Letter-winged Kite (Elanus scriptus)

Conservation status

South Australia, National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972: Vulnerable.

Northern Territory, Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1976: Near threatened.

Breeding season

The species does not have a single fixed breeding and movement calendar across Australia. Breeding, local abundance and irruptions follow rainfall and prey cycles, so the months below are an operational guide based on the available records, not a substitute for site surveys.

The sources do not provide a fixed national breeding season, incubation period, fledging period or migration calendar. Treat the species as conditionally present and conditionally breeding, particularly after good rainfall or local increases in mice and other small mammals.

• Breeding, mating and laying: Breeding may occur continuously while rodent numbers are high after good rains. Nesting, eggs and young were documented in June and July in South Australia in 1970.
• Young in nest or dependent: Four eggs and recently hatched, nestling and flying young were recorded during June to August in the 1970 South Australian breeding event. Timing varies with resource conditions.
• Movement and irruption: Dispersal and irruptions follow local prey decline or broader periods of high productivity. The timing is irregular and can occur in any month. Birds may move far beyond the core range.
• Highest clearing risk: Risk is highest when nests, eggs or dependent young are present. June to August is highlighted because nesting and young were documented then, but project-specific breeding checks are needed after rainfall and prey increases in any month.

Identification

The Letter-winged Kite is a small, pale kite that can be confused with the Black-shouldered Kite. It is most readily identified in flight by its contrasting black underwing markings and slow, loose wing action, but perched birds can be difficult to detect in foliage.

Adults are predominantly white and grey, with a distinctive black marking on the underwing. The black shoulder marking is generally longer and narrower than that of the Black-shouldered Kite. The black marking in front of the eye does not extend behind the eye, unlike the Black-shouldered Kite.

The supplied sources do not provide a body length, wingspan or weight for the species. Do not rely on size alone for identification.

Identification: Separating it from the Black-shouldered Kite

In flight, the Letter-winged Kite has a slow, floppy wing beat and appears to hold its wings less stiffly. The Black-shouldered Kite has a crisper, faster wing beat and stiffer-looking wings.

The Letter-winged Kite usually holds its wings less raised when gliding. A hovering bird may briefly resemble a Black-shouldered Kite, so confirm the underwing pattern and facial markings where possible.

The species is primarily nocturnal, whereas daytime observations usually involve roosting, flushing, drinking or movement to and from a roost. This behaviour can help distinguish it from a white kite actively hunting during daylight.

• Record the underwing pattern, facial marking, wing shape and wing beat rather than identifying a white kite from colour alone.
• Photograph birds in flight and perched, where safe and practicable, because perched identification is more difficult.

Identification: Field signs and behaviour

Day roosts may be detected by groups of white kites in trees, repeated flushing from the same trees, pellets beneath roosts, and birds returning after the observer withdraws. At Saltbeef Lake, up to 10 adults used one of 8 to 10 dead Beefwood trees, approximately 3.5 metres tall and about 25 metres apart.

At Nyrripi, up to four adults roosted deep in the foliage of one of two well-foliated Ghost Gums approximately 60 metres apart. The birds were inactive during the day unless approached, then circled for 1 to 3 minutes before settling in another tree.

Calls are similar to the piping or harsh calling of the Black-shouldered Kite, although they may sound stronger or louder. Nests may be self-built or old Raven nests, and are placed in eucalypt or casuarina trees, often in open scrub with dead upright tree-tops. The supplied sources do not provide diagnostic tracks, scats, eyeshine or sloughs.

• Search likely roost trees for pellets, feathers and repeated daytime use, while keeping disturbance low.
• Treat a group of white kites repeatedly using a tree or tree cluster as a potential roost colony until identification and use are resolved.

Distribution: National range

The Letter-winged Kite is endemic to arid and semi-arid Australia. Its distribution has a resident or regularly occupied core in the inland Channel Country and a much larger, irregular range used during resource-driven irruptions.

The core range is centred on the Channel Country of south-west Queensland and north-east South Australia. It extends into adjoining parts of the Simpson-Strzelecki Desert and Mitchell Grasslands.

Records and irruptions may extend across much of mainland Australia, including the Northern Territory, Western Australia, New South Wales and Victoria, as well as other regions and offshore islands. The supplied material documents records in the Northern Territory, South Australia, Queensland and Victoria, and describes occasional records across the broader Australian mainland.

In the Northern Territory, the species is most common on the Barkly Tablelands between approximately 18 and 20 degrees south and 135 and 138 degrees east. It is uncommon in the Top End and apparently rare in the south, although south-western records include Saltbeef Lake and Nyrripi.

• Expect the species outside its core range mainly during irregular irruption events, especially after periods of high rainfall, seed production and rodent increase.
• Do not dismiss an inland or southern record as a misidentification without checking the underwing pattern and facial markings.

Distribution: Strongholds and population structure

The supplied material describes a small resident population in the core range that persists through both productive and poor conditions. Birds may breed rapidly and colonially there when rodent numbers increase.

No separate subpopulations are known in the supplied material. The species may form temporary colonies during irruptions, but these are not established as distinct populations.

The 1994 to 1995 Saltbeef Lake colony in the southern Tanami Desert probably persisted for at least 16 months. A smaller Nyrripi group was recorded beside Waite Creek from February to April 1995.

Distribution: Population size and trend

Estimated mature population: Approximately 1,500 mature individuals, as cited in the supplied material.

Recent range pattern: Records and abundance increased inside the core range but declined outside it between 1966 and 2024.

Irruptive spread: The distance of records from the core range declined by approximately 6.52 kilometres per year in one analysis, with fewer and smaller recent irruptions than historically.

Survey data: The study compiled 2,915 records from 1863 to 2024 and retained 992 records after filtering to one record per approximately 11.1 square kilometre grid cell per year.

Habitat: Habitat types

The Letter-winged Kite occupies open inland habitats with enough small-mammal prey for hunting and suitable trees for daytime roosting. Habitat use changes with rainfall, flooding, rodent cycles and local prey availability.

Typical habitats include grasslands, lightly wooded shrublands, timbered drainages, flood-outs and open arid or semi-arid plains. The core range is associated with the Channel Country, while irruptive birds may use a wide range of inland and southern habitats.

At Saltbeef Lake, habitat comprised an infrequently filled saline lake, samphire margins, short annual grass patches, flat sandplain, low dunes with spinifex and sparse shrubs, and isolated Beefwood patches. At Nyrripi, the species used a shallow watercourse fringed by River Red Gums and Ghost Gums, surrounded by sandplain, spinifex and sparse Acacia shrubland.

Habitat: Structural features

Important structural features include open ground or low vegetation for hunting, small-mammal habitat, and mature or dead trees for daytime roosting and perching. Trees may be clustered along drainage lines or occur as isolated patches across otherwise treeless plains.

Breeding sites recorded in South Australia were in eucalypt or casuarina trees, in open, lightly wooded scrub with many dead upright tree-tops used as perches. Nest heights ranged from approximately 4.6 to 9.1 metres.

• Map mature, dead and well-foliated trees near open hunting habitat before clearing.
• Include drainage lines, flood-outs, samphire margins, annual grass patches, spinifex and sparse shrubland in habitat assessments, even where tree cover is limited.

Habitat: Climate and elevation

The supplied sources describe an arid and semi-arid inland distribution but do not provide an elevation limit. Occurrence and breeding are strongly linked to rainfall, seed production and subsequent increases in rodents and other small mammals.

Flood inundation and drought are both reported within the core range. Local presence may therefore change substantially between seasons and years.

Foraging habitat: Diet

Letter-winged Kites feed mainly on small terrestrial mammals and normally hunt at night over open country. They can change prey when small mammals are scarce, including taking reptiles, insects, birds and carrion.

At Saltbeef Lake, mammals occurred in 95 percent of 109 pellets and supplied an estimated 80 to 90 percent of dietary biomass. Small native mammals, mostly under 40 grams, made up most mammal records.

Recorded prey included Pseudomys mice, Sandy Inland Mouse, Desert Mouse, Forrest's Mouse, Spinifex Hopping-mouse, dunnarts, Fat-tailed Antechinus, a possible Western Chestnut Mouse, Little Button-quail, fairy-wrens, skinks and invertebrates. Rabbits and a Common Brushtail Possum were also recorded in the Saltbeef Lake material.

At Nyrripi, skinks and carrion from large mammals were relatively important, with records also including Sandy Inland Mouse, Budgerigar and invertebrates.

Foraging habitat: Foraging method and habitat

The species is primarily nocturnal. It leaves daytime roosts around dusk and has been observed flying in silent, constantly shifting circles before plunging towards prey. It may hunt through the night and return to day roosts before sunrise.

Open grasslands, annual grass patches, lightly wooded shrublands, flood-outs, drainage margins and areas supporting mice or other small mammals are likely to be used for hunting. The sources do not provide a measured foraging radius or home-range size.

Use of lizards and invertebrates increased during hotter months at Saltbeef Lake, suggesting dietary switching when small-mammal prey was less available. Carrion use at Nyrripi also indicated low availability of small mammal prey.

• Inspect open areas around roost trees for prey remains and pellets, but do not assume that all hunting occurs within the immediate tree cluster.
• Time targeted behavioural observations around dusk, night and first light, subject to project safety and approvals.
• Retain connected open hunting habitat around known roosts where practicable.

Breeding habitat: Breeding biology

Breeding is opportunistic and linked to rainfall, seed production and increases in rodents. The species may breed continuously during favourable resource pulses and may breed outside the core range during irruptions.

Breeding trigger: Breeding increases after good rains and elevated seed production, when rodent populations build.

Breeding pattern: Breeding may be continuous while Long-haired Rat or other small-mammal populations remain high. Colonies may form during boom periods.

Recorded breeding season: The supplied material records nesting and young in June and July in South Australia in 1970. The sources do not establish a fixed breeding season across Australia.

Clutch size: Four eggs were recorded in several South Australian nests.

Incubation: Not reported in the supplied documents.

Age at maturity: Not reported in the supplied documents.

Lifespan: Not reported in the supplied documents.

Breeding habitat: Nest habitat

Seven occupied or recently occupied nests in South Australia were in eucalypt or casuarina trees, in open, lightly wooded scrub with many dead upright tree-tops. Two nests were built by the kites and five were old Raven nests.

Self-built nests were bulky and placed among thin upright twigs in thick foliage. Nests were approximately 4.6 to 9.1 metres above ground and were lined with wool or fur over dried eucalypt leaves. Young were fed mainly at night in the observations reported.

• Survey mature eucalypts, casuarinas and old Raven nests in open scrub when local conditions indicate a prey increase or when kites are repeatedly using the area.
• Before clearing, inspect trees with nests, fresh pellets, adult calling, defensive behaviour or young birds, and establish a suitable no-disturbance area through the project ecologist and relevant approvals.

Sheltering habitat: Day roosts

Daytime shelter is provided by trees, including dead trees, live trees with dense foliage and trees along drainage lines. Roosts may be used by single birds or groups and can persist for many months when food remains available.

At Saltbeef Lake, adults usually roosted together in one of 8 to 10 dead Beefwood trees, each approximately 3.5 metres tall and about 25 metres apart. The birds occupied upper branches early in the morning and moved into partial shade on lower branches as the day became hotter.

At Nyrripi, adults roosted deep within the foliage of one of two well-foliated Ghost Gums approximately 60 metres apart. Birds returned to the original tree after disturbance on some visits, indicating that repeated use may be important.

• Search both dead and live trees, including isolated trees in open plains and well-foliated trees along drainage lines.
• Record all trees used by a group, not only the tree occupied during one inspection.

Sheltering habitat: Roost signs and site use

Roosts may be indicated by repeated daytime sightings, white feathers, pellets beneath trees, prey remains and birds flushing in a group before circling and settling in another nearby tree. At Saltbeef Lake, the colony probably persisted for at least 16 months.

The sources do not report use of hollows, burrows, caves or dense ground cover as shelters. The species was once flushed from the ground, but no prey material was found at that location.

• Avoid repeated approach or flushing of a suspected roost, particularly during hot weather.
• Check nearby trees after a flush because birds may settle in another tree and return the following morning.
• Treat roost trees and the surrounding movement corridor as fauna-sensitive until the duration and extent of use are known.

Threats: Clearing and construction disturbance

The main documented concern is a possible decline in irruptive range, abundance and frequency. On project sites, direct loss or disturbance of roost and nest trees, loss of open hunting habitat, and changes to drainage or prey conditions are the most relevant risks supported by the available ecology.

Clearing can remove dead Beefwood, eucalypts, casuarinas and Ghost Gums used for daytime roosting, perching or nesting. It can also remove open grassland, samphire, annual grass, spinifex and drainage habitats that support prey.

Noise, night lighting, vehicle movements and repeated approach can flush birds from roosts. Disturbance is most harmful when adults are nesting or dependent young are present, although the sources do not define a species-specific buffer distance.

• Complete pre-clearing surveys in daylight and around dusk where safe, because birds may be hidden in foliage during the day and forage at night.
• Retain known roost trees, nest trees, nearby mature and dead trees, and open hunting habitat where practicable.
• Do not clear a suspected roost or nest tree until use has been checked and the site has been assessed under relevant state requirements.

Threats: Fragmentation, roads and fire

Fragmentation may reduce access between roost trees, open hunting areas and prey-rich drainage or flood-out habitat. The supplied documents do not quantify road mortality or identify a species-specific response to fire.

Roads, night works and traffic can disturb nocturnal movement and foraging. Fire that removes grass, spinifex or shrub structure may reduce small-mammal prey or alter cover, but the direction and duration of effects are not documented in the supplied sources.

• Maintain movement links between roost trees and open foraging areas where feasible.
• Manage night lighting and vehicle activity near known roosts and nests.
• Record carcasses and collision observations during construction and operation so project controls can be adjusted if a pattern develops.

Threats: Prey and hydrology

The species depends heavily on fluctuating small-mammal populations. Drought, collapse of rodent populations and loss of productive grass or flood-out habitat may reduce food availability and cause dispersal or mortality.

Changes to drainage, flooding, watercourse vegetation, saline lake margins or flood-out hydrology may alter the prey base and roost habitat. The supplied documents do not identify a disease, invasive predator or parasite as a confirmed major threat.

• Assess how culverts, diversions, extraction, inundation changes and altered runoff may affect drainage-line trees, flood-outs and small-mammal habitat.
• Avoid treating a site as unimportant solely because no kites are present during a poor prey year.
• Report unusual mortality or emaciated birds to the relevant wildlife authority and project ecologist.

Survey methodology: 1. Desktop assessment and habitat inspection

Survey for Letter-winged Kites must account for their nocturnal activity, daytime roosting and highly variable movements. The species may be present in small groups or may arrive during an irruption, so combine habitat inspection, daytime roost searches and night observations.

Review records, recent rainfall and likely small-mammal abundance before fieldwork. The species is associated with arid grasslands, lightly wooded shrublands, timbered drainages, flood-outs and watercourses.

Map open hunting areas, drainage lines, flood-outs, samphire or grassland, scattered trees and potential daytime roosts. Pay particular attention to trees near watercourses and isolated dead trees or well-foliated trees suitable for group roosting.

Check records in state wildlife databases and the Atlas of Living Australia, noting that records can be concentrated in the core range and may be absent from a site during a non-irruption period.

Typical recorded roost examples: Saltbeef Lake: 8 to 10 dead Beefwood trees, about 3.5 m high and about 25 m apart. Nyrripi: two well-foliated Ghost Gums about 60 m apart.

• Inspect all trees and tree groups within and near the disturbance area, including dead trees and trees with dense foliage.
• Record tree species, height, foliage density, distance to water or drainage, number of potential roost trees, nearby open feeding areas and any observed pellets or prey remains.

Survey methodology: 2. Daytime roost search

Search potential roost trees during daylight, when Letter-winged Kites are inactive and may be difficult to detect. The birds may sit near the top of a tree in the morning and move into partial shade on lower branches as the day becomes hotter.

Approach quietly and inspect foliage, dead branches and tree tops with binoculars. Do not rely on a single visual inspection because birds may remain concealed in foliage.

Search all suitable trees in the project area and a practical surrounding buffer set by the approval or fauna management plan. At Nyrripi, observers found no birds outside the occupied roost trees despite searching apparently suitable trees.

• Record the number of birds, age class where apparent, tree species, tree condition, height, exact location, roosting position and response to disturbance.
• Collect photographs and GPS points from a distance where this can be done without repeatedly flushing the birds.
• Search beneath occupied or suspected roosts for pellets and prey remains, but do not disturb the tree or handle material unless authorised under the project plan.

Survey methodology: 3. Nocturnal observation and spotlighting

Conduct observations from dusk through the night and, where required by the survey guideline or approval, before dawn. Letter-winged Kites are primarily nocturnal feeders and may leave daytime roosts around dusk to hunt.

Use quiet stationary observation points and slow vehicle or foot transects through open feeding areas, drainage lines and the edges of roost trees. Record the start and finish time, route, weather, moon phase, visibility and observer effort.

Use a spotlight only in accordance with the relevant state permit and animal welfare requirements. Avoid repeatedly shining lights into occupied roosts or following flying birds.

The species may be overlooked during daylight and can be confused with the Black-shouldered Kite. Confirm records from the underwing pattern, wing shape, flight style and other diagnostic features.

• Record every detection, including birds flying from a roost, hunting behaviour, calls, flock size, direction of travel and the distance from the project footprint.
• Repeat night surveys when conditions are suitable and when local approval conditions require repeat surveys; the supplied documents do not specify a standard number of nights or hours for this species.
• Do not treat a negative night survey as proof that the species is absent where suitable roosts, open feeding areas or recent regional records are present.

Survey methodology: 4. Pellets, prey and activity evidence

Inspect the ground below suspected roosts for cast pellets and prey remains as supporting evidence. At Saltbeef Lake, 109 pellets yielded 189 identified prey items, with mammals in 95 percent of pellets and about 80 to 90 percent of dietary biomass.

Use prey evidence to identify active roosts and periods of use, not as a substitute for direct observation. Small mammals were more important in cooler months, while reptiles and invertebrates increased during hotter months at Saltbeef Lake.

Diet indication: Small native mammals, particularly mice and dasyurids, were the main food at Saltbeef Lake; skinks, invertebrates and carrion were relatively more important at Nyrripi.

• Photograph and label pellets and prey remains before collection.
• Have mammal, bird, reptile and invertebrate remains identified by a suitably qualified person where the result affects the impact assessment or management response.

Survey methodology: Minimum effort and reporting

Set final survey effort from the relevant state survey guideline, approval conditions, habitat quality, recent regional records and the size of the disturbance area. No species-specific survey guideline or fixed effort standard is provided in the supplied documents.

• Complete a daytime search of all potential roost trees and suitable tree groups in the disturbance area and areas that may be affected by access, lighting, noise or clearing.
• Complete nocturnal observations covering dusk and the main night activity period, with repeat effort where conditions, records or the project risk require it.
• Record survey dates, times, personnel, qualifications, methods, routes, weather, moon conditions, visibility, habitat, effort, detections and the basis for any negative conclusion.
• Submit confirmed records, including zero counts where required by the database, to the relevant state wildlife database and the Atlas of Living Australia where appropriate.
• Report the location of any active roost, flock, breeding site or unusual movement to the project ecologist and the relevant state wildlife authority.

Before habitat disturbance: Avoid and minimise

Avoid disturbance to active roosts and retain the habitat that supports nocturnal feeding. The project ecologist should treat a site as potentially important when it contains suitable roost trees, open arid feeding areas, drainage lines or recent records, even if birds are not detected on one visit.

Retain trees used for daytime roosting, including dead Beefwood, Ghost Gum and other suitable trees along drainage lines or near open feeding areas.

Retain connected drainage lines, flood-outs, grasslands, lightly wooded shrublands and timbered watercourses that provide roosting, hunting and movement habitat.

Keep project lighting away from known roosts and likely night feeding areas where practicable. Use directional, shielded lighting and switch it off when not required.

Avoid removing several nearby roost trees at once. At recorded colonies, birds used groups of trees and moved between trees when disturbed.

• Map active and potential roost trees before finalising the disturbance footprint.
• Establish no-go areas and buffers around active roosts in the fauna management plan, with distances set by the project ecologist, approval conditions and the level of disturbance proposed.
• Maintain movement routes between retained trees, drainage lines and open feeding areas.

Before habitat disturbance: Approvals and timing

The Letter-winged Kite is not listed under the EPBC Act in the supplied project information. It is listed as Vulnerable in South Australia and Near Threatened in the Northern Territory.

Check the current state legislation, wildlife permits, clearing controls and approval conditions before survey, capture, handling or clearing. Recheck the listing before works begin because listings can change.

Plan high-noise work, vegetation removal and night lighting outside periods of confirmed roost use or breeding activity where practicable. The species can breed rapidly when rodent populations increase after good rain, and breeding may occur during irruptions.

State status supplied: South Australia: Vulnerable. Northern Territory: Near Threatened.

• Obtain any state scientific, wildlife handling, relocation or disturbance permits required for the site and proposed methods.
• Refer the action under the EPBC Act if another protected matter is triggered or if the national listing status changes; do not assume a referral is required for this species on the supplied listing alone.
• Stage works so an occupied roost or breeding site can be retained while the project ecologist confirms the management response.

Before habitat disturbance: Site preparation

Complete the pre-clearance survey shortly before works, because the species is mobile and may arrive after good conditions or a local increase in small mammals.

Mark active roosts, potential roost trees, drainage lines, retained feeding areas and no-go zones on plans and on the ground.

Use exclusion fencing where it can prevent machinery, vehicles and workers entering retained roost or drainage habitat. Inspect fencing daily and keep access gates controlled.

Brief all operators on the identification features, nocturnal behaviour, stop-work triggers and the requirement to contact the fauna spotter catcher.

• Confirm that the fauna spotter catcher, ecologist, machinery supervisor and site manager have the same marked exclusion areas and escalation contacts.
• Remove unnecessary food waste, carcasses and materials that may attract introduced predators or create hazards near retained habitat.
• Plan a safe holding and release location within nearby retained habitat before any clearing begins.

During habitat disturbance: Daily controls and machinery interface

Works must proceed under active fauna supervision where habitat is being cleared or disturbed. The fauna spotter catcher should have authority to pause machinery and must be able to communicate directly with the operator and site supervisor.

Complete a pre-start inspection of the work area, exclusion fencing, retained trees, drainage lines and access tracks each day.

Use a staged clearing sequence that moves fauna towards retained habitat and away from active machinery, roads and pits. Do not clear towards an occupied roost or watercourse.

Keep machinery outside marked no-go areas and use a spotter to control plant movement near retained trees, drainage lines and temporary fencing.

Stop work if a Letter-winged Kite is found in the active work area, if an occupied roost is identified, or if the approved controls cannot be maintained.

• The fauna spotter catcher must remain in communication with the operator and must signal a clear stop before approaching an animal or habitat feature.
• Do not operate at night near a known roost unless the activity is specifically approved and the lighting and disturbance controls are in place.
• Keep workers, vehicles and dogs away from occupied roosts and do not repeatedly flush birds to identify them.

During habitat disturbance: Habitat feature handling

Retain roost trees, including dead trees and well-foliated trees, wherever practicable. The supplied records do not identify hollow trees, logs, rocks or burrows as specific Letter-winged Kite habitat features.

Protect drainage lines, flood-outs, samphire areas, grassland and open hunting areas from unnecessary vehicle access, sediment movement, stockpiles and night lighting.

If a tree used by Letter-winged Kites must be removed, stop and obtain written direction from the project ecologist and approval holder before proceeding. Confirm whether birds, nests or dependent young are present.

Inspect trees and the ground below them for birds, nests, pellets and prey remains before removal. Use a qualified arborist and fauna spotter catcher for any approved removal.

• Do not fell or push a suspected roost tree without a documented inspection and clearance decision.
• Do not place spoil, fill, concrete washout, fuel or machinery in drainage lines or beneath retained roost trees.
• Treat any nest, dependent young or repeated use of a roost as a stop-work matter until the management response is approved.

During habitat disturbance: If a kite is found

Keep people and machinery back and allow the bird to leave without pursuit where it is alert and able to fly.

Only an authorised and appropriately trained person may capture, handle or relocate the bird. Handling should be limited to what is necessary for immediate safety, assessment and approved relocation.

Relocate a healthy bird only under the relevant permit and project fauna plan, to nearby retained habitat with suitable trees and open feeding areas. Record the release point and time.

Send an injured bird to an authorised wildlife carer or veterinarian through the approved project contact. Do not release an injured or exhausted bird without professional direction.

• Stop work within the immediate risk area and establish a quiet exclusion zone.
• Never attempt to catch a flying bird with a vehicle, net or improvised equipment.
• If the bird is dead, protect the carcass, photograph the location, notify the ecologist and report it as required by the permit or state authority.
• Record the species identification, number of birds, behaviour, location, cause of risk or injury, action taken, handler and final outcome.

During habitat disturbance: Stop-work triggers and records

Stop work for an occupied roost, nest, dependent young, injured bird, bird trapped in a building or pit, unexpected flock, collision, mortality or damage to a marked retention area.

The project ecologist should set the restart conditions, which may include removal of the hazard, establishment of a larger exclusion zone, additional survey, relocation under permit or approval from the relevant authority.

• Maintain a daily fauna register with weather, work areas, clearing quantities, inspections, detections, incidents, photographs, relocations and approvals.
• Record all stop-work events and the time taken to notify the site supervisor, ecologist and relevant authority where required.
• Update the site map whenever a new roost, feeding area, movement route or exclusion zone is identified.

After habitat disturbance: Post-clearance checks

Post-clearance work should confirm that no birds, nests or dependent young remain at risk and that retained roost and feeding habitat is still usable. Monitoring should focus on active roosts, nearby drainage habitat and any area where irruptive birds were detected.

Inspect the cleared area and retained trees at the end of each work stage and before demobilisation of the fauna team.

Check pits, trenches, buildings, temporary fencing and stored materials for trapped or roosting fauna.

Reinspect retained trees and drainage lines for fresh pellets, prey remains, birds, nests, erosion, sediment or lighting impacts.

• Complete a final daylight roost search after each staged clearing event.
• Complete follow-up night observations where a kite, flock, roost or breeding attempt was recorded before or during works.
• Keep exclusion fencing and fauna controls in place until the project ecologist confirms that the risk has ended.

After habitat disturbance: Monitoring and reporting

Monitor occupied or suspected roosts during the period specified in the fauna management plan. Record whether birds continue to use the trees, whether nearby feeding areas remain available and whether disturbance changes their roosting behaviour.

Interpret detections in the context of rainfall, small-mammal abundance and irruptive movements. A change in detections does not by itself establish a population change.

Compare post-work records with the pre-clearance baseline, including bird numbers, roost trees, activity times, pellets and prey evidence.

Observed variability: The Saltbeef Lake colony varied from 0 to 10 birds between August 1994 and November 1995, while the Nyrripi group reached 4 birds and was not recorded after mid April 1995.

• Provide the project owner, ecologist and relevant state authority with a clearance and fauna incident report.
• Submit confirmed records, mortality records and new roost locations to the relevant state wildlife database where required.
• Retain photographs, GPS locations, field sheets, permit records and release or veterinary records in the project environmental file.

After habitat disturbance: Controls, offsets and corrective action

Maintain retained habitat, fencing, lighting controls, drainage protection and weed or predator controls for the period required by approvals and the fauna management plan.

If approved clearing removes habitat used by the species, apply the required offset, restoration or conservation measure. The supplied documents do not specify a species-specific offset formula.

Take corrective action if birds abandon a retained roost, mortality occurs, erosion affects drainage habitat or night lighting reaches feeding or roost areas.

• Review the controls after each monitoring visit and amend them through the approved environmental management process.
• Report any failure to meet approval conditions to the project manager and relevant authority within the required timeframe.
• Do not remove temporary controls until the ecologist confirms that the site is stable and no fauna risk remains.

Rehabilitation actions: Restore roost and feeding habitat

Rehabilitation should restore a linked set of daytime roosts, open nocturnal feeding areas and drainage or flood-out habitat. There is no supplied species-specific planting list or nest-box standard, so rehabilitation design must use local ecological advice and the approval requirements.

Retain and protect existing mature trees, dead trees and dense-foliage trees wherever safe. Letter-winged Kites used Beefwood and Ghost Gum roosts in the supplied records.

Replant locally appropriate native trees and shrubs along drainage lines and watercourses, using species naturally occurring at the site and approved by the project ecologist.

Restore open grassland, lightly wooded shrubland, flood-out and samphire habitat where these were part of the pre-disturbance site.

Do not create dense plantings across all open ground. The species hunts over open areas and roosts in trees, so rehabilitation should provide both open feeding areas and separated or connected roost trees.

• Protect planted trees from grazing, vehicles, fire and weed competition until established.
• Use local seed or tubestock where appropriate and record species, numbers, planting areas and survival.
• Do not install nest boxes as a substitute for retaining suitable natural roost trees unless a qualified ecologist supports their use and the design is approved.

Rehabilitation actions: Reinstate site structure and water movement

Reinstate natural drainage paths, flood-outs and shallow watercourse margins without creating erosion or permanent barriers to fauna movement.

Retain or replace locally appropriate ground structure, including logs and rocks, only where these features were present before disturbance and where they do not obstruct drainage or create a machinery hazard.

Keep roost trees and rehabilitation plantings connected to open feeding areas and avoid isolating them behind roads, fences or permanent infrastructure.

• Remove temporary stockpiles, access pads and spoil from drainage lines and potential feeding areas.
• Stabilise exposed soil with locally appropriate native groundcover and erosion controls.
• Inspect rehabilitated drainage and flood-out areas after substantial rainfall and repair scour, sedimentation or blocked flow.

Rehabilitation actions: Weed, predator and fire management

Control weeds that reduce native grassland, shrubland or watercourse structure and maintain the treatment records required by the project plan.

Manage introduced predators and pest animals in accordance with approved local programs, particularly where they affect small mammals, nesting birds or rehabilitation success.

Use a fire regime advised by the local land manager and ecologist. Avoid unplanned fire that removes roost trees, dense foliage or native ground cover.

Do not use bait, poison or fire near retained fauna habitat without checking permit, animal welfare and non-target species requirements.

• Inspect rehabilitation for weed invasion, grazing, pest activity, fire damage and vehicle entry at each monitoring visit.
• Keep a buffer around retained and newly established roost trees during slashing, burning and chemical treatment.
• Coordinate fire planning with the need to retain mature and dead trees and connected drainage habitat.

Rehabilitation actions: Monitoring and success measures

Monitor planted tree survival, retained roost condition, open feeding habitat, drainage function, weed cover, predator activity and use by Letter-winged Kites.

Use repeat daylight roost searches and nocturnal observations where the species was recorded before disturbance or where rehabilitation is intended to replace lost habitat.

Set measurable targets in the rehabilitation plan, such as survival of planted local species, stable drainage function, retained roost trees remaining safe and usable, and no unresolved fauna incidents.

• Record bird detections, flock size, roost tree use, activity time, pellets, prey remains and any breeding evidence during monitoring.
• Compare monitoring results with the pre-clearance baseline and continue until the approval authority accepts the rehabilitation outcome.
• Modify planting, weed, predator, fire or lighting controls if the site does not provide suitable roost and feeding habitat or if birds show repeated avoidance.

Sources

• Letter-winged Kites Elanus scriptus in the South-west of the ..., BirdLife Australia: https://afo.birdlife.org.au/afo/index.php/afo/article/viewFile/156/146
• Tracking range and abundance trends of the poorly known Letter-winged Kite Elanus scriptus, tandfonline.com: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01584197.2026.2665112
• The Letter-winged Kite, Elanus scriptus., BirdLife Australia: https://afo.birdlife.org.au/afo/index.php/afo/article/download/1644/1384