DOCSLIB.ORG

Managing Diversity in the Riverina Rice Fields—

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Reconciling Farming with Wildlife —Managing diversity in the Riverina rice fields— RIRDC Publication No. 10/0007 RIRDCInnovation for rural Australia Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields by J. Sean Doody, Christina M. Castellano, Will Osborne, Ben Corey and Sarah Ross April 2010 RIRDC Publication No 10/007 RIRDC Project No. PRJ-000687 © 2010 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 1 74151 983 7 ISSN 1440-6845 Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields Publication No. 10/007 Project No. PRJ-000687 The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, RIRDC, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication. This publication is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. However, wide dissemination is encouraged. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the RIRDC Publications Manager on phone 02 6271 4165. Researcher Contact Details J. Sean Doody Department of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, ACT 2601 Phone: 0418 599 719 Fax: 02 6125 5573 Email: [email protected] In submitting this report, the researcher has agreed to RIRDC publishing this material in its edited form. RIRDC Contact Details Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Level 2, 15 National Circuit BARTON ACT 2600 PO Box 4776 KINGSTON ACT 2604 Phone: 02 6271 4100 Fax: 02 6271 4199 Email: [email protected]. Web: http://www.rirdc.gov.au Electronically published by RIRDC in April 2010 Print-on-demand by Union Offset Printing, Canberra at www.rirdc.gov.au or phone 1300 634 313 ii Foreword Although the establishment of the Australian rice industry has led to an altered pastoral landscape, it has also resulted in the seasonal availability of extensive aquatic habitats in a previously drier landscape. Consequently, rice-farming areas are of considerable importance to a range of vertebrate fauna. The study aimed to begin farm management of biodiversity using the knowledge gained in the previous study. An experimental approach for incorporation into the Environmental Champions Program was used in tandem with monitoring and further research on selected significant species. However, the re-gripping of Australia’s worst drought on record had a significant impact on the project, through retraction of funding, and through the environmental impact on revegetation efforts on farm. Nevertheless, significant outcomes were achieved, and this publication details findings from (1) baseline monitoring of vertebrates on rice farms; (2) a study of frogs as natural pest control for rice crops; and (3) a study of how an iconic snake species utilises farms. The project concludes by integrating knowledge gained in these studies with that of other studies to formulate management strategies for rice farmers and other stakeholders in the region. This report is an addition to RIRDC’s diverse range of over 2000 research publications and it forms part of our Rice R&D program, which aims to improve the profitability and sustainability of the Australian rice industry through the organisation, funding and management of a research, development and extension program that is both market and stakeholder driven. Most of RIRDC’s publications are available for viewing, free downloading or purchasing online at www.rirdc.gov.au. Purchases can also be made by phoning 1300 634 313. Peter O’Brien Managing Director Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation iii Acknowledgments We sincerely thank the following farmers for allowing continuous access to their properties, for advice and general assistance during the study: Barry Kirkup, David Pike, Gary and Marg Knagge, Jim and Caroline Maskus, June and Russell Mason, Michael McAliece, Mick Anderson and Rob Houghton. Rob, Jayne, Alice and Jacob Houghton and Barry, Gillian and Renee Kirkup also played instrumental roles in data collection on their homesteads. We also thank Marc Serafin for providing accommodation and Max O’Sullivan for conducting the bird surveys. Russell and Robin Ford were invaluable to us in many ways, including general needs, accommodation, local advice and exceptional cooperation. Without their help the study would not have been possible. We sincerely appreciate the time, energy and resources put forth by Russell Ford and we thank him for the construction of the experimental rice bays. For assistance in the field, we thank Rohan Rewhinkel, Imi Moore, Dave Rhind, Mitchell Sidwell, Geoff Sidwell, Tim Ross, Emily Ford, James Knight, Paul Read, Kirsten Wheatley, Glenn Murray, Dave Steer, Christy Davies, Brett Stewart and Brian Green. We are also grateful to Lesley Ishiyama and Dave Rhind for their assistance in the laboratory. Geoff Heard and Peter Robertson shared their knowledge of Morelia spilota with us and provided supporting literature. We are indebted to the Gardiner family for their support and hospitality and to David Pederson for assisting with the data analysis. The study would not have been possible without the assistance and support of Janelle McGufficke. We thank those showing an interest in the study and other members of the RIRDC Rice R&D Committee, members of the Biodiversity Steering Committee for the rice industry and Rice Research Australia Pty Ltd. The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, Ricegrowers’ Association of Australia and Rice Research Australia funded this study. iv Contents Foreword ............................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................. iv Tables and Figures .............................................................................................................................. vii Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. x Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Reconciliation Ecology ..................................................................................................................... 1 Importance of Biodiversity ............................................................................................................... 2 Revegetation ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Significant Species ............................................................................................................................ 3 Frog Species Under Study ................................................................................................................ 4 Dietary Habits of Frogs .............................................................................................................. 7 Feeding Mechanisms .................................................................................................................. 7 Ontogenetic Dietary Shifts ......................................................................................................... 8 Foraging Strategies ..................................................................................................................... 8 Prey Selection ............................................................................................................................. 9 Diet Overlap in Sympatric Species .......................................................................................... 10 Prey Availability ...................................................................................................................... 10 Top Predators ........................................................................................................................... 11 Space Use by Wildlife .............................................................................................................. 11 The Carpet Python .................................................................................................................... 12 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland

    Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland

    Herpetological Conservation and Biology 11:408–425. Submitted: 26 January 2016; Accepted: 2 September 2016; Published: 16 December 2016. Amphibian Abundance and Detection Trends During a Large Flood in a Semi-Arid Floodplain Wetland Joanne F. Ocock1,4, Richard T. Kingsford1, Trent D. Penman2, and Jodi J.L. Rowley1,3 1Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia 2Centre for Environmental Risk Management of Bushfires, Institute of Conservation Biology and Environmental Management, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia 3Australian Museum Research Institute, Australian Museum, 6 College St, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia 4Corresponding author, email: [email protected] Abstract.—Amphibian abundance and occupancy are often reduced in regulated river systems near dams, but com- paratively little is known about how they are affected on floodplain wetlands downstream or the effects of actively managed flows. We assessed frog diversity in the Macquarie Marshes, a semi-arid floodplain wetland of conserva- tion significance, identifying environmental variables that might explain abundances and detection of species. We collected relative abundance data of 15 amphibian species at 30 sites over four months, coinciding with a large natural flood. We observed an average of 39.9 ± (SE) 4.3 (range, 0-246) individuals per site survey, over 47 survey nights. Three non-burrowing, ground-dwelling species were most abundant at temporarily flooded sites with low- growing aquatic vegetation (e.g., Limnodynastes tasmaniensis, Limnodynastes fletcheri, Crinia parinsignifera). Most arboreal species (e.g., Litoria caerulea) were more abundant in wooded habitat, regardless of water permanency.
  • Effects of Human Disturbance on Terrestrial Apex Predators

    Effects of Human Disturbance on Terrestrial Apex Predators

    diversity Review Effects of Human Disturbance on Terrestrial Apex Predators Andrés Ordiz 1,2,* , Malin Aronsson 1,3, Jens Persson 1 , Ole-Gunnar Støen 4, Jon E. Swenson 2 and Jonas Kindberg 4,5 1 Grimsö Wildlife Research Station, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-730 91 Riddarhyttan, Sweden; [email protected] (M.A.); [email protected] (J.P.) 2 Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Postbox 5003, NO-1432 Ås, Norway; [email protected] 3 Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden 4 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, NO-7485 Trondheim, Norway; [email protected] (O.-G.S.); [email protected] (J.K.) 5 Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-901 83 Umeå, Sweden * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The effects of human disturbance spread over virtually all ecosystems and ecological communities on Earth. In this review, we focus on the effects of human disturbance on terrestrial apex predators. We summarize their ecological role in nature and how they respond to different sources of human disturbance. Apex predators control their prey and smaller predators numerically and via behavioral changes to avoid predation risk, which in turn can affect lower trophic levels. Crucially, reducing population numbers and triggering behavioral responses are also the effects that human disturbance causes to apex predators, which may in turn influence their ecological role. Some populations continue to be at the brink of extinction, but others are partially recovering former ranges, via natural recolonization and through reintroductions.
  • Dietary Specialization and Variation in Two Mammalian Myrmecophages (Variation in Mammalian Myrmecophagy)

    Dietary Specialization and Variation in Two Mammalian Myrmecophages (Variation in Mammalian Myrmecophagy)

    Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 59: 201-208, 1986 Dietary specialization and variation in two mammalian myrmecophages (variation in mammalian myrmecophagy) Especializaci6n dietaria y variaci6n en dos mamiferos mirmec6fagos (variaci6n en la mirmecofagia de mamiferos) KENT H. REDFORD Center for Latin American Studies, Grinter Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA ABSTRACT This paper compares dietary variation in an opportunistic myrmecophage, Dasypus novemcinctus, and an obligate myrmecophage, Myrmecophaga tridactyla. The diet of the common long-nosed armadillo, D. novemcintus, consists of a broad range of invertebrate as well as vertebrates and plant material. In the United States, ants and termites are less important as a food source than they are in South America. The diet of the giant anteater. M. tridactyla, consists almost entirely of ants and termites. In some areas giant anteaters consume more ants whereas in others termites are a larger part of their diet. Much of the variation in the diet of these two myrmecophages can be explained by geographical and ecological variation in the abundance of prey. However, some variation may be due to individual differences as well. Key words: Dasypus novemcinctus, Myrmecophaga tridactyla, Tamandua, food habits. armadillo, giant anteater, ants, termites. RESUMEN En este trabajo se compara la variacion dietaria entre un mirmecofago oportunista, Dasypus novemcinctus, y uno obligado, Myrmecophaga tridactyla. La dieta del armadillo comun, D. novemcinctus, incluye un amplio rango de in- vertebrados así como vertebrados y materia vegetal. En los Estados Unidos, hormigas y termites son menos importantes como recurso alimenticio de los armadillos, de lo que son en Sudamérica. La dieta del hormiguero gigante, M tridactyla, está compuesta casi enteramente por hormigas y termites.
  • Species Assessment for the Northern Leopard Frog (Rana Pipiens)

    Species Assessment for the Northern Leopard Frog (Rana Pipiens)

    SPECIES ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTHERN LEOPARD FROG (RANA PIPIENS ) IN WYOMING prepared by 1 2 BRIAN E. SMITH AND DOUG KEINATH 1Department of Biology Black Hills State University1200 University Street Unit 9044, Spearfish, SD 5779 2 Zoology Program Manager, Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave, Dept. 3381, Laramie, Wyoming 82071; 307-766-3013; [email protected] prepared for United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Wyoming State Office Cheyenne, Wyoming January 2004 Smith and Keinath – Rana pipiens January 2004 Table of Contents SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3 NATURAL HISTORY ........................................................................................................................... 5 Morphological Description ...................................................................................................... 5 Taxonomy and Distribution ..................................................................................................... 6 Taxonomy .......................................................................................................................................6 Distribution and Abundance............................................................................................................7
  • Ecology of a Widespread Large Omnivore, Homo Sapiens, and Its Impacts on Ecosystem Processes Meredith Root-Bernstein, Richard Ladle

    Ecology of a Widespread Large Omnivore, Homo Sapiens, and Its Impacts on Ecosystem Processes Meredith Root-Bernstein, Richard Ladle

    Ecology of a widespread large omnivore, homo sapiens, and its impacts on ecosystem processes Meredith Root-Bernstein, Richard Ladle To cite this version: Meredith Root-Bernstein, Richard Ladle. Ecology of a widespread large omnivore, homo sapiens, and its impacts on ecosystem processes. Ecology and Evolution, Wiley Open Access, 2019, 9 (19), pp.10874-10894. 10.1002/ece3.5049. hal-02619228 HAL Id: hal-02619228 https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02619228 Submitted on 25 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License Received: 19 November 2018 | Accepted: 14 February 2019 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.5049 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Ecology of a widespread large omnivore, Homo sapiens, and its impacts on ecosystem processes Meredith Root‐Bernstein1,2,3,4 | Richard Ladle5,6 1Section for Ecoinformatics & Biodiversity, Department of Bioscience, Aarhus Abstract University, Aarhus, Denmark 1. Discussions of defaunation and taxon substitution have concentrated on mega‐ 2 Institute of Ecology and Biodiversity, faunal herbivores and carnivores, but mainly overlooked the particular ecological Santiago, Chile 3UMR Sciences pour l'Action et le importance of megafaunal omnivores. In particular, the Homo spp.
  • Petition to List the Relict Leopard Frog (Rana Onca) As an Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act

    Petition to List the Relict Leopard Frog (Rana Onca) As an Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act

    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE RELICT LEOPARD FROG (RANA ONCA) AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE PETITIONERS May 8, 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The relict leopard frog (Rana onca) has the dubious distinction of being one of the first North American amphibians thought to have become extinct. Although known to have inhabited at least 64 separate locations, the last historical collections of the species were in the 1950s and this frog was only recently rediscovered at 8 (of the original 64) locations in the early 1990s. This extremely endangered amphibian is now restricted to only 6 localities (a 91% reduction from the original 64 locations) in two disjunct areas within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area in Nevada. The relict leopard frog historically occurred in springs, seeps, and wetlands within the Virgin, Muddy, and Colorado River drainages, in Utah, Nevada, and Arizona. The Vegas Valley leopard frog, which once inhabited springs in the Las Vegas, Nevada area (and is probably now extinct), may eventually prove to be synonymous with R. onca. Relict leopard frogs were recently discovered in eight springs in the early 1990s near Lake Mead and along the Virgin River. The species has subsequently disappeared from two of these localities. Only about 500 to 1,000 adult frogs remain in the population and none of the extant locations are secure from anthropomorphic events, thus putting the species at an almost guaranteed risk of extinction. The relict leopard frog has likely been extirpated from Utah, Arizona, and from the Muddy River drainage in Nevada, and persists in only 9% of its known historical range.
  • U.S. Sheep Experimental Station Grazing and Associated Projects

    U.S. Sheep Experimental Station Grazing and Associated Projects

    United States Department of the Interior IDAHO FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE 1387 S. Vinncll Way, Rmn 35E Boisc, Idaho 83709 Tclcphone (208 ) 37 E -5243 hflp://IdahoES.tus.gov tf0v 0 s 20n Dr. Greg Lewis Research lrader U.S. Sheep Experimental Station 19 Office Loop Dubois,Idaho 83423 Subject: Biological Opinion on U.S. Sheep Experimantal Station Grazing and Associated Projects, Agricultural Research Services In Reply Refer to: 14420-2011-F-0326 lnternal Use: 102.0100 Dear Dr. Lewis: This letter transmits Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Biological Opinion (Opinion) on the Agricultural Research Senrices' (ARS)proposal for theU.S. Sheep Experimental Sheep Station Grazngand Associated Projects (ProjecQ and its effects to threatened grtzzlybear (Ursus arctos horribilis'). In the enclosed Opinion, the Seruice finds that the adverse effects from the Project are not likely to jeopardizethe gizzly bear. ARS also determined that the Project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect Canada lynx Qya canadensis). The Service's concrur€nse with this determination is found below. The Service's Opinion and concurrence were prepared in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. l53l et seq.; hereafter referred to as the Act). ARS's request for consultation wast dated August 19,2011, and received by the Service on August 23,2011. Included in the request was a biological assessment describing effects of the subject action on gizzlybears and Canada lynx. Concurrence for Canada lynx Proposed Action The proposed action is to continue sheep gr:r,ing and associatd activities in a manner consistent with information contained in the Assessment (Assessment pp.
  • Australia-15-Index.Pdf

    Australia-15-Index.Pdf

    © Lonely Planet 1091 Index Warradjan Aboriginal Cultural Adelaide 724-44, 724, 728, 731 ABBREVIATIONS Centre 848 activities 732-3 ACT Australian Capital Wigay Aboriginal Culture Park 183 accommodation 735-7 Territory Aboriginal peoples 95, 292, 489, 720, children, travel with 733-4 NSW New South Wales 810-12, 896-7, 1026 drinking 740-1 NT Northern Territory art 55, 142, 223, 823, 874-5, 1036 emergency services 725 books 489, 818 entertainment 741-3 Qld Queensland culture 45, 489, 711 festivals 734-5 SA South Australia festivals 220, 479, 814, 827, 1002 food 737-40 Tas Tasmania food 67 history 719-20 INDEX Vic Victoria history 33-6, 95, 267, 292, 489, medical services 726 WA Western Australia 660, 810-12 shopping 743 land rights 42, 810 sights 727-32 literature 50-1 tourist information 726-7 4WD 74 music 53 tours 734 hire 797-80 spirituality 45-6 travel to/from 743-4 Fraser Island 363, 369 Aboriginal rock art travel within 744 A Arnhem Land 850 walking tour 733, 733 Abercrombie Caves 215 Bulgandry Aboriginal Engraving Adelaide Hills 744-9, 745 Aboriginal cultural centres Site 162 Adelaide Oval 730 Aboriginal Art & Cultural Centre Burrup Peninsula 992 Adelaide River 838, 840-1 870 Cape York Penninsula 479 Adels Grove 435-6 Aboriginal Cultural Centre & Keep- Carnarvon National Park 390 Adnyamathanha 799 ing Place 209 Ewaninga 882 Afghan Mosque 262 Bangerang Cultural Centre 599 Flinders Ranges 797 Agnes Water 383-5 Brambuk Cultural Centre 569 Gunderbooka 257 Aileron 862 Ceduna Aboriginal Arts & Culture Kakadu 844-5, 846 air travel Centre
  • Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for The

    Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for The

    Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle (Myuchelys georgesi) December, 2016 1 Workshop participants. Back row (l to r): Ricky Spencer, Bruce Chessman, Kristen Petrov, Caroline Lees, Gerald Kuchling, Jane Hall, Gerry McGilvray, Shane Ruming, Karrie Rose, Larry Vogelnest, Arthur Georges; Front row (l to r) Michael McFadden, Adam Skidmore, Sam Gilchrist, Bruno Ferronato, Richard Jakob-Hoff © Copyright 2017 CBSG IUCN encourages meetings, workshops and other fora for the consideration and analysis of issues related to conservation, and believes that reports of these meetings are most useful when broadly disseminated. The opinions and views expressed by the authors may not necessarily reflect the formal policies of IUCN, its Commissions, its Secretariat or its members. The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Jakob-Hoff, R. Lees C. M., McGilvray G, Ruming S, Chessman B, Gilchrist S, Rose K, Spencer R, Hall J (Eds) (2017). Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle. IUCN SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, MN. Cover photo: Juvenile Bellinger River Snapping Turtle © 2016 Brett Vercoe This report can be downloaded from the CBSG website: www.cbsg.org. 2 Executive Summary The Bellinger River Snapping Turtle (BRST) (Myuchelys georgesi) is a freshwater turtle endemic to a 60 km stretch of the Bellinger River, and possibly a portion of the nearby Kalang River in coastal north eastern New South Wales (NSW).
  • Conservation of the Northern Leopard Frog Are Contradictory Management Objectives

    Conservation of the Northern Leopard Frog Are Contradictory Management Objectives

    United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Assessment Forest Service for the Northern Leopard Rocky Mountain Region Frog in the Black Hills Black Hills National Forest National Forest South Custer, South Dakota Dakota and Wyoming April 2003 Brian E. Smith Conservation Assessment of the Northern Leopard Frog in the Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota and Wyoming Brian E. Smith Department of Biology Black Hills State University 1200 University Street Unit 9044 Spearfish, SD 57799-9044 [email protected] Dr. Brian E. Smith is an assistant professor of biology at Black Hills State University in Spearfish, South Dakota. He is a conservation biologist who primarily studies reptiles and amphibians. He earned his doctorate from the University of Texas at Arlington in January of 1996 and has studied the herpetofauna of the Black Hills since then. He also conducts research on the conservation biology of reptiles in the Caribbean. He is the author of several scholarly and popular publications on the herpetofauna of the Black Hills and the Caribbean. Table of Contents INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................................2 CURRENT MANAGEMENT SITUATION.................................................................................................................2 Management

  • North Central Waterwatch Frogs Field Guide

    North Central Waterwatch Frogs Field Guide “This guide is an excellent publication. It strikes just the right balance, providing enough information in a format that is easy to use for identifying our locally occurring frogs, while still being attractive and interesting to read by people of all ages.” Rodney Orr, Bendigo Field Naturalists Club Inc. 1 The North Central CMA Region Swan Hill River Murray Kerang Cohuna Quambatook Loddon River Pyramid Hill Wycheproof Boort Loddon/Campaspe Echuca Watchem Irrigation Area Charlton Mitiamo Donald Rochester Avoca River Serpentine Avoca/Avon-Richardson Wedderburn Elmore Catchment Area Richardson River Bridgewater Campaspe River St Arnaud Marnoo Huntly Bendigo Avon River Bealiba Dunolly Loddon/Campaspe Dryland Area Heathcote Maryborough Castlemaine Avoca Loddon River Kyneton Lexton Clunes Daylesford Woodend Creswick Acknowledgement Of Country The North Central Catchment Management Authority (CMA) acknowledges Aboriginal Traditional Owners within the North Central CMA region, their rich culture and their spiritual connection to Country. We also recognise and acknowledge the contribution and interests of Aboriginal people and organisations in the management of land and natural resources. Acknowledgements North Central Waterwatch would like to acknowledge the contribution and support from the following organisations and individuals during the development of this publication: Britt Gregory from North Central CMA for her invaluable efforts in the production of this document, Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority for allowing use of their draft field guide, Lydia Fucsko, Adrian Martins, David Kleinert, Leigh Mitchell, Peter Robertson and Nick Layne for use of their wonderful photos and Mallee Catchment Management Authority for their design support and a special thanks to Ray Draper for his support and guidance in the development of the Frogs Field Guide 2012.
  • Pre-Incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs

    Pre-Incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs

    Pre-incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs Scope This plan is in place to guide prevention and eradication activities and the management of non-indigenous populations of Toads and Frogs (Order Anura) in the wild in Victoria. Version Document Status Date Author Reviewed By Approved for Release 1.0 First Draft 26/07/11 Dana Price M. Corry, S. Wisniewski and A. Woolnough 1.1 Second Draft 21/10/11 Dana Price S. Wisniewski 2.0 Final Draft 11/01/12 Dana Price S.Wisniewski 2.1 Final 27/06/12 Dana Price M.Corry Visual Standard approved by ADP 3.0 New Final 6/10/15 Dana Price A.Kay New DEDJTR template and document revision Acknowledgement and special thanks to Peter Courtenay, Senior Curator, Zoos Victoria, for reviewing this document and providing comments. Published by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, Agriculture Victoria, May 2016 © The State of Victoria 2016. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, 1 Spring Street, Melbourne 3000. Front cover: Cane Toad (Rhinella marinus) Photo: Image courtesy of Ryan Melville, HRIA Team, DEDJTR For more information about Agriculture Victoria go to www.agriculture.vic.gov.au or phone the Customer Service Centre on 136 186. ISBN 978-1-925532-37-1 (pdf/online) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.