FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN

VOLUME 1 PAST AND EXISTING PRACTICES Fauna Sensitive Road Design. Volume 1, Past and Existing Practices

First published February 2000. Reprinted 2002.

Published by the Queensland Department of Main Roads, Planning, Design and Environment Division.

Copyright © The State of Queensland (Department of Main Roads) 2000.

Copyright in this document remains with the Queensland Department of Main Roads. It may be reproduced for study, research or training purposes subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source and no commercial usage or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those listed above requires the prior written permission of the Executive Director, Planning, Design and Environment Division. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Principal Manager (Environment), Planning, Design and Environment Division, GPO Box 1412, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia.

Disclaimer: information in this document does not necessarily represent Government policy. While this publication has been prepared with care, the Queensland Government accepts no liability for any decisions or actions taken on the basis of this document.

National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Fauna sensitive road design Bibliography. ISBN 0 7242 9648 (v.1) 1. Roads - Design and construction - Environmental aspects - Australia. 2. Corridors (Ecology) - Australia. 3. Wildlife crossings - Australia. 4 Wildlife conservation - Australia. 5 Roads - Australia Safety measures. 6. Culverts - Australia - Design and construction. I. Queensland Department of Main Roads. Planning, Design and Environment Division. II. Title: Past and existing practices.

625.725

Cite this document as: Queensland Department of Main Roads (2000). Fauna Sensitive Road Design. Volume 1 - Past and Existing Practices. Queensland Department of Main Roads, Planning, Design and Environment Division. Brisbane.

Available from: Queensland Department of Main Roads, Planning, Design and Environment Division GPO Box 1412, Brisbane, Qld. 4000.

Cover design by Dragon Prints TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 4 2 CURRENT LEGISLATION REGARDING FAUNA CONSERVATION 5 3 POPULATION ECOLOGY AND ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR 6 3.1 Theoretical Issues 6 3.2 Behaviour of Animal Species 12 4 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS 16 4.1 Wildlife Corridors as Habitat Linkages 16 4.2 Corridors along Roadsides 18 4.3 Suitability of Vegetated Corridors 19 4.4 Corridor Width 21 5 EFFECTS OF ROADS 22 5.1 Direct Impacts 22 5.2 Indirect Impacts 26 6 EXISTING PRACTICES 29 6.1 Underpasses and Culverts 29 6.2 Overpasses 37 6.3 Exclusion or Guide Fencing 38 6.4 Wildlife Reflectors 42 6.5 Warning Signs 43 7 REVIEW OF FIELD DATA 47 7.1 General Description of the Data 48 7.2 Culvert Size and Type 51 7.3 Vegetation Associated with Culverts 55 7.4 Wet or Dry Passage through Culverts 56 7.5 Wildlife Fencing 57 7.6 Summary of Findings 58 8 CONCLUSIONS 60 8.1 Influence of Animal Behaviour on Impacts of Roads 60 8.2 Fauna Use of Existing Structures 61 8.3 Recommendations for Accommodating Fauna 62 8.4 Overview of Present Management Practices 64 8.5 Future Directions and Research 64 9 REFERENCES 66 APPENDICES A Survey Data from Study of Culverts by AMBS Consulting(1997) B Survey Data from Study of Culverts by Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) Fauna Sensitive Road Design

SUMMARY

BACKGROUND

Clearing practices in Australia have reduced the area of native habitat available to fauna. Transport corridor infrastructure has not only played a part in the clearing of land, but also in habitat fragmentation. As a consequence of these actions, it is becoming increasingly important that we design and manage transport corridors so as to reduce the impact on Australia’s native fauna species.

Research to date has confirmed that transport infrastructure (and in particular roads) has both direct and indirect impacts on fauna. Direct impacts such as road mortalities can be significant for fauna populations with low numbers or widely dispersed individuals. In addition, indirect impacts from barriers to fauna movement, such as fences or embankments, and edge effects, created by vegetation clearing, are known to reduce movement and thus reduce breeding opportunities for many species.

The increasing recognition of these impacts has led to the trialling and implementation of measures (or modifications) to improve road design. Measures vary from the installation of structures designed specifically to facilitate or guide fauna movement, to signs intended to increase the awareness of motorists. The installation of many measures in the past was largely driven by perceptions of what structures animals would use. In many cases, post-construction monitoring, or the appropriate maintenance of such structures, was not undertaken, and many structures have now been found to be ineffective. The monitoring of existing structures has increased over recent years, and a better understanding of their utility is being developed.

IMPORTANCE OF THIS DOCUMENT

The Queensland Department of Main Roads has recognised the importance of planning, designing, constructing and maintaining roads in an ecologically sensitive manner. Although there is a large body of work about transport infrastructure effects on fauna, this information has not been compiled into a form that would help practitioners identify the most appropriate and effective measures to adopt.

This volume, ‘Fauna Sensitive Road Design—Past and Existing Practices’, is the first in a two-volume series, and is intended to provide an overview of existing knowledge relating to the impact of transport infrastructure on fauna, in addition to discussing the methods available to reduce these impacts. It is intended that the second volume, ‘Fauna Sensitive Road Design—Preferred Practices’, will provide a compilation of trials currently being undertaken by Main Roads and other State and international road management agencies. This latter volume will identify which measures are appropriate for facilitating

1 Fauna Sensitive Road Design the safe movement of fauna. For the purposes of these two volumes, fauna has been divided into fauna groups (e.g. small ground dwelling mammals, large ground dwelling mammals, birds, reptiles, etc).

COMPILATION OF DATA WITHIN THIS VOLUME

This volume discusses the potential impacts of transport infrastructure on fauna. It includes a brief theoretical background to animal behaviour and the function of vegetated corridors so as to help the reader understand the challenges faced when designing infrastructure that is to accommodate fauna movement. Also included in this volume is a review of practices used in road designs to facilitate fauna movement.

Two field studies in particular are analysed, and the general trends in effective designs and modifications noted in these studies are discussed. The studies mainly examine drainage structures and the use of these structures by fauna. A general indication of which culvert type facilitates effective movement for each fauna group is provided (see Table 1). It is, however, important to recognise that the data presented in Table 1 is preliminary only, and this data will be consolidated following further studies currently being undertaken and envisaged for inclusion in Volume 2 of this series.

Table 1 Confirmed use of culvert or underpass type by fauna (+ indicates known use, - indicates not known or unconfirmed use)

Fauna type Small pipe Large pipe Small box Large box Bridge <0.5 m >0.5 m culvert culvert underpass diameter diameter <1.2 m high >1.2 m high Small mammal + + + + + Medium mammal + + + - + Large mammal - + - + + Semi-arboreal mammal¹ - - - +* +* Arboreal mammal² - - - - - Microchiropteran bats³ - - - + + Reptile - + - + + Bird + - - + + Amphibian + - + + + Introduced predator + + + + +

* The only semi-arboreal mammals recorded in fauna tunnels are the Koala and Eastern Pygmy Possum. These species are not considered to be exclusively arboreal. 1 Semi-arboreal mammal is one that spends the majority of time in trees but is also known to travel on the ground (e.g the Koala). 2 Arboreal mammals are tree-dwelling mammals (e.g. the Sugar Glider). 3 Microchiropteran bats are the small, insect-eating bats.

2 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

A synopsis of successful measures that facilitate fauna movement is included in Chapter 8 of Volume 1. Key findings include:

Culverts of a size appropriate for the safe passage of numerous fauna types, rather than just one or a few fauna types, should be installed.

The provision of dry passage within underpasses or culverts is preferable. Multiple cell culverts with the outer cells raised, or raised ledges within a culvert, will greatly assist fauna movement.

Revegetation using locally indigenous plant species is suggested for the entrances of culverts. This provides an extension of habitat nearer to culvert entrances and thus provides shelter for fauna entering and exiting culverts.

Wildlife fencing associated with culverts has proven to be effective in guiding animals into culverts and reducing road deaths. Fences installed on one side of the road only have not been found to reduce fauna road-kills.

Ongoing maintenance of fences is essential to maintain their effectiveness. In particular, Koala- proof fences (unlike wildlife fences) require maintenance so that trees do not grow within 3 m of the fence. This ensures that Koalas do not climb the trees and jump the fence.

FUTURE RESEARCH

The final section of this volume identifies those areas that require research so that we may further our knowledge regarding roads and fauna. It is envisaged that the research areas listed in Chapter 8 will be targeted by road management agencies throughout Australia, and the findings of these subsequent studies be compiled into volume two of this series. Key areas for future research include:

The use and design of canopy bridges for arboreal species.

The effectiveness of Swareflex wildlife reflectors for nocturnal species (particularly macropods).

The appropriate design and location of wildlife fencing.

The most effective location of culverts and the use of these structures by native fauna and introduced predators.

3 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

1 INTRODUCTION

Increasing recognition of the impacts that roads have on fauna populations has led to the development of modifications to road designs that assist in facilitating natural fauna movement. Direct impacts on fauna, especially road-kills, have been evident since the invention of motorised vehicles. However, the effects that road-kills and other impacts have on fauna populations (or groups of individuals from the same species) have been investigated only in the past twenty to thirty years.

This book is the first in a two-volume series that provides information to assist practitioners to design, construct and maintain roads that better accommodate the needs of fauna. By doing so, road authorities can more readily achieve environmental legislative compliance in addition to conserving biodiversity. This volume is designed to provide background information relating to the effect that roads have on individuals, populations and the habitat of fauna species. Included in this volume is a discussion of the theoretical issues of habitat fragmentation, island biogeography, genetic isolation, and some aspects of animal behaviour that influence the degree of impact incurred by various fauna species. It discusses the direct and indirect impacts of roads on fauna, and identifies practices currently used during road construction to help facilitate fauna movement or prevent road mortalities. It also includes a review of field data, both published and unpublished, compiled from investigations of fauna use of underpasses and culverts.

The second volume of this series (Preferred Practices) will consolidate the preferred designs to accommodate fauna. This will occur by documenting the findings from field surveys and research currently being undertaken by the Queensland Department of Main Roads (Main Roads), other State government departments, other national road authorities and internationally.

In producing these two volumes, Main Roads is aiming to provide the most recent information relating to fauna and roads to those planning, designing, constructing and maintaining roads.

4 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

CURRENT LEGISLATION REGARDING 2 FAUNA CONSERVATION

The conservation of native fauna is now well enshrined in legislation. Most native species are protected from being removed from their natural habitat or protected from actions that would cause their unnecessary demise. Those species that are afforded additional protection to ensure their preservation, are listed under State and Commonwealth legislation. Within Queensland, such species are known as ‘scheduled’ species, as they are listed under Schedules 1–4 of the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 1994 (subordinate legislation to the Environmental Protection Act 1994). These schedules relate to ‘presumed extinct’, ‘endangered’, ‘vulnerable’ and ‘rare’ species.

Environmental legislation encourages the development of ‘ecologically sustainable development’ that allows for development which improves the total quality of life, both now and in the future, while maintaining the ecological processes on which life depends. The environmental legislation stipulates that the degree of impact on the environment from a proposal should be determined, and appropriate mitigation measures implemented. Main Roads maintains a ‘Queensland Environmental Legislation Register 1998’, which documents aspects of legislation pertinent to road construction and operation.

Recently, policies to conserve fauna have changed from focusing on the reservation of government lands with high habitat value (i.e. as Crown Reserves or National Parks), towards the maintenance of scheduled species throughout their geographical range. This requires management strategies that focus on maintaining certain fauna populations and their habitats within freehold and leasehold land. Numerous protected species inhabit certain lands that are poorly represented within Crown-held reserves. For example, the Rufous Bettong (Aepyprymnus rufescens) (refer Figure 2.1) inhabits low, dry open woodland (Dennis and Johnson 1995), and most of these areas are now freehold tenure and therefore not adequately protected. Legislation measures are currently being strengthened to protect vegetation on private lands and to permit state governments to develop conservation management agreements with landowners.

Figure 2.1 Rufous Bettong Source: Queensland Museum

5 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

POPULATION ECOLOGY AND ANIMAL 3 BEHAVIOUR

The ecology and population dynamics of fauna species often determines the level of impact these species incur from the construction and operation of roads. The populations likely to be impacted by the road need to be identified and examined so that appropriate amelioration measures can be implemented to reduce impacts.

Determining the distribution, abundance and likely impacts on the population as a result of a road or other transport infrastructure is difficult. General theories relating to the isolation and fragmentation of populations and habitats (areas in which fauna live) have been developed largely over the last 20 to 30 years. These theories provide a ‘blanket view’ of likely impacts from habitat fragmentation and population isolation, and are not species specific. Research into these theories and locations that have suffered significant habitat fragmentation have found that individuals and populations react differently to isolation and fragmentation. Some species are impacted to a higher degree than other species. This is largely related to the behavioural characteristics of the species and its relationship with other species within the environment.

This chapter provides a general description of the theoretical background regarding habitat fragmentation and isolation and the impact this has on fauna species. It also includes a basic outline of the behavioural characteristics of species so the reader may gain a better understanding of the potential impacts resulting from the construction and operation of roads.

3.1 THEORETICAL ISSUES

3.1.1 Habitat fragmentation

Background

Habitat fragmentation is generally considered to be a reduction in the continuity of a habitat through disturbance or loss. This disturbance or loss may be the result of either natural or unnatural disturbances. Natural disturbance or loss of habitat may be due to factors such as changes in climatic conditions including flood or drought, fire, and competition or predation by other species. Unnatural disturbance or loss (created by people) is seen today as likely to have a more significant long-term impact upon species and populations. Unnatural habitat fragmentation may be caused by activities such as the clearing of land for housing, agriculture, or construction of transport corridors through vegetated areas (see Figure 3.1 for an example of habitat fragmentation by linear infrastructure corridors). Another example of unnatural fragmentation is the wheat belt in Western Australia. Research in Kellerberrin has found that habitat loss and fragmentation is the prime cause of fauna species losses in this area (Saunders et al. 1993).

6 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 3.1 An aerial depiction of linear infrastructure corridors severing native habitat areas (Coomera area, south-east Queensland)

Source of Image: Department of Natural Resources

7 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Although reduction in habitat size is a major factor determining the impact of habitat fragmentation (ie. the disturbance footprint), the disturbance of adjacent vegetation often increases the impact felt by local fauna species (ie. by means of edge effects). For example, where a network of vehicle access tracks pass through an area of open eucalypt forest, the tracks themselves may cause only a limited amount of habitat loss. However, weeds such as Lantana (Lantana camara) often recolonise and dominate the areas adjacent to each track, and feral predators penetrate further into bushland by using the newly constructed tracks. The results are considerable edge effects, discussed further in Section 5.3.1.

The primary impacts upon fauna populations from habitat fragmentation are a reduction in suitable habitat size and the increased chance of isolation from other populations of the same species. With particular reference to forest bird populations, several studies have demonstrated that wildlife diversity and species richness (ie. a high number of different species occupying one area) are related to fragment size. That is, a reduction in habitat size results in a decrease in species diversity and richness (De Santo and Smith 1993).

A reduction in the size of suitable habitat for a species often means that individuals are forced to hunt or forage in areas that increase the chance of death. This includes crossing cleared lands, roads or entering other individuals territories including that of predators. The increased chance of mortality, and thus the reduction of individuals in the population, may not significantly impact large populations. Smaller populations however, with less individuals, are likely to be placed at risk of local extinction (Petterson 1985).

Small populations are more vulnerable to decline and extinction than large populations for two main reasons. First, both small and large populations are subject to ongoing disturbance processes of both unnatural and natural origin. A large population with a wide distribution and large gene pool is more likely to survive such processes and possess an ability to adapt to new conditions (see Section 3.1.3). Secondly, Soule (1987) and Simberloff (1995) demonstrated that small populations are more sensitive than large populations to chance variations in population parameters, genetic processes, environmental processes and natural catastrophes. Small populations are more likely to suffer significant mortality rates during any chance variation of existing conditions, leading to reduced opportunities for successful reproduction.

8 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Management practices to reduce impacts

The fragmentation of habitats is often unavoidable as the demand for land and infrastructure increases. Many areas have already become fragmented and have seen a decline in native species.

Management practices to reduce impacts include the avoidance of large habitats, retaining as much native plant diversity in adjacent habitats if avoidance is not possible, and providing vegetated corridors between smaller habitat fragments (ie. wildlife corridors). Wildlife corridors and their role in conservation of fauna species are discussed further in Chapter 4.

Concluding remarks

Habitat fragmentation has impacts on many animal populations, but especially populations with small or low numbers of individuals. Exceptions tend to be opportunistic species that are able to adapt to disturbed environments and introduced predators that thrive in fragmented habitats. Consequently, it is the species presently at risk of extinction (i.e. scheduled or threatened species) that are the most affected by habitat fragmentation. However, with continued fragmentation other more common species may also become locally threatened.

3.1.2 Island biogeography

Background

The island biogeography theory was first established by MacArthur and Wilson (1967) in their study of marine islands. They investigated the relationship of island size and isolation, and the population dynamics of the species present. The theory describes a dynamic equilibrium between extinction and recolonisation rates, which determines the number of species on an island (Saunders and Ingram 1987). The major factors that influence the rate of recolonisation and extinction are the distance between the island and the mainland source (i.e. a measure of isolation), and the total area of the island (Bennet 1990).

Island biogeography has subsequently been applied to the study of habitat fragmentation as both concepts describe a small habitat that is fragmented or isolated either by natural or unnatural processes. The habitat then becomes a small island of remnant habitat in the sea of disturbed landscapes. The level of isolation encountered by organisms in a fragmented environment will vary according to the size of the fragment and the mobility of the organism. In the majority of fragmented environments produced through unnatural causes, the so called ‘sea’ is a hostile environment which can be perilous for the movement of organisms, particularly vertebrate fauna.

Natural ‘islands’ may be the result of a fire or flood that misses a particular habitat patch. Alternatively, natural islands may simply be the result of variations in natural landforms. For example, a small patch of rainforest vegetation that surrounds a natural spring in otherwise dry open forest, or

9 Fauna Sensitive Road Design a stand of palm trees in a rainforest or open forest (see Figure 3.2). Unnatural habitat islands are often the result of vegetation clearing such as in the wheat belt of Western Australia or in any urban environment around the world. The construction of linear infrastructure corridors including pipelines, roads or power-lines often bisect habitats and creates vegetated ‘islands’.

Figure 3.2 An ‘island’ of palm trees within eucalypt forest (Bruce Highway, near Nambour turnoff, south-east Queensland)

Management practices to reduce impacts

The effects of island biogeography are difficult to measure or predict, but they can have profound effects on populations. Therefore, any measures that would reduce isolation and increase the rate of movement would have a significant conservation benefit. Accordingly, vegetated patches of remnant forests referred to as stepping stones, or preferably continuous corridors of habitat that link isolated patches, are recommended in design strategies for nature conservation. Further, the presence of corridors to facilitate movement of animals could supplement declining populations before they reach extinction. This was termed the ‘rescue effect’ by Brown and Kodric-Brown (1977).

Concluding remarks

The island biogeography theory predicts that wildlife corridors will increase the conservation status of isolated habitat by facilitating a higher level of species movement and hence richness. This is achieved by increasing the rate of movement of species and supplementing declining populations and reducing the rate of species extinction. The ability and opportunity of individual animals to move between isolated populations is crucial. For example, when movement between populations is reduced, local extinctions will be high and recolonisation rates will be low. If this occurs regularly, regional extinctions will result (Fahrig and Merriam 1985).

10 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

3.1.3 Genetic isolation

Background

The fragmentation of habitats may result in the genetic isolation of a fauna species. This occurs where the habitat areas become isolated and species are not able to move between populations. The lack of movement of individuals between populations results in a decrease of genetic material entering the isolated population. Individuals within this isolated population must mate with relatives of the same species (inbreeding), or with other species or subspecies within the same environment (outbreeding). Inbreeding between relatives can result in fewer offspring, or offspring that are weak or sterile and may also result in the accumulation of harmful recessive genes. Offspring produced through outbreeding are often weak or sterile and may have incompatible chromosomes and enzymes making their long-term survival less likely (Primack 1993).

The most significant impact on fauna populations from genetic isolation is an inability to adapt to changing environmental conditions (changing conditions happen naturally, though human intervention may quicken the process). A population containing individuals with limited genetic variability are all adapted to one set of environmental conditions, and are generally unable to become acclimatised or adapted to new conditions. Environmental variability (the natural change in environmental conditions) and natural catastrophes can change environmental conditions very quickly. With a population composed of individuals with similar genetic characteristics (in effect almost ‘clone’ like), an environmental variation which will weaken and kill one individual is more than likely to lead to the death of all individuals in the population.

The genetic variation within any normal population is described by the bell-shaped curve (Figure 3.3). This figure illustrates the ability of a population to adapt to a new set of environmental conditions. Some individuals will be ideally suited to the present environmental conditions, whereas others will not be suited (or adapted) to these conditions and may not survive in the present environment. However, should environmental conditions change, through a drought or climate change for example, individuals that were not ideally suited to the previous environmental conditions may thrive under the new conditions and vice-versa.

Small populations are more susceptible to environmental change as more ‘suitably adapted’ individuals are likely to be present in populations with higher numbers than those with only limited numbers.

Management practices to reduce impacts

To reduce the impacts of genetic isolation on a population, genetic exchange within populations needs to occur. This occurs naturally through random breeding within the population, which is facilitated by the regular movement of fauna. However, in artificial environments, habitat fragmentation and island biogeographical effects restrict random breeding. Therefore, as the retention of large intact areas is not

11 Fauna Sensitive Road Design always possible, it is imperative that vegetated corridors are retained. By doing so, the isolation of habitats will be reduced, and therefore the chance of genetic isolation will be decreased.

Figure 3.3 The bell shaped curve describing genetic variation within a population

Concluding remarks

The discussion above highlights the major concern of wildlife managers and the reason why conserving large habitats, and therefore large populations, is critical to species conservation. Namely, the retention of genetic variability provides species with a buffer to survive extreme changes in environmental conditions.

3.2 BEHAVIOUR OF ANIMAL SPECIES

The role of roads acting as barriers to movement, migration and dispersal of terrestrial vertebrate fauna has been documented both in Australia (see Bennett 1991, 1992 for review) and overseas (see Kozakiewicz 1993 for review). The most obvious barriers to faunal movement are roads with wide multiple carriageways. However, the role of small secondary roads as barriers to movement are also of importance, particularly as localised movement between habitats is vital to many animals for seasonal feeding and breeding, as well as for the dispersal of young.

3.2.1 Movement, migration and dispersal

To most people the terms ‘movement’, ‘migration’ and ‘dispersal’ appear to represent the same or similar processes. However, to an ecologist they have quite different definitions. The definitions are as follows:

12 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

‘Movement’ is associated with individuals of a species and relates to regular travel within the species home range. Home ranges may be defined as areas that an individual regularly covers for feeding, nesting and breeding requirements (Burt 1943).

‘Migration’ is associated with an entire population or species and is generally of a seasonal nature. For example, the Red-bellied Pitta (Pitta erythrogaster) is only a summer migrant to northern Queensland from Papua New Guinea.

‘Dispersal’ on the other hand, is often used as a genetical term that relates to the geographical radiation of a species, where each member of the species has common mechanisms to aid geographical radiation. For example, tumble weeds found throughout America are all rounded in shape to aid travel and the plants themselves have their seed capsules located on branches toward the centre of the plant so as to prevent the seeds from all dislodging too early or all in the same area.

The following section discusses the area requirements of fauna and summarises how roads impact upon different fauna species as a result of their behaviour.

3.2.2 Area requirements

The area requirement of animals varies greatly among species. For example, the False Water Rat (Xeromys myoides) (see Figure 3.4) has a foraging range within mangroves of around 0.6 ha (Van Dyck 1995). Large predators such the Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua) (see Figure 3.5) commonly patrol home ranges of up to or in excess of 1,000 ha (Seebeck 1976). Area requirements are generally dependent on factors such as the behaviour of the species, available food resources, breeding, and competition between the same species and other species.

Most animals have a home range. Excursions beyond this range are rare or of a dispersal or migratory nature (Bennett 1990). In a given habitat, the size of a home range varies little between individuals of the same species. At times animals may be restricted to one area within their home range such as a nest site when breeding. A defended home range is termed a ‘territory’, and species such as the Australian Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen) commonly defend a territory.

The variability in area requirements among species means that the retention of suitable corridor widths and/or suitable habitats will also vary considerably. In general, where roads bisect areas of significant habitat, the road should be as narrow as possible, and edges should be replanted with native species indicative of the surrounding habitats. In contrast, vegetated corridors that link core habitats should be as wide as possible.

13 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 3.4 False Water Rat Figure 3.5 Powerful Owl Source: Queensland Museum Source: Queensland Museum

3.2.3 Population dynamics

The study of population dynamics is concerned with the changes that occur in the quality and quantity of individuals within a biological population through time (Kitching 1983). The number of organisms within a population can change in any time period through additions from births or immigration. Similarly, reduction in numbers can occur by the two complementary processes, death and emigration.

These processes have been the subject of many computer simulated population dynamics models. However, the common limitations to each of these models is that they assume that the organisms operate in a closed system (i.e. there are no influences acting on the population other than those of the population itself). This does not however, reflect natural situations accurately. Researchers are now attempting to simulate ‘more realistic’ models to account for the many variables that were originally modelled as constant. These variables include the rate of births and deaths, the age structure of the population and environmental variables to which the organism is exposed in the natural environment (e.g. fluctuations in temperature and rainfall, competition and predation).

In attempts to synthesise the way in which species with low population numbers may avoid extinction, research has targeted the concept of a ‘minimum viable population’ (Gilpin and Soule 1986). This type of model is still in its infancy with regard to bird and mammal populations and field investigations are required to confirm the findings of the simulated model. The majority of these models target species with exceptionally high reproductive rates and generation times, such as insect species (e.g. drosophilid flies), so that the models can be tested in laboratories relatively quickly. Therefore, principles that may be applied to all wildlife as a result of simulated models have not yet become available.

14 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

3.2.4 Summary of animal behaviour and how it relates to roads

The impact of road construction and operation on fauna will be influenced by the behavioural habits of the animal. The construction of roads through habitat areas can isolate populations or individuals, and has the potential to cause genetic isolation. The severing of migratory paths or home ranges may lead to numerous road deaths, as animals follow instinctive routes.

Management practices implemented during the planning, design, construction and operational phases may alleviate some of the impacts caused by roads. The key principles likely to have a positive influence on fauna populations are as follows:

Avoid ‘core’ habitat areas wherever possible (ie. undisturbed habitats).

Avoid bisecting large habitat areas wherever possible.

Minimise clearing.

Retain or establish vegetated corridors.

Include appropriate structures that assist the safe movement of fauna across the road (see Chapter 6 for details).

15 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

4 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS

Wildlife corridors are increasingly used to connect isolated habitats. These corridors are generally thought to allow plants and animals to disperse (or migrate) from one habitat area to another, facilitating gene flow and colonisation of suitable sites (Primack 1993). Land reserved as easements for roads, rail lines and for protection of creeks and rivers (see Figure 4.1) often provide vegetated corridors vital to fauna movement. As such, the management of road reserves is an important tool in the management of fauna sensitive roads.

4.1 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AS HABITAT LINKAGES

Wildlife corridors have become a common land use planning and management practice to aid daily and even seasonal fauna movements. Corridors may represent linkages between larger areas of suitable habitat. Research related to population ecology, outlined in Chapter 3, has concluded that small habitats that are physically interconnected to larger source pools of organisms will support and maintain a greater species richness than comparable habitats that are not physically connected (Harris and Scheck 1991).

In general, wildlife corridors have varying degrees of ‘value’ and ‘significance’. Specifically, ‘value’ pertains to the intrinsic quality of the corridor (i.e. a combination of the size, health, ratio of edge to core habitat, etc.), where the ‘significance’ relates to the corridor’s relationship to other vegetation remnants (i.e. does it join core habitats). As such, a long narrow strip of native vegetation that is unconnected at either end and is surrounded by modified agricultural or pastoral lands may have a high intrinsic biodiversity value but a relatively low significance. This is in comparison to a smaller strip in poorer condition but which provides the only linkage between two areas of remnant vegetation and hence would have a low intrinsic biodiversity value but high connectivity significance.

Wildlife corridors, to be of high significance, must provide a link between relatively large patches of remnant vegetation and should accommodate a variety of species. For example, a narrow, densely vegetated corridor that runs along a creek will not be suitable for most macropods. However, if a wider area was provided on either side of the creek it would produce a higher quality corridor, suitable to a variety of species.

16 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 4.1 A corridor provided by riparian vegetation (Stony Creek, south-east Queensland)

Source of Image: Department of Natural Resources

17 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

4.2 CORRIDORS ALONG ROADSIDES

Little work has been undertaken in Queensland regarding the importance of roadside corridors to fauna species. However, roadside corridors and stock routes have been identified as important conservation reserves for threatened flora species (Allworth 1998). It is highly probable that these corridors are also of high conservation significance for fauna, especially in highly altered landscapes. An example of the importance of roadside corridors is illustrated by Figure 4.2 where the road reserve provides the only native habitat within a highly modified landscape.

Roadside vegetation and its importance to native fauna has been examined in Victoria and Western Australia. Most studies undertaken in these states are comparable to the species and corridors found in Queensland.

Roadside vegetation is important for the conservation of Carnaby’s Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) in Western Australia. This Cockatoo covers large distances to fulfil its requirements of tree hollow nesting in woodlands, and foraging in mallee and heathland. Extensive areas of nesting habitat for this species have been cleared for agriculture, and salinisation threatens much of the remaining habitat. In a monitoring program conducted by the Western Australian Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM), 56% of nest sites of Carnaby’s Cockatoo were found on road and rail reserves (Lamont 1998). It is, therefore, considered that the retention of these nest trees in road and rail reserves is critical for the survival of this species.

Saunders and Ingram (1987) showed that breeding success of birds was higher in landscapes with broad vegetated roadsides that provide clear links between remnants of heathland and woodlands. At one study site, where roadside linkages were narrow and incomplete, several native populations had a low breeding success and some subsequently declined to extinction.

In south-western Victoria, Bennett (1987, 1990) recorded the mammals in forested roadside corridors (5 - 40 m wide), that form a network of linkages through a forest-farmland mosaic. Eighteen species, 78% of the local terrestrial and arboreal mammalian fauna, were recorded using the roadside as a refuge, foraging area, movement corridor, or as resident habitat. Studies of the population dynamics and movements of six species of small terrestrial mammals showed that roadside corridors facilitate continuity between forest patches for these species. This occurs by the movement of single animals within the corridor, and the gene flow resulting from the movement of animals to and from populations outside the corridor.

Dispersal of the arboreal Sugar Glider (Petaurus breviceps) (see Figure 4.3) along a forested roadside in eastern Victoria was documented by Suckling (1984). He studied populations of gliders living in several forest fragments and a roadside corridor, and found that all known dispersal movements, of up to 1.9 km, involved movement along the roadside corridor. Four other arboreal marsupials, the Common Ringtail Possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus), Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus

18 Fauna Sensitive Road Design vulpecula), Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus), and the Feathertail Glider (Acrobates pygmaeus), were also recorded in the roadside corridor. Suckling concluded that, other than incidental use by the Koala, the remaining three species probably use the corridor as a regular movement pathway.

Figure 4.2 Remnant habitat corridor Figure 4.3 Sugar Glider preserved within road reserve Source: Queensland Museum (West Australian wheat belt) Source: Breckwoldt and others, 1990

4.3 SUITABILITY OF VEGETATED CORRIDORS

It is important when developing plans for the management of corridor systems, that careful attention is given to measures that will maximise the value of the corridor to suit a variety of species and increase overall landscape connectivity and function. This will require recognition of those factors that are important for both structural and functional connectivity.

Management of the structural connectivity of a corridor system is the simplest objective to understand and achieve. It is relatively simple to assess and map the continuity of vegetation, to identify gaps and, where appropriate, to target these for revegetation (refer Figure 4.4 for an illustration of variations in movement rates in response to different corridor types). While structural connectivity is important, it does not necessarily mean that a corridor will be used by a particular species. Understanding the functional aspects of connectivity, including those factors that determine whether or not a species will use a corridor, are more difficult. Bennett (1992) has reviewed several factors that are considered important to gain an understanding of connectivity. These factors are:

The type and quality of the habitat: Does the corridor vegetation provide the habitat and particular resources required by the species concerned? For example, some species may require thick patches of scrubby ground cover, others may require logs and litter for foraging and shelter,

19 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

and others still may require tree hollows for refuge and nesting. The topography of the landscape may lead to considerable variation in vegetation composition and structure along the roadside, and revegetation programs should reflect these variations.

The potential for edge effects: With increasing width, roadside corridors encroach upon greater areas of natural habitat for animals, and these then become more vulnerable to disturbance along edges. Edge effects will influence the diversity and type of fauna that will live in the corridor. Some species thrive with disturbance, while other more specialist species will be affected by change.

Animal mobility: The relative mobility of animals will influence the type and length of corridor that they can use. For example, many birds will be able to fly over gaps in suitable vegetation communities and move substantial distances, whereas for small lizards, effective connectivity may require continuous suitable habitat.

Predation and competition: The presence of predators or competitors in a corridor may inhibit movement, or impose an increased risk on mortality. Movement of introduced predators such as the Fox (Vulpes vulpes) or Cat (Felis catus) is often facilitated through the clearing of natural vegetation. Other native fauna species able to adapt to disturbed environments, such as the Noisy Minor (Manorina melanocephala), often dominate road reserves, discouraging other species from using them.

Figure 4.4 Expected movement rates of animals in corridors as a consequence of variations in the quality and type of connectivity

(A) High rate of movement in connected corridor (B-F) Medium rate of movement in corridors of predominantly medium quality habitat or with small gaps (C-J) Low rate of movement in corridors with large gaps (K-L) Negligible rate of movement in corridors severed by a barrier to movement. Figure redrawn from Forman, 1995

20 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

4.4 CORRIDOR WIDTH

The necessary width of a useful corridor varies greatly among wildlife species. For example, small reptiles may utilise narrow corridors whereas larger macropods require wider areas for daily movement. In addition, the habitat retained within the corridor may not be suitable for all wildlife species, and therefore wider corridors are required to include several vegetation types. For example, a densely vegetated riparian corridor would be unlikely to support the dispersal of Koalas, which prefer a corridor of readily accessible trees. Conversely, sparsely vegetated woodland corridors would not be preferred by species such as the Swamp Wallaby (Wallabia bicolor), which prefers thick undergrowth.

A general recommendation for south-east Queensland was to ‘... avoid having (corridors) less than 100 m in width, and the wider the better’ (Catterall et al. 1993). However, Harris and Scheck (1991) suggest that generalities regarding dimensions of corridors, such as a certain number of metres, are inadequate unless in a homogeneous landscape. They suggest that a more effective approach would be to take into account landform, topography, and the native vegetation present including composition, structure and significance. For example, dryland corridors that link habitat remnants generally need to be wider than riparian corridors, because they have a lower vegetation diversity and provide less cover. Also, corridors connecting areas of high conservation significance should be wider, to preserve the diversity and abundance of native species in ‘core’ habitat areas.

Therefore, it is important to determine the appropriate corridor width based on local and regional environmental factors, rather than by selecting a standard width for all situations.

21 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

5 EFFECTS OF ROADS

The impacts of roads on fauna are far reaching and variable, from the most obvious impacts such as collisions to the less obvious like genetic isolation. Roads and their associated activities (e.g. borrow pits) have had significant impacts on the fauna of Australia.

The management of roadsides varies from active intervention to conserve natural resources, to continual mowing aimed at maintaining low grasses. Although vegetation can recolonise utility corridors, it is often maintained at an early successional stage by routine slashing or the spraying of herbicides. This has a significant impact upon the plants and animals living there.

Road systems in Australia appear to be distinctive in that many roadsides support strips of remnant forest, woodland or shrubland (Scott 1981; Grieves and Lloyd 1984; Walling 1985; Arnold et al. 1987; Hussey 1987; Bennett 1987). In the case of fauna, Hunt et al. (1987) demonstrated that roadside verges with a dense cover of native flora supported significantly higher numbers of native wildlife than barren or continually mowed roadside areas.

Studies examining the effects of roads on wildlife are often species specific and therefore, do not determine the impacts of roads on fauna in general. Sections 5.2 and 5.3 provide an overview of the direct and indirect impacts of roads on a variety of fauna species.

5.1 DIRECT IMPACTS

5.1.1 Road mortalities

The most obvious effect of roads is on the direct mortality of fauna caused by collisions with vehicles. The variety of wildlife that is killed on roads is considerable, with birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates all falling victim. The death of fauna due to collisions with passing vehicles has been the centre of studies by biologists from all over the world, including Australia.

Numerous surveys to investigate the impact of road-kills on native fauna populations have been conducted in Australia. In most cases, these studies have targeted individual species. The impact of roads on Koalas have been well documented in recent years (see Prevett et al. 1992; Pahl 1992; Fanning 1992; Gardyne 1995 for reviews). Road kills of macropods have also been the centre of some studies (Coulson 1982). In Victoria and Tasmania, the threatened Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) has been the focus of numerous studies, including the value of road-kill counts to monitor changes in numbers of this species (Mallick et al. 1998).

Ehmann and Cogger (1985) documented the impact of road kills on amphibian and reptile populations,

22 Fauna Sensitive Road Design estimating that some five million frogs and reptiles are killed annually on Australian roads. Bennett (1991) searched a half kilometre transect along a road in western Victoria, and recorded 419 carcasses of five species of frog, all being casualties of a single night following heavy rainfall.

Fauna most affected

The University of Southern Queensland investigated which species are most commonly recorded as road kills along one section of road in southern Queensland. These species (in no particular order) are listed in Table 5.2.

Table 5.1 Fauna species most commonly recorded as road kills in south-east Queensland (from P McConnell, University of Southern Queensland, unpublished results)

Faunal type Species Mammal Northern Brown Bandicoot (Isoodon macrourus) Mammal Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) Mammal Red-necked Wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus) Mammal Brown Hare (Lepus Capensis) Bird Australian Magpie-Lark (Grallina Cyanoleuca) Bird Australian Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen) Bird Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides) Bird Galah (Cacatua rosecapilla) Reptile Carpet Python (Morelia spilota) Reptile Bearded Dragon (Pogona barbata)

The bird species listed in Table 5.1 are likely to be killed on the road whilst foraging for seed or carrion. These animals, along with the reptiles probably using the road for basking, are not excluded from roads by fences. Other animals such as the mammals listed are likely to be hit by cars during natural movement patterns. The factors influencing road mortalities on such species are discussed below.

Reasons for mortalities

Certain species and certain life stages appear to be more vulnerable to road kills than others. Animals that are attracted to habitats or food resources found on roadsides and species that travel considerable distances each day (and therefore increase the likelihood of crossing roads) are generally at higher risk. For example, many road-kills of granivorous birds (those birds that feed primarily on grains) are attributed to grain spillage along roadsides and seeding grasses adjacent to roads (Hodson 1960, 1962; Vestjens 1973; Dhindsa et al. 1988).

In Victoria, more than 175 individuals of the threatened Regent Parrot (Polytelis anthopeplus) were killed at a single site in north-western Victoria where grain had spilt onto the road (Bird Observer 1980). The deaths of other bird species may occur while they are dust bathing (some birds often bathe in dust), or taking grit from the road edge (Hodson 1960, 1962; Brown et al. 1986), or while hawking (or hunting) for insects low over the road (Hodson 1962).

23 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Roadside grasses are also a food source for large herbivores. In Australia, macropods such as the Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus), Western Grey Kangaroo (Macropus fuliginosus), Red- necked Wallaby (Macropus rufogrisens), Swamp Wallaby (Wallabia bicolor) and Tasmanian Pademelon (Thylogale billardieri) are all vulnerable to road deaths (Johnson 1977; Coulson 1982; Osawa 1989). The distribution of sites where large herbivores are killed is generally non-random (Coulson 1982). Roads with generally high mortalities include those areas such as woodland- grassland interfaces, forested areas where the roadside provides good pasture, and sites where regular movement pathways cross roads.

Animals that regularly cross roads as part of their daily movement or migration paths also become victims. For example, frogs that cross roads to ponds during the breeding season are frequently killed in large numbers (Hodson 1960, 1966; Van Gelder 1973). Such mortality is highly seasonal. For example, 40% of the annual road mortality of the Common Frog (Rana temporaria) was recorded in a single week along a 3.2 km stretch of road in Britain (Hodson 1960). Mortality of snakes and lizards, attracted to road surfaces to bask are also markedly seasonal, most occurring in the warmer months (Vestjens 1973).

Small mammals that live in roadside vegetation (Adams and Geis 1983; Garland and Bradley 1984) and birds that live or nest there (Oetting and Casell 1971; Brown et al. 1986) are also vulnerable to collisions with passing traffic. For many species, the frequency of road kills is greatest during the breeding season. This is a consequence of greater movements by adult animals at this time (Haugen 1944; Vestjens 1973; Case 1975; Brown et al. 1986). In southern Australia, road kills of Australian Magpies (Gymnorhina tibicens) are primarily during the spring breeding season when large numbers of juveniles are killed. These deaths contribute largely to the annual tally of all road killed animals (37% of recorded casualties by Vestjens 1973; and 28% by Bennett, unpublished data). In rural areas, Australian Magpies commonly nest in roadside trees and the juveniles of such birds are often victims of road kills (Carrick 1963). Also, Koalas are usually killed in higher numbers on roads during the summer months when adult males travel considerable distances defending their territories or as young males disperse into new territories (Prevett et al. 1992).

Predators that frequent roads to feed on the carcass of road-killed victims are also common among the mortalities. In Australia, the Fox (Vulpes vulpes), Cat (Felis catus), Barn Owl (Tyto alba), Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides), Southern Boobook (Ninox novaeseelandiae), and several ravens (Corvus spp.) are regularly killed on roads (Vestjens 1973; Disney and Fullagar 1978; Brown et al. 1986; Thomas 1988). In more arid areas, the Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax) (see Figure 5.1) is commonly killed whilst feeding on road kills.

24 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 5.1 Wedge-tailed Eagle Figure 5.2 Southern Cassowary Source: Queensland Museum Source: Queensland Museum

Many species, mainly mammal fauna, are killed at certain times of the day, especially dawn and dusk. This is due to the nocturnal activity patterns of many mammal species, who often travel at these times to feed. Many animals, particularly macropods, are hit on the outskirts of towns as many road users leave or enter towns at dawn or dusk (M. Ryan, Technology and Environment Division, Department of Main Roads pers. comm.). Measures to reduce fauna mortalities, particularly wildlife reflectors, may be beneficial in these areas (see Chapter 6 for details).

Impacts on populations

In general, it appears that for most common animals, particularly the smaller species, road kills do not exert a significant pressure on population dynamics or conservation status. Schmidly and Wilkins (1977) found that less than 1% of the rodent community living on three roadsides in east Texas were killed on roads over an annual cycle. Brown et al. (1986) found that of the 28,887 birds banded in their study area in Western Australia between 1977 and 1985, only ten banded individuals were found as road victims between January 1984 and December 1985.

However, for large animals, particularly those with restricted and declining distributions, and those that are regularly and repeatedly in contact with roads, such as for migration paths or daily movement for food, there is some evidence that road kills have a significant impact on the population. Harris and Gallagher (1989) stated that road kills in Florida are the major known source of mortality for most of the large endangered species including crocodiles, deer, bears and eagles. Over 50% of known deaths of the endangered Florida Panther (Felis concolor) since 1981 have been the result of road kills.

25 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

In Australia, road mortalities of threatened populations with low numbers of individuals can have a significant impact. For example, the remnant and declining population of the threatened Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Perameles gunnii), in the city of Hamilton, western Victoria, is under considerable threat (Brown 1989; Sheridan 1991). Specifically, Sheridan (1991) found that of the estimated population of several hundred (Arnold et al. 1990) 50–60 individuals are killed on roads annually.

In similar cases, Lee and Martin (1988) noted that on the busy tourist locality of Phillip Island Victoria, road mortality has emerged as a major factor associated with koala population decline. Saunders (1990) reported road kills of Carnaby’s Cockatoo (Calypotorhynchus latirostris) to be a significant source of mortality for a declining population (approximately 14 pairs) at Manmanning in Western Australia.

Also, at Mission Beach in north Queensland, where the densest population of the threatened Southern Cassowary (Casuarius casuarius) (refer Figure 5.2, previous page) exists, nineteen of fifty-nine known birds fell victim to road kills in two years (Smith and Muller 1988; cited in Andrews 1990). The total loss had increased to twenty-five early in 1990 (Roberts 1990; cited in Andrews 1990). Roadside warning signs have not reduced these road deaths, and local residents are now being asked to stop feeding the birds as this attracts them to roadsides. These alarming figures have resulted in Main Roads funding a detailed project to identify movement corridors, and to provide additional measures to protect this keystone species. Findings from this project will be included in the second volume of this series.

5.2 INDIRECT IMPACTS

5.2.1 Edge effects

An edge effect is the result of disturbance causing two contrasting habitats to suddenly converge without any natural gradient. The edge is usually hostile to most native wildlife, and species from the natural interior of the habitat or ‘core’ of the habitat seldom inhabit the edges. Species with excellent dispersal abilities, and those capable of invading and colonising disturbed habitats, especially introduced predators and opportunistic native species able to colonise these areas, are attracted to road edges.

The fragmentation of habitats often leads to the formation of significant areas of edge habitat and a subsequent reduction in interior habitat. Many species not adapted to the levels of disturbance experienced in the edge habitat will be confined to smaller areas of interior habitat. These species are generally the ones that are less common and therefore of greater concern (Ranney et al. 1981). As such, core areas are of paramount importance for conservation and early road planning studies should aim to avoid such areas.

26 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Edge effects are noticeable by differences in diversity, density and distribution of flora and fauna populations along roads and utility corridors. The presence of particular species usually found in this edge habitat is an early indicator of edge effects. A few widespread species can dominate edges. These patterns have been described for small mammals (Johnson et al. 1979; cited in Andrews 1990) and birds (Kroodsma 1985), and studies have indicated that the structural differences of the plants also add to the differences in faunal populations. For example, weeds such as Lantana (Lantana camara) and fauna such as the House Mouse (Mus musculus), Fox (Vulpes vulpes), feral Cat (Felis catus), Noisy Minor (Manorina melanocephala) and Torresian Crow (Corvus orru) commonly inhabit disturbed areas.

Edges have been described as ‘ecological traps’ following studies that showed some birds were attracted to the vegetation on edges to breed, only to lose their offspring through nest predation (Yahner 1988). Harris (1988) and Yahner (1988) warn that edges can have negative consequences for wildlife, especially those species dependant on large undisturbed areas. It is difficult to delineate the edge dimensions and to quantify the effect of the edge (Yahner 1988). Studies in the Amazon forest fragments show an avoidance of edges by interior forest birds noticeable more than 50 m into the forest.

5.2.2 Barrier effects

Barriers to fauna movement may be provided by infrastructure associated with roads (e.g. fencing), or by roads themselves. This section discusses the effects associated with these barriers.

Taylor and Martin (1987) (cited in Andrews 1990) list the detrimental effects of fences on wildlife, which include:

Entanglement.

The severing of access to essential natural requirements such as water supplies.

The prevention of movement into suitable habitat areas.

The disruption of seasonal movement.

Overpopulation through limitations on dispersal.

Increased human intervention through the use of fenced maintenance roads.

This illustrates the need to consider the use of fencing and to provide specifically-designed culverts or underpasses in association with fences. Fencing of roads is often intermittent, with some stretches of road fully or partially fenced, whilst others are fenced by landholders with stock fencing or not fenced at all. The type and extent of fencing is an important consideration for roads. These should be determined with the knowledge of the fauna species in the area, and the design characteristics (e.g. dimensions of underpasses) of the proposed roads.

27 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

6 EXISTING PRACTICES

In recent times, the impact of roads on local fauna populations has been given further consideration. As a result of this attention, a number of mitigation measures have been introduced, most targeting specific species. These measures have involved a variety of innovative techniques including tunnels, fences, funnels, bridges, reflectors, overpasses, underpasses, culverts and signage. The effectiveness of these measures varies and in most cases, more research and monitoring is required to determine their relative cost effectiveness. Road modification designs from Australia and overseas are outlined below.

For the purposes of this report, ‘underpasses’ refer to sections under bridges or raised sections of road over depressions or similar topographical features. ‘Culverts’ however, refer to structures specifically designed to facilitate fauna movement or water drainage and come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes. Most culverts are either round pipes or box culverts and are generally made of reinforced concrete.

6.1 UNDERPASSES AND CULVERTS

In North America, highway underpasses and culverts are regularly used for the management of large game species such as elk, deer and mountain goats (Reed et al. 1975; Reed and Woodward 1981; Ward 1982; Singer et al. 1985; Harris 1988). More recently, fauna underpasses have become desirable to accommodate native mammal populations in Australia (Hunt et al. 1987; Mansergh and Scotts 1989; Pieters 1993). Some have proved to be effective in facilitating animals crossing roads at migration pathways, or where busy roads bisect fauna habitats.

Underpasses or culverts have also been used to facilitate movement of smaller animals such as the Mountain Pygmy-possum (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). Specifically, a road in the Victorian highlands of south-eastern Australia bisected the possums’ alpine habitat. This disrupted social organisation within the population by preventing the dispersal of males and causing direct loss to the population as a result of road kills. When a rock scree corridor and culverts were installed to restore habitat continuity, dispersal of males occurred, and the survival of resident females within the breeding habitat was significantly increased (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). Additional modifications included the culverts being filled with basalt boulders and grills being installed at the entrances to the culverts to prevent predator access. Such modifications require careful consideration, and would not be appropriate for the majority of culverts installed on Australian roads.

29 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

6.1.1 Underpasses

The movement corridors provided under bridges are generally referred to as ‘underpasses’. Bridges have been shown to provide successful underpasses that facilitate natural fauna crossings (Evink 1990, Foster and Humphrey 1995). Underpass placement based on knowledge of actual travel routes may be more important in determining underpass use than other factors such as structural dimensions. Underpasses and bridge extensions in locations where movement paths crossed roads were found to significantly reduce road mortalities of the Florida Panther (Felis concolor) (Evink 1990). However, Hanna (1982) found that placing underpasses without regard to traditional paths failed to facilitate movement of deer (cited in Foster and Humphrey 1995).

Limited research has been undertaken in Australia into the use of underpasses by terrestrial fauna. Tracks of fauna such as kangaroos and bandicoots are present under many bridge structures, but limited research appears to have been conducted into the effects on population dynamics from constructed underpasses. Such issues will be targeted in the second volume of this series.

Most researchers have concluded that animals using an underpass should have an unobstructed view of the habitat or horizon on the far side of the underpass (Foster and Humphrey 1995). However, some vegetation should be present to suit a variety of species, especially small mammals. Lack of light often limits the amount of vegetation that will grow under a bridge, however Broadbent et al. (1981) feel that vegetation cover should be retained in the areas immediately adjacent to and under the bridge. This provides protection for species using the underpass and may discourage use of the underpass by large predators (Armstrong and Francis 1997).

An example of successful regeneration is found at a bridge over Steggalls Creek on the Yandina Bypass in south-east Queensland. Construction of the bridge was completed in 1997 (Figure 6.1) and substantial regeneration of the site had occurred by 1999 (Figure 6.2). Figure 6.3 shows an underpass which does not provide adequate cover for fauna species, although the dry banks would be suitable for future revegetation.

It is recommended that bridge abutments be moved away from creek banks to increase opportunities for fauna movement. Figure 6.4 demonstrates an underpass unsuitable for fauna movement as it is dark and would not provide dry passage during high flow events.

30 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.1 Steggalls Creek bridge on the Yandina Bypass, south-east Queensland, shortly after construction (1997)

Figure 6.2 Steggalls Creek bridge showing advanced revegetation with native species (July 1999)

31 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.3 Ideal opportunity to provide native plantings under a bridge that has dry fauna passage (Nambour Bypass, south-east Queensland)

Figure 6.4 Bridges which are dark and have limited dry passage for fauna, consequently providing inadequate cover for native fauna species (Bruce Highway, south-east Queensland)

32 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

6.1.2 Culverts

The culverts most suitable for fauna passage allow the free movement of a wide range of native species. Culverts suitable for terrestrial fauna should, in general, provide dry passage during low flow conditions and in some cases, this may require the construction of benches or flow diversions. It has been suggested that box culverts should be placed on an angle to provide dry areas (AMBS Consulting 1997). However, it would be more practically feasible to provide raised ledges (of only 100 mm) on one side of a box culvert (Armstrong and Francis 1997) (see Figure 6.5), or to raise the outer cells where multiple culverts are constructed.

Hunt et al. (1987) established that small native mammals had a preference for established culverts over newer culverts, and that newer culverts were predominantly utilised by predators. This is possibly a consequence of the lack of vegetation around new culvert entrances. The presence of vegetation adjacent to culverts was found to significantly increase activity of fauna near the culvert entrances along the Kwinana Freeway in Western Australia (Ecologia Environmental Consultants 1995). It was also found during this study that the level of activity around the culvert entrance decreased as the distance of the vegetation from the entrance increased. Examples of culverts without appropriate revegetation at entrances are shown in Figures 6.6 and 6.7. The box culvert illustrated in Figure 6.8 has substantial revegetation of the culvert entrance. Although some weed species are present, the majority of the regrowth is native species and provides considerable protection for small animals.

De Santo and Smith (1993) and AMBS Consulting (1997) report that culverts with natural flooring, either dirt or sediments, increased animal usage of culverts. Yanes et al. (1995) noted a high degree of acceptance of culverts by small mammals and concluded that this may be due to the ground surface of the culverts being covered in soil and debris which provides a less hostile environment for these animals than the open roadway. Figure 6.9 illustrates a box culvert where silt has accumulated and provided a base for vegetation. However, in this instance, the species revegetating the site is an introduced grass. Revegetation using native species and installation of appropriate flow diversion structures after construction would have increased the value of this culvert to native fauna.

It is suggested by much research (e.g. AMBS Consulting 1997; Armstrong and Francis 1997; Ishta Consultants 1999) that culverts should be modified to provide protection for native species from predators. These modifications may include revegetating the entrance with local flora, or placing logs, rocks or upright poles inside the culvert to enable protection. In culverts designed specially for fauna use these modifications may be feasible, but many culverts in Australia also have a dual purpose as water conduits and as such, modifications such as these may be unsuitable. Such issues will be discussed at length in the second volume of this series (see also Chapter 8 for preliminary findings).

33 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.5 Raised ledges within a culvert (Old Northern Road, south-east Queensland)

Figure 6.6 A small three cell box culvert partially obstructed with sediment and with little revegetation of entrance (Sunshine Coast Motorway, south-east Queensland)

34 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.7 Pipe culverts where limited revegetation provides little cover for fauna (south-east Queensland)

Figure 6.8 A culvert entrance where revegetation of native species is well advanced, providing good cover for fauna (Brunswick Heads Bypass, northern NSW)

35 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.9 A culvert in which accumulated silt provides a substrate for revegetation but exotic species dominate (Burnett Highway, south-east Queensland)

Modifications to culvert entrances to exclude feral predators have also been recommended by some studies. Ishta Consultants (1999) suggested the installation of fences at the entrances of culverts that Koalas could climb, as these would prevent the movement of large dogs from rural/urban areas into bushland. However, such fences would also negate the movement of other medium and large fauna species (including macropods and bandicoots), and are therefore not recommended. Rather, Koala refuge poles may be strategically placed within the culvert or underpass entrance and exits (see Figure 6.10).

Figure 6.10 A Koala refuge pole located outside a well revegetated culvert entrance (Brunswick Heads Bypass, northern NSW)

36 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Other suggested modifications to culvert design have included roughening the roof and walls of box culverts to encourage the roosting of small bats (Armstrong and Francis 1997). The viability of this suggestion is not known, although the Little Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus australis) and Large Bent- wing Bat (M. schriebersii) are both known to roost in overflow culverts associated with Grahamstown Dam, north of Newcastle (H. Parnaby, Australian Museum pers. comm. 1995). However, a debate exists as to whether culverts should provide nesting or roosting habitat for fauna in addition to safe passage. This debate is not addressed in this report.

Culvert skylights (installed in median strips illustrated in Figures 6.11 and 6.12) have also been mentioned as necessary to introduce light into culverts to encourage terrestrial fauna (Armstrong and Francis 1997). The use of skylights or grates in culverts has not been recommended by AMBS Consulting (1997) and Ishta Consultants (1999), as it is felt that these structures will increase levels of detritus and road noise into the underpass. AMBS Consulting (1997) noted that reptiles used the underpasses during the day only on a opportunistic basis. As most Australian mammals are nocturnal, it is considered that the addition of skylights would only encourage the use of culverts by domestic and feral predators during daylight hours.

Figure 6.11 Surface view of a culvert skylight Figure 6.12 View of skylight in roof of culvert

6.2 OVERPASSES

The consideration of overpasses in road projects is particularly relevant where tree-dwelling (i.e. arboreal) species are common. Arboreal mammals are rarely recorded using underpasses. Koalas, although considered arboreal, traverse the ground to move from one area to another, but other exclusively arboreal animals, especially gliders, often have difficulty crossing wide roads. The use of vegetated overpasses has had relatively little investigation in Australia due to the high costs of building and maintaining bridge like structures or tunnelling roads. Generally, for an overpass to allow successful movement of arboreal species, an upper canopy is considered necessary to provide gliding ability. This would require a substantial amount of ground surface above a tunnelled road to allow tree growth.

37 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

AMBS Consulting (1997) outlined some of the studies that have been undertaken into overpasses but did not provide recommendations. The NSW Roads and Traffic Authority is presently trialing structures, such as rope or canopy bridges, to assess the viability of accommodating movement of arboreal mammals. Research into the effectiveness of canopy bridges in the rainforests of north Queensland is also being undertaken by the Rainforest Co-operative Research Centre (CRC). This research will include examination of a purpose-built canopy bridge built around five years ago (Radio National 2000). Outcomes of both investigations will be included in the second volume of this series.

6.3 EXCLUSION OR GUIDE FENCING

Wildlife-exclusion or guide fencing has been used widely throughout the world, though most investigations of its effectiveness have been conducted in America. This fencing is generally 1.8 m high chain-wire mesh fencing. Such fences have been constructed to reduce collisions between vehicles and large game animals, such as deer and elk. Research by Ratcliffe (1974) demonstrated that small mammals, such as badgers, also benefit from guide fences.

In Australia, fencing has most commonly been used for the conservation of Koalas (see Prevett et al. 1992; Gardyne 1995) and to exclude macropods from roads. The guide fencing is mainly associated with underpasses and culverts (see Figure 6.13), leaving large sections of highways unfenced. This is necessary and appropriate in areas where culverts are impractical, but it also prevents animal deaths from fire where the ability of an animal to escape is impeded by extensive lengths of fence without sufficiently spaced and suitably sized underpasses. Fencing of areas where regular movement paths cross over roads may be of significant benefit to some fauna populations. However, many animals in Australia have random movement paths and will not benefit significantly from extensive wildlife fence networks.

Figure 6.13 A culvert with wildlife guide fencing and raised ledges (Sunshine Coast Motorway, south-east Queensland)

38 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Many animals are hit by cars where unfenced sections of road join a fenced culvert, particularly at high risk areas such as woodland/grassland interfaces or areas that support remnant corridor vegetation. The design of many guide fences around culverts cause the fence to narrow close to the road, shown on Figure 6.14. Guide fence designs have recently included breaks in the fence to allow animals to escape off the roadway. Kinhill Pty Ltd has designed an alternative culvert fence for two road projects in north-eastern NSW, the proposed Pacific Highway realignments at Halfway Creek (Kinhill Pty Ltd 1997a) and Tandys Lane (Kinhill Pty Ltd 1997b) (see Figure 6.15). This innovative fence design requires monitoring to document its effectiveness.

Guide fencing may be constructed to suit a range of animals or may be species specific. In North America, specifically designed deer fencing is required in some areas, as deer can jump over the standard wildlife fencing (Foster and Humphrey 1995). In Australia, the majority of wildlife fencing used is designed to discourage macropods, but will also discourage many other medium to large sized mammals. Small mammals, reptiles or amphibians are rarely restricted from road surfaces by the commonly used wire mesh fencing. However, installing strips of sheet metal at the bottom of the guide fence has proved effective in controlling some species (M. Ryan, Technology and Environment Division, Department of Main Roads, pers. comm.).

In areas containing a Koala population, specifically designed Koala fencing is required, as Koalas will climb standard wildlife fences (Prevett et al. 1992). There are two designs for Koala-proof fencing: one is a metal sheet retrofitted to the top of an existing fence (see Figure 6.16), and the other is a fence with a floppy-top (see Figure 6.17), which cannot be climbed. The former fence design appears more aesthetically pleasing and the metal sheet may be retrofitted to standard wire mesh. In addition, the floppy-top fencing is more susceptible to invasion by introduced vines and other weed species, and therefore requires more ongoing maintenance.

It is necessary to ensure that all Koala-proof fencing is located or maintained so that trees do not grow within approximately 3 m of the fence. Should trees grow within this zone, Koalas may readily climb the tree and jump over or on top of the fence.

39 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.14 Illustration showing how guide fencing on only one side of a road may increase road-kills

Figure 6.15 Modified fence design to allow trapped animals to escape from road reserve

40 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.16 Design drawing for a ‘sheet metal’ type Koala-proof fence

Figure 6.17 ‘Floppy-top’ fencing designed to prevent Koalas entering the road reserve (Brunswick Heads Bypass, northern NSW)

41 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

It is generally recognised that ongoing maintenance of fences is essential for the effective restriction of animals from roads. Wildlife quickly exploit breaks in fences and one problem often associated with guide fencing associated with culverts is a lack of maintenance and that holes caused by vandalism or general wear are often not repaired (AMBS Consulting 1997).

6.4 WILDLIFE REFLECTORS

An Austrian company, Swareflex, manufacture wildlife reflectors that were demonstrated to be effective in reducing the number of traffic collisions with deer in Austria (Schafer et al. 1985). The Swareflex wildlife reflectors consist of a series of 16 cm x 5 cm red reflectors mounted along the roadside on posts at a height of about 1 m. Light from the headlights of an approaching vehicle is reflected as red light at right angles to the road by the reflectors. The purpose of this is to cause approaching animals to ‘freeze’ and remain motionless until the car passes and the headlight reflection ceases (see Figure 6.18).

Figure 6.18 An illustration of a ‘Swareflex’ wildlife reflector and a description of its use Figure redrawn from Sheridan, 1991

42 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

A study conducted in Ballarat, Victoria, to assess the usefulness of such reflectors in an attempt to reduce road kills of the Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) met with little success (Sheridan 1991). The apparent failure of these reflectors may be the result of poor experimental design with respect to the target animal rather than the ineffectiveness of the reflectors. In particular, subsequent studies of the Eastern Barred Bandicoots have shown that these animals are less perturbed by red light than they are by white light (Sheridan 1991). As such, more specifically-designed experiments are required before the use of these reflectors is rejected.

The NSW Roads and Traffic Authority have trialed red and white reflectors in northern NSW with early results indicating that this combination of colours may be effective (M. Ryan, Technology and Environment Division, Department of Main Roads pers. comm.). The Queensland Department of Main Roads is undertaking studies on wildlife reflectors and the finding of this work will be included in the second volume of this series.

6.5 WARNING SIGNS

In Australia, Coulson (1982) and Gardyne (1995) reported that warning signs were not an effective method of reducing the number of animals killed. They found no significant difference in the number of kangaroos and Koalas respectively, killed before and after the installation of warning signs in central Victoria and the Redland Shire of Queensland (see Figure 6.19 for a typical kangaroo warning sign).

Warning signs that reveal the number of animals killed on a particular stretch of road have also not contributed to a reduction in road mortalities. Such signs are generally used for Koalas throughout Australia, including along the roads of Phillip Island in Victoria.

However, a reduction in the speed limit from 100 km/h to 80 km/h was found to reduce the number of Koalas killed on the roads in the Redland Shire of Queensland (Gardyne 1995). Signs that suggest a lower speed during the Koala breeding season have been used near Koala populations with high densities in south-east Queensland (see Figure 6.20).

43 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.19 A kangaroo warning sign intended to increase motorists awareness of these animals

Figure 6.20 A sign used in south-east Queensland to increase driver awareness during the Koala breeding season

44 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

These signs are aimed at increasing driver awareness in areas where fauna are known to cross roads. It is not known whether the number of road accidents between motorists and fauna has decreased as a result of signage and raised awareness. Other Local Government Authorities are also installing signs to increase the publics awareness of fauna (see Figure 6.21).

It is considered preferable to use Koala awareness signs that more accurately represent a Koala in the walking stance (see Figure 6.22a), rather than those which show a Koala in a tree (see Figure 6.22b).

Figure 6.21 A fauna awareness sign used by local government (Pine Rivers Shire)

45 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Figure 6.22 Design drawings and erected signs of (A) a walking Koala and (B) a sitting Koala Source: (A) NSW Roads and Traffic Authority (B) Department of Main Roads

46 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

7 REVIEW OF FIELD DATA

There is only limited information available regarding research into the use and effectiveness of road design modifications for fauna. Published research investigating modifications in Australia is generally difficult to find and varies greatly in the degree of detail and the methodologies employed.

Overseas studies have been largely undertaken to prevent road mortalities of large animals that are also likely to injure vehicle occupants during collisions, and therefore the designs are of little relevance to Australian roads. In particular, other than macropods and perhaps wombats, Australian mammals are smaller and less likely to cause serious injuries to vehicle occupants. As such, modification to designs on Australian roads, are more focused on conserving threatened or locally restricted species.

At present, the most significant item of Australian literature regarding the use of culverts by fauna has been published by the Australian Museum Business Services as AMBS Consulting (1997). This survey involved a study of three culverts under the F3 Freeway between Sydney and Newcastle. The study included examination of the fauna surrounding the underpass, the species using the underpass and the influence that the design and features of each culvert may have on fauna movement.

In 1996, Kinhill Pty Ltd conducted a study of the culverts along three sections of motorway located in the Sunshine Coast region of south-east Queensland. Although unpublished, the data obtained during this survey provides an indication of the species likely to use culverts for movement in south- east Queensland, and the effectiveness of culverts that have been modified for fauna movement.

Collation of the data from these two studies (in addition to results obtained from species-specific assessments) provides an indication of which species utilise certain culvert types, and which modifications to culvert surrounds are likely to encourage fauna movement through the culverts. A detailed statistical comparison of data could not be undertaken as a result of variations in the recording of data, the experimental design employed and the methodology used in the surveys. However, as a general guide, this data will assist in identifying conditions that appear to facilitate fauna movement through underpasses and culverts and areas which may benefit from more research.

Findings from targeted field surveys currently being undertaken by the Queensland Department of Main Roads and other road authorities, will be compiled and presented in the second volume of this series. Field surveys have and will continue to be developed to test the preliminary findings provided in this volume.

47 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

7.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA

A summary of the raw data from field surveys conducted by AMBS Consulting (1997) and Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) is presented in Appendices A and B. A general description of this data is included below. Interpretation of the data has been undertaken using total number of species or percentages of total records. This has been undertaken to allow comparison between the two different data sets.

To further aid interpretation of this data, fauna species recorded during both surveys are grouped into faunal types as identified on Table 7.1. In general, the fauna in each category would have similar requirements in culvert design and modification.

Table 7.1 Categories of animals used for interpretation of field data

Faunal type Animals included within category Small terrestrial mammal Ground-dwelling species including rodents (both native and introduced), antechinus* and dunnarts Medium-sized terrestrial mammal Ground-dwelling species including echidnas, bandicoots and quolls Large terrestrial mammal Ground-dwelling species including kangaroos, wallabies and wombats Semi-arboreal mammal Tree-dwelling species which move across the ground including possums and koalas Arboreal mammal Tree-dwelling species which usually move through the canopy, rarely moving on the ground, including gliders Bat/flying-fox Flying mammal species including microchiropteran bats and flying-foxes Reptile Ground or tree-dwelling reptiles including all snakes and lizards Bird Predominantly ground-dwelling birds species with only incidental records of flying bird species Amphibian Ground or tree-dwelling frogs and toads Introduced predator Introduced ground dwelling carnivores namely cats, dogs and foxes

* Antechinus spp. are generally considered to be terrestrial, but may be semi-arboreal or exclusively arboreal in particular conditions. For this investigation these animals are considered to be terrestrial.

48 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

7.1.1 AMBS Consulting (1997)

AMBS Consulting examined three culverts which are further described in Table 7.2. All culverts were located under the F3 Freeway north of Sydney and were of a similar length.

Table 7.2 Description of culverts studied by AMBS Consulting 1997

Location Culvert type Dimensions Presence Vegetation type Presence of culvert of wildlife in vicinity of water fencing Mooney Elongated pipe 10 m diameter Yes Low open forest No water present Mooney installed specifically as a tunnel for fauna movement* Sparks Road 3 cell box culverts 3 m wide x No Melaleuca, Standing water at 1.5 m high woodland, cleared eastern end. Access pasture dry open by small fauna forest not obstructed Palmers Road 4 cell pipe 1.5 m diameter No Regenerated Some standing vegetation, water on western particularly sedges side and shrubs within approaches to pipes

* Referred to as a fauna tunnel in this report.

Details of species in the surrounding environment were obtained by AMBS Consulting (1997) from database information from the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, close examination of the surrounding habitats including terrestrial and arboreal trapping, spotlighting, searches for indicators and identification of road-kills. Animals inside the culverts were identified using infra-red photography. Variations in the number of entrances at each site has probably led to an under-representation of fauna records within the culverts as the camera was only installed in one cell.

A comparison between the number of species recorded in the surrounding environment and the number of species recorded utilising the culverts are listed in Table 7.3. Investigations of these culverts found that more than twice the number of species was recorded in the surrounding environment as was recorded using the culvert. This is only a general estimate for mammals as surveys for reptiles, amphibians and birds were not undertaken. Records of these animals largely come from incidental use of the culvert by these fauna types or identification of road kills. Bats were not surveyed.

49 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Table 7.3 Comparison of species number (including introduced species) recorded in the surrounding environment and within each culvert (from AMBS Consulting 1997)

Mooney Mooney Sparks Road Palmers Road Fauna type General Culvert General Culvert General Culvert population population population Small terrestrial mammal 8 3 4 3 5 2 Medium-sized terrestrial mammal 5 3 1 - 5 3 Large terrestrial mammal 9 2 3 1 5 1 Semi-arboreal mammal 3 1 2 - 3 - Arboreal mammal 5 - 3 - 4 - Bat/flying-fox ------Bird 2 1 3 - 4 - Reptile - 3 3 1 - 2 Amphibian - - - 1 - 1 Introduced predator 3 3 3 1 3 2 Total number of species 35 16 22 7 29 11

7.1.2 Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996)

Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) conducted surveys of culverts and underpasses along three stretches of road on the Bruce Highway in the Sunshine Coast area of south-east Queensland. In general, each section of highway had numerous cross drainage structures of varying sizes and types. An indication of the size and type of structures along each section of road is provided in Table 7.4.

Table 7.4 Structure size and type along sections of the Bruce Highway (from Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996)

Number of sites Location Small pipe Large pipe Small box Large box Bridge <0.5 m d >0.5 m d <1.2 x 1.2m >1.2 x1.2 m Nambour Bypass section 4 3 - - 2 Cooroy Bypass section 3 5 - 4 - Sunshine Coast Motorway section 6 - 3 5 - Total 13 8 3 9 2

The survey methodology to detect species occurring in the surrounding environment included small terrestrial mammal trapping, spotlighting, interpretation of indicators (such as tracks and scats) and identification of road-kills. Investigation inside the culverts included small mammal trapping and identification of indicators inside the structures. Trapping within the culverts was generally not representative of the size of the opening. For example, the same number of traps (generally around 2 or 3), were used to survey both a pipe of 40 cm diameter and a bridge 10 m wide. As such, comparison between some sites provides only a guide.

50 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Comparison between the number of species using the culverts and the number of species recorded in the surrounding population is listed in Table 7.5. Results from both AMBS Consulting (1997) and Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) estimate that approximately half the number of species recorded within the surrounding environment are recorded utilising the culverts.

Table 7.5 Comparison of species number (including introduced species) recorded in the surrounding environment and within the culverts from Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996)

Nambour Bypass Cooroy Bypass Sunshine Coast section section Motorway section Fauna type General Culvert General Culvert General Culvert population population population Small terrestrial 6 3 6 3 6 3 mammal Medium-sized 2 1 1 1 1 1 terrestrial mammal Large terrestrial 1 - 2 2 1 1 mammal Semi-arboreal 2 - 1 - 1 - mammal Arboreal mammal 2 - 1 - - - Bat/flying-fox 1 - 1 - - - Bird 1 1 4 - 2 2 Reptile 1 1 1 - 4 - Amphibian 1 1 1 - - 1 Introduced predator 1 2 1 2 - 1 Total 18 9 19 8 15 9

The data provided by AMBS Consulting (1997) and Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) has been further analysed to assist in the identification of particular features of culverts which appear to facilitate fauna movement. This included investigations of the suitability of culvert type and size, influence of associated vegetation and wildlife fencing and impacts upon fauna movement by wet or dry passage. The findings of these investigations are provided below.

7.2 CULVERT SIZE AND TYPE

The size and type of culverts can influence which animals will use the passage. It is generally considered desirable that culverts should be large enough to allow natural movement of a variety of animals. The majority of studies indicate that small mammals can readily use any sized culverts, but large mammals are restricted by the size of the opening.

AMBS Consulting (1997) used infra-red photography to examine three relatively large culverts under the F3 Freeway, including a specifically designed fauna tunnel (Mooney Mooney site). All three culverts chosen for the study were 1.5 m, or taller to allow movement of larger species including

51 Fauna Sensitive Road Design wombats and macropods. Representation of each faunal type as a percentage of total fauna records obtained for each culvert location is included in Table 7.6.

Table 7.6 Percentage of fauna type photographed in each culvert (from AMBS Consulting 1997) presented as a percentage of total for each culvert

Culvert location and description Mooney Mooney Sparks Road Palmers Road 10 m dia. Tunnel 3 m x 1.5 m box 1.5 m dia. reinforced Faunal type (%) culvert (%) concrete pipe (%) Small terrestrial mammal 32 65 29 Medium-sized terrestrial mammal 28 - 69 Large terrestrial mammal 18 3 - Semi-arboreal mammal 2 - - Arboreal mammal - - - Bat/flying-fox --- Birds 7 - - Reptiles 7 9 - Amphibians - 6 - Introduced Predator 6 17 2 Total 100 100 100

Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) studied a total of 35 culverts. Unfortunately, the same number of traps were used at all sites, without consideration of the variations in the size of the culvert openings. This therefore bias’ the results in the favour of smaller culverts. The culverts were divided into four categories based on size and type. Representation of each fauna type as a percentage of total fauna records obtained for each culvert type for this data set are presented in Table 7.7.

Table 7.7 Fauna types either trapped or identified from tracks and scats (dung) in each structure type (from Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996) presented as a percentage of total for each culvert

Structure Small pipe Large pipe Small box Large box <0.5 m >0.5 m <1.2 x 1.2 m >1.2 x 1.2 m diameter diameter (%) (%) Faunal type (%) (%) Small terrestrial mammal 61 57 75 76 Medium-sized terrestrial mammal 10 14 8 4 Large terrestrial mammal - 7 - 10 Semi-arboreal mammal - - - - Arboreal mammal - - - - Bat/flying-fox - - - - Birds 5 - - - Reptiles 2 7 - - Amphibians 15 - 8 - Introduced Predator 7 15 9 10 Total 100 100 100 100

52 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

A brief discussion of the implications of results from the above data sets are provided below. The usage of culverts by each fauna type have been outlined separately as each animal has different requirements and preferences for culvert size and type. All numbers quoted in the following section refer to Tables 7.6 and 7.7.

7.2.1 Usage of culverts by faunal type

Small terrestrial mammals

Small ground-dwelling mammals were commonly recorded in all culverts examined by AMBS Consulting (1997) and Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996). Numbers varied between 29% of all animals recorded at the Palmers Road underpass to 76% of all animals recorded in large box culverts. The data reflects the ability of small mammals to use culverts of any type, but both studies recorded the highest number of small mammals in large box culverts.

Medium-sized terrestrial mammals

Numbers of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals varied between 4% in large box culverts (Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996) and 69% in a 1.5 m reinforced concrete pipe (at Palmers Road; AMBS Consulting 1997). Variations in this data are likely to be due to less reliable identification methods by Kinhill as only prints were used to identify animals other than small terrestrial mammals as opposed to the infra-red camera used at Palmers Road. In addition, AMBS Consulting’s data was also influenced by 212 Long-nosed Bandicoots (Perameles nasuta) being photographed at this one site. It is highly likely that many of these records were of the same animal.

Medium-sized mammals were recorded in all culvert types. However, low percentages were recorded in large box culverts (0% by AMBS Consulting (1997) at Sparks Road and 4% by Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996)).

Large terrestrial mammals

Culvert use by large mammals is generally restricted by size. Eighteen percent of fauna using the tunnel at Mooney Mooney were large mammals including wombats and macropods. Large mammals constituted 3% of the fauna use in the box culvert at Sparks Road and no animals were recorded in the pipe at Palmers Road. Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) showed that large mammals only utilised the larger structures.

Semi-arboreal mammals

Only one record of an animal in this category was recorded. An Eastern Pygmy Possum (Cercartetus nanus) was photographed in the fauna tunnel at Mooney Mooney. The use of culverts by these animals is largely unknown. It is, however, generally considered that large structures (in excess of 6 m wide by 3 m high) promote passage of individuals in this fauna type.

53 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Arboreal mammals

No arboreal mammals were recorded using culverts during either survey, although both studies indicated that gliders were observed in the surrounding environments during spotlighting.

Bats/Flying-foxes

The use of culverts by these species was not investigated.

Birds

Bird records are largely incidental and are comprised mainly of birds that spend a large portion of their time on the ground. AMBS Consulting (1997) had 13 records (7% of the fauna recorded) of the Wonga Pigeon (Leucosarcia melanoleuca) at Mooney Mooney. Kinhill Pty Ltd (1997) has records of the White-faced Heron (Ardea novaehollandiae) and Bush Thick-knee (Burhinus grallarius) comprising 4% of the total fauna using small pipes. No specific bird surveys of the surrounding environments were undertaken.

Reptiles

Reptiles were recorded in low numbers in both studies. However, no specific surveys were undertaken to study reptiles.

Amphibians

Three native frogs were recorded using the fauna tunnel at Mooney Mooney and only the introduced Cane Toad (Bufo marinus) was recorded using culverts in the Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) study. Amphibians are not usually guided into culverts by wildlife fencing and therefore the majority of amphibian records are incidental and are probably a reflection of frog habitats being present in the vicinity of the culverts. Kinhill’s (1997) study included some wet culverts which has possibly increased the likelihood of Cane Toads using culverts in these areas.

Introduced predators

The introduced predators Cat, Dog and Fox were a relatively large component of the fauna using culverts. This included the box culvert at Sparks Road (17%; AMBS Consulting 1997) and small pipes (7%), small box culverts (9%) and large pipes (10%). The high number at Sparks Road is possibly due to the location of this culvert near a rural setting.

7.2.2 Faunal diversity

The number of different fauna species recorded in the three culverts studied by AMBS Consulting (1997) is included in Table 7.8.

54 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Table 7.8 The number of fauna species (including introduced species) recorded in each culvert during the survey (from AMBS Consulting 1997)

Culvert location and description Mooney Mooney Sparks Road Palmers Road 10 m dia. tunnel 3 m x 1.5 m box 1.5 m dia. reinforced culvert concrete pipe Number of fauna species 17 7 10 recorded in culvert

As shown in Table 7.8, the highest faunal diversity was recorded in the specifically designed fauna tunnel at Mooney Mooney. Records from this site included many uncommon species including Wombats (14 records), Echidnas (4 records) and one record each of the Eastern Pygmy Possum and Tiger Quoll. These records indicate that this structure is more suitable to a wider range of species than the smaller, concrete culverts.

The faunal diversity of the different culvert types studied by Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) is shown in Table 7.9.

Table 7.9 Number of species (including introduced species) recorded in each culvert type during the survey (from Kinhill 1996)

Culvert type and size Small pipe Large pipe Small box Large box <0.5 m dia. >0.5 m dia. <1.2 x 1.2 m >1.2 x 1.2 m Number of species recorded 12 7 6 8 in each culvert type

The highest species diversity in the Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) study was recorded from small reinforced concrete pipes. This is most likely a reflection of higher trapping and surveying efforts able to be undertaken in a confined space. During this survey, the same methodology and trapping effort (i.e. number of traps at each location) was applied to both small pipes less than 0.5 m in diameter and large box culverts. It is proposed to undertake additional studies to test this assumption, and to present the results in the second volume of this series.

7.3 VEGETATION ASSOCIATED WITH CULVERTS

Many studies suggest that revegetating entrances to culverts makes these culverts more suitable for fauna movement. While this was confirmed by numerous bandicoots making noticeable tracks through dense stands of Cumbungi (Typha orientalis), it was also found that animals of varying sizes traversed expanses of bare ground, either in or on the approach to the Mooney Mooney tunnel (AMBS Consulting 1997).

Culverts located in areas adjacent to native bushland should accommodate a larger range of species. Table 7.10 lists the number of species recorded within the culverts and observed in surrounding

55 Fauna Sensitive Road Design vegetation or identified on local fauna databases. Both Mooney Mooney and Palmers Road were surrounded by native vegetation, whilst Sparks Road was near rural development.

Table 7.10 Number of native species recorded in culverts or in surrounding vegetation (from AMBS Consulting 1997)

Culvert location and description of surrounding vegetation Mooney Mooney Sparks Road Palmers Road Cleared approach Cleared approach Regenerated surrounded by near woodland and vegetation on Number of species native vegetation cleared pasture approach near forest Native species recorded 13 5 9 in culvert Native species in 32 20 23 surrounding vegetation

Analysis of Kinhill Pty Ltd’s (1996) data determined that of the 35 culverts examined, 16 had vegetated approaches or entrances, 15 had no vegetation on the approach and 4 were not suitably described to determine the extent of vegetation. Table 7.11 describes the number of species trapped in culverts with vegetated and non-vegetated entrances.

Table 7.11 Number of native species recorded in culverts with vegetated or non-vegetated entrances (from Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996)

Number of species Culverts with vegetated Culverts with non-vegetated approach or entrance (16 sites) approach or entrance (15 sites) Native species recorded 9 5 in culvert Number of native species 24 24 recorded in surrounding vegetation

Table 7.11 indicates that a higher representation of native species from the surrounding environment were trapped in culverts which had vegetated entrances. This is supported by research conducted by Ecologia Environmental Consultants (1995) who found a reduction in faunal activity outside culverts with non-vegetated entrances.

7.4 WET OR DRY PASSAGE THROUGH CULVERTS

Culverts examined by AMBS Consulting (1997) were chosen for their dry conditions and unobstructed entrances. Although culverts at Sparks Road and Palmers Road did contain shallow surface waters at times, these conditions were generally not sufficient to impede animal movement. Both culverts had silted floors which would provide a natural surface for fauna.

56 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

The data presented by Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996) in Table 7.12 shows that more native species are recorded in culverts with dry passage than wet passage. Although the data set is small, this is not surprising, as many species especially some small mammals and reptiles are unlikely to cross deep or fast flowing water.

Table 7.12 Number of native species recorded in wet and dry culverts (from Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996)

Dry culverts Wet culverts (27 sites) (6 sites) Number of native species 12 3

7.5 WILDLIFE FENCING

Three sections of highway were examined by Kinhill Pty Ltd (1996):

The Nambour Bypass which has no wildlife fencing.

The Cooroy Bypass which has some wildlife fencing, mainly confined to one side of the road.

The Sunshine Coast Motorway which has specifically designed wildlife fencing in most locations.

Table 7.13 provides results of road-kill surveys along these sections of road over a one month period.

Table 7.13 Number of fauna road-kills along three sections of the Bruce Highway over a one month period (from Kinhill Pty Ltd 1996)

Road-killed animals Nambour Bypass Cooroy Bypass Sunshine Coast Motorway No wildlife fencing Some wildlife fencing Wildlife fencing mainly on one side installed on both of the road sides of road Mammals 12 11 1 Amphibians 5 2 - Birds 2 5 2 Reptiles 1 1 4 Total 20 19 7

The results show a significant reduction in road kills on the Sunshine Coast Motorway which has specifically-designed wildlife fencing. The wildlife fencing installed on both sides of the road is designed to prevent mammals entering the road and guide mammals through culverts. Also, the animals killed on the section of road with fencing on both sides were predominantly birds and reptiles and these fauna types are not excluded from the road by wildlife fencing.

57 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

It is important to note that fencing installed on one side of the road only does not reduce road kills. In some instances fencing on one side of the highway can increase the likelihood of road kills, as mammals can be prevented from exiting the road after they have successfully crossed the road once. This chance of increased deaths can be exacerbated in areas where the fence comes close to the road, such as at culverts, where the change in fence direction tends to funnel animals back onto the carriageway. This has been discussed previously in Chapter 6 (refer to Section 6.3).

Field data on road kills collected over a nine-month period by AMBS Consulting (1997) is described in Table 7.14. This indicates a reduction in total road kills where wildlife fencing is present. However, this data records large numbers of mammal kills and indicates a potential deficiency in the installed fencing as it appears that many mammals are not being guided through the fauna tunnel. High road kill totals at Sparks and Palmers Roads have been largely attributed to birds, which cannot be excluded from the pavement by wildlife fencing.

Table 7.14 Road-kill data for fenced and unfenced culverts over a nine month period (from AMBS Consulting 1997)

Road killed animals Mooney Mooney Sparks Road Palmers Road Wildlife fencing installed No wildlife fencing No wildlife fencing Mammal 33 29 38 Amphibian - - - Bird 3 20 13 Reptile - 3 - Total 36 52 51

7.6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This review of available field data regarding the use of culverts by fauna has identified general trends. Importantly however, this review has also established the need to undertake additional field surveys in a targeted manner and with a sound experimental design, so that the trends noted in the two data sets recorded here may be tested.

General conclusions from the available field data are listed below. It is again stressed that the following findings are preliminary in nature and need to be confirmed. Present investigations being undertaken by the Queensland Department of Main Roads and other Australian road authorities are aimed at testing these generalities and will be presented in the second volume of this series.

58 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

General findings from information outlined in this chapter are:

Small ground-dwelling mammals may utilise any size culvert.

Medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals are more likely to utilise underpasses greater than 0.5 m in width.

The most reliable data on large ground-dwelling mammals suggests that this fauna type prefers large box culverts (greater than 1.5 m in height) and bridge underpasses.

Arboreal (tree-dwelling) mammals do not appear to utilise culverts and therefore additional measures (such as canopy bridges) require investigation to assess their effectiveness in accommodating movement of this fauna type across the road.

The present field surveys did not target reptiles, birds or amphibians. Incidental recordings suggest these fauna groups may utilise culverts or pipes of any dimension. This requires testing.

Introduced predators do not appear to have a preference for any culvert type or size.

The most reliable data on faunal diversity suggest that a greater number of species utilise bridge underpasses, when compared with culverts or reinforced concrete pipes.

Higher numbers of animals and species are recorded in culverts with vegetated approaches or entrances, or those contiguous with native vegetation.

Notably more fauna species utilise culverts that provide dry passage.

Where properly installed, wildlife fencing significantly reduces road mortalities if the fencing is installed on both sides of the road. In most cases, fencing on one side of the road only, appears to have no benefit over no fencing with regard to road kills, and may result in an increase in mortalities.

Surveys investigating fauna movement over roads are important, as fauna provisions should provide for a variety of species, not only generalist species which are able to readily adapt to new environments. The Queensland Department of Main Roads intends to use these studies to design suitable methodologies to monitor the effectiveness of fauna-specific culvert designs. Numerous projects regarding the safe movement of fauna over or under roads are currently being undertaken by road authorities, and the second volume of this series ‘Fauna Sensitive Road Design—Preferred Practices’ will compile the findings from these, so as to further enhance the design of structures included in road projects.

59 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

8 CONCLUSIONS

The design of fauna sensitive roads encompasses a range of factors related to the impacts of roads on fauna, some of which are largely based on theory. The importance of fauna conservation in the design, construction, operation and maintenance of roads has increased in recent years, providing opportunities for design modifications to be implemented. Examination of numerous measures and their effectiveness at facilitating safe passage of fauna has been undertaken by various scientists, consultants and road authorities in Australia and overseas. Conclusions obtained from examination of this body of research, and recommendations of where further work is required, is included in this chapter.

8.1 INFLUENCE OF ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR ON IMPACTS OF ROADS

The behaviour of animals is known to influence the degree to which animals are impacted upon by roads. Certain behavioural traits make some animals more susceptible to impacts than others. To reduce impacts on fauna from roads, the behaviour of animals needs to be identified and understood so that appropriate measures may be implemented during the design, construction and maintenance of roads.

Certain fauna behaviour will be in response to factors in the environment, instinct and interaction with other species. Therefore, factors such as the topography, vegetation present near the road, natural movement paths of species and influence of predators on individuals and populations all need to be taken into account when determining a route alignment through a natural environment.

Animal behaviour also includes habits of fauna species, such as basking on roads by reptiles and feeding on road verges by birds and macropods. Other such species-specific characteristics include the slow crossing of roads by Koalas or the unpredictability of macropod movement. Characteristics such as these make some species more susceptible to road deaths in certain environments.

Vegetated road reserves are increasingly being identified as essential for the survival of many protected and threatened fauna species in highly fragmented habitats, and in many areas, road reserves are being targeted for protection and conservation.

Increased understanding of animals, their requirements and motorists safety has led to the installation of structures designed specifically to facilitate fauna movement. Many of these modifications or measures have been shown to be successful in facilitating fauna movement. However, only with additional and targeted research will the true effectiveness of these and future modifications be determined and enhanced.

60 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

8.2 FAUNA USE OF EXISTING STRUCTURES

The information contained in this report confirms that roads have an impact on fauna. As such, it is essential to identify effective measures to reduce this impact so as not to further endanger Australia’s native fauna species.

The key focus of this two volume series is to identify road design measures that will increase the safe movement of animals across roads, either over or under the pavement. The collation of existing information from the literature and the analysis of available field data presented in this volume indicates many areas where further research is required (see Section 8.5). Investigation to further our knowledge in relation to these areas is underway and will be presented in the second volume.

Table 8.1 indicates our knowledge to date with regards to which culvert type fauna have been recorded. The known information is patchy and compiled from a number of sources as no studies have been specifically designed to determine the best culvert design for specific faunal types.

Table 8.1 Confirmed use of culvert or underpass type by fauna (+ indicates known use, - indicates not known or unconfirmed use)

Fauna type Small pipe Large pipe Small box Large box Bridge <0.5 m dia >0.5 m dia culvert culvert underpass <1.2 m h >1.2 m h Small mammal + + + + + Medium mammal + + + - + Large mammal - + - + + Semi-arboreal mammal - - - +* +* Arboreal mammal - - - - - Microchiropteran bats - - - + + Reptile - + - + + Bird + - - + + Amphibian + - + + + Introduced predator + + + + +

* The only semi-arboreal mammals recorded in fauna tunnels are the Koala and Eastern Pygmy Possum. These species are not considered to be exclusively arboreal.

Gaps in known information include the use of underpasses or culverts by arboreal mammals. When identifying impacts on fauna movement by roads, the main concentration has previously focussed on terrestrial species. However, wide road pavements also sever the habitats of arboreal species and movement between habitat areas is restricted.

The present studies have found that only generalist species such as small mammals and introduced predators will use any culvert type. This identifies a need to design culverts to suit larger species of mammal, reptile, amphibian and bird when such fauna types are locally significant.

61 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

8.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACCOMMODATING FAUNA

Practices currently implemented during construction, or retrofitted to previous designs, have increased the likelihood of safe fauna passage. In general, the design and basis for fauna modifications is dynamic and often changes through findings of research and trials. As such, field survey data of the type included in Chapter 7 is important as background information to future studies as it shows that some specific conditions contribute to increased fauna movement.

Available data suggests that some measures have been found to work better than others. However, the practices that fail also provide information on the road related behaviour of fauna species to those planning, designing, constructing and maintaining fauna sensitive roads. From this, designs and management practices may be developed to increase the effectiveness of fauna modifications.

From review of the literature and available field data, the following summarises our knowledge and recommendations with regard to accommodating fauna:

Underpasses beneath bridges are used for fauna movement overseas, but there has been little research into their use in Australia. It is recognised, however, that provision of dry passage is required to increase their effectiveness. As such, bridge abutments should be set back from the watercourse to allow dry areas for fauna passage.

Appropriately sized culverts should be used to accommodate numerous faunal types rather than be targeted to only one or a few faunal types (refer Table 8.1). Exceptions may occur when creating a passage necessary to accommodate a single targeted species for conservation reasons (an example being the Mountain Pygmy Possum, refer Section 6.1).

For terrestrial species, dry passage is preferable. Multiple cell culverts with the outer cells raised or raised ledges within a culvert will assist fauna movement. Soil and debris on the floor of the culverts may also increase the level of use by fauna. It is acknowledged that desilting of culverts is necessary, however, in many cases some natural flooring will persist as a result of continued sedimentation.

Revegetation using locally indigenous species is suggested for the entrances of culverts. This is to provide extension of habitat areas nearer to culvert entrances and provide shelter for fauna entering and exiting culverts.

Refuge poles may be effective both at the entrance and exit as well as within the culverts in areas where introduced predators are likely to attack animals, such as Koalas (refer Section 6.1.2 for details). It is important to locate such poles at least 3 m away from exclusion fencing.

Barrier fences at the entrances of culverts are not recommended as they prohibit the movement of medium and large mammals as well as the predators.

62 auna Sensitive Road Design

There is dispute into the effectiveness of skylights in culverts and their ability to increase fauna use. It is likely that culverts that are considered to need skylights are too long to facilitate movement of fauna in any case. Skylights are thought to increase levels of debris into the culvert and therefore increase maintenance requirements. Noise levels may also increase inside the culvert, which may discourage some species. Further investigation is required to establish the effectiveness of skylights.

Little research into canopy bridges to accommodate arboreal species has been published, although research is currently being undertaken and will be included in Volume 2 of this series.

Wildlife fencing around culverts has proven to be effective in guiding animals into culverts and reducing road deaths. However, some fence designs require modifications to increase effectiveness and guide an increased number of species into culverts. Fences installed on one side of the road only have not been found to reduce fauna road-kills.

In many cases, fences should be reflective of species in the surrounding environment. Examples include the two designs of Koala-proof fence described in Section 6.3 of Chapter 6. These designs have been developed in response to the Koala’s ability to climb over most fence designs. Other examples would include building fences high enough (e.g. 1.8 m) to discourage macropods jumping over them or providing metal strips at the base of fences to restrict the movement of reptiles and frogs (refer Section 6.3).

Ongoing maintenance of installed fences is essential to maintain effectiveness. It is important to remember that Koala-proof fences (unlike wildlife fences) require maintenance so that trees do not grow within 3 m of the fence. This ensures that Koalas do not climb the trees and jump the fence.

The effectiveness of wildlife reflectors is currently being investigated by numerous researchers and may be effective in deterring nocturnal animals from the road when cars approach. Preliminary findings are promising and outcomes of further research will be included in Volume 2 of this series.

Warning signs may assist in reducing vehicle speeds and collisions with animals in some areas, but the effectiveness of warning signs is dependent on the response of vehicle drivers. Unfortunately these signs are generally not effective in reducing the speed of the motorist and are therefore more likely to be effective in low speed areas where they may be used simply to raise the awareness of drivers. Fauna Sensitive Road Design

8.4 OVERVIEW OF PRESENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

In recent years, much progress has been made in designing and constructing fauna sensitive roads. The importance of maintaining biodiversity has resulted in government bodies changing past practices and reducing the impacts of development on the environment.

Road authorities throughout Australia are adopting better practices to help accommodate fauna and the findings to date suggest most specifically-designed structures are effective. Maintenance of such structures is important and this area requires further education and adoption of appropriate practices. Continued research into the effectiveness of modifications for fauna movement is essential and continued monitoring is necessary to establish protocols in the design, implementation and maintenance of structures to accommodate fauna movement.

One major success to date is the installation of culverts to re-establish connections between the male and female populations of the Mountain Pygmy Possum, which was suffering a population decline when a road was constructed through its natural dispersal path. The decline of this species was noted by ecologists and measures were implemented to reduce the impact. These measures were found to be successful and have since indicated a turning point in the conservation of this species.

The effectiveness of existing practices is generally measured by the amount of use of culverts or underpasses by fauna and a general reduction in road deaths. At present, these are the only parameters that indicate a change, as indirect impacts such as edge effects, barrier effects and theoretical issues such as genetic isolation cannot be simply measured. However, a relationship between reduced road deaths and increased use of culverts and underpasses indicates that the barriers to movement are dissipating.

8.5 FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND RESEARCH

The design, construction and maintenance of structures aimed at increasing fauna movement has been tending away from what is either expected to work or aesthetically appealing to human eyes toward what is known to work and more suited to animals. In many cases, culverts that both facilitate fauna movement as well as drainage can be installed if properly designed, constructed and maintained. Increasing recognition of the behavioural and ecological characteristics of species when designing culverts and associated modifications has led to more effective safe passage by fauna.

The recognition of vegetated road reserves, as being of importance for the conservation of species, has furthered the installation of appropriate structures and revegetation near culverts and on road verges. Such measures are aimed at facilitating natural fauna migration and dispersal through these environments. Continued recognition of the importance of vegetated road reserves is essential to ensure the retention of a network of viable habitats for a variety of species in otherwise degraded

64 Fauna Sensitive Road Design areas.

The findings of research currently being undertaken will be compiled and presented as the second volume of this series, ‘Fauna Sensitive Road Design—Preferred Practices’. Practices currently being investigated and trialed in Queensland, and throughout Australia, will be described and their effectiveness for each relevant fauna type assessed to provide conclusions on successful and unsuccessful designs.

Specific areas of investigation that are targeted for inclusion in the second volume include:

Confirmation of which fauna types utilise which culverts and underpasses.

The effectiveness of providing structures (i.e. logs, poles etc.) within culverts and culvert entrances.

Canopy bridges for arboreal species.

Appropriate design and location of wildlife fencing.

Effectiveness of wildlife reflectors.

Value of raised ledges and skylights within culverts.

The use of underpasses and culverts by predatory species.

The aim of the second volume is to provide a document that outlines the preferred practices that facilitate fauna movement. Each animal has different requirements, and culverts should be designed, constructed and maintained so as to suit the majority of species found in the surrounding area. As such, a combination of modifications may be necessary to provide the most effective design for fauna passage. Volume 2 of this series will enable practitioners to identify the most suitable design modification to accommodate the passage of fauna species identified in the area. It is, however, noted that the adoption and implementation of structures to accommodate fauna should continue to be assessed in the wider context that enables a balanced assessment of environmental, engineering and economic considerations. To this end, practical solutions to accommodate safe fauna passage shall be the focus of the second volume. Fauna Sensitive Road Design

9 REFERENCES

Adams, L.W. and Geis, A.D. (1983) Effects of roads on small mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology 20: 403-15.

Allworth, D. (1998) Roadside conservation issues on the Darling Downs. The Growing Idea. Greening Australia.

Andrews, A. (1990) Fragmentation of habitat by roads and utility corridors: A review. Australian Zoologist. 26 (3 and 4) 130–141.

Armstrong, P and Francis, D. (1997) Culvert modifications to assist wildlife movement. Greening Australia—Queensland (Inc.).

Arnold, G.W., Algar, D., Hobbs, R.J. and Atkins, L. (1987) A survey of vegetation and its relationship to vertebrate fauna present in winter on road verges in the Kellerberrin District, Western Australia. Department of Conservation and Land Management Western Australia. Roadside Vegetation Conservation Committee Technical Report, No: 18.

Arnold, A.H., Goldstraw, P.W., Hayes, A.G. and Wright, B.F. (1990) Recovery management of the eastern barred bandicoot in Victoria: The Hamilton Conservation Strategy. In: Management and Conservation of Small Populations. W. Tims, J. Clarke and H. Seebeck (Editors). Conference Proceedings, Melbourne, Australia. September, pp. 26-27.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (1996) Australian Yearbook.

Australian Museum Business Services (AMBS) Consulting (1997) Fauna Usage of Three Underpasses Beneath the F3 Freeway Between Sydney and Newcastle. For NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.

Bakowski, C. and Kozakiewicz, M. (1988) Effect of a forest road on bank vole and yellow-necked mouse populations. Acta Theriologica 33: 345-353.

Barnett, J.L., How, R.A. and Humphreys, W.F. (1978) The use of habitat components by small mammals in eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Ecology 3: 277-285.

Baur, A. and Baur, B. (1990) Are roads barriers to dispersal in the land snail Arianta arbustorum. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68: 613-17.

Bennett, A.F. (1987) Biogeography and conservation of mammals in a fragmented forest environment in south western Victoria. Melbourne University, Department of Zoology, PhD Thesis.

Bennett, A.F. (1990) Land use, forest fragmentation and mammalian fauna at Naringal, south western Victoria. Australian Wildlife Research 17(4): 325-347.

Bennett, A.F. (1991) Roads, roadsides and wildlife conservation: a review. In: Nature Conservation 2: the Role of Corridors. D.A. Saunders and R.J. Hobbs (Editors). Surrey Beatty and Sons, NSW.

Bennett, A.F. (1992) Restoring connectivity to fragmented landscapes: does roadside vegetation have a role? Victorian Naturalist 109(4): 105-110.

Bird Observer. (1980) Road kills of Regent Parrots at Kiamal, Victoria. Bird Observer 588: 99.

66 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Breckwoldt R. and others. (1990) Living Corridors—Conservation and management of roadside vegetation. Greening Australia Ltd, Canberra.

Broadbent, J.A., Pressey, R., Ehman, H., Ivantsoff, W., Jones, A., and Williams, R. (1981). Faunal studies for the proposed Wahroonga - Berowra section of the Sydney - Newcastle Freeway No 3. Macquarie University. Centre for Environmental and Urban Studies, North Ryde, New South Wales.

Brown, J.H. and Kodric-Brown, J.M. (1977) Turnover rates in insular biogeography: effect of immigration on extinction. Ecology 58: 445-449.

Brown, R.J., Brown, M.N. and Pesotto, B. (1986) Birds killed on some secondary roads in Western Australia. Corella 10: 118-22.

Brown, P.R. (1989) Management Plan for the Conservation of the Eastern Barred Bandicoot Perameles gunnii in Victoria. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 63. (Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria).

Burt, W.H. (1943) Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. Journal of Mammalogy. 24:346–352.

Carrick, R. (1963) Ecological significance of territory in the Australian Magpie Gymnorhina tibicen. Proceedings of the XIII International Ornithologist Congress. pp. 740-753.

Case, R.M. (1975) Interstate highway road-killed animals: a data source for biologists. Wildlife Society Bulletin 6: 8-13.

Catterall, C.P., Kingston, M. and Kordas, G. (1993) A strategy for the conservation of flora and fauna and natural communities within Moreton Shire, South-east Queensland. Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Griffith University.

Coulson, G.M. (1982) Road-kills of macropods on a section of highway in central Victoria. Australian Wildlife Research 9: 21-26.

Dennis, A.J. and Johnson, P.M. (1995) Rufous Bettong, Aepyprymnus rufescens. In: The Mammals of Australia. R. Strahan (Editor). Reed Books. Chatswood, NSW.

Department of Main Roads. (1998) Environmental Management Policy and Strategy. Roads Policy and Efficiency Branch.

Department of Main Roads. (1998) Queensland Environmental Legislation Register. Technology and Environment Division, Spring Hill, Queensland.

De Santo, R.S. and Smith, D.G. (1993) Environmental auditing: An introduction to issues of habitat fragmentation relative to transportation corridors with special reference to high-speed rail (HSR). Environmental Management 17(1): 111-114.

Dhindsa, M.S., Sandhu, J.S., Sandhu, P.S. and Toor, H.S. (1988) Roadside birds in Punjab (India): relation to mortality from vehicles. Environmental Conservation 15: 303-310.

Disney, H.J. and Fullagar, P.J. (1978) A note on road kills. Corella 2: 89.

Ecologia Environmental Consultants. (1995) Kwinana Freeway wildlife underpass study—fauna monitoring program. Prepared for Main Roads, Western Australia.

67 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Ehmann, H. and Cogger, H. (1985) Australia’s endangered herpetofauna: a review of criteria and policies. pp. 435-447. In: Biology of Australasian Frogs and Reptiles. G. Grigg, R. Shine, H. Ehmann (Editors). Surrey Beatty and Sons and the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales. Sydney.

Evink, G.L. (1990) Wildlife Crossings of Florida I-75. Transportation Research Record 1279—Hydrology and Environmental Design. Florida Department of Transportation.

Fahrig, L. and Merriam, G. (1985) Habitat patch connectivity and population survival. Ecology 66: 1762- 1768.

Fanning, F.D. (1992) Koala Road Deaths: Causes and Measures. Gunninah Consultants and the Roads and Traffic Authority. Greenwich, NSW.

Forman, R. T. T. (1995) Land Mosaics—The ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.

Foster, M.L. and Humphrey, S.R. (1995) Use of highway underpasses by Florida Panthers and other wildlife. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23(1):95–100.

Gardyne, W. (1995) Cleveland–Redland Bay Road Duplication—Koala issues. Unpublished report. Queensland Department of Transport, Transport Technology Division

Garland, T. and Bradley, W.G. (1984) Effects of a highway on Mojave desert rodent populations. Am. Midl. Nat. 111: 47-56.

Gilpin, M.E. and Soule, M.E. (1986) Minimum viable populations: processes of species extinction. pp. 19- 34. In: Conservation Biology. M.E. Soule (Editor) Sinauer Sunderland. London and New York.

Goldingay, R.L. and Whelan, R.J. (1997) Powerline easements: Do they promote edge effects in eucalypt forests for small mammals? Wildlife Research 24: 737-744.

Grieves, C. and Lloyd, D. (1984) Conservation of roadsides and roadside vegetation. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 11. (Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands, Victoria).

Harris, L. (1988) Edge effects and conservation of biotic diversity. Conservation Biology 2: 330-332.

Harris, L.D. and Gallager, P.B. (1989) New Initiatives for wildlife conservation. The need for movement corridors. pp. 11-34. In: In Defence of Wildlife. Preserving Communities and Corridors. G. Mackintosh (Editor) Defenders of Wildlife. Washington.

Harris, L.D. and Scheck, J. (1991) From implications to applications: the dispersal corridor principle applied to the conservation of biological diversity. Section 18, pp. 189-220. In: Nature Conservation 2: The Role of Corridors. D.E. Saunders and R.J. Hobbs (Editors) Surrey Beatty and Sons. Chipping Norton.

Haugen, A.O. (1944) Highway mortality of wildlife in southern Michigan. Journal of Mammalogy 25(2): 177-184.

Hodson, N.L. (1960) A survey of vertebrate road mortality 1959. Bird Study 7: 224-231.

Hodson, N.L. (1962) Some notes on the causes of bird road casualties. Bird Study 9: 168-173.

Hodson, N.L. (1966) A survey of road mortality in mammals (and including data for the grass snake and common frog). Journal of Zoology, London 148: 576-9.

68 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Hunt, A., Dickens, H.J. and Whelan, R.J. (1987) Movement of mammals through tunnels under railway lines. Australian Zoologist 24: 89-93.

Hussey, P. (1987) On the Verge. Landscape 2: 40-43 (Department of Conservation and Land Management, Western Australia).

Ishta Consultants (1999) Report on the observed limitations on the implementation of koala underpasses and barrier fence systems.

Johnson, K.A. (1977) Methods for the census of wallaby and possum in Tasmania. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Tasmania. Wildlife Division Technical Report No. 77/2.

Kinhill Pty Ltd. (1996) Impact of Highways on Australian Fauna: Field surveys and a review of relevant literature (draft report submitted to the Queensland Department of Transport).

Kinhill Pty Ltd (1997a) Halfway Creek Pacific Highway Realignment - Review of Environmental Factors. Prepared for NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.

Kinhill Pty Ltd (1997b) Proposed Upgrade of the Pacific Highway at Tandys Lane - Review of Environmental Factors. Volume 1. Prepared for NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.

Kitching, R.L. (1983) Systems Ecology: An introduction to ecological modelling. University of Queensland Press. St. Lucia.

Kozakiewicz, M. (1993) Habitat isolation and ecological barriers: the effect on small mammal populations and communities. Acta Theriologica 38(1): 1-30

Kroodsma, R.L. (1985) Assessing the loss of wildlife habitat in environmental impact statements. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 82-87.

Lamont, D. (1998) Roadsides—The Vital Link. Landscape 13 (3).

Lee, A.K. and Martin, R.W. (1988) The Koala. University of New South Wales Press, Kensington.

MacArthur, R.H. and Wilson, R.O. (1967) Biogeographie der Insein. Munchen, Goldmann-Verlag.

Mader, H.J. (1984) Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biological Conservation 29: 81-96.

Mallick, S.A., Hocking, G.J. and Driessen, M.M. (1998) Road-kills of the Eastern Barred Bandicoot (Perameles gunnii) in Tasmania: An index of abundance. Wildlife Research 25(2):139–146.

Mansergh, I.M. and Scotts, D.J. (1989) Habitat continuity and social organisation of the mountain pygmy- possum restored by tunnel. Journal of Wildlife Management 53(3): 701-707.

Oetting, R.B. and Casell, J.F. (1971) Waterfowl nesting on interstate highway right-of-way in North Dakota. Journal of Wildlife Management 35: 774-781.

Osawa, R. (1989) Road-kills of the swamp wallaby (Wallabia bicolor) on North Stradbroke Island, south- east Queensland. Australian Wildlife Research 16: 95-104.

Oxley, D.J., Fenton, M.B. and Carmody, G.R. (1974) The effects of roads on populations of small mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology 11: 51-59.

69 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Pahl, L. (1992) Assessment of impact on koalas of a proposed transport corridor in the Logan and Redland area. The University of Queensland, Gatton College. Department of management Studies. Occasional Paper 1: 1-50.

Petterson, B. (1985) Extinction of an isolated population of the middle spotted woodpecker Dendrocopus medius (L.) in Sweden and its relation to general theories on extinction. Biological Conservation 32: 335-353.

Pieters, C. (1993) An Investigation into the Efficiency of a Koala/Wildlife Funnel/Tunnel at Gaven, Queensland, Stage Two. Urban Wildlife Research Centre, Report to Queensland Department of Transport.

Prevett, P., Hives, N., and Cerini, G. (1992) Koala protection and fenced freeways. Ballarat University College.

Primack, R.B. (1993) Essentials of conservation biology. Sinauer Associates Inc., Massachusetts USA.

Radio National (2000) Earthbeat transcript—Saturday 22 January 2000. Roads and powerlines, Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Ranney, J.W., Brunner, M.C. and Levenson, J.B. (1981) The importance of edge in the structure and dynamics of forest islands. In: Forest Island Dynamics in Man-dominated Landscapes. R.L. Burgess and D.M. Sharpe (Editors) Springer-Verlag. New York.

Ratcliffe, E.J. (1974) Through the Badger Gate. Bell Publishing Company. London.

Reed, D.F., Woodard, T.N. and Pojar, T.M. (1975) Behavioural response of mule deer to a highway underpass. Journal of Wildlife Management 39(2): 361-367.

Reed, D.F. and Woodward, T.N. (1981) Effectiveness of highway lighting in reducing deer-vehicle accidents. Journal of Wildlife Management 45: 721-726.

Saunders, D.A. (1990) Problems of survival in an extensively cultivated landscape: the case of Carnaby’s cockatoo. Biological Conservation 54: 277-290.

Saunders, D.A. and Ingram, J.A. (1987) Factors effecting survival of breeding populations of Carnaby’s cockatoo Calyptorhynchus funereus latirostris in remnants of native vegetation. In: Nature Conservation: The Role of Remnants of Native Vegetation. D.A. Saunders, G.W. Arnold, A.A. Burbidge and A.J.M. Hopkins (Editors). Surrey Beatty and Sons, Sydney. pp. 249-258.

Saunders, D.A., Hobbs, R.J. and Arnold, G.W. (1993) The Kellerberrin project on fragmented landscapes: A review of current information. Biological Conservation 64:185–192.

Schafer, J.A. and Penland, S.T. (1985) Effectiveness of Swareflex reflectors in reducing deer-vehicle accidents. Journal of Wildlife Management 49: 774-776.

Schmidly, D.J. and Wilkins, K.T. (1977) Composition of small mammal populations on highway right-of- way in east Texas. Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Research Report. 197-1F.

Scott, J.K. (1981) A survey method for identifying roadside flora suitable for conservation in Western Australia. Western Australia Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Report No. 41.

Seebeck, J.H. (1976) The diet of the Powerful Owl in western Victoria. Emu 76:167–170.

70 Fauna Sensitive Road Design

Sheridan, G.J. (1991) The use of wildlife reflectors to reduce road kills of the eastern barred bandicoot, Perameles gunnii. Ballarat University College. Report.

Simberloff, D. (1995) Habitat fragmentation and population extinction of birds. Ibis 137: 105-111.

Singer, F.J. and Doherty, J.L. (1985) Managing mountain goats at a highway crossing. Wildlife Society Bulletin 13: 469-477.

Soule, M.E. (1987) Viable Populations for Conservation. Cambridge University Press. London and New York.

Suckling, G.C. (1984) Population ecology of the sugar glider Petaurus breviceps in a system of fragmented habitats. Australian Wildlife Research 11: 49-75.

Swihart, R.K. and Slade, N.A. (1984) Road crossings in Sigmodon bispidus and Microtus ochrogaster. Journal of Mammalogy 65: 357-360.

Thomas, E. (1988) Road deaths. Bird Observer 678: 94.

Van Dyck, S. (1995) False Water-rat (Xeromys myoides) In R. Strahan (ed) The Mammals of Australia. Reed Books, Sydney.

Van Gelder, J.J. (1973) A quantitative approach to the mortality resulting from traffic in a population of Bufo bufo L. Oecologia. 13: 93-95.

Vestjens, W.J. M. (1973) Wildlife mortality on a road in New South Wales. Emu 73: 107-112.

Walling, E. (1985) Country Roads: The Australian Roadside. First Published 1952, Oxford University Press. New Edition: Pioneer Design Studio, Victoria.

Ward, A.L. (1982) Mule deer behaviour in relation to fencing and underpasses on Interstate 80 in Wyoming. Transp. Res. Rec. 859: 8-13.

Yahner, R.H. (1988) Changes in wildlife communities near edges. Conservation Biology 2: 333-339.

Yanes, M., Velasco, J.M. and Suárez, F. (1995) Permeability of roads and railways to vertebrates: the importance of culverts. Biological conservation 71: 217-222.

71

FAUNA SENSITIVE ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

VOLUME 2

June 10

TRADEMARKS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Terms mentioned in this document that are known or understood to be trademarks, whether registered or not, have been identified. Where trademarks have been confirmed as registered in Australia, this has been indicated by the addition of the ® symbol, otherwise the ™ symbol is used. While all care has been taken to identify trademarks, users should rely on their own inquiries to determine trademark ownership. Use of a term in this document as a trademark should not be regarded as affecting the validity of any trademark.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION The requirements of this document represent Technical Policy of the department and contain Technical Standards. Compliance with the department’s Technical Standards is mandatory for all applications for the design, construction, maintenance and operation of road transport infrastructure in Queensland by or on behalf of the State of Queensland. This document will be reviewed from time to time as the need arises and in response to improvement suggestions by users. Please send your comments and suggestions to the feedback email given below.

FEEDBACK Your feedback is welcomed. Please send to [email protected].

COPYRIGHT © State of Queensland (Department of Transport and Main Roads) 2010 Copyright protects this publication. Except for the purposes permitted by and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act, reproduction by any means (including electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microcopying or otherwise) is prohibited without the prior written permission of the department. Enquiries regarding such permission should be directed to the Road & Delivery Performance Division, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads.

DISCLAIMER This publication has been created for use in the design, construction, maintenance and operation of road transport infrastructure in Queensland by or on behalf of the State of Queensland. Where the publication is used in other than the department’s infrastructure projects, the State of Queensland and the department gives no warranties as to the completeness, accuracy or adequacy of the publication or any parts of it and accepts no responsibility or liability upon any basis whatever for anything contained in or omitted from the publication or for the consequences of the use or misuse of the publication or any parts of it. If the publication or any part of it forms part of a written contract between the State of Queensland and a contractor, this disclaimer applies subject to the express terms of that contract.

June 10 Department of Transport & Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Table of Contents

Chapter Title Issue Date 1 OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose 06/10 1.2 Importance of this Document 06/10 1.3 Sources of Information 06/10 1.4 Future Direction 06/10 1.5 How to use this Manual 06/10 1.6 Key Reference 06/10 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Effects of Roads and Traffic on Fauna 06/10 2.2 Objectives of Fauna Sensitive Road Design 06/10 3 PREFERRED PLANNING FOR MITIGATION MEASURES 3.1 Concepts 06/10 3.2 Choice of Appropriate Fauna Mitigation Measures 06/10 3.3 Planning and Involvement 06/10 3.4 Smart Technique 06/10 3.5 Integrated and Holistic Approach 06/10 3.6 Key References 06/10 4 SITE ASSESSMENT OF MONITORING 4.1 Ecological Site Assessments 06/10 4.2 Fauna Monitoring 06/10 5 MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT 5.1 Purpose 06/10 5.2 Key References 06/10 6 MEASURES TO ACHIEVE FAUNA SENSITIVE ROADS 6.1 Overpass: Land Bridge 06/10 6.2 Overpass: Small Roads (Dual Purposes) 06/10 6.3 Overpass: Cut and Cover Tunnel 06/10 6.4 Overpass: Canopy Bridge 06/10 6.5 Overpass: Poles 06/10 6.6 Underpass: Culvert 06/10 6.7 Underpass: Tunnel 06/10 6.8 Underpass: Bridge 06/10 6.9 Non-Structural Mitigation: Canopy Connectivity 06/10

Page i of ii TOC June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport & Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Chapter Title Issue Date 6.10 Non-Structural Mitigation: Local Traffic 06/10 6.11 Barriers: Fencing 06/10 6.12 Barriers: Chemical Repellents 06/10 6.13 Barriers: Perching Deterrents 06/10 6.14 Habitat Enhancement: Frog Ponds 06/10 6.15 Habitat Enhancement: Nest Boxes 06/10 6.16 Habitat Enhancement: Artificial Shelter Sites 06/10 6.17 Consideration which influence effectiveness of Fauna Structures 06/10 6.18 Other Methods that influence the effectiveness of Fauna Structures 06/10 7 TARGET SPECIES DESIGN COkNSIDERATIONS 7.1 Fish 06/10 7.2 Amphibians 06/10 7.3 Platypus 06/10 7.4 Arboreal Species 06/10 7.5 Koala 06/10 7.6 Birds 06/10 7.7 Bats 06/10 7.8 Macropods 06/10 7.9 Small Mammals 06/10 7.10 Reptiles 06/10 7.11 Invertebrates 06/10 8 NON-NATIVE SPECIES DESIGN CONSIDERATION 8.1 Deer 06/10 9 CASE STUDIES 9.1 Tugun Bypass 06/10 9.2 Compton Road – Brisbane City Council 06/10 9.3 The East Evelyn Range Upgrade 06/10 9.4 Mount Higginbotham, Victoria 06/10 10 TERMINOLOGY AND ABBREVIATIONS 10.1 Words, Expressions and Terms used in the Manual 06/10 10.2 Abbreviations 06/10 11 References 06/10

Page ii of ii TOC June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

1. OVERVIEW

1.1 Purpose ...... 1

1.2 Importance of this document ...... 1

1.3 Sources of information ...... 1

1.4 Future Directions...... 1

1.5 How to use this manual ...... 1

1.6 Who should use this manual...... 2

1.7 Acknowledgements...... 2

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 1 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

1 OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose This is the second volume in a two-part series on fauna sensitive road design. The aim of this manual is to provide guidelines for preferred practices to reduce or eliminate the impact of road infrastructure on fauna. Specifically, this manual outlines preferred practices and provides recommendations to achieve fauna sensitive road design. The manual addresses four crucial questions: 1. How well do certain practices/mitigation measures work? 2. In what circumstances do certain structures function best? 3. For which species are the mitigation measures appropriate? 4. How can overall performance of these mitigation measures be maintained and improved? Practices outlined in this manual are applicable across Australia. However, local knowledge, data and experience should always be used to enhance, modify or even replace the recommendations provided within this manual. The aim of fauna sensitive road design is to produce the best overall, locally relevant, outcome. 1.2 Importance of this document Over recent years, the Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) has increasingly recognised the importance of ameliorating the effects of road infrastructure on fauna and the environments they inhabit. This is evidenced by the release of Fauna Sensitive Road Design Volume 1: Past and Existing Practices manual in 2001, and now the production of this volume, Fauna Sensitive Road Design Volume 2: Preferred Practices. 1.3 Sources of information This volume provides guidance on how to achieve fauna sensitive road design. It is based on research that has specifically investigated the effectiveness of fauna impact mitigation measures. The research was conducted by the TMR, other state and international road agencies, and national and international research institutes. Information was collected from multiple resources including desktop research, conversations with knowledgeable people and agencies, and field research. 1.4 Future Directions The desktop research revealed there is a significant lack of scientific rigour when designing and monitoring fauna impact mitigation measures. This can be addressed through more involved surveying, monitoring and maintenance of fauna impact mitigation measures. Furthermore, investment towards good surveying and monitoring is more cost-effective than a series of minimal monitoring attempts. A standard method of monitoring through preconstruction, construction and post-construction should be performed. The implementation of the SMART technique (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timeframed) is recommended. Secondly, the communication of road studies and learnings could be improved. Reliable research on the success of mitigation measures is not readily available. Findings from future road projects could be documented for inclusion in peer-reviewed literature. The availability of these findings would allow for informed decisions on fauna sensitive road design to be made in the future. 1.5 How to use this manual This manual provides an overall introduction to the principles underlying habitat connectivity and recommends solutions to retain connectivity. The structure of this manual enables the user to find information within distinct sections. The majority of fauna sensitive road design measures are outlined in Sections 6 and 7. The following information provides a summary of the sections and their content: Section 1: Overview: explains the need for fauna sensitive road design and how to use the manual. Section 2: Introduction: provides objectives and basic concepts. Section 3: Preferred Planning for Mitigation Measures: outlines the principles of effective fauna sensitive road design. Page 1 of 3 Vol 2 Chapter 1 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Section 4: Site Assessment and Monitoring: gives a brief introduction to site assessment, monitoring techniques and principles. Section 5: Maintenance Requirements: highlights the need for ongoing maintenance of fauna sensitive road designs. Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads: introduces the various structures and techniques that can be used to achieve fauna sensitive road designs, as well as providing advantages and disadvantages for a number of fauna groups. Section 7: Target Species Design Considerations: provides some background information for a number of fauna groups to assist with the implementation of fauna sensitive road design. Section 8: Non-native Species Design Considerations: provides information on road design for non-native fauna. Section 9: Case Studies: provides examples of fauna sensitive road design and associated learnings. It should be noted that the existence of this manual does not indicate fauna mitigation structures should automatically be implemented in all instances, but rather TMR should undertake appropriate consideration of fauna mitigation measures within the context of each project and the region within which it occurs. Furthermore, structures should always be designed in accordance with other relevant design standards and guidelines. 1.6 Who should use this manual This manual should be used as a reference document by TMR staff involved in the implementation of fauna sensitive road design and general environmental management for road projects and road corridor management. To encourage the adoption of these processes, it is necessary to strive for their integration within the overarching Road System Manager (RSM) Framework. Table 1.6.1 specifically indicates the points of integration into the RSM Framework. Table 1.6.1 Overview of linkages between TMR Processes and Fauna Sensitive Road Design

RSM Framework

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 Phase 7

Products and Road Road Operation Road System Services Corridor Road Project

OnQ Project Development and Management Concept Finalisation Implementation Phases TMR Main Roads Input of RCEA data Project Project Project Environmental Environment environmental as part of Environmental Environmental Environmental Policy / and Heritage consideration Corridor Assessment Management Auditing and Practices Policy and s as required Development Project Project Reporting Strategy Plans Environmental Environmental Management Certification Project Works Environmental Management Plans Fauna Section 1 Section 3 Section 5 Section 5 Sensitive Section 2 Section 4 Section 6 Section 9 Road Design Manual: Section 3 Section 6 Section 7 Volume 2 Section 7 Section 8 Section 8 1.7 Acknowledgements Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Volume 2: Preferred Practice was written based on information from Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Volume 1: Past and Existing Practices. This volume provides a practical guideline following on from recommendations in Volume 1, as well as providing updates from more Page 2 of 3 Vol 2 Chapter 1 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices recent road impact and mitigation research and studies. The authors of the earlier document summarised research undertaken in the field of road ecology and also included a review of research from Australia and around the world. The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of the authors of the previous document. In writing this second volume of Fauna Sensitive Road Design there have been many contributors of research and project findings, TMR would like to particularly acknowledge the significant contributions of Dr Rodney van der Ree (ACRUE), Greg Collins (RTA), Dr Miriam Goosem (JCU), Assoc Prof Darryl Jones (GU), the Tugun Bypass project team (including Camilla Freestone (SMEC), Wayne Purcell (TMR), Darren Brighton (TMR)), Mary O’Hare (BCC), Nigel Weston (NRMBNT), Amelia Selles (BCC) and David Francis (Chenoweth). We would also like to thank many people for their contributions and assistance in the development of this volume, including Robin Stone, Dr Sarah Robinson-Wolrath, Gavin Taylor, Vincent Hsu, Maria Tegan, Karen Oakley, Alison McKirdy, Norman Scott, Kim Forsyth, Marina Gibson, Viviana Gamboa Pickering, John Foley, Jay Quadrio, Susan Scott, Michelle Sauter, Bruce Thomson, Matt Wessling, Michael Yates, Catherine Dear, Joel Benjamin, Greg Porter, Ross Kapitzke, Kevin Roberts, Nicholas Frances-Coni, Steven Garrad, Anders Sjölund, Jennifer Nosovich, Deidre de Villiers, Anna Greig, Tom McHugh, Pauline Fitzgibbon, Tony O’Malley, Marilyn Cameron, Tina Ball, Mike Gerlach, Martin Cohen, Phil Rowles, Dr Rhidian Harrington, Dawn Balmer, Janis Ringuette, Andy Stewart, FaunaTech Austbat, Friends of Koalas Inc, Ecobiologica and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute. Finally, we would like to acknowledge additional reviewers including Mark Chilton, Don Cook, Ken Fong, Peter Graham, Luke Hamilton, Bret Kershaw, Mahendra Mistry, Simon O’Donnell, Julie Peters, Greg Ringwood, Helen Stevenson and Alex Findlay.

Page 3 of 3 Vol 2 Chapter 1 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

2. INTRODUCTION

2.1 Effects of roads and traffic on fauna...... 1

2.2 Objectives of Fauna Sensitive Road Design ...... 3

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 2 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Effects of roads and traffic on fauna The effects of roads and traffic on fauna are numerous (Table 1.1). The main effects are: 1. Loss, fragmentation and degradation of habitat. 2. Invasion by weeds, disease, pollution and feral fauna. 3. Disturbance due to vehicle movement: for example, noise, headlights. 4. Mortality of fauna due to collisions with vehicles. 5. Barriers to the movement of fauna. 6. Changed microclimatic conditions. The extent to which each of these factors affects fauna is directly related to the road attributes and the surrounding landscape. Table 1.1 The impacts of road infrastructure and traffic on fauna

Impacts Detailed Impacts

Construction work (including land clearance, earthworks, Loss of habitats explosions):  Destroys habitats and

species, both within the road reserve and adjacent areas.

 Terrestrial and aquatic Clogging of aquatic environments are habitats affected to varying degrees.

Fragmentation of habitats and Loss of habitats local populations.

Consequences are complex and embrace two main aspects: reduction of available habitat areas and mosaic distribution of Increased distances habitats. between residual habitats

Creation of new edges

Page 1 of 4 Vol 2 Chapter 2 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Impacts Detailed Impacts

Barrier and filter effect

Road traffic causes disturbances, but the effect of traffic is most visible through animal collision mortality. Habitat fragmentation

Indirect effects of road infrastructure. Genetic depletion  Indirect effects

associated with ancillary

developments during land ownership reorganisation become apparent in

multiple forms and can be

ultimately greater than the direct infrastructure

effects. Corridor effect

Page 2 of 4 Vol 2 Chapter 2 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Impacts Detailed Impacts

Collision

Pollution, contamination

Cumulative effects of road Light, noise disturbance infrastructure are relatively unknown.

 They are linked not only to general fauna contamination by traffic

generated toxic molecules, but also to

different negative effects, which are cumulative.

Land reallocation

Changed fire regime

2.2 Objectives of Fauna Sensitive Road Design The objectives to achieve fauna sensitive road design are as follows: a. Avoid environmentally sensitive areas. b. Identify the nature of the fauna impact issues. c. Identify the goals to mitigate impacts on fauna.

Page 3 of 4 Vol 2 Chapter 2 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document d. Design mitigation structures that accommodate a wide range of faunal groups, communities and ecosystem processes. e. Conduct targeted research to gain an awareness of the conditions and populations adjacent to fauna structures. f. Ensure monitoring of the construction and management process. g. Ensure maintenance of mitigation structures.

Page 4 of 4 Vol 2 Chapter 2 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

3. PREFERRED PLANNING FOR MITIGATION MEASURES

3.1 Concepts ...... 1 3.1.1 Habitat/population connectivity versus reducing fauna mortality...... 1 3.1.2 Avoiding habitat and population fragmentation...... 3 3.1.3 Specific measures versus modified structures...... 4 3.1.4 Fauna passage as part of a general landscape permeability concept ...... 4

3.2 Choice of appropriate fauna mitigation measures ...... 5

3.3 Planning and involvement...... 5

3.4 SMART technique...... 6

3.5 Integrated and holistic approach...... 7

3.6 Key references...... 7

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

3 PREFERRED PLANNING FOR MITIGATION MEASURES Definitions and detailed descriptions of the fauna mitigation structures mentioned are detailed in Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads. 3.1 Concepts 3.1.1 Habitat/population connectivity versus reducing fauna mortality Measures to protect fauna and to reduce habitat/population fragmentation in the vicinity of road infrastructure can be divided into two groups (Figure 2.1.1):  Those which directly reduce fragmentation. These measures provide links between habitats severed by the infrastructure such as fauna connectivity structures (for example, overpasses, underpasses and so on).  Those which aim to reduce or eliminate the impact of road traffic on fauna populations. In practice, there may not be a clear distinction between the two functions of these mitigation measures. For example, fauna exclusion fencing may reduce fauna mortality on roads but it can act negatively by severing links between habitat areas.

Page 1 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Aim: Aim: AND/OR Providing Links Reducing Mortality

Linkage: Linkage: Specific measures Habitat Adaptation Infrastructure adaptation Solutions Above the road Below the road

 Land bridge  Fence  Clearing vegetation  Noise barrier Mitigation  Culvert  Overpass (small  Tunnel  Artificial deterrent  Planting vegetation  Adaptation of the kerb roads)  Passage below  Warning sign/  Escape ramp from drain  Canopy bridge warning system bridge  Width of road with sensor  Pole  Artificial light  Local traffic management  Fauna exit in waterway

Figure 3.1.1 Types of measures to mitigate habitat fragmentation and reduce animal mortality (adapted from Iuell et al. 2003).

Page 2 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

3.1.2 Avoiding habitat and population fragmentation The following principles can be applied to both new and existing roads. For existing roads the principles can be adopted during repair and/or maintenance. Adjacent existing land use and future development should be considered as this may severely reduce the efficacy of any mitigation or compensatory measures (Figure 2.1.2).  Avoid habitat fragmentation. This is the preferred option.  Where habitat avoidance is impossible or impractical, consider fauna mitigation measures.  Where mitigation is insufficient or significant residual impacts remain, consider compensation.

a) Avoidance b) Mitigation

c) Compensation d) Fragmentation

Figure 3.1.2 Representation of a) avoidance, b) mitigation, c) compensation and d) fragmentation (adapted from Iuell et al. 2003).

Page 3 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

3.1.3 Specific measures versus modified structures  Structures can either be: o Designed solely for fauna passage, where human access is prohibited; or o Built for people or drainage and modified to allow fauna passage.  It is important to note that the modification of existing structures to reduce the barrier effect and increase the permeability of road infrastructure to fauna may, in specific environments, be more appropriate and a cheaper option than building dedicated fauna mitigation structures (Iuell et al. 2003) (Figure 2.1.3).

a) b)

c) d)

Figure 3.1.3 Retrofit of existing box culverts with ledges to provide dry fauna passage. 3.1.4 Fauna passage as part of a general landscape permeability concept  Landscape permeability is the degree to which fauna are capable of moving through the landscape (Suter et al. 2007).  Purpose built fauna passage structures and other structures adapted to increase the movement of animals across road infrastructure should not be considered in isolation (Bank et al. 2002; Iuell et al. 2003; van der Ree et al. 2007). Page 4 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Connectivity between habitats at a regional scale (at the minimum) should be considered, with particular regard for transport infrastructure, distribution of habitats and other potential barriers such as built-up areas.  Fauna mitigation structures should maintain connectivity within and between fauna populations. 3.2 Choice of appropriate fauna mitigation measures  Selection of the most appropriate type of fauna connectivity structure requires consideration of: o Landscape/topography (local and regional); o Habitats affected; o Target species; o Risk identification; o Funding availability; and o Conservation importance.  In general, mitigation measures become more elaborate the more important the area or corridor is to the target species (Figure 2.2.1).  In practice, there is rarely one mitigation measure available to effectively mitigate impacts on fauna. Instead, a set of integrated measures is required to address identified issues at specific sites and for the road as a whole.  A combination of mitigation measures suitable for different groups of animals will often be the best solution (Bank et al. 2002; Iuell et al. 2003; van der Ree et al. 2007).

Conservation importance: Conservation importance: Conservation importance: HIGH MEDIUM LOW

 Area of national importance  Area or species of  Non built-up areas: forests, regional/local importance agricultural land, non-  Wildlife corridor of productive land international/national  Wildlife corridor of

importance regional/local importance

Recommended fauna passage Recommended fauna passage Modified/retrofit structures to to be: to be: maintain general permeability.  Specific  Joint-use  Large dimensions  Medium dimensions Use a combination of different Use a combination of different measures to ensure maximum measures to ensure maximum permeability. permeability.

Figure 3.2.1 The choice of different types of fauna passages is dependent upon the conservation importance of the area or corridor (adapted from Iuell et al. 2003). 3.3 Planning and involvement Planning which involves fauna sensitive road design concepts will enable the adoption of best practice and in turn result in well conducted environmental assessment, design and likely an excellent overall environmental outcome. Most importantly, good quality environmental assessment will result in the installation of appropriate (both in terms of type and number) fauna mitigation measures. Fauna sensitive road design goals for each project must be specific to the location, species of concern and nature of the issue. To achieve these goals, consider the following: a) Early and continued involvement by environmental professionals so that:

Page 5 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Potential ecological impacts can be identified as early as possible.  Formal arrangements can be made to guarantee environmental staff are formally alerted and consulted at the concept stage of every road project (new and upgrades).  Compliance with environmental objectives and conditions is ensured. b) Investigating existing and future land use along and adjacent to the road project.  Contact relevant local government councils, interested community groups and any other stakeholders to confirm current and future land use before undertaking design and construction of fauna connectivity mitigation measures.  This will ensure the long-term success and viability of proposed fauna mitigation structures. c) Desktop research Review and evaluate the following to assist in the planning of fauna mitigation measures:  Case studies from similar environments.  Previous surveys of the ecosystem and associated fauna.  Environmental assessment documentation.  Roadkill surveys and databases.  Main Roads’ Road Corridor Environmental Assessment (RCEA) database.  Government policy and legislation. d) Ecological studies  The implementation of adequate and applicable ecological baseline studies will enhance the effectiveness of mitigation works.  Ensure appropriately qualified people are engaged to manage and carry out ecological studies. This will result in properly designed, meaningful and adequately funded studies. e) Community engagement  Follow relevant guidelines to ensure consultation is thorough. If consultation is poor the resulting issues may become time-consuming and less effective than if initial contact was undertaken. 3.4 SMART technique This technique has been widely employed, ranging from the dairy industry to human resource management, and recently to the mitigation of barrier effects on fauna species (van der Ree et al. 2007). The following SMART objectives should be considered in planning future fauna impact mitigation measures: Specific Measurable Achievable Realistic Timeframed For example: a) Identify the specific species of concern and the specific issues related to the road infrastructure (habitat degradation, fragmentation and so on).  In more detail, the specific purpose of a fauna mitigation structure should be identified. For example: o Gene flow: if the structure is constructed to ensure gene flow, then the dispersal of one animal per generation may be sufficient. o Annual Migration: if the aim is to enable the annual migration of a certain species across road infrastructure, then multiple structures at frequent intervals may be required (van der Ree et al. 2007).

Page 6 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 The number and frequency of structures is dependent on the behaviour of the target species. To connect populations with a small home range, the structures must be constructed at a higher density, whereas if the species has a large home range, fewer but perhaps larger structures may be required. b) Outline the ways each stage of the mitigation process is measurable. c) Ensure each specific and measurable aim is achievable. d) Ensure each specific and measurable aim is realistic. e) Ensure each specific and measurable aim is timeframed so deadlines can be targeted and reached. 3.5 Integrated and holistic approach There are two aspects to achieving a holistic approach to fauna sensitive road design, namely: permeability and integration. a) At a regional scale, fauna mitigation structures are required to maintain necessary contact within and between populations of animals (permeability concept). This concept emphasises the connectivity between habitats on a large scale and considers not only the transportation infrastructure, but the distribution of habitats and other potential barriers, such as built-up areas (PIARC 2007). b) At a local scale, it is imperative that all fauna sensitive structures (overpasses, underpasses, signage, fencing, lighting and so on) are considered together. For example, fauna underpasses or overpasses should always be installed with appropriate fencing to guide animals towards them. 3.6 Key references Bank, F.G., Irwin, C.L., Evink, G.L., Gray, M.E., Hagood, S., Kinar, J.R., Levy, A., Paulson, D., Ruediger, B., Sauvajot, R.M., Scott, D.J. and White, P. (2002) Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European Highways. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs Office of Policy, Washington, USA. Iuell, B., Bekker, G.J., Cuperus, R., Dufek, J., Fry, G., Hicks, C., Hlavac, V., Keller, V.B., Rosell, C., Sangwine, T., Torslov, N., Wandall, B. le Maire (eds.) (2003) Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions. European Co-operation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research, Brussels. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2002) Fauna Sensitive Road Design Volume 1: Past and Existing Practices. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Planning, Design and Environment Division, Brisbane, Queensland. Roedenbeck, I.A., Fahrig, L., Findlay, C.S., Houlahan, J.E., Jaeger, J.A.G., Klar, N., Kramer-Schadt, S. and van der Grift, E.A. (2007) The Rauischholzhausen Agenda for Road Ecology. Ecology and Society. 12:11. Suter, W., Bollmann, K. and Holderegger, R. (2007) Landscape Permeability: From Individual Dispersal to Population Persistence. In: Kienast, F., Wildli, O. and Ghosh, S. A Changing World: Challenges for Landscape Research. 8th edition. Netherlands: Springer. Pp 157-174. The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety – France (Sétra). (2005) Technical Guide: Facilities and Measures for Small Fauna. Reference number 0527, France. van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D. T., Holland, K., Gulle, N. and Budden, M. (2007) Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure. Report for the Department of Environment and Water Resources, Symonston. World Road Association (PIARC.) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. Technical Report, World Road Association La Défense Cedex, France.

Page 7 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 3 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

4. SITE ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING

4.1 Ecological site assessment...... 1

4.1.1 General principles of ecological site assessment ...... 1

4.1.2 General methods for ecological site assessment ...... 1 a) Vegetation distribution and condition ...... 1 b) Target species...... 2 c) Fauna movement patterns ...... 2 d) Fauna roadkill analysis...... 2 e) Identification of potential environmental risks ...... 2 f) Topographical features ...... 3 g) Current and future land use ...... 3

4.2 Fauna monitoring ...... 3

4.2.1 General principles of fauna monitoring ...... 3

4.2.2 Principles for monitoring fauna structures...... 4 a) Compliance ...... 4 b) Use of structures by wildlife ...... 5

4.2.3 Monitoring methods...... 5 a) Capture-mark-recapture...... 6 b) Spotlighting ...... 8 c) Radio tracking ...... 9 d) Roadkill survey...... 11 e) Genetic surveying ...... 12 f) Netting and capturing...... 13 g) Elliott traps and cage devices ...... 14 h) Scats ...... 15 i) Hair tubes/funnels ...... 16 j) Observational and audio methods ...... 17 k) Active searches...... 18 l) Sand plot monitoring ...... 18 m) Still and video cameras...... 20 n) Ink method ...... 22 o) Playback...... 23 p) Sooted plates ...... 23 q) Spotting ...... 24 r) Pitfall traps...... 25 s) Hollow surveying ...... 26

4.3 Key references...... 26

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

4 SITE ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING 4.1 Ecological site assessment The aim of this section is to provide a general idea of ecological site assessment principles. This is not suggesting that environmental officers should undertake such works, but rather is intended to help them understand the terminology presented in contracts and fee proposals. 4.1.1 General principles of ecological site assessment Ecological site assessment is the ecological evaluation of a site that may be completed prior to detailed planning, design and construction work. There are many techniques available to assess a site that ensure the effectiveness of fauna sensitive road design measures.  General principles:  To enable a broad understanding, ecological assessments at multiple locations along the road alignment may be undertaken, although the entire alignment may be assessed if appropriate. o Adhering to the SMART technique is useful (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timeframed; refer Section 3.4). o Determine site assessment objectives prior to field surveys. This assists in the determination of what is measurable and what is achievable. - Time and financial constraints will determine whether management options can be adopted within the scope of the project. - Determine timeframes with assistance from consultants and researchers. 4.1.2 General methods for ecological site assessment The following are some areas and methods to consider during an ecological site assessment. The described methods are not an exhaustive list. a) Vegetation distribution and condition  Purpose: o Identify areas of intact vegetation within the broad study area. o Identify mature native vegetation that could enhance the success of a fauna mitigation measure. o Identify vegetation quality. o Identify weed locations.  Methods: o Desktop analysis: - Maps of remnant vegetation are available from the Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM). o There are a number of vegetation assessment methods including the Specht and Beard-Webb Schemes. - Sonic Tomograph:  Measures the amount of decay and hardwood of trees.  Advantages: o Revegetation costs can be limited if areas of suitable vegetation are identified and utilised to maintain existing connectivity in conjunction with fauna structures. o Vegetation that suits target fauna species can be maintained. o Identification of weeds ensures that management practices can be in place early and therefore maximise the success of fauna connectivity structures by minimising weed infestation.

Page 1 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document b) Target species  Purpose: o Identify possible target species to ensure structural designs and mitigation measures (including monitoring) are effective.  Methods: o Methods employed during fauna surveys need to be well-documented to enable replication across projects: pre-, during and post-construction. o Methods are often target species-specific. o Desktop analysis. o Contact local experts. o Fauna monitoring.  Advantages: o By identifying target species early in the concept phase of road design, fauna monitoring will be more effective and ensure the appropriateness of structures installed. c) Fauna movement patterns  Purpose: o Identify established fauna movement patterns to ensure fauna crossing structures are located appropriately.  Methods: o Use appropriate monitoring methods listed in Section 4.2.3: Monitoring methods, including roadkill analysis and general fauna monitoring methods.  Advantages: o The success and use of fauna structures is increased if constructed in established fauna movement corridors. d) Fauna roadkill analysis  Purpose: o Detect presence of fauna species. o Detect hotspots of roadkill.  Methods: o Refer to Section 4.2.3 d: Roadkill survey.  Advantages: o Identified fauna roadkill hotspots benefit from the installation of fauna mitigation measures. o Provides information on species present within adjacent habitat areas. e) Identification of potential environmental risks  Purpose: o Identify specific baseline environmental conditions. o Identify potential legal compliance issues.  Methods: o Desktop analysis (for example, RCEA, regional ecosystem maps and so on). o Site visits. o Soil and water sampling.

Page 2 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Flora and fauna monitoring. o Cultural heritage assessment.  Advantages: o Early identification of possible environmental risks increases the effectiveness of management strategies. o Reduces the likelihood of cumulative environmental impacts. f) Topographical features  Purpose: o Ensure fauna sensitive road design measures are appropriate and cost effective in the area of concern.  Methods: o Analysis of topographic maps. o Site visits.  Advantages: o Careful planning can ensure that structures are located to complement topographical features. o For example, the cost of excavation may be decreased by using natural undulating areas for fauna underpasses and/or overpasses. g) Current and future land use  Purpose: o Identify areas that may not complement fauna structures in the future. - For example, fauna structure designs should accommodate any future upgrade or expansion works. - A fauna structure should connect suitable land on both sides to accommodate target species in the long-term. o Identify areas of land that are suitable for fauna structures. o To ensure the long term effectiveness of fauna crossing structures installed.  Methods: o Determine if adjacent lands will be developed in the future which may reduce a structure’s effectiveness. - Review relevant planning schemes, land use plans and strategic regional plans.  Advantages: o Appropriate financial investment. 4.2 Fauna monitoring 4.2.1 General principles of fauna monitoring Monitoring is used to assess the impact roads have on fauna and the level to which fauna sensitive road designs can be used to mitigate this impact.  Prior to commencing monitoring, determine success criteria. For example, how will success be measured, how often monitoring will occur and for what period of time monitoring will continue?  Document initial fauna surveys to be undertaken during the site assessment phase to ensure methodological consistency is employed pre-, during and post-construction.  Note certain methods undertaken to survey populations are specific to certain groups of animals (refer to methods described in Section 4.2.3: Monitoring methods).

Page 3 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Monitoring is essential for: o Assessing the effectiveness of fauna mitigation measures. o Ensuring the efficiency of structures through feedback (specifically, successes and failures). o Determining whether fauna structures require alteration to maximise effectiveness.  To maximise monitoring effectiveness three phases of monitoring should occur: o Pre-construction monitoring: - Develop a baseline for comparison with construction and post-construction surveys. This may include: - species and population richness and abundance and size; - whether fauna has attempted to cross the road; - relationship of individuals on either side of the road; - existing fauna passageways; - fauna community composition (age, age ratios, gender, gender ratios, breeding patterns). o During-construction monitoring: - Undertake regular site assessment to ensure fauna structures are constructed to specifications. Design drawing should also be regularly reviewed. - Establish a post-construction monitoring regime with adequate budget prior to finalisation of the construction project. - Monitor sensitive sites to ensure no damage is caused by construction (for example, site inspections of nesting sites, water monitoring and so on). o Post-construction monitoring: - Should occur for several years (at least five years) and focus on multiple species. - Use results to compare pre-construction baseline survey information with effectiveness of fauna mitigation measures. 4.2.2 Principles for monitoring fauna structures  Monitoring is an integral part of achieving effective fauna sensitive road design.  Failure to undertake monitoring can jeopardise the success of fauna sensitive road design (particularly in the long term).  The success of mitigation structures is measured in terms of: o Compliance. o Use of structures by fauna. a) Compliance  Audit fauna sensitive road design measures to ensure they have been constructed and delivered to the satisfaction of the expert environmental advice and documentation provided.  Compliance may be aided by adopting the following concepts: o Keeping communication open between all parties. - Poor communication with the environmental expert during the road project may result in the construction of structures that do not meet the original purpose or design. Failure to comply with all design details may render an otherwise suitable mitigation structure unusable or ineffective. o Comply with specifications and guidelines through all stages of the project. o Be mindful of the different stakeholders involved in all levels of the project.

Page 4 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

- Each stage of development involves different people who have varying levels of interest in fauna movement. b) Use of structures by wildlife  Specific criteria are required to evaluate the effectiveness of fauna sensitive road design measures: o Identify criteria prior to construction. o Identify criteria by developing clear and concise evaluation questions and definitions of effectiveness.  Criteria that could be used to measure fauna sensitive road design success are: o Fauna using structures. o Reduction in roadkill. o Maintenance of habitat connectivity. o Retained genetic interchange. o Dispersal and recolonisation. o An increase in the viability of local populations (or prevention of reduced population viability).  When assessing the effectiveness of fauna structures the following should be noted: o Although the presence of fauna using structures indicates a level of structure success, structure use or a reduction in roadkill alone does not necessarily indicate that road impacts have been sufficiently mitigated or that structures are effective. - For example, only a few individuals from a population may use a structure that was previously a major migration route prior to construction. o Are positive effects local or do they encompass the whole population? 4.2.3 Monitoring methods  When developing a monitoring program for fauna structures consider using the following: o Conduct monitoring regularly, consistently and systematically: pre-, during and post- construction. - Employ the same sampling techniques across a project (where applicable) as those used pre-construction to maintain consistency and allow for meaningful comparisons. o Use a variety of monitoring methods to encompass a wide range of species. o Determine the area to be monitored. This should include adjacent habitats. - Are all species present in adjacent habitats likely to use the fauna structures? - What is the proportion on each species likely to use the fauna structures? Does this correlate to adjacent population sizes? o Monitoring should occur across different seasons to ensure all species are recorded. Also, allow for differences occurring across time, lunar cycles and weather. o Ensure methods are scientifically-based so they can be replicated and compared. o Ensure all scientific and animal ethics permits have been obtained.  Considerations affecting the form and timing of monitoring are: o Species home ranges: - Sampling areas need to consider a species home range. - Often change over time (for example, breeding seasons, weather and lunar periods). - Can be difficult to determine if monitoring is only undertaken for a short time period. This period may not include seasonal fluctuations in populations, as a result of breeding activities, food availability and migration events (Wormington 2006).

Page 5 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Seasonality: - Changes in food availability, breeding, migration patterns and so on. o Weather: - Some monitoring methods are less effective in particular weather conditions. For example, sand plots are less effective and reliable during the wet weather periods. - Weather affects species movements and activities. For example, nocturnal species are active earlier on overcast days, frogs are more active during and soon after rain events. o Topography and landscape structure: - Home ranges may be different across landscape types. - Some techniques are not suitable for slopes, for example sand plots. o Lunar cycles: - Animal activity level changes throughout the lunar cycles. - Some monitoring techniques have different levels of effectiveness depending on lunar cycles (for example, spotlighting is less effective during a full moon).  Examples of issues to be considered when interpreting results from monitoring: o A lack of a particular life stage of a species may indicate a serious issue with a population (for example, no record of sub adults). o A high number of individuals in a particular life stage or sex may indicate lack of dispersion due to fragmentation. o A high rate of disease may indicate an unusual level of stress. o An area recording a high number of individuals. Are individuals moving through the area or are they stagnant and is their movement constrained? - A high rate of moving individuals may indicate a wildlife corridor. - A high amount of stagnant individuals can indicate food or shelter preferences in the area. o Is the presence of individuals using fauna structures inhibiting other species/individuals from using fauna structures? a) Capture-mark-recapture  Purpose: o A method of analysis used to estimate population size. o Used to determine the dispersal or movement of species across road barriers. o Sex and age ratios can also be inferred.  Typical Target Species: o Small and medium-sized mammals. o Birds.  Method: o A trap is used to capture a number of live individuals. Traps are left out for a set period of time (for trapping methods refer to Section 4.2.3 f and g). - Trapping may occur over a number of days. - Multiple sites can be monitored to establish movement patterns. o Individuals are caught and marked with a unique identifier (for example, ear tag or band) and then released back into the environment (Figure 4.2.1).

Page 6 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

- Markings should be chosen that will not affect the survival probability of the individual (for example, avoid the use of bright coloured tags). - Data collected on each individual caught may include sex, weight, age (juvenile or adult), measurements, and any distinguishing characteristics. o Sufficient time is allowed to pass for the marked individuals to redistribute themselves among the unmarked population prior to subsequent trapping events. o Methods used for subsequent trapping events should be identical (or as close as possible) to the methods used in the first period of trapping. o Individuals captured that have been previously marked are known as recaptures. o Animals caught for the first time are usually marked and then are released. o Further trapping events can occur, particularly if estimates of survival or movement are desired.  Advantages: o Detailed data about the condition of species is collected allowing for useful post-construction comparisons. o Population size is estimated from as few as two visits to the study area. o Additional capture periods can simply be added to previous data by recording the dates recaptured, the newly caught individuals and the new identity tags used. o Capture histories can be easily analysed to estimate population sizes, survival and/or movement patterns. o Best method to achieve a full set of data on each individual. o Genetic analysis is also possible as individuals are handled.  Disadvantages: o If an individual is recorded on both sides of a road, it is impossible to determine which fauna crossing structure, if any, was used to cross the road. - For example, if there is a breach in exclusion fencing individuals may cross the road rather than use the fauna crossing structures. o Potentially time-consuming to trap, tag and record individuals. o Animals may become ‘trap happy’ or ‘trap shy’, which can impact population predictions. o Certain sexes, life stages or individuals may be prone to trapping causing biased results. o Animals may become distressed or injured by being trapped and handled.

a) b) Figure 4.2.1 a) Application of a marine turtle flipper tag (Source: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute). b) Bird leg tags (Source: Janis Ringuette).

Page 7 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document b) Spotlighting  Purpose: o To survey the presence of nocturnal fauna.  Target species: o Predominantly nocturnal fauna.  Method: o At night traverse monitoring area, preferably utilising transects (set lines within the survey area) with a light to spot target species. o Transects (usually perpendicular to roads) can be marked with coloured/reflective tape to be followed at night. o Search time along each transect is controlled and recorded to ensure that differing results are not a direct consequence of the search effort. - When comparing separate areas, the time of night should be consistent. - Weather should be recorded as this can affect results (for example, nocturnal species tend to be more active earlier in the night on overcast nights). - Species may require different spotlight strength to maximise visibility and minimise stress on animals. - Refer to Section 7: Target Species Design Considerations, tables for information about when species are most active and therefore most likely to be spotted. - Consult a lunar calendar before spotlighting as some nocturnal species may be less active during a full moon. - Daytime observations of den locations may enhance spotlight survey results. o Post-construction spotlighting will have increased frequency over time. Such increased frequency recognises the habituation process (of the target species to the constructed fauna structure).  Species-specific information o Ringtail possums - Cover spotlights with a neutral density filter to reduce light intensity to 7W. - Conduct between 1800 and 2400 hours. o Other possums - Lower than 55 W (30 W recommended) with a filter (semi-opaque) to prevent blindness and stress (Wilson 1999). - Having a lower watt is much more important than a filter to reduce stress on possums. o Gliders - Spotlighting for gliders is best at low vehicular speed, approximately 500 metres/hour. - Half-moon nights with warm and fine conditions are the best conditions to undertake spotlighting for gliders. - Use a maximum 50 W spotlight with a red filter, connected to a 12V battery.  Advantages: o An effective method for surveying nocturnal fauna. o Cheap and results are instantaneous. o Information on the habitat use by species. o May provide information about animal interactions.

Page 8 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Determination of the success of species reintroduction programs.  Disadvantages: o Generally limited to nocturnal fauna. o Ineffective for some nocturnal species that move quickly when a torch is shone on them. o Survey limitations due to lunar and weather cycles. o Bias may result across different sites due to varying light penetration (into vegetation). o The spotter’s background knowledge and skill will impact the results. o Different individual search techniques may affect results if a number of people are undertaking the works. o Repeated and frequent spotlighting may have a detrimental effect on the fauna. o Often sex and age cannot be identified and population health cannot be inferred. c) Radio tracking  Purpose: o Identify movement patterns of fauna. o Identify how fauna interact. o Location of dens/nests.  Target species: o Most species (depending on size or tracking device).  Method: o The animals are caught and a transmission device is attached (for trapping methods refer to Section 4.2.3 f and g). o Individuals are released at the site of capture. o There are three types of transmitters: - Satellite; - High frequency radio waves; and - GPS units utilising mobile telephone networks. o Radio tracking methods generally fall into three categories: 1. VHF transmitters: - A transmitter attached to an animal sends out radio signals which are picked up using large antennae. - Fixes are achieved by using a triangulation technique. - This method can be error prone and not suitable for animals that travel large distances. 2. Satellite Systems: - The transmitter system calculates and transmits location information from Earth to a satellite. - Information is then transmitted to a receiving station where the information is available via the Internet. - This method is extremely quick and accurate, but has a high cost.

Page 9 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

3. GPS units: - GPS units attached to transmitters regularly take a location fix and store it for future collection. - Some systems are programmed to ‘unlatch’ at a certain time or when their databanks are full. - Increasingly mobile phone networks are being used to transmit location information via a text message. o Most tracking devices are custom made. - Attach tracking devices using a soft leather band where viable to reduce irritation to the animal’s skin. Leather bands are also more resistant to gnawing and general use than PVC straps.  Species-specific information: o Squirrel gliders - Studies showed single-stage brass loop design radio collars in the 151 MHz and 150 MHz frequencies were effective for squirrel gliders (Ball and Goldingay 2007). o Gliders - Studies showed single-stage tuned-loop radio-transmitters were effective for gliders (Wilson et al. 2007). o Koalas - Figure 4.2.2. - Conduct night tracking between sunset and midnight. - Some research indicates for the first two and a half years it is recommended all tagged koalas be tracked five days per week. For the following six months, tracking should occur once a week (Matthews et al. 2007).  Advantages: o Enable determination if fauna crossing structures are being utilised. o May provide information on species interactions. o Fauna movement routes may be identified. o Nests and food sources may be located. o May be comparatively less time consuming and labour intensive than other methods (depending on method used). o Location information can be very accurate.  Disadvantages: o Comparatively expensive, as most items need to be custom-made. o Can be labour intensive depending on device used (VHF). o Causes disruption to animals.

Page 10 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 4.2.2 Koala with radio tracking collar and ear tag (Source: Friends of the Koala Inc.). d) Roadkill survey  Purpose: o To identify where and when roadkill occurs in a defined area. o To determine the target species for the design and location of safe fauna crossing structures and other mitigation strategies. o Provide species location data.  Target species: o Most species. o Less effective for soft bodied fauna (amphibians and reptiles) due to decay rates.  Method: o Surveys take place either on foot or in a slow moving vehicle (40 km/h). o Roadkill is best recorded in the early morning. o Survey both sides of the road (particularly if carrying out the survey from a car or surveying a road with multiple lanes) o Information which should, if possible, be recorded: - Species or species group; - Date and time found; - Sex; - Age (juvenile/adult); - Context of roadkill (rural, residential, commercial); - Road design (bend, cut and fill, fencing etc); - Vegetation in the area (forest, cleared etc). o Mark roadkill if multiple surveys in the same area are conducted within short timeframes to prevent double-counting. o Data may be recorded and analysed using a database with GPS software or maps. o Analyse roadkill data in conjunction with local population data. This ensures a more complete view of how roadkill is affecting local population size and movement patterns.

Page 11 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Advantages: o Survey method is inexpensive and results can be processed easily. o Clear knowledge of where and what fauna crossing structures may be required.  Disadvantages: o Untrained individuals may incorrectly identify species. o Not very effective for soft bodied creatures as they degrade quickly. o Sometimes only species group and not species can be identified. o There are risks associated with traversing roads by foot (particularly to mark carcasses). o May not provide a complete understanding of species assemblage. e) Genetic surveying  Purpose: o Provides a detailed measure of dispersal across a road barrier.  Target species: o Primarily for those species for which genetic markers exist, although markers can be developed if required. o Check Internet databases to determine if the target species has existing markers: - Genbank Searchable database: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=Nucleotide - http://www.uga.edu/srel/Msat_Devmt/Microsatellites--home.htm  Method: o Conducted by trained researchers, not ecological consultants and should be management focused. o Genetic sampling stages are: - Capturing individuals (refer to parts 6 and 7 for capture techniques); - Blood sampling; - Genetic laboratory analyses; - Statistical analyses; - Interpretation. o A minimum of 20 individuals are needed to be sampled from each population with the genetic analysis undertaken for each individual. o Baseline time frames for results using this technique have not been established. The length of a study will depend on life cycle and migration habits of the target species.  Advantages: o Comparatively cheaper and less time consuming than other forms of field surveying. o Provides an estimation of population dispersal and genetic transfer rates. o Longitudinal studies can be conducted over the years to provide information regarding the short and long-term impact of road infrastructure and the effectiveness of fauna structures. o Adds scientific rigour to the management of road infrastructure undertaken in a fauna sensitive manner. o More specifically, it can be used as a measureable target when managers apply the SMART approach to fauna sensitive road design.  Disadvantages o Must be conducted by professionals.

Page 12 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Waiting periods for analysis may be significant. f) Netting and capturing  Purpose: o Used to capture animals for use in other techniques (for example, mark recapture, genetic sampling and general species presence and abundance measures).  Target species: o Most species.  Methods: o Methods vary according to the species being sampled. o Some methods include: - Tranquilising. For example, nocturnal species should be tranquilised early in the night so the anaesthetic wears off in time for animal to recover and feed before returning to den (Wilson 2007). - Mistnetting (Figure 4.2.3). - Harp trap (Figure 4.2.3).  Advantages: o Several survey techniques can be used simultaneously (for example, mark recapture and genetic sampling).  Disadvantages: o Direct capture can be stressful on individuals.

a) b) Figure 4.2.3 Netting and capture equipment. a) Mistnet (Source: Dawn Balmer). b) Harp trap (Source: Ecobiological).

Page 13 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document g) Elliott traps and cage devices  Purpose: o Used to capture animals for use in other techniques (for example, mark recapture, genetic sampling, and general species presence and abundance measures).  Target species: o Most species.  Methods: o There are a number of different designs and methods (for example, Figure 4.2.4). o Trap information is highly species-specific: - Some species require shelter to be placed in traps (for example, cotton wool or paper). - If traps are not waterproof they may need to be covered with plastic. - Some traps entice animals to the device using bait. - The bait used is species-specific and related to the target species’ diet. In general, baits can consist of peanut butter, rolled oats, vanilla essence, honey and/or creamed honey. Traps in tree trunks may be sprayed with dilute honey to attract certain species. o Traps may be placed above the ground: - Hanging traps are generally 2.5 metres above the ground. - Elliott traps can be attached to poles and trees with wire and/or bracketed platforms. o Traps may need to be left in the same place for three or four nights to allow habituation, but they will need checking daily. o Traps should not interfere with normal fauna pathways or cause changes to an animal’s behaviour. o Data collected from trapped fauna may include: - Body weight; - Teeth condition; - Breeding status; - Sex; - Weight; - Age (juvenile or adult); - If gliders, then the glider membrane colour may be recorded. o Traps come in different sizes to suit different target species.  Species-specific information: o Koalas - If transporting koalas, crates must be 420 x 470 x 580 mm with only one koala per crate.  Advantages: o The technique can be used to infer a large amount of information (presence, abundance, genetic variability).  Disadvantages: o Direct capture can be stressful on individuals. o May catch non-target species.

Page 14 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) b)

Figure 4.2.4 a) Small Elliott trap b) Cage device (Note: figures not to scale). h) Scats  Purpose: o Infer species presence and their movement patterns. o Can indicate regular fauna movement routes.  Target species: o Mainly used for mammals.  Method: o Collected for a set area. - May be collected from underpasses, transects and/or around specific trees. o Analysed and identified to the lowest subset, if species cannot be identified. o Hairs attached to or within scats can also be used for identification or used in genetic analysis. o Scat information can be collected from canopy bridge structures to indicate use. Scats are collected by erecting a shade cloth slung under the structure. o Scat collection can be undertaken on glider poles using shade-cloth circles above the metal pole guards.  Species-specific information: o Koalas - Scats are usually collected from the base of eucalypts over 100 mm in diameter in a 1 m2 quadrant. - Pellet counts can be used to predict estimates of koala abundance.  Advantages: o Can indicate fauna movement patterns. o Indicates feeding trees and preferred habitats. o Shows predation of species.  Disadvantages: o Cannot distinguish between individuals. o Waiting time for analysis results and performing analysis may be significant.

Page 15 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Researchers must have scat identification knowledge. i) Hair tubes/funnels  Purpose: o Monitor the use of fauna structures by animals. o Measure the presence of animals.  Target species: o Mammals  Method: o Line funnel or tube entrances with double-sided tape and attach to glider poles, any natural (tree) or man-made (pole) structure or to the ground. - Hair tubes are usually PVC and 100 mm long x 40 mm diameter with holes drilled through the middle. - Tubes are usually nailed to structures approximately four metres off the ground (unless being used in fauna underpasses) or pegged to the ground (Figure 4.2.5). o Bait may be used to attract species to enter the tubes. o Can be utilised on glider poles during intensive monitoring periods (Figure 4.2.6).  Species-specific information: o Squirrel gliders. - Spray tubes with a mixture of water and diluted honey to attract squirrel gliders.  Advantages: o Items are cost-effective and simple to install. o Can indicate use of fauna structures immediately. o Can gain genetic information from samples.  Disadvantages: o Analysis of hair samples at a species level can be expensive. o Waiting time for analysis results and performing analysis may be significant. o Not always accurate when distinguishing between similar species.

Figure 4.2.5 Hair funnel pegged to the ground (Source: FaunaTech Austbat).

Page 16 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 4.2.6 Hair funnel used for monitoring. Tube is mounted on a glider pole at Compton Road, Brisbane (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). j) Observational and audio methods  Purpose: o Indicate the use of fauna structures by species. o Audio is often used to supplement other monitoring data and provide evidence of species presence.  Target species: o Observational - all species. o Audio - Vocal species (particularly birds, frogs and bats).  Methods: o Observational - note any animals observed during movements within the study area. o Observational studies may benefit from placement of artificial shelter sites, such as concrete pavers, particularly when reptiles and invertebrates are part of the target group of species. o Observational – monitor at different times (for example, dawn, midday, dusk and after dark) as species activities and locations will change throughout the day. o Observational - At night, night vision equipment including image intensifying goggles or infra-red video cameras may be utilised to visualise microbats. o Audio - recording devices (for example, Anabat) are used to record sounds (including ultrasonic) or vocalisations made by animals.  Advantages: o Quick and easy. o Can provide additional rigour to other survey techniques. o Audio can indicate the presence of species that cannot be monitored by other methods (trap- shy species and birds). o Can monitor the presence of insects. o Less invasive to species than other survey methods.

Page 17 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Disadvantages: o Can be time-consuming listening to recorded audio. o Identification of species requires a detailed knowledge base. o Direct observation is not useful for all species (for example, microbats) and may not allow for species-specific information. k) Active searches  Purpose: o Establish use of fauna structures for cryptic and shy species. o Locate nesting and breeding locations.  Target species: o All species. o Particularly useful to monitor shy species.  Method: o Move through a particular area and actively search for fauna. - This includes overturning rocks, searching through leaf litter, tree hollows and logs. o When performing active searches: - Do not disturb nests during searches. - Replace all rocks and logs picked up and/or turned over in the same spot with same side touching the ground. Do not leave rocks and habitat structures overturned.  Advantages: o Surveys species when other techniques are inappropriate. o Results are immediate. o Cost-effective as no equipment is required.  Disadvantages: o Individual must have sufficient knowledge to accurately identify species. l) Sand plot monitoring  Purpose: o Monitors the use of fauna structures by recording tracks of species left in sand plots located at the entrance and exit of the fauna crossing structures.  Target species: o All species.  Method: o Sand is placed in trays or directly onto the ground at the entrance and exit of fauna structures (Figure 4.2.7). o The placement of track beds depends on the gait of fauna being studied. o Numerous types of sand may be used. - Silver sand is most commonly used as it can be used to get prints of small mammals and does not harden or dry out. - Alternative substrate types may be pure sand, sieved agricultural gypsum powder, marble dust, bricklayers loam or any combination. Loose soil and clay/loam mixtures have also been used.

Page 18 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Sand should be 20-50 mm in depth and 1-2 metres wide and cover the breadth of the fauna structure. o Place sand 1-2 metres from the entrance to limit disturbance from the wind and rain. o Moisten sand (fine spray of water) to hold animal prints longer. - If sand is placed straight on a soil substrate it will not dry out and prints will be well preserved. o Check plots regularly and identify and record species prints. - The configuration of plots will vary according to the structural constraints of crossings. o Identify tracks on site and then rake over to achieve a smooth surface. o Document methods used to determine if animal tracks constitute a complete crossing to maintain consistency across surveys. - A complete crossing is usually denoted by a set of prints by the same taxa in all sand plots, facing the one direction. - A probable crossing is usually denoted by a set of prints recorded in all but one sand plot facing the one direction (not applicable if only one or two plots are used). o Monitoring between two and three times a week optimises the opportunity to identify animals tracks. - Triggs (1996) may be used for track identification.  Advantages: o Set-up and maintenance of testing equipment is inexpensive when compared to other monitoring methods. o Results are immediate.  Disadvantages: o If trays are not wide enough some species (for example, macropods) may jump over a sand tray without detection. o Does not distinguish between individuals. o Wind and rain can affect monitoring. o May be considered labour intensive as the plots must be monitored regularly. o Majority of tracks can only be identified to the level of fauna group (for example, macropod or rodent) rather than species. o If sand trays are not monitored regularly then tracks can overlap resulting in the loss of data.

Page 19 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 4.2.7 Underpass with two sand plots used to monitor fauna use. m) Still and video cameras  Purpose: o Record use of fauna structures by species. o Collect additional information on fauna use, such as the precise time and date an animal used a structure.  Target species: o Can be used for all species.  Method: o Methods depend on the specific camera or video being used. o Combination of sensors, cameras, control box and power supply (Figure 4.2.8). o Attached to either natural or man-made structures. o Control box and/or cameras can be placed in a metal locked cage or box to prevent vandalism (Figure 4.2.9). o Should be waterproof. o Some considerations for different types of cameras and sensors are: - Active infra-red beam sensors: - Sensitivity set to allow particular animals to be photographed. - Sensors are very accurate. - Some sensors are waterproof which allows placement outside culverts and near the ground (Goosem 2005). - Passive infra-red sensors: - Uses body heat to set trigger for photograph. - Cannot change sensitivity and, therefore, will photograph all species. - Accurate for larger animals. - Cannot detect exothermic species such as reptiles and amphibians. - Can be set off by inanimate heat-emitting structures (for example, metal).

Page 20 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

- Cover a wider area than active sensors (Goosem 2005). - Microwave sensors: - Not usually used in isolation, rather used in conjunction with passive sensors. - Similar to the passive sensors but are not affected by shadows/heat changes. - New technology and is, therefore, expensive and has not been used widely (Goosem 2005). - Remotely-triggered video camera systems: - Very expensive, mainly due to power use requirements. - Predominantly used for species with a high conservation value, due to expense. - Review of video footage is labour intensive. - Motion-detecting camera system: - Widely used. - Sensitive to fog and rain. - High maintenance and false triggering from branches often occurs. - Regularly clear stored images as the camera can be triggered by insects, vegetation, rain and fog and memory card may fill quickly. - Set up cameras at either end of a rope tunnel to detect complete crossings. - Digital cameras: - Able to store a large number of images. - Can store time and date information with pictures. - Difficulty in capturing images of fast moving species as it may take up to five seconds to take a picture. - Flashes are usually of lower quality. - High power demand. - Some types cannot take footage in the dark. o Considerations before installation: - Ease of accessibility (to cameras, control boxes and power supplies). - Equipment required to complete the installation. - Safety concerns. - The side of the fauna crossing and direction the cameras are to face. - Distance between cameras, control box and power source.  Advantages: o Provides information on species utilising fauna structures and frequency of use. o Indicates use of fauna structures by predator species and/or humans. o Provides information on the precise time and date fauna structures are used. This may indicate fauna passage patterns. o Provides information on animals undetected by other means of monitoring. o Possible to obtain environmental data (for example, temperature, light, humidity).  Disadvantages: o Prone to vandalism. o May be costly and time-consuming.

Page 21 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o May not indicate complete crossings by individuals. This can be overcome if detectors and cameras are placed at both ends of the fauna structure. o Power sources can be unreliable.

Figure 4.2.8 Camera and sensors used to monitor use of canopy bridges at Palmerston Highway (Cohen 2008).

Figure 4.2.9 Vandalism resistant cage for still camera in fauna underpass, East Evelyn (Scott 2007). n) Ink method  Purpose: o Monitors the use of fauna structures by recording tracks of species left on paper plots located at the entrance and exit of crossing structures.

Page 22 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Target species: o Can be used for large and some small mammals. o Very effective for recording amphibians.  Method: o The ink consists of a mixture of paraffin with some carbon powder (40 g/l oil). o Spread ink on a piece of plastic (with a small upright rounded edge) or mat (more effective). o Lay paper across the whole width of the passageway. o Check paper weekly for animal prints. Tracks and sheets to be replaced with new ones if more than approximately three tracks are found.  Advantages: o Ink pad does not affect the movement of species. o Animal prints can be taken from site for analysis, decreasing field time.  Disadvantages: o Only some fauna can be classified down to the species level using this method. o Ink may have adverse effects on fauna (particularly invertebrates). o Identifications of animal tracks must be undertaken by an expert. o) Playback  Purpose: o Identify the presence of species.  Target species: o Vocal species.  Method: o A call is recorded and played back in the field, after which the observer will listen and record responses to identify species.  Advantages: o Quick and easy to use. o Results are immediate.  Disadvantages: o Specific calls to initiate responses may not be available. o Relies on the observer having adequate knowledge to identify calls. p) Sooted plates  Purpose: o Used to analyse small animal use of fauna structures (mainly culverts). o Most appropriate for use in small culverts.  Target species: o Small-sized fauna.  Method: o Place an aluminium plate with soot (acetylene torch or similar apparatus) on the ground. o Wrap a sticky piece of plastic around the centre of the plate with the sticky side up (often clear contact is used).

Page 23 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Animal presses foot into the soot which imprints onto the sticky band allowing for identification.  Advantages: o Easy to install, transport and construct. o Comparatively inexpensive to other monitoring methods. o Does not harm fauna. o There are no time restrictions on analysis of plates as a permanent record is created. o Plates can be transported for experts to analyse (unlike sand plot tracks). o Particularly useful to record small-sized fauna prints (for example, amphibians, small mammals and reptiles).  Disadvantages: o Not effective to record presence of large-sized fauna. o Unable to distinguish between individuals of the same species. q) Spotting  Purpose: o Identify the presence of species and their location. o Commonly used to locate and remove species before clearing.  Target species: o Primarily used for species with conservation status, but all types of species can be targeted. o Recommended for use prior to and during land clearing.  Method: o Choose sites randomly (usually in a stratified pattern). However, sites may, in some circumstances, be intentionally chosen. o View all trees in the survey area and determine the presence of fauna. o Attach a tag, flag or piece of tape to the tree once ‘observed’ to prevent double counting. This assumes a sedentary behaviour of the observed species. o Can be used in conjunction with scat monitoring. o When an individual is sighted, data collection may include, where possible: - Age class. - Reproductive class (for example, presence of pouch with young). - Health status (for example, overall appearance). - Location (marked on a map). o Can record tree species information with sufficient detail to add to information about species habitat requirements.  Advantages: o Allows species to be located and removed prior to clearing. o Applicable when specific location data of species is required.  Disadvantages: o Time consuming. o Costly as the survey is generally carried out by a trained and registered spotter.

Page 24 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices r) Pitfall traps  Purpose: o Sample invertebrate, small mammal, reptile and amphibian species to obtain presence/absence information.  Target species: o Most effective for the monitoring of invertebrates and other small terrestrial species.  Method: o A number of pitfall trap types. o Consists of a cup or container submerged into the soil. o Container may be partly filled with a preservative. o Animals fall into the trap and cannot escape, allowing researchers to identify the presence of species. o Containers can be covered to prevent issues created by rain and falling debris. o Guide rails can be erected to guide species towards traps (Figure 4.2.10). o Container size varies depending on site and target species.  Advantages: o Cost-effective and simple to use. o No field identification for invertebrates is needed. Samples can be taken from the field for identification by experts.  Disadvantages: o May trap non-target species. o If preservative is used then all species are killed. o Species trapped in container may fall prey to predation.

Pitfall trap

a) b) Figure 4.2.10 a) Pitfall trap line with guiding fence. b) Covered pitfall trap (Walters 2003).

Page 25 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document s) Hollow surveying  Purpose: o Identify species utilising the hollow. o Determine whether hollow is being utilised.  Target species o Arboreal species. o Birds.  Method: o If utilised as a pre-clearing method: - An ecologist inspects the site (five metres on either side of carriageway) prior to vegetation clearing and marks trees as hollow, inactive (hollow not being used) or not hollow. - Alternatively, trees with hollows should be numbered, given a GPS position and spray- painted/tagged. This information should be provided in a map for relevant site staff to ensure care is taken around these trees if being retained. 4.3 Key references Australian Museum Business Service Consulting. (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring, Stage 1 - Final Report. Brunswick Heads. Report for the Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Brisbane City Council. (Undated) Ecological Assessment Guidelines. Available: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_1644. Accessed 2 September 2009. Ball, T.M. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007) Can Wooden Poles be Used to Reconnect Habitat for a Gliding Marsupial? Unpublished. Bax, D. (2006) Karuah Bypass: Fauna Crossing Report. Prepared for the New South Wales Road Traffic Authority, New South Wales. Bond, A. and Jones, D. (2007) Temporal Trends in Use of Fauna-friendly Underpasses and Overpasses. Unpublished. Centre for Innovative Conservation Strategies, Griffith University, Brisbane. Forman, R., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J., Clevenger, A., Cutshall, C., Dale, V., Fahrig, L., France, R., Goldman, C., Heanue, K., Jones, J., Swanson, F., Turrentine, T. and Winter, T. (2003) Road Ecology: Science and Solutions. Island Press, Washington, USA. Goosem, M. (2004) Progress Report - East Evelyn Underpass Monitoring Project. Rainforest Cooperative Research Centre, Cairns, Queensland. Goosem, M. (2005) Wildlife Surveillance Assessment Compton Road Upgrade 2005 - Review of Contemporary Options for Monitoring. Unpublished Report to the Brisbane City Council, Environment and Parks Branch, Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest Cooperative Research Centre, Cairns, Queensland. Matthews, A., Lunney, D., Gresser, S. and Maitz, W. (2007) Tree Use by Koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) After Fire in Remnant Coastal Forest. Wildlife Research 34(2): 84-93. Ng, S. J., Dole, J. W., Sauvajot, R. M., Riley, S. P. D. and Valone, T. J. (2004) Use of Highway Undercrossings by Wildlife in Southern California. Biological Conservation. 115: 499-507. Queensland Department of Main Roads (1998) Roads in the Wet Tropics: Planning, Design, Construction, Maintenance and Operation - Best Practice Manual. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland. Smith, A. (2004) Koala Conservation and Habitat Requirements in a Time Production Forest in North-east New South Wales. In: Lunney, D. Conservation of Australia's Forest Fauna (2nd Ed.) Pp 591-611, Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman. Taylor, B. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road 2006 – 07: Final Report. Final Report for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland.

Page 26 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Taylor, B. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road – Progress Report July-Dec 2007. Final Report for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane. Technologies for Conservation and Development (2006) Radio Tracking. Available: http://www.t4cd.org/Technology/UnderstandingTechnology/Pages/RadioTracking.aspx (Accessed 27 March 2009). Triggs, B. (1996) Tracks, Scats and Other Traces: A Field Guide to Australian Mammals. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D. T., Holland, K., Gulle, N. and Budden, M. (2007) Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure. Prepared for the Department of Environment and Water Resources, Symonston. Wilson, S. (2007) Bridging the Gap: Reptiles on the Compton Road Overpass between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests. Final Report for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland. Wilson, R. (1999) Possums in the Spotlight. Nature Australia. Autumn: 34-41. World Road Association (PIARC.) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. Technical Report, World Road Association, Paris. Wormington, K. (2006) Management Options for Possums and Gliders Living Close to Highways. Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland.

Page 27 of 27 Vol 2 Chapter 4 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

5. MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Maintenance...... 1

5.1.1 General principles of maintenance ...... 1

5.1.2 Maintenance considerations during the design phase...... 1

5.1.3 Maintenance effectiveness...... 1

5.1.4 Issues and challenges...... 2

5.2 Key references...... 2

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 5 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

5 MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS 5.1 Maintenance 5.1.1 General principles of maintenance Maintenance is the recurrent day-to-day, periodic, or scheduled work required to preserve or restore a fauna structure to ensure its effectiveness. It includes work to prevent damage or deterioration that may otherwise be more costly to restore, and if left unchecked would eventually progress to structural damage. Fauna structures often require special types of maintenance. Nevertheless, in some cases regular standardised maintenance techniques can reduce the effectiveness of fauna structures. Below are general maintenance requirements for fauna structures. More detailed information on maintenance requirements for specific fauna structures may be found in Section 6 - Measures to achieve fauna sensitive roads. 5.1.2 Maintenance considerations during the design phase Maintenance of fauna structures is important. Poorly maintained structures are less effective and cause safety risks. Fauna structures whose maintenance requirements are considered during the design phase may lower maintenance burdens and decrease the probability of poor maintenance in the future. Things to consider during the design phase:  Are there other equally effective fauna structures that have lower maintenance requirements? o Consider maintenance requirements during the design and construction phases. Design fauna structures to minimise the need for maintenance and decrease maintenance financial liability. o For example, floppy top fencing is effective at excluding koalas. However, floppy top fences require larger clear zones than standard TMR’s fauna exclusion fencing. Thus in areas with no koala populations standard fauna exclusion fencing should be used due to reduced maintenance requirements, whilst effectively excluding the majority of fauna groups from the road corridor.  Will the proposed fauna structure require special maintenance? o May incur increased maintenance costs. o May require specialist skill sets that need to be programmed or sourced externally.  Is the proposed fauna structure easy to access for maintenance? o Fauna structures need to allow access for maintenance crews. This must occur even if the fauna structure is not regularly maintained. 5.1.3 Maintenance effectiveness There are many factors to consider in order to ensure effective maintenance of fauna structures. Things to consider:  Plan and budget for ongoing maintenance prior to the project completion.  Ensure fauna structures are easily accessible for maintenance work, ensuring minimal disruption to traffic.  Need for regular inspection to ensure correct maintenance works are being undertaken.  Minimise the need for inspections, especially those requiring traffic control.  Communicate special maintenance requirements to maintenance crews on completion of the project.  Incorporate feedback mechanisms into monitoring and inspection reports for maintenance processes.  Maintenance requirement may be different across Queensland. o For example: maintenance requirements may be higher in tropical areas due to different weather patterns (cyclones, floods, etc) and increased fungal activity caused by higher humidity levels.

Page 1 of 2 Vol 2 Chapter 5 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

5.1.4 Issues and challenges Ineffective maintenance of fauna structures can result from (but is not limited to):  Conflicting maintenance priorities. o For example, some fauna structures and associated vegetation may be more effective if not maintained (resulting in better integration into the surrounding environment), but safety is the highest priority and clearing may be required for safety reasons.  Lack of communication between designers and maintenance workers, which can result in inappropriate maintenance of fauna structures. 5.2 Key references Department of Main Roads (2002) Asset Maintenance Guidelines. Brisbane, Queensland. Department of Main Roads (2008) Bridge/Culvert Servicing Manual. Brisbane, Queensland.

Page 2 of 2 Vol 2 Chapter 5 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

6. MEASURES TO ACHIEVE FAUNA SENSITIVE ROADS

6.1 Overpass: Land Bridge...... 6 6.1.1 Target species ...... 6 6.1.2 Design specifications ...... 6 6.2 Overpass: Small Roads (dual purpose)...... 9 6.2.1 Target species ...... 11 6.2.2 Design specifications ...... 11 6.3 Overpass: Cut and Cover Tunnel ...... 12 6.3.1 Target species ...... 12 6.3.2 Design specifications ...... 13 6.4 Overpass: Canopy Bridge...... 13 6.4.1 Target species ...... 14 6.4.2 Design specifications ...... 14 a) Rope tunnel...... 16 b) Rope ladder ...... 17 c) Single rope crossings ...... 18 6.5 Overpass: Poles ...... 19 6.5.1 Target species ...... 19 6.5.2 Design specifications ...... 19 a) Glider poles...... 19 b) Refuge poles...... 22 6.6 Underpass: Culvert ...... 25 6.6.1 Target Species...... 26 6.6.2 Design Specifications ...... 26 a) Design of structures for aquatic species...... 26 b) Design of structures for amphibian species...... 39 c) Design of structures for turtles...... 42 d) Design of Structures for platypus...... 42 e) Design of structures for terrestrial species ...... 43 f) Design of structures for bats...... 53 6.7 Underpass: Tunnel...... 55 6.7.1 Target species ...... 55 6.7.2 Design specifications ...... 55 6.8 Underpass: Bridge ...... 56 6.8.1 Target species ...... 56 6.8.2 Design specifications ...... 56

Page i of iii Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

6.9 Non-structural mitigation: Canopy Connectivity ...... 58 6.9.1 Target species...... 59 6.9.2 Design specifications ...... 59 6.10 Non-structural mitigation: Local Traffic Management...... 61 6.10.1 Target species...... 61 6.10.2 Design specifications ...... 61 a) Signage and road markings ...... 63 b) Wildlife warning reflectors ...... 65 6.11 Barriers: Fencing...... 65 6.11.1 Target species...... 66 6.11.2 Design specifications ...... 66 a) Fauna exclusion/ koala proof fencing ...... 67 b) Frog fencing ...... 72 c) Turtle fencing ...... 76 d) Cassowary fencing...... 76 6.12 Barriers: Chemical Repellents ...... 79 6.12.1 Target species...... 79 6.12.2 Design specifications ...... 79 6.13 Barriers: Perching Deterrents...... 79 6.13.1 Target species...... 79 6.13.2 Design specifications ...... 79 6.14 Habitat enhancement: Frog Ponds...... 82 6.14.1 Target species...... 82 6.14.2 Design specifications ...... 82 6.15 Habitat enhancement: Nest Boxes ...... 83 6.15.1 Target species...... 83 6.15.2 Design specifications ...... 83 a) Arboreal species ...... 83 b) Bats ...... 86 6.16 Habitat enhancement: Artificial Shelter Sites ...... 87 6.16.1 Target species...... 87 6.16.2 Design specifications ...... 87 a) Pavers and roof tiles ...... 88 6.17 Considerations which influence effectiveness of fauna structures ...... 88 6.17.1 Aspects that positively influence rates of fauna structure use...... 88 a) Vegetation management in vicinity of structures ...... 88 b) Density of fauna mitigation structures...... 89 c) Location of fauna mitigation structures ...... 89 d) Integration into the surroundings ...... 89

Page ii of iii Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

e) Table drain management...... 89 6.17.2 Aspects that negatively influence the rates of fauna structure use ...... 90 a) Table drain management...... 90 b) Vegetation management...... 90 6.18 Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures...... 90 6.18.1 Education...... 90 6.18.2 Lighting ...... 90 a) Vehicle lights...... 91 b) Street lighting...... 94 6.18.3 Noise...... 95 a) Elevation of the road surface, and cuts and fills...... 95 b) Solid barriers...... 95 c) Vegetative barriers...... 98 d) Road surface...... 99 6.18.4 Design Speed ...... 99 6.18.5 Road Safety Barriers ...... 99

Page iii of iii Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

6 MEASURES TO ACHIEVE FAUNA SENSITIVE ROADS  This section of the manual describes the purpose of fauna mitigation measures and the detailed descriptions of each measure.  The content and directions in the manual are considered as best case scenario outcomes. Based on this, the aim for fauna sensitive road design should be to produce the best overall, locally relevant outcome, considering site specific limitations.  There is a great detail of ambiguity on the definition of structure types. In this manual the definitions for structure types have been adopted from van der Ree et al. (2007) for consistency.  For a more detailed review see Hayes (2006). Table 6.0.1 Definitions of options aimed at achieving fauna sensitive road design (adopted from van der Ree et al. 2007). Title Description OVERPASS Passage of animals above the road Land bridge A bridge extending over a road, typically 20 to 70 metres wide. The bridge is covered in soil, planted with vegetation and enhanced with other habitat features (for example, logs, rocks and so on). Also known as an eco-duct or wildlife bridge. Overpass (small roads) A narrow bridge (not hour-glass shaped) above a major road, which allows human or vehicular access across the minor road. The road on the overpass is typically a minor road, which may be unsealed or a single lane. Additional areas adjacent to the road may be utilised for fauna movement. Cut and Cover Tunnel The road passes below ground level through a tunnel with the area above available for revegetation and use by some fauna species.

Canopy bridge A rope or pole suspended above the traffic, either from vertical poles or from trees. Used by arboreal and scansorial (climbing) species.

Pole Vertical poles placed in the centre median, on the road verge or on an overpass to provide species that glide with an intermediate landing and multiple launch opportunities. Alternative designs can be utilised to provide refuge from predators for tree-kangaroos or other arboreal species. UNDERPASS Passage of animals below the road Culvert Square, rectangular or half circle in shape and may be purpose built for fauna passage or water drainage, or a combination of both. They are typically pre-cast concrete cells, or arches made of steel.

Page 1 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Title Description Tunnel Typically round pipes of relatively small diameter (for example, less than 1.5 metres in diameter). May also be known as an eco-pipe.

Passage below bridge A structure that maintains the grade of the road or elevates the traffic above the surrounding land, allowing animals to pass under the road. Facilitates water drainage or the movement of local human traffic and secondarily facilitates fauna passage. Vegetation clearing can also be minimised (clearing only required for bridge piers or pylons) and allow natural vegetation to grow under the infrastructure. NON-STRUCTURAL MITIGATION Items that facilitate natural permeability Canopy connectivity The linear clearing is kept sufficiently narrow to allow the tree canopy to remain continuous above the road or where discontinuous, sufficiently narrow to allow gliders (and other volant species) to safely traverse.

Local traffic Devices to reduce the speed, volume of traffic management or increase awareness of fauna, for example, road closures, chicanes, crosswalks, lighting, signage.

Structures that create a barrier to animals BARRIERS entering the road corridor or using road furniture Fencing Stops animals crossing the road surface, and is used as an integral component encouraging animals towards safe crossing passages. Chemical Repellents Used on a temporary basis (for example, when a breach in a fauna exclusion fence occurs) to discourage animals from approaching the road.

Perching Deterrents Prevents birds perching on top of road furniture.

Structures that improve the functionality of HABITAT ENHANCEMENT the road corridor and surrounding areas for fauna species Frog Ponds Aimed at re-creating frog breeding opportunities

Page 2 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Title Description Nest Boxes Provides replacement nesting and roosting opportunities for fauna when tree hollows are removed.

Artificial Shelter Sites Non-natural material placed within the road corridor or adjacent areas to restore or replace lost habitat.

Fauna mitigation structures are designed with a specific purpose in a specific environment. As such, the drawings and designs for fauna mitigation structures vary. The following are general descriptions, functions and design considerations for fauna mitigation measures outlined in the above table, with the information provided to be used as a guide only. Generally, the integration of anthropocentric measures (reducing speed limits, raising awareness) with fauna sensitive structures (providing crossing structures, escape routes from roads and discouraging road use by fauna) results in the retention of habitat connectivity and lowers road kill faster and is more effective than implementing individual mitigation measures (van der Ree et al. 2007). General factors to consider which influence the success of structures:  Dimensions;  Openness;  Location;  Habitat quality;  Connectivity with wildlife corridors;  Features of passage approach;  Presence of furniture within the passage (logs, ropes, vegetation cover, and so on);  Fencing;  Period of time that structure has been available for usage; and  Ability to view habitat on the other side of the road (Finegan 2004). All of these factors must be considered to ensure the success of the proposed fauna mitigation measure as it is costly to upgrade/modify structures after the road has been constructed.  Fauna mitigation structures should be considered where: o A habitat, community or species is or is planned to be 'significantly damaged' by the presence of a road. o Species vulnerable to impacts of barriers and traffic are located near a road. o Habitat connectivity is reduced, primarily by infrastructure. o The most appropriate mitigation measure is a fauna crossing. o The road is fenced (PIARC 2007). o A section of the road has a high fauna roadkill rate. o The road crosses a regular fauna passage.  When installing a fauna mitigation structure consider: o Target species (see Table 6.0.2).

Page 3 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Natural and existing fauna pathways. - Place fauna structures as close as possible to these pathways. o Access to structure. - Future land development may decrease the effectiveness or use of the installed structure. o Provision of canopy connectivity. - The presence of canopy connectivity has been proven to positively affect the use of structures. o Topography, as highest species diversity usually occurs in hilly terrain. o Suitability and purpose of vegetation.

Page 4 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Table 6.0.2 Suitability of different types of fauna structures for a selection of commonly addressed species or groups of species. Overpasses Underpasses Non-structural mitigation Barriers Overpass Passage Land Canopy Canopy Local traffic Chemical (small Poles Culvert Tunnel below Fencing bridge bridge connectivity management repellents roads) bridge Fishes - - - - ○ ○ ● - - - - Frogs ● ○ - - ○ ○ ● ○ - ● - Mammals: macropods ● ● - ● ○ - ○ - ○ ● ? Mammals: arboreal species ● ● ● ● ○ ○ ○ ● ○ ● ? Mammals: koalas ● ● - ● ● ○ ○ - ○ ● ? Mammals: platypus - - - - ○ ○ ● - - ? - Mammals: bats/flying foxes ● ● - - - - ● ● - - - Mammals: small-size ● ● - ○ ● ● ● - ○ ● ? Birds: flying ● ● - - - - ○ - - - - Birds: non-flying ● ● - - ○ - ● - ○ ● ? Reptiles: snakes and lizards ● ○ - - ○ ○ ● - - - - Reptiles: turtles ● ○ - - ● ● ● - ○ ○ - Invertebrates: insects and spiders ● ○ - - ● ● ● - - - - ● optimal solution ○ can be used with some adaptation to local conditions - unsuitable ? unknown, more research required

Page 5 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

6.1 Overpass: Land Bridge A land bridge is a bridge which extends over a road, typically between 20 to 70 metres wide. The bridge is covered in soil, planted with vegetation and enhanced with other habitat features (for example, logs, rocks and so on) (Figures 6.1.1 to 6.1.3). It is also known as an eco-duct or wildlife bridge. Refer to Section 9.2: Case Studies: Compton Road, Brisbane City Council for an example project.

6.1.1 Target species  All species, excluding aquatic.

Figure 6.1.1 Land bridge at Compton Road, Brisbane (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). Rope ladder installed to cater for arboreal species.

6.1.2 Design specifications  Width: o Dependent on the purpose, surrounding topography, environment and target species, for example, birds require a wider bridge. o Existing land bridges range from eight to 870 metres in width. o 50 metres or greater: - will be utilised by the widest variety of species; and - animals will exhibit natural behaviour. o A narrower land bridge will be used by some species if designed appropriately.  Location of land bridge: o Animal movement hotspots. o Consider all animals, including birds, invertebrates, bats and reptiles. o In high cuts to align with the natural ridge contours, where possible.  Depth of Soil: o Dependent on planned vegetation. o Acts as a limiting factor to vegetation height. o Indication of soil depth required for specified groups:

Page 6 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

- Grass: 300 mm - Shrubs: 600 mm - Trees: 1.5 – 2 metres  Vegetation considerations: o Native to the area and provide food sources and habitat requirements for target species (for enticement purposes). o Choose planting which will attract target species to the structure. o Fast growing local grasses (and other palatable species) that provide a food source are ideal for attracting macropods. o Flowering and seeding plants serve as attractants to birds. o Maintain remnant mature vegetation leading up to the bridge abutments to encourage early use of the fauna structure and maintain invertebrate populations. Ground covers suitable for small mammals, reptiles and invertebrates are: - Wood and bark pulp; - Leaf litter near and around planted vegetation; and - Large logs placed in a mosaic fashion (Figure 6.1.3). A moderate density of leaf litter in various stages of decomposition to cover 70-80% of the ground layer of fauna structures will encourage invertebrate species use. For species with roosting or resting requirements (for example, gliders and koalas) provide sufficient number of trees to ensure there are adequate options to allow them to change trees at least once every 24 hours.  Furniture: Glider poles (where appropriate), boulders, rocks, logs provide opportunities for a broad range of species.  Compliance with standard bridge clearance is required (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2005a).  Ensure vegetated approach embankments to elevated land bridges are formed to a gentle 1:3 gradient, when required.  Use a natural material base on land bridge (see ‘Vegetation Considerations’ above).  Construct land bridge so macropods cannot see the traffic or headlights passing on the road beneath. Edges should be lined with high, wooden or blocked out exclusion fences to minimise noise and visual disturbance.  Prohibit vehicle access by placing structures at either end, such as large boulders or guard rails.  Although some countries (for example, France) prefer a few larger land bridges, it has been found that a greater number of small land bridges are more beneficial. Advantages  Provides a more natural crossing for fauna, particularly disturbance-sensitive species.  Is utilised by a wide range of terrestrial species, including bats, birds, butterflies.  Maintains genetic diversity through habitat and population connectivity.  Provides a new habitat.  Proven to provide a guiding-line function, encouraging birds to cross roads at safe crossing points.  Encourages community and tourist interest in fauna crossings.

Page 7 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Disadvantages  Success is dependent on several variables (for example, width, fauna exclusion fencing, vegetation, light, noise disturbance, suitability of vegetation, provision of artificial shelter sites and minimised human disturbance).  Is costly.  No standard design principles have been established in Australia.  Must provide a variety of furniture types to cater for all of the target species.  Has the potential to have a large disturbance footprint in order to establish approaches to and supports for the structure.  Requires fencing to direct species to structure. This may not always be beneficial in otherwise undisturbed areas.  May occur within the home range of a limited number of individuals constraining access for territorial species. Maintenance Requirements:  At least a yearly major maintenance.  Ensure revegetation has established and is similar to existing, surrounding vegetation, where possible.  Maintain furniture.

a) Cross section view

b) Plan view Figure 6.1.2 Land bridge designed to accommodate a wide variety of species, including arboreal species as indicated by the presence of glider poles.

Page 8 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.1.3 Vegetation and habitat structures provided for reptiles on the Compton Road land bridge (Scott 2007).

6.2 Overpass: Small Roads (dual purpose) A small road (dual purpose) is a bridge above a major road, which is narrow (not hour-glass shaped) and allows human access across the road (Figures 6.2.1 and 6.2.2). The road on the overpass is typically a minor road, which may be unsealed and may be a single lane.

a) Cross-sectional view

Page 9 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

b) Plan view Figure 6.2.1 Optimal design of a dual purpose overpass with a dedicated fauna-crossing section.

a) Cross-sectional view

Page 10 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Plan view Figure 6.2.2 Less optimal dual purpose overpass with fauna and local traffic sharing the complete structure.

6.2.1 Target species  All species, excluding aquatic.  Less suitable for highly sensitive species due to the likely impact of human disturbance.

6.2.2 Design specifications  Ensure a section solely dedicated to fauna movement. o Width of approximately eight metres but will be dependent on the target species concerned.  Road crossing should be a low speed environment.  Drainage from the fauna crossing section shall be adequately designed to ensure no negative effects on the road crossing area.  The structure is usually ‘tanked’ (waterproofed) and geofabric is utilised to provide a barrier between the soil, plants and the bridge structure.  Furniture should be constructed to encourage use by target species. For example, rocks, boulders, leaf litter, glider poles, rope bridges.  Fencing should be considered to exclude humans and vehicles from the fauna crossing section. o Fencing can be a combination of fauna exclusion fencing and solid wooden fencing to block out the impact of traffic and street lights on nocturnal fauna (refer to Section 6.18.2: Lighting). Advantages  Provides a more natural crossing for fauna than culverts. o May be utilised by a wide range of terrestrial species including bats, birds, butterflies.  Likely to maintain a minimum level of genetic diversity through a degree of habitat and population connectivity.

Page 11 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Provides a new habitat.  Encourages community and tourist interest in fauna crossings.  A cost-effective means to provide both fauna crossing opportunities and vehicular/pedestrian traffic. Disadvantages  Success is dependent on several variables (for example, width, fauna exclusion fencing, vegetation, light and noise disturbance).  No standard design principles have been established in Australia.  Must provide a variety of furniture types to cater for all of the target species.  Has the potential to have a large disturbance footprint in order to establish approaches to and supports for the structure.  Requires fencing to direct species to the structure. This may not always be beneficial in otherwise undisturbed areas.  May occur within the home range of a limited number of individuals constraining access for territorial species. Maintenance Requirements:  At least a yearly major maintenance.  Ensure that revegetation has established and is similar to existing, surrounding vegetation, where possible.  Ensure vegetation does not cause any safety issues for the adjacent road.  Maintain furniture.

6.3 Overpass: Cut and Cover Tunnel The road passes below ground level through a tunnel, with the area above available for revegetation and use by some fauna species (Figure 6.3.1).

Figure 6.3.1 A cut and cover tunnel.

6.3.1 Target species  All species, excluding aquatic.

Page 12 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

6.3.2 Design specifications Refer to Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge for relevant concepts and design specifications.  Each site must be assessed (according to factors such as topography, geology and grade) to determine suitability.  At least 1.5 metres of soil is required on top of structure to enable revegetation with tree species. Advantages  Provides a more natural crossing for fauna as it is a continuation of the existing landscape.  May be utilised by a wide range of terrestrial species including bats, birds, butterflies.  Maintains genetic diversity through natural habitat and population connectivity.  Encourages community and tourist interest in fauna crossings.  Is ideal for an at-grade fauna crossing.  Disturbance can be minimised as construction may occur under the dedicated fauna crossing in the form of a tunnel.  Unnecessary to provide additional furniture to encourage use by fauna, as area above road can be revegetated. Disadvantages  Success dependent on several variables (for example, width, fauna exclusion fencing, vegetation, light and noise disturbance).  Expensive.

6.4 Overpass: Canopy Bridge A canopy bridge is a rope or pole suspended above the traffic, either from vertical poles or from trees to provide canopy connectivity (Figure 6.4.1). This structure is used by arboreal and scansorial (climbing) species (Figure 6.4.2).

Figure 6.4.1 Canopy bridges (ladder and box) over Palmerston Highway, North Queensland (Scott 2007).

Page 13 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

a) Plan view

b) Cross-sectional view Figure 6.4.2 Diagrammatic representation of a canopy bridge designed to accommodate arboreal species.

6.4.1 Target species Refer to Section 7.4: Arboreal Species for additional species information.

6.4.2 Design specifications  There are no standards regarding optimal dimensions of rope tunnels or ladders. Investigations during the design phase are required to determine the size of the largest animal most likely to use the structure.  Supports are usually constructed from recycled electricity poles.  Minimum of seven metres clearance from the road (to allow for traffic to pass underneath as well as sufficient height above traffic noise). Some have been constructed 12 metres above the road.  Connected to adjacent vegetation via ropes (Figure 6.4.3).  Provide crossing opportunities for possums every 100 – 120 metres when possum home ranges coincide with the road corridor.

Page 14 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 A cost-benefit analysis is required in areas with a high number of tree-kangaroos, before the installation of rope structures and/or culverts.  Consider potential conflict with adjacent powerlines and other service infrastructure.  Comply with safety requirements when structural supports are placed in the road median or road- edge. These may need safety barrier or guardrail protection.  Consider roadway clear zone requirements and design of roadside hazards (refer Chapter 8 of TMR Road Planning and Design Manual 2005).  More research is required to determine the effectiveness of scenting the rope with urine to attract use by target arboreal species.  Construction technique previously utilised: o Screw eyelets into the pole and attach rope and attach 12-14 gauge marine grade silver (high UV rating) rope and stainless steel cables and frames (for rope tunnel). o Attach sheet metal above the rope bridge connection points to prevent arboreal species from ascending further. o Attach sheet metal or metal cones to support poles in the middle of the roadway to ensure animals are unable to descend in the median between traffic lanes, and to hinder predators from using the structures. o Appropriately tension canopy bridge.

Figure 6.4.3 Canopy bridge at Compton Road, Brisbane. Bridge is connected to the surrounding environment by ropes (Robinson-Wolrath 2007).

Page 15 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document a) Rope tunnel  Refer to Figures 6.4.4 and 6.4.5.  Dimensions are: 200 mm high x 300 mm wide. o Design ensures stability when two or more individuals are crossing simultaneously or in strong winds.  Design allows fauna to avoid predators or another individual crossing simultaneously.  Design considerations: o Ensure entrances and exits are rectangular. o Connected to poles via steel cables. o A stainless steel frame can increase strength of tunnel. o Vegetation growth on tunnel may promote use, particularly when vegetation is a food source. o Case study: A rope tunnel in New South Wales has been constructed which is covered in shade cloth to reduce headlight glare. No monitoring of this structure has been undertaken to determine effectiveness.  Species-specific information: o Research has shown that green, Herbert River and lemuroid ringtail possums utilise rope tunnels. o Rainforest ringtail possums have been observed crossing a rope tunnel which is 45-50 metres long. o Brushtail possums and squirrel gliders have been observed utilising a rope tunnel that is 70 metres long. o Some species (particular possums and rodents) prefer to travel on top rather than through the tunnel.

Figure 6.4.4 Rope tunnel crossing, northern New South Wales (Robinson-Wolrath 2007).

Page 16 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.4.5 Rope tunnel b) Rope ladder  Refer to Figure 6.4.6.  Preferred canopy bridge structure.  Constructed to resemble a ladder.  Adapted from tunnel design because research found possums only crossed on top of the traditional box canopy bridge structure.  Attracts more species than other types of canopy bridge structure.  Design considerations: o Research indicates there is no correlation between the rope ladder’s use and its length (Weston 2003). o Ensure stability even when two or more animals are crossing simultaneously or in strong winds.  Species-specific information: o Ringtail possums predominantly utilise these structures. o Case study: A rope bridge constructed where no connectivity existed before was utilised within five months by ringtail and brushtail possums (Weston 2002).

Figure 6.4.6 Rope ladder.

Page 17 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document c) Single rope crossings  Refer to Figure 6.4.7.  Excludes use by several fauna species.  Requires regular maintenance as it is affected by turbulence and is susceptible to losing tautness which reduces overhead height.  Species specific information: o Ringtail possums have been known to cross single wires 8 mm wide and 50 metres long (Magnus et al. 2004).

Figure 6.4.7 Single rope crossing structure. Advantages for canopy bridge structures:  Economical.  Allow species that never descend to the ground to migrate and disperse.  Used by a variety of species.  Possess tourist appeal which increases awareness of wildlife. Disadvantages for canopy bridge structures:  No standard design principles established.  Single rope crossings are not utilised by the majority of fauna due to stability, turbulence and weight issues.  Single rope crossings are susceptible to loss of tautness which reduces overhead height clearance. Maintenance requirements for canopy bridge structures:  Ensure ropes do not deteriorate or decay.  Inspect on an annual basis or after storm events (or similar events causing tree falls).  Ensure that heavy vegetation does not grow on bridge as it can place stress on the bridge, increase decay rate and cause false triggering of monitoring cameras.  Single rope crossings require regular maintenance as they are affected by turbulence.  Single rope crossings require more frequent inspections and maintenance.

Page 18 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

6.5 Overpass: Poles Vertical poles placed in the centre median, on the road verge or on overpasses to provide species with intermediate landing points and/or multiple launch opportunities (Figures 6.5.1 and 6.5.2). Alternatively, poles can also aid species to disperse in open areas by providing refuge from predators.

6.5.1 Target species  Glider Poles: o Species which have the ability to glide between vegetation. o Refer to Section 7.4: Arboreal species.  Refuge Poles: o Koalas. o Tree-kangaroo species. o Refer to Section 7.5: Koalas and Section 7.8: Macropods.

6.5.2 Design specifications a) Glider poles  Primary use is to provide a launching pad for gliders.  May be a temporary measure while awaiting canopy connectivity.  Locational considerations: o Fauna movement pathways. o Natural tree growth and future canopy connectivity (poles will not be utilised if a canopy crossing is available). o Use by juveniles (may have shorter glide distances). o Topography. Design requirements:  Gliders prefer to glide between trees but if a pole is closer they may utilise the pole.  Can be constructed from used electricity poles or tree trunks salvaged from the site.  Consider potential conflict with adjacent powerlines and other service infrastructure.  Consider height of poles, height of crossbars and distance between poles. Use trigonometry to determine the specific requirements.  Minimum height of 12 metres. Additionally, must be of sufficient height to allow gliders to pass over trucks.  Cross bars should be provided at various heights. Highest crossbar at least 11 m above the ground.  Distance between poles: o Allow for an average of 1.8 metres flying distance with a one metre loss in elevation. o Research on sugar, mahogany and squirrel gliders shows an average glide angle is 30.5º with a one metre loss in height for every 1-2 metres in glide length.  Attach metal around poles (below launch points and any refuges) to stop gliders from descending to the ground.  Predation refuges can be added. Presently the design for such refuges consists of: three PVC pipes (110 x 380 mm) attached to each pole at heights of approximately 9, 10 and 11 metres.

Page 19 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Structural supports placed in the road median or road-edge may require safety barriers or guardrail protection to comply with safety requirements.  Roadway clear zone requirements and design of roadside hazards need consideration (refer Chapter 8 of TMR Road Planning and Design Manual 2005).  For additional species-specific information see Table 6.5.1.  Case study: glider poles in the Miriam Vale region were not used at all by gliders as they preferred to utilise remaining trees (Wormington 2006).  Case Study: squirrel gliders adapted easily to utilising glider poles at Compton Road, Brisbane. They were frequently recorded on glider poles within a year at sites where they had not previously occurred.  Case study: research regarding the requirement for vegetation at the base of glider poles is inconclusive. It has been suggested that glider poles without vegetation around the base will remain unused (van der Ree et al. 2007). However, other research indicates gliders will use the glider poles if they can sense food on the opposite side of the road. Table 6.5.1 Specific recommendations regarding glider poles Species Average glide Minimum Spacing between Height of lengths crossbeam structures structure (launch) height sugar glider 48 m with a launch 11.96 m (average) 1. Maximum distance Dependent upon (Petaurus breviceps) height of 25 m1. 60 m3. length required 1 to glide (ie squirrel glider 80 m with a launch 11.96 m (average) . Maximum distance distance (Petaurus height of 45 m1. 60 m3. between norfolcensis) Average glide of 2 structures). Use 30-40 m . Average trigonometry to glide length is one determine. metre with one metre decrease in height. yellow-bellied glider Maximum 30 m 11.96 m (average) 1. No more than 30 m. (Petaurus australis) glide4. mahogany glider Glide length 11.96 m (average) 1. (Petaurus gracilis) unknown. greater glider 25–35 m with a 11.96 m (average) 1. Maximum distance (Petauroides volans) launch height of 20- 60 m3. 25 m1. feathertail glider Maximum glide of 11.96 m (average) 1. No more than 30 m. (Acrobates 20–30 m1. pygmaeus) General Most species can All Australian glide 1.8m with a gliders (except one metre loss in feathertail and altitude1. Average yellow-bellied glide angle is 30.5 gliders with a degrees. maximum glide of 20–30m1) can glide at least 60m3.

1Australian Museum Business Services 2001 2 van der Ree 2006 3 Weston 4 Strahan 1995

Page 20 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Advantages  Cost-effective technique for ensuring connectivity.  Acts as stepping stones for crossing traditionally unfavourable habitat.  Provides refuge from predators.  Utilised by a variety of fauna.  Encourages community and tourist awareness. Disadvantages  Rate of use dependent upon species present.  May remain unused if not positioned correctly.  No standard design principles have been established. Maintenance Requirements:  Ensure glider poles and crossbeams are not decayed.  Tree trunks require more frequent replacement than reused electricity poles.

a) Cross-sectional view

b) Plan view Figure 6.5.1 Indication of glider movement utilising glider poles to cross a road.

Page 21 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

a) b) Figure 6.5.2 a) Glider pole at Compton Road, Brisbane (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). b) Glider pole. b) Refuge poles  Primarily used for predation refuge for tree-kangaroos and koalas.  May be used in conjunction with vegetative corridors or utilised as a temporary measure while awaiting revegetation works to mature. Tree-kangaroos  At least five metres in height.  Constructed out of old electricity poles with four treated pine pieces of wood (100 x 50 mm rafters) bolted together to form a pyramid shape (Figure 6.5.3).  Most efficient and effective when installed in rows across open areas and along known tree-kangaroo dispersal routes.  Case study: tree-kangaroo refuge poles have been installed as part of the Anderson Road Landscape Linkage Package. Four poles were installed at 30-40 metres intervals for use by Lumholtz tree- kangaroos (Figures 6.5.3 and 6.5.4). o Constructed of old electricity poles. o Cross bars were bolted to poles five metres above ground level for tree-kangaroos to rest on. o Covered with shade cloth to provide shelter for animals that may become stranded during the day. o Main pole is 300-400 mm in diameter. This is considered to be the upper end of stem size climbed by the target species. o The lower part was roughened and a thick rope was installed to aid climbing.  There are currently no reports indicating effectiveness of these structures. Advantages  Structures are a cost effective way of maintaining habitat connectivity.

Page 22 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Disadvantages  Short life span (5-10 years). Maintenance Requirements:  Low maintenance.  Shade cloth may require replacement after storm or strong wind events.

a) b) Figure 6.5.3 a) Tree-kangaroo refuge pole (Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group 2008). b) Tree-kangaroo using a refuge pole.

Figure 6.5.4 Refuge poles installed as part of the Anderson Road Landscape Linkage Package (Tree- Kangaroo and Mammal Group 2008).

Page 23 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Koalas  Escape poles installed on the roadside of fencing to provide koalas with a refuge if unable to escape the road corridor.  Utilised at the entrance and exit points to fauna culverts to provide resting and predator avoidance points.  200 mm diameter is optimum but no more than 500 mm in diameter.  Sufficient height (between three and six metres) to provide refuge from predators such as dogs.  Timber or rubberized cement.  Installed at least every 200 metres along the road.  Installed against fauna exclusion fencing may provide a means for koalas to return to vegetative side unassisted (Figure 6.5.5). o Metal sheeting must be installed to prevent koalas from using poles to gain access to road corridors. o Research into the effectiveness of this design is required as metal sheeting requires koalas to jump down from poles.  Can be installed in place of suitable vegetation on land bridges, in front of and throughout underpasses and anywhere else they are required.  Install on the basis of expert advice. Advantages:  Allows safe escape from road.  Provides refuge from predators.  Inexpensive.  Does not affect efficacy of fence.  Can be used by a variety of fauna species. Disadvantages:  In most circumstances, requires person to remove the koala to habitat side of fence (Figure 6.5.6).  May remain unused if incorrectly positioned.

Page 24 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.5.5 Escape pole design aimed at assisting koalas to escape the road corridor and return to vegetative side unassisted.

Figure 6.5.6 Escape pole at Compton Road, Brisbane. Note: Koalas must be assisted to return to vegetative side of fence.

6.6 Underpass: Culvert Culverts are square, rectangular or half circle in shape and may be purpose built for fauna (terrestrial and/or aquatic) passage or water drainage, or a combination of both. They are typically pre-cast concrete cells or steel arches. Factors affecting the success of a fauna culvert:  Substrate, may be species-specific (for example, concrete, mulch, bare earth).  Presence of hiding places or escape routes.

Page 25 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Presence of suitable vegetation cover, native plant species, rocks and logs at entrances, exits and throughout.  Length (should be minimised, but dependent on openness).  Drainage requirements.  New technology and methods.  Monitoring.

6.6.1 Target Species  Most aquatic and terrestrial species.

6.6.2 Design Specifications  Consider the safety of all road users.  For the design and location of the ends of the structures (ie wing walls) check clear zone and road side hazard requirements. Design determined by:  Target species (aquatic or terrestrial species): o Specific groups of fauna. o Behaviour of fauna.  Environment: o Hydraulic requirements. o Soils.  Dimensions (dependent on size of road itself).  Cost of construction.  Cost of maintenance.  Monitoring requirements. a) Design of structures for aquatic species  Design in close consultation with an appropriate expert or the Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries.  Consider specific fish passage requirements when selecting culvert type.  Arch, pipe or box-shaped cells allow water to pass underneath the roadway.  Usually made of concrete or galvanised corrugated steel pipe.  Types of culverts (Table 6.6.1 in descending order of preference): o Arch culvert. o Open-bottom box culvert. o Stream simulation design with buried base box culvert. o Multicell culverts. o Closed-bottom box culvert. o Pipe culvert.  Design and/or maintain appropriately to ensure effective fish population connectivity.  Perched culverts are not appropriate. Larger bottomless and buried base box culverts are preferred for fish passage.

Page 26 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Ensure erosion and scour management is adequate.  Usually made of concrete or galvanised corrugated steel pipe.  Stream simulation design recommends: o Burying the base of the culvert and reconstructing the stream bed within the cell. o Cell width to be as wide as the bank full waterway width. o Cell area to be as large as the bank full waterway area. o Install multicell culverts at the same level as the waterway bed profile. The low flow cell must provide for fish passage at low flows with the outer cells providing for fish passage at mid and flood flow levels. o Install the base of the culvert cell at the waterway gradient.  Sediment control debris deflector walls can be used to reduce the impact of debris blockages on fish passage while also reducing maintenance costs. Debris deflector walls decrease flow velocities at the entrance to culverts causing suspended partials to fall outside the culvert rather then accumulate in baffle structures (Figure 6.6.1).  Optimal culvert placement allows for fish movement in high and low water flows (Figure 6.6.2).  For information on the general effectiveness of structures refer to Table 6.6.2. Advantages  Must be designed and maintained correctly to maintain fish passage. Disadvantages  If not designed and maintained appropriately will be ineffective (for example, Figure 6.6.3).  Head cut erosion, if present, creates fish passage issues.  Elevated culvert crossings (above the stream bed) create a drop on the downstream side causing a physical barrier to fish (100 mm is a barrier to most native fish) (Cotterell 1998).  If culverts are too long they form physical and behavioural barriers to fish. Some fish hesitate at the entrance to long dark culverts and refuse to travel through them.

a) Perspective view

Page 27 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

b) Cross-section Figure 6.6.1 Debris deflector walls decrease flow velocities at the entrance to culverts causing suspended partials to fall outside the culvert rather then accumulate in baffle structures (Fairfull and Witheridge 2002).

a) Fish passage maintained during high flow

Page 28 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Fish passage maintained during low flow Figure 6.6.2 Optimal culvert position allows for fish movement in high and low water flows.

Fish blocked by water velocity

Figure 6.6.3 Water velocities blocking fish passage (Yates 2010).

Page 29 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Table 6.6.1 Types of culverts for aquatic species (in order of descending preference). Type Details Advantages Disadvantages Arch culvert  Arch culverts should be  Retains the natural stream  The advantages of using arch no more than six metres bed profile and original flow culverts (for example, increased light in length and have a of water. and free water flow) may be lost if minimum three metre they are not wide enough (minimum width, when light width three metres) maximisation is  The installation of arch culverts proposed. involves excavation for the culvert footings which can cause substantial disturbance to natural stream beds and banks. Open-bottom  Retains the natural  Retains the natural stream  If poorly designed, installed or box culvert streambed with a box- bed profile and original flow maintained it can be a barrier to fish shape culvert overhead. of water. passage in all flow conditions.  If large enough, flow will not be constricted and debris will not be trapped during normal flow conditions. Multicelled  If multiple culverts are  May ensure there is flow  One large culvert spanning the width culvert needed to span the during low flow periods. of the waterway is preferable to two stream bed, one or more or more small culverts because it is should be slightly lower usually more efficient hydraulically. than the others to  If poorly designed, installed or concentrate low flows maintained it can be a barrier to fish and allow fish to swim passage in all flow conditions. through. Closed-bottom  Entirety of crossing is  May be simpler to construct if  If poorly designed, installed or box culvert box-shaped concrete stream is redirected maintained it can be a barrier to fish structure, retaining no throughout construction. passage in all flow conditions. natural stream bed.  If poorly designed erosion may  Important to consider cause drop downs at the end of the flow velocities within culvert. culvert.

Page 30 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Type Details Advantages Disadvantages Pipe culvert  Entirety of crossing is  May be simpler to construct if  If poorly designed, installed or pipe-shaped concrete stream is redirected maintained it can be a barrier to fish structure, retaining no throughout construction. passage in all flow conditions.

natural stream bed.  If poorly designed erosion may  Important to consider cause drop downs at the end of the flow velocities within culvert. culvert.

Page 31 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Table 6.6.2 Factors that determine the effectiveness of culverts for aquatic species movement Considerations Description Mitigation Flow velocity  Function of slope, roughness, culvert  Include baffles and/or rocks sized size and length. To control velocity, all at 25% culvert width, spaced the these parameters should be same distance apart, or using the considered in the passage design. natural stream bed.  In natural streams, channel  Install a larger size culvert than irregularities, pools, meanders and that required for hydraulic flow. other similar features provide zones of  Use a greater number of culverts slow water where fish can rest. These (multiple culverts). areas do not exist in culverts where the velocities are uniform throughout  Increase the depth of the culvert and are usually greater than those in below the stream bed. natural channels.  Design so the weakest fish can  Velocity should not exceed pre- swim through the structure. development conditions (determine target fish species’ requirements). Flow depth  Important there is sufficient water  Flow depth should be a minimum inside the culvert to allow the fish to of 200-500 mm to encourage fish pass through. passage.  The depth depends on the cross-  Design to ensure the largest fish sectional shape. Box culverts disperse remain submerged. flow to a greater extent than pipe culverts which concentrate water during low flow.  Curtain aprons reduce water depth. Turbulence  Increasing the internal surface  Decrease surface roughness roughness of culverts increases water (Note: this will affect water velocity. turbulence within the culvert. The balance between increasing  Turbulence can also be an issue at the surface roughness to decrease culvert inlet. flow velocity and decreasing surface roughness to decrease  Culvert alignment and headwall shape turbulence is unknown). influence water turbulence.  Culvert cells should be aligned with the waterway ensuring turbulence does not increase through the cell.  Natural waterway bed of bottomless and buried culverts best provides for fish passage.  In higher velocity locations the headwall may need to be rounded to reduce turbulence. Debris blockage  Debris itself will not create a barrier,  Wide, short box culverts are the but when combined with other most desirable to ensure minimum difficulties, such as increased water debris accumulation. velocity and/or culvert length, the total  Avoid debris blockage by effort required may exceed the conducting routine maintenance swimming ability of the fish. checks.  Trapped debris may also cause injury  At sites with high debris loads, to fish. debris deflector walls may be  Debris can impair a fish’s swimming required to avoid blockage. ability and in turn affect their spawning  Wider culvert cells have fewer

Page 32 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Considerations Description Mitigation success and increase mortality. debris issues. Sediment  Sedimentation can reduce the culvert’s  Vary the invert level of culverts to control hydraulic capacity, increase upstream simulate the channel's natural flood levels, fill habitat and fish resting cross section, but this may not pools, and cause the permanent allow sufficient flood capacity. flooding of terrestrial pathways (dry  Alternatively, construct sediment cells). training walls in front of the 'dry' cells (Figure 6.6.1).  Larger culvert cells (bottomless or adequately buried) allow sediment transport to remain at equilibrium.  Additional measures must be taken to prevent undercut and head cut erosion from occurring. Length  Excessive length, when coupled with  Construct perpendicular to the flow excessive water velocity or turbulence, to minimise the length needed can create a barrier to fish passage. (less than four metres) and allow  The majority of fish are unable to fish to swim through, where maintain burst speeds long enough to possible. swim the entire length of most culverts.  Ideally, culverts should be less If the distance is too great (greater than six metres, if no resting areas than six metres), fish may tire before are available and/or water velocity reaching the other end and be swept is faster than pre-development back downstream (dependent upon conditions. target species).  Longer culverts may be considered  Long culverts can be dark, which may if other requirements for effective discourage some fish species. fish passage are met (for example, lower water velocity, greater width and illumination). Width  If culverts are not as wide as the  Large diameter culverts provide natural stream bed, water flow is easy access and are easy to restricted and water velocity increased. maintain.  Narrow culverts are dark and tend to  Should be at least 600 mm wide, accumulate debris, which may result in but the overall crossing structure blockage. should be as close as possible to the natural stream width to ensure minimum flow restriction. Lighting  Long dark, or intermittent light patches  Maximise available natural light by (gaps or skylights) can be a barrier to making the dimensions of the fish passage. culvert as large as possible.  Skylights set in the bridge decking are only justified when endangered fish species are present that are sensitive to total darkness. Water level  For culverts which are not at stream  In situations where erosion is a across inlet and level the jump or drop may be likely issue in the future, arch outlet impassable for most fish. structures are preferable.  Countersinking of culverts below the stream bed is strongly recommended. Design culverts with a specified minimum countersunk dimension (a

Page 33 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Considerations Description Mitigation minimum of 20% of the culvert diameter). Culvert slope or  If culverts are placed on a significant  Crossings should be placed in gradient slope, most fish will be unable to parts of the stream where slope is negotiate them. minimal.  Avoid using culverts on a waterway that has a gradient of more than two percent (1:50). The gradient immediately downstream of the culvert should be less than five percent (1:20) so fish can approach the culvert outlet.  The culvert gradient should be similar to that of the stream, which should be gently sloping.  For multicelled culverts follow the natural waterway bed profile.

Multicell culverts  A multicell culvert spanning the entire stream is more beneficial to migrating fish than a single culvert that does not span the stream width.  Allows water velocity to remain similar to the natural stream condition.  Box and pipe culverts can be utilised into multicell culvert designs.  Pipe culverts can be used mid-stream to move the bulk of the water, with box culverts installed at the stream edges where water flow velocities allow fish passage.  When installing multicell culverts, they should be staggered at different heights, with the lowest in the middle of the stream channel, concentrating the water during low flow.  Install at the waterway bed profile. Baffles  Refer to Figures 6.6.4 and 6.6.5.  Before installing seek expert advice to ensure correct placement.  Appropriate for new culverts and retrofit for existing culverts, but should only be used when stream simulation designs cannot be implemented.  Act as energy dissipators.  Increase roughness of the surface of the culvert to reduce water velocity.  Change the flow pattern in the immediate vicinity, creating a sequence of slow and fast water zones. This allows fish to use burst speed to advance from one resting place to the next and cruising speed to swim through the resting zones.  For multiple parallel culverts, only those near the stream banks should be fitted with baffles.  Types of baffles include: offset baffle, spoiler baffle, side/corner baffle, angle baffle, notch baffle, weir baffle (Kapitzke 2009). Disadvantages o Likely to snag debris and therefore, require additional maintenance.

Page 34 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a)

b)

Figure 6.6.4 Cross sectional view of baffle designs. a) Baffle design for a box culvert b) Baffle design for a pipe culvert (Kapitzke 2009).

Page 35 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

a)

b) Figure 6.6.5 a) Culvert section with baffles installed on both sides of the culvert b) Culvert section with baffles installed on one side of culvert. This allows high velocity water flows on one side and provides rest areas for fish species (Kapitzke 2009). Culvert rehabilitation  Existing culverts can be rehabilitated to improve fish passage conditions. This can be done by: o Inclusion of baffles to the bed of wet cells. o Downstream channel modifications to raise low-flow water levels within the culvert. o The addition of sidewall roughness. o Upstream channel modifications to remove drop inlets or excessively steep rock ramps.  Fishways may be installed to address existing fish movement barriers and outlet erosion drop issues. Rock ramps  Are constructed by placing large rocks placed within the stream to form a staircase-type arrangement. This slows flows and forms resting locations for fish at the exit of culverts or leading up to weirs (Figure 6.6.6).  Accommodates up- and down-stream migration.  Allows migration even during low flow.  Are used by a variety of fish, in particular smaller fish.  Cater for a variety of fish behaviour and movement patterns.  Gradient and design are determined by maximum swimming speeds of various fish.  Full width rock ramps are optimal but partial rock ramps are most common.

Page 36 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Design correctly to ensure appropriate hydraulic conditions.  Can incorporate traverse or randomly placed ridge rocks to mimic flow conditions (Kapitzke 2009).

a) Perspective view

b) Perspective view

c) Cross-sectional view Figure 6.6.6 Rock ramps allow fish migration during a variety of flow periods.

Page 37 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Fords Fords are vehicle crossings that are approximately level with the river bed. Low flows pass over the structure rather than through a culvert. If the bed level is raised by the use of concrete or rocks, the crossing then becomes a causeway.  Used when infrequent vehicle use is anticipated (if more frequent use is anticipated, a permanent or temporary culvert may be needed to prevent disturbance to the channel).  Fords are 'wet' crossings so they should be used only when flows are low or non-existent.  Fords are suitable for intermittent waterways with little or no defined drainage channel, no lasting pools and little or no vegetation. Design requirements:  Site to have a stable, non-erodible rock or bedrock base to minimise siltation from traffic.  Sandy, vegetated and silty sites are not appropriate.  Install perpendicular to the waterway.  Concrete fords should have a 'V'-shaped or rounded notch on the lowest point of main channel so fish can swim across the ford during times of low flow. The 'V' or notch should be at least 50 mm deep and 300 mm wide.  Avoid deep box cuts on the approaches to the ford. The height of the banks adjacent to the ford should be less than two metres.  If rocks are used they should be almost level with the stream bed and not affect flows significantly.  Only clean material from another site should be used. Excavating rock from the stream is rarely acceptable.  Ensure the surface of the ford is erosion-proof, for example interlocking angular rock or concrete.  Should not be made of smooth concrete.  Design access tracks to ensure sediments and pollution do not enter the waterway. Advantages  If designed in accordance with environmental requirements there may be a cost-effective compromise between vehicle movement and fish passage. Disadvantages  A fence may be needed to stop livestock entering the stream from the ford.  Poorly designed and sited fords may trigger stream bed and bank erosion.  Frequent use of unhardened fords may destabilise the channel.  A vertical drop created due to erosion will prevent or create difficulties for fish and other aquatic animals to travel upstream across the ford.  Flows are often spread across the width of fords during low flows. As a result, the water may be too shallow to allow fish and other aquatic animals to cross. Causeways Causeways are structures which raise the base of the stream bed. They allow water through a culvert during low flows but are inundated during floods. They are:  Typically located on waterways with intermittent flows, poorly defined drainage channels and semi- permanent pools that provide habitat for aquatic animals.  Suitable for wide shallow streams with gravel and soft substrate beds when bridge or culvert construction is too expensive and intensive use is not anticipated.

Page 38 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Design requirements:  Sited on a straight waterway stretch with a minimal gradient perpendicular to the waterway.  Normal hydraulic regime should be preserved, where possible.  Provide stable substrate and scour-resistant material immediately downstream (if not tidal).  Do not site near a riffle or pool.  ‘Key’ ends of the causeway into the bank for between three and five metres.  Construct the causeway surface of erosion-proof material, such as interlocking angular rock or concrete.  Avoid deep box cuts on the approaches to the causeway.  Incorporate culverts that adequately provide for fish passage, particularly during low flow conditions.  Must be low enough to allow fish passage during high flows. Advantages  If designed in accordance with environmental requirements, they may be a cost-effective compromise between vehicle movement and fish passage. Disadvantages  Can restrict fish movement.  Poorly sited causeways can lead to erosion of the stream bed and banks.  A drop caused by erosion may be created on the downstream side of the causeway. This may make it difficult for fish and other aquatic animals to cross. b) Design of structures for amphibian species  Refer to Section 7.2: Amphibians for additional species-specific information.  Design in close consultation with amphibian experts, as different species have specific requirements. Design requirements:  Refer to Figures 6.6.7 and 6.6.8.  Location and design based on expert knowledge of the target species and frog migration routes in the project area.  Connect known habitat areas, with consideration of current and future land uses.  Orient culverts along known movement routes, such as those between breeding and foraging areas.  Average dimensions: one metre high and three metres wide. Length should, preferably, not exceed 30-35 metres.  Construct a channel through the centre. This holds water during dry periods to encourage amphibian use.  Allow rain to moisten the substrate within the culvert.  Line base of the culvert with a natural substrate: earth or humus (amphibians are unlikely to pass through culverts with a concrete base).  Design variations can include hanging pieces of shade cloth at regular intervals throughout the culvert to provide refuge (Figure 6.6.8). See Section 9.1 Case studies: Tugun Bypass.  Encourage use by spraying inside of the culvert with water from nearby water bodies (ponds or streams inhabited by amphibians). Note: there must be sufficient water to proceed with this option.  Fencing:

Page 39 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Exclusion of adult cane toads from the culverts can be achieved by erecting fine mesh or 500 mm vertical metal at the entrance to the culverts (refer to Section 9.1). o Frog fencing used in conjunction with culverts to direct and encourage use. Construction:  Minimise/avoid impact on the vegetation surrounding culvert entrances. If entrances are severely trampled during construction frog usage may be limited. Advantages:  If designed in close consultation with amphibian experts, structures will be effective in allowing movement across a road barrier. Disadvantages:  If not designed in close consultation with experts structures are likely to be ineffective.

a)

Page 40 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Figure 6.6.7 a) Frog culvert at Tugun Bypass (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). b) Frog culvert at Tugun Bypass with shade cloth installed to provide amphibian refuge (Robinson- Wolrath 2007).

Figure 6.6.8 Cross section drawing of frog culvert adapted from drawing 3003181-DRN- 020-3076 (Pacific Alliance Link 2006d).

Page 41 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document c) Design of structures for turtles Underpasses have been used to link aquatic habitats for turtles (Figure 6.6.9). In overseas locations, increasing the number of culverts is known to decrease predation at fencing and people stealing turtles as pets (or meat). In these circumstances it is recommended that turtle culverts be placed every 200-300 metres, although this must be determined in relation to the target species. A 3.5 metre diameter and 46.6 metre long round corrugated metal drainage culvert has been used in north- western Florida (USA) for multiple fauna species. The specific turtle species targeted were Florida cooters, yellow-bellied sliders and mud turtles (Aresco 2003).

a) Cross-sectional view

b) Plan view Figure 6.6.9 Culverts can be used to link turtle habitat disconnected by a road. Guide fencing is shown. d) Design of Structures for platypus  Must not have an exposed concrete base: o Platypus are known to avoid concrete-based culverts (interferes with their electromagnetic sensitivity) and will risk crossing the road instead.

Page 42 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Install bio-baffles to reduce smoothness of culvert.  Ensure platypus can comfortably enter and exit the culvert.  Prefer culverts with low flow rate (no more than 2.4 m/second and need to be able to grip onto culvert surface).  Greater amounts of vegetation cover in and around the culvert are known to be associated with reduced roadkill levels.  Require stable banks to burrow into, therefore the maintenance of riparian tree roots (such as from Casuarina trees) in the vicinity of the culvert is essential. o If possible, revegetate and reconsolidate denuded banks as quickly as possible with native trees and shrubs (for example, Eucalyptus, Casuarina and Callistemon).  To be constructed in association with appropriate fencing preventing access to the roadway. Effectiveness:  Platypus have a 'long term memory' so the structure must be ideal from the start. Poor design has resulted in culvert avoidance even when modifications are made at a later stage.  Construction recommendations: o Construct during the driest part of the year (May – September) and when platypus are not rearing young (April – August). o Ensure water flow is maintained at all times. o Minimise the time taken for heavy plant operations (for example, pile driving) and if possible confine these to a discrete time period. o Minimise the length and width of bank destruction necessary for construction access. o Avoid large alterations to bank profiles that may redirect water flow. o Avoid compromising stream and bank sections that are preferentially used by platypus. o Retain the voids between the gravel and rocks within the natural waterway ensuring aquatic invertebrates are retained. o Prevent water pollution, sedimentation and substrate disturbance ensuring the survival of local aquatic invertebrates (foraging resource). Advantages:  Encourage natural movement up- and downstream. Disadvantages:  If constructed incorrectly, platypus will actively avoid these areas for the long term.  Electromagnetic fields from culvert supports may interfere with platypus electroreception (Magnus et al. 2004). e) Design of structures for terrestrial species  Size: o The 'Relative Aperture' of a culvert is one method to ensure utilisation of the structure by a large variety of fauna. o Relative Aperture = length/opening width or height. o Optimal size: relative aperture to be less than eight. o 3 metre x 3 metre box culverts are generally considered suitable to accommodate a wide variety of terrestrial fauna species (including macropods, koalas and flightless birds). o Minimum vertical clearances between the ground and roof of the structure are chosen to accommodate the targeted fauna species.

Page 43 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o To encourage the passage of a variety of small to large fauna species, a minimum vertical clearance of three to five metres is considered necessary. o Size of the culvert must be cost-effective. o A 3.4 metre high x 3.7 metre wide culvert has been installed for the safe passage of cassowaries in North Queensland (Figure 6.6.10). This structure has a dry ledge with a ‘natural’ surface. The effectiveness of the structure is uncertain at present. o For small mammals, pipes or rectangular tunnels should have a diameter/width of 0.4 – 2 metres. This is, however, dependent on the structure’s length, openness and the specific target species. A diameter of 1.5 metres or greater is suitable for multiple small mammal species. o Rectangular tunnels are preferable for small mammals (Figure 6.6.11). o When constructing pipe structures for small mammals ensure the diameter is large enough to allow the bottom section of the structure to be filled in to provide a horizontal surface.  Substrate: o As natural as possible. o Place gravel, mulch or embedded rocks into the bottom of the culvert unless surrounding substrate can be replicated. o Openings to lead directly into the habitat (not concrete). o Travel of arboreal fauna along bare ground in an underpass increases their vulnerability to introduced predators such as dogs, foxes and cats. o Prevent waterlogging and in general provide dry passage for fauna. Koalas require a dry substrate. o Roughen surfaces with a gradient.  Vegetation: o Plant entrances with appropriate and potentially palatable vegetation (for example, eucalypts, shrubs and grassy groundcover). o Ensure there is a continuum of habitat to the underpass entrance. o Although most native fauna prefer complex vegetation structure near underpass entrances (three to 50 metres from entrance), macropods prefer a simple vegetation structure. - For macropod corridors include open and closed forest and a mixed vegetation structure.  Furniture: (Figures 6.6.12 - 6.6.18). o Provide a dry ledge or similar within dual purpose culverts. Those without ledges are known to be avoided. o Include horizontal and vertical poles and netting attached to pylons where appropriate to target species. o Place horizontal logs for passage as high above the base of the opening as practical, allowing 0.6 metre ceiling clearance for fauna passage (Figure 6.6.15a). o Vertical logs are secured to the invert of the concrete base slab and soffit of the culvert ceilings by attachment brackets (Figure 6.6.15b). o Interconnecting logs can provide a dry passage for koalas whilst also providing refuge from predators. - Outside and within the culvert: refuge poles (three metres tall and 200 mm diameter) are effective where introduced predators are likely to attack koalas (Figure 6.6.14). - It is important to ensure that the poles are located at least three metres away from koala exclusion fencing. o The advantages of using lead-up logs at either end of the culvert for predator use or avoidance is unknown (Figure 6.6.12c).

Page 44 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o A break in the middle of the culvert (if a median strip exists) is preferred if the culvert is located under a four-lane road. o Skylights should be avoided as excess runoff, traffic noise and other additional barrier effects can reduce effectiveness of a fauna crossing structure. o Overlapping rocks and boulders to be placed inside a large opening to provide predator protection for small mammals and/or reptiles. o Refuge poles and ropes can also be used for animals, such as koalas and arboreal species, for predator evasion (Figures 6.6.12a and 6.6.14). o General reptile furniture includes tiles, logs, mulching and stones and will increase the likelihood of usage by reptile species. Similar furniture will increase the likelihood of small mammal usage due to increased prey distribution (ie. invertebrates). o Provide shelter and guidance for small mammals.  Fencing: o In accordance with Main Roads Standard Drawing 1603: Fauna exclusion fencing. o Constructed to guide fauna towards the culvert entrances (Figures 6.6.12b, 6.6.17 and 6.6.18). o Construct culvert prior to the erection of permanent fencing. o Conventional fencing is unsuitable when small mammals are part of the target species. - Wire-mesh size and height must be adapted to prohibit these species from the road corridor. o See Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing for additional fencing information.  General: o Ensure that underpass entrances lead to natural habitat on both sides and that this view is visible from culvert entrances. o The installation of several underpasses at one location decreases the possibility of interference caused by other fauna movement (species interactions), provides alternative routes to bypass predators, decreases travel time to find safe crossing and enables more equal population distribution. o Minimum gradient of 1% and a maximum gradient of 1:2 for small mammal species. This is, however, dependent on the target species. o Ponds, cleared areas and noise near underpass entrances were found to discourage use by macropods. o For macropods, dry passage at all times within the culvert must be provided. Culverts that do not provide a dry crossing are known to be avoided. o Long and narrow underpasses deter macropods. o Appropriate height of a culvert for macropods will be influenced by gait behaviour. o Eastern grey kangaroos can utilise 3 metre x 3 metre box culverts (Australian Museum Business Services 2001). o Red-necked wallabies are known to use box culverts 3 metre x 3 metre and 800 mm diameter purpose-built arches (Australian Museum Business Services 2001). o Swamp wallabies can utilise box culverts 3 metre x 3 metre, 1.2 metre x 2.4 metre, and 2.8 metre diameter purpose-built arches (Australian Museum Business Services 2001). o Small culvert usage tends to be dominated by small mammals, with these species preferring established culverts. o Keep entrances free from human disturbance and avoid artificial light. o Provide unobstructed access.

Page 45 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Table 6.6.3 Table of considerations when designing a macropod underpass. Structure Considerations Underpass location  Construct at regular intervals.  Ensure that there are a sufficient number of underpasses to allow escape crossings, especially during fire.  Investigate repetitive macropod movements before installing fauna structures.  Locate fauna structures at locations with highest rates of roadkill. Culvert  Either end of culvert must be clearly visible.  Take measures to reduce water pooling.  Include at least one ledge or similar for dry crossing.  Avoid lights within culverts. Underpass flooring  Concrete floors had higher rates of crossings by echidnas, wallabies, kangaroos, possums and water rats than koalas.  Encourage sedimentation of flooring for a more natural environment.  Take measures to avoid water pooling. Size  Macropods and koalas prefer underpasses with large diameters.  Refer to above section discussing optimal 'Relative Aperture' dimensions.  3 m x 3 m box culverts are preferable for macropod species.  Underpasses with height smaller than the width are more commonly used by fauna.  Lengths longer than 20 m have generally lower use. Furniture –lights  Open skylights may cause noise and other associated pollution issues.  May encourage vegetation growth. Furniture – refuge poles  Provides safety for koalas.  May encourage underpass use by koalas. Furniture – ledges  Favoured by smaller fauna although koalas do utilise them.  Place in the top two-thirds (towards the roof) of the underpass.  Ensure slope at both ends of the culvert is 1:5 or vertical to ensure that predators are unable to utilise the ledges (research is required to determine the ideal slope if any). Silt traps  Discourage fauna use when located near underpass entrances. Fencing  Install to ensure fauna are protected from predators/pests/disturbances.  Ensure that fencing does not trap animals, especially during fire.  Ensure that fencing guides fauna towards the underpass. Vegetation  Underpass openings need to be vegetated.  Provide forest structure to cater for needs of all fauna.  Allow access to, and view of, entrance and exit.

Advantages  Utilised by a wide variety of fauna.  Provides new habitat, unlike some other structures which merely serve to connect habitats.

Page 46 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Disadvantages  Success is determined by several variables (for example, size, vegetation, furniture, guide fencing, clearance).  Can be expensive.  At present, dual purpose culverts in Queensland designed to accommodate drainage and fauna passage have had problems. Currently, may be better to have separate drainage and fauna movement structures.  Due to the size of some culverts designed for small mammal movement, maintenance can be difficult.  If there is an insufficient openness of the culvert, vegetation provided within the structure will deteriorate. Maintenance Requirements  Ensure vegetation establishes.  Ensure vegetation consists of diverse species and heights.  Control weeds and silt buildup.  Maintenance should occur at least once a fortnight during construction and be ongoing.  Maintain furniture.  Undertake inspection of entrances twice a year to ensure access for fauna.

a) Entrance for culvert and showing relative height of passage

b) Ledge for dry passage within the culvert Figure 6.6.10 Underpass with a ledge to provide dry passage for cassowaries, Mission Beach, Queensland (Scott 2007).

Page 47 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.6.11 Small mammal culvert design.

a) Cross-sectional view

b) Plan view

Page 48 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

c) Simplified entrance drawing Figure 6.6.12 Diagram of general fauna culvert with furniture that can accommodate koalas. Note: optional extensions (lead-ups) on either end of the horizontal furniture logs. Note: fauna exclusion fencing is used to guide fauna into culverts (‘straight’ fence design) (Figure b).

Figure 6.6.13 Lead up pole to a horizontal log used to traverse the culvert at a safe height (Robinson-Wolrath 2008).

Page 49 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.6.14 Refuge pole being utilised by a koala at the entrance to a culvert.

a)

Page 50 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Figure 6.6.15 a) Fauna underpass from Bonville Upgrade (NSW Roads and Traffic Authority project) indicating required height for horizontal logs (Robinson-Wolrath 2008). b) Brackets used to affix vertical logs to underpass base, used on Yelgun to Chinderah project (NSW Roads and Traffic Authority project) (Robinson-Wolrath 2008).

a) b)

c) Figure 6.6.16 Different types of fauna underpasses Compton Road, Brisbane (Scott 2007). a) East Evelyn Range, North Queensland (Scott 2007). Trawler ropes were installed to accommodate arboreal movement. b) Yelgun to Chinderah, northern New South Wales. Designed to accommodate a number of species, including birds.

Page 51 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.6.17 Furniture used to encourage underpass use by multiple species.

a) Cross-sectional view

Page 52 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Plan view Figure 6.6.18 Fauna exclusion fence installation used to guide fauna to culvert entrances (‘jagged’ fence design). f) Design of structures for bats No purpose-built bat structures should be built without contact and ongoing involvement of a bat specialist. Design requirements:  Designs are dependent on the target bat species, the environment and the culvert’s purpose.  A general design requirement may be, for example: o 1.5 to 2 metres in diameter. o Of sufficient length to allow enough bends to prevent light from reaching the main roosting site (Figure 6.6.19). - If only one bend is to be constructed, it should be sufficient enough (approximately 30 – 40 degrees) to ensure darkness at the roosting site. o Have height variation along its length and at least two entrances, preferably at different heights. - If this is not possible or the aim is to simply provide a roosting site then driving a culvert into a pile of fill may also be suitable if designed appropriately. o Roosting sites have been constructed utilising concrete culverts, pipes and tyres. o Construct the roost area out of rough rock or have the roof of the roosting area roughened. o A carefully-designed fence at the entrance may be required to keep people out. A sign may be provided to inform the public why access is denied. Design the fence appropriately to ensure bat access remains.  Airflow needs to be established: o Two entrances at different levels (preferred option) or a single entrance with the interior of the roosting area to be inclined/declined to create temperature and pressure differentials to establish air flow. o Should not be so strong as to create wind, but rather act to facilitate air replacement in the structure. o There are no simple design guidelines to achieve appropriate airflow.

Page 53 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 A range of temperature regimes at various points in the structure needs to be created. o Designed to accommodate as many different species as possible by establishing a range of different conditions. o May be achieved by constructing roof avens that trap warm air and some sections which are low and trap the cold air.  A high degree of temperature and humidity buffering from the ambient conditions is preferred.  Structures need to be built to protect bats from predators (rats, snakes and so on). This can be achieved by: o Smoothing lower walls of the roost area without any projections from the ground or any shelves. o Provision of total darkness, as this may act as a barrier to some predators.  Construct roosting sites within the structure out of rock (preferred) or a wood material. o Steel can rust and cause damage to bats’ feet. o Steel can act as a conductor of heat and, therefore, transfer heat away from the roost site. o Wood material does not last for a long period of time, particularly in the ‘underground’ environment of a roosting site. o Bats prefer to roost on clean surfaces.

a) Plan view illustrating a possible bat culvert design providing a dark roosting site.

Page 54 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Cross-sectional view showing the light gradient created from bends in the culvert.

c) Magnified view of a bat roost section (circled in blue in (b)) Figure 6.6.19 Bat culvert. Note the rough roof roosting surface and smooth side walls to prevent predation.

6.7 Underpass: Tunnel Typically round pipes of relatively small diameter (for example, less than 1.5 metres in diameter). May also be termed an eco-pipe.

6.7.1 Target species  Small-sized fauna, depending on dimensions, and whether it is wet or dry.  Limited applicability to medium- to large-sized fauna.

6.7.2 Design specifications  Refer to Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert for detailed information on design features to enhance the tunnel’s functionality.  Suitable for aquatic fauna if installed below water level but hydraulic preferences of aquatic fauna must be taken into consideration.  Only suitable for terrestrial fauna if the tunnel is located in an area that does not experience flooding.

Page 55 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Design improved when a dedicated drainage pipe is installed alongside a fauna-dedicated tunnel.

6.8 Underpass: Bridge A structure that maintains the grade of the road or elevates the traffic above the surrounding land, allowing animals to pass under the road (Table 6.8.1). It facilitates water drainage or the movement of local human traffic and secondarily the passage of wildlife.

6.8.1 Target species  All fauna

6.8.2 Design specifications  Movement corridors provided under bridges are the most appropriate crossings for sites with threatened species, fish habitat or aquatic vegetation.  Bridges with no in-stream support sections are the only crossings that pose no physical barrier to fish movement.  Generally, bridge structures have the least impact on aquatic fauna passage as they normally involve minimal disturbance to the water flow and aquatic habitat.  Used when frequent fish crossings are anticipated. Table 6.8.1 Types of bridges. Single span No intermediate support pylons bridge

Multiple span One or more intermediate support pylons bridge

Viaduct A long multi-span bridge

Grid bridge Constructed from railway lines and welded beams, with concrete abutments and piers, they range from 6-100 metres in length and are relatively cheap to build.

Design requirements for aquatic species:  Built to avoid marine plants and/or high value fish habitats, where possible.  Designed to span the waterway with no in-stream supports, wherever possible.  Designed and constructed to accommodate all flow conditions. o Seek expert advice on a range of issues, including geography, hydrology, hydraulics, geotechnical and geochemical issues and road geometry. o Place piers and footings beyond the channel and above the high water mark to avoid constricting the channel and reducing the flow area.  Need to consider erosion management (aimed at decreasing maintenance costs).  Use grated decking on a multilane bridge to allow light and moisture to penetrate. Only consider if the risk of pollution from road spills is minimal.

Page 56 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 In the case of multiple lane bridges, a gap between lanes will assist in allowing light penetration under the bridge.  Skylights are only justified where endangered fish species sensitive to total darkness are present.  Construct perpendicular to the waterway, where possible.  Placement should aim to minimise future maintenance requirements.  Consider future maintenance requirements and associated disturbance of fish habitats with the aim of minimizing maintenance-related disturbance.  Elevated approach roads across floodplains need to include culvert cells to reduce flooding and to allow fish passage along the floodplain.  Construction materials to have clean fill, with no potential to leach and pollute waterways. Advantages:  Limited disturbance to the environment if designed in accordance with environmental requirements. Disadvantages:  Reduces stream stability.  Can degrade water quality as a result of road runoff.  Increases flood flow velocities.  Blockage of fish passage on floodplains caused by elevated approach roads.  Limited light penetration under bridge affects in-stream and bank vegetation and in turn affects habitat values and water velocities.  Creates a non-physical barrier for some aquatic species which avoid dark, colder areas during daylight hours.  Incorrect placement of pylons/footings leads to the creation of eddies, increased water velocity and turbulence which may delay migrating fish as a result of confused flow signals.  May produce adverse hydraulic conditions due to increased velocities, channel simplification or excessive water surface drops (Kapitzke 2009). Design requirements for terrestrial species:  Use grated decking on a multilane bridge to allow light and moisture to penetrate. Only consider if the risk of pollution from road spills is minimal.  In the case of multiple lane bridges, a gap between lanes will assist in allowing light penetration under the bridge.  Where terrestrial passage is required under a bridge, all reasonable and practical efforts should be taken to restore and/or maintain continuous riparian cover along the channel banks. This should occur on both banks, but if not practical, then priority should be given to the bank which is more likely to form part of a fauna movement path.  Where possible, move bridge abutments away from the watercourse banks to increase the opportunity for terrestrial passage along the banks and overbank areas.  Include culvert cells in elevated approach roads across floodplains to reduce flooding and to allow fauna passage along the floodplain.  Provide vertical logs cast into concrete footings and attached to underside of bridge or top of arch spans for fauna passage.  Viaducts provide the most effective form of passage for birds under the road (Figure 6.8.1).  Viaducts and bridges are suitable for cassowaries. o Landscape with cassowary food trees to act as an attractant. o Use appropriate guide fencing.

Page 57 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Provide dry passage. o Current design: Revegetated and reprofiled embankments underneath bridge. This has been successful in enabling safe cassowary passage.

Figure 6.8.1 Viaduct design which can be utilised by bird species.

6.9 Non-structural mitigation: Canopy Connectivity The width of the linear vegetation clearing is kept sufficiently small to allow the tree canopy to remain continuous, or where not continuous, sufficiently small to allow gliders (and other volant species) to safely traverse the clearing (Figure 6.9.1).

a) Cross-sectional view

Page 58 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Plan view Figure 6.9.1 Diagrammatic representation of canopy connectivity designed to accommodate arboreal species

6.9.1 Target species  Arboreal species.  Flight birds.  Flying invertebrates.

6.9.2 Design specifications  Refer to Section 7.4: Arboreal species for additional species information.  Arboreal species prefer natural canopy connectivity to artificial structures.  Ensure there is a minimum clearance of seven metres to allow traffic to pass underneath the canopy.  Retaining a median strip between two carriageways is an effective way to ensure that the target species can pass from one side to the other with relative ease (Figure 6.9.2).  Ensure final layout and elevation of the carriageway does not alter the drainage significantly to ensure conditions are appropriate for the survival of median vegetation.  Clear zone and roadside barrier design requirements need to be considered.  Vegetation: o For the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area, it is important to retain median strip vegetation to enhance canopy crossings. o Retention of large trees is crucial for glider conservation as these are preferentially chosen for foraging. Large trees also provide hollows, which younger trees cannot supply.

Page 59 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Species-specific information:  Retaining mature trees with 400-800 mm diameter is not only important for shelter, but also produces flowers more regularly than smaller trees. This is particularly important for feathertail gliders, sugar gliders, squirrel gliders and yellow-bellied gliders.  Lemuroid ringtail possums are more affected by lack of canopy connectivity than traffic volume.  Canopy connectivity is also important to small mammals as it reduces edge and linear barrier effects. Advantages:  Low maintenance.  Low cost, if additional land available.  Preferred by fauna.  Aesthetically pleasing for motorists.  Enhances and creates habitat connectivity, allowing migration and dispersion. Disadvantages:  Safety issues relating to falling branches or animals.  Can utilise intact canopy connections only over narrow roads.  Overhead clearance issues.  Without fencing, canopy connectivity may encourage fauna towards road-edge.  Area underneath the canopy (ie the road) may become damp and slippery in tropical areas.  Costly if land purchase is required. Maintenance Requirements:  Maintain necessary overhead clearance.  Maintain dead and decaying branches in areas adjacent to the road.  Retain mature trees with 400-800 mm diameter for shelter and foraging resources.  Retention of large trees is crucial for glider conservation as these are preferentially chosen for foraging and roost opportunities.

a)

Page 60 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Figure 6.9.2 Maintained median strip of mature vegetation to facilitate safe glider migration. a) Pacific Motorway, Bonville Upgrade, New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority. b) Pacific Motorway, Brunswick Heads, New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority.

6.10 Non-structural mitigation: Local Traffic Management Local traffic management incorporates devices aimed at reducing the speed or volume of traffic, for example, road closures, chicanes, crosswalks, lighting, signage, rumble strips. These measures raise driver awareness to the presence of wildlife.

6.10.1 Target species  All species.

6.10.2 Design specifications  Numerous methods and devices installed to change driver behaviour and result in slower speeds. For example, o Bends in roads (Figure 6.10.1). - The inclusion of bends in roads and maintaining appropriate vegetation clearing may assist with slowing traffic in areas where fauna cross the road. - May alternatively decrease advanced warning of fauna in the road corridor. o Chicanes (Figure 6.10.2a). o Raised crosswalks (Figure 6.10.2b). o Signage (Section 6.10.2a; Figure 6.10.3). o Rumble Strips (Figure 6.10.5).  Most effective in low speed areas. o In high speed areas, it is reported that there is not a significant drop in roadkill events after the installation of signage (Coulson 1982).  Where practicable, maximise visibility of the fauna crossing area in both directions of road traffic.

Page 61 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Local traffic management measures are most effective when installed in conjunction with other measures of mitigation.  Permanent and temporary signage has been installed in North Queensland in an attempt to reduce vehicle collisions with cassowaries (Figure 6.10.3).  The success of permanent signage in reducing roadkill and public awareness diminishes over time, particularly with local residents who are regular travellers on the target roads.  Reduction in speed limits may have the potential to reduce fauna roadkill. Such mitigation needs to be accompanied by public education and enforcement (policing).

Figure 6.10.1 Roads with bends are likely to increase safe fauna crossings due to decreased vehicular speed.

Page 62 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) b) Figure 6.10.2 Diagram showing increased likelihood of safe fauna passage (displayed with green arrows) using: a) Chicanes b) A raised pedestrian crosswalk.

Figure 6.10.3 Warning sign used to alert drivers to the presence of cassowaries on the road, Mission Beach, Queensland (Scott 2007). a) Signage and road markings  Signs for kangaroos and wallabies are the same. They have a fluorescent yellow background colour to make them more visible at dawn and dusk when these animals are more active (Figure 6.10.4).  Wildlife corridors do not warrant the installation of significant wildlife conservation areas signs but may be signed (if warranted) using wildlife warning or wildlife information signs.

Page 63 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Generally, where there is a high risk of local extinction, signs alone are insufficient for mitigation purposes.

a)

b) Figure 6.10.4 a) Macropod warning sign, Brisbane, Queensland. b) Wildlife information sign indicating a wildlife survey area (McKirdy 2008). Sign placement  In areas which are regularly inhabited by macropods (habitat and crossing points that are not seasonal locations).  Utilise the WILDLIFE (or similar signs) if there are more than two species requiring signs in the same area.  If animals are expected to cross in an area over 1km long, then a NEXT…km sign should be added (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2007).

Page 64 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Rumble strips  Rumble strips have been installed in North Queensland as a tool to alert both drivers and cassowaries to changed conditions (Figure 6.10.5).  Over time their effectiveness is reduced as regular drivers become familiar with the modified road surface.

Figure 6.10.5 Rumble strips on the road aimed at slowing traffic in a cassowary area, Mission Beach, Queensland. b) Wildlife warning reflectors Target Species  Ungulates. Background  Originally designed to scare target species from the road corridor by sending vehicular lights into their eyes.  Manufactured and distributed under the names Swareflex (Austria) and Streiter-Lite (USA).  Field trials have been undertaken in Australia by Ramp and Croft, as well as the Queensland Department of Main Roads, to determine effectiveness of these reflectors on macropod species.  Unsuccessful at reducing wallaby and kangaroo vehicle collisions (Ramp and Croft 2006; Scott 2003).  Animals habituate to reflectors very quickly (Ramp and Croft 2006).

6.11 Barriers: Fencing Fencing stops animals crossing the road surface, and is used as an integral component aimed at guiding animals towards safe fauna crossing structures or passages.

Page 65 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

6.11.1 Target species  All species, excluding flighted birds, most invertebrates and some reptiles.

6.11.2 Design specifications  Fencing design shall generally be in accordance with Chapter 8 of TMR’s Road Planning and Design Manual (June 2005).  Type of fauna fencing is dependent upon: o Specific purpose; o Specific species; o Maintenance considerations; o Cost-effectiveness; o Land use; o Topography; o Vegetation; and o Property access requirements.  Types of fauna fencing: o Fauna exclusion/koala proof fencing (Main Roads Standard Drawing 1603). - Refer to Section 6.11.2a o Floppy-top fencing (New South Wales standard fauna exclusion fencing). o Temporary fencing - May be erected or other types of temporary structures put in place when environment/habitats on the roadside are being changed leading to an increase in animal movement. - For example, sugar cane burning may result in animal movement across roads and consequently an increase in the amount of fauna roadkill. o Construction barriers - Erected to ensure animals do not enter the roadway while under construction. o Frog fencing - Refer to Section 6.11.2b. - Refer to Section 9.1 Case Studies: Tugun Bypass. o Turtle fencing - Refer to Section 6.11.2c. o Cassowary fencing - Refer to Section 6.11.2d.  General Considerations: o Ensure fencing is used in conjunction with fauna crossing structures. o Ensure regular fence breaks if fauna exclusion fencing is installed in areas that do not have crossing structures. This allows for concentrated fauna movement. - Necessary to prevent trapping of animals in the case of a fire. - Signs may be erected near fence breaks to alert drivers that fauna may be crossing. o Fauna exclusion fences may separate a population into less sustainable smaller populations with no provision for recolonisation.

Page 66 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Extend fencing either side of a safe crossing point to act as a funnel to guide animals (Figure 6.11.1). At least 150 metres is recommended but this is dependent on environmental conditions such as topography and vegetation.  Include a 'return' design at the end of fencing to direct animals towards the habitat. The return should extend a minimum of 10 metres. Alternatively, placing boulders at the end may encourage fauna to return to intact habitat.  Construct in conjunction with other fauna mitigation measures and only after other fauna mitigation measures have been completed.  Provide exit points to enable animals caught within the road corridor access to the adjacent habitat. Advantages:  Fauna are unable to cross the road, eliminating the chance of vehicle collision.  Designs have been trialled, tested and monitored extensively, confirming their efficacy. Disadvantages:  Regular maintenance required.  Maintenance costs.  Without ‘returns’ success cannot be guaranteed.  Has the potential to trap fauna in the event of fire.  Fauna exclusion fencing alone, while reducing roadkill, may be more detrimental in negating dispersal than the road acting as a barrier. Maintenance Requirements:  Maintenance needs to occur regularly and for perpetuity.  Failure to maintain fauna exclusion fencing may result in animals climbing over or through weaknesses in the fencing. a) Fauna exclusion/ koala proof fencing  Refer to Section 7.5: Koala.  In koala habitat areas the fence must comply with Main Roads Standard Drawing 1603. o Barrier to most fauna. o Guide fauna towards crossing sites. o Sheet metal must be above wire (at the top of the fence) such that the selvedges are positioned below the top of the sheet metal strip (Figure 6.11.2).  Exclude fauna from the road corridor but allow them to escape from the road. o Large tree stumps, build earthen berms or escape poles on the roadside of exclusion fencing can be utilised to allow fauna to escape the road corridor.  Conduct surveys of routes, paths and home-ranges of fauna before installation of fencing and escape structures. Fencing should account for repetitive pathway behaviour, as many species are averse to changing paths and will try to use the same path even if it is blocked.  Implement measures to stop animals entering the road at the end of fauna exclusion fencing resulting in fauna roadkill hotspots. For example fence ‘returns’ (Figure 6.11.1).  Must be installed with knowledge of other fauna which may impact upon the design of fauna fencing (such as amphibians).  Construct metal flaps at the base of fencing where the fence crosses drainage lines to ensure fauna cannot pass under the fence at these points (Figure 6.11.3).

Page 67 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Plastic strips at the bottom of fauna exclusion fencing may be used to stop the movement of small to medium-sized reptiles onto the road (Figure 6.11.4).  Habitual climbers, such as carpet snakes, will not be stopped by generic fences. Specifically designed fencing with smaller openings will be required.  If bandicoots are within the project area fauna exclusion fencing needs to be constructed from fine galvanised wire mesh or other material with gaps no larger then 20 mm. The foot of the mesh is to be buried to a depth of at least 150 mm and rise at least 500 mm above the ground (Department of Environment and Climate Change 2002).  Fencing for guiding koalas to fauna structures (such as underpasses) can be configured in two designs: o Straight design. This design does not tie into the entrance to culvert or alternative fauna structures. This is less preferred as it can create predator traps and requires more maintenance. o Jagged fence design. This design ties into the culvert entrance. This is the preferred design.  Koala exclusion fencing must have a three metre buffer free of vegetation (excluding grasses) on habitat side of the fence (Figure 6.11.5). Advantages:  Metal sheets can be attached to any type of fence.  More secure and economical than other forms of fauna exclusion fencing.  100% success rate at keeping koalas off roads when maintained. Disadvantages:  Requires regular maintenance to ensure no vegetation growth. Maintenance Requirements:  Must maintain a three metre buffer on the habitat side of the fence, free of vegetation (excluding grasses) (Figure 6.11.5). Buffer area must not have any vegetation that could be used to climb over the fence.  Vegetation from the roadside should be maintained to ensure it cannot be utilised to access the road corridor (for example, remove overhanging branches, creepers, etc.).  Maintenance/inspections should occur once a week and be ongoing.  Maintenance vehicles only require a 1.5 metre clear zone on the habitat side of the fence for access purposes. Self-closing gate  Allows koalas to pass through the gate from the roadside, after which the gate is designed to automatically lock to prohibit re-entry to road. Advantages:  Allows safe escape from road.  Able to be used by a variety of fauna.  Inexpensive.  Does not affect efficacy of fence.  Reduces roadkill. Disadvantages:  Not all koalas are able to use gates because their weight and height is not sufficient.

Page 68 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

One-way fence Design Requirements:  Enables koalas to pass from the roadside, through fauna exclusion fencing, by means of a ‘drop-down’ to the safe side of the fencing (Figure 6.11.6).  The break in the fence is designed in conjunction with guide fencing to the return drop (Figure 6.11.6).  The purpose of the structure being a 'drop' is to ensure fauna are unable to climb over from the habitat side of the fence, that is, a one-way fence (Figure 6.11.7). Advantages:  Simple.  Effective. Disadvantages:  Requires continued maintenance.

Figure 6.11.1 Optimal design of fauna exclusion fencing on either side of a crossing structure with incorporated returns at both ends.

Page 69 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.11.2 Incorrectly installed fauna exclusion fencing. For correct installation details refer to Main Roads Standard Drawing 1603.

Figure 6.11.3 Flap joined to the bottom of fauna exclusion fencing to prevent fauna penetrating road corridors at drainage line.

Page 70 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.11.4 Plastic strips at the base of fauna exclusion fencing can be used to prevent movement of reptiles into the road corridor (Scott 2007).

Figure 6.11.5 Fauna exclusion fencing (floppy top) with a three metre clearance buffer on vegetative side, Bonville Upgrade (Roads and Traffic Authority) (Robinson-Wolrath 2007).

Page 71 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

a) b) Figure 6.11.6 One-way fence to allow koalas to escape from the road corridor. a) Photo taken from the drop-off side of a one-way fence located at Yelgun to Chinderah section of the Pacific Motorway (NSW Roads and Traffic Authority). b) The ramp leading up to the drop-off side of the fence.

Figure 6.11.7 Use of a one-way fence design by koalas to escape the road. If not using floppy-top fencing, attach sheet metal in accordance with Main Roads Standard Drawing 1603. b) Frog fencing  Prevents the movement of amphibians across the road but also directs them towards culverts providing safe passage.  Design in close consultation with amphibian experts as different species have different requirements. General frog fence  Currently being monitored for effectiveness.

Page 72 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Consists of a 5 mm insertion rubber clamped to a galvanised backing plate then attached to a chain wire fence. The current design is 400 mm high with a 150 mm wide sloped roof to discourage amphibian access (Figure 6.11.8). o Expected minimum lifetime of 20 years.  Can be attached to other fauna fencing or security fencing (Figure 6.11.9).  Construct using: o A solid sheet of durable rubber (insertion rubber) which reaches approximately 400-500 mm high. - The insertion rubber is chosen for its durability, availability and the length of the rolls (50- 100 m) supplied. o Recycled plastic planks (200 mm x 40 mm x 3 m) o Recycled plastic posts: - one at each end of the planks (75 mm x 75 mm x 1200 mm) - a post at mid-span (50 mm x 50 mm x 1200 mm) o Construct the roof (155 mm at an angle of 45 degrees from the planks) and lip (30 mm at an angle of 45 degrees from the 'roof') of pre-fabricated galvanised sheets (1.2 mm). This is attached to the top of the planks. o Purpose of using recycled plastic planks and posts: - Long term durability; - Do not require painting or sealing; - Made from recycled products; - Installed using manual labour; and - Easily repaired using hand tools.  Set fence 60-100 mm into the ground to prevent movement under fences.  Clear vegetation one metre on either side of the fence.  Angling the fence toward culvert entrances has been found to be more effective than being constructed parallel to the road. Temporary frog fence  Used during construction (Figure 6.11.10): o Shade cloth set into the ground and attached to reo hooks. o Issues have arisen with durability and the cost of maintaining this form of temporary fencing. Untrialled barrier fence  Concrete drainage-like ditch alongside the fence (vegetated side). Frogs have a strong preference to avoid concrete surfaces, therefore a sufficiently wide and deep ditch may hinder movement towards the fence itself. This structure should not be used for drainage per se, and if it is, a mesh of some sort must be placed above water level to prevent frogs utilising the structure to breed after rain. Maintenance Requirements:  It is imperative that vegetation remains clear of both sides of the frog fence.  Ensure there are no breaches to the fence.  Maintenance checks should occur on a regular basis. Advantages:  Avoids roadkill of amphibians.

Page 73 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Encourages amphibians to utilise dedicated amphibian culverts in order to maintain population connectivity. Disadvantages:  Ongoing and regular maintenance is vital for its effectiveness.  The current temporary construction frog fence design has had durability and maintenance cost issues.

Figure 6.11.8 Cross-section of frog fence design (adapted from 3003181-BFF-020-6003) (PacificLink Alliance 2006d).

Page 74 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a)

b) Figure 6.11.9 a) Frog fence attached to an existing fence (adapted from 3003181-BFF-020-6003) (PacificLink Alliance 2006d). b) Free-standing frog fence (adapted from 3003181-BFF-020-6003) (PacificLink Alliance 2006d).

Page 75 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.11.10 Temporary frog fence, Tugun Bypass (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). c) Turtle fencing The design for turtle fencing has been sourced from overseas situations. The applicability of the design to Australian turtle species has been untrialled.  Designed to divert turtles away from the road and through a turtle-specific culvert.  600 mm high woven vinyl erosion control fencing with pre-attached wooden stakes. Preferably installed at the edge of the mowed road corridor.  The bottom edge of the fence must be buried 200 mm. The above-ground height of the fence is thus 400 mm.  The ends of the fence should be turned back gradually towards the water at least 80-100 metres.  Single-entrance screen funnel traps have also been used. d) Cassowary fencing  Constructed to direct cassowaries to fauna crossing points (Figure 6.11.11).  Constructed of shade cloth to inhibit view of habitat on other side of the road (Figure 6.11.12). If habitat on other side of road is visible through fence, cassowaries will attempt to pass through fence and often end up becoming entangled.  Space underneath the fence allows small mammals to pass through and enables easy access for slashing machinery.  Vertical gaps in the fence allow cassowaries trapped on the road to be directed to the habitat side.  Signage to be placed at the end of the barrier fence to alert drivers to the presence of potential cassowary crossings.  The effectiveness of the current fence design to guide cassowaries to installed fauna crossing structures is unknown and the desire to fence large portions of the road corridor to ensure effectiveness may not be appropriate.

Page 76 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) Detailed fence design

b) Overview Figure 6.11.11 Cassowary fencing guiding birds towards the safe fauna crossing structure.

Page 77 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

a) Cassowary fence position in relation to the road (on left hand side of the road).

b) Detail of fencing with shade cloth and gap at base Figure 6.11.12 Detail of current cassowary fence design with escape gap.

Page 78 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Cross-sectional view Figure 6.11.13 Space underneath the fence allows small mammals to move through the broader landscape.

6.12 Barriers: Chemical Repellents

6.12.1 Target species  Macropods.

6.12.2 Design specifications  Species-specific effectiveness and responses are varied. For example, the pademelon responded to a scent by approaching it to investigate whilst the wallaby fled from it (Ramp et al. 2005).  Temporary use may be appropriate. This will reduce the likelihood of habituation to the scent. o For example, could be used while maintenance crews mend gaps in fauna exclusion fencing.  Case study: o Tested the response of western grey kangaroos to the urine of dingoes, which initiated a flight response, while human urine initiated no response (Parsons et al. 2007).

6.13 Barriers: Perching Deterrents Birds perching above roads can cause a hazard when excretion lands on passing cars. The installation of perching deterrents on road furniture, such as light poles, can reduce this risk.

6.13.1 Target species  Birds.

6.13.2 Design specifications  'Spider' deterrents fitted to the top side of lights (Figure 6.13.1).  Light poles designed to deter pelican roosting opportunities (Figure 6.13.2)  A bird deterrent wire attached to the gantry cross bar, with associated bird perches constructed to extend three metres out from the gantry (Figure 6.13.3).  Case study: o Pelicans along the Houghton Highway (South-east Queensland) rest on the top of light poles causing a hazard when their droppings landed on windscreens of motor vehicles and visors of motorcycle riders. o Mitigation: - 'Spider' deterrents have been retrofitted to the top side of lights. - A bird deterrent wire attached to the gantry cross bar, with associated bird perches was constructed.

Page 79 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

- ‘Safe’ perch structures are to be installed on the new bridge (Figure 6.13.3b).

a) Location of spider deterrent on light pole

b) Detailed view of spider deterrent Figure 6.13.1 Spider deterrent on top of light poles reduces potential hazards from perching.

Page 80 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.13.2 Light pole designed to deter roosting opportunities

a) Detailed drawing of deterrent wire b) Detailed drawing of perch structure Figure 6.13.3 a) Bird deterrent wire on the top of a gantry to stop bird perching. b) A perch structure installed to provide a safe, hazard free place for perching.

Page 81 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

6.14 Habitat enhancement: Frog Ponds Frog ponds are small constructed ponds and pools aimed at recreating breeding opportunities for target species.

6.14.1 Target species  Amphibian species.

6.14.2 Design specifications

Figure 6.14.1 Frog pond, Tugun Bypass (Robinson-Wolrath 2007). Site selection:  Consult with local amphibian experts.  Locate in areas where conditions replicate the species’ known requirements. For example, pH, salinity, absence of known predators.  Site constraints will often dictate the placement and form/shape of the ponds. For example, the approximate design criteria for the wallum sedge frog as part of the Tugun Bypass project (Pacific Link Alliance 2006) was: o Minimum of 1.5 metres deep with a gradient sloping to 0.3 metres at pond edges. o Approximately 15-20 metres long and 5-10 metres wide. Timing:  Construction of ponds must be conducted during a dry period (for example, spring) leading up to a pronounced rainfall event (normally in summer) to enable machinery access to the site with minimal damage and to enhance the likelihood of transplanted vegetation survival. Site preparation:  Appropriate preparation of frog ponds is critical to their success.  The physical and hydrological conditions must match the requirements of the target species.  Consider: o Physical conditions (site topography);

Page 82 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Soil characteristics, as they play a fundamental role in determining the vegetation community and therefore, habitat potential; o Hydrology; and o Outlet control enabling water level control. Design requirements: Design in close consultation with amphibian experts. Specific to the target species. In some cases, steep sides (as close to vertical as possible) are required to ensure cane toads do not utilise the structure. Ensure pond is appropriately vegetated.

6.15 Habitat enhancement: Nest Boxes

6.15.1 Target species  Arboreal species.  Bats.

6.15.2 Design specifications a) Arboreal species Background  If the tree with roosting/nesting opportunities requires removal it is important to consider replacing this lost resource with a nest box (see Figure 6.15.1) or similar structure in a nearby suitable tree. A ratio of at least 1:1 is recommended.  When a hollow tree is removed note the species that potentially utilised the hollow to ensure replacement nest boxes are species-specific and appropriate.  Different species utilise different hollow sizes and thus require different styles of nest boxes.

Page 83 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 6.15.1 Glider nest box installed in South-east Queensland (Scott 2007). Design requirements:  Height of nest box will determine its use: o Install between three and eight metres above the ground. This is dependent on target species and environment. o Species-specific information: - Eastern pygmy possums are the only species to prefer nest boxes lower than two metres.  Orientation and general placement of next boxes must take into account: o Rainfall. o Sunlight (must provide shade during summer). o Probability of human disturbance (avoid installing along walking tracks). o Natural nesting habits. Undertake baseline surveys prior to the removal of hollows to determine nest box spacing and orientation.  Each species requires: o A different style of nest box. Collect information from natural hollows before replacements are constructed. o Due to competition between exotic birds and native species for nest boxes, construct with entrances that are either covered with a baffle, rear-entry entrances, or have a slit-entrance on base (determined by target native species).  Density of nest boxes: o Species have different nest densities and spacings. o Separate individual nest boxes by approximately two to four metres. o Clusters of nest boxes to be separated by approximately 20 metres.

Page 84 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Materials: o Nest box wall thickness should, ideally, be a minimum of 30 mm, to provide the greatest resistance to external temperature variation. o Plywood: 18-25 mm thick and can be sourced from environmentally-friendly companies. o Hardwood: Approximately 30 mm thick and can be sourced from waste products from timber production. o Non-toxic organic timber sealer should be used. o Metal edging on lid is required to prevent damage by chewing. o Internal material does not have to be provided in most nest boxes unless specifically designed for bats. - Bats require internal plastic mesh or shade cloth to allow them to cling to or climb within the nest box.  Dimensions and entrance locations: o Internal widths of 80-160 mm and 160-240 mm are most commonly used. o Do not use nest boxes with less than 200 mm between the entrance and nest box floor, unless target species requires an entrance in the floor. o Entrances can be a hole located: - at the front near the top; - as a hole on the side near the top; or - as a slit on base or hole on back, towards the tree.  Tree attachment: o Preferable to use a strap allowing tree growth, that does not damage the tree. o Attached by either wiring directly to the trunk or using wire hooks put through a loop placed around the trunk (easier to remove). o The use of metal is not recommended as it can corrode quickly and will cause damage to trees.  Species-specific details: o Feathertail gliders, sugar gliders and phascogales are the most common fauna found in nest boxes (Beyer and Goldingay 2006; Goldingay et al. 2007). o Brushtail and ringtail possums use nest boxes with an internal volume of 46 900 cm3. o Feathertail gliders: - Generally prefer small rear-entry boxes, large slit-entrance boxes and wedge-shaped bat boxes, all with 25 mm or smaller entrance diameters. - Comparisons between the different designs of nest boxes with small entrances (wedge and non-wedge) have revealed no strong preference. - Avoid medium sized rear-entry boxes with 45 mm diameter entrances. - Require an internal volume of 3 900 cm3. o Sugar gliders: - Use nest boxes with small but high entrances (Ball and Goldingay 2007). o Greater gliders: - Prefer tree canopies so are unlikely to be attracted to nest boxes. o Squirrel gliders: - Rear entry: 150 x 250 x 350 mm.

Page 85 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

- Medium sized rear-entry boxes with 45 mm diameter entrances are also utilised.  General Design Considerations: o An ecologist should be onsite during clearing to ensure that hollows and replacements are removed and reinstated with minimal impact and disturbance. o Nest box use is dependent on seasons (except for feathertail gliders) and presence of competitors (Beyer and Goldingay 2006). Maintenance Requirements:  Maintain furniture within nest box.  Remove pests/competitors from nest box. o At a minimum, should occur after fires and storms. Frequency of maintenance is otherwise unknown.  Utilise monitoring information to determine whether location, orientation or any other factors need to be altered. b) Bats  Some road crossing structures have been retrofitted with various geometric designs of timber bat roosts. These have usually been installed beneath bridge decks or culvert ceilings. o These roosts only provide refuge for bat species that are found in association with water and forage of water.  The central ceiling areas of long sheltered culverts or the soffit of concrete bridge decks between composite girders is the best location to encourage small bat roosting.  To reduce human disturbance (if likely) install blackout screens and 'no-go' zones (Figure 6.15.2).  Case study: Bat roosts have been installed under bridges in New South Wales. However, in some cases, despite careful planning and expert advice they remain unused (Figure 6.15.3).  Bat droppings are a health hazard. Where provisions are made for bat roosting, such roosts must be well clear of areas requiring maintenance access or human movement. Advantages:  Provides a form of mitigation for bats when their natural roosting sites are disturbed. Disadvantages:  Requires expert advice to ensure appropriate location for roosts.  Needs careful consideration about location to ensure health hazards associated with bat droppings are avoided.

Page 86 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.15.2 Blackening screens used to stop any disturbance of areas designated for bat roosting, Brunswick Heads, northern New South Wales.

Figure 6.15.3 Timber bat roost under a bridge at Brunswick Heads, northern New South Wales

6.16 Habitat enhancement: Artificial Shelter Sites

6.16.1 Target species  Reptiles  Invertebrates

6.16.2 Design specifications In selected prioritised locations the use of artificial shelter sites may be used to benefit reptiles.  Cropped/slashed grass in piles can be used as artificial habitat for reptiles.  Placement of non-combustible, durable cover, such as roofing tiles or sheet metal, along selected road corridors may be useful. Informal studies have shown these can provide suitable shelter for reptile species. Imperfect 'rejects' of these ‘cover’ materials can be obtained for minimal cost from manufacturers and demolition sites.

Page 87 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 The placement of artificial shelter sites should not impact on the overall health of the remnant vegetation, thus recommended for existing weedy sites. a) Pavers and roof tiles  Used as a technique to restore lost or degraded habitat.  Dimensions: o Large pavers (300-450 mm wide and 50-100 mm thick) with a variety of crevice sizes (up to 10 mm) may be used to maximise the diversity of retreat sizes for snakes and lizards (Webb and Shine 2000) and also create habitat for both juveniles and adults. o Invertebrates prefer small crevices. o For reptiles, pavers should not be thinner than 5 mm as they become too hot over the summer months. o 5 mm thick pavers may be attractive to various species of invertebrates.  Many invertebrate species prefer habitat created by pavers exposed to sunlight over those located in the shade. Advantages:  Inexpensive.  Long lasting.  Unlikely to be attractive to rock thieves. Disadvantages:  Long term effectiveness remains unknown.

6.17 Considerations which influence effectiveness of fauna structures The effectiveness of fauna mitigation structures varies between locations and is likely to be species- or species-group specific. Nevertheless, there are certain aspects of their design that can strongly influence their effectiveness and should be considered.

6.17.1 Aspects that positively influence rates of fauna structure use  Funnelling of fauna (often with the assistance of fencing) through a narrow habitat corridor to a fauna mitigation structure.  Planted vegetative corridors should mimic the original habitat.  Abundant and high-quality habitat near to entrance of the structures.  Dirt or natural substrate floors.  Large openness ratios (length x width x height of underpass).  Absence or low rate of use by humans.  Presence of furniture, such as logs, rocks and vegetation on or in the structure.  Several structures placed within home-ranges will result in fauna utilising new structures much more quickly. a) Vegetation management in vicinity of structures  Abundant and high-quality habitat near to entrance of the structures.  Careful plant selection (in consultation with experts) to provide habitat opportunities for fauna.  Appropriate maintenance intervention levels will ensure objectives of vegetation planting are preserved.

Page 88 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Retention of the existing vegetation in the median or provision of a careful revegetation scheme in the median may assist in mitigating habitat fragmentation. b) Density of fauna mitigation structures  Dependent upon the target species and the distribution of the habitat types in the area.  In some cases, one or more wide fauna passages will be appropriate, whereas other passage issues may be better resolved with a larger number of smaller-scale measures.  The behaviour of target species can be used as a guiding factor.  Higher density of passages should be provided in natural areas, for example, forests and wetlands, than in densely built-up or intensively-used agricultural areas. o However, in areas where there are many artificial barriers due to transport infrastructure or built- up areas, fauna passages can be essential in maintaining the general permeability of the landscape. In such cases, solutions can be integrated with all remaining open corridors.  The density of passages in relation to the environmental goals has been poorly studied and requires additional research. c) Location of fauna mitigation structures  Decisions regarding the location of fauna mitigation structures need to be made on the basis of sound knowledge regarding fauna movements and the distribution of important habitats.  Where clearly defined animal trails exist locate proposed fauna mitigation structures as close to them as possible.  Topography and landscape structure are often used to identify likely migration and movement routes, for example, continuous forest, valley bottoms and streams.  Planning is crucial. Ensure all fauna passages consider the surrounding landscape. For example, access to the passage must be guaranteed in the future. d) Integration into the surroundings  Fauna passages should be well-connected to the surroundings:  By habitat corridors leading towards passages for small animals.  Barriers that prevent or hinder animals from reaching fauna passages must be removed.  Where other infrastructure elements are located nearby, an integrated approach to defragmentation is required. e) Table drain management  A number of methods can be employed to mitigate the negative impacts table drains may have on fauna passage, including: o Line ditches with concrete to prevent water pooling; o Line ditches with boulders to prevent animals entering; o Spray roadside with biodegradable herbicide; o Slash vegetation; or o Concrete roadsides.  Of the above mitigation procedures, spraying, slashing and concreting roadsides are least feasible due to cost and requirement for ongoing maintenance. In particular, slashing vegetation should be avoided as regrowth is attractive to fauna.

Page 89 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

6.17.2 Aspects that negatively influence the rates of fauna structure use a) Table drain management  Road run-off into roadside ditches can lead to water accumulation and vegetation that may attract fauna away from fauna structures and result in roadkill. b) Vegetation management  Careful plant selection (in consultation with experts) will either provide or reduce habitat opportunities for fauna.  Plant selection to be based on the purpose of the planting (for example, preventing birds foraging adjacent to roads or provision of habitat).  Careful and ongoing maintenance of vegetation is required. Appropriate maintenance intervention levels will ensure objectives of vegetation planting are preserved.  Regrowth of roadside vegetation (for example, after fire burn-offs in the road reserve new grass shoots may attract macropods to graze) can lead to an increase in macropod roadkills at these sites.  Plant selection: o Flowering plants within close proximity to the road pavement should be trimmed prior to flowering to reduce the presence of foraging birds and possible interactions with vehicles. o Sterile grass species can be chosen to avoid the seeds attracting fauna to the roadside.

6.18 Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures

6.18.1 Education  Education is of critical importance and must be available to and encouraged for all on-site staff, construction staff, office staff and the community. o On-site and construction staff: - Ensure staff take due care when removing vegetation and translocating fauna. - All on-site staff need to be trained to know what measures to take when rescuing fauna (Refer to Section 9.1: Case Studies: Tugun Bypass). - Toolbox talks and 'strip maps' can be used by staff to raise awareness of areas containing important/high populations of fauna or fauna mitigation structures. o Community: - Appreciation of the community's local fauna is encouraged. This will ensure revegetation, maintenance and other activities can be undertaken with economic and social benefits. Create a 'proud' community.

6.18.2 Lighting  Purpose: o The impact of artificial lighting created by roads is relatively unknown and only occasionally considered in impact studies. o Artificial lighting (vehicle and street lights) has numerous negative impacts which have only started to be quantified.  Fauna groups affected: o Nocturnal animals. o Diurnal species - sleep patterns disturbed by flashes of light.

Page 90 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Frogs - Become immobilised by headlights and vehicular noise, resulting in roadkill. - Can be affected by temporary and permanent changes to lighting in terms of reproduction, foraging, predator avoidance and social interactions. - May be blinded by artificial light. - Species-specific information: . Grey tree frog's ability to hunt and eat was significantly impacted when light illumination was above that of bright moonlight. . Several frogs of the Hyla genus are more active between 0.00001-0.001lux, a range well below that on roads. Some only conduct particular calls, such as for breeding and mating, between this range. o Birds - Particularly when migrating, may be attracted to bright lights and become trapped within the circle of light (similar to insects and turtles). - Singing and reproductive behaviour of some may be affected. - May attempt, unsuccessfully, to nest on streetlights. o Insects - Attract a variety of insects and, in turn, their predators (for example, quolls), resulting in roadkill. - May affect signal effectiveness for fireflies. o Marine turtles - Attracted to street lighting when emerging from nests leading to roadkill (Ecological Associates 2002). o Macropods - Pademelons are transfixed by car head lights and suffer from temporary blindness, making them easy targets for predators and increasing chance of vehicle collision. - Red-legged pademelons are likely to be attracted to lit areas as they preferentially graze on forest edges. - Tammar wallabies are attracted to lit areas. - Brush-tailed rock-wallabies are particularly sensitive to light. They have been found to become 'unsettled' on moonlit nights when compared to moonless nights. o Bats - Feeding behaviour may be altered, and result in an increased chance of predation and alteration to their community structure. a) Vehicle lights  Head- and tail-lights can be visible up to 90 metres into the forest and further in open areas.  Cause anxiety for fauna and alienate habitat areas.  Cause roadkill related to stunning and disorientation effects. o The mouse opossum (Marmosa mitis) is temporarily blinded by light over 20 lux (car high beam headlights are 20 lux at a ten metre distance) (Wilson and Goosem 2007).  The general pattern of traffic at night mimics the movement times of nocturnal fauna, that is, heavier movement in the early evening and closer to dawn, which may result in increased rates of roadkill.

Page 91 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Mitigation designs:  Light barriers: o Solid barriers at the base of fences may reduce blindness or stunning caused by headlights (Figure 6.18.1b). o Designed to block light from highset head-lights. o Consider in sensitive areas (such as wetlands or other breeding grounds). - Specifically, on sections of roads bisecting creeks, gullies and other areas purpose-built for fauna connectivity under or above the road (such as underpasses, fauna-friendly culverts, land bridges). o Height: - At least 1400 mm, depending on topography (may be able to block light from highset headlights). - Barriers of the greatest feasible height (likely to be 1600 mm) should be used on down slope sections of road where headlights may sweep over a greater distance.  Construction of earth berms may be an alternative where general fauna passage needs to be maintained (Figure 6.18.2).  Smooth bends on roads to decrease light penetration (Figure 6.18.3). However, this may increase the speed environment leading to fauna roadkill.  Provision of facilities encouraging the use of low beam headlights (for example, fluorescent road marking, reflectors set at short intervals).  Lower speed limits encourage the use of low beam headlights.  Create a vegetative barrier of non-palatable species along the roadside (for macropods, refer to Section 7.8 for additional information on palatable species). This requires careful planting and maintenance.

a)

Page 92 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

b) Figure 6.18.1 a) Retention of dense vegetation along the roadside can decrease the effect of vehicle lights on the surrounding environment. b) Vehicle headlights disturbance can also be minimised by attaching solid barriers to the base of existing fencing along the road.

Figure 6.18.2 The use of dense vegetation and earth berms can reduce vehicle light penetration into the surrounding environment.

a) b) Figure 6.18.3 Sketches showing the effect of headlights caused by bends in roads. a) Less optimal sharp bends cause greater light penetration into the surrounding environment. b) The optional smoother bend, with less illumination of the surrounding environment. Keep speed limits to a minimum to maintain effectiveness.

Page 93 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document b) Street lighting  Traditional lighting can potentially affect fauna’s energy budgets through increased stress and changed movement (Figure 6.18.4a). o Attracting fauna and possibly even trapping them in an illuminated area; and/or o Fauna may actively avoid illuminated areas.  Ineffective measure for reducing roadkill.  Reduces habitat quality by illuminating surrounding areas.  Gliders may avoid crossing in areas which are well-lit but more study is required.  Lighting adjacent to nesting beaches for marine turtles requires mitigation, as emerging nestlings and breeding females are attracted to lights. Mitigation:  Reduce intensity of bulbs and pressure of lamps in streetlights.  Use low pressure sodium lamps.  Use fewer streetlights and only where necessary for safety.  Install shields on streetlights to minimise light spill into neighbouring vegetation and to impede birds establishing nests (Figure 6.18.4b).  Reduce glare from lighting by using a flat glass aeroscreen instead of a refractor glass cover in streetlights (Wilson and Goosem 2007).  Use barriers, mounds or dense vegetation to stop light infiltration into surrounding habitat. However, ensure habitat connectivity is maintained (Figure 6.18.4c).  Decrease height of light poles.  Use alternatives to lighting such as pavement with light-emitting diodes or fluorescent paint. o Increasing the reflectivity of signs and road stripping (retro-reflectivity) can increase visibility for drivers.  Use lighting that turns on when a car approaches or is at a low illumination level until required (Wilson and Goosem 2007).  Vegetative Barriers: o Vegetation can be used to decrease light penetration from street lighting (Figure 6.18.5). o In order to perform as a barrier, a vegetative belt must have sufficient height, length and mass. The mass of the vegetation is based upon its maturity and the type of vegetation. o The type of vegetation must be evergreen with dense, leafy growth to limit optical penetrability. o Recommendations for planting: - Individual plants should be spaced to have sufficient room to develop into mature shrubs. - At least two to three rows of dense plantings of tall trees and/or dense shrubs increases effectiveness. - Row spacing should be maintained to ensure they do not grow together.

Page 94 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) b) c) Figure 6.18.4 Effect of traffic light poles on the surrounding environment a) Traditional lighting methods may penetrate surrounding areas and affect normal fauna behaviour. This effect can be minimised by: b) Installing shields on lights; c) Retaining and/or creating barriers along roadsides

Figure 6.18.5 The use of dense vegetation and earthen berms can reduce vehicle light penetration into the surrounding environment.

6.18.3 Noise  Most noise from highways is produced by engines and tyres as they contact the surface, with noise varying by tyre and surface qualities.  Noise from vehicular traffic can be of a level to distort territorial bird song, resulting in difficulties in attracting and keeping females (Reijnen and Foppen 1994).  Increased predation may occur due to the inability of birds to hear predators (Scherzinger 1979).  Breeding birds appear to be heavily affected by traffic noise (Forman et al. 2003).  Lower bird density has been correlated to traffic noise.  Typical noise barrier structures may have negative effects on birds. Mitigation: a) Elevation of the road surface, and cuts and fills.  As most of the noise derives from the road surface a change in the elevation and/or the type of road surface may reduce noise. Cuts and fills can be used to advantage. b) Solid barriers  Noise wall barriers are commonly constructed in urban situations along highways and high traffic volume roads using materials such as timber, concrete and steel panels, concrete block and toughened glass (Figures 6.18.6 to 6.18.8).

Page 95 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 While this effectively reduces noise in lower vegetation layers, it also eliminates permeability for many terrestrial fauna groups, reduces light penetration at low levels and is expensive.  TMR guidelines provide information on planting in conjunction with solid noise walls: o Re-planted vegetation: a minimum of three-quarters the height of the barrier; vegetation should be stratified (i.e. start with groundcover, shrubs, small trees and then larger trees against the barrier) and extend from the barrier at least 1.5 times the height of the barrier (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2004).  Considerations of transparent noise wall barrier (Figure 6.18.8). o Birds have trouble seeing transparent noise walls and this can result in bird strikes. o Constructed from acrylic or glass. o Install glass that is treated with a UV reflective coating. Glass coated in UV- reflective coating is clearly visible to birds and virtually transparent to humans (Ambrose 2008). o Embed mesh in acrylic transparent noise walls. - This treatment stops bird strike and does not disturb the driver’s view. - Lines should be 50 mm apart if oriented horizontally, and 100 mm if oriented vertically. o Horizontal line etchings, five centimetres apart on clear noise wall barriers is the optimal treatment to avoid bird strikes and minimise disturbance to drivers (Figure 6.18.8b). o Other markings on noise walls have also been used (Figure 6.18.7).

Figure 6.18.6 Solid noise wall barrier (Taylor 2008).

Page 96 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 6.18.7 Transparent noise wall with etchings to reduce bird strike along the Tugun Bypass (Taylor 2008).

a) Transparent noise wall design without consideration of potential bird strike.

Page 97 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

b) Transparent noise wall design with horizontal etchings incorporated to minimise bird strike. Figure 6.18.8 Transparent noise wall barriers need to consider the issue of bird strike. c) Vegetative barriers  Vegetation can be used as an alternative noise (and light) abatement measure when substantial reductions in noise levels are not required (Figure 6.18.9).  In order to perform as a barrier, a vegetative belt must have sufficient height, length and mass. The length and height requirements are analogous to those of a conventional freestanding noise wall (Harris 1986).  The mass of the vegetation is based upon its maturity and the type of vegetation.  The type of vegetation must be an evergreen with dense, leafy growth that will limit optical and sound penetrability.  Recommendations for planting: o Individual plants spaced to ensure sufficient room for the development of mature shrubs. o At least two to three rows of dense plantings of tall trees and/or dense shrubs increases effectiveness. o Correct row spacing to be maintained, ensuring rows do not grow together.  Vegetative barriers will not provide the same noise reduction as a free standing noise wall.  For a vegetative barrier to provide a 3dB reduction, it needs to be at least 30 metres wide and 4.6 metres high (depending on the type of planting and maintenance).  Effectiveness is dictated by the planting scheme and the maintenance schedule.  Consider dense vegetation where noise walls would cause a greater level of disturbance and fragmentation than a dense hedge of vegetation.

Page 98 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) Plan view

b) Cross-sectional view Figure 6.18.9 Drawing highlighting the effectiveness of vegetation as a noise barrier. d) Road surface  Smooth surfaces have been developed to reduce noise while retaining safe traction control; in addition some tyres are less noisy than others. Road authorities need to consider road surface design when upgrading or constructing highways.

6.18.4 Design Speed A reduction in road speed may be a cost effective way to reduce fauna roadkill.

6.18.5 Road Safety Barriers Road safety barriers potentially increase road mortality by trapping fauna on the road. Safety barrier design may need to be modified to enable fauna to climb over or under such structures. Temporary structures may be attached to these barriers to assist fauna to pass over these structures. Plastic Road Safety Barriers: To enable fauna to cross under the barrier, a 400 mm x 400 mm arch cut-out at the base is suggested. o Every second barrier requires a cut-out. o Smaller size cut-outs currently prohibit use by large koalas (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2009). Can be modified by placing plastic mesh (parawebbing) or wooden planks on the sides of these barriers. This assists koalas to climb over the barriers and may also prove useful for some small mammal species (although untrialled for the latter fauna group) (Figures 6.18.10 and 6.18.11).

Page 99 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

The current forklift holes within these barriers may provide some level of permeability for small mammals depending on climbing capabilities.

a) Parawebbing

b) Wooden planks attached to thick parawebbing Figure 6.18.10 Modifications that can be placed over barriers to assist fauna to more easily escape road corridors.

Figure 6.18.11 Koala barrier trial at the Australian Wildlife Hospital, Queensland. Some koalas were able to use parawebbing to climb over the barrier (Scott 2008). Concrete Safety Barriers: To enable fauna to cross over concrete barriers wooden poles placed horizontally along barriers may be installed. o Maximum of 500 mm apart to suit koalas’ reach.

Page 100 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Can also be modified by placing plastic mesh (parawebbing) or wooden planks on the side of these barriers. This may assist koalas to climb over the barriers. Currently studies indicate that modifications may still be inadequate to enable safe fauna passage (Figure 6.18.12).

Figure 6.18.12 Koala barrier trials at the Australian Wildlife Hospital in Queensland. This koala was able to use wooden logs to climb over the simulated concrete barrier (Scott 2008).

Page 101 of 101 Vol 2 Chapter 6 June 2010

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices 7. TARGET SPECIES DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 Fish ...... 1 7.1.1 Background ...... 1 7.1.2 Designs and structures ...... 1 7.1.3 Construction ...... 4 7.1.4 Maintenance...... 4 7.1.5 Key references ...... 5

7.2 Amphibians ...... 5 7.2.1 Background ...... 5 7.2.2 Designs and structures ...... 6 7.2.3 Key references ...... 7

7.3 Platypus...... 8 7.3.1 Background ...... 8 7.3.2 Designs and structures ...... 8 7.3.3 Key references ...... 8

7.4 Arboreal species...... 8 7.4.1 Background ...... 8 7.4.2 Designs and structures ...... 8 7.4.3 Key references ...... 9

7.5 Koala...... 11 7.5.1 Background ...... 11 7.5.2 Designs and structures ...... 12 7.5.3 Vegetation clearing ...... 13 7.5.4 Key references ...... 13

7.6 Birds...... 15 7.6.1 Background ...... 15 7.6.2 Designs and structures ...... 16 7.6.3 Key references ...... 16

7.7 Bats...... 17 7.7.1 Background ...... 17 7.7.2 Designs and structures ...... 17 7.7.3 Key references ...... 18

7.8 Macropods ...... 18 7.8.1 Background ...... 18 7.8.2 Designs and structures ...... 18

Page i of ii Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document 7.8.3 Key references ...... 19

7.9 Small Mammals...... 19 7.9.1 Background ...... 19 7.9.2 Designs and structures...... 20 7.9.3 Key references ...... 20

7.10 Reptiles...... 20 7.10.1 Background ...... 20 7.10.2 Designs and structures...... 21 7.10.3 Key references ...... 21

7.11 Invertebrates ...... 22 7.11.1 Background ...... 22 7.11.2 Designs and structures...... 22 7.11.3 Key References...... 22

Page ii of ii Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

7 TARGET SPECIES DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS General principles:  Any species native to the project’s region can be considered a target species for fauna connectivity structures.  Non-native species should not be considered target species of fauna connectivity structures.  Due to the cost of building fauna connectivity structures priority should be given to locally or regionally important species threatened by road infrastructure.  Identifying target species is an important step in the: o Planning process where the location and design of fauna connectivity structures is, to a large extent, determined by the location and movement of target species. o Process of determining appropriate monitoring procedures to evaluate a structure’s success.  The design of fauna connectivity structures should consider a variety of species, not just a single target species. o For example, a land bridge should form a habitat connection for populations of invertebrates (for example, beetles), birds or smaller vertebrates (for example, lizards) rather than considering the movement requirements of only one species or group of species (for example, macropods). o Table 6.0.2 (Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads) provides additional information on fauna structures suitable for a variety of target species. 7.1 Fish 7.1.1 Background  Movement throughout waterways is critical to the survival of native fish.  Fish movement allows access to food and shelter, to avoid predators, to migrate for spawning and to search for mates to reproduce.  Fish passage structures should be considered whenever infrastructure crosses fish habitats such as rivers, streams, wetlands and lakes. 7.1.2 Designs and structures  Consider local research and documentation when pursuing detailed designs.  Design to be undertaken in conjunction with an appropriate expert or the relevant government agency.  Fish passage needs to be provided in ephemeral streams, as well as for the full range of water levels in non-ephemeral waterbodies.  Fish passage must be considered when infrastructure crosses fish habitats and movement corridors and has the potential to negatively impact on fish movement.  Fish passage structures must be considered when roads reduce connectivity between fish habitat areas.  Important aspects to consider for aquatic fauna: o water velocity; o water turbulence; o light penetration; o length, width, depth and slope of crossing;  maintenance of crossing (that is, to avoid waterways becoming overgrown or full of debris); o existence of any drop-offs either side of the crossing; and o noise, light and pollution during construction.  Infrastructure must not change a fish’s existing ability to move both upstream and downstream.

Page 1 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document  The type of stream crossing will depend on the: o crossing's purpose and anticipated frequency of use; o site characteristics (for example, bank height, bed stability, flow regime, depth); o upstream and/or downstream environmental values; o outcome of public consultation; and o budget.  As a general rule-of-thumb preferred structures are as follows (in descending order of preference): o Bridges; o Arch culverts and open-bottom box culverts; o Stream simulated design with buried base box culverts; o Pipe culverts.  Design flow magnitudes for fish passage are much less than commonly used in drainage design flows for trafficability, inundation and/or erosion protection (Kapitzke 2009). Site selection for structures  Refer to Figure 7.1.1.  Consider the implications of the project for aquatic species at the catchment scale.  Minimise the number of times roads cross waterways.  Existing road crossings should be used where possible (ie, do not construct new or additional waterway crossings unless absolutely necessary). Existing structures should be assessed for fish passage requirements to determine whether work is required to remove barriers to fish movement.  If a new road needs to cross a waterway (or additional waterway crossings are required) and there is a choice of sites for the crossing, the following should be considered: o Avoid wetland and floodplains; o Avoid environmentally sensitive areas such as fish habitat areas, high conservation value wetlands, known spawning grounds, nursery areas and riffles and rapids; o Avoid areas where contaminated sediments could mobilise; o Avoid unique, endangered or highly valued areas; o Avoid sharp bends; o Avoid sections of unstable channel; o Avoid major riffle systems; o Avoid meandering waterways; o Additional care will be needed if the crossing is upstream of domestic and town water supplies, aquaculture and other industrial off-takes, sensitive ecosystems and/or recreational areas are present; o Avoid areas of aesthetic value.

Page 2 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a)

a)

b)

c)

Figure 7.1.1 Site selection for road crossings over waterways (adapted from Fairfull and Witheridge 2002). a) Existing habitat. b) Less desirable site selection as bridge placement damages sensitive habitat areas. c) Optimal site selection for road crossing over waterways as sensitive environments are avoided.

Page 3 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document Site Assessment  Determine: o The presence/absence of local native fish species (local authorities, appropriate expert or locally relevant primary data sources may be of assistance). o Waterway and flow characteristics. o The types of fish activity that occur in the place of interest determine the most effective crossing design. - For example, migration for breeding requires upstream and downstream movement. o The movement capabilities of the local fish. This determines the maximum water flow rate. - Most Australian native fish are very poor swimmers. The best method of maintaining fish passage is to maintain the natural water velocity through the road crossing. - Structures may be incorporated to provide rest areas. Structure design See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.8: Underpass: Bridge. 7.1.3 Construction  Should occur at times of low flow and outside of resident fish migrations (particularly those associated with breeding activities).  Remove all aspects of old waterway crossings located within the waterway channel.  Take all reasonable and practical measures to prevent or minimise environmental disturbance during construction, including the minimisation of fish passage restrictions. o Minimise disturbance to the outer bank of stream bends during works and while gaining access to the waterway.  Remove all temporary in-stream sediment controls and sidetracks as soon as possible.  Where practical, construct the crossing in stages to allow flow diversion.  Construct side access tracks from clean fill (free of fines) using pipe or box culvert cells to carry flows or alternatively employ the use of a temporary bridge structure.  Return all disturbed areas to their original condition.  Remove all redundant structures.  Maintain water quality during and after construction. 7.1.4 Maintenance  Time in stream maintenance activities to minimise overall environmental disturbance, by taking into consideration fish migration periods and seasonal high flows.  Maintain stream crossings regularly.  Avoid disturbance to marine plants.  Carry out regular inspections and maintenance on crossings, after periods of high flow, prior to when fish start to migrate. o Clear debris from the crossing's surface, entrance and exit. o Remove excess silt from the entrance and exit of the culvert/s if more than a third of the entrance is blocked. o Ensure erosion is not being exacerbated.

Page 4 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices  Maintenance activities may both hinder and improve fish passage. In general, the removal of debris improves fish passage. However, in some cases, the removal of sediment can adversely affect the development of desirable fish habitat. 7.1.5 Key references Cotterell, E. (1998) Fish Passage in Streams: Fisheries Guidelines for Design of Stream Crossings: Fish Habitat Guideline FHG001. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Queensland. Fairfull, S. and Witheridge, G. (2002) Why do Fish Need to Cross the Road: Fish Passage Requirements for Waterway Crossings. NSW Fisheries, Cronulla. Hyde, V.B. (2007) Civil Engineering for Passage of Fish and Fauna. Australian Journal of Water Resources. 11(2): 193-206. Kapitzke, R. (2009) Culvert Fishway Planning and Design Guidelines. Prepared for Department of Transport and Main Roads, Townsville, Queensland. Witheridge, G. (2002) Fish Passageway Requirements for Waterway Crossings- Engineering Guidelines. Catchment and Creeks Pty Ltd, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2002) Road Drainage Manual. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland. 7.2 Amphibians 7.2.1 Background  Road mortality has been cited as a potentially important factor in the worldwide decline of amphibians. o This can be attributed to amphibian movement patterns related to foraging and breeding activities. Such movements increase the likelihood of amphibians crossing roads and result in mortality. o Amphibians are also attracted to the roads during rain, again leading to mortality.  Adult amphibians often demonstrate strong fidelity for breeding sites resulting in relatively discrete populations (Jackson 1996).  The viability of small ponds is likely to be dependent on gene exchange and the supplementation of populations via dispersal.  Given their reliance on small, temporary ponds, many amphibian populations may be vulnerable to local extinction events during periods of unusually dry weather. Over time, these populations are probably maintained via a process of supplementation and recolonisation, thus connectivity is vital for maintaining regional or metapopulations.  The presence of thriving amphibian populations is commonly used as an indication of a healthy environment.  Research indicates frogs have a strong preference not to move across concrete.  Amphibians are sensitive to environmental pollutants due to their: o permeable skin and eggs; o their position in the foodweb as mid-level consumers; o their potential for prolonged exposure to contaminants in both aquatic and terrestrial habitats; and o early development in aquatic environments, where they are exposed to chemical contaminants during critical developmental periods.  Road run-off is likely to affect amphibian populations, therefore, mitigation of such impacts must be considered throughout the entire road project. General measures to reduce impact on amphibian populations:  Locate roads away from key habitats, such as wetlands, streams and pond sites.

Page 5 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document  Maintain buffers of undisturbed native vegetation around and adjacent to key habitats to discourage human access to these areas.  Provide suitable landscape linkages, such as riparian management areas, parks and greenways, to allow movement between important seasonal habitats.  Prefer protective riparian vegetation extending over the waterway and adjacent land passage sections, which should be damp with shallow ponds and puddles.  Maintain existing hydrological flow regimes and water quality during post-construction.  Minimise roadkill of amphibians migrating between seasonal habitats by locating roads away from these areas. Consider road-crossing structures where this is unavoidable (see Section 6).  Control the spread of non-native animals and plants; introduced amphibians can compete with and prey on native amphibians; weedy exotic plants can overtake native vegetation and choke wetlands.  Encourage residents and site workers to take an interest in protecting these species by providing interpretive materials such as signs and brochures.  Consider designs that accommodate all life cycle stages.  Ensure effective management of road drainage and runoff to minimise water pooling. Breeding-site specific measures:  Preserve all wetlands, ponds, pools and streams.  Protect shallow water areas and their vegetation from trampling and other disturbance.  Avoid altering natural patterns of flooding and drying of wetlands.  Maintain sufficient terrestrial habitat or access to terrestrial habitat for amphibians to complete all life history phases.  Avoid known breeding ponds for frogs when designing and constructing access tracks. Environmental contamination prevention specific measures:  Reduce the use of chemical compounds in the road corridor. o Restrict the use of herbicides and growth retardants to control vegetation, as well as fire retardants and insecticides over and adjacent to waterbodies. o Adopt integrated pest control methods that decrease the reliance on chemical herbicides and insecticides to reduce contamination of aquatic habitats. - For example, increase use of native plants, pest-resistant varieties of exotics and design features that minimise and confine intensively managed areas.  Contain contaminants through appropriate road run-off management.  Trap and filter contaminants through vegetative buffers and other means before they enter water bodies.  Restrict the use of chemicals near any frog ponds, streams, ditches, underpasses. This is essential to safeguard breeding habitats.  Undertake pH monitoring and correction (if required) during tunnel excavation, groundwater extraction and infiltration to maintain suitable habitat conditions. 7.2.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing;  Section 6.14: Habitat enhancement: Frog Ponds;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting.

Page 6 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices Section 9.1: Case Studies: Tugun Bypass also provides an example of frog habitat and movement mitigation measures. 7.2.3 Key references Australian Museum Business Services. (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring: Stage 1 –Final report – Bulahdelah to Coolongolook. Report for the Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Barnes, D. (2007) Fauna Use of Underpasses. Connell Wagner, Brisbane, Queensland. Chambers, J. and Ingram, G. (2005) Can A Fence Stop a Frog? Results of Frog Exclusion Fencing Trials Report. Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd Prepared for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland. Cogger, H. (2000) Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. (6th edition). New Holland Publishers, Sydney. Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010) A-Z of plants and animals Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife- ecosystems/wildlife/threatened_plants_and_animals/endangered/mahogany_glider.html/. Accessed 27 January 2010. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009). Litoria lorica. Species Profile and Threats Database. Available: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 3 September 2009. Ecosure (2005) Bird Management Plan: Tugun Bypass. Report for Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Queensland. Fahrig, L. Pedlar, J.H., Pope, S.E., Taylor, P.D. and Wegner, J.F. (1995) Effect of Road Traffic on Amphibian Density. Biological Conservation. 73: 177-182. Frogs Australia Network (2005) Litoria brevipalmata. Australian Frogs Database. Available: http://frogsaustralia.net.au/frogs/display.cfm?frog_id=135. Accessed 3 September 2009. Gibbs, J.B. (1998) Amphibian Movements in Response to Forest Edges, Roads and Streambeds in Southern New England. Journal of Wildlife Management. 62: 584-589. Goosem, M., Harriss, C., Chester, G. and Tucker, N. (2004) Kuranda Range: Applying Research to Planning and Design Review. Rainforest CRC. Prepared for Department of Main Roads, Queensland. Hay, B. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (Presentation), Queensland. Ingram, G. and Caneris, A. (2005) Proposed Tugun Bypass: Review of Wallum Sedgefrog and Green- thighed Frog Final Report. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Queensland. Iuell, B., Bekker, G.J., Cuperus, R., Dufek, J., Fry, G., Hicks, C., Hlavac, V., Keller, V.B., Rosell, C., Sangwine, T., Torslov, N., Wandall, B. le Maire (eds.) (2003) Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions. European Co-operation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research, Brussels. Jackson, S.D. (1996) Underpass Systems for Amphibians. In: Evink, G.L., Garrett, P., Zeigler, D. and Berry, J. (eds.) Trends in Addressing Transportation Related Wildlife Mortality. Proceedings of the Transportation Related Wildlife Mortality Seminar. State of Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, USA, P4. Marsh, D., Milam, G., Gorham, N. and Beckman, N. (2005) Forest Roads as Partial Barriers to Terrestrial Salamander Movement. Conservation Biology. 19(6): 204-208. PacificLink Alliance (2007) Position Paper: Frog Fence – Selection Options DR-151-RD for the Tugun Bypass Project. Report for Queensland Department of Main Roads, Queensland. PacificLink Alliance (2006) Tugun Bypass Drawings, Queensland. Trombulak, S. and Frissell, C. (2000) Review of Ecological Effects of Roads on Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities. Conservation Biology. 14(1): 18-30. Wargo, R. and Weisman, R. (2006) A Comparison of Single-cell and Multicell Culverts for Stream Crossings. Journal of American Water Resources Association. 42(4): 989-995.

Page 7 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document Wilson, R. and Goosem, M. (2007) Vehicle Headlight and Streetlight Disturbance to Wildlife – Kuranda Range Upgrade Project. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland. 7.3 Platypus 7.3.1 Background  Require permanent fresh water, an intact benthic invertebrate food chain and consolidated banks in which to build burrows.  Changes in their habitat as a result of land use, impoundment, channelisation, riparian zone clearing, erosion, silting pollution and eutrophication can compromise platypus populations.  In the absence of site specific trapping or observational data, a guide to likely stream utilisation by platypus can be assessed by site survey. Should take into account: o Land use; o Riparian zone vegetation; o Stream and bank parameters; o Presence of burrows; and o Local knowledge. 7.3.2 Designs and structures  See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert. 7.3.3 Key references Carrick, F.N. and Grimley, A.J. (1994) Platypus in Near Urban Waterways of Brisbane City. Prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland. Grant, T.R. (1991) The Biology and Management of the Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) in NSW. Species Management Report No. 5. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, New South Wales. Grimley, A., McKee, J. (1998) Platypus Habitat at Canungra Creek Bridge Construction Sites. Currumbin Sanctuary Research, Currumbin, New South Wales. Magnus, Z., Kriwoken, L., Mooney, N. and Jones, M. (2004) Reducing the Incidence of Wildlife Roadkill: Improving the Visitor Experience in Tasmania. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, Tasmania. 7.4 Arboreal species  An arboreal species is an organism that lives in trees for more than half of its time during at least one stage of its lifecycle.  A semi-arboreal species is an organism which is routinely found in trees but spends less than half of its time there. 7.4.1 Background  Without canopy connectivity, many arboreal species face extinction due to elevated competition for limited resources, reduced home ranges, and/or genetic inbreeding (due to barrier effects).  This impact is most severe for arboreal species which are strictly arboreal, such as lemuroid ringtail possum, and those species which rarely descend, such as Herbert River ringtail possum. o Maintaining connectivity across road infrastructure for arboreal species is, therefore, vital to mitigate the fatal impact of roads.  Those arboreal species that do descend, for example common brushtail possums, are the second most common roadkill in South-east Queensland (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2002). 7.4.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:

Page 8 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.4: Overpass: Canopy Bridge;  Section 6.5: Overpass: Poles;  Section 6.9: Non-structural mitigation: Canopy Connectivity;  Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing;  Section 6.15: Habitat enhancement: Nest Boxes;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting;  Section 6.18.3: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Noise. Section 9.2: Case Studies: Compton Road – Brisbane City Council also provides an example of a project implementing arboreal species mitigation measures. 7.4.3 Key references Australian Museum Business Service (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring, Stage 1 - Final Report - Brunswick Heads. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Australian Geographic (2000) Bridge to Life. Australian Geographic. 59(10). Ball, T.M. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007) Can Wooden Poles be Used to Reconnect Habitat for a Gliding Marsupial? Unpublished. Bank, F.G., Irwin, C.L., Evink, G.L., Gray, M.E., Hagood, S., Kinar, J.R., Levy, A., Paulson, D., Ruediger, B., Sauvajot, R.M., Scott, D.J. and White, P. (2002) Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European Highways. United Sates Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs Office of Policy, Washington, USA. Bax, D. (2006) Karuah Bypass: Fauna Crossing Report. Prepared for the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales. Beyer, G.L. and Goldingay, R.L. (2006) The Value of Nest Boxes in the Research and Management of Australian Hollow-using Arboreal Marsupials. Wildlife Research. 33:161-174. Barnes, D. (2007) Fauna Use of Underpasses. Connell Wagner, Brisbane, Queensland. Claridge, A. W. and D. B. Lindenmayer (1998) Consumption of Hypogeous Fungi by the Mountain Brushtail Possum (T. caninus) in Eastern Australia. Mycological Research. 102: 269–272. Department of Environment and Climate Change. (2007) Threatened and Pest Animals of Greater Southern Sydney: Fauna of Conservation Concern and Priority Pest Species Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/threatenedspecies/07471tpagssvol2pt10mammals2.pdf . Accessed 3 September 2009. Department of Environment and Climate Change. (2002) Native Animal Fact Sheets Bandicoots. Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/plantsanimals/bandicoots.htm. Accessed 15 April 2010. Environmental Protection Agency. (2007) A-Z of Plants and Animals. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/index.html. Accessed 27 January 2010. Environmental Protection Agency. (1998) Tropical Topics: An interpretive newsletter for the tourism industry. Newsletter No. 46. April 1998. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p00820bo.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010. Eyre, T. (2004) Distribution and Conservation Status of the Possums and Gliders in Southern Queensland. In Goldingay, R. and Jackson, S. The Biology of Australian Possums and Gliders. Pp 1-25, Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Finegan, A. (2004) Fauna Underpasses Along the Pacific Highway between Gosford and Coolongolook Presentation. Goosem, M. (2005) Wildlife Surveillance Assessment Compton Road Upgrade 2005 - Review of Contemporary Options for Monitoring. Unpublished report to the Brisbane City Council, Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland.

Page 9 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document Goosem, M., Izumi, Y. and Turton, S. (2001) Efforts to Restore Habitat Connectivity for an Upland Tropical Rainforest Fauna: A Trial of Underpasses Below Roads. Ecological Management and Restoration. 2(3):196-202. Goosem, M., Weston, N. and Bushnell, S. (2005) Effectiveness of Rope Bridge Arboreal Overpasses and Faunal Underpasses in Providing Connectivity for Rainforest Fauna. Wildlife Impacts on Conservation Solutions. ICOET Proceedings, Chapter 8 Pp 304-315. Harris, R A. (1986) Vegetative Barriers: An Alternative Highway Noise Abatement Measure. Noise Control Engineering Journal. 27:4-8. Hayes, I. (2006) Effectiveness of Fauna Road-kill Mitigation Structures in North-eastern New South Wales. School of Environmental Science and Management, Southern Cross University, Queensland. Holland, G., Bennett, A. and van der Ree, R. (2007) Time-budget and Feeding Behavior of the Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) in Remnant Linear Habitat. Wildlife Research. 34:288-295. Hollow Log Homes (2005) Hollow Log Homes. Available: http://www.hollowloghomes.com.au/HLHEntry2.htm. Accessed 13 August 2007. Magnus, Z., Kriwoken, L., Mooney, N. and Jones, M. (2004) Reducing the Incidence of Wildlife Roadkill: Improving the Visitor Experience in Tasmania. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, Tasmania. National Parks and Wildlife Services. (1999) Threatened Species Information: Brush-tailed Phascogale. New South Wales. PacificLink Alliance (2006) PP – 036 – FFMP Flora and Fauna Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland. Priday, S., O'Sullivan, T., Ryan, B. and Goldingay, R. Dr. (2001) An Investigation of the Use of Road Overpass Structures by Arboreal Marsupials. Australian Museum Business Services, New South Wales. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2009) Koalas and Their Ability to Traverse Road Traffic Safety Barriers. Metropolitan region, Brisbane, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2002) Fauna Sensitive Road Design Volume 1: Past and Existing Practices. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 7 – Cross Section. Brisbane, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (1998) Roads in the Wet Tropics: Planning, Design, Construction, Maintenance and Operation - Best Practice Manual. Brisbane, Queensland. Smith, G. C., Mathieson, M. and L. Hogan. (2007) Home Range and Habitat Use of a Low-density Population of Greater Gliders Petauroides volans (Pseudocheiridae: Marsupialia), in a Hollow Limiting Environment. Wildlife Research. 34:472-483. Strahan, R. (ed.) (1995) The Australian Museum Complete Book of Australian Mammals (2nd ed.) Reed New Holland, Sydney. New South Wales. van der Ree, R. (2006) Road Upgrade in Victoria: A Filter to the Movement of the Endangered Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis): Results of a Pilot Study. Ecological Management and Restoration. 7(3): 226-228 van der Ree, R. (2002) The Population Ecology of the Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) Within a Network of Remnant Linear Habitats. Wildlife Research. 29:329-340. van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D. T., Holland, K., Gulle, N. and Budden, M. (2007) Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure. Prepared for the Department of Environment and Water Resources, Symonston. Viggers, K.L. and Lindenmayer, D.B. (2000) A Population Study of the Mountain Brushtail Possum, in the Central Highlands of Victoria. Australian Journal of Zoology. 48: 201-216. Weston, N. (2003) The Provision of Canopy Bridges to Reduce the Effects of Linear Barriers on Arboreal Mammals in the Wet Tropics of Northeastern Queensland. Master Thesis, School of Tropical

Page 10 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices Environment Studies and Geography and the Centre for Tropical Urban and Regional Planning, James Cook University, Queensland. Weston, N. (2002) Using Rainforest Research: Why Did the Ringtail Cross the Road? Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management, Cairns, Queensland. Weston, N. (2001) Bridging the Rainforest Gap. Wildlife Australia. Summer: 17–19 Available: http://www.rainforest-crc.jcu.edu.au/publications /wildlife_australia_1.pdf. Accessed 13 January 2009. Wilson, R. and Goosem, M. (2007) Vehicle Headlight and Streetlight Disturbance to Wildlife – Kuranda Range Upgrade Project. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland. Wilson, R. (1999) Possums in the Spotlight. Nature Australia. Autumn: 34-41. Winter, J.W., Dillewaard, H.A., Williams, S.E. and Bolitho, E.E. (2004) Possums and Gliders of North Queensland: Distribution and Conservation Status. In Goldingay, R.L. and Jackson, S.M. (eds.) The Biology of Australian Possums and Gliding Possums. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Pp 26- 50. World Road Association (PIARC.) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. World Road Association, La Défense cedex, Paris. Wormington, K. (2006) Management Options for Possums and Gliders Living Close to Highways. Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland. 7.5 Koala 7.5.1 Background  Queensland subspecies: Phascolarctos cinereus adustus  Birthing season: o August to May with peak between November and January.  Home range: o Approximately 10-12 hectares for males and five to six hectares for females in South-east Queensland. o Coastal populations generally have smaller home ranges than inland populations. Home ranges vary between one koala every three hectares in coastal habitats to one koala every 200 hectares in semi-arid habitat. o Males and females can share parts of home ranges, but males are less tolerant. o Although home ranges may overlap, koalas remain solitary. o Daily movement: usual movements are within a few hundred metres. o Move to a different tree at least once every 24 hours. o Averse to changing paths and will try to use same path even when blocked.  Dispersal: o Koalas have been known to disperse over 10 kilometres.  Preferred Vegetation: o The most appropriate vegetation may be difficult as tree preference changes with season, sex and age. o Trees of varying ages, species and sizes (Smith 2004). o Avoid sites with large numbers of stumps and low vegetation. o Trees with diameter at breast height (DBH) of 310 mm (greater than 200 mm and no more than 500 mm). o Significant koala food trees are Angophora; Corymbia; Eucalyptus; Lophostemon and Melaleuca (Environmental Protection Agency 2006).

Page 11 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document o Favoured food tree species include tallowwood (Eucalyptus microcorys), grey gum (E. propinqua), Queensland blue gum (E. tereticornis), red mahogany (E. resinifera) and Queensland white stringybark (E. tindaliae). o E. robusta is particularly favoured by female koalas (Matthews et al. 2007). o For understorey species, koalas prefer casuarina, banksia, melaleuca and acacia. o Koalas utilise non-eucalypt species for shelter and as secondary food sources (McAlpine et al. 2006b). o In a study over 35 months, it was found that no one tree was utilised by more than three koalas (Matthews et al. 2007). o Suitable vegetation may not be inhabited if adjacent to human land use. o Mortality o Roads have been identified as a leading cause of koala mortality. o Collisions with vehicles mainly occur during breeding and dispersal seasons. o Highest number of male deaths occurs from July to October, peaking in October (greater than 100 reported casualties in October). o Highest number of female deaths occurs during July and October (greater than 60 reported casualties).  Population density: o Dependent on habitat-type and quality of habitat. o 0.005 to 2.5 koalas/hectare. o 0.2 – 0.5 to more than two koalas/hectare in forested habitat. o Approximately one koala/200 hectare. o Density in urban areas is as high as 0.25 koala/hectare whilst density in bushland areas and remnants is 1.26 koala/hectare.  Koala populations require at least 5000 individuals to maintain sustainable genetic diversity. The existing koala population in the Koala Coast consists of a total of 4611 individuals, which comprises multiple isolated subpopulations. The small size of the subpopulations increases the probability of inbreeding and decreases the populations’ viability. Although inbreeding is an issue, most koala subpopulations become extinct from direct mortality, due to lack of suitable habitat and collisions with vehicles, prior to loss of genetic diversity becoming an issue.  Although still uncertain, it is widely considered that one koala per generation must disperse across a road barrier to maintain genetic diversity. 7.5.2 Designs and structures  Fauna structures to take into account koala’s repetitive pathway behaviour. Conduct surveys examining koala routes, paths and home-ranges prior to installation. See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.3: Overpass: Cut and Cover Tunnel;  Section 6.5: Overpass: Poles;  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing;  Section 6.18.5: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Road Safety Barriers.

Page 12 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices 7.5.3 Vegetation clearing Currently there are strict legislative requirements in regard to the clearing of vegetation within koala habitat areas. The following outlines some of the principles associated with these.  Sequential clearing principles should be employed.  Sequential clearing conditions refer to all of the following: o Vegetation clearing carried out in a way that ensures koalas in the area being cleared (the clearing site) have sufficient time to move out of the clearing site without human intervention. o Vegetation clearing carried out in a way that ensures appropriate habitat links are maintained within the clearing site and between the site and its adjacent areas to allow koalas to move away; o Trees with koalas present are not to be cleared, as well as trees that overlap with such trees.  Fauna spotter/catcher principles employed in koala habitat areas: o Must be present during clearing of koala habitat areas (including koala habitat trees – Angophora, Corymbia, Eucalyptus, Lophostemon and Melaleuca) that have a trunk with a diameter of more than 100 mm at 1.3 metres above the ground. o If there is more than one machine operating, there may be the requirement for more than one fauna spotter/catcher. o Must be in close proximity to the vegetation being cleared. o Their role is to spot fauna in vegetation, mark any trees appropriately and ensure that fauna are not injured during any clearing. They are also required to relay information to the machine operator/s. o Koalas are not to be physically removed from a tree to another location. o Any tree (or patch of vegetation) that has been identified as a risk to the animal if cleared, must not be felled, damaged or interfered with until the animal has moved from the site of its own accord. o Should an animal (not limited to koalas) be found sick or injured, contact must be made with a suitable treatment facility or QPWS hotline regarding the most appropriate course of action. o Must be suitably qualified for the task and also have the appropriate permits/licences in place from the State Government. 7.5.4 Key references Australian Museum Business Services (1997) Fauna Usage of Three Underpasses Beneath the F3 Freeway Between Sydney and Newcastle. Prepared for the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney. Bank, F.G., Irwin, C.L., Evink, G.L., Gray, M.E., Hagood, S., Kinar, J.R., Levy, A., Paulson, D., Ruediger, B., Sauvajot, R.M., Scott, D.J. and White, P. (2002) Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European Highways. United Sates Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs Office of Policy, Washington, USA. Barnes, D. (2007) Fauna Use of Underpasses. Connell Wagner, Brisbane, Queensland. Caneris, A. (2007) Koala Movement (presentation). Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/0E353C6F-6005-4905-B990- 3261494D7EDC/0/Adrian_Caneris.pdf. Accessed 26 November 2007. Caneris, A.H. and Jones, P.M. (2004) Action Plan to reduce Koala Hits from Vehicles in Redland Shire. Redland Shire Council, Queensland. Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture. (2003) Ecological Corridors and Edge Effects Project: Case Study–Greenbank-Karawatha Corridor. Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture, Brisbane, Queensland.

Page 13 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document Environmental Protection Agency (2004) State Planning Policy1/97 Conservation of Koalas in the Koala Coast: Five Year Review Report. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p01520aa.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010. Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation Plan 2006 and Management Program 2006 – 2016. Available: Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation Plan 2006 and Management Program 2006 – 2016. http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p01950aa.pdf Accessed 27 January 2010. Finegan, A. (2004) Fauna Underpasses Along the Pacific Highway between Gosford and Coolongolook presentation. Kavanagh, R.P., Stanton, M. A. and Brassil, T.E. (2007) Koalas Continue to Occupy Their Previous Home- ranges After Selective Logging in Callitris–Eucalyptus Forest. Wildlife Research. 34: 94–107. Magnus, Z., Kriwoken, L., Mooney, N. and Jones, M. (2004) Reducing the Incidence of Wildlife Roadkill: Improving the Visitor Experience in Tasmania. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, Tasmania. Matthews, A., Lunney, D., Gresser, S. and Maitz, W. (2007) Tree Use by Koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) After Fire in Remnant Coastal Forest. Wildlife Research. 34(2): 84-93. McAlpine, C., Bowen, M., Callaghan, J., Lunney, D., Rhodes, J., Mitchell, D., Pullar, D. and Possingham, H. (2006a) Testing Alternative Models for the Conservation of Koalas in Fragmented Rural–urban Landscapes. Austral Ecology. 31: 529-544. McAlpine, C., Rhodes, J., Callaghan, J., Bowen, M., Lunney, D., Mitchell, D., Pullar, D. and Possingham, H. (2006b) The Importance of Forest Area and Configuration Relative to Local Habitat Factors for Conserving Forest Mammals: A Case Study of Koalas in Queensland, Australia. Biological Conservation. 132: 153-165. McAlpine C., Rhodes, J., Peterson, A., Possingham, H., Callaghan, J., Curran, T., Mitchell, D. and Lunney, D. (2007) Planning Guidelines for Koala Conservation and Recovery: Guidelines for Best Practice Available: http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/docs/news/Koala_Planning_Guidelines_UQ_AKF.pdf. Accessed 4 September 2009. Pieters, C. (1993) An Investigation into the Efficacy of a Koala/Wildlife Funnel-Tunnel at Gaven, Queensland. Urban Wildlife Research Centre. Queensland. Port Stephens Council and Australian Koala Foundation. (2002) Port Stephens Council Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management – June 2002. Australia. Queensland Department of Main Roads. (2005) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 7 – Cross Section. Brisbane, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads. (2009) Koalas and Their Ability to Traverse Road Traffic Safety Barriers. Metropolitan Region, Brisbane, Queensland. Redland Shire Council. (2007a) Draft Redlands Koala Policy and Strategy 2007. Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/EB2229C4-506D-4660-8398- 9FA14AC3573F/0/Koalapolicy2.pdf. Accessed 26 November 2007. Redland Shire Council. (2007b) Koala Futures Discussion Paper: Koala Summit. Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/F2DBD313-7FF6-481B-BBBC- F329CA69F656/0/KoalaFutures_Discussion_Paper.pdf. Accessed 26 November 2007. Rhodes, J.R. (2005) The Ecology, Management and Monitoring of Wildlife Populations in Fragmented Landscapes: A Koala Case Study. Submitted for PhD at the University of Queensland. Rhodes, J., Wiegand, T., McAlpine, C., Callaghan, J., Lunney, D., Bowen, M. and Possingham, H. (2006) Modelling Species' Distributions to Improve Conservation in Semiurban Landscapes: Koala Case Study. Conservation Biology. 20(2) 449-459. Roads and Traffic Authority (2006) Karuah Bypass: Environmental Impact Audit Report, Available: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/downloads/pacific/karuah_bypass_environmental _impact_audit_report_september_2006.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2007.

Page 14 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices Scott, N. (2007) Can Koalas and a Booming Road Network Co-exist? (Presentation) Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/9A6DCCEA-7ACE-4565-8CD4- C3D931021FFD/0/Norman_Scott.pdf. Accessed 27 November 2007. Smith, A. (2004) Koala Conservation and Habitat Requirements in a Time Production Forest in North-east New South Wales. In: Lunney, D. Conservation of Australia's Forest Fauna. (2nd Ed.) Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman. Pp 591-611. Weston, N. (2003) The Provision of Canopy Bridges to Reduce the Effects of Linear Barriers on Arboreal Mammals in the Wet Tropics of Northeastern Queensland. Master Thesis, School of Tropical Environment Studies and Geography and the Centre for Tropical Urban and Regional Planning, James Cook University, Queensland. World Road Association (PIARC.) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. World Road Association, La Défense cedex, Paris. Yanes, M., Velasco, J.M. and Suárez, F. (1995) Permeability of Roads and Railways to Vertebrates: The Importance of Culverts. Biological Conservation. 71: 217-222. 7.6 Birds 7.6.1 Background  Highways cause impacts to birds in four ways: direct mortality, indirect mortality, habitat fragmentation and disturbance (noise and lights).  Research indicates that some bird species experience higher stress levels in environments with roads than those without (Wasser et al. 1997).  To determine whether to create or eliminate bird habitat is dependent upon a number of factors, including the surrounding environment, the road environment and the degree of vulnerability (habitat loss and/or road kill) of the target bird species. o These issues must be determined prior to designing mitigation measures.  Clearing of roadkill will reduce the likelihood of scavenger birds being hit by vehicles.  Increasing traffic volumes as a result of growing local and tourist populations have caused an increase in cassowary road mortality.  Road mortality is a significant threat to cassowaries.  Mitigation solutions for bird species based on specific impact issues are shown in Table 7.6.1. Table 7.6.1 Mitigation solutions for bird species based on the specific impact issues.

Impact Problem Suggested solutions

Flightless birds Flightless birds incur greater  Open and vegetated passage mortality risk due to conflicts with provided under bridge structures. vehicles on roads.  Crossing structure with large Winds over bridges can drag flying openness ratios (underpasses) or birds into vehicles. wildlife overpasses.  Reduced speed limits may be appropriate for some specialised species. Water birds Waterbirds are attracted to pooled  Ensure there is no water pooling in water adjacent to the roadside. areas where this may cause fauna impact issues. Nocturnal Owls generally hunt at heights  Short fences along highway medians Raptors similar to headlight height. and right-of-ways, where this group of birds is the target species. Ground nesters Nesting individuals are impacted  Mow/maintain verges outside by mowing roadsides. breeding seasons.

Page 15 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document Impact Problem Suggested solutions

Scavengers Scavenger birds are killed while  Remove roadkill from road. foraging on roadkill.  Increased frequency of roadkill clearing may be best targeted during the breeding season when roadkill numbers are at their peak. Frugivores, Birds are attracted to food trees in  Avoid planting food tree varieties. honey and the median strip and can be blossom eaters impacted by vehicles when around  Remove food trees. this vegetation. 7.6.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.8: Underpass: Bridge;  Section 6.10: Non-structural mitigation: Local Traffic Management;  Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing;  Section 6.13: Barriers: Perching Deterrents;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting;  Section 6.18.3: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Noise. Section 9.2: Case Studies: Compton Road – Brisbane City Council also provides an example of a project implementing mitigation measures for bird species. 7.6.3 Key references Ambrose, S. (2008) Transparent Noise Walls and Bird Mortality on New South Wales Roads: A Review of the Problem and Suggested Mitigation Measures. Prepared for NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Environmental Branch, Ryde New South Wales. Brown, K. and Stevenson, W. (2004) Tugun Bypass Species Impact Statement and Equivalent Studies under Relevant Queensland and Commonwealth Environmental Legislation. DoTARS, NSW Roads and Traffic Authority and Queensland Department of Main Roads. Forman, R., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J., Clevenger, A., Cutshall, C., Dale, V., Fahrig, L., France, R., Goldman, C., Heanue, K., Jones, J., Swanson, F., Turrentine, T. and Winter, T. (2003) Road Ecology: Science and Solutions. Island Press, Washington, USA. Harris, R. A. (1986) Vegetative Barriers: An Alternative Highway Noise Abatement Measure. Noise Control Engineering Journal. 27:4-8. Maron, M. and Kennedy, S. (2006) Roads, Fire and Aggressive Competitors: Determinants of Bird Distribution in Subtropical Production Forests. Forest Ecology and Management. 240:24-31. Queensland Department of Main Roads. (2001) Cassowary Management Strategy. Tully Mission Beach Road 2001. Townsville, Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads. (2004) Road Landscape Manual (2nd ed.), Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland. Reijnen, R. and Floppen, R. (1994) The Effects of Car Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations in Woodland. In: Evidence of Reduced Habitat Quality for Willow Warblers (Phylloscopus trochilus) Breeding Close to a Highway. The Journal of Applied Ecology. 31(1): 85-94. Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (1995) Wildlife Crossings for Roads and Waterways. Road and Hydraulic Engineering Division, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Delft, The Netherlands.

Page 16 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices Scherzinger, W. (1979) Zum Feindverhalten des Haselhuhnes (Bonasa bonasia). Die Vogelwelt. 100:205- 217, Germany. Terrain NRM, (2008) Wongaling Corridors Fauna Crossings, Prepared by Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture. Wasser, S.K., Bevis, K., King, G. and Hanson, E. (1997) Noninvasive Physiological Measures of Disturbance in the Northern Spotted Owl. Conservation Biology. 11: 1019-1022. Wilson, R. and Goosem, M. (2007) Vehicle Headlight and Streetlight Disturbance to Wildlife – Kuranda Range Upgrade Project. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland. 7.7 Bats 7.7.1 Background  Bats contribute significantly to the overall biodiversity of areas.  In many areas of Australia the number of bat species present may equal the number of all other native mammal species present.  Bats fulfil a unique purpose in the environment and are of notable service to humans. It is thought that bats feeding upon insects is an environmental service for agriculture as otherwise these insects would damage crops. The bats’ service thus reduces the need for chemical insecticides and, consequently, they may be economically beneficial to humans.  Large flying foxes (often called fruit bats) are fruit and flower eaters and dwell typically in riparian trees or those located near watercourses.  Many Queensland bats are adaptable and will make use of various structures for roosting provided they are predator free and buffer extreme climatic conditions. Many bats use these different roosting sites on a seasonal basis. The use of roosting sites tends to vary across the state, by species, season, and features of the structures. o The highly specific selection criteria for bat roosts is linked to their metabolic rate requirements. - Bats have a large surface area ratio to body mass and thus require special techniques to retain body heat. For instance, bats generally seek roosting locations with trapped warm air, where light intensity and air movement is reduced. These conditions assist them in maintaining appropriate body temperatures.  Roads can impact on bat populations/species by: o Increased mortality through roadkill. o Damaging roosting/maternity sites. o Decreasing the habitat availability either by general clearing or fragmentation.  Road structures can act as habitat enhancements for microbats: o Bridge decks can provide alternative bat roosts when their natural habitat in caves and sheltered cliff overhangs has been disturbed. o Bridge decks may also provide some bats with a more preferable night roosting location as they can act as daytime heat sinks.  Bats are attracted to light sources to feed on insects and can therefore fall prey as roadkill (refer to Section 6.18.2 Lighting for detailed information).  No provisions in road structures have been made to accommodate any flying foxes. 7.7.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.15: Habitat enhancement: Nest Boxes;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting.

Page 17 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document 7.7.3 Key references Hyde, V.B. (2007) Civil Engineering for Passage of Fish and Fauna. Australian Journal of Water Resources. 11(2):193-206. Keeley, B. and Tuttle, M. (1999) Bats in American Bridges Resource Publication No. 4. Bat Conservation International Inc, America. Thomson, B. (2002) Australian Handbook for the Conservation of Bats in Mines and Artificial Cave-Bat Habitats. Australian Centre for Mining and Environmental Research, Melbourne, Australia. 7.8 Macropods 7.8.1 Background  Macropod-vehicle collisions are very common and can result in the death or injury to the animal and/or humans.  Rock wallabies are required to be connected as colonies, as they cannot maintain the required genetic diversity as stand-alone populations.  Timing of collisions: o High traffic volumes at dusk and dawn coincide with high movement times for macropods, which may result in increased rates of roadkill. - Macropods are stunned by headlights and do not move in time to avoid collisions. - Macropods shelter during the day and graze in the evening. o In winter collisions are reduced, most likely due to reduced movement/dispersion of macropods and smaller populations due to natural attrition.  Hotspots for collisions: o Highways or streets are the most common collision areas whilst country roads are second most common (Abu-Zidan et al. 2002). o Watering points: - Vegetated drainage lines, adjacent to roads, tend to have a significantly higher kangaroo density. This is most likely due to the provision of water and shade during day and grazing opportunities in the evening. o Areas with more vegetation cover and greener plants (Klocker et al. 2006). o Roadside vegetation with regrowth (for example, after fire burn-offs in the road reserve new grass shoots may attract macropods to graze).  Mitigation measures to reduce collisions include: o Excluding macropods from the road with fencing. o Providing safe crossing structures. o Changing driver behaviour. o Raising driver awareness through education in conjunction with signage and road markings. o Alerting and slowing down drivers (with signage and/or special temporary lighting on the road at night) during the period of grassy regrowth and after a fire burn-off. 7.8.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.5: Overpass: Poles;  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.10: Non-structural mitigation: Local Traffic Management;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting.

Page 18 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices  Section 9.2: Case Studies: Compton Road – Brisbane City Council also provides an example of a project implementing macropod species mitigation measures. 7.8.3 Key references Abu-Zidan, F., Parmar, K. and Rao, S. (2002) Kangaroo-related Motor Vehicle Collisions. Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care. 53:360-363. Australian Museum Business Services. (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring: Stage 1 - Final report - Bulahdelah to Coolongolook. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Australian Museum Business Service (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring, Stage 1 - Final Report - Brunswick Heads. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Barnes, D. (2007) Fauna Use of Underpasses. Connell Wagner, Brisbane, Queensland. Klocker, U., Croft, D. and Ramp, D. (2006) Frequency and Causes of Kangaroo-vehicle Collisions on an Australian Outback Highway. Wildlife Research. 33:5-15. Montague-Drake, R. and Croft, D. (2004) Do Kangaroos Exhibit Water-focused Grazing Patterns in Arid New South Wales? A Case Study in Sturt National Park. Australian Mammalogy. 26:87-100. Parsons, M., Lamont, B., Kovacs, B. and Davies, S. (2007) Effects of Novel and Historic Predator Urines on Semi-wild Western Grey Kangaroos. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71(4): 1225-1228. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2007) Wildlife Signage Guidelines (DRAFT Volume 9) Technical Note. Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane. Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads. (2005) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 7 – Cross Section. Brisbane, Queensland. Ramp, D. and Croft, D. (2006) Do Wildlife Warning Reflectors Elicit Aversion in Captive Macropods? Wildlife Research. 33:583-590. Ramp, D., Russell, B. and Croft, D. (2005) Predator Scent Induces Differing Responses in Two Sympatric Macropodids. Australian Journal of Zoology. 53: 73–78. Strahan, R. (ed.) (1995) The Australian Museum Complete Book of Australian Mammals (2nd ed.) Reed New Holland, Sydney. New South Wales. Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group (2008) K-T Shelter Poles at Risk. Newsletter of the Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group Inc., Pp 1-3. Queensland. Viggers, K. and Hearn, J. (2005) The Kangaroo Conundrum: Home Range Studies and Implications for Land Management. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42: 99-107. Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland (2006) Time Running Out for Small Colony of Wallabies. Wildlife Queensland: Your Voice for Your Wildlife. 185:14. Wilson, R. and Goosem, M. (2007) Vehicle Headlight and Streetlight Disturbance to Wildlife – Kuranda Range Upgrade Project. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland. 7.9 Small Mammals 7.9.1 Background  Roads affect the abundance and distribution of small mammals. o There are differences in the density of small mammals that occur along the road corridor when compared with habitat outside of the road environment.  Direct mortality of small mammals on the road has variable effects on their demographics, including a disproportionate loss of sex or age classes.  Small mammals will use the majority of fauna crossing structures once they are well established.  Numerous specific small fauna crossings may be required where small mammals regularly cross the road surface and suffer high mortality.

Page 19 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document 7.9.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.18.5: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Road Safety Barriers. 7.9.3 Key references Australian Museum Business Service (2001) Fauna Underpass Monitoring, Stage 1 - Final Report - Brunswick Heads. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales. Bissonette, J.A. and Cramer, P.C. (2008) Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. NCHRP Report 615. National Cooperative Highway Research Program. USA. Department of Environment and Climate Change (2002) Native Animal Fact Sheets Bandicoots. Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/plantsanimals/bandicoots.htm. Accessed 3 September 2009. Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007) Threatened and Pest Animals of Greater Southern Sydney: Fauna of Conservation Concern and Priority Pest Species Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/threatenedspecies/07471tpagssvol2pt10mammals2.pdf . Accessed 3 September 2009. Hunt, A., Dickens, H. and Whelan, R. (1987) Movement of Mammals Through Tunnels Under Railway Lines. Australian Zoologist. 24(2):89. Iuell, B., Bekker, G.J., Cuperus, R., Dufek, J. Fry, G., Hicks, C., Hlavac, V., Keller, V.B., Rosell, C., Sangwine, T., Torslov, N., Wandall, B. le Maire (eds.) (2003) Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions. European Co-operation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research, Brussels. National Parks and Wildlife Service (2000) Threatened Species Information: Endangered Long-nosed Bandicoot Population at North Head. New South Wales. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2009) Koalas and Their Ability to Traverse Road Traffic Safety Barriers. Metropolitan region, Brisbane, Queensland. The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety (2005) Technical Guide: Facilities and Measures for Small Fauna. France. 7.10 Reptiles 7.10.1 Background  Generally, there are two types of impact that roads can have on reptiles: o Reduction in population due to vehicular collision as a result of being: - attracted to the road surface; or - desire to cross the road; or - species which are attracted to the road surface and also have a desire to cross the road. This group is vulnerable to collisions with vehicles. o Population isolation or habitat loss caused as the road becomes a physical barrier.  Reptiles are often utilised to gauge the effectiveness of fauna crossing structures.  During construction, the following impacts should be minimised as they have the potential to negatively impact upon reptiles: o Changes to microclimates through the disturbance to rocks, debris, shrubs, logs, leaf litter and grasses. o Weed invasions. o Alterations to fire regimes.

Page 20 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices 7.10.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.6: Underpass: Culvert;  Section 6.11: Barriers: Fencing;  Section 6.16: Habitat enhancement: Artificial Shelter Sites;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting. Section 9.2: Case Studies: Compton Road – Brisbane City Council also provides an example of a project implementing reptile species mitigation measures. 7.10.3 Key references Aresco, M.J. (2003) Highway Mortality of Turtles and Other Herpetofauna at Lake Jackson, Florida, USA, and the Efficacy of a Temporary Fence/culvert System to Reduce Roadkills. Road Ecology Centre eScholarship Repository. University of California, USA. Brisbane City Council. (2005) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement. Brisbane, Queensland. Cogger, H. (2000) Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia (6th edition). New Holland Publishers, Australia Pty Ltd, Sydney, New South Wales. Drury, W.L., Wilson, S.K. and Vanderduys, E. (2002) Fauna of the Darling Downs Rail Corridors: Diversity and Management Options. Report by World Wildlife Fund for Queensland Rail, Queensland. Ehmann, H. (1992) Encyclopaedia of Australian Animals: Reptiles. Angus and Robertson. Pymble, New South Wales. Environmental Protection Agency (2007) Common Death Adder. http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife- ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/common_death_adder.html. Accessed 27 January 2010. Leopold-Woodridge, K. (2008) Temporal Fauna Use of Seven Road Underpass Structures in Urban/Peri- Urban Landscapes in South-east Queensland (Spring 2007-Summer 2008). Honours thesis. Griffith University, Queensland. Peck, S. (2004) Conservation Status Review and Management Recommendations for the Collared Delma, Delma torquata. In: Brisbane City Council (2005) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement. Queensland. Peck, S. and Hobson, R. (2007) Survey Results and Management Options for the Collared Delma, Delma torquata Along the Proposed Toowoomba Bypass, Toowoomba Range, South-East Queensland, November 2006. Environmental Protection Agency and Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Queensland. Porter, R. (1998) Observations of the Large Population of the Venerable Pygopodid, Delma torquata. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum. 42(2) 565-572 In: Brisbane City Council (2005) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement. Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 7 – Cross Section. Brisbane, Queensland. Ryan, S. (2006) Conservation Management Profile: Collared Delma, Delma torquata. Ecosystem Conservation Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p02094aa.pdf. Accessed 28 October 2009. Webb, J.K. and Shine, R. (2000) Paving the Way for Habitat Restoration: Can Artificial Rocks Restore Degraded Habitats of Endangered Reptiles? Biological Conservation. 92: 93-99. Wilson, S. (2007) Bridging the Gap: Reptiles on the Compton Road Overpass Between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests. Brisbane, Queensland. Wilson, S. (2006) Bridging the Gap: Potential Dispersal of Reptiles Between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests across Compton Road. Brisbane, Queensland.

Page 21 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document 7.11 Invertebrates 7.11.1 Background  Invertebrate communities: o Play a critical role in sustaining ecosystem health specifically, the abundance, diversity and activities of invertebrates contribute to nutrient cycling, energy storage and transfer. o May be put at risk through habitat fragmentation. o Can be used as an indicator of the ecological health of a fragmented area.  Invertebrate monitoring can be used to evaluate the quality of habitat on land bridges, and hence their suitability as corridors for target vertebrate species. However, monitoring an entire invertebrate community is not realistic or cost-effective, therefore, a subset of taxa is usually chosen, for example: o Spiders: - Shown to be informative indicators of environmental health. - Are top predators, so they are less numerous than other invertebrate groups, yet still diverse. - Both generalist and specialist species which respond dramatically to the availability of specific prey types, therefore, provide a good indication of overall invertebrate population health. - Cost-effective species to focus monitoring on to determine the ecological patterns of invertebrate communities. 7.11.2 Designs and structures See Section 6: Measures to Achieve Fauna Sensitive Roads for design details. Specifically:  Section 6.1: Overpass: Land Bridge;  Section 6.16: Habitat enhancement: Artificial Shelter Sites;  Section 6.18.2: Other methods that influence the effectiveness of fauna structures: Lighting. 7.11.3 Key References Churchill, T.B. (1995) Scales of Spatial and Temporal Variation in a Tasmanian Heathland Spider Community. Unpublished Thesis. Griffith University. Brisbane, Queensland. Churchill, T.B. (1997) Spiders as Ecological Indicators: An Overview for Australia. Proceedings of the Invertebrate Biodiversity and Conservation Conference. Melbourne Victoria. 52(2):331-337. Churchill, T.B. (2008) Invertebrate Research Initiative: Using Invertebrates to Monitor and Evaluate Environmental Change Across Brisbane City. Initial Project Report 2008. Report prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland. Churchill, T.B. and Ludwig, J.A. (2004) Changes in Spider Assemblages in Relation Along Grassland and Savanna Grazing Gradients in Northern Australia. The Rangeland Journal. 26(1):3-16. Stanisic, J. Burwell, C. Raven, R. Monteith, G. and Baehr, B. (2005) Terrestrial Invertebrate Status Review: Brisbane City. prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Australia. Van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D. T., Holland, K., Gulle, N. and Budden, M. (2007) Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure. Department of Environment and Water Resources, Symonston. Webb, J.K. and Shine, R. (2000) Paving the Way for Habitat Restoration: Can Artificial Rocks Restore Degraded Habitats of Endangered Reptiles? Biological Conservation. 92: 93-99.

Page 22 of 22 Vol 2 Chapter 7 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

8. NON-NATIVE SPECIES DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

8.1 Deer...... 1 8.1.1 Purpose ...... 1 8.1.2 Designs and structures...... 1 a) Exclusion fencing...... 1 b) Chemical repellents ...... 2 c) Non-palatable species ...... 2

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 8 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

8 NON-NATIVE SPECIES DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 8.1 Deer 8.1.1 Purpose  Deer are becoming an increasing issue on roads around Australia: o Negative impact on revegetation areas within road reserves. o High speed collisions with deer have the potential to be fatal. 8.1.2 Designs and structures a) Exclusion fencing Design Requirements:  General: o Must allow for movement of native species, where appropriate. o Electric fences are expensive to operate and need frequent monitoring and maintenance. They are not recommended for long stretches of road, but may be considered locally where a high risk exists. They can also be used temporarily to train deer to change their habits after a new road is built.  Height is determined by species of deer: o Height sufficient to prevent deer jumping over it. o Red deer - minimum height 2.2 metres (preferably 2.6 – 2.8 metres). o Roe deer - minimum height 1.5 metres (preferably 1.6 – 1.8 metres).  Mesh: o Installed to prevent deer from passing through the openings and passing under the fence. o Wires have a diameter of at least 2.5 mm and consist of rust-free material. o The bottom wire is installed directly onto the ground and can be fixed to prevent young deer from pushing their way underneath. Burying the wire mesh 200-400 mm underground may be necessary in areas where species are known to dig and destroy fences. o Place mesh on the outside of the poles (away from the roadside) to prevent mesh becoming dislodged if a large animal crashes into the fence.  Poles: o Metal or wooden poles are suitable. o Poles are to be strong enough to withstand the impact of an animal in flight running into the fence. End posts should have a diameter of 60-65 mm (steel) or 100 x100 mm/120 mm diameter (wood). Middle posts can be slightly thinner. o Replace when damaged. o Ensure all posts are firmly embedded in the ground (at least 700 mm). o The distance between posts should be between four and six metres (up to 10 metres in flat areas).  Considerations: o Wire fences effectively stop the access of deer. o A dense row of unpalatable bushes planted close to the fence (non-roadside) can prevent animals from attempting to jump the fence. o Do not use plant species adjacent to the fence considered attractive to foraging deer.

Page 1 of 2 Vol 2 Chapter 8 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Maintenance: o Particular attention to be paid to maintaining: - Holes in fencing (to be repaired immediately). - Pole attachments. - Ground attachments. - Trails and hollows in vegetation which indicate the regular passage of animals under the fence. b) Chemical repellents  Olfactory repellents are a relatively new measure to prevent vehicular collisions with deer.  In overseas use, natural or artificial substances, usually a mix of scents from humans, wolves and other predators, are injected into foam as a substance carrier and then applied to trees or posts in the vicinity of the road.  They are only placed during critical periods, otherwise habituation to these scents may occur and reduce the overall effectiveness of this measure.  Further research is required to determine efficacy. c) Non-palatable species  If possible, non-palatable plant species should be planted.  Implement in consultation with an expert aware of species-specific preferences.  Plant in conjunction with exclusion fencing.

Page 2 of 2 Vol 2 Chapter 8 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

9. CASE STUDIES

9.1 Tugun Bypass...... 1 9.1.1 Location ...... 1 9.1.2 Project Area Biota...... 1 9.1.3 Species-specific information...... 2 a) Frogs ...... 2 b) Birds ...... 2 c) Mammals ...... 3 9.1.4 Phase mitigation measures ...... 4 9.1.5 Mitigation measures: Underpasses...... 5 a) Potoroo culvert (Boyd Street) ...... 5 b) Frog culverts...... 7 c) Wet-dry culvert ...... 9 d) Fish culvert ...... 11 9.1.6 Mitigation measures: Barriers...... 12 a) Temporary frog exclusion fence...... 12 b) Floppy-top fence with ground mesh ...... 13 c) Fauna fence with ground mesh...... 14 d) Stand-alone frog fencing ...... 15 e) Frog fencing attached to chain-wire fence ...... 19 f) Fauna escape ramps ...... 21 g) Fence monitoring...... 22 9.1.7 Habitat enhancement ...... 23 a) Frog ponds ...... 23 b) Nest boxes...... 26 9.1.8 General environmental project information ...... 28 a) Anthropogenic measures ...... 28 b) General issues...... 29 c) General learnings ...... 29 9.1.9 References ...... 29

9.2 Compton Road - Brisbane City Council ...... 30 9.2.1 Background ...... 30 9.2.2 Target species...... 30 9.2.3 Mitigation measures ...... 33 a) Overpass: Land bridge ...... 33 b) Barrier structure: Fauna exclusion fence ...... 36

Page i of ii Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

c) Underpasses: Culverts ...... 37 d) Glider poles...... 40 e) Rope ladders ...... 41 9.2.4 General information ...... 42 a) Monitoring ...... 42 b) Maintenance ...... 43 c) Anthropogenic measures...... 43 d) General issues...... 43 e) General learnings ...... 43 9.2.5 References ...... 44

9.3 The East Evelyn Range Upgrade...... 44 9.3.1 Background...... 44 9.3.2 Target species ...... 45 9.3.3 Mitigation measures...... 45 a) Underpasses...... 45 b) Revegetation corridor ...... 48 c) Revegetation...... 49 9.3.4 General information ...... 50 9.3.5 References ...... 50

9.4 Mount Higginbotham, Victoria...... 50 9.4.1 Background...... 50 9.4.2 Mitigation measures...... 51 9.4.3 References ...... 55

Page ii of ii Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

9 CASE STUDIES 9.1 Tugun Bypass 9.1.1 Location The Tugun Bypass is a new seven kilometre long motorway between Currumbin in Queensland and Tweed Heads in New South Wales. Construction was undertaken by the PacificLink Alliance between April 2006 and June 2008 and involved the construction of a four-lane restricted access motorway with a central median to separate north and south traffic flows at a posted speed of 100 km/h. The median was designed to allow for future upgrading of the road to six lanes. The road corridor ranges in width from 60 metres to 90 metres with additional land required at interchanges. The design objective was to maintain the required safety standards and minimise impacts on environmentally sensitive areas. The following environmental management principles were employed during the project in decreasing order of preference:  Avoid  Minimise  Mitigate  Compensate For example, the project avoided a number of significant areas through corridor realignment designs. Impacts were also minimised on some species and communities. Fauna management mitigation measures were incorporated and included regenerative corridors between 10 metres and 30 metres wide aimed at attracting wildlife to fauna structures. The provision of compensatory habitats included four frog ponds, 43 nest boxes, five underpasses and one at-grade overpass. Three of the underpasses were principally for planigales and frogs and one for fish.

Figure 9.1.1 Tugun Bypass project under construction. 9.1.2 Project Area Biota The Tugun Bypass spans an area of south-eastern Queensland and north-eastern New South Wales recognised for its high environmental values. It comprises a biogeographical zone where temperate and sub-tropical regions meet and a large number of flora and fauna species are at the northern or southern limits of their geographical range. The area accommodates significant flora and fauna species and a high diversity of vegetation communities and important mammal, bird, amphibian and bat species. A total of 586 plant species were recorded in the study area together with 247 species of vertebrate fauna, consisting of

Page 1 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

179 species of bird, 31 species of mammal, 20 reptile species and 17 amphibians. Notable values of the area include:  The occurrence of a number of populations of threatened plants;  Small isolated populations of common planigales and long-nosed potoroos and significant populations of the wallum sedge frog, wallum froglet and the eastern long-eared bat;  A high diversity of vegetation communities;  wallum heath/sedgeland;  rainforest;  swamp;  woodland/forest;  mangroves; and  saltmarsh.  A high diversity of bird, amphibian and bat species;  The occurrence of habitat for a range of threatened and significant flora and fauna species and important habitat for use by a number of protected migratory bird species;  A regional wildlife corridor and a sub-regional wildlife corridor; and  Proximity to Cobaki Broadwater, an important breeding ground for commercially and recreationally important fish in the Tweed Estuary. 9.1.3 Species-specific information a) Frogs  The project’s management plan required the capture and release of frogs within the project’s footprint prior to construction (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  A number of frogs, including the L. olongburensis and C. tinnula were captured and relocated. This involved five ecologists and resulted in the capture of approximately one or two frogs per hour of effort.  Monitoring: o Has been and will continue to be undertaken between 4pm and midnight (although exact times are dependent upon weather and season). o Monitoring of frog pond usage to occur between April and August for wallum froglets and between September and April for wallum sedge frogs (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Monitoring of the wallum froglet and wallum sedge frog for one day every month for the first year post-construction (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). b) Birds  Prior to construction the alignment was searched either side for 50-100 metres for any fauna, but the listed species, brahminy kite and eastern grass owl were particularly targeted during their breeding season (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Call playback was utilised during searches for species including the eastern grass owl and brahminy kite.  A bird specialist relocated nests that were found within the proposed road footprint (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Birds were discouraged from the construction site by limiting food scraps through the provisions of bins.  During construction sediment ponds were heavily landscaped to minimise the likelihood of them attracting foraging waterbirds.

Page 2 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Monitoring: o During clearing monitoring was undertaken three times a day - Monitoring commenced thirty minutes after first light; at midday; and concluded thirty minutes before dark (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). - This was aimed at minimising bird strikes associated with airport activities. o Bird breeding areas within 100 metres of the construction zone were monitored during construction for any changes (PacificLink Alliance 2006a; PacificLink Alliance 2006c). o During construction, contractors were employed to undertake daily monitoring of bird numbers, behaviour and activities. This information was used to reduce impacts on significant bird species and to identify the need for additional mitigation measures to reduce bird activity and attraction. o If an area had particularly high bird numbers during construction, the reason was identified and mitigation actions undertaken (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). These included waving arms, sounding car horn and chasing away (Ecosure 2005). o Monitoring was further reduced once treatment ponds and other water holding devices were either vegetated or decommissioned.  Transparent noise walls included a rectangular pattern to minimise bird collisions (Figure 9.1.2).

Figure 9.1.2 Transparent noise walls with pattern to prevent bird collisions (Taylor 2008). c) Mammals  Common planigales o Capture and release of common planigales occurred prior to construction and followed the project’s management plans (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o After trapping common planigales were transferred out of the proposed construction zone (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2004). o Mammals monitored annually using pitfall traps.  Long-nosed potoroos o Pre-clearing guidelines were followed.

Page 3 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Visual delineation of road footprint occurred with no-go zones clearly marked. o Potoroo warning signs were erected around known long-nosed potoroo habitat during construction. o Potoroo-specific toolbox presentations were provided during construction to staff working near known potoroo habitat. o Grass was slashed at intervals of 600mm to decrease the chance of wildfire in potoroo habitat.  Microbats o Prior to construction, bark was stripped at dusk from paperbark trees earmarked for clearing to encourage microbat species, specifically Nyctophilus bifax (eastern long-eared bat), to roost elsewhere (PacificLink Alliance 2006b). o Lights less attractive to bats and insects were used in the tunnel (Tugun Bypass Alliance undated).  Grey-headed flying-fox o Seasonal monitoring occurred during construction and post-construction using active searches and nocturnal surveys at known camp sites on the eastern shores of Cobaki and Hidden Valley. 9.1.4 Phase mitigation measures  Pre-construction measures o Baseline data of all threatened species was compiled prior to clearing (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Management plans were created for the following species: - frogs; - long-nosed potoroos; - common planigales; - grey-headed flying foxes; - vegetation; - wetlands; and - Bird control (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o The locations of hollow-bearing or habitat trees were recorded using a GPS and visibly marked to be checked prior to clearing. o No-go zones were delineated using signs and flagging tape and illustrated on "Sensitive Area Drawings". No-go zones were communicated to all staff through site induction and toolbox talks (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Significant fauna from within and immediately adjacent to the project footprint were relocated to alternative suitable habitat (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o A "fauna rescue kit" was kept by spotter-catchers (and the project ecologist when acting in this capacity) and in the site office (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o A pre-clearing integrated work method statement was also developed prior to commencement of clearing works.  During Construction o The environment team communicated to all staff the importance of preserving environmental integrity. o A fauna specialist was present during vegetation clearing and tree relocation (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Clearing occurred in two stages. Smaller, younger trees were cleared first, followed by mature, hollow-bearing trees the following day.

Page 4 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o If threatened species were found during construction activities work in the immediate area was to be halted and the relevant authorities and Site Environmental Manager to be informed (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Rescued animals were either immediately relocated or for nocturnal species kept in a designated area until dusk. o During construction, "no-go" fences were monitored regularly (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Post-construction o All maintenance staff and sub-contractors completed environmental training during site induction. Training included: - Location, identification and management of environmentally sensitive areas and threatened species; - Purpose and content of relevant standard operating procedures; and - Any information regarding environmental issues relevant to the staff’s intended activity. o Fauna underpasses to be monitored for noise and vibration levels. o Environmental reporting on temporary and permanent structures quarterly. This includes recommendations for improvements to structures. o Weekly roadkill surveys to record observational road mortality data. 9.1.5 Mitigation measures: Underpasses a) Potoroo culvert (Boyd Street) Target Species  Long-nosed potoroo. Design:  Figures 9.1.3 and 9.1.4.  Box culvert.  Dimensions: o Width: 2.4 metres. o Height: 1.8 metres. o Length: approximately 25 metres.  Fauna exclusion fencing is used to guide fauna into the culvert.  Base slab was constructed above the natural ground surface to ensure water does not pond.  Entrances and exits to culvert were revegetated.  Refuge pole design: o Height: 1.2 metres. o Diameter: 200 mm. o Placed to one side of the culvert. o Fork at the top.  Logs were placed at entry and exit points to act as refuge for long-nosed potoroos. Monitoring:  Annual monitoring of bush hen nest sites at Boyd Street for one year.  Infra-red still camera monitoring has now commenced in the Boyd Street culvert. A FaunaFocus FF120 remote camera is being utilised with two infra-red pre-illuminators (Figure 9.1.5). This system

Page 5 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

has been attached to the roof of the culvert with a tree bracket from Faunatech. The camera has been placed mid-way through the structure. o The camera has recorded a number of rodents, snakes, lizards and butterflies, a swamp wallaby and an echidna. Issues:  Species scheduled to be planted at the culvert entrances were selected based on observed behaviours and use of plants by the long-nosed potoroo. Some of these species were difficult to procure from nurseries and a more generalised species mix was utilised.

Figure 9.1.3 Cross section of fauna underpass, adapted from drawing 3003181-BYD-010-7306 (PacificLink Alliance 2006e).

Page 6 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 9.1.4 View of culvert alignment adapted from drawing 3003181-BYD-010-1001.

Figure 9.1.5 Infra-red still camera utilised in Boyd Street culvert b) Frog culverts Fauna passage was needed to link areas identified as frog habitat and compensatory frog ponds. Target Species  Wallum sedge frog and wallum froglet.

Page 7 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Design:  Three frog-specific box culverts have been installed (PacificLink Alliance 2006e).  Precast box culvert.  Dimensions: o Width: 3 metres. o Height: 900 mm. o Length: 41 metres.  Base was made up of 17 concrete blocks with 22 mm gaps.  Base slab dimensions (per block): o Width: 3 metres. o Height: 900 mm. o Length: 2.44 metres.  25 mm of mulch placed on culvert floor.  Four strips of shade cloths were placed at regular intervals in underpass opening to provide refuge points (see Figure 9.1.6) (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Shade cloth is not usually utilised in fauna or frog culverts. This is an experimental design.  Clearing was minimised near entrances.  Culvert is protected from large fauna by exclusion fencing.  Landscaping near entrances occurred as soon as possible after construction.  Specific frog fencing is used to guide frogs towards the culvert entrances.

a) b) Figure 9.1.6 a) Cross sectional drawing of frog culvert adapted from drawing 3003181-DRN-020- 3076 (PacificLink Alliance 2006c). b) Frog culvert shade cloth treatment.

Page 8 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 9.1.7 Drawing of frog culvert alignment adapted from drawing 3003181-DRN-020-3021 (PacificLink Alliance 2006c). Issues:  During rain periods the culvert will hold moisture and facilitate movement. However, during drier times culverts do not readily maintain a moist environment, which may affect the structure’s success.  Issues with monitoring techniques used have not been resolved. For more information see the Monitoring section below. Monitoring:  Monitoring has consisted of pitfall trapping at entrances to culverts.  Pitfall trap monitoring is not effective as wallum sedge frogs are able to jump over the guiding barriers and out of buckets.  Pitfall trapping outside the entrances to the culvert may only indicate presence of frogs adjacent to the structure and not actual use. To rectify this issue active searches within the culvert during or after significant rainfall events is being considered.  Ink pads were used to monitor use of culverts. However, this method was seen as an undesirable monitoring method for frogs by the environmental approval agency. c) Wet-dry culvert A fauna crossing structure was needed in an area where frogs and common planigale were known to cross frequently, the wet-dry culvert was the solution (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Target Species  Common planigale, arboreal species and frogs. Design:  A wet-dry culvert was installed (Figure 9.1.8).  The culvert consisted of two dry ledges running along the length (each side 850 mm wide) and a channel running down the centre (700 mm wide, 300 mm deep).  Dimensions: o Height: 0.9 metres. o Width: 2.4 metres. o Length: 3.7 metres.  One fauna refuge pole was placed at each end of the culvert.  Refuge pole design: o Height: 1.2 metres.

Page 9 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Diameter: 200 mm. o Fork at top. o Placed to one side of culvert.  An unobstructed view of habitat is provided at either end.  Minimal clearing was undertaken near the culvert.  Culvert entrances have been revegetated with low, dense local plant species.

Figure 9.1.8 Cross section drawing of wet-dry culvert adapted from drawing 3003181-DNR-020-3096. Design Proposal:  A proposal to trial skylights and light wells was not approved due to concerns over their proposed locations (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Issues:  The low height and length of culvert may discourage use by common planigales.  Mulch was supposed to be placed in the dry sections of the culvert but this has not occurred due to wetness of the culvert.  Unexpected changes in drainage patterns have caused: o the culvert to convey more water then was originally anticipated; o water to pool around the culvert entrance; o postponement of planting vegetation required in designs.  Construction of an access track on the western side of the culvert has resulted in an area of rock riprap that has been unable to be replanted.

Page 10 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Monitoring:  After construction the culvert has been and will continue to be inspected monthly to ensure it does not become blocked with debris. Debris to be removed if it prevents fauna movement.  Pit-fall monitoring was scheduled but this has not been possible due to the presence of water around culvert entrances. d) Fish culvert A drainage channel was constructed as a dedicated fish passageway (PacificLink Alliance 2007). This was a combination fauna and drainage channel but the structure’s primary purpose was drainage. Design:  Two-celled box culvert design (Figure 9.1.10).  Culvert has a one metre incline to accommodate drainage.  Dimensions: o Height: 1.5 metres. o Width: 1.8 metres each. o Length: 100 metres.  Rocks were embedded in base slab to create back eddies or areas of reduced flow.  25 mm of sand was placed on top of the base slab to create a natural base.

Figure 9.1.9 Rock arrangement for fish culvert base slab adapted from drawing 3003181-DNR-020- 3116.

Figure 9.1.10 Cross sectional drawing of fish culverts adapted from drawing DNR-020-3116.

Page 11 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Issues:  Construction of the culvert required a creek diversion.  Mass fish relocation was required.

Figure 9.1.11 Fish passage alignment adapted from drawing 3003181-DRN-020-3111. 9.1.6 Mitigation measures: Barriers a) Temporary frog exclusion fence This fence was to prevent frogs escaping from the wetlands and entering the construction site and to assist in stabilising wetland habitat (Ecosure 2005; Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006). Target Species:  Wallum sedge frog and wallum froglet. Design:  Installed around known wallum sedge frog and wallum froglet habitat (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Constructed from sediment fencing (Figure 9.1.12).  Dimensions: o Height: 400 mm (minimum).  Once temporary frog fences were installed, ecologists searched known frog habitat and relocated frogs caught into the compensatory ponds enclosed by these temporary fences.  Flexible lip to deter climbing frogs. Monitoring  Fence monitored monthly through active searches after rainfall events. Issues:  Sediment fence replacement became increasingly expensive as it deteriorated quickly and construction vehicles often ran over the fence. Learnings:  Fencing was relatively easy to install, and materials were easy to obtain.  For long-term structures, UV resistant sediment fence material should be used to decrease fence maintenance costs.  The innovation of having frog fencing that also performed the function of sediment fencing had the following benefits: o Saved time and costs on installation. o Less maintenance costs (as less structures). o Reduced vegetation clearing needed. Page 12 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Flexible lip

a) b) Figure 9.1.12 a) Temporary frog fence b) Sketch of frog fence design b) Floppy-top fence with ground mesh This fence type channels fauna towards either the Hidden Valley viaduct or the closest fauna culvert (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Target species:  Range of species. Design:  Large trees and road design were considered when deciding on fence alignment.  Dimensions: o Height: 1.8 metres. o Metal angle length: 400 mm (Figure 9.1.13). o Mesh overhang (fauna side): 500 mm past end of metal frame.  The fence was designed to have internal angles no less than 135o to ensure that the fence does not create predator trap (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Does not cross through waterways.  Maintenance gates were constructed so that fauna cannot pass through when closed but access to the road corridor has been maintained. Monitoring:  Fauna fence inspected monthly and any maintenance issues are noted (PacificLink Alliance 2007) and repaired within one month. (PacificLink Alliance 2008).

Page 13 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Issues:  A small drainage culvert (typically dry) passed beneath the exclusion fencing. This was identified as potentially allowing fauna onto the carriageway. The culvert was retrofitted with vertical bars to prevent use by fauna.  At the Tweed interchange the fence was installed within three metres of retained vegetation. Vegetation was retained rather than cleared as it was deemed unlikely that arboreal species were in the area.  The length of the ground mesh pins made them unsuitable for sandy soils so they were lengthened.

Ground mesh

Ground mesh pins

Figure 9.1.13 Floppy top fencing (adapted from drawing 3003181-BFF-020-6003). c) Fauna fence with ground mesh Installed in known potoroo habitat to direct fauna to the Boyd Street underpass. Target Species:  Used to exclude ground dwelling species with the potential to dig. Design:  The fauna fences are joined in some sections and two distinct fences in others.  The fence is designed to have internal angles no less than 135o to ensure that the fence does not create a predator trap (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Does not cross through waterways.  Maintenance gates were constructed so that fauna cannot pass through when closed but access to the road corridor has been maintained.

Page 14 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 9.1.14 Fauna exclusion fencing with frog fencing attached (adapted from PacificLink Alliance 2006 Drawing 3003181-BFF-020-6003) (Pacific Alliance 2006c). Issues:  Complete installation of fences could not occur until the end of the construction phase due to ongoing access requirements.  Mesh pinning did not work satisfactorily in sandy soils and the mesh rolled upwards. Rocks have held down the fencing, but to avoid this issue would require longer and more numerous pins to be installed. Grass is now starting to assist in pinning down the mesh. Monitoring:  Fauna fence is inspected monthly and any maintenance issues are noted (PacificLink Alliance 2007) and repaired within one month (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  Fence monitoring is currently being undertaken to: o identify gaps, particularly at drains, gates and other areas; o ensure mesh is intact; o clear vegetation within three metres of the fence that is likely to allow fauna to climb the fence. d) Stand-alone frog fencing Target Species  Frogs. Options:  No existing frog fence designs were considered suitable for the species and location (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Eight options for a free-standing fence were designed and trialled.

Page 15 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Trials:  Undertaken prior to construction (PacificLink Alliance 2006b).  An initial trial looked at a number of options based on recommendations from Dr Glen Ingram (PhD Bsc).  Fence efficacy was determined by giving each design a weighted score from 1 = low, 3 = high for the following categories: o Durability. o Ease of construction. o Price. o Ability to blend with surrounds. o Recycled components.  Trial designs undertaken by PacificLink Alliance for free-standing frog exclusion fence based on constructability were: o Recycled polyethylene sheeting and galvanised star pickets. o Recycled polyethylene sheeting and plastic SHS posts. o Galvanised roof purlin and galvanised SHS posts. o 8 mm compressed fibre cement sheeting and galvanised SHS posts. o 18 mm compressed fibre cement sheeting and galvanised star pickets. o Hebel blocks and galvanised universal column. o Recycled plastic planks and recycled plastic posts. o 18 mm compressed fibre cement sheeting and galvanised SHS posts (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Based on research and trials a design was chosen for the project. Design:  Installed recycled plastic planks and recycled plastic posts (Figure 9.1.15).  The roof and lip were made of pre-fabricated galvanised sheet and attached to the top of the planks (Chambers and Ingram 2005).  Dimensions: o Height: 400 mm. o 150 mm long sloped (Ecosure 2005; Hay 2007).  The lip material, lip length and angle of lip toe seemed to be important factors in fence success.  Sub soil drainage pipes were installed.  Rock riprap and geofabric were installed to counteract erosion and reduce vegetation maintenance requirements.  Vegetation was cleared one metre either side of the fence (Hay 2007; McPherson and Metzger 2007).  The fence was installed as close as possible to the bypass zone to allow for the greatest habitat retention (PacificLink Alliance 2007).

Page 16 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) b) Figure 9.1.15 a) Stand-alone frog fencing. b) Detailed drawing of freestanding frog fence adapted from PacificLink Alliance Drawing 3003181- BFF-020-6003. Issues:  Issues have arisen due to lack of vegetation maintenance around frog fencing  Difficult to undertake the cost-benefit analysis between price and durability for the different options (Hay 2007; Marix-Evans 2007).  The fence was not designed as a retaining wall. However, the area behind the fence was backfilled resulting in difficulties with drainage and change in vegetation behind fence (Figure 9.1.16).  There were issues with the fence alignment where it crossed access tracks. A special frog fence for access tracks was designed and installed to correct this issue (Figure 9.1.17).  Fence installation led to some erosion issues below the fence line.

Figure 9.1.16 Specially designed frog gate across access track. Note the geofabric at the base of the frog fence.

Page 17 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.1.17 Backfilling behind frog fences has caused drainage problems. Learnings:  Minor changes to the fence design were needed because batters directed concentrated water flows through the fence.  Due to the height of the fence, it required very little vegetation adjacent to it before frogs had the potential to jump or climb over the fence.

Figure 9.1.18 Concrete batter chute channelling water through the frog fence. Rubber flaps were installed to minimise frog access.

Page 18 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices e) Frog fencing attached to chain-wire fence Target Species  Frogs and other fauna. Options:  No existing frog fence designs were suitable for attaching to a chain-wire fence so another design was needed (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Three options of frog fences to be attached to existing fences were designed (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Design:  5 mm insertion rubber clamped to a galvanised backing plate then attached to a chain-wire fence (Figures 9.1.19 – 9.1.21).  Dimensions: o Height: 400 mm. o 150 mm long sloped roof (Ecosure 2005; Hay 2007).  Vegetation was cleared one metre either side of fence (Hay 2007; McPherson and Metzger 2007).  The fence was installed as close as possible to bypass zone to allow for the greatest habitat retention (PacificLink Alliance 2007). Issues:  Difficult to undertake the cost-benefit analysis between price and durability for different options (Hay 2007; Marix-Evans 2007).  Difficulties with drainage occurred.  Minor issues with installation occurred. The design required that the rubber flap be dug into the ground. In some areas this was overlooked.  Vegetation around the fence has required active maintenance to maintain clear zones.

a)

Page 19 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

b) Figure 9.1.19 Frog fencing attached to chain-wire fence. a) Frog fence attached to floppy top fencing. b) Permanent frog fence design to be attached to the existing airport security fence (PacificLink Alliance 2007).

Figure 9.1.20 Frog fencing attached to chain-wire adapted from Drawing BFF-020-6003.

Page 20 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 9.1.21 Security fence with frog fencing attached. f) Fauna escape ramps Target species  Variety of species including swamp wallaby and echidna. Design  Ramp enables fauna to escape from the roadside to the habitat.  Constructed as part of the fauna exclusion or site fencing.  For details on structure design see Figures 9.1.22 and 9.1.23. Issues  The escape ramp was not high enough to prevent swamp wallabies using the ramp as an access point onto the carriageway. A retrofit occurred to correct this problem.

a)

Page 21 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

b) Figure 9.1.22 Retrofit design drawings of fauna escape ramp adapted from Drawing SK-1001. a) Fauna escape opening. b) Fauna escape mechanism front elevation.

Figure 9.1.23 Retrofit fauna escape ramp. g) Fence monitoring  Preliminary monitoring results show a decline in roadkill in the area. This indicates effectiveness of the retrofitted barrier structures.  Slight adjustments to fences, particularly at access points and drainage crossings, may continue to decrease incidence of roadkill.

Page 22 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

9.1.7 Habitat enhancement a) Frog ponds  The design was needed to allow frog movement without allowing fish migration into the frog ponds (Ingram and Caneris 2005).  Ponds were constructed as stepping stones between existing wetlands areas and within existing vegetative corridors (PacificLink Alliance 2006c). Design:  Four frog ponds were installed.  Dimensions: o Depth: 1.5 metres. o Slope leading into water: 300 mm (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006; PacificLink Alliance 2006c). o Two ponds approximately 10 metres x 20 metres (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006). o One pond approximately 15 metres x 30 metres. o One pond of 15 metres x 15 metres (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006).  Water heights in ponds are controlled using a water control device (see Figure 9.1.24). o Water controlled using a uPVC twister, in a precast pit. o The twister height can be set to enable adjustment of water levels, or complete draining of the pond. o Twister can be capped to prevent loss of water from pond when required. o The twister joins a drainage pipe running through the pond embankment and discharging into the nearest watercourse.  An impermeable layer of bentonite was used in two of the ponds to help hold water in ponds to prevent drying out (Figure 9.1.25).  Vegetation and soil from the surrounding area were used to construct ponds (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006).  Hydro periods were established so ponds periodically dried out, preventing Gambusia infestations from lasting for more than one season.  Revegetation of surrounds aimed to replicate frog habitat with locally sourced native species to reduce edge effect and invisibility of pond ecosystems (PacificLink Alliance 2008; PacificLink Alliance 2006c).  Reeds were planted to limit bird access to ponds (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  Constructed frog ponds were fenced with sediment and frog protection fencing during construction.  Ponds were protected from soil build-up and erosion via sediment fences (PacificLink Alliance 2007).

Page 23 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.1.24 uPVC twister used to control water level in ponds.

a)

b)

Page 24 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

c) Figure 9.1.25 Frog pond construction process. a) Laying of impermeable layer necessary to prevent the pond from drying out. b) Slabbing method used to transfer wetland vegetation. c) Established revegetated frog pond. Issues:  Suspected leaking seals affected hydro-periods.  It was hard to prevent weed outbreak.  One test pond for relocated frogs was unsuccessful, potentially due to inappropriate location (Tugun Bypass Alliance undated).  Personnel with knowledge of pond design principles were required to be present on site at all times to ensure that any deviations from drawings still fulfilled design requirements. This was very time consuming.  Leaking pipe outlets required replacement.  Manual weed removal (as required) is resource intensive. Learnings:  Time and money was saved by ensuring non-weed contaminated soil was utilised and transferred.  Time and money can be saved by ensuring only high-quality seeds are utilised for revegetation.  The slabbing method used to transfer wetland vegetation was very successful as it reduced the need for direct planting of tube stock.  It took time for the water to reduce in pH (to the required level) whilst ponds matured. Monitoring:  Monitoring will continue for five years (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006).  Ponds are monitored quarterly for the identification and removal of weeds (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  Monitoring has involved quarterly active searches at night, preferably after or during a significant rainfall event.  Call playback has also been used.

Page 25 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Physical parameters of the frog ponds have also been collected as they have been identified as a measure of success. Parameters collected included: o pH; o Water level; and o Electricity conductivity.  Preliminary results are inconclusive. However, maturing of vegetation and active maintenance may improve effectiveness.  Frog monitoring needs to account for different habitat requirements at different stages of life cycle. b) Nest boxes Target species  Nest boxes have been installed for a variety of species: o common brushtail possum; o sugar glider; o squirrel glider; o large bats; o boobook owl; o barn owl; o owlet nightjar; o medium-sized microbat; o mountain brushtail possum. Considerations:  Data was collected on density and dispersion of original hollows before removal (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  Site ecologist completed a hollow inspection checklist every time a hollow was disturbed.  If a hollow-bearing tree was cleared, the tree species, positioning and dimensions of hollow were noted so that an appropriate nest box could be provided.  Tree hollows that could not be relocated were replaced by nest boxes at a ratio of 1:1 (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  43 nest boxes were installed. For target species please see Table 9.1.1 (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). Table 9.1.1 Nest boxes installed at Tugun Bypass (PacificLink Alliance 2008).

Target Species Number of boxes common brushtail possum 10 sugar glider 9 squirrel glider 10 large bats 5 boobook owl 1 barn owl 1 owlet nightjar 3 medium-sized microbat 2 mountain brushtail possum 2

Page 26 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Medium hollows were replaced with medium nest boxes and large hollows with large nest boxes (PacificLink Alliance 2007).  New boxes and hollows were installed before clearing of original habitat, where possible. Design:  Nest box openings were designed to allow minimal rainfall and sunlight to enter (PacificLink Alliance 2007; PacificLink Alliance 2006c).  Nest boxes were installed away from human pathways and approximately 4-8 metres above ground by a flexible metal strap to allow for tree growth (PacificLink Alliance 2007; PacificLink Alliance 2006c).  Replacement hollow logs were sourced from other construction sites to provide a more natural habitat. Issues:  Although details regarding tree species, positioning and dimensions of hollow were noted, it was found that land tenure, access issues and limited area were the main limiting factors on box location. Monitoring:  Nest boxes were installed to facilitate monitoring.  Placement of nest boxes took into account future land-use and land tenure issues to ensure that nest boxes could be accessed till the end of the monitoring period.  Monitoring will occur for two to three years.  If nest boxes are being used by pests or insects then modifications and/or movement of the nest boxes are made in consultation with a qualified ecologist (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  After initial monitoring, any unused boxes were moved and/or modified (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  The following are being monitored: o Effectiveness of nest boxes; o Appropriateness of nest box location; o Whether the nest box is inhabited or vacant; o What species is using the box; and o If maintenance is required.  Preliminary monitoring indicates a 75% rate of occupation.

Page 27 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.1.26 Nest box used to compensate for hollows lost from Tugun Bypass construction (Environment and Heritage presentation 2007). 9.1.8 General environmental project information a) Anthropogenic measures  Site environmental officers encouraged communication between workers to enhance fauna and flora mitigation measures. These methods included: o Educating staff to ensure they understood how to mitigate impacts to fauna (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). o Communicating the importance and location of ‘no-go’ zones. o Forming relationships with site staff encouraging them to contact environmental officers with any problems. o Maintaining a strong site presence by environmentally qualified staff by having at least two environmental officers and one ecologist on site for the majority of the project.  Site environmental officers developed and delivered toolbox talks to raise environmental awareness to all site staff (PacificLink Alliance 2008).  Toolbox talks included: o Bird flocking – understanding the importance of controlling waste and ponded water to reduce attractiveness of work areas to birds and focused on those staff working around the Gold Coast Airport and tunnel. o Long-nosed potoroo – showed staff what a long-nosed potoroo looked like and explained their lifestyle habits. Undertaken for those staff working in the vicinity of known potoroo populations. o Frogs – explained the importance of taking care when working in known frog habitat, and explained the importance of minimal impacts, staying out of these areas, not polluting water, including the correct management of acid sulphate soils. o General environmental issues included pollution of waterways, waste management and importance of no-go zones.  All employees and sub-contractors received inductions in: o Location of sensitive areas according to sensitive area drawings. o Vegetation protection areas (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).

Page 28 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Habitat trees. o Basic fauna rescue procedures. o Threatened species habitat areas. o Weed identification and control (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Employees and sub-contractors particularly involved with flora and fauna received additional training in: o Clearing. o Topsoil management. o Culvert installation requirements. o Waterway realignment. o Species identification. o Bridge construction. o Crossing installation. o Habitat restoration. o Mitigation measures. o Fauna injury response (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Site meetings addressed complaints, monitoring outcomes and other issues (PacificLink Alliance 2006a). b) General issues  Although monitoring results were supposed to be used to evaluate management plans, there were minimal changes due to extended process of gaining approval for changes made (PacificLink Alliance 2006a).  Excavating soil needed to minimise release of acid sulphate soil (ASS). Had to ensure that ASS did not leach into frog wetlands (Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd 2006).  Government agencies and contractors often had personal values and ideas about the environment which impacted upon management plans and day-to-day operations. c) General learnings  Roads and Traffic Authority developed specific fauna rescue framework with New South Wales Department of Environment and Conservation (Tugun Bypass Alliance undated).  Introduced role of independent project verifier who guaranteed quality of design and also negotiated any changes proved successful (Los and Stein 2007).  Having representatives from RTA and TMR with the ability to make decisions and amendments available on site decreased and simplified the review process (Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop 2007). 9.1.9 References Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd. (2006). Wallum Sedge Frog (Litoria olongburensis) Wetland Habitat Relocation DRAFT (including diagrams). Prepared for PacificLink Alliance, Queensland. Biodiversity Assessment and Management. (2005) Proposed Tugun Bypass: Review of Wallum Sedgefrog and Green-thighed Frog. Brisbane, Queensland. Chambers, J. and Ingram, G. (2005) Can A Fence Stop a Frog? Results of Frog Exclusion Fencing Trials. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd. Cuskelly, M. and Los, T. (2007) Tugun Bypass: Where, What, How and When? Presented at Queensland Department of Main Roads, Environment and Heritage Symposium (4 September 2007).

Page 29 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Ecosure (2005). Bird Management Plan: Tugun Bypass. Prepared for Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Queensland. Hay, B. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (presentation), Queensland. Ingram, G. and Caneris, A. (2005) Proposed Tugun Bypass: Review of Wallum Sedgefrog and Green- thighed Frog Final Report. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Queensland. Los, T. and Stein, T. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop. (presentation) Queensland. McPherson, G. and Metzger, G. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop, (presentation), Queensland. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2004). Tugun Bypass Species Impact Statement. Report for the Australian Government Department of Transport and Regional Services, New South Wales Road Traffic Authority and Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland. Marix-Evans, M. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (presentation). Queensland. PacificLink Alliance. (2008) Operation Environmental Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland. PacificLink Alliance. (2007) Position Paper: Frog Fence – Selection Options DR-151-RD for the Tugun Bypass Project. Prepared for Queensland Department of Main Roads, Queensland. PacificLink Alliance. (2006a). PP – 036 – FFMP Flora and Fauna Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland. PacificLink Alliance. (2006b). PP – 039 – WMP Wetland Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland PacificLink Alliance. (2006c). PP – 040 – FMP Frog Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland. PacificLink Alliance. (2006d). PP – 041 – PMP Potoroo Management Plan (Potorous tridactylus) for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland. Tugun Bypass Alliance. (undated) Tugun Bypass Environmental Impact Statement Technical Paper Number 12 Flora and Fauna Assessment. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Main Roads. 9.2 Compton Road - Brisbane City Council 9.2.1 Background Compton Road is located on Brisbane's south-side. A 1.3 kilometre section of Compton Road was upgraded from two lanes to four lanes with a centre median (Goosem 2005; Jones 2006). The upgrade included measures to link Kuraby Bushlands with the nationally significant Karawatha Forest via eight glider-poles; three rope ladders; two box culverts, two wet culverts; fauna exclusion fencing; escape poles; and a fauna land bridge (Brisbane City Council 2005) (Figure 9.2.1). This collection of fauna mitigation structures is the highest diversity of fauna structures in one location anywhere in the world (Veage and Jones 2007). The upgrade was finalised in 2005. 9.2.2 Target species Arboreal species  feathertail glider (Acrobates pygmaeus).  sugar glider (Petaurus breviceps).  squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis).  greater glider (Petauroides volans). Birds  grey goshawk (Accipiter novaehollandiae).  brown goshawk (Accipiter fasciatus).

Page 30 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 powerful owl (Ninox strenua).  varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera).  black-faced monarch (Monarcha melanopsis).  spectacled monarch (Monarcha trivirgatus).  satin flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca).  white-throated treecreeper (Cormobates leucophaeus). Reptiles  fire-tailed skink (Morethia taeniopleura).  lace monitor (Varanus varius). Monotremes, rodents and marsupials  eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus).  short-beaked echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus).  koala (Phascolarctos cinereus).  common dunnart (Sminthopsis murina).  common planigale (Planigale maculate).  yellow-footed antechinus (Antechinus flavipes).  bush rat (Rattus fuscipes).  swamp rat (Rattus lutreolus).

Page 31 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.2.1 Location of Compton Road and fauna mitigation measures (Veage and Jones 2007).

Page 32 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

9.2.3 Mitigation measures a) Overpass: Land bridge Considerations:  The final measurements of the land bridge were based on budgetary constraints, topography and engineering ability. Design:  Figures 9.2.2 and 9.2.3.  Arched and hourglass.  Dimensions: o Length: 70 metres, base width: 20 metres, mid-width: 10 metres. o Height is eight metres above the road. o Each vehicle tunnel is 5.4 metres high. o Slope of the batters on either side is 1:3.  Roadside fauna exclusion fence is continuous along both sides of the road for the entire length of the upgraded road and keys into the land bridge.  The land bridge vegetation consists of local shrub, tree and grass species. However, vegetation at either end of land bridge was not replanted. This has caused a gap between the land bridge and forest vegetation until natural regrowth establishes.  Vegetation growth on the land bridge was aided by a drip irrigation system and between two and three metres of mulch during the early stages of plant establishment.

Figure 9.2.2 Land bridge at Compton Road (Robinson-Wolrath 2008).

Page 33 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.2.3 Longitudinal section of the land bridge adapted from drawing LB-02 (Chambers and Ingram 2005). Monitoring:  Scat collection and identification was the primary method of monitoring.  Pitfall trapping was utilised (Veage and Jones 2007).  Two Faunatech Digicam 120 infra-red triggered cameras were installed on the land bridges in 2006 (Figure 9.2.4). Cameras utilised dual sensor modification for passive infra-red sensors and active infra-red beam sensors. o Due to a series of technical issues cameras were unavailable to collect data on a regular basis. o Cameras were raised on poles on either side of the land bridge, against the fauna exclusion fencing. o Each camera was powered by a 12V sealed lead-acid battery which was changed fortnightly.  Results from monitoring cameras: o Due to serious technical and logistical problems camera monitoring capabilities were compromised. Despite camera problems, monitoring methods detected the following species: brown hare, red-necked wallaby, swamp wallaby, Australian magpie, torresian crow and lace monitor.  Results from monitoring: o Over the summer of 2006 the introduced brown hare dominated, with a report of utilisation by short-beaked echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus) (Veage and Jones 2007). o Species which have become resident on the land bridge include lace monitor (Varanus varius), yellow-faced whip snake (Demansia psammophis) and ornate-burrowing frog (Limnodynastes ornatus) (Veage and Jones 2007). o There are fewer snakes utilising the land bridge than expected. The reason for this is unclear (Wilson 2007).

Page 34 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a)

b) Figure 9.2.4 a) Faunatech Digicam used to monitor use of land bridge (Veage and Jones 2007). b) Active infra-red beam sensors (Veage and Jones 2007). Issues:  The slope leading into Karawatha Forest is particularly steep to avoid excessive clearing of vegetation.  The presence of a gully on the Karawatha Forest side of the land bridge also contributed to the slope’s steepness.  There were concerns that such a gradient would deter some fauna from utilising the land bridge. However, monitoring outcomes to date have shown this has not been a factor.

Page 35 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 A break in the vegetation growth at the base of the land bridge for access purposes has resulted in a loss of the habitat continuum. Learnings:  Vegetating the land bridge with grass seeds instigated immediate usage by macropods.  Due to the success of establishing vegetation and relocating logs on to the land bridge, it has become home to numerous species rather than just acting as a movement corridor. b) Barrier structure: Fauna exclusion fence Design:  Aim of the structure is to guide fauna towards safe fauna crossing structures.  The fauna exclusion fence is continuous along both sides of the road for the length of the upgraded road.  Dimensions: o 2.48 metres high. o Extends five centimetres into the ground (Figure 9.2.5).  The fence is constructed of rubberised metal mesh.  A UV stabilised root barrier 3 mm thick and 480 mm high runs along the bottom of the fence and extends 300 mm into the ground. The sheet is attached to the forest side of the fence.  A rolled metal sheet, 590 mm wide and 1.38 metres above the ground, is attached on the forest side of the fence to discourage climbing animals.  Timber escape poles are located every 50 metres on the roadside of the fence.

Figure 9.2.5 Fauna exclusion fencing at Compton Road (Robinson-Wolrath 2008). Monitoring:  Success of fauna structures was determined by monitoring roadkill pre- and post-construction.  Pre-construction monitoring: o 1.3 kilometres of road were surveyed by walking along the road (both sides) and recording fauna roadkill numbers.

Page 36 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Surveys were undertaken over 16 weeks between February and June 2004, twice weekly over consecutive days. o Surveys were conducted between the hours of 8.30 am – 11.00 am. o Numbering of each individual roadkill and recording locations prevented duplication.  Post-construction monitoring: o Weekly roadkill surveys commenced in February 2005 immediately following construction. Surveys continued through until June 2007. o Post-construction monitoring consisted of travelling both sides of the survey section in a car at 70 km/h. o The change in survey method from pre- to post-construction was due to work health and safety concerns.  Results: o Monitoring of the fauna exclusion fence revealed a 77% reduction in mammal roadkill and a 66% reduction in bird fatalities (Brisbane City Council 2005). Issues:  Landholder negotiations were required as the fauna exclusion fence was required to cross a private driveway and a section of their property. o The fence design in front of this property was amended to have clear sheeting (instead of rolled sheet metal) and a sliding door across the driveway. Learnings:  Compton Road has shown the necessity for and effectiveness of fauna exclusion fencing. During the four months pre-construction thirteen individuals (fauna species) were killed on Compton Road whilst in the two years post-construction this was reduced to five individuals, two of which were attributed to human-caused fence breaches (Veage and Jones 2007). c) Underpasses: Culverts Considerations:  Existing drainage lines, ‘natural’ water movement and target species.  Details, such as size, entrance pole gradient and furniture were based on budgetary capability, engineering possibility and cooperation between project managers, engineers and ecologists. Design:  Two fauna-specific concrete culverts were installed (Figures 9.2.6 and 9.2.7).  Dimensions: o 2.4 metres high; o 2.5 metres wide; o 48 metres long.  Contains three levels: o A lower cement level (0.9 metres wide) for water flow. o A raised cement level with rocks, leaf litter, sand and gravel as furniture: - This level is 1.6 metres wide and 400 mm above the ground, leaving a height of two metres from this level. - Although rocks were embedded into the concrete, natural processes are required to deposit sand, gravel and leaf litter. o Two shelves are provided along the entire length of the underpass to provide dry passage and safety from predators:

Page 37 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

- A small wooden shelf (250 mm wide) attached to the wall of the underpass aims to facilitate the passage of smaller species without requiring them to move along the relatively open area of the underpass floor; and - A raised half-log railing one metre from the bottom of the culvert. Entrance poles on the end of this railing are installed.  The substratum is cement which allows for water flow if required.  One of the culverts has a gully in the median that acts as a skylight and is connected to an artificial pond.

Figure 9.2.6 An underpass at Compton Road. Note the raised cement level with rock ‘furniture’, wooden shelf and log railing (Bond and Jones 2006).

Figure 9.2.7 Kuraby Bushland entrance to an underpass and the wet culverts opening into an artificial pond. The fauna exclusion fence is also visible above the culverts (Bond and Jones 2006).

Page 38 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Monitoring:  Post-construction monitoring consisted of sand plots, scat collection and infra-red cameras with sensors.  Sand plots: o Sand strips inside both ends of the culverts, approximately one to two metres from the end to minimise disturbance from rain or wind. The strips were approximately 10-20 mm thick, one metre wide and covered the entire width of the raised section of the underpasses. o Smaller sand strips were also set up on the shelves (5 mm thick and 500 mm wide).  Results from sand plot monitoring: o A successful crossing was claimed if prints belonging to the same species were found at either end of the culvert and at the same time. Between 15% and 28% of detected tracks by animals made complete crossings (Veage and Jones 2007). o The highest rate of use recorded for one day has been 42 tracks in February 2006, one year after construction (Veage and Jones 2007). o Small mammal, ‘rodents’, specifically Rattus species, both native and introduced species have dominated the structures. o The next most frequent users have been lizards, snakes and birds. o Sand tracking revealed there were strong seasonal movements by the northern brown bandicoot (Isoodon macrourus).  Infra-red cameras: o Four Faunatech Digicam 120 cameras were operational in the underpass in 2007. o Cameras were passive infra-red and microwave sensors triggered by treadles on the raised shelf. o Cameras were encased in weatherproof and vandal deterrent housing. o Cameras were positioned within two to three metres of each culvert entrance mounted with stainless-steel brackets that sit perpendicular to the culvert ceiling, secured via two U-shaped padlocks. o Each camera was powered by a battery pack of 10 rechargeable nickel-metal hydride AA batteries, which lasted for four nights. o Microwave sensors enabled detection of smaller species using the underpass. o Passive sensors detected changes in ambient background temperature.  Results from infra-red cameras: o Initial mounting of cameras directly into the culvert ceiling was ineffective in terms of field of vision and life of batteries. o Due to serious technical and logistical problems camera monitoring capabilities were compromised. Despite camera problems the house mouse, rodent and skink were all recorded using the underpass. Issues:  One culvert has a drainage pipe passing close to the roof of the culvert resulting in the clearance between the wooden fauna ledge and the pipe to be only 300 mm (approximately). However, a ramp was recently installed to allow for fauna movement over the pipe.  Existing water levels in some areas prohibited the design of dry fauna culverts due to the high probability of constant flooding.  The process of establishing details such as the dimensions of culverts, shelving, height of shelving, other furniture and gradient of entrance poles generally had a very limited scientific basis.

Page 39 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Nevertheless, monitoring has revealed that most design features have been successful at providing a safe crossing.  A potential ongoing issue is that the culverts have large concrete aprons with limited vegetation around the entrance. Some species are known to avoid the concrete bases. d) Glider poles Design:  Eight glider poles made of bare treated timber were installed spanning the entire length of the land bridge (Taylor and Goldingay 2007a).  Each pole is eight metres high with crossbeams located between six and seven metres above the ground (Figure 9.2.8). The cross beams serve as possible landing pads and launch opportunities for gliders moving across the land bridge.

Figure 9.2.8 Glider pole drawing adapted from drawing LB-02 (Chambers and Ingram 2005).

Page 40 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

a) b) Figure 9.2.9 a) Glider pole on the land bridge. b) Hair tube mounted on glider pole. Monitoring:  PVC hair tubes 100 mm x 40 mm with double sided tape on the inside were installed approximately four metres off the ground (Figure 9.2.9b).  Analysis of hair tubes has revealed the presence and use of gliders but not their abundance.  Trapped gliders have been radio tagged, determining whether gliders have crossed the road (Taylor and Goldingay 2007a).  Some radio tagged gliders were caught, translocated to the opposite side of the road and then monitored to ascertain whether they returned to their original side, either simply through gliding or use of the fauna structures (Veage and Jones 2007).  Squirrel glider tissue samples have also been collected and genetically tested to ascertain whether crossings are necessary for the survival of the population (Veage and Jones 2007). Learnings:  The height of the poles is too low to provide sufficient height for gliding from pole to pole. The recommendation is that glider poles should be 12 metres tall.  The monitoring revealed that some gliders avoided glider poles and used the vegetation between poles instead. The reason for this is uncertain but it is believed that glider poles may be too open, unsheltered and low for many gliders (Taylor and Goldingay 2007b). e) Rope ladders Design:  Three rope ladders were installed, each with a centre pole in the median strip (Brisbane City Council 2005).  The rope ladders are constructed with durable sailing rope and resemble a ladder with three vertical supports.  The rope bridges are linked to the adjoining canopy via several ropes leading from the top of the poles adjacent to the forest.

Page 41 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.2.10 Canopy bridge used by arboreal species to the road (Scott 2007). Monitoring:  Hair tubes were set up on six poles and 24 trees connected to rope bridges (Taylor and Goldingay 2007a). o Hairs from squirrel gliders, sugar gliders, common brushtail possums and common ringtail possums were detected in the hair tubes attached to trees (Veage and Jones 2007).  Two Faunatech Digicam 120 cameras with active infra-red beams were mounted atop support poles of two canopy bridges. o 12V battery and USB port for downloading data were located close to the ground (small ladder required) in a security box. o Due to technical reasons, no images have been collected by cameras to date.  Results from hair tubes: o Hair tubes detected gliders (squirrel glider and sugar glider) and possums (brushtail and ringtail) on the trees connected via rope leading to the canopy bridge. Issues:  Cameras were shut down for at least a month as a result of movement of the rope constantly triggering the sensors.  Researchers were unable to modify the sensors, as Brisbane City Council policy only allows staff to do so. Thus, researchers lost valuable time and information waiting for Brisbane City Council staff to modify the sensors. 9.2.4 General information a) Monitoring  Roadkill monitoring: o Carried out four months pre- and post-construction (Bond and Jones 2007). o Pre-construction survey found 13 terrestrial vertebrates of ten species, whilst immediate post- construction survey (four months after completion) found a wallaby and a wood duck (Bond and Jones 2007).

Page 42 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

o Up to July 2007 only three vertebrate individuals have been found (Bond and Jones 2007).  Monitoring by researchers for Brisbane City Council commenced four months pre-construction and finalised in 2009. o The aim, however, is for monitoring to be extended until 2011. o This extensive monitoring period will allow for comprehensive data analysis. b) Maintenance  Brisbane City Council only undertakes maintenance as requested by the public or researchers. c) Anthropogenic measures  Local community groups undertook data collection and informed Brisbane City Council about impacts of construction before mitigation actions were undertaken.  Results from an ecological assessment conducted through the cooperation of Brisbane City Council and the Karawatha Forest Protection Society provided the primary justification for implementing the fauna structures. The report indicated animals regularly crossed into habitat on either side of the road.  Ecologists, architects and engineers cooperated and compromised to install fauna crossing structures which were favoured by all.  Engineers did not make changes to design or location of structures without consultation with other parties.  Brisbane City Council created a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with researchers. The MoU allows researchers to undertake necessary research whilst Brisbane City Council provided in-kind support, maintenance and necessary equipment. Researchers provide Brisbane City Council with annual effectiveness reports.  The ongoing relationship between researchers and Brisbane City Council has been positive for all parties. There have, however, been some issues: o Poor communication between researchers and Brisbane City Council maintenance crews; o Inability for researchers to access some equipment (such as cameras) without Brisbane City Council personnel present (due to workplace health and safety concerns). o These issues have extended both time and labour costs. d) General issues  Street lighting infiltration into nearby habitat may cause stress or behavioural changes to nearby fauna (Caneris and Ingram 2003).  Maintenance occurs only on an "as-need" basis.  Monitoring has been unable to provide estimations of abundance of individuals by scat collection and analysis, as site-specific information is required and is unavailable for the Compton Road area (Veage and Jones 2007).  A cat and fox eradication program was undertaken during construction due to fears they would prey on wildlife attempting to utilise fauna structures. e) General learnings  Use of the underpasses has fluctuated with seasons. Winter has lower usage rates; most use was recorded in summer (Bond and Jones 2007; Veage and Jones 2007).  Despite findings from other research, all sizes of mammals habituated to structures faster than expected. Arboreal species took the longest time to habituate (Veage and Jones 2007).  Glider pole use may be increased by increasing vegetation around poles (Taylor and Goldingay 2007b).

Page 43 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

9.2.5 References Bond, A. and Jones, D. (2007) Temporal Trends in Use of Fauna-Friendly Underpasses and Overpasses. Unpublished, Centre for Innovative Conservation Strategies, Griffith University, Brisbane. Bond, A. and Jones, D. (2006) Fauna Use of Underpasses and the Land Bridge at Compton Road: Results from Six Months Passive Monitoring. Report for the Brisbane City Council. Suburban Wildlife Research Group, Griffith University, Brisbane. Brisbane City Council. (2005) Biodiversity Research Partnerships Program – Wildlife Movement Solutions - Compton Road: successful solutions. Brisbane. Caneris, A. and Ingram, G. (2003) Review and Fauna Management Advice: Compton Road Kuraby. prepared for Brisbane City Council, Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland. Chambers, J. and Ingram, G. (2005) Can a Fence Stop a Frog? Results of Frog Exclusion Fencing Trials. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland. Goosem, M. (2005) Wildlife Surveillance Assessment Compton Road Upgrade 2005 - Review of Contemporary Options for Monitoring. Unpublished report to the Brisbane City Council, Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland. Jones, D. (2006) Crossing Over - at Compton Road. Wildlife. Winter: 38. Mack, P. (2003) Proposed Road Widening Compton Road, Kuraby Report on Ecological/Fauna Movement Issues. Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland. Taylor, B. and Goldingay R.L. (2007a) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road 2006 - 07: Final Report. Brisbane, Queensland. Taylor, B. and Goldingay R.L. (2007b) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road - Progress Report July-December 2007. Brisbane, Queensland. Veage, L. and Jones, D. (2007) Breaking the Barrier: Assessing the Value of Fauna-friendly Crossing Structures at Compton Road. Prepared for Brisbane City Council. Centre for Innovative Conservation Strategies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland. Wilson, S. (2007) Bridging the Gap: Reptiles on the Compton Road Overpass Between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests. Brisbane, Queensland. Wilson, S. (2006) Bridging the Gap: Potential Dispersal of Reptiles Between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests across Compton Road. Brisbane, Queensland. 9.3 The East Evelyn Range Upgrade 9.3.1 Background The East Evelyn Range Road Upgrade was a 13 million dollar project between the townships of Ravenshoe on the Evelyn Tableland and Millaa Millaa on the Atherton Tableland in northeast Queensland (Goosem et al. 2001). This winding single lane section of road at high altitude (1,100 metres) was replaced with a straighter, two lane road (Goosem et al. 2005). The 3.2 kilometre section of road separates the Mount Fischer and Hypipamee Wet Tropics World Heritage Areas. The Department of Transport and Main Roads worked closely with the Wet Tropics Management Authority, the Department of Environment and Resource Management, James Cook University, Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group and Trees for the Evelyn and Atherton Tablelands (TREAT) on this project (Interface Magazine 2002). Road construction commenced in August 2000 (Goosem et .al. 2001) and the new road was opened in December 2001 (Goosem 2004). Fauna mitigation consisted of three fauna underpasses, a revegetated corridor and revegetation to reduce previous fragmentation. Habitat present adjacent to the road corridor:  Rainforest interior (dominated by pioneer species and gullies);  Rainforest edges;  Closed lantana shrub land; and

Page 44 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Grassland (mainly consisting of dense pasture grasses). 9.3.2 Target species Birds  southern cassowary (Casuarius casuarius johnsoni) Mammals  Lumholtz tree-kangaroo (Dendrolagus lumholtzi)  lemuroid ringtail possum (Hemibelideus lemuroides)  Herbert River ringtail possum (Pseudochirulus herbertensis)  green ringtail possum (Pseudochirops archeri) 9.3.3 Mitigation measures  Preconstruction measures o An environmental survey was completed, confirming the presence of southern cassowaries in the area (previously thought not to occur in the area) (Goosem et al. 2005). o Underpasses were designed through extensive consultation with stakeholders and experts. o All lantana located in the road verge was removed prior to construction commencing (Goosem et al. 2001)  Post-construction measures o TREAT assisted in an awareness education program for local schools and community groups. o Roadkill will be monitored for five years post-construction (Goosem et al. 2005). a) Underpasses Considerations:  Needed to be large enough to allow target fauna to pass through.  Alignment and size needed to be adequate to allow fauna to have a direct line of sight to the forest on the other side (Goosem et al. 2005). Design:  Three fauna underpasses were installed (Figure 9.3.1).  Underpasses were galvanised steel arches with a wide concrete base (Gibson 2001).  Dimensions: o 3.4 metres high; o 3.7 metres wide; o 38 metres long.  Placed (where possible) in existing gullies and where thicker vegetation already provided good cover for local animals minimising revegetation costs (Gibson 2001).  Rock piles and logs were installed to provide shelter from predators for animals such as goannas, frogs, rats and echidnas (Gibson 2001).  A thin pathway through underpass was left clear for movement by larger species (Goosem et al. 2005).  Ground cover consisted of logs, rocks, leaf litter and soil to replicate a natural environment (Gibson 2001).  Thick trawler ropes were hung from the roof of culverts and extended to neighbouring trees for use by obligate arboreal species (for example, tree-kangaroos) (Gibson 2001) (Figures 9.3.1 and 9.3.2).

Page 45 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Footings for underpass furniture allow logs to be raised off the underpass floor (Figure 9.3.3). This prevents rotting and extends log life.  Escape poles were installed to accommodate arboreal species (Goosem et al. 2001; Goosem 2004).  Infra-red monitoring cameras were placed in cages to reduce the likelihood of theft (Figure 9.3.4).

Figure 9.3.1 Fauna underpass at East Evelyn Range (Scott 2008).

Figure 9.3.2 Fauna furniture in underpass (Scott 2008).

Page 46 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Figure 9.3.3. Footings for underpass furniture (Scott 2008). Monitoring:  Infra-red cameras and sand plots were used to monitor the effectiveness of the underpasses.  Sand plots were installed as a one metre wide strip of fine sand 5 cm deep in centre of underpasses (Goosem et al. 2005).  Monitoring of sand plots commenced in January 2002 and were monitored weekly (Goosem et al. 2005).  Roadkill monitoring commenced in July 1999 and concluded in 2004 (Goosem 2004).  Two section of the upgrade in the vicinity of the Millaa Millaa lookout were monitored for roadkill each week (Goosem 2004).  Two sections of the Kennedy Highway near Longland's Gap were monitored as a 'control' to compare roadkill counts (Goosem 2004).  During post construction surveys roadkill observed when checking the sand plots were noted (Goosem 2004).  Results of monitoring: o Underpasses were used by rainforest generalist species. o Terrestrial and small mammal species have been found using the underpasses including two confirmed sightings of the Lumholtz tree-kangaroo (Goosem et al. 2005). o Underpasses were found to be ineffective for target possum species (Goosem et .al. 2005). o The presence of feral species did not inhibit use of the underpass by native species (Goosem 2004). o A decline or absence of roadkill for rainforest species was observed post-construction (Goosem 2004; Goosem 2008). o Birds were noted to fly through the underpasses (Goosem et al. 2005).

Page 47 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

o Observational sightings included crimson rosella and red-backed wren flying through underpasses, buff-banded rail foraging within the underpasses and boobook owl roosting on ropes and branches in the underpasses.

Figure 9.3.4 Infra-red monitoring cameras were caged to prevent theft (Scott 2008). Issues:  High rainfall in the area has washed away sand in sand plots and human interference limited data during monitoring periods (Goosem 2004).  At the underpass entrances low bushes were planted to encourage passage by fauna. However, due to bad weather plants were unable to establish themselves in the shallow soil (Goosem 2004).  Weeds have started to grow at the entrance of some underpasses due to sub-standard weed matting (Goosem 2004).  Deep drainage channels along entrances and pooling of water in underpasses has decreased the attractiveness of these structures to animals.  Cattle escaped from a neighbouring property (with inadequate fencing) and severely damaged furniture in an underpass (Goosem 2004). There has been no funding available to repair furniture.  The cassowary has not been recorded using the underpasses. It is hypothesised that underpasses are too small to attract movement by the cassowary (Goosem et al. 2005).  Due to extensive media coverage there has been a large amount of human use of fauna underpasses and some vandalism of furniture has occurred. Learnings:  Treatment for weeds immediately following construction would have aided underpass effectiveness (Goosem 2004). b) Revegetation corridor Considerations:  The upgrade provided an opportunity to rehabilitate areas previously disturbed by the road and land use. Design:  Revegetation around underpass entrances was designed to channel species into these structures.

Page 48 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 Trawler rope connected to hooks inside the underpass extended into vegetative corridor (Figure 9.3.5).  A funnel shape corridor measuring nine metres wide at the entrances to the underpasses and 50 metres wide near rainforest remnants was revegetated (Goosem et al. 2005).  Monitoring of corridor did not occur.

Figure 9.3.5 Trawler rope connecting the surrounding vegetation to hooks inside the underpass (Scott 2008). c) Revegetation Design:  Previously disturbed habitat connectivity was re-established.  15 hectares was revegetated with a variety of local plants (Queensland Department of Main Roads 2001).  Plants were chosen based on initial ecological studies.  The local tree community group, TREAT, coordinated volunteers who collected, propagated and planted 40,000 trees in the area (Interface Magazine 2002).  To prevent roadkill in the area, non palatable food plants were planted near roads (Goosem et al. 2001).  Steep embankments around the underpass openings were used to discourage fauna from reaching the road (Goosem et al. 2001).  The closed canopy design was aimed at protecting smaller species and attracting larger species to the underpasses (Goosem et al. 2001). Monitoring:  The success of food tree placement and the effectiveness of the steep embankments adjacent to the underpasses were monitored by proxy through roadkill monitoring and sightings of target species on road surfaces.  Results: o After three years the trees planted in the rainforest corridor had grown to a height of between three and six metres and were starting to create a closed canopy attracting bird species (Goosem 2008).

Page 49 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Issues:  Food tree placement and steep embankments has not been sufficient to prevent roadkill (Queensland Government 2001).  It has been recommended that fauna exclusion fences be installed, however funding for this work has yet to be obtained. Learnings:  One roadkill tree-kangaroo occurred during the monitoring phase. It appeared that the tree-kangaroo became trapped on the road (after crossing) between two steep embankments with no means of escape (Goosem 2004).  Ongoing roadkill indicates that unpalatable trees and steep embankments were not sufficient to prevent roadkill. 9.3.4 General information  Rope bridges are proposed to be installed when trees in the road corridor have grown tall enough and if funding is available (Goosem et al. 2001).  The local community has been responsible for the translocation of flora displaced by road construction and rainforest restoration works (Goosem et al. 2001). 9.3.5 References Gibson, S. (2001) Designer Décor. Wet Tropics Newspaper. Dry Season: 15. Goosem, M. (2008). Rethinking Road Ecology. In: Stork, N. and Turton, S. (eds). Living in a Dynamic Tropical Forest Landscape. Chapter 36. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, Pp 445-459. Goosem, M. (2004) Progress Report - East Evelyn Underpass Monitoring Project. Rainforest Cooperative Research Centre. Cairns, Queensland. Goosem, M., Izumi, Y. and Turton, S. (2001) Efforts to Restore Habitat Connectivity for an Upland Tropical Rainforest Fauna: A Trial of Underpasses Below Roads. Ecological Management and Restoration. 2(3):196-202. Goosem, M., Weston, N. and Bushnell, S. (2005) Effectiveness of Rope Bridge Arboreal Overpasses and Faunal Underpasses in Providing Connectivity for Rainforest Fauna. Wildlife Impacts on Conservation Solutions. ICOET Proceedings, Chapter 8 Pp 304-315. Interface Magazine, (2002). A Magazine for staff of Queensland Transport and Main Roads, (Media Release), March edition P21. Local Government and Planning (2001) Invitation to Join Community Revegetation Project. Bush Telegraph, Department of Communities and Information (media release). McBain, R. (2002) Roundabout RS & E. Department of Main Roads, Media release February, P6. Queensland Department of Main Roads (2001) Achievement Awards 2001: The East Evelyn Range Upgrade, Queensland. 9.4 Mount Higginbotham, Victoria 9.4.1 Background A population of endangered mountain pygmy-possums occurs between Mount Higginbotham and Mount Loch in Victoria, Australia (Mansergh and Scotts 1989) (Figure 9.4.1). The mountain pygmy-possum is the only mammal restricted to the alpine regions with an altitude of greater than 1430 metres. The mountain pygmy-possum occurs in the peri-glacial rock screes and boulder fields (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). The species is one of the most threatened mammals in Australia (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). The Victorian population has sexual segregation during non-breeding seasons (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). Road and resort development have bisected mountain pygmy-possum habitat on the eastern slopes of Mount Higginbotham (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). This has led to problems as the juvenile males are ‘choosing’ not to disperse from their natal grounds. This has caused increased competition for resources and resulted in an increased level of female deaths over winter (Mansergh and Scotts 1989).

Page 50 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Due to the impact caused by the road, retro-fit mitigation measures were proposed. These are discussed below.

Figure 9.4.1 Locations of mountain pygmy-possum populations (Mansergh and Scotts 1989) The habitat in the Mount Higginbotham area is:  mountain plum-pine (Podocarpus lawrenceii) heathland.  This community is long-lived, fire sensitive and introduced species are rare or absent (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). 9.4.2 Mitigation measures  Post-construction o A basalt filled funnel shaped corridor of rock was constructed. o Two connecting box culverts were constructed to pass beneath the road. Considerations:  Species only travels through rocky substrate and avoids open spaces. Design:  A funnel shaped corridor of basalt rocks was constructed on the disturbed eastern slope between the largest remaining patches of habitat (Figures 9.4.2 - 9.4.4).  Rocks were obtained from building excavations.  Two culverts were installed and filled entirely with rock. Rocks used to fill the culverts were greater than 300 mm on their longest axis.  Box culverts measured 900 mm x 1.2 metres.

Page 51 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

 Wire mesh grills at the culvert entrances and rock depth of more than one metre ensured that animals using the structure had no higher then normal risk of predation by feral species.  Rocks were removed from a small area of one culvert and two drift fences were erected to direct animals through a 0.5-1 metre rock free area.

Figure 9.4.2 Cross-section of corridor and tunnel construction (Mansergh and Scotts 1989).

Figure 9.4.3 Entrance to the rock underpass (ABC 2009).

Page 52 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Monitoring:  1983 Study o Culvert use was monitored using a remote sensing camera (Canon T70) with light beam sensors. o Elliott traps were also used to sample the populations. o Areas of special interest were also monitored through Elliott trapping. o A capture-mark-release program was conducted over a series of trapping grids (van der Ree et al. 2009). o Biological information was obtained from captured animals and ear-tags were fitted (van der Ree et al. 2009).  2007 Study o The effectiveness of the installed fauna structures was analysed using population viability analysis (PVA). o A subset of the census data set was used to complete analysis of the PVA. o Two populations were compared: one population was divided by the road, the second population remained unaffected by the road.  Results o Female survival rates increased over winter from 21% (pre-construction) to 42% (post- construction). o The female survival rate post-construction is similar to those found in undisturbed sites (44%) (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). o There were only two recorded roadkill pygmy possums during post-construction monitoring. o Although the mitigation structures reduced the impact of the road, the overall number of females was still 15% lower than in undisturbed sites. o Results showed fauna structures mitigated the barrier effect of roads but did not completely restore population levels (van der Ree et al. 2009).

Page 53 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Figure 9.4.4 Extent of breeding habitat (past and present) and trap sites, the corridor, and the tunnels on Mount Hogginbotham, Victoria, Australia (Mansergh and Scotts 1989). Issues:  Juveniles take a long time to disperse when using the culverts. This may be because they could not find the culvert and will not cross the open road corridor.  The population has not returned to post-construction numbers. This may have been due to insufficient numbers of culverts, the impact of road mortality and/or natural variation (van der Ree et al. 2009). Learnings:  Because the species is restricted to travel in rock habitats fauna exclusion fencing was not needed.  Studies of the structure’s effectiveness for the pygmy-possum revealed the actual use of the structures does not mean that the impact of the road is entirely eliminated.

Page 54 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

 The rapid use of tunnels can probably be attributed to the unique habitat requirements and the social organisation of the species. 9.4.3 References ABC (2009) Possum Dreaming – Photo Gallery. Available http://www.abc.net.au/science/scribblygum /May2000/gallery.htm. Accessed 25 November 2009. Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) Burramys parvus. Species Profile and Threats Database. Canberra, ACT. Available: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 6 March 2009. Mansergh, I. and Scotts, D. (1989) Habitat Connectivity and Social Organisation of the Mountain Pygmy- possum Restored by Tunnel. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3):701-707. Van der Ree, R., Heinze, D., McCarthy, M. and Mansergh, I.M. (2009) Under-road Tunnel Restores Population Dynamics of Endangered Pygmy-possum. Ecology and Society. 34:145-156.

Page 55 of 55 Vol 2 Chapter 9 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

10. TERMINOLOGY AND ABBREVIATIONS

10.1 Words, expressions and terms used in the manual ...... 1 10.2 Abbreviations...... 7

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

10 TERMINOLOGY AND ABBREVIATIONS 10.1 Words, expressions and terms used in the manual

Term Definition Anthropogenic Generated and maintained, or at least strongly influenced by human activities Arboreal Fauna living in or amongst trees Aven Vertical tube found in the roof of cave passages Structures placed in culverts that change the flow pattern in the immediate vicinity, creating a sequence of slow and fast water zones. They allow fish to Baffles use burst speed to advance from one resting place to the next, and cruising speed to swim through the resting zones The combined effect of traffic mortality, physical barriers and avoidance, which Barrier effect together reduce the likelihood and success of fauna crossing infrastructure The uniform side slope of a cutting or an embankment, expressed as a ratio of Batter one unit vertical to ‘x’ units horizontal Horizontal ledge in an earth bank or cutting constructed to ensure the stability of Berm a steep slope The richness among living organisms including terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are a part. It Biodiversity includes diversity within and between species and within and between ecosystems as well the processes linking ecosystems and species A structure that maintains the grade of the road or elevates the traffic above the surrounding environment, allowing fauna to pass under the road. Facilitates water drainage or the movement of local human traffic and facilitates the Bridge passage of fauna. Vegetation clearing can also be minimised (clearing only required for bridge piers or pylons) and allows natural vegetation to grow under the infrastructure. Also see ‘overpass’ Bypass Highway route that passes around an area Cage device A humane trap to capture small to medium mammals, aimed at reducing injury A rope or pole suspended above the traffic, either from vertical poles or from Canopy bridge trees. Used by arboreal and scansorial (climbing) fauna The width of the linear clearing is kept sufficiently small to allow the tree canopy Canopy connectivity to remain continuous above the clearing, or where discontinuous, sufficiently small to allow gliders (and other volant species) to safely traverse the clearing The portion of the road formation, including lanes, auxiliary lanes and shoulders Carriageway set aside for the use of vehicles Structures that raise the base of the stream bed to allow water through a culvert Causeway during low flows but are inundated during floods or high flows Chemical that can be used on a temporary basis (for example, during a breach Chemical repellents in a fauna exclusion fence) to discourage fauna from approaching the road The area commencing at the edge of the traffic lane and is available for emergency use by errant vehicles. The distance that the clear zone extends Clear zone from the carriage edge is dependent on the traffic volume, road geometry and design speed of the road. This area may consist of a shoulder, parking bays, a recoverable slope and a clear run-out area Community (biotic) Assemblage of interacting species living in a given location at a given time

Page 1 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Term Definition The state of structural landscape features being connected, enabling access Connectivity between places via a continuous route of passage. The physical connections between landscape elements Tract of land or water connecting two or more areas of habitats that aid fauna Corridor movement across the landscape. See also 'Wildlife corridor' Cross section A vertical section of the ground surface taken at right angles to a survey line Designated or recognised place for people or fauna to traverse from one side of Crossing an infrastructure to the other Square, rectangular or half-circle in shape and may be purpose built for fauna Culvert passage or water drainage, or a combination of both. Typically pre-cast concrete cells or arches made of steel Construction method where trench is excavated to accommodate the road to Cut and cover pass below ground level through a tunnel with the area above available for revegetation and use by some fauna species Excavation of the land enabling transport infrastructure to be placed below the Cutting surrounding ground level Operating speed of individual elements of a road, including straights, horizontal Design speed curves and vertical curves, i.e. a nominal speed adopted for the design of the geometric features of the road Dispersal The process or result of the spreading of organisms from one place to another A system devised to remove excess water (surface or subsurface) from an Drainage infrastructure surface Road with two lanes of traffic moving in opposite directions on either side of a Dual carriageway central reservation Landscape features of various size, shape and vegetative cover that maintain, Ecological corridor establish or enhance landscape connectivity Dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their Ecosystem non-living environment, interacting as a functional unit The portion of an ecosystem near its perimeter, where influences of the Edge (effect) surroundings prevent the development of interior environmental conditions Effect See 'Impact' Elliott trap Collapsible, folding trap used for the capture of small mammals Artificial bank (made of packed earth or gravel) such as a mound or dike, Embankment constructed above the natural ground surface in a linear form and designed to carry a roadway or railway across a lower lying area Endemic species A species confined to a particular region and thought to have originated there Plant species of foreign origin or character, introduced from abroad and not Exotic species native to Australia A method and a process by which information about the existing environment is Environmental Impact collected and the positive and negative impacts of a proposal are assessed and Assessment used to inform decision-making to ensure the project avoids or minimises adverse impacts. Also referred to as Environmental Assessment Fauna Animal species Man-made measure installed to enable animals to cross over or under a road, Fauna passage railway or canal without coming into contact with the traffic

Page 2 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Term Definition A freestanding structure and/or barrier designed to partition an area and prevent Fencing or restrict pedestrian and/or fauna movement across a boundary, particularly in hazardous situations Flora Plant or bacterial life This area is located between the face of the kerb and the property boundary for use by pedestrian traffic, possible bicycle traffic and also for the placement of Footpath utility services. Footpaths typically share the same longitudinal gradient as the adjoining roadway The physical ground surface area occupied by a building or structure (whether Footprint existing or planned). Vehicle crossings that are almost level with the river bed. Low flows pass over Fords the structure rather than through a culvert. If concrete or rocks are added and the bed level is raised then the crossing becomes a causeway Fragmentation The breaking up of a habitat, ecosystem or land-use unit into smaller parcels Vertical poles placed in the centre median, on the road verge or overpass, to Glider pole provide fauna with an intermediate landing and/or multiple launch opportunities Gradient The (rate of) change of a parameter between one area or region and another Guide fencing Fencing built to lead fauna to a dedicated crossing point. Paved channel designed to carry runoff from the edge of infrastructure into the Gutter drainage system The type of site (vegetation, soils, and so on) where an organism or population Habitat naturally occurs, including a mosaic of components required for the survival of a species Dissection and reduction of the habitat areas available to a given species. Caused directly by habitat loss (for example, land-take) or indirectly by habitat Habitat fragmentation isolation (for example, by barriers preventing movement between neighbouring habitat patches) Funnel with double-sided sticky tape and baited, used to identify fauna species Hair tube/funnel by taking samples of their fur/hair Highway See ‘Road’ The positive or negative response of an organism, species or community to an Impact external factor. This response may have an effect on the species that results in wider consequences at the population, species or community level Measures of simple environmental variables used to indicate some aspect of the Indicator state of the environment (for example, the degree of habitat fragmentation) Infrastructure The system of transport services within an area Invertebrate Animals lacking a vertebral column, or backbone Kerb Edging (usually concrete) built along infrastructure to form part of the gutter The total spatial and visual entity of human living space integrating the geological, biological and human-made environment. A heterogeneous land Landscape area composed of a cluster of interacting ecosystems that create a specific, recognisable pattern Modification of the original landscape by altering the topography and/or plant Landscaping cover This may include building earthworks to form new landscape structures

Page 3 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Term Definition Roads which lie under the jurisdiction of local authorities. Local roads also Local road include any other associated infrastructure and landscape areas that interface and connect with TMR road corridors Local traffic Devices to reduce the speed or volume of traffic (for example, road closures, management chicanes, crosswalks, lighting, signage) Major road Road which is assigned permanent traffic priority over other roads The central strip of road not intended for use by traffic, that separating opposing Median traffic flows A set of local populations within an area, where migration typically occurs between one local population to at least some others in order to sustain local Metapopulation population numbers. The metapopulation may have a higher persistence than the single local populations The regular, usually seasonal, movement of all or part of a fauna population to Migration and from a given area Mitigation Action to reduce the severity of, or eliminate, an adverse impact Combination of observation and measurement employed to quantify the Monitoring performance of a plan, measure or action against a set of predetermined indicators, criteria or policy objectives The pattern of patches and corridors embedded in a matrix (in this case, within Mosaic a landscape) Major arterial highway that features: two or more traffic lanes of traffic moving in each direction, separated by a central reserve; controlled entries and exits; and Motorway alignment eliminating steep grades, sharp curves, and other hazards (for example, grade crossings) and inconveniences to driving Plant residues and other suitable material applied to the ground to conserve Mulch moisture, hold the soil in place, aid in establishing plant cover, increase filtration and minimise temperature fluctuation Plant species both cultivated from indigenous origins, or hybrid varieties (or forms), which are readily available within the nursery industry. These species Native plants are selected for their use in meeting particular design criteria. Native species, for the purposes of this manual, must not be invasive or species that are a threat of becoming a future weed The ground surface that exists prior to any construction work being carried out Natural ground cover under a contract Measure installed to reduce the dispersal of traffic noise in a certain sensitive Noise barrier area (for example, wall, fence, screen) Project management framework initially developed by Queensland Transport's Integrated Transport Planning Division in 2001 and adopted by the Department OnQ of Main Roads in 2002. It consists of a set of inter-related phases, activities and tasks that define the project process, from the start through to completion A bridge extending over a road, typically 20 to 70 metres wide. The bridge is covered in soil, planted with vegetation and enhanced with other habitat Overpass (land bridge) features (for example, logs, rocks, water-body and so on.). Also known as an eco-duct or wildlife bridge. See also ‘Bridge’ This bridge is above the major road and is narrow (not hour-glass shaped) and Overpass (small roads) allows human access above the road. The road on the overpass is typically a minor road and may be unsealed or single lane. See also ‘Bridge’

Page 4 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Term Definition The point at which water discharges from a stream, river, lake, tidewater Outlet artificial dam or drainage structure Pavement The structural component that supports traffic on the road Functional group of individuals that interbreed within a given, often arbitrarily Population chosen, area Cylindrical watertight structure sunk into the ground to provide a passage (from Pipe one side of the infrastructure to another) Refuge pole Used to aid fauna dispersal in open areas by providing refuge from predators A geographical area (usually larger than 100 square kilometres) embracing several landscapes or ecosystems that share some features (for example Region topography, fauna, vegetation, climate, and so on). Examples include bio- geographic and socio-economic regions The process of returning to an earlier condition or state. Ecological restoration Restoration involves a series of measures and activities undertaken to return a degraded ecosystem to its former state. Riparian Vegetation naturally associated with a river or creek system Road Concrete or tarmac public way for vehicles, humans and fauna Linear surface used by vehicles plus any associated verges (usually vegetated). Includes the area of land immediately influenced by the road in terms of noise, Road corridor visual, hydrological and atmospheric impact (normally within 50 to 100 metres of the edge of the infrastructure). Road Corridor Database used to record spatial environmental data on the road corridor. Data Environmental is used to; identify risks to projects, identify environmental issues and identify Assessment special maintenance requirements of the road corridor Road network The interconnected system of roads serving an area Designed to inform, regulate and advise road users (with considerable advance Road signs warning) of directions, distances, destinations, routes, hazards, service locations, points of interest and other required traffic information Provides a consistent statewide understanding of how TMR conducts business. Road System It provides a high level view of TMR’s end-to-end processes in meeting Management government priorities and community outcomes, and provides an environment Framework for decision-making, policy development and support Rock ramps Rocks placed within streams to decrease water velocities Junction where three or more roads join and traffic flows in one direction around Roundabout a central island of land which is often vegetated A vehicle-resistant barrier installed alongside or on the central reserve of Safety barrier infrastructure, intended to prevent errant vehicles from leaving the designated corridor and thus limit consequential damage In landscape ecology, the spatial and temporal dimensions of patterns and Scale processes Scat Fauna excrement Scansorial Capable of or adapted for climbing The linear paved strip at the side of a motorway or roads which vehicles can use Shoulder during emergencies and which is used by maintenance vehicles to access works

Page 5 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Term Definition Site A defined place, point or locality in the landscape The maximum speed at which a motor vehicle is legally permitted to travel on a Speed limit particular section of road Ecologically suitable patch where an organism temporarily stops while moving Stepping stone along a heterogeneous route Target species A species that is the subject of a conservation action or the focus of a study Taxa A taxonomic category or group, such as phylum, order, family, genus or species Terrestrial Pertaining to land or earth Top soil The top layer of soil that supports vegetation Typically round pipes of relatively small diameter (for example, less than 1.5 Tunnel (fauna) metres in diameter). May also be termed eco-pipe Structure, including its approaches, allowing one route to pass under another Underpass route or obstacle All plant species occurring between the ground and the canopy layer. It includes Understorey low grasses and ground covers through to large shrubs up to four metres in height The strip of land (often vegetated) beyond the infrastructure surface itself, but Verge within the infrastructure corridor Vertebrate Any animal characterised by a vertebral column, or backbone Long elevated bridge, supported on pillars, which carries infrastructure over a Viaduct valley or other similar low-level landscape area Volant Engaged in or having the power of flight Waterway A body of water A plant which poses a threat to other vegetation and the environment, usually Weed by way of its invasive habitat, to the detriment of native plants or landscape and revegetation treatments Construction in a river or canal designed to hold the water upstream at a certain Weir level Land or area containing high levels of soil moisture or completely submerged in Wetland water for either part or whole of the year Wildlife All wild animals, plants, fungi and bacteria collectively Linear-shaped area or feature of value to wildlife, particularly for facilitating Wildlife corridor movement across a landscape Designated place for fauna to cross infrastructure safely (for example, using a Wildlife crossing specially-designed overpass, underpass, etc)

Page 6 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

10.2 Abbreviations

ARCUE Australian Research Centre for Urban Ecology

ASS Acid sulphate soil

BCC Brisbane City Council

DERM Department of Environment and Resource Management

DoTARS Department of Transport and Regional Services

GPS Global Positioning Satellite

GU Griffith University

JCU James Cook University

mm millimetres

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

NRMBNT Natural Resource Management Board (Northern Territory)

NSW New South Wales

PVA population viability analysis

PVC polyvinyl chloride

QDMR Queensland Department of Main Roads

QPWS Queensland Parks and Wildlife Services

RCEA Road Corridor Environmental Assessment

RSM Road System Manager

RTA Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW)

TMR Department of Transport and Main Roads

TREAT Trees for the Evelyn and Atherton Tablelands

USA United States of America

UV ultraviolet

VHF Very High Frequency

Page 7 of 7 Vol 2 Chapter 10 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

11. TERMINOLOGY AND ABBREVIATIONS

A...... 1 B...... 2 C...... 2 D...... 3 E ...... 4 F ...... 5 G...... 5 H...... 6 I ...... 6 J ...... 6 K...... 7 L ...... 7 M ...... 7 N...... 8 P ...... 9 Q...... 10 R...... 10 S ...... 11 T ...... 12 V ...... 12 W ...... 13 Y ...... 14

Page i of i Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

11 REFERENCES A

ABC (2009) Possum Dreaming – Photo Gallery. Available http://www.abc.net.au/science/scribblygum /May2000/gallery.htm. Accessed 25 November 2009.

Abu-Zidan, F., Parmar, K. and Rao, S. (2002) Kangaroo-related Motor Vehicle Collisions. Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care. 53:360-363.

Ambrose, S. (2008a) Transparent Noise Walls and Bird Mortality on New South Wales Roads: A Review of the Problem and Suggested Mitigation Measures. Prepared for NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Environmental Branch, Ryde, New South Wales.

Ambrose, S. (2008b) Specialist Advice: Transparent Noise Walls and Bird Mortality. Report prepared for the Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Aresco, M.J. (2003) Highway Mortality of Turtles and Other Herpetofauna at Lake Jackson, Florida, USA, and the Efficacy of a Temporary Fence/Culvert System to Reduce Roadkills. Road Ecology Centre eScholarship Repository. University of California, USA.

Australian Geographic (2000) Bridge to Life. Australian Geographic. 59(10).

Australian Museum Business Services (1997) Fauna Usage of Three Underpasses Beneath the F3 Freeway Between Sydney and Newcastle. Prepared for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Australian Museum Business Service (2001a) Fauna Underpass Monitoring, Stage 1 - Final Report - Brunswick Heads. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Australian Museum Business Services (2001b) Fauna Underpass Monitoring: Stage 1 - Final report - Bulahdelah to Coolongolook. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Australian Museum Business Services (2001c) Fauna Underpass Monitoring: Stage 2 - Episode 3 - Bulahdelah to Coolongolook. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Australian Museum Business Services (2001d) Pacific Highway - Fauna Underpass Monitoring: Stage 2 – Episode 3 Taree. Report for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney, New South Wales.

Australian State of the Environment Committee (2001) Australia State of the Environment 2001. Independent Report to the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment and Heritage, CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Available: http://www.environment.gov.au/soe/2001/publications/report/index.html. Accessed 7 August 2007.

Australian Wetlands Pty Ltd (2006) Wallum Sedge Frog (Litoria olongburensis) Wetland Habitat Relocation DRAFT (including diagrams). Prepared for PacificLink Alliance, Queensland.

Austroads (2000) Ecologically Sustainable Development: Toolbox. Part A: Guidance Package; Part B: Case Studies. AP-R166/00. Austroads, Sydney, New South Wales.

Page 1 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

B

Ball, T.M. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007) Can Wooden Poles be Used to Reconnect Habitat for a Gliding Marsupial? Unpublished.

Bank, F.G., Irwin, C.L., Evink, G.L., Gray, M.E., Hagood, S., Kinar, J.R., Levy, A., Paulson, D., Ruediger, B., Sauvajot, R.M., Scott, D.J. and White, P. (2002) Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European Highways. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs Office of Policy, Washington, USA.

Barnes, D. (2007) Fauna Use of Underpasses. Connell Wagner, Brisbane, Queensland.

Bax, D. (2006) Karuah Bypass: Fauna Crossing Report. Prepared for the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority.

Beyer, G.L. and Goldingay, R.L. (2006) The Value of Nest Boxes in the Research and Management of Australian Hollow-using Arboreal Marsupials. Wildlife Research. 33:161-174.

Bissonette, J.A. and Cramer, P.C. (2008) Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. NCHRP Report 615. National Cooperative Highway Research Program. USA.

Bond, A. and Jones, D. (2006) Fauna use of Underpasses and the Land Bridge at Compton Road: Results from Six Months Passive Monitoring. Report for the Brisbane City Council. Suburban Wildlife Research Group, Griffith University, Brisbane.

Bond, A. and Jones, D. (2007) Temporal Trends in Use of Fauna-friendly Underpasses and Overpasses. Unpublished, Centre for Innovative Conservation Strategies, Griffith University, Brisbane.

Brown, K. and Stevenson, W. (2004) Tugun Bypass Species Impact Statement and Equivalent Studies under Relevant Queensland and Commonwealth Environmental Legislation. DoTARS, NSW Roads and Traffic Authority and Queensland Department of Main Roads.

Brisbane City Council (2005a) Biodiversity Research Partnerships Program - Wildlife Movement Solutions - Compton Road: successful solutions. Brisbane, Queensland.

Brisbane City Council (2005b) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement. Brisbane, Queensland.

Brisbane City Council. (Undated) Ecological Assessment Guidelines. Available: http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_1644. Accessed 2 September 2009.

C

Caneris, A. (2007) Koala Movement. Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/0E353C6F- 6005-4905-B990-3261494D7EDC/0/Adrian_Caneris.pdf. Accessed 26 November 2007.

Caneris, A.H. and Jones, P.M. (2004) Action Plan to Reduce Koala Hits from Vehicles in Redland Shire. Redland Shire Council, Queensland.

Caneris, A. and Ingram, G. (2003) Review and Fauna Management Advice: Compton Road Kuraby. Prepared for Brisbane City Council, Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland.

Carrick, F.N. and Grimley, A.J. (1994) Platypus in Near Urban Waterways of Brisbane City. Prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland.

Chambers, J. and Ingram, G. (2005) Can A Fence Stop a Frog? Results of Frog Exclusion Fencing Trials. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Queensland.

Page 2 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture. (2003) Ecological Corridors and Edge Effects Project: Case Study - Greenbank - Karawatha Corridor. Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture, Brisbane, Queensland.

Churchill, T.B. (1995) Scales of Spatial and Temporal Variation in a Tasmanian Heathland Spider Community. Unpublished. Thesis. Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland.

Churchill, T.B. (1997) Spiders as Ecological Indicators: An Overview for Australia. Proceedings of the Invertebrate Biodiversity and Conservation Conference, Melbourne, Victoria. 52(2):331-337.

Churchill, T.B. (2008) Invertebrate Research Initiative: Using Invertebrates to Monitor and Evaluate Environmental Change across Brisbane City. Initial Project Report 2008. Report prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland.

Churchill, T.B. and Ludwig, J.A. (2004) Changes in Spider Assemblages in Relation Along Grassland and Savanna Grazing Gradients in Northern Australia. The Rangeland Journal. 26(1):3-16.

Claridge, A. W. and Lindenmayer, D.B. (1998) Consumption of Hypogeous Fungi by the Mountain Brushtail Possum (T. caninus) in Eastern Australia. Mycological Research 102: 269–272.

Clevenger, A.P. and Waltho, N. (2005) Performance Indices to Identify Attributes of Highway Crossing Structures Facilitating Movement of Large Mammals. Biological Conservation. 121(3).

Clevenger, A.P., Chruszcz, B. and Gunson, K. (2001) Drainage Culverts as Habitat Linkages and Factors Affecting Passage by Mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology. 38:1340-1349.

Clevenger, A.P. and Waltho, N. (2000) Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Wildlife Underpasses in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. Conservation Biology. 14: 47-56.

Cogger, H. (2000) Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. (6th edition). New Holland Publishers, Australia Pty Ltd, Sydney, New South Wales.

Cohen, M. (2008) A Step-by-step Guide to Setting Up Infra-red Video Cameras (Faunatech) to Monitor Wildlife on a Rope Canopy Bridge. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane.

Cotterell, E. (1998) Fish Passage in Streams: Fisheries Guidelines for Design of Stream Crossings: Fish Habitat Guideline FHG001. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Queensland.

Cuskelly, M. and Los, T. (2007) Tugun Bypass: Where, What, How and When? Presented at Queensland Department of Main Roads Environment and Heritage Symposium (4 September 2007).

D

Department of Environment and Climate Change (2002) Native Animal Fact Sheets Bandicoots. Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/plantsanimals/bandicoots.htm. Accessed 3 September 2009.

Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007) Threatened and Pest Animals of Greater Southern Sydney: Fauna of Conservation Concern and Priority Pest Species. Available: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/threatenedspecies/07471tpagssvol2pt10mammals2.pd f. Accessed 3 September 2009.

Department of Environment and Resource Management (2010) A-Z of plants and animals. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife- ecosystems/wildlife/threatened_plants_and_animals/endangered/mahogany_glider.html Accessed 27 January 2010.

Page 3 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) Burramys parvus. Species Profile and Threats Database. Canberra, ACT. Available: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 6 March 2009.

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2009) Litoria lorica. Species Profile and Threats Database. Available: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 3 September 2009.

Department of Primary Industries (2006) Reducing the Impact of Road Crossings on Aquatic Habitat in Coastal Waterways – Northern Rivers, NSW. Report to the New South Wales Environmental Trust, NSW Department of Primary Industries: Wollongbar, New South Wales.

Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (2000) Bonville Project Pacific Highway Coffs Harbour. Director- General's Report Section 115C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. New South Wales.

DK Images (Undated) Canopy Road Sign. Available: http://www.dkimages.com/discover/Home/Geography/North-America/United- States/South/Florida/Panhandle/Roads/Canopy-Road-Sign/index.html. Accessed 22 August 2007.

Drury, W.L., Wilson, S.K. and Vanderduys, E. (2002) Fauna of the Darling Downs Rail Corridors: Diversity and Management Options. Report by World Wildlife Fund for Queensland Rail, Queensland.

E

Ecological Associates Inc (2002) Coastal Roadway Lighting Manual: A Handbook of Practical Guidelines for Managing Street Lighting to Minimise Impacts to Sea Turtles. Prepared for Florida Power and Light Company. Available: http://www.myfwc.com/WILDLIFEHABITATS/SeaTurtle_index.htm. Accessed 4 September 2009.

Ecosure. (2005) Bird Management Plan: Tugun Bypass. Report for Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Queensland.

Ehmann, H. (1992) Encyclopaedia of Australian animals: Reptiles. Angus and Robertson. Pymble, New South Wales.

Environmental Protection Agency (1998) Tropical Topics: An Interpretive Newsletter for the Tourism Industry. Newsletter No. 46. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p00820bo.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010.

Environmental Protection Agency (2004) State Planning Policy 1/97 Conservation of koalas in the Koala Coast: Five Year Review Report. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p01520aa.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010.

Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Nature Conservation (Koala) Conservation Plan 2006 and Management Program 2006 – 2016. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p01950aa.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010.

Environmental Protection Agency (2007) Common Death Adder. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/wildlife-ecosystems/wildlife/az_of_animals/common_death_adder.html. Accessed 27 January 2010.

Eyre, T. (2004) Distribution and Conservation Status of the Possums and Gliders in Southern Queensland. In Goldingay, R. and Jackson, S. The Biology of Australian Possums and Gliders. Pp. 1-25, Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton.

Page 4 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

F

Fahrig, L. Pedlar, J.H., Pope, S.E., Taylor, P.D. and Wegner, J.F. (1995) Effect of Road Traffic on Amphibian Density. Biological Conservation. 73: 177-182.

Fairfull, S. and Witheridge, G. (2002) Why Do Fish Need to Cross the Road: National Guidelines on Fish Passage Requirements for Waterway Crossings. Catchment and Creeks Pty Ltd. Sydney, New South Wales.

Finegan, A. (2004) Fauna Underpasses Along the Pacific Highway between Gosford and Coolongolook presentation.

Forman, R., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J., Clevenger, A., Cutshall, C., Dale, V., Fahrig, L., France, R., Goldman, C., Heanue, K., Jones, J., Swanson, F., Turrentine, T. and Winter, T. (2003) Road Ecology: Science and Solutions, Island Press, Washington, United States of America.

Frogs Australia Network (2005) Litoria brevipalmata. Australian Frogs Database. Available: http://frogsaustralia.net.au/frogs/display.cfm?frog_id=135. Accessed 3 September 2009.

G

Gibbs, J.B. (1998) Amphibian Movements in Response to Forest Edges, Roads and Streambeds in Southern New England. Journal of Wildlife Management. 62: 584-589.

Gibson S. (2001) Designer Décor. Wet Tropics Newspaper. Dry Season Edition: 15.

Goosem, M. (2002) Effectiveness of Tropical Rainforest Roads on Small Mammals: Fragmentation, Edge Effects and Traffic Disturbance. Wildlife Research. 29:277-289.

Goosem, M. (2004) Progress Report - East Evelyn Underpass Monitoring Project. Rainforest Cooperative Research Centre, Cairns, Queensland.

Goosem, M. (2005) Wildlife Surveillance Assessment Compton Road Upgrade 2005 - Review of Contemporary Options for Monitoring. Unpublished Report to the Brisbane City Council, Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland.

Goosem, M. (2008) Rethinking Road Ecology. In: Stork, N. and Turton, S. (eds.). Living in a Dynamic Tropical Forest Landscape. Chapter 36. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, Pp 445-459.

Goosem, M., Harriss, C., Chester, G. and Tucker, N. (2004) Kuranda Range: Applying Research to Planning and Design Review. Rainforest CRC. Prepared for Department of Main Roads, Queensland.

Goosem, M., Izumi, Y. and Turton, S. (2001) Efforts to Restore Habitat Connectivity for an Upland Tropical Rainforest Fauna: A Trial of Underpasses Below Roads. Ecological Management and Restoration. 2(3):196-202.

Goosem, M. and Turton S. (2000) Impacts of Roads and Powerlines on the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management, Queensland.

Goosem, M and Weston, N. (2002) Under and Over. Wildlife Australia. 39(3):34-37.

Goosem, M., Weston, N. and Bushnell, S. (2005) Effectiveness of Rope Bridge Arboreal Overpasses and Faunal Underpasses in Providing Connectivity for Rainforest Fauna. Wildlife Impacts on Conservation Solutions. ICOET Proceedings. Chapter 8 Pp 304-315.

Grant, T.R. 1991. The Biology and Management of the Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) in NSW. Species Management Report Number 5. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, New South Wales.

Page 5 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Grimley, A. and McKee, J. (1998) Platypus Habitat at Canungra Creek Bridge Construction Sites. Currumbin Sanctuary Research, Currumbin, NSW.

H

Harris, R.A. (1986) Vegetative Barriers: An Alternative Highway Noise Abatement Measure. Noise Control Engineering Journal. 27:4-8.

Hay, B. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (Presentation). Queensland.

Hayes, I. (2006) Effectiveness of Fauna Road-kill Mitigation Structures in North-eastern New South Wales. School of Environmental Science and Management, Southern Cross University, Queensland.

Heads Road Reference Panel (2007) The Forgotten Corner. Available: http://www.heads-road.org/. Accessed 22 August 2007.

Holland, G., Bennett, A. and van der Ree, R. (2007) Time-budget and Feeding Behavior of the Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) in Remnant Linear Habitat. Wildlife Research. 34:288-295.

Hollow Log Homes (2005) Hollow Log Homes. Available: http://www.hollowloghomes.com.au/HLHEntry2.htm. Accessed 13 August 2007.

Hunt, A., Dickens, H. and Whelan, R. (1987) Movement of Mammals Through Tunnels under Railway Lines. Australian Zoologist. 24(2):89.

Hyde, V.B. (2007) Civil Engineering for Passage of Fish and Fauna. Australian Journal of Water Resources. 11(2):193-206.

I

Ingram, G. and Caneris, A. (2005) Proposed Tugun Bypass: Review of Wallum Sedgefrog and Green- thighed Frog Final Report. Prepared by Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd, Queensland.

Interface Magazine. (2002) A Magazine for Staff of Queensland Transport and Main Roads. (Media Release). March: 21.

Institute of Transportation Engineers (2007) Chicane. Available: http://www.ite.org/traffic/tcstate.htm. Accessed 13 August 2007.

Iuell, B., Bekker, G.J., Cuperus, R., Dufek, J. Fry, G., Hicks, C., Hlavac, V., Keller, V.B., Rosell, C., Sangwine, T., Torslov, N., Wandall, B. le Maire (eds.) (2003) Wildlife and Traffic: A European Handbook for Identifying Conflicts and Designing Solutions. European Co-operation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research, Brussels.

J

Jackson, S.D. (1996) Underpass Systems for Amphibians. In: Evink, G.L., Garrett, P., Zeigler, D. and Berry, J. (eds.) Trends in Addressing Transportation Related Wildlife Mortality. Proceedings of the Transportation Related Wildlife Mortality Seminar. State of Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, USA, P4.

Jones, D. (2006) Crossing Over – at Compton Road. Wildlife. Winter: 38.

Jungalwalla, A. (2003) Outline Framework for Fauna Sensitive Road Design and Management. Austroads Environmental Reference Group, Queensland.

Page 6 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

K

Kanowski, J. and Tucker, N. I. J. (2002) Trial of Shelter Poles to Aid the Dispersal of Tree Kangaroos on the Atherton Tablelands, North Queensland. Ecological Management and Restoration. 3(2).

Kapitzke, I. R. (2005) Multipurpose Design for Remediation of Fish Passage Barriers on Creek Road Crossings, Townsville, North Queensland. National Environmental Engineering and Sustainability 2005 Conference. Sydney, New South Wales.

Kapitzke, I. R. (2009) Culvert Fishway Planning and Design Guidelines. Parts A – I. Prepared for Department of Queensland Transport and Main Roads, Townsville, Queensland.

Kavanagh, R. P., Stanton, M. A. and Brassil, T. E. (2007) Koalas Continue to Occupy Their Previous Home- ranges After Selective Logging in Callitris–Eucalyptus Forest. Wildlife Research. 34: 94–107.

Keeley, B. and Tuttle, M. (1999) Bats in American Bridges. Resource Publication No. 4. Bat Conservation International Inc, America.

Klocker, U., Croft, D. and Ramp, D. (2006) Frequency and Causes of Kangaroo-vehicle Collisions on an Australian Outback Highway. Wildlife Research. 33:5–15.

Koala Konnection (Undated) It's All Good. Available: http://www.queensland.me.uk/nl4_content.htm. Accessed 22 August 2007.

L

Lawrence, M., Sully, D., Beumer, J. and Couchman, D. (2009) Fisheries Guidelines for Conducting an Inventory of Instream Structures in Coastal Queensland. Fish Habitat Guideline FHG 007. Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries. Queensland.

Leopold-Woodridge, K. (2008) Temporal Fauna Use of Seven Road Underpass Structures in Urban/Peri- Urban Landscapes in South-East Queensland (Spring 2007-Summer 2008). Honours Thesis, Griffith University, Queensland.

Local Government and Planning (2001) Invitation to Join Community Revegetation Project. Bush Telegraph. Department of Communities and Information (media release).

Lomov, B., Keith, D.A., Britton, D.R. and Hochuli, D.F. (2006) Are Butterflies and Moths Useful Indicators for Restoration Monitoring? A Pilot Study in Sydney’s Cumberland Plain Woodland. Ecological Management and Restoration. 7(3).

Los, T. and Stein, T. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (presentation).

Lunney, D., O'Neill, L., Matthews, A. and Sherwin, W. (2002) Modelling Mammalian Extinction and Forecasting Recovery: Koalas at Iluka. Biological Conservation 106:101–113.

M

Mack, P. (2003) Proposed Road Widening Compton Road, Kuraby Report on Ecological/Fauna Movement Issues. Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Queensland.

Magnus, Z. (2004) Wildlife Roadkill Mitigation Information Kit – A Guide for Local Government and Land Managers. Tasmanian Environment Centre Inc., Hobart, Tasmania.

Magnus, Z., Kriwoken, L., Mooney, N. and Jones, M. (2004) Reducing the Incidence of Wildlife Roadkill: Improving the Visitor Experience in Tasmania. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, Tasmania.

Page 7 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Marsden, T., Stewart, R., Woods, K., Jennings, D. Ianna, S. and Thorncraft, G. (2006) Freshwater Fish Habitat Rehabilitation in the Mackay Whitsunday Region. Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries, Queensland.

Main Roads Western Australia (2007) Design of Fauna Underpasses. Document no. 67-08-83, revision 1B. Main Roads Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia. Available http://standards.mainroads.wa.gov.au/internet/standards/rtems/roadside/fauna.asp. Accessed 4 November 2009.

Mansergh, I. and Scotts, D. (1989) Habitat Connectivity and Social Organisation of the Mountain Pygmy- possum Restored by Tunnel. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 53(3):701-707.

Marix-Evans, M. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (Presentation).

Maron, M. and Kennedy, S. (2006) Roads, Fire and Aggressive Competitors: Determinants of Bird Distribution in Subtropical Production Forests. Forest Ecology and Management, 240:24-31.

Marsh, D., Milam, G., Gorham, N. and Beckman, N. (2005) Forest Roads as Partial Barriers to Terrestrial Salamander Movement. Conservation Biology. 19(6): 204-208.

Matthews, A., Lunney, D., Gresser, S. and Maitz, W. (2007) Tree Use by Koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) After Fire in Remnant Coastal Forest. Wildlife Research. 34(2): 84-93.

McAlpine, C., Bowen, M., Callaghan, J., Lunney, D., Rhodes, J., Mitchell, D., Pullar, D. and Possingham, H. (2006) Testing Alternative Models for the Conservation of Koalas in Fragmented Rural–urban Landscapes. Austral Ecology. 31: 529-544.

McAlpine, C., Rhodes, J., Callaghan, J., Bowen, M., Lunney, D., Mitchell, D., Pullar, D. and Possingham, H. (2006) The Importance of Forest Area and Configuration Relative to Local Habitat Factors for Conserving Forest Mammals: A Case Study of Koalas in Queensland, Australia. Biological Conservation. 132: 153-165.

McAlpine C., Rhodes, J., Peterson, A., Possingham, H., Callaghan, J., Curran, T., Mitchell, D. and Lunney, D. (2007) Planning Guidelines for Koala Conservation and Recovery: Guidelines for Best Practice. Available: http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/docs/news/Koala_Planning_Guidelines_UQ_AKF.pdf. Accessed 4 September 2009.

McBain, R. (2002) Roundabout RS & E, for the Department of Main Roads, Media release February, P6.

McPherson, G. and Metzger, G. (2007) Tugun Bypass Project Learnings Workshop (Presentation).

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management (1995) Wildlife Crossings for Roads and Waterways. Road and Hydraulic Engineering Division, Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, Delft, The Netherlands.

Moffett, M.W. (2000) What's "Up"? A Critical Look at the Basic Terms of Canopy Biology. Biotropica. 32(4): 569-596.

Montague-Drake, R. and Croft, D. (2004) Do Kangaroos Exhibit Water-focused Grazing Patterns in Arid New South Wales? A Case Study in Sturt National Park. Australian Mammalogy. 26:87–100.

N

National Parks and Wildlife Service (1999). Threatened Species Information: Brush-tailed Phascogale. New South Wales.

National Parks and Wildlife Service (2000). Threatened Species Information: Endangered Long-nosed Bandicoot Population at North Head. New South Wales.

Page 8 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Ng, S.J., Dole, J.W., Sauvajot, R.M., Riley, S.P.D. and Valone, T.J. (2004) Use of Highway Undercrossings by Wildlife in Southern California. Biological Conservation. 115: 499-507.

P

PacificLink Alliance (2006a) PP – 036 – FFMP Flora and Fauna Management Plan. for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006b) PP - 038 - BMP Bird Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Prepared by Ecosure for the Queensland Department of Main Roads, Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006c) PP – 039 – WMP Wetland Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006d) PP – 040 – FMP Frog Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland

PacificLink Alliance (2006e) PP – 041 – PMP Potoroo Management Plan (Potorous tridactylus) for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006f) PP – 042 – CPMP Common Planigale Management Plan (Planigale maculate) for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006g) PP – 053 – FMP Fire Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006h) PP – 059 – GHFFMP Grey-headed Flying Fox Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2006i) Tugun Bypass Drawings. Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2007) Position Paper: Frog Fence – Selection Options DR-151-RD for the Tugun Bypass Project. Report for Queensland Department of Main Roads, Queensland.

PacificLink Alliance (2008) Operation Environmental Management Plan for the Tugun Bypass Project, Queensland.

Parsons, M., Lamont, B., Kovacs, B. and Davies, S. (2007) Effects of Novel and Historic Predator Urines on Semi-wild Western Grey Kangaroos. Journal of Wildlife Management. 71(4): 1225-1228.

Peck, S. (2004) Conservation Status Review and Management Recommendations for the Collared Delma, Delma torquata. In: Brisbane City Council (2005) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement. Queensland.

Peck, S. and Hobson, R. (2007) Survey Results and Management Options for the Collared Delma Delma torquata Along the Proposed Toowoomba Bypass, Toowoomba Range, South-East Queensland, November 2006. Environmental Protection Agency and Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Queensland.

Peterken, C., Ringwood, G. and Sarac, Z. (2009) Waterway Barrier Works Development Approvals. Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries Fish Habitat Management Operational Policy FHMOP 008, Queensland.

PIARC. (World Road Association) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. World Road Association, La Défense Cedex, Paris.

Pieters, C. (1993) An Investigation into the Efficacy of a Koala/Wildlife Funnel-Tunnel at Gaven, Queensland. Urban Wildlife Research Centre. Queensland.

Page 9 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Port Stephens Council and Australian Koala Foundation (2002) Port Stephens Council Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management – June 2002. Australia.

Porter, R. (1998) Observations of the Large Population of the Venerable Pygopodid, Delma torquata. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum. 42(2) 565-572. In: Brisbane City Council (2005) Collared Delma: Conservation Action Statement, Brisbane.

Priday, S., O'Sullivan, T., Ryan, B. and Goldingay, R. (2001) An Investigation of the Use of Road Overpass Structures by Arboreal Marsupials. Australian Museum Business Services, New South Wales.

Pyper, W. (2004) Koalas are Losing Out to Traffic. ECOS. 31:118.

Q

Queensland Department of Main Roads (1998) Roads in the Wet Tropics: Planning, Design, Construction, Maintenance and Operation - Best Practice Manual. Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2001a) Cassowary Management Strategy. Tully Mission Beach Road 2001. Townsville, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2001b) Achievement Awards 2001: The East Evelyn Range Upgrade. Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2002a) Fauna Sensitive Road Design Volume 1: Past and Existing Practices. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2002b) Road Drainage Manual. Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2004a) Road Landscape Manual (2nd ed.). Queensland Government Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2004b) Tugun Bypass Species Impact Statement. Report for the Australian Government DoTARS, New South Wales Road Traffic Authority and Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005a) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 7 – Cross Section. Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005b) Road Planning and Design Manual. Chapter 8 - Safety Barriers and Roadside Furniture. Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005c) Bird Management Plan: Tugun Bypass. Available: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/tugun_appendix_p.pdf. Accessed 1 September 2009.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2005d) Tugun Bypass, Stewart Road to Kennedy Drive - Environmental Impact Statement December 2004 Volume 1: Main Volume. Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2007) Wildlife Signage Guidelines (DRAFT Volume 9) Technical Note. Queensland Department of Main Roads, Brisbane, Queensland.

Queensland Department of Main Roads (2009) Koalas and Their Ability to Traverse Road Traffic Safety Barriers. Metropolitan Region, Brisbane, Queensland.

R

Ramp, D. and Croft, D. (2006) Do Wildlife Warning Reflectors Elicit Aversion in Captive Macropods? Wildlife Research. 33:583-590.

Page 10 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Ramp, D., Russell, B. and Croft, D. (2005) Predator Scent Induces Differing Responses in Two Sympatric Macropodids. Australian Journal of Zoology. 53: 73–78.

Redland Shire Council (2007) Koala Futures Discussion Paper: Koala Summit. Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/F2DBD313-7FF6-481B-BBBC- F329CA69F656/0/KoalaFutures_Discussion_Paper.pdf. Accessed 26 November 2007.

Redland Shire Council (2008) Redlands Koala Policy and Strategy 2008. Available: http://indigiscapes.redland.qld.gov.au/wildlife/koala/Pages/KoalaPolicyStrategy.aspx. Accessed 16 December 2009.

Reijnen, R. and Floppen, R. (1994) The Effects of Car Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations in Woodland. In: Evidence of Reduced Habitat Quality for Willow Warblers (Phylloscopus trochilus) Breeding Close to a Highway. The Journal of Applied Ecology. 31(1): 85-94.

Roads and Traffic Authority (2005) Submission Report/Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Tugun Bypass (Volume 1). Parramatta, New South Wales.

Roads and Traffic Authority (2006) Karuah Bypass: Environmental Impact Audit Report. Available: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/downloads/pacific/karuah_bypass_environmental _impact_audit_report_september_2006.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2007.

Rhodes, J.R. (2005) The Ecology, Management and Monitoring of Wildlife Populations in Fragmented Landscapes A Koala Case Study. Submitted for PhD at the University of Queensland.

Rhodes, J., Wiegand, T., McAlpine, C., Callaghan, J., Lunney, D., Bowen, M. and Possingham, H. (2006) Modelling Species' Distributions to Improve Conservation in Semiurban Landscapes: Koala Case Study. Conservation Biology. 20(2) 449-459.

Roedenbeck, I.A., Fahrig, L., Findlay, C.S., Houlahan, J.E., Jaeger, J.A.G., Klar, N., Kramer-Schadt, S. and van der Grift, E.A. (2007) The Rauischholzhausen Agenda for Road Ecology. Ecology and Society. 12:11.

Ryan, S. (2006) Conservation Management Profile: Collared delma Delma torquata. Ecosystem Conservation Branch, EPA, Queensland. Available: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/register/p02094aa.pdf. Accessed 27 January 2010.

S

Scherzinger, W. (1979) Zum Feindverhalten des Haselhuhnes (Bonasa bonasia). Die Vogelwelt. 100:205- 217.

Scott, N. (2003) Fauna Sensitive Road Design. Presentation at the Road Engineering Association of Asia and Australasia, Cairns.

Scott, N. (2007) Can Koalas and a Booming Road Network Co-exist? (Presentation). Available: http://www.redland.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/9A6DCCEA-7ACE-4565-8CD4- C3D931021FFD/0/Norman_Scott.pdf. Accessed 27 November 2007.

Smith, A. (2004) Koala Conservation and Habitat Requirements in a Time Production Forest in North-east New South Wales. In: Lunney, D. Conservation of Australia's Forest Fauna (2nd Ed.) Pp 591-611. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman.

Smith, G. C., Mathieson, M. and Hogan, L. (2007) Home Range and Habitat Use of a Low-density Population of Greater Gliders Petauroides volans (Pseudocheiridae: Marsupialia), in a Hollow Limiting Environment. Wildlife Research. 34:472-483.

Stanisic, J., Burwell, C., Raven, R., Monteith, G. and Baehr, B. (2005) Terrestrial Invertebrate Status Review: Brisbane City. Prepared for Brisbane City Council, Brisbane, Australia.

Page 11 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Strahan, R. (ed.) (1995) The Australian Museum Complete Book of Australian Mammals (2nd ed.). Reed New Holland, Sydney. NSW.

Sullivan, B., Baxter, G. and Lisle, A. (2003) Low Density Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) Populations in the Mulgalands of South-west Queensland. III. Broad-scale Patterns of Habitat Use. Wildlife Research. 30: 583-591.

Sullivan, B., Baxter, G., Lisle, A., Pahl, L. and Norris, W. (2004) Low Density Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) Populations in the Mulgalands of South-west Queensland. IV. Abundance and Conservation Status. Wildlife Research. 31: 19-21.

Suter, W., Bollmann, K. and Holderegger, R. (2007) Landscape Permeability: From Individual Dispersal to Population Persistence. In: Kienast, F., Wildli, O. and Ghosh, S, A Changing World: Challenges for Landscape Research. 8th ed. Netherlands: Springer. Pp 157-174. T

Taylor, B. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007a) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road – Progress Report July-December 2007. Brisbane, Queensland.

Taylor, B. and Goldingay, R.L. (2007b) The Study of Gliding Possums at Compton Road 2006 - 07: Final Report. Brisbane, Queensland.

Technologies for Conservation and Development(2006) Radio Tracking. Available: http://www.t4cd.org/Technology/UnderstandingTechnology/Pages/RadioTracking.aspx. Accessed 27 March 2009.

Terrain NRM (2008) Wongaling Corridors Fauna Crossings. Prepared by Chenoweth Environmental Planning and Landscape Architecture.

The Technical Department for Transport, Roads and Bridges Engineering and Road Safety (2005) Technical Guide: Facilities and Measures for Small Fauna. France.

Thomson, B. (2002) Australian Handbook for the Conservation of Bats in Mines and Artificial Cave-Bat Habitats. Australian Centre for Mining and Environmental Research, Melbourne, Australia.

Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group (2008) T-K Shelter Poles at Risk. Newsletter of the Tree-Kangaroo and Mammal Group Inc. March 2008: 1-3.

Trombulak, S. and Frissell, C. (2000) Review of Ecological Effects of Roads on Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities. Conservation Biology. 14(1): 18-30.

Tugun Bypass Alliance (Undated) Tugun Bypass Environmental Impact Statement Technical Paper Number 12 Flora and Fauna Assessment. Prepared for the Queensland Department of Main Roads.

V van der Ree, R. (2002) The Population Ecology of the Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) Within a Network of Remnant Linear Habitats. Wildlife Research. 29:329-340. van der Ree, R. (2006) Road Upgrade in Victoria a Filter to the Movement of the Endangered Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis): Results of a Pilot Study. Ecological Management and Restoration. 7(3): 226-228. van der Ree, R., Heinze, D., McCarthy, M. and Mansergh, I.M. (2009) Under-road Tunnel Restores Population Dynamics of Endangered Pygmy-possum. Ecology and Society. 34:145-156. van der Ree, R., Clarkson, D. T., Holland, K., Gulle, N. and Budden, M. (2007) Review of Mitigation Measures Used to Deal with the Issue of Habitat Fragmentation by Major Linear Infrastructure.

Page 12 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Department of Transport and Main Roads Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Technical Document Volume 2: Preferred Practices

Department of Environment and Water Resources. Prepared for the Department of Environment and Water Resources, Symonston.

Veage, L. and Jones, D. (2007) Breaking the Barrier: Assessing the value of fauna-friendly crossing structures at Compton Road. Prepared for Brisbane City Council. Centre for Innovative Conservation Strategies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland.

Viggers, K.L. and Hearn, J. (2005) The Kangaroo Conundrum: Home Range Studies and Implications for Land Management. Journal of Applied Ecology. 42: 99-107.

Viggers, K.L. and Lindenmayer, D.B. (2000) A Population Study of the Mountain Brushtail Possum in the Central Highlands of Victoria. Australian Journal of Zoology. 48: 201-216.

W

Wargo, R. and Weisman, R. (2006) A Comparison of Single-cell and Multi-cell Culverts for Stream Crossings. Journal of American Water Resources Association. 42(4): 989-995.

Webb, J.K. and Shine, R. (2000) Paving the Way for Habitat Restoration: Can Artificial Rocks Restore Degraded Habitats of Endangered Reptiles? Biological Conservation. 92: 93-99.

Wasser, S.K., Bevis, K., King, G. and Hanson, E. (1997) Noninvasive Physiological Measures of Disturbance in the Northern Spotted Owl. Conservation Biology. 11: 1019-1022.

Weston, N. (2001) Bridging the Rainforest Gap. Wildlife Australia. Summer: 17–19.

Weston, N. (2002) Using Rainforest Research: Why Did the Ringtail Cross the Road? Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management, Cairns, Queensland.

Weston, N. (2003) The Provision of Canopy Bridges to Reduce the Effects of Linear Barriers on Arboreal Mammals in the Wet Tropics of Northeastern Queensland. Master Thesis, School of Tropical Environment Studies and Geography and the Centre for Tropical Urban and Regional Planning, James Cook University, Queensland.

Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland (2006) Time Running out for Small Colony of Wallabies. Wildlife Queensland: Your Voice for Your Wildlife. 185:14.

Wilson, R. and Goosem, M. (2007) Vehicle Headlight and Streetlight Disturbance to Wildlife – Kuranda Range Upgrade Project. Cooperative Research Centre for Tropical Rainforest Ecology and Management. Rainforest CRC, Cairns, Queensland.

Wilson, R., Marsh, H. and Winter, J. (2007) Importance of Canopy Connectivity for Home Range and Movements of the Rainforest Arboreal Ringtail Possum (Hemibelideus lemuroides). Wildlife Research. 34(3):177-184.

Wilson, R. (1999) Possums in the Spotlight. Nature Australia. Autumn: 34-41.

Wilson, S. (2006) Bridging the Gap: Potential Dispersal of Reptiles between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests across Compton Road. Brisbane, Queensland.

Wilson, S. (2007) Bridging the Gap: Reptiles on the Compton Road Overpass Between Karawatha and Kuraby Forests. Brisbane, Queensland.

Winter, J.W., Dillewaard, H.A., Williams, S.E. and Bolitho, E.E. (2004) Possums and Gliders of North Queensland: Distribution and Conservation Status. In Goldingay, R.L. and Jackson, S.M. (eds.) The Biology of Australian Possums and Gliding Possums. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Pp 26- 50.

Page 13 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10

Fauna Sensitive Road Design Manual Department of Transport and Main Roads Volume 2: Preferred Practices Technical Document

Witheridge, G. (2002) Fish Passageway Requirements for Waterway Crossings - Engineering Guidelines. Catchment and Creeks Pty Ltd, Queensland.

World Road Association (PIARC.) (2007) Social and Environmental Approaches to Sustainable Transport Infrastructures. World Road Association, La Défense Cedex, Paris.

World 66 (2006) The Viaduct Cullen, Moray. Available: http://www.world66.com/europe/unitedkingdom/lib/gallery/showimage?pic=europe/unitedkingdom/th e_viaduct_cullen. Accessed 22 August 2007.

Wormington, K. (2006) Management Options for Possums and Gliders Living Close to Highways. Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland.

Wormington, K.R., Lamb, D., McCallum, H.I. and Moloney, D.J. (2002) Habitat Requirements for the Conservation of Arboreal Marsupials in Dry Sclerophyll forests of Southeast Queensland, Australia. Forest Science. 48(2):217-227.

Y

Yanes, M., Velasco, J.M. and Suárez, F. (1995) Permeability of Roads and Railways to Vertebrates: the Importance of Culverts. Biological Conservation. 71: 217-222.

Page 14 of 14 Vol 2 Chapter 11 June 10