PACIFIC HIGHWAY UPGRADE: WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA - Sections 3 to 8 Green-thighed Frog Construction Monitoring: Year
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
PACIFIC HIGHWAY UPGRADE: WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA Sections 3 to 8 Green-thighed Frog Construction Monitoring: Year 1 November 2018
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Commercial in Confidence
This ecological report is copyright to Lewis Ecological Surveys (LES) and its licensed use is restricted explicitly to the RMS. Beyond this, persons, organisations and
government may only use information contained within this report following written consent by LES. The report must not be provided to any third party without the written
consent of LES who reserves all legal rights and remedies regarding any infringement of its rights with respect to this report. Lewis Ecological Surveys acknowledges that
the report will be made publicly available on the internet in accordance with the Ministers Conditions of Approval.
Disclaimer
The client (RMS) may only use this document for the purposes for which it was commissioned. This report relies upon data, surveys, measurements and results based on
a short-term objective study in response to a Lewis Ecological Surveys advising RMS – PacificComplete and their representatives (Amanda Leonard, Chris Greenaway, Mat
Neeson). Although conclusions have been based on the available data at that time, some professional judgement has been applied in reaching these conclusions due to
the temporal limitations arising from the dynamic nature of available information, legislation, schedules, individual species and associated habitats. Every attempt has been
made to ensure the accuracy and objectivity of the report’s findings, conclusions and recommendations. Lewis Ecological Surveys does not accept responsibility for its use
beyond the scope of works.
………………………….
Ben Lewis
(B. Applied Science Hons)
…6th November 2018………
Date
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Ben Lewis (Lewis Ecological Surveys) – Field Surveys, Report Author and Report Review.
Adrian Vanesse (Geoview) – GIS and map production.
Simon Wilson (Pacific Complete) – Project Management.
Mat Neeson (Pacific Complete) – Project Management.
Shayne Walker (Roads and Maritime Services) - Review
Photography - Lewis Ecological Surveys © else stated
Title Page – Green-thighed Frog from BACI Site 9A.
Report to be cited as: Lewis, B.D. (2018). Woolgoolga to Ballina: Green-thighed Frog Monitoring for Sections 3 to 8: Year 1. Report
prepared for Roads and Maritime Services and Pacific Complete by Lewis Ecological Surveys. ©
Project Number: 2921617
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page i
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Document Control:
Date Status No. Format Dispatched Client Client Contact
Copies
11/05/2018 Vers 1 1 PDF Via email Pacific Complete Simon Wilson
11/05/2018 Vers 1 1 PDF Via email Roads and Maritime Services Scott Lawrence
17/08/2018 Vers 2 1 PDF Via email Pacific Complete Simon Wilson
17/08/2018 Vers 2 1 PDF Via email Roads and Maritime Services Scott Lawrence
06/11/2018 Vers 3 1 PDF Via email Pacific Complete Simon Wilson
06/11/2018 Vers 3 1 PDF Via email Roads and Maritime Services Scott Lawrence
Revision History
Date Status Author Reviewer Organisation
18/05/2018 Vers 1 Ben Lewis Shayne Walker Roads and Maritime Services
18/05/2018 Vers 1 Ben Lewis Simon Wilson Roads and Maritime Services
06/11/2018 Vers 2 Ben Lewis Simon Wilson Roads and Maritime Services
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page ii
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND BACKGROUND TO THIS MONITORING .....................................................................................1
1.2 UPDATES AND ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM YEAR 1 MONITORING ....................................................................2
1.3 SUBJECT SPECIES – GREEN-THIGHED FROG (LITORIA BREVIPALMATA) ............................................................................2
1.3.1 Description ................................................................................................................................2
1.3.2 Distribution ...............................................................................................................................2
1.3.3 Habitat and Ecology ...................................................................................................................2
2.0 SURVEY METHODS ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 SITE SELECTION ........................................................................................................................................3
2.2 TIMING OF SURVEYS ....................................................................................................................................3
2.3 ABIOTIC DATA ...........................................................................................................................................6
3.0 MONITORING RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................................ 7
3.1 FROG SURVEYS .........................................................................................................................................7
3.1.2 Stage 1 Surveys - Calling Intensity and Spotlighting ....................................................................7
3.1.3 Stage 2 Surveys – Post Breeding Counts of Tadpoles and Froglets .............................................. 10
3.2 SEASONAL RAINFALL AND ASSOCIATED SURVEY CONDITIONS .................................................................................... 10
4.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................................................ 11
5.0 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ................................................................................................. 12
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 16
7.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................................................. 17
8.0 APPENDIX A – GREEN-THIGHED FROG SURVEY SUMMARY DATA & SEASONAL RAINFALL CONDITIONS .................... 19
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page iii
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1. Summary of the Green-thighed Frog surveys for BACI Sites 6-10. ............................................................................................ 9
Table 5-1. Performance indicators and corrective actions from the Threatened Frog Species Management Plan (RMS 2015). .............. 13
Table 6-1. W2B Year 1 Sections 3-8 recommendations and RMS responses. .......................................................................................... 16
Table A1. Summary of Green-thighed Frog surveys in Sections 3-7: Year 1 (2017). ................................................................................ 19
Table A2. Rainfall recorded between October 2016 and May 2017 from New Italy station (058097) (BoM 2017). ................................... 20
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1a. Locations of Green-thighed Frog BACI Sites 1-7 between ch.11800–40000. ......................................................................... 4
Figure 2-1b. Locations of Green-thighed Frog Control and Impact sites between ch. 57500–118500........................................................ 5
Figure 3-1. The number of calling male Green-thighed Frogs between the baseline surveys and during construction for Year 1 and Year
2 monitoring. ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 3-2. The number of Green-thighed Frogs observed between the baseline surveys (shaded) and Year 1 data compiled by Lewis
(2015). .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1-1. Green-thighed Frog (ad + juv). ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
Plate 3-1. Green-thighed Frogs recorded from Site 9B adjacent to ch. 111500 with male (left) calling and female (right). ........................ 8
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page iv
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Executive Summary
Year 1 monitoring for the Green-thighed Frog (Litoria brevipalmata) was performed at five paired
BACI (Before-After-Control-Impact) sites (n=10) located in Sections 3 (ch.37400; 64700), 6 (ch.
102500) and 7 (ch. 118500) of the Woolgoolga to Ballina Upgrade. Surveys were initially triggered
by localised thunderstorm activity in the Tyndale, Tabbimoble and New Italy on the 6th January
which delivered around 75 mm of rain across sites 8-10. Follow up tropical low pressure systems
in March delivered well in excess of 100mm rainfall events and provided additional opportunities
to survey these sites as well as surveys Site 6 and 7 located around Grafton Airport and Glenugie
State Forest.
The sampling regime was consistent with the Threatened Frog Management Plan (RMS 2015) in
that breeding or calling surveys were undertaken during a period of intense rainfall and this was
followed up by post breeding surveys of the ponds 41-50 days later to determine the overall
success of the breeding event. During the field surveys, checks as to the presence of temporary
frog fencing were performed and notes taken with regard to its integrity and extent relevant to the
Threatened Frog Management Plan.
Green-thighed Frogs were recorded at 6 (40%) of the 10 sites and specifically at Site 6B, 7A, 7B,
8B, 9A and 9B. Sampling could not be undertaken at Site 6A (ch. 35200) due to ongoing access
constraints. Between 6-18 males were heard calling at both impact and control sites whilst the post
breeding surveys performed in late February and again in late April recorded froglets at three sites
around Grafton airport and Glenugie State Forest. The earlier post breeding surveys at Sites 8-10
were performed in February and found no sign of breeding success and all ponds had dried out.
Further additional sampling opportunities would benefit the monitoring program.
The implications of the findings and how these compare with performance measures outlined in
the Threatened Frog Management Plan (RMS 2015) are discussed.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page v
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Overview and Background to this Monitoring
The Woolgoolga to Ballina Pacific Highway Upgrade comprises approximately 155 km of highway to achieve a four-lane
divided road extending north of Woolgoolga at the northern extent of Sapphire to Woolgoolga Upgrade to south of Ballina
where it ties into the southern extent of the Ballina bypass. The project includes grade separated interchanges, service
roads and upgrades to local road connections and has the potential to be staged in 11 sections. The State Minister for
Planning and Environment approved the project on 24th June 2014. On 14th August 2014, the Federal Minister for the
Environment Greg Hunt approved the project in accordance with Part 9 of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity
Conservation Act (1999).
In order to enable commencement of construction in mid-2015, some key preconstruction survey tasks were to be
undertaken as a priority. During preconstruction, baseline and targeted surveys of threatened species will enable the
establishment of the monitoring program to be implemented on an ongoing basis to help manage and mitigate any
potential impacts of the project on threatened species. Requirements for monitoring and mitigation measures throughout
various stages of the project are outlined in a series of threatened species management plans.
The Threatened Frog Management Plan (RMS 2015) addresses the impacts of the upgrade and proposed mitigation on
a number of threatened frog species including the Wallum Sedge Frog (Litoria olongburensis), Giant Barred Frog
(Mixophyes iteratus) and Green-thighed Frog (Litoria brevipalmata). This management plan identifies both areas of
known and potential habitat throughout the Project corridor and proposes a number of management actions to ensure
the long-term survival of these species in the area of the project. In order to gauge the performance of these management
actions a pre-construction baseline monitoring survey was undertaken by Lewis Ecological Surveys in February, March
and April 2015 (Lewis 2015). The results of this survey would then provide a comparable data set from which successive
monitoring events could be compared.
With construction commencing in Sections 3, 6 and 7 in mid 2016, PacificComplete engaged Lewis Ecological Surveys
in December 2016 to implement Year 1 during construction surveys of the five paired sites (n=10) in Sections 3, 6 and 7.
The following reports on these findings.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 1
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
1.2 Updates and Adoption of Recommendations from Year 1 Monitoring
The following recommendations were adopted following Year 1 monitoring in the southern Sections 1 and 2 for
Woolgoolga to Ballina and are considered applicable to this monitoring event:
1. Update aspects of the Threatened Frog Species Management Plan (RMS 2015) and with that the following
changes:
a. The frog counts be the total number of Green-thighed Frogs recorded during Stage 1 surveys.
1.3 Subject Species – Green-thighed Frog (Litoria brevipalmata)
1.3.1 Description
The Green-thighed Frog is a small to medium sized (max. 47 mm) hylid frog (Barker et al. 1995; Cogger 1995; Murphy
and Turnbill 1999; Lemckert et al. 2006). It is a relatively distinct species with a prominent white upper lip, armpits and
groin marked in lime green with black markings (Barker et al. 1995; Lemckert et al. 2006).
Plate 1-1. Green-thighed Frog (ad + juv).
1.3.2 Distribution
The Green-thighed Frog is distributed in coastal
and sub coastal areas from near Bundaberg
(Cordalba) in the north to Ourimbah (i.e. central
coast NSW) in the south (Barker et al. 1995;
Lemckert et al. 2006). Despite this relatively wide
distribution, it is known from few areas (see
Ehmann 1997).
1.3.3 Habitat and Ecology
The cryptic habits of the Green-thighed Frog
ensured it remained unknown to science until 1972
(Tyler et al. 1972). The main habitat requirement
of this species is warm temperate lowland forest,
although more recent records have indicated other habitat types including dry sclerophyll forest, heathland and swamp
forest are used (Nattrass and Ingram 1993; Lemckert 1999; Murphy and Turnbill 1999; Lewis 2000; Lewis 2006). The
Green-thighed Frog is most often detected during breeding events between October and April when males congregate
around flooded depressions and call from either the ground or low fallen branches or vegetation (Barker et al. 1995;
Ehmann 1997; Lemckert et al. 2006). Typically, calling events occur when the breeding site has received at least 75 mm
in 24 hours or around 150 mm over a 72 hour period (B. Lewis unpublished data).
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 2
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
2.0 SURVEY METHODS
Field surveys were performed in accordance with the Threatened Frog Species Management Plan (RMS 2015). The
following details the areas surveyed along with the timing of field surveys and how the data were treated or analysed.
2.1 Site Selection
The location of BACI sites 6 to 10 in Section 3-7 were already identified from a selection of known Green-thighed Frog
sites (Lewis 2015). Their distribution across the study area is shown in Figure 2-1ab.
2.2 Timing of Surveys
Weather patterns were constantly monitored between December 2016 through to May 2017 for the suitability of
implementing field surveys during or immediately after a rainfall event delivering >75 mm in 24 hours, or alternatively 150
mm over 72 hours (Table A1). Thunderstorm activity and the development of low pressure systems including ex tropical
cyclone Debbie enabled stage one sampling to occur on the 6th and 7th January, 16th to 18th March and on the 31st March
2017. Most of the sampling was confined to the 6th and 7th of January for Sites 8-10 and mid March for Sites 6-7. Some
follow up cursory surveys in response to ongoing rainfall were performed in mid March and late March to enable further
distillation on the data being collected.
During stage one calling surveys, each site was visited and an initial five minute listening survey was performed to identify
calling individuals. This was followed by a search of any flooded habitat to visually identify any non-calling individuals
present in and around the flooded areas. At each site, the following were recorded: time at start and end of survey for
each survey site, conditions during the survey (including temperature, humidity, cloud cover, relative wind intensity and
rainfall) and species of frogs calling (see Section 2.3).
The second round or post breeding surveys were used to measure the breeding success at each site and these were
performed on the 26th February and 27th April or around 41-50 days after the potential breeding event. A slightly shorter
interval was used to account for the warmer air temperatures and the ephemeral nature of ponds at most of the sites.
During the post breeding surveys, a fine scale mesh net (400 mm diameter) was used to sweep any of the residual water
body. In an attempt to standardise this method, a minimum of 10 sweeps was undertaken per 25m2 of water body. Any
tadpoles captured were examined to determine if they were hylids representative of Green-thighed Frog, and if so, a
sample was taken for further identification. The bank area within 5-10 m was also traversed to visually search for
metamorphosed froglets over a set 20 minutes per site and the number of frogs recorded.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 3
WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Figure 2-1a. Locations of Green-thighed Frog BACI Sites 1-7 between ch.11800–40000.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 4WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Figure 2-1b. Locations of Green-thighed Frog Control and Impact sites between ch. 57500–118500.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 5WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
2.3 Abiotic Data
The following abiotic variables were collected during the survey:
Air temperature (°C) measured with a thermometer at the start and finish of the frog survey and averaged;
Relative humidity (%) measured with wet/dry bulb thermometer at the start and finish of the frog survey and
averaged;
Prevailing cloud cover was expressed as a percentage (%) coverage of the sky;
Wind speed measured using a subjective scale (0 = no wind, 1 = light rustles of leaves on trees, 2 = leaves and
branches moving and 3 = whole canopy moving); and
Rain fall was also measured in a subjective scale (0 = no rain in past 24 hours, 1 = rain within 24 hours and 2 =
rain during survey).
Seasonal rainfall data was also collated for the period between September 2015 and July 2016 to assess when
the surveys were performed and how they compared to other rainfall events within the perceived breeding
period. The data were collated from Grafton Airport (058161).
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 6WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
3.0 MONITORING RESULTS
3.1 Frog Surveys
3.1.2 Stage 1 Surveys - Calling Intensity and Spotlighting
Green-thighed Frogs were recorded at 6 (60%) of the 10 sites and were absent from Site 8A (Tyndale Crown ch. 64700),
10A (Tabbimoble north ch. 118500) and 10B (Glencoe Road ch. 114000; Figure 3-1). No surveys were conducted at Site
6A due to access restrictions.
Frogs were recorded from two (20%) of the impact sites and from four (80%) of the control sites. Frogs comprised both
calling and non-calling males as well as female frogs (Table 3-1). Amplecting or mating frogs were recorded from Site 6B
and 7A on the 17th of March whilst an amplecting pair of frogs were recorded from Site 9B on the 7th January 2017. Count
sizes were highly variable with up to 18 individuals but generally in the order of 1-10 individuals.
2015 Baseline Calling Males 2017 Year 1 Calling Males
20 Calling/chorusing Surveys
Number of calling male frogs
15
10
5
0
6A (35200) 6B (38000) 7A (37400) 7B (35000) 8A (64700) 8B (57500) 9A (102500) 9B (111500) 10A 10B
(118500) (114000)
BACI Monitoring Site and Adjacent Chainage
Figure 3-1. The number of calling male Green-thighed Frogs between the baseline surveys and during construction for
Year 1 and Year 2 monitoring.
2015 Baseline Frogs Observed 2017 Year 1 Frogs Observed
50 Spotlighting
Number of frogs observed
40
30
20
10
0
6A (35200) 6B (38000) 7A (37400) 7B (35000) 8A (64700) 8B (57500) 9A (102500) 9B (111500) 10A 10B
(118500) (114000)
BACI Monitoring Site and Adjacent Chainage
Figure 3-2. The number of Green-thighed Frogs observed between the baseline surveys (shaded) and Year 1 data
compiled by Lewis (2015).
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 7WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Plate 3-1. Green-thighed Frogs recorded from Site 9B adjacent to ch. 111500 with male (left) calling and female (right).
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 8WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Table 3-1. Summary of the Green-thighed Frog surveys for BACI Sites 6-10.
Stage 1 – Calling/Breeding Surveys Stage 2 – Post Breeding Follow-up
Survey
BACI Site Date No. Calling No. Frogs Date SA Juv Tads Frog Management Mitigation Observed General Comments Presence of Green-
Males Spotlighted or Recorded thighed Frogs
(chorusing Confirmed in 2015
intensity)
6A (35200) No data No data No data No data No No No No access was permitted due to heritage No access permitted to this area. Likely to have successfully bred Yes
data data data investigations future access will be at this monitoring location given the results from the surrounding
investigated. sites.
6B (38000) Outside works footprint but close to Airport Site immediately adjacent to Airport Road which continuously Yes
17.03.2017 18 15 27.04.2017 0 23 0 Road. provides a good barometer of local Green-thighed Frog activity.
7A (37400) i. Temporary frog fencing recorded in the Potential breeding area is not well defined but numbers of frogs Yes
form of geo textile fabric. suggest this area as a ‘hotspot’ in 2015 (Lewis 2015).
ii. Clearing has extended to around 150 m
17.03.2017 12 14 27.04.2017 0 3 0 south of Old Six Mile Lane Road
7B (35000) Outside works footprint. Site logistically difficult to access during rainfall events. Frogs are No
likely to have congregated here either just before or after stage 1
17.03.2017 0 1 27.04.2017 0 4 0 surveys as successful breeding was recorded.
8A (64700) i. Geotextile fabric used as temporary frog Frogs at this site appear to vary their breeding location based on No
fence. extent of rainfall. Frogs have been heard calling from a number of
ii. Access road graded which has reduced locations including adjacent private property where access now
suitability to frogs based on past restricted.
7.1.2017 0 0 26.02.2017 0 0 0 observations.
8B (57500) Outside works footprint. Site is seasonally grazed by cattle. Frogs likely to vary their
calling breeding site depending on extent of rainfall. Breeding
suspected to have shifted around 300 m to north in drainage line
now that ephemeral ponds appear to dry rapidly within a few
7.1.2017 0 1 26.02.2017 0 0 0 weeks.
9A (102500) i. No frog fencing observed. Site was progressively cleared from February 2017 onwards. No
7.1.2017 8 8 ii. Surveys performed just prior to clearing Some frog fencing noted during later stage 2 surveys and in
26.02.2017 0 0 0 works. months thereafter.
9B (111500) Outside works footprint. Frogs are generally scattered throughout this section of Glenugie
7.1.2017 6 7 0 0 0 State Forest. Two breeding sites identified. Not really considered
26.02.2017 Year 1 during construction survey when nothing has changed.
10A (118500) i. No clearing works at present. Not really considered Year 1 during construction survey when Yes
7.1.2017 0 0 0 0 0
26.02.2017 nothing has changed.
10B (114000) 0 Outside works footprint Calling or breeding location are highly dependent on prevailing No
7.1.2017 0 0 0 0 rainfall conditions and are likely to select particular areas based
26.02.2017 on the rainfall event and associated runoff.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 9WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
3.1.3 Stage 2 Surveys – Post Breeding Counts of Tadpoles and Froglets
Tadpoles or juvenile frogs were recorded at 3 (30%) of the monitoring sites (Table 3-1). At Site 6B, 23 juvenile froglets
were recorded during post breeding surveys on the 27th April which equates to around 41 days from the initial Stage 1
survey in mid March. Neighbouring sites of 7A and 7B also recorded froglets with both treatments recording three and
four respectively.
Although no Green-thighed Frog tadpoles were captured during the standardised 10 sweeps, other species of tadpole
were identified including Broad-palmed Frog (Litoria latapalmata), Bleating Tree Frog (Litoria dentata), Tyler’s Tree Frog
(Litoria tyleri)and/or Perons Tree Frog (Litoria peronii) and some ground dwelling species, presumably Striped Marsh
Frog (Limnodynastes peroni) and Ornate Burrowing Frog (Platyplectrum ornatum). No froglets or tadpoles were recorded
at the northern sites of 8-10. Following the storm event on the 6th January, there was little follow up rain and all ponds
dried out over a number of weeks (Plate 3-2).
Plate 3-2. Breeding ponds at Site 10A (top left), 10B (top right), Site 9A (bottom left) and 9B (bottom right) during follow up
post breeding (stage 2 surveys) in late February.
3.2 Seasonal Rainfall and Associated Survey Conditions
Suitable seasonal conditions in the form of heavy rainfall events exceeding 50 mm in 24 hours or cumulative tallies
exceeding 150 mm in 72 hours occurred on a few occasions (Table A-2). Rainfall events exceeding 50 mm in 24 hours
occurred on the 3rd January (76 mm) and on a number of days in mid March (14th – 20th) with two very large 24 hour
events on the 19th March (248 mm) and 31st March (287 mm). Stage 1 sampling took place on the 6th into the 7th January
when just over 100 mm was recorded over a 48 hr period. Consequently, only some sporadic breeding may have occurred
over the broader area. Sampling in the south coincided with mid March rainfall events.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 10WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
4.0 DISCUSSION
Year 1 sampling recorded frogs from six of the nine sites sampled whilst Site 6A remains restricted access. The number
of sites that recorded frogs is lower than the baseline survey when apart from Site 8B (Pine Brush State Forest), frogs
were recorded at all monitoring sites. The explanation for this year to year variability probably relates more to the
prevailing conditions at the time surveys were conducted as habitat disturbance associated with construction had no yet
commenced (i.e. Site 10) or was irrelevant in the case of the control sites.
Opportunities to sample for the Green-thighed Frog in Year 1 became available in mid summer (early January) following
localised thunderstorm activity and again during early autumn (i.e. mid March) as part of multiple low pressure systems
moving across the study area including ex tropical cyclone Debbie. Based on 24 hour rainfall tallies, three potential
breeding events occurred over the study area in the 2016/17 season. In theory, surveys should have recorded Green-
thighed Frogs at all sites yet difficulties arise when trying to conduct surveys following the first suitable rainfall event.
Such an event may occur as a localised thunderstorm meaning some, but not all of the sites have received the required
rainfall, and in some cases this may extend to within site treatments. This is thought to have occurred at Sites 8-10 during
early January sampling when frogs were active and calling at both treatments at Site 9 (ch. 102000-112000) yet no frogs
were heard or seen at either Site 10 treatment (ch.114000-119000) located a further 5-7 km north. Predicting how
widespread such a rainfall event may be is difficult at this locality as the nearest Bureau of Meteorology station is located
nearby at New Italy (ch. 120000), however, it only updates daily at 0900 hrs but it does tend to provide a more accurate
indication of rainfall received then the neighbouring coast stations at Evans Head and Yamba which tend to receive far
greater amounts and create false survey triggers. Only the installation of site specific weather stations would alleviate
this and until such time, constant forecast updates and reviewing of BOM radar coverage will provide a coarse guide to
initiating a survey. Sampling at the southern sites and the reliance on the Bureau of Meteorology station at Grafton Airport
continues to prove more reliable for Sites 6 and 7.
Sampling Sites 6 and 7 in mid March proved effective with calling frogs and amplecting pairs in response to the hundreds
of millimetres. The fact that no calling frogs and only one individual was spotlighted at Site 7B probably reflects frogs
using a neighbouring location on this occasion or the frogs themselves holding off until the later low pressure system in
late March as a result of ex tropical cyclone Debbie. The difference between the two locations is not more than 5-6 km
yet the calling and breeding periods appear to have differed at Site 7 on this occasion. Multiple sampling events are
required to improve the accuracy of one off monitoring surveys.
Year 1 sampling coincided with construction works at Sites 7A, 8A and 9A. All three locations were found to contain
temporary frog fencing constructed from geo textile fabric and apart from some minor breaches it was considered
functional. How the data compares or performs against the prescriptions outlined in the Threatened Frog Management
Plan is outlined in the following section.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 11WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
5.0 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
A series of performance indicators and corrective actions have been outlined in Section 7.2.3 of the Threatened Frog
Species Management Plan (RMS 2015). This plan states that should it become clear that sites that were occupied prior
to road construction (i.e. established impact monitoring sites) have become unoccupied, or abundance (estimated using
the transect counts) has declined beyond the identified thresholds (i.e. 25%) relative to control/reference sites, corrective
actions must be implemented in accordance with those provided in Table 7-1.
Year 1 monitoring is mainly tied into the population monitoring component outlined in Table 5-1 as the culverts,
compensatory ponds and revegetation works are not yet complete. The performing factor for the population monitoring
is the number of male frogs during the Stage 1 survey, although recommendations in Lewis 2017 have allowed for this
to be updated to the number of frogs recorded. With this, the numbers or actual counts of frogs had more than doubled
at Site 6B as did calling males, declined sharply at Site 7A, down from 49 individuals to just 14 individuals yet they were
similarly down at the paired treatment from 25 individuals in the baseline survey to just one on this occasion. At Site 8A
(Tyndale Crown), frogs were absent compared to the one individual observed during the baseline survey. Conversely,
one individual was observed at the paired treatment Site 8B (Pine Brush State Forest) compared to no frogs during the
baseline survey. At Site 9A, there was a fourfold increase in the numbers of frogs and similarly, the paired treatment of
Site 9B recorded a seven fold increase. Site 10 recorded an absence of frogs from both treatments when the baseline
survey had recorded two and three individuals respectively.
The timing of the surveys and the variability of rainfall across the monitoring sites is thought to have had the greatest
influence in the Year 1 monitoring results. This was best illustrated at the northern sites where both greater calling intensity
and numbers of frogs were recorded at both Site 9 treatments yet several kilometres away at Site 10 no frogs were heard
or seen and neither had received any habitat disturbance associated with construction for the Upgrade.
Opportunities to investigate how effective some of the other frog mitigation tools including pre clearing surveys is not yet
available but should be forthcoming as part of Year 2 monitoring and reporting. As for other mitigation and associated
performance measures, they are similarly not relevant to Green-thighed Frog monitoring at this point in time. The
underpass structures themselves are not yet installed and still yet to receive frog fencing treatments. The compensatory
ponds should now be finalised so that is accords with the commitments identified in the TFMP, that being “where breeding
habitat will be directly impacted by the project or changed hydrological patterns have the potential to affect the suitability
of breeding habitat areas adjacent to the corridor”. As the ponds nor monitoring sites occur in riparian areas, the riparian
habitat revegetation parameters appear irrelevant at this time.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 12WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Table 5-1. Performance indicators and corrective actions from the Threatened Frog Species Management Plan (RMS 2015).
Triggers for corrective actions Corrective actions Relevance to Year 1 Results of Year 1 Green- Potential Contributing Factors Corrective Action Required
Green-thighed Frog thighed Frog Monitoring
Monitoring
Population Monitoring
The absence of threatened frogs at Review monitoring methods immediately, Relevant Green-thighed Frogs Variability in results influenced Wait until third monitoring event before
impact sites identified as occupied in considering further monitoring and assessment if recorded from Ste 6B, 7A, by prevailing weather conditions determining the requirements for any
the baseline monitoring surveys. there is a decline in population abundance. 7B, 8B, 9A and 9B. at the time of sampling. corrective actions.
A relative decline in abundance of Investigate effectiveness of frog exclusion fencing Green-thighed Frogs
25% or more at an impact site than immediately. absent from Site 8A, 10A,
its relative control site over 3 10B.
consecutive monitoring periods. Closely monitor habitat conditions over a period of
Frog abundance determined by three months to ensure they are suitable, in Although some declines
standardised transect counts: particular hydrology (hydro-period), water quality and absences, tied more
• Number of Wallum Sedge and vegetation. to variability in survey
Frogs per 100 m2 of habitat; conditions than any real
• Number of Giant Barred Frogs Assess the requirement for additional offsets decline. For example, no
per 500 m of habitat; where a threatened frog population is no longer works/habitat removal had
• Number of adult male Green- present in a previously occupied area, and this occurred at the time
thighed Frogs per Stage 1 survey habitat is deemed unsuitable for the target surveys were undertaken
(breeding survey) (as outlined in species. at Site 10.
Section 4.3).
Underpass Structure Monitoring
The use of the structure by less than Review monitoring methods where goals are not No relevant at this Not Applicable Not applicable Not Applicable
1% of the estimated population size. achieved, by increasing frequency, intensity and point in time.
duration, to ensure individuals are identified. Structures are not
Connectivity structures not operational.
maintained (i.e. culverts clogged with Survey habitat adjoining the connectivity structures
debris or sedimentation). Frog and undertake Landscape improvement (planting,
exclusion fencing damaged or weed removal) to improve habitat functionality.
ineffective.
Survey and monitor crossing structures and frog
fencing to ensure they are functional (i.e. are
adequately maintained, including fencing is not
damaged, and connectivity structure is operating
correctly). Monitor twice per year.
Assess the need for offsets if connectivity
structures are identified as ineffective over three
consecutive monitoring periods.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 13WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Triggers for corrective actions Corrective actions Relevance to Year 1 Results of Year 1 Green- Potential Contributing Factors Corrective Action Required
Green-thighed Frog thighed Frog Monitoring
Monitoring
Constructed Pond Monitoring
Absence of threatened frogs and Investigation be undertaken to determine why No relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
metamorphs at the compensatory there may be a lack of success and, as where point in time. No ponds
ponds after three years since recommended, changes be made to the habitat had been constructed
construction. and monitored for effectiveness (i.e. 3 more years at the time sampling
of monitoring) was undertaken.
Review monitoring methods, considering timing
and weather conditions to ensure individuals are
identified.
Review location of the compensatory pond and
consider moving, and/or modifying or constructing
additional ponds.
Investigate habitat adjoining the upgraded highway
and consider improving habitat condition and
connectivity.
Water pH exceeds 5.5 for Wallum Investigate ways to reduce pH of water. Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
Sedge Frog
Visual water quality of the Complete site specific investigation to identify the Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
compensatory pond is not similar to causes of the unsuitable hydrological conditions or point in time.
nearby unimpacted and/or similar water quality.
wetlands or is unsuitable for frog
occupation.
No persistent water present in ponds Assess possible causes for water draining from Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
(negative hydroperiod) despite recent the pond and apply point in time.
rainfall. physical corrective actions
Mosquito Fish present and Draining pond to remove Mosquito Fish and allow No relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
threatened frogs / tadpoles absent. pond fill at the next rain event. point in time.
Constructed habitat un-suitable for Undertake revegetation maintenance, i.e. Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
frogs (e.g. wetlands have un-suitable replanting, erosion control, weed control. point in time.
hydro-period (as determined from
monitoring events), water quality or
associated vegetation) as detailed in
section 5.4.4.
Revegetated native habitat in poor Ensure wetlands are functioning as designed and Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
condition (e.g. >30% cover died, plant present suitable habitat in terms of water quality point in time.
dieback). and hydro-period.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 14WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
Triggers for corrective actions Corrective actions Relevance to Year 1 Results of Year 1 Green- Potential Contributing Factors Corrective Action Required
Green-thighed Frog thighed Frog Monitoring
Monitoring
Frog absence confirmed following Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
monitoring surveys (it should be point in time.
noted that a pond may be suitable for
frogs, but not colonised).
Riparian Habitat Revegetation
Greater than 10% of riparian plants Review maintenance schedule for revegetated Not relevant at this Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable
have died after first 12 months of areas immediately after trigger. point in time.
maintenance. Landscape and habitat
Replace dead plants within one month of issue rehabilitation is
Greater than 20% of riparian plants being identified. expected to
have died after three years of commence during
maintenance. Year 3 of the Green-
Increase weed control if required as soon as thighed Frog
Total weed coverage is more than practicable or review control methods being used. monitoring program
30% in revegetation areas.
Install physical measures to halt bank erosion
within one month of issue being identified.
Bank erosion causes unforeseen
revegetation area instability.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 15WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Year 1 monitoring surveys were undertaken during a series of staggered rainfall events resulting from mid summer
thunderstorms in January and some prominent tropical low pressure systems in mid March and later from ex tropical
cyclone Debbie in late March. This produced a number of suitable rainfall events which resulted in stage one calling
surveys being conducted between early January and late March. As a consequence, calling male frogs were recorded at
four sites and observed at another two sites whilst the follow up post breeding surveys confirmed breeding had been
successful at a few sites around Grafton airport and Glenugie State Forest.
The performance indicators of the monitoring program have been recently updated to reflect the actual number of frogs
recorded rather than relying on the numbers of calling males. With this in mind, there had been a recorded decline at Site
8A but this was by a number of one frog, and this is likely to change when surveys coincide with other suitable rainfall
events. Declines were similarly recorded at Site 10, however, the simple fact that no habitat disturbance had taken place
illustrates there are other contributing factors, namely localised thunderstorms make it difficult to standardise and
implement a sampling strategy when rainfall differs over a few kilometres.
In light of the Year 1 findings, the following recommendations have been outlined in Table 6-1.
Table 6-1. W2B Year 1 Sections 3-8 recommendations and RMS responses.
ID No Recommendation Roads and Maritime Response
1 The calling/breeding survey should occur twice within any Not Adopted – Monitoring to continue in accordance
given season so that it can accommodate for localised with the baseline surveys and approved Threatened
rainfall events and improve the opportunity to records frogs. Frog Management Plan.
2 The compensatory Green-thighed Frog breeding ponds be Noted – Compensatory breeding ponds will be
identified. The TFMP currently notes “These will be installed in accordance with the Threatened Frog
constructed where breeding habitat will be directly impacted Management Plan.
by the project (Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-3) or changed
hydrological patterns have the potential to affect the
suitability of breeding habitat areas adjacent to the corridor”.
3 Access be obtained for any construction related automated Adopted - RMS has provided the author with access
weather station located between the following chainages: to the projects automated weather stations
a. Ch.55000-75000; and
b. Ch. 95000-123000.
4 Ensure Year 2 monitoring provides a review of the targeted Pre-clearing survey results form part of a separate
pre clearing survey results for Green-thighed Frog surveys. report with associated review of results, and if
required, recommendations for consideration for
future pre-clearing surveys.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 16WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
7.0 REFERENCES
Anstis, M. (2002). Tadpoles of South-eastern Australia. A guide with keys. Sydney, NSW: Reed New Holland.
Barker, J; Grigg, G; and Tyler, M.J. (1995). A field guide to Australian Frogs. Surrey Beauty and Sons, Chipping Norton,
NSW.
Cogger, H.G. (1995). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. 5th edition. Reed Books, Sydney.
BoM (2016/2017). New Italy & Grafton Airport NSW. Daily weather observation. Bureau of Meteorology. Accessed 1st
June 2015. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/201404/html/IDCJDW2043.201404.shtml
DEC (2004). Threatened biodiversity survey and assessment: Guidelines for developments and activities. Working Draft.
NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. November 2004.
DECC (2008). Hygiene protocol for the control of disease in frogs. NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change.
April 2008.
Ehmann, H. (1997). Threatened Frogs of New South Wales. Habitats, Status and Conservation. Green-thighed Frog.
Published by Frog and Tadpole Study Group of NSW Inc, PO Box A2405, Sydney South 2000.
Lemckert, F.L. & Slatyer, C. (2002). Short-term movements and habitat use of the green-thighed frog, Litoria brevipalmata
(Anura: Hylidae). Australian Zoologist 32:56-61.
Lemckert, F., Mahony, M., Brassil, T. & Slatyer, C. (2006). The biology of the threatened Green-thighed Frog Litoria
brevipalmata (Anura: Hylidae) in the central and mid-north coastal areas of New South Wales. Australian Zoologist
33:337-344.
Niche (2014). Woolgoolga to Ballina Upgrade Green-thighed Frog Baseline Surveys Baseline Monitoring Survey Report
prepared for the RMS by Niche Pty Ltd.
Lewis, B.D. (2000). Record of the green-thighed frog (Litoria brevipalmata) from north-east New South Wales.
Herpetofauna 30 (2): 7-9.
Lewis, (2013a) Pacific Highway Upgrade: Arrawarra to Halfway Creek targeted frog survey. Report prepared for PB-
ARUP Joint Venture by Lewis Ecological Surveys, April 2013.
Lewis, (2013b) Pacific Highway Upgrade: Halfway Creek to Glenugie targeted frog survey. Report prepared for PB-ARUP
Joint Venture by Lewis Ecological Surveys, April 2013.
Lewis, B.D. (2015). Woolgoolga to Ballina: Green-thighed Frog 2015 Pre-construction Baseline Monitoring Report. Report
prepared for the NSW Roads and Maritime Services by Lewis Ecological Surveys. ©
Lewis, B.D. (2017). Woolgoolga to Ballina: Giant Barred Frog Year 1 Monitoring Report for Sections 1 and 2. Report
prepared for the NSW Roads and Maritime Services by Lewis Ecological Surveys. ©
Murphy, M.J and Turnbill, J. 1999. A new locality for the threatened Green-thighed Frog (Litoria brevipalmata) in
coastal north-east New South Wales. Australian Zoologist 31 (1) 225-9.
Nattrass, A.E.O & Ingram, G.J. (1993). New records of the rare Green-thighed Frog. Mem. Qld Mus. 33 (1):348.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 17WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
RMS (2015). Threatened Frog Species Management Plan. Woolgoolga to Ballina – Pacific Highway Upgrade. Report
prepared by the NSW Roads and Maritime Services, Aurecon and Sinclair Knight Merz, AMEC Foster-Wheeler. March
2013.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 18WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1 DURING CONSTRUCTION
8.0 APPENDIX A – GREEN-THIGHED FROG SURVEY SUMMARY DATA & SEASONAL RAINFALL CONDITIONS
Table A1. Summary of Green-thighed Frog surveys in Sections 3-7: Year 1 (2017).
No.
Stage 1 Calling Stage 2 Days No.
BACI Adjacent Easting Time AT Hum No. Frogs No. No. Breeding
Site Name Survey Wind Rain CC Males Survey After Sub Comments
Site Chainage Northing (24hr) oC % Spotlighted Juv Tads Confirmed
Date (chorusing Date Chorusing Adults
intensity)
Pheasant E:502672
6A 35200 Creek N:6704172 no data No access permitted at this time
Stage 1 calling survey had four
E:501766 amplecting pairs and this
Airport N:6706969 0300- probably reflected in number of
6B 38000 Road 17.03.2017 0330 21 87 0 1 90 18 15 27.04.2017 41 0 23 0 yes juveniles recorded
Sporadic use of small pools
E:503837
Old Six Mile 0349- often where trees had blown
N:6706546
7A 38000 Lane 17.03.2017 0417 21 83 0 1 90 12 14 27.04.2017 41 0 3 0 yes over.
Breeding likely to have been
successful given the follow up
E:505733 rain events. Calling/breeding
N:6703338 more likely to have happened at
Glenugie 2130- the end of March rather than
7B 35000 East 17.03.2017 2155 21 85 0 1 80 0 1 27.04.2017 41 0 4 0 yes time of mid March survey.
Tyndale
E:513362
64700 Crown 0340- Ponds were dry at time of post
N:6727361
8A Reserve 7.1.2017 0410 22.2 88 0 2 100 0 0 26.02.2017 50 0 0 0 no breeding survey
Pine Brush E:517300 0425- Ponds were dry at time of post
57500
8B State Forest N:6719708 7.1.2017 455 22 85 0 1 80 0 1 26.02.2017 50 0 0 0 no breeding survey
Ponds were dry at time of post
breeding survey. Surveys in
E:520731 0240-
102500 JackyBulbin 7.1.2017 22 85 0 1 80 8 8 March and post breeding
N:6758742 310
thereafter likely to yield differing
9A 26.02.2017 50 0 0 0 no results.
Ponds were dry at time of post
breeding survey. Surveys in
Tabbimoble E:525262 0120-
111500 7.1.2017 22 85 0 1 90 6 7 0 0 0 no March and post breeding
East N:6767265 150
thereafter likely to yield differing
9B 26.02.2017 50 results.
Ponds were dry at time of post
Tabbimoble E:527238 0000- breeding survey. Surveyed
118500 7.1.2017 22.3 88 0 1 80 0 0 0 0 0 no
North N:6772864 0020 again in mid March and late
10A 26.02.2017 50 March 2017 but still no frogs.
Ponds were dry at time of post
Glencoe E:524143 0040- breeding survey. Surveyed
114000 7.1.2017 22.3 88 0 1 80 0 0 0 0 0 no
Road N:6769665 0100 again in mid March and late
10B 26.02.2017 50 March 2017 but still no frogs.
2921718-BDL-Ver3 Page 19WOOLGOOLGA TO BALLINA: SECTION 3-8 GREEN-THIGHED FROG MONITORING: YEAR 1
Table A2. Rainfall recorded between October 2016 and May 2017 from New Italy station (058097) (BoM 2017).
Red shaded area reflects likely breeding/calling event.
Station New Italy Number: 58097
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Graph
1st 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
2nd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3rd 0 0 0 76 0 0 2 0
4th 5.2 0 18.2 0 0 0 4.2 2
5th 0 0 0 0 0 5.4 9 15
6th 0 0 22 67.2 0 2.4 15 3
7th 0 0 1 33.4 0 0 0 3.2
8th 0 0 8 0 0 0 15.2 0
9th 0 0 28 0 5.6 0 1.8 0
10th 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 13.4
11th 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
12th 0 0 0 24.4 0 0 0 0
13th 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 2.6
14th 0 0 0 4 0 12.2 0 3.2
15th 0 0.6 0 0 0 37.6 0 0
16th 0 1.8 0 0 0 89.4 0 0
17th 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
18th 5 0 4 0 0 83.2 0 0
19th 0 0 0 0 0.4 248 5.6 0
20th 0 0 0 0 3.2 35.4 4 17.6
21st 0 0 0.6 24 5.4 1.2 3 0
22nd 0 0 0 1.6 0 4 3.6 0
23rd 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24th 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0
25th 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0
26th 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 0
27th 0 0 15.2 8 9.6 0 0 0
28th 7.2 0 0 6.6 74.6 0 0 0
29th 12.2 17 0 0 0 0 2.6
30th 0 0 0 36 0 0
31st 0 0 0 287.2 0
Highest
12.2 18 28 76 74.6 287.2 15.2 17.6
Daily
Monthly
33.6 37.4 97 249.2 98.8 863 65.6 70.6
Total
2921617-BDL-Vers3 Page 20You can also read
