DOCSLIB.ORG

Significant Species Management Plan 3 Egernia Rugosa (Yakka Skink)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Significant Species Management Plan 3 Egernia Rugosa (Yakka Skink) Significant Species Management Plan 3 Egernia rugosa (Yakka Skink) Egernia rugosa (Photo Craig Eddie) Egernia rugosa Occurrence Records Map (Atlas of Living Australia, 2015) EPBC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable NC Act Conservation Status Vulnerable Known Distribution The Yakka Skink is distributed from Cape York Peninsula in the north, to central southern Queensland, as far south as the St. George area. Much of its southern distribution lies within the Brigalow Belt Biogeographic Region (Wilson and Knowles 1988; Cogger 2000). Recent surveys have extended the range further south to the NSW border (TSN 2008). This Yakka Skink distribution and records in relation to the Anya project area are shown in Figure 1. Occurrence within Anya Block There are currently no available records of the Yakka Skink from within the Anya block however mapping indicates the species distribution may extend over the area. Atlas of Living Australia (2015) shows the closest record to Anya as being 58kms North West near the Condamine State Forest. However, QGC has found the Yakka Skink within the southern portion of the Braemar State Forest during Surat Basin gas field development, approximately 11km South West from Anya. The Land Zones (LZ) and dominant tree species within Anya may provide suitable habitat for the species (refer to Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat). Potential habitat for the species within the Anya project area has been mapped using RE associations and is shown in Figure 2. Description and Relevant Characteristics The Yakka Skink is a large, robust skink to 40cm long (DoE 2015). It is a little smaller than a Blue- tongued Lizard (Tiliqua scincoides). The Yakka Skink has a light brown body with a darker brown back and usually a straw-coloured line along each side (DoE 2015). Biology and Reproduction The Yakka Skink, like other Egernia species, is highly gregarious, with populations occurring primarily as colonies or aggregations; these groups consist of both adults and juveniles of a wide variety of body sizes (Chapple 2003; Osterwalder et al. 2004). Colonies live in burrows under or around surface structures such as rocks or logs and they have been known to excavate deep burrow systems (DoE 2015 DSITIA 2014). They tend to be active during cooler parts of the day, dusk and sometimes at night. The Yakka Skink is an omnivorous species (consumes plant and animal matter) ambushing arthropods and small vertebrates that venture near the burrow entrance. The species produces live young, with around six per litter (TSN 2008). The breeding season has not been recorded. Preferred Habitat and Microhabitat Yakka Skinks occur in a wide variety of vegetation types including Poplar Box (Eucalyptus populnea), Ironbark (Eucalyptus spp.), Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla), White Cypress Pine (Callitris spp.), Mulga (Acacia aneura), Bendee (Acacia catenulata) and Lancewood (Acacia spp.) woodland and open forest (TSN 2008) in QLD RE LZs 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10. Of these LZs 3, 5 and 7 occur within Anya. Chapple (2003) suggests that this species is diurnal and secretive, preferring ecotonal forest in rainforest and wet / dry sclerophyll forest in the northern sections of its range. They use burrows as shelter that are dug under rocks, logs (especially very large logs, if available), old root tracts, bases of large trees or stumps, stick-raked piles and dense covering vegetation. They may also utilise old rabbit warrens, deep gullies and tunnel erosion and sinkholes (QMDC 2008). Like several related species, Yakka Skinks use communal defecation sites near permanent burrows (Ehmann 1992; Wilson and Knowles 1988). These sites help to identify burrows that are currently in use by a colony (DSITIA 2014). This species, and other similar skinks, often take refuge among dense ground vegetation, large hollow logs, and cavities in soil-bound root systems of fallen trees and beneath rocks (Wilson and Knowles 1988; Cogger 2000). Alternatively, this species may also excavate burrow systems among low vegetation or below logs (Ehmann 1992). In cleared habitat, this species can persist where shelter sites such as tunnel erosion, rabbit warrens and log piles exist (TSN 2008). This species is not generally found in trees or rocky habitats (Chapple 2003). The Yakka Skink may use several sites during the year with the occupied burrow identified by scat piles near the entrance (Ehmann 1992). General Threats The main threat to the Yakka Skink is habitat reduction and degradation. The Yakka Skink occurs in the Brigalow Belt Bioregion, an area of high human impact (Covacevich et al. 1998). Much of this land has been modified through agricultural and urban development (Cogger et al. 1993; McDonald et al. 1991). In particular, Brigalow communities have been severely modified and are poorly reserved (Covacevich et al. 1998). Other threats impacting the Yakka Skink include inappropriate roadside management, removal of wood debris and rock microhabitat features, ripping of rabbit warrens and feral animals (TSN 2008). Inappropriate roadside management includes road widening and removal of microhabitat such as rocks, logs, dense leaf litter and fallen bark. Feral animal impacts include predation by Foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and Feral Cats (Felis catus). Inappropriate fire regimes and trampling of burrow systems by stock and feral pigs are also known to have adverse impacts. Potential Project Threats The Project specific threats for this species include: Development • Clearing resulting in the loss of habitat; • Soil or burrow degradation from clearing, use of heavy vehicles and machinery and increased access by stock • Reduced shelter availability and soil degradation from removal of microhabitat features; • Clearing activities causing injury or mortality; • Vehicle traffic resulting in injury or mortality; • Increased access to habitat by feral predators; • Increased likelihood of trampling of individuals or burrows by livestock due to increased access to habitat; • Creation of barriers to movement; • Trenches and other excavations acting as traps resulting in injury or mortality; • Provision of shelter resources (open pipes and under stored equipment/building materials) resulting in subsequent mortality; and • Increased likelihood of weed invasion leading to degradation of habitat. Operation • Vehicle traffic resulting in injury or mortality; • Increased likelihood of weed invasion from disturbed areas leading to degraded habitat; • Increased predation due to increased access to habitat by feral species; and • Increased predation by fauna which may benefit from the disturbance. Decommissioning • Vehicle traffic resulting in injury or mortality; • Altered fire regimes; and • Increased likelihood of weed invasion from disturbed areas leading to degradation of habitat. Management Strategies As the Yakka Skink has not been identified as occurring in the Anya project area, the primary management strategy is to focus on the identification, avoidance and protection of individuals, populations, habitat and breeding areas. Planning and placement of infrastructure During the planning phase proposed infrastructure locations will be placed following QGCs Constraints Planning and Field Development Protocol (The Protocol). The primary aim of the protocol is to avoid placing infrastructure within areas of significant environmental value, including MNES, by ranking constraints as Low, Moderate, High, Very High or No Go according to infrastructure type. In accordance with the Protocol, MNES, including the Yakka Skink are designated as either ‘very high’ or ‘no go’ constraints in the mapping depending on infrastructure type (e.g. static or linear). Buffers are applied to these areas for linear and static infrastructure and these buffers are assigned the same constraint ranking as the MNES. Where the constraint is ‘no go’, QGC will not conduct activities in the area containing MNES unless: • ground truthing and field ecological surveys demonstrate that siting infrastructure in that location will cause minimal adverse impact on MNES or ESAs, including habitat for listed species and/or MNES/habitat is recoverable; • it would be within disturbance limits; and • other constraints preclude any alternative location; or • QGC obtains the relevant permits and/or approvals for the activity to commence e.g. EA Amendments or Clearing Permits. Where the constraint is ‘very high’ QGC will seek alternative locations for proposed infrastructure in that location. Very high is generally assigned to environmental constraints when planning for linear infrastructure as it is not always possible to avoid these constraints. From a mapping and desktop assessment perspective, Yakka Skink habitat may be widespread throughout the area as assessment stops at the RE level. Further validations will aim to further refine these areas to a more accurate representation of habitat on a finer scale. This will allow infrastructure to be proposed within areas that are less likely to provide suitable habitat or that offer lower quality habitat. Burrows and Burrow systems (particularly active sites/those with latrines) will be ranked as No Go as these are likely to be discrete locations that can be avoided. Alternative locations may be recommended by QGC’s environment advisers based on desktop analysis of environmental and other constraints, or the DoE approved ecologist conducting pre-clearance surveys in the field. The approval process for determining the final location of infrastructure is described in Section 3.0 of the Protocol. This requires
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alpine Skinks
    AUSTRALIAN THREATENED SPECIES ALPINE SKINKS Alpine Water Skink Eulamprus kosciuskoi; Conservation Status (Victoria): Critically Endangered* Alpine She-oak Skink Cyclodomorphus praealtus ; Conservation Status (Victoria): Endangered* *Advisory List of Rare or Threatened Vertebrate Fauna, Department of Sustainability and Environment (2003) and listed under Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 What do they look like? Australia and its external territories occur nowhere else in the world. Generally, skinks (family Scincidae ) are small- • to medium-sized lizards. The reptile fauna of the alpine region of Victoria is dominated by skinks (in terms of Two threatened alpine skinks are the Alpine she- numbers), although one dragon lizard and oak skink — a relatively broad-headed, short- three venomous snakes also occur in this legged, smooth-scaled lizard and the Alpine area. • water skink – a robust skink, with a body length Two other Victorian alpine skinks, the of up to 80 millimetres. Alpine bog skink ( Pseudemoia cryodroma) and the Guthega skink ( Egernia guthega) are also threatened with extinction in Where do they live? Victoria. Although some alpine skink species also occur in • The Alpine skinks give birth to live young. other parts of Victoria, several are endemic to the • A large proportion of the known range of the Alps. Nearly half of the skinks are officially Alpine she-oak skink occurs within, or listed as threatened by the Victorian Department adjacent to, the Mt Hotham and Falls Creek of Sustainability and Environment. Some of Alpine Resorts. these reptiles are abundant and readily observed, whilst others are rare and/or secretive. The Alpine water skink is restricted to sphagnum bogs, streamsides and wet heath vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Section Introduction
    Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 RE-INTRODUCTION PRACTITIONERS DIRECTORY 1998 Compiled and Edited by Pritpal S. Soorae and Philip J. Seddon Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 © National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, 1998 Printing and Publication details Legal Deposit no. 2218/9 ISBN: 9960-614-08-5 Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 Copies of this directory are available from: The Secretary General National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development Post Box 61681, Riyadh 11575 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966-1-441-8700 Fax: +966-1-441-0797 Bibliographic Citation: Soorae, P. S. and Seddon, P. J. (Eds). 1998. Re-introduction Practitioners Directory. Published jointly by the IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Re-introduction Specialist Group, Nairobi, Kenya, and the National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 97pp. Cover Photo: Arabian Oryx Oryx leucoryx (NWRC Photo Library) Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 CONTENTS FOREWORD Professor Abdulaziz Abuzinadai PREFACE INTRODUCTION Dr Mark Stanley Price USING THE DIRECTORY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PART A. ANIMALS I MOLLUSCS 1. GASTROPODS 1.1 Cittarium pica Top Shell 1.2 Placostylus ambagiosus Flax Snail 1.3 Placostylus ambagiosus Land Snail 1.4 Partula suturalis 1.5 Partula taeniata 1.6 Partula tahieana 1.7 Partula tohiveana 2. BIVALVES 2.1 Freshwater Mussels 2.2 Tridacna gigas Giant Clam II ARTHROPODS 3. ORTHOPTERA 3.1 Deinacrida sp. Weta 3.2 Deinacrida rugosa/parva Cook’s Strait Giant Weta Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 3.3 Gryllus campestris Field Cricket 4. LEPIDOPTERA 4.1 Carterocephalus palaemon Chequered Skipper 4.2 Lycaena dispar batavus Large Copper 4.3 Lycaena helle 4.4 Lycaeides melissa 4.5 Papilio aristodemus ponoceanus Schaus Swallowtail 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Care Sheet: Robust and Mcgregor's Skinks
    Care Sheet: Robust and McGregor’s skinks Robust skink (Oligosoma alani) McGregor’s skink (Oligosoma macgregori) Adult Size: up to 150mm SVL. Adult Size: up to 114mm SVL. Threat status: ‘At Risk – Recovering’. Threat status: ‘At Risk – Recovering’. Lifespan: over 32 years. (likely over 40). Lifespan: over 35 years. Habitat: coastal forest, flaxland, deep rock Habitat: coastal forest, flaxland, boulder beaches, piles, iceplant herbfield, seabird burrows, deep deep rock piles, iceplant herbfield, seabird burrows, leaf litter and under rocks / logs. deep leaf litter and under rocks / logs. Permit Level: Conservation species. Permit Level: Insurance population species. Enclosure: Minimum recommended enclosure size = 150x70x70cm (LxWxH). Ideal Group Size: 1:1 (M:F). Compatible Species: Duvaucel’s geckos (but authorisations usually prohibit housing with other species). Recommended Cage Furnishing: The enclosure should be decorated with live plants (though these are not entirely necessary), logs, low branches for climbing, and a thick layer of leaf litter for these skinks to forage and take refuge in. Robust and McGregor’s skinks are particularly susceptible to evaporative water loss through their skin, so it is crucial that they be provided adequate damp refuge sites in the form of buried containers filled with damp leaf litter and/or damp sphagnum moss. The provision of dry refuges is also equally important as despite these lizards’ requirement for damp habitats, they will usually take refuge in cool dry refuges. Issues with skin infections can be experienced if these species are kept in conditions that are too damp where they aren’t provided adequate dry refuge sites. Refuge sites that have proved popular in captivity include rock piles, sections of bamboo or polythene pipe (with one end blocked up) buried in leaf litter, rock piles, bark stacks, hollow ponga logs, and stacks of Onduline semi-buried in leaf litter.
    [Show full text]
  • Brigalow Belt Bioregion – a Biodiversity Jewel
    Brigalow Belt bioregion – a biodiversity jewel Brigalow habitat © Craig Eddie What is brigalow? including eucalypt and cypress pine forests and The term ‘brigalow’ is used simultaneously to refer to; woodlands, grasslands and other Acacia dominated the tree Acacia harpophylla; an ecological community ecosystems. dominated by this tree and often found in conjunction with other species such as belah, wilga and false Along the eastern boundary of the Brigalow Belt are sandalwood; and a broader region where this species scattered patches of semi-evergreen vine thickets with and ecological community are present. bright green canopy species that are highly visible among the more silvery brigalow communities. These The Brigalow Belt bioregion patches are a dry adapted form of rainforest, relics of a much wetter past. The Brigalow Belt bioregion is a large and complex area covering 36,400 000ha. The region is thus recognised What are the issues? by the Australian Government as a biodiversity hotspot. Nature conservation in the region has received increasing attention because of the rapid and extensive This hotspot contains some of the most threatened loss of habitat that has occurred. Since World War wildlife in the world, including populations of the II the Brigalow Belt bioregion has become a major endangered bridled nail-tail wallaby and the only agricultural and pastoral area. Broad-scale clearing for remaining wild population of the endangered northern agriculture and unsustainable grazing has fragmented hairy-nosed wombat. The area contains important the original vegetation in the past, particularly on habitat for rare and threatened species including the, lowland areas. glossy black-cockatoo, bulloak jewel butterfl y, brigalow scaly-foot, red goshawk, little pied bat, golden-tailed geckos and threatened community of semi evergreen Biodiversity hotspots are areas that support vine thickets.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Matters Wildlife Conservancy
    australian wildlife matters wildlife conservancy Spring 2009 Pungalina reveals one of Australia’s rarest mammals Carpentarian Pseudantechinus 2 australian saving australia’s threatened wildlife wildlife Pictograph conservancy Welcome to the Spring 2009 edition of Wildlife Matters. As this edition goes to print, we are in the process of fi nalising the acquisition of Bowra (see pages 4-5), a 14,000 the awc mission hectare property located in the heart of the Mulga Lands in Queensland. Bowra will The mission of Australian Wildlife Conservancy be our 21st sanctuary, bringing the AWC network to more than 2.56 million hectares (AWC) is the effective conservation of all (6.3 million acres). Australian animal species and the habitats in While the overall scale of the portfolio is impressive, it is not the number of properties or which they live. To achieve this mission, our hectares that really count. A more accurate measure of the value of the portfolio is the actions are focused on: number of species and ecosystems that occur within the AWC estate. In this respect, • Establishing a network of sanctuaries the statistics are even more impressive – for example, around 80% of all Australian which protect threatened wildlife and terrestrial bird species and over 60% of all terrestrial mammal species occur on one or ecosystems: AWC now manages 20 more of our sanctuaries. sanctuaries covering over 2.56 million The fact that our portfolio captures such a high percentage of Australia’s wildlife species hectares (6.3 million acres). refl ects a deliberate, science-based strategy to ensure that AWC invests in properties • Implementing practical, on-ground of the highest environmental value.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Fauna Assessment
    Cameby Downs Continued Operations Project EnvironmentalEnvironmental Values Assessment Assessment APPENDIX E Terrestrial Fauna Assessment Cameby Downs Continued Operation Project Terrestrial Fauna Assessment May 2018 Syntech Resources Pty Ltd ecology / vegetation / wildlife / aquatic ecology / GIS Executive summary The Cameby Downs Mine is owned and operated by Syntech Resources Pty Ltd (Syntech) and is managed by Yancoal Australia Ltd (Yancoal). Syntech are considering expanding their operation area as part of the Cameby Downs Continued Operations Project (the Project) and an environmental values statement is being prepared to accompany a major Environmental Authority Amendment application. Syntech commissioned Ecosure Pty Ltd (Ecosure) to undertake terrestrial fauna field surveys and ecological assessments to address the minimum requirements in the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage (DEHP) Information Request for an Amendment Application for an Environmental Authority. To supplement previous fauna surveys undertaken over the last decade, Ecosure undertook preliminary surveys and targeted surveys in July 2016. More comprehensive surveys followed in October 2016. Overall, six detailed trapping sites, 50 observational surveys and 56 targeted surveys were undertaken across the study area to determine the likelihood of occurrence of species listed as conservation significant species under State legislation and/ or threatened under Commonwealth legislation. A total of five conservation significant species have been recorded during field surveys (including previous surveys) conducted in the study area. These were: • koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) • glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami lathami) • grey snake (Hemiaspis damelii) • short-beaked echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus) • yakka skink (Egernia rugosa) (during previous surveys only). A total of 192 species were recorded during the field surveys, including 13 amphibians, 101 birds, 25 mammals and 26 reptiles.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Whitaker's Skink and Robust Skink
    RECOVERY PLAN FOR WHITAKER'S SKINK AND ROBUST SKINK Prepared by David Towns (Science and Research Division) for Threatened Species Unit, Wellington Department of Conservation P.O. Box 10-420 Wellington NEW ZEALAND May 1992 ISSN 1170-3806 ISBN 0-478-01382-5 Threatened Species Recovery Plan Series No. 3 FOREWORD This recovery plan is one of a series of Threatened Species Unit publications produced by the Department of Conservation. Recovery plans are statements of the department's intentions for the conservation of plants and animals for a defined period. In focusing on goals and objectives for research and management, and the tasks by which these will be achieved, recovery plans serve to guide the department in its allocation of resources. Following the preparation of a technical report which was refined by scientists and managers within the department a draft of this plan was forwarded to the N. Z. Conservation Authority and relevant Conservation Boards and other interest groups for comment. After further refinement this plan was formally approved by the Director- General of Conservation on 1 April 1992. The department acknowledges the need to take into account the views of the tangata whenua and the application of their values in the conservation of natural resources. As the expression of these values may vary between iwi, it is not possible to incorporate these variations within a general theme in all recovery plans. This recovery plan will be refined and implemented in such a way as to ensure that consultation with tangata whenua of the areas in which Whitaker's and robust skinks are present has been carried out.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Whitaker's Skink and Robust Skink
    18 Increase the number of Whitaker's and robust skinks in captivity so that self-sustaining populations can be established for later release. 6. Protect populations on land outside Crown control. Establish management partnerships on locations in private ownership to ensure that their natural values as key sites for threatened lizards are not compromised. 7. Manage the mainland population of Whitaker's skink at Pukerua Bay. Establish a formally gazetted reserve at Pukerua Bay and institute management that will enhance the Whitaker's skink population. 8. Promote public interest and involvement in the recovery of Whitaker's skink and robust skink and in community restoration. Keep the public informed of progress with habitat restoration, and lizard reintroductions, involve interested groups as appropriate and provide for long term public participation. CRITICAL PATH 19 8. RECOVERY STRATEGY: WORK PLAN To meet each objective and the fulfil the recovery goals the following actions are required: OBJECTIVE 1. ERADICATE RODENTS FROM LARGE ISLANDS Explanation Restoration of island biotic communities relies on efficient techniques for eradication of rodents. Successful cost-effective techniques have been developed for small islands, but these tend to be labour intensive (McFadden and Towns 1991). Mechanical techniques for air drops of rodenticide will need to be applied to islands of 100 ha or more if the options defined in this plan are to be met. Plan Aerial drops by helicopter using TALON 20P provided gratis by a chemical company began in September 1991 on Stanley Island (100 ha). If successful it may be extended to Red Mercury Island in 1992. Outcomes The eradication campaign against kiore (as well as rabbits) on Stanley and Red Mercury Islands will: Rehabilitate two populations of tuatara Release invertebrates from predation by kiore Provide two very large islands with considerable suitable habitat for Whitaker's and robust skinks.
    [Show full text]
  • Mana Island Ecological Restoration Plan
    9. Reptiles Designing a future reptile community on Mana Island required information on: what indigenous species are currently present what species are likely to have been present historically what nationally or regionally threatened species require habitats free of introduced mammals to ensure their continued survival, and whether there are other more appropriate sites for their introduction potential conflicts between proposed introductions and resident species and/ or other proposed introductions (including invertebrates and other reptiles), e.g., predation, competition, disease risk, hybridization. Mana island already has nationally important populations of two threatened lizard species (McGregor's skink and goldstripe gecko) and it is essential that future introductions and habitat management do not jeopardise their survival. The list of reptiles recorded from the entire Cook Strait Ecological District is not an appropriate model for guiding restoration of Mana Island's reptile fauna, as many lizard taxa do not occur on both sides of Cook Strait. Of 17 lizard species recorded from Cook Strait Ecological District, only eight (47%) occur on both sides of Cook Strait (Table 9.1). Most notably, Cook Strait is the southern limit of the skink genus Cyclodina, five species of which occur (or occurred) in the Wellington region. TABLE 9.1 REPTILE SPECIES RECORDED FROM COOK STRAIT ECOLOGICAL DISTRICT, WITH A SUMMARY OF PAST AND PRESENT DISTRIBUTION ON BOTH SIDES OF COOK STRAIT. NOTE THAT PACIFIC GECKOS OCCUR NEARBY IN THE WELLINGTON ECOLOGICAL DISTRICT, AND WERE PROBABLY PART OF THE ORIGINAL COOK STRAIT REPTILE FAUNA. OGLE (1989a) RECOMMENDED THAT THE TWO SIDES OF COOK STRAIT BE INCLUDED IN DIFFERENT ECOLOGICAL REGIONS OR DISTRICTS BASED ON DIFFERENCES IN FAUNA EITHER SIDE OF THE STRAIT.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Assessment of Faunal Values Within and Adjacent EPC 1029, Styx Basin, Central-East Queensland
    A preliminary assessment of faunal values within and adjacent EPC 1029, Styx Basin, central-east Queensland ) Prepared for Yeats Consulting Engineers by Ed Meyer, Ecological Consultant,S Luscombe Street, Runcorn QLD 4113 (ed_meyeroz@yahoo.com.au) Conditions of use This report may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned. The use of this report, or part thereof, for any other reason or purpose is prohibited without the written consent of the author. Front cover: Fauna recorded from EPC 1029 during March 2011 surveys. Clockwise from upper left: ornamental snake (Denisonia maculata); squatter pigeon (southern race) (Geophaps scripta scripta); metallic snake-eyed skink (Cryptoblepharus metal/icus); and eastern sedgefrog (Litoria tal/ax). ©Edward Meyer 2011 5 Luscombe Street, Runcorn QLD 4113 E-mail:ed_meyeroz@yahoo.com.au Version 2 _ 3 August 2011 2 Table of contents 1. Summary 4 2. Background 6 Description of study area 6 Nomenclature 6 Abbreviations and acronyms 7 3. Methodology 9 General approach 9 ) Desktop assessment 9 Likelihood of occurrence assessments 10 Field surveys 11 Survey conditions 15 Survey limitations 15 4. Results 17 Desktop assessment findings 17 Likelihood of occurrence assessments 17 Field survey results -fauna 20 Field survey results - fauna habitat 22 Habitat for conservation significant species 28 ) 5. Summary and conclusions 37 6. References 38 Appendix A: Fauna previously recorded from Desktop Assessment Study Area 41 Appendix B: likelihood of occurrence assessments for conservation significant fauna 57 Appendix C: March 2011 survey results 73 Appendix D: Habitat photos 85 Appendix E: Habitat assessment proforma 100 3 1. Summary The faunal values of land within and adjacent Exploration Permit for Coal (EPe) 1029 were investigated by way of desktop review of existing information as well as field surveys carried out in late March 201l.
    [Show full text]
  • Eton Range Realignment Project ATTACHMENT 2 to EPBC Ref: 2015/7552 Preliminary Documentation Residual Impact Assessment and Offset Proposal - 37
    APPENDIX 3: KSAT RESULTS – PELLET COUNTS Table 5: KSAT results per habitat tree. Species Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6 Total Eucalyptus tereticornis 9 30 16 - 42 7 104 Eucalyptus crebra 91 16 29 2 0 25 163 Corymbia clarksoniana 11 0 0 1 4 5 21 Corymbia tessellaris 5 0 0 0 0 20 25 Corymbia dallachiana - 12 - - - - 12 Corymbia intermedia - 3 1 0 11 - 15 Corymbia erythrophloia - - 0 - 0 - 0 Eucalyptus platyphylla - - - 0 0 0 0 Lophostemon - - - 0 0 - 0 suaveolens Total 116 61 46 3 57 57 Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 22 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder APPENDIX 4: SITE PHOTOS The following images were taken from the centre of each BioCondition quadrat and represent a north east south west aspect, top left to bottom right. Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 23 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 3: BioCondition quadrat 1 (RE11.3.4/11.12.3) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 24 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 4: BioCondition quadrat 2 (RE11.3.4/11.12.3) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 25 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 5: BioCondition quadrat 3 (RE11.12.3) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 26 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 6: BioCondition quadrat 4 (RE11.3.9) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 27 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 7: BioCondition quadrat 5 (RE11.3.25) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 28 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Plate 8: BioCondition quadrat 6 (RE11.12.3/11.3.4/11.3.9) Ref: NCA15R30439 Page 29 27 November 2015 Copyright 2015 Kleinfelder Appendix E: Desktop Assessment for Potential
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship of Herpetofaunal
    Georgia Southern University Digital Commons@Georgia Southern Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of Spring 2009 The Relationship of Herpetofaunal Community Composition to an Elephant (Loxodonta Africana) Modified Savanna oodlandW of Northern Tanzania, and Bioassays with African Elephants Nabil A. Nasseri Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd Recommended Citation Nasseri, Nabil A., "The Relationship of Herpetofaunal Community Composition to an Elephant (Loxodonta Africana) Modified Savanna oodlandW of Northern Tanzania, and Bioassays with African Elephants" (2009). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 763. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/763 This thesis (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of at Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@georgiasouthern.edu. THE RELATIONSHIP OF HERPETOFAUNAL COMMUNITY COMPOSITION TO AN ELEPHANT ( LOXODONTA AFRICANA ) MODIFIED SAVANNA WOODLAND OF NORTHERN TANZANIA, AND BIOASSAYS WITH AFRICAN ELEPHANTS by NABIL A. NASSERI (Under the Direction of Bruce A. Schulte) ABSTRACT Herpetofauna diversity and richness were compared in areas that varied in the degree of elephant impact on the woody vegetation ( Acacia spp.). The study was conducted at Ndarakwai Ranch in northeastern Tanzania. Elephants moving between three National Parks in Kenya and Tanzania visit this property. From August 2007 to March 2008, we erected drift fences and pitfall traps to sample herpetofaunal community and examined species richness and diversity within the damaged areas and in an exclusion plot.
    [Show full text]