DOCSLIB.ORG

Management Interventions for 119 Priority Animal Species

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Management Interventions for 119 Priority Animal Species MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS FOR 119 PRIORITY ANIMAL SPECIES This table identified priority management interventions for 119 animal species identified as high priority for urgent management intervention following the 2019-20 bushfires. Developed by the Wildlife and Threatened Species Bushfire Recovery Expert Panel, this analysis of actions will help guide post-fire management and conservation responses. Actions were based on consensus opinion across many experts and are intended to inform the management response immediately, and in the first year, post bushfire. While these actions are intended to support the management response for bushfire-affected species, this information should not be the only consideration of decision makers when focusing investment and effort. a The likely priority actions have been based on the analysis of species' traits. Some activities will require permits and permission of the public land manager. b Survey to establish extent of population loss, and establish baseline for ongoing monitoring. c This includes careful management of unburnt areas within or adjacent to recently burnt ground that provide refuges; also unburnt areas that are not adjacent to burnt areas. Includes protection from extensive, intense fire. d These columns indicate whether the actions are potentially suitable and feasible in the first year after fire, and record what action have taken place to date. In most cases, opportunities to salvage individuals and populations as a 'rescue' action are now past, but there may still be opportunities to capture wild animals to stock captive breeding programs, to carry out wild-to-wild translocations to unburnt habitat and to safe havens (fenced areas and islands), in future years and these are noted for some species. e Careful risk assessment is required in all cases. f Where appropriate, note that food and water provision may be less relevant as time goes on. g Note that many forest-dependent fauna are disadvantaged by post-fire salvage logging, especially hollow-dependent species, so an action to limit post-fire salvage logging will benefit most species. As well as priority actions for the first year post-fire, some key longer-term actions are indicated for some species. Published by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment on 9 September 2020 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia. Licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. For licence conditions see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ SPRAT Emergency salvage of plant and animal Supplementary Feral predator and herbivore control to Species identified as the highest priority for ID species for ex-situ conservation or wild-to- shelter, food, and a Rapid on-ground reduce the pressure on native species where urgent management action d f assessment for wild translocation water for animals appropriate Careful management g species and c Salvage/translocate to Longer-term additional actions of unburnt areas Exclude herbivores from High scores for communities of Salvage/capture into ex nearby unburnt habitat Provision of Control introduced Common name b unburnt and concern situe or havens (including supplementary resources predators ecological traits regenerating vegetation waterways for fish)e Invertebrates Herbivore with a Pseudococcus specialised diet (one No, 100% of adult host markharveyi species of Banksia); 86868 Yes Yes Unlikely plant population Unlikely Yes Unknown Banksia montana habitat specialist that impacted mealybug needs long-unburnt habitat; social Bertmainius colonus High fire mortality Eastern Stirling Range Yes; to prevent 89125 because burrows are Yes Yes Yes Maybe Unlikely Unknown Pygmy Trapdoor trampling shallow Spider Maybe, if unburnt Trioza barrettae Herbivore with a host plants exist, 87805 Banksia brownii plant specialised diet (one Yes Yes Yes Unlikely Yes Unknown which does not louse species of Banksia) already support louse Thaumatoperla alpina Yes; exclude from 25289 Yes Yes Unlikely Unlikely No Unknown Alpine Stonefly waterways Published by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment on 9 September 2020 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia. Licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. For licence conditions see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ SPRAT Emergency salvage of plant and animal Supplementary Feral predator and herbivore control to Species identified as the highest priority for ID species for ex-situ conservation or wild-to- shelter, food, and a Rapid on-ground reduce the pressure on native species where urgent management action d f assessment for wild translocation water for animals appropriate Careful management g species and c Salvage/translocate to Longer-term additional actions of unburnt areas Exclude herbivores from High scores for communities of Salvage/capture into ex nearby unburnt habitat Provision of Control introduced Common name b unburnt and concern situe or havens (including supplementary resources predators ecological traits regenerating vegetation waterways for fish)e Maybe, cool burns - Weeds also a threat have been trialled in - Manage symbionts strong symbiotic relationships Specialist herbivore Maybe; possible Paralucia spinifera NSW which has with Bursaria spinosa subsp lasiophylla (for egg laying) with symbiotic habitat Yes; pigs, especially in 26335 Bathurst Copper Yes Yes No established new Yes and with Anonychomyrma itinerans (ant) which relationship to a plant supplementation for unburnt habitat Butterfly habitat in some areas, protects larvae and receives some food form them and an ant ants possible target for - Somewhat dependent on fire, as species prefer nearby salvage young Bursaria plants Mammals Yes, noting extreme difficulty of capturing High mortality in live individuals in this Sminthopsis intense fires; very high Maybe (species is so Yes; the most rare species that is not Yes; artificial shelters griseoventer aitkeni susceptibility to naturally rare, that important action in 87634 Yes Yes attracted to baits, and in burnt areas are an Yes Kangaroo Island introduced predators unburnt patches may the short to medium that only very small option Dunnart (compounded by be unoccupied) term. numbers are left, cover loss) probably confined to unburnt fragments High mortality in intense fires; very high Maybe; if founders Maybe; as it is known Yes; artificial shelters Pseudomys oralis - Mass regeneration of eucalypts and wattle post fire susceptibility to required for later to be absent from in burnt areas could 98 Hastings River Mouse, Yes Yes Yes Yes could suppress the grass they need, so localised introduced predators reintroductions patches that seem be an option in some Koontoo control of these plants may be an option (compounded by suitable circumstances cover loss) Maybe; nearby unburnt habitat may Specialised habitat; be saturated, but very high susceptibility Yes; artificial shelters - Cross jurisdiction workshop and analysis to see if Maybe; if founders known to be absent Potorous longipes to introduced in burnt areas could wild to wild translocations to other suitable areas to 217 Yes Yes required for later from some sites in Yes Yes Long-footed Potoroo predators be an option in some support new populations and spread risk would be reintroductions NSW that previously (compounded by circumstances beneficial. supported this species, cover loss) so these locations may be options Tachyglossus Maybe; to relocate aculeatus Yes; but less critical from areas if ant 87597 multiaculeatus Specialised diet Yes Yes No No No than for other mounds have been Kangaroo Island mammal species destroyed Echidna Published by the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment on 9 September 2020 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia. Licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. For licence conditions see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ SPRAT Emergency salvage of plant and animal Supplementary Feral predator and herbivore control to Species identified as the highest priority for ID species for ex-situ conservation or wild-to- shelter, food, and a Rapid on-ground reduce the pressure on native species where urgent management action d f assessment for wild translocation water for animals appropriate Careful management g species and c Salvage/translocate to Longer-term additional actions of unburnt areas Exclude herbivores from High scores for communities of Salvage/capture into ex nearby unburnt habitat Provision of Control introduced Common name b unburnt and concern situe or havens (including supplementary resources predators ecological traits regenerating vegetation waterways for fish)e Specialised diet and Yes; supplementary Burramys parvus habitat; very Ex situ animals already feeding already in 267 Mountain Pygmy- susceptible to Yes Yes No Yes Yes exist place in NSW, and possum introduced predators; continuing until May social Yes; cattle and horses Yes; artificial shelters especially in and Antechinus argentus Habitat specialist, Yes; resurvey previous in burnt areas could adjacent to Kroombit 88218 Silver-headed prefers long-unburnt Yes No No Yes - Lantana and other weed control, especially post-fire locations using dogs be an option in some Tops and Blackdown Antechinus vegetation circumstances Tablelands National Parks Unlikely; nearby Specialised herbivore; unburnt habitat may very susceptible to Yes; artificial
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wildlife Trade Operation Proposal – Queen of Ants
    Wildlife Trade Operation Proposal – Queen of Ants 1. Title and Introduction 1.1/1.2 Scientific and Common Names Please refer to Attachment A, outlining the ant species subject to harvest and the expected annual harvest quota, which will not be exceeded. 1.3 Location of harvest Harvest will be conducted on privately owned land, non-protected public spaces such as footpaths, roads and parks in Victoria and from other approved Wildlife Trade Operations. Taxa not found in Victoria will be legally sourced from other approved WTOs or collected by Queen of Ants’ representatives from unprotected areas. This may include public spaces such as roadsides and unprotected council parks, and other property privately owned by the representatives. 1.4 Description of what is being harvested Please refer to Attachment A for an outline of the taxa to be harvested. The harvest is of live adult queen ants which are newly mated. 1.5 Is the species protected under State or Federal legislation Ants are non-listed invertebrates and are as such unprotected under Victorian and other State Legislation. Under Federal legislation the only protection to these species relates to the export of native wildlife, which this application seeks to satisfy. No species listed under the EPBC Act as threatened (excluding the conservation dependent category) or listed as endangered, vulnerable or least concern under Victorian legislation will be harvested. 2. Statement of general goal/aims The applicant has recently begun trading queen ants throughout Victoria as a personal hobby and has received strong overseas interest for the species of ants found.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Fire Impact Assessment for Priority Frogs: Northern Philoria
    Post-fire impact assessment for priority frogs: northern Philoria Geoffrey Heard, Liam Bolitho, David Newell, Harry Hines, Hunter McCall, Jill Smith and Ben Scheele July 2021 Cite this publication as: Heard, G., Bolitho, L., Newell, D., Hines, H., McCall, H., Smith, J., and Scheele, B., 2021. Post-fire impact assessment for priority frogs: northern Philoria. NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub Project 8.1.3 report, Brisbane. Main cover image: Philoria habitat. Image: Liam Bolitho. Insert images (from top to bottom): Philoria kundagungan. Image: Harry Hines; Philoria richmondensis. Image: David Newell; Philoria loveridgei. Image: Harry Hines. 2 Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Background .................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Study species .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Animal Keepers Species List
    Revised NSW Native Animal Keepers’ Species List Draft © 2017 State of NSW and Office of Environment and Heritage With the exception of photographs, the State of NSW and Office of Environment and Heritage are pleased to allow this material to be reproduced in whole or in part for educational and non-commercial use, provided the meaning is unchanged and its source, publisher and authorship are acknowledged. Specific permission is required for the reproduction of photographs. The Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) has compiled this report in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for any particular purpose. OEH shall not be liable for any damage which may occur to any person or organisation taking action or not on the basis of this publication. Readers should seek appropriate advice when applying the information to their specific needs. All content in this publication is owned by OEH and is protected by Crown Copyright, unless credited otherwise. It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), subject to the exemptions contained in the licence. The legal code for the licence is available at Creative Commons. OEH asserts the right to be attributed as author of the original material in the following manner: © State of New South Wales and Office of Environment and Heritage 2017. Published by: Office of Environment and Heritage 59 Goulburn Street, Sydney NSW 2000 PO Box A290,
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Photo Editor
    Environmental research on the impact of bumblebees in Australia and facilitation of national communication for and against further introductions Kaye Hergstrom Tasmanian Museum & Art Gallery Project Number: VG99033 VG99033 This report is published by Horticulture Australia Ltd to pass on information concerning horticultural research and development undertaken for the vegetable industry. The research contained in this report was funded by Horticulture Australia Ltd with the financial support of the vegetable industry and Hydroponic Farmers Federation. All expressions of opinion are not to be regarded as expressing the opinion of Horticulture Australia Ltd or any authority of the Australian Government. The Company and the Australian Government accept no responsibility for any of the opinions or the accuracy of the information contained in this report and readers should rely upon their own enquiries in making decisions concerning their own interests. ISBN 0 7341 0532 0 Published and distributed by: Horticulture Australia Ltd Level 1 50 Carrington Street Sydney NSW 2000 Telephone: (02) 8295 2300 Fax: (02) 8295 2399 E-Mail: [email protected] © Copyright 2002 Environmental Research on the Impact of Bumblebees in Australia and Facilitation of National Communication for/against Further Introduction Prepared by Kaye Hergstrom1, Roger Buttermore1, Owen Seeman2 and Bruce McCorkell2 1Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, 40 Macquarie St, Hobart Tas., 2Department of Primary Industries, Water and the Environment, Tas. 13 St Johns Ave, New Town, Tas. Horticulture Australia Project No: VG99033 The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding support provided by: Horticulture Australia Additional support in kind has been provided by: The Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery Front cover illustration by Mike Tobias; design by Lexi Clark Any recommendations contained in this publication do not necessarily represent current HRDC policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area Ramsar Site Ecological Character Description
    Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area Ramsar Site Ecological Character Description 2010 Disclaimer While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the contents of this ECD are correct, the Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of the Environment does not guarantee and accepts no legal liability whatsoever arising from or connected to the currency, accuracy, completeness, reliability or suitability of the information in this ECD. Note: There may be differences in the type of information contained in this ECD publication, to those of other Ramsar wetlands. © Copyright Commonwealth of Australia, 2010. The ‘Ecological Character Description for the Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area Ramsar Site: Final Report’ is licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Australia licence with the exception of the Coat of Arms of the Commonwealth of Australia, the logo of the agency responsible for publishing the report, content supplied by third parties, and any images depicting people. For licence conditions see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This report should be attributed as ‘BMT WBM. (2010). Ecological Character Description of the Shoalwater and Corio Bays Area Ramsar Site. Prepared for the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.’ The Commonwealth of Australia has made all reasonable efforts to identify content supplied by third parties using the following format ‘© Copyright, [name of third party] ’. Ecological Character Description for the Shoalwater and
    [Show full text]
  • Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Along an Elevational Gradient at Eungella in the Clarke Range, Central Queensland Coast, Australia
    RAINFOREST ANTS (HYMENOPTERA: FORMICIDAE) ALONG AN ELEVATIONAL GRADIENT AT EUNGELLA IN THE CLARKE RANGE, CENTRAL QUEENSLAND COAST, AUSTRALIA BURWELL, C. J.1,2 & NAKAMURA, A.1,3 Here we provide a faunistic overview of the rainforest ant fauna of the Eungella region, located in the southern part of the Clarke Range in the Central Queensland Coast, Australia, based on systematic surveys spanning an elevational gradient from 200 to 1200 m asl. Ants were collected from a total of 34 sites located within bands of elevation of approximately 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000 and 1200 m asl. Surveys were conducted in March 2013 (20 sites), November 2013 and March–April 2014 (24 sites each), and ants were sampled using five methods: pitfall traps, leaf litter extracts, Malaise traps, spray- ing tree trunks with pyrethroid insecticide, and timed bouts of hand collecting during the day. In total we recorded 142 ant species (described species and morphospecies) from our systematic sampling and observed an additional species, the green tree ant Oecophylla smaragdina, at the lowest eleva- tions but not on our survey sites. With the caveat of less sampling intensity at the lowest and highest elevations, species richness peaked at 600 m asl (89 species), declined monotonically with increasing and decreasing elevation, and was lowest at 1200 m asl (33 spp.). Ant species composition progres- sively changed with increasing elevation, but there appeared to be two gradients of change, one from 200–600 m asl and another from 800 to 1200 m asl. Differences between the lowland and upland faunas may be driven in part by a greater representation of tropical and arboreal-nesting sp ecies in the lowlands and a greater representation of subtropical species in the highlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Sucrose Triggers Honeydew Preference in the Ghost Ant, Tapinoma Melanocephalum (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) A
    Sucrose triggers honeydew preference in the ghost ant, Tapinoma melanocephalum (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) A. M. Zhou1, 2,*, B. Q. Kuang2, Y. R. Gao2, and G. W. Liang2 Abstract Honeydew produced by hemipterans mediates mutualistic interactions between ants and hemipterans. Previous studies demonstrated that the mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) and the aphid Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) produce abundant honeydew and attract a large number of tending ants. Ghost ants, Tapinoma melanocephalum (F.) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), show a significant preference for mealybug honeydew over aphid honeydew. Although many studies have indicated that the honeydew produced by hemip- terans plays an important role in ant–hemipteran interactions, we know little about what triggers ants’ foraging preferences. Our results showed that the honeydew produced by both mealybugs and aphids contained fructose, sucrose, trehalose, melezitose, raffinose, and rhamnose. There were no significant difference in the concentrations of the various sugars between mealybugs and aphids, except sucrose. Xylose was present only in mealy- bug honeydew, and glucose was present only in aphid honeydew. We also found no substantial difference in the excretion frequency and the total weight of honeydew produced per 24 h between mealybugs and aphids. Ghost ants preferred sucrose. In addition, attractiveness of sucrose solutions increased significantly with increasing concentration. These results suggest that sucrose is the trigger for ghost ants’ honeydew preference. Key Words: ant–hemipteran mutualism; sugar composition; sugar concentration Resumen La mielcilla producida por hemípteros regula las interacciones mutualistas entre las hormigas y los hemípteros. Los estudios anteriores demostraron que la cochinilla harinosa Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) y el áfido Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) producen mielcilla abundante y atraen a un gran número de hormigas que atienden.
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan
    Appendix 1 to Murray, K., Skerratt, L., Marantelli, G., Berger, L., Hunter, D., Mahony, M. and Hines, H. 2011. Guidelines for minimising disease risks associated with captive breeding, raising and restocking programs for Australian frogs. A report for the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan Compiled by: Graeme Gillespie, Director Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria; Russel Traher, Amphibian TAG Convenor, Curator Healesville Sanctuary Chris Banks, Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria. February 2007 1 1. Background Amphibian species across the world have declined at an alarming rate in recent decades. According to the IUCN at least 122 species have gone extinct since 1980 and nearly one third of the world’s near 6,000 amphibian species are classified as threatened with extinction, placing the entire class at the core of the current biodiversity crisis (IUCN, 2006). Australasia too has experienced significant declines; several Australian species are considered extinct and nearly 25% of the remainder are threatened with extinction, while all four species native to New Zealand are threatened. Conventional causes of biodiversity loss, habitat destruction and invasive species, are playing a major role in these declines. However, emergent disease and climate change are strongly implicated in many declines and extinctions. These factors are now acting globally, rapidly and, most disturbingly, in protected and near pristine areas. Whilst habitat conservation and mitigation of threats in situ are essential, for many taxa the requirement for some sort of ex situ intervention is mounting. In response to this crisis there have been a series of meetings organised by the IUCN (World Conservation Union), WAZA (World Association of Zoos & Aquariums) and CBSG (Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, of the IUCN Species Survival Commission) around the world to discuss how the zoo community can and should respond.
    [Show full text]
  • Fauna of Australia 2A
    FAUNA of AUSTRALIA 26. BIOGEOGRAPHY AND PHYLOGENY OF THE SQUAMATA Mark N. Hutchinson & Stephen C. Donnellan 26. BIOGEOGRAPHY AND PHYLOGENY OF THE SQUAMATA This review summarises the current hypotheses of the origin, antiquity and history of the order Squamata, the dominant living reptile group which comprises the lizards, snakes and worm-lizards. The primary concern here is with the broad relationships and origins of the major taxa rather than with local distributional or phylogenetic patterns within Australia. In our review of the phylogenetic hypotheses, where possible we refer principally to data sets that have been analysed by cladistic methods. Analyses based on anatomical morphological data sets are integrated with the results of karyotypic and biochemical data sets. A persistent theme of this chapter is that for most families there are few cladistically analysed morphological data, and karyotypic or biochemical data sets are limited or unavailable. Biogeographic study, especially historical biogeography, cannot proceed unless both phylogenetic data are available for the taxa and geological data are available for the physical environment. Again, the reader will find that geological data are very uncertain regarding the degree and timing of the isolation of the Australian continent from Asia and Antarctica. In most cases, therefore, conclusions should be regarded very cautiously. The number of squamate families in Australia is low. Five of approximately fifteen lizard families and five or six of eleven snake families occur in the region; amphisbaenians are absent. Opinions vary concerning the actual number of families recognised in the Australian fauna, depending on whether the Pygopodidae are regarded as distinct from the Gekkonidae, and whether sea snakes, Hydrophiidae and Laticaudidae, are recognised as separate from the Elapidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Predation by Introduced Cats Felis Catus on Australian Frogs: Compilation of Species Records and Estimation of Numbers Killed
    Predation by introduced cats Felis catus on Australian frogs: compilation of species records and estimation of numbers killed J. C. Z. WoinarskiA,M, S. M. LeggeB,C, L. A. WoolleyA,L, R. PalmerD, C. R. DickmanE, J. AugusteynF, T. S. DohertyG, G. EdwardsH, H. GeyleA, H. McGregorI, J. RileyJ, J. TurpinK and B. P. MurphyA ANESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia. BNESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Research, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia. CFenner School of the Environment and Society, Linnaeus Way, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2602, Australia. DWestern Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Bentley, WA 6983, Australia. ENESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Desert Ecology Research Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. FQueensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Red Hill, Qld 4701, Australia. GCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences (Burwood campus), Deakin University, Geelong, Vic. 3216, Australia. HNorthern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, PO Box 1120, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia. INESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia. JSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, United Kingdom. KDepartment of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew Street, Welshpool, WA 6106, Australia. LPresent address: WWF-Australia, 3 Broome Lotteries House, Cable Beach Road, Broome, WA 6276, Australia. MCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Table S1. Data sources used in compilation of cat predation on frogs.
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA YOTF Infopack.Pdf
    ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Information pack ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Printing: The ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign pack was generously supported by Madman Printing Phone: +61 3 9244 0100 Email: [email protected] Front cover design: Patrick Crawley, www.creepycrawleycartoons.com Mobile: 0401 316 827 Email: [email protected] Front cover photo: Pseudophryne pengilleyi, Northern Corroboree Frog. Photo courtesy of Lydia Fucsko. Printed on 100% recycled stock 2 ARAZPA 2008 Year of the Frog Campaign Contents Foreword.........................................................................................................................................5 Foreword part II ………………………………………………………………………………………… ...6 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................9 Section 1: Why A Campaign?....................................................................................................11 The Connection Between Man and Nature........................................................................11 Man’s Effect on Nature ......................................................................................................11 Frogs Matter ......................................................................................................................11 The Problem ......................................................................................................................12 The Reason
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]