34AD962B2D57EB9EE0632144CD9B130BEnglishData Requests OfficerDepartment of Lands, Planning and EnvironmentGeospatial Services Unit (on behalf of department)Datarequests.DLPE@nt.gov.au2025-05-09AS/NZS ISO 19115 Geographic Information - Metadata, ANZLIC Metadata Profile1.0 High Value Habitat for Threatened Mammals in the Greater Weddell Subregion, 20252025-05-09Broadly delineated areas of high value for threatened mammals in the Greater Weddell subregion. Produced as part of the biodiversity assessment of the Greater Weddell subregion, 2025. The biodiversity assessment study area covers approximately 39,422 ha and is located approximately 13 km south of Darwin.English-12.716146-12.538253130.917695131.001609datasetnot knownCompleted.0not knownPolygon topology rules applied: must not overlap, must not have gaps.0not knownThere are no attributes for the delineated areas.0'Habitat quality' indices were developed from spatial data for fire frequency, predicted areas of 'old growth' forest and vegetation community mapping. All spatial data were resampled to the coarsest input data, that of fire frequency with a cell size of approximately 276 m x 272 m, and normalised to range from 0 to 1. The value of each cell in the study area was derived using focal statistics with a 3 x 3 cell rectangular window (an area of c. 68 ha), to better incorporate surrounding habitat into the analysis. The congruence of predicted high-quality habitat with current knowledge of critical weight range (CWR) mammal occurrence in the study area was tested using records of the three most frequent CWR mammals (Northern Brushtail Possum, Black-footed Tree-rat, and Northern Bandicoot). A spatial index of the presence of the three species was calculated using the same cell size and focal statistics window as above. The map of CWR mammal record density emphasised the importance of the Middle Arm area as known habitat for these species (particularly Black-footed Tree-rat). There was also a small area with a relatively high density of mammal records in the Territory Wildlife Park, which corresponded to an area modelled to be of high habitat quality. The concentration of mammal records at Middle Arm did not correspond well with the distribution of modelled high-quality habitat. This may partly be due to the relatively small patches of woodland on Spitfire and Kittyhawk peninsulas, relative to the spatial window used for the analysis, which would preclude a high score for the habitat index. It also suggests that the selected predictor variables do not adequately represent the key environmental features that determine CWR mammal persistence in this landscape. These broad areas were manually delineated to produce the dataset polygons. Further details are provided in the report listed in Supplementary Information.