Moreton Bay Rail Koala Action Plan Prepared by Department of Transport and Main Roads - TMR
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Moreton Bay Rail
Koala Action Plan
Prepared by Department of Transport and Main Roads
July 2015 Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 2
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Moreton Bay Rail Project (Project) consists of the Lawnton to Petrie Upgrade Project and the Moreton Bay Rail Link which was a greenfield project extending from Petrie Station in the west of the Moreton Bay Region to Kippa-Ring Station in the east. The Project traverses the suburbs of Petrie, Kallangur, Murrumba Downs, Mango Hill, Rothwell and Kippa-Ring. Given the close relationship between the two projects, both were managed by a single Moreton Bay Rail Project team. Both projects are located in the south east of the Moreton Bay Regional Council (MBRC) local government area. This Koala Action Plan (KAP) details the original koala environment, impacts and mitigation actions (Appendix 1). The Investigation Area for this KAP extends approximately one kilometre either side of the alignment and further where intersecting with connecting habitats such as the Pine River, Freshwater Creek and Saltwater Creek. Koala activity was widespread across the Investigation Area. Further habitat loss and increased mortality associated with urban development, vehicles and wild dogs were likely to erode the long-term viability of the population. The cumulative impact of the overall development footprint was an important consideration when developing mitigation measures and offsets for an infrastructure project. This was prioritised during this project given that it is located in a major urban growth area that had already impacted on the local koala population. The Project is located in the South East Queensland Koala Protection Area (SEQKPA) and traverses areas identified as “Koala Bushland Habitat” and “Suitable for Rehabilitation” on the State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala Conservation in South East Queensland Koala Habitat Values Map. The Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP), (formerly the Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM)) and the Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR) established a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) for government supported transport infrastructure within the SEQKPA. The MoA establishes the respective roles and responsibilities of DEHP and DTMR to ensure that planning, design, construction and maintenance of government supported transport infrastructure in the SEQKPA is carried out in a way that seeks to avoid, minimise and finally offset adverse impacts to koalas and their habitats. The development of the KAP considered the objectives of the MoA, and desirability of creating a net benefit for the local koala population, that is scientifically demonstrable. With the high concentration of koalas in the Project area, DTMR developed a monitoring program as a strategy for meeting its legislative and MoA obligations and to minimise Project impacts on koalas. Knowing the location of koalas, through electronic or radio monitoring and with the aid of fauna spotters, greatly reduced the possibility of injury or death during clearing. It provided a project cost benefit by reducing the likelihood of delays by planning clearing around known koala locations. It also facilitated targeted and adaptive management of emergent risks to koalas as the project progressed, which improved the cost-effectiveness of mitigation measures and increased efficacy, compared with general or non- targeted offsets. Endeavour Veterinary Ecology (EVE) has been engaged by DTMR to conduct a Koala Tagging and Monitoring Program (KTMP) for the Project. This initial program, referred to as ‘KTMP1’, involved an intensive search for koalas, capture, veterinary health check and telemetric monitoring and was designed to continue until constructed commenced. The next phase (KTMP2) of koala management was designed to protect koalas during clearing and construction. Originally it was intended that the principal contractor for the construction of the Project conduct KTMP2, however DTMR maintained control and management of the program.
The Project could have resulted in isolated and unviable koala populations through reduction and
fragmentation of habitat with translocation offered as a mitigation strategy. The decision to translocate
considered the suitability of individual koalas for translocation as well as donor (current) and recipient
(translocation) site factors. A multi-criteria analysis was developed to ensure that selection was an
objective, scientifically valid and transparent process. Potential translocation sites were selected in
consultation with MBRC with site finalisation subjected to property owner consent. EVE have been
engaged by DTMR to undertake this program known as ‘KTrans’.
The impact of infectious disease on the viability of koala populations is gaining increased recognition. The
management of disease was identified as critical to population stabilisation and viability. Research shows
that addressing the impact of disease is more likely to stabilise koala populations than addressing other
causes of premature death, such as motor vehicle and domestic dog fatalities, (Rhodes et al 2011). To
assist in disease research and management, DTMR is a funding partner of a field trial of the koala
Chlamydia vaccine developed at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and conducted under the
banner of KTMP2.
The findings from KTMP1 clearly indicated that the leading cause of mortalities in the local koala
population is from wild dog predation. Therefore, the Project engaged an experienced Wild Dog Control
team through MBRC to reduce wild dog numbers in the Investigation Area.
The KTMP2, KTrans and Koala Chlamydia Vaccine Trial all operate under a number of regulatory approvals:
Scientific Purposes Permits issued under the provisions of the Nature Conservation Act 1992 and Animal
Ethics Committee approvals issued under the provisions of the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001.
The original clearing footprint was approximately 130ha and was reduced during construction to
approximately 60ha, containing a mix of mature koala habitat, regrowth vegetation and unvegetated
areas. Based on the reference design, DEHP mapping and the requirements of Table 4 of the South East
Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulation Provisions 2010; it was determined that
approximately 31.52ha of Koala Bushland Habitat would be lost. Through calculation, it is estimated that
the Project has removed 17,058 non-juvenile koala habitat trees, considerably less than the initial 22,993
estimate.
The objective of the Offsets for Net Gain of Koala Habitat in South East Queensland Policy 2010 is to
“ensure that offsets for unavoidable impacts on high quality koala habitat contribute to a net gain in
bushland koala habitat in Southeast Queensland by 2020.” The policy objective is met by “requiring an
offset to contribute (through an appropriate delivery option) the equivalent of five new koala habitat trees
for every non-juvenile habitat tree removed”. A further option exists to provide financial contributions in
lieu of koala habitat trees. This is the less preferred option for the Project as the provision of funds does
not necessarily or promptly provide a direct benefit to the impacted koalas.
In addition to habitat loss, the Project caused habitat fragmentation as the rail corridor passes through two
main habitat patches (at the Amcor site in the western area and at the eastern end of the corridor at the
Chelsea Street Reserve), directly dividing habitats. It was also necessary to provide connectivity adjacent to
Saltwater Creek to allow koalas access to habitat areas to the north. To mitigate the impact of habitat
fragmentation, it was necessary to provide underpass structures to promote effective ecological
connectivity across the railway.
Rail bridges were designed to incorporate koala passage at North Pine River, Yebri Creek, Black Duck Creek,
Freshwater Creek and Saltwater Creek. Through the Chelsea Street Reserve and adjoining habitats, the
topography did not support bridges. In this area fauna underpasses were provided and culverts located at
waterways.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 5
DTMR worked with DEHP and EVE to develop a holistic approach, through infrastructure solutions in
addition to vegetation offsets aiming to improve the viability of koalas impacted by the Project. These
infrastructure solutions were in addition to koala infrastructure mitigation measures already provided as
part of the Project. The philosophy was to target offset work that was outside the Project scope and would
benefit koalas. The proposed infrastructure solutions included fauna fencing and crossing structures in the
local area, with the goal of reducing vehicular strikes and predation to increase safe movement of koalas
between areas of habitat.
The opportunity to minimise koala habitat loss through design and construction management was limited
as the Project corridor was acquired during the 1970’s. Alterations to the alignment would have resulted in
significant impacts to the adjoining urban footprint. However, where practical, opportunities were
identified that would minimise habitat loss and these were implemented. Train strike was not identified as
a significant source of koala mortality, however precautions to limit koala - train interactions were
implemented by installing exclusion fencing at key points of the rail corridor. This was designed to reduce
the possibility of koala mortality as a result of train strikes or vehicle strikes in car parks and link roads once
the Project became operational.
In summary:
This plan outlined the mitigation of risks and provision of offsets or compensatory measures that provided
a demonstrable net benefit for the local koala population over the medium to long term. Key measures
included:
1. A thorough koala capture and monitoring program that properly assessed risks to safety and
population viability, and advised on mitigation measures;
2. Improved viability and fecundity of the koala population through disease management by veterinary
treatment and chlamydial vaccination;
3. Identification of safe translocation sites for koalas displaced into habitat remnants that were not safe
or did not provide opportunities for long-term contribution to the local koala population;
4. The installation of physical structures to reduce koala mortality on train lines and roads in urban areas
and provide effective ecological connectivity along habitat corridors intersected by the rail;
5. Effective reduction of wild dog impacts on the koala population; and
6. Surveyed, assessed and compared population viability prior to, and after completion of construction
and initial operational use of the Moreton Bay Rail Link.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 6
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................4
1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Background and Project Description ........................................................................................................... 11
1.2 Synopsis for management ........................................................................................................................... 19
1.3 Objectives of management .......................................................................................................................... 19
2 The Affected Koala Population and Its Habitats .................................................................................................. 21
2.1 Validating the state planning policy koala habitat value mapping .............................................................. 21
2.1.1 Existing koala habitat mapping and koala records .............................................................................. 21
2.1.2 Assessing and updating koala habitat mapping................................................................................... 21
2.1.3 Tree species preferences ..................................................................................................................... 24
2.2 Defining areas of significance ...................................................................................................................... 31
3 Managing project impacts through monitoring, translocation and a vaccine trial ............................................. 33
3.1 Monitoring program .................................................................................................................................... 34
3.1.1 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 34
3.1.2 Koala capture for identification/tagging and health check ................................................................. 35
3.1.3 Koala transport after capture for health check ................................................................................... 35
3.1.4 Health check......................................................................................................................................... 35
3.1.5 Sick or injured koalas ........................................................................................................................... 35
3.1.6 Necropsy examination of koalas .......................................................................................................... 36
3.1.7 Koala identification and tagging .......................................................................................................... 36
3.1.8 Telemetry devices ................................................................................................................................ 36
3.1.9 Release of koalas back into the wild .................................................................................................... 37
3.1.10 Monitoring of koalas after release ...................................................................................................... 37
3.2 Translocation program................................................................................................................................. 38
3.2.1 Approach to koala translocation.......................................................................................................... 38
3.2.2 Koala selection ..................................................................................................................................... 38
3.2.3 Recipient site selection ........................................................................................................................ 39
3.2.4 Koala population monitoring at possible recipient sites ..................................................................... 39
3.2.5 Pre-translocation assessment and holding of displaced koalas .......................................................... 42
3.2.6 Translocation of koalas ........................................................................................................................ 42
3.2.7 Six monthly koala capture and veterinary examination ...................................................................... 42
3.2.8 Responsive koala capture .................................................................................................................... 42
3.3 Vaccine trial ................................................................................................................................................. 42
4 Potential impacts of the project .......................................................................................................................... 44
4.1 Direct habitat loss ........................................................................................................................................ 44
4.2 Habitat fragmentation and degradation...................................................................................................... 44
4.3 Injury during the clearing program .............................................................................................................. 45
4.4 Injury from new project infrastructure........................................................................................................ 45
4.5 Cumulative impacts ..................................................................................................................................... 45
4.5.1 Predation.............................................................................................................................................. 45
4.5.2 Disease ................................................................................................................................................. 46
5 Construction management measures.................................................................................................................. 47
5.1 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 47
5.2 Managing habitat loss through design and construction management ...................................................... 47
5.2.1 Design phase ........................................................................................................................................ 48
5.2.2 Construction phase .............................................................................................................................. 48
5.3 Habitat offsets ............................................................................................................................................. 48
5.4 Infrastructure solutions as part of the offset requirements........................................................................ 49
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 7
5.5 Improving habitat connections through fauna crossing structures ............................................................ 50 5.6 Managing injury during tree clearing program ............................................................................................ 53 5.7 Managing injury on new rail and road infrastructure ................................................................................. 53 5.7.1 Construction phase .............................................................................................................................. 53 5.7.2 Operational phase................................................................................................................................ 53 6 References ........................................................................................................................................................... 55 Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 8
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 – IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES APPENDIX 2 – KOALA LEGISLATIVE AND POLICY CONTEXT APPENDIX 3 – SPECIES INFORMATION APPENDIX 4 - KINSELLAS ROAD EAST FAUNA MANAGEMENT AND TREE CLEARING STRATEGY FIGURES FIGURE 1 – PROJECT LOCALITY MAP FIGURE 2 – INVESTIGATION AREA (GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES) FIGURE 3 – INVESTIGATION AREA (AERIAL) FIGURE 4 – MANGO HILL LOCAL PLAN FIGURE 5 – TOD AT KALLANGUR, MANGO HILL AND KINSELLAS ROAD STATIONS FIGURE 6 – SEQ BIODIVERSITY PLANNING ASSESSMENT FIGURE 7 – PROCESS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT MEASURES FIGURE 8 – KOALA HABITAT MAPPING FIGURE 9 – DERM KOALA RECORDS FIGURE 10 – SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE KOALA HABITAT MAPPING FIGURE 11 – SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE KOALA HABITAT MAPPING FIGURE 12 – KOALA HABITAT QUALITY MAPPING FIGURE 13 – CORRIDORS FIGURE 14 – PRELIMINARY POTENTIAL RECIPIENT SITES FOR KOALAS FIGURE 15 – DECISION FLOWCHART FOR THE SELECTION OF OFFSET SITES FIGURE 16 – UNDERPASS APPROACH FOR CULVERTS FIGURE 17 – UNDERPASS FURNITURE TABLES TABLE 1 – SITES USED IN THE FIELD INVESTIGATION OF KOALA HABITAT UTILISATION IN THE INVESTIGATION AREA TABLE 2 – DETAILS OF THE SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES PERMIT AND ANIMAL ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVALS TABLE 3 – SCHEDULING OF KOALA MONITORING PROGRAM Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 9
Acronyms
AEC Animal ethics committee
EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
EVE Endeavour Veterinary Ecology Pty Ltd
Investigation Area Extends approximately one km either side of the alignment and further where
intersecting with connecting habitats such as the Pine River, Freshwater Creek
and Saltwater Creek
KTMP1 Stage One of the Koala Tagging and Monitoring Program (Pre-construction)
KTMP2 Stage Two of the Koala Tagging and Monitoring Program (Construction &
Operation)
KTrans Koala Translocation
KAP Koala Action Plan
KDMP Koala Disease Management Plan
MBRC Moreton Bay Regional Council
MoA Memorandum of Agreement
NJKHT Non-Juvenile Koala Habitat Tree
Project Moreton Bay Rail Project
Regional Plan South East Queensland Regional Plan
SEQ South east Queensland
Koala SPRP South East Queensland Koala Conservation State Planning Regulation Provision
SEQKPA Southeast Queensland Koala Protection Area
SPP Scientific Purposes Permit
TOD Transport Oriented Development
Department of Former Queensland Government Department now titled Department of
Environment and Environment and Heritage Protection
Resource
Management
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 101 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Project Description
The Moreton Bay Rail Project (Project) consists of the Lawnton to Petrie Upgrade Project and the Moreton
Bay Rail Link which is a greenfield project that extends from Petrie Station in the west of the Moreton Bay
region to Kippa-Ring Station in the east. Both are located in the south east of the Moreton Bay Regional
Council (MBRC) local government area (Figure 1). The Project will pass through the suburbs of Petrie,
Kallangur, Murrumba Downs, Mango Hill, Rothwell and Kippa-Ring. Given the close relationship between
the two projects, both are being managed by a single Moreton Bay Rail Project team.
This Koala Action Plan (KAP) details the:
Original koala environment;
Population impacts from both Project and non-Project; and
Actions that avoided, mitigated and offset Project impacts, taking into consideration the ultimate
urban footprint.
The Investigation Area for this KAP extends approximately one kilometre either side of the train alignment,
and further where intersecting with connecting habitats such as the Pine River, Freshwater Creek and
Saltwater Creek. The clearing footprint of the Project is included in this area, which provided important
habitat for koalas whose home range is intersected by the alignment. The extent and character of the
Investigation Area is shown in Figures 2 and 3. Consistent reference is made to the Amcor Site and Chelsea
Street reserve throughout this document as these sites contain significant koala habitat and therefore they
have been highlighted on all of the corridor-wide maps for ease of reference.
Historically, the Investigation Area would have supported an almost continuous cover of sclerophyll forest
and woodland dominated by koala habitat trees1. It has however been subject to significant clearing and
urbanisation. Native vegetation is now restricted to: waterway corridors (Pine River, Freshwater Creek,
Black Duck Creek, Saltwater Creek); urban remnants (Amcor Site and Chelsea Street Reserve) and the
coastal plain surrounding Hays Inlet. This provided tenuous connections to other areas of koala habitat in
the locality (e.g. the large areas of habitat around Lake Kurwongbah and Lake Samsonvale).
The Project is located in the South East Queensland Koala Protection Area (SEQKPA) and traverses areas
identified as “Koala Bushland Habitat” and “Suitable for Rehabilitation” on the State Planning Policy 2/10:
Koala Conservation in South East Queensland Koala Habitat Values Map 2010.
1
Species in the genera Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Melaleuca, Lophostemon and Angophora as defined by State Planning
Policy 2/10 (Koala Conservation in South East Queensland).
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 11Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 12
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 13
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 14
The Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) and Department of Transport and Main
Roads (DTMR) have an established Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) for government supported
transport infrastructure within the SEQKPA. The MoA identifies the respective roles and responsibilities of
the two parties to ensure that planning, design, construction and maintenance of government supported
transport infrastructure in the SEQKPA was delivered in a manner that seeks to avoid, minimise and finally
offset adverse impacts to koalas and koala habitat.
The Project required clearing of a construction footprint for the rail alignment; rail over road structures;
stabling yard; car parks; shared pathways and road works. The clearing footprint was estimated at 130 ha
based on the reference design; however this footprint was reduced as part of the detailed design to
approximately 60ha. One purpose of this KAP was to guide planning, design and construction decisions
made in regard to the Project to ensure compliance with the MoA and the broader regulatory
requirements for koala management in the SEQKPA. Policy context is discussed further in Appendix 2.
In November 2010, the Project was referred to the then Commonwealth Department of Sustainability,
Environment, Water, Population and Communities (now Department of Environment) and the decision was
made that the Project was not a controlled action under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act). In April 2012 the koala was listed as a Matter of National Environmental
Significance (Vulnerable) under the EPBC Act. Through section 158A of the EPBC Act in November 2010, the
previous decision that the Project was not a controlled action was not altered by the subsequent listing of
the koalas in April 2012. The Project managed potential impacts on koalas in line with relevant State
legislation and continued to liaise with the Commonwealth Department of Environment.
Management and mitigation measures were applied to areas directly affected by the Project (e.g. re-
establishing koala passage via underpass structures) but also in locations that were not part of the Project
(e.g. offset plantings2). Proposed measures take into consideration the land use planning intent for the
Investigation Area (likely future development), noting that:
i. The alignment is almost wholly within the South East Queensland Regional Plan (Regional Plan)
urban footprint. In line with the objectives of the Regional Plan, further intensification of
development in the urban footprint will occur;
ii. The MBRC Mango Hill Local Area Plan envisages significant expansion of urban development in
areas between the Pine River and Saltwater Creek (Figure 4);
iii. Transit oriented developments are proposed for areas surrounding Kallangur, Mango Hill and
Mango Hill East (formally referred to as Kinsellas Road) stations (refer MBRC Temporary Local
Planning Instrument 1/11 – MBRL) (Figure 5); and
iv. Pine River, Yebri Creek, Freshwater Creek, Saltwater Creek, parts of the Hays Inlet Coastal Plain and
areas surrounding Chelsea Street Reserve have been identified as areas of State Biodiversity
Significance by the Southeast Queensland Biodiversity Planning Assessment (Figure 6). These
waterways are also recognised as biodiversity corridors by the MBRC Pine Rivers Plan. The Project’s
management measures are prioritised in these areas of biodiversity significance. Such areas were
also a focus for investigation of offsets.
2
In regard to the identification of offset sites, priority is given to: (i) areas geographically proximate to the area of
impact; and (ii) areas of strategic significance (e.g. buffering or consolidating areas of existing value, or improving
strategic linkages).
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 15Figure 4: Mango Hill Local Area Plan
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 16Figure 5: TOD at Kallangur, Mango Hill and Mango Hill East (Kinsellas Road) Stations
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 17Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 18
1.2 Synopsis for management
Population size is the most important determinant of population viability, with up to 7,000 individual
adults required for a long-term viable population, defined as a 99% probability of persistence over 40
generations (Reed et al. 2003). This is greater than the total number of koalas estimated to be in Pine
Rivers Shire (Dique et al. 2003c). Koalas are however known to maintain populations of as few as 300
individuals over periods of 80-100 years on islands and in habitat fragments (e.g. Melzer and Ellis 2009), so
it is possible that this species has developed mechanisms for surviving in small isolated populations, such
as a tolerance of low genetic diversity (Wilmer et al. 1993).
Population viability is also affected by variation in life history traits, such as adult mortality, juvenile
mortality, longevity and reproductive output. Long lived, slow breeding animals tend to be more sensitive
to adult and juvenile mortality rates than reproductive parameters (Oli 2004). Several sources of unnatural
mortality were identified in the Investigation Area including vehicular strike, dog attack, train strike and
pool drownings. While there was originally no data available to quantify all of these impacts within the
Investigation Area, dog attack and vehicular strikes were expected to be the most significant threats based
on regional data and collectively constituted an annual mortality rate of almost 5% per year (Dique et al
2003c). The significant threat from dog attack has been supported by data from the first 12 months of
monitoring which demonstrated a mortality rate from wild dog related trauma of closer to 20%. Variations
in the mortality rate of 5% were shown to have a profound effect on estimates of population viability of
Squirrel Glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) inhabiting a series of urban remnants in the south-east suburbs of
Brisbane (Goldingay and Sharpe 2004). Based on existing knowledge about the regional koala population, it
would be expected that any increase in the mortality rate would likely further reduce the viability of the
koala population in the Investigation Area.
On the basis of size alone, the koala population in the Investigation Area may theoretically have low
prospects for long-term viability. Further habitat loss, fragmentation and increased mortality (more
vehicles, more dogs) associated with on-going urban development is likely to erode population viability
further. Indeed, repeat koala surveys show that the koala population in the locality continues to decline
(Dique et al. 2003c; Dique and Taske 2008; Clowes et al. 2010), providing evidence that the koala
metapopulation is not viable at its present size and subject to current levels of threat. This trend can be
ameliorated by targeted conservation efforts. Thus, efforts to ensure long-term population viability, such
as increasing the total area of habitat, ensuring habitat connectivity and reducing artificial sources of
mortality, are warranted and need to be quantified with Population Viability Analysis.
1.3 Objectives of management
This KAP guided the implementation of measures that:
Avoided destruction or damage to koala habitats other than what was essential for the construction
and operation of the rail line and associated infrastructure;
Minimised risk of harm to koalas either directly or indirectly as a result of construction work and
operational use of the rail line; and
Provided offsets for unavoidable negative impacts that benefit the conservation and/or welfare of
koalas.
This approach is represented graphically in Figure 7.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 19Figure 7: Process for the implementation of management measures Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 20
2 THE AFFECTED KOALA POPULATION AND ITS HABITATS
2.1 Validating the state planning policy koala habitat value mapping
2.1.1 Original koala habitat mapping and koala records
The Original koala mapping in the Investigation Area was derived from criteria provided by the former
Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) (2009) as part of the south east
Queensland (SEQ) koala habitat mapping project (Figure 8). The State Planning Policy 2/10: Koala
Conservation in South East Queensland Koala Habitat Values Map 2010 indicated that all parts of the
Investigation Area that support Eucalypt forest were koala habitat. The majority of koala habitat was
described as medium value ‘bushland’ and ‘suitable for rehabilitation’, with some substantial areas of low
value bushland and suitable for rehabilitation habitat also present. A number of high value habitat areas
are scattered through the Investigation Area, with the only large area located in Petrie (Amcor Site) at the
far western end of the corridor.
Koala records maintained by the DERM for the locality were provided by MBRC (Figure 9). These confirmed
that koalas were widespread in the Investigation Area. A visual inspection of data showed that koala
records were biased towards areas of human presence, such as along roads and the boundaries of
properties that abut bushland, a finding that was typical of community- based surveys reflecting the
locations in which they were undertaken (e.g. Harris and Goldingay 2003). This indicated it was likely that
there were areas of bushland within the Investigation Area that did not produce records, even though
koalas were present. In turn, this caused the value of such areas to be under-estimated according to the
mapping criteria of DERM (2009).
For this reason, areas of low and medium quality bushland (suggesting they may not have produced koala
records at the time of mapping) required further investigation to determine whether koalas were indeed
present. If koalas were present, this justified mapped areas to be upgraded to a higher quality category.
2.1.2 Assessing and updating koala habitat mapping
Fieldwork was conducted by SMEC as part of the development of this KAP using the methods followed by
the DERM (2009) to:
Determine whether suitable habitat was present in mapped habitat units;
Update the koala habitat mapping based on updated location records (i.e. assign a higher map class if
evidence of koala use was found where previously there was none 3); and
Assess koala habitat values based on tree species strike rates and extent of use.
3
This could only be applied to habitat patches within 500m of the rail corridor due to the availability of data on
previous koala records, except for patches mapped as “low” quality as these by definition had no records available at
the time of mapping.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 21Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 22
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 23
This fieldwork demonstrated that the koala was widespread in the areas within and surrounding the
Investigation Area as activity was found at all sites investigated (Figure 10). This included habitat patches for
which there were no previous koala records, enabling the koala habitat map to be updated in accordance with
the recommendations of DERM (2009). Significantly, evidence of koalas were found in all six areas of low
quality habitat and therefore these areas were revised to medium value habitat. The common feature of these
six areas was the presence of Queensland Blue Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis), Broad-leaved Paperbark
(Melaleuca quinquenervia) and associated floodplain species (Table 1). Some areas previously mapped as low
or medium value habitat were found not to support koala habitat at all (e.g. Acacia regrowth, Swamp Oak
(Casuarina glauca) Forest, exotic grassland). These areas, which occurred within the urban footprint, were
removed from the mapping shown in Figure 11. While every effort was made to verify habitat boundaries in
the field, time constraints prevented a full account being realised. It was not possible to verify all koala habitat
polygons shown in Figure 11 due to time constraints or lack of availability of koala records >500m from the rail
corridor. The fieldwork results suggested that all areas identified as bushland vegetation on the DEHP Koala
Habitat Values Map should be regarded as either medium to high quality habitat.
The qualitative analysis of koala habitat values based on tree strike rates and pellet counts revealed a slightly
different picture to that given by in the DERM (2009) mapping criteria. Based on this fieldwork, it was possible
to provide some refinement to the updated DERM koala habitat map for the 24 polygons for which field data
were available (Figure 11). This analysis indicated that there were no areas of low koala activity in the
Investigation Area (Table 1), based on the criteria of Phillips and Callaghan (2011). Four sites were classified as
medium value habitat, with all remaining sites classified as high activity sites (Table 1, Figure 12). Overall, the
Investigation Area was considered high quality koala habitat. It appeared that koalas have some difficulty in
maintaining higher densities in more isolated habitat patches. It was not clear whether this was due to
isolation per se and therefore symptomatic of inefficient space use, or whether there was something intrinsic
to those habitat areas that made them low quality. Irrespective of the reason behind this finding, it was clear
that the large remnants and remnants nearer other bushland areas, were of the highest value to the local
koala population.
2.1.3 Tree species preferences
Many tree species were widely encountered throughout the Investigation Area and sampled in sufficient
numbers to assess their importance to the koala. Three tree species (E. tereticornis, Northern Grey Ironbark (E.
siderophloia), Scribbly Gum (E. haemastoma)) were encountered at many sites. More than 80% of E.
haemastoma and E. tereticornis had at least one koala pellet beneath them, whereas the strike rate was 67%
for E. siderophloia. Moreover, greater than 28% of these species had 10 or more koala pellets beneath them
(Table 1). E. tereticornis and E. siderophloia were generally encountered on alluvial plains, whereas E.
haemostoma mainly occurred on elevated land and slopes. Spotted Gum (Corymbia citriodora) also had a high
proportion of trees with pellets, but it was only encountered at two sites (Table 1). Flooded Gum (E. grandis),
Tallowwood (E. microcorys) and Small-fruited Grey Gum (E. propinqua) were restricted in occurrence and were
only represented by a few individual trees. These species also showed a high level of koala activity (Table 1).
All other tree species were used by the koala less frequently or were poorly represented in the Investigation
Area.
Monitoring data from KTMP1 indicate that koalas were using a variety of native and non-native tree species
throughout the rail corridor. E. tereticornis was the species most commonly used by koalas, with around one
third (35%) of all radio monitored koalas located in this species. While this data indicated preferred resting
trees, it was likely that this species was also one of the preferred food tree species for the local koalas. The
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 24species of tree used by koalas was also a reflection of the trees that were available on site – for example, while
E.tereticornis was present along the entire rail corridor, E. grandis was mostly confined to the Amcor polygon.
The other most commonly used species included Narrow-leaved Scribbly Gum (E. racemosa) (20%), E.
siderophloia (12%) and E. grandis (7%) and M.quinquenervia (7%).
The tree usage documented in the Investigation Area was consistent with the koala’s established tree
preferences in SEQ (DERM 2008). This locally collated information was of value for the targeting of offset sites
(i.e. offset sites should preferentially have the capacity to regenerate regional ecosystems dominated by these
species –RE 12.3.6; RE 12.3.11; RE 12.5.3).
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 25Table 1: Sites used in the field investigation of koala habitat utilisation in the Investigation Area. See Figure 12 for site locations.
Mq = Melaleuca quinquenervia; Cc = Corymbia citriodora; Ci = C. intermedia; Ct = C. tessellaris; Cg = Casuarina glauca; Cs = Callistemon
salignus; Er = Eucalyptus racemosa; Es = E. siderophloia; Et = E. tereticornis; Ls = Lophostemon suaveolens; P = Pinus sp.
Dominant
Species
Sit No. % Trees with Total DERM Revised DERM Site
e Description Trees Pellets Pellets Mapping Mapping Quality Slope Class 1 2 3
M. quinquenervia open forest with M
1 emergent eucalypts 26 86.7 190 L M H Slight q Et Ls
M
2 Eucalypt open forest with paperbark 26 86.7 463 L M H Nil q Et Es
3 Eucalypt open forest 21 70.0 472 M M H Moderate Ls Es Et
4 Eucalypt open forest 18 60.0 193 M M H Moderate Es Ci Mq
5 Eucalypt open forest 24 80.0 473 L M H Nil Et Es Mq
M. quinquenervia open forest with M
6 emergent eucalypts 8 26.7 45 L M M Nil q Et Es
7 Eucalypt open forest 20 66.7 392 H H H Moderate Es Et Ls
8 Eucalypt open forest 19 63.3 349 H H H Steep Er Es Ci
9 Eucalypt open forest with paperbark 8 26.7 73 L M M Nil Et Es Mq
Eucalypt open forest and open M
10 paperbark forest 12 40.0 79 L M H Slight q Et Es
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 2611 Eucalypt open forest with paperbark 8 26.7 15 L M M Nil Et Es Ci
M. quinquenervia open forest with M
12 emergent eucalypts 22 73.3 142 M M H Slight q Et Es
M. quinquenervia open forest with M
13 emergent eucalypts 8 26.7 76 H H M Slight q Et Es
14 Eucalypt open forest 25 83.3 136 M H H Slight Er Ci Es
15 Eucalypt open forest 21 70.0 203 H H H Slight Er Ci Ls
16 Eucalypt open forest 23 76.7 333 M H H Steep Et Ls Ci
17 Disturbed Eucalypt open forest 26 86.7 346 H H H Moderate Er Ci Es
18 Eucalypt open forest with paperbark 16 53.3 139 M M H Slight P Er Mq
M E
19 Eucalypt open forest with paperbark 14 46.7 56 M/L H/M H Slight q Ls race
M. quinquenervia open forest with M
20 emergent eucalypts 11 36.7 37 M M H Nil q Et Cg
21 Spotted gum open forest 14 46.7 130 ? ? H Mod Ci Ct Es
22 Spotted gum open forest 20 66.7 304 H H H Mod Cc Ci Es
23 Parkland 15 93.8 968 H Mod Et P Cs
C24 Reserve 23 76.7 785 L M H Mod Et Ci Es
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 27Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 28
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 29
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 30
1.4 Defining areas of significance
Koala activity was widespread across the Investigation Area. Analysis of the viability of the koala population
in the KTMP monitoring polygons suggested that the population was under considerable stress due to the
loss of habitat, isolation and especially elevated mortality rates due to wild dog attack. Therefore, all koala
habitat areas in these monitoring polygons area were important to the viability of the local koala
population.
Notwithstanding, larger habitat patches were more important than smaller patches because they were
more likely to support entire home-ranges, reducing the need to traverse cleared areas or enter residential
areas. Moreover, larger patches were considered more likely to support many koalas, enabling social
behaviour (e.g. mate access) to be facilitated. In this respect remnant patches around the Amcor Site, the
Chelsea Street Reserve and habitat patches along Freshwater Creek and Saltwater Creek were of greatest
importance. Smaller patches that required more frequent and extensive movements exposed koalas to
increased chance of vehicle strike and domestic dog attack, and exposure to higher levels of stress that
were likely to be expressed in a greater incidence of disease, though not higher wild dog predation rates as
was expected. Despite this concern, smaller habitat patches that were close to other areas of bushland
were important because each patch could be used as part of a home-range area and because they provide
movement habitat that had a low risk compared to more isolated patches.
Because koala habitat in the monitoring polygons was very fragmented, areas of habitat linking remnant
patches were important. The local creek systems played an important role because they provided
connectivity and were likely to be excluded from future urban development. Similarly, low-lying habitat
along the landward margins of Hayes Inlet was unlikely to be used for future development. These areas
could support Queensland blue gum, which was found to be one of the most important food trees in the
Investigation Area. Thus, the margins of Hayes Inlet provided habitat that supported a range of functions
(food, movement and shelter) for koalas.
Assigning a hierarchy of significance to different habitat patches will be useful to prioritise management
efforts according to available social and economic resources. Predictably, these habitats and corridors
largely correlate with the areas of state biodiversity significance shown by the Southeast Queensland
Biodiversity Planning Assessment (Figures 6 and 13). It should be remembered that the viability of the local
koala population was and remains precarious and ultimately, all areas of remaining habitat should be
considered important in relation to the persistence of the koala in the locality.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 31Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 32
3 MANAGING PROJECT IMPACTS THROUGH MONITORING,
TRANSLOCATION AND A VACCINE TRIAL
The DEHP and the DTMR established the MoA for government supported transport infrastructure within
the SEQKPA. The MoA established the responsibilities of both parties to ensure that planning, design,
construction and maintenance of government supported transport infrastructure in the SEQKPA is carried
out in a way that seeks to avoid, then minimise and as a last resort offset, adverse impacts to koalas and
koala habitat.
With the high concentration of koalas in the Project area, DTMR developed a monitoring program as a
strategy for meeting its legislative and MoA obligations to minimise Project impact on koalas. Knowing the
location of koalas through electronic monitoring in addition to fauna spotters greatly reduced the
likelihood of injury or death during clearing and allowed clearing to be programmed around known
locations. It also minimised the likelihood of koalas being isolated without fauna corridors to allow
movement away from clearing areas. In circumstances where a koala was encountered, it was and still is a
legislative requirement that clearing must cease until the koala moves on of its own accord. It is illegal to
interfere with koalas without permission granted by the DEHP, which was only considered if the koalas
were under immediate threat. Monitoring therefore not only reduced the likelihood of injury or death but
when used appropriately, potentially reduced project delays and costs.
DTMR’s strategy for managing Project impacts on koala populations included 2 proactive steps:
1) translocating koalas where necessary and expanding monitoring to include translocation receive sites
2) DTMR enabled the University of the Sunshine Coast (previously by the Queensland University of
Technology) to trial a a Chlamydia vaccine on the local Koala population. The KTMP1, KTMP2, KTrans and
the Koala Chlamydia Vaccine Trial were delivered under a number of regulatory approvals: Scientific
Purposes Permits (SPPs), issued under the provisions of the Nature Conservation Act 1992, and Animal
Ethics Committee (AEC) approvals were issued under the provisions of the Animal Care and Protection Act
2001. Details of these approvals are provided in Table 2.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 3334
Table 2: Details of the Scientific Purposes Permit and Animal Ethics Committee approvals
Approval Issuing Valid from Details
authority
SPP DEHP 14 July 2012 to Issued for the monitoring and health
WISP11525212 13 July 2015 check of 150 koalas along with a
Chlamydia vaccine trial of 25 koalas
DEHP 8 October 2013 Re-issued for the monitoring and health
to 13 July 2015 check of 400 koalas along with a
Chlamydia vaccine trial of 25 koalas
AEC CA DEEDI 1 May 2012 to Assessing, monitoring and management
2012/03/597 Animal 30 April 2015 of disease in up to 150 koalas inhabiting
Ethics the Project, including the efficacy of the
Chlamydia vaccine in a koala population
SPP DEHP 1 November Translocation of koalas to up to four sites
WISP13661313 2013 to involving up to 40 koalas at each site
31 October 2018
AEC CA DAFF 1 October 2013 Investigation of in situ and ex situ
2013/09/719 Animal to 30 September management options for up to 450 koalas
Ethics 2016 impacted by the loss of habitat for the
Project
3.1 Monitoring program
3.1.1 Background
Endeavour Veterinary Ecology (EVE) were engaged by the DTMR to conduct a Koala Tagging and
Monitoring Program for the Project. This initial program, known as KTMP1, involved surveying
koala habitat along and adjacent to the proposed rail link corridor, and the capture and
telemetric monitoring of all koalas found. KTMP1 provided a standardised veterinary health
check and ongoing monitoring to determine movement patterns and home ranges. The
program was to occur over a 12-month period prior to construction and then a new monitoring
program was to be undertaken by the contractor for the Project. DTMR decided to continue the
program, which then became known as KTMP2 and included:
Koala capture for identification/tagging and health check;
Koala transport after capture for health check;
Health check;
Treatment and recording of sick or injured koalas;
Necropsy examination of koalas;
Koala identification and tagging;
Telemetry devices;
Release of koalas back into the wild; and
Monitoring of koalas after release
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 3435
3.1.2 Koala capture for identification/tagging and health check
When a koala was located, an assessment was made on the suitability of the tree for conducting
a safe capture. Two primary capture methods were used:
1. Traditional capture: an experienced koala-capture and tree climber ascended either the tree
in which the koala was located, or an adjacent tree. One or two experienced koala handlers
were close to the base of the koala tree to capture the koala on its descent and to assist the
climber. When the climber had reached a suitable position in the tree, the koala was
encouraged to descend by holding or waving a flag or “halo”. When the koala descended to
a level that was reachable by ground personnel, the koala was manually restrained and then
placed into a transport cage and covered with a towel or cage cover.
2. Trap capture: a koala trap was set up at the base of the tree. When the trap was triggered,
an SMS message was sent to the personnel monitoring the trap, who then retrieved the
koala.
The decision about which method to use was made by the koala capture team leader and
influenced by:
The suitability of the tree for climbing;
The prevailing weather conditions;
The presence of dependent young;
Any other factor that may have affected the safety to koalas and personnel; and
The suitability of the tree for trapping
If a koala was moribund, or otherwise on the ground, a simple manual capture was conducted.
3.1.3 Koala transport after capture for health check
After capture, koalas were placed into purpose-built koala transport cages and transported to
the site that veterinary examinations were conducted on the day. This was at one of two
locations: in the field, using a mobile field veterinary unit; or at the EVE veterinary facilities at
Toorbul.
Koalas were transported in an enclosed, air-conditioned vehicle. When a koala was required to
be in a transport cage for more than 30 minutes, suitable browse was provided.
3.1.4 Health check
In accordance with SPP WISP11525212, monitored Project koalas were given a veterinary health
examination under general anaesthesia at six monthly intervals. Veterinary examinations were
usually conducted at the EVE veterinary facilities at Toorbul.
3.1.5 Sick or injured koalas
All koalas received thorough and standardised veterinary examinations on initial capture. If
found to be healthy, koalas were tagged, released and recaptured for updated health checks.
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 3536
Any koalas found to be suffering from significant clinical injury or illness (conditions warranting
veterinary treatment) were:
Referred to the Australia Zoo Wildlife Hospital for treatment. When the Australia Zoo
Wildlife Hospital was unable to admit koalas, EVE provided limited in-patient care at the
Toorbul facility; or
Treated by EVE; or
Euthanised by intravenous barbiturate overdose, when treatment was unlikely to be
successful and euthanasia was warranted on humane grounds
3.1.6 Necropsy examination of koalas
Project koalas that died or were euthanised over the course of the KTMP2 were subjected to a
thorough necropsy examination by EVE. Exceptions were when the carcass had been predated
upon. Necropsy examination included the following:
Gross necropsy examination;
Histopathologic examination of tissues when necessary, to provide or refine a diagnosis of
cause of death;
Microbiological analysis of swabs or tissues when necessary, to support or refine a diagnosis
of cause of death or contributing factors; and
Samples for support of approved scientific research (University-based) – as required
3.1.7 Koala identification and tagging
All koalas in the KTMP2 were uniquely identified by:
Name;
A uniquely numbered ear-tag applied under general anaesthesia during veterinary
examination;
Microchip (RFID Tag) inserted under general anaesthesia during veterinary examination;
Telemetry collar applied under general anaesthesia during veterinary examination; and/or
Telemetry anklet(s) applied under general anaesthesia during veterinary examination
3.1.8 Telemetry devices
All koalas in the monitoring program were fitted with (usually) two telemetry devices. This
allowed for redundancy in the event of a device failure or drop-off, which was a relatively
common event. Telemetry devices were fitted in a way that they could come off in the event of
entrapment or ensnarement in vines, branches etc., so that koalas did not become fatally
entrapped by the device. This meant that device drop-off was an unavoidable consequence of
appropriately applied devices.
Two types of telemetry devices were used to monitor koalas being:
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 3637
Conventional radio-frequency (VHF) transmitters in either anklet or collar configurations;
and
Bio-telemetry collars, which provided near-real-time positional and activity data (subject to
availability)
Standard GPS and “remote” download GPS collars available were not suitable for koalas and/or
did not meet requirements for health and mortality monitoring.
3.1.9 Release of koalas back into the wild
In accordance with Section 15 of the Code of Practice: Care of orphaned, sick or injured
protected animals, which was approved under the Nature Conservation Act 1992, if the location
where wildlife was found is known and is suitable for the release, then the wildlife must be
released there. A suitable environment for release is one that:
Contains appropriate habitat, shelter, water and food resources;
Is free of immediate hazards or risks (i.e. not a roadside)l; and
Is known not to be subject to imminent land-clearing or development
Section 15 further states that if the original site of capture is not appropriate, then the animal
must be released as close to the original site as possible.
In the case of koalas that were included in the translocation program, the conditions of release
were detailed in the application, which was approved through SPP WISP13661313.
“At the discretion of the Chief Investigator, a koala may be held in captivity for a period of 7 to
14 days to dull home range fidelity instincts prior to translocation, if considered warranted.
Translocated koalas were released into the recipient habitat during a period of the day in which
the temperature does not exceed 28 degrees Celsius. Koalas were not released during extremes
of weather (excessive heat, storm, high wind).
3.1.10 Monitoring of koalas after release
Each koala was monitored by a team of two field personnel using the schedule in Table 3.
Table 3: Schedule of koala monitoring program
Collar type Remote Field Field Field Monitoring Week 3
Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring onwards
1 week 2nd week
Bio- Daily - Every 2 day Twice/wk Fortnightly
telemetry ongoing
VHF N/A Every day Every 2 day Twice weekly
Moreton Bay Rail Project – Koala Action Plan 37You can also read
