the 2001 Recovery Plan was adopted. |\n| Educate fishers and promote public awareness of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels | (1 Action)33% achieved | Good for visitation to breeding colonies and longline fishing. Lacking for intentional shooting, and trawl and troll fishers. |\n| Achieve substantial progress towards global conservation of albatrosses and giant petrels in international conservation and fishing fora | (2 Actions)100% achieved | Australia has had significant, substantial and influential involvement in international fora. |\n| Assess and revise the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan as necessary | (2 Actions)33% achieved | Annual meetings to assess and revise the recovery plan did not occur although in-house informal assessment was carried out. |","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"Diomedea exulans","sectionType":"section","heading":"Diomedea exulans","content":"###### Diomedea exulans","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"Distribution and Populations","sectionType":"part","heading":"Distribution and Populations","content":"# Distribution and Populations\n\nThere are ten separate breeding locations for albatrosses and giant petrels under Australian jurisdiction (Table 2 and Figure 1).\n\nTable 2: Breeding populations of albatrosses and giant petrels within Australian jurisdiction.\n\n```html\n

Breeding location

Species

Estimated annual breeding population

Most recent survey date

Population trend

Trend assessment based on

Macquarie Island

Black browed albatross

57

2010

Stable

Annual data 1995-2010

Light mantled albatross*

~12001

2005

Stable

Data 1994 and 2005

Grey headed albatross*

108

2010

Stable

Annual data 1995-2010

Wandering albatross*

4

2010

Stable/ Decreasing?

Annual data 1963-2010

Northern giant petrel

1689

2009

Stable/ Increasing?

Annual data 1995-2010

Southern giant petrel

2534

2010

Stable

Data 1996-2004 and 2006-2010

Bishop and Clerk

Black browed albatross

~140

1993

Unknown

Very few data available due to difficulty of access

Heard Island

Black browed albatross

~600

2000

Unknown

Few data available due to limited access; 1954, 1955, 1980, 1987, 2001

Light mantled albatross*

200-500

1954

Unknown

Very few data (only 1954)

Southern giant petrel

~3000

1988

Unknown

Very few data: 1952, 1988, 2004

McDonald Island

Light mantled albatross*

Unknown

Na

Unknown

Not visited since extensive seismic activity began in late 1990s; visits not permitted by Management Plan

Black browed albatross

~80

1981

Unknown

Southern giant petrel

~1400

1979

Unknown

Giganteus Island

Southern giant petrel

3

2007

Stable

Few comparable data

Hawker Island

Southern giant petrel

~452

2010

Stable?

As above

Frazier Islands

Southern giant petrel

~170

1990

Stable?

As above

Albatross Island

Shy albatross

5233

2009

Stable

Data 1989, 2000, 2002 and 2004-2010

Mewstone

Shy albatross

9000-11000

2005

Unknown

Very few data available

Pedra Branca

Shy albatross

~220

2007

Decreasing

Data 1991, 1993, 1995-1997 and 1999-2007

\n```\n\n\\* Denotes biennial breeding species. Breeding population estimates represent annual census, not the total breeding population.\n\n1 Annual monitoring continues at 9 breeding sites. Light mantled albatross breed at intervals of 2 to 4 years and not all sites are accessible, total breeding population probably ranges from around 1,000 to 2,000 annual breeding pairs. Population trends were determined from monitored sites which were largely stable.\n\n2 Preliminary figure based on a count of occupied nests using photographs taken by automated cameras during 2009/10.\n\n![](image.003.png)\n\nFigure 1: Location of albatross and giant petrel breeding colonies within Australian jurisdiction.\n\n# Habitat critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels\n\nBreeding Habitat\n\nAlbatrosses and giant petrels breed at only six localities under Australian jurisdiction. These are:\n\n- Macquarie Island (including Bishop and Clerk Islets);\n- Albatross Island;\n- Pedra Branca;\n- the Mewstone;\n- Heard and McDonald Islands; and\n- the Australian Antarctic Territory (Giganteus Island, Hawker Island and the Frazier Islands).\n\nThese remote islands constitute the only suitable breeding habitat under Australian jurisdiction and should be regarded as habitat that is critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels in Australian waters. Shy albatrosses breed only within Australia, and hence the breeding habitats of this species (Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone) comprise its entire breeding habitat. Macquarie Island, Heard and McDonald Islands and the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) host several species of albatrosses and giant petrels. There are no other islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction that are considered to be potential or former breeding habitat for albatrosses or giant petrels.\n\nForaging Habitat\n\nAlbatross and giant petrel species exhibit a broad range of diets and foraging behaviours, and hence their at-sea distributions are diverse. Combined with their ability to cover vast oceanic distances, all waters within Australian jurisdiction can be considered foraging habitat, however the most critical foraging habitat is considered to be those waters south of 25 degrees where most species spend the majority of their foraging time. This assessment is supported by a range of research, including extensive albatross tracking studies (see summary map at Appendix B).\n\n# Key threats\n\nThere are numerous threats to albatrosses and giant petrels both on terrestrial breeding sites and at-sea in their foraging habitat. These are listed below and summarised in the background paper available at ([www.antarctica.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.antarctica.gov.au) and [www.environment.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.environment.gov.au)). Land based threats are specific to Australian populations whereas threats faced at sea may affect individuals from any population that spends some part of their life foraging in waters under Australian jurisdiction.\n\nTable 3: Summary of threats to albatrosses and giant-petrels\n\n| At-sea threats | Land-based threats |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Incidental catch resulting from fishing operationsCompetition with fisheries for marine resourcesDependence on discardsMarine pollutionClimate changeIntentional shooting/killing | Feral pest speciesHuman disturbance at the nestParasites and diseasesLoss of nesting habitatCompetition for nest spaceClimate change |\n\nThe most pervasive threat to albatross and giant petrel survival is the accidental mortality and injury arising from interactions with human fishing activities. These interactions have been implicated in the dramatic population declines witnessed around the globe and are the focus of conservation efforts. While additional threats to albatrosses and giant petrels, whether on land or in the marine environment, are generally less devastating, they compound the problem of fishing related mortality.\n\nThe magnitude and temporal and spatial extent of fishing related mortality in the southern hemisphere to date has been such that it potentially renders other conservation actions ineffective. For example, for some albatross colonies subject to serious unmanageable threats to breeding habitat (e.g. from volcanic activity), it has been suggested that translocation of breeding colonies (i.e. encouraging birds to breed in a new, more favourable location) might be appropriate. Notwithstanding the inherent difficulties of such an action (e.g. the very high degree of philopatry exhibited by albatrosses, the limited success and resource-intensive nature of translocations), fishing mortality has been so pervasive in the southern hemisphere, at least, that it would potentially continue to cause population declines in a translocated population.\n\nClimate change is emerging as an important factor in understanding the threats and recovery of albatross and giant petrel populations. Through modifications to marine and terrestrial environments, climate change is likely to cause fundamental changes to aspects of the breeding biology and foraging ecology of albatross and giant petrel species. Changes in abundance and distribution of fish species leads to continual changes in fishing methods and spatial and temporal distribution of fishing effort – which has direct implications for albatross and giant petrel conservation. Climate change may also influence the scale and severity of other threats, in turn directly influencing survival and breeding parameters.\n\nSpecific impacts of climate change predicted for albatross and giant petrel species are:\n\n- altered reproductive success;\n\n- changes to prey species abundance, distribution and availability;\n- changes to breeding phenology; and\n- loss or alteration of breeding and feeding habitats due to sea level rise and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.\n\nActions relating to the effect of climate change on albatrosses and giant petrels focus on identifying information gaps and developing research and monitoring protocols to detect and measure impacts of change. Strategic actions to build resilience to climate change, such as ensuring major food sources and associated trophic pathways are maintained and that mortality associated with human activity is minimised, are also important.\n\nThe ultimate responsibility for threats facing albatrosses and giant petrels breeding and foraging within Australian jurisdiction varies. Threats may be exclusive to Australia and involve dedicated management or mitigation strategies. They may also involve other nations, in which case Australia has to engage with those nations to promote and assist seabird conservation. The threatening process may be a phenomenon that cannot practically be reversed, i.e. climate change and regime shifts. In this case Australia should understand the changes and consider compensating or active interventions as appropriate.\n\nAs the nature of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels is constantly changing, an adaptive, flexible management approach for conservation must incorporate prediction and information collection, feedback and re-assessment.\n\n# Evaluation of Performance of Previous Plan\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan nominated four recovery criteria against which to judge the success of the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan. None of those four criteria can be judged to have been fully met (Table 4).\n\nTable 4: Assessment of recovery criteria in 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Recovery Criteria | Status |\n| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ |\n| Incidental bycatch during longline fishing operations is consistent with the criteria specified in the longline fishing threat abatement plan for all albatross and giant petrel species within the AFZ. | Not achieved |\n| All human induced threats to albatrosses and giant petrels have been minimised or eliminated. | Not achieved |\n| No breeding population within areas under Australian jurisdiction declines due to human activities. | Unknown |\n| All albatross and giant petrel breeding populations within areas under Australian jurisdiction that have declined, exhibit a sustained increase in population size. | Not achieved |\n\nThe poor outcome of these recovery criteria is due to one or a combination of the following:\n\n- the criteria operate on a time scale beyond the life of the recovery plan;\n- the criteria were not practical, e.g. many human induced threats are outside Australian control; and\n- longline fishing is no longer the sole major threat facing albatrosses and giant petrels. Land-based threats, as well as other forms of fishing, such as trawl fishing operations, also threaten these species.\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan identified six specific objectives and a total of forty associated recovery actions. As part of the performance evaluation, each recovery action was assessed according to the performance indicator and scored between 0-3 using the following criteria:\n\n0 No progress / cannot be assessed\n\n1 Insufficient action to meet criteria\n\n2 Action underway – most elements of action met or it is anticipated they will be\n\n3 Criteria met – further action may or may not be required\n\nThe individual assessments for each of the forty recovery actions are contained in the background document. The results for the specific objectives are summarised in Table 5.\n\nTable 5: Evaluation of achievement against specific objectives of 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Specific Objective | Score | Comments |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (11 Actions)45% achieved | Good achievement where recovery actions are aligned with Threat Abatement Plan (i.e. longlining) and for investigation into the foraging ranges of albatrosses and giant petrels has been comprehensive. Lack of actions relating to all other threats, particularly other fishing methods, is responsible for poor achievement. Note that priority was intentionally given to longlining as it posed the greatest immediate threat. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (13 Actions)72% achieved | Most of the actions relating to land based threats have been partially or completely implemented.Threats at sea require quantification. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the foraging habitat of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (3 Actions)11% achieved | Lower priority in the case of marine pollution. Dietary requirements not directly accounted for in AFMA's fisheries management regime although they indirectly form part of the ecosystem-based management framework being implemented. |\n| a) Maintain existing population monitoring programs for albatrosses and giant petrels breeding on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone; andb) Develop population monitoring programs for other representative breeding populations under Australian jurisdiction | (8 Actions)63% achieved | All monitoring and demographic programs that were in existence at the start of the 2001 recovery plan have been maintained. Few new reliable data have been obtained for other breeding populations for which the population level and trend were unknown when the 2001 Recovery Plan was adopted. |\n| Educate fishers and promote public awareness of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels | (1 Action)33% achieved | Good for visitation to breeding colonies and longline fishing. Lacking for intentional shooting, and trawl and troll fishers. |\n| Achieve substantial progress towards global conservation of albatrosses and giant petrels in international conservation and fishing fora | (2 Actions)100% achieved | Australia has had significant, substantial and influential involvement in international fora. |\n| Assess and revise the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan as necessary | (2 Actions)33% achieved | Annual meetings to assess and revise the recovery plan did not occur although in-house informal assessment was carried out. |","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"Population trend","sectionType":"part","heading":"Population trend","content":"## Population trend","sortOrder":4},{"sectionNumber":"Trend assessment based on","sectionType":"part","heading":"Trend assessment based on","content":"## Trend assessment based on","sortOrder":5},{"sectionNumber":"Habitat critical to the survival of alba","sectionType":"part","heading":"Habitat critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels","content":"# Habitat critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels\n\nBreeding Habitat\n\nAlbatrosses and giant petrels breed at only six localities under Australian jurisdiction. These are:\n\n- Macquarie Island (including Bishop and Clerk Islets);\n- Albatross Island;\n- Pedra Branca;\n- the Mewstone;\n- Heard and McDonald Islands; and\n- the Australian Antarctic Territory (Giganteus Island, Hawker Island and the Frazier Islands).\n\nThese remote islands constitute the only suitable breeding habitat under Australian jurisdiction and should be regarded as habitat that is critical to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels in Australian waters. Shy albatrosses breed only within Australia, and hence the breeding habitats of this species (Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone) comprise its entire breeding habitat. Macquarie Island, Heard and McDonald Islands and the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) host several species of albatrosses and giant petrels. There are no other islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction that are considered to be potential or former breeding habitat for albatrosses or giant petrels.\n\nForaging Habitat\n\nAlbatross and giant petrel species exhibit a broad range of diets and foraging behaviours, and hence their at-sea distributions are diverse. Combined with their ability to cover vast oceanic distances, all waters within Australian jurisdiction can be considered foraging habitat, however the most critical foraging habitat is considered to be those waters south of 25 degrees where most species spend the majority of their foraging time. This assessment is supported by a range of research, including extensive albatross tracking studies (see summary map at Appendix B).","sortOrder":6},{"sectionNumber":"Key threats","sectionType":"part","heading":"Key threats","content":"# Key threats\n\nThere are numerous threats to albatrosses and giant petrels both on terrestrial breeding sites and at-sea in their foraging habitat. These are listed below and summarised in the background paper available at ([www.antarctica.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.antarctica.gov.au) and [www.environment.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.environment.gov.au)). Land based threats are specific to Australian populations whereas threats faced at sea may affect individuals from any population that spends some part of their life foraging in waters under Australian jurisdiction.\n\nTable 3: Summary of threats to albatrosses and giant-petrels\n\n| At-sea threats | Land-based threats |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Incidental catch resulting from fishing operationsCompetition with fisheries for marine resourcesDependence on discardsMarine pollutionClimate changeIntentional shooting/killing | Feral pest speciesHuman disturbance at the nestParasites and diseasesLoss of nesting habitatCompetition for nest spaceClimate change |\n\nThe most pervasive threat to albatross and giant petrel survival is the accidental mortality and injury arising from interactions with human fishing activities. These interactions have been implicated in the dramatic population declines witnessed around the globe and are the focus of conservation efforts. While additional threats to albatrosses and giant petrels, whether on land or in the marine environment, are generally less devastating, they compound the problem of fishing related mortality.\n\nThe magnitude and temporal and spatial extent of fishing related mortality in the southern hemisphere to date has been such that it potentially renders other conservation actions ineffective. For example, for some albatross colonies subject to serious unmanageable threats to breeding habitat (e.g. from volcanic activity), it has been suggested that translocation of breeding colonies (i.e. encouraging birds to breed in a new, more favourable location) might be appropriate. Notwithstanding the inherent difficulties of such an action (e.g. the very high degree of philopatry exhibited by albatrosses, the limited success and resource-intensive nature of translocations), fishing mortality has been so pervasive in the southern hemisphere, at least, that it would potentially continue to cause population declines in a translocated population.\n\nClimate change is emerging as an important factor in understanding the threats and recovery of albatross and giant petrel populations. Through modifications to marine and terrestrial environments, climate change is likely to cause fundamental changes to aspects of the breeding biology and foraging ecology of albatross and giant petrel species. Changes in abundance and distribution of fish species leads to continual changes in fishing methods and spatial and temporal distribution of fishing effort – which has direct implications for albatross and giant petrel conservation. Climate change may also influence the scale and severity of other threats, in turn directly influencing survival and breeding parameters.\n\nSpecific impacts of climate change predicted for albatross and giant petrel species are:\n\n- altered reproductive success;\n\n- changes to prey species abundance, distribution and availability;\n- changes to breeding phenology; and\n- loss or alteration of breeding and feeding habitats due to sea level rise and increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.\n\nActions relating to the effect of climate change on albatrosses and giant petrels focus on identifying information gaps and developing research and monitoring protocols to detect and measure impacts of change. Strategic actions to build resilience to climate change, such as ensuring major food sources and associated trophic pathways are maintained and that mortality associated with human activity is minimised, are also important.\n\nThe ultimate responsibility for threats facing albatrosses and giant petrels breeding and foraging within Australian jurisdiction varies. Threats may be exclusive to Australia and involve dedicated management or mitigation strategies. They may also involve other nations, in which case Australia has to engage with those nations to promote and assist seabird conservation. The threatening process may be a phenomenon that cannot practically be reversed, i.e. climate change and regime shifts. In this case Australia should understand the changes and consider compensating or active interventions as appropriate.\n\nAs the nature of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels is constantly changing, an adaptive, flexible management approach for conservation must incorporate prediction and information collection, feedback and re-assessment.","sortOrder":7},{"sectionNumber":"Evaluation of Performance of Previous Pl","sectionType":"part","heading":"Evaluation of Performance of Previous Plan","content":"# Evaluation of Performance of Previous Plan\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan nominated four recovery criteria against which to judge the success of the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan. None of those four criteria can be judged to have been fully met (Table 4).\n\nTable 4: Assessment of recovery criteria in 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Recovery Criteria | Status |\n| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------ |\n| Incidental bycatch during longline fishing operations is consistent with the criteria specified in the longline fishing threat abatement plan for all albatross and giant petrel species within the AFZ. | Not achieved |\n| All human induced threats to albatrosses and giant petrels have been minimised or eliminated. | Not achieved |\n| No breeding population within areas under Australian jurisdiction declines due to human activities. | Unknown |\n| All albatross and giant petrel breeding populations within areas under Australian jurisdiction that have declined, exhibit a sustained increase in population size. | Not achieved |\n\nThe poor outcome of these recovery criteria is due to one or a combination of the following:\n\n- the criteria operate on a time scale beyond the life of the recovery plan;\n- the criteria were not practical, e.g. many human induced threats are outside Australian control; and\n- longline fishing is no longer the sole major threat facing albatrosses and giant petrels. Land-based threats, as well as other forms of fishing, such as trawl fishing operations, also threaten these species.\n\nThe 2001 Recovery Plan identified six specific objectives and a total of forty associated recovery actions. As part of the performance evaluation, each recovery action was assessed according to the performance indicator and scored between 0-3 using the following criteria:\n\n0 No progress / cannot be assessed\n\n1 Insufficient action to meet criteria\n\n2 Action underway – most elements of action met or it is anticipated they will be\n\n3 Criteria met – further action may or may not be required\n\nThe individual assessments for each of the forty recovery actions are contained in the background document. The results for the specific objectives are summarised in Table 5.\n\nTable 5: Evaluation of achievement against specific objectives of 2001 Recovery Plan.\n\n| Specific Objective | Score | Comments |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the survival of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (11 Actions)45% achieved | Good achievement where recovery actions are aligned with Threat Abatement Plan (i.e. longlining) and for investigation into the foraging ranges of albatrosses and giant petrels has been comprehensive. Lack of actions relating to all other threats, particularly other fishing methods, is responsible for poor achievement. Note that priority was intentionally given to longlining as it posed the greatest immediate threat. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (13 Actions)72% achieved | Most of the actions relating to land based threats have been partially or completely implemented.Threats at sea require quantification. |\n| Quantify and reduce the threats to the foraging habitat of albatrosses and giant petrels within areas under Australian jurisdiction | (3 Actions)11% achieved | Lower priority in the case of marine pollution. Dietary requirements not directly accounted for in AFMA's fisheries management regime although they indirectly form part of the ecosystem-based management framework being implemented. |\n| a) Maintain existing population monitoring programs for albatrosses and giant petrels breeding on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone; andb) Develop population monitoring programs for other representative breeding populations under Australian jurisdiction | (8 Actions)63% achieved | All monitoring and demographic programs that were in existence at the start of the 2001 recovery plan have been maintained. Few new reliable data have been obtained for other breeding populations for which the population level and trend were unknown when the 2001 Recovery Plan was adopted. |\n| Educate fishers and promote public awareness of the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels | (1 Action)33% achieved | Good for visitation to breeding colonies and longline fishing. Lacking for intentional shooting, and trawl and troll fishers. |\n| Achieve substantial progress towards global conservation of albatrosses and giant petrels in international conservation and fishing fora | (2 Actions)100% achieved | Australia has had significant, substantial and influential involvement in international fora. |\n| Assess and revise the albatross and giant petrel recovery plan as necessary | (2 Actions)33% achieved | Annual meetings to assess and revise the recovery plan did not occur although in-house informal assessment was carried out. |","sortOrder":8},{"sectionNumber":"Objective for the 2011-2016 Albatross an","sectionType":"part","heading":"Objective for the 2011-2016 Albatross and Giant Petrel Recovery Plan","content":"# Objective for the 2011\\-2016 Albatross and Giant Petrel Recovery Plan\n\nThe overall objective of the 2011\\-2016 recovery plan is:\n\nto ensure the long term survival and recovery of albatross and giant petrel populations breeding and foraging in Australian jurisdiction by reducing or eliminating human related threats at sea and on land.","sortOrder":9},{"sectionNumber":"Criteria to measure performance of the P","sectionType":"part","heading":"Criteria to measure performance of the Plan against the objective","content":"# Criteria to measure performance of the Plan against the objective\n\nIt is not anticipated that the objective, including population increases, will be achieved within the lifetime of the Plan. However, considering the limitations highlighted by the assessment of the previous performance criteria, the 2011\\-2016 Recovery Plan will be deemed successful if positive trends, in terms of achieving the overall objective, can be demonstrated; in particular:\n\n1. the population status and trends of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding under Australian jurisdiction are known, verified and updated and, where possible, the demographic parameters of those trends are known;\n2. all Australian fisheries are assessed for their risk of adverse interactions with albatrosses and giant petrels where relevant. Where sufficient risk is present, robust observer / data collection programs are implemented to statistically quantify bycatch rates and best practice mitigation measures are promptly implemented to reduce / eliminate mortality. Where bycatch is occurring in longline fisheries, bycatch rates should be reduced in line with the requirements of the “Threat Abatement Plan for the incidental catch (or bycatch) of seabirds during oceanic longline fishing operations” (the Threat Abatement Plan);\n3. all factors adversely influencing the conservation status of albatross and giant petrel populations breeding and foraging within Australian jurisdiction are identified and, where feasible, prevented, minimised or eliminated; and\n4. education and support amongst fishers and fisheries management bodies is improved.","sortOrder":10},{"sectionNumber":"Specific Objectives","sectionType":"part","heading":"Specific Objectives","content":"# Specific Objectives\n\n1. Research and monitoring of the biology, ecology and population dynamics of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within Australian jurisdiction is sufficient to understand conservation status and to implement effective and efficient conservation measures.\n2. Land-based threats to the survival and breeding success of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within areas under Australian jurisdiction are quantified and reduced.\n3. Marine\\-based threats to the survival and breeding success of albatrosses and giant petrels foraging in waters under Australian jurisdiction are quantified and reduced.\n4. Fishers are educated and public awareness is raised on the threats to albatrosses and giant petrels.\n5. Substantial involvement in the promotion and development of improved and, ultimately, favourable conservation status of albatrosses and giant petrels globally in international conservation and fishing fora is maintained.","sortOrder":11},{"sectionNumber":"Actions to achieve specific objectives","sectionType":"part","heading":"Actions to achieve specific objectives","content":"# Actions to achieve specific objectives\n\nSO1: Research and monitoring of the biology, ecology and population dynamics of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within Australian jurisdiction is sufficient to understand conservation status and to implement effective and efficient conservation measures\n\n```html\n

Action

Description

Performance criteria

Cost

Duration

Responsible agency

Priority

1. Population monitoring programs

A. 1.1

Develop strategy (where required) for and obtain population estimates for all albatross and giant petrel populations breeding under Australian jurisdiction.

Reliable current estimates at the time of this plan are consistently available for

Black browed albatrosses

  • Macquarie Island

Grey headed albatrosses

  • Macquarie Island

Light mantled albatrosses

  • Macquarie Island

Wandering albatrosses

  • Macquarie Island

Northern giant petrels

  • Macquarie Island

Southern Giant petrels

  • Macquarie Island

Shy albatrosses

  • Albatross Island
  • Pedra Branca
  • The Mewstone

Reliable current estimates at the time of this plan are lacking for:

Black browed albatrosses

  • Bishop and Clerk Islets
  • Heard Island
  • McDonald Island

Light Mantled Albatross

  • Heard Island
  • McDonald Island

Southern Giant petrels

  • Heard Island
  • McDonald Island
  • Australian Antarctic Territory, all 3 sites.

Robust and up to date (i.e. preferably within 5 but no more than 10 years) population estimates are available for all albatross and giant petrel populations breeding under Australian jurisdiction.

Repeat monitoring strategies are developed for each population, tailored for logistical and other constraints and consideration given to the use of remote methods.

Macquarie and Albatross Islands – approx. $120 000 per year.

Pedra Branca and Mewstone approx. $24 000 per year (for both).

Heard and McDonald Islands approx. $10 000 excluding logistical costs and if logistical support is available.

AAT approx $10 000 per site excluding logistical costs and if logistical support is available

Ongoing – assessed regularly, preferably annually

DSEWPC and Tas Gov’t

High

A 1.2

Continue long-term demographic studies of albatrosses on Macquarie Island and shy albatrosses on Albatross Island and assess survivorship data on a regular basis.

Where populations without demographic studies are identified as decreasing (see above action), assess the logistical and resource feasibility for undertaking banding and demographic studies on other populations to identify the driving parameter for observed population declines.

Robust estimates and trends for survivorship and breeding parameters of Macquarie Island and Albatross Island albatrosses are known with confidence and reported regularly.

Extent to which demographic parameters driving population decreases in these populations are identified and described.

Programs contained in (A 1.1).

Ongoing

DSEWPC and Tas Gov’t

High

A 1.3

Australia participates in national and global dissemination of population status and trend data.

All population estimates and demographic trend data are updated annually (or as appropriate) with ACAP and other relevant organisations.

There is alignment of conservation listings between State and Federal Governments and the IUCN where appropriate.

Minimal

Ongoing

DSEWPC and Tas Gov’t

High

2: Foraging distributions

A 2.1

At sea data for albatross and giant petrel populations breeding within Australian jurisdiction are evaluated with respect to:

  • gaps and limitations in sample size;
  • overlap with fisheries and consequent risk; and
  • population trend.

Identify priority populations, species, age and breeding status and, where appropriate, undertake further foraging investigations

Submit remote tracking data to Procellariiform Global Tracking database.

Gaps in the knowledge of foraging ranges and at sea distributions undergo regular assessment annually or as appropriate (i.e. changes to threats or population status).

Priorities are identified and data are collected where appropriate.

All remote tracking data are submitted to Procellariiform Global Tracking database.

Low (<$10 000) if done with other research on a population; costs falling due to gains in new technology.

Costs of new studies could be significant.

Minimal

Ongoing

DSEWPC

High

3: Climate change

A 3.1

The effects of climate change predicted for the marine and terrestrial environments of albatrosses and giant petrels within Australian jurisdiction are synthesised. The likely impacts on albatrosses and giant petrels breeding and foraging within Australian jurisdiction are assessed and reported and knowledge gaps identified (long term monitoring strategies – A.1.1 – are important for understanding and tracking impacts of climate change).

Where climate change is identified as having the potential for significant negative impacts on Australian populations of seabirds:

i) appropriate monitoring strategies are implemented to fill information gaps; and

ii) mitigation actions are identified and adopted where feasible and appropriate.

Related to A.1.1.

Ongoing

DSEWPC

Medium

\n```\n\nSO2: Quantify and reduce land based threats to the survival and breeding parameters of albatrosses and giant petrels breeding within areas under Australian jurisdiction.\n\n```html\n

Action

Description

Performance criteria

Cost

Duration

Responsible agency

Priority

4. Feral pest species

B 4.1

Complete the integrated pest eradication program on Macquarie Island targeting rabbits and rodents

On Macquarie Island rabbits and rodents have been eliminated.

$24.6m provided

5 years

DSEWPC and Tas Gov't

High

B 4.2

Stringent formal quarantine measures are in place and adhered to (including regulated access to all breeding islands)

Mandatory measures are in place and adhered to (measured). No new introductions occur.

Low

DSEWPC and Tas Gov't

Medium

B 4.3

Breeding islands assessed for presence of feral species; Tasmanian islands to be highest priority

Accurate and up to date catalogue of feral species on all breeding islands.

Low

DSEWPC and Tas Gov't

Medium

5. Human disturbance at the nest

B 5.1

Implement or continue restrictions (through protected area and other arrangements) on human disturbance at and access to albatross and giant petrel breeding sites

Protected area arrangements or other similar controls are established or maintained, and regularly assessed.

Access to breeding islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction is restricted to appropriate permit holders only.

Low

DSEWPC and Tas Gov't

High

B 5.2

Education material regarding the impacts of wildlife disturbance should be provided to all visitors to albatross and giant petrel breeding colonies

Education material is prepared and distributed as appropriate.

Minimal

DSEWPC and Tas Gov't

High

6. Loss of / competition for nesting habitat

B 6.1

Monitor shy albatross population on Pedra Branca for the relative distribution and abundance of Australasian gannets.

Document interactions between shy albatross and gannets and assess appropriate methods that may limit adverse interactions between the species.

The relative distribution and abundance of shy albatrosses and Australasian gannets at Pedra Branca are monitored and measured.

Interactions are documented and methods to limit adverse interactions are assessed and, where appropriate, implemented.

Included in (Action A1.1)

DSEWPC and Tas Gov’t

Medium

7. Parasites and disease

B 7.1

Determine baseline presence of disease on breeding islands and implement stringent quarantine measures where appropriate

Disease presence is determined and no new diseases or parasites are transferred by humans.

Estimated at $12 000 per year.

DSEWPC

Medium to low

B. 7.2

Quantify the demographic impact of disease on shy albatrosses on Albatross Island.

The impact of the disease on shy albatross survival and breeding parameters is established and monitored over time.

Further research and / or mitigating actions are considered as appropriate.

Included in (Action A1.1)

DSEWPC

Medium to low

\n```\n\nSO3: Quantify and reduce marine based threats to the survival and breeding parameters of albatrosses and giant petrels foraging in waters under Australian jurisdiction\n\n```html\n

Action

Description

Performance criteria

Cost

Duration

Responsible agency

Priority

8. Incidental catch during fishing operations

C 8.1

All actions in the Threat Abatement Plan are fully implemented

Robust observer data indicate bycatch rates approach or reach zero; and there is full compliance with mitigation measures.

Ongoing

DSEWPC, AFMA

High

C 8.2

The scale and nature of interactions between albatrosses and giant petrels and trawl fishing operations in Australian waters are quantified and, if required, reporting processes are improved and bycatch is mitigated. (see also C8.6 on page 18 and D13.1 on page 32)

Where required, observer and other data collection programs are established that report robust bycatch data in a timely and relevant manner, allowing for adaptive and responsive management, and the effectiveness of any mitigation actions taken.

Variable subject to circumstances; initial at-sea study of the Commonwealth major trawl sector approx. $30 000 (already partly funded)

Ongoing

DSEWPC, AFMA

High

C 8.3

All longline and trawl fisheries, both Commonwealth and State managed, are and continue to be assessed for the risk of albatross and giant petrel interactions, and where required, a program for the collection, synthesis and analysis of data relating to incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant petrels is introduced.

Agreed risk assessment process developed; observer programs in place and reporting of robust data and mitigation action where appropriate.

Reporting of interactions with EPBC Act listed species occurs.

Ongoing

DSEWPC, AFMA, DAFF, relevant State agencies

High

C 8.4

Where bycatch in a fishery is identified as significant, limits or other appropriate management arrangements to prevent significant adverse impacts on the conservation status of the albatross and giant petrel species and populations are implemented.

Where DSEWPC identifies the potential for significant adverse impacts on albatross and giant petrel populations, associated fisheries adhere to agreed limits and facilitate timely reporting for monitoring of catch events and rates. Where appropriate, other measures such as closures and move on provisions have been implemented.

Ongoing

DSEWPC, AFMA, relevant State agencies

High

C 8.5

Monitor the frequency of fishing equipment ingestions / entanglement at breeding colonies as part of existing population monitoring programs under Action A 1.1.

Fishing equipment ingestion / entanglement at breeding colonies is monitored and quantified.

Monitoring of fishing gear entanglement and / or ingestion is a low priority action being undertaken as part of a high priority action (Action A 1.1).

Included in (Action A 1.1)

Ongoing

DSEWPC and Tas Gov’t

Low

C 8.6

Determine vulnerability of species to bycatch mortality using molecular species assignment methods (and building on previous genetic provenance work, see D13.1, page 32).

Provenance of species is determined genetically and analysed in relation to fishing effort to determine species specific management actions.

New methods of genetic analysis are low cost.

Ongoing

DSEWPC

Medium

9. Competition with fisheries for marine resources

C 9. 1

Encourage research to quantify the scale and nature of dietary requirements of albatrosses and giant petrels, with priority for populations breeding in Australian jurisdiction.

Provide this data to AFMA and other agencies managing fisheries that overlap with albatross and giant petrel species.

Promote the incorporation of total dietary requirements of albatross and giant petrel populations into fisheries assessments and the development of improved management strategies.

The best available scientific data on total dietary requirements of albatrosses and giant petrels have been taken into account when AFMA and other fisheries management agencies:

(i) strategically assess (e.g. under the EPBC Act) the ecological sustainability of each fishery that overlaps with any albatross and giant petrel species; and

(ii) develop or revise management arrangements that might otherwise adversely affect albatross and giant petrel populations (e.g. setting of catch limits, spatial / temporal closures) for fisheries overlapping with any albatross and giant-petrel population.

Ongoing

DSEWPC, AFMA

Medium

10. Dependence on fisheries discards

C 10.1

Continue to monitor the effects of offal discharge on the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels, to the extent feasible.

Quantity and quality of feasible monitoring, including by observers at-sea.

DSEWPC

Low

C 10.2

Continue to encourage management of offal discharge to prevent birds habituating to this food source.

Level of compliance with this measure is high

DSEWPC, AFMA, DAFF

Medium

11. Marine pollution

C 11.1

Where feasible, population monitoring programs also monitor, in a standardised manner, the incidence of:

i) oiled birds at the nest;

ii) marine debris egestion / entanglement at the nests; and

iii) egg shell thinning.

The incidence of:

i) oiled birds at the nest;

ii) marine debris egestion / entanglement at the nests; and

iii) egg shell thinning

are reported by each population monitoring program in a standardised manner.

Included in (Action A 1.1)

DSEWPC

Low

\n```\n\nSO4: Educate fishers and promote public awareness of the threats to albatrosses and giant-petrels\n\n| Action | Description | Performance criteria | Cost | Duration | Responsible agency | Priority |\n| ------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | -------- | ------------------ | -------- |\n| D 12.1 | Design and implement education strategies for fisheries with significant risk of albatross and giant petrel interactions. | Information is disseminated to fishers as appropriate and there is a reasonable awareness of conservation issues and / or use of mitigation measures by fishers. | Minimal | | DSEWPC, AFMA, DAFF | High |\n| D 12.2 | Where feasible, encourage the development by industry and others of measures that allow consumers to distinguish products from \"albatross and giant petrel friendly\" fisheries. Develop criteria that might facilitate formal recognition of such fisheries. | There is sufficient information available to vendors and consumers to allow them to distinguish “albatross and giant petrel friendly” fisheries products. | | | DSEWPC, AFMA, DAFF | Low |\n\nSO5: Achieve substantial progress towards global conservation of albatrosses and giant petrels in international conservation and fishing fora:\n\n| Action | Description | Performance criteria | Cost | Duration | Responsible agency | Priority |\n| ------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | -------- | ------------------ | -------- |\n| E. 13.1 | Promote best practice seabird by-catch mitigation, data collection and dissemination by foreign fishers, including through international fora such as CCAMLR, CCSBT, IOTC, WCPFC and other applicable international arrangements to which Australia is a Party | Extent to which RFMOs have implemented effective and universally applied measures to gather accurate bycatch data and minimise bycatch.Levels of bycatch are declining and impacts on bycatch populations are thought to be sustainable. | $20,000 | Ongoing | DSEWPC, DAFF | High |\n| E. 13.2 | Use diplomatic and other means to encourage countries to co-operate to conserve albatrosses and petrels, including by avoiding or mitigating fisheries bycatch. | Approaches are made to relevant countries and are effective (e.g. result in improved bycatch mitigation measures being employed and, in the longer term bycatch is avoided or bycatch rates are reduced). | | Ongoing | DSEWPC, DAFF, DFAT | High |\n| E. 13.3 | Encourage ACAP to develop strong relationships with RFMOs, the UN FAO and other relevant bodies, including by promulgating assessments of albatross and giant petrel species population trends and status, their spatial distribution and bycatch mitigation measures | The quality and extent of ACAP's relationship with RFMOs and the extent to which they accept and implement ACAP's advice. | | Ongoing | DSEWPC | High |","sortOrder":12},{"sectionNumber":"Performance criteria","sectionType":"part","heading":"Performance criteria","content":"# Performance criteria","sortOrder":13},{"sectionNumber":"Benefits to other threatened species and","sectionType":"part","heading":"Benefits to other threatened species and ecological communities","content":"# Benefits to other threatened species and ecological communities\n\nA range of other seabird species, including other petrels, shearwaters, gulls, skuas, gannets and cormorants, are also killed in a range of fisheries. These species will also benefit from best practice fishing methodology. Other flora and fauna species breeding on islands will benefit from reduction in land based threats.","sortOrder":18},{"sectionNumber":"Duration and cost of recovery process","sectionType":"part","heading":"Duration and cost of recovery process","content":"# Duration and cost of recovery process\n\nThe recovery process will take longer than the life of this plan (2011 – 2016), which should be reviewed after 5 years. A recovery plan for threatened albatrosses and giant petrels should remain in place until such time that populations of these species breeding and / or foraging within Australian jurisdiction have improved to the point where populations are considered secure.\n\nThe cost of this plan will be met through various direct and indirect funding activities undertaken by the Commonwealth Government, State and Territory governments, researchers, conservation groups, marine based industries and the Australian public. While some indicative costings have been included, the costing of specific actions will be determined at the time of activity.","sortOrder":19},{"sectionNumber":"Affected interests","sectionType":"part","heading":"Affected interests","content":"# Affected interests\n\nAustralian Government:\n\n- Australian Fisheries Management Authority\n- Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities\n- Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry\n\nState Government\n\n- Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment Tasmania\n- Tasmanian, New South Wales, Queensland, Victorian, South Australian and Western Australian fisheries management bodies","sortOrder":20},{"sectionNumber":"Non government conservation organisation","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"Non government conservation organisations","content":"#### Non government conservation organisations\n\n- World Wide Fund for Nature\n- Humane Society International\n- Greenpeace\n- Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition\n- The Wilderness Society\n- Southern Ocean Seabird Association\n\nFishers in affected fisheries","sortOrder":21},{"sectionNumber":"Social and Economic impacts","sectionType":"part","heading":"Social and Economic impacts","content":"# Social and Economic impacts\n\nThe imposition of technical and operational mitigation measures may have financial impacts on fishers. These may be partially offset; for example, if measures to reduce seabird mortality result in a market advantage for fish marketed as being caught in a manner that avoids seabird bycatch.","sortOrder":22},{"sectionNumber":"Indigenous consultation","sectionType":"part","heading":"Indigenous consultation","content":"# Indigenous consultation\n\nMany marine species have cultural significance to Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people. There is some evidence from Aboriginal language and history of a link to albatross and their breeding habitat in Tasmania. Recognising this cultural connection is important. The Tasmanian Aboriginal Land and Sea Council were consulted during the drafting of this Plan.","sortOrder":23},{"sectionNumber":"Organisations / persons involved in eval","sectionType":"part","heading":"Organisations / persons involved in evaluating the performance of the plan","content":"# \nOrganisations / persons involved in evaluating the performance of the plan\n\nThe Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities will monitor and review this plan, including throughout its life, with the assistance of relevant scientists, managers and other stakeholders. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee may assist in the evaluation of the performance of this plan and report the results of its review to the Commonwealth Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities.","sortOrder":24},{"sectionNumber":"Where to get the plan","sectionType":"part","heading":"Where to get the plan","content":"# Where to get the plan\n\nThis recovery plan is obtainable from:\n\n[www.antarctica.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.antarctica.gov.au) and [www.environment.gov.au](file:///C:\\Users\\ian_hay\\Desktop\\www.environment.gov.au)\n\nOR\n\nTerritories, Environment and Treaties Section\n\nAustralian Antarctic Division\n\nDepartment of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities\n\n203 Channel Highway\n\nKINGSTON TAS 7050","sortOrder":25},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix A: Evaluation of recovery actio","sectionType":"part","heading":"Appendix A: Evaluation of recovery actions in the previous (2001) Recovery Plan","content":"# Appendix A: Evaluation of recovery actions in the previous (2001) Recovery Plan\n\n0 No progress / cannot be assessed.\n\n1 Insufficient action to meet criteria\n\n2 Action underway – most elements of action met or it is anticipated they will be\n\n3 Criteria met – further action may or may not be required\n\nSpecific Objective A\n\n| | 1. Longline fisheries | | | Score0-3 | |\n| ----- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| A 1.1 | Implement the Threat Abatement Plan for the Incidental Catch (or By-catch) of Seabirds During Oceanic Longline Fishing Operations. | AFMA / EA | The incidental catch of seabirds within the AFZ is reduced to below 0.05 birds per 1000 hooks (set across all seasons, strata and fisheries at the 1998 fishing effort) by August 2003, and ultimately reduced to zero via implementation of the Longline Fishing Threat Abatement Plan. | 2 | Bycatch rates and observer coverage targets in most fisheries/areas/seasons have been met; some other actions may not have been fully implemented, e.g. retention of dead birds and presentation of statistical data. |\n| A 1.2 | Determine the foraging range and at-sea distribution of:Adult and juvenile shy albatrosses from Pedra BrancaAdult and juvenile shy albatrosses from the MewstoneJuvenile shy albatrosses from Albatross Island | TASPAWS / EA | The foraging range and at-sea distribution of shy albatrosses is determined. | 3 | Substantial progress has been made in tracking of shy albatrosses; however some populations and age classes are better represented than others. The indicator is poorly worded - at-sea distribution never fully determined. |\n| A 1.3 | For Macquarie Island populationsi) Continue studies into the foraging ranges and at sea distribution of :wandering albatrosseslight mantled albatrossesgrey headed albatrossesblack browed albatrosses; andii) in the longer term, determine the foraging ranges and at sea distribution of:northern giant petrelssouthern giant petrels | TASPAWS / EA | Knowledge of the foraging ranges and at-sea distributions of Macquarie Island populations of these species is substantially increased | 3 | Substantial progress has been made in tracking of all Macquarie island albatrosses and giant petrels, some species and age classes are better represented than others. A risk / gap analysis underway to identify important gaps. |\n| A 1.4 | Ensure that existing population monitoring programs on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca, the Mewstone and the AAT also monitor the frequency of fishing equipment ingestion / entanglement at breeding colonies. | TASPAWS / EA | Fishing equipment ingestion / entanglement at breeding colonies is monitored and quantified. | 3 | All existing population monitoring programs (those listed in D12.1 and D 12.2) record instances of ingestion / entanglement at colonies when they occur. |\n| | 2: Trawl fisheries | | | | |\n| A 2.1 | Continue to collect, collate and analyse data regarding incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant-petrels associated with subantarctic trawl fisheries | AFMA /EA | The incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant-petrels associated with trawl fishing operations around Macquarie Island and Heard and McDonald Islands is monitored and quantified. | 3 | Observer coverage in subantarctic trawl fisheries is high and rates of mortality well quantified. |\n| A 2.2 | Continue to collect, collate and analyse data regarding incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant petrels associated with the South East Fishery. | AFMA / ISMP /EA | The incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant petrels associated with trawl fishing operations within the South East Fishery is adequately monitored and quantified. | 0 | Incidental mortality in SE fisheries has not been extensively quantified but observations to date indicate that it is likely to be significant for some seabird species, including Shy albatross.. |\n| A 2.3 | Quantify the current levels of incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant petrels associated with trawl fishing operations occurring within the AFZ south of 30˚S (other than the subantarctic and South East Fishery trawl fisheries) through assessment of logbooks and current observer programs. | AFMA | The incidental mortality of albatrosses and giant petrels associated with trawl fishing operations occurring within the AFZ south of 30˚S (other than the subantarctic and South East Fishery trawl fisheries) is quantified. | 0 | Refer to comments for A2.2 |\n| A 2.4 | Design and implement an education strategy aimed at commercial trawl fishers to encourage the implementation of simple by-catch mitigation measures. | AFMA / EA | An effective education strategy is developed and in operation. | 0 | |\n| | 3: Intentional shooting/killing | | | | |\n| A 3.1 | EA to investigate the capacity of the Commonwealth to regulate to prohibit the carrying of firearms on fishing vessels operating within the AFZ. | EA | The carrying of firearms on fishing vessels within the AFZ is prohibited. | 0 | The carrying of firearms on fishing vessels is not prohibited and unlikely to be achieved. Fishers use firearms to kill large tuna and sharks when they land them. |\n| A 3.2 | Design and implement an education strategy aimed at commercial and recreational fishers to discourage the intentional killing of albatrosses and giant petrels. | AFMA / EA | An effective education strategy is developed and in operation. | 1 | Fishers in Commonwealth managed fisheries are well informed of their obligations not to harm albatrosses and giant petrels. However, education of recreational fishers and commercial fishers in State fisheries has not been undertaken. |\n| | 4: Trolling vessels | | | | |\n| A 4.1 | Design and implement an education strategy aimed at commercial and recreational troll fishers to encourage them to set their fishing lines at least 2m below the surface of the water. | AFMA / EA | An effective education strategy is developed and in operation. | 0 | Refer to comments for 3.2. |\n| Total | | | | 15/33 | |\n\nSpecific Objective B\n\n| | 5: Feral pest species | | | | |\n| ----- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| B 5.1 | Continue the integrated vertebrate pest management program on Macquarie Island targeting:feral catsrabbitsrodents | TASPAWS / EA | On Macquarie Island, feral cats have been eradicated and rabbit and rodent numbers are maintained at a significantly reduced level or eradicated. | 2 | 1. Feral cats have been eradicated.2. Rabbit and rodent numbers have increased. A vertebrate pest eradication (targeting rabbits and rodents) is underway. |\n| B 5.2 | Maintain the current guidelines preventing the introduction of feral species to all albatross and giant petrel breeding islands. | TASPAWS / AAD | Current guidelines preventing the introduction of feral species to all albatross and giant petrel breeding islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction are maintained. | 1 | Generally inadequate quarantine arrangements for Tasmanian breeding islands. Breeding sites at Heard and McDonald Island and in Australian Antarctic Territory all have strong management arrangements to prevent the introduction of non-indigenous species and also avian diseases. |\n| | 6: Human disturbance at the nest | | | | |\n| B 6.1 | Maintain the existing 25m minimum approach limit around wandering albatrosses on Macquarie Island. | TASPAWS | The existing 25m minimum approach limit around wandering albatrosses on Macquarie Island is maintained. | 3 | Implementation of the Special Management Areas (SMAs) on Macquarie island exceeds this standard; 25m now considered inadequate |\n| B 6.2 | Continue to manage the seasonal area closures around albatross breeding colonies around Caroline Cove and the Featherbeds on Macquarie Island. | TASPAWS | Seasonal area closures around Caroline Cove and the Featherbeds on Macquarie Island are closely managed. | 3 | Implementation of the SMAs on Macquarie island encompasses all seabird species around the island and supersedes the concept of area closures. |\n| B 6.3 | Educational material regarding the impacts of wildlife disturbance should:i) Continue to be provided to all tourists and ANARE expeditioners prior to arrival on Macquarie Island and the AAT.ii) Be designed, developed and provided to all visitors to Heard Island | TASPAWS / AAD | Education material is prepared and distributed as appropriate. | 3 | Education of expeditioners and tourists is thoroughly implemented on Macquarie Island, Heard and McDonald Islands and in the Australian Antarctic Territory. Breeding sites' entry is by permit only and only for essential purposes. |\n| B 6.4 | Continue to manage access to all albatross and giant petrel breeding islands under Australian jurisdiction. | TASPAWS / AAD | Access to breeding islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction is restricted to appropriate permit holders only. | 2 | 1. Access to Macquarie Island, Heard and McDonald Islands and the AAT sites is well managed.2. Shy albatross colonies are freely accessed by tourists, recreationalists and fishermen. It is intended to seek improved controls by the Tasmanian government on visiting these colonies. |\n| B 6.5 | Maintain the current guidelines restricting the construction of further infrastructure on albatross and giant petrel breeding islands under Australian jurisdiction in accordance with the relevant management plans for each island. | TASPAWS / AAD | Guidelines restricting the construction of further infrastructure on breeding islands within areas under Australian jurisdiction are maintained. | 3 | The construction of further infrastructure on breeding islands is tightly managed. |\n| | 7: Avian Parasites and disease | | | | |\n| B 7.1 | Conduct an investigation into the parasites and diseases causing mortality of shy albatrosses at Albatross Island. | TASPAWS / EA | An investigation into the parasites and diseases causing mortality of shy albatrosses at Albatross Island is completed. | 1 | A preliminary investigation was conducted on Albatross Island to determine which diseases were present in the population. Additional investigation to quantify prevalence, incidence and impact and understand the ecology of the disease agents did not proceed as no further funding was secured. The priority for this action needs to be reassessed based on the impact of disease agents on shy albatross demographic parameters on Albatross Island. |\n| B 7.2 | Ensure that existing population monitoring programs on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone also monitor the presence or absence of avian parasites and diseases at breeding colonies. | TASPAWS / EA | The presence or absence of avian parasites and diseases at breeding colonies is monitored. | 1 | Obvious external sign of avian parasites and diseases are monitored and quantified during existing population monitoring programs and provide an indication of disease prevalence. However there is no systematic clinical sampling protocol to collect baseline data on diseases present in these two albatross populations. |\n| | 8: Interspecific competition for nest space | | | | |\n| B 8.1 | Ensure that the existing population monitoring program on Pedra Branca also monitors the relative distribution and abundance of shy albatrosses and Australasian gannets. | TASPAWS / EA | The relative distribution and abundance of shy albatrosses and Australasian gannets at Pedra Branca is monitored. | 3 | The shy albatross population-monitoring program on Pedra Branca includes the collection of data on the relative distribution and abundance of Australasian gannets. |\n| | 9: Dependence upon discards | | | | |\n| B 9.1 | Continue to monitor the effects of offal discharge on the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels. | TASPAWS / EA | The effects of offal discharge on the reproductive success of albatrosses and giant petrels are monitored. | 0 | The existing population monitoring programs record incidental observations but do not otherwise quantify the reliance of offal in albatross and giant petrel diet. This would require invasive diet studies, which are inconsistent with ethical considerations. |\n| B 9.2 | Investigate the foraging ranges of albatrosses and giant petrels. | TASPAWS / EA | See entries under Actions A 1.3 and A 1.4 | 3 | Refer to comments for Actions A 1.3 and A 1.4 |\n| B 9.3 | IAATO to regulate to prohibit the intentional provisioning of seabirds during tourist operations. | IAATO / EA | The intentional provisioning of food sources to seabirds during tourist operations is prohibited. | 3 | IAATO wildlife guidelines 2007 \"advise\" - Never feed wild birds and no chumming to attract birds. This is in IAATO code of practice, but IAATO can only deal with members; i.e. not all tour operators. Apart from yachts, nearly all Antarctic tourism is by IAATO members. All tourist visits to subantarctic islands are strictly managed and feeding is prohibited. |\n| Total | | | | 28/39 | |\n\nSpecific Objective C\n\n| | 10: Competition with fisheries for marine resources | | | | |\n| ------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| C 10.1 | As required by the EPBC Act, AFMA will strategically assess the ecological sustainability of each fishery that overlaps with any albatross and giant petrel species by taking into account the total dietary requirements of each albatross and giant petrel population. | AFMA / EA | The total dietary requirements of albatrosses and giant petrels have been taken into account when AFMA:i) strategically assesses the ecological sustainability of each fishery that overlaps with any albatross and giant petrel species (under the EPBC Act); andii) develops or revises management arrangements (e.g. the setting of TACs) for fisheries overlapping with any albatross and giant petrel population. | 1 | Each Commonwealth fishery is assessed for its ecological sustainability. Direct provision for dietary requirements is not made in these assessments however the requirements of an ecosystem-based management approach to fisheries does indirectly consider these aspects. More research is needed into quantifying dietary requirements of albatrosses and giant petrels. |\n| | 11: Marine Pollution | | | | |\n| C 11.1 | Ensure that existing population monitoring programs on Macquarie Island, Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone also monitor the incidence of:i) hatching failure due to egg shell thinning;ii) oiled birds at the nest; andiii) marine debris egestion / entanglement at the nest | TASPAWS/ EA | i) Hatching failure due to egg-shell thinning;ii) The presence of oiled birds at the nest; andiii) Marine debris egestion / entanglement at the nest, at breeding colonies is monitored and quantified. | 1 | There is no formal assessment of eggshell thinning, however checks for oiled birds and marine debris entanglement at nest are monitored and quantified as part of existing population monitoring programs. Eggshell thinning is not assessed as this is currently considered a low priority; however ongoing population monitoring allows detection. |\n| C 11.2 | Design and implement an education strategy to increase general public understanding of the environmental consequences of using industrial, agricultural and domestic chemicals. | WWF / EA | An effective education strategy is developed and in operation. | 0 | No work has been undertaken on this issue. |\n| Total | | | | 2/9 | |\n\nSpecific Objective D\n\n| | 12: Population monitoring programs | | | | |\n| ------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| D 12.1 | Maintain existing population monitoring programs on Macquarie Island measuring demographic and breeding parameters of:wandering albatrosses;black browed albatrosses;grey-headed albatrosses;light mantled albatrosses;northern giant petrels; andsouthern giant petrels | TASPAWS / AAD / EA | Existing population monitoring programs on Macquarie Island are continued. | 3 | Long-term population and demographic monitoring programs on Macquarie Island albatrosses and giant petrels have been maintained on an annual basis. |\n| D 12.2 | Maintain existing population monitoring programs measuring demographic and breeding parameters of shy albatrosses breeding on:Albatross IslandPedra BrancaThe Mewstone | TASPAWS / EA | Existing population monitoring programs on Albatross Island, Pedra Branca and the Mewstone are continued. | 3 | Long term population (and demographic Albatross Island only) programs on shy albatrosses have been maintained on an annual basis. |\n| D 12.3 | Maintain AAD's existing program of opportunistically estimating the population size and breeding success of southern giant petrels breeding within the AAT. | AAD / EA | AAD's existing program of opportunistically estimating the population size and breeding success of southern giant petrels breeding within the AAT is continued. | 1 | Presently reviewing ways to improve quality of opportunistic counting and quality of AAT monitoring more generally, particularly through the use of automated cameras deployed for successive seasons. |\n| D 12.4 | For Heard Island populations, representative population monitoring programs using non-intrusive techniques should be conducted whenever the island is visited (during the breeding season) or every ten years (whichever is sooner) in order to determine the population status of:black browed albatrosses;light mantled albatrosses;wandering albatrosses (if present); andsouthern giant petrels. | AAD / EA | On Heard Island, representative, non-intrusive population monitoring programs are conducted for:black browed albatrosseslight mantled albatrosseswandering albatrosses (if present)southern giant petrels | 1 | No recent or consistent population censuses due to lack of visitation. Automated cameras systems and more regular visits are desirable and being investigated so that the requirements of the Recovery Plan and the Heard Island Wilderness Reserve Management Plan can be met in the future. |\n| D 12.5 | For McDonald Island populations, representative population monitoring programs using non-intrusive techniques should be conducted whenever the island is visited (during the breeding season) or every ten years (whichever is sooner) in order to determine the population status of:black browed albatrosses;light mantled albatrosses; andsouthern giant petrels. | AAD / EA | On McDonald Island, representative, non-intrusive population monitoring programs are conducted for:black browed albatrosses;light mantled albatrosses; andsouthern giant petrels. | 0 | There is no population monitoring program for this island. Landings are generally prohibited on the island. |\n| D 12.6 | Continue investigations into remote population-monitoring techniques to enable rapid assessment of isolated albatross and giant petrel populations. | TASPAWS / EA | Effective remote population-monitoring techniques are developed. | 2 | Remote aerial photographic methods are well developed. Limited development of other remote methods due to logistical constraints and/or funding availability. |\n| | 13: Reduced genetic variability (identifying provenance using genetic markers)[1] | | | | |\n| D 13.1 | Complete the genetic profiling of the three shy albatross populations and the closely related white capped albatross from NZ. These data are to be used to assess the impact of Longline Fishing operations. | TASPAWS/ ANU/EA | The genetic profiling of all shy albatross and white capped albatross populations is completed, and the data are used in assessing the impact of Longline Fishing operations. | 3 | The genetic profiling of shy and white capped albatrosses has been comprehensive and data have been used to assess the impact of longline fishing operations. Results have been published in peer reviewed journals: Abbott et al. (2006) Molecular provenance analysis for shy and white capped albatrosses killed by fisheries interactions in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Conservation Genetics. Vol 7, 531–542, and Baker et al. (2007) A global assessment of the impact of fisheries-related mortality on shy and white capped albatrosses: conservation implications, Biological Conservation Vol 137, 319–333. |\n| D 13.2 | Initiate genetic profiling programs of populations breeding on Macquarie Island for:wandering albatrossblack browed albatrossgrey-headed albatrosslight mantled albatross | TASPAWS/ ANU / EA | Genetic material of Macquarie Island populations of the following species are collected:wandering albatrossblack browed albatrossgrey-headed albatrosslight mantled albatross | 2 | Genetic material has been collected from all albatross species as well as the two giant petrel species on Macquarie Island. Genetic profiling of the wandering, black browed and grey headed albatross has been completed; Alderman et al. 2005. Genetic affinities of newly sampled wandering and black browed albatross populations, EMU. Light mantled albatross have not been profiled as this species is considered a low priority to pursue. Researchers at the British Antarctic Survey are currently finalising analysis of giant petrel samples. |\n| Total | | | | 15/24 | |","sortOrder":26},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix B: Extract from the global Proc","sectionType":"part","heading":"Appendix B: Extract from the global Procellariiform tracking database. (Courtesy of Birdlife International)","content":"# \nAppendix B: Extract from the global Procellariiform tracking database. (Courtesy of Birdlife International)\n\n![](image.004.png)","sortOrder":27}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"_metrics":{"model":"kimi-k2.5","source":"moonshot-realtime","completionTokens":2854},"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The plan remains focused on the conservation and recovery of threatened albatross and giant petrel populations as required by the EPBC Act. While it updates the previous 2001 plan and pragmatically includes three additional non-listed species, and expands consideration of emerging threats like trawl fishing and climate change, these adjustments reflect necessary scientific and operational updates within the original statutory purpose rather than a fundamental expansion of scope."},"complexity_factors":["Detailed implementation tables with over 40 specific actions, each with associated performance criteria, costings, and responsible agencies","Coordination required between multiple jurisdictions (Commonwealth, Tasmanian Government, Australian Antarctic Division, AFMA)","Taxonomic reconciliation between EPBC Act listings and international Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) standards","Conditional management triggers requiring adaptive responses (e.g., 'where bycatch is identified as significant, implement limits')","Cross-references to separate statutory instruments including the Threat Abatement Plan for longline fishing and various fisheries management regimes"],"plain_english_summary":"This national recovery plan under the EPBC Act (2011–2016) aims to protect 21 threatened albatross and giant petrel species that breed on Australian islands or forage in Australian waters. It targets key threats—fishing bycatch, invasive pests (notably Macquarie Island eradication), human disturbance, climate impacts, pollution and disease—by assigning actions, performance targets, costs and timelines to agencies. The measures are intended to stop population declines and avert extinctions (e.g. the range‑restricted shy albatross)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016","history":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016/history","analysis":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/national-recovery-plan-for-threatened-albatrosses-and-giant-petrels-2011-2016/documents"}}