Nest Hollows

HollowHog- Go Fund Me- Support us

‘HollowHog’ is a handy tool invented by an innovative Australian conservation scientist (watch a short video here). The tool can safely create internal cavities (hollows) in trees through small, customisable entry holes to target specific species. The benefit is two-fold:

  1. It creates immediate habitat for hollow dependent species
  2. It accelerates the natural hollow forming process by ~70 years.


We are crowdfunding to purchase:

  • a HollowHog tool,
  • relevant training and
  • all the relevant kit (a generator, grinder, dust extractor, and safety equipment)

We aim to bring this to our local community on the Central Coast NSW.


If you would like to support us, click here.

Hollows as homes
Citizen Science Project to record & monitor existing hollows

Nestbox tales
Species-specific nestbox designs, materials and installation tips

Guidelines for Artificial Hollows
Biodiversity Conservation Trust guidelines and framework

ACF investigation (Report)
Australian Conservation Foundation investigation into the Australian government aggravating extinction by approving the destruction of threatened species habitats

ACF investigation (Data)
Australian Conservation Foundation investigation into the Australian government aggravating extinction- publically available data

Relocation of Large Tree Hollows
Central Coast Council Guideline for the Relocation of Large Tree Hollows

A tool designed to safely create internal cavities (hollows) in trees through small, customisable entry holes to target specific species.

Nest Hollows – Literature

Find below the literature cited in our talk, and associated links to each:

Gibbons P, Lindenmayer DB, Barry SC, Tanton MT. 2000 Hollow formation in eucalypts from temperate forests in Southeastern Australia. Pacific Conserv. Biol. 6, 218–228.

Koch AJ, Munks SA, Driscoll D, Kirkpatrick JB. 2008 Does hollow occurrence vary with forest type? A case study in wet and dry Eucalyptus obliqua forest. For. Ecol. Manage. 255, 3938–3951.

Gibbons P, Lindenmayer DB, Barry SC, Tanton MT. 2002 Hollow selection by vertebrate fauna in forests of southeastern Australia and implications for forest management. Biol. Conserv. 103, 1–12.

Adkins MF. 2006 A burning issue: Using fire to accelerate tree hollow formation in Eucalyptus species. Aust. For. 69, 107–113.

Gibbons P, Lindenmayer DB. 1997 Developing tree retention strategies for hollow-dependent arboreal marsupials in the wood production eucalypt forests of eastern australia. Aust. For. 60, 29–45.

Penton CE, Radford IJ, Woolley LA, von Takach B, Murphy BP. 2021 Unexpected overlapping use of tree hollows by birds, reptiles and declining mammals in an Australian tropical savanna. Biodivers. Conserv. 30, 2977–3001.

Kikuchi K, Akasaka T, Yamaura Y, Nakamura F. 2013 Abundance and use of cavity trees at the tree- and stand-levels in natural and plantation forests in Hokkaido, Japan. J. For. Res. 18, 389–397.

McDowell NG et al. 2020 Pervasive shifts in forest dynamics in a changing world. Science (eaaz9463). 368.

Bull EL, Partridge AD. 1986 Methods of Killing Trees for Use by Cavity Nesters. Wildl. Soc. 14, 142–146.

Sanderson HR. 1975 Den-Tree Management for Gray Squirrels. Wildl. Soc. 3, 125–131.

Honey R, McLean CM, Murray BR, Callan MN, Webb JK. 2021 Choice of monitoring method can influence estimates of usage of artificial hollows by vertebrate fauna. Aust. J. Zool. 69, 18–25.

Le Roux DS, Ikin K, Lindenmayer DB, Bistricer G, Manning AD, Gibbons P. 2016 Enriching small trees with artificial nest boxes cannot mimic the value of large trees for hollow-nesting birds. Restor. Ecol. 24, 252–258.

Fitzsimons JA. 2021 Little Lorikeet Glossopsitta pusilla nest hollow preparation and interspecific aggression in Melbourne, Victoria. Vic. Nat. 138, 107–109.

Lindenmayer DB, Welsh A, Donnelly C, Crane M, Michael D, Macgregor C, McBurney L, Montague-Drake R, Gibbons P. 2009 Are nest boxes a viable alternative source of cavities for hollow-dependent animals? Long-term monitoring of nest box occupancy, pest use and attrition. Biol. Conserv. 142, 33–42.

Rowland JA, Briscoe NJ, Handasyde KA. 2017 Comparing the thermal suitability of nest-boxes and tree-hollows for the conservation-management of arboreal marsupials. Biol. Conserv. 209, 341–348.

Larson ER, Eastwood JR, Buchanan KL, Bennett ATD, Berg ML. 2015 How does nest-box temperature affect nestling growth rate and breeding success in a parrot? Emu – Austral Ornithol. 115, 247–255.

Saunders DA, Dawson R, Mawson PR, Cunningham RB. 2020 Artificial hollows provide an effective short-term solution to the loss of natural nesting hollows for Carnaby’s Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus latirostris. Biol. Conserv. 245, 108556.

Terry W, Goldingay RL, van der Ree R. 2021 Can chainsaw carved hollows provide an effective solution to the loss of natural tree cavities for arboreal mammals? For. Ecol. Manage. 490, 119122.

Griffiths SR, Semmens K, Watson SJ, Jones CS. 2020 Installing chainsaw-carved hollows in medium-sized live trees increases rates of visitation by hollow-dependent fauna. Restor. Ecol. 28, 1225–1236.

Griffiths SR, Lentini PE, Semmens K, Watson SJ, Lumsden LF, Robert KA. 2018 Chainsaw-carved cavities better mimic the thermal properties of natural tree hollows than nest boxes and log hollows. Forests 9, 1–27.