Management Plan for Cane Toads in National Parks and Reserves 2012

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Management plan for cane toads in national parks and reserves 2012 © Copyright 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 management plan 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. This document may be subject to revision without notice and readers should ensure they are using the latest version. Cover photograph: Cane toad Bufo marinus. Photo: John Pumpars Published by: Office of Environment and Heritage NSW 59 Goulburn Street, Sydney NSW 2000 PO Box A290, Sydney South NSW 1232 Phone: (02) 9995 5000 (switchboard) Phone: 131 555 (environment information and publications requests) Phone: 1300 361 967 (national parks, climate change and energy efficiency information, and publications requests) Fax: (02) 9995 5999 TTY users: phone 133 677, then ask for 131 555 Speak and listen users: phone 1300 555 727, then ask for 131 555 Email: [email protected] Website: www.environment.nsw.gov.au Report pollution and environmental incidents Environment Line: 131 555 (NSW only) or [email protected] See also www.environment.nsw.gov.au ISBN 978 1 74293 393 1 OEH 2013/0772 November 2013 Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 4 Actions ........................................................................................................................... 5 References.................................................................................................................... 12 Appendices ................................................................................................................... 13 Introduction Cane toads Bufo marinus were introduced into northern Queensland from South America in 1935 as a biological control for the cane beetle, an agricultural pest of sugar cane. Cane toads have since spread west into the Northern Territory and the top end of Western Australia and south into northern NSW. Their spread in northern NSW was aided by further releases near Byron Bay and Ballina in the 1960s. Cane toads are now widespread in north-east NSW north of Evans Head, with small isolated populations occurring further south, including at Angourie and Brooms Head near Yamba (Figure 1) and at Taren Point near Sydney. Cane toads are also approaching the border in north-west NSW via the Murray–Darling and Lake Eyre basins in Queensland. The impacts of cane toads on biodiversity are unclear. Cane toads are toxic at all stages of their life cycle, as eggs, tadpoles, toadlets and adults, and their ingestion can be lethal to native predators (Hayes et al 2009). Cane toads have been linked to local declines and extinctions of several native predator species in the Northern Territory and Queensland, most notably the northern quoll (Burnett 1997, Watson & Woinarski 2003, Oakwood 2004). However, there is little data for most native predators on the frequency with which they prey on cane toads or the effects such frequency has on long-term population dynamics and extinction risk. There is also little evidence of other direct impacts by cane toads on native fauna, although declines in numbers of native predators may have cascading effects on other species (Shine 2010). Management plan for cane toads in national parks and reserves 2012 1 Figure 1 Distribution of cane toads in northern NSW as indicated by species records from 1980–2011. Source: the Atlas of NSW Wildlife 2 Management plan for cane toads in national parks and reserves 2012 Given the potential for significant adverse impacts on several native species, ‘invasion and establishment of cane toads’ has been listed as a key threatening process under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 – see www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/BufoMarinusKtp.htm. Similarly, ‘biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads’ has been listed as a key threatening process under the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive/ferals/cane-toads/index.html#ktp. Eradication of cane toads in NSW is not feasible given their high reproductive capacity, flexible habitat requirements and current widespread distribution. Furthermore, there are insufficient resources to control cane toads effectively in all areas where they coexist with native wildlife. Consistent with the goals of the NSW Invasive Species Plan 2008–2015 (NSW Department of Primary Industries 2008), management of cane toads in NSW should aim to: x prevent further spread of cane toads through the eradication of outlier populations and surveillance of and response to new populations (containment) x minimise the impacts of cane toads on biodiversity in areas of NSW where they are established and widespread, through targeted control (asset protection). This plan outlines how cane toads will be managed in national parks and reserves in NSW (hereafter referred to as on-park) in keeping with the goals of containment and asset protection. In particular, management on-park will be determined by a containment line beyond which the objective will be to eradicate cane toads. Inside the containment line, the objective will be to minimise the impacts of cane toads on biodiversity through targeted control. The engagement of other land managers and the wider community in this approach may provide better information to guide management on-park and also benefit biodiversity across all tenures. Management plan for cane toads in national parks and reserves 2012 3 Objectives The specific objectives of this plan are: 1. To eradicate all outlier populations of cane toads on-park. 2. To ensure no new populations of cane toads are established on-park beyond their current distribution. 3. To minimise the impacts of cane toads on biodiversity on-park in areas of NSW where cane toads are established and widespread. 4. To encourage other land managers and the broader community in NSW to adopt these objectives. 4 Management plan for cane toads in national parks and reserves 2012 Actions Action 1: Identify and eradicate outlier populations of cane toads on- park To identify outlier populations of cane toads to target for eradication, a containment line was drawn based on their current known distribution (Figure 2). The line forms an envelope around the area of north-east NSW where records of cane toads are abundant and continuous. The line has been modified to take account of potential barriers to movement (e.g. the Clarence River), potential survey lines (e.g. major roads) and land tenure. The following known populations of cane toads in or immediately adjacent to parks were thus identified as outlier populations: x Bundjalung National Park x Mororo Creek Nature Reserve and surrounds x Yaegl Nature Reserve x Angourie, including the northern end of Yuraygir National Park x Brooms Head, adjacent to Yuraygir National Park x Taren Point, adjacent to Towra Point Nature Reserve. The National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) will control cane toads on-park at the sites listed above with the objective of eradication. Control works will be detailed in a site plan as illustrated in Appendix 1 and will be planned and reported through the NPWS Pest and Weed Information System. NPWS will assist managers of adjacent lands to control cane toads on these sites as required. Action 2: Undertake surveillance of and respond to new populations of cane toads on-park beyond their current distribution NPWS staff will submit observations of cane toads in or near parks outside the containment line to the Atlas of NSW Wildlife. Observations at sites with no current records (i.e. new sites) will also be reported to the NPWS Pest Management Officer for the Region. The Pest Management Officer will initiate the preparation of a site plan as described above under Action 1. Action 3: Identify priority sites for management on-park in areas of NSW where cane toads are established and widespread, and initiate control programs Records of threatened native predators at risk from cane toads were overlaid on the area delineated by the containment line (Figure 3). The records were accessed from the Atlas of NSW Wildlife database (www.environment.nsw.gov.au/wildlifeatlas/about.htm). Note that expert opinion and data from Beckmann and Shine (2009) were used to refine the list of species at risk. Thus species of native frogs were included as some level of predation by native frogs on the tadpoles or eggs of cane toads is likely. However, some other native predators were excluded on the premise that they were unlikely to prey on cane toads
Recommended publications
  • National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes Balbus

    National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes Balbus

    National Recovery Plan for the Stuttering Frog Mixophyes balbus David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie Prepared by David Hunter and Graeme Gillespie (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria). Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Melbourne, October 2011. © State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne. ISBN 978-1-74242-369-2 (online) This is a Recovery Plan prepared under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the assistance of funding provided by the Australian Government. This Recovery Plan has been developed with the involvement and cooperation of a range of stakeholders, but individual stakeholders have not necessarily committed to undertaking specific actions. The attainment of objectives and the provision of funds may be subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved. Proposed actions may be subject to modification over the life of the plan due to changes in knowledge. Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. An electronic version of this document is available on the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website www.environment.gov.au For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186 Citation: Hunter, D.
  • New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: a Review of Methods to Control and Mitigate the Biodiversity Impacts of Invasive Cane

    New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: a Review of Methods to Control and Mitigate the Biodiversity Impacts of Invasive Cane

    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316915049 New Weapons in the Toad Toolkit: A Review of Methods to Control and Mitigate the Biodiversity Impacts of Invasive Cane... Article in The Quarterly Review of Biology · June 2017 DOI: 10.1086/692167 CITATIONS READS 2 207 13 authors, including: Reid Tingley Robert J Capon University of Melbourne University of Queensland 47 PUBLICATIONS 1,042 CITATIONS 359 PUBLICATIONS 5,007 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Richard Shine University of Sydney 1,087 PUBLICATIONS 40,853 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Accounting for imperfect detection in environmental DNA surveys View project Novel P-glycoprotein substrates and inhibitors in application to Multidrug Resistance View project All content following this page was uploaded by Simon Clulow on 14 May 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Volume 92, No. 2 June 2017 THE QUARTERLY REVIEW of Biology NEW WEAPONS IN THE TOAD TOOLKIT: A REVIEW OF METHODS TO CONTROL AND MITIGATE THE BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS OF INVASIVE CANE TOADS (RHINELLA MARINA) Reid Tingley School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne Melbourne, Victoria 3010 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Georgia Ward-Fear School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Lin Schwarzkopf College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University Townsville, Queensland 4811 Australia e-mail: [email protected] Matthew J. Greenlees School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia e-mail: [email protected] The Quarterly Review of Biology, June 2017, Vol.
  • Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report

    Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report

    Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Kill Monitoring Report Roads and Maritime Services THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Document control Pacific Highway Upgrade Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Operational Road Report name Kill Monitoring Report Date 15 February 2019 Revision 1 Section 2A initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 2 Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring report Revision 3 Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring report Revision 4 Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring report Revision 5 Annual report 2018 including Spring (October) 2018 monitoring Revision 6 Summer (January) 2019 monitoring report Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of this report .................................................................................................................................... 1 Appendix 1 WC2NH Road Kill Monitoring Program Appendix 2 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Stage 2A initial 12 week monitoring. Appendix 3 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Autumn (April) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 4 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2A Winter (July) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 5 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Section 2B initial 12 week monitoring Appendix 6 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Annual report 2018 inc. Spring (October) 2018 monitoring. Appendix 7 Road Kill Monitoring Report – Summer (January) 2019 monitoring. Introduction Road kill monitoring is a requirement of the approved Warrell Creek to Nambucca Heads Koala, Spotted- tailed Quoll and Grey-headed Flying-fox management plans and the Ecological Monitoring Program. The aim of the monitoring program is to; • report on any animal road kill on the project following the opening to traffic; and • assess the effectiveness of the presence of fauna fencing to prevent fauna being killed by vehicles while attempting to cross the WC2NH Upgrade.
  • Giant Burrowing Frog-(Heleioporus

    Giant Burrowing Frog-(Heleioporus

    #61 This Action Statement was first published in 1994 and remains current. This Giant Burrowing Frog version has been prepared for web publication. It Heleioporus australiacus retains the original text of the action statement, although contact information, the distribution map and the illustration may have been updated. © The State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2003 Published by the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria. Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus australiacus) Distribution in Victoria (DSE 2002) 8 Nicholson Street, (Illustration by John Las Gourgues) East Melbourne, Victoria 3002 Australia Description and Distribution coastal slopes of the Great Dividing Range The Giant Burrowing Frog (Heleioporus below 1000 m altitude, between Gosford in This publication may be of New South Wales and Walhalla in central assistance to you but the australiacus Shaw & Nodder 1795) is a large, Gippsland. No records are known between State of Victoria and its robust species with a maximum body employees do not guarantee length of 100 mm. Body colour is chocolate Jervis Bay and Eden, indicating that the that the publication is brown above and white beneath with species may be composed of two disjunct without flaw of any kind or scattered yellow spots, usually capping populations. Gillespie (1990) gives a detailed is wholly appropriate for warts, on the flanks and around the cloaca. coverage of Victorian records since 1982. your particular purposes The back and sides are covered with small All Victorian records of the species have and therefore disclaims all warts each with a small black spine. The been from eucalypt forest of various types.
  • Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): a Review with Regard for Species of Concern Under the EPBC Act 1999

    Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): a Review with Regard for Species of Concern Under the EPBC Act 1999

    Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): A Review with regard for Species of Concern under the EPBC Act 1999 Report to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra KF Walker Consultant in River and Floodplain Ecology PO Box 331, YANKALILLA 5203 Adjunct Associate Professor School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide www.sunwater.com.au November 2008 ii … This report may be cited as: Walker KF. 2008. Environmental Impact Statement for Traveston Crossing Dam (Mary River, Queensland): A Review with regard for Species of Concern under the EPBC Act 1999. Report to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. November 2008. xx+84p. iii Executive Summary Queensland Water Infrastructure (QWI) proposes to construct Traveston Crossing Dam on the Mary River as part of a strategy to meet anticipated water demands in south‐ eastern Queensland. This is the last high‐yield dam site available in the region, according to QWI, but it is also an extremely sensitive site in terms of significance for conservation. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been released for public comment, and a Supplement containing responses to submissions has also been issued. This review is concerned with the implications for a number of species listed under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act), including three ‘iconic’ species, the Australian lungfish, Mary River cod and Mary River turtle. Context Ecologically Sustainable Development In many cases, the EIS makes assumptions on the basis of scant evidence and draws conclusions about impacts with little or no justification.
  • Conservation Research Saving Australia's Frogs

    Conservation Research Saving Australia's Frogs

    CONSERVATION RESEARCH SAVING AUSTRALIA’S FROGS A team of top-notch biologists from the University of Newcastle have racked up several world-first discoveries that will not only preserve the genetic diversity of frogs, but could also support the conservation of other species. Emerging infectious diseases, invasive species and Globally, nearly 200 frog species have been lost in climate change are the greatest threats to global the past 30 years to disease, and a further 200 face biodiversity. imminent threat. Traditional conservation programs known as Australia has around 250 frog species, with many translocations typically fail because those threats of them found nowhere else in the world. We’ve remain present or establish themselves in already lost nearly 10 species and researchers translocation sites. They also don’t stop at estimate another 30 to 40 are at risk. boundaries of national parks, reserves or other conservation areas. The Environmental Biology and Biotechnology Research Group has made several world-first That’s why the University of Newcastle’s discoveries that offer new hope for Australia’s Environmental Biology and Biotechnology much-loved frogs. Research Group is creating a new conservation paradigm – one focused on innovative biological Fighting the deadly chytrid fungus interventions that mitigate threats which can’t be stopped in time to prevent extinction. Responsible for wiping out more than a third of the world’s frog species, chytrid is a highly infectious They’re applying many of their discoveries to fungal disease that attacks the keratin in a frog’s Australia’s beloved frogs. skin, disrupts the flow and levels of electrolytes, and eventually causes a heart attack.
  • Cane Toad (Bufo Marinus) (Linnaeus, 1758)

    Cane Toad (Bufo Marinus) (Linnaeus, 1758)

    RISK ASSESSMENTS FOR EXOTIC REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS INTRODUCED TO AUSTRALIA – Cane Toad (Bufo marinus) (Linnaeus, 1758) Class - Amphibia, Order - Anura, Family - Bufonidae (Gray, 1825), Genus - Bufo (Laurenti, 1768); (The Reptile Database 2007, Catalogue of Life 2008) Score Sheet SPECIES: Cane Toad (Bufo marinus) Species Description – Largest of the toads, short, squat body with short legs. Up to 15 cm snout-vent length, females are noticeably larger than the males. Grey, brown, olive-brown or reddish-brown above, adults rarely with Other common names include: Marine Toad; Giant Toad. any marked pattern other than dark brown caps to the wards, whereas juveniles have a series of narrow dark bars, Synonyms: dashes or lines on the head and back. Whitish or yellow below, usually speckled or mottled with dark brown. Skin very dry and warty above, granular below. A prominent pair of parotoid glands, located behind each eye. The Rana marina supraocular region is warty and is separated from the smooth interorbital region by a high bony ridge, the ridge on Chaunus marinus each side continuing forward to meet on the snout between the nostrils. Fingers free, toes with a tough leather webbing. Tadpoles are less than 3.5 cm long, are jet black above and silvery white with black spots below (Cogger (Christy et al 2007b, Catalogue of Life 2008). 2000, Lever 2001, Cameron 2002, Robinson 2002, Churchill 2003). General Information – The species is very flexible in regards to breeding sites, with eggs and larvae developing in most slow or still shallow waters of ponds, ditches, temporary pools, reservoirs, canals and streams, and it can tolerate salinity levels of up to 15%.
  • Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis)

    Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana Chiricahuensis)

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Draft Recovery Plan April 2006 DRAFT CHIRICAHUA LEOPARD FROG (Rana chiricahuensis) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by: Chiricahua Leopard Frog Recovery Team, including the Technical Subgroup, Southeastern Arizona/Southwestern New Mexico Stakeholder Subgroup, Mogollon Rim Stakeholder Subgroup, and West-Central New Mexico Stakeholder Subgroup Prepared for: Region 2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico DRAFT Chiricahua Leopard Frog Recovery Plan 2006 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and are sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director, or Director, as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature citation of this document should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Draft Chiricahua Leopard Frog (Rana chiricahuensis) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM.
  • FLEAY's BARRED FROG (Mixophyes Fleayi) and MOUNTAIN FROG

    FLEAY's BARRED FROG (Mixophyes Fleayi) and MOUNTAIN FROG

    FLEAY’S BARRED FROG (Mixophyes fleayi) AND MOUNTAIN FROG (Philoria kundagungan) BASELINE SURVEY SCENIC RIM TRAIL, MAIN RANGE Prepared for Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd PO Box 1376 CLEVELAND 4163 Specialised ecological knowledge that reduces your risk Document Control Sheet File Number: 0435-004a Project Manager/s: Dr Penn Lloyd Client: Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd Project Title: Fleay’s Barred Frog (Mixophyes fleayi) and Mountain Frog (Philoria kundagungan) Baseline Survey, Scenic Rim Trail, Main Range Project Author/s: Dr Penn Lloyd Project Summary: This report presents the results of a baseline survey of two threatened frog species in the vicinity of proposed new hiking trails in Main Range National Park for the Scenic Rim Trail proposal. Draft Preparation History: Draft No. Date draft Reviewed by Issued by completed 0435-004a Draft A 13/11/2018 Paulette Jones Penn Lloyd Revision/ Checking History Track: Version Date of Issue Checked by Issued by 0435-004a Version 0 03/12/2018 Paulette Jones Penn Lloyd Document Distribution: Destination Revision 1 Date 2 Date 3 Date 4 Date Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Dispatched Client Copy 1 - A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 digital Client Copy 1- hard copy PDF - server A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 PDF – backup – A 14/11/2018 0 03/12/2018 archived Hard Copy - library BAAM Pty Ltd File No. 0435-004a Version 0 NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS REPORT Purpose of Report Biodiversity Assessment and Management Pty Ltd has produced this report in its capacity as {consultants} for and on the request of Spicers Retreats Hotels and Lodges Pty Ltd (the "Client") for the sole purpose of providing a baseline survey of two threatened frog species in the vicinity of of proposed new hiking trails in Main Range National Park for the Scenic Rim Trail proposal (the "Specified Purpose").
  • How to Make a Woolly Mammoth Should Scientists Bring Extinct

    How to Make a Woolly Mammoth Should Scientists Bring Extinct

    BIOLOGY: Genetics // CHEMISTRY: Biochemistry // // EARTH SCIENCE: environment PHYSICS: technology ntil the 1980s, Australia was home natural disasters, disease outbreaks, or to a very odd amphibian: the climate change. WATCH gastric-brooding frog. The strange “All of these ‘de-extinction’ projects are A VIDEO thing about this frog was that the focused on trying to increase the complexity ONLINE www.scholastic.com female laid her eggs in water, and and diversity of the natural world,” says Mike /scienceworld Uonce the male fertilized them, she swallowed Archer, a paleontologist at the University the eggs whole. Her tadpoles grew inside of New South Wales in Australia. Archer is 4 BONUS her stomach. When the baby frogs were fully leading the team that’s trying to bring back SKILLS developed, the mother burped them out of the gastric-brooding frog. SHEETS her mouth! When Archer set out to revive the frog www.scholastic.com /scienceworld FROM This strange species fascinated scientists. 5 years ago, the first thing he needed was an BACK But soon after researchers discovered gastric- intact nucleus from one of its cells. Nuclei brooding frogs in the early 1980s, a fungal contain an organism’s DNA. This chemical infection wiped all of them out. The species carries the hereditary information that became extinct. determines an animal’s traits. Now, three decades later, the gastric- Scientists have been using nuclei from brooding frog may come back to life. living animals to create clones, or genetically Scientists are trying to use biotechnology— identical copies, of those animals for many THE the artificial manipulation of living things—to years (see Cloning Timeline, p.
  • An Update on the Status of Wet Forest Stream-Dwelling Frogs of the Eungella Region

    An Update on the Status of Wet Forest Stream-Dwelling Frogs of the Eungella Region

    AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF WET FOREST STREAM-DWELLING FROGS OF THE EUNGELLA REGION MEYER, E. A.1, HINES, H. B.2, CLARKE, J. M.3 & HOSKIN, C. J.4 Eungella’s wet forests are home to a number of stream-breeding frogs including three species endemic to the Eungella region: the Eungella dayfrog (Taudactylus eungellensis), Eungella tinkerfrog (T. liemi), and northern gastric brooding frog (Rheobatrachus vitellinus). During the mid-1980s, T. eungellensis and R. vitellinus suffered dramatic population declines attributable to amphibian chytridiomycosis, a disease caused by the amphibian chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis or Bd). While su rveys in the late 1980s failed to locate T. eungellensis or R. vitellinus, populations of the former were located on a handful of streams surveyed by researchers in the mid-to- late 1990s. Between January 2000 and November 2015, additional surveys targeting these and other wet forest frog species were conducted at 114 sites within Eungella National Park and adjoining areas of State Forest. During these surveys, we located T. eungellensis at many more sites than surveys in the 1990s. Abundances of T. eungellensis at these sites were typically low, however, and well below abundance levels prior to declines in the mid-1980s. As with surveys in the 1990s, T. eungellensis was scarce at high-elevation sites above 600 metres altitude. Numbers of this species do not appear to have increased significantly since the mid-1990s, suggesting recovery of T. eungellensis popula- tions is occurring slowly, at best. In contrast with T. eungellensis, T. liemi was frequently recorded at high-elevation sites, albeit at low densities.
  • Fleay's Barred Frog

    Fleay's Barred Frog

    Consultation Document on Listing Eligibility and Conservation Actions Mixophyes fleayi (Fleay’s Barred Frog) Mixophyes fleayi (image: M. Mahony, University of Newcastle) You are invited to provide your views and supporting reasons related to: 1) the eligibility of Mixophyes fleayi (Fleay’s Barred Frog) for inclusion on the EPBC Act threatened species list in the Endangered category and 2) the necessary conservation actions for the above species. Evidence provided by experts, stakeholders and the general public are welcome. Responses can be provided by any interested person. Anyone may nominate a native species, ecological community or threatening process for listing under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) or for a transfer of an item already on the list to a new listing category. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee (the Committee) undertakes the assessment of species to determine eligibility for inclusion in the list of threatened species and provides its recommendation to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment. Mixophyes fleayi (Fleay’s Barred Frog) consultation document Page 1 of 32 Responses are to be provided in writing either by email to: [email protected] or by mail to: The Director Marine and Freshwater Species Conservation Section Biodiversity Conservation Division Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment PO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2601 Responses are required to be submitted by 24 July 2020. Contents of this information package Page