Kakadu National Park
This unique archaeological and ethnological reserve, located in the Northern Territory, has been inhabited continuously for more than 40,000 years. The cave paintings, rock carvings and archaeological sites record the skills and way of life of the region’s inhabitants, from the hunter-gatherers of prehistoric times to the Aboriginal people still living there. It is a unique example of a complex of ecosystems, including tidal flats, floodplains, lowlands and plateaux, and provides a habitat for a wide range of rare or endemic species of plants and animals.
2017 Conservation Outlook
Current state and trend of VALUES
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Click the + and - signs to expand or collapse full accounts of information under each topic. You can also view the entire list of information by clicking Expand all on the top left.
Description of values
Great natural beauty and sweeping landscapes
Vast congregations of migratory waterbirds
Large and relatively intact landscape allowing continued evolutionary processes
Conservation of significant habitats
Threatened, endemic and relict plants
Threatened, endemic and relict mammals
Seventeen mammal species are listed as being threatened under national or IUCN listing criteria, of which five are probably no longer present in the park (J. Woinarski pers. comm.).
Threatened, endemic and relict birds
Threatened, endemic and relict frogs
Threatened and endemic reptiles
Threatened, endemic and relict fish
Threatened and endemic invertebrates
Since 2014 Kakadu has made very real progress against threats to its plants and animals. The Australian Government launched a strategy in November 2014 to better focus resources on Kakadu’s threatened plants and wildlife. The Kakadu Threatened Species Strategy 2014-2024 was developed primarily by leading wildlife expert Professor John Woinarski, through the Northern Australia Hub of the Australian Government’s National Environmental Research Program.
Mining has been viewed as one of the principal threats to the property given that a uranium mine is surrounded by the park, and that ore has to be transported through the area with the risk of radioactive contamination. In addition, safe storage of the uranium tailings is an ongoing concern. Many reports, monitoring and discussion about the uranium issue have been produced (see WHC, 1998; Environment Australia, 1999 and others in http://www.environment.gov.au/ssd/supervision/arr-mines/jabiluka.html ). Restoration of small-scale mining has been undertaken elsewhere in Kakadu (IUCN, 1992) and is ongoing in the south of the park (SOC, 2003; DNP, 2012). The Koongarra Project Area (1,228 ha), one of the three mining leases surrounded by the park, was added to the property in 2011 (Decision 35COM 8B.49), meaning that mining at Koongarra will never be permitted.
With the closure of the Ranger Mine in 2021, there is a need to ensure nature tourism, rather than mining, provides a sustainable economic base for local communities.
Tourism in Kakadu is carefully managed to sensitively showcase the natural and cultural values to visitors, provide economic and employment opportunities for locals and improve management programs for threatening processes through increasing operational funds.
Potential impacts of more tourism opportunities and higher visitor numbers include increasing the transmission of invasive species and the risk of fire, as well as damaging landscape values with more roads, infrastructure and waste. With tourism a key driver for the local traditional owners, any potential impacts will be managed carefully into the future through Kakadu’s management plan.
Para grass (Urochloa mutica) was spreading rapidly on the Magela floodplain in Kakadu National Park (Bayliss et al. 2012), with infestations on the Wildman River floodplain and smaller patches occurring on the West Alligator River and South Alligator River floodplain margins (Setterfield et al. 2013). Olive hymenachne (Hymenachne amplexicaulis) is also an increasing invasive grass on the KNP floodplains. Other invasives include mission grass (Pennisetum polystachion); gamba grass (Andropogon gayanis); Mimosa pigra, candle bush (Senna alata); calopo (Calopogonium mucunoides); gambia pea (Crotalaria goreensis); golden shower (Cassia fistula); poinciana (Delonix regia), and coffee bush (Leucaena leucocephala) (http://www.environment.gov.au/parks/kakadu/management/programs/weeds.html ). Additional invasive plants which continue to be managed include Pennisetum Pennisetum pedicillatum; bellyache bush (Jatropha gossypifolia), wild cotton (Gossypium sp.) and rubber bush (Calotropis procera) (http://www.environorth.org.au/windows/dk/dk_weeds_conservation.html, Cowie & Werner, 1987; Storrs, 1996 ). However, there is a high potential for weeds to enter Kakadu from Arnhem Land and adjoining pastoral properties on the western boundary. New species, such as Aleman grass (Echinochloa polystachya); olive hymenachne (Hymenachne amplexicaulis); and knobweed (Hyptis capitata) have recently been found in the park. Weeds also have the potential to be carried into the park on vehicles. There are significant weed infestations in Jabiru and other lease areas that could pose a major threat to the rest of the park if they are not effectively managed (DNP, 2007). Therefore while weeds in the park are generally well managed given the difficulty of preventing weeds from entering into the property and the number of known invasive species already affecting the property, the threat of invasive plant species on the site's values remains high.
Over the past few years, small mammal decline across the woodlands of Northern Australia has been attributed to an increase in widespread and intense late season wildfires.
In 2016 and 2017 Kakadu responded by undertaking an extensive program of early dry season prescribed burns. While fire is often seen as a threatening process, carefully and skilfully managed, it is the park’s best landscape-scale management tool. By implementing these carefully designed and positioned prescribed burns along roads and river edges, Kakadu has created effective firebreaks that restrict the extent and therefore damage of late season fires.
Following these programs, there is now much more unburnt woodland available as habitat for species. Additionally, delicate prescribed burning in the wet season is used to create finer mosaics of burnt and unburnt vegetation. These changes to fire regimes in the park are expected to create conditions that support the recovery of species populations. It will take time to see the outcomes, but Kakadu National Park is working with the Northern Territory Department of Environment and Natural Resources to put in place a new long-term monitoring program that will enable changes in fauna populations to be detected.
The cessation of traditional indigenous floodplain burning practices in the past (McGregor et al. 2010), is thought likely to have contributed to the widespread increase in aquatic grasses and in particular the invasive paragrass, on the floodplain (Bayliss et al. 2006). In more recent times, there have been efforts to reintroduce traditional fire management to areas such as the Kakadu wetlands (MacGregor and others 2010).
In early 2017, a large feral animal culling program was undertaken in southern Kakadu following extensive consultation with Traditional Owners. Approximately 6,000 animals were culled, with some meat being returned to Traditional Owners for food. Further culling was undertaken in October 2017 with approximately 2,900 culled (nearly 9,000 for the year).
A feral animal working group, made up of Kakadu Traditional Owners, has developed a set of feral animal management protocols to improve the management of feral animals in Kakadu. These protocols set out the ways in which feral animals are managed in Kakadu, including provisions for economic opportunities for Bininj/Mungguy.
While management responses to these threats are generally appropriate, the impact of invasive animals on World Heritage values is so great that the threat level must be assessed at high. It would be very high if good management was not in place.
Invasive animals in the property include Asian water buffalo, cattle, pigs, horses, donkeys, cats, dogs, rats, mice, house geckos and European bees. Cane toads were recorded in Kakadu for the first time in early 2001.
While all the invasive animals may impact the park’s World Heritage values, possibly the most harmful are feral cats, buffalo and pigs; as well as cane toads, which have been partially implicated in the decline in northern quolls, goanna and snake populations over the past few decades (Woinarski et al. 2001; Palmer et al. 2003; Doody et al., 2007; Woinarski et al. 2007; Burbridge et al., 2009; Woinarski et al., 2010).
Feral pigs are now widespread consumers of plants, especially sedges (primarily Eleocaris dulcis), competing directly with waterbirds such as magpie geese (Anseranas semipalmata) and brolgas (Grus rubicunda) (Bayliss et al., 2006, Pettit et al. 2011). There is growing concern that feral cat predation, particularly in interaction with the effects of extensive fires on habitat conditions, is a very significant threatening process (Ziembicki et al., 2015).
Kakadu is undertaking a trial of different methods for feral cat management throughout the park.
In 2016-17, 38.8 per cent of revenue generated through park passes and permits was distributed to traditional owners directly ($1.837 million), an increase of nine per cent on the previous financial year. The remaining revenue received from Park user fees and other income subsidises the Commonwealth Government’s contribution to the Park (SOC, 2003). Today tourism revenue constitutes 22 per cent, or one fifth, of the park’s total Budget ($4.026 million).
Director of National Parks Annual Reports are available at https://www.environment.gov.au/topics/national-parks/parks-australia/publications.
Security procedures are high, and monitored by Australia’s Supervising Scientist, but NGOs have cited breaches in the past. The responsibility for rehabilitating Ranger to an appropriate condition lies with the lease holder – Energy Resources of Australia and its parent company, Rio Tinto. A multi-government, multi-party working group has been established to oversee the mine’s transition and closure.
Information is available about the management of protected areas bordering Kakadu; for example:
Nitmiluk National Park: https://dtc.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/260496/Nitmiluk-NP_Plan_July2014.pdf
Warddeken Indigenous Protected Area: https://www.warddeken.com/
There is no information on the management of the pastureland leases or the military base surrounding the property.
The inaugural Taste of Kakadu food festival in May 2017. The festival boasted a program of 50 plus interactive activities across our park, such as bush food tasting, basket weaving and painting with traditional owners. 40 Bininj (Kakadu’s Aboriginal traditional owners) were employed during the event.
The dry season has been the best in recent years with July up 7% on the previous year and August also up strongly. In addition, park pass revenue is up even more strongly – July revenue was up 10% - indicating increased visitation from international and interstate tourists. This can be partly attributed to the increased profile of the park, which is a result of activities like Taste of Kakadu.
Kakadu is enhancing relationships with tour operators (given that 45% of visitation occurs through this medium); supporting local tourism planning and infrastructure initiatives; working with the Northern Territory Tourism bureau; developing an on-line park visitation sales system; introducing Wi-fi to enhance visitation experience (DNP, 2016b). The promotion of economic opportunities for aboriginal landowners through commercial / contracted fire (and associated greenhouse emissions) management activities (DNP, 2016b) is a significant step forward. In the previous assessment, joint management arrangements and innovative research were highlighted. While it is fair to say that innovative biodiversity conservation research continues to be pursued by the park, including the reintroduction of northern quolls trained to avoid cane toads as prey and action research addressing delivery of fine-scale fire management, as noted previously more attention is required to deliver more effective joint management engagement. This is being addressed through the establishment of a dedicated Joint Management Team on the park in addition to the Joint Management Officer position which the park already funds.
|№||Organization/ individuals||Project duration||Brief description of Active Projects|
|1||Australian Government National Environmental Research Program (NERP), and ongoing National Environmental Science Program (NESP)||
|Ongoing National Environmental Research Programme/National Environmental Science Programme projects focusing on the potential impact of climate change on wetland and coastal environments. A NERP project, continued under NESP, assessed impacts of cat predation using an exclosure experiment: http://www.nespnorthern.edu.au/projects/nerp/research-and-management-to-reverse-the-decline-of-native-mammal-fauna/ http://www.nespnorthern.edu.au/projects/nesp/investigating-feral-cats-in-small-mammal-decline/ New research is being undertaken through NESP to assess the condition of and develop management guidelines for riparian communities Summary list of NESP Projects: • Guidelines for the management of threats to savanna riparian zones (2016–2019), including riparian responses to fire management in Kakadu • Investigating the role of feral cats in small mammal decline in Kakadu National Park (2015–2016). Continuation of the NERP cat-proof exclosure project—fauna sampling within exclosures, estimation of predator densities, cat dietary studies • Adaptive management of fire and feral animals to improve conservation of threatened species in Kakadu National Park (2016–2019) Threatened species monitoring design in Northern Australia (2015-2018). Re-designing the previous threatened species monitoring program for Kakadu, Litchfield and Gregory National Parks (“Three parks program”).|
|2||Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory Dept of Environment and Natural Resources||
|The Three Parks Savanna Fire-Effects Network (“Three parks program”) was established in 1994 to develop adaptive approaches to conservation-based fire management in regional savanna systems. The program assessed fire regimes and their impacts on plant and vertebrate biodiversity components in Kakadu, Litchfield and Gregory National Parks.|
|3||Kakadu NP||Kakadu National Park invasive plant monitoring and control. Includes: long-term annual monitoring of Mimosa pigra at 250 sites throughout the park and treatment of any plants found; biological control of salvinia using the salvinia weevil at key sites.|
|4||Kakadu National Park||Kakadu National Park feral vertebrate monitoring and control, including periodic aerial culling of feral herbivores (pigs, buffalo, cattle, horses, donkeys).|
|5||Kakadu National Park||Fire management across the park, including implementation of Kakadu National Park Stone Country Fire Management Plan.|
|6||Kakadu National Park||
|Kakadu National Park Nesting Flatback Turtle (Natator depressus) survey on Gardangarl (Field Island)—annual monitoring and tagging of nesting indivduals.|
|7||Parks Australia with funding from the Threatened Species Commissioner||
|1. Targeting Threats from Fire, Weeds and Feral Animals: involving action to improve the conservation of Kakadu’s threatened species through intensive fire management with associated weed and feral animal control 2. Creating a Wildlife Refuge on Gardangarl (Field Island): involving practical action to improve the long-term viability of Kakadu’s threatened wildlife through the management of an island refuge 3. Expansion of the 'Toad Smart' Quolls Project: the project aimed to reintroduce ‘toad smart’ northern quolls to the Mary River District, Kakadu National Park, expanding on the toad smart quoll research conducted in Kakadu since 2010 4. Rescue Plan for Threatened Plants: involving practical steps to improve the conservation of the threatened plant species of Kakadu National Park through ex situ seed conservation|
|1||Asbridge, E. & Lucas, R.M. (2016). Mangrove response to environmental change in Kakadu National Park. IEEE Journal of Related Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 9: 5612-5620.|
|2||BOWMAN, D. M. J. S., PRIOR, L. D. and DE LITTLE, S. C. (2010), Retreating Melaleuca swamp forests in Kakadu National Park: Evidence of synergistic effects of climate change and past feral buffalo impacts. Austral Ecology, 35: 898–905|
|3||Bayliss, P., Saunders, K., Dutra, L.X.C., Hilton, J., Melo, L.F.C., Woolard, F. and Prakash, M. (2016). Assessing sea level rise risks to coastal floodplains in the Kakadu Region, northern Australia, using a tidally-driven hydrodynamic model. Marine and Freshwater Research xx, xx‐xx. Published early online at http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/MF16049.htm|
|4||Bayliss, P., van Dam, R., and Bartolo, R.E. (2012). Quantitative Ecological Risk Assessment of the Magela Creek Floodplain in Kakadu National Park, Australia: Comparing Point Source Risks from the Ranger Uranium Mine to Diffuse Landscape-Scale Risks. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 18(1):115-151. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2012.632290|
|5||BirdLife International (s.d.) Important Bird Areas factsheet: Alligator Rivers Floodplains. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 05/02/2013.|
|6||Bowman, D.M., J.S., Riley, J.E., Boggs, G.S. , Lehmann, C.E.R. & Prior, L.D. (2008) Do feral buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) explain the increase of woody cover in savannas of Kakadu National Park, Australia? Journal of Biogeography 35(11): 1976–1988.|
|7||Bradshaw et al. (2007) ‘Current and future threats from non-indigenous animal species in northern Australia: a spotlight on World Heritage Area Kakadu National Park’ Wildlife Research 34(6) 419–436|
|8||Burbidge, A.A., McKenzie, N.L., Brennan, K.E.C., Woinarski, J.C.Z., Dickman, C.R., Baynes, A., Gordon, G., Menkhorst,P.W., and Robinson, A.C. (2009). Conservation status and biogeography of Australia’s terrestrial mammals. Australian Journal of Zoology 56, 411–422.|
|9||Chapple, D.G., Tingley, R., Mitchell, N.J., Macdonald, S.L., Keogh, J.S., Shea, G.M., Bowles, P., Cox, N.A., and Woinarski, J.C.Z. (in press). The Action plan for Australian lizards and snakes 2017. (CSIRO Publishing, Clayton.)|
|10||CoA (Commonwealth of Australia) (2012). The nationally protected Arnhem Plateau sandstone shrubland complex. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra. (http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/nationally-protected…)|
|11||Cook, G.D., Setterfield, S.A. & Maddison, J.P. (1996). Shrub invasion of a tropical wetland: Implications for weed management. Ecological Applications 6: 531-537.|
|12||Cowie, I.D. & Werner, P.A. (1987). Weeds in Kakadu National Park: A Survey of Alien Plants. Unpub. report to Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.|
|13||DNP (2007). Kakadu National Park Management Plan 2007-2014. Director of National Parks (DNP), Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Australia. 229 pp.|
|14||DNP (2012). State of the Parks Report. Director of National Parks (DNP) Annual Report 2011-2012 Supplementary Information. Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Australia.|
|15||DNP (2016a). Kakadu National Park Management Plan 2016-2026. Australian Government, Canberra. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/topics/national-parks/parks-australi…|
|16||DNP (2016a). Kakadu National Park Management Plan 2016-2026. Australian Government, Canberra. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/topics/national-parks/parks-australi…|
|17||Doody, J.S. et al. (2007): A Preliminary Assessment of the Impacts of Invasive Cane Toads (Bufo marinus) on Three Species of Varanid Lizards in Australia. Mertensiella 16 (Advances in Monitor Research III) 218-227|
|18||Draft SoOUV (2012). Draft Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (State party, IUCN).|
|19||Environment Australia (1999). Australia’s Kakadu: Protecting World Heritage. Response by the Government of Australia to the UNESCO World Heritage Committee regarding Kakadu National Park. Environment Australia, Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Heritage. http://www.environment.gov.au/ssd/supervision/arr-mines/jab…|
|20||Fraser, F., Lawson, V., Morrison, S., Christopherson, P., Sandra, M. and Rawlinson, M. 2003. Fire management experiment for the declining Partridge Pigeon, Kakadu National Park. Environmental Management & Restoration 4: 94-102.|
|21||Garnett, S.T., Szabo, J.K. and Dutson, G. 2011. The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.|
|22||Haynes, C.D. (2013). Seeking control: disentangling the difficult sociality of Kakadu National Park’s joint management. Journal of Sociology 49: 194-209.|
|23||Hyder Consulting Pty Ltd. 2008. The Impacts and Management Implications of Climate Change for the Australian Government's Protected Areas. A report to the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and the Department of Climate Change. Department of Climate Change, Canberra, Australia.|
|24||IUCN (1981). World Heritage Nomination IUCN Technical Review: Kakadu National Park.|
|25||IUCN (1992). World Heritage Nomination IUCN Technical Review: Kakadu National Park.|
|26||IUCN (2011). IUCN technical evaluation to the World Heritage Committee. On WHC website.|
|27||KBM (2008). Kakadu National Park Draft Tourism Master Plan 2008-2014. Kakadu Board of Management.|
|28||Kingsford, R.T., Porter, J.L. & Halse, S.A. (2012). National waterbird assessment. Waterlines Report Series No. 74, National Water Commission, Canberra.|
|29||Lawrence, D.R. (2000). Kakadu: the making of a national park. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.|
|30||NAERH (2016). Northern Australia Environmental Research Hub. see http://www.nespnorthern.edu.au/|
|31||Nomination (1981). Nomination of Kakadu National Park. Stage 1. Government of Australia.|
|32||Nomination (1987). Nomination of Kakadu National Park. Stage 2. Government of Australia.|
|33||Nomination (1991). Nomination of Kakadu National Park. Stage 3. Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, Government of Australia.|
|34||Norris, A., Low, T., Gordon, I., Saunders, G., Lapidge, S., Lapidge, K., Peacock, T. & Pech, R. (2005). Review of the management of feral animals and their impact on biodiversity in the rangelands. Pest Animal Control CRC Report.|
|35||O’Malley, C. (2006). National Recovery Plan for the Gouldian Finch (Erythrura gouldiae). WWF-Australia, Sydney and Parks and Wildlife NT, Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, NT Government, Palmerston.|
|36||Palmer, C., Taylor R. & Burbidge, A.A. (2003) Recovery plan for the golden bandicoot Isoodon auratus and golden-backed tree-rat Mesembriomys macrurus 2004-2009. Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Darwin.|
|37||Parr, C.L., Woinarski, J.C.Z. & Pienaar, D.J. (2009). Cornerstones of biodiversity conservation? Comparing the management effectiveness of Kruger and Kakadu National Parks, two key savanna reserves . Biodiversity and Conservation 18(13): 3643-3662.|
|38||Pettit, N. E., Bayliss, P., Davies, P. M., Hamilton, S. K., Warfe, D. M., Bunn, S. E., and Douglas, M. M. (2011). Seasonal contrasts in carbon resources and ecological processes on a tropical floodplain. Freshwater Biology 56, 1047–1064|
Pettit, N. E., Naiman, R. J., Warfe, D. M., Jardine, T. D., Douglas, M. M., Bunn, S. E., and Davies, P. M. (2016). Productivity and connectivity in tropical landscapes of northern Australia: ecological insights for management.
Ecosystems 20, 492-514.
|40||Pettit, N.E., Bayliss, P. & Barthollo, R. (2016) Dynamics of plant communities and the impact of saltwater intrusion on the floodplains of Kakadu National Park. Marine and Freshwater Research 10.1071/MF16148|
|41||Petty, A., Alderson, J., Muller, R., Scheibe, O., Wilson, K. & Winderlich, S. (2007). Kakadu National Park Arnhemland Plateau Fire Management Plan. Tropical Savannas Cooperative Research Centre and Kakadu National Park.|
|42||Russell-Smith, J., Edwards, A.C. & Price, O.F. (2012). Simplifying the savanna: the trajectory of fire-sensitive vegetation mosaics in northern Australia. Journal of Biogeography 39: 1303-1317.|
|43||Russell-Smith, J., Evans, J., Edwards, A.C. & Simms, A. (2017). Assessing ecological performance thresholds in fire-prone Kakadu National Park, northern Australia. Ecosphere 7: 10.1002/ecs2.1856.|
|44||SOC (2003). Report on the State of Conservation of Kakadu National Park. Australian National Periodic Report.|
|45||Setterfield, S. A., M. M. Douglas, A. M. Petty, P. Bayliss, K. B. Ferdinands, and S. Winderlich. 2013. Invasive plants in the floodplains of Australia’s Kakadu National Park. In P. G. L. C. Foxcroft, P. Pysek, and D. M. Richardson (Ed.). Plant invasions in protected areas-patterns, problems and challenges, pp. 167–189. Springer Series in Invasion Ecology. Springer, Dordrecht.|
|46||Storrs, M. (1996). A Weed Management Strategy for Kakadu National Park 1996 – 2001. Unpub. report to Australian Conservation Agency, Kakadu National Park|
|47||WHC (1998). Report on the mission to Kakadu National Park, Australia, 26 October to 1 November 1998. WHC-99/CONF.205/INF.3A.|
|48||Woinarski J.C.Z., Armstrong M., Brennan K.E.C., Fisher A., Griffiths A.D., Hill B., Milne D.J., Ward S., Watson M., Wunderlich S. & Young S. (2010). Monitoring indicates rapid and severe decline of native small mammals in Kakadu National Park, northern Australia. Wild. Res. 37, 116-126.|
|49||Woinarski, J.C.Z. & Winderlich, S. (2014). A strategy for the conservation of threatened species and threatened ecological communities in Kakadu National Park, 2014-2024. Northern Australia Hub, National Environmental Research Program, Charles Darwin University, Darwin. http://www.nerpnorthern.edu.au/sites/default/files/managed/….|
|50||Woinarski, J.C.Z., Hempel, C., Cowie, I., Brennan, K., Kerrigan, R., Leach, G., and Russell-Smith, J. (2006). Distributional patterns of plant species endemic to the Northern Territory, Australia. Australian Journal of Botany 54, 627-640|
|51||Woinarski, J.C.Z., Milne, D.J. & Wanganeen, G. (2001). Changes in mammal populations in relatively intact landscapes of Kakadu National Park, Northern Territory, Australia. Austral Ecology 26(4): 360–370|
|52||Woinarski, J.C.Z., Pavey C., Kerrigan R., Cowie I. & Ward S. (2007) Lost From Our Landscape: threatened species of the Northern Territory. Northern Territory Government, Darwin.|
|53||Woinarski, J.C.Z., Russell-Smith, J., Andersen, A., and Brennan, K. (2009). Fire management and biodiversity of the western Arnhem Land plateau. In: Culture, ecology and economy of fire management in north Australian savannas: rekindling the wurrk tradition. (eds J. Russell-Smith, P.J. Whitehead, P. Cooke) pp. 201-228. (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne)|
|54||Ziembicki, M.R., et al. (2015) Stemming the tide: progress towards resolving the causes of decline and implementing management responses for the disappearing mammal fauna of northern Australia. Therya 6: 169-225|