Threatened species & ecological communities

National recovery plan for Threatened Tasmanian Lowland Euphrasia Species 1997-2001

Wendy C Potts
Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, July 1999
ISBN 0 724 64601 9

Contents

Foreword

A Research Plan was commenced in 1995 in order to learn more about the conservation biology of the genus Euphrasia, given the large proportion of threatened taxa in the genus. Although the Plan concentrated on four threatened Tasmanian lowland species, it was intended that the results would also be of use to the conservation of other threatened Euphrasia taxa (Ball 1994).

Results from the research (Potts 1997) indicate that Euphrasia populations occupy two different types of habitats, namely, habitats kept open by exposure to extreme environmental factors such as wind and cold temperatures, and habitats kept open by disturbance such as fire, grazing or trampling. Populations occupying the different habitats face different probabilities of extinction and have different potentials for recovery by management. Habitat type has therefore been used in the Recovery Plan to indicate priority for action. In general, subalpine and alpine Euphrasia populations tend to occupy habitats which are exposed. Such populations are relatively less threatened and little can be done to improve their conservation status by management. Therefore, only lowland taxa have been included in the Recovery Plan. Lowland taxa that occupy exposed habitats have not been excluded from the Plan as some taxa are known to occupy both types of habitats. However, further management actions are not recommended for populations that occupy habitats kept open by exposure.

In consequence, the emphasis of the Recovery Plan has been altered from a species approach to a population approach and as such allows many taxa to be efficiently covered by a single Recovery Plan. The change of emphasis can be further justified by the fact that many taxa show a relatively high level of genetic variation between populations and this variation needs to be addressed in any conservation program. Also, most taxa are represented by very few populations and the loss of any population can have significant consequences for the survival of taxa.

The high level of morphological variation between populations has led to confusion in the taxonomy of Euphrasia. Results from the Research Plan (Potts 1997) demonstrate that the taxonomy is not sufficiently developed to handle the variation encountered in many instances. The expansion of the Recovery Plan to include all lowland taxa in Tasmania will necessitate some taxonomic clarification though this will not hinder the management of populations. The Plan has been designed to cope with new taxa and new populations, as well as populations that are transient (ephemeral).

Priority will be given to taxa currently listed as threatened by ANZECC (Briggs and Leigh 1993) including E. fragosa (formerly E. sp. 'Southport') which is listed as Endangered. It will at the same time cover newly identified threatened taxa as well as those taxa that have not yet been listed through oversight, insufficient information or taxonomic confusion.

Endangered Species Unit Project Number 428. Funded by the Endangered Species Program, a program of the Natural Heritage Trust, and administered by the Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia. The views expressed are those of the author.

Citation: Potts, W.C. (1997) Recovery Plan for Threatened Tasmanian Lowland Euphrasia Species 1997-2001. Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, Hobart.

Copyright © The Director, Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment, GPO Box 44A, Hobart, Tasmania 7001.

Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any means without permission of the Director, Parks and Wildlife Service.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the following people for their advice and assistance in preparing this Recovery Plan: Stephen Harris, Phil Barker, Phil Collier, David Keith, Louise Gilfedder, Fred Duncan, Peter McGlone, Mark Fountain, Andrew Smith, David Rounsevell.

 

SUMMARY

Current Species Status

Seventeen lowland Euphrasia taxa have been identified in Tasmania and all but three are endemic to the state. Most are considered to be at risk. Their conservation status is summarised in the following table. The number of populations has been included for taxa for which populations have been verified recently.

Lowland Taxa in Tasmania

(and number of populations recently verified in Tasmania in brackets)

ANZECC

1993

ROTAP 1995

TSPA

1995

FAC

1994

IUCN

1994

**

ROTAP

suggestions

(Barker '82,'84,'87,'96)

Section Phragmostomae (6)

            

E. phragmostoma (1)

V

3VC-

v

v

VU

2E

E. amphisysepala (2)

V

2VC-

v

v

VU

2?E

E. sp. 'fabula' (3)

        

EN

  

Section Striatae

            

E. gibbsiae ssp. psilantherea (1)

        

CR

2?X

E. gibbsiae ssp. kingii

        

NE

Not at risk

E. fragosa (3)

E

2E

r

r1u

CR

2EC

E. semipicta (4)

V

2VC-

v

v

*

2V/R

E. semipicta type 1 (1)

        

CR

  

E. semipicta type 2 (2)

        

VU

  

E. semipicta type 3 (1)

        

VU

  

Section Australes

            

E. collina ssp. collina

        

NE

Not at risk

E. collina ssp. diemenica

        

DD

Some variants possibly At risk

E. collina ssp. 'Northwest Tasmania'

        

DD

?E

E. collina ssp. tetragona

    

r

r2u

DD

(Tas)

Not at risk but

?x in Tasmania

E. collina ssp. 'tasmanica'

        

DD

V

E. collina ssp. gunnii

    

v

r2

DD

3?E

E. collina ssp. deflexifolia

    

v

r2

DD

2VC

Section Scabrae

            

E. scabra (3)

  

3KCa

e

e

CR (Tas)

3E

* The recently proposed subspecies of E. semipicta were considered separately using rules for classification into 1994 IUCN Red List categories.

** Resulting from application of rules for classification into 1994 IUCN Red List categories

X, x: presumed extinct

CR: critically endangered

EN, E, e: endangered

VU, V, v: vulnerable

R, r: rare

K: poorly known

DD: data deficient

NE: not evaluated

ROTAP code 2: range < 100km

ROTAP code 3: range > 100km

ROTAP code C: reserved

ROTAP code -: reserved population size not accurately known

ROTAP code a: 1000 or more plants within a conservation reserve(s)

FAC code r1: rare, not threatened, range not exceeding a 100 x 100 km square

FAC code r2: rare, not threatened, occur in 20 or less 10 x 10 km grid squares

FAC code u: not known from any secure reserve

Some taxa have not been listed at least at the national level through oversight (e.g. E. gibbsiae ssp. psilantherea) or insufficient knowledge or taxonomic confusion (e.g. E. collina ssp. 'Northwest Tasmania' and E. collina ssp. 'tasmanica'). Many variants of E. collina ssp. diemenica have been identified though few are lowland types and while the subspecies is unlikely to be at risk, some of its variants may be e.g. the lowland variant on Mt. Brown qualifies as Vulnerable using the 1994 IUCN Red List criteria. E. collina ssp. collina, which also occurs on the mainland, and E. gibbsiae ssp. kingii, are the only lowland taxa thought not to be at risk.

Most of the lowland taxa occur on or near coastal areas particularly on the Tasman Peninsula and the East Coast. Though still qualifying as threatened due to their rarity, many of the lowland taxa have stable and secure habitats due to their exposed locations (e.g. E. phragmostoma, E. amphisysepala, E. sp. 'fabula', the Mt. Brown variant of E. collina ssp. diemenica and one population of E. semipicta type 2). However, many of the lowland taxa require disturbance and are threatened by inappropriate disturbance regimes or a change in land use (e.g. E. fragosa, E. semipicta type 1 and E. scabra). Being in less exposed habitats, the threat of a change in land use is relatively high for these taxa, and the fluctuations in the size of populations associated with their dependence on disturbance makes them more prone to extinction.

Habitat Requirements and Limiting Factors

Due to their relatively short life span and light requirement for germination,Euphrasia species require patches of open ground for germination to ensure population persistence. They also require relatively high soil moisture levels for survival of germinants. They occupy two types of habitats which meet these requirements; those that are open due to exposure to wind and cooler temperatures e.g. cliff faces and alpine habitats, and those that are open due to disturbance such as fire. Populations in exposed habitats are relatively stable and are limited by the area of habitat available, whereas disturbance dependent populations tend to be transient and fluctuate in size and are therefore more prone to extinction. In between fires, disturbance dependent populations can become restricted to areas with persistent patches of open ground which result from regular small scale disturbance such as that associated with tracks or grazing. In the absence of a seed rain, fire related germination cues may be necessary for recovery from the soil seed bank. While populations in exposed habitats tend to be secure from major changes in land use, those in disturbance dependent habitats are more prone to adverse changes in land use or disturbance patterns. Hybridisation and introgression may be a significant cause for the large number of relatively rare taxa and the high degree of endemism in the genus.

Recovery Plan Objectives

The overall objective is to ensure the persistence of threatened lowland Euphrasia taxa by:

Recovery Criteria

Actions Needed

Estimated Cost of Recovery

1997 prices in $000s/year.

Actions

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Total

Year 1

21.0

4.0

9.2

12.2

2.0

6.4

  

54.8

Year 2

8.6

4.0

9.2

10.4

1.6

6.2

  

40.0

Year 3

8.6

4.0

9.2

6.4

1.6

6.2

2.0

38.0

Year 4

8.6

4.0

9.2

6.4

1.6

6.2

4.0

40.0

Total

46.8

16.0

36.8

35.4

6.8

25.0

6.0

172.8

Biodiversity Benefits

Euphrasia is a genus with a large proportion of rare and threatened taxa. It shows a high degree of endemism and has a global distribution. Studies on genetic variation within the genus have important biogeographical inferences and demonstrate the importance of hybridisation in the speciation process. The Recovery Plan will promote the conservation of the 17 lowland taxa of Euphrasia recognised in Tasmania, all but three of which are endemic to Tasmania. Euphrasia taxa generally occur in species-rich habitats which are of special interest. The exposed habitats of many of the Euphrasia taxa have created a refuge in lowland areas for relictual species. The disturbance dependent habitats of other Euphrasia taxa provide for a succession of species between disturbance events. The management of the disturbance dependent habitats of Euphrasia will contribute to the management of successional vegetation types, particularly the heathy or sedgey/heathy and grassland ecosystems and contribute to the conservation of other threatened species such as orchids. Changes in the distribution of formerly more widespread Euphrasia taxa such as E. scabra have been suggested as possible indicators of global climate change due to their sensitivity to hydrological and temperature change. Euphrasia extracts are used medicinally for treating eye ailments and the genus is in the family Scrophulariaceae, of which members such as Digitalis are well known for their medicinal properties.


INTRODUCTION

Description

Euphrasia, commonly known as eyebright, is a genus of semi-parasitic annual or perennial terrestrial herbs or undershrubs. They are characterised by decussate leaves which are generally fleshy, usually with patches of sessile glands and veins prominent on the undersurface of the leaves and with impressions from veins on the upper leaf surface. The leaf margins are somewhat revolute and the blade is usually shallowly to deeply incised. The corolla is bilabiate, with a tube, a hooded upper lip which usually encloses the anthers, and a three lobed spreading lower lip. They have 4 stamens, and the anthers, with awned lobes, can be fused to form a U shape. The fruit is a capsule, and the small seeds are covered with a multifolded testa with fine transverse ridges connecting the folds (Curtis, 1967; Barker 1982).

Taxonomic Status

Euphrasia, in the family Scrophulariaceae, is widespread in temperate areas of both hemispheres. It is characterised by a large degree of variation. Fourteen sections have been recognised, five of which are endemic to Australia and one section is shared with New Zealand. Tasmania has representatives of four sections, one of which is endemic to the state (Barker 1982). Twenty one species are recognised in Australia, all endemic, with 9 species in Tasmania, six of which are endemic to the state. Some of the species are polymorphic to the extent that several have been subdivided into subspecies. In all, 47 species and subspecies are recognised in Australia, 19 of which are endemic to Tasmania and a further three are shared with the mainland (Barker 1982, 1987). Of the 22 Tasmanian taxa, fourteen are considered to be lowland types (Barker 1984, 1987). Recent taxonomic studies have resulted in the recognition of another lowland species and divided a further lowland species into 3 subspecies (Potts, 1997). With such a large degree of variation evident between populations of many taxa, further study is likely to result in the recognition of more taxonomic groupings. Hybridisation is thought to play a role in the large degree of variation encountered (Du Rietz 1948a, 1948b; Barker 1982, 1987; Potts 1997).

Distribution

The distribution of lowland Euphrasia taxa in Tasmania is shown in Table 1. Lowland Euphrasia taxa are concentrated near coastal areas particularly on the Tasman Peninsula and the East Coast.

Habitat

Euphrasia habitats are characterised by the availability of patches of open ground, proximity of low vegetation and relatively moist soils (Potts 1997). Such habitats can occur in naturallyexposed areas at higher altitudes and are associated with rocky areas and low vegetation. At lower altitudes they occur on cliff faces and windswept rocky plateaux and in low wet vegetation types in exposed coastal areas. Euphrasia populations in such habitats kept open by exposure are restricted by the availability of suitable habitat. In non-exposed areas, disturbance is required at intervals for creation of suitable open habitat and fire is thought to be the main disturbance involved. Grazing or the presence of tracks will enable the persistence of populations in the absence of fire. Suitable habitat kept open by disturbance can be found in heathland, sedgeland, grassland and open woodland. Populations in habitats kept open by disturbance tend to be transitory and fluctuate in size. They are more vulnerable to extinction due to the requirement for disturbance at the appropriate intensity, timing and interval.

Life History

Euphrasia are annual or relatively short lived perennials (up to 5 years). Mortality rates can be high, particularly after fruiting, as new growth from axillary buds is not easily stimulated following reproductive activity. They therefore rely on the successful recruitment of seedlings for persistence. Euphrasia seed has a requirement for light for germination and thus requires patches of open ground for germination to occur in field conditions. Most seed is released from late summer to autumn and germinates in winter due to a requirement for period of low temperatures (stratification). The survival of germinants is dependent on adequate moisture levels and germinant survival has been observed to increase dramatically following an unusually wet spring to summer period in several taxa (Potts 1997). Euphrasia are semi-parasitic, and while they will survive in the absence of hosts, their growth rate and reproductive output is reduced. They are not host specific and prefer the presence of low or sparse vegetation, explaining their relative abundance on edges of tracks.

Seed production is copious and seed that does not fall in areas suitable for germination is thought to survive in the soil seed bank, probably for decades. Germination can be profuse after fire indicating that this response may be due to cues additional to allowing exposure of seed to light. Population sizes are generally small, at least in terms of area occupied, due to restricted habitats and their low seed dispersal potential (the vast majority of seed is shed within 30 cm of the plants).

The breeding system of several groups of Tasmanian Euphrasia has been studied. There are different patterns of pollination evident, ranging from largely selfed (e.g. E. fragosa) to self incompatible taxa (e.g. E. collina ssp. diemenica and ssp. collina). Naturally occurring hybrids have been reported (Barker 1982, 1987) and interspecific and even intersectional hybrid seed has been produced using manipulated crosses (Potts 1997). Much of the variation encountered in Tasmanian Euphrasia in some regions (e.g. the Tasman Peninsula) can be attributed to the occasional hybridisation event following insect pollination with subsequent introgression aided by rapid generation turnover. The probability of hybridisation would be increased following fire which can allow a transient expansion of disturbance dependent populations into the range of other Euphrasia taxa.

Euphrasia is characterised by a large number of rare taxa which show a high degree of endemism. All in all, this is due to the interplay of specific habitat requirements and poor seed dispersal resulting in small isolated populations, together with a rapid generation turnover which hastens introgression after hybridisation as well as the effects of genetic drift and different selection pressures.

Reasons for Conservation Status

Table 2 shows various conservation status listings for lowland Euphrasia taxa in Tasmania.

Of the 17 lowland taxa identified in Tasmania, all but three are suggested to be threatened though one of these, E. collina ssp. diemenica, has at least ten variants identified, some of which are possibly at risk (Barker 1982,1984,1996) e.g. application of rules for classification into IUCN Red List categories (1994) suggest a classification of Vulnerable (VU) for the lowland Mt Brown variant (Potts 1997).

While many of these taxa are inherently rare and therefore classify as threatened due to low numbers of populations, they occur in habitats kept open by exposure and are at little risk from land use change by virtue of their exposed positions and their existence in reserves. Examples of such taxa are the three species of the Phragmostomae which occupy steep or cliff face habitats, the Mt Brown variant of E. collina ssp. diemenica which occurs on a rocky exposed mountain plateau and ridge near coastal cliffs and one population of E. semipicta type 2 which occurs on an exposed wet heath. 1994 IUCN Red List classifications of Vulnerable (VU) are proposed for all these taxa except for E. sp. 'fabula' for which an Endangered (EN) classification is proposed. Although more plants of E. sp. 'fabula' are likely to exist and allow a reclassification to Vulnerable (VU), difficulty of access to cliff face habitats has only allowed less than 250 plants to be located to date.

1994 IUCN classifications of Critically Endangered (CR) are proposed for four Euphrasia taxa in Tasmania, namely E. fragosa, E. scabra, E. gibbsiae ssp. psilantherea and E. semipicta type 1 (all lowland taxa). This is because of their restricted ranges, critically low numbers of populations, low or extremely fluctuating number of individuals, lack of reservation, or past or possible declines (Potts 1997). These taxa appear to be dependent on disturbance for maintenance of open habitat suitable for recruitment. Relative to the habitats kept open by exposure, such habitats are also at greater risk of habitat destruction by land use change due to an increased suitability of the land for other uses.

A 1994 IUCN classification of Vulnerable (VU) has been suggested for E. semipicta type 3, even though it occupies a habitat which requires disturbance for openness. This is because openness has been maintained in part of its range by the presence of a permanent dirt road which has created suitable habitat along its edges, allowing the Euphrasia to persist in the absence of other disturbance. The population occurs in State Forest, though forestry operations are unlikely to threaten the population, and a detrimental change in land use is unlikely due to its skyline location.

Insufficient information is available to determine 1994 IUCN Red List classifications for the lowland subspecies of E. collina. E. collina ssp. 'Northwest Tasmania' is closely allied to E. collina ssp. tetragona, and occurs in a locality close to locations of records of E. collina ssp. tetragona. Similarly, more field studies are required to determine the conservation status of the E. collina subspecies occurring along the East Coast of Tasmania.

In summary, threats to Euphrasia populations are primarily changes in land use which result in habitat destruction or inappropriate changes in disturbance patterns.

The eight remaining Tasmanian taxa occur in subalpine or alpine habitats and are listed in Table 3 for comparison. E. collina ssp. diemenica and E. gibbsiae ssp. kingii also occur in subalpine or alpine habitats.

Subalpine or alpine taxa, whilst generally rare, are considered to be less threatened than lowland taxa and none are listed as threatened. This is most likely due to reduced threats to their habitats as well as a reduced reliance on disturbance to maintain openness suitable for recruitment.

Existing Conservation Measures

A Euphrasia species Research Plan (Ball 1994) was implemented in order to improve knowledge of the conservation biology of the genus, given that nearly half the Australian species and subspecies are listed as rare or threatened (ROTAP 1995). The Research Plan concentrated on 4 Tasmanian lowland species and provided the information necessary to formulate the Recovery Plan. Results from this study have been released publicly and a monitoring kit has been produced to encourage volunteers to monitor populations known to be at risk and to search for new populations.

Strategy for Recovery

Populations of lowland taxa that occur in habitats kept open by exposure generally occur in secure reserves and are not threatened by a change in land use. Further conservation measures are not needed for their recovery and changes in their conservation status are unlikely unless more populations are found, in which case their status may be improved. Those populations that occur in habitats kept open by exposure and that do not occur in secure reserves may benefit from protection from a change in land use. On the other hand, taxa occurring in habitats kept open by disturbance will require active intervention to ensure their conservation and recovery. The Recovery Plan will determine which populations require such intervention. Intervention will be of three types; protection from a change in land use, management of fire regimes and lastly, maintenance of openness by introduction of regular small scale disturbance to allow population persistence. Fire management prescriptions will be designed to recover populations that have declined to low numbers due to an increase in vegetation density as well as to gain data regarding fire ecology, namely the longevity of the soil seed bank and the possible existence of germination cues other than allowing exposure of seed to light. In some areas, openness in parts of the habitat may be able to be stabilised by introduction of regular small scale disturbance (e.g. creation of tracks) thereby allowing persistence of populations in between fire events.

The Recovery Plan will run for four years and is based on the following strategies.

Strategies 1 and 2 have largely been implemented for many taxa during implementation of the Research Plan (Ball 1994), namely, the three species in Section Phragmostomae, the three proposed subspecies of E. semipicta, E. fragosa and the Mt. Brown variant of E. collina ssp. diemenica. Verification of E. scabra populations is in progress by Forestry Tasmania.

Ex situ conservation measures were not considered to be a useful primary conservation strategy due to the number of taxa involved, the cost and difficulty of propagation, short life spans and danger of genetic contamination (Potts 1997).

A Euphrasia Recovery Team has been established and currently consists of representatives from the Threatened Species and Communities Section of Environment Australia, the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, Forestry Tasmania, the Royal Tasmanian Botanical Gardens, the Threatened Species Network and a Euphrasia enthusiast. Certain private landowners and local council representatives may be invited to join the team. The Recovery Team will supervise the activities of a project officer that will be employed on a part time basis for 4 to 6 months per year for four years.

RECOVERY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

The overall objective of the Recovery Plan is to ensure the persistence of threatened Tasmanian lowland Euphrasia taxa by:

The criteria for achieving this objective are:


RECOVERY ACTIONS

1. Population Verification and Identification

1.1 Population Verification

Reports of populations of E. gibbsiae ssp. psilantherea and the subspecies of E. collina will require verification and some suitable areas will need to be surveyed for additional populations. Populations have already been verified recently for the 3 species of Section Phragmostomae, the 3 proposed subspecies of E. semipicta, E. fragosa and E. scabra. It will not be necessary to verify records of populations of E. gibbsiae ssp. kingii due to its unthreatened status and for the same reason only minimal verification of E. collina ssp. collina will be required when in proximity to other Euphrasia taxa in case of problems with hybridisation. Only lowland populations of E. collina ssp. diemenica will be verified. This action is best undertaken during the flowering season.

Funds are required to cover the salaries of a research and technical officer, vehicle hire, travel allowance, maps and tags. Volunteer costs are included.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

15 800

3 400

3 400

3400

26 000

1.2 Population Identification

The taxonomic identity of populations will need to be clarified in order to conform to botanical standards and to facilitate reporting and future listing of conservation status. Two taxa have informal recognition (E. collina ssp. 'Northwest Tasmania' and E. collina ssp. 'tasmanica') and their taxonomic status will need verification as will several populations showing affinities to E. collina ssp. diemenica. The formal description of E. sp. 'fabula' and the 3 proposed subspecies of E. semipicta will need to be completed. In some cases a multivariate morphometric analysis may be the most efficient method to help determine taxonomic groupings.

Funds are required to cover the salaries of a research and technical officer.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

5 200

5 200

5 200

5 200

20 800

2. Conservation Status and Threat Abatement Potential

Many lowland Euphrasia taxa have evaded formal listing of conservation status through oversight, taxonomic uncertainty or insufficient knowledge and many have not been assessed by less subjective rule based criteria for classification of conservation status such as the 1994 IUCN Red List criteria and modifications thereof e.g. RARE (Keith 1997). The 1994 IUCN Red List rules and modifications thereof require the documentation of qualifying rules for transparency and to facilitate review in the light of new information. They use available information concerning potential threats or evidence of decline as well as information on population parameters and life history features to determine risk of extinction. Much of this information can be gathered as populations are verified (action 1.1). The tenure, state of openness in the habitat and size of each population can be used to determine whether management intervention is required and if so the type of management that is appropriate. The relative potential success of management options can also be estimated.

Funds are required to cover the salary of a research officer for collating data and organising formal listing of conservation status on national and state lists. This will include the preparation of listing statements for the Threatened Species Unit at the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service. Travel costs are covered by action 1.1..

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

4 000

4 000

4 000

4 000

16 000

3. Protection of Populations and Encouragement of Management

Options for the long term formal protection and management of critical populations will be pursued with private landowners. Options that are established with current landowners and that are binding to subsequent landowners include proclamation as a private wildlife sanctuary, writing of a management plan and establishment of a conservation covenant. The other option is the bequest or donation of land to the Parks and Wildlife Service for conservation purposes. Otherwise, advice and assistance will be provided to landowners for management of the populations.

Options for the conservation of critical populations in State Forest or in Forest Reserves will be pursued with Forestry Tasmania using the Management Decision Classification System (Gerrand 1996) and, for production forests, will involve the preparation of management prescriptions for Timber Harvesting Plans as required by the Forest Practices Code (1993). Management guidelines will be prepared for populations on reserved or uncommitted crown land and in areas administered by local governments. Recommendations for reservation will be made where appropriate.

Funds are required for the salary of a research officer and administrative officer for negotiation with landowners and preparation of management guidelines, vehicle hire and travel allowance costs.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

9 200

9 200

9 200

9 200

36 800

4. Population Recovery by Fire and Further Investigation of Fire Ecology

Some critical lowland Euphrasia populations have declined to very low numbers due to the increasing density of vegetation and subsequent reduction of patches of open ground which allow recruitment. Often, in such populations, plants will become restricted to tracks where open ground persists and even though plants numbers can increase dramatically after a wetter than average spring/summer period, virtually all germinants will still be restricted to the persistent patches of open ground within range of the seed rain from existing plants. In the absence of persistent patches of open ground, populations will become restricted to the soil seed bank which may remain viable for decades. Fire is thought to be required for the recovery of populations from the seed bank, however, the risk of extinction of such populations is greater due to the risk of unfavourable conditions for germinant survival following fire.

Evidence for a soil seed bank longevity of at least decades is largely circumstantial and arises from records of the transient nature of some populations and the germination of Euphrasia seed from soil taken from an area from which Euphrasia plants were not noted for years (Gilfedder and Kirkpatrick 1993). Fire appears to offer germination cues additional to allowing exposure of soil borne seed to light. This has been determined from reports of mass germination after fire in the assumed absence of the existence of plants prior to firing (Collier 1990) and the fact that virtually no germination can be stimulated in patches of open ground created by physical disturbance when the patches are out of range of the seed rain from existing plants (Potts 1997). Such evidence suggests that germination from the soil seed bank in the absence of a seed rain is rare unless the area is burnt.

Attempts to recover populations by fire will produce useful information on the response to fire with respect to change in range area following fire, knowledge of soil seed bank longevity and germination response especially if control treatments and physical disturbance treatments are also included in the first few sites treated. Information gained from such exercises will enable a fine tuning of techniques for management by fire. However, detailed knowledge regarding the longevity of the soil seed bank is critical for the efficient management of disturbance dependent Euphrasia populations. Such knowledge would avoid burning more frequently than necessary or introducing other disturbance to maintain openness in the habitat as this may disadvantage other species directly or indirectly by encouraging access and spread of disease. In addition, the cost of managing populations would be minimised. While some information can be obtained by observing the response of known populations after fire, further information is necessary and can be achieved using replicated seed burial experiments. Buried seedlots can be retrieved at intervals and examined for viability to determine decay rates that can be extrapolated to estimate soil seed bank longevity.

Nevertheless, while sufficient information is already available to commence the recovery of populations by fire, precautions will need to be taken to avoid failed recovery. These include firing only part of the previous range of a population in a year to spread the risk of subsequent conditions that are unfavourable for germinant survival, timing fires after seed release in autumn and if possible storing seed to be used to supplement populations in case of poor recovery.

Several known populations are currently ideal candidates for recovery by fire. These include the E. fragosa population on the Labillardiere Peninsula on Bruny Island where plants have become restricted to 4WD wheel tracks due to an increase in vegetation density. This population has been monitored since 1986 (Collier 1990) with a population size of less than about 50 plants until recently when numbers have increased to several hundred following a wet season which has allowed increased germinant survival (Potts 1997). However, even with the recent increase in numbers, the range has not increased beyond the wheel ruts where the species was present in the previous season. Similarly, E. phragmostoma , previously known from a particular site near the main population, has not been noted from that site since 1990 due to an increase in vegetation density (Collier 1990). The population of E. scabra at Timmine Creek has been monitored for several years and had dwindled in size to 1 standing plant in 1996 (Gilfedder pers. comm.). No plants were found in 1997.

Funds are required for the salary of a research officer, vehicle hire, travel allowance and costs for organisation and implementation of fires, control treatments and follow-up monitoring and for seed burial experiments. Volunteer costs are included.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

12 200

10 400

6 400

6 400

35 400

5. Maintenance of Openness by Non-Fire Disturbance

Several extant disturbance dependent Euphrasia populations exemplify the stabilising effect of regular small scale disturbance which creates patches of persistent open ground allowing continuous seedling recruitment and population persistence. Such populations would normally be transient in the absence of such disturbance and would then rely on fire as well as subsequent conditions favourable to germinant survival for recovery. As such, populations which are at least partly stabilised in this manner have a relatively lower risk of extinction and therefore the introduction of small scale disturbance can be justified as a management option for the conservation of some populations provided that other species are not jeopardised. This action may be appropriate for populations for which management by fire is inappropriate due to proximity to private property.

The best example of a population in which openness has been stabilised by a non-fire disturbance is the only known population of E. semipicta type 3 which occurs along the edges of a well used dirt road. The road edges provide suitable habitat for Euphrasia, especially in moister areas near puddles and drains and support a relatively large population of several thousand plants. Few plants are found away fom the road edge. Similarly, small scale disturbances associated with a horse jumping trail and 4WD tracks have provided a refuge for several patches of the only extant population known of E. semipicta type 1. Cattle grazing and animal and 4WD tracks have allowed persistence of E. fragosa on private property near Southport by reducing vegetation density and providing open ground to enable recruitment of seedlings and E. fragosa on the Labillardiere Peninsula on Bruny Island is now confined to a 4WD and walking track. Similarly, E. semipicta type 2 plants in heathland on the Cape Hauy Peninsula are largely restricted to edges of walking tracks. Populations of E. scabra and some subspecies of E. collina occur on grasslands that are maintained by grazing.

Maintenance of openness by introduction of regular small scale disturbance would be best done before populations have declined to low numbers as standing plants appear to be required as a seed source to allow colonisation of open soil patches, even if a soil stored seed bank is present. However, most of the recently verified disturbance dependent populations have not been burnt recently and numbers of standing plants are now generally low and restricted to small patches. The most suitable candidates for stabilisation are patches of E. semipicta type 1 which occur on now disused 4WD tracks. Creation and maintenance of patches of open ground adjacent to standing plants would encourage an increase in the number of standing individuals. Similar treatment near the small number of plants found away from main tracks could be used to increase numbers of E. semipicta type 2 in low dense heath on the Cape Hauy Peninsula. Other candidates for such treatment are expected to be found on implementation of action 1.1 (population verification).

Funds are required for the salary of a research officer, vehicle hire and travel allowance, costs for organisation and implementation of disturbances and follow-up maintenance and monitoring. Volunteer costs are included.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

2 000

1 600

1 600

1 600

6 800

6. Develop and Promote Volunteer Monitoring Program

A monitoring kit has been developed for Euphrasia populations studied during implementation of the Research Plan (Ball 1994). The kit includes guide notes for use, maps indicating the location of populations, a description of relevant features of each population including the need for monitoring, data collection sheets and a taxonomic key for identification for use if the population has not been described. The kit will need to be updated to include populations as they are verified in action 1.1.

As well as being a method for the systematic documentation of past and present information on populations, the kit can be used in two ways. Volunteers can target specific populations which require monitoring (this information can be obtained from sheets describing known populations) or can be used to identify and describe new populations that have not been included in the kit.

The existence of the kit will provide a focus for enlisting the involvement of volunteers or organisations such as the Botanical Guardians, the Threatened Species Network, the Society for Growing Australian Plants, the Understorey Network, Landcare Groups and walking clubs. This will be done by publicising the kit together with a public information program on the plight of lowland Euphrasia taxa and the need for long term monitoring. To do this media releases will be prepared, presentations made at meetings of relevant organisations, contributions made to newsletters of various groups interested in plant conservation and information will be provided on the Internet through the Threatened Species Unit at the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service. Training of volunteers will be provided and reminders will be sent to relevant volunteers and organisations when monitoring is due.

Funds are required for the salary of a research officer and vehicle hire for the tasks listed above. Costs of volunteers are covered in actions 1.1, 4 and 5.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

6 400

6 200

6 200

6 200

25 000

7. Establish Mechanism to Ensure Management Intervention When Required

It is anticipated that the Threatened Species Unit of the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service will be responsible for the updating and management of the threatened lowland Euphrasia monitoring kit beyond the life of this Recovery Plan. Tasks required are updating the population information sheets with new information received from volunteers, verifying reports of new populations and preparing population information sheets for new populations, training of volunteers, acting as a depot for pickup and delivery of the kit for volunteers and the delivery of reminder notices to volunteers or organisations when monitoring is due. The kit will hold information on present and past data regarding populations and the information received from volunteers will indicate when management intervention is required. Management intervention will be required when habitat openness and plant numbers decline. Beyond the life of the Recovery Plan, it will be the responsibility of the Unit to organise and implement management when required.

Funds are required for the salary of a research officer to prepare management guidelines for management of threatened lowland Euphrasia populations and pass on use and management of the monitoring kit to the Tasmanian Threatened Species Unit.

Year

Yr 1

Yr 2

Yr 3

Yr 4

Total

Cost

    

2 000

4 000

6 000

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

Task

Task Description

Priority

Feasibility

Year

Year

Year

Year

Total
       

1

2

3

4

  

1.1

Population verification

1

100%

15.8

3.4

3.4

3.4

26.0
   

started

            

1.2

Population identification

2

100%

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.2

20.8
   

started

            

2

Conservation status and

1

100%

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

16.0
 

threat abatement potential

started

            

3

Population protection

1

90%

9.2

9.2

9.2

9.2

36.8

4

Population recovery by fire

1

100%

12.2

10.4

6.4

6.4

35.4

5

Maintenance of openness by

2

90%

2.0

1.6

1.6

1.6

6.8
 

non-fire disturbance

              

6

Volunteer monitoring

1

80%

6.4

6.2

6.2

6.2

25.0
   

started

            

7

Mechanism for long term

1

90%

    

2.0

4.0

6.0
 

management

              

Total

      

54.8

40.0

38.0

40.0

172.8

REFERENCES

ANZECC (1993). - see Briggs and Leigh (1993).

Ball, P.S. (1994). Four threatened Euphrasia species (E. amphisysepala, E. phragmostoma, E. semipicta and E. sp. 'Southport') Research Plan. Wildlife Report 94/6. Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania.

Barker, W.R. (1982). Taxonomic studies in Euphrasia L. (Scrophulariaceae). A revised Infrageneric classification, and a revision of the genus in Australia J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 5:1-304.

Barker, W.R. (1984). Euphrasia. The Australian Eyebrights. Australian Plants 12:335-347

Barker, W.R. (1987). Taxonomic studies in Euphrasia L. (Scrophulariaceae). V. New and rediscovered taxa, typifications, and other notes on the genus in Australia. J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 10:201-221.

Barker, W.R. (1996). Taxonomic studies in Euphrasia L. (Scrophulariaceae). VII. A new species and a widely disjunct population from south-eastern Tasmania J. Adelaide Bot. Gard. 17:217-221.

Briggs, J.D. and Leigh, J.H. (1993). Threatened Australian Flora. - prepared by the Endangered Flora Network for the Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC). Australian Nature Conservation Agency.

Briggs, J.D. and Leigh, J.H. (1995). Rare or Threatened Australian Plants. CSIRO Australia.

Collier, P.A. (1990). Rare taxa in the genus Euphrasia L. from lowland south-eastern Tasmania. The Tasmanian Naturalist. 103:1-5.

Curtis, W.M. (1967). The Students Flora of Tasmania, Part 3. Government Printer, Tasmania.

Du Rietz, G.E. (1948a). Taxonomical notes on some Tasmanian species of Euphrasia. I. Euphrasia striata R. Br. and E. gibbsiae Du Rietz n. sp. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 42:99-115.

Du Rietz, G.E. (1948b). Taxonomical notes on some Tasmanian species of Euphrasia. II. Euphrasia collina R. Br. and E. gunnii Du Rietz nov. nom. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 42:348-363.

Endangered Species Protection Act (1992) No. 194 of 1992, Australia.

FAC (1994). Native Higher Plant Taxa which are Rare or Threatened in Tasmania. Edition 1. Species at risk, Tasmania - Flora. -prepared by the Flora Advisory Committee, Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania.

Forestry Commission (1993). Forest Practices Code. Forestry Commission, Tasmania.

Gerrand, A.M. (1996). Management Decision Classification - A System for Zoning Land Managed by Forestry Tasmania Paper presented to the Conference on 'Conservation Outside Nature reserves', University of Queensland 5-8/2/96.

Gilfedder, L. and Kirkpatrick, J.B. (1993). Germinable soil seed and competitive relationships between a rare native species and exotics in semi-natural pasture in the midlands, Tasmania. Biological Conservation. 64:113-119.

IUCN (1994). IUCN Red List Categories. IUCN Species Survival Commission.

Keith, D. (1997). An evaluation and modification of IUCN Red List criteria for classification of extinction risk in vascular plants. Report to Environment Australia for Endangered Species Unit Project number 450. Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment and Land Management, Hobart.

Potts, W.C. (1997). The conservation biology of threatened lowland Euphrasia taxa in south-eastern Tasmania. Report to Environment Australia for Endangered Species Unit Project number 428. Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment and Land Management, Hobart.

ROTAP (1995) - see Briggs and Leigh (1995).

Threatened Species Protection Act (1995) No. 83 of 1995, Tasmania.

TSPA (1995) - see Threatened Species Protection Act. (1995)