FINAL REPORT:
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria
raniformis Conservation Strategy within the
Revised Urban Growth Boundary and
Associated 28 Precincts:
Technical Background and Guidelines
PREPARED FOR
Department of Sustainability and Environment
NOVEMBER 2011
Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd
HEAD OFFICE: 420 Victoria Street Brunswick VIC 3056 MELBOURNE: PO Box 298, Brunswick VIC 3056 GEELONG: PO Box 8048 Newtown VIC 3220
Table of Contents
Summary ........................................................................................................... 5
1
Introduction ........................................................................................ 10
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Project Information ........................................................................................10
Strategy Objectives .......................................................................................10
Consultation ..................................................................................................11
Implementation of Strategy and Review ........................................................11
Precinct Structure Planning ...........................................................................12
Study Area ....................................................................................................12
1.6.1
1.6.2
1.6.3
1.6.4
1.6.5
1.7
1.8
Melbourne West Growth Area .......................................................................12
Melbourne North-West Growth Area .............................................................13
Melbourne North Growth Area ......................................................................13
Melbourne South-East Growth Area .............................................................13
Existing 28 precincts .....................................................................................14
Definition of an Important Population of Litoria raniformis .............................33
Legislative and Policy Context ......................................................................34
2
Background ........................................................................................ 35
2.1
Ecology of Litoria raniformis ..........................................................................35
2.1.1
Distribution ....................................................................................................35
2.1.2
2.1.3
Habitat requirements .....................................................................................35
Threatening Processes .................................................................................39
3
Objective 1 – Determine the Distribution and Habitat Quality ....... 44
3.1
3.2
Rationale .......................................................................................................44
Methods ........................................................................................................44
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Literature Review ..........................................................................................44
Field Surveys ................................................................................................44
Classification of Habitat Quality.....................................................................47
Qualifications and Limitations .......................................................................47
Results ..........................................................................................................48
3.5.1
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
Melbourne West Growth Area .......................................................................48
Melbourne North-West Growth Area .............................................................51
Melbourne North Growth Area ......................................................................52
Melbourne South East Growth Area..............................................................57
4
Objective 2 – Development of a Wetness Habitat Connectivity
Model ................................................................................................... 59
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Rationale .......................................................................................................59
Methods ........................................................................................................59
Qualifications and Limitations .......................................................................60
Results ..........................................................................................................61
4.4.1
4.4.2
Melbourne West Growth Area .......................................................................61
Melbourne North-West Growth Area .............................................................61
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
1
4.4.3
4.4.4
Melbourne North Growth Area ......................................................................61
Melbourne South-East Growth Area .............................................................62
5
Objective 3 – Strategically Important Habitat Areas and Linkages
63
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
Rationale .......................................................................................................63
Litoria raniformis Metapopulation Dynamics .................................................63
Defining Key Areas and Implementation .......................................................64
SRS Results ..................................................................................................66
5.4.1
5.4.2
Melbourne West Growth Area .......................................................................67
Melbourne North-West Growth Area .............................................................67
5.4.3
5.4.4
Melbourne North Growth Area ......................................................................68
Melbourne South-East Growth Area .............................................................69
6
Objective 4 – Guidelines for Conservation ...................................... 71
6.1
6.2
Rationale .......................................................................................................71
Habitat Protection..........................................................................................71
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.3
Principles of habitat protection ......................................................................71
Protection of breeding, dispersal and foraging habitat ..................................72
Habitat Enhancement....................................................................................73
6.3.1
6.4
Habitat enhancement within the Growth Areas .............................................73
Habitat Creation ............................................................................................74
6.4.1
6.4.2
6.5
Principles of habitat creation .........................................................................74
Habitat creation .............................................................................................75
Terrestrial Habitat and Connectivity ..............................................................79
6.5.1
6.5.2
6.5.3
6.5.4
Terrestrial Habitat and Buffers ......................................................................79
Habitat Connectivity ......................................................................................81
Other Design Requirements and Considerations ..........................................87
Staging of Proposed Works in Precincts .......................................................89
7
Objective 5 – Guidelines for Implementation .................................. 90
7.1
Habitat Management, Maintenance and Monitoring ......................................90
7.1.1
7.1.2
7.2
Habitat Management and Maintenance ........................................................90
Population and Habitat Monitoring ................................................................96
Salvage and Translocation ............................................................................98
Figures .......................................................................................................... 101
References .................................................................................................... 119
Appendices ................................................................................................... 137
Tables
Table 1. Areas for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area. ................................... 7
Table 2. Status of L. raniformis in the 28 Precincts within the study area............................. 15
Table 3. Areas for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area. ................................. 72
2
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Table A1.1. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne
West ........................................................................................................................... 138
Table A1.2. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne
North West Growth Area. ............................................................................................ 142
Table A1.3. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne
North Growth Area. ..................................................................................................... 146
Table A1.4. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne
South-East Growth Area. ............................................................................................ 151
Table A3.1. A selection of suitable plants for Litoria raniformis habitat................................ 160
3
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Acknowledgments
We thank the following people for their contribution in the project:

Adam Muir, Clare White, Alan Webster, Jeremy Aarons [Department of Sustainability
and Environment (DSE)] for invaluable input throughout the preparation of the
strategy and comments on several versions of the document.

Fiona Ferwerda (DSE) for providing mapping data for the project and spatial
modelling throughout the Growth Areas.

Geoffrey Heard (Melbourne University), Christina Renowden (Ecology Australia Pty.
Ltd.), Michael Scroggie and Nick Clemman (Arthur Rylah Institute - DSE), Teigan
Allen (DSE) for their contributions at project workshops and comments on the draft
Strategy.

Mark Venosta and Daniel Gilmore (Biosis Research Pty Ltd) for information on the
distribution of the species throughout the study area.

Representatives from the Growth Areas Authority for their review of the Strategy.

Andrew Hamer (Australian Research Centre for Urban Ecology) for information
relating to the ecology of Bell Frogs and evidence of predation of the Green and
Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea by Red Fox Vulpes vulpes.

Landholders within the revised urban growth boundary and 28 precincts who gave
permission to access their property as part of the habitat assessment and targeted
surveys of the species.

DSE for access to the data on the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas, Atlas of Victorian
Wildlife and Flora Information System.
The following Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd employees either undertook the field assessments and / or contributed to the
preparation of the final report: Aaron Organ (Project Manager), Amanda Smith, Amanda Feetham, Andrea Canzano, Andrew Hill,
Andrew Taylor, Bill Fish, Claire Steele, Cristina De Borrello, Drew Hutchinson and Stuart Cooney.
Copyright © Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd
This document is subject to copyright and may only be used for the purposes for which
it was commissioned. The use or copying of this document in whole or part without the
permission of Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd is an infringement of copyright.
Disclaimer
Although Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd have taken all the necessary steps to
ensure that an accurate document has been prepared, the Company accepts no liability
for any damages or loss incurred as a result of reliance placed upon either the report or
its content.
4
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
SUMMARY
Introduction
Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd was commissioned by the Department of Sustainability
and Environment (DSE) to prepare technical details and guidelines for a Sub-regional Strategy
(SRS) for the nationally threatened Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (herein referred to
L. raniformis) to meet the requirements of the Melbourne Strategic Assessment Program (the
Program), under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation
Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
This technical background and guidelines should be read in conjunction with the main SRS
for the species that has been prepared by DSE. The SRS has been developed to provide a
strategic framework for the conservation of L. raniformis throughout the revised Urban
Growth Areas Boundary (UGB) and associated 28 precincts included within the Program
(referred to as the study area).
Purpose of the SRS
The L. raniformis SRS provides a framework to address the habitat requirements and
connectivity between and within important populations over the long term, and is a strategic
document that assists in the delivery of the outcomes sought for L. raniformis through the
Program of Melbourne’s future urban development. That is:

Functioning sustainable populations of L. raniformis with connectivity between
populations; and,

Protection and enhancement of ‘important populations’ throughout the study area.
Objectives
The overarching objective of the SRS is the identification of areas across the landscape that
will be protected and managed for L. raniformis, to ensure that populations are viable in an
urban landscape in the future.
The five primary objectives of SRS for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area are:
Objective 1 – Determine the distribution and habitat quality.
Objective 2 – Develop a wetness habitat connectivity model.
Objective 3 – Identify strategically important habitat areas and linkages.
Objective 4 – Provide guidelines for conservation.
Objective 5 – Provide guidelines for implementation.
5
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Study area
The SRS covers the area outlined in the Program. This includes the new Growth Areas within
the expanded UGB (created as a result of Planning Amendment VC68 in August 2010), and
the 28 precincts located within the previous UGB.
The four Growth Areas include Melbourne West, Melbourne North-West, Melbourne North
and Melbourne South-East.
Results
Litoria raniformis is known to occur throughout the study area, primarily along the major
waterways, together with several off-stream waterbodies located within the vicinity of these
waterways. Sites occupied by the species in the study area typically support habitat
characteristics such as a high cover of aquatic vegetation (i.e. emergent, submergent and
floating vegetation), high water quality and lack predatory fish, and many sites are known to
be important for ongoing breeding and recruitment. Adjoining terrestrial environments also
support essential habitat for non breeding activity such as movement, foraging, over-wintering
and shelter.
Permanent and ephemeral waterways also provide suitable dispersal habitat (linkages) to other
suitable sites across the landscape.
Important populations within the Melbourne Area
In the context of the SRS, and based on the definition in the EPBC Act Policy Statement,
important populations are currently known to occur in association with the following
waterways:

Melbourne North: Merri, Darebin, Edgars and Kalkallo Creeks, and their tributaries.

Melbourne West: Kororoit Creek, lower Skeleton Creek, sections of Werribee River,
Lollipop Creek, Skeleton Creek and their tributaries.

Melbourne North-West: Jackson’s and Emu Creeks, and their tributaries.

Melbourne South-East: Principally along the southern parts of Cardinia and Clyde
Creeks, along with Gum Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek and off-stream waterbodies.
Areas required for conservation
The SRS identifies conservation areas that will provide for the long-term functioning of L.
raniformis populations throughout and adjacent to the study area. These areas (designated as
Category 1 areas on the accompanying maps) are all associated with the major waterways
which support important populations. The Category 1 areas typically include the waterway
and associated buffer of 50–200m and are required to be set aside for the conservation of L.
raniformis.
6
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
A three-stage approach of: 1) Protection, 2) Enhancement, and, 3) Creation of habitats has
been used as part of the prioritisation of conservation actions for L. raniformis in the study
area. Information pertaining to site-specific habitat improvement requirements will be
provided in individual CMPs (CMPs) prepared as part of the Precinct Structure Plan (PSP)
process.
The Category 1 protection areas are considered sufficient to:

Protect much of the existing habitats that support important populations of L.
raniformis, and undertake enhancement measures and ongoing management;

Create extensive new areas of habitat consisting of a network of interconnected
constructed wetlands that will be planted with a diversity of aquatic vegetation, and
will support required habitat features (e.g. high water quality, suitable refuge sites) and
interspersed with grassed and/or treed areas;

Include sufficient areas above the flood zone where large off-stream waterbodies can
be created to provide for ongoing breeding and recruitment; and,

Enable other uses such as stormwater treatment (where appropriate) and recreation to
occur without undermining the conservation objectives.
Protection of important populations
Important populations covered by Category 1 in the SRS need to be protected via appropriate
zoning, and need to be managed on a landscape level and also on a patch or population level,
where frogs have the capacity to move within and between sites (i.e. no barriers to dispersal).
Areas known to support or have a high probability of supporting important populations of L.
raniformis are provided below (Table 1). Although these are based on the larger waterways, it
is important to protect free standing waterbodies in the vicinity (i.e. within 300 metres) of
these waterways wherever practicable as it is typically these waterbodies, and not necessarily
sections along the waterways themselves, within which L. raniformis are likely to breed.
Table 1. Areas for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area.
Growth Area
Areas for L. raniformis Conservation
Areas where protection of breeding, dispersal and foraging habitat is required
Melbourne West
Kororoit Creek , Werribee River, Dry Creek, Davis Creek, Lollipop
Creek, Skeleton Creek
Melbourne North-West
Jacksons Creek, Emu Creek
Melbourne North
Merri Creek, Kalkallo Creek, Darebin Creek, Edgars Creek
Melbourne South-East
Cardinia Creek, Clyde Creek, Gum Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek
7
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Habitat enhancement
Habitat enhancement for L. raniformis within the Category 1 areas across the study area is
required to ensure that extant populations remain viable. Habitat enhancement will be
undertaken where L. raniformis is known to occur, or at sites within the vicinity of occupied
sites that have the greatest potential to contribute to the long-term viability of populations.
Habitat creation
The creation of L. raniformis habitat can be in the form of waterbodies (wetlands, lakes or
ponds) which can be used for breeding, and the provision of terrestrial habitat in and around
sites that provide opportunities for frogs to move within and between sites. Habitat creation is
typically considered a secondary conservation measure to habitat protection outlined above.
However, in the context of this strategy the creation of habitat to compensate for the removal
of habitat within development areas is a critically important mitigation measure, given the
scale of habitat removal likely to be required over the life of the Program. Habitat created to
compensate for losses elsewhere will be located in the Category 1 protection areas.
Detailed guidelines are provided for the creation and management of L. raniformis habitat in
Chapter 6 of the SRS.
Additional requirements
Given the strategic nature of this work, the data available for the preparation of this SRS are
considered sufficient to identify strategically important habitat and linkages required for the
protection of L. raniformis habitat. However, further surveys will be required in the future to
confirm the extent of other suitable habitat or to inform salvage/translocation requirements
within a particular development area (e.g. a PSP area).
Sites where the extent of suitable habitat still needs to be determined (due to access
limitations) are identified on Figure 2. Targeted species surveys will be required at locations
identified in this report (Figure 2) and in other sites surveyed and confirmed to be suitable
habitat to determine whether frogs are present. All surveys will follow the minimum survey
requirements consistent with the Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning Kit.
The detailed design and implementation of PSPs needs to take into consideration the
recommendations provided in the SRS, particularly in terms of protection/enhancement
requirements, and the sequencing of habitat removal to ensure that the extent of any salvage
and translocation requirements are known and properly planned. In addition, the urban design
and future development of the study area needs to ensure that connection between suitable
breeding and terrestrial habitats for L. raniformis are not severed, so that local populations and
metapopulation processes are viable in perpetuity.
8
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Ongoing collaboration between DSE, SEWPaC, the GAA, local councils and other
government agencies (e.g. water authorities, CFA, VicRoads), together with land developers,
consultants and private landowners is required during the PSP process to ensure that the SRS
is implemented, and future development within the study area proceeds in accordance with the
approvals under the EPBC Act Strategic Assessment for the Delivering Melbourne’s Newest
Sustainable Communities program.
9
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Information
Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd was commissioned by the Department of Sustainability
and Environment (DSE) to prepare technical details for a Sub-regional Strategy (SRS) for the
nationally threatened Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (herein referred to L.
raniformis) to meet the requirements of the Melbourne Strategic Assessment Program (DPCD
2009) (the Program), under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
This technical background and guidelines should be read in conjunction with the main SRS
for the species that has been prepared by DSE (DSE 2011). The SRS has been developed to
provide a strategic framework for the conservation of L. raniformis throughout the revised
Urban Growth Areas Boundary (UGB) and associated 28 precincts included within the
Program (referred to as the study area).
As identified in the Strategic Impact Assessment Report (DSE 2009), the growth of
Melbourne into the expanded Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) may result in negative impacts
on L. raniformis populations and habitats (both aquatic and terrestrial) throughout the new
growth areas. To avoid and minimise impacts associated with urban expansion, the protection
of areas that are known to contain L. raniformis populations, or that are likely to be suitable
for ongoing population dynamics is required. In addition, there are opportunities through
precinct structure planning (see below) to create waterbodies to ensure the long-term
persistence of L. raniformis within the study area.
The L. raniformis SRS provides a framework to address the habitat requirements and
connectivity between and within important populations over the long term, and is a key
mechanism to assist delivery of the overall outcomes sought for L. raniformis through the
Program of Melbourne’s future urban development set out in DPCD (2009). That is:

Functioning sustainable populations of L. raniformis with connectivity between
populations; and,

Protection and enhancement of ‘important populations’ throughout the study area.
The SRS will be used by DSE to consult with the Growth Areas Authority (GAA), relevant
municipalities, environmental organisations, developers and other stakeholder groups prior to
submitting it to the Commonwealth for their approval.
1.2 Strategy Objectives
The overarching objective of the SRS is to identify areas on a landscape level that need to be
protected and managed appropriately for L. raniformis metapopulations, to ensure that they
are viable in an urban landscape in the future.
10
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The Strategy is not intended to be used for the detailed management of L. raniformis at a sitespecific, or precinct level, nor is it intended to replace Conservation Management Plans
(CMPs) at the precinct level, where existing populations occur.
This technical document generally contains broad principles and guidelines, rather than
specific prescriptions on the local level. With the exception of Objective 3 – Identify
strategically important habitat areas and linkages (below and Section 5), the SRS does not
adopt a prescriptive approach.
Given our knowledge of L. raniformis’ habitat requirements and current distribution across
the study area the principles and guidelines presented herein are relevant in the long-term.
They will be used to guide the preparation of CMPs within precincts (Section 1.6).
The five primary objectives of the SRS for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area
are:
Objective 1 – Determine the distribution and habitat quality.
Objective 2 – Develop a wetness habitat connectivity model.
Objective 3 – Identify strategically important habitat areas and linkages.
Objective 4 – Provide guidelines for conservation.
Objective 5 – Provide guidelines for implementation.
1.3 Consultation
Workshops were held on 4 February and 12 March 2010 to discuss the SRS. Those consulted
during this process include Adam Muir, Fiona Ferwerda and Teigan Allen (Biodiversity and
Ecosystem Services, DSE), Michael Scroggie (Arthur Rylah Institute, DSE), Alan Webster
(Statewide Services, DSE), Geoffrey Heard (Melbourne University) and Christina Renowden
(Ecology Australia Pty Ltd). A peer review group was established to comment on early
drafts, which included the attendees at the workshops as well as Nick Clemman (Arthur Rylah
Institute, DSE) and Clare White (Statewide Services, DSE). Several meetings were held with
DSE to discuss the draft versions of the SRS.
1.4 Implementation of Strategy and Review
Several Government agencies, including DSE, GAA, the Commonwealth Department of
Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPaC), local councils
and water authorities, and private organisations such as land developers, consultancies and
land management bodies, and contractors will be involved in the implementation of the SRS.
As outlined in the Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities - Program
Report (DSE 2009) a monitoring report is to be prepared at least every two years according to
an agreed schedule outlined in the individual CMPs.
11
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The strategies and management requirements provided in this document may need to alter if
new information becomes available, or if management actions are considered inappropriate or
inadequate for the long-term persistence of L. raniformis. It is intended that the Strategy will
be reviewed after 10 years, with the review informed by the results of monitoring.
1.5 Precinct Structure Planning
Precinct structure planning provides a framework on how greenfield areas will be developed.
Precinct Structure Plans (PSPs) are created to establish a basis for development in the future
and the purpose of these plans is to provide a balance between meeting complex policy
requirements and providing affordable development. There is a greater emphasis on the use
of the PSP process within the study area to guide development and the need for integrated
planning at an early stage in the process.
The GAA is the statutory authority responsible for overseeing the preparation of all PSPs in
Melbourne's growth areas and advising the Minister for Planning on their approval. Once
PSPs are completed they will be an incorporated document in local planning schemes and
conservation requirements for significant flora and fauna species, including L. raniformis, will
be implemented in accordance with the relevant SRS and species-specific CMPs.
1.6 Study Area
The SRS covers the area outlined in the Program (DPCD 2009). This includes the new
Growth Areas within the expanded UGB (created as a result of Planning Amendment VC68 in
August 2010), and the 28 precincts located within the previous UGB.
The primary study area for the SRS covers the four geographically discrete growth areas
(Figure 1). A description of these areas is provided below, followed by an assessment of the
current status of L. raniformis in each of the relevant PSPs (Table 2).
1.6.1 Melbourne West Growth Area
The Melbourne West Growth Area includes land to the west and south-west of the existing
Werribee-Wyndham Vale urban area, extending north to Boundary Road, taking in areas of
Truganina, Tarneit and Mount Cottrell (Figure 1). The land is predominantly used for rural,
industrial and public purposes. The growth area lies within the City of Wyndham and Melton
Shire Council. The southern part of this Growth Area lies adjacent to the two proposed
grassland reserves. Detailed vegetation mapping has recently been completed for several of
the PSPs within the Growth Area (GAA 2010a, 2010b, 2010c, 2010d, 2010e, 2010f, 2010g,
2010h).
The PSPs within the previous UGB in the Melbourne West Growth Area include Precincts: 27
Melton North; 30 Taylors Hill West; 31 Toolern; 37 Truganina Employment Area; 38
Truganina South; 39 Werribee Technology Park; and, 40 Wyndham Vale (GAA 2011).
12
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
1.6.2 Melbourne North-West Growth Area
The Melbourne North-West Growth Area extends from Diggers Rest in the south, and east
and north east of Sunbury (Figure 1). The land within this Area is predominantly used for
agricultural purposes and is lies wholly within the City of Hume. This Growth Area and the
Melbourne West Growth Area have similar biogeography.
1.6.3 Melbourne North Growth Area
The Melbourne North Growth Area includes land to the east and south of the existing Sunbury
urban area as well as land along the Hume Freeway from the outer areas of Craigieburn
through Donnybrook to the township of Beveridge in the north (Figure 1). Within the Growth
Area, including the Sunbury and Craigieburn-Beveridge area, is predominantly used for rural,
industrial and public purposes. The Sunbury section of the Growth Area lies within the
Melton Shire and City of Hume and Craigieburn-Beveridge section of the Growth Area lies
within Cities of Hume and Whittlesea and the Mitchell Shire.
The PSPs that fall within the Melbourne North Growth Area inside the previous UGB include
Precincts: 19 Craigieburn (R2); 21 Greenvale Activity Centre (A4); 22 Greenvale North (R1);
23 Greenvale West (R3); 25 Mickleham Employment Area North (E2); and, 26 Mickleham
Employment Area South (E3) (GAA 2011).
1.6.4 Melbourne South-East Growth Area
The Melbourne South-East Growth Area extends from the existing urban areas of Cranbourne
and Langwarrin, including areas of Cranbourne East, Clyde North and Clyde (Figure 1). The
topography is generally flat to gently undulating with some low lying areas particularly in the
creek and swamp environs. Land use in the area is predominantly rural, industrial and public
use. The Growth Area lies within the City of Casey and Cardinia Shire Council, and remnant
native vegetation is principally restricted to roadside and railway reserves, and along
waterways.
Cardinia Creek is the major watercourse that runs along the north eastern boundary of the
Growth Area. Other smaller creeks and drains (e.g. Clyde Creek and Western Contour Drain)
are also present, along with several large irrigation dams which are used for market gardens,
agriculture crops and turf farms.
The Growth Area lies within the Gippsland Plain bioregion. The PSPs that occur within the
previous UGB in the Melbourne South-East Growth Area include Precincts: 1 Beaconsfield; 4
Officer; 3 Cardinia Road Employment Area/Precinct (CREP); 5 Officer Employment Area; 6
Pakenham Employment Area (Stage 1); 7 Pakenham Employment Area (Stage 2); 8
Pakenham Township; 9 Berwick Waterways; 10 Botanic Ridge; 11 C21 Business Park; 12
Casey Central Town Centre; 13 Clyde North; 14 Cranbourne East; 16 Cranbourne North
(Stage 2); and, 18 Hampton Park Hill (GAA 2011).
13
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
As part of the DMNSC Program, a large (approximately 300 hectare) area of retained and
constructed floodplain and wetlands is proposed immediately outside the new UGB (in the
vicinity of the disused railway line). This will be designed to serve multiple objectives,
including water retention and improvement; the provision of habitat for L. raniformis,
waterbird and other fauna, and the use of the area by the public for passive recreation (DPCD
2009).
1.6.5 Existing 28 precincts
As outlined above, the 28 precincts within the former UGB are also included within the scope
of the SRS. However, several of these precincts have already been completed since the time
that the Program was prepared. In these cases the SRS includes these for completeness, but
merely reflects decisions already made as a result of the preparation of PSPs for these areas.
The 28 precincts and their status are described below (Table 2).
14
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Table 2. Status of L. raniformis in the 28 Precincts within the study area.
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
1
Beaconsfield
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
for Area 1 Beaconsfield
2010, Ecology Partners.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – sufficient
information
available
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
No suitable habitat
for L. raniformis
has been identified
in the precinct.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
No action required.
No action required.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
No
15
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
2&3
Cardinia
Road
Employment
Area/Precinc
t (CREP)
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
Status of
the
Precinct
Completed
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted L. raniformis
surveys conducted for the
precinct as outlined in the
Targeted GGF Surveys
within Cardinia Road
Employment Precinct,
2009, Ecology Partners.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – surveys
completed, PSP
completed.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
L. raniformis has
been recorded
throughout the PSP
in farm dams.
Important frog
clusters and suitable
habitat for the
species has been
identified across the
PSP. Records of
breeding in the
precinct exist.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected,
enhanced and managed
are:
 Gum Scrub Creek (100
metre buffer on PSP
side);
 Toomuc Creek (50m
buffer on PSP side);
 Cardinia Road Drain
Corridor (70–100m
total width);
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
N/A
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes. Cardinia
Road
Employment
Precinct
Conservation
Management
Plan 16
September
2010 has been
approved by
DSE.
 The east west
powerline easement,
and east west corridor
(30–70m in width)
from Cardinia Road to
Gum Scrub Creek
adjacent to the
Pakenham Bypass;
 Creation of 16
dedicated wetlands for
L .raniformis in
addition to stormwater
wetlands being created
with habitat for the
species.
16
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
4
Precinct
Name
Officer
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre -planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted L. raniformis
surveys conducted for the
precinct as outlined in the
Biodiversity Assessment
Report for Officer PSP
2010, Ecology Partners.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – surveys
completed
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
L. raniformis was
detected in several
dams in the southeast of the precinct,
adjacent to Gum
Scrub Creek.
Suitable habitat
throughout the
precinct.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected,
enhanced and managed
are:
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
N/A
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes.
Completed.
 Gum Scrub Creek (50
metres either side);
 Cardinia Creek
(corridors to be
protected, enhanced
and managed for
species habitat);
 Wetlands in the Gum
Scrub creek corridor to
be created in line with
habitat requirements for
L. raniformis;
 Additional dedicated
wetlands will be
created for the species.
 Wetlands created in the
south-west, between the
Officer Services Station
Centre and Cardinia
Creek.
17
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
5
Officer
Employment
Area
6
Pakenham
Employment
Area (Stage
1)
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
for Officer Employment
Area 2010, Ecology
Partners.
Targeted GGF surveys
undertaken as outlined in
Flora and Fauna
Assessment for the
Proposed Pakenham
Industrial and
Employment Precinct,
Pakenham, Victoria 2007,
Ecology Partners.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
Additional surveys
completed through
SRS.
No – surveys
completed
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Suitable habitat
(e.g. dams) occurs
across the PSP area,
as well as Cardinia
Creek Corridor.
Historical records
exist from the east
of the PSP, along
Lecky Road and
adjacent to Sum
Scrub Creek.
N/A
There is a good
understanding of the
species’ likelihood
of occurrence.
There is low quality
habitat for L.
raniformis across
much of the PSP.
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced and managed
are:

Cardinia Creek
and Gum Scrub
Creek Corridors
(200m);

The creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in
Cardinia Creek
and Gum Scrub
Creek
Corridors.
No action required.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
No
18
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
7
Pakenham
Employment
Area (Stage
2)
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted L. raniformis
surveys undertaken as
outlined in Flora and
Fauna Assessment for the
Proposed Pakenham
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – surveys
completed
Industrial and
Employment Precinct,
Pakenham, Victoria 2007,
Ecology Partners.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
The species was
detected in several
locations in the
south-east, southwest and north of
the PSP. L.
raniformis has also
been recorded along
the Pakenham
Bypass at created
waterbodies. There
is suitable habitat
for L. raniformis
across much of the
PSP. The large
waterbodies
adjacent to Toomuc
Creek is an
important breeding
site for the
Pakenham
metapopulation (i.e.
100s of individuals
regularly recorded).
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:

Toomuc Creek
Corridor
(200m) with
connection to
the large
wetland
adjacent to
Toomuc Creek,

The large
waterbodies
adjacent to
drainage line;

The north south
drainage line;

The creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in
Toomuc Creek
Corridor.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
8
Pakenham
Township
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Pre-planning
Targeted surveys of the
species are not required
due to lack of suitable
habitat.
No – no suitable
habitat.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis within
the PSP.
N/A
No action required.
No
9
Berwick
Waterways
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Pre-planning
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
for Berwick Waterways,
2010, Ecology Partners.
Surveys completed
through SRS.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis in the
precinct.
N/A
No action required
No
19
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
10
Precinct
Name
Botanic
Ridge
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted surveys for L.
raniformis outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
of Botanic Ridge PSP
2009, Practical Ecology.
Targeted L. raniformis
surveys over the 2009/10
breeding season have also
been completed by
Ecology Partners across
the PSP area.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
No L. raniformis
were detected
within the precinct.
L. raniformis has a
low likelihood of
occurrence in
Settlers Run Golf
Course based on the
Biodiversity
Assessment for
Botanic Ridge 2009.
The Settlers Run
Golf Course has
been removed from
the Botanic Ridge
PSP boundary.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
No areas to be retained
for GGF. Rehabilitation
of drainage lines and the
creation of stormwater
wetlands to be in
accordance with the
habitat requirements of L.
raniformis.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
No action required
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
20
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
11
C21 Business
Park
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in the
Biodiversity Assessment
for C21 Business Park,
2010, Practical Ecology.
There have been some
detailed targeted surveys
for the species within the
PSP (i.e. as part of the
Pakenham Bypass Flora
and Fauna investigations
in 2004, Ecology
Partners).
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
Surveys completed
through SRS.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Species assigned a
moderate likelihood
of occurrence in the
precinct as outlined
in the Biodiversity
Assessment for C21
Business Park 2010.
Artificial wetlands
(primarily dams) in
the precinct
identified as
suitable habitat for
L. raniformis
including large
wetlands adjacent to
Cardinia Creek,
large vegetated
wetland in the west
of the precinct, and
irrigation dams in
the middle of the
precinct.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:

Existing large
wetlands
adjacent to
Cardinia Creek
with 100m
buffer from
large wetlands;

Large vegetated
wetland in the
west of the
precinct;

Drainage
system to
incorporate
habitat
requirements
for L.
raniformis and
to incorporate
existing
wetlands;

Creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in
Cardinia Creek
Corridor.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes.
21
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
12
Casey
Central
Town Centre
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
of Area 12 Casey Central,
Cranbourne, 2010,
Ecology Partners.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
Survey completed
through SRS.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis across in
the precinct.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
N/A
No action required.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
No
22
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
13
Clyde North
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Status of
the
Precinct
Prefinalisation
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted surveys outlined
in Biodiversity
Assessment of Clyde
North 2009, Practical
Ecology. Additional
targeted surveys outlined
in Clyde North PSP
Cardinia Creek:
Threatened Fauna
Conservation
Management Plan, 2010,
Ecology Australia.
Habitat assessment
outlined in Practical
Ecology Letter to DSE.8
June 2010. Further
clarification of Growling
Grass Frog likelihood of
occurrence within Clyde
North PSP.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Suitable habitat for
L. raniformis
throughout most of
the Clyde North
PSP area. Cardinia
Creek and adjacent
wetlands identified
as important for L.
raniformis.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
N/A
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes.
Completed.
 2 existing wetlands
adjacent to Cardinia
Creek with terrestrial
buffers of 50–80
metres;
 An additional 9
wetlands to be
created along Grices
Road Anabranch and
in south of the
corridor and buffered
by 50–80 metres;
 Retarding basin
established with
habitat requirements
for L. raniformis and
connectivity to the
creek corridor;
 Cardinia Creek
Corridor to be more
than 100 metres in
width, ensuring
buffers on wetlands
as listed above;
 Creation of
compensatory habitat
for L. raniformis in
Cardinia Creek
Corridor.
23
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
Status of
the
Precinct
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
14
Cranbourne
East
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Completed
General fauna assessment
of the precinct outlined in
Cranbourne East:
Existing Conditions,
Flora and Fauna Report,
2007 Golders Associates.
No – Surveys
completed, PSP
Completed.
Species record in
the precinct from
1980. Although
there is a recent
record adjacent to
the precinct, due to
lack of suitable
habitat within the
precinct, it was
concluded that there
is low likelihood of
occurrence in the
precinct.
No action required.
Precinct planning process
completed.
N/A
No
16
Cranbourne
North (Stage
2)
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Pre-planning
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
of Cranbourne North
(Stage 2) 2009, Practical
Ecology. Targeted
surveys not required due
to lack of suitable habitat.
No – Surveys
completed.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis in the
precinct. The areas
identified as habitat
for L. raniformis in
the Biodiversity
Assessment are the
wetlands in the
north of the
precinct. These
areas have been
removed from the
boundary of the
precinct.
N/A
No action required.
No
18
Hampton
Park Hill
Melbourne
South-east
(Casey –
Cardinia)
Pre-planning
General flora and fauna
assessments completed-
Surveys completed
through the SRS.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis in the
precinct.
N/A
No action required.
No
24
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
Status of
the
Precinct
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
19
Craigieburn
(R2)
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Complete
General fauna surveys
and habitat assessment
conducted in the precinct
as outlined in the
Craigieburn R2 Precinct
Structure Plan Flora and
Fauna Assessment, 2009,
Practical Ecology.
Targeted Surveys for the
species outlined in
Targeted survey for
Growling Grass Frog
within the R2 Precinct
Structure Plan,
Craigieburn, Victoria,
2009, Biosis Research,.
Ecology Partners
completed targeted
surveys across the Peet
Limited land, south of
Craigieburn Road.
No – Surveys
completed.
Suitable habitat has
been identified
within the precinct.
Closest population
is on the Merri
Creek.
Protection and
enhancement of drainage
lines for Growling Grass
Frog habitat.
N/A
Yes. CMPs
required for
each of the
relevant land
parcels:
properties 7,
8, 12, 13 and
14 in the
Craigieburn
R2 Precinct
Structure Plan
21
Greenvale
Activity
Centre (A4)
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Pre-planning
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
Report- Contract Area 21,
2010, SMEC.
Surveys completed
through SRS.
L. raniformis was
recorded along
Brodies Creek in the
north east during the
surveys undertaken
in 2010. No habitat
was identified
within the precinct,
but L. raniformis
may occur in habitat
associated with the
adjacent Greenvale
Reservoir and
Yuroke Creek.
N/A
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:
Yes

Brodie Creek
and buffer;

Creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in
Brodie Creek
Corridor.
25
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
22
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
Greenvale
North (R1)
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Status of
the
Precinct
Completed
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Flora and Fauna
Assessment and Targeted
Matted Flax-lily and
Golden Sun Moth
Surveys, 400 Somerton
Road, Greenvale Victoria,
2010, Ecology Partners
and
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
There are no records
of L. raniformis
from within the PSP
and no suitable
habitat in the
precinct .
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
No Action required.
N/A
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
No
Flora and Fauna
Assessment and Targeted
Golden Sun Moth and
Matted Flax-lily Surveys
for land at 1170
Mickleham Road,
Mickleham, Greenvale,
Victoria, 2009, Ecology
Partners.
26
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
23
Precinct
Name
Greenvale
West (R3)
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Status of
the
Precinct
Completed
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted surveys outlined
in Biodiversity
Assessment ReportGreenvale South PSP
Area 23, 2009 SMEC.
Additional surveys
undertaken as part of the
SRS.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
There are no records
of L. raniformis
from within the PSP
and only small areas
of low quality
habitat in the
precinct. Litoria
raniformis was
recorded by
Ecology Partners in
2010 along Brodies
Creek north of
Somerton Road and
west of Greenvale
Reservoir (northwest of this
precinct).
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
No action required.
N/A
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
No
27
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
25
Mickleham
Employment
Area North
(E2)
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted surveys are
outlined in Biodiversity
Assessment Report –
Mickleham, PSP Area 25
and 26, 2009, SMEC.
Additional targeted L.
raniformis surveys have
recently (over several
breeding seasons) been
completed by Ecology
Partners and others along
Merri and Kalkallo
Creeks (adjacent to
Donnybrook Road in the
north of the PSP).
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
There is suitable
habitat and
considerable
number of records
for L. raniformis in
the precinct along
Merri Creek,
Kalkallo Creek and
adjoining drainage
lines. Farm dams
across the PSP
provide habitat for
the species,
particularly sites
close to waterways.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:

Merri Creek
(200 metres
either side) and
Kalkallo Creek
(100 – 200
metres either
side);

The drainage
line connecting
Kalkallo Creek
to the wetland
on western side
of the Hume
Highway;

The creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in all
protected areas.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
28
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
26
Mickleham
Employment
Area South
(E3)
Melbourne
North
(Hume –
Mitchell –
Whittlesea)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Targeted surveys are
outlined in Biodiversity
Assessment Report –
Mickleham, PSP Area 25
and 26, 2009, SMEC
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
No – Surveys
completed
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
There is suitable
habitat and a
considerable
number of records
for L. raniformis in
the precinct along
Merri Creek,
Kalkallo Creek and
adjoining drainage
lines. Farm dams
across the PSP
provide habitat for
the species.
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:

Merri Creek
(200m buffer)
and Malcolm
Creek;

The creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis in
Creek
Corridors.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
27
Melton North
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Completed
General surveys and
habitat assessment
outlined in Melton
Structure Plan: Flora and
Fauna Assessment,
Melton, Victoria , 2007,
Ecology Partners.
No – Surveys
completed.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis and there
are no historical
records of the
species.
No Action Required.
N/A
No
30
Taylors Hill
West
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Completed
General fauna survey and
habitat assessment
conducted for the precinct
as outlined in Taylors Hill
West Precinct Structure
Plan: Flora and Fauna
Assessment, Plumpton
Victoria, 2007, Ecology
Partners.
No – Surveys
completed.
L. raniformis was
recorded 100–200
m south of Taylors
Road on the western
boundary of the
PSP. Suitable
habitat for the
species occurs in the
large dam along
eastern edge of the
survey area.
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:
N/A
Yes.
Completed.
 The large dam along
eastern edge of the with
a 30 metre buffer.
29
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
31
37
Precinct
Name
Toolern
Truganina
Employment
Area
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Status of
the
Precinct
Completed
PSP
completed
without
Native
Vegetation
Precinct Plan
and
consideration
of
Biodiversity
issues.
Biodiversity
values to be
considered at
individual
planning
permit stage
or as part of
a future
amendment
for the
Native
Vegetation
Precinct
Plan.
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
General fauna survey and
habitat assessment for
precinct as outlined in the
Toolern Precinct Structure
Plan: Flora and Fauna
Assessment and Habitat
Hectare Analysis, Melton
South, Victoria, 2009,
Ecology Partners.
No – Surveys
completed.
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Biodiversity Assessment
Contract Area 37
(including Truganina
Employment, 2010,
AECOM.
No – no suitable
habitat.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
There is suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis along
Toolern Creek and
Werribee River.
Much of the study
area is lacking
suitable habitat for
the species.
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:
There are no
previously
documented records
of L. raniformis
within this PSP.
No suitable habitat
within the precinct.
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
N/A
Yes. Near
completion.
N/A
No
 Toolern Creek corridor
to be part of Parks
Victoria Regional Park;
 Buffers on Toolern
Creek to 100 metres.
30
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
38
39
Status of
the
Precinct
Precinct
Name
Precinct
Location
Truganina
South
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Pre
finalization
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Pre-planning
Werribee
Employment
(Post Panel,
prior to
incorporation
of
documents)
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
General fauna and habitat
assessment outlined in
Sayers Road and Palmers
Road Truganina, Flora,
Fauna, and Threatened
Species Assessment, 2009,
Brett Lane Associates.
No – Surveys
completed.
There is no suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis and there
are no historical
records of the
species.
No Action Required.
N/A
No
Targeted surveys outlined
in Preliminary Flora and
Fauna Assessment,
Werribee Employment
Precinct, Werribee,
Victoria, 2010, Ecology
Partners.
Survey completed
through Sub
Regional Strategy.
There is one record
of a calling male L.
raniformis near the
southern boundary
of the PSP as a
result of these
surveys. There is a
small amount of
suitable habitat for
L. raniformis
present in the PSP
(e.g. artificial
waterbodies),
however this is
essentially
disconnected from
larger streams.
N/A
No areas required to be
protected or managed due
to small, isolated nature
of habitat patches
Yes
Additional targeted L.
raniformis surveys have
recently (over several
breeding seasons) been
completed by Ecology
Partners across the entire
PSP area.
31
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
Precinct
Number
40
Precinct
Name
Wyndham
Vale
Precinct
Location
Melbourne
West
(Melton –
Caroline
Springs and
Wyndham)
Status of
the
Precinct
Pre-planning
Litoria raniformis
surveys undertaken in
the Precinct
General fauna through
Biodiversity Assessments
for Ballan Road (40),
Manor Lakes (41), Black
Forest Road (42), and
Alfred Road (43), 2010,
AECOM. Surveys to be
conducted through Sub
Regional Strategy.
Additional
surveys required
for the L.
raniformis SRS?
Surveys completed
through Sub
Regional Strategy.
L. raniformis
habitat within
the precinct
L. raniformis was
recorded in both the
north and south of
the precinct along
Lollypop Creek.
There is suitable
habitat for L.
raniformis present
across much of the
PSP.
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the SRS in precincts
where there are
agreed outcomes
from PSP process
N/A
Areas to be protected
in accordance with
the Sub Regional
Strategy in Precincts
where PSP is in early
stages at time of the
SRS
Areas to be protected,
enhanced, and managed
are:

Werribee River,
Lollipop creek,
and Werribee
West Drain with
suitable buffers.

The creation of
compensatory
habitat for L.
raniformis.
Litoria
raniformis
CMP
required?
Yes
32
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Strategy within the Revised Urban Growth Boundary
1.7 Definition of an Important Population of Litoria raniformis
The focus of the SRS is around important populations and associated habitats following the
criteria of an ‘Important Population’ of L. raniformis as outlined in the EPBC Act Policy
Statement (DEWHA 2009a, 2009b). ‘Important Population’ is defined below (DEWHA
2009a, 2009b):
‘Much of the habitat for L. raniformis has been isolated or fragmented, restricting the
opportunity for important population processes such dispersal and colonisation. As
such, any viable population is considered to be an important population for the
persistence and recovery of the species.
For this species, a viable population is one which is not isolated from other
populations or waterbodies, such that it has the opportunity to interact with other
nearby populations or has the ability to establish new populations when waterbodies
fill and become available. Interaction with nearby populations and colonisation of
newly available waterbodies occurs via the dispersal of individual frogs across
suitable movement habitat’.
‘In addition, a population of L. raniformis could be considered an important
population if it is near the limit of the species range (for example small isolated
populations in South Australia), is well-studied or has a history of monitoring, and
hence provides opportunity for greater understanding of the species through the
collection of long-term data’.
Important populations of L. raniformis in the Melbourne Area
In the context of the SRS, and based on the definition in the EPBC Act Policy Statement,
important populations are currently known to occur in the following areas:

Melbourne North: Merri, Darebin, Edgars and Kalkallo Creeks, and their
tributaries;

Melbourne West: Kororoit Creek, lower Skeleton Creek, sections of Werribee
River, Lollipop Creek, and their tributaries;

Melbourne North-West: Jackson’s and Emu Creeks, and their tributaries.

Melbourne South-East: Principally along the southern parts of Cardinia and Clyde
Creeks, along with Gum Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek and off-stream waterbodies.
33
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
1.8 Legislative and Policy Context
Litoria raniformis is commonly known by several other names; Warty Bell Frog, Southern
Bell Frog, Warty Swamp Frog and Green and Golden Frog. The species is listed as
endangered in Victoria (DSE 2007) and vulnerable nationally (DEWHA 2009a, 2009b).
It is also listed as a threatened taxon under Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988
(FFG Act). A draft Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement (Robertson 2003) and a
draft National Recovery Plan (Clemann and Gillespie 2010) have been developed for the
species.
These various pieces of legislation require that approval be sought for any actions, including
urban development, which may significantly impact the species (DEWHA 2009a).
Any proposed action that has the potential to impact L. raniformis needs to consider the
definition of an important population of the species, whether a proposed action is likely to
have a ‘significant impact’ on the species, and mitigation measures and offset strategies that
can be undertaken to minimise the impacts to the species (DEWHA 2009a, 2009b).
34
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
2
BACKGROUND
2.1 Ecology of Litoria raniformis
2.1.1 Distribution
Although formerly widely distributed across south eastern Australia, including Tasmania
(Littlejohn 1963, 1982; Barker and Grigg 1977; Hero et al. 1991), the species has declined
markedly across much of its former range (Ashworth 1998; Wassens 2008; Clemann and
Gillespie 2010). This decline has been most evident over the past two decades and in many
areas, particularly in south and central Victoria, populations have experienced apparent
declines (including within the study area) and local extinctions (Mahoney 1999; Clemann and
Gillespie 2010). However, recent surveys of this species throughout the former Koo Wee
Swamp and Pakenham area, and north of Melbourne in the Merri Creek catchment have
revealed that the species is widely distributed throughout the area, with a number of relatively
large populations present.
Several populations throughout the greater Melbourne region have been extensively studied
(Williams 2001, 2002; Organ 2002a, 2002b, 2003a, 2003b; Robertson et al. 2002; Heard et al.
2004a, Heard et al. 2008; Hamer and Organ 2008).
2.1.2 Habitat requirements
2.1.2.1 Waterbody type and hydrology
This species is largely associated with permanent or semi-permanent still or slow flowing
waterbodies (i.e. streams, lagoons, old quarry sites) (Hero et al. 1991; Barker et al. 1995;
Cogger 1996; Ashworth 1998). Litoria raniformis can also utilise seasonally inundated
waterbodies for breeding purposes provided that they contain water over the breeding season
(Organ 2003a; Wassens et al. 2010). Farm dams and irrigation storages are the primary
source for breeding and recruitment for L. raniformis in many rural environments throughout
southern Victoria (e.g. Pakenham, Nar Nar Goon, Koo Wee Rup region) (Hamer and Organ
2008; Smith et al. 2008; Organ pers. obs.).
Habitat complexity such as variation in hydrological processes (water depth, flooding
frequency, ephemerality / permanency) and the type and location of refuge sites are
considered important for this species (Organ 2002; Heard et al. 2004).
However, waterbodies that do not support these habitat characteristics may support important
habitat that is temporarily occupied by L. raniformis while moving between higher-quality
habitats (i.e. ‘stepping stones’).
35
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
2.1.2.2 Vegetation
There is a strong correlation between the presence of the species and key vegetation attributes.
For example, the species is associated with waterbodies supporting extensive cover of
emergent, submerged and floating vegetation (Robertson et al. 2002, Organ 2004a, 2005a,
Hamer and Organ 2008; Wassens et al. 2008; Wassens 2010). Occupied waterbodies are
usually dominated by emergent vegetation including Water Ribbons Triglochin procera, Tall
Spike Rush Eleocharis sphacelata, Common Reed Phragmites australis and Cumbungi Typha
sp. Submerged vegetation is usually dominated by Potamogeton spp. and Myriophyllum spp.,
while fringing vegetation may include Common Spike Rush Eleocharis acuta and Juncus spp.
During a recent study it was apparent that one of the key habitat attributes influencing the
species at sites throughout the Pakenham area was the presence of an extensive cover of
floating vegetation, primarily Blunt Pondweed Potamogeton ochreatus and Sago Pondweed
Potamogeton pectinatus (Hamer and Organ 2008).
Emergent vegetation provides basking sites for frogs and protection from predators, while
floating vegetation provides suitable calling stages for adult males (Heard et al. 2008), and
breeding and oviposition (egg deposition) sites. Terrestrial vegetation (grasses, sedges), rocks
and other ground debris around a wetland perimeter also provide foraging, dispersal and overwintering sites for frogs (Wilson 2003).
2.1.2.3 Population dynamics and movement patterns
Litoria raniformis populations are structured as metapopulations, demonstrating spatially
clustered patterns of wetland occupancy, where movement between waterbodies occurs as
habitat conditions change over time (i.e. when waterbodies dry out or flood) (Robertson et al.
2002; Heard et al. 2004b, Heard et al. 2010). True metapopulation dynamics doesn't
necessarily involve the movement of populations from one place to another (although that
might occasionally occur in L. raniformis). Rather, metapopulation dynamics refers to
situations where stochastic patterns of patch extinction (usually governed by patch
size/quality) and colonisation (usually governed by patch isolation), determine the temporal
and spatial arrangement of sub-populations occupying distinct patches of habitat in a
landscape.
Mark-recapture studies in the Merri Creek Catchment demonstrated that individual wetlands
support discrete populations of L. raniformis, however some individuals disperse between
wetlands, and hence, between populations (Heard et al. 2010). In this study, annual
monitoring of wetland occupancy showed frequent population extinction and recolonisation,
and therefore, a temporally dynamic pattern of population occurrence (Heard et al. 2010).
Waterbodies that contain suitable habitat and that are located in proximity to each other are
more likely to support a population of L. raniformis, compared with isolated sites lacking
important habitat features (Hamer and Organ 2008; Heard et al. 2010). An example of
interconnected sites along the Mitta Mitta that currently support a population of L. raniformis
in north eastern Victoria is provided below (Plate 1) (A. Organ pers obs.).
36
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
During a recent study an individual frog moved 427 metres from a pool on the Merri Creek to
a pool on the Curley Sedge Creek in Somerton, following its inundation by heavy rainfall in
February 2005 (Heard et al. 2010). Overland movements of up to 490 metres were also
documented (Heard et al. 2010). Other examples of frog movements have been documented
in a study in Pakenham, where tagged frogs have moved at least 200 metres between
waterbodies (Hamer and Organ 2008; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010d).
During radio-telemetry studies in southern Victoria frogs have been recorded moving up to
one kilometre in one night (K. Jarvis cited in Robertson 2003), and frogs have been
documented moving several kilometres from permanent watercourses and channels to recently
flooded wetlands in the Murray River floodplain (Wassens 2005; Schultz 2006, 2007, 2008).
Frogs are often located at the waterline, or in the nearby terrestrial zone (<100 metres from the
waterline) (Heard et al. 2008; Heard et al. 2010; A. Organ pers. obs.), which highlights the
importance of adequate buffers around wetlands.
Dispersal is thought to occur primarily along drainage lines or other low-lying areas between
waterbodies, and unhindered movement between and within waterbodies is considered
important for population viability.
37
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Plate 1. Habitat connectivity in the wider landscape for Litoria raniformis along the Mitta Mitta River
floodplain, North East Victoria.
38
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
2.1.2.4 Water quality
Water quality is important for successful breeding and larval development in L. raniformis.
Many of the sites occupied by the species in Tasmania contained low nitrate and phosphate
levels (Ashworth 1998). In laboratory experiments the tadpoles of L. aurea had significantly
higher levels of mortality in high concentrations of nitrate and phosphate than did the
Common Froglet Crinia signifera and Striped Marsh Frog Limnodynastes peronii (Hamer et
al. 2004).
Although water quality is likely to be important for larval development, adult frogs appear to
have wide tolerances for variation in water quality (Organ 2004b). For example, pH, salinity,
conductivity, dissolved oxygen and turbidity did not influence the occupancy of waterbodies
by Litoria aurea (a closely related species to L. raniformis) in an agricultural and estuarine
area (Hamer et al. 2002a), and other recent studies on the physico-chemical properties of
waterbodies inhabited by Bell Frog species indicate wide tolerances (Ashworth 1998; Patmore
2001; Pyke et al. 2002).
2.1.2.5 Breeding habitat
Litoria raniformis is an opportunist in its choice of breeding sites and may use waterbodies of
varying permanency (i.e. ephemeral, semi-permanent) to breed, although permanent
waterbodies are usually required for successful breeding due to the species’ relatively long
larval period, which may be several months or, for some tadpoles, may extend over-winter to
metamorphose in the following season (Anstis 2002). The species has been recorded breeding
in a variety of ephemeral or semi-permanent waterbodies around metropolitan Melbourne,
southern NSW and Tasmania (AMBS 2000; Organ 2001, 2002a, 2003a; Williams 2001).
However, as a minimum, waterbodies need to contain suitable vegetative structure for the
species to breed, including sufficient areas of emergent and submerged vegetation (Harmer
and Organ 2008; Heard et al. 2010).
2.1.3 Threatening Processes
Factors that are likely to have contributed to the contraction in the species’ distribution and
decline in populations, include habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation (e.g. land clearing
for agriculture and urban development), altered flooding regimes of natural waterbodies,
predation on eggs and tadpoles by introduced fish, salinisation, chemical pollution of
waterbodies by fertilisers and pesticides, and infection by the amphibian Chytrid Fungus
(White and Pyke 1996; Hamer et al. 2002a; DEH 2006; Clemann and Gillespie 2010).
Several of these factors are, or may presently be acting on metapopulations throughout the
study area.
Further information on threats to the species is contained in the L. raniformis National
Recovery Plan (Clemann and Gillespie 2010) and summarised below.
39
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
2.1.3.1 Habitat Loss, isolation and modification
Habitat fragmentation and the loss of dispersal corridors are increasingly important causes of
declines in amphibian populations that has been extensively studied (Bradford et al. 1993;
Blaustein et al. 1994; Hecnar and M’Closkey 1996; Semlitsch and Bodie 1998; Pellet et al.
2004). Loss of habitat connectivity can result in the species being restricted to a reduced
number of suitable sites increasing the risks from droughts and predation, which can
ultimately reduce breeding success and recruitment (Pellet et al. 2004).
Human-induced changes to landscapes have created barriers to frog movement (e.g. roads,
residential development), that are likely to compromise the ability of L. raniformis to respond
to changed to hydrological regimes, drought, and fluctuations in water levels of local systems
of waterbodies (Heard et al. 2010). At least some populations may depend on a small number
of waterbodies in which successful breeding occurs (Hamer and Organ 2008). There is
evidence that the persistence of L. raniformis in most landscapes is dependent upon the
movement of frogs between particular sites, and between breeding and non-breeding habitats
(Wassens et al. 2007, 2008; Heard et al. 2010). Barriers disrupt the movement of frogs and
may compromise the long-term viability of populations.
As outlined above, given that L. raniformis and other Bell Frog species disperse widely and
their populations are structured as metapopulations (Hamer et al. 2002a; Heard et al. 2010),
the species is particularly vulnerable to changes across the landscape. The loss of suitable
waterbodies containing L. raniformis will increase the distance between the remaining
occupied waterbodies, and potentially reduce the probability that individuals will disperse
within the population. This may place the remaining occupied sites at greater risk of
extinction from stochastic events (e.g. drought, disease) and other threatening processes,
because such sites cannot be easily recolonised, as frogs have to move further.
Isolated waterbodies are at greater risk of extinction if individuals emigrate due to pond
drying, because sites cannot be recolonised easily as the distance to the nearest occupied
waterbody may be beyond the distance normally travelled by dispersing individuals.
Likewise, loss of waterbodies may reduce the availability of potential breeding sites and this
is particularly important as the recruitment status of many waterbodies is known to vary over
time. As outlined above, L. raniformis requires a network of closely-spaced and diverse
wetlands that support key habitat characteristics for breeding (e.g. high cover of submerged
vegetation, low turbidity, lack of predatory fish).
2.1.3.2 Roads
Several studies have investigated the impacts of roads on amphibians and other fauna species
(Van Gelder 1973; Mader 1984; Andrews 1990; Mader et al. 1990; Bennett 1991; Fahrig et
al. 1995; Daly 1996; Reed et al. 1996; Vos and Chardon 1998; DeMaynadier and Hunter
2000; Carr and Fahrig 2001; Hels and Buchwald 2001; Heard et al. 2004; Eigenbrod et al.
2009; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009a, 2010d). Roads are a source of amphibian mortality
(Ehmann and Cogger 1985; Fahrig et al. 1995; Daly 1996; Vos and Chardon 1998), and can
lead to habitat fragmentation and isolation (Hels and Buchwald 2001).
40
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
A recent study of L. raniformis populations throughout the Merri Creek Catchment revealed
that urban cover, which was approximated by road density, influenced occupancy by L.
raniformis (Heard et al. 2004).
If movement between habitats is impaired, such as by the creation of roads near occupied
habitats, or suitable sites that are likely to be used by the species over time, the local
population and possibly the wider metapopulation may become fragmented. This can lead to
local extinctions at individual waterbodies which cannot be recolonised by dispersing frogs
from nearby sites.
Therefore, fragmentation leading to isolation of populations may result in reduced population
size and increase the risk of extinctions (Hels and Buckwald 2001). The consequences of
these impacts on local frog populations in an area may not become evident for many years,
although it is highly probable that the creation of a barrier to frog movement will reduce the
long-term viability of a local population, and potentially, the wider metapopulation.
There is limited information regarding how traffic noise affects amphibian behaviour.
However, traffic noise may interfere with the vocalisations by male L. raniformis in wetlands
and waterbodies adjacent to roads. For example, frogs are known to increase the pitch of their
calls as a result of traffic noise (Barrass 1985; Parris et al. 2009), and this may affect the
ability of male frogs to successfully attract a mate, and thus, potentially lead to reduced
breeding success.
Road construction can lead to the sedimentation of wetlands inhabited by frogs, reducing their
suitability as habitat for L. raniformis. During the operational phase of a road, pollutants from
vehicles, particularly accidental spillages from trucks, may wash into adjacent wetlands,
usually via stormwater runoff. This may render such wetlands unsuitable as breeding sites (A.
Organ unpubl. data).
Roads may also result in changes to adjacent vegetation, causing increased weed
encroachment, and alter the hydrology (i.e. the frequency, timing, duration and extent of
inundation) of adjacent wetlands.
In large scale residential or precinct developments, where wetlands are often integrated into
open space networks, such as parkland and general recreation areas, suitable frog habitat is
almost always surrounded by an extensive road network, which can hinder immigration and
emigration from neighbouring sites. Additionally, if no measures are implemented to
facilitate frog movement (e.g. drift fences, underpasses, culverts), individuals can find their
way onto paved surfaces, where they are susceptible to traffic strike. However, there is
limited information on the use of crossing structures by L. raniformis, and whether crossing
structures have the ability to cater for life-history functions.
41
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
2.1.3.3 Predation by the Plague Minnow
Plague Minnow Gambusia holbrooki is known to eat the eggs and tadpoles of L. raniformis
and has been implicated in the decline of other members of the Bell Frog complex (i.e. L.
aurea, and L. moorei) and other Australian amphibians (Harris 1995; Morgan and Buttemer
1996; Webb and Joss 1997; Mahony 1999; Pyke and White 2000; Howard 2004; Reynolds
2009). Conversely, other studies have found no significant relationship between the presence
of the fish and occupancy of waterbodies by L. aurea (Hamer et al. 2002a; Poole 2004; Hamer
and Organ 2008).
Predation risk has been shown to be greatly reduced if habitat complexity exists at a breeding
site, whereby tadpoles can seek refuge amongst rocks and submerged vegetation (Morgan and
Buttemer 1996; Pyke and White 2000). Indeed, the presence of aquatic vegetation at sites is
known to reduce predator related mortality in anurans (Babbitt and Jordan 1996; Babbitt and
Tanner 1997; Babbitt and Tanner 1998; Baber and Babbit 2004, cited in Heard et al. 2010),
thus leading to increased survivorship of Bell Frog tadpoles (Hamer et al. 2002b).
2.1.3.4 Disease
Recent declines in amphibian populations throughout the world have been attributed to the
water borne fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Chytrid fungus) causing the
disease Chytridiomycosis (Blaustein and Wake 1990; Osborne et al. 1996; Berger et al. 1998,
1999, Bosch et al. 2001; Hopkins and Channing 2003; DEH 2006; Schloegel1 et al. 2006; ).
Chytrid is widespread in frog populations in eastern Australia and is known to infect L. aurea
(Mahony and Werkmann 2001; DEH 2006). It is unknown what impact Chytrid Fungus in the
population of L. raniformis is having across the study area. However, Chytrid Fungus has
been diagnosed in sick and dying L. raniformis in other populations in southern Victoria (A.
Organ per. obs.). Further information regarding the impacts of the disease on L. raniformis is
provided in the species’ National Recovery Plan (Clemman and Gillespie 2010).
2.1.3.5 Water quality
The effects of salinity on frogs are becoming better understood (Christy and Dickman 2002;
Chinathamby et al. 2006; Smith et al. 2007). In addition to any toxological impacts on
development and survival of the larval stages of L. raniformis, increasing salinity levels are
likely to reduce plant and insect diversity (James et al. 2003), possibly affecting the prey and
habitat of L. raniformis.
Present and future residential development has the potential to result in stormwater
contamination and uncontrolled runoff into existing and created frog habitat, potentially
resulting in a reduction in water quality (i.e. increased water turbidity). Construction activities
associated with future developments have the potential to result in sedimentation of nearby
waterways and produce sediment-laden runoff into drainage lines.
Altered drainage patterns resulting from urban development has the potential to modify the
length of time water courses, drainage lines and associated wetlands hold water.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
42
Given that water permanency is an important determinant of wetland quality for L. raniformis
(Pyke 2002; Heard et al. 2004a; Hamer et al. in prep), the reduction of water permanency at
some sites may render waterbodies unsuitable as potential breeding or movement corridors.
2.1.3.6 Fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides
The use of chemicals to improve pasture and to control pests and weeds on farming land has
the potential to reduce water quality in waterbodies occupied by L. raniformis throughout the
Growth Area. The tadpoles of L. aurea are sensitive to the nitrates and phosphates commonly
used in commercial fertilizers, and have been shown to have higher mortality rates than
common frog species (Hamer et al. 2004; Christy and Dickman 2002). Likewise, the tadpoles
of the Western Bell Frog L. moorei are sensitive to herbicides (Mann and Bidwell 1999).
Herbicides are likely to be used around new residential developments to control weeds in
parks, gardens and along roadsides. An increase in application of these chemicals due to the
management of residential areas has the potential for their input into waterbodies via surface
runoff and, consequently, impact L. raniformis.
2.1.3.7 Weeds
An important habitat requirement for L. raniformis is an ‘open’ terrestrial habitat immediately
adjacent to waterbodies. A recent study by Heard et al. (2008) revealed that the majority of
frogs located in the riparian zone preferred microhabitats of low structural complexity, where,
during nocturnal activity, frogs displayed preferential use of microhabitats such as bare
ground, rocks or leaf litter, and low emergent vegetation cover.
The preference of L. raniformis to use these open areas is possibly because, like L. aurea, the
species employs an ‘ambush’ or ‘sit-and-wait’ foraging mode to capture prey (Christy 2001,
Miehs and Pyke 2001 in Heard et al. 2008).
Increased weed encroachment into areas of terrestrial and aquatic indigenous vegetation in
and around waterways and waterbodies can occur from disturbance of soil seed banks during
excavations or transported via construction equipment. Excessive weed growth can smother
terrestrial habitat, rendering habitats unsuitable for breeding and/or foraging (Organ pers.
obs.).
2.1.3.8 Other Disturbances
Human access to terrestrial and aquatic frog habitat has the potential to result in disturbance
and potential degradation of wetlands and waterbodies through rubbish dumping, mechanical
disturbance of vegetation from trampling, vehicles, weed invasion and uncontrolled cats and
dogs. Humans can also introduce and spread the introduction of the exotic disease
chytridiomycosis caused by the pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (DEH 2006).
Overgrazing by domestic livestock around the edges of wetlands can destroy fringing
vegetation and affect water quality (Jansen and Healy 2003, Hazell 2003), or ultimately
change the form of creek (i.e. become eroded and / or deeply incised) (Hazell et al. 2003).
43
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
OBJECTIVE 1 – DETERMINE THE DISTRIBUTION AND
HABITAT QUALITY
3
3.1 Rationale
It is important to have an understanding of the distribution of L. raniformis as this aids in the
identification and prioritisation of areas required to be conserved as part of future
development throughout the study area. The identification of areas where the species is
known to occur, or has the potential to occur (see Objective 2) is fundamental in the
preparation of individual Conservation Management Plans (CMPs) for the species on the
precinct level, and is also the key basis of strategic planning (e.g. at the Growth Area
Framework Planning stage).
3.2 Methods
3.2.1 Literature Review
A literature review was undertaken to identity areas where previous surveys have occurred
and where there were a lack of targeted surveys and research on the species, to determine
sites/areas where habitat assessments and targeted surveys for the species were required.
Reports from government agencies, ecological consultancies and universities were also
reviewed for information relating to the past and present distribution of L. raniformis.
The Atlas of Victorian Wildlife (AVW) (AVW 2009) and the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas
(VBA) (VBA 2010) were searched for records of L. raniformis within and beyond the study
area. Additional records of the species were obtained from unpublished sources, including a
recent report (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a) that contains results of a SRS for L.
raniformis in the study area.
3.2.2 Field Surveys
3.2.2.1 Diurnal survey and habitat assessment
During the sub-regional surveys, which were conducted between 16 November 2009 and 21
January 2010, each survey site was visited once during the day (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd
2010a). Additional habitat assessments were completed by Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty
Ltd across a large proportion of the free-standing waterbodies throughout the four Growth
Areas between late November and March 2011 (Figure 2). The following attributes were
recorded at each site during the habitat assessments:

Location of site (AMG) recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS);

Size and type of waterbody (e.g. farm dam, drain);

Hydrology (e.g. permanent, semi-permanent, ephemeral);

Percentage cover of emergent, fringing, submerged and floating vegetation;

Presence of terrestrial refuge sites (e.g. rocks, logs, debris);
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
44

Water quality based on turbidity (i.e. poor = turbid, moderate = slightly turbid, high =
clear) and physical water pollutants;

Type of surrounding habitat within 30 metres of each site;

The detection / non-detection of other frogs;

Presence / absence of fish, and other predators such as foxes, cats and dogs.

Assessment of effects of drying climate and drought and whether the site has the
capacity to support Growling Grass Frog populations in the future; and,

Observation of tadpoles through the water column.
3.2.2.2 Roadside census
Roadside censuses were undertaken during the 2009/10 breeding season in most of the
Growth Areas as part of the sub-regional surveys (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a). In
addition, given the presence of a large number of permanent waterbodies (i.e. primarily
irrigation dams) and the lack of detailed targeted surveys of L. raniformis undertaken
throughout the South-East Growth Area, several nights of roadside census were undertaken
between October 2010 and early December 2010 in an effort to detect calling males and
expand our current understanding of site occupancy throughout this area. The following was
undertaken during roadside censuses:

At least one team (two people per team) traversed areas by vehicle listening for calling
male L. raniformis;

Surveyors stopped periodically to get out of the car and listen for calling males for
approximately five minutes;

If any frogs were heard calling, their approximate location was marked on a map and
surveyors drove as close as possible to the call to identify the source;

All frog species heard were recorded and an estimate of numbers and their known, or
likely location, was recorded with a hand-held GPS and on aerial photos; and,

Habitat details of sites and the surrounding areas that could be seen from the road were
recorded.
3.2.2.3 Nocturnal surveys
As part of the preparation of the SRS nocturnal surveys were undertaken throughout the
Growth Areas and also in a selection of PSPs.
Growth Areas: Targeted surveys were undertaken throughout most of the Growth Areas
during the 2009/10 breeding period of the species (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a).
However, more extensive surveys were undertaken by Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty Ltd
between 16 February 2010 and 17 March 2010, and also during the 2010/11 active period of
the species in areas of potentially suitable habitat.
45
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
A large proportion of waterbodies were surveyed for L. raniformis in the Growth Areas
(Figure 2) over the two active seasons of the species.
Selected PSPs: Targeted surveys for L. raniformis have been completed by Ecology and
Heritage Partners Pty Ltd and other consultancies, as part of the PSP process across most of
the precincts that currently provide suitable habitat for L. raniformis (Table 2). Surveys of the
five remaining PSPs were undertaken from 17 February 2011 to 28 March 2011 as part of this
SRS work. The five remaining precincts where targeted surveys for L. raniformis were
undertaken are:

Officer Employment Area (Precinct 5)

Berwick Waterways (Precinct 9)

C21 Business Park (Precinct 11)

Casey Central Town Centre (Precinct 12)

Hampton Park Hill (Precinct 18)
All targeted surveys were undertaken at a time when L. raniformis was known to be active
and surveys were completed in accordance with the Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning
Kit (DSE 2010). As a result, all of the 28 precincts have now been surveyed to the standard
required for precinct structure planning (Table 2).
In summary, the following was undertaken at the five remaining precincts:

Surveys commenced after sunset;

Climatic conditions were recorded at the commencement of the survey (e.g. relative
humidity, temperature, wind direction, speed, cloud cover, and occurrence of rain in
the previous 24-48 hours (these were also checked on the Bureau of Meteorology
website the following day);

Five minutes was spent listening for calling male frogs upon arriving at a site;

If no frogs were heard calling, call play-back was used to illicit a response;

Following the aural surveys, a systematic search was undertaken across the water
surface and in aquatic vegetation (i.e. emergent and submerged vegetation), and also
around the wetland perimeter using 30 watt 12 volt handheld spotlight; and,

The number, location, and if frogs were caught, the sex and size of frogs were
recorded. Tadpoles and metamorphs were also recorded.
46
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
3.3 Classification of Habitat Quality
The size of a waterbody was estimated in the field or measured from a scaled aerial
photograph. The classification of habitat quality is provided below.
High quality habitat: Areas that currently contain, or have a high likelihood to contain
important habitat attributes required by the species for breeding as well as foraging and
dispersal (e.g. permanent or semi-permanent, extensive aquatic vegetation, high water quality,
connected to other occupied sites, absence or low densities of predatory fish, high cover of
terrestrial refuge sites).
Moderate quality habitat: Habitat that supports one or more key habitat characteristics
outlined above, but not all (for example site may be important for dispersal or foraging but not
breeding).
Low quality habitat: Sites that are unlikely to be used by L. raniformis for breeding and of low
importance for dispersal due to one or more of the following; absence or lack of aquatic
vegetation, low water quality, presence of predatory fish, lack or low cover of terrestrial
refuge sites.
In addition, the overall extent of suitable habitat was mapped (shown as Category 2 in Figure
6) and is based on the following criteria:

Litoria raniformis has previously been recorded at the site, or is likely to use the site in
the future as it is connected to other suitable sites in the local area (i.e. no apparent
barriers to movement between sites); and either

The site is known to, or is likely to support key habitat characteristics for L.
raniformis; and, or

The area has a moderate to high wetness habitat connectivity modelled.
The “suitable habitat” or Category 2 habitat mapped in Figure 6 generally includes High and
Medium quality habitat described above, and in some cases Low quality habitat where this is
part of functional connectivity, particularly between known and likely breeding locations.
3.4 Qualifications and Limitations
A reasonably accurate account of the species’ current distribution across the study area was
determined through the combination of the data from the recent targeted surveys and other
sources.
These included a detailed literature review of previous flora and fauna
investigations, including targeted surveys for L. raniformis (see reference list), together with
an interrogation of the data available on the AVW (AVW 2009, VBA 2010). Despite this
approach, there is likely to be additional literature and data pertaining to the species’ former
and current distribution within the study area.
47
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
While the results of the desktop analysis assisted in determining the importance of habitats for
L. raniformis on a landscape level, they may not provide a complete representation of current
and former populations of the species across the study area. Detailed targeted surveys for L.
raniformis were not undertaken along all waterways across the Growth Areas.
Property access was another limitation at some sites. Despite a large number of free-standing
waterbodies being assessed as part of this project, access several properties was not possible
either due to refusal from the landowner, the unavailability of landowners when approval for
property access was being sought, or the absence of landowner details. The need for future
targeted surveys prior to development, as described below, is designed to account for this
limitation.
Overall, given the strategic nature of this work, the data available for the preparation of the
SRS is considered sufficient to identify protection areas for L. raniformis and no further
surveys are considered necessary for this purpose. However, further survey may be required
in the future to confirm the extent of other suitable habitat within a particular development
area (e.g. a PSP area) to inform mitigation requirements (e.g. detailed design and management
of Category 1 protection areas).
In addition, all relevant waterbodies will require targeted surveys for the species following the
minimum survey requirements consistent with the Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning
Kit (DSE 2010). These surveys would be required prior to wetland drainage / removal, to
inform salvage or translocation requirements. Ideally such surveys would be undertaken with
sufficient lead time to inform the appropriate sequence and timing of wetland removal in
relation to nearby compensatory habitat creation/protection. A protocol for determining
salvage or translocation requirements will be developed by DSE as discussed further in
Section 7.2.
3.5 Results
3.5.1 Melbourne West Growth Area
3.5.1.1 Distribution
During the present survey a large number of free-standing waterbodies were surveyed. Litoria
raniformis was recorded from seven locations during these surveys (Figure 2a). Several adult
L. raniformis were heard calling at sites in the vicinity of Kororoit Creek.
In the Melbourne West Growth Area L. raniformis has largely been recorded along the major
creek systems (Kororoit Creek, Skeleton Creek and Lollipop Creek) and there are documented
records of the species along Werribee Creek, immediately outside the Growth Area (Figure
2a). There have also been several records of the species from permanent and ephemeral offstream waterbodies, principally within two kilometres of Kororoit Creek (Figure 2a).
48
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Kororoit Creek
Previous ecological investigations, targeted surveys for L. raniformis and management plans
or strategies that have been completed at sites along and in the immediate vicinity of Kororoit
Creek include Beardsell (1991), Rhodes et al. (1999), Costello and Organ (2001), McMillan et
al. (2003); Organ (2004b, 2004c, 2005a, 2005b), TBLD (2004), Gilmore (2006), Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd (2008a) (Figure 2a).
There are several records of L. raniformis along Kororoit Creek and in off-stream waterbodies
in proximity to the Creek (AVW 2009, VBA 2010). A large population occurs to the east of
the Growth Area along Kororoit Creek, Caroline Springs, and is concentrated in the wetlands
that have been created as part of the urban development (Organ 2004b, 2004b). Although a
relatively large population of L. raniformis occurs in the Caroline Springs wetlands north
(Caroline Lake) and south (series of wetlands west of Caroline Springs Boulevard) of
Kororoit Creek, many of these sites are now either isolated, or in the process of being isolated
from Kororoit Creek due to the residential development (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008a; A.
Organ pers. obs.).
Skeleton Creek
There are records of L. raniformis along Skeleton Creek (Robertson and Heard 2003,
Renowden and Crowfoot 2006; AVW 2009), with many of the previous records further south
of the Growth Area, in areas that are now surrounded by urban development (Figure 2a). The
habitat conditions along Skeleton Creek within the Growth Area vary to that further south, in
that the creek is more ephemeral in nature, and in many sections it is expected to be dry for
most of the year.
Litoria raniformis is likely to occur in isolated sections of the creek where habitat conditions
are suitable for dispersal. The creek north of Leakes Road becomes more ephemeral and
habitat conditions are currently sub-optimal for breeding and recruitment, however as for
several waterways in this area, this is expected to change as the catchment becomes more
urbanised.
Dry Creek
Dry Creek which is largely an ephemeral watercourse runs in a north westerly directly from
the confluence of Skeleton Creek (Figure 2a). There are no previous records of L. raniformis
along Dry Creek, and there is a low likelihood that this creek provides important breeding,
foraging or dispersal habitat for this species.
While a large permanent waterbody exists at the confluence of Dry Creek and Skeleton Creek,
and that superficially appears suitable for L. raniformis, no individuals were detected at this
site during recent surveys.
49
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Davis Creek
Davis Creek, which is an ephemeral watercourse, runs north from the confluence of the
Werribee River (Figure 2a). Although there are no previous records of L. raniformis along
Davis Creek, this species was recorded directly adjacent to the study area in an off-stream
waterbody, south of Sayers Road, near Butterfly Boulevard (Figure 2a). Although the species
is unlikely to use Davis Creek for breeding, frogs have a potential to use this for movement
between other suitable sites in the local area.
Werribee River
Werribee River flows in a south easterly direction and is located in the southern portion of the
Growth Area. While there are several records of L. raniformis along the upper reaches of
Werribee River (outside of the study area), there are no previous records of the species along
and immediately adjacent to the River within the Growth Area (AVW 2009; VBA 2010)
(Figure 2a). Litoria raniformis has also previously been heard calling along the southern
reaches of the Werribee River (Organ 2002a). During the targeted surveys, L. raniformis was
detected in a large irrigation dam to the south of the Werribee River, and the species is likely
to use sections of River for breeding, recruitment, dispersal and shelter.
Lollipop Creek
A tributary of Lollipop Creek occur within the Growth Area, south of Greens Road. While
there are several records of L. raniformis along Lollipop Creek these are located in the
southern catchment (Organ 2002; Renowden and Quin 2007; AVW 2009). This tributary is
likely to provide dispersal habitat for L. raniformis, and during favourable conditions the
species may use it for breeding.
There is also a previously documented record immediately outside of PSP 40 which is located
at the end of Black Forest Road (Figure 2b) (Melways Map 204 D6-D7). Despite survey
being undertaken for L. raniformis at this site (during the 2009/10 breeding period) no
individuals were detected (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a). During periods of high rainfall
this ephemeral wetland is likely to fill, and when dispersal corridors are maintained, L.
raniformis is likely to colonise this wetland.
Deanside Wetlands
Deanside has previously been recognised as a site of zoological significance because when
flooded, this wetland provides suitable habitat for a range of threatened or uncommon
waterbirds (Schulz et al. 1991), while also providing habitat for a suite of amphibian species
such as L. raniformis (A. Organ pers. obs.).
There are several records of L. raniformis from this wetland (AVW 2009, VBA 2010).
Several individuals were detected at this site during the diurnal habitat assessments (Figure
2a). Deanside Wetlands are likely to be used by L. raniformis for breeding, where frogs move
between Kororoit Creek and the wetlands depending on site conditions.
50
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
3.5.1.2 Habitat quality
The permanent watercourses (Kororoit Creek, Skeleton Creek and Werribee River) and offstream waterbodies that are connected to these areas provide high habitat value for L.
raniformis. However, many off-stream waterbodies located some distance from waterways
and drainage lines, and that lack suitable habitat characteristics for the species, are unlikely to
provide habitat for the species.
The current habitat assessments and targeted surveys concentrated in areas where there was
limited information on site occupancy by L. raniformis (e.g. in the vicinity of ephemeral
drainage line located north and south of Dohertys Road). Based on aerial photography, and
the current and previous habitat assessments (AVW 2009, Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a),
the many of the free-standing waterbodies (i.e. farm dams) in this Growth Area support
habitat for the species. It is likely that individuals use some of these sites as part of their
dispersal between breeding habitat (e.g. dispersal between the larger watercourses and
waterways/drainage lines when conditions are suitable).
3.5.2 Melbourne North-West Growth Area
3.5.2.1 Distribution
During the present survey several free-standing waterbodies were surveyed. Litoria
raniformis was recorded from two locations during these surveys (Figure 2b). No adult L.
raniformis were heard calling and there was no evidence of successful breeding and
recruitment. Based on the current habitat L. raniformis is unlikely to breed in the ephemeral
drainage line that runs in a south-easterly direction from the two sites where frogs were
recorded to Emu Creek, however moderate quality breeding habitat was recorded in offline
waterbodies near the creek.
There are a small number of previous records of L. raniformis in the Melbourne North West
Growth Area (AVW 2009, VBA 2010). For example, there has been a recent (2006) record of
L. raniformis along Emu Creek, approximately 200 metres north of Gellies Road, and also
along Jacksons Creek, along the south edge of the Growth Area (Figure 2b). In addition, an
adult female was detected from along Jacksons Creek during a recent targeted survey for the
species along the creek (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010a).
The female was recorded on the bank of Jacksons Creek in the Holden Flora and Fauna
Reserve (Figure 2b). There is one historic record (1990) from within this reserve (AVW
2009, VBA 2010).
Additional records of L. raniformis to the south of the study area were attained (Melbourne
Water Frog Census; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010b).
Although there is a lack of records of L. raniformis throughout the Growth Area this is likely
to be attributed to the low survey effort completed in the past for this species in the area. For
example, although there is high quality habitat along sections of Jacksons and Emu Creeks,
there are only a small number of previous records of the species along these waterways.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
51
Other artificial waterbodies (e.g. farm dams)
With the exception of the two dams where L. raniformis was detected during the current
targeted surveys, the species hasn’t previously been recorded from any other free-standing
waterbodies (i.e. farm dams or large waterbodies) (Figure 2b).
3.5.2.2 Habitat quality
Jacksons and Emu Creeks provide important breeding, foraging and dispersal habitat for L.
raniformis. The species is also likely to use several off-stream waterbodies located between
Jacksons and Emu Creeks. Habitat assessments were undertaken at waterbodies in the
Growth Area (Figure 2b). Site access to most of the waterbodies that were considered
potentially suitable to support L. raniformis was restricted, and of the waterbodies that were
assessed several were assessed as being of moderate habitat quality.
The area situated on the western side of the Calder Highway, between the Calder Highway in
the north and Diggers Rest-Coimadai Road at the southern limit of the Growth Area, along
with areas north and south Gap Road, contain very few (~15 waterbodies) farm dams. Based
on the results of the habitat assessments as part of the PSP process the waterbodies in these
areas are generally highly turbid and lack connectivity to high quality habitats. As such, these
do not currently provide habitat for L. raniformis (A. Organ pers. obs.).
3.5.3 Melbourne North Growth Area
3.5.3.1 Distribution
Habitat assessments and nocturnal surveys were undertaken at over 50 free-standing
waterbodies across the Growth Area. Litoria raniformis was recorded at seven of these
locations during these surveys (Figure 2c). An adult male was also confirmed from a
permanent waterbody along Bodies Creek west of the Greenvale Reservoir, approximately
two kilometres south of the Growth Area (Figure 2c). Two adult males were heard calling
along Merri Creek, immediately north of Donnybrook, during the roadside census as part of
the sub-regional survey for the species for the GAA.
Consistent with previous detailed surveys of L. raniformis along the Merri and Kalkallo
Creeks (Robertson et al. 2002; Heard et al. 2004), these streams support an important
population of the species (>100 frogs present, ongoing breeding and recruitment) (Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd 2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f) (Figure 2c).
Despite targeted surveys for L. raniformis at several waterbodies throughout the Precinct 19
(i.e. in areas north and south of Craigieburn Road in the upper reaches of Aitken Creek) the
species was not recorded in this area.
There are a large number of previous records of L. raniformis within the Growth Area, and
records date back to 1970 (AVW 2009, VBA 2010) (Figure 2c). These records are largely
from the eastern side of the Hume Highway, primarily along the Merri and Kalkallo Creeks,
and immediate surrounds (Figure 2c) (Williams 2001, 2002; Conole et al. 2003; Robertson et
52
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
al. 2002; Heard et al. 2004; Moysey et al. 2004; Wilson 2005; Renowden et al. 2006a;
Renowden 2007; Renowden et al. 2008) (Figure 2c).
Extant populations are also known to occur in large off-stream waterbodies (e.g. former
quarries, large permanent waterbodies) in the vicinity of these creeks (Organ 2002b, Organ
2003a; Brett Lane and Associates Pty Ltd 2008; Heard and Robertson 2005; Renowden et al.
2006a) (Figure 2c).
Previous targeted surveys for L. raniformis have also been undertaken in the southern portion
of the Growth Area, and in areas south of the Growth Area surrounding Cooper Street (e.g.
existing population at the Epping Waste Disposal site and the Edgars Creek cluster) (George
et al. 2001; Organ 2002b, 2003a; Carr et al. 2005; Conole et al. 2005; Heard and Robertson
2005; Wilson et al. 2005; Renowden 2006; Renowden et al. 2006b; Renowden 2007).
Merri Creek
As outlined above, there are a large number of records of L. raniformis along the Merri Creek
(Williams 2001, 2002; Conole et al. 2003; Robertson et al. 2002; Heard et al. 2004; Moysey
et al. 2004; Wilson 2005; Mueck et al. 2005; Mueck et al. 2006; Renowden et al. 2006a; Sofo
2006; Venosta 2006; Renowden 2007; Renowden et al. 2008; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd
2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f.).
There are also several additional records further south of the current Growth Area, although
many of these populations are now isolated due to urban development (e.g. roads, residential
and industrial developments).
Kalkallo Creek
Several targeted surveys for L. raniformis have previously been completed at sites along and
in the immediate vicinity of Kalkallo Creek (Heard et al. 2004; Mueck et al. 2005; Mueck et
al. 2006; Venosta 2006; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f.; Sofo 2006)
(Figure 2c).
An extant population of L. raniformis occurs along Kalkallo Creek, largely within 200 metres
north and south of Donnybrook Road where suitable breeding habitat (i.e. large semipermanent pools with an extensive cover of emergent vegetation) is present. Frogs are likely
to use Kalkallo Creek as a movement corridor to other potentially suitable sites upstream and
downstream of Donnybrook Road.
Recent detailed monitoring of the population along this section of Kalkallo Creek within 100
metres to the north and south of Donnybrook Road has estimated the population at
approximately 50 adult frogs (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008b, 2009b, 2010f.).
During the 2002/03 field investigations a total of 144 L. raniformis were recorded within
seven sites along Merri and Kalkallo Creeks (Heard et al. (2004).
53
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Successful breeding and recruitment (i.e. presence of tadpoles and metamorphs) has also been
documented at this location during the 2007/08 and 2009/10 breeding periods (Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd 2008b, 2010f.).
The section of Kalkallo Creek east of the Hume Highway east to Merri Creek supports an
important population of L. raniformis. In addition, a juvenile was recently detected along the
Creek, on the western side of the Hume Highway (M. Venosta, pers. comm.) (Figure 2c).
Craigieburn Bypass and Edgars Road extension
Targeted surveys have recently been completed to determine whether large artificial wetlands,
and the installation of underpasses and frog ponds, that have been created to mitigate against
potential impacts associated with the Craigieburn Bypass (Robertson 2002a) and Edgars Road
Extension, are currently been used by L. raniformis (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006b, 2006c,
2007b, 2007c, 2008c).
Although L. raniformis (two adult frogs) has previously been recorded using created frog
ponds adjacent to Edgars Road (i.e. on the western side of Edgars Road, near the intersection
of Edgars Road and Cooper Street) as part of the detailed monitoring project, the species was
not recorded despite targeted surveys. There is potential for L. raniformis to colonise large
created wetlands along the Craigieburn Bypass in the future.
Other waterways and waterbodies (e.g. farm dams)
With the exception of the two records (Kalkallo Creek and an artificial waterbody in
Beveridge) of the species during the present surveys (Figure 2c), there are no confirmed
records of L. raniformis within the Growth Area, west of the Hume Highway. There is
currently sub-optimal breeding habitat for L. raniformis throughout areas west of the Hume
Highway, due to the absence of permanent watercourses or drainage lines, and the lack of
important habitat characteristics required by the species (see below).
In addition, there are no records of L. raniformis along Edgars Road, north of Craigieburn
Road East, and there is one confirmed record (1988) of L. raniformis along Darebin Creek
(AVW 2009, VBA 2010). However, the species may use habitat resources along Edgars
Creek.
While there are a few confirmed records of the species at the Austral Bricks quarry, located
north of Craigieburn Road East and east of the Merri Creek (most recently in 2002), there are
no other large permanent quarry holes within the Growth Area. The large artificial wetland
located west of the Hume Highway and south of the Donnybrook Road off-ramp (previously
known as the Shell Dam) has previously supported a population of L. raniformis. However,
no individuals have been recorded at this site over the past four breeding seasons (Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd 2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f; in prep.). It is likely that individuals move
between this site and Kalkallo and Merri Creeks via an existing drainage culvert under the
Hume Highway that connects to Kalkallo Creek (Heard, G. pers. comm.).
54
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Furthermore, L. raniformis has recently been recorded (several individuals) from a dam
located approximately 50 metres east of Merri Creek and 20 metres south of Donnybrook
Road, at a large dam located between Spring Road and the Melbourne to Sydney Railway,
approximately 400 metres north of Donnybrook Road, a large waterbody to the east of the
railway and north of Donnybrook Road, and from an off-stream waterbody immediately north
of Kororoit Creek, within a couple of hundred metres north of Donnybrook Road.
Several waterbodies within the Mickleham area were recently surveyed as part of the subregional surveys for the species (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a) and L. raniformis was not
detected in this area during these previous surveys.
3.5.3.2 Habitat quality
The current habitat assessments and targeted surveys concentrated in areas where there was
limited information on site occupancy by L. raniformis and not in areas where local
populations are known to occur (e.g. Kalkallo Creek and Merri Creek) (Figure 2c).
Based on aerial photography interpretation, and the current and recent habitat assessments
(AVW 2009, Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a), although the majority of the free-standing
waterbodies (i.e. farm dams) in this Growth Area support suitable habitat for the species, they
are typically highly turbid with low coverage of aquatic vegetation.
Merri Creek
The habitat conditions along Merri Creek within the Growth Area are similar to those further
south, in that the creek contains fluctuating levels of permanent water with high coverage of
emergent, submergent and fringing vegetation. Litoria raniformis is currently known to
occupy habitats along the creek where habitat conditions are suitable, and in surrounding
waterbodies that within one kilometre from the waterway.
In areas north of Donnybrook Road, Merri Creek is subject to varying degrees of grazing
down to the water’s edge.
Although L. raniformis appears to prefer microhabitats (foraging during nocturnal periods)
along the creek that are of low structural diversity (Heard et al. 2008), stock grazing along the
creek may lead to a deterioration of vegetation and water quality, which may impact the extant
population thus leaving habitat conditions unsuitable.
The key habitat attributes that are present along Merri Creek include:

Deep interconnected pools along the length of the creek which provide a permanent
source of water;

High water quality (low turbidity throughout much of the year);

Areas supporting a high percentage cover of emergent, submerged, and floating
vegetation;
55
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

Dense fringing vegetation in the form of reeds (e.g. Typha spp.) and open exposed
banks with a varying cover of surface rocks which are likely to be important for
shelter, over-wintering and prey ambush; and,

Permanent waterbodies (principally farms dams) that are connected to the creek,
where frogs have the ability to move between sites in response to fluctuating habitat
conditions.
Kalkallo Creek
Kalkallo Creek supports similar habitat to Merri Creek, but is more limited spatially and
temporally. Areas that support the highest habitat value for L. raniformis are within 100
meters north and south of Donnybrook Road, where large open pools form each year. In these
areas the creek supports extensive areas of emergent (Bullrush Typha spp. and Club Rush
Bolboschoenus spp.), floating / submergent (Water Ribbons Triglochin procera) and fringing
vegetation (largely exotic grasses).
A small area within the Creek, located immediately south of Donnybrook Road, has recently
been excavated in an attempt to provide additional breeding habitat for L. raniformis as part of
a suite of mitigation measures undertaken during the Donnybrook Interchange development
(Sofo 2006).
The hydro-period along this creek is highly variable, and over recent years the creek has dried
out completely, thus potentially reducing the level of recruitment of L. raniformis in the local
population. The frequency and duration of inundation is likely to be the main habitat variable
that influences whether or not successful breeding and recruitment by L. raniformis can occur.
Habitat conditions along Kalkallo Creek within the Growth Area vary to those areas further
south, in that the creek is more ephemeral and in many sections is likely to be dry for most of
the year. Despite this, there has been recruitment by L. raniformis in Kalkallo Creek during
two out of the past three breeding seasons (i.e. during the 2007/08 and 2009/10 breeding
periods) (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010f).
Other waterways and off-stream waterbodies (farm dams)
The majority of the free-standing waterbodies that were surveyed during the present survey
are of low habitat quality as they lack key habitat attributes for L. raniformis such as a high
cover of emergent, submergent and floating vegetation, and a low cover of terrestrial refuge
sites (e.g. rocks and other ground debris). In addition, many sites, particularly west of the
Hume Highway are isolated from known populations along Merri and Kalkallo Creeks.
While L. raniformis has previously been recorded from the Austral Brick Quarry, located
within one kilometre of Merri Creek, the overall habitat conditions and suitability for the
species is currently unknown.
56
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Darebin and Edgars Creeks are variable and much of the sections within the Growth Area
provide low habitat quality for L. raniformis as they lack deep open pools with key habitat
attributes. Individuals may, however, use both of these creeks within the Growth Area for
dispersal between any extant populations to the north and south, where habitat quality is
generally higher.
3.5.4 Melbourne South East Growth Area
3.5.4.1 Distribution
There has been very little previous survey of L. raniformis in the new South East Growth
Area, and therefore an absence of data to draw on. During the present survey a large number
of free-standing waterbodies were surveyed. Litoria raniformis was detected at eight
locations (all from artificial waterbodies through roadside census) during the surveys and
individuals were also heard calling from a site located immediately outside of the Growth
Area (Figure 2d). In addition, there have also been numerous targeted surveys and monitoring
projects (between 2000 and 2009) where L. raniformis has been recorded in several of the
PSPs (Table 2).
The species has also been recorded at several sites throughout the Officer, Pakenham,
Cardinia, Bayles and Koo Wee Rup areas (Robertson and Heard 2002; Costello et al. 2003;
Timewell 2003; Brett Lane & Associates Pty Ltd 2004, 2005; Moysey et al. 2003; Heard et al.
2004a; Norris 2004; Organ 2004a, 2005c; Quin et al. 2005; Renowden and Quin 2006a; Quin
and Renowden 2006; Renowden and Marr 2006b, 2008; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006a,
2006d, 2006e, 2006f, 2006g, 2008d, 2009a, 2009c, 2009d, 2010c, 2010d; Gilmore and
Venosta 2008; Hamer and Organ 2008; Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2009).
Areas east of Cardinia Creek and south of the Princes Highway (i.e. the Greater Pakenham
Habitat) are of national conservation significance for L. raniformis (BioSite 6976) (DSE
2005b).
Recent sub-regional surveys recorded L. raniformis in three waterbodies within the Melbourne
South-East Growth Area (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a) (Figure 2d). These sites are
located approximately 100-200 metres south of Pattersons Road (Figure 2d; Melways Ref:
135 F9). In addition, a single adult frog was detected (21 January 2010) from a small
waterbody located directly adjacent to several much larger permanent waterbodies, which are
situated approximately 600 metres west of Cardinia Creek (Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a)
(Figure 2d). The species was detected at another five artificial waterbodies within the Growth
Area, while a small number of frogs were recorded from a site directly east of the Growth
Area during the recent roadside census.
Due to the permanency of water, in addition to the proximity to other potentially suitable
waterbodies, all three sites are likely to provide an important resource for L. raniformis within
the Melbourne South-East Growth Area.
57
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Cardinia Creek
Cardinia Creek flows along the north eastern boundary of the Growth Area (Figure 2d). With
the exception of the confirmed record of L. raniformis during the sub-regional surveys
(Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a) there are no previous records from along or adjacent to the
creek either within the Growth Area or within one kilometre to the east of the creek (Figure
2d, AVW 2009). Based on available information there has been no previous targeted surveys
for L. raniformis along Cardinia Creek.
Clyde Creek and Muddy Gates Drain
Clyde Creek and Muddy Gates Drain also provide suitable dispersal habitat and shelter for the
species. L. raniformis was also detected in large irrigation dams directly to the east of Clyde
Creek (Figure 2d). Connection between Clyde Creek and these off-stream waterbodies is
likely to be important for the species (Figure 6d).
Other artificial waterbodies (e.g. farm dams)
As outlined above, the species has recently been documented in several artificial waterbodies
(e.g. large farm / irrigation dams) within the Growth Area, two of which are in the vicinity of
the proposed south-east wetlands and two of which are located in the area between Clyde and
Cardinia Creeks (Figure 2d).
3.5.4.2 Habitat quality
Within the South-East Growth Area there is a high density of waterbodies that are located
within one kilometre of each other and that support potential breeding habitat for L.
raniformis. Most of these waterbodies are large permanent irrigation dams that contain
emergent, submerged, floating and fringing vegetation. As such, they provide moderate to
high habitat quality for L. raniformis.
An extensive network of drains (largely ephemeral), that connect many of the large
waterbodies and augment current available habitat for L. raniformis are also present. In
addition, there are very few barriers to dispersal between waterbodies, which is an important
habitat requirement for L. raniformis.
While there are no known records within this section of Cardinia Creek, the area provides
suitable movement and dispersal habitat for local L. raniformis populations. The species may
also use sections of the creek (principally areas containing open pools) for breeding and
recruitment.
Clyde Creek and Muddy Gates Drain currently provide suitable dispersal and foraging habitat
L. raniformis, but are not likely to be used for breeding. These areas have been designated
Category 1 due to the opportunity to connect the creek to existing occupied sites, and for the
creation of additional waterbodies along the riparian area that are likely to provide breeding
habitat for the species in the future.
58
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
4
OBJECTIVE 2 – DEVELOPMENT OF A WETNESS
HABITAT CONNECTIVITY MODEL
4.1 Rationale
The wetness habitat connectivity modelling shows the degree of connection of L. raniformis
habitat across the landscape, and provides a visual guide for where habitat retention and
restoration should occur as part of the future development in the study area. The model
provides a representation of landscape permeability and broadly predicts landscape occupancy
by L. raniformis, or where the species has the highest potential to occur. This is particularly
useful in areas where there are few or no documented records of L. raniformis.
4.2 Methods
4.2.1.1 Wetness habitat connectivity modelling
Modelling of potential habitat for L. raniformis was undertaken by DSE. This modelling
produced a connectivity matrix based on data describing the wetness of the Growth Areas
(Figure 3). The connectivity matrix describes proximity to water and connectivity within the
landscape based on soil / vegetation moisture. The model was specifically designed to
represent potential connectivity for L. raniformis during a wet summer, when juvenile
dispersal is likely to occur away from, and between, more permanent wetland habitat. The
data incorporates barriers to movement such as sealed roads and the urban built up areas.
The purpose of the modelling, as part of the formulation of the SRS was threefold: 1) to guide
which areas should be selected for targeted surveys to maximise detection, 2) to assist in the
identification of areas throughout the growth areas that should be considered for retention and
protected from urban development, and, 3) to identify areas for habitat augmentation
(principally through the creation of wetlands and linkages throughout the landscape).
The wetness layer was derived from the following datasets:
1. Wetness Surface for a wet year (Summer 1990/91) – interpretation of landsat imagery
by SKM Pty Ltd (Jan 2010) for BES;
2. Wetness Surface for a dry year (Summer 2006/07) – interpretation of landsat imagery
by SKM Pty Ltd (Jan 2010) for BES;
3. Landuse Classification (12 classes) – interpretation of landsat imagery by ARI, DSE,
2009 [restricted Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, DSE dataset]; and,
4. Native Vegetation classification (DSE).
59
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The wetness layer was created in the following steps:
1. The creation of a mask of built-up areas, sealed roads and core areas of woody
vegetation (considered ‘exclusion’ zones for the frog);
2. Potential habitat was determined as the wettest parts of the landscape in a dry year (i.e.
2006/07);
3. A number of neighbourhood analyses were calculated across the wetness surface of
1990/91 [i.e. for each 25 metre cell in the grid (outside the mask) the mean wetness
value was calculated within five circular neighbourhoods: 100 metre, 200 metre, 600
metre, 1000 metre, 2000 metre radii]. These five neighbourhood grids were added
together to create a single neighbourhood grid;
4. A weighted distance analysis was run from the potential habitat areas (determined in
step 2 above). The distance was weighted according to the wetness surface (i.e. wetter
and closer is better); and,
5. The neighbourhood and weighted distance results were added together to create the
final wetness habitat connectivity layer.
4.3 Qualifications and Limitations
Although the wetness modelling is based on the most recent available data, the accuracy of the
dataset is dependent on source data accuracy, which has not been verified (F. Ferwerda, DSE,
pers. comm.). In addition, the wetness data was derived from several satellite images taken
over a period of time, resulting in any given point of the map not being directly comparable to
another point.
The wet year data was derived from three satellite images taken on 29 December 1990, 6
February 1991 and 3 March 1991. During this period the landscape dried considerably. The
dry year data was derived from two satellite images taken on 1 December 2006 and 11
February 2007, however there is little difference in the wetness of the region between these
periods. The result of this mosaic of images being used to predict the wetness of the region is
that an accurate index was not created, and therefore the range of absolute values was not
assigned to a range of habitat values.
Although this weakens the effectiveness of the wetness data, it still provides an indication of
the patterns of wetness across the study area, which is a valuable tool to predict patterns of
occupation and important movement linkages at a landscape level, and the identification of
wetter areas where habitat augmentation or recreation could be considered as part of the future
planning of the PSPs.
60
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
4.4 Results
4.4.1 Melbourne West Growth Area
The results of the modelled wetness habitat connectivity showed that areas north of the
Western Highway, in the vicinity of Kororoit Creek and its tributaries, have a moderate to
high connectivity for L. raniformis (Figure 3a).
Conversely, with the exception of moderate levels of wetness habitat connectivity along, and
directly adjacent to creeks and drainage lines, due to the high density of sealed roads
dissecting the Growth Area and the small proportion of waterbodies, most areas south of the
Western Highway are of low wetness habitat connectivity (shown as pink on Figure 3a).
Consequently, based on the wetness habitat connectivity modelling, the lack of suitable
permanent waterbodies, and the absence of records of L. raniformis, there is a low likelihood
that the species is widely distributed across these drier parts of the landscape.
4.4.2 Melbourne North-West Growth Area
The results of the modelled wetness habitat connectivity showed that due to the presence of
Jacksons and Emu Creeks, many low lying areas in the vicinity of these creeks are of
moderate connectivity for L. raniformis (Figure 3b). There are two large areas within the
Growth Area, located in the north-west and south-east that are modelled as having low
connectivity.
Based on the modelled wetness habitat connectivity, there is a moderate potential for L.
raniformis to either occupy high quality free-standing waterbodies in the vicinity of the
creeks, or colonise any wetlands that are created as part of the future development of the
Growth Area.
4.4.3 Melbourne North Growth Area
Consistent with other Growth Area, the results of the modelled wetness habitat connectivity
shows that areas along, and in the vicinity of the creeks and the Melbourne to Sydney railway
line have a moderate to high level of connectivity for L. raniformis (Figure 3c). Conversely,
areas east of the Hume Highway and north of Donnybrook Road, and areas west of the Hume
Highway, north and south of Donnybrook Road, have a low modelled wetness habitat
connectivity due to the absence of large permanent waterbodies, and the drier conditions
through these areas (shown as pink on Figure 3c).
As such, based on the modelled wetness habitat connectivity, the lack of suitable permanent
waterbodies, and the absence of records of L. raniformis, there is a low likelihood that the
species occurs in large numbers throughout areas modelled as low wetness habitat
connectivity, and / or these areas are not likely to support a large number of occupied sites.
61
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The creation of wetlands as part of the future development of the Growth Area need to
primarily focus in areas where existing populations are known to occur (i.e. within 300 metres
of Merri and Kalkallo Creeks), and in areas that have a moderate to high modelled wetness
habitat connectivity.
4.4.4 Melbourne South-East Growth Area
The modelled wetness habitat connectivity reveals that with the exception of the north east of
the Growth Area (i.e. low wetness habitat connectively shown as pink on the figure), most of
the areas have a moderate degree of connectivity for L. raniformis (Figure 3d). This further
reinforced the need for targeted surveys (roadside census) for L. raniformis in these areas
(which were subsequently undertaken). Habitat creation needs to focus in areas adjacent to
Cardinia Creek and Clyde Creek/Muddy Gates Drain, and in other areas where moderate
wetness habitat connectivity has been modelled.
The large area of moderate wetness habitat connectivity that has been modelled is contrary to
many of the other Growth Areas (e.g. Melbourne West Growth Area) where there is a low
modelled wetness habitat connectivity given the drier landscape, absence or lack of large
permanent waterbodies, and presence of roads and other barriers to dispersal.
62
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
5
OBJECTIVE 3 – STRATEGICALLY IMPORTANT
HABITAT AREAS AND LINKAGES
5.1 Rationale
Strategically important habitat areas and linkages for L. raniformis are developed to ensure
that an appropriate area of land supporting important populations is conserved, so that longterm metapopulation processes can function in an urbanising landscape. These include areas
to be protected and enhanced, and identify compatible / incompatible land uses for proposed
habitat links.
The process of determining important habitat and linkages is one that identifies known and
potential areas containing a cluster of suitable sites that are connected to each other, and
where future population dynamics can occur in an urban landscape.
5.2 Litoria raniformis Metapopulation Dynamics
A metapopulation is an assemblage of spatially delineated local populations, coupled by some
degree of movement between populations (Hanski and Gaggiotti 2004). As outlined above, L.
raniformis populations are structured as metapopulations, demonstrating spatially clustered
patterns of wetland occupancy, where movement between waterbodies occurs as habitat
conditions change over time (Robertson et al. 2002; Heard et al. 2004b, Heard et al. 2010).
There have been several recent studies that have researched the metapopulation biology of
pond-dwelling amphibians (Gill 1978; Berven and Grudzien 1990; Sjogren 1991; Sinsch
1992; Edenhamn 1996; Trenham 1998; Skelly et al. 1999; Smith and Green 2005), including
L. raniformis throughout the Merri Creek Catchment (Heard et al. 2004b, Heard et al. 2010).
As outlined in Nicol and Possingham (2010), in many cases populations threatened by habitat
loss or fragmentation may be improved by habitat restoration or creation. However, an
important consideration for the conservation of L. raniformis in individual PSPs is whether the
priority is to increase the area of the patch (i.e. as defined as a discrete habitat area such as a
wetland), or to increase the number of patches in an area (Etienne and Heesterbeek 2000;
McCarthy et al. 2004; Nicol and Possingham 2010). This will need to be determined during
the detailed design of PSPs and needs to be clearly articulated in the L. raniformis CMP.
In the case of L. raniformis, a formal approach to conservation decision making must consider
metapopulation processes if the ecological requirements of the species are to be appropriately
addressed. The problem of optimally conserving metapopulations, as patches are destroyed or
isolated, has been extensively studied (Nicol and Possingham 2010). As such, for the
conservation of L. raniformis in the Growth Areas it is logical that consideration is made to
the empirical and theoretical understanding that has been gained through other studies that
have rigorously examined metapopulation theory and dynamics.
63
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
5.3 Defining Key Areas and Implementation
Four categories defining important habitat areas and linkages are provided as a basis for future
protection, enhancement and creation of habitat for L. raniformis (Figure 6). Categories
defining important habitat areas and linkages, and the impacts of these areas in terms of the
PSP or other development planning processes, are defined below.
Category 1: Strategically important habitat areas and linkages
Category 1 areas are defined as areas of suitable habitat that must be protected and enhanced
to ensure the long-term viability of important populations of L. raniformis. These areas are
generally defined as the minimum required area for long-term population viability (Figure 6).
Category 1 areas will generally be excluded from urban development and conserved for L.
raniformis. However, in some cases there may be potential to apply a ‘variable width buffer’
around waterbodies and watercourses, rather than the standard ‘fixed width buffer’ (e.g. 200
metres either side of river and creeks). Such a decision will depend on the terrestrial matrix,
and current and future land use intensity, and must not undermine the overall purpose and the
extent of habitat required within the habitat corridor area. Additionally, wider buffers are
required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality habitat (e.g. large open pools
where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding season). Other site-specific
habitat features and landscape variables that will influence the buffer width either side of
waterways during the PSP process include:
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity
-
Topography (break of slope)
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction opportunities and constraints)
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements)
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal
-
Location of current and future road crossings, walkways and tracks
etc
-
Buffer landscape design
Any variation in buffer widths will need to be based on sound ecological information (i.e.
further details survey / research), considering the overall context and purpose of the corridor,
and the species’ habitat requirements in a given area.
The detailed design of Category 1 areas will be provided in the CMPs for each precinct, which
will be to the satisfaction of DSE.
64
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
In order to appropriately manage protected habitat, the hydrology in these Category 1 areas
(and potentially upstream) will need to be maintained or improved to provide for the longterm use of these areas by L. raniformis.
This may affect the type of stormwater and other hydrological management proposed for the
precinct. The location and requirements of Category 1 areas will therefore be relevant
considerations for the drainage schemes in the new growth areas to be prepared by Melbourne
Water.
As a general principle Category 1 areas must be established and permanently protected prior
to destruction of Category 2 areas.
Category 1 areas, which are shown on Figure 6, identify areas extending beyond the Program
area, into areas of urban Melbourne and beyond Melbourne into rural areas (including into the
Western Grassland Reserves). These are indicative as in many cases areas outside of the
Growth Areas have not been surveyed for L. raniformis. However, they do provide additional
context for the protection works in the Growth Areas. Such areas outside the Program area do
not convey any particular management obligation on the landowner. Nonetheless, these areas
should be used to guide to the conservation of L. raniformis through the protection and
enhancement of habitat where relevant (e.g. to inform investment decisions or incentive
schemes for biodiversity conservation).
Category 2: Areas of suitable habitat
Category 2 areas are defined as habitat likely to be used by L. raniformis for either breeding,
foraging or dispersal, but of lower strategic importance than Category 1 habitat. It
automatically includes a 200 metre radius around sites where L. raniformis has been recorded,
or waterbodies that provide suitable habitat (not necessarily breeding habitat) for the species.
This ‘dispersal radius’ is broadly consistent with Commonwealth guidelines (DEWHA 2009a,
2009b), but is significantly less than that shown by recent research where the chance of vacant
(or new) wetlands being colonised by L. raniformis is determined overwhelmingly by the
presence and proximity of other occupied wetlands within a one kilometre radius (Heard et al.
2010).
The intent with Category 2 areas is to identify suitable habitat for which the Commonwealth
would typically require compensatory habitat (for example an “offset”) under the EPBC Act
should it be permitted to be removed during development. In some cases the final designation
of the extent of Category 2 areas may require further on-ground assessment. This would
typically be undertaken at the development planning (e.g. PSP) stage, and would be requested
by DSE.
Assuming the protection of Category 1 areas can be achieved, the protection of habitat within
Category 2 areas is not necessary to achieve the objectives of the SRS. However, if clearing
of these habitats is permitted it should be in conjunction with the protection (and creation) of
compensatory habitat elsewhere. This process should be outlined in CMPs or similar
document (for non-PSP developments). All such compensatory habitat should, as a priority,
65
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
be located within Category 1 areas, or other areas to be permanently protected and managed
for L. raniformis, as prescribed in the CMPs. Compensatory habitat (if required) must be
established and permanently protected prior to the disturbance (e.g. drainage or removal of the
site) of the associated Category 2 area. This is discussed further in Section 6.5.4.
Category 3: Habitat linkages to be created
Habitat linkages are depicted as arrows that identify, at the PSP stage, where habitat
connectivity should be provided. The purpose of these areas is to ensure connectivity of L.
raniformis habitat across the landscape. The details of required linkages/corridors will be
negotiated at PSP Stage.
Two linkages have been identified in this strategy.
1. The potential linkage in the south-east between the Clyde and Cardinia Creeks is
subject to further investigation in terms of feasibility, and depends on the location and
habitat potential of the reconstructed wetland/floodplain area outside the growth area
(shown as Proposed South East Wetlands in Figure 6).
2. The linkage in the north, associated with Merri and Darebin Creeks, is essential for
habitat connectivity and must be included in planning processes. Its implementation
will need to be included within the CMP for the relevant precinct to the satisfaction of
DSE. Further targeted surveys and habitat assessment may be required to determine
the most appropriate location, design and treatment to achieve this connection.
Unclassified areas
Unclassified areas are defined as any areas of Urban Growth Zone within the new growth
areas (as per amendment VC68 gazetted 6/8/2010) that are not included within Category 1, 2
or 3 above.
With the exception of sites identified on Figure 2, these areas do not need further surveys as
part of the relevant PSP processes. These unclassified areas currently provide a low potential
to support extant populations of L. raniformis. Accordingly, these areas will not require
habitat protection for L. raniformis as part of the PSP or other planning processes.
5.4 SRS Results
The following section identifies important habitat areas and linkages (i.e. Category 1 and 2
areas) (Figure 6) that fall within areas zoned for conservation and floodway management, and
areas that are currently zoned Urban Growth Zones that need to be protected for L. raniformis
throughout the Growth Areas. In addition, recommendations for the protection, enhancement
and creation of habitat for the long-term conservation of L. raniformis populations in the
Growth Areas are provided in Appendix 1 (Table A1).
66
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
5.4.1 Melbourne West Growth Area
5.4.1.1 Important habitat areas and linkages
Important habitat areas and linkages across the Growth Area are shown below (Figure 6).
Due to the high habitat quality (i.e. sites suitable for breeding, recruitment, shelter and
dispersal) there are several areas that are of importance for L. raniformis across the Growth
Area. These sites include Kororoit Creek, Skeleton Creek, Davis Creek, and Werribee River
(Figure 5a). These areas are either currently functioning or could act in the future as dispersal
corridors to ensure habitat connectivity is maintained. Connection between sites will be
important for the ongoing exchange of frogs within and between sites on a local and regional
scale, particularly considering extensive areas are proposed to be developed.
5.4.1.2 Planning zones
The planning zone constraints (i.e. areas where urban development is currently excluded) in
the Melbourne West Growth Area is shown below (Figure 4a). The major waterways (i.e.
Kororoit Creek, Skeleton Creek and Werribee River) will be protected within the Rural
Conservation Zone and Urban Flood Zone.
Therefore, most of the sites known to support L. raniformis within this Growth Area are
proposed to be protected (Figure 4a).
However, several of the waterbodies where L. raniformis was detected during the current
surveys (refer to Figure 4a) are within a Special Use Zone and may be impacted in the future.
Many of the low quality waterbodies surveyed during the current surveys lie within areas
zoned for residential purposes.
Recommendations for the protection and management of L. raniformis populations / habitats,
and other considerations relating to the species within the Growth Area are provided below
(Table A1.1).
5.4.2 Melbourne North-West Growth Area
5.4.2.1 Planning zones
The planning zone constraints (i.e. areas where urban development is currently excluded) in
the Melbourne North-West Growth Area is shown below (Figure 4b).
Jacksons and Emu Creeks, and areas along the floodplain (e.g. extensive areas in the south of
the Growth Area) are either within the Rural Conservation Zone, Public Conservation and
Recreation Zone or Farming Zone. The entire area to the west of the Calder Highway is
currently zoned Residential, which is unlikely to impact the species or associated habitats in
the future.
67
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Currently the entire length of Jacksons Creek and majority of Emu Creek will be excluded
from future residential development. Therefore, most of the breeding sites known to support
L. raniformis within this Growth Area are proposed to be protected (Figure 2b and 4a).
Many of the low quality waterbodies surveyed lie within areas zoned for residential purposes.
5.4.2.2 Important habitat areas and linkages
Based on the proposed planning zones throughout this Growth Area, important habitat areas
and broad linkages have been provided through appropriate zoning along and directly adjacent
to Jacksons and Emu Creeks. Due to the habitat quality (i.e. known source sites for breeding,
recruitment, shelter and dispersal) along Jacksons and Emu Creeks these areas provide
important habitat and linkages for L. raniformis in the Growth Area (Figure 6b).
As a result of extensive areas proposed to be protected along either site of Jacksons and Emu
Creeks there are opportunities to create additional habitat in the form of off-stream
waterbodies in areas where L. raniformis is currently known to occur, or in areas where the
species is likely colonise or have the potential to move into in the future. Connection between
creeks and current and future off-stream waterbodies needs to be maintained or provided for
as part of the future development of the Growth Area.
Recommendations for the protection and management of L. raniformis populations / habitats,
and other considerations relating to the species within the Growth Area are provided below
(Table A1.2).
5.4.3 Melbourne North Growth Area
5.4.3.1 Planning zones
The planning zone constraints in Melbourne North Growth Area are shown below (Figure 4c).
Consistent with the other Growth Areas, the major waterway and associated sites known to
support L. raniformis within the study area (i.e. Merri Creek) will be protected within the
Rural Conservation Zone and Urban Flood Zone.
However, the site where the presence of L. raniformis has recently been confirmed within the
Growth Area, west of the Hume Highway (at Beveridge), is currently zoned Residential 1.
Areas immediately adjacent to Kalkallo Creek between the Hume Highway and Donnybrook
Road are also zoned Residential 1.
With the exception a small number of off-stream waterbodies known to support the species
the key areas (namely Merri Creek and surrounds) that are known to support an important
population of L. raniformis are likely to be protected and buffered from future urban
development (Figure 4c). Notwithstanding this, given that a detailed targeted survey of the
species across the entire Growth Area has not been conducted, and that additional sites
supporting the species may be identified as part of the future PSP process, there will need to
be future considerations to the conservation of the species during the PSP process.
68
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Most of the low quality waterbodies surveyed during the site assessments lie within areas
zoned for residential purposes.
5.4.3.2 Important habitat areas and linkages
Important habitat areas and linkages are along, and in the vicinity of Merri and Kalkallo
Creeks, north and south of Donnybrook Road (Figure 6c). Habitat protection, the existence of
sufficient buffers around occupied sites, and the creation and future management of
waterbodies that are designed specifically for L. raniformis are critical for the long-term
viability of populations in a given area. Linkages across the Growth Area will need to be
provided during the PSP process – largely within Category 1 areas, including the area of the
proposed Melbourne Water Retarding Basin (Figure 6c).
Due to the habitat quality (i.e. known source sites for breeding, recruitment, shelter and
dispersal) there are several areas across the Growth Area that provide important habitat for L.
raniformis, namely Merri and Kalkallo Creeks, and connected off-stream waterbodies within
one kilometre from the creeks) (Figure 6c). These important areas are either currently
functioning, or could act in the future as dispersal corridors. As such, habitat connectivity
needs to be maintained. Connection between sites will be important for the ongoing exchange
of frogs within and between sites on a local and regional scale, particularly considering
extensive area are proposed to be developed.
Recommendations for the protection and management of L. raniformis populations / habitats,
and other considerations relating to the species within the Growth Area are provided below
(Table A1.3).
5.4.4 Melbourne South-East Growth Area
5.4.4.1 Planning zones
The planning zone constraints (i.e. areas where urban development is currently excluded) in
the Melbourne South-East Growth Area are shown below (Figure 4d).
While Cardinia Creek and Clyde Creek will be protected within the Rural Conservation Zone
and Urban Flood Zone, respectively, the vast majority of the large permanent irrigation dams
and drainage lines are currently designated for residential development.
Therefore, the current zoning across most of the area will not be conducive to future habitat
and population protection if populations are recorded in the future (Figure 4d). The entire
area located west of the South Gippsland Highway is located within a Farming Zone.
5.4.4.2 Important habitat areas and linkages
Important habitat areas and linkages across the Growth Area are shown below (Figure 6c).
Given the presence of high quality dispersal habitat and the potential for habitat creation along
and adjacent to Cardinia Creek, this natural dispersal corridor is important for L. raniformis
(Figure 6d).
69
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
With the exception of Clyde Creek and its associated large habitat connection to Muddy Gates
Drain, the remaining semi-permanent and ephemeral drainage lines are considered Category 2
areas, and can therefore be cleared and developed.
Recommendations for the protection and management of L. raniformis populations / habitats,
and other considerations relating to the species within the Growth Area are provided below
(Table A1.4). Areas along Clyde Creek are proposed to be protected along with off-stream
waterbodies adjacent to the creek where L. raniformis is known to occur (i.e. where the
species was recently confirmed during the site surveys) (Figure 6c).
70
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6 OBJECTIVE 4 – GUIDELINES FOR CONSERVATION
6.1 Rationale
A three-stage approach of, 1) Protection, 2) Enhancement, and, 3) Creation has been used as
part of the prioritisation of conservation measures for L. raniformis in the Growth Areas. The
reason for this is so that conservation efforts can be directed into the most effective area to
maximise the conservation gains for L. raniformis. Conservation efforts will be concentrated
in Category 1 areas (Figure 6).
The three-stage approach to the conservation of L. raniformis is described in detail below,
while recommendation for each of the four Growth Areas is provided in Appendix 1.
6.2 Habitat Protection
6.2.1 Principles of habitat protection
The first priority for the conservation of L. raniformis throughout the study area is the
protection of breeding and terrestrial habitat (including dispersal and shelter sites). It is
important to emphasise that the protection of suitable L. raniformis habitat is the primary
requirement over any proposed habitat creation. The proposed network of protected habitats
within the study area is shown below (Figure 6).
There are several examples where suitable habitat that is known to support L. raniformis has
been protected in an urban context as part of development around Melbourne, either
permanently or in the short-term until replacement habitat is created (i.e. staged removal).
Future decisions pertaining to the protection of individual sites and / or a cluster of sites
occupied by L. raniformis need to take into account the following:

They must be underpinned by detailed empirical data on the species’ current and
likely future distribution, and therefore additional surveys may be required in areas
that currently provide potentially suitable aquatic and terrestrial habitat for the
species (e.g. the South-East Growth Area);

The relative importance of sites on a landscape-level, and also on the patch-level
must be considered. That is, information on whether sites are known to act as
‘source sites’, where frequent breeding and recruitment is likely to occur, or
‘ecological sinks’ where breeding at sites is either unlikely or limited may be
required. This is particularly pertinent to off-stream waterbodies;

An evaluation of areas that are known to, or that are likely to act as important
movement / dispersal corridors for L. raniformis (e.g. permanent creeks and rivers,
or permanent and ephemeral drainage lines) (Harmer and Organ 2008);
71
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

In the absence of empirical data regarding site occupancy and habitat conditions at
sites across the Growth Areas, the presence of suitable, large waterbodies (including
waterways) located within 200-300 metres of each other (Hamer and Organ 2008;
DEWHA 2009a), together with the results of the wetness habitat connectivity
modelling (Section 4) should be used as a basis for habitat protection for L.
raniformis during the PSP process and future development;

Areas containing a series of interconnected waterbodies that support suitable habitat
characteristics on a landscape-level and patch-level;

The modelled wetness habitat connectivity across the Growth Areas should be used
as a guide to determine where L. raniformis is likely to exist, or has the potential to
occur in the future, and where habitat protection is required;

The long-term viability of L. raniformis where existing threatening processes will
be amplified, or additional threats / impacts are likely; and,

Whether degraded sites are to be enhanced (see below), and that have a moderate to
high probability of being colonised and used regularly by L. raniformis in the
future.
6.2.2 Protection of breeding, dispersal and foraging habitat
It is important that waterbodies that are suitable, or that have the potential to become suitable
for L. raniformis are protected. Areas that require protection within the study area principally
occur along permanent slow flowing or still waterways, and large artificial waterbodies (stock
/ irrigation dams), and these areas are shown in Figure 6.
Areas that require
protection/conservation across the Growth Areas are outlined below (Table 3).
Table 3. Areas for the conservation of L. raniformis in the study area.
Growth Area
Areas Important for L. raniformis Conservation
Areas where protection of breeding, dispersal and foraging habitat is required
Melbourne West
Kororoit Creek , Werribee River, Dry Creek, Davis Creek, Lollipop
Creek, Skeleton Creek
Melbourne North-West
Jacksons Creek, Emu Creek
Melbourne North
Merri Creek, Kalkallo Creek, Darebin Creek, Edgars Creek
Melbourne South--East
Cardinia Creek, Clyde Creek, Gum Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek
72
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6.3 Habitat Enhancement
6.3.1 Habitat enhancement within the Growth Areas
Habitat enhancement in strategic locations needs to be undertaken. Detailed prescriptive
recommendations relating to site-specific habitat enhancement measures will be outlined in
the L. raniformis CMPs developed during the PSP process.
Key areas for habitat enhancement are sites in the vicinity of waterways and drainage
channels, and known sites supporting a high number of frogs, or that are likely to be
important for ongoing breeding and recruitment.
The modelled wetness habitat connectivity across the study area (Figure 3) should be used as
a guide to determine where L. raniformis is likely to exist, or has the greatest potential to
occur in the future, and therefore where habitat enhancement measures should be directed.
Information on suitable L. raniformis breeding, shelter and dispersal habitat across the
Growth Areas is presented in the habitat connectivity and recommendations tables provided
above. Habitat enhancement measures that need to be undertaken where L. raniformis is
known to occur, or has the potential to occur in the future, include:

Creation of waterbodies to augment existing habitats and to reduce the distance
between sites;

Excavation of sections of waterways and off-stream waterbodies to increase the
hydroperiod of sites, thus potentially increasing the suitability of sites for breeding
and recruitment;

Fencing of waterbodies, either entirely or partially, to reduce current and / or future
impacts from stock;

Planting of aquatic vegetation in the form of emergent, submerged and floating
vegetation in waterbodies;

Improvement of water quality;

Control of aquatic and terrestrial weeds. A staged process of weed removal along
creeks and waterbodies to ensure that L. raniformis is not negatively impacted may
be required;

Provision of suitable shelter sites such as basalt boulders or rocks, and other suitable
ground debris around the perimeter of waterbodies, and provision of suitable
dispersal habitat between sites;

Provision of suitable buffers and dispersal corridors to facilitate ongoing movement
between sites, and so that L. raniformis can use these areas to forage and shelter.
73
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

Removal of large trees and shrubs that overshadow sites to improve breeding and
recruitment conditions for L. raniformis;

Removal of exotic aquatic predators through the periodic draining of off-stream
waterbodies and the management of native waterfowl; and,

The prevention or reduction of grazing in or immediately surrounding suitable
aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Although, this may lead to an improvement in water
quality, the removal of low level grazing may lead to an increase in cover of
undesirable weeds.
Habitat enhancement measures will need to consider the potential impacts on other flora and
fauna species, including threatened species at sites. An example of actions that may lead to
direct impacts to other species include changes to wetland hydroperiods, excavation and
disturbance of sites to remove dense emergent vegetation such as Cumbungi Typha spp., and
extensive weed control, thus removing vegetation cover.
Planning for habitat enhancement works should be undertaken in conjunction with planning
and implementation of the local drainage schemes (Melbourne Water), and it will be
important for the management requirements of Category 1 protection areas to be considered in
the preparation of these schemes.
6.4 Habitat Creation
6.4.1 Principles of habitat creation
The creation of L. raniformis habitat can be in the form of waterbodies (wetlands, lakes or
ponds) which can be used for breeding, and the provision of terrestrial habitat in and around
sites that provide opportunities for frogs to move within and between sites. Habitat creation is
typically considered a secondary conservation measure to habitat protection outlined above.
However, in the context of this strategy the creation of habitat to compensate for the removal
of habitat within development areas is a critically important mitigation measure, given the
scale of habitat removal likely to be required over the life of the Program. Habitat created to
compensate for losses elsewhere will be located in the Category 1 protection areas.
A summary of a selected number of habitat replacement and / or creation projects that have
been completed, currently in progress, or are proposed for L. raniformis populations in the
Greater Melbourne metropolitan area is provided below (Appendix 2).
The creation of additional aquatic and terrestrial habitat in areas that are known, or that have
the potential to support populations of L. raniformis throughout the Growth Areas needs to
consider the following:

The availability of detailed information on the species’ current and likely future
occupancy where habitat creation would principally focus in areas where extant
populations occur and have a high likelihood of future persistence;
74
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

The proximity to known or potentially suitable sites occupied by L. raniformis,
including the major waterways (i.e. Kororoit Creek, Werribee River, Jacksons, Emu,
Merri, Kalkallo and Cardinia Creeks). The creation of habitat should primarily occur
in areas where populations currently exist, and wetlands should be located within 200300 metres from each other (Hamer and Organ 2008; Heard et al. 2010), or within the
species’ dispersal capabilities in southern Victoria (i.e. considered at least one
kilometre) (K. Jervis undated, pers. comm. cited in Robertson et al. 2002);

The creation of wetlands should principally occur in areas where there are currently a
series of interconnected waterbodies that contain high quality breeding and terrestrial
habitat required by the species. That is, the priority for habitat creation needs to be in
areas that contain a high density of waterbodies of high quality, compared with a low
density of sites.

Habitat creation should focus in areas that are known to, or that are likely to act as
important movement / dispersal corridors for L. raniformis (e.g. permanent creeks and
rivers, or permanent and ephemeral drainage lines);

The viability of L. raniformis where existing threatening process will increase, or
additional threats / impacts (e.g. predation by cats, changes to hydrological processes)
are likely;

The potential to create high quality breeding habitat above the flood zone;

The current zoning of the land and likely future land use at sites; and,

The modelled wetness habitat connectivity across the study area (Figure 3) can be
used as a guide to determine where L. raniformis is likely to exist, or has the potential
to occur in the future, and therefore where habitat creation should be directed. The
creation of additional habitat needs to occur in areas that have a moderate to high
modelled wetness habitat connectivity.
6.4.2 Habitat creation
Previous research has shown that a landscape-based approach to habitat creation for L.
raniformis is required (Robertson et al. 2002). For example, the likelihood of the species
occupying a waterbody is largely dependent on the distance to a nearby occupied site. Based
on recent research, waterbodies created generally within 200-300 metres of occupied sites are
more likely to be colonised by L. raniformis than more distant waterbodies, provided that they
are suitable (i.e. large, deep, permanent waterbodies, containing a high cover of emergent,
submerged and floating vegetation, fish-free and have high water quality) (Hamer and Organ
2008). This is consistent with recommendations provided in Hamer and Mahony (2010) on a
L. aurea population in Newcastle, where they suggested that it would be preferable to create
waterbodies within 300 metres of other occupied waterbodies and recently-used recruitment
sites (e.g. metamorphosis detected in the previous 2 years). They also found that the probably
of a site being colonised increased with an increase in the waterbody area.
75
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
As such, although smaller wetlands may also be important for breeding and recruitment in
Bell Frogs generally (including L. raniformis and L. aurea), the creation of larger wetlands
are preferred (Heard et al. 2010) to maximise the carrying capacity of the species at sites, thus
increasing the viability or the metapopulation.
Given that the species is known to use the Werribee River and the major creeks (i.e. Kororoit,
Jacksons, Emu, Merri, Kalkallo and Cardinia Creeks) within the Growth Areas, there is a high
likelihood that, if created and managed appropriately, habitats within the vicinity of these
waterways will be colonised by the species. As such, a series of interconnected wetlands
(located within 200-300 metres of each other) along either (ideally both) side of waterways
should to be created.
Heard et al. (2010) examined the possible influence of wetland area on extinction probability
for L. raniformis, given their finding that larger wetlands are more likely to be occupied by
the species. As outlined in this study area, wetland size should be maximised for the
following reasons; 1) large wetlands are more likely to support larger populations of L.
raniformis given that they are likely to dry out less frequently than smaller wetlands, 2) large,
deep wetlands often have a diversity of aquatic vegetation required by the species, compared
with small, shallow wetlands that have a tendency to become smothered or ‘choked’ by
emergent vegetation often making them unsuitable for breeding, and 3) given that males are
territorial during the reproductive season and the species is cannibalistic (Pyke 2002), this
suggests that the density of frogs at a site can influence population growth. Further, in the
same study, wetlands occupied by L. raniformis were on average 120 metres in length, 35
metres wide, and had a mean water surface area of 3837 m2 (Heard et al. 2010).
The following needs to be considered as part of the creation of suitable wetlands for L.
raniformis:

Wetlands need to be still or slow flowing and be located within 200-300 metres of
occupied sites (Hamer and Organ 2009), or sites where L. raniformis is likely to occur;

Wetlands should be as large and deep as possible;

Wetlands may need to be created at road underpasses and culvert entrances;

A range of edge habitats need to be created;

Wetlands need to have low water turbidity, and low nitrate, phosphate and salinity
levels;

Wetlands should be adequately buffered from development (i.e. preferably at least 100
metres), with at least a 30 metres wide area landscaped with indigenous grasses,
herbaceous species and low shrubby vegetation (although no trees). Mowing,
slashing, or the use of herbicides and pesticides should be excluded or occur
infrequently within this 30-metre area. An additional grassed area of 50-70 metres
beyond the wetland and 30 metre buffer is preferable to allow additional foraging
76
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
opportunities, however this can be mown. Such areas can be interspersed with treed
areas as long as some permeability of habitat (low vegetation only) is maintained
between wetlands to facilitate dispersal.

Wetlands should have permanent water levels varying in depth from 0.5 to at least 4.0
metres. However, ephemeral wetlands should also be created around larger permanent
wetlands;

Rock piles and matrices, and large woody debris needs to be provided around
wetlands;

Wetlands need be planted with a dense cover and diversity of emergent, submerged
and floating vegetation;

Access tracks, roads, houses and other infrastructure should not be located near
created wetlands, and there needs to be no apparent barriers to dispersal. However,
sensitively designed and located walking/bicycle paths, boardwalks, and bridges etc
can generally be compatible;

Wetlands need to be kept free of exotic predatory fish;

Intensive cattle grazing is discouraged around existing and created wetlands, and
movement corridors, particularly within the riparian zone of the major waterway and
areas conserved adjacent to riparian habitats; and,

Small ponds and depressions need to be constructed between created wetlands, and
between created wetlands and potential dispersal corridors, preferably along drainage
lines, to act as smaller movement corridors throughout the area.
An example of a wetland design is provided below (Plate 2). Created wetlands should be not
used for recreational purposes, other than passive recreation in some cases, and should not be
stocked with fish for sporting or other purposes. Undesirable weeds or aquatic vegetation
(e.g. Typha spp., or Common Reed Phragmites australis) that have the propensity to choke
the wetland should not be planted and, if required, controlled. Protective netting may need to
be installed immediately after planting to prevent damage to aquatic vegetation by waterfowl.
Wetlands may need to be pumped dry if predatory fish invade, although the implications of
draining on tadpoles and frogs needs to be considered prior to this occurring. A visual
example of how a network of wetlands can be created, together with the creation of smaller
ephemeral ponds adjacent to the main wetland chain, is provided below.
The hydrological design and management of such networks of created wetlands needs to be
undertaken with Melbourne Water in conjunction with the local drainage scheme and broader
water management requirements.
77
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Plate 2: Example of wetland section.
78
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6.5 Terrestrial Habitat and Connectivity
6.5.1 Terrestrial Habitat and Buffers
6.5.1.1 Background
Terrestrial habitats surrounding waterbodies provides foraging, cover and overwintering
resources that are crucial for amphibian populations (e.g. Madison 1997; Richter et al. 2001),
reducing the potential for desiccation, and predation. Indeed, many amphibians are known to
spend most of their time in the terrestrial zone, including some distance from breeding sites
(Wilbur 1984; Gillespie 1990; Penman et al. 2008). Research has revealed that terrestrial
habitat plays a crucial role in population dynamics in amphibians (Rudolph and Dickson
1990; Schwarzkopf and Alford 1996; Loredo et al. 1996), and species with different lifehistory strategies are known to respond differently to the loss and degradation of terrestrial
habitat (Harper et al. 2008).
In a previous study by Semlitsch and Bodie (2003) the role of core terrestrial habitats
surrounding breeding sites was emphasised, and they explained that terrestrial habitat are not
buffers per se, but necessary habitat for amphibian populations to successfully function. They
conducted a detailed literature review of over 19 frogs species in USA on the use of terrestrial
habitats by amphibians associated with wetlands, and found that the core terrestrial habitat
ranged from 159 metres to 290 metres for amphibians from the edge of aquatic sites [i.e. both
lentic (pond) and lotic (stream)] that are either permanent or temporary. They also concluded
that additional area of terrestrial habitat is needed to adequately protect core habitats and
minimise edge effects on amphibian populations.
However, there is still a degree of ambiguity regarding the terrestrial habitat or buffer distance
required for many pond-breeding frog species (Dodd and Cade 1998; Richter et al. 2001;
Belger et al. 2003; Semlitsch and Bodie 2003).
As outlined in Baldwin et al. (2006), based on detailed investigations of required buffer
distances around wetlands for a North American frog species, they suggested that in urbanised
areas, or rapidly developing areas, a shift from core-habitat conservation model to a spatially
explicit approach, that considers pond-breeding frog habitat as a network of migrationconnected habitat elements (e.g. breeding sites, dispersal corridors and terrestrial habitats) is
desirable.
There is a strong association between the structure of surrounding terrestrial habitat and
amphibian diversity at breeding sites, and this reinforces the importance of protecting key
terrestrial habitats around breeding sites for maintaining amphibian diversity (Porej et al.
2008).
6.5.1.2 Key considerations
Litoria raniformis is known to use terrestrial habitat at considerable distances from
waterbodies (see Section 2.1.2.3) (Heard et al. 2008; A. Organ per obs.).
79
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The presence of logs, rocks, soil cracks, dense grass, and other ground debris in terrestrial
habitats provides important shelter and over-wintering sites for L. raniformis (A. Organ pers.
obs.). At a landscape scale, L. raniformis is known to move across open ground to forage,
seek shelter and to colonise suitable waterbodies to breed (Hamer and Organ 2008; Heard et
al. 2008; Heard et al. 2010), and therefore, terrestrial habitat used by frogs needs to be
retained and appropriately managed for metapopulation dynamics to function effectively.
Terrestrial habitat between sites needs to be permeable (e.g. no barriers such as roads and
other infrastructure) to permit the unimpeded movement of frogs within and between
waterbodies and terrestrial habitat.
The importance of sufficient terrestrial habitat that buffers breeding sites from threatening
processes, and that allows population processes to function, is important for L. raniformis.
This is reflected in the species’ EPBC Act Policy Statement developed by SEWPaC, where as
a guide, this document recommends terrestrial buffers in temperate zones (which includes the
Growth Areas) of at least 200 metres from the water’s edge (DEWHA 2009a).
Whilst recommendations of 100 or 200 metre wide buffers either side of waterways have been
provided in Appendix 1, and are shown in Figure 6, it may be appropriate that the width of
these buffers within and between clusters are expanded and / or reduced in particular
circumstances depending on the presence and relative importance of breeding sites and the
surrounding landscape matrix. For example, retention of terrestrial habitat should be
prioritised in areas that are likely to contain favourable terrestrial cover for the species, or that
have a high modelled wetness habitat connectivity (Figure 3).
In such cases, the exact location, width and treatment of terrestrial zones will be confirmed
during the PSP process, and will need to be clearly shown and described in the L. raniformis
CMPs. In the vast majority of circumstances it is expected that the recommendations for
buffer widths shown in this report (Figure 6) will be appropriate.
In some cases indicated in Appendix 1 such as Skeleton and Dry Creeks, the recommended
buffer width is to be determined in conjunction with the local drainage scheme. The
assumption here is that the land to be identified as floodprone and unsuitable for urban
development in the drainage scheme is likely to be sufficient in most cases to meet the habitat
protection and creation requirements for L. raniformis. The terrestrial buffer is currently
shown as 100 metres, consistent with the Urban Flood Zone in that area (VC68) but it could
potentially be reduced marginally depending on the results of the drainage scheme work.
In the context of future development across the study area, a spatially explicit habitat
connectivity approach needs to be undertaken during the development of the individual CMPs
for L. raniformis, and the design of PSPs should adequately protect site-specific habitat
conditions for the species at breeding sites and also the terrestrial matrix surrounding these
sites. The requirement in the approved prescription for L. raniformis for the CMP to be
consistent with the SRS will ensure this occurs.
80
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
The fundamental requirement to achieve this is to strategically link, provide buffers, and
protect and manage discrete habitat elements within the likely dispersal distance of L.
raniformis.
6.5.2 Habitat Connectivity
Connectivity habitat for L. raniformis is likely to be in the form of waterways (Hamer and
Organ 2008; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010d), drainage lines, wetlands, vegetated swales,
stormwater culverts, or open grassland (Plate 3).
In a recent study in the Merri Creek Catchment the modelling of occupancy confirmed that
habitat connectivity was the primary determinant of the likelihood of colonisation for L.
raniformis (Heard et al. 2010). In their study, the presence and proximity of other occupied
wetlands within a 1000 metre radius increased the probability of wetlands being colonised by
frogs. However, given that the sites in this study were largely confined to stream-based
corridors with few physical barriers to dispersal, in situations where terrestrial habitat between
wetlands is not suitable (e.g. urban development and linear infrastructure), site colonisation by
L. raniformis will either not occur or will be limited (Heard et al. 2010).
The retention of terrestrial habitats between breeding sites is a primary requirement for the
viability of L. raniformis populations throughout the Investigations Areas. However, where
terrestrial habitat is proposed to be dissected by roads and other infrastructure, crossing
structures should be installed in appropriate locations in an effort to ameliorate against habitat
fragmentation and isolation. The L. raniformis EPBC Act Policy Statement also recognises
the maintenance of dedicated terrestrial habitat corridors of at least 100 metres wide
(DEWHA 2009a).
81
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Plate 3. Example of habitat connectivity for L. raniformis.
82
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6.5.2.1 Underpasses
Road underpasses designed specifically to increase the permeability of roads for frogs can
potentially be an effective measure to reduce the artificial barrier effects. Utilisation and
effectiveness of underpasses to maintain the movement of some European and North
American amphibians has been described by various authors (e.g. Erickson et al. 1978;
Langton 1989a, 1989b; Lesbarrères 2004).
Several recent road developments around Melbourne such as Craigieburn Bypass, Pakenham
Bypass and Edgars Road extension have underpasses incorporated into their design in
proximity to existing populations in an effort to ameliorate against impacts on L. raniformis
(Robertson 2002a; Organ 2003a, 2005c; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006b).
The intention is that these structures will be used by frogs during dispersal, and allow
populations to interact.
However, given the paucity of evidence (particularly in Australia) concerning the efficacy of
underpasses for mitigating the isolation effects of roads, information regarding the value of
underpasses as a conservation tool for L. raniformis is lacking.
Whist these structures are largely an unproven conservation measure to maintain habitat
connectivity and to facilitate dispersal of L. raniformis, further research is currently being
undertaken along the Pakenham Bypass south-east of Melbourne in an effort to elucidate their
use and effectiveness in mitigating against habitat isolation (A. Organ unpubl. data.).
The installation of underpasses as a primary measure to mitigate against the likely impacts
(e.g. fragmentation of the landscape, isolation of waterbodies and dispersal corridors) of urban
development on populations of L. raniformis should be treated as purely experimental
(DEWHA 2009a; Heard et al. 2010). Although the installation of underpasses may
potentially be a suitable measure to permit exchange of frogs across the landscape, they need
to be secondary to the primary objective of retaining and managing habitat connection across
the landscape. That is, until further detailed empirical data is available on their effectiveness
for ongoing exchange of frogs and to cater for population dynamics, their application needs to
be treated as experimental (DEWHA 2009a).
While there are several design features (e.g. underpasses, culverts) that can be used in an
attempt to allow frog permeability across the landscape, thereby aiming to reduce the negative
impacts of fragmentation caused by roads and other physical barriers, further detailed research
is required to determine whether culverts and other crossing structures are used by L.
raniformis and other amphibian species. More importantly, empirical data is required to
determine whether such structures allow for population dynamics and genetic exchange to
occur.
It is critical therefore that where such underpasses or other treatments are attempted (e.g.
where a road crosses a Category 1 protection area), these are treated as experiments and
relevant pre and post construction monitoring is undertaken. It is appropriate that such
83
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
projects (typically transport related) fund this monitoring. DSE should coordinate the
standards and results of such research and ensure that these are published and used to inform
future mitigation approaches.
While the requirement to use underpasses in the study area is not currently known, any
inclusion of underpasses in the PSP, including their location and design, will be provided in
the L. raniformis CMPs developed for the particular PSP (or similar development).
Fences either side of underpasses must be designed so that they do not block the entrance, and
they need to funnel frogs towards the underpass. This funnelling can also be achieved
through increasing the vegetation (low growing sedges and grasses) at and towards the
entrances, and through the construction of wetlands within 5-20 metres from the underpass
entrance.
6.5.2.2 Culvert design
Culverts are aimed at providing L. raniformis with an alternative route to continue dispersing
through the wider landscape to existing breeding and overwintering sites, or new habitat.
Culverts may need to be installed where a road is proposed to dissect known or potential L.
raniformis dispersal and foraging corridors.
Singular box culverts and a series of interconnected box culverts have been installed along the
Pakenham Bypass (Organ 2005c) and Craigieburn Bypass (Hume Highway upgrade) in
Victoria (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006b, 2007b). An example of a triple box culvert design
is provided below (Plate 3).
Whist certain features should be considered in the culvert design to maximise their potential
use by L. raniformis, there is no empirical data available on whether one culvert design is
more superior than another. Notwithstanding this, the following should be considered in an
effort to permit frog movement under roads:

Located in areas that link existing habitat, and be as short as possible;

Light or air slots in the top of the underpass should be incorporated into the design for
aeration and temperature equilibrium. A suitably sized grated heavy duty pit lid
should be provided within the central median of each underpass to allow light to enter;

Vehicle and foot access should be kept to a minimum close to the underpass (frog
habitat) and along frog fences;

Flaring at underpass entry points and a smooth surface along the base of the
underpass. Underpasses should be rectangular in cross section with minimum
dimensions of 900 centimetres high x 1.5 metres wide (i.e. standard size of a box
culvert) at ground level and as straight as possible, running perpendicular to the road;
84
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

The internal sides of the box culvert need to have an elevated dry passage on one or
both sides, at least 0.3 metre wide, to permit frog passage during a 1 in 5 flood or
during high water levels.

Relatively open areas leading to the entrances of underpasses. Clear access in and out
of the underpass is required, while openings along the underpass should not enable
fauna to access the road surface;

Discourage artificial lighting at entrances as lighting may reduce their effectiveness to
facilitate frog movement;

Entrances of the underpasses should support areas of suitable wetland habitat,
comprising a variety of indigenous aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation, and areas of
rock;

Constructed wetlands at underpass entrances should be large and deep (up to four
metres in depth (if possible), and contain sufficient vegetation cover and refuge sites;

No obstructions such as rocks or logs should be placed within the underpasses, and
there should be visibility from one end of the underpass to the other, although suitable
refuge habitat must be available close to underpass entrances;

Underpass inverts should match the level of adjacent land on each side of the road,
and should not to act as a drain. They must incorporate a longitudinal grade that
avoids the creation of a low point in the underpass (maximum grade of 1 in 50), to
allow for adequate drainage and prevent flooding. Therefore, flowing water or
significant road run off must not be directed into the underpass. Underpasses must not
be permanently inundated and should be designed to receive water periodically;

Grates must be installed at each end of the underpass to exclude rabbits, foxes and
cats. The grates should be fitted in a frame, with the frame bolted to the underpass
end. A minimum gauge on the grate wire should be 2.5 millimetres, and grates must
be padlocked to the frame; and,

Appropriate drift or exclusion fencing may be required to further guide frogs into
culverts (see below).
Where roads are proposed directly adjacent to wetlands permanent frog fencing must be
installed between the road and some distance back from the wetland banks. The primary
purpose of fencing is to prevent frogs dispersing from wetlands across the road pavement and
potentially being killed by traffic. Several road-killed L. raniformis have been observed on a
suburban road within five metres of constructed wetlands at Botanica Park, Bundoora (A.
Organ unpubl. data).
Examples of underpass designs are provided below (Plate 4 and 5).
85
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Plate 4: Example of a triple box culvert design for L. raniformis.
Plate 5. Example of culverts installed as part of the Pakenham Bypass, south east of Melbourne, Victoria
(Source: Aaron Organ Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty. Ltd.).
86
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6.5.3 Other Design Requirements and Considerations
6.5.3.1 Temporary Protective Fencing
Given that development in the growth areas will be staged, different areas will be exposed to
disturbance from construction activities at different times. As such, temporary protective
fencing needs to be erected in the vicinity of suitable habitat for L. raniformis, and can be in
the form of two metre high chain-link material, or other materials which are easy to supply,
install, maintain and uninstall.
Protective fencing may need to be erected and maintained at a distance of 20 metres from the
edge of waterbodies and watercourses which are to be retained, when construction activities
are within 100 metres of their edge, to protect these areas from inadvertent damage. The
protective fencing should remain until construction activities have been completed in the
vicinity of the waterbody or watercourse.
Similarly, protective fencing should be installed to the above specifications to exclude
construction machinery or unauthorised access to newly created wetlands and frog ponds,
such that inadvertent damage does not occur.
6.5.3.2 Drift Fencing
Overseas studies investigating the effectiveness of underpasses or tunnels in providing habitat
connectivity and offsetting the barrier effects of roads have shown that frogs have difficulty in
finding these structures if drift fences are not installed (Brehm 1989). Drift fencing must be
used along both ends of all proposed underpasses and culverts, and along the edges of any
wetlands which come in direct contact with roads within the development. They should be
designed to prevent frogs entering the road surface by guiding frogs towards underpasses (see
Van Leeuwen 1982).
The following are requirements for the design of frog fencing:
 Either a solid or a mesh structure should be used. The solid structure could be a
constructed with concrete or other material, while durable mesh is commercially
available;
 Must be installed both sides of roads that directly abut any of the wetlands within the
development;
 One metre high with an additional 0.2 metres below ground and a 0.2 metre section at
the top angled outwards (away from the road) and downward from horizontal;
 Erected along the edge (10 metre buffer from the edge of any waterbody) of wetlands
either running parallel, or at a 45 degree angle to the road verge to prevent frogs
entering the road pavement;
87
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
 Acoustic fencing may be used to act as a barrier to frog movement onto the road;
however, they must not impede frog movement at entrances of underpasses and
culverts;
 Rock and other debris such as course may be placed at least one metre away from the
fence, along likely dispersal routes, to provide temporary sites of refuge; and,
 Vegetation within 0.5 metres of the drift fencing should be less than 0.5 metres high.
An example of drift fencing that has been installed along the Pakenham Bypass is shown
below (Plate 6).
Plate 6. Example of frog fencing installed along the Craigieburn Bypass, north of Melbourne, Victoria
(Source: Aaron Organ Ecology and Heritage Partners Pty. Ltd.).
88
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
6.5.4 Staging of Proposed Works in Precincts
Suitable L. raniformis habitat must not be removed until additional areas have been created
and sufficiently established to provide habitat for the species. Development should be staged
to allow for creation and establishment of habitat for at least 2-3 years prior to removal of
habitat, and to the satisfaction of DSE.
Where waterbodies have been identified as breeding sites:

Within Category 1 areas: these areas must be retained and enhanced to allow for
continued use of the site for breeding to the satisfaction of DSE; and,

Outside Category 1 areas: these areas should be retained where possible. Where
removal of the site is permitted by DSE, removal will be approved subject to
demonstration that breeding is successfully occurring in other well connected sites that
have been created. For this to occur, development will need to be staged to allow for
creation of additional habitat and demonstration of breeding, prior to removal of any
known or potential breeding sites. DSE should determine thresholds or standards for
demonstrating successful breeding at the relevant sites.
89
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
7 OBJECTIVE 5 – GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION
7.1 Habitat Management, Maintenance and Monitoring
Guidelines for the management of L. raniformis in urbanising landscapes around Melbourne
have recently been developed by Heard et al. (2010). These guidelines are aimed at assisting
both public and private land managers and conservation agencies, private organisations
involved in urban development (developers, consultants, etc.), and private land holders
wishing to implement conservation initiatives for the species on their properties (Heard et al.
2010). The guidelines for implementation provided below, are broadly consistent with the
key principals presented in Heard et al. (2010).
7.1.1 Habitat Management and Maintenance
Management and maintenance refers to actions which must be implemented as soon as a L.
raniformis Conservation Management Plan for a particular precinct has been completed
during the PSP process and approved by DSE. Management and maintenance must be
undertaken throughout pre-construction, construction and post-construction stages of the
development.
Post-construction relates to the stage of the development following the completion of all
construction activities. This stage of the development, in particular, focuses on monitoring
and management of L. raniformis. Management of existing habitat, and habitat created during
the development must be undertaken to ensure areas are suitable for L. raniformis.
The Category 1 areas will include extensive new areas of habitat consisting of a network of
constructed wetlands (frog ponds). These will be planted with indigenous aquatic and
amphibious vegetation and will be interspersed with grassed and treed areas. Whilst some
wetlands will be “off-limits” to the public, in most situations there will be ample opportunity
to have some visitation and viewing areas, with sensitively designed boardwalks etc.
Dispersal of frogs between wetlands will be achieved by including generally grassed (mown
and some unmown) areas. Mown areas and intervening stands of trees and other indigenous
revegetation will be appropriate for passive recreation. Bicycle and walking trails throughout
the network of wetlands and terrestrial areas will be compatible with the overall objectives but
need to be sensitively designed and located.
90
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Plate 7: Example of recreated habitat for L. raniformis along a waterway.
91
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
7.1.1.1 Hydroperiod and vegetation
Wetland hydroperiod, and aquatic and terrestrial vegetation management needs to include:
 Full water supply in wetlands during the breeding period of L. raniformis (i.e. between
late September and February);
 Maintenance of vegetated benches between wetlands to allow for staged flooding and
drying of wetlands. There has been a positive response to the manipulation of water
depths and varying wetland permanency by L. raniformis at the Western Treatment
Plant (Organ 2003c), and where required, periodically drying of wetlands during late
autumn or winter, and allowing them to refill in September should be undertaken;
 Extensive cover of aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation which is an important habitat
requirement of L. raniformis. Wetland plants need to be associated with distinct
habitat zones and water depths (Appendix 3). Wetlands need to contain deeper
sections (up to four metres) of open water where emergent vegetation is excluded and
floating vegetation (e.g. Floating Pondweed Potamogeton tricarinatus and Blunt
Pondweed Potamogeton ochreatus) dominates. The presence of extensive areas of
Potamogeton spp. and aquatic vegetation is important for L. raniformis.
Rafts of vegetation provide suitable nocturnal calling and foraging stages for adult
males during the breeding season (Poole 2004; Heard et al. 2008; Hamer and Organ
2008; A. Organ pers. obs), and protection of larvae from aquatic predators (Babbitt and
Jordan 1996; Babbitt and Tanner 1997; Babbitt and Tanner 1998, cited in Heard et al.
2010);
 Installation of protective netting in created wetlands to prevent damage caused by
waterfowl, which often use vegetation for foraging, roosting and nesting, which can
lead to extensive damage through trampling; and,
 Routine (i.e. at least every 3-6 months) maintenance of vegetated swales, particularly
after periods of high rainfall.
7.1.1.2 Water quality
Based on known information of water quality tolerances and preferences by L. raniformis it
appears that the species requires waterbodies containing low levels of nitrates, nitrides and
phosphates (Ashworth 1998; Organ 2002a, 2003b). Water quality is particularly important
for larval development and recruitment. For example, wetlands containing low levels of
pollutants and turbidity are more likely to lead to higher survivorship of tadpoles and a greater
recruitment of metamorphs (juveniles) (Organ 2003b).
Future residential development in areas that either currently contain, or have the potential to
support populations of L. raniformis throughout the Growth Areas may result in stormwater
contamination and uncontrolled runoff into existing and created frog habitat.
92
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
An increase in the area of hard surfaces, if not managed appropriately, is likely to lead to
increased runoff, nutrient levels and sediment entering watercourses within the Growth Areas,
and development upstream of waterways has the potential to alter the local hydrology.
Water quality management needs to be undertaken in accordance with an appropriate Erosion
and Sediment Control Plan, prepared during the PSP process, and will include:
 Inspections, and if required, clearing of gross pollutant traps and / or sediment filters at
created wetlands, particularly after heavy rain or storm events;
 Management actions such as drying or flushing of ponds if chemical spills are
detected, or if there is a noticeable deterioration in water quality, particularly any
dramatic increases in phosphate, ammonia, nitrates and nitrites concentrations;
 The removal of pollutants such as heavy metals, petroleum products, herbicides and
solvents from waterbodies. Complete or partial drainage of wetlands in the event of a
chemical spill or water contamination;
 The removal of building material and other unwanted materials (e.g. plastic,
polystyrene) from waterbodies. The removal of rubbish is particularly important over
the first few years during the development of the precinct and when wetlands are
becoming established; and,
 Appropriate management of open space and the enhancement of linear riparian
corridors to protect the integrity of frog movement corridors (Figure 6). Water
Sensitive Urban Design needs to be incorporated into the design of PSPs where L.
raniformis populations exist.
If water chemistry measurements do not fall within the ranges of these results mitigation
measures will be implemented. The frequency of the water quality monitoring needs to be
reviewed after the initial two-year period and a decision will be made on whether ongoing
water chemistry monitoring is required.
7.1.1.3 Underpasses and drift fencing
As outlined above, road underpasses designed specifically to increase the permeability of
roads for frogs can potentially be an effective measure to reduce barrier effects on local frog
populations. However, although the installation of underpasses may potentially be a suitable
measure to facilitate movement of frogs between sites, the effectiveness of crossing structures
is unknown, and their application needs to be treated secondary to the primary objective of
maintaining habitat connectivity.
The management of any underpasses and drift fencing that are installed as part of the
development of the PSP needs to include:
 Removal of litter or debris at underpass entrances;
93
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
 Removal of tall (over 0.5 m) and / or dense vegetation underpass entrances.
 Pressure-washing the base of underpasses to maintain a smooth, unimpeded surface for
frog passage;
 Repair of damaged grates at underpass entrances;
 The placement of shelter sites in the form of rocks within one metre of the underpass
entrance;
 Repair of gaps in drift fencing;
 Maintenance of vegetation to <0.5 metres in height.
7.1.1.4 Exotic and domestic animal control
In areas identified for L. raniformis conservation that have high fox and cat densities, active
control of these introduced predators may be warranted. Foxes are known to prey on Bell
Frogs (A. Hamer pers. comm.) and therefore pose a potential risk to the population of L.
raniformis in the Growth Areas.
A Feral Animal Control Plan may need to be development and incorporated into individual L.
raniformis CMPs, although feral animal control may need to be undertaken on a catchmentwide scale to be effective.
Future residential development close to the priority area is likely to introduce unrestrained
cats that may also hunt and kill L. raniformis. Therefore, implementation of a curfew on cats
should be considered, or alternatively a cat covenant may be applied to future PSPs.
Responsible pet ownership needs to be encouraged, particularly regarding the proper
confinement and restraint of cats.
In addition, wetlands may need to be dried (not simultaneously) via a drainage valve or
pumping (in-situ pump infrastructure) in the event that introduced fish and/or any other exotic
fish are detected, and are known to be having an impact on L. raniformis populations (i.e.
limiting recruitment success).
7.1.1.5 Pest plant control
The control of pest plants is an important management requirement, as many parts of the
Growth Area are under continual pressure from weed invasion (e.g. Spiny Rush along
Kororoit Creek). In order to control and / or eradicate weed species, particularly in and
adjacent to areas of remnant native vegetation, several techniques (e.g. herbicide application)
can be used. However, with any weed control works it is important to establish a cover of
native species as soon as possible to occupy the newly vacated environment. While native
species will naturally re-colonise such areas, so will exotic species, if weed seed is present.
94
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Several management techniques are required to control weeds, including physical removal,
brush cutting and herbicide application. In most cases, herbicides will only need to be applied
to weeds by using the spot-spraying technique, to prevent off-target issues. It is important to
ensure that weed control works using herbicides are targeted and undertaken at the correct
time of the year, as this can also reduce the need for future weed control works.
The following must be considered as part of weed control:

Weed control should be undertaken in a manner that minimises soil disturbance;

Herbicide use adjacent to waterbodies should be prevented to avoid adverse effects on
L. raniformis. Where herbicide application is required, waterway sensitive products
such as Roundup Biactive®, Weedmaster Duo® or Weedmaster 360® need to be
employed, without the addition of a surfactant;

Where herbicides are used, selective application is preferred, while non-residual
herbicides need to be used rather than residual herbicides; and,

The effectiveness of weed control needs to be regularly monitored so that any changes
to the type, extent and frequency of control can be made.
7.1.1.6 Noise management
Frogs are known to increase their pitch as a result of traffic noise (Barrass 1985; Parris et al.
2009), and this may affect the ability of male frogs to successfully attract a mate, and thus,
potentially lead to reduced breeding success. However, L. raniformis has bred at waterbodies
over several seasons close to roads experiencing heavy traffic volumes, and / or within areas
with high industrial noise (e.g. Hume Highway, Somerton, Pakenham, Victoria) (Heard et al.
2004a; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008d, 2009a, 2010d).
Acoustic barriers such as mounds and sound-attenuation fences along the boundaries of
wetland areas within the Growth Areas should be used to reduce the potential of noise related
impacts on L. raniformis populations.
7.1.1.7 Other management requirements
Additional management requirements of L. raniformis habitat include:
 Replacement or provision of additional refuge sites surrounding wetlands if suitable is
deficient;
 Recreational use of the area may result in vegetation trampling, rock disturbance or
rubbish ingress, therefore public access outside designated walking and / or bike trails
should be discouraged; and,
 Extensive areas of mown grass along either side of any pedestrian paths and bike trials
near the wetlands should be kept to a minimum.
95
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
7.1.2 Population and Habitat Monitoring
The following section provides an overview of the considerations with respect to population
and habitat monitoring within the Growth Areas. However, further detailed prescriptive
measures relating to the monitoring requirements will be provided in the comprehensive L.
raniformis CMPs, which will be developed in precincts that currently support L. raniformis,
or that have a moderate to high likelihood of containing future populations.
Monitoring will document changes in habitat conditions, wetland occupancy and the relative
importance of sites for ongoing population viability.
7.1.2.1 Population monitoring
Local frog populations are known to vary on spatial and temporal scales depending upon
habitat conditions across the landscape and at individual sites. It is therefore important that
population and habitat monitoring is undertaken prior to, during, and following the
development of precincts for at least 10 years post construction.
Monitoring is required to determine if ongoing exchange of frogs is occurring within and
between discrete clusters of sites, whether frogs have naturally colonised and bred
successfully at sites, and to ensure that management actions and habitats are suitable for a
viable population of the species. Specific survey procedures need to follow those used to
monitor the species elsewhere, such as detailed mark-recapture investigations being
conducted throughout the Officer and Pakenham area (Hamer and Organ 2008), and the
survey guidelines presented in . Monitoring for at least 10 years after wetland completion
will be used to guide decisions upon the success of habitat creation within relevant precincts.
Surveys that are aimed at establishing patterns of occurrence are required to effectively
manage the species (Heard et al. 2010). The reasons for this are that the knowledge of the
species’ local distribution is a prerequisite for identifying appropriate habitat management
strategies, and monitoring changes in occupancy is important to determine the success or
failure of habitat management (Heard et al. 2010).
At least two days of diurnal survey over the species’ active period (i.e. between September
and March) and one day during the non-breeding period of the frog needs to be conducted to
collect data on habitat variables. In addition, nocturnal monitoring will need to be undertaken
at each site, over at least three nights when the species is active.
Although a survey monitoring protocol / program will be developed for a particular precinct
where a L. raniformis CMP is required to be prepared, the following should be used as a
guide:
 During diurnal surveys observers should walk around the perimeter of wetlands to
locate frogs basking on vegetation and / or to listen for frogs entering the water when
alarmed.
96
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
 Nocturnal monitoring should be conducted on still nights when air temperatures are
above 13°C, preferably within 24 hours of rain;
 Survey extent and intensity at each wetland should be consistent during each visit;
 An initial period of five minutes should be spent recording any calling frogs (all
species) in and adjacent to wetlands;
 Surveyors should search ground-level habitat including surface rocks, underneath hard
litter, and at the base of vegetation for frogs;
 Surveyors should use 30-50 watt 12 volt hand-held spotlights to locate calling males
on floating vegetation in the waterbody and around the perimeter of wetlands; and,
 Water quality monitoring needs to be undertaken to ensure that wetlands are suitable
for breeding, larval development and recruitment;
Monitoring breeding and recruitment success
Commercially-available, collapsible bait-traps constructed of nylon netting should be baited
with meat or florescent glow sticks, and then set at the completion of each spotlight survey, in
an effort to capture tadpoles at predetermined locations.
Traps should be set at each waterbody for a minimum of two nights over the breeding period
of L. raniformis. Traps should be suspended (use of floats) so that at least part of the trap
emerges above water-level, allowing tadpoles to breathe. Traps will then need to be retrieved
the following morning, and checked for tadpoles and predatory fish. All tadpoles caught will
need to be identified to species level, counted and released. Alternatively, dip nets will need
to be used to sample for tadpoles at, or in the vicinity of sites where calling males are
identified.
Finally, active searching for metamorphs (around the perimeter of wetlands) will need to be
conducted between December and February at sites where breeding activity is observed and /
or tadpoles caught.
7.1.2.2 Habitat monitoring
Several site-specific habitat variables need to be assessed during the survey / monitoring
period to determine if habitat is suitable for L. raniformis, and if not then to development
management actions to improve the quality of habitat. The following should be documented
as part of habitat motoring at sites:
 Wetland depth, flow, permanency and water quality / chemistry;
 Availability and suitability of shelter and over-wintering sites;
 Vegetation diversity, structure, composition and percentage of cover;
97
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
 Presence of introduced fish, particularly Plague Minnow, Trout, Redfin and Goldfish;
and,
 Presence of pollutants, rubbish and other threatening processes.
A photographic reference needs to be taken at existing and created wetlands, and also along
waterways so that comparisons of habitat conditions can be made over time.
7.1.2.3 Other considerations
Fish surveys should be conducted during tadpole and spotlight surveys. Data recorded should
include the presence or absence of fish species and the number of fish captured in a dip-net or
fish traps.
Measures to reduce the potential spread of infectious pathogens such as Chytrid Fungus need
to be implemented in accordance with standards described by the New South Wales National
Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS 2001). All footwear and equipment should be treated with
an appropriate biodegradable disinfectant prior to surveys, and sick or visibly distressed frogs
should be taken from the site for further analysis.
7.2 Salvage and Translocation
Translocation involves the capture and movement of frogs from wetlands that are to be
destroyed, or where habitat improvement works such excavation of sediment and removal of
aquatic vegetation is planned. Translocation is not considered to mitigate or offset the
impacts on the species (DEWHA 2009a). There is little evidence that individual frogs and /
or populations can be successfully relocated. Translocation should only be undertaken as a
secondary measure, after all possible habitat retention and management options have been
considered. Salvage and translocation of L. raniformis from waterbodies proposed to be
destroyed throughout the Growth Areas needs to be treated as experimental.
There is also a risk of the spread of pathogens such as Chytrid Fungus, which could
potentially impact existing populations at, or near the salvage and recipient site. This could
ultimately have a detrimental impact on the individual [i.e. the salvaged frog(s)], and at a
population-level (Heard et al. 2010). Management authorisation to ‘live capture’, collect and
relocate L. raniformis under the Wildlife Act 1975 is required from DSE for any future
developments where salvage and translocations measures are required.
Any salvage of L. raniformis in the Growth Areas will need to be undertaken by qualified
zoologists experienced with these operations. A summary of the salvage procedures that have
been undertaken as part of previous developments in areas containing population of L.
raniformis include:

Prior to any salvage operations an appropriate wildlife permit from DSE and Animal
Ethics Committee approval is required;
98
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy

Salvage should be undertaken throughout potential habitat for L. raniformis, including
waterbodies and drainage lines;

Salvage should take place prior to site disturbance but as close as possible to proposed
construction periods (a longer intervening period may mean frogs move back into the
area);

Field personnel should survey for L. raniformis throughout potential habitat over a
minimum of two nights, ideally during the species’ active period;

If frogs are detected during salvage, or if it is considered the species could be using
habitats within construction areas, salvage during construction may be conducted.
This would involve an observer actively searching soil, vegetation and other ground
debris for frogs immediately prior to, and during excavation;

Frog salvage may also be undertaken during the drainage / pumping of any
waterbodies, whether for construction or as a management measure;

Footwear should be washed in bleach or disinfectant at the beginning and end of each
salvage period to prevent the introduction and / or spread of any diseases (i.e. in
accordance with the NPWS Hygiene Protocol for the Control of Disease in Frogs)
(NPWS 2001);

If a qualified zoologist is not present during construction, contractors should contact a
nominated person immediately in the event that frogs are located. Contractors need to
be made fully aware of the appearance of L. raniformis, and in the event that a
zoologist is not available, any specimens would need to be stored in an appropriate
container and kept in a cool place out of direct sunlight until a suitably qualified
zoologist arrives; and,

Salvage procedures need to be conducted in accordance with the hygiene protocol for
the control of disease in frogs (NSWS 2001).
In the event that frogs are salvaged from pre-construction surveys, individuals should be
relocated to secure habitat, preferably in the vicinity of the disturbance site. The chosen
translocation sites would need to be approved by DSE and SEWPaC prior to frog
translocation, and owners of the translocation sites need to be notified and an agreement made
to ensure that future land use and management does not compromise the longevity of the
species on the site. Ideally, this needs to be in the form of a letter of support.
Frog translocation should be undertaken by a qualified zoologist experienced with these
operations. Salvaged frogs should be released into favourable micro-habitats such as areas
containing rocks or dense vegetation around the perimeter of a waterbody where there is
sufficient cover. The success or failure of frog translocation needs to be documented and a
monitoring protocol will be developed for this purpose.
99
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
To guide this process a translocation strategy and operational plan should be developed by
DSE. Costs for salvage, translocation and monitoring should be borne by landowners, where
salvage is required.
100
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
FIGURES
101
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 1. Location of the study area.
102
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 2a. Location of survey sites and Litoria raniformis records in the Melbourne West Growth Area.
103
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 2b. Location of survey sites and Litoria raniformis records in the Melbourne North West Growth
Area.
104
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 2c. Location of survey sites and Litoria raniformis records in the Melbourne North Growth Area.
105
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 2d. Location of survey sites and Litoria raniformis records in the Melbourne South-East Growth
Area.
106
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 3a. Modelling of wetness data and Litoria raniformis habitat connectivity for the Melbourne
West Growth Area.
107
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 3b. Modelling of wetness data and Litoria raniformis habitat connectivity for the Melbourne
North West Growth Area.
108
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 3c. Modelling of wetness data and Litoria raniformis habitat connectivity for the Melbourne
North Growth Area.
109
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 3d. Modelling of wetness data and Litoria raniformis habitat connectivity for the Melbourne
South-East Growth Area.
110
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 4a. Proposed planning zone constraints to development in the Melbourne West Growth Area.
111
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 4b. Proposed planning zone constraints to development in the Melbourne North West Growth
Area.
112
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 4c. Proposed planning zone constraints to development in the Melbourne North Growth Area.
113
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 4d. Proposed planning zone constraints to development in the Melbourne South-East Growth
Area.
114
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 5a. Important habitat areas, linkages, and suitable habitat for Litoria raniformis in the
Melbourne West Growth Area.
115
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 6b. Important habitat areas, linkages, and suitable habitat for Litoria raniformis in the
Melbourne North West Growth Area.
116
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 6c. Important habitat areas, linkages, and suitable habitat for Litoria raniformis in the
Melbourne North Growth Area.
117
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Figure 6d. Important habitat areas, linkages, and suitable habitat for Litoria raniformis in the
Melbourne South-East Growth Area.
118
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
REFERENCES
119
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
References
Alford, R.A., & S.J. Richards. 1999. Global amphibian declines: a problem in applied
ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 30:133-165.
AMBS 2000. Biodiversity Benchmarking Survey of the Colleambally Irrigation Area.
Report prepared for the Coleambally Irrigation Corporation.
Andrews, A. 1990. Fragmentation of habitat by roads and utility corridors: A review.
Australian Zoologist 26 (3&4), 130-141.
Anstis, M. 2002. Tadpoles of South-eastern Australia: a guide with keys. New Holland
Publishers Pty. Ltd., Australia.
Ashworth, J.M. 1998. An appraisal of the Conservation of Litoria raniformis (Kefferstein) in
Tasmania. University of Tasmania March 1998. Unpublished Masters thesis.
AVW 2009. Atlas of Victorian Wildlife. The Department of Sustainability and Environment,
Victoria.
Babbitt, K.J. & Jordan, F. 1996. Predation on Bufo terrestris tadpoles: effects of cover and
predator identity. Copeia 1996: 485-488.
Babbitt, K.J. & Tanner, G.W. 1997. Effects of cover and predator identity on predation of
Hyla squirella tadpoles. Journal of Herpetology 31: 128-130.
Babbitt, K.J. & Tanner, G.W. 1998. Effects of cover and predator size on survival and
development of Rana utricularia tadpoles. Oecologica 114: 258-262.
Baldwin, R.F., Calhoun, A.J.K. & DeMaynadier 2006. Conservation planning for amphibian
species with complex habitat requirements: a case study using movements and habitat
selection of the Wood Frog Rana sylvatina. Journal of Herpetology 40: 442-453.
Barker, J. & Grigg, G.C. 1977. A Field Guide to Australian Frogs. Rigby, Sydney.
Barker, J., Grigg, G.C. & Tyler, M.J. 1995. A Field Guide to Australian Frogs. Surrey Beatty
& Sons. New South Wales.
Barrass, A. N. 1985. The effects of highway traffic noise on the phonotactic and associated
reproductive behaviour of selected anurans. Dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville,
Tennessee, USA.
Barrass, A.N. 1985. The effects of highway traffic noise on the phonotactic and associated
reproductive behaviour of selected anurans. Dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville,
Tennessee, USA.
Beardsell, C. 1991. Sites of Faunal Significance in the Western Region of Melbourne (inland
of the Princes Freeway). The Department of Natural Resources and Environment,
Melbourne.
Belden, L.K & Blaustein, A.R. 2002. Exposure of red-legged frog embryos to ambient UV-B
radiation in the field negatively affects larval growth and development. Oecologia 130:
551–554
Bennett, A.F. 1991. Roads, roadsides and wildlife conservation: a review. Nature
Conservation II: The role of Corridors (Eds D.A. Saunders & R. J. Hobbs), pp. 99-117
Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton.
120
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Berger, L., Speare, R. & Hyatt, A.D. 1999. Chytrid fungi and amphibian declines: Overview,
implications and future directions. Pp. 23-33 in Declines and Disappearances of
Australian Frogs. Ed. by A. Campbell, Environment Australia, Canberra.
Berger, L., Speare, R., Daszak, P., Green, D.E., Cunningham, A.A., Goggin, C.L., Slocombe,
R., Ragan, M.A., Hyatt, A.D., McDonald, K.R., Hines, H.B., Lips, K.R., Marantelli, G. &
Parkes, H. 1998. Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian mortality associated with population
declines in the rain forests of Australia and Central America. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA 95: 9031-9036.
Berven, K.A. & Grudzien, T.A. 1990. Dispersal in the wood frog (Rana sylvatica):
implications for genetic population structure. Evolution 44(8): 2054-2056
Biosis Research Pty Ltd 2008. Growling Grass Frog Conservation Management Plan for the
VicUrban Development at Officer, Victoria. Unpublished report for VicUrban by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Biosis Research Pty Ltd 2009. Targeted surveys for Growling Grass Frog at Merrifield West
Properties, Mickleham, Victoria. Unpublished report for Merrifield Corporation by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Blaustein, A.R., & Wake D.B. 1990.
Declining amphibian populations: a global
phenomenon. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5:203–204
Blaustein, A.R., Romansici, J.M., Kiesecker, J.M. & Hatchi, A.C. 2003. Ultraviolet
radiation, toxic chemicals and amphibian population declines. Diversity and Distributions
9: 123–140.
Blaustein, A.R., Wake, D.B., & Sousa, W.P. 1994. Amphibian declines: judging stability,
persistence, and susceptibility of populations to local and global extinctions. Conservation
Biology 8: 60-71.
Bosch, J., MartõÂnez-Solano, I. & GarcõÂa-ParõÂs, M. 2001. Evidence of a Chytrid Fungus
infection involved in the decline of the common midwife toad Alytes obstetricans in
protected areas of central Spain. Biological Conservation 97: 331-337.
Bradford, D.F., Tabatabai, F., & Graber, M. 1993. Isolation of remaining populations of the
native frog Rana muscosa, by introduced fish in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National
Parks, California. Conservation Biology 7: 882-888.
Brehm K. 1989. The acceptance of 0.2-metre tunnels by amphibians during their migration to
the breeding site. Proceedings from the Toad Tunnel Conference, Rendsburg.
Brett Lane & Associates Pty Ltd 2004. Existing Pakenham Golf Course, Flora and Fauna
Assessment report 2004.48(1). Unpublished report for Cardinia Shire Council by Brett
Lane & Associates Pty. Ltd., North Carlton.
Brett Lane & Associates Pty Ltd 2005. Targeted survey for the Growling Grass Frog at the
existing and proposed Golf Course sites. Unpublished report for Cardinia Shire Council by
Brett Lane & Associates Pty. Ltd., North Carlton.
Brett Lane & Associates Pty Ltd 2008. Edgars Creek and tributary, Cooper Street, Epping.
Flora and fauna assessment, and threatened species targeted surveys. Unpublished report
for Edgars Road Pty Ltd and Melbourne Water by Brett Lane & Associates Pty. Ltd.,
North Carlton.
Brett Lane and Associates Pty Ltd 2004. Former Lalor Golf Course Growling Grass Frog
survey. Unpublished report to Abah Group Pty Ltd and Coomes Consulting Pty Ltd by
Brett Lane and Associates Pty. Ltd., Melbourne.
121
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Briggs, J.D. & Leigh, J.H. 1996. Rare or Threatened Australian Plants. CSIRO Australia &
Australian Nature Conservation Agency.
Broomhall, S.D., Osborne, W.S. & Cunningham, R.B. 2000. Comparative efects of ambient
ultraviolet-B radiation on two sympatric species of Australian frogs. Conservation Biology
14: 420-427.
Broomhall, S.D., Osborne, W.S. & Cunningham, R.B. 2000. Comparative Effects of
Ambient Ultraviolet-B Radiation on Two Sympatric Species of Australian Frogs.
Conservation Biology 14(2): 420-427.
Bulger, J.B., Scott, N.J. & Seymour, R.B. 2003. Terrestrial activity and conservation of adult
California Red-legged Frogs Rana aurora draytonii in coastal forests and grasslands.
Biological Conservation 110: 85-95.
Carr, GW., Wilson, C. & Campbell, C.J. 2005. Flora and Fauna Assessment of the ‘Dickey
Site’, Cooper Street, Epping. Unpublished report prepared for Major Projects –
Department of Infrastructure, Victoria by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Carr, L.W. & Fahrig, L. 2001. Effects of road traffic on two amphibian species of differing
vagility. Conservation Biology 15: 1071-1078.
Chinathamby, K., Reina, R. D., Bailey, P. C. E., & Lees, B. K. 2006. Effects of salinity on
the survival, growth and development of tadpoles of the brown tree frog, Litoria ewingii.
Australian Journal of Zoology 54: 97-105.
Christy, M. T., and Dickman, C. R. 2002. Effects of salinity on tadpoles of the Green and
Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea. Amphibia-Reptilia 23: 1-11.
Christy, M.T. 2001. The ecology and conservation of the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria
aurea (Lesson, 1829) (Anura: Hylidae). PhD Thesis, University of Sydney.
Christy, M.T., & Dickman, C.R. 2002. Effects of salinity on tadpoles of the green and golden
bell frog Litoria aurea. Amphibia-Reptilia 23: 1-11.
Clemann, N. and Gillespie, G.R. 2010. National Recovery Plan for the Southern Bell Frog
Litoria raniformis. Draft for public comment January 2010. Department of Sustainability
and Environment, Melbourne.
Cogger, H. 1996. Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. Reed Books, Sydney.
Cogger, H.G., Cameron, E.E., Sadlier, R.A. & Eggler, P. 1993.
Australian Reptiles. Australia Nature Conservation Age.
The Action Plan for
Conole, L., Moysey, E. & Way, S. 2003. Craigieburn Bypass: Pre-construction Monitoring of
the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis – Summer 2002/03. Unpublished report for
VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Conole, L.E., Carr, G.W., Wilson, C. & Campbell C.J. 2005. Overview of flora and fauna
values, 445 and 475 Cooper Street, Epping. By Conole, L.E., Carr, G.W., Wilson, C. and
Campbell C.J. Unpublished report for the Alex Fraser Group Pty Ltd by Ecology Australia
Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Costello, C. & Organ, A. 2001. Ecological assessment and management, Kororoit Creek:
Department of Defence Property Rockbank, Victoria. Unpublished report by Biosis
Research Pty Ltd for Hyder Consulting.
Costello, C., Timewell, C. & Organ, A. 2003. Flora and fauna assessment of the proposed
Pakenham Bypass, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report by Biosis Research Pty Ltd
prepared for VicRoads.
122
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Daly, G. 1996. Some problems in the management of the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria
aurea (Anura: Hylidae) at Coomonderry Swamp on the South Coast of New South Wales.
Australian Zoologist 30: 199-207.
DEH 2006. Threat Abatement Plan – Infection of Amphibian with Chytrid Fungus resulting
in Chytridiomycosis. The Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra.
DeMaynadier, P.G. & Hunter, M.L. 2000. Road effects on amphibian movements in a
forested landscape. Natural Areas Journal 20: 56–65.
DEWHA 2009a. EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.14: Significant Impact Guidelines for the
vulnerable growling grass frog Litoria raniformis. The Department of the Environment,
Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, ACT. www.environment.gov.au/epbc.
DEWHA 2009b. Background paper to EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.14: Significant Impact
Guidelines for the vulnerable growling grass frog Litoria raniformis. The Department of
the
Environment,
Water,
Heritage
and
the
Arts,
Canberra,
ACT.
www.environment.gov.au/epbc.
Dodd, C.K,. Jr., & Cade, B.S. 1998. Movement patterns and the conservation of amphibians
breeding in small temporary wetlands. Conservation Biology 12: 331-339.
DPCD 2009. Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities - Program Report.
Victorian Government, Department of Planning and Community Development, East
Melbourne.
DSE 2005a. Advisory List of the Threatened Flora in Victoria – 2005. Department of
Sustainability and .Environment, Melbourne.
DSE 2005b. Sites of biodiversity significance (BioSites), Maps and Reports for Port Phillip
Region. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria, East Melbourne.
DSE 2007. Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria - 2003. Department of
Sustainability & Environment, Victoria.
DSE 2009. Strategic Impact Assessment Report for the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Report produced by The Department of Sustainability
and Environment, East Melbourne.
DSE 2010. Biodiversity Precinct Planning Kit. Report produced by The Department of
Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne.
DSE 2011. Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Conservation Strategy within the revised
Urban Growth Boundary and associated 28 Precincts: Purpose, Requirements and
Implementation. Department of Sustainability and Environment, East Melbourne.
Duncan, A., Baker, G.B. & Montgomery, N. 1999. The Action Plan for Australian Bats.
Environment Australia, Canberra.
Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2009. Cardinia Creek – Growling Grass Frog: Conservation
Management Plan, Clyde North Precinct Structure Plan. Unpublished report for Growth
Areas Authority by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010a. Sub-regional surveys for the Growling Grass Frog.
Unpublished report for Growth Areas Authority by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Ecology Australia Pty Ltd 2010b. Cardinia Creek – Growling Grass Frog: Conservation
Management Plan, Officer Precinct Structure Plan. Unpublished report for Growth Areas
Authority by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
123
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2005. Targeted Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis survey and
management recommendations for the proposed Fairway Waters, Pakenham, Victoria.
Unpublished report prepared for Thinc Projects Pty Ltd by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd.,
Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006a. Distribution, Habitat Use, Movement Patterns and
Conservation Management of the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis throughout the
Pakenham Area, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for the Department of
Sustainability and Environment by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006b. Craigieburn Bypass: Monitoring of Crossing Structures for
the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis, Thomastown to Craigieburn – 2005/06,
Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd.,
Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006c. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring at
Crossing Locations, Edgars Road Extension, Epping – 2005/06, Victoria. Unpublished
report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006d. Strategic Advice on the Growling Grass Frog Litoria
raniformis: Officer Structure Plan, Officer, Victoria. Unpublished report for Cardinia
Shire Council by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006e. Targeted Survey and Conservation Management Plan for
the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis: Pakenham Urban Growth Corridor,
Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared report for Cardinia Shire Council by
Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006f. Growling Grass Frog monitoring 2005/06, Pakenham
Bypass, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared report for VicRoads by
Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006g. Targeted Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Survey
and Management Plan, Officer Farm, Cardinia Road, Officer, Victoria. Unpublished
report prepared report for AV Jennings Limited by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick,
Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006h. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Survey and
Preliminary Management Advice: Thomastown East Reserve and Botanica Park,
Thomastown/Bundoora, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for City of Whittlesea by
Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007a. Targeted L. raniformis Litoria raniformis survey of the
proposed Donnybrook Road-Hume Hwy Interchange, Kalkallo, Victoria. Unpublished
report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007b. Craigieburn Bypass: Monitoring of Crossing Structures for
the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis 2006/07, Thomastown to Craigieburn,
Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd.,
Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007c. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring at
Crossing Locations, Edgars Road Extension, Epping, Victoria - 2006/07. Unpublished
report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
124
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008a. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring
2007/08 at Caroline Springs (Northern Precinct), Victoria. Unpublished report prepared
for Delfin Lend Lease by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008b. Hume Freeway / Donnybrook Road Interchange Works –
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring 2007-2008. Unpublished report
prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria., Brunswick,
Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008c. Craigieburn Bypass: Monitoring of Created Wetlands for
the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis – 2007/08. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2008d. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring
2007/08, Pakenham Bypass, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009a. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring
2008/09, Pakenham Bypass, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009b. Hume Freeway / Donnybrook Road Interchange –
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring 2008/09. Unpublished report
prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009c. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation
Management Plan for the proposed Cardinia Road Employment Precinct, Cardinia Road,
Officer, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for Cardinia Shire Council by Ecology
Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009d. Targeted Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Survey
within Cardinia Road Employment Precinct, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report
prepared for Cardinia Shire Council, on behalf of Macroplan Pty. Ltd., Brunswick,
Victoria
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010a. Targeted surveys for the Growling Grass Frog Litoria
raniformis in Jacksons Creek, Sunbury. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by
Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010b. Targeted Survey for the Growling Grass Frog Litoria
raniformis at Maribyrnong River, Avondale Heights and Jacksons Creek, Keilor.
Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick,
Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010c. Cardinia Motor Recreation and Education Park: Detailed
flora and fauna assessment, and targeted Growling Grass Frog survey at 335 McGregor
Road, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report for Cardinia Shire Council by Ecology
Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010d. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring
2009/10, Pakenham Bypass, Pakenham, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria.
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010e. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Habitat Creation
and Management Guidelines. Unpublished report prepared for Melbourne Water by
Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria
125
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010f. Hume Freeway / Donnybrook Road Interchange – Growling
Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Monitoring 2009/10. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd., Brunswick, Victoria
Ehmann, H. & Cogger, H. 1985. Australia’s endangered herpetofauna: a review of criteria
and policies. In Biology of Australasian frogs and reptiles, ed. G. Grigg, R. Shine & H.
Ehamann. Surrey Beatty & Sons, NSW pp 235-255.
Eigenbrod, F., Hecnar, S.J. & L. Fahrig. 2009. Quantifying the road-effect zone: threshold
effects of a motorway on anuran populations in Ontario, Canada. Ecology and Society
14(1): 24. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art24/.
EPBC Referral 2007.
VicUrban Residential Development/Epping North/VIC/Aurora
Residential Subdivision, Epping North (2007/3524). The Department of the Environment,
Water, Heritage and the Arts website.
Erickson, P.A., Camougis, G. & Robbins, E. J. 1978. Highways and ecology: impact
assessment and mitigation. US Department of Transportation. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington.
Etienne, R.S. & Heesterbeek, J. 2000. On optimal size and number of reserves for
metapopulation persistence. Ecological Modelling 179: 77-90.
Fahrig, L., Pedlar, J.H. Shealagh, E.P., Taylor, P.D. & Wegener, J.F. 1995. Effect of road
traffic on amphibian density. Biological Conservation 73: 177–182.
GAA
(2011).
Precinct
Structure
Plan
Status
Map.
URL:
http://www.gaa.vic.gov.au/Assets/Files/PSP%20status%20map%20MARCH.pdf. Growth
Areas Authority, Melbourne.
GAA 2010a. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section A. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010b. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section B. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010c. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section C. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010d. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section D. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010e. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section E. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010f. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section F. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
GAA 2010g. Biodiversity Assessment Report (Native Vegetation) Melton - Wyndham
Investigation Area: Section G. Unpublished report by the Growth Areas Authority,
Melbourne.
126
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Garnett, S. & Crowley, G. 2000. The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Environment
Australia, Canberra.
George, S., Mueck, S. & Kimber, S. 2001. An archaeological, flora and fauna assessment of
the Edgars Road duplication and extension, Epping, Victoria. Unpublished report for
VicRoads by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd, Port Melbourne.
Gill, D.E. 1978. The Metapopulation Ecology of the Red-Spotted Newt, Notophthalmus
viridescens (Rafinesque) Ecological Monographs. 48:145-166
Gillespie, G.R. 1990. Distribution, habitat and conservation status of the Giant Burrowing
Frog, Heleioporus australiacus (Myobatrachidae), in Victoria. Victorian Naturalist 107:
144-53.
Gilmore, D. & Venosta, V. 2008. Growling Grass Frog Conservation Management Plan for
the VicUrban Development at Officer, Victoria. Unpublished report for VicUrban by
Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Gilmore, D. 2006. Survey for the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis, 2005/06, Caroline
Springs, Victoria. Unpublished report for Delfin Lend Lease by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd.,
Port Melbourne.
Hamer, A.J & Organ, A. 2008. Aspects of the ecology and conservation of the Growling
Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in an urban-fringe environment, southern Victoria.
Proceedings of the Biology and Conservation of Bell Frogs Conference. Australian
Zoologist 34(3): 414–425.
Hamer, A.J & Organ, A. in prep. Aspects of the ecology and conservation of the Growling
Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in an urban-fringe environment, southern Victoria.
Proceedings of the Biology and Conservation of Bell Frogs Conference. Australian
Zoologist 34(3): 414–425.
Hamer, A.J. & Mahony, M.J. 2010. Rapid turnover in site occupancy of a pond-breeding frog
demonstrates the need for landscape-level management. Wetlands 30: 287–299.
Hamer, A.J., Lane, S.J. & Mahony, M. 2002a. Management of freshwater wetlands for the
endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea: roles of habitat determinants and
space. Biological Conservation 106: 413–424.
Hamer, A.J., Lane, S.J. & Mahony, M.J. 2002b. The role of introduced mosquitofish
Gambusia holbrooki in excluding the native green and golden bell frog Litoria aurea from
original habitats in south-eastern Australia. Oecologia 132: 445-452. Environment,
Victoria.
Hamer, A.J., Makings, J.A., Lane, S.J. & Mahony, M.J. 2004. Amphibian decline and
fertilizers used on agricultural land in south-eastern Australia. Agriculture, Ecosystems
and Environment 102: 299-305.
Hamer, A.J., Organ, A., Rose, L. & Steele, W. in prep. Response of a pond-breeding
amphibian (Litoria raniformis) to contrasting water practices in managed wetlands.
Harper, E.B. Rittenhouse, T.A.G. & Semlitsch, R.D. 2008. Demographic Consequences of
Terrestrial Habitat Loss for Pool-Breeding Amphibians: Predicting Extinction Risks
Associated with Inadequate Size of Buffer Zones. Conservation Biology 22(5): 1205 –
1215.
Harris, K. 1995. Is there a negative relationship between Gambusia and tadpoles in the
Northern Tablelands? B.Sc. (Hons) Thesis, Department of Ecosystem Management,
University of New England, Armidale.
127
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Hazell, D. 2003. Frog ecology in modified Australian landscapes: a review.
Research 30: 193-205
Wildlife
Hazell, D., Osbourne, W. & Lindenmayer, D. 2003. Impact of port-European stream change
on frog habitat: southeastern Australia. Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 301-320.
Heard G.W., & Robertson P. 2005. An assessment of conservation requirements for the
endangered Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in the vicinity of the Cooper Street
Development Area, Epping. Unpublished draft report prepared for Major Projects –
Department of Infrastructure, Victoria. Wildlife Profiles Pty. Ltd., Heidelberg.
Heard G.W., Robertson P. & Scroggie M. 2004b. The ecology and conservation status of the
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis within the Merri Creek Corridor. Report prepared
for the Department of Sustainability and Environment by Wildlife Profiles Pty Ltd and the
Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research.
Heard, G.W. & Scroggie, M.P. 2009. Assessing the impacts of urbanisation on Growling
Grass Frog Metapopulations. Report produced for the Department of Sustainability and
Environment. Wildlife Ecology and Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research.
Heard, G.W., Scroggie, M.P., Clemann, N 2010. Guidelines for the managing the endangered
Growling Grass Frog in urbanising landscapes. Arthur Rylah Institue for Environmental
Technical Report Series 208. The Department of Sustainability and Environment.
Heidelburg, Victoria.
Heard, G.W., Robertson, P. & M.P. Scroggie 2006. Assessing detection probabilities for the
endangered growling grass from Litoria raniformis in southern Victoria. Wildlife Research
33:(7).
Heard, G.W., Robertson, P. & Moysey E.D. 2004a. Management Plan for the Growling Grass
Frog Litoria raniformis within the ‘Fairway Waters’ development, Pakenham, Victoria.
Unpublished report to Westmont Holdings Pty Ltd & Simons Builders Pty Ltd Wildlife
Profiles Pty Ltd., Ecology Australia Pty Ltd.
Heard, G.W., Robertson, P. & Scroggie, M.P. 2008. Microhabitat preferences of the
endangered Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis in southern Victoria. Proceedings of
the Biology and Conservation of Bell Frogs Conference. Australian Zoologist 34(3): 414425.
Hecnar, S.J. & M’Closkey, R.T. 1996. Regional dynamics and the status of amphibians.
Ecology 77: 2091-2087.
Hels, T. & Buchwald E. 2001. The effect of road kills on amphibian populations. Biological
Conservation 99: 331–340.
Hero, J.M., Littlejohn, M. & Marantelli, G. 1991. Frogwatch Field Guide to Victorian Frogs.
Department of Conservation and Environment, East Melbourne.
Howard, K.M. 2004. The impact of fish predation on Growling Grass Frog tadpoles Litoria
raniformis. BSc(Hons) thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora.
IUCN 2009. 2009 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for the
Conservation of Nature & Natural Resources, Geneva.
James, K. R., Cant, B., & Ryan, T. 2003. Responses of freshwater biota to rising salinity
levels and implications for saline water management: a review. Australian Journal of
Botany 51: 703-713.
128
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Jansen, A. & Healy, M. 2003. Frog communities and wetland condition: relationships with
grazing by domestic livestock along an Australian floodplain river.
Biological
Conservation 109: 207-219.
Laan, R. & Verboom, B. 1990. Effects of pool size and isolation on amphibian communities.
Biological Conservation 54(3): 251-262.
Langhelle, A., Lindell, M. J. & NystrÎm, P. 1999. Effects of ultraviolet radiation on
amphibian embryonic and larval development. Journal of Herpetology 33: 449-456.
Langton, T. E. S. (ed.) 1989b. Reasons for preventing amphibian mortality on roads.
Proceedings of the Toad Tunnel Conference, Rendsburg, Federal republic of Germany, 7-8
January 1989. ACO Polymer Products Ltd. Shefford, England.
Langton, T.E.S. (ed.) 1989a. Amphibians and Roads. Proceedings of the Toad Tunnel
Conference, Rendsburg, Federal republic of Germany, 7-8 January 1989. ACO Polymer
Products Ltd. Shefford, England.
Lee, A. K. 1995. Action Plan for Australian Rodents. Australian Nature Conservation
Agency, Canberra.
Lesbarrères, D., Lodé, T. & Merilä, J. 2004. What type of amphibian tunnel could reduce
road kills? Oryx 38: 220-223.
Littlejohn, M.J. 1963. Frogs of the Melbourne area. Victorian Naturalist. 79:296–304.
Littlejohn, M.J. 1982. Amphibians of Victoria. Victorian Yearbook. 85:1–11.
Loredo, I.D., Vurcn, V. & Morrison, M.L. 1996. Habitat use and migration behaviour of the
California tiger salamander. Journal of Herpetology 30: 282-285.
Mader, H. J. 1984. Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biological
Conservation 29: 81-96
Madison, D.M. 1997. The emigration of radio-implanted spotted salamanders, Ambystoma
maculatum. Journal of Herpetology 31: 542–552.
Mahoney, M. 1999. Review of the declines and disappearances within the bell frog species
group (Litoria aurea species group) in Australia. In: Declines and Disappearances of
Australian Frogs. The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.
Mahony, M.J. & Werkmann, H. 2001. The distribution and prevalence of Chytrid Fungus in
frog populations in eastern New South Wales and developing a means to identify presence
or absence of Chytrid Fungus in the field. Report prepared for NSW National Parks and
Wildlife Service. The University of Newcastle.
Mann, R. & Bidwell, J. 1999. Toxicological Issues for Amphibians in Australia. Pp. 185-201
in Declines and Disappearances of Australian Frogs. Ed. by A. Campbell, Environment
Australia, Canberra.
Maxwell, S., Burbidge, A. & Morris, K. 1996. Action Plan for Australian Marsupials and
Monotremes. IUCN Species Survival Commission.
McCarthy, M.A., Thompson, C.J. & Possingham, H.P. 2004. Theory for designing nature
reserves for single species. American Naturalist 165: 250-257.
McComb, W.C., McGarigal, K. & Anthony, R.G. 1993. Small mammal and amphibian
abundance in streamside and upslope habitats of mature Douglas-fir stands, western
Oregon. Northwest Science 67:7–15.
129
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
McMillian, S.E., Moysey, E.D., & Carr, G.W. 2003. Kororoit Creek Strategic Plan.
Biodiversity Technical Report. Unpublished report for Chris Dance Land Design Pty Ltd
by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd
Melbourne Water Corporation 2002. Constructed Wetland Systems – Design Guidelines for
developers. Melbourne Water Corporation.
Miehs, A. & Pyke, G. 2001. Observations on the foraging behaviour of adult Green and
Golden Bell Frogs Litoira aurea. Herpetofauna 31: 94-96
Morgan, L.A. & Buttermer, W.A. (1996). Predation by the non-native fish Gambusia
holbrooki on small Litoria aurea and L. dentata tadpoles. Australian Journal of Zoology:
30:143–149.
Moysey E., Wilson C. & Conole L. 2004. Growling Grass Frog Surveys, Summer 2003/04 Craigieburn Bypass construction phase. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Ecology
Australia Pty Ltd, Fairfield.
Moysey, E.D., Kohout, M. & Carr G. W. 2003. Flora and Fauna Assessment of ‘Fairway
Waters’ Racecourse Road, Pakenham. Unpublished report by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd
for Westmont Holdings Pty Ltd / Simon’s Builders Pty. Ltd.
Mueck, S., Venosta, M. & Nicholson, R. 2005. Ecological Assessment of ‘Shell Land’ Lot 1,
Corner Donnybrook Road and Hume Highway, Kalkallo. Biosis Research Pty Ltd.
Nicol, S.C. & Possingham, H.P. 2010. Should metapopulation restoration strategies increase
patch area or number of patches? Ecological Applications 20(2): 566-581.
Norris, K. 2004. Survey for Litoria raniformis Greenhills, Pakenham. Unpublished report to
Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty. Ltd.
NPWS (National Parks & Wildlife Service) 2001. Hygiene Protocol for the Control of
Disease in Frogs. Information Circular No. 6. N.S.W. National Parks & Wildlife Service,
Hurstville.
NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW DEC) 2005a. Southern Bell Frog
Litoria raniformis Draft Recovery Plan, [Online], Sydney, NSW Department of
Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from:
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/recoveryplanDraftSouthernBellFrog.
pdf.
Nye, N. 2008. Targeted surveys for Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis, Leakes Road,
Rockbank, Victoria. Unpublished report for Leakes Road Rockbank by Biosis Research
Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2003c. Management Plan for the Growing Grass Frog Litoria raniformis at the
Western Treatment Plant, Werribee, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for Melbourne
Water by Biosis Research Pty Ltd, Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2001. Melba Highway – Yarra Glen Bypass: a survey for the Warty Bell Frog
Litoria raniformis, Yarra Glen, Victoria. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2002a. Survey for the Warty Bell Frog Litoria raniformis, at the Western
Treatment Plant, Werribee, Victoria. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
130
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Organ, A. 2002b. Warty Bell Frog Litoria raniformis ecological advice for the proposed
Edgars Road extension, Epping Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by
Biosis Research Pty Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2003a. Conservation strategy for the Warty Bell Frog Litoria raniformis at the
proposed Edgars Road extension, Epping, Victoria. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Biosis Research Pty Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2003b. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis monitoring over the 2002/03
breeding period, Western Treatment Plant, Werribee, Victoria Unpublished report prepared
for Melbourne Water by Biosis Research Pty Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2004a. Pakenham Bypass: Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis 2003/04
survey, Pakenham and surrounds Victoria. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2004b. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis survey and management
recommendations, Northern Neighbourhood, Caroline Springs, Victoria. Unpublished
report for Delfin Lend Lease by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2004c. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis survey and impact minimisation
recommendations for a proposed gas main, Kororoit Creek, Caroline Springs, Victoria.
Unpublished report for T-squared by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2005a. Kororoit Creek amphibian habitat assessment – Altona to Rockbank,
Victoria. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water for Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port
Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2005b. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis survey and management
recommendations along Kororoit Creek – Altona to Rockbank, Victoria. Unpublished
report for Melbourne Water by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2005c. Pakenham Bypass: Conservation Management Plan for the Growling Grass
Frog Litoria raniformis, Pakenham Victoria. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Biosis
Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2005d. Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Management Plan,
Northern Neighbourhood, Caroline Springs, Victoria. Unpublished report for Delfin Lend
Lease by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
Organ, A. 2008. Provision of Specialist Advice in Relation to the Nationally Significant
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis at the Proposed Residential Development in
Officer, Victoria. Unpublished report for VicUrban by Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd.,
Brunswick, Victoria.
Osborne, W.S., Littlejohn, M.J. & Thomson, S.A. 1996. Former distribution and apparent
disappearance of the Litoria aurea complex from the Southern Tablelands of New South
Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. Pp 190-198 in The Green and Golden Bell
Frog (Litoria aurea): Biology and Conservation, edited by G.H. Pyke and W.S. Osborne.
Vol. 30. Transactions of the Royal Society of New South Wales, Mossman, NSW.
Pahkalal, M., Laurila, A, & Merila, J. 2001. Carry-over effects of ultraviolet-B radiation on
larval fitness in Rana temporaria. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268: 1699^1706.
Parris, K. M., M. Velik-Lord, and J. M. A. North. 2009. Frogs call at a higher pitch in traffic
noise.
Ecology
and
Society
14(1):
25.
[online]
URL:
http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss1/art25/
131
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Parris, K. M., M. Velik-Lord, and J. M. A. North. 2009. Frogs call at a higher pitch in traffic
noise. Ecology and Society 14(1): 25
Patmore, S.R. 2001. Distribution, habitat use and movement patterns of the Green and
Golden Bell Frog, Litoria aurea (Anura: Hylidae) on the Upper Molonglo River, NSW.
Unpublished Bachelor of Applied Science (Honours) thesis, University of Canberra.
Pellet, J., Guisan, A, & Perrin, N, 2004. A Concentric Analysis of the Impact of Urbanization
on the Threatened European Tree Frog in an Agricultural Landscape. Conservation
Biology 18(6): 1599 – 1606.
Penman, T.D., Lemckert, A.B. & Mahony, M.J. 2008. Spatial ecology of the giant burrowing
frog Heleioporus australiacus: implications for conservation prescriptions. Australian
Journal of Zoology 56(3): 179–186.
Poole, E. 2004. Habitat associations, regional distribution, and the conservation management
of some Victorian frogs. BSc (Hons) thesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Porej, D. Micacchion, M., & Hetherington, T.E. 2004. Core terrestrial habitat for
conservation of local populations of salamanders and wood frogs in agricultural
landscapes. Biological Conservation 120(3): 399-409.
Pyke G.H. 2002. A review of the biology of the Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis
(Anura: Hylidae). Australian Zoologist 32: 32–48.
Quin, D.G., & Renowden, C. 2006. Koo Wee Rup – Longwarry Road, Bayles/ Growling
Grass Frog and Southern Brown Bandicoot EMP. Report prepared for VicRoads by
Ecology Australia Pty Ltd, Fairfield.
Quin, D.G., Wilson, C., Crowfoot, L.V., Campbell, C., 2005. Results of a follow up
Growling Grass Frog and threatened plant survey along Yallock Creek- Bayles. Report
prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd, Fairfield.
Ramamurthy, S. 2003. Habitat suitability of wetlands at the Portland Aluminium Smelter for
the reintroduction of the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis. Unpublished report by
Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne, Victoria.
Ramamurthy, S. & Coulson, G. 2008. Assessing the suitability of wetlands for the
reintroduction of the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis. Australian Zoologist 34(3):
426-437.
Reed, R.A., Johnson-Barnard, J., & Baker, W.L. 1996. Contribution of roads to forest
fragmentation in the Rock y Mountains. Conservation Biology 10(4): 1098-1106.
Renowden, C. & Crowfoot, L.V. 2006. Skeleton Creek Improvement Project, Background to
impact assessment and Net Gain Implications. Unpublished draft report for Melbourne
Water by Ecology Australia, Fairfield.
Renowden, C. & Quin, D.G. 2007. Targeted surveys for the Growling Grass Frog of Toolern
and Lollypop Creek. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by Ecology Australia
Fairfield.
Renowden, C. 2006. Assessment of Growling Grass Frog Habitat: Melbourne Wholesale
Markets re-development, Cooper Street Epping. Unpublished report prepared for Major
Projects Victoria and the Department of Primary Industries by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd
Fairfield.
132
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Renowden, C. 2007. Growling Grass Frog Survey Craigieburn Bypass post-construction
Phase 2006-2007. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd.,
Fairfield.
Renowden, C., & Marr, R. 2008. Healesville – Koo Wee Rup Road upgrade: Growling Grass
Frog and Swamp Skink Surveys. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology
Australia Pty Ltd, Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Conole, L.E., Heard, G.W. & Robertson, P. 2006b. Sub-regional
Conservation Strategy for the Growling Grass Frog – Epping/.Somerton, Victoria.
Unpublished report prepared for the Department of Primary Industries by Ecology
Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Crowfoot L.V., Kershaw J. & Marr, R. 2010. Conservation Management Plan
for Highlands Residential Development, Craigieburn. Unpublished report for Stockland by
Ecology Australia, Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Quin, D.G. 2006a. Healesville- Koo Wee Rup Road Upgrade- Growling
Grass Frog Surveys. Report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd,
Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Quin, D.G., & Moysey, E.D., 2006a. Growling Grass Frog Survey
Craigieburn Bypass post-construction Phase 2005-2006. Unpublished report for VicRoads
by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Quin, D.G., 2006b. Results of Growling Grass Frog Surveys, 2006: Bayles
Bridge preconstruction. Report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd,
Fairfield.
Renowden, C., Schmidt, B., Quin, D.G. & North, J. 2008. Growling Grass Frog Survey
Craigieburn Bypass post-construction Phase 2007-2008. Unpublished report for VicRoads
by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Reynolds, S.J. 2009. Impact of the introduced poeciliid Gambusia holbrooki on amphibians
in southwestern Australia. Copeia 2009: 296-302.
Rhodes D, Hill A.J. & Smith J.S. 1999. Archaeological/Heritage and Environmental
Assessment of the Middle Neighbourhood at Caroline Springs. Unpublished report by
Biosis Research Pty Ltd for the Delfin Property Group.
Richter, S., J. E. Young, R. A. Seigel, and G. N. Johnson. 2001. Postbreeding movement of
the dark gopher frog, Rana sevosa Goin and Netting: implications for conservation and
management. Journal of Herpetology 35: 316–321.
Ritchter, S.C., Young, J.E., Seigel, R.A. & Johnson, G.N. 2001. Postbreeding movements of
the Dark Gopher Frog, Rana sevoas Goin and Netting: implications for the conservation
and management. Journal of Herpetology 35: 315-321.
Robertson, P.
2001.
Feasibility study for an experimental translocation of the
Warty Swamp Frog Litoria raniformis. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by
Wildlife Profiles Pty Ltd
Robertson, P. 2003. Draft Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement for the Growling
Grass Frog, Litoria raniformis. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria.
Robertson, P. 2002a. Discussion Paper: Design requirements for structures to ameliorate the
potential effects on frog movements of construction and operation of the proposed
Craigieburn Bypass Freeway. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by Wildlife
Profiles Pty Ltd Heidelberg.
133
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Robertson, P. 2002b. Experimental salvage and release of Litoria raniformis: interim report.
Melbourne Water, Melbourne, Australia. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by
Wildlife Profiles Pty Ltd
Robertson, P., & Heard, G. 2002. Yallock Creek and Yallock Cut Amphibian Study. Report
of a field evaluation of the habitat for amphibians in the Yallock Creek area, south of the
South Gippsland Highway. Report prepared for Melbourne Water by Wildlife Profiles Pty.
Ltd., Heidelberg, Victoria.
Robertson, P., & Heard, G. 2003. Taylors and Skeleton Creek Amphibian Study: Report of a
field evaluation of the habitat for amphibians in designated sections of Taylors and
Skeleton Creeks, west of Melbourne. Unpublished report for Melbourne Water by
Wildlife Profiles Pty Ltd Heidelberg, Victoria.
Robertson, P., Heard, G. & Scroggie, M. 2002. The Ecology and Conservation Status of the
Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis within the Merri Creek Corridor. Interim Report:
Distribution, Abundance and Habitat Requirements. Unpublished report prepared for the
Department of Natural Resources and Environment by Wildlife Profiles Pty. Ltd.,
Heidelberg Victoria.
Rudolph, D. C., and Dickson, J.G. 1990. Streamside zone width and amphibian and reptile
abundance. Southwestern Naturalist 35: 472–476.
Schloegel1, L.M., Jean-Marc Hero, J.M., Berger, L., Speare, A., McDonald, K., & Daszak, P..
2006. The Decline of the Sharp-Snouted Day Frog Taudactylus acutirostris: The First
Documented Case of Extinction by Infection in a Free-Ranging Wildlife Species?
EcoHealth 3: 35–40. Springer New York.
Schultz, M. 2006. Distribution, detectability and initial habitat assessment of the Golden Bell
Frog Litoria raniformis in the South Australian River Murray Corridor: Implications for
Conservation and Management. Report to SA MDB NRM Board, Department for
Environment and Heritage, October 2006.
Schultz, M.A. 2007. Response of the Golden Bell Frog Litoria raniformis to environmental
watering programs on the Chowilla floodplain. Report prepared for the Department of
Land Biodiversity and Conservation, Department for Environment and Heritage,
Murraylands Region, October 2007.
Schultz, M.A. 2008. Distribution and detectability of Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis
in the South Australian River Murray Floodplain: Proceedings of the Biology and
Conservation of Bell Frogs Conference. Australian Zoologist 34(3):438-445.
Schulz M., Beardsell C., & Sandiford K. 1991. Sites of faunal significance in the western
wetlands of Melbourne. Department of Conservation and Environment, Melbourne.
Schulz, M. 1987. Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibians of the M.M.B.W. Farm (Werribee).
Unpublished consultant report to the Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibians Working Party,
Wildlife Consultative Committee, Melbourne & Metropolitan Board of Works, Melbourne.
Schwarzkopf, L. & Alford, R.A. 1996. Desiccation and shelter-site use in a tropical
amphibian: comparing toads with physical models. Functional Ecology 10: 193-200.
Semlitsch, R.D. & Bodie, J.R. 1998. Are small, isolated wetlands expendable? Conservation
Biology 12: 1129-1133.
Semlitsch, R.D. & Bodie, J.R. 2003. Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and
riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conservation Biology 17(5): 1219-1228.
134
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Sinsch 1992. Structure and dynamic of a natterjack toad metapopulation (Bufo calamita).
Oecologia 90: 489-499.
Sjogren, P. 1991. Extinction and isolation gradients in metapopulations: the case of the pool
frog (Rana lessonae). Biological Journal of the Limean Society. 42: 135-148.
Smith, A.M. & Green, D.M. 2005. Dispersal and the metapopulation paradigm in amphibian
ecology and conservation: are all amphibian populations metapopulations? Ecography
28(1): 110-128.
Smith, M. and Clemann, N. 2008. A second survey for relocated Growling Grass Frogs
Litoria raniformis at the Waterways Estate. Unpublished report by Arthur Rylah Institute
for Environmental Research (Department of Sustainability and Environment), Heidelberg,
for Melbourne Water.
Smith, M. J., Clemann, N., Scroggie, M. and Peterson, G. 2008. The threatened Growling
Grass Frog in the Wimmera and Corangamite. An assessment of habitat requirements and
the utility of automatic call recording devices as a survey tool. Arthur Rylah Institute for
Environmental Research. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg.
Smith, M. J., Schreiber, E. S. G., Scroggie, M. P., Kohout, M., Ough, K., Potts, J., Lennie, R.,
Turnbull, D., Jin, C., & Clancy, T. 2007. Associations between anuran tadpoles and
salinity in a landscape mosaic of wetlands impacted by secondary salinisation. Freshwater
Biology 52: 75-84.
Sofo, K. 2006. Growling Grass Frog Conservation Management Plan for proposed
Donnybrook Road-Hume Highway interchange, Kalkallo, Victoria. Unpublished report
for VicRoads by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne.
TBLD 2004. Kororoit Creek Waterway Management Activity Plan. Report by Thompson
Berrill Landscape Design Pty Ltd for Melbourne Water Corporation.
Timewell, C. 2003. Pakenham Bypass: Survey for the Warty Bell Frog Litoria raniformis,
Pakenham and surrounds, Victoria. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Biosis Research
Pty Ltd Port Melbourne.
Tyler, M.J. 1997. The Action Plan for Australian Frogs. Wildlife Australia Endangered
Species Program for Environment Australia, Canberra.
Van Gelder, J.J. 1973. A quantitative approach to the mortality resulting from traffic in a
population of Bufo bufo L. Oecologia Berl. 13: 93-95
Van Leeuwen, B.H. 1982. Protection of mitigating common toad Bufo bufo against car
traffic in The Netherlands. Environmental Conservation 9.1.
Venosta, M. 2006. Targeted survey for the Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis within
the proposed footprint of the Hume Hwy/Donnybrook Rd interchange. Unpublished report
for VicRoads by Biosis Research Pty. Ltd., Port Melbourne, Victoria.
VBA 2010.
Victorian Biodiversity Atlas ‘VBA_FAUNA25, FAUNA100
FAUNARestricted’ August 2010. The Department of Sustainability and Environment.
&
Vos, C.C. & Chardon, J.P. 1998. Effects of habitat fragmentation and road density on the
distribution pattern of the Moor Frog Rana arvalis. Journal of Applied Ecology 35: 44–56.
Wassens S. 2008. Review of the past distribution and decline of the southern bell frog Litoria
raniformis in New SouthWales. Australian Zoologist 34: 446–52.
135
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Wassens S. 2010. Flooding regimes for frogs in lowland rivers of the Murray-Darling Basin.
In: Ecosystem Response Modelling in the Murray-Darling Basin (eds N. Saintilann & I. C.
Overton) pp. 215–29. CSIRO Publishing, Canberra.
Wassens, S, Watts, R.R., Jansen, A. & Roshier, D.A. 2008. Movement Patterns of Southern
Bell Frogs Litoria raniformis in the response to flooding. Wildlife Research 34(3): 50–58
Wassens, S. 2005. The use of space by the Endangered Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis
in the Semi-arid region of south east region of New South Wales, Australia. PhD Thesis,
Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW.
Wassens, S., Hall, A., Osborne, W., Watts, R.J. 2010. Habitat characteristics predict
occupancy patterns of the endangered amphibian Litoria raniformis in flow-regulated flood
plain wetlands. Austral Ecology.
Wassens, S., Roshier, D.A., Watts, R.J., & Robertson, A.I. 2007. Spatial patterns of a
Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis population in an agricultural landscape. Pacific
Conservation Biology 13:104-110.
Webb, C.E. & Joss, J. 1997. Does predation by the fish Gambusia holbrooki (Atheriniformes:
Poecilidae) contribute to declining frog populations? Australian Zoologist 30:316-324.
White A. W. & Pyke G.H. 1996. Distribution and conservation status of the green and golden
bell frog Litoria aurea in New South Wales. Australian Zoologist 30: 177–189.
Williams, L.M. 2001. Proposed Hume F2 Freeway: Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis
Survey. Unpublished report prepared for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd.,
Fairfield.
Williams, L.M. 2002. Craigieburn Bypass: Pre-construction monitoring of the Southern Bell
Frog Litoria raniformis, November 2001 – January 2002. Unpublished report prepared for
VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
Wilson, C. 2003. The use of translocations as a conservation strategy for the Growling Grass
Frog, Litoria raniformis. Unpublished 3rd year research project. Deakin University,
Melbourne.
Wilson, C. 2005. Growling Grass Frog Surveys, Summer 2004/2005 – Craigieburn Bypass
post-construction phase. Unpublished report for VicRoads by Ecology Australia Pty Ltd,
Fairfield.
Wilson, C.W., Campbell, C. & Carr, G.W. 2005. Flora and fauna assessment of the proposed
Melbourne Wholesale Market site, Epping. Unpublished report to the Major Projects,
Victorian Department of Infrastructure by Ecology Australia Pty. Ltd., Fairfield.
136
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
APPENDICES
137
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
Appendix 1. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations
Table A1.1. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne West
Location
Kororoit Creek
Known and potential
habitats
Known breeding habitat
along the entire length of
the creek within the study
area and beyond.
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Along the entire length of the
creek within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of
200 metres.
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Population / Habitat Protection
2)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Kororoit Creek through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is paramount.
3)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of Kororoit Creek.
4)
Protect and buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools along the creek) (e.g. north of Beattys
Road).
5)
Ensure impacts on Deanside Wetlands from the proposed Outer Metropolitan Ring Road and / or
other future development are minimised to the fullest extent. If the wetlands are proposed to be
protected and managed in the future then habitat connection between the wetlands and Kororoit
Creek needs to be maintained.
6)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate stormwater
treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek. Similar to the lower reaches
(Organ 2005a, 2005b) without adequate stormwater management and treatment it is highly likely
that the changes to the hydrology (i.e. increased frequency of flooding, higher flows, reduction in
water quality and subsequent deterioration in submerged vegetation) along the creek will lead to
sub-optimal breeding conditions for L. raniformis.
7)
A 200-metre buffer either side the Kororoit Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important
for the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open
space requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
138
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Habitat Enhancement
8)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control (e.g. Spiny Rush removal), and the
planting of emergent, submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable
ground debris may also be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek.
Habitat Creation
9)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within Category 1 areas. Dedicated L. raniformis
wetlands constructed directly adjacent to the creek and not surrounded by urban development
(i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and off-stream waterbodies)
(see Section 7). Large off-stream waterbodies (minimum of 10 x 30 metres) created out of the
flood zone and be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used
for breeding by L. raniformis.
10) Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure they are suitable for L. raniformis.
Additional Requirements
11) Additional detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along Kororoit Creek
to determine the extent of the species along the creeks and the relative importance of habitats
along sections of creek (i.e. the key areas such as open pools where the species is likely to
breed) to inform management planning. Targeted surveys of other potentially suitable sites
outside Category 1 areas will be undertaken to determine where salvage and translocation
measures are required.
12) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided.
Werribee River and
Davis Creek
Potential breeding habitat
along sections of the River.
Dispersal and shelter sites
along the length of the
River and Davis Creek
Along the entire length of the
waterways within the study
area and beyond, including a
buffer of 200 metres. Large
irrigation dams within one
kilometres of the river have
potential to support breeding
populations of L. raniformis
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Werribee River through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is important, particularly within 200 metres from the River.
Protection of 100 metres either side of Davis Creek. The protection of a cluster of interconnected
sites is required for long-term population maintenance.
2)
Protect and buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools along the river).
3)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of the river.
4)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the river. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the river via a series of separate
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
139
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the river. Similar to the lower
reaches of Kororoit Creek (Organ 2005a, 2005b) without adequate stormwater management and
treatment it is highly likely that the changes to the hydrology (i.e. increased frequency of flooding,
higher flows, reduction in water quality and subsequent deterioration in submerged vegetation)
along the river will lead to sub-optimal breeding conditions for L. raniformis.
5)
A 200-metre buffer either side the Werribee River, and 100 metre either side of Davis Creek
corridors.
Habitat Enhancement
6)
Enhance existing sections of the River through weed control, and the planting of emergent,
submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris may also
be provided along the banks or adjacent to the River.
Habitat Creation
7)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within Category 1 areas. Dedicated L. raniformis
wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the River and not surrounded by urban
development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the river and off-stream
waterbodies) (see Section 7). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the flood
zone and be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used for
breeding by L. raniformis.
8)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Additional Requirements
9)
Undertake a detailed habitat assessment along the entire length of the river to identify the most
important sections for habitat protection and augmentation.
10) Additional targeted surveys are required along the entire length of Werribee River within the
Growth Area to identify any key sections / reaches that are either known to be used, or that have
the potential to be used for breeding in the future by L. raniformis, to inform management
planning. Targeted surveys of other potentially suitable sites outside Category 1 areas will be
undertaken to determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
11) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided.
Skeleton , Lollipop and
Dry Creeks
Low quality breeding and
dispersal habitat along
sections of the creeks,
primarily in the lower
reaches where areas are
inundated permanently or
Given the highly degraded
nature of the creeks, and the
lack of permanent water and
high quality habitat these areas
have low habitat connectivity.
Habitat Protection
1)
Protect L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Skeleton and Lollipop Creeks
through appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity
between aquatic and terrestrial habitat is important, particularly within 200 metres from the creek.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
140
Location
Known and potential
habitats
ephemerally. There are
few prominent corridors
leading into the creeks.
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
2)
If L. raniformis is recorded along the creeks in the future and / or additional habitat along the
creeks is created, then habitat connectivity along the length of the creeks is required.
3)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creeks. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creeks via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek.
4)
Given that Skeleton and Lollipop Creeks are ephemeral and support low quality breeding and
dispersal habitat for L. raniformis a reduced buffer of 50-100 metres should be created. The
buffer width does not necessarily need to be consistent along the entire creek but contain suitable
terrestrial habitat and connection to surrounding areas (i.e. to any off-stream waterbodies). The
final buffer width for Dry and Skeleton Creeks (upstream of Leakes Road) should be resolved in
conjunction with the Melbourne Water drainage scheme for the catchment.
Habitat Enhancement
5)
Enhance existing sections of the creeks through weed control, and the planting of emergent,
submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris may also
be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creeks.
Habitat Creation
6)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7). There may also be an opportunity
to excavate sections of the creeks to enhance habitat conditions (i.e. permanent pools) for L.
raniformis.
Additional Requirements
7)
The L. raniformis CMP which will be developed during the PSP process will need to include the
potential for habitat recreation along or adjacent to the creeks in strategic locations (i.e. where the
species has the ability to naturally colonise created wetlands and where any resident populations
are likely to have suitable habitats to persist in the future). Actions need to be prescriptive and
detailed monitoring and maintenance actions are required.
8)
Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside Category 1 areas to determine where salvage and
translocation measures are required.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
141
Table A1.2. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne North West Growth Area.
Location
Jacksons Creek
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Known breeding habitat
along the length of the creek
within the study area and
beyond.
Along the entire length of the
creek within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of
200 metres.
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Jacksons Creek through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is paramount. The protection of a cluster of interconnected sites is
required for long-term population maintenance.
2)
Protect and adequately buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools along the creek).
3)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of Jacksons Creek.
4)
Retain large irrigation dams (e.g. in the south boundary) and ensure these areas are not
impacted by future urban development. Habitat connection between wetlands and Jacksons
Creek needs to be maintained.
5)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek. Without adequate
stormwater management and treatment it is highly likely that the changes to the hydrology (i.e.
increased frequency of flooding, higher flows, reduction in water quality and subsequent
deterioration in submerged vegetation) along the creek will lead to sub-optimal breeding
conditions for L. raniformis.
13) A 200-metre buffer either side Jacksons Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important
for the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
142
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Habitat Enhancement
6)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control, and the planting of emergent,
submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris may also
be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek. The hydroperiod of sections of the creek
may also be prolonged.
Habitat Creation
7)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the Creek and not surrounded by
urban development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and offstream waterbodies) (see Section 7). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the
flood zone and be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used
for breeding by L. raniformis.
8)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Additional Requirements
9)
Detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along Jacksons Creek to
determine the extent of the species along the creeks and the relative importance of habitats along
sections of creek to inform management planning. Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside
Category 1 areas to determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
10) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided.
Emu Creek
Likely breeding habitat along
sections of the Creek.
Dispersal and shelter sites
along the length of the
creek, within the study area
and beyond
Along the length of the Creek
within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of
200 metres. Large irrigation
dams within one kilometres of
the creek have potential to
support breeding populations of
L. raniformis
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Emu Creek through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is paramount. The protection of a cluster of interconnected sites is
required for long-term population maintenance.
2)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of Emu Creek.
3)
Protect and buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools along the creek).
4)
Retain large irrigation dams (e.g. in the south boundary) that are suitable for L, raniformis, and
ensure these areas are not impacted by future urban development. If the wetlands are proposed
to be protected and managed in the future then habitat connection between the wetlands and
Emu Creek needs to be maintained.
5)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
143
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek. Without adequate
stormwater management and treatment it is highly likely that the changes to the hydrology (i.e.
increased frequency of flooding, higher flows, reduction in water quality and subsequent
deterioration in submerged vegetation) along the creek will lead to sub-optimal breeding
conditions for L. raniformis.
14) A 200-metre buffer either side Emu Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important
for the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Habitat Enhancement
6)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control, and the planting of emergent,
submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris may also
be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek. The hydroperiod of sections of the creek
may also be prolonged.
Habitat Creation
7)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the Creek and not surrounded by
urban development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and offstream waterbodies) (see Section 7). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the
flood zone, and be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be
used for breeding by L. raniformis.
8)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
144
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Additional Requirements
9)
Additional detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along Emu Creek to
determine the relative importance of sections of creek within the Growth Area to inform
management planning. Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside Category 1 areas to
determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
10) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided to ensure they are suitable for L.
raniformis (see Section 7).
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
145
Table A1.3. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne North Growth Area.
Location
Merri Creek
Known and potential
habitat
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Known breeding habitat
along the entire length of the
creek within the study area
and beyond. Much of the
creek within the Growth Area
provides suitable dispersal
habitat for frogs.
Along the entire length of the
creek within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of at
least 200 metres. Where
occupied off-stream wetlands
occur within 0.5 – 1 kilometre of
the creek (like at Donnybrook),
they will need to be protected,
as they are vital for
metapopulation processes in
these locations.
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Merri Creek through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is important, particularly within 200 metres of the creek. The
protection of a cluster of interconnected sites at the Donnybrook Road cluster is required for longterm population maintenance.
2)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of the Merri Creek.
3)
Protect and buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools along the creek).
4)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek. Without adequate
stormwater management and treatment it is highly likely that the changes to the hydrology (i.e.
increased frequency of flooding, higher flows, reduction in water quality and subsequent
deterioration in submerged vegetation) along the creek will lead to sub-optimal breeding conditions
for L. raniformis.
15) A 200-metre buffer either side Merri Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important for
the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Habitat Enhancement
5)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control, and where required, the planting of
emergent, submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
146
Location
Known and potential
habitat
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
may also be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek. The hydroperiod of sections of the
creek may also be prolonged.
Habitat Creation
6)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the creek and not surrounded by
development and associated infrastructure (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained
between the creek and off-stream waterbodies). Given that the hydrology of Merri Creek is likely to
change once areas to the north of Donnybrook Road and east of the Hume Highway is developed
for residential purposes, it is important that large off-stream waterbodies are created out of the
flood zone. These sites should to be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known
or likely to be used for breeding by L. raniformis and support key habitat characteristics required by
the species.
Additional Requirements
Kalkallo Creek
Known breeding habitat in
areas within 200m areas
north and south of
Donnybrook Road. Frogs
are likely to use the creek
during dispersal to areas
north of Donnybrook Road
and south to Merri Creek.
Along the entire length of the
creek within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of
200 metres.
7)
Detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along sections of Merri Creek
where there has been less survey effort or fewer records, to determine the relative importance of
sections along the creek for management planning. Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside
Category 1 areas to determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
8)
Future population and habitat monitoring will need to take into consideration the monitoring
methodology currently being undertaken along the Creek as part of the recent Donnybrook Road
Interchange (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f.)
9)
Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided.
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of Kalkallo Creek through
appropriate zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between
aquatic and terrestrial habitat is important, particularly within 200 metres of the creek. The
protection of a cluster of interconnected sites at the Donnybrook Road cluster is required for longterm population maintenance.
2)
Protect and buffer breeding sites (i.e. areas of open pools immediately north and south of
Donnybrook Road).
3)
Maintenance of habitat connectivity along the length of Kalkallo Creek.
4)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek. Without adequate
stormwater management and treatment it is highly likely that the changes to the hydrology (i.e.
increased frequency of flooding, higher flows, reduction in water quality and subsequent
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
147
Location
Known and potential
habitat
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
deterioration in submerged vegetation) along the creek will most likely lead to sub-optimal
/unsuitable breeding conditions for L. raniformis.
16) A 100-metre buffer either side Kalkallo Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important for
the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Habitat Enhancement
5)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control, and where required, the planting of
emergent, submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable ground debris
may also be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek. The hydroperiod of sections of the
creek may also be prolonged.
Habitat Creation
6)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the creek and not surrounded by
development and associated infrastructure (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained
between the creek and off-stream waterbodies). Given that the hydrology of Kalkallo Creek is
likely to change once areas to the north of Donnybrook Road and east of the Hume Highway is
developed for residential purposes, it is important that large off-stream waterbodies are created out
of the flood zone. These sites should be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are
known or likely to be used for breeding by L. raniformis, and support key habitat characteristics
required by the species.
7)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Additional Requirements
8)
Detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along the Kalkallo Creek within
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
148
Location
Known and potential
habitat
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
the Category 1 area of the Growth Area to determine the presence of the species and the relative
importance of habitats / sites along sections of creek to inform management planning. Targeted
surveys will be undertaken outside Category 1 areas to determine where salvage and translocation
measures are required
9)
Future population and habitat monitoring will need to take into consideration the monitoring
methodology currently being undertaken along the Creek as part of the recent Donnybrook Road
Interchange (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2007a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010f).
10) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed
monitoring and maintenance actions need to be provided.
Darebin Creek, Edgars
Creek, Austral Bricks
quarry and low quality
watercourses
Low quality breeding habitat
within the Growth Area. May
provide suitable dispersal
habitat for L. raniformis
between other suitable sites
within or outside of the
Growth Area.
Areas shown in Figure 6c.
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect any L. raniformis breeding sites along, and in the vicinity of the creeks and other low quality
waterways through appropriate PSP design – habitat connectivity between aquatic and terrestrial
habitat is important, particularly within 200 metres of the creek. The protection of a cluster of
interconnected sites is required for long-term population maintenance. For example, the retention
zones along the Darebin Creek should be continuous, and encompass the offstream sites in that
area (e.g. Wollert Quarry, Aquatic Nursery on Masons Lane). Retention of Edgar’s Creek linking
and encompassing the Harvest Home waterbody and the Epping Waste disposal site is required
outside of the Growth Area.
2)
If L. raniformis is detected along the creeks and other low quality waterways in the future, and if
extant breeding populations occur then ensure habitat connectivity along the waterway(s) is
maintained.
3)
Protect and manage any existing populations within in the Austral Bricks quarry site.
4)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into the creeks. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creeks via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek.
5)
A 30-100 metre buffer either side the creeks. The buffer width does not necessarily need to be
consistent along the entire creek but contain suitable terrestrial habitat and connection to
surrounding areas (i.e. to any off-stream waterbodies).
Habitat Enhancement
6)
If deemed necessary, enhance existing sections of the creeks through weed control, and the
planting of emergent, submergent and floating vegetation. Basalt boulders and other suitable
ground debris may also be provided along the banks or adjacent to the creeks.
Habitat Creation
7)
Create off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L. raniformis
wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to waterways and not surrounded by urban
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
149
Location
Known and potential
habitat
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and off-stream
waterbodies). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the flood zone and be
located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used for breeding by L.
raniformis.
8)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure that they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Additional Requirements
9)
Undertake a detailed habitat assessment along the entire length of Darebin Creek and other low
quality waterways to identify the most important sections for habitat protection and augmentation.
10) Additional targeted surveys may be required along the length of Darebin Creek within the Growth
Area to identify any sections / reaches that are either known to be used, or that have the potential
to be used by L. raniformis. Targeted surveys will be undertake outside Category 1 areas n to
determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
11) Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
creation and future management and maintenance, in an effort to protect any extant populations
and to encourage L. raniformis to move into newly created habitats in the future.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
150
Table A1.4. Important habitat areas, linkages, and recommendations within the Melbourne South-East Growth Area.
Location
Cardinia Creek
Known and potential
habitats
Potential breeding and
dispersal habitat along the
entire length of the creek
within the study area and
beyond.
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Along the entire length of the
creek within the study area and
beyond, including a buffer of
200 metres.
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
Population / Habitat Protection
1)
Protect known L. raniformis habitat along, and in the vicinity of Cardinia Creek through appropriate
zoning and overlays, and appropriate PSP design. Habitat connectivity between aquatic and
terrestrial habitat is required.
2)
Habitat connectivity along Cardinia Creek along with connection between Cardinia Creek and Site
#43 needs to be maintained.
3)
Prevent direct stormwater discharge from urban development into Cardinia Creek. Stormwater
runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the creek via a series of separate
stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek.
17) A 200-metre buffer either side the Cardinia Creek corridor. The width of the buffer, along with the
treatment within the buffer (e.g. open grassed areas and the creation of wetlands) are important
for the species. Wider buffers are required along sections of the creek that contain higher quality
habitat (e.g. large open pools where frogs are more likely to congregate during the breeding
season). In addition, the applied buffer can vary along the length of the creek depending on sitespecific habitat conditions, i.e.
-
Hydrology – WSUD, localised catchment capacity, salinity.
-
Topography (break of slope).
-
Geomorphology (wetland construction constraints).
-
Interface treatments (development type and intensity, and open space
requirements).
-
Existing or likely barriers to dispersal.
-
Location of road crossings, walkways, tracks etc.
-
Buffer landscape design.
Habitat Enhancement
4)
Enhance existing sections of the creek through weed control, and the planting of emergent,
submergent and floating vegetation. Rocks and other suitable ground debris may also be
provided along the banks or adjacent to the creek.
Habitat Creation
5)
Create additional off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to the creek and not surrounded by
urban development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and off-
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
151
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
stream waterbodies) (see Section 7). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the
flood zone and be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used
by for breeding L. raniformis.
6)
Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure they are suitable for L. raniformis (see Section 7).
Additional Requirements
Clyde Creek
Low quality breeding habitat.
Provides suitable dispersal,
foraging and terrestrial cover
for L. raniformis between
other suitable sites within or
outside of the Growth Area.
Areas shown in Figure 6d.
7)
Additional detailed targeted surveys and habitat assessments are required along Cardinia Creek
to determine the extent of the species along the creek and the relative importance of habitats
along sections of creek (i.e. the key areas such as open pools where the species is likely to breed)
to inform management planning. Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside Category 1 areas to
determine where salvage and translocation measures are required.
8)
Development of a detailed L. raniformis CMP during the PSP process, concentrating on habitat
protection, management and maintenance. The plan needs to build on the previous CMP
prepared along Cardinia Creek as part of the Clyde North and Officer PSPs (Ecology Australia Pty
Ltd 2009, 2010b). Actions need to be prescriptive and detailed monitoring and maintenance
actions need to be provided.
Population / Habitat Protection
9)
Ensure Category 1 areas are protected to ensure connection between suitable breeding sites is
maintained. Appropriate zoning and overlays, and PSP design is required. Habitat connectivity
between occupied sites and terrestrial habitat is important, while the protection of a cluster of
interconnected sites is required for long-term population maintenance.
10) Prevent direct stormwater discharge from future urban developments into creeks and drainage
lines. Stormwater runoff needs to be adequately treated prior to entering the waterways via a
series of separate stormwater treatment wetlands that are located directly adjacent to the creek.
11) A buffer either side of Clyde Creek and other drainage lines needs to be provided. The buffer
width does not necessarily need to be consistent along the entire creek but contain suitable
terrestrial habitat and connection to surrounding areas (i.e. to any off-stream waterbodies),
including the sites along Muddy Gates Drain where a larger area of habitat linking both waterways
is proposed (Figure 6d). In general 100m buffer is appropriate downstream of Tuckers Road,
whereas the buffer upstream of Tuckers Road may be less and determined in conjunction with the
drainage scheme for the catchment.
Habitat Enhancement
12) Existing sections of Clyde Creek need to be enhanced through weed control, excavation of pools,
and the planting of emergent, submergent and floating vegetation. Rocks and other suitable
ground debris may also be provided.
Habitat Creation
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
152
Location
Known and potential
habitats
Habitat connectivity and
priority retention areas
Recommendations for the conservation of L. raniformis , and other considerations (in
priority order - protection, enhancement and then creation)
13) Creation of off-stream breeding habitat within designated Category 1 areas. Dedicated L.
raniformis wetlands need to be constructed directly adjacent to waterways and not surrounded by
urban development (i.e. habitat connection needs to be maintained between the creek and offstream waterbodies). Large off-stream waterbodies need to be created out of the flood zone and
be located directly adjacent to large open pools that are known or likely to be used for breeding by
L. raniformis.
14) Wetlands need to be designed, constructed and established with appropriate habitat features to
ensure they are suitable for L. raniformis.
Additional Requirements
15) A detailed L. raniformis CMP will need to be prepared as part of the PSP process. The CMP will
concentrate on habitat creation and future management and maintenance, in an effort to protect
any extant populations and to encourage L. raniformis to move into newly created habitats in the
future.
16) Targeted surveys will be undertaken outside Category 1 areas to determine where salvage and
translocation measures are required.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
153
Appendix 1. Final Litoria raniformis EPBC Act Prescription
under the SIAR
The following is the final prescription for L. raniformis approved on 27 May 2010 by the
Australian Government Minister for the Environment pursuant to the endorsed Program
Delivering Melbourne’s Newest Sustainable Communities (December 2009) (DPCD 2009)
Preamble
The following objectives should apply to management of Growling Grass Frog in relation to
urban development planning:
 Protect important Merri Creek population;
 Identify and protect other important populations including in the Pakenham area and
South-East Growth Area, and along Kororoit Creek;
 Retain, upgrade and connect or buffer some existing habitats within proposed
precincts;
 Create new habitat within precincts;
 Manage hydrology and aquatic vegetation carefully to avoid the introduction of
predatory fish; and
 Monitor retained and new habitat, and adjust management accordingly.
Detail
Precinct planning design should not commence until surveys to confirm the presence of
suitable habitat and likely occurrence of Growling Grass Frog in an area are complete
(irrespective of whether the species is actually detected). Surveys to be consistent with
Biodiversity Precinct Structure Planning Kit methodology (DSE 2010).
A Growling Grass Frog Conservation Management Plan (CMP) must be prepared for precincts
(or other development areas included within the Program) containing suitable habitat for
Growling Grass Frog. The CMP must be prepared prior to exhibition of the Precinct Structure
Plan (PSP), or for developments not covered by a PSP, prior to approval of that development.
The CMP must be to the satisfaction of the Department of Sustainability and Environment
(DSE).
The CMP must demonstrate how, for an important population (or potentially important
population) of Growling Grass Frog:
 Habitat will be retained and/or created and managed with sufficient connectivity so the
population can function over the long term. This may consider and include habitat both
on and off-site but must not rely on translocation;
 Monitoring will be employed to determine effectiveness;
 Habitat and threatening processes will be appropriately managed in a way that is
responsive to the results of monitoring; and
 Actions relating to proposed development will be sequenced to ensure there is no net
loss of habitat and local population.
The CMP must be consistent with the SRS for the Growling Grass Frog approved by DSE.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
154
Appendix 2. Examples of habitat creation for Litoria
raniformis around Melbourne
A2.2. Examples of Habitat Creation
The following is a selection of examples where habitat has been created, or is proposed to be
created for L. raniformis around Melbourne.
Cardinia Road Employment Precinct
A total of 26 wetlands are proposed to be created specifically for L. raniformis throughout the
Gum Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek and Cardinia Road Drain open space corridors, in addition
to six ponds along the southern boundary of the Cardinia Road Employment Precinct
(Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009c). A further six large stormwater retention wetlands are
proposed to be constructed in Cardinia Road Drain open space corridor. Two more wetlands
are proposed for the Toomuc Creek corridor, north and south of Thompsons Road.
The riparian corridor, through which Gum Scrub Creek and Toomuc Creek flows, will be
protected and the corridor width increased in areas. Pyke (2002) recommends a minimum
movement corridor width of 20 metres, and preferably greater (e.g. 50 metres) for populations
of L. aurea in New South Wales.
A similar approach has been adopted in this precinct in designing corridors for L. raniformis
in Victoria, although the minimum buffer distances implemented around dedicated frog ponds
within the Precinct will be at least 30-40 metres, providing an increased width along Gum
Scrub Creek, Toomuc Creek and Cardinia Road Drain.
This will also allow opportunities to rehabilitate degraded swamp scrub vegetation and
improve the quality of instream aquatic habitat for frogs, fish and other native fauna.
The creation of a series of large ponds interconnected to one another along the lengths of Gum
Scrub Creek and Cardinia Road Drain will be constructed, in addition to eight large online
wetlands. Ongoing monitoring and management of created habitat will be undertaken in
accordance with the approved CMP prepared for the species within this precinct, to ensure
that created habitat becomes, and remains suitable during and after the development of the
precinct (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009c).
‘Azola Waters’ – Pakenham
This is a 17 hectare site is located at 36 Racecourse Road, directly north of Gippsland railway
line, Pakenham (Melways Ref 317 G9 – H9). A series of wetlands were constructed in 2006
in the southern portion of a site known as ‘Azola Waters’.
These wetlands were designed and constructed specifically to provide suitable habitat for L.
raniformis. A CMP for the species, which includes detailed design and habitat management
actions to cater for L. raniformis has also been prepared (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2005).
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
155
Waterbodies now support a range of habitat characteristics such as extensive cover of aquatic
and semi-aquatic macrophytes, and the presence of suitable cover and overwintering sites.
Additionally, management have the ability to drain individual ponds in the event that
undesirable fish species such as Plague Minnow or pollutants are present.
Although L. raniformis is not currently present at this site (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2005),
the nearest population has been recorded on the Pakenham District Golf Course,
approximately 500 metres north east of the site (Timewell 2003; Organ 2004a; Brett Lane &
Associates Pty Ltd 2004, 2005; A. Organ pers. obs.). Up to five specimens were detected
from waterbodies (dams) supporting emergent and submerged vegetation during a targeted
survey conducted over the 2002/03 and 2003/04 breeding periods (AVW 2009, Timewell
2003; Organ 2004a).
It is possible that, owing to the proximity of the ‘Fairway Waters’ site to a known population,
and the current absence of any apparent barriers to dispersal, frogs may naturally re-colonise
the sites. The success or failure of created habitat, and long-term persistence of the species on
the site (if assuming the species is able to colonise the site) will depend upon the suitability of
wetlands after construction and the implementation of the L. raniformis CMP (Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd 2005).
Pakenham Bypass
The proposed Pakenham Bypass covers a distance of approximately 20 kilometres and
commences on the western end of the Princes Highway (between Beaconsfield and Officer),
continuing eastwards on the southern side of Pakenham, then returning to the existing
highway to the north of Nar Nar Goon.
Most of the study area has been wholly or substantially modified since European settlement,
and largely consists of agricultural land, primarily used for cattle grazing.
However, many areas in the vicinity of the road are currently been developed for residential
and industrial use.
Litoria raniformis currently occupies several waterbodies in the vicinity (north and south) of
the proposed Bypass. Subsequent to the detailed monitoring of L. raniformis populations
which was undertaken between November and March 2002/03 and 2003/04 (Costello et al.
2003; Timewell 2003; Organ 2004a), a detailed CMP for the species was developed to
mitigate against the likely adverse impacts of the road on local populations (Organ 2005c).
Specifically, the following measures have been implemented as part of the proposed
development:

Installation of frog underpasses and culvert crossings in an effort to provide for
ongoing exchange of frogs north and south of the Bypass;
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
156

The creation of at least 29 separate wetlands to mitigate against potential habitat
fragmentation associated with the road development and to provide additional
dispersal opportunities under the road. These wetlands will contain key habitat
features required by the species;

Installation of ‘drift fencing’ or frog fencing. This serves two main purposes; firstly to
prevent frogs from entering the road pavement, thus reducing the risk of road
mortality, and secondly to guide frogs into crossing structures and under the road; and,

Ongoing population and habitat monitoring to determine the likely impact of the road
on local frog populations.
Recent monitoring of constructed wetlands either side of underpasses has been undertaken
during 2008/09 and 2009/10 active period of the species (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2009a,
2010d). During the 2008/09 monitoring period L. raniformis was recorded at 12 of the 36
Underpass sites. The highest number of L. raniformis detected was 45, 20 and 12. No
between-pond movement was recorded amongst the individual L. raniformis that were marked
in Underpass sites and nor was there any movement recorded between Underpass sites and
Bypass sites.
Litoria raniformis colonised constructed waterbodies (varying in size) along the Pakenham
Bypass within one year after construction, and monitoring during the recent 2009/10 breeding
period documented frog movement (approximately 200 metres) between ponds on the same
side of the road, and one frog movement (~50 metres) under the road (i.e. from north to south
of the Bypass) via Toomuc Creek (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2010d).
Craigieburn Bypass
Similar to the Pakenham Bypass, Craigieburn Bypass is a major road development that may
potentially cause adverse impacts on known L. raniformis populations surrounding the road
(Williams 2001, 2002; Conole et al. 2003; Robertson 2002; Moysey et al. 2004; Wilson 2005;
Renowden et al. 2006a; Renowden 2007; Renowden et al. 2008; Ecology Partners Pty Ltd
2006b, 2007b, 2008c). Several waterbodies either side of the Bypass have been created to
treat water runoff from the road pavement.
The vegetation in these large waterbodies are in varying stages of establishment with wetlands
further south of the Bypass (i.e. Stage 2 of the development) more advanced than those
created in the north (A. Organ pers. obs.). Small ponds have also been created at the
entrances of crossing structures to attract frogs to these areas and to facilitate movement under
the road.
Although several of the larger waterbodies currently provide suitable breeding habitat for L.
raniformis, as of January 2006 the species has yet to be detected at these sites (Ecology
Partners Pty Ltd 2008c). However, at this stage it is too early to ascertain whether wetlands
and underpass structures are functioning as intended, and therefore ongoing monitoring will
continue.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
157
Cairnlea Estate
Cairnlea Estate is a newly developed site located approximately 13 kilometres north-west of
Melbourne CBD (Melways Map 25 F6 and G6). A series of artificial stormwater treatment
wetlands have been created as part of the residential development, with several now
supporting a population of L. raniformis (Organ 2005b). Populations exist in recently created
wetlands at Cairnlea Estate and Serpentine Wetlands, Caroline Springs. These artificial ponds
have been colonised by frogs dispersing from Kororoit Creek prior to development on the site.
However, the majority of these waterbodies are now surrounded by houses, roads and other
development, and consequently there is little connection between habitats. While several
waterbodies have been created and subsequently colonised by L. raniformis, long-term
viability of these populations is unknown.
Botanica Park – Thomastown
Botanica Park is located approximately 15 kilometres from Melbourne CBD, directly north of
the Western Metropolitan Ring Road (Melways Map 9 G9 and H9). At this site, waterbodies
have been created to compensate for the loss of L. raniformis habitat located approximately
400 metres to the north, and immediately east of the G.B. Landfill site.
The wetlands comprise one large sediment wetland (~30 metres x 20 metres) which receives
stormwater runoff from the surrounding residential development, and a long linear (~200
metres long x 10 metres wide) waterbody which varies in depth. This linear waterbody
contains extensive areas of varying sized rocks lining the wetland edge.
A diversity of emergent, submerged and floating vegetation has also been planted and is now
established throughout the entire waterbody. Unfortunately there are now few areas of open
water, which is generally required by the species for breeding, as the majority of the
waterbody is choked with Cumbungi Typha sp. An outlet valve has also been installed at the
eastern end of the wetland in the event that it needs to be drained to remove undesirable fish
species or pollutants. Treated water eventually discharges into Darebin Creek.
Several L. raniformis frogs were translocated into these artificial sites and have bred over the
past three seasons (Ecology Partners Pty Ltd 2006h).
This site is currently managed by the City of Whittlesea and a detailed management plan
which will include detailed actions to ensure that habitats remain suitable for the species will
be developed.
Western Treatment Plant – Werribee
The Western Treatment Plant is located approximately 35 kilometres south-west of
Melbourne. Melbourne Water manages the Western Treatment Plant primarily for the
treatment of approximately 54% of Melbourne’s domestic and industrial wastewater. A series
of sewage treatment lagoons, drainage channels, and large ponds managed primarily for
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
158
conservation purposes (e.g. shorebirds, crakes, rails, ducks and the Growling Grass Frog) are
present.
The site contains large areas of water which support a diversity of water quality, vegetation
cover and other habitat characteristics, and currently supports one of the largest known
populations of L. raniformis close to Melbourne. With the exception of a few of the natural
streams dissecting the site (e.g. Cherry Tree Creek, Little River), all waterbodies currently
occupied by the species are artificial and were created several years ago. It appears that
relatively large populations of the species have persisted at the site for over the past 20 years.
Indeed, Schulz (1987) recorded large numbers of individuals in treatment ponds and irrigation
channels across the southern sections of the plant.
There is currently ongoing management, in accordance with a detailed CMP for the species, of
numerous sites to ensure that the L. raniformis population on the site is viable (Organ 2003b).
Caroline Springs
Caroline Springs is a relatively recently (post 2000) residential development located
approximately 22 kilometres north west of Melbourne CBD (Melways Map 358 F2). A series
of artificial wetlands were created as part of the residential development, with several now
supporting a population of L. raniformis (Organ 2004b, 2005d). A large number of frogs of
mixed age classes were recorded during a targeted survey of the species in November 2005
along Kororoit Creek and in artificial waterbodies south of the creek (Organ 2005d).
However, fewer frogs were recorded during a recent inspections of the site (October 2009),
which may be a result of the lack of successful recruitment due to habitat changes and the
high density of Plague Minnow. Wetlands at Caroline Springs, between Kororoit Creek and
the Western Highway, are now surrounded by residential development, with no connection to
Kororoit Creek. While several waterbodies were created during the development, and have
since been colonised by L. raniformis, the viability of this population is questionable in an
urban context.
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
159
Appendix 3. Wetland vegetation species
Table A3.1. A selection of suitable plants for Litoria raniformis habitat.
Botanical Name
Common Name
* Eleocharis acuta
Common Spike-sedge
* Potamogeton ochreatus
Blunt Pondweed
* Potamogeton tricarinatus
Floating Pondweed
* Vallisneria americana
Ribbon-weed
* Triglochin procerum s.l.
Water Ribbons
* Ottelia ovalifolia
Swamp Lily
# Eleocharis sphacelata
Tall Spike-sedge
Poa labillardierei var. labillardierei
Common Tussock-grass
Lachnagrostis filiformis
Common Blown-grass
Calystegia sepium
Large Bindweed
Carex appressa
Tall Sedge
Carex fascicularis
Tassel Sedge
Crassula helmsii
Swamp Crassula
Epilobium billardierianum
Smooth Willow-herb
Juncus amabilis
Hollow-rush
Juncus gregiflorus
Green Rush
Juncus procerus
Tall Rush
Juncus sarophorus
Broom Rush
Urtica incisa
Scrub Nettle
Hydrocotyle sibthorpioides
Shining Pennywort
Melaleuca ericifolia
Swamp Paperbark
Carex gaudichaudiana
Fen Sedge
Persicaria praetermissa
Spotted Knotweed
Persicaria subsessilis
Hairy Knotweed
Ranunculus inundatus
River Buttercup
Alisma plantago-aquatica
Water Plantain
Amphibromus fluitans
River Swamp Wallaby-grass
Baumea articulate
Jointed Twig-sedge
Cladium procerum
Leafy Twig-sedge
Glyceria australis
Australian Sweet-grass
Lycopus australis
Lythrum salicina
Myriophyllum crispatum
Australian Gypsywort
Small Loosestrife
Upright Water-milfoil
Myriophyllum simulans
Amphibious Water-milfoil
Neopaxia australasica
White Purslane
Persicaria decipiens
Slender Knotweed
Ranunculus amphitricus
Running Marsh Flower
Rumex bidens
Mud Dock
Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani
River Club-sedge
Villarsia reniformis
Running Marsh Flower
Myriophyllum caput-medusae
Coarse Water-milfoil
* Indicates highly desirable vegetation for L. raniformis;
# Limit use of this species, as it may become invasive
Sub-regional Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis Conservation Strategy
160