WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 Annual Report WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 PO Box 119 Lennox Head NSW 2478 T 02 6687 7666 PO Box 1446 Coffs Harbour NSW 2450 T 02 6651 7666 PO Box 1267 Armidale NSW 2350 T 02 6772 0454 PO Box 229 Lismore NSW 2480 T 02 6621 6677 [email protected] Prepared for: PACIFICO © GeoLINK, 2018 UPR Description Date Issued Issued By 2378-1421 First issue 06/03/2018 Jessica O’Leary 2378-1432 Second issue 09/03/2018 Jessica O’Leary 2378-1433 Third issue 12/03/2018 Jessica O’Leary Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Project Overview 1 1.2 Giant Barred Frog Habitat 2 1.3 Giant Barred Frog Description 2 1.4 Purpose of this Report 3 2. Methodology 6 2.1 Timing of Surveys 6 2.2 Frog Surveys 7 2.3 Swabbing for Chytrid Fungus 9 2.4 Tadpole Surveys 10 2.5 Abiotic Data 10 2.6 Habitat Data 10 2.7 Water Quality Data 11 3. Results 12 3.1 Abiotic Data 12 3.2 Giant Barred Frog Demography 14 3.2.1 Summary of Summer 2018 GBF Population and Habitat Monitoring 14 3.2.2 Year 3 Seasonal Monitoring Captures and Age Classes 17 3.2.3 Calculating Population Size 20 3.2.4 Sex Classes 23 3.3 Presence of Chytrid Fungus 24 3.4 Habitat Use 25 3.4.1 Frog Distribution along the Transect 25 3.4.2 Distance between GBF location and the stream edge 25 3.4.3 Position within the microhabitat 26 3.4.4 Movements of recaptured frogs within the habitat 26 3.4.5 Habitat Condition 26 3.4.6 Water Quality Monitoring 27 3.4.7 The Addition of Butchers Creek GBF Management Zone 29 4. Discussion 30 4.1 Capture and Age Class 30 4.1.1 Recaptured Frogs 30 4.1.2 Decrease in GBF recorded at UWC since baseline monitoring 31 4.1.3 Butchers Creek Potential GBF Habitat 31 4.2 Habitat Use 32 4.2.1 GBF habitat rehabilitation and landscaping once construction is complete 33 4.3 Recaptured Frogs 33 Annual Report - WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 i 2378-1433 5. Recommendations 35 6. Objectives and Performance Measures 36 7. References 38 Illustrations Illustration 1.1 Site Context 4 Illustration 1.2 Butchers Creek GBF Management Zones 5 Illustration 2.1 Upper Warrell Creek GBF Management Zones and GPS Capture Locations 8 Illustration 3.1 Giant Barred Frog Movements within the Habitat 28 Tables Table 2.1 Key for Determining Reproductive Condition in Male GBF 9 Table 3.1 Abiotic Conditions during Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/ 2018 13 Table 3.2 Rainfall Data During Nocturnal Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/ 2018 13 Table 3.3 Monthly Rainfall Data (mm) 23 January 2015 – 7 February 2018 (source: WC2NH southern weather station, data from weathermation.net.au) 14 Table 3.4 Average Monthly Rainfall Data (mm) Smoky Cape, NSW (source: BOM, 2018) 14 Table 3.5 Records of Recaptured Frogs Overtime – Years 1 and 3 of Construction Monitoring 15 Table 3.6 Summary of Giant Barred Frog capture/ record data during seasonal population monitoring for Years 1 and 3 of construction 18 Table 3.7 Data input and Results of the Lincoln-Peterson Population Size Estimate Calculation for Year 1 and 3 of Construction Monitoring 20 Table 3.8 Results of the Lincoln-Peterson Population Size Estimate Calculation for Baseline, Year 1 and 3 of Construction Monitoring 22 Table 3.9 Chytrid Swab analysis results 24 Table 6.1 Summary of Key Performance Criteria for Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring (Construction Phase) 37 Plates Plate 3.1 Frog 00078ABC66 (new capture) measured 95 mm snout to vent length and 130 grams 15 Plate 3.2 Frog 00078ABBF2 (new capture) was the longest frog measured at 100 mm snout to vent length and 152 grams 15 Plate 3.3 00078ABBF2 (new capture) photo of nuptial pads recorded as moderately grey (note this frog was recorded as female) 16 Plate 3.4 Frog 00077E9014 (recapture) is the heaviest frog captured weighing 159 grams and has been captured four times over Years 1 and 3, first in spring 2015 16 Plate 3.5 Butchers Creek water level between Zones 5 and 6 autumn 2017 17 Plate 3.6 Butchers Creek water level between Zones 5 and 6 summer 2018 17 Plate 3.7 Mixophyes fasciolatus (Great Barred Frog) tadpole, top/side view - Butchers Creek – Zone 7 23 Plate 3.8 Mixophyes fasciolatus (Great Barred Frog) tadpole, ventral view - Butchers Creek – Zone 7 23 Plate 4.1 UWC construction area through Zones 9 and 10 view to the north 32 Plate 4.2 UWC construction area through Zones 9 and 10 view to the south 32 Plate 4.3 Western side of UWC causeway view to the north through Zone 8 32 Annual Report - WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 ii 2378-1433 Figures Figure 3.1 Giant Barred Frog records over six seasonal monitoring events during Years 1 and 3 of construction 18 Figure 3.2 The Lincoln-Peterson Equation to calculate population size (excerpt from page 8 of Baseline Monitoring Report within the GBFMS (Lewis Ecological, 2014)) 22 Figure 3.3 Mean distance of Giant Barred Frogs captured in proximity to the stream edge over six seasonal monitoring periods during Years 1 and 3 of construction 25 Appendices Appendix A GBF Population Monitoring (Raw Data) - Summer 2018 Appendix B Water Quality Results Compared Against ANZECC Trigger Values Appendix C Water Quality Laboratory Results – Autumn, Spring and Summer – Year 3 Appendix D Chytrid Results Analysis and Discussion Annual Report - WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 iii 2378-1433 Executive Summary A population of Giant Barred Frogs (GBF) (Mixophyes iteratus) inhabit the Upper Warrell Creek (UWC) system which intercepts the Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads (WC2NH) Pacific Highway Upgrade route alignment. As such, this population of GBF and construction works are required to be managed in accordance with the WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Management Strategy (Lewis Ecological, 2014). GeoLINK have been engaged by PACIFICO to undertake seasonal monitoring of two GBF management zones within the Project alignment. UWC has a resident population of GBF which has been previously studied by Lewis Ecological (2013/2014) to establish a population baseline. A total of 47 GBF were recorded, including records of juveniles and sub-adults (and recaptures). Since the unexpected find of GBF tadpoles within Butchers Creek, a new GBF management area was established with eight survey zones created for monitoring. No GBF have been recorded within the Butchers Creek survey zones during seasonal population monitoring for Years 1 or 3 of construction. Population monitoring undertaken in 2015/2016 (Year 1) returned fewer records of GBF across the three monitoring periods of autumn, spring and summer, with a total of 16 frogs captured at UWC. No sub-adults or juveniles were recorded during this survey period. Population monitoring undertaken in 2017/2018 (Year 3) returned again fewer records of GBF across the three monitoring periods of autumn, spring and summer, with a total of 14 frogs captured at UWC. Only one sub-adult was recorded during the Year 3 during monitoring. No juveniles were recorded during any survey periods. No GBF tagged in the baseline population monitoring of 2013/2014 have been recaptured during seasonal monitoring for Years 1 or 3 of construction. It can be reasonably expected that a reduced number of GBF have been recorded during construction phase monitoring as a result of an area of high GBF activity (and breeding habitat) has now been fully or partially impacted by construction works. During baseline population monitoring these areas recorded the highest number of frog captures with 21 records in Zones 8 and 9 and six in Zone 10 (i.e. a total of 27 GBF). Prior to construction works, pre-clearing surveys resulted in the capture and relocation of three GBF to outside of the works footprint; no other GBF were accounted for. Despite meeting the mitigation measure requirements via pre-clearing surveys, spotter/catcher presence during clearing works and installation of exclusion fencing, it appears GBF within the construction zone have been substantially affected and this population has declined. Other factors which may explain the considerable reduction in GBF records and no further recaptures since baseline population monitoring may include: ■ Non-favourable survey conditions due to lower than usual rainfall, particularly in the lead up to spring 2017 monitoring. ■ Lower than average monthly rainfall records and smaller than usual flood events. ■ The apparent lack of successful breeding events during the years between monitoring (and therefore no recruitment of juveniles). ■ GBF previously captured or recorded in baseline studies have moved out of the survey area seeking better dispersal or breeding opportunities. Annual Report - WC2NH Giant Barred Frog Population Monitoring 2017/2018 - Year 3 iv 2378-1433 Section 7.0 of the Giant Barred Frog Management Strategy (GBFMS) states that the objectives of the GBF monitoring program are as follows: ■ To demonstrate through the life of the Project that mitigation has maintained or improved population sizes and habitat of the Giant Barred Frog. The use of preconstruction, during construction and post construction monitoring to measure both frog distribution, abundance and habitat quality with defined thresholds will used to measure the overall performance of the mitigation; and ■ To ensure that mitigation measures are effective in maintaining Giant Barred Frog connectivity near the Project. Based on the results to date, the UWC GBF population has not been maintained or improved, but has declined.
Recommended publications
  • Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania Regional Focus
    November 2011 Vol. 99 www.amphibians.orgFrogLogNews from the herpetological community Regional Focus Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania INSIDE News from the ASG Regional Updates Global Focus Recent Publications General Announcements And More..... Spotted Treefrog Nyctixalus pictus. Photo: Leong Tzi Ming New The 2012 Sabin Members’ Award for Amphibian Conservation is now Bulletin open for nomination Board FrogLog Vol. 99 | November 2011 | 1 Follow the ASG on facebook www.facebook.com/amphibiansdotor2 | FrogLog Vol. 99| November 2011 g $PSKLELDQ$UN FDOHQGDUVDUHQRZDYDLODEOH 7KHWZHOYHVSHFWDFXODUZLQQLQJSKRWRVIURP $PSKLELDQ$UN¶VLQWHUQDWLRQDODPSKLELDQ SKRWRJUDSK\FRPSHWLWLRQKDYHEHHQLQFOXGHGLQ $PSKLELDQ$UN¶VEHDXWLIXOZDOOFDOHQGDU7KH FDOHQGDUVDUHQRZDYDLODEOHIRUVDOHDQGSURFHHGV DPSKLELDQDUN IURPVDOHVZLOOJRWRZDUGVVDYLQJWKUHDWHQHG :DOOFDOHQGDU DPSKLELDQVSHFLHV 3ULFLQJIRUFDOHQGDUVYDULHVGHSHQGLQJRQ WKHQXPEHURIFDOHQGDUVRUGHUHG±WKHPRUH \RXRUGHUWKHPRUH\RXVDYH2UGHUVRI FDOHQGDUVDUHSULFHGDW86HDFKRUGHUV RIEHWZHHQFDOHQGDUVGURSWKHSULFHWR 86HDFKDQGRUGHUVRIDUHSULFHGDW MXVW86HDFK 7KHVHSULFHVGRQRWLQFOXGH VKLSSLQJ $VZHOODVRUGHULQJFDOHQGDUVIRU\RXUVHOIIULHQGV DQGIDPLO\ZK\QRWSXUFKDVHVRPHFDOHQGDUV IRUUHVDOHWKURXJK\RXU UHWDLORXWOHWVRUIRUJLIWV IRUVWDIIVSRQVRUVRUIRU IXQGUDLVLQJHYHQWV" 2UGHU\RXUFDOHQGDUVIURPRXUZHEVLWH ZZZDPSKLELDQDUNRUJFDOHQGDURUGHUIRUP 5HPHPEHU±DVZHOODVKDYLQJDVSHFWDFXODUFDOHQGDU WRNHHSWUDFNRIDOO\RXULPSRUWDQWGDWHV\RX¶OODOVREH GLUHFWO\KHOSLQJWRVDYHDPSKLELDQVDVDOOSUR¿WVZLOOEH XVHGWRVXSSRUWDPSKLELDQFRQVHUYDWLRQSURMHFWV ZZZDPSKLELDQDUNRUJ FrogLog Vol. 99 | November
    [Show full text]
  • Abandoned Australia’S Forest Wildlife in Crisis
    Abandoned Australia’s forest wildlife in crisis Photo: Endangered Spotted-tailed Quoll by award-winning nature photographer David Gallan. Used with permission. ​ ​ ​ March 2019 (Updated July 2019) Contents Part 1: A sample of threatened forest-dwelling fauna species at risk from logging 3 ​ Comparison between ‘RFA forests’ and habitat for critically endangered species 5 Regent Honeyeater (NSW) 6 Western Ringtail Possum (WA) 7 Swift Parrot (NSW/Tas/Vic) 8 Leadbeater’s Possum (Vic) 9 Barred Galaxias (Vic) 10 ​ ​ Giant Freshwater Crayfish (Tas) 11 ​ ​ Koala (NSW/Vic) 12 ​ ​ Forest Red-tailed Black Cockatoo (WA) 13 ​ ​ Giant Barred Frog (NSW) 14 ​ ​ Numbat (WA) 15 ​ ​ Spotted-tailed Quoll (NSW/Vic) 16 Greater Glider (NSW/Vic) 17 ​ ​ Large Forest Owls: Masked Owl, Sooty Owl, Powerful Owl (NSW/Tas/Vic) 18 Further threatened forest-dwelling, logging-impacted species 20 ​ Part 2: Summary of new laws and proposals for new protected areas 25 ​ Part 3: Case studies: Threatened species under new RFAs and accredited logging plans 29 ​ 3.1 NSW ‘Integrated Forestry Operations Approvals’ (IFOAs) 30 ​ 3.2 Victoria: State of the Forests Report documents species decline 31 3.3 Tasmania 31 Part 4: Relevant court cases and rulings and their implications 32 ​ 4.1 Enforcement of EPBC Act in relation to threatened species 33 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Appendix 1: The total number of EPBC-listed, forest-dwelling species in Australia 34 ​ ​ ​ Appendix 2: Key threatening processes 35 ​ ​ Appendix 3: FSC HCV categories 37 ​ Acknowledgements and selected references 38 The Wilderness Society acknowledges the First Nations peoples of the lands and seas on which we work across Australia, and recognises their continuing connection to land, water and community.
    [Show full text]
  • National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes Balbus
    National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes balbus David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie Prepared by David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria). Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Melbourne, October 2011. © State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 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 Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne. ISBN 978-1-74242-369-2 (online) This is a Recovery Plan prepared under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the assistance of funding provided by the Australian Government. This Recovery Plan has been developed with the involvement and cooperation of a range of stakeholders, but individual stakeholders have not necessarily committed to undertaking specific actions. The attainment of objectives and the provision of funds may be subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved. Proposed actions may be subject to modification over the life of the plan due to changes in knowledge. 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 that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. An electronic version of this document is available on the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website www.environment.gov.au For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186 Citation: Hunter, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report
    Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report Roads and Maritime Services THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Document control Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Report name Kill Monitoring Report Date 15 February 2019 Revision 1 Section 2A initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 2 Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring report Revision 3 Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring report Revision 4 Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 5 Annual report 2018 including Spring (October) 2018 monitoring Revision 6 Summer (January) 2019 monitoring report Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of this report .................................................................................................................................... 1 Appendix 1 WC2NH Road Kill Monitoring Program Appendix 2 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Stage 2A initial 12 week monitoring. Appendix 3 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 4 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 5 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring Appendix 6 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Annual report 2018 inc. Spring (October) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 7 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Summer (January) 2019 monitoring. Introduction Road kill monitoring is a requirement of the approved Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Koala, Spotted- tailed Quoll and Grey-headed Flying-fox management plans and the Ecological Monitoring Program. The aim of the monitoring program is to; • report on any animal road kill on the project following the opening to traffic; and • assess the effectiveness of the presence of fauna fencing to prevent fauna being killed by vehicles while attempting to cross the WC2NH Upgrade.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O
    1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published.
    [Show full text]
  • No 158, December 2018
    FROGCALL No 158, December 2018 THE FROG AND TADPOLE STUDY GROUP NSW Inc. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/FATSNSW/ Email: [email protected] Frogwatch Helpline 0419 249 728 Website: www.fats.org.au ABN: 34 282 154 794 MEETING FORMAT President’s Page Friday 7th December 2018 Arthur White 6.30 pm: Lost frogs: 2 Green Tree Frogs Litoria caerulea, seeking forever homes. Priority to new pet frog owners. Please bring your membership card and cash $50 donation. Sorry, we don’t have EFTPOS. Your current NSW NPWS amphibian licence must be sighted on the night. Rescued and adopted frogs can 2017 –2018 was another strong year for FATS. FATS is one of the few conservation groups that is man- never be released. aging to maintain its membership numbers and still be active in the community. Other societies have seen numbers fall mainly because the general public seems to prefer to look up information on the web 7.00 pm: Welcome and announcements. and not to attend meetings or seek information firsthand. It is getting harder for FATS to get people to 7.45 pm: The main speaker is John Cann, talking about turtles. be active in frog conservation but we will continue to do so for as long as we can. Last year we made the decision to start sending out four issues of FrogCall per year electronically. 8.30 pm: Frog-O-Graphic Competition Prizes Awarded. This saves FATS a lot of postage fees. Our members have informed us that when FrogCall arrives as an email attachment it is often not read, or simply ignored.
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA YOTF Infopack.Pdf
    ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Information pack ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Printing: The ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign pack was generously supported by Madman Printing Phone: +61 3 9244 0100 Email: [email protected] Front cover design: Patrick Crawley, www.creepycrawleycartoons.com Mobile: 0401 316 827 Email: [email protected] Front cover photo: Pseudophryne pengilleyi, Northern Corroboree Frog. Photo courtesy of Lydia Fucsko. Printed on 100% recycled stock 2 ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Contents Foreword.........................................................................................................................................5 Foreword part II ………………………………………………………………………………………… ...6 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................9 Section 1: Why A Campaign?....................................................................................................11 The Connection Between Man and Nature........................................................................11 Man’s Effect on Nature ......................................................................................................11 Frogs Matter ......................................................................................................................11 The Problem ......................................................................................................................12 The Reason
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): a Review with Regard for Species of Concern Under the EPBC Act 1999
    Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): A Review with regard for Species of Concern under the EPBC Act 1999 Report to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra KF Walker Consultant in River and Floodplain Ecology PO Box 331, YANKALILLA 5203 Adjunct Associate Professor School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide www.sunwater.com.au November 2008 ii … This report may be cited as: Walker KF. 2008. Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): A Review with regard for Species of Concern under the EPBC Act 1999. Report to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. November 2008. xx+84p. iii Executive Summary Queensland Water Infrastructure (QWI) proposes to construct Traveston Crossing Dam on the Mary River as part of a strategy to meet anticipated water demands in south‐ eastern Queensland. This is the last high‐yield dam site available in the region, according to QWI, but it is also an extremely sensitive site in terms of significance for conservation. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been released for public comment, and a Supplement containing responses to submissions has also been issued. This review is concerned with the implications for a number of species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act), including three ‘iconic’ species, the Australian lungfish, Mary River cod and Mary River turtle. Context Ecologically Sustainable Development In many cases, the EIS makes assumptions on the basis of scant evidence and draws conclusions about impacts with little or no justification.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Advice Mixophyes Iteratus Giant Barred Frog
    THREATENED SPECIES SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Established under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Minister’s delegate approved this Conservation Advice on 13/07/2017 . Conservation Advice Mixophyes iteratus giant barred frog Conservation Status Mixophyes iteratus (giant barred frog) is listed as Endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) (EPBC Act) effective from the 16 July 2000.The species is eligible for listing under the EPBC Act as on 16 July 2000 it was listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of the preceding Act, the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992 (Cwlth). Species can also be listed as threatened under state and territory legislation. For information on the current listing status of this species under relevant state or territory legislation, see http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl. The main factor that is the cause of the species being eligible for listing in the Endangered category is a substantial decline in numbers and distribution partly attributed to chytridiomycosis. This species’ status under the EBPC Act is currently being reviewed as part of a species expert assessment plan for frogs. Description A very large frog (snout-to-vent length up to 115 mm) with a pointed snout and well developed hind legs. The dorsal surface is dark brown to olive, with darker blotches and an irregular dark vertebral band commencing between the eyes and continuing posteriorly. A dark stripe runs from the snout, through the eye and above the tympanum, terminating at a point above the forelimb. There are irregular dark spots or mottling on the flanks.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossing Dam Environmental Impact Statement I Mplementation Framework
    TRAVESN TO CROSSING DAM Environmental Impact Statement I mplementation Framework S eptember 2009 FINAL Traveston Crossing Dam Implementation Framework Traveston Crossing Dam – Implementation Framework CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Aim of Implementation Framework 3 1.3 Governance Model 4 2 KEY OUTCOME AREAS 5 2.1 Habitat rehabilitation and restoration 5 2.1.1 On-ground and in-stream works 6 2.1.2 Rationale for using local groups 7 2.1.3 Freshwater Species Conservation Centre 8 2.2 Species mitigation measures 9 2.3 Flow management 9 2.4 Carbon offsets 11 2.4.1 Programs 11 2.4.2 Carbon Offset Research 11 2.5 Vegetation offsets 11 2.6 Contaminated land 11 2.7 Managing activities on QWI land 12 2.8 Environmental management during construction 13 2.9 Operational issues 13 2.10 Support for local businesses 14 2.11 Facilitating long-term sustainable local enterprises 15 2.11.1 Programs 15 2.11.2 Research 15 2.12 Promoting the long-term sustainability of rural industries 15 2.13 Maximising tourism opportunities 16 2.14 Maintaining and enhancing community facilities in the Mary Valley 16 2.15 Cultural heritage 17 2.15.1 Indigenous cultural heritage 17 2.15.2 Non-indigenous cultural heritage 17 3 GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS 18 3.1 Implementation process 18 3.2 Interface Groups 18 3.3 Implementation phases 19 4 REFERENCES 21 APPENDIX A Summary of full implementation program A-1 APPENDIX B Letters of commitment – Greening Australia & QWaLC B-1 APPENDIX C Summary of construction EMP commitments C-1 APPENDIX D Habitat Restoration Plan D-1 Traveston Crossing Dam – Implementation Framework Page i APPENDIX E FSCC Overview E-1 APPENDIX F Letters of Endorsement F-1 APPENDIX G Curriculum Vitae G-1 Traveston Crossing Dam – Implementation Framework Page ii 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Traveston Crossing Dam Project (Project) is a critical component of the water strategy for South East Queensland (SEQ).
    [Show full text]
  • Memoirs of the Queensland Museum
    Memoirs OF THE Queensland Museum W Brisbane Volume 45 29 February 2000 PARTl Memoirs OF THE Queensland Museum Brisbane © Queensland Museum PO Box 3300, SouthBrisbane 4101, Australia Phone 06 7 3840 7555 Fax 06 7 3846 1226 Email [email protected] Website www.qm.qld.gov.au National Library of Australia card number ISSN 0079-8835 NOTE Papers published in this volume and in all previous volumes of the Memoirs of the Queensland Museum maybe reproduced for scientific research, individual study or other educational purposes. Properly acknowledged quotations may be made but queries regarding the republication of any papers should be addressed to the Editor in Chief. Copies of the journal can be purchased from the Queensland Museum Shop. A Guide to Authors is displayed at the Queensland Museum web site A Queensland Government Project Typeset at the Queensland Museum CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. ODONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O'Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue ofprotozoan parasites recorded iii -1 Australia. Memoirs ofThe Oiwenslcmd Museum 45( 1 ): I 63. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports ofprotozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host-parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and s\ mbionls but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagcllalcs.ciliates and 'sporo/oa" (tlie latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplo- sporidians and paramyxeaiis). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including eulherian mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • FLEAY's BARRED FROG (Mixophyes Fleayi) and MOUNTAIN FROG
    FLEAY’S BARRED FROG (Mixophyes fleayi) AND MOUNTAIN FROG (Philoria kundagungan) BASELINE SURVEY SCENIC RIM TRAIL, MAIN RANGE Prepared for Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd PO Box 1376 CLEVELAND 4163 Specialised ecological knowledge that reduces your risk Document Control Sheet File Number: 0435-004a Project Manager/s: Dr Penn Lloyd Client: Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd Project Title: Fleay’s Barred Frog (Mixophyes fleayi) and Mountain Frog (Philoria kundagungan) Baseline Survey, Scenic Rim Trail, Main Range Project Author/s: Dr Penn Lloyd Project Summary: This report presents the results of a baseline survey of two threatened frog species in the vicinity of proposed new hiking trails in Main Range National Park for the Scenic Rim Trail proposal. Draft Preparation History: Draft No. Date draft Reviewed by Issued by completed 0435-004a Draft A 13/11/2018 Paulette Jones Penn Lloyd Revision/ Checking History Track: Version Date of Issue Checked by Issued by 0435-004a Version 0 03/12/2018 Paulette Jones Penn Lloyd Document Distribution: Destination Revision 1 Date 2 Date 3 Date 4 Date Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Client Copy 1 - A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 digital Client Copy 1- hard copy PDF - server A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 PDF – backup – A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 archived Hard Copy - library BAAM Pty Ltd File No. 0435-004a Version 0 NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS REPORT Purpose of Report Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd has produced this report in its capacity as {consultants} for and on the request of Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd (the "Client") for the sole purpose of providing a baseline survey of two threatened frog species in the vicinity of of proposed new hiking trails in Main Range National Park for the Scenic Rim Trail proposal (the "Specified Purpose").
    [Show full text]