RISK ASSESSMENT FOR AUSTRALIA – Ostrich (Struthio camelus) (Linnaeus, 1758)
Class - Aves, Order - Struthioniformes, Family - Struthionidae, Genus - Struthio (Linnaeus, 1758); (Sibley and
Monroe 1990, Catalogue of Life 2008)
Score Sheet
SPECIES: Ostrich (Struthio camelus)
Subspecies:
S. c. camelus
S. c. massaicus
S. c. australis
S. c. syriacus
(del Hoyo et al 1992, Catalogue of Life 2008).
SCORE
Species Description - Largest and heaviest living bird species; flightless with small wings, but
capable of running at speeds of up to 60 km/hr (del Hoyo et al 1992, Ginn et al 1996, Borrow and
Demey 2001). Height - male 2.1-2.75, female 1.75-1.9 m; weight - male 100-135 kg, female 90-110 kg.
The head is small in relation to the body size, it has large eyes (diameter = 50 mm) protected by long
black eyelashes. Neck long and pink, almost bare of feathers; long, pink, stout legs (females more
brown and during breeding males more red) with two large forward pointing toes and long flattened
claw on the thick inner toe. Body plumage is soft and smooth; the male is mostly black with white
wings and tail; females dull greyish-brown, drabber version of the male (del Hoyo et al 1992, Borrow
and Demey 2001, Stevenson and Fanshawe 2002).
Longevity - Maximum longevity reportedly 50 years (HAGR Human Ageing Genomic Resources
2006).
Status –
1.
Red List Category – Least Concern (LC).
Rationale: This species has a large range, with an estimated global extent of occurrence of
2
12,000,000 km . The global population size has not been quantified, but it is believed to be large
as the species is described as ‘common’ in at least parts of its range. Global population trends
have not been quantified, but the species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the
population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List (i.e. declining more than 30% in ten years or
three generations) (Birdlife International 2004).
2.
CITES listed Protection Status – CITES Appendix I.
Rationale: The populations of Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, The Central African Republic,
Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, the Niger, Nigeria, Senegal and the Sudan are listed in CITES
Appendix I. Appendix I lists species that are the most endangered among CITES-listed animals
and plants. They are threatened with extinction and CITES prohibits international trade in
specimens of these species except when the purpose of the import is not commercial, for instance
for scientific research. In these exceptional cases, trade may take place provided it is authorised
by the granting of both an import permit and an export permit (or re-export certificate). All other
populations are not included in the Appendices (CITES 2007).
The subspecies Struthio camelus syriacus is now extinct (del Hoyo et al 1992, Shirihai 1996).
DATE OF ASSESSMENT: 24/01/2008
The Risk Assessment Model
Bird and Mammal Model used (Bomford 2008) using PC CLIMATE
(Brown et al 2006, Bureau of Rural Sciences 2006)
Models for assessing the risk that exotic vertebrates could establish in Australia have been developed
for mammals, birds (Bomford 2003, 2006, 2008), reptiles and amphibians (Bomford et al 2005,
Bomford 2006, 2008). Developed by Dr Mary Bomford of the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS), the
model uses criteria that have been demonstrated to have significant correlation between a risk factor
and the establishment of populations of exotic species and the pest potential of those species that do
establish. For example, a risk factor for establishment is similarity in climate (temperature and rainfall)
within the species’ distribution overseas and Australia. For pest potential, the species’ overseas pest
status is a risk factor. The model was originally published in ‘Risk Assessment for the Import and
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
1
Keeping of Exotic Vertebrates in Australia’ (Bomford 2003) available online
http://www.daff.gov.au/brs/land/feral-animals/management/risk . This model used the Apple Mac
application CLIMATE (Pheloung 1996) for climate matching.
The risk assessment model was revised and recalibrated ‘Risk Assessment for the Establishment of
Exotic Vertebrates in Australia: Recalibrated and Refinement of Models’(Bomford 2006) and the
climate application changed to PC CLIMATE software (Bureau of Rural Sciences 2006), available
online at http://affashop.gov.au/product.asp?prodid=13506. The most recent publication (Bomford
2008) includes updated instructions for using the exotic vertebrate risk assessment models and an
additional model for freshwater fish. A bird and mammal model for New Zealand has also been
included.
Which models are being used for the assessments:
Birds and mammals have been assessed using the Australian Bird and Mammal Model (Bomford
2008), pp 16-28, including both versions of stage B, models 1 (4 factors) and 2 (7 factors). All reptiles
and amphibians were assessed using three models; the Australian Bird and Mammal Model (Bomford
2008), including Model A, using 3 factors from stage B (pp 54-55), and Model B, using 7 factors from
stage B (pp 20), and the Australian Reptile and Amphibian Model (Bomford 2008), p 51-53. The
rational for using additional models for reptiles and amphibians is to compare establishment risk ranks
of the three models for a precautionary approach. If the models produce different outcomes for the
establishment potential of any reptile or amphibian, the highest ranked outcome should be used
(Bomford 2008).
Climate Matching Using PC CLIMATE
Sixteen climate parameters (variables) of temperature and rainfall are used to estimate the extent of
similarity between data from meteorological stations located in the species’ world distribution and in
Australia. Worldwide, data (source; worlddata_all.txt CLIMATE database) from approximately 8000
locations are available for analysis. The number of locations used in an analysis will vary according to
the size of the species’ distribution. Data from approximately 762 Australian locations is used for
analysis.
To represent the climate match visually, the map of Australia has been divided into 2875 grid squares,
each measured in 0.5 degrees in both longitude and latitude.
CLIMATE calculates a match for each Australian grid by comparing it with all of the meteorological
stations within the species’ distribution (excluding any populations in Australia) and allocating a score
ranging from ten for the highest level match to zero for the poorest match. These levels of climate
match are used in the risk assessment for questions B1 (scores are summed to give a cumulative
score), C6, and C8. For a grid square on the Australian map to score highly, it must match closely all
16 climatic variables of at least one meteorological station in the species’ distribution for each level of
climate match. [The score for each grid is based on the minimum Euclidian distance in the 16dimensional variable space between it and all stations in the species’ distribution. Each variable is
normalized by dividing it by its worldwide standard deviation.]
LITERATURE SEARCH TYPE AND DATE:
NCBI, CAB Direct, MEDLINE, Science Direct, Web of Knowledge
(Zoological Records, Biological Abstracts), SCIRUS, SORA
(Searchable Ornithological Research Archive), Google Search and
Google Scholar 29/10/2007
FACTOR
SCORE
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
2
STAGE A: RISKS POSED BY CAPTIVE OR RELEASED INDIVIDUALS
A1. Risk to people from individual escapees (0–2)
1
Assess the risk that individuals of the species could harm people. (NB, this question only
relates to aggressive behaviour shown by escaped or released individual animals.
Question C11 addresses the risk of harm from aggressive behaviour if the species
establishes a wild population).
Captive female Ostriches are generally very docile by nature, and shun petting, they can be handled
without much problem. Males are also quite docile during the non-breeding season (Drenowatz 1995).
Ostriches are very wary, and may panic and may run at the slightest danger (Ginn et al 1996). If
escape is not an option, they may sit down with its head and neck stretched out on the ground in front,
and remain motionless in an attempt to remain undetected (del Hoyo et al 1992). They possess a long,
sharp, flattened claw on the inner toe, which is also used as defence, by kicking in a forward and
downward motion (del Hoyo et al 1992, Levitz et al 2004). Provoked and unprovoked attacks on
humans by captive Ostriches have been recorded, which have resulted in minor injuries such as
scrapes and bruises (King 2007 ), or more serious injuries such as a fractured skull (del Hoyo et al
1992, Khan and Olumide 2006) and loss of vision from kicks or pecks to the eye (Chaudhry et al 2003,
Levitz et al 2004). Human deaths have also occurred from captive Ostrich attacks (Animal Attack Files
1999). In Africa, attacks by Ostriches on humans are not uncommon, sometimes resulting in human
fatalities (Levitz et al 2004). Around 14 people may be killed by Ostriches per year (Stark 2001).
Aggressive behaviour, size, plus the possession of organs capable of inflicting harm, such
as sharp teeth, claws, spines, a sharp bill, or toxin-delivering apparatus may enable
individual animals to harm people. Any known history of the species attacking, injuring or
killing people should also be taken into account. Assume the individual is not protecting
nest or young.
A2. Risk to public safety from individual captive animals (0–2)
Animal that is unlikely to make an unprovoked attack but which can cause serious injury (requiring
hospitalisation) or fatality if cornered or handled
0
Nil or low risk (highly unlikely or not possible).
Assess the risk that irresponsible use of products obtained from captive individuals of the
species (such as toxins) pose a public safety risk (excluding the safety of anyone entering
the animals’ cage/enclosure or otherwise coming within reach of the captive animals)
STAGE A. PUBLIC SAFETY RISK SCORE
1
SUM A1 TO A2 (0–4)
STAGE B: PROBABILITY ESCAPED OR RELEASED INDIVIDUALS WILL ESTABLISH FREE-LIVING POPULATION
Model 1: Four-factor model for birds and mammals (BOMFORD 2008)
B1. Degree of climate match between species overseas range and
Australia (1–6)
5
Climate Match Score = 2572 Very high climate match with Australia
Climate data from 708 locations (see species worldwide distribution map) were used to calculate the
CMS. Overseas distribution Africa and the Middle East (del Hoyo et al. 1992) (see B3 for details).
[See above information on climate matching.]
B2. Exotic population established overseas (0–4)
0
No exotic population ever established
The subspecies S. c. syriacus formerly occurred in parts of the Middle East, however it became extinct
by the 1940s (see B7 for details). Attempts have been made to reintroduce Ostriches in both Jordan
and Israel, and eighteen chicks were reintroduced in southern Israel in 1973 (del Hoyo et al 1992) (no
information provided regarding the survival of these chicks).
Ostrich farming takes place in many countries other than Africa and Australia, including New Zealand,
the United States, Canada, Europe and China however, there are no reports of establishment of
populations in the wild (del Hoyo et al 1992, Milton et al 1994, Tuckwell 1997).
[(Introductions to Australia have not been included in the climate match analysis).The Ostrich was first
introduced to Australia for the feather industry in 1869, but by 1882 the South Australian Government
began to encourage Ostrich farming and large flocks were developed near Port Augusta and Coorong.
Some stock escaped, and many birds were released when the industry collapsed after the first World
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
3
War. Introduced populations occurred in southern Australia - north of Port August and at Redcliffe and
around the Flinders Ranges northeast of Port Augusta, numbers may have reached hundreds or
possibly thousands of birds. This population is thought to now be extinct, but a handful of birds may
still survive (Long 1981, del Hoyo et al 1992, Lever 2005, Norris et al 2005). Small populations may be
present throughout the rangelands in SA in areas where Ostrich farming once occurred however,
these populations may not be able to survive future land use changes (Norris et al 2005). The Ostrich
was introduced to Western Australia before 1912. Some may have been liberated at Gingin, and some
were released at Mount Morgan in the goldfields,, but they did not become established (Long 1988).]
B3. Overseas range size score (0–2)
1
Scoring 0 – 1 = 0; 1 - 70 = 1; N70 = 2
B4. Taxonomic Class (0–1)
0
B. ESTABLISHMENT RISK SCORE
6
2
2
Overseas range between 1-70 million km , estimated at 12.33 million km . Includes current and past
1000 years, natural and introduced range.
•
Natural range is from southern Morocco and Mauritania to Sudan, Ethiopia, northern Uganda,
Somalia, Kenya, central Tanzania and southern Africa; also the Syrian and Arabian deserts in the
Middle East (del Hoyo et al 1992, Drenowatz 1995, Lever 2005).
•
Western Africa, occurred from Mauritania, central Mali, through central Niger, most of Chad, north
of the Central African Republic, north-east Nigeria, and north Cameroon (Borrow and Demey
2001).
•
Southern Africa, occurred from South Africa, Namibia, Botswana, west and central Zimbabwe, and
south-west Mozambique (Drenowatz 1995, Ginn et al 1996).
•
Eastern Africa, occurred in north-east Tanzania and west Kenya (Drenowatz 1995, Stevenson
and Fanshawe 2002).
•
The subspecies S. c. syriacus formerly occurred in Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, southern Israel and
north and central Egypt but became extinct sometime between the 1920s and 1940s. It currently
only occurs in south-east Egypt (Long 1981, del Hoyo et al 1992, Drenowatz 1995, Shirihai 1996,
Borrow and Demey 2001).
•
The species now been eliminated from much of its former range due to intense persecution by
th
th
man, as well as habitat destruction. Main damage occurred during the 19 and 20 centuries due
to trade in Ostrich plumes (tail feathers) as well as hunting and collecting of its eggs (del Hoyo et
al 1992, Ginn et al 1996).
•
In North and West Africa, Ostrich populations are very small and continue to decline; in South
Africa it is now confined to the extreme north-west; in other parts of Africa, it occurs mainly in
protected areas in East Africa and populations are still viable (del Hoyo et al 1992, Ginn et al
1996, Borrow and Demey 2001, Stevenson and Fanshawe 2002).
•
It was introduced to Australia for farming during the 1880s, and birds now exist in the wild in South
Australia (Norris et al 2005) (see B2 for details) (these locations have not been included on the
overseas distribution map).
Bird (Sibley and Monroe 1990).
SUM OF B1-4 (1–13)
Model 2: Seven-factor model for birds and mammals (BOMFORD 2008)
B5. Diet score (0–1)
1
Generalist with a broad diet of many food types
Ostriches are omnivores, but principally herbivorous with up to 60 % of the diet consisting of plant
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
4
material, 15 % of fruits and legumes, 4 to 5 % insect eggs and small mammals and the remaining
cereal grains, salts and stones. Plant material includes roots, leaves, flowers and seeds of a range of
grasses and forbs, as well as succulents and woody plants; supplemented with locusts, insects and
small vertebrates, such as lizards or little tortoises (Long 1981, del Hoyo et al 1992, Milton et al 1994,
Ginn et al 1996, Borrow and Demey 2001, Aganga et al 2003). They have also been known to feed on
maize, lucernes and groundnuts in farming areas (Ginn et al 1996).
B6. Habitat score - undisturbed or disturbed habitat (0–1)
1
Can live in human-disturbed habitats
In the wild, Ostriches are found in a variety of different open habitats, ranging from savannah to desert,
but generally preference is for open, semi-arid areas with relatively short grass (del Hoyo et al 1992).
In farmlands Ostriches will feed on fodder put out for stock (Ginn et al 1996).
The Ostrich appears to be less influenced by human settlements than other wildlife species. A study of
human settlements and wildlife distribution in the southern Kalahari of Botswana found that the
presence of boreholes had no apparent influence on Ostrich. In this area, artificial water points are
centres of human activity, as all former hunter-gathers are settled and other people are mainly
pastoralists, requiring water for livestock. This suggests that livestock have no impact on Ostrich
distribution (Verlinden 1997). Another study found that Ostrich were one of the wildlife species that
could be observed closest to villages (Bergstrom and Skarpe 1999).
B7. Non-migratory behaviour (0–1)
1
Non-migratory or facultative migrant in its native range
Ostriches are sedentary and nomadic (Long 1981, del Hoyo et al 1992). Movements depend on the
availability of food and water; in arid areas they move frequently in search of food and water; in wetter
regions they usually remain within a 20 km radius (del Hoyo et al 1992).
B. ESTABLISHMENT RISK SCORE
9
SUM OF B1-7 (1–16)
STAGE C: PROBABILITY AN ESTABLISHED SPECIES WILL BECOME A PEST
C1. Taxonomic group (0–4)
0
Other group
Order Struthioniformes, Family Struthionidae (Sibley and Monroe 1990).
2
C2. Overseas range size including current and past 1000 years,
natural and introduced range (0–2)
1
C3. Diet and feeding (0–3)
0
Not a mammal (Catalogue of Life 2008).
C4. Competition with native fauna for tree hollows (0–2)
0
Does not use tree hollows
2
Overseas range 10–30 million km . Estimated at 12.33 million km .
Overseas distribution Africa and the Middle East (del Hoyo et al. 1992 (see B3 for details).
Ostriches nest in shallow depressions on the ground, 3 m diameter, which the male scratches out with
his feet (del Hoyo et al 1992, Ginn et al 1996). At night Ostriches roost at regular communal sites,
squatting with their necks raised most of the night (del Hoyo et al 1992).
C5. Overseas environmental pest status (0–3)
0
Has the species been reported to cause declines in abundance of any native species of
plant or animal or cause degradation to any natural communities in any country or region of
the world?
C6. Climate match to areas with susceptible native species or
communities (0–5)
This species has never been reported as an environmental pest in any country or region
No reports found.
5
One or more susceptible native species or ecological communities that are listed as vulnerable or
endangered under the Australian Government Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999 has a restricted geographical range that lies within the mapped area of the highest six
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
5
climate match classes for the exotic species being assessed.
Identify any native Australian animal or plant species or communities that could be
susceptible to harm by the exotic species if it were to establish a wild population here.
Reference for all vulnerable or endangered species (status noted in bold) (Dept of the Environment
Water Heritage and the Arts 2007, 2008).
Susceptible Australian native species or natural communities that could be threatened include:
The natural plant communities: Bluegrass (Dichanthium spp.) (Cook et al 2005) dominant
grasslands of the Brigalow Belt Bioregions (North and South) (endangered) and the Iron-grass Natural
Temperate Grassland of South Australia (critically endangered) occur within the climate match for
the Ostrich. Some plant species that occur in these two communities would likely be eaten by
Ostriches. The major threat to the Bluegrass grasslands is their ongoing conversion from native
pastures to cropping systems. The overgrazing of Bluegrass grasslands enables the invasion of the
exotic herb Parthenium hysterophorus, thus lowering the value of the native grassland for grazing. The
low grazing value of the grasslands then favours their conversion to a cropping system.
Animals: invertebrates and small vertebrates constitute only a small part of the Ostrich diet (see B5
for details), therefore it is unlikely any native species would be affected.
C7. Overseas primary production pest status (0–3)
0
Has the species been reported to damage crops or other primary production in any country
or region of the world?
C8. Climate match to susceptible primary production (0–5)
No reports of damage to crops or other primary production in any country or region
No known damage occurs (Long 1981), although they have been known to feed on maize, lucernes
and groundnuts put out for cattle in farming areas (Ginn et al 1996).
3
Assess Potential Commodity Impact Scores for each primary production commodity listed
in Table 9, based on species’ attributes (diet, behaviour, ecology), excluding risk of
spreading disease which is addressed in Question C9.
Score = 94 (Bomford 2003, Bomford 2006)
See Commodity Scores Table – species has attributes making it capable of damaging sheep, cattle,
cereal grain, oilseed, grain legume, and other fruit commodities.
C9. Spread disease (1–2)
2
All birds and mammals (likely or unknown effect on native species and on livestock and other domestic
animals).
C10. Harm to property (0–3)
1
$1.00-$10 million
No reports found. Given the large size of the species (Borrow and Demey 2001), significant damage
could occur to vehicles from collision with an Ostrich.
C11. Harm to people (0–5)
Assess the risk that, if a wild population established, the species could cause
harm to or annoy people. Aggressive behaviour, plus the possession of organs
capable of inflicting harm, such as sharp teeth, tusks, claws, spines, a sharp
bill, horns, antlers or toxin-delivering organs may enable animals to harm
people. Any known history of the species attacking, injuring or killing people
should also be taken into account (see Stage A, Score A1). Take into account
aggressive behaviour that may occur when the species is protecting nest or
young. Some species are a social nuisance, especially those that live in close
association with people, for example species that invade buildings, or those
with communal roosts that can cause unacceptable noise. Also consider the
risk that the species could become a reservoir or vector for parasites or
diseases that affect people, the likelihood of transmission to people, and the
level of harm caused to people should this occur.
4
Serious risk – injuries or harm severe or fatal but few people at risk
[Scored as serious because of reports of ostriches being responsible for killing people.]
Ostriches posses a long, sharp, flattened claw on the inner toe that can be used against perceived
predators or threats by kicking in a forward and downward motion (del Hoyo et al 1992, Levitz et al
2004). Ostriches are generally quite docile (Drenowatz 1995), however, male Ostriches are extremely
aggressive during the breeding season, and will run as far as 1 km to chase and attack a potential
threat to the nest (Drenowatz 1995, Ginn et al 1996, Department of Labour 2000). Around 14 people
may be killed by Ostriches per year (Stark 2001).
Zoonoses:
Possible reservoir for parasites that affect people; workers at an Ostrich farm were affected by a thrip
infestation, which resulted in skin irritation and allergic conjunctivitis (Cooper 2007).
Ostriches can be affected by the Avian Influenza A virus, records exist of Ostriches infected with the
subtypes H5N2 and H7N1 (Allwright et al 1993, Altman 2004, Sinclair et al 2006). These subtypes
have never been confirmed to infect humans; of the influenza A viruses, only subtypes H1, H2 and H3
have been transmitted easily between humans. Australia is free from Avian Influenza (Altman 2004,
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
6
Department of Health and Ageing 2006, National Institute of Infectious Diseases 2006, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention 2007a, b).
C. PEST RISK SCORE
16
SUM C 1 TO 11 (1–37)
STAGE A. PUBLIC SAFETY RISK RANK –
RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY POSED BY
CAPTIVE OR RELEASED INDIVIDUALS
0 = Not dangerous; 1 = Moderately dangerous;
STAGE B. ESTABLISHMENT RISK RANK –
MODERATELY DANGEROUS
6
MODERATE ESTABLISHMENT RISK
9
MODERATE ESTABLISHMENT RISK
16
SERIOUS PEST RISK
2 = Highly dangerous
RISK OF ESTABLISHING A WILD
POPULATION
MODEL 1: FOUR-FACTOR
1
MODEL FOR BIRDS AND MAMMALS
(BOMFORD
2008)
5 = low establishment risk; 6-8 = moderate establishment risk; 9-10 =
serious establishment risk; 11-13 = extreme establishment risk
STAGE B. ESTABLISHMENT RISK RANK –
RISK OF ESTABLISHING A WILD
POPULATION
MODEL 2: SEVEN-FACTOR
MODEL FOR BIRDS AND MAMMALS
(BOMFORD
2008)
6 = low establishment risk; 7-11 = moderate establishment risk; 12-13
= serious establishment risk; 14 = extreme establishment risk
STAGE C. PEST RISK RANK -
RISK OF BECOMING A PEST FOLLOWING
ESTABLISHMENT
< 9 = low pest risk; 9-14 = moderate pest risk; 15-19 = serious pest
risk; > 19 = extreme pest risk
VERTEBRATE PESTS COMMITTEE THREAT CATEGORY
SERIOUS – ENDORSED BY VPC
Median number of references per bird, for all birds assessed by (Massam et al
-
2010) (n=17)
24 – only one bird assessed, so no conclusions can be drawn regarding the level of uncertainty.
Total number of references for this species
(median number for references for Public Safety Risk, Establishment Risk and
Overseas Environmental and Agricultural Adverse Impacts)
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
7
WORLDWIDE DISTRIBUTION - Ostrich (Struthio camelus), includes current and past 1000 years; including natural populations
(black) and introduced populations (red).
Each black dot is a location where meteorological data was sourced for the climate analysis (see B1), red dot introduced population in Australia; faint grey dots are locations available for
CLIMATE analysis but are not within the species distribution therefore not used. There is no introduced range for this species outside Australia.
[Note: The Australian distribution was not included in the climate analysis for this assessment. However, to assist predictions of further spread within Australia, an analysis that includes the
Australian distribution has been included on page 9.]
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
8
Map 1. Climate match between the world distribution of Ostrich (Struthio camelus) and Australia for five match classes.
Colour on
Map
Level of Match from
Highest (10) to Lowest (6)
No. Grid
Squares on
Map
Red
10 HIGH MATCH
0
Pink
9 HIGH MATCH
52
Dark Green
8 MOD MATCH
529
Mid Green
7 MOD MATCH
1413
Lime Green
6 LOW MATCH
578
CMS = 2572
Map 2. Climate match between the world distribution including Australian distribution of Ostrich (Struthio camelus) and Australia for five match
classes. [Only minor differences between the analysis and 2 maps, as populations in Australia restricted to a small area.]
Colour on
Map
Level of Match from
Highest (10) to Lowest (6)
No. Grid
Squares on
Map
Red
10 HIGH MATCH
0
Pink
9 HIGH MATCH
52
Dark Green
8 MOD MATCH
540
Mid Green
7 MOD MATCH
1404
Lime Green
6 LOW MATCH
576
CMS = 2572
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
9
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) Susceptible Australian Primary Production – Calculating Total Commodity Damage Score
The commodity value index scores in this table are derived from Australian Bureau of Statistics 1999 – 2000 data. The values will require updating if significant change has occurred in the
value of the commodity (Bomford 2006).
Industry
Cattle (includes dairy and beef) consumption of stock fodder
consumption of stock fodder only therefore commodity value
adjusted down by 1/3
Timber (includes native and plantation forests)
Cereal grain (includes wheat, barley sorghum etc) no reports of
damage to this commodity
Sheep (includes wool and sheep meat) consumption of stock
fodder only therefore commodity value adjusted down by 1/3
Fruit (includes wine grapes)
Vegetables
Poultry and eggs
Aquaculture(includes coastal mariculture)
Oilseeds (includes canola, sunflower etc) no reports of damage to
this commodity
Grain legumes (includes soybeans) no reports of damage to this
commodity
Sugarcane
Cotton
Other crops and horticulture (includes nuts tobacco and flowers etc)
Pigs
Other livestock (includes goats, deer, camels, rabbits)
Bees (included honey, beeswax and pollination)
Total Commodity Damage Score (TCDS)
Commodity Value Index 1
(CVI based on 2005- 06 data)
Potential Commodity
Impact Score (PCIS 0-3)
Climate Match to
Commodity Score (CMCS
0–5)
Commodity Damage Score
(CDS columns 2 X 3 X 4)
11/3 = 3.6
2
4
28.8
10
0
0
0
8
1
4
32
5/3 = 1.6
2
4
12.8
4
1
3
12
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
4
1
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
93.6
[Table 9 Rational Potential Commodity Impact Score (0-3)
Assess Potential Commodity Impact Scores for each primary production commodity listed in Table 9, based on species’ attributes (diet, behaviour, ecology), excluding risk of spreading disease which is addressed in Question C9, and pest status
worldwide as:
0.
Nil (species does not have attributes to make it capable of damaging this commodity)
1.
Low (species has attributes making it capable of damaging this or similar commodities and has had the opportunity but no reports or other evidence that it has caused damage in any country or region
2.
Moderate–serious (reports of damage to this or similar commodities exist but damage levels have never been high in any country or region and no major control programs against the species have ever been conducted OR the species has
attributes making it capable of damaging this or similar commodities but has not had the opportunity)
3.
Extreme (damage occurs at high levels to this or similar commodities and/or major control programs have been conducted against the species in any country or region and the listed commodity would be vulnerable to the type of harm this
species can cause).
Climate Match to Commodity Score (0–5)
•
None of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest eight climate match classes (ie classes 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 and 3) = 0
•
Less than 10% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest eight climate match classes = 1
•
Less than 10% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest six climate match classes (ie classes 10, 9, 8, 7, 6 and 5) = 2
•
Less than 50% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest six climate match classes AND less than 10% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match
within the highest three climate match classes (ie classes 10, 9 and 8) = 3
•
Less than 50% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest six climate match classes BUT more than 10% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match
within the highest three climate match classes = 4
•
OR More than 50% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest six climate match classes BUT less than 20% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate
match within the highest three climate match classes = 4
•
More than 20% of the commodity is produced in areas where the species has a climate match within the highest three climate match classes OR overseas range unknown and climate match to Australia unknown = 5.]
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
10
Map 3. Climate match between the world distribution of Ostrich (Struthio camelus) and Australia for eight match classes.
Colour on Map
Level of Match from
Highest (10) to Lowest (3)
No. Grid
Squares
on Map
Red
10 HIGH MATCH
0
Pink
9 HIGH MATCH
52
Dark Green
8 HIGH MATCH
529
Mid Green
7 MOD MATCH
1413
Lime Green
6 MOD MATCH
578
Yellow
5 MOD MATCH
123
Blue
4 LOW MATCH
47
Light blue
3 LOW MATCH
28
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
11
References
Aganga AA, Aganga AO and Omphile UJ (2003). Ostrich feeding and nutrition. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 2(2):60-67.
Allwright DM, Burger WP, Geyer A and Terblanche AW (1993). Isolation of an influenza A virus from ostriches (Struthio camelus). Avian Pathology, 22:59-65.
Altman LK (2004). Avian Flu Kills 1,500 Ostriches on 2 South Africa Farms In: The New York Times, New York.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9402E0D9113CF933A2575BC0A9629C8B63&n=Top%2FNews%2FScience%2FTopics%2FBirds
Animal Attack Files (1999). The Associated Press - Man Killed by Ostrich at Farm http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/1999/ostrich_kills_in_washington.html [Access
date:28/07/2008].
Bergstrom R and Skarpe C (1999). The abundance of large wild herbivores in a semi-arid savanna in relation to seasons, pans and livestock. African Journal of Ecology,
37(1):12-26.
Birdlife International (2004). Struthio camelus. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. www.iucnredlist.org [Access date:29/10/2007].
Bomford M (2003). Risk Assessment for the Import and Keeping of Exotic Vertebrates in Australia. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.
(2006). Risk assessment for the establishment of exotic vertebrates in Australia: recalibration and refinement of models - A report produced for the Department of
Environment and Heritage. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.
(2008). Risk assessment models for establishment of exotic vertebrates in Australia and New Zealand - A report produced for the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research
Centre. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.
Bomford M, Kraus F, Braysher M, Walter L and Brown L (2005). Risk Assessment Model for the Import and Keeping of Exotic Reptiles and Amphibians. A report produced
for the Department of Environment and Heritage. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.
Borrow N and Demey D (2001). Birds of Western Africa. Christopher Helm, London.
Brown L, Barry S, Cunningham D and Bomford M (2006). Current practice in applying CLIMATE for weed risk assessment in Australia. In: Proceedings of the 15th
Australian Weeds Conference, Adelaide, South Australia, pp.703-706.
Bureau of Rural Sciences (2006). CLIMATE software. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra.
http://adl.brs.gov.au/anrdl/metadata_files/pe_brs90000003434.xml [Access date:09/04/2010].
Catalogue of Life (2008). Catalogue of Life: 2008 Annual Checklist. http://www.usa.species2000.org [Access date:09/04/2010].
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2007a). Avian Influenza A Virus Infections of Humans. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA.
http://www.cdc.gov [Access date:01/02/2008].
(2007b). Key Facts About Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) and Avian Influenza A (H5N1) Virus. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA http://www.cdc.gov
[Access date:01/02/2008].
Chaudhry IA, Al-Sharif A and Hamdi M (2003). Severe Ocular and Periocular Injuries Caused by an Ostrich. Ophthalmic Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 19(3):246-247.
CITES (2007). Appendices I, II and III. CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). http://www.cites.org [Access
date:01/02/2008].
Cook BG, Pengelly BC, Brown SD, Donnelly JL, Eagles DA, Franco MA, Hanson J, Mullen BF, Partridge IJ, Peters M and Schultze-Kraft R (2005). Tropical Forages Dichanthium sericeum. CSIRO, DPI&F(Qld), CIAT and ILRI, Brisbane, Australia. http://www.tropicalforages.info/key/Forages/Media/Html/Dichanthium_sericeum.htm
[Access.
Cooper RG (2007). Dermatitis & conjunctivitis in workers on an ostrich farm following thrips infestation. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 125:588-589.
del Hoyo J, Elliott A and Sargatal J (1992). Handbook of the Birds of the World Vol. 1 Ostrich to Ducks. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona.
Department of Health and Ageing (2006). Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) - Key Facts. Department of Health and Ageing, Woden, ACT. http://www.health.gov.au [Access
date:01/02/2008].
Department of Labour (2000). Livestock Handling: Ostrich and Emu. In: Farming Bulletins. Department of Labour New Zealand. http://www.osh.govt.nz/ [Access
date:29/10/2007].
Dept of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts (2007). Threatened species and threatened ecological communities.
http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species.html [Access date:09/04/2010].
(2008). EPBC Act List of Threatened Ecological Communities. Australian Government. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publiclookupcommunities.pl
[Date accessed:15/01/2008].
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
12
Drenowatz C (1995). The Ratite Encyclopedia: Ostrich, Emu, Rhea. Ratite Records Inc., San Antonio, Texas.
Ginn PJ, McIlleron WG and Milstein PlS (1996). The Complete Book of Southern African Birds. Struik Publishing Group Pty Ltd, Cape Town.
HAGR Human Ageing Genomic Resources (2006). AnAge Database. Human Ageing Genomic Resources http://genomics.senescence.info/ [Access date:09/04/2010].
Khan MA and Olumide AA (2006). Head Injury Caused by an Ostrich: A Rare Entity. Pediatric Neurosurgery, 42(5):308-310.
King T (2007 ). Ostrich Attack Leads to Vengeance Killing. Salem-News.com http://salem-news.com/articles/october092007/ostrich_attack_10907.php [Access
date:10/01/2008].
Lever C (2005). Naturalised Birds of the World. T & A D Poyser, London.
Levitz LM, Carmichael TR and Nissenbaum M (2004). Severe ocular trauma caused by an ostrich. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 88(4):591.
Long JL (1981). Introduced Birds of the World. Reed Pty Ltd, Sydney.
(1988). Introduced birds and mammals in Western Australia. Agricultural Prodection Board of Western Australia, South Perth.
Massam M, Kirkpatrick W and Page A (2010). Assessment and prioritisation of risk for 40 exotic animal species Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Canberra.
Milton SJ, Dean WRJ and Siegfried WR (1994). Food selection by Ostrich in southern Africa. Journal of Wildlife Management, 58(2):234-248.
National Institute of Infectious Diseases (2006). Regarding the results of avian influenza antibody tests in Ibaraki and Saitama prefectures. Ministry of Health, Labour and
Welfare, Tokyo, Japan http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/influenza/avian01.html [Access date:01/02/2008].
Natural Resource Management Standing Committee (2004). Guidelines for the Import, Movement and Keeping of Exotic Vertebrates in Australia. Developed by the
Vertebrate Pests Committee http://www.feral.org.au/feral_documents/VPCGuidelinesApril05.pdf [Access date:09/04/2010].
Norris A, Low T, Gordon I, Saunders G, Lapidge S, Lapidge K, Peacock T and Pech R (2005). Review of the management of feral animals and their impact on biodiversity
in the Rangelands: A resource to aid NRM planning. Pest Animal Control CRC, Canberra.
Pheloung PC (1996). CLIMATE: a system to predict the distribution of an organism based on climate preferences. Agriculture Western Australia, Perth.
Shirihai H (1996). The birds of Israel. Academic Press, London.
Sibley CG and Monroe BLJ (1990). Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Sinclair M, Bruckner GK and Kotze JJ (2006). Avian influenza in ostriches: epidemiological investigation in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. Veterinaria Italiana,
42(2):69-76.
Stark P (2001). Last Breath: Cautionary tales from the limits of human endurance. Ballantine Publishing Group, New York.
Stevenson T and Fanshawe J (2002). Field Guide to the Birds of East Africa. T & D Poyser.
Tuckwell C (1997). The ostrich industry. In: The New Rural Industries: A handbook for Farmers and Investors (ed by Hyde K). Rural Industries Research & Development
Corporation, Canberra, pp.63-68.
Verlinden A (1997). Human settlements and wildlife distribution in the southern Kalahari of Botswana Biological Conservation, 82(2):129-136.
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
13
Vertebrate Pests Committee Threat Categories (Natural Resource Management Standing Committee 2004)
VPC Threat Category
A species’ VPC Threat Category is determined from the various combinations of its three risk ranks; (A) Public safety risk rank, (B) Establishment
risk rank, (C) Pest risk rank.
B. Establishment
1
Risk Rank
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
High
High
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
C. Pest Risk Rank
Extreme
High
Moderate
Low
Extreme
High
Moderate
Low
Extreme
High
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
Extreme
High
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Low
Low
1
A. Public Safety Risk Rank
Threat Category
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous
Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous
Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous, Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous
Moderately Dangerous or Not Dangerous
Highly Dangerous
Moderately Dangerous
Not Dangerous
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
Extreme
Serious
Serious
Extreme
Serious
Serious
Moderate
Serious
Moderate
Serious
Serious
Serious
Moderate
Serious
Moderate
Low
‘Establishment Risk’ is referred to as the ‘Establishment Likelihood’ and ‘Pest Risk’ is referred to as the ‘Establishment Consequences’ by the Natural
Resource Management Standing Committee (2004).
1
Ostrich (Struthio camelus) risk assessment for Australia. Amanda Page, Win Kirkpatrick and Marion Massam, January 2008, Department of Agriculture and Food, Western Australia.
14