{"id":"F2008B00665","name":"Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits","slug":"threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"repealed","isInForce":false,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":71995,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2008B00665-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"Repealed","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits","content":"![](image.001.png)\n\nThreat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits\n\nmade under section 33 of the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992 and continued in force under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999\n\nCompilation No. 1\n\nCompilation date: 1 October 2008\n\nIncludes amendments up to: F2009L00068\n\nAbout this compilation\n\nThis compilation\n\nThis is a compilation of the Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits that shows the text of the law as amended and in force on 01/10/2008 (the compilation date).\n\nThe notes at the end of this compilation (the endnotes) include information about amending laws and the amendment history of provisions of the compiled law.\n\nUncommenced amendments\n\nThe effect of uncommenced amendments is not shown in the text of the compiled law. Any uncommenced amendments affecting the law are accessible on the Legislation Register (www.legislation.gov.au). The details of amendments made up to, but not commenced at, the compilation date are underlined in the endnotes. For more information on any uncommenced amendments, see the series page on the Legislation Register for the compiled law.\n\nApplication, saving and transitional provisions for provisions and amendments\n\nIf the operation of a provision or amendment of the compiled law is affected by an application, saving or transitional provision that is not included in this compilation, details are included in the endnotes.\n\nModifications\n\nIf the compiled law is modified by another law, the compiled law operates as modified but the modification does not amend the text of the law. Accordingly, this compilation does not show the text of the compiled law as modified. For more information on any modifications, see the series page on the Legislation Register for the compiled law.\n\nSelf‑repealing provisions\n\nIf a provision of the compiled law has been repealed in accordance with a provision of the law, details are included in the endnotes.\n\nThreat abatement plan\n\nfor competition and land degradation by rabbits\n\n2008\n\n \n\nDepartment of the Environment, Water, Heritage \nand the Arts\n\nISBN 978-0-642-55395-9\n\n© Commonwealth of Australia 2008\n\nThis work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth, available from the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to:\n\nAssistant Secretary \nBiodiversity Conservation Branch \nDepartment of the Environment, Water, Heritage \nand the Arts \nGPO Box 787 \nCanberra ACT 2601\n\nThis publication and its background document are available on the internet at: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/tap-approved.html\n\nThey are also available by emailing the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Community Information Unit, at ciu@environment.gov.au \nor freecall 1800 803 772.\n\nThis plan should be cited as: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits, DEWHA, Canberra.\n\nFront cover photo: Supplied by Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre\n\nTechnical editing and production management: Biotext Pty Ltd\n\nDesign and artwork: Design Direction\n\n \nContents\n\n1 Introduction 1\n\n1.1 Threat abatement plans 1\n\n1.2 Threat abatement plan for rabbits 2\n\n1.2.1 The threat 2\n\n1.2.2 The impacts 2\n\n1.2.3 Managing the threat 2\n\n1.2.4 The review of the 1999 TAP 3\n\n1.2.5 Involvement of stakeholders 3\n\n2 Objectives and actions 4\n\nObjective 1 4\n\nObjective 2 6\n\nObjective 3 7\n\nObjective 4 8\n\nObjective 5 9\n\n3 Duration, cost, implementation and evaluation of the plan 10\n\n3.1 Duration and cost of the plan 10\n\n3.2 Implementing the plan 11\n\n3.3 Evaluating implementation of the plan 11\n\nAppendix A: Species affected by rabbits 12\n\nGlossary 20\n\nAcronyms and abbreviations 22\n\nReferences 23\n\n \n1 Introduction\n\nThis threat abatement plan (TAP) establishes a national framework to guide and coordinate Australia’s response to the impacts of rabbits on biodiversity. It identifies the research, management and other actions needed to ensure the long-term maintenance of native species and ecological communities affected by competition and land degradation caused by rabbits. It replaces the threat abatement plan for feral rabbits published in 1999 (EA 1999a).\n\nThis plan should be read in conjunction with the publication Background document for the threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits (DEWHA 2008). The background document provides information on rabbit characteristics, biology and distribution; impacts on environmental, economic, social and cultural values; and current management practices and measures.\n\n1.1 Threat abatement plans\n\nUnder the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), the Australian Government develops TAPs and facilitates their implementation. To progress the main strategic development actions, the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) assesses the potential for partnerships and co-investment with other government agencies, industry and other stakeholders. An important part of implementation of the TAP is ensuring that knowledge of improved abatement methods is disseminated to potential users.\n\nMitigating the threat of invasive species is a matter of developing, applying and integrating a number of control methods, not relying on one method. It also requires understanding and addressing social and economic factors; for example, through supporting the efforts of private landholders and leaseholders to manage invasive species on their lands for biodiversity conservation and primary production. In addition, research and development programs for controlling pest species need to integrate the interests of both primary production and environmental conservation.\n\nRegional natural resource management plans and site-based plans provide the best scale and context for developing operational plans to control invasive species. They allow primary production and environmental considerations to be jointly addressed, and control to be integrated across the local priority vertebrate pests within the scope of other natural resource management priorities.\n\nThe national coordination of pest animal control activities occurs under the Australian Pest Animal Strategy, released in 2007 by the Natural Resource Management and Primary Industries Ministerial councils. The Vertebrate Pests Committee, comprising representatives from all Australian, state and teritory governments, has responsibility for implementation of the strategy. This TAP provides guidance for the management of rabbits within that broader context.\n\n \n\n1.2 Threat abatement plan for rabbits\n\n1.2.1 The threat\n\nThe European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) was deliberately released on the Australian mainland in the mid to late 1800s, and is now widely distributed over a large part of the Australian mainland, in Tasmania and on many offshore islands. Rabbits are well adapted to climatic conditions in much of Australia and occur in all states and territories. Rabbits, along with foxes and cats, are considered to be Australia’s most serious vertebrate pests; rabbits are the country’s most abundant small mammal (with the possible exception of the introduced house mouse) and severely affect native flora and fauna, vegetation communities, landforms, geomorphic processes and sensitive sites, as well as primary industries. This situation continues despite the availability and application of chemical and physical control methods, and the release of the biological control agents myxomatosis and rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD).\n\nCompetition and land degradation by feral rabbits are listed as a key threatening process under the EPBC Act and pose a threat to a large number of native species (see Appendix A), although impacts from rabbits are not restricted to these species.\n\n1.2.2 The impacts\n\nRabbits have a number of characteristics that help to explain their invasiveness and the magnitude of their impact. For example, their warrens protect them from predators and climatic extremes. Other attributes include their extreme fecundity and their ability to colonise a wide range of habitats.\n\nRabbits have direct impacts on native flora and fauna; for example, by grazing on native vegetation and thus preventing regeneration, and by competing with native fauna for food and shelter. They also have indirect and secondary effects, such as supporting populations of introduced cats and foxes, denuding vegetation and thereby exposing fauna species (e.g. burrowing petrels) to increased predation, and digging and browsing leading to a loss of vegetation cover and consequent slope instability and soil erosion.\n\n1.2.3 Managing the threat\n\nAs rabbits are so widely established in Australia, the focus of management is generally on abating their impacts rather than prevention or eradication. However, eradication may be achievable in isolated areas such as small reserves and offshore islands; for example, a program for the eradication of rabbits and rodents from Macquarie Island has been initiated. In many areas, such as the rangelands, rabbit control is heavily dependent on biocontrol. Sustained control of rabbits is feasible and has been achieved in some large areas using integrated control that combines well-planned, timely poisoning, warren ripping and warren fumigation, after rabbits have been reduced by drought or disease (Cooke 1993). Control efforts should be targeted to protect sites where rabbits pose the greatest threat to biodiversity. At these sites, rabbit populations must be suppressed and managed.\n\nInteractions between pest species mean that control of rabbits can have effects on other invasive animals, such as foxes and cats. For example, a study in inland Australia found that cat and fox numbers fell after a major reduction in rabbit numbers caused by RHD (Bowen and Read 1998). Similarly, monitoring of sites across Australia for two years after the release of RHD found some recovery of native vegetation had occurred at most sites (Sandell and Start 1999). In contrast, eradication of cats from some islands has led to an increase in the rabbit population, resulting in extreme environmental damage.[\\[1\\]](#_ftn1)\n\nProgress in rabbit control must be monitored to ensure that objectives are met, and to allow management options to be adapted to changing circumstances. Best-practice management of rabbits must involve reduction of the threat not only to targeted threatened species, but also to all native plant and animal species that may be affected by rabbit competition and land degradation.\n\n1.2.4 The review of the 1999 TAP\n\nIn accordance with the requirements of the EBPC Act, the original TAP for feral rabbits (EA 1999a) was reviewed in 2004–05 by the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) (Hart 2005) as part of a broader review encompassing the TAPs for foxes (EA 1999b), cats (EA 1999c) and goats (EA 1999d).\n\nThe BRS review found that it was difficult to accurately determine the extent to which the TAPs had reduced the impacts of rabbits on biodiversity. This reflects the current paucity of nationally consistent data on the ranges and densities of rabbits and their impacts, and the difficulties of linking outcomes in population changes to the outputs of the rabbit TAP. The invasive species indicator data to be produced under the National Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (NRMMC 2003) should improve the availability of continental overview data over the next year or so.\n\nThe BRS surveyed a broad range of stakeholders and assessed a range of projects commissioned by the Department of the Environment and Heritage (now the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) that were developed under the auspices of the existing TAPs. This has helped to identify actions that will need to be initiated or continued into the future. The review concluded, however, that the rabbit-related projects that were assessed had positively contributed to reducing the impacts of rabbits. Furthermore, projects have addressed specific pest control needs in high-priority locations. Of the 26 actions in the 1999 TAP for rabbits, many were targeted by at least one project, and almost half the rabbit actions had been fully completed through one or more projects. The general breakdown of project types fell into the categories of research and development, on-ground control and a small number of extension projects.\n\nThe BRS review proposed a number of changes to the actions in the original TAP, but recommended that the objectives remain substantially unchanged. The review suggested that the implementation of the revised rabbit TAP should give priority to improved national engagement, integrated pest animal control, flexibility in implementation, setting priorities for research, follow-through with research and development, and establishment of a new advisory panel for vertebrate TAPs. The review also recommended that the revised plan include measures to enhance existing processes through, for example, regional processes, control and monitoring techniques that support on-ground management, and monitoring of key projects according to national protocols.\n\nThis document replaces the 1999 TAP. It incorporates the knowledge gained in the intervening years and has been modified in line with recommendations from the review. The TAP aims to guide the responsible use of public resources and the best outcome for native species and ecological communities threatened by competition and land degradation caused by rabbits. The plan seeks to achieve these outcomes by recognising the opportunities and limitations that exist, and ensuring that field experience and research are used to further improve management of rabbits. The activities and priorities under the TAP will need to adapt to changes as they occur.\n\n1.2.5 Involvement of stakeholders\n\nThe successful implementation of this TAP will depend on a high level of cooperation between landholders, community groups, local government, state and territory conservation and pest management agencies, and the Australian Government and its agencies. Success will depend on all participants assessing rabbit impact and allocating adequate resources to achieve effective on-ground control of rabbits at critical sites, improve the effectiveness of control programs, and measure and assess outcomes. Various programs in natural resource management, at national, state and regional levels, can make significant contributions to implementing the plan.\n\n \nObjectives and actions\n\nThe goal of this TAP is to minimise the impact of rabbit competition and land degradation on biodiversity in Australia and its territories by:\n\n• protecting affected native species, broadscale vegetation and ecological communities, and\n\n• preventing further species and ecological communities from becoming threatened.\n\nTo achieve this goal, the plan has five main objectives, developed through the review of the previous TAP (Hart 2005) and consultation with experts. These objectives are to:\n\n1. prevent rabbits from occupying new areas in Australia and eradicate rabbits from high- conservation-value ‘islands’\n\n2. promote the maintenance and recovery of native species and ecological communities that are affected by rabbit competition and land degradation\n\n3. improve knowledge and understanding of rabbit impacts and interactions with other species and other ecological processes\n\n4. improve the effectiveness, target specificity, integration and humaneness of control options for rabbits, and\n\n5. increase awareness of all stakeholders of the objectives and actions of the TAP, and of the need to control and manage rabbits.\n\nEach objective is accompanied by a set of actions, which, when implemented, will help to achieve the goal of the plan. Performance indicators have been established for each objective. Progress will be assessed by determining the extent to which the performance indicators have been met.\n\nThe sections below provide background on each objective, followed by a table listing the actions required to meet the objective. Fifteen actions have been developed to meet the five objectives.\n\nPriorities for each action are given in the tables below, categorised as ‘very high’, ‘high’ or ‘medium’. Also, each action has been assigned a timeframe within which the outcome could be achieved once the action has commenced. Timeframes are categorised as short term (i.e. within three years), medium term (i.e. within three to five years) or long term (i.e. five years or beyond).\n\n![](image.002.png) Objective 1\n\nPrevent rabbits from occupying new areas in Australia and eradicate rabbits from high- conservation-value ‘islands’\n\nKey actions for Objective 1 include identifying ‘islands’ of high conservation value, ranking the risk to such areas posed by rabbits, and developing and implementing management plans to protect such areas from rabbit damage. The actions are designed to prevent rabbits from extending their range in Australia and to remove them from high-conservation-value ‘islands’ if eradication is feasible. An important activity in achieving this is to monitor rabbit distribution at the edge of their current extent. The actions focus on offshore islands and on mainland ‘islands’ that are isolated or currently do not have rabbits but may become potential habitats due to factors such as climate change. An example of a mainland ‘island’ is the Darling Downs Rabbit Board protection area in southeast Queensland. Most of these actions are of high to very high priority. DEWHA is establishing a national database of introduced animals across Australian offshore islands that will complement this work.\n\nAction 1.1 focuses on collating data on conservation values of ‘island’ areas, the likelihood of significant biodiversity impacts from rabbits, and the risk that colonisation by rabbits will become a threat in these areas.\n\nAction 1.2 involves developing contingency plans for monitoring, preventing and, if an incursion occurs, containing and eradicating rabbits in areas with high conservation values. Assessment of invasion risk by rabbits should use population genetic approaches to identify past invasion routes. Action 1.3 implements these contingency plans. Action 1.4 involves eradicating established populations of rabbits from those ‘islands’ considered of high conservation value, depending on feasibility and cost-effectiveness of eradication. These actions cannot be implemented until Action 3.1 is complete. All planning and implementation work needs to recognise that rabbits are one of many pests facing land managers and therefore should be undertaken within the context of integrated management activities.\n\nPerformance indicators\n\n• No further establishments of rabbits on offshore islands or in other rabbit-free areas.\n\n• Successful eradication of isolated populations of rabbits where this is attempted.\n\n• Increased populations of affected native species in areas from which rabbits, and other invasive species, have been eradicated.\n\n| Action | Priority and timeframe |\n| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------ |\n| 1.1 Collate data on all islands and on isolated mainland ‘islands’, assess their conservation value, the likelihood of significant biodiversity impacts from rabbits and, if there are no rabbits present, rank the level of risk of rabbits being introduced and establishing populations. | High priority, short term |\n| 1.2 Develop management plans to prevent, monitor and, if incursions occur, contain and eradicate any rabbit incursion, for ‘islands’ with high conservation values and into potential new habitats with high conservation values. | Medium priority, medium term |\n| 1.3 Implement management plans for high-conservation-value ‘islands’, including prevention and monitoring actions, and containment or eradication actions if incursions occur. | Very high priority, medium term |\n| 1.4 Eradicate established populations of rabbits from ‘islands’ with high conservation values where this is cost-effective, feasible and a high conservation priority. | Very high priority, medium–long term |\n\n \n\n![](image.003.png) Objective 2\n\nPromote the maintenance and recovery of native species and ecological communities that are affected by rabbit competition and land degradation\n\nKey actions for Objective 2 include identifying priority areas for rabbit control, implementing and supporting regional control programs, and applying incentives for promoting and maintaining control programs in areas adjacent to priority areas. Actions 2.1–2.3 focus programs in rabbit control on the maintenance and recovery of native species and ecological communities affected by rabbit competition and land degradation. Actions 2.1 and 2.2 are of very high priority and will have to be ongoing for the foreseeable future.\n\nBroadscale eradication of rabbits from Australia is not feasible using the methods and resources currently available, although integrated control methods have been effective on a relatively large scale; for example, the Bounceback program in South Australia. Abatement of the damage that rabbits cause must initially be undertaken in discrete, manageable areas. These are selected based on scientific evidence of the significance of the population of native species or the ecological community being damaged, and the importance of rabbit damage relative to other processes such as livestock grazing. In addition, cost–benefit analyses of control programs, which cannot focus solely on environmental gains, must be considered. These activities are covered by Action 2.1. Identification of priority areas can involve mapping the distributions of susceptible species, high-risk habitats and rabbits to produce a national overview of priority regions (e.g. using the approach outlined in Dickman \\[1996\\] and NSW NPWS \\[2001\\]).\n\nOnce priority areas have been identified, the next step is to implement regional control programs and support existing control programs, as described in Action 2.2. Organisations implementing control programs will be encouraged to focus on areas where rabbit control will help to reduce the threat to native species. The success of control programs should be monitored, applying national monitoring protocols as soon as these are available (see Action 3.1).\n\nIt is important to promote the control of rabbits in both priority areas and adjacent areas to prevent immediate reinvasion. Action 2.3 focuses on incentives for such actions on private and leasehold lands.\n\nPerformance indicators\n\n• Priority areas, where rabbit control is to protect important affected flora and fauna, have been identified and are a focus for rabbit control programs.\n\n• Rabbit control work involves pre and post-control monitoring of rabbit populations and key native species, according to national protocols, to measure the outcome of control operations.\n\n| Action | Priority and timeframe |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------- |\n| 2.1 Identify priority areas for rabbit control based on:• the significance of the regional population of the affected native species or of the ecological community• the degree of threat posed by rabbits to species and ecological communities relative to other threats• the cost-effectiveness of maintaining rabbit populations below an identified ‘damage threshold’ in the region• the feasibility of effective remedial action, and• the possibility of eradicating the rabbit population. | Very high priority, medium term |\n| 2.2 Conduct and monitor regional rabbit control, through new or existing programs, in priority areas identified in Action 2.1. | Very high priority, long term |\n| 2.3 Apply existing and new incentives to promote and maintain on-ground rabbit control on private or leasehold lands within or adjacent to priority sites identified in Action 2.1. | Medium priority, medium term |\n\n![](image.004.png) Objective 3\n\nImprove knowledge and understanding of rabbit impacts and interactions with other species and other ecological processes\n\nKey actions for Objective 3 focus on ensuring rabbit control does not lead to unintended effects, through better understanding of the impacts of rabbits and their interactions with other species. The actions include development of simple, cost-effective methods for monitoring impacts; improving knowledge of interactions between rabbits and wild cats, foxes and wild dogs; and identifying unintended effects of broadscale rabbit control, including the possible increase of weeds or undesirable plants once the rabbit grazing is reduced. These actions are of high to very high priority and most could be achieved within the next three to five years, although some will require a long-term commitment. A range of available genetic marker analyses may be useful to this work in improving understanding and management of rabbits. These techniques can be used, for example, to identify likely invasion routes and monitor population dynamics.\n\nTo determine the effectiveness of rabbit control programs, Action 3.1 is to develop simple, cost-effective methods for monitoring rabbit populations, and the impact of this invasive species on affected species and ecological processes relative to other kinds of impact. Monitoring methods need to be reliable for different densities of both rabbits and the native species with which they compete or which they deprive of resources. Areas for investigation include the feasibility and practicality of individual identification by genotyping scats or hairs, to help estimate abundance, particularly at low densities. This action is very high priority.\n\nInteractions between rabbits and other species need to be considered when undertaking control programs. Action 3.2 is to investigate interactions between rabbits, feral cats, foxes and wild dogs so that control activities for these four species can be more effectively integrated (e.g. certain fences used to exclude rabbits can also exclude other pest species).\n\nAction 3.3 is to identify any unintended effects that rabbit control may have if it is not integrated with other management activities, such as weed control. These unintended effects could include weed outbreaks, ‘prey-switching’ or a decline in prey for native predators.\n\nPerformance indicators\n\n• Reliable rabbit monitoring techniques have been developed.\n\n• Integration of control methods for rabbits, other pests and weed species are improved.\n\n• The unintended effects of rabbit control are minimised. \n\n| Action | Priority and timeframe |\n| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------ |\n| 3.1 Develop simple and cost-effective methods for monitoring rabbit populations and the impacts of rabbits relative to other kinds of impact. | Very high priority, short term |\n| 3.2 Identify the importance of rabbits for maintaining feral cat, fox and wild dog numbers, and the potential effects of the removal of predators, so that control of these species can be integrated to minimise risks to native species. | High priority, medium term |\n| 3.3 Identify any unintended effects that rabbit control may have if conducted in isolation from other management activities. | High priority, medium term |\n\n![](image.005.png) Objective 4\n\nImprove the effectiveness, target specificity, integration and humaneness of rabbit control options\n\nKey actions for Objective 4 include: increasing the integration of available control options such as the use of baits, warren destruction and fumigation; training land managers to make the best use of control methods; and increasing the adoption of standard control methods. Actions 4.1–4.4 focus on increasing the effectiveness of rabbit control through better use of existing techniques and the development of new techniques, including those for monitoring success of control in the field. These actions are of medium or high priority, and most will require a long-term commitment.\n\nPoisoning, warren ripping and warren fumigation can be used in combination (although not at the same time) to control rabbits effectively. Action 4.1 is to support research to ensure these management options are effective, target specific and humane. For example, a more humane alternative to the fumigant chloropicrin is required. An alternative to chloropicrin may be supported by industry on occupational health and safety grounds as operators must be trained to use it safely.\n\nTo improve the effectiveness of control programs, Action 4.2 is to develop training programs to help land managers to evaluate and adopt eradication or control methods appropriate for local conditions, and determine in what circumstances and times they should be used. This is important because of the lack of skills in this area, especially as many younger land managers have not yet experienced high rabbit numbers due to the success of RHD. Encouraging adoption of new and appropriate control methods by managers should reduce impacts on non-target species, and the likelihood that rabbits will develop genetic and behavioural resistance to toxins and baits.\n\nAction 4.3 is to research ways of maximising the effectiveness of biocontrols such as myxomatosis, RHD and immunocontraception through integration with other control methods, and investigate potential new biocontrol agents. Initial emphasis should be on increasing the effectiveness of RHD in high-rainfall areas.\n\nTo ensure that rabbit management follows best practice, Action 4.4 is to continue to promote the adoption and adaptation of the relevant model codes of practice and standard operating procedures for the effective and humane management of rabbits. This includes their recognition as a reference under the National Competency Standards for Vertebrate Pest Management (NTIS 2007).\n\nPerformance indicators\n\n• Maximised effectiveness of RHD and integrated use with other biological control agents and conventional control options.\n\n• Widespread use of improved rabbit baiting tools and methods.\n\n• Increased adoption and adaptation of the model codes of practice and standard operating procedures for humane management of rabbits, including their recognition as a reference under the National Competency Standards for Vertebrate Pest Management.\n\n| Action | Priority and timeframe |\n| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------- |\n| 4.1 Enhance current methods for poisoning, warren ripping and warren fumigation to ensure they are effective, target specific and humane, and develop alternatives as required. | High priority, long term |\n| 4.2 Develop programs to help land managers adopt locally appropriate control methods, including a process to prioritise warren ripping areas in the rangelands. | Medium priority, short term |\n| 4.3 Conduct research to maximise the effectiveness of existing biocontrols, and investigate new biocontrols. | High priority, long term |\n| 4.4 Continue to promote the adoption of the model codes of practice and standard operating procedures for effective and humane management of rabbits. | Medium priority, long term |\n\n![](image.006.png) Objective 5\n\nIncrease awareness of all stakeholders of the objectives and actions of the TAP, and of the need to control and manage rabbits\n\nAction 5.1 focuses on ensuring that the TAP actions are better communicated to interested parties by preparing and distributing extension materials. The extension materials will help to promote knowledge and understanding of the 14 actions listed in Objectives 1–4, of the techniques used in rabbit control, and why competition and land degradation by rabbits are listed as a key threatening process. This action has a high priority and will require a long-term commitment.\n\nPerformance indicators\n\n• Widespread use of current best-practice techniques in rabbit control.\n\n• Increased awareness of the threat posed by rabbits.\n\n• Increased awareness of the TAP actions and objectives.\n\n \n\n| Action | Priority and timeframe |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ |\n| 5.1 Promote:• broad understanding of the threat to biodiversity posed by rabbits and support for their control• support for the actions to be undertaken under this plan• the use of humane and cost-effective rabbit control methods• best-practice effective rabbit control in all tenures, and• understanding of competition and land degradation by rabbits as a key threatening process. | High priority, long term |\n\n \n3 Duration, cost, implementation and evaluation of the plan\n\n3.1 Duration and cost of the plan\n\nThis plan reflects the fact that the threat abatement process is likely to be ongoing, as there is no likelihood of nationally eradicating all rabbits in the wild in the foreseeable future. In general, most current rabbit control programs aim for long-term suppression of rabbit populations, and a reduction in damage to the environment and production in the most cost-efficient manner (Williams et al. 1995).\n\nInvestment in many of the TAP actions will be determined by the level of resources that stakeholders commit to management of the problem. The total cost of implementation therefore cannot be quantified at the time of writing. Figures for the amount spent on rabbit control are, to varying degrees, available from states and territories. For example, in New South Wales, funding for operational programs for rabbit control was $84 000 in 2000–01 and $108 000 in 2001–02 (English and Chapple 2002). The total labour cost for rabbit control in Australia over the period 1998–2003 was estimated at between $0.8 million and $1.4 million (Reddiex and Forsyth 2004, Reddiex et al. 2004). However, these figures are low because they were collected in the period when RHD was having its greatest impact. A significant increase in rabbit numbers is inevitable as rabbit populations begin to recover over wide areas as a result of such factors as a decrease in the effectiveness of RHD (B Cooke, Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, pers comm, January 2007).\n\nThis TAP provides a framework for undertaking targeted priority actions. Budgetary and other constraints may affect the achievement of the objectives of this plan, and as knowledge changes, proposed actions may be modified over the life of the plan. Australian Government funds may be available to implement key national environmental priorities, such as relevant actions listed in this plan and actions identified in regional natural resource management plans.\n\n3.2 Implementing the plan\n\nDEWHA will work with other Australian Government agencies, state and territory governments and national and regional industry and community groups, to facilitate the implementation of the plan. There are many different stakeholder interests and perspectives to take into account in managing rabbits. For example, Indigenous communities’ views need to be fully considered. It will be important to consult and involve the range of stakeholders in implementing the actions in this plan. Greater integration between agricultural/pastoral and other control efforts will be encouraged.\n\nThe Australian Government will implement the plan as it applies to Commonwealth land.\n\nDEWHA will support a TAP implementation team to assist and advise on the implementation of the plan. The team will draw on expertise in vertebrate pest management from state and territory agencies, and non-government organisations.\n\nThis TAP will operate under the overarching framework of the Australian Biosecurity System for Primary Production and the Environment (AusBIOSEC) and in the context of the Australian Pest Animal Strategy, both of which aim to reduce the impacts of invasive species on native species and ecosystems.\n\n3.3 Evaluating implementation \nof the plan\n\nIt will be difficult to assess directly the effectiveness of the plan in abating the impacts of rabbits on Australia’s biodiversity. However, the Natural Resource Management Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (NRMMC 2003) established a program to provide national information about resource condition on a range of biophysical matters, including threats from vertebrate species such as rabbits. As part of this work, a range of indicators will provide information on the extent of the impact of priority vertebrate species on biodiversity, as well as national trends on their distribution and abundance.\n\n \nAppendix A: Species affected by rabbits\n\nThe species in the table below may be adversely affected by rabbit competition and land degradation (that is, there is scientific proof, anecdotal evidence or the potential for impact). The threatened species included are listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The list is indicative and not comprehensive.\n\nInformation for species listed under the EPBC Act is available from the Species Profile and Threats Database: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl.\n\n```html\n

Type/category

Scientific name

Common name

Current status

Listed threatened species that may be adversely affected

Birds

Acanthiza iredalei iredalei

Slender-billed thornbill (western)

Vulnerable

Amytornis barbatus barbatus

Grey grasswren (bulloo)

Vulnerable

Amytornis textilis modestus

Thick-billed grasswren (eastern)

Vulnerable

Amytornis textilis myall

Thick-billed grasswren (Gawler Ranges)

Vulnerable

Cacatua pastinator pastinator

Muir’s corella (southern), western long-billed corella (southern)

Vulnerable

Calyptorhynchus lathami halmaturinus

Glossy black-cockatoo (South Australian), glossy black-cockatoo (Kangaroo Island)

Endangered

Diomedea exulans

Wandering albatross

Vulnerable

Geophaps scripta scripta

Squatter pigeon (southern)

Vulnerable

Halobaena caerulea

Blue petrel

Vulnerable

Leipoa ocellata

Malleefowl

Vulnerable

Neophema chrysogaster

Orange-bellied parrot

Critically endangered

Pachyptila turtur subantarctica

Fairy prion (southern), fairy prion (Macquarie Island)

Vulnerable

Pedionomus torquatus

Plains-wanderer

Vulnerable

Birds (continued)

Pezoporus occidentalis

Night parrot

Endangered

Poephila cincta cincta

Black-throated finch (southern)

Endangered

Polytelis alexandrae

Princess parrot, Alexandra’s parrot

Vulnerable

Pterodroma mollis

Soft-plumaged petrel

Vulnerable

Pterodroma neglecta neglecta

Kermadec petrel (western)

Vulnerable

Xanthomyza phrygia

Regent honeyeater

Endangered

Mammals

Burramys parvus

Mountain pygmy-possum

Endangered

Dasycercus byrnei

Kowari

Vulnerable

Dasycercus cristicauda

Mulgara

Vulnerable

Dasycercus hillieri

Ampurta

Endangered

Lagorchestes hirsutus unnamed subsp.

Mala, rufous hare-wallaby (central mainland form)

Endangered

Macrotis lagotis

Greater bilby

Vulnerable

Notomys fuscus

Dusky hopping-mouse, wilkiniti

Vulnerable

Perameles gunnii unnamed subsp.

Eastern barred bandicoot (mainland)

Endangered

Petrogale lateralis lateralis

Black-flanked rock-wallaby

Vulnerable

Petrogale lateralis MacDonnell Ranges race

Warru, black-footed rock-wallaby

Vulnerable

Petrogale penicillata

Brush-tailed rock-wallaby

Vulnerable

Petrogale xanthopus xanthopus

Yellow-footed rock-wallaby (SA and NSW)

Vulnerable

Pseudomys australis

Plains rat

Vulnerable

Reptiles

Ophidiocephalus taeniatus

Bronzeback snake-lizard

Vulnerable

Tympanocryptis pinguicolla
( listed as Tympanocryptis lineata pinguicolla)

Grassland earless dragon

Endangered

Insects

Synemon plana

Golden sun moth

Critically endangered

Plants

Abutilon julianae

Norfolk Island abutilon

Critically endangered

Acacia araneosa

Spidery wattle, Balcanoona wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia awestoniana

Stirling Range wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia carneorum

Needle wattle, dead finish, purple-wood wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia cretacea

Chalky wattle

Endangered

Acacia enterocarpa

Jumping-jack wattle

Endangered

Acacia glandulicarpa

Hairy-pod wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia insolita
subsp. recurva

Yornaning wattle

Endangered

Acacia latzii

Latz’s wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia peuce

Waddy, waddi, waddy-wood, Birdsville wattle

Vulnerable

Acacia pickardii

Vulnerable

Acacia rhamphophylla

Kundip wattle

Endangered

Acacia rhetinocarpa

Neat wattle, resin wattle (SA)

Vulnerable

Acacia subflexuosa
subsp. capillata

Endangered

Achyranthes margaretarum

Critically endangered

Arachnorchis amoena
( listed as Caladenia amoena)

Charming spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis argocalla
( listed as Caladenia argocalla)

White-beauty spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis audasii

McIvor spider-orchid, Audas spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis busselliana ( listed as Caladenia busselliana)

Bussell’s spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis concolor

Crimson spider-orchid, maroon spider-orchid

Vulnerable

Arachnorchis conferta

Coast spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis formosa
( listed as Caladenia formosa)

Elegant spider-orchid, blood-red spider-orchid

Vulnerable

Plants (continued)

Arachnorchis gladiolata ( listed as Caladenia gladiolata)

Bayonet spider-orchid, clubbed spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis lowanensis
( listed as Caladenia lowanensis)

Wimmera spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis macroclavia

Large-club spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis robinsonii
( listed as Caladenia robinsonii)

Frankston spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis rosella
( listed as Caladenia rosella)

Rosella spider-orchid, little pink spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis tensa
( listed as Caladenia tensa)

Greencomb spider-orchid, rigid spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis thysanochila
( listed as Caladenia thysanochila)

Fringed spider-orchid

Endangered

Arachnorchis versicolor ( listed as Caladenia versicolor)

Candy spider-orchid

Vulnerable

Arachnorchis xanthochila ( listed as Caladenia xanthochila)

Yellow-lip spider-orchid

Endangered

Asterolasia nivea

Bindoon starbush

Vulnerable

Austrostipa nullanulla

Club spear-grass

Vulnerable

Ballantinia antipoda

Southern shepherd’s purse

Endangered

Banksia cuneata

Matchstick banksia, Quairading banksia

Endangered

Banksia oligantha

Wagin banksia

Endangered

Barbarea australis

Native wintercress

Critically endangered

Boronia capitata subsp. capitata

Endangered

Borya mirabilis

Grampians pincushion-lily

Endangered

Brachyscias verecundus

Ironstone brachyscias

Critically endangered

Brachyscome muelleri

Endangered

Plants (continued)

Caladenia bryceana subsp. bryceana

Dwarf spider-orchid

Endangered

Calectasia arnoldii

Stilted tinsel lily

Vulnerable

Calonema wanosa

Vulnerable

Calonemorchis elegans ( listed as Caladenia elegans)

Endangered

Calotis glandulosa

Mauve burr-daisy

Vulnerable

Chamelaucium sp. Gingin (NG Marchant s.n. 4/11/1988)

Gingin wax

Endangered

Chorizema humile

Prostrate flame pea

Endangered

Conostylis dielsii
subsp. teres

Irwin conostylis

Endangered

Conostylis drummondii

Drummond’s conostylis

Endangered

Conostylis micrantha

Small-flowered conostylis

Endangered

Conostylis rogeri

Kulin conostylis, single-flowered conostylis

Vulnerable

Cynanchum elegans

White-flowered wax plant

Endangered

Darwinia carnea

Mogumber bell

Endangered

Darwinia sp. Carnamah
(J Coleby-Williams 148)

Harlequin bell

Endangered

Dichanthium setosum

Vulnerable

Drakonorchis drakeoides

Hinged dragon orchid

Endangered

Eremophila viscida

Varnish bush

Endangered

Eucalyptus cadens

Warby Range swamp gum

Vulnerable

Eucalyptus gunnii
subsp. divaricata

Miena cider gum

Endangered

Eucalyptus morrisbyi

Morrisbys gum

Endangered

Frankenia parvula

Short-leaved frankenia

Endangered

Gastrolobium lehmannii

Cranbrook pea

Vulnerable

Grevillea althoferorum

Split-leaved grevillea

Endangered

Grevillea curviloba
subsp. incurva

Narrow curved-leaf grevillea

Endangered

Plants (continued)

Grevillea maccutcheonii

Endangered

Grevillea scapigera

Corrigin grevillea

Endangered

Gyrostemon reticulatus

Net-veined gyrostemon

Critically endangered

Hakea aculeata

Column hakea

Vulnerable

Hakea maconochieana

Vulnerable

Hakea pulvinifera

Endangered

Hemiandra gardneri

Red snakebush

Endangered

Lepidium aschersonii

Spiny pepper-cress

Vulnerable

Lepidium hyssopifolium

Basalt pepper-cress

Endangered

Lepidium monoplocoides

Winged pepper-cress

Endangered

Lepidium peregrinum

Endangered

Minuria tridens

Minnie daisy

Vulnerable

Oligochaetochilus despectans
( listed as Pterostylis despectans)

Lowly greenhood

Endangered

Philotheca basistyla

White-flowered philotheca

Endangered

Pomaderris subplicata

Concave pomaderris

Vulnerable

Prasophyllum correctum

Gaping leek-orchid

Endangered

Prasophyllum frenchii

Maroon leek-orchid, slaty leek-orchid, stout leek-orchid, French’s leek-orchid

Endangered

Prasophyllum goldsackii

Goldsack’s leek-orchid

Endangered

Prasophyllum morganii

Mignonette leek-orchid, Cobungra leek-orchid, dense leek-orchid

Vulnerable

Prasophyllum pallidum

Pale leek-orchid

Vulnerable

Prasophyllum subbisectum

Pomonal leek-orchid

Endangered

Prostanthera calycina

Vulnerable

Prostanthera eurybioides

Monarto mintbush

Endangered

Pterostylis arenicola

Sandhill greenhood orchid

Vulnerable

Plants (continued)

Pterostylis basaltica

Basalt greenhood

Endangered

Pterostylis bryophila

Hindmarsh Valley greenhood

Critically endangered

Pterostylis cheraphila

Floodplain rustyhood

Vulnerable

Pterostylis gibbosa

Illawarra greenhood, rufa greenhood, pouched greenhood

Endangered

Pterostylis sp. (Northampton)
(SD Hopper 3349)

Northampton midget greenhood

Endangered

Pterostylis sp. Halbury
(R Bates 8425)

Halbury greenhood

Endangered

Pterostylis sp. Hale
(R Bates 21725)

Hale dwarf greenhood

Endangered

Pterostylis xerophila

Desert greenhood

Vulnerable

Ptilotus beckerianus

Vulnerable

Ptilotus fasciculatus

Fitzgerald’s mulla-mulla

Endangered

Ranunculus anemoneus

Anemone buttercup

Vulnerable

Rulingia sp. Trigwell Bridge (R Smith s.n. 20/6/1989)

Trigwell’s rulingia

Endangered

Rutidosis heterogama

Vulnerable

Senecio garlandii

Vulnerable

Senecio macrocarpus

Large-fruit fireweed, large-fruit groundsel

Vulnerable

Senecio megaglossus

Superb groundsel

Vulnerable

Stachystemon nematophorus

Three-flowered stachystemon

Vulnerable

Stackhousia annua

Annual stackhousia, annual candles

Vulnerable

Swainsona murrayana

Slender Darling-pea, slender swainson, Murray swainson-pea

Vulnerable

Swainsona pyrophila

Yellow swainson-pea

Vulnerable

Synaphea quartzitica

Quartz-loving synaphea

Endangered

Tetratheca deltoidea

Granite tetratheca

Endangered

Plants (continued)

Tetratheca gunnii

Shy Susan

Critically endangered

Thelymitra epipactoides

Metallic sun-orchid

Endangered

Thelymitra mackibbinii

Brilliant sun-orchid

Vulnerable

Thomasia glabripetala

Sandplain thomasia

Vulnerable

Tribonanthes purpurea

Granite pink

Vulnerable

Verticordia fimbrilepis
subsp. fimbrilepis

Shy featherflower

Endangered

Verticordia spicata
subsp. squamosa

Scaley-leaved featherflower, scaly-leaved featherflower

Endangered

Verticordia staminosa var. cylindracea
( listed as Verticordia staminosa subsp. cylindracea var. cylindracea)

Granite featherflower

Endangered

Verticordia staminosa
subsp. staminosa

Endangered

Westringia crassifolia

Whipstick westringia

Endangered

Unlisted species or taxa that could be adversely affected

Plants

Cullen parvum

Small scurf-pea

Hemigenia exilis

Huperzia australiana

Menkea draboides

Nematoceras dienemum

Nematoceras sulcatum

Phlegmatospermum drummondii

Drummond’s phlegmatospermum

Poa cookii

Polystichum vestitum

Triodia bromoides

Listed critical habitat

Diomedea exulans (Wandering albatross) — Macquarie Island

\n```\n\n \nGlossary\n\nBiocontrol Control of pests by disrupting their ecological status through the use of organisms that are natural predators, parasites or pathogens.\n\nCritically endangered Under the EPBC Act, a native species is eligible to be included in the critically endangered category at a particular time if, at that time, it is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria.\n\nEndangered Under the EPBC Act, a native species is eligible to be included in the endangered category at a particular time if, at that time, (a) it is not critically endangered; and (b) it is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria.\n\nFecundity Potential rate at which an organism reproduces.\n\nFeral An introduced animal, formerly in domestication, with an established, self-supporting population in the wild.\n\nGenotyping The process of determining the genotype (i.e. the genetic makeup) of an individual with a biological assay.\n\nInvasive species A species occurring as a result of human activities beyond its accepted normal distribution and which threatens valued environmental, agricultural or personal resources by the damage it causes (Beeton et al. 2006).\n\nKey threatening process Under the EPBC Act, a process that threatens or may threaten the survival, abundance or evolutionary development of a native species or ecological community.\n\nMyxomatosis A disease caused by the myxoma virus that was introduced to Australia as a biological control agent for rabbits. The disease is effective in reducing rabbit populations in areas of moderate and high rainfall (Williams et al. 1995).\n\nPerformance indicator A criterion or measure that provides information on the extent to which a policy, program or initiative is achieving its outcomes.\n\nPest animal or species Any non-human species of animal that causes trouble locally, or over a wide area, to one or more persons, either by being a health hazard or a general nuisance, or by causing damage to agriculture, wild ecosystems or natural resources.\n\nRabbit haemorrhagic disease A viral disease exotic to Australia that causes high death rates in rabbits. Also called rabbit calicivirus disease (Williams et al. 1995).\n\nThreat abatement plan Under the EPBC Act, a plan providing for the research, management, and any other actions necessary to reduce the impact of a listed key threatening process on affected species and ecological communities.\n\nThreatened species A species under the EPBC Act listed as critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable or conservation dependent.\n\nVulnerable Under the EPBC Act, a native species is eligible to be included in the vulnerable category at a particular time if, at that time, (a) it is not critically endangered or endangered; and (b) it is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria.\n\n \nAcronyms and abbreviations\n\nBRS Bureau of Rural Sciences\n\nDEWHA Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts\n\nEPBC Act the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999\n\nRHD rabbit haemorrhagic disease\n\nTAP threat abatement plan\n\n \nReferences\n\nBeeton RJS, Buckley KI, Jones GJ, Morgan D, Reichelt RE and Trewin D (2006). Australia state of the environment 2006, independent report to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra.\n\nBowen ZE and Read JL (1998). Factors influencing breeding and survivorship of rabbits in the Roxby Downs region. Wildlife Research \n25:655–662.\n\nCooke BD (1993). Integrated control of rabbits. In: Australian rabbit control conference, Cooke BD (ed), Australian Rabbit Control Conference, Adelaide, 2–3 April 1993, Anti-Rabbit Research Foundation of Australia, 14–17.\n\nDEWHA (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts) (2008). Background document for the threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits, DEWHA, Canberra.\n\nDickman CR (1996). Overview of the impact of feral cats on Australian native fauna, report to the Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra. \nhttp://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/cat-impacts/index.html (Accessed December 2006)\n\nEA (Environment Australia) (1999a). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by feral rabbits, EA, Canberra.\n\nEA (Environment Australia) (1999b). Threat abatement plan for predation by the European red fox, EA, Canberra.\n\nEA (Environment Australia) (1999c). Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats, EA, Canberra.\n\nEA (Environment Australia) (1999d). Threat abatement plan for predation by feral goats, EA, Canberra.\n\nEnglish A and Chapple R (2002). A report on the management of feral animals, New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service. \nhttp://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/PDFs/english\\_report\\_pest\\_animal\\_progs\\_fullreport.pdf (Accessed December 2006)\n\nHart Q (2005). A review of the Commonwealth Government’s threat abatement plans for feral goats, feral rabbits, feral cats and the European red fox, final report for the Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.\n\nNRMMC (Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council) (2003). National natural resource management monitoring and evaluation framework. \nhttp://www.nrm.gov.au/publications/frameworks/me-framework.html (Accessed August 2007)\n\nNSW NPWS (New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service) (2001). Threat abatement plan for predation by the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), NSW NPWS, Hurstville.http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Predation+by+the+red+fox+-+final+threat+abatement+plan (Accessed December 2006)\n\nNTIS (National Training Information Service) (2007). National competency standards for vertebrate pest management (RTD1501A, RTD4406A, RTD5402A). \nhttp://www.ntis.gov.au/Default.aspx?/TrainingPackage/RTE03/volume/RTE03\\_4/importedunit (Accessed November 2007)\n\nReddiex B and Forsyth DM (2004). Review of existing red fox, feral cat, feral rabbit, feral pig and feral goat control in Australia. II. Information gaps, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/information-gaps/pubs/information-gaps-final.pdf (Accessed December 2004)\n\nReddiex B, Forsyth DM, McDonald-Madden E, Einoder LD, Griffioen PA, Chick RR and Robley AJ (2004). Review of existing red fox, wild dog, feral cat, feral rabbit, feral pig, and feral goat control in Australia. I. Audit, Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. \nhttp://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/publications/feral-audit/summary.html (Accessed December 2006)\n\nSandell PR and Start AN (1999). Rabbit calicivirus disease program report 4: implications for biodiversity in Australia, Group RM, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.\n\nWilliams K, Parer I, Coman B, Burley J and Braysher M (1995). Managing vertebrate pests: rabbits, Bureau of Resource Sciences and CSIRO Division of Wildlife and Ecology, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.\n\n> Note: Endnotes\n\n> Note: Endnote 1—About the endnotes\n\nThe endnotes provide information about this compilation and the compiled law.\n\nThe following endnotes are included in every compilation:\n\nEndnote 1—About the endnotes\n\nEndnote 2—Abbreviation key\n\nEndnote 3—Legislation history\n\nEndnote 4—Amendment history\n\nAbbreviation key—Endnote 2\n\nThe abbreviation key sets out abbreviations that may be used in the endnotes.\n\nLegislation history and amendment history—Endnotes 3 and 4\n\nAmending laws are annotated in the legislation history and amendment history.\n\nThe legislation history in endnote 3 provides information about each law that has amended (or will amend) the compiled law. The information includes commencement details for amending laws and details of any application, saving or transitional provisions that are not included in this compilation.\n\nThe amendment history in endnote 4 provides information about amendments at the provision (generally section or equivalent) level. It also includes information about any provision of the compiled law that has been repealed in accordance with a provision of the law.\n\nMisdescribed amendments\n\nA misdescribed amendment is an amendment that does not accurately describe the amendment to be made. If, despite the misdescription, the amendment can be given effect as intended, the amendment is incorporated into the compiled law and the abbreviation “(md)” added to the details of the amendment included in the amendment history.\n\nIf a misdescribed amendment cannot be given effect as intended, the abbreviation “(md not incorp)” is added to the details of the amendment included in the amendment history.\n\n> Note: Endnote 2—Abbreviation key\n\n| | o = order(s) |\n| ---------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- |\n| ad = added or inserted | Ord = Ordinance |\n| am = amended | orig = original |\n| amdt = amendment | par = paragraph(s)/subparagraph(s) |\n| c = clause(s) | /sub‑subparagraph(s) |\n| C[x] = Compilation No. x | pres = present |\n| Ch = Chapter(s) | prev = previous |\n| def = definition(s) | (prev…) = previously |\n| Dict = Dictionary | Pt = Part(s) |\n| disallowed = disallowed by Parliament | r = regulation(s)/rule(s) |\n| Div = Division(s) | |\n| exp = expires/expired or ceases/ceased to have | reloc = relocated |\n| effect | renum = renumbered |\n| F = Federal Register of Legislation | rep = repealed |\n| gaz = gazette | rs = repealed and substituted |\n| LA = Legislation Act 2003 | s = section(s)/subsection(s) |\n| LIA = Legislative Instruments Act 2003 | Sch = Schedule(s) |\n| (md) = misdescribed amendment can be given | Sdiv = Subdivision(s) |\n| effect | SLI = Select Legislative Instrument |\n| (md not incorp) = misdescribed amendment | SR = Statutory Rules |\n| cannot be given effect | Sub‑Ch = Sub‑Chapter(s) |\n| mod = modified/modification | SubPt = Subpart(s) |\n| No. = Number(s) | underlining = whole or part not |\n| | commenced or to be commenced |\n\n> Note: Endnote 3—Legislation history\n\n| Name | Registration | Commencement | Application, saving and transitional provisions |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------ | ------------ | ----------------------------------------------- |\n| Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits | 14 Oct 2008(2008B00665) | 02 Jul 1999 | |\n| Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Rabbits 2008 | 12 Jan 2009(F2009L00068) | 01 Oct 2008 | |\n\n> Note: Endnote 4—Amendment history\n\n| Provision affected | How affected |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------- |\n| Threat Abatement Plan for Competition and Land Degradation by Feral Rabbits | rs F2009L00068 |\n\n---\n\n[\\[1\\]](#_ftnref1) See, for example, http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/factsheets/parks\\_and\\_places/MacquarieIslandRabbits.pdf","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The TAP retains the original 1999 objectives substantially unchanged but revises actions and priorities (1.2.4; Objectives). The update emphasises improved national engagement, integrated pest control, monitoring protocols and stakeholder involvement rather than expanding legal scope or creating new regulatory powers. Implementation therefore depends on resource commitments by state/territory agencies, regional bodies and private landholders, with the Australian Government providing coordination and possible targeted funding for national priorities (1.2.5; 3.1–3.3)."},"complexity_factors":["Multi-jurisdictional implementation across Commonwealth, states/territories, regional NRM bodies and private/leasehold landholders (1.1; 1.2.5; 3.2).","Long‑term, open‑ended duration with uncertain total cost and reliance on stakeholder funding and priorities (3.1).","Need for integration with other pest-control programs (foxes, cats, wild dogs) to avoid unintended consequences and prey‑switching (1.2.3; 3.3).","Significant scientific and monitoring gaps; requirement to develop nationally consistent, cost‑effective monitoring protocols (1.2.4; 3.3; Action 3.1).","Wide scope of affected taxa and sites (extensive Appendix A; Objective 1 focuses on many islands/mainland ‘islands’), increasing prioritisation complexity.","Technical complexity of control methods and R&D needs (biocontrol optimisation, humane alternatives, training) and uptake barriers among land managers (Objectives 3–4).","Coordination and information‑sharing obligations, establishment of an implementation/advisory team and integration with national strategies (AusBIOSEC, Australian Pest Animal Strategy) (1.1; 3.2).","Performance measurement challenge: linking program outputs to biodiversity outcomes and establishing indicators (1.2.4; 3.3)."],"plain_english_summary":"This Threat Abatement Plan (under the EPBC Act) creates a national framework to coordinate research, monitoring and targeted control to reduce rabbit competition and land degradation. It sets five objectives (island eradication, priority regional control, research, better control tools, stakeholder outreach) with priorities and timeframes. It affects Commonwealth and state agencies, regional bodies, landholders and conservation groups; DEWHA coordinates implementation while costs rest mainly with stakeholders, with limited Australian Government support (1.2.3; 1.2.5; 3.1–3.3)."},"kimi_summary":{"_metrics":{"model":"kimi-k2.5","source":"moonshot-realtime","completionTokens":2332},"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a replacement of the 1999 Threat Abatement Plan for feral rabbits. A 2004-05 review recommended that the objectives remain substantially unchanged, and this 2008 version maintains the same core scope of managing rabbit impacts on biodiversity through coordinated national action. While actions have been updated based on new knowledge, the fundamental purpose of abating competition and land degradation by rabbits has not expanded."},"complexity_factors":["15 discrete actions across 5 objectives with interdependencies (e.g., Action 1.4 cannot proceed until Action 3.1 is complete)","Extensive cross-referencing to the EPBC Act, Australian Pest Animal Strategy, AusBIOSEC framework, and National Competency Standards","Conditional implementation logic requiring assessment of feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and conservation priority before action","Technical scientific terminology requiring a 15-term glossary (e.g., genotyping, biocontrol, myxomatosis)","Multi-jurisdictional coordination requirements involving federal, state, territory, and private landholders"],"plain_english_summary":"Australia’s Threat Abatement Plan (2008) is a national framework coordinating government, states, landholders, Indigenous groups and conservationists to reduce feral rabbit impacts on native plants and animals. It prioritises preventing spread, protecting high‑value conservation areas, improving monitoring and control methods, and building community awareness through integrated pest management.\n\nIt accepts mainland eradication is currently unrealistic, focusing instead on targeted suppression to prevent extinctions and recover threatened ecosystems."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits","history":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits/history","analysis":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/threat-abatement-plan-for-competition-and-land-degradation-by-feral-rabbits/documents"}}