Pictures and Story by JAMES WOODFORD
Additional pictures at Stuart Cohen’s Flickr site and at Rick Stevens’ Flickr site
It is the mystery of the Montague Island “mouse” that shouldn’t be there.
The eighty-hectare nature reserve, nine kilometres off the NSW South Coast town of Narooma has suffered a feral mouse plague that has lasted for nearly 130 years, since the lighthouse station was established.
Goats, rabbits and an impenetrable infestation of introduced kikuyu grass have also cursed the island’s ecology.
The last goat was shot in the late 1980s and for the past decade scientists and park managers have been determined to declare the island feral free.
Two years ago a massive baiting program using helicopter distributed poison-laced cereals was undertaken that simultaneously wiped out the entire rabbit and exotic mouse population.
The equivalent of thousands of nights worth of trapping and track analysis, without any sign of the pests, has made researchers confident the island is indeed free of mice.
But in recent months three staff have sighted at least three individuals of a small, rat-sized mammal “shaped like a black tube, that doesn’t hop, with a non-descript tail”.
On one occasion two people saw the odd little beast while they were walking together.
Because of the scale of the baiting and the massive follow-up surveys for mice it cannot be a rodent, says seabird project officer with the Department of Environment and Climate Change, Nicholas Carlile.
Yet not one single NSW offshore island has a native terrestrial mammal population, Carlile says.
That is, possibly, until now.
A search has begun this week to solve the mystery. According to Carlile, the most likely theory, based on the descriptions of those who have seen it is that the recently-spotted mammal is a Dusky Antechinus.
“What I don’t understand is how a native mammal has been out here since the constant human presence following 1881 and hasn’t been seen,” Carlile says.
Unlike mice, rats and other species of antechinus, Dusky antechinus would not readily stow away in gear brought onto the island. This means that it is possible the population has survived as an isolated colony for up to 10,000 years since sea level rise separated Montague from the mainland.
Dusky antechinus are also not cereal eaters and so would not have taken the baits laid to kill mice and rabbits.
A trapping program began this week in an attempt to capture a live specimen so the creature can be identified. But because it is thought to be in such low numbers success may take many months.
Whatever it turns out to be, Carlile is confident that Montague will have more surprises.
A new population of storm petrels established itself on Brush Island, off Ulladulla last year following a rat eradication in 2005.
Other spectacular ecological recoveries are underway following the removal of rabbits from Cabbage Tree off Port Stephens and the same is hoped for nearby Broughton Island with the removal of rats and rabbits later this year.
All of these feral pest eradications, though, are dress rehearsals for the most ambitious plan of all – the total eradication of rodents from Lord Howe Island in 2011.
It is not just the environment that benefits, says Carlile.
“One of the big things is the improvement of the amenity both for people who operate and work in these places and the tourists who pay to visit these sanctuaries. They are no longer exposed to the diseases that mice carry or leave in their droppings and the historic fabric of buildings [like the lighthouse quarters on Montague] are more easily protected.”
First published in the Sydney Morning Herald 20/06/09
Incredibly beautiful photos, and an exciting feel-good story, thanks James
I hope that it is really an Antechinus – their survival amidst 130yrs of rabbit/mouse infestation would really give one hope.
Still have my fingers crossed James.
Imagine! We may have on our very doorstep a small place, a tiny fraction of Australia, we can declare “feral-animal-free”.
If I could give an “alternate” view to the management of Montague Island.
Montague Island is about 1.5kms long and 500m wide, it has no trees on it. It was the last manned lighthouse in NSW, and goats were put onto the Island in the 1800′s to help shipwrecked sailors. It has been the second largest rookery for little penguins in the world for hundreds of years. The NPWS took over the management of Montague Island in 1987.
Without any Environmental Impact Statement, any forethought or any study, the senior management in NPWS decided that the goats, being feral, had to go. The bullets would have cost about twenty dollars. The goats and the penguins had established a natural balance, not a symbiotic relationship, but certainly neither was threatening the survival of the other.
After killing the goats the only source of control of the Kikuyu grass (itself introduced) disappeared and Kikuyu became rampant, choking out the burrows for the penguins and mutton birds. Since then the NPWS would have spent close on a million dollars, if not more, to try and get rid of the Kikuyu. It has choked everything out on the Island. By the 1990′s it had dramatically reduced the penguin and mutton bird population who live in burrows on the ground. There was a disastrous attempt at a burn off several years ago that killed hundreds of penguins.
Since then they have learnt their lesson. No matter what it costs, and it is costing a huge amount, the problem will be solved. So more money is wasted because the NPWS senior management hadn’t taken the time to sit back and think about the problem carefully, perhaps even asking a few locals how the problem could be solved. Perhaps this monetary and environmental catastrophe would never have eventuated.
Once again this demonstrates that the greatest threat to the environment can be the stupidity of man. I just wish it wasn’t the senior management of National Parks and Wildlife Service so often.
I would like to respond to the claims made by Phillip of Narooma because I regard what he has said as illinformed nonsense.
Firstly let’s just illustrate the circumstance and situation at Montague island just prior to the National Parks and Wildlife Service taking over management in 1989.
For decades this island was off limits to the public. If you didn’t happen to be friendly with the lighthouse staff or were there on official business then you simply didn’t set foot on this 80 hectare rock.
From all accounts the buildings had deteriorated considerably over time. There were 200 feral goats, rabbits and mice which had free reign.
10,000 years ago it was the headland to a promontory that jutted out into the sea and was finally cut off by rising sea levels where it remained isolated. Just prior to the arrival of Europeans Montague Island had been known as Baranguba by the Aboriginal people during an era where it probably looked more like a south coast headland with a rich vegetation community that included the full suite of coastal shrubs, acacias, banksias and stunted eucalypts. There were probably small woodland birds that shared the island with thousands of seabirds such as the Little Penguin and three species of shearwater.
Europeans turned up and within less than a century had reduced the island to environmental rubble. An environment that once was a harmonious ecosystem had been trashed. By 1989 the island was virtually a bare rock accommodating 200 goats that were not living in harmony as is often suggested by some of the ill-informed but were responsible for trampling the thousands of burrows that were constructed by seabirds that had used the island as a primary breeding site for thousands of years.
Then the NPWS arrived and with persistent and consistent determination made changes that has seen a stunning reversal of the catastrophe that had occurred. In the nick of time complete and utter disaster was averted through good management backed with solid and extensive scientific research over many years by many organisations including Charles Sturt University and the CSIRO as well as Taronga Zoo and other researchers too numerous to mentione. Few patches along the east coast of Australia have withstood the pitter patter of scientists feet per hectare than that of Montague island.
The goats were removed first. Then attention was turned to how best to resolve the rapid growth in kikuyu. After a decade of research and experiments Charles Sturt scientists such as Professor Nick Klomp developed a method for the permanent removal of the grass. It was sprayed with a considerably diluted form of round up during winter which affected only the kikuyu. After curing it was burnt and then thousands of native shrubs and trees were planted to shade out the kikuyu. It worked.
In the process, on one day 22 Little penguins were killed when a fire previously thought to have been extinguished appears to have smouldered until nightime when it burnt a hectare that had not yet been searched for penguins. Tragic as it was there were maybe 10,000 other penguins that survived.
Since then the NPWS has treated a large area of the island in stages in the same way and the result has been stunning. The island now has expansive areas of native vegetation growing where previously there had only been kikuyu. Penguins and other beasties are recolonising these areas. The island thrives in a way that has not been possible for most of the past two centuries. There are no more goats, rabbits or mice, each having been eliminated by NPWS staff. Imagine that, a feral free island!!
Importantly the NPWS has opened the island to a controlled and sensitive ecotourism operation that now sees more than 5,000 people a year come to visit where previously there were none. Now people pay to stay overnight and undertake conservation work!!! The NPWS has received numerous, regional, state, national and international awards for the work that it has done on Montague Island. It generates at least 30 jobs and a million dollars in revenue for the local economy where previously it did not.
The NPWS might not get everything right all the time and it might make mistakes but it learns and grows and manages better. The staff who have single handedly rescued Montague island from the precipice deserve all praise for their efforts. I think it’s a great shame that Phillip from Narooma can’t see this and give credit where credit is due.
Dear Phillip from Narooma,
In regard to your “alternative view” on the management of Montague Island Nature Reserve. If there ever was a best case example of peer reviewed, best practice, science based management, Montage is it. Unfortunately, you, like many other conservation reserve/management critics, don’t think its necessary to provide any credible basis for your own views and opinions on conservation management.
On the other hand, given you subscribe to the silly notion that the Penguins and Goats on the Island were “in a natural balance” its probably good that you don’t tell us.
Greetings John P and Ross ( C ..?)
John P’s extensive history of Montague Island is generally correct except for a few significant errors. Paragraph 3 Rather than having to be ‘friendly’ with the lighthouse keepers to get onto Montague, the island was made “off limits” by the Commonwealth Government in 1953 when it came under the care of the National Trust .. worth noting that Montague was the first sanctuary to be protected as such. This was due to pressure from one of the earliest ‘practical’ conservationists Judith Cassell (Small). This decision was greeted with approval.
When the NPWS took over it was NOT a “bare rock of environmental rubble” .. such sensationalist language !!, and “in a nick of time complete disaster was averted” is NOT correct. There were NOT 200 goats on the island, there were about 60. A carrying capacity of about 1 DSE per hectare, not an overly aggressive stocking rate for goats … 3 DSE/He would be. The goats had been on the island since 1870’s. Without any shadow of doubt they had eaten the trees down and damaged the burrows of both Penguins and shearwaters. HOWEVER over 100 years the survival rate of both Penguin and Shearwater, in 1987, was dependent on how much food was available in the sea and what the weather was like that year, rather than presence of goats on the Island.
I disagree with Ross Constable’s 2001 assertion that the Goats were NOT keeping the Kikuyu under control when they were shot .. not because the goats were “part of the Island’s history” but because in 1987 they were in a ‘neutral’ state with Penguins, Seals and Shearwaters. To eliminate the goats and do nothing else, as happened, meant that the Kikuyu became rampant very quickly .. this was completely predictable. This was my professional opinion at the time, however the NPWS knew better.
I FIRMLY believed that a careful process of getting rid of the Kikuyu, whilst the goats were still there, then once this was achieved move onto getting rid of the goats and so on. What annoys people who have studied Montague is the fact that the elimination of the Kikuyu was the desired outcome from everyone concerned with conservation management. What happened was senior management in Sydney approved a stupid process .. which ultimately will cost NSW taxpayers at least 1.5million dollars more than it needed to eliminate the Goats and Kikuyu form M.I.
Ross .. you claim I have no credible basis for my views. I have been a Veterinary Scientist for nearly 40 years, I was involved in the early days of the NPWS with KNP and nearly became the first Veterinary Officer with the NPWS. I have taken a great interest in the past 30 years on wildlife management, both in Australia and overseas, and the interactions that occur .. I believe that I am logical. In 35 years I have I have attended over 30 Wildlife and Conservation management conferences in 4 countries. I have studied CLOSELY the science behind what was done on M. I and the history behind it very closely. What is your opinion of a ‘credible basis’??
You claim it is “ a best case example of peer reviewed, best practice, science based management” .. interesting generalizations for quite specific phrases .. I have seen NO peer reviewed literature on what you are describing on M.I. – do you know what peer reviewed means? “Best practice” is a useless public service weasel word and “science based management” is another generalization.
When I write anything down I like to be thoroughly research my topic. Consequently the ‘fundamentalist’ Conservationists on the Far South Coast have taken to “attacking the messenger” rather than the message. This is a pity and generally ends up with a no win situation
However it IS good to see M.I. without goats, rabbits or mice.
Sorry Phillip. It’s not John P. Although I do respect John’s view on many issues. I must say I’m surprised that a person who has gone to as much effort as you have attending wildlife conferences that you find nothing at all good to say about the NPWS. If you’ll forgive me but your crusade against the NPWS and the MPA appears to be a bit on the obsessive side. Why don’t you just enjoy your retuirement and go fishing in the 80% of the batemans Marine Park that is available for this pursuit. Surely that’s got to be more satisfying than getting twisted in knots over one environmental issue after another. Take a break.
As reghards Montague and the Kikuyu – all I can say is that a huge amount of thought and scintific research was carried out prior to the effort to remove the various feral pests. Science is to some extent and trial and error school and the errors have led to a pest free island. It is pleasing though that you at least concede that the absence of ferals on Montague is a good thing. Try and have a nice day Phillip.
Greetings JP(or PP)
I have never understood why people, particularly Green conservationists, have to attack the messenger rather than the message?.
I have raised several issues regarding Montague Island, none of them responded to in John P’s reply. Given J.P. has NO idea what I do nowadays, and I do not intend to enlighten him with that. Perhaps I could just appeal to the moderator to take down Post #8 and let John P reply in a vein that does not sound like a fawning admiration society for NSW DECC, or the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, or a personal attack on me. If he does not wish to, perhaps I may be permitted to respond in the manner I would really LIKE to?.
Otherwise my polite response is thus:
“I must say I’m surprised that a person who has gone to as much effort as you have attending wildlife conferences that you find nothing at all good to say about the NPWS” .. WHY?
“If you’ll forgive me but your crusade against the NPWS and the MPA appears to be a bit on the obsessive side” … I have an interest in Wildlife & Conservation management. I know several Rangers from KNP who are as disturbed as I am at the direction the senior management of NPWS has taken since the late ‘90s. The Westminster system means that most Ministers have NO knowledge of their brief … consider nowadays Whan as Minister for Primary Industries, or recently Robinson when Minister for DECC. They rely COMPLETELY on what their Department heads tell them. Unfortunately in my opinion DECC is a classic example of “Public Servants” becoming “Politacised masters” , and believing they can run it better than the Minister .. for god’s sake they have had 5 ministers since January 2007.
“Why don’t you just enjoy your retuirement and go fishing in the 80% of the batemans Marine Park that is available for this pursuit.” .. Thank you I do. I notice no improvement one way or other, although surely I must!! I also fish overseas, and am currently doing a World War 1 project in France etc. etc
“As regards Montague and the Kikuyu – all I can say is that a huge amount of thought and scintific research was carried out prior to the effort to remove the various feral pests” .. As I stated above it was NOT in relation to removing the Goats in 1988.
“Science is to some extent and trial and error school and the errors have led to a pest free island.” .. On what grounds do you say that confusing sentence?? Are you a scientist?? Trial and Error is usually called “faith based science”.
Sorry Phillip. You are quite right it was a crap sentence. I think I got bored or distracted or both towards the end. It doesn’t really matter because I think I’ve said enough on Montague to have made a sound case on behalf of the NPWS efforts there. They have done a good job. How bout we leave it at that. And nope I’m not a scientist. BTW – who’s PP?