MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT – IS THERE A CONFLICT BETWEEN SHORT-TERM COMPLIANCE AND LONG-TERM RESEARCH VALUES?

AMY EVANS MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

My Background

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT Location

(Source: Google Maps, 2014) MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Mitigation Examples

Glider Crossings

Rope Bridges Glider Poles MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Mitigation Examples

Nest Boxes

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Mitigation Examples

Bird Underpasses

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Mitigation Examples

Fauna Friendly Culverts

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Fauna Mitigation Examples

Widened Median Plantings Coarse Woody Debris Placement

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Examples to Discuss

1. Nest Box Monitoring Program

2. Squirrel Glider Monitoring Program at Thurgoona

3. Landscaping as a mitigation measure

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Nest Box Monitoring Program

• The Duplication of the from Sturt Hwy to Tabletop resulted in removal of 231 hollow bearing trees, containing 580 hollows.

• The Ministerial Conditions of Approval (MCoA) for the project outline the proponent’s duties with regard to hollow dependent fauna and nest boxes. The MCoA state:

“The Proponent shall install nest boxes and relocated hollows to offset the loss of tree hollows/habitat. Structures to replace hollows shall be installed prior to or during the early stages of clearing, other than minor clearing (except where threatened species, populations or communities would be impacted).”

• Five year monitoring program undertaken by Australian National University (ANU)

(Photo Source: Mason Crane, ANU) MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Nest Box Monitoring Program

Results so far

• 10% of boxes are being occupied.

• Detection rates have varied over the four years – Year 1 = 12.8% – Year 2 = 16.1% – Year 3 = 14% – Year 4 = 9.5%

• Since installation – 8% failed to be functional

(Photo Source: Mason Crane, ANU) MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Nest Box Monitoring Program

• Does the mitigation measure line up with the monitoring program timeline?

• Whose responsibility is it after the CoA have been met?

• Short term success versus long term failure

(Photo Source: Sachiko Okada, ANU) MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Squirrel Glider Monitoring Program at Thurgoona

• - National Highway (14.7kms long) was opened in 2007.

• Five year monitoring program was implemented, being conducted bi-annually in spring and autumn which commenced in spring 2008 and finished in autumn 2013.

• Primary objective was to evaluate the effects of the operation of the new Highway on target species such as the Squirrel Glider.

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Squirrel Glider Monitoring Program at Thurgoona

• So far, the population is successfully breeding and persisting in the environment.

• No evidence of individuals crossing the highway at this area.

• What would the results be in another 5 or 10 years of monitoring.

• Where to now?

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Landscaping as a Mitigation Measure

• Landscaping is vital to providing future connectivity across the landscape.

• Imperative that landscaping treatments are undertaken in and around fauna crossing zones.

• In southern NSW, weather plays a vital role in determining how successful landscaping is.

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Landscaping as a Mitigation Measure

• On average glider poles are expected to last 25 -30 years.

• Ongoing maintenance is required for glider crossings, which RMS is committed to = long term commitment and ongoing costs.

• No landscaping monitoring is undertaken beyond the defect period.

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Conclusion

• Confusion and conflict between the short term goals versus the long term research goals.

• Often, conditions of approval are generally short term natured.

• Ongoing research is expensive to gain adequate data.

• So, who is responsible – Who should fund further research monitoring.

Thanks goes to:

• Mason Crane – ANU • Rodney van der Ree – ARCUE

• Roads and Maritime – South West Region • Kylie Soanes - ARCUE

• Roads and Maritime – Hume Highway Office • Erwin Budde – NGH environmental

• Roads and Maritime – Biodiversity Section

MONITORING FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN IN A WOODLAND ENVIRONMENT

Questions