Fauna Spotters logo

Doeg's Watermite (Pseudohydryphantes doegi)

Doeg's watermite is an aquatic mite known from very few Western Australian records, with the records associated with the Warren region. Its habitat and ecology are poorly documented, so works near aquatic habitats in the region warrant cautious assessment. It is Priority 2 on DBCA's priority fauna list, a DBCA priority category rather than a listing under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

Conservation status

Western Australia, WA Threatened and Priority Fauna List: Priority 2.

Seasonal planning

No seasonal activity or survey timing is known for this species. Use the following only as a planning prompt, not as evidence of when it is active.

Species-specific timing: Not recorded

Survey timing: Set with an aquatic invertebrate ecologist for the site and proposed methods

Do not interpret this planning row as a known seasonal pattern for Doeg's watermite.

  • Survey and works planning: Planning window only. No seasonal activity period is known for this species; confirm appropriate timing with an aquatic invertebrate ecologist.

Identification: Appearance and size

Doeg's watermite is a watermite, but field identification details are limited.

It is an aquatic mite in Hydracarina. Its colour, form, diagnostic characters and size have not been documented.

Identification: Similar species and signs

Similar species and distinctive field signs have not been described. A specimen cannot be identified from its common name or locality alone. Seek confirmation from a suitably qualified aquatic invertebrate specialist.

Distribution: Known range

Records indicate a very restricted known distribution, but no named collection site is identified.

Atlas of Living Australia records show nine Western Australian records at one distinct 0.1-degree location, around latitude -34.6 and longitude 116.7. Records outside Western Australia were excluded from that summary as likely errors.

The full range and whether the species persists beyond the recorded location are not established.

Distribution: WA region

The DBCA priority list identifies the Warren region. The record summary and regional listing indicate where to focus assessment, not the species' complete range.

Habitat: Known information

The species is associated with aquatic environments, but its specific habitat is not described.

Doeg's watermite is included among south-western Australian aquatic invertebrates. The type of waterbody, water conditions, vegetation, substrate and season of occurrence are not documented.

Habitat: Site assessment

Where works in the Warren region may affect aquatic habitat, assess waterbodies and wet areas without assuming that any particular habitat type is suitable for this species. Record habitat conditions and the basis for any conclusions.

Foraging habitat: Diet and feeding sites

The species' feeding ecology has not been documented.

Its diet, prey and foraging habitat are not recorded. Do not infer a feeding relationship or preferred waterbody from its name.

Foraging habitat: Precaution

If aquatic habitat is present within a works footprint, describe it and seek specialist advice before disturbance. Avoid unsupported claims about the species' food or feeding areas.

Breeding habitat: Known information

Breeding biology and habitat are poorly known.

No breeding season, life cycle, egg-laying site or other reproductive information has been documented.

Breeding habitat: Planning implication

Do not schedule works on the assumption that breeding is confined to a particular season. Treat aquatic habitat that could be affected as potentially important until an ecologist has assessed it.

Sheltering habitat: Known information

Sheltering and refuge habitats have not been documented.

No refuge, resting habitat, substrate association or seasonal shelter has been recorded for the species.

Sheltering habitat: Precaution

Avoid assuming that dry margins, wet sediments or other features are unoccupied refuges. Have an aquatic invertebrate ecologist assess potentially affected water and wet-area habitat.

Threats: Evidence and uncertainty

No specific threat to Doeg's watermite has been documented.

The species is Priority 2, meaning it is poorly known and known from few locations, with some records on conservation lands. This status does not establish a particular cause of decline.

Threats: Aquatic habitat context

A DBCA review notes that wetland and river ecosystems in south-western Australia have been altered by human activity and a drying climate, with likely effects on aquatic fauna generally. These pressures have not been demonstrated specifically for Doeg's watermite.

Survey methodology: 1. Desktop assessment

Survey design should account for limited species-specific information and the need for reliable specialist identification.

Check current DBCA records and the project's aquatic features, with particular attention to the Warren region and the record summary around -34.6, 116.7. Treat the known record location as a guide rather than a complete range boundary.

Survey methodology: 2. Field assessment

Engage an aquatic invertebrate ecologist to select suitable survey methods for the waterbodies present. No species-specific sampling method, seasonal window or detectability information is available.

Survey methodology: 3. Records and identification

Document survey dates, locations, water and habitat conditions, methods and results, including non-detections. Arrange specialist examination of specimens or other potential records and follow applicable collection and handling requirements.

Vegetation associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific vegetation association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Ecosystem associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific ecosystem association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Soil and substrate associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific soil association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Water and wetland associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific water association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Fauna records and mapped habitat: Not yet analysed

Record locations can be overlaid with mapping, but record frequency alone does not measure habitat preference. No species is excluded from desktop assessments by this analysis.

No quality-controlled record-to-map analysis has been completed for this species. The existing generalised distribution dots and indicative range polygons have not been treated as precise occurrence coordinates.

A defensible run needs dated, independently attributable records, coordinate uncertainty, duplicate and captive-record checks, layer versions and regional scope. Preference and absence require additional survey-effort and detection evidence.

Habitat limitations and contrary evidence: No supported exclusion recorded

Not recorded is not the same as cannot occur. Low suitability, resident habitat, breeding habitat and occasional movement are different conclusions.

This library has not established a vegetation, ecosystem or soil-type exclusion for this species. This does not mean all habitat is suitable; the evidence needed to justify an exclusion has not been assembled.

Habitat limitations and contrary evidence: Before using a negative association

  • Confirm the taxon, geographic region, life stage and habitat function covered by the evidence.
  • Check survey methods, season, repeated effort and detectability before interpreting non-detection.
  • Investigate credible contradictory records and microhabitats absent from broad mapping.
  • Do not convert a missing map class, low record count or failed data request into species absence.

Before habitat disturbance: 1. Confirm the footprint

Because the species is poorly known, establish whether works could affect aquatic habitat before clearing or ground disturbance begins.

Map waterbodies and wet areas that could be affected directly or indirectly by the works. Compare the project area with known records and seek advice from DBCA or an aquatic invertebrate specialist where the risk is uncertain.

Before habitat disturbance: 2. Set controls

Agree on survey needs, habitat protection measures, responsible personnel and a response process for unexpected findings. Brief clearing crews on areas to avoid and on how to pause work and notify the environmental lead.

During habitat disturbance: 1. Protect habitat

Use conservative controls wherever works may affect aquatic or wet-area habitat.

Keep machinery, spoil and sediment-producing activities out of aquatic habitat and any agreed protection areas. Avoid unapproved changes to water flow or disturbance of wet sediments.

During habitat disturbance: 2. Respond to findings

If a possible specimen or relevant habitat feature is encountered, pause work in the affected area, prevent further disturbance and contact the project ecologist. Do not attempt an unapproved collection or relocation.

After habitat disturbance: 1. Review and report

Check that agreed controls were maintained and retain a clear record of works and observations.

Record the areas disturbed, any changes to aquatic habitat and any survey or incidental observations. Refer potential records to a specialist for confirmation and follow applicable reporting requirements.

After habitat disturbance: 2. Follow up

Where habitat was affected, have the ecologist assess whether further monitoring or corrective action is warranted. No species-specific post-disturbance monitoring method is documented.

Rehabilitation actions: 1. Restore site conditions

Rehabilitation should avoid further effects on aquatic habitat and be guided by site conditions rather than unsupported species-specific assumptions.

Where aquatic habitat has been disturbed, use an ecologist to guide restoration of the site's relevant physical conditions and avoid introducing unapproved materials or changing water movement.

Rehabilitation actions: 2. Check outcomes

Document rehabilitation and inspect the affected area as directed by the project ecologist. No species-specific rehabilitation targets are documented.

Sources