Read StockingPlan.pdf text version

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project

Stocking Plan

Prepared for: Redland City Council

frc environmental

PO Box 2363 Wellington Point Qld 4160 Telephone: + 61 7 3820 4900 Facsimile: + 61 7 3207 5640

frc Ref:

090807

frc environmental

Document Control Summary Project No.:

Status: Project Director: Project Manager: Title: Project Team: Client: Client Contact: Date: Edition: Checked by: Issued by:

090807

Final Report John Thorogood Ashley Morton Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan. A, Morton, L. Thorburn, J. Thorogood Redland City Council (RCC) Mick Holland July 2010 090807Rix John Thorogood ______________ Ashley Morton________________

Distribution Record

RCC: one pdf copy

This work is copyright. A person using frc environmental documents or data accepts the risk of: a) b) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original signed hard copy version; and Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by frc environmental.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

FRC_Files:frc_projects:Projects:090807_RCC_Fish-n-Creeks:Report:sent_10-07-21:090807Rix_10-07-21_AM.doc

frc environmental

Contents

Summary 1 2 Introduction Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase Stocking Plan 2.1 Background, Objective and Goals 2.2 Fish Species to be Released 2.3 Release Locations 2.4 Stocking Plan 2.6 Potential Implications of Releasing Native Fauna 2.7 Monitoring Plan 3 References i 1 2 2 2 2 6 9 10 12

Appendix A: Fish, Creeks & Us, Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

frc environmental

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Primary release locations on Hilliards Creek. 5

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Release locations. Synthetic mop used as spawning material. 4 7

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

frc environmental

Summary

There has been a steady decline in the number of native fish and an increase in the number of exotic fish in the freshwaters of the Redlands, over time. The objective of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase is to reintroduce native fishes to selected freshwater creeks of the Redlands. For the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase, crimson-spotted rainbowfish will be released at selected locations in the freshwater reaches of Hilliards Creek. Conditions on the ground will determine the exact release locations, however we envisage that the majority of fish will be released near three sites. Crimson-spotted rainbowfish have been shown to be easily bred in captivity, exist in Hilliards Creek and are considered to have the highest potential for initial success for this project. The Fish, Creeks & Us stocking plan consists of four stages: collection, breeding, egg harvesting and rearing, and release. The breeding facility is proposed to be established at the Redlands IndigiScapes Centre. The facility will consist of four tanks that will have aerators, sand filters and screens to prevent fish from jumping out. Approximately 50 ­ 100 crimson-spotted rainbowfish will be collected from Hilliards Creek, using a variety of methods including electrofishing and / or baited traps. The timing of collection will be prior to spawning, in late winter or early spring (August ­ October 2010). Captured fish will be transported to a quarantine tank at the breeding facility in accordance with the Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries fish salvage guidelines. The quarantine tank will have a biological and UV filtration system and the fish will remain in quarantine for a minimum of 2 weeks, or until they are no visible signs of stress. After quarantine, the breeding stock will be moved to, and maintained in a breeding tank. Within the breeding tank, dark green acrylic wool will be used to create synthetic mops, which will be used as spawning habitat. Once eggs are deposited on the spawning material, both the spawning material and the eggs will be moved to a hatching tank. Once the fish are approximately 3 cm in length, they will be transferred to a release tank, which will serve to quarantine the fish prior to release. At each location, we plan to release approximately 500 crimson-spotted rainbowfish into Hilliards Creek, up to a maximum of 3 000 fish released. The fish will be released along the bank so that no more than 100 fish are released within a 50 m stretch. Fish will be released under optimum habitat and water quality conditions. Using the stocking plan, the likelihood of inbreeding, outbreeding depression and transferring unwanted species and disease is considered unlikely.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

i

frc environmental

Prior to releasing native fish, exotic fish will be substantially eradicated from one release location. The exotic fish removed will be disposed in accordance with animal ethics requirements. A post-stocking monitoring program will be implemented to determine the success of the Project.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

ii

frc environmental

1

Introduction

The Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) of Redland City Council (RCC) is developing a Project to support the trial re-introduction of native fishes to the Redlands freshwater creeks. The aims of this Project in the 2009 / 2010 financial year are to:

·

develop practical options for breeding and releasing native fishes to the creeks of the Redlands and to organise trials of methods necessary to do this (termed the Trial Phase) develop 1 and 10 year plans to effect the recovery of native fish populations in the creeks of the Redlands establish strategic partnerships with both the scientific and local communities to support field trials, and lead community and stakeholder awareness of issues associated with the Project.

·

·

·

In support of these aims, this report presents a stocking plan for the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

1

frc environmental

2

2.1

Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase Stocking Plan

Background, Objective and Goals

There has been a steady decline in the abundance and diversity of native fish and an increase in the number of exotic fish in the freshwaters of the Redlands, over time (Moffatt 2008). The objective of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase is to reintroduce native fishes to selected freshwater creeks of the Redlands.

2.2

Fish Species to be Released

Based on the success of similar projects, the crimson-spotted rainbowfish (Melanotaenia duboulayii) will be used in the Trial Phase of the project. This species has been recorded in Hilliards Creek, appears to be easily bred in captivity, and has the highest potential for initial success for this project. Once the trial is up and running, expansion to other species, such as purple-spotted gudgeons (Mogurnda adspersa) and ornate rainbowfish (Rhadinocentrus ornatus) will be considered.

2.3

Release Locations

To determine which locations have the most suitable habitat for crimson-spotted rainbowfish, we completed a reconnaissance and detailed aquatic flora and fauna survey on Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks. Based on results from the flora and fauna survey, Hilliards Creek has been chosen for the Trial Phase of the project because of the moderate habitat and water quality and diverse macroinvertebrate and fish communities (see Appendix A for the Fish, Creeks & Us, Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment). The ecological values of the Hilliards Creek Catchment, based on EHMP and RCC data and our surveys, include:

·

diverse native fish communities; although abundant exotic species have been recorded during some surveys healthy and diverse macroinvertebrate communities

·

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

2

frc environmental

· ·

high dissolved oxygen (DO) levels, and high (compared to guideline levels) nutrient (due to wastewater release) concentrations and electrical conductivity (however, values recorded are within the known range of environmental tolerances for crimson-spotted rainbowfish).

Crimson-spotted rainbowfish will be released at selected locations in Hilliards Creek between sites H2 to H8 (Figure 2.1). Conditions on the ground will determine the exact release locations, however we envisage that the majority of fish will be released near sites H2, H7 and H8 (Table 2.1). Once the trial in Hilliards Creek has been completed and evaluated, consideration will be given to expanding the trial to other locations and species.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

3

frc environmental

Fish, Creeks & Us, Trial Phase Release Locations Figure 2.1 (Google Earth 2010) Release locations. July 2010

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

4

frc environmental

Table 2.1 Site H2

Primary release locations on Hilliards Creek. Photo

Location (UTM, WGS84, Zone 56J) and Access Directions

· ·

524 330 m E, 6 955 292 m N access through the Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries property, site located approximately 300 m upstream of bridge

H7

· ·

524239 m E, 6953670 m N access through Cleveland Wastewater Treatment Plant on Weippin Street, downstream from bridge

H8

· ·

523970 m E, 6953037 m N pedestrian access from Industry Court

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

5

frc environmental

2.4

Stocking Plan

The stocking plan, outlined below, consists of four stages: collection, breeding, egg harvesting and rearing, and release. The stocking plan considers potential genetic implications, translocation of unwanted species and diseases and the suitability and carrying capacity of the receiving environment. The Fish, Creeks & Us breeding facility is proposed to be established at the Redlands IndigiScapes Centre. The facility will comprise four cut-down 5 000 L rain water tanks in a secure area on the property. Each tank will be fitted with sand filters, aerators, and screens to prevent fish from jumping out. The tanks will also be covered with shade structures. The tanks will be filled with water, at a minimum, two weeks prior to stocking and the water will be tested prior to stocking with fish.

Collection

Crimson-spotted rainbowfish will be collected from Hilliards Creek, using a variety of methods including electrofishing and / or baited traps. The timing of collection will be prior to spawning, in late winter or early spring (August ­ October 2010). For the Trial Phase, we envisage that we will capture approximately 50 ­ 100 adult crimson-spotted rainbowfish. Based on the experience from the Moreton Bay Regional Council fishbreeding project, this number of fish is required for a successful breeding program. Captured fish will be transported in accordance with the Queensland Primary Industries and Fisheries (QPIF) fish salvage guidelines. During transport, water temperature will be monitored and an aerator will be used to oxygenate the water. The fish captured will be considered the `breeding stock'. These fish will be transported to, and placed into a quarantine tank at the breeding facility. The quarantine tank will have a biological and UV filtration system and the fish will remain in quarantine for a minimum of 2 weeks, or until there are no visible signs of stress. The fish will be fed on a daily basis. As electrofishing will likely be used to capture the fish, a general fisheries permit will be obtained prior to collection from QPIF.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

6

frc environmental

Breeding

After quarantine, the breeding stock will be moved to, and maintained in a breeding tank, which will include a sand filter and aeration, and be based on a regimen of water changes and / or regular feeding. Within the breeding tank, dark green acrylic wool will be used to create synthetic mops which will be used as spawning habitat (Figure 2.2). For the trials, the breeding stock will be kept for one spawning season, after which they will be released at the location from which they were captured.

Figure 2.2 Synthetic mop used as spawning material.

Egg Harvesting and Rearing

Once eggs are deposited on the mops, both the spawning material and the eggs will be moved to a hatching tank. This will minimise predation of the eggs and potential inbreeding. The hatching tank will be fitted with a sand filter and will be aerated and the fish will be regularly fed. The juvenile fish will be reared to approximately 3 cm in length.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

7

frc environmental

Release

Once the fish are approximately 3 cm in length, they will be transferred to a release tank, which will serve to quarantine the fish and minimise the translocation of unintended biological material (e.g. algae). The release tank will have a biological and UV filtration system and the fish will remain in quarantine for a minimum of 2 weeks. Prior to release the fish will be marked with a Visable Implant Elastomer Tag. Stocking density is usually determined based on the surface area and depth of the water, fish species present and abundance, and expected survival of the fish to be stocked (Simpson et al. 2002). The survival rate may be difficult to determine and is dependent on abundance of predators, availability of food and habitat, the size of the fish released and the location of where they are released. For riverine areas, determining stocking rates can be difficult, as there is no set surface area or depth within which the stocked fish will be constrained. When stocking is used to re-habilitate or enhance a fish population it is critical that the number of fish distributed is appropriate for the water being stocked (DNR 2006). If waters are under-stocked there may be little benefit realised from stocking efforts, while over-stocking can increase competition and predation on native fish populations. At each location, we will release approximately 500 crimson-spotted rainbowfish into Hilliards Creek and we will release a maximum of 3 000 fish in total. The fish will be released along the bank so that no more than 100 fish are released within a 50 m stretch. The fish will be released to the receiving environment under optimum conditions (i.e. during daylight hours so the released fish can find suitable habitat, after a flow event which will reduce the number of exotics but when the creek is not flowing strongly to prevent unnecessary physical stress, etc.). Prior to release, a stocking permit will be obtained from QPIF.

Operations and Maintenance of the Breeding Facility

It is envisaged that volunteers will be recruited and trained to complete most of the tasks involved in the day-to-day operations for breeding fish (described above) and maintenance of the breeding facility. The volunteers will be trained and supervised by Council's primary consultant / contractor under Council's direction.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

8

frc environmental

2.5

Potential Implications of Releasing Native Fauna

Transferring Unwanted Species and Diseases

By using the quarantine tank prior to releasing the native fish, the likelihood of transferring unwanted species and diseases to the receiving environment is considered low. Chemical sterilisation will be considered to further reduce this risk.

Genetic Implications

Since the breeding stock will be captured from the waterways where the juveniles will be released, the juveniles will be genetically similar to the fish in the waterways. Therefore, it is considered highly unlikely that outbreeding depression will occur. By using multiple tanks for each stage of the breeding and rearing process, the likelihood of inbreeding is considered unlikely.

Interactions with Native Resident Fauna

There are few problems associated with introducing native fish that are bred in captivity to natural and constructed watercourses, provided they are not introduced to catchments where they do not naturally occur (Russell 2008). Negative interactions with native resident fauna are unlikely to be a problem for the Fish, Creeks & Us Project as the fish species to be released are native to the region (though not abundant).

Interactions with Exotic Fauna

Within Hilliards Creeks, a total four exotic species have been recorded (Tappin 2007; Moffatt 2008; DERM 2009; frc environmental 2010): tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus), mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki), swordtail (Xiphophorus helleri), and platy (Xiphophorus maculatus). Only mosquitofish and swordtails have been recorded near the potenial release locations (frc environmental 2010). Mosquitofish are aggressive and nip the fins of other fish species as well as eat their eggs (DPIF 2010). Swordtails are not particularly aggressive, however their introduction has been shown to have detrimental effects on small surface-dwelling native fishes (e.g. crimson-spotted rainbowfish). The presence of either species typically results in a reduction and possible loss of native fish species. During the flora and fauna survey, no exotics were captured from site H2, while exotics were abundant at sites H7 and H8 (Appendix A). As a qualitative measure of the

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

9

frc environmental

impact exotic species have on released captive bred native fish, the captive bred fish will be released into the following conditions:

· · ·

few to no exotics present (site H2) exotics present (site H7), and exotics historically present, however the majority of the exotics will be substantially eradicated prior to releasing the native fish (site H8).

Prior to releasing the native captive bred crimson-spotted rainbowfish, bait trapping will be completed near site H8 to remove the majority of the exotic fish. It is envisaged that a minimum of 20 bait traps will be set along the bank for approximately 300 m near site H8. The traps will be checked daily and will be set for a minimum of two weeks. Trapping will continue until no more than 10 individual exotic fish are captured within a 24-hour period. If this is not achievable, trapping will occur for a maximum of three weeks. Trapping techniques will be consistent with QPIF guidelines for fish trapping. Exotic species will be euthanised with AQUI-S (approximatley 400 mL per 20 L of ambient water; lethal < 5 minutes exposure). Euthanising by this method is considered to be the most humane method available (ANZCCART 2001). Any native fish captured will be released unharmed. A general fisheries permit (issued by QPIF) is not required to use baited traps provided there are a maximum of four bait traps per person trapping (e.g. five people can set 20 bait traps, without a permit). If this is not logistically feasible, a general fisheries permit will be obtained prior to trapping from QPIF. Animal ethics approval is not required to euthanise exotic species as part of an eradication activity (Malcolm Pearce [QPIF] 2009, pers. comm. December 2).

2.6

Monitoring Plan

A pre-stocking survey has been completed (Appendix A), which when combined with a post-stocking plan will help to determine the success of the stocking Project. The proposed monitoring program is based on selected EHMP / AusRivAS protocols, but also includes quantitative elements to support monitoring. The monitoring program includes an assessment of (at each site):

· ·

physical habitat using a modified AusRivAS protocol physicochemical water quality

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

10

frc environmental

· ·

macrophyte community structure and coverage aquatic macroinvertebrates using EHMP protocol, modified to incorporate replicated sampling; and analysis that also incorporates tropic structure, and fish using EHMP protocol.

·

The post-stocking monitoring will require temporal replication and will include rapid assessments of fish communities, and full aquatic flora and fauna surveys. It is envisaged that the rapid assessment of fish communities will involve setting bait traps for 24 hours along Hilliards Creek and several tributaries to determine the survival and distribution of the released crimson-spotted rainbowfish, which will be identified using the implanted Visable Implant Elastomer Tags. Traps will be checked regularly (e.g. in the morning and every 4 hours during the day) to release any native fishes and to replace bait as required. It is recommended that the rapid assessment be completed shortly after stocking (e.g. within one week) and then quarterly for the first year after releasing the fish and then every three months for the second year after releasing the fish. It is also recommended that full aquatic flora and fauna surveys are completed every six months for two years after releasing the fish and will include quantitative monitoring of water quality, aquatic habitat, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates, fish and turtle communities (methods will be similar to those from the flora and fauna survey, Appendix A). After each survey, the monitoring program will be re-evaluated and adjusted as required.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

11

frc environmental

3

References

ANZCCART, 2001, Euthanasia of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes, ed. J.S. Reilly, Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching, Adelaide. DERM, 2009, Wildlife Online, http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/nature_conservation/wildlife/wildlife_online/, accessed May 2010

DNR, 2006, DNR Fish Stocking Policy FWB 019 2006, report prepared for New Brunswick Natural Resources. DPIF, 2010, Gambusia or Mosquitofish, www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_13877.htm, accessed May 2010. frc environmental, 2010, Fish, Creeks & Us, Trail Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment, report prepared for Redland City Council. Google Earth, 2010, Google Earth Map, http://earth.google.com/, accessed May 2010. Moffatt, D.B., 2008. Ecological Assessment of the Non-Tidal Waterways of Redland Shire: Autumn 2007. Queensland Government. Russell, D.J., 2008, Towards responsible native fish stocking identifying management concerns and appropriate research methodologies (FRDC Project Number 2007/057), report prepared for Department of Primary Industries, and the Fisheries Research Development Corporation, the State of Queensland. Simpson, B., Hutchinson, M., Gallagher, T. & Chilcott, K., 2002, Fish stocking in impoundments: A best practice manual for eastern and northern Australia, report prepared for the Department of Primary Industries, and the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, the State of Queensland. Tappin, A., 2007, Redlands Catchment - QLD, report prepared for ANGFA unpublished report, pg. 11.

Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project: Stocking Plan

12

Fish, Creeks & Us

Trial Phase Potential Release Location Assessment

Prepared for: Redland City Council

frc environmental

PO Box 2363 Wellington Point Qld 4160 Telephone: + 61 7 3820 4900 Facsimile: + 61 7 3207 5640

frc Ref:

090807

frc environmental

Document Control Summary Project No.:

Status: Project Director: Project Manager: Title: Project Team: Client: Client Contact: Date: Edition: Checked by: Issued by:

090807

Final Report John Thorogood Ashley Morton Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment D. Holzeimer, K. McPherson, A, Morton, L. Thorburn, J. Thorogood, L. West Redland City Council Mick Holland July 2010 090807Rviii John Thorogood ________________ Ashley Morton ________________

Distribution Record

RCC 1 pdf copy via email

This work is copyright. A person using frc environmental documents or data accepts the risk of: a) b) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original signed hard copy version; and Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by frc environmental.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

FRC_Files:frc_projects:Projects:090807_RCC_Fish-nCreeks:Report:Current:Flora_and_fauna_survey:Main:090807Rviii_10-07-05_1532_TWD.doc

frc environmental

Contents

Summary 1 2 3 4 Introduction Methodology Aquatic Habitat Water Quality 4.1 Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase 5 Macrophyte Communities 5.1 Richness and Coverage 5.2 Community Composition 5.3 Indicators of Stream Health 5.4 Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase 6 Macroinvertebrate Communities 6.1 Taxonomic Richness and Composition 6.2 PET Richness 6.3 SIGNAL 2 / Family Bi-plot 6.4 Macrocrustacean Communities 6.5 Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase 7 Fish Communities 7.1 Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase 8 Turtle Communities 8.1 Other Aquatic Vertebrates 8.2 Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase 9 10 Summary and Recommendation References i 1 2 4 7 8 9 9 10 12 13 14 14 15 15 16 18 19 22 24 24 24 25 28

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

frc environmental

Appendix A: Detailed Methodology Appendix B: Aquatic Habitat of the Survey Sites

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

frc environmental

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 5.1 Table 7.1 Table 9.1 Positive and negative features of each site assessed; shading represents sites that were chosen as potential release sites. WQOs & QWQG for lowland freshwaters in Redland Creeks (EPA 2007; DERM 2009)1. Water quality in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010 and the relevant guidelines (EPA 2007; DERM 2009)1. Percent coverage of macrophytes at each site in April and June 2010, listed by growth form. Number of fish recorded at each site in April and June 2010. Positive and negative features of Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks.

5 7 8 11 20 26

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Figure 3.1 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2 Figure 5.3 Figure 5.4 Figure 6.1 Location of sites surveyed. Habitat bioassessment scores in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April 2010. Taxonomic richness of macrophytes in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Percent coverage of macrophytes in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Slender mat rush, growing along the bank at Tingalpa Creek site T1. Submerged and floating macrophytes at Hilliards Creek site H2. Taxonomic richness in edge habitat in April and June 2010, and the QWQG range for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009). 3 4 9 10 12 12

14

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

frc environmental

Figure 6.2

PET richness in edge habitat in April and June 2010, and the QWQG for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009). SIGNAL 2 / family by-plot for macroinvertebrate communities in edge habitat in April and June 2010 (quadrant boundaries represent the QWQG for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009)). Taxonomic richness of macrocrustaceans in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Total abundance of macrocrustaceans in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Crimson-spotted rainbowfish at Tingalpa Creek site T1. Fish taxonomic richness in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Fish total abundance in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010. Swordtail at Hilliards Creek site H7. Saw-shelled turtle at Tingalpa Creek site T2.

15

Figure 6.3

16 17 17 19 21 21 22 24

Figure 6.4 Figure 6.5 Figure 7.1 Figure 7.2 Figure 7.3 Figure 7.4 Figure 8.1

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

frc environmental

Summary

The Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) of Redland City Council (RCC) is developing a Project to support the re-introduction of native fishes to the Redland's freshwater creeks. A reconnaissance and detailed aquatic flora and fauna survey was completed on Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks to identify suitable locations on these creeks to release captive-bred crimson-spotted rainbowfish (Melanotaenia duboulayii) and purple-spotted gudgeons (Mogurnda adspersa), and to determine which creek ultimately has the highest potential for success for the Fish, Creeks & Us Project. Sites T1, T2 and T4 on Tingalpa Creek, and sites H2, H7 and H8 on Hilliards Creek had a diversity of substrate types (i.e. sand, gravel, pebbles and cobbles), a high coverage of physical habitat for fauna (such as large woody debris), a diversity of habitat types (i.e. riffles, runs and pools), and stable banks with a high coverage of streamside vegetation. These sites also had similar habitat to that where crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purplespotted gudgeons have previously been recorded. Given that these sites had a range of positive features that were likely to contribute to the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase, these sites were surveyed for aquatic flora and fauna. At the time of survey, water quality in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks was moderate. The values recorded for each water quality parameter are within the known range of environmental tolerances for crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons. Water quality should not impact on the survival of released captive bred native fish, provided they are acclimatised to the conditions. The coverage of macrophytes recorded at each site was within the known range of macro / meso habitat used by crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons. However, coverage of the exotic dense waterweed (Egeria densa) in Hilliards Creek was (as the name suggests) very dense in places, and would likely present a barrier to fish migration in several reaches of the creek. Crimson-spotted rainbowfish are known to reside and forage in areas with few submerged macrophytes, although they do prefer to breed on submerged macrophtyes. The lack of submerged macrophtyes in two of the Tingalpa Creek sites may inhibit breeding of crimson-spotted rainbowfish. Within both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks, there was a low diversity of macroinvertebrate fauna and the community composition is indicative of urban or agricultural pollution. However, Tingalpa Creek supported a moderate number of PET taxa, which may be indicative of moderate water quality and minimal disturbance. Macroinvertebrates communities indicate that there is mild pollution in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks, but not of a level likely to inhibit fish colonisation.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

i

frc environmental

Crimson-spotted rainbowfish were recorded at every site except at Hilliards Creek site H8, however it is likely that they do inhabit this reach. As none of the native fish recorded are particularly aggressive or occupy the same habitat niche as crimson-spotted rainbowfish, the other native species recorded are unlikely impact of the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase. The presence of the exotic mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) and swordtails (Xiphophorus hellerii) may impact on the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase. The presence of either species typically results in a reduction and possible loss of native fish species. Mosquitofish were more abundant in Hilliards Creek than in Tingalpa Creek. Swordtails were only recorded in Hilliards Creek. The ornate rainbowfish is a species of conservation concern in the Redlands and was recorded in Tingalpa Creek. It is possible that releasing crimson-spotted rainbowfish or purple-spotted gudgeons may impact on the ornate rainbowfish population through predation and / or competition. Turtles present in both creeks may prey on released captive bred native fish. Both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks have a range of positive features that are likely to contribute to the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase. Tinglapa Creek does have slightly better habitat and water quality, and supports a diverse macroinvertebrate and fish community with very few exotics, however, it is unclear how re-introducing captive bred native fish into Tingalpa Creek would impact on the ornate rainbowfish community. Hilliards Creeks does have moderate habitat and water quality and supports a diverse macroinvertebrate and fish community, but it also supports one exotic macrophyte and two exotic fish species. It is predicted that if some of the exotic nonindigenous fishes are removed, that re-introduced captive bred crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons would thrive given the moderate habitat quality. We recommend that the next phase of the Fish, Creeks & Us Project involve removal of exotic fish and stocking trials of crimson-spotted rainbowfish to sites H2, H7 and H8 in Hilliards Creek.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

ii

frc environmental

1

Introduction

The Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) of Redland City Council (RCC) is developing a Project to support the trial re-introduction of native fishes to the Redlands freshwater creeks. The aims of this Project in the 2009 / 2010 financial year are to:

·

develop practical options for breeding and releasing native fishes to the creeks of the Redlands and to organise trials of methods necessary to do this (termed the Trial Phase) develop 1 and 10 year plans to effect the recovery of native fish populations in the creeks of the Redlands establish strategic partnerships with both the scientific and local communities to support field trials, and lead community and stakeholder awareness of issues associated with the Project.

·

·

·

In support of the first aim, we have completed a reconnaissance and detailed aquatic flora and fauna survey on Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks. The objective of these surveys was to identify suitable locations on Hilliards and Tingalpa creeks to initially release captive bred crimson-spotted rainbowfish (Melanotaenia duboulayii) and to determine which creek ultimately has the highest potential for success for the Fish, Creeks & Us Project. As the project develops, we will look at releasing other species, particularly purple-spotted gudgeons (Mogurnda adspersa) and eventually the ornate rainbowfish (Rhadinocentrus ornatus) to other creeks in the Redlands. This report presents the findings from the reconnaissance and detailed flora and fauna survey, and presents our recommendations for release locations for the Trial Phase of the Fish, Creeks & Us Project.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

1

frc environmental

2

Methodology

We completed a reconnaissance and habitat assessment on 31 March 2010 and 20 May 2010 at four sites on Tingalpa Creek (T1, T2, T3 and T4) and at seven sites on Hilliards Creek (H1, H2, H4, H5, H7, H8 & H10; Figure 2.1). Aquatic flora and fauna (macroinvertebrates, fish and turtles) were surveyed at a subset of these sites on Tingalpa Creek (sites T1, T2 & T4) and Hilliards Creek (sites H2, H7 & H8) from 15 ­ 16 April 2010 and on 24 June 2010. For detailed methods, see Appendix A.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

2

frc environmental

Fish, Creeks & Us, Trial Phase Release Locations Figure 2.1 Location of sites surveyed. July 2010

(Google Earth 2010)

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

3

frc environmental

3

Aquatic Habitat

Sites T1, T2 and T4 on Tingalpa Creek, and sites H2, H7 and H8 on Hilliards Creek had the highest bioassessment scores (Figure 3.1). This was due to a diversity of substrate types (i.e. sand, gravel, pebbles and cobbles), a high coverage of physical habitat for fauna (such as large woody debris), a diversity of habitat types (i.e. riffles, runs and pools), and stable banks with a high coverage of streamside vegetation. These sites also had similar habitat to that where crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purplespotted gudgeons have previously been recorded (Appendix B). Given that these sites had a range of positive features that were likely to contribute to the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase (Table 3.1), these sites were surveyed for aquatic flora and fauna. A description of each of these sites is presented in Appendix B.

Figure 3.1

Habitat bioassessment scores in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April 2010.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

4

frc environmental

Table 3.1

Positive and negative features of each site assessed; shading represents sites that were chosen as potential release sites. Negative features

Site

Positive features

Tingalpa Creek T1

· ·

good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and a diversity of substrate types riffles, runs and pools at time of survey good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and a diversity of substrate types riffles, runs and pools at time of survey small upstream dam could provide potential habitat good riparian vegetation good riparian vegetation abundant submerged and emergent macrophytes

·

logs and upstream culvert may create barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

T2

· ·

·

upstream bridge may create a barrier to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

T3

·

·

shallow, likely to dry for most of the year, particularly during the dry season downstream bridge may create a barrier to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

T4

· ·

·

Hilliards Creek H1 H2

· · · · ·

deep, likely to hold water all year riffles, runs and pools at time of survey abundant submerged macrophytes good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and a variety of substrate types runs and pools at time of survey good riparian vegetation runs and pools at time of survey deep, likely to hold water all year abundant submerged macrophytes potential for community awareness (signage on footbridge) runs and pools at time of survey

· · ·

poor riparian vegetation dominated by fine sediment (silt / mud) logs may create natural barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

H4 H5

· · · · ·

· · ·

very dense submerged macrophytes dominated by fine sediment (silt / mud) dominated by fine sediment (silt / mud)

·

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

5

frc environmental

Site H7

Positive features

· ·

Negative features

·

good riparian vegetation abundant submerged and emergent macrophytes variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and various substrate types riffles, runs and pools at time of survey good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and various substrate types riffles, runs and pools at time of survey small downstream wetland provide potential habitat could

upstream bridge and concrete wall may create barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

·

H8

· ·

·

potential to become a series of isolated pools during dry season

·

H10

·

· ·

poor riparian vegetation shallow, likely to dry during the dry season dominated by fine sediment (silt / mud)

·

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

6

frc environmental

4

Water Quality

Water quality objectives (WQOs) are the measurable indicators of the characteristics needed to protect or restore the selected environmental values for the particular waterway. Long-term goals for water quality management based on scientific criteria and / or water quality guidelines (such as the Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (QWQG; DERM 2009) have been established, and these may be modified by social, cultural or economic inputs (DERM 2009). Specific WQOs have been scheduled under the Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 (EPP Water) for many Queensland waterways, including for Redlands Creeks (EPA 2007). Under the EPP Water, the waterways on the site have been classified as lowland freshwaters. To provide an indication of water quality at the time of sampling, spot water quality measurements were compared to the prescribed WQOs for lowland freshwaters (aquatic ecosystem ­ slightly to moderately disturbed; Table 4.1). There are no WQOs for conductivity; therefore the conductivity values at each site were compared to the preliminary guideline value in the QWQG (DERM 2009); Table 4.1).

Table 4.1 WQOs & QWQG for lowland freshwaters in Redland Creeks (EPA 2007; 1 DERM 2009) . WQO for Lowland Streams ­ 85 ­ 110 6.5 ­ 8.0 ­ < 50

Parameter Temperature Dissolved Oxygen pH Conductivity Turbidity

1 2 3 2

Units ºC % saturation pH units µS/cm NTU

QWQG ­ 85 ­ 110 6.5 ­ 8.0 520 50

3

Shaded values were used for comparison with in situ values recorded at each relevant site. DO guidelines should only be applied to flowing waters, as stagnant pools in intermittent streams naturally experience DO levels below 50% saturation. th Preliminary guideline only, based on the 75 percentile of data from the Southern Coastal salinity zone.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

7

frc environmental

At the time of survey, water quality in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks was moderate (Table 4.2). In Tingalpa Creek, conductivity and turbidity values were within the relevant guidelines, however, pH was slightly below and dissolved oxygen was well below the WQOs for Redlands Creeks (EPA 2007). In Hilliards Creek, pH and turbidity values were within the WQOs, however, dissolved oxygen was below the WQO and conductivity was above the QWQG (DERM 2009).

Table 4.2 Water quality in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010 and the 1 relevant guidelines (EPA 2007; DERM 2009) . Site Variable Units Guideline T1 Temperature Dissolved Oxygen pH Conductivity Turbidity

1

T2 18.8 51.3 6.33 297 8.7

T4 14.5 28.2 6.10 166 10.6

H2 20.5 72.0 6.80 900 12.0

H7 20.7 83.3 6.77 893 14.8

H8 20.1 73.9 6.81 1315 5.1

ºC % saturation pH units µS/cm NTU

­ 85 ­ 110 6.5 ­ 8.0 520 50

16.7 38.0 6.36 487 4.2

Shaded values indicate values that do not comply with the guideline.

4.1

Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase

The values recorded for each water quality parameter are within the known range of environmental tolerances for crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons (Pusey et al. 2004). Water quality should not impact on the survival of released captive bred native fish, provided they are acclimatised to the conditions (e.g. low dissolved oxygen in Tingalpa Creek and high conductivity in Hilliards Creek).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

8

frc environmental

5

5.1

Macrophyte Communities

Richness and Coverage

Sixteen species of macrophytes were recorded in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks (Figure 5.1), with at least one macrophyte species recorded at each site. Taxonomic richness was similar in Hilliards and Tingalpa creeks (Figure 5.1). Hilliards Creek site H7 and Tingalpa Creek site T4 had the highest richness (seven) and Tingalpa Creek site T1 had the lowest richness (one). Hilliards Creek site H2 had the highest coverage of macrophytes (32%) and Tingalpa Creek site T1 had the lowest coverage (10%; Figure 5.2). The remaining sites (T2, H7 & H8) had between 17 to 20% coverage.

Figure 5.1

Taxonomic richness of macrophytes in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

9

frc environmental

Figure 5.2

Percent coverage of macrophytes in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

5.2

Community Composition

Macrophytes with an emergent growth form were the most abundant (i.e. they covered a large percentage of the sites) and common (i.e. they were recorded at all sites) along Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks, and generally included sedges (Cyperus spp.), slender mat rush (Lomandra hystrix) and rush (Juncus sp.). Slender mat rush was the most abundant and common species in Tingalpa Creek, whereas sedges and rushes were more prominent in Hilliards Creek. Emergent macrophytes grew along the channel margins. Two floating and five submerged macrophytes were also recorded (Figure 5.2). Tingalpa Creek, submerged and floating macrophytes were only recorded at site T4. In

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

10

frc environmental

Table 5.1

Percent coverage of macrophytes at each site in April and June 2010, listed by growth form. Site Latin name Common Name T1 T2 T4 H2 H7 H8

GROWTH FORM / Family EMERGENT Amaranthaceae Cyperaceae

Alternanthera denticulata Cyperus sp. Cyperus difformis Cyperus digitatus Schoenoplectus validus

lesser joyweed flat sedge dirty dora ­ river club rush knotgrass rush ­ slender mat rush

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 18

0 2 0 2 0 0 2 5 0

2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0

0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0

Gramineae Juncaceae Juncaginaceae Lomandraceae FLOATING Hydrocharitaceae Lemnaceae SUBMERGED Ceratophyllaceae Haloragaceae Hydrocharitaceae

Paspalum distichum Juncus sp. Maundia triglochinoides Lomandra hystrix

Ottelia ovalifolia Spirodela spp.

swamp lily duckweed

0 0

0 0

2 0

0 0

0 0

0 5

Ceratophyllum demersum Myriophyllum crispatum Egeria densa* Vallisneria nana

hornwort upright ­ water milfoil dense waterweed ribbon weed blunt pondweed

0 0 0 0 0 10

0 0 0 0 0 20

0 5 0 0 0 20

0 0 15 15 0 32

5 0 0 0 5 17

5 0 0 0 5 17

Potamogetonaceae TOTAL

* exotic macrophyte

Potamogeton ochreatus

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

11

frc environmental

Figure 5.3 Slender mat rush, growing along the bank at Tingalpa Creek site T1.

Figure 5.4 Submerged and floating macrophytes at Hilliards Creek site H2.

5.3

Indicators of Stream Health

One exotic species was recorded at Hilliards Creek site H2, the dense waterweed (Egeria densa), which covered 15% of the site. No macrophytes listed under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)1 or Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act)2 were recorded, or are likely to occur in the survey area.

1

Act no. 91 of 1999 as amended, prepared on 25 November 2009 taking into account amendments up to Act No. 125 of 2008. Prepared by the Office of Legislative Drafting and Publishing, Attorney-General's Department, Canberra.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

12

frc environmental

5.4

Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase

The coverage of macrophytes recorded at each site was within the known range of macro / meso habitat used by crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons (Pusey et al. 2004). However, coverage of the exotic dense waterweed in Hilliards Creek was (as the name suggests) very dense in places, and would likely present a barrier to fish migration in several reaches of the creek. Crimson-spotted rainbowfish are known to reside and forage in areas with few submerged macrophytes, although they do prefer to breed on submerged macrophtyes (Pusey et al. 2004). The lack of submerged macrophtyes at Tingalpa Creek sites T1 and T2 may inhibit breeding of crimson-spotted rainbowfish.

2

Reprint No. 1B, Reprinted as in force on 11 December 2009. Reprint prepared by the Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Council.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

13

frc environmental

6

6.1

Macroinvertebrate Communities

Taxonomic Richness and Composition

Taxonomic richness was below the QWQG in edge habitat at all sites, with between eight (Hilliards Creek site H7) and 19 (Hilliards Creek site H8) families recorded at each site (Figure 6.1; DERM 2009). Hilliards Creek sites H2 and H7 had greater taxonomic richness than the Tingalpa Creek sites. Hilliards Creek site H7 had the lowest taxonomic richness (8). Macroinvertebrate communities were dominated by freshwater shrimp (Atyidae), freshwater snails (Thiaridae) and caddisflies (Leptoceridae).

Figure 6.1

Taxonomic richness in edge habitat in April and June 2010, and the QWQG range for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

14

frc environmental

6.2

PET Richness

PET richness was four at Tingalpa Creek sites T1 and T2, which met the QWQG (Figure 6.2; DERM 2009). PET taxa are particularly sensitive to poor water quality and disturbance, and this may be indicative of moderate water quality and minimal disturbance in Tingalpa Creek. Conversely, between one and three PET families were recorded in Hilliards Creek and at Tingalpa Creek site T4 (Figure 6.2), which was below the QWQG and may be indicative of habitat degradation and / or poor water quality conditions.

Figure 6.2

PET richness in edge habitat in April and June 2010, and the QWQG for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009).

6.3

SIGNAL 2 / Family Bi-plot

Macroinvertebrate communities sampled from edge habitat were predominantly in quadrant 4, which is indicative of urban, industrial or agricultural pollution or downstream effects of dams (Figure 6.3). Hilliards Creek site H7 was in quadrant 3, which is indicative of toxic pollution or harsh physical conditions (Figure 6.3). Macroinvertebrate communities in both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks are likely to be affected by pollution and harsh physical conditions.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

15

frc environmental

Figure 6.3

SIGNAL 2 / family by-plot for macroinvertebrate communities in edge habitat in April and June 2010 (quadrant boundaries represent the QWQG for slightly to moderately disturbed waters in south-east Queensland (DERM 2009)).

6.4

Macrocrustacean Communities

In April 2010, macrocrustaceans were recorded at all sites in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks. Taxonomic richness was three at Tingalpa Creek site T2, and was two at the remaining sites (Figure 6.4). Total abundance was higher in Tingalpa Creek than in Hilliards Creek; with Tingalpa Creek site T2 having almost five times as many macrocrustaceans than Hilliards Creek site H2 (Figure 6.5). Freshwater shrimp (Atyidae) and orange tipped crayfish (Parastacidae) were the most abundant taxa caught. Prawns (Palaemonidae) were also present.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

16

frc environmental

Figure 6.4

Taxonomic richness of macrocrustaceans in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

Figure 6.5

Total abundance of macrocrustaceans in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

17

frc environmental

6.5

Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase

Within both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks, there was a low diversity of macroinvertebrate fauna and the community composition is indicative of urban or agricultural pollution. However, Tingalpa Creek supported a moderate number of PET taxa, which may be indicative of moderate water quality and minimal disturbance in Tingalpa Creek. Macroinvertebrate communities indicate that there is mild pollution in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks, but not of a level likely to inhibit fish colonisation.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

18

frc environmental

7

Fish Communities

A total of nine fish species were recorded in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks (Table 7.1). Firetailed gudgeon (Hypseleotris galii) were the most common (i.e. they were recorded at every site) and abundant species. Crimson-spotted rainbowfish were also abundant, however they were not recorded at Hilliards Creek site H8 (Figure 7.1). Mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) and marbled eel (Anguilla reinhardtii) were less abundant (less than 40 individuals were recorded), however they were quite common (i.e. recorded at three of five sites). Swordtail (Xiphophorus hellerii) and fly-specked hardyhead (Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum) were only recorded in Hillliards Creek and ornate rainbowfish (Rhadinocentrus ornatus) were only recorded in Tingalpa Creek. Mosquitofish and swordtails are exotic non-indigenous species (see below). Agassiz's glassfish (Ambassis agassizii) and eel-tailed catfish (Tandanus tandanus) were uncommon (i.e. there were only caught at one site) and rare (only one individual of each species was recorded). Taxonomic richness ranged from two at Tingalpa Creek site T4 to six at Hilliards Creek sites H7 and H8 (Figure 7.2). Most fish recorded were associated with edge and pool habitat, undercut banks, large woody debris and instream roots. In Hilliards Creek, fish were also associated with instream vegetation (e.g. submerged macrophtyes). Marbled eels were typically associated with riffle habitat.

Figure 7.1 Crimson-spotted rainbowfish Tingalpa Creek site T1. at

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

19

frc environmental

Table 7.1

Number of fish recorded at each site in April and June 2010. Common Name Agassiz's glassfish marbled eel Life History Stage adult adult intermediate juvenile Site T1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 25 2 23 T2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 18 25 7 0 T4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 36 0 H2 0 0 0 0 6 8 7 7 9 0 5 H7 0 0 8 0 1 3 4 2 0 3 1 H8 0 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 3 1 0

Family Ambassidae Anguillidae

Latin Name Ambassis agassizii Anguilla reinhardtii

Atherinidae

Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum

fly-specked hardyhead

adult intermediate juvenile

Eleotridae

Hypseleotris galii

firetailed gudgeon

adult intermediate juvenile

Melanotaeniidae

Melanotaenia duboulayi

crimsonspotted rainbowfish

adult

intermediate juvenile Melanotaeniidae Rhadinocentrus ornatus ornate rainbowfish adult intermediate juvenile Plotosidae Poeciliidae Tandanus tandanus Gambusia holbrooki* eel-tailed catfish mosquitofish adult adult intermediate juvenile Poeciliidae Xiphophorus helleri* swordtail adult intermediate juvenile

·

33 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

1 0 10 8 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 14 23 36 1

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 3 11 8 0

exotic species

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

20

frc environmental

Figure 7.2

Fish taxonomic richness in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

Figure 7.3

Fish total abundance in Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks in April and June 2010.

Life History Stages

All life history stages (juvenile, intermediate and adult) of most species were recorded, however, only adult Agassiz's glassfish and eel-tailed catfish were recorded (Table 7.1).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

21

frc environmental

Generally more adults and intermediate fish were recorded than juvenile fish. The low abundance of juveniles may be due to seasonal influences, or a lack of suitable breeding habitat for these species in the reaches surveyed.

Indicators of Stream Health

Two exotic species (i.e. not native to Australia) were recorded: mosquitofish and swordtails (Figure 7.4). The mosquitofish is declared noxious in Queensland under the Fisheries Regulation 20083 and was recorded at all sites except Hilliards Creek site H2. Swordtails were recorded at Hilliards Creek sites H7 and H8 (Figure 7.4), and at site H7, they were very common, accounting for 54% of the total catch. No exotic fish were recorded at Hilliards Creek site H2 or Tinglapa Creek site T4.

Figure 7.4 Swordtail at Hilliards Creek site H7.

No listed rare or threatened species were captured during the survey. Ornate rainbowfish are patchily distributed in south-east Queensland and northern New South Wales and are a species of conservation concern in Redland City Council.

7.1

Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase

Crimson-spotted rainbowfish were recorded at every site except at Hilliards Creek site H8, however it is likely that they do inhabit this reach. As none of the native fish recorded are

3

Reprint No. 2I, Reprinted as in force on 2 April 2010. Reprint prepared by the Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Council.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

22

frc environmental

particularly aggressive or occupy the same habitat niche as crimson-spotted rainbowfish, these other native species recorded are unlikely to impact the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase, provided the carrying capacity of crimson-spotted rainbowfish is not exceeded during stocking. The presence of the exotic mosquitofish and swordtails may impact on the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase. Mosquitofish are aggressive and nip the fins of other fish species as well as eat their eggs (DPIF 2010). Swordtails are not particularly aggressive, but their introduction has been shown to have detrimental effects on small surfacedwelling native fishes (e.g. crimson-spotted rainbowfish). The presence of either species typically results in a reduction and possible loss of native fish species. Mosquitofish and swordtails were more abundant in Hilliards Creek than in Tingalpa Creek. The ornate rainbowfish is a species of conservation concern in the Redlands. It is possible that releasing crimson-spotted rainbowfish or purple-spotted gudgeons may impact on the ornate rainbowfish population through predation and / or competition. More research is required to determine what, if any impact there would be on this species. Purple-spotted gudgeons were not recorded in either creek.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

23

frc environmental

8

Turtle Communities

An adult saw-shelled turtle (Wollumbinia latisternum) was recorded at Tingalpa Creek site T2 (Figure 8.1). No other turtles or suitable turtle nesting banks were observed.

Figure 8.1 Saw-shelled turtle at Tingalpa Creek site T2.

8.1

Other Aquatic Vertebrates

No other aquatic vertebrates were observed or captured.

8.2

Relevance for Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase

The turtles present may prey on a few of the released captive bred native fish; however, it is likely that turtles are present in both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks. This is unlikely to impact the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Project.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

24

frc environmental

9

Summary and Recommendation

Both Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks have a range of positive features that are likely to contribute to the success of the Fish, Creeks & Us Trial Phase (Table 9.1). Tinglapa Creek does have slightly better habitat and water quality, and supports a diverse macroinvertebrate and fish community with very few exotics. However, at this point it is unclear how re-introducing captive bred native fish into Tingalpa Creek would impact on the ornate rainbowfish community. It is recommended that more research be conducted to determine what, if any impact there would likely be on this species before any restocking occurs in Tingalpa Creek. Hilliards Creeks does have moderate habitat and water quality and supports a diverse macroinvertebrate and fish community, but it also supports one exotic macrophyte and two exotic fish species. It is predicted that re-introduced captive bred crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons would thrive given the moderate habitat quality. Therefore, we recommend that the next phase of the Fish, Creeks & Us Project involve stocking trials of crimson-spotted rainbowfish to Hilliards Creek near sites H2, H7 and H8. The stocking densities and timing will be discussed in a Stocking Report (frc environmental 2010).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

25

frc environmental

Table 9.1 Variable

Positive and negative features of Tingalpa and Hilliards creeks. Positive Features Negative Features

Tingalpa Creek Habitat

· ·

good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and a diversity of substrate types riffles, runs and pools at time of survey conductivity, pH and turbidity within or close to relevant guideline healthy macrophytes emergent

·

logs and upstream culvert may create barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

Water Quality

·

·

low dissolved oxygen

Macrophytes Macroinvertebrates

·

·

no submerged macrophytes, which may limit breeding potential low diversity of macroinvertebrate fauna community composition indicative of urban, industrial or agricultural pollution

·

moderate number of PET taxa macroinvertebrates communities indicate that there is mild pollution, but not of a level likely to inhibit fish colonisation diverse native communities fish

·

·

·

Aquatic Fauna

·

·

exotic non-indigenous mosquitofish may compete for habitat and may nip the fins of introduced fish releasing captive bred native fish may impact on the ornate rainbowfish communities turtles may prey on captive bred native fish released

·

·

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

26

frc environmental

Variable Hilliards Creek Habitat

Positive Features

Negative Features

· ·

good riparian vegetation variety of instream habitat, including woody debris and a variety of substrate types runs and pools at time of survey dissolved oxygen, pH and turbidity within or close to guidelines abundant macrophytes submerged

·

logs may create natural barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow

·

Water Quality

·

·

very high conductivity

Macrophytes

·

·

very dense submerged macrophytes in some reaches which may limit migration exotic macrophytes present low diversity of macroinvertebrate fauna low number of PET taxa, indicating habitat degradation and / or poor water quality conditions community composition indicative of urban, industrial or agricultural pollution exotic non-indigenous mosquitofish may compete for habitat and may nip the fins of introduced fish exotic non-indigenous swordtails may compete for habitat turtles may prey on captive bred native fish released

·

Macroinvertebrates

·

macroinvertebrates communities indicate that there is mild pollution, but not of a level likely to inhibit fish colonisation

·

·

·

Aquatic Fauna

·

diverse native communities

fish

·

·

·

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

27

frc environmental

10

References

DERM, 2009. Queensland Water Quality Guidlines Version 3 September 2009. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Brisbane DPIF, 2010, Gambusia or Mosquitofish, www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_13877.htm, June 2010. accessed

EPA, 2007, Redands Creeks Environmental Values and Water Quality Objections Basin No. 145 (part) Including Coolnwynpin, Eprapah, Hilliards, Lota, Moogurrapum, Tarradarrapin, Tingalpa, and Wynnum Creeks, Environmental Protection Agency. frc environmental, 2010, Redland City Council's Fish, Creeks & Us Project Stocking Plan, report prepared for Redland City Council. Google Earth, 2010, Google Earth Map, http://earth.google.com/, accessed June 2010. Pusey, B.J., Kennard, M. & Arthington, A., 2004, Freshwater Fishes of North-Eastern Australia, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, pp. 684.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment

28

frc environmental

Appendix A Contents

1

Detailed Methodology

Survey Design and Methodology 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 Survey Design Aquatic Habitat Water Quality Aquatic Flora Macroinvertebrate Communities Fish Communities Turtles Communities

1 1 3 6 6 6 10 11 13

2

References

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Location of sites and type of survey at each site. Average cover of habitat types from which crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons have been recorded in south-east Queensland (Pusey et al. 2004). Habitat bioassessment scores used to derive overall condition categories. QWQG biological guidelines for south-east Queensland (DERM 2009). Sampling effort at each site. 2

4 5 8 12

Table 1.3 Table 1.4 Table 1.5

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 The quadrant diagram for the family version of SIGNAL 2 (Chessman 2003b).

10

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

frc environmental

1

1.1

Survey Design and Methodology

Survey Design

Reconnaissance

A reconnaissance and habitat assessment was completed on 31 March 2010 and 20 May 2010 at four sites on Tingalpa Creek (T1, T2, T3 and T4) and at seven sites on Hilliards Creek (H1, H2, H4, H5, H7, H8 and H10). The location of these sites were chosen based on the results of a literature review; maps and aerial photography, overlaid by records of significant habitat; and on the ground conditions (i.e. site access and presence of water).

Flora and Fauna Survey

Aquatic habitat, water quality, aquatic flora, and macroinvertebrate, fish and turtle communities of Hilliards and Tingalpa creeks were assessed during a field survey on 15 ­ 16 April 2010 and 24 June 2010 (Table 1.1). For a discussion on how these sites were chosen, see below.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

1

frc environmental

Table 1.1 Location of sites and type of survey at each site. UTM (GDA84, Zone 56J) Site Easting (m) Hiliards Creek H1 H2 H4 H5 H7 H8 H10 Tingalpa Creek T1 T2 T3 T4 518 339 519 662 520 691 520 374 6 947 432 6 945 463 6 944 436 6 943632 524 350 524 330 524 713 524 711 524 239 523 970 523 252 6 955 729 6 955 292 6 954 835 6 954 698 6 953 670 6 953 037 6 951 363 Northing (m) Reconnaissance Aquatic Habitat Water Quality Aquatic Flora Macroinvertebrates Fish Flora and Fauna Survey

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

2

frc environmental

1.2

Aquatic Habitat

We collected data on the physical condition of the creeks using standard data sheets based on the Queensland AusRivAS Sampling and Processing Manual (DNRM 2001). We described and summarised the instream habitat condition at the time of survey, based on the AusRivAS protocol, including:

· · · · ·

the type and condition of riparian vegetation habitats (pools, riffles, runs, etc.) water depth and velocity substrate type and the presence of bars the presence of snags (large woody debris), overhangs, undercuts, and other forms of shelter, and any physical barriers to fish passage.

·

We estimated the percent coverage of the preferred habitat variables for crimson-spotted rainbowfish (Melanotaenia duboulayii) and purple-spotted gudgeons (Mogurnda adspersa) as listed in Table 1.2. Based on these descriptions, each site was given a habitat assessment score following the Habitat Bioassessment Score system (DNRM 2001).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

3

frc environmental

Table 1.2

Average cover of habitat types from which crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons have been recorded in south-east Queensland (Pusey et al. 2004). Crimson-Spotted Rainbowfish Purple-Spotted Gudgeons

Habitat Variable

Site Characteristics Stream width (m) Riparian cover (%) Gradient (%) Mean depth (m) Mean velocity (m3/s) Substrate (%) Mud Sand Fine gravel Coarse gravel Cobble Rocks Bedrock Instream Habitat (%) Open water Macrophytes Filamentous algae Overhanging vegetation Submerged vegetation Emergent vegetation Leaf litter Large woody debris Small woody debris Undercut banks Root masses 16.0 13.6 7.4 1.8 3.7 1.8 11.9 5.6 4.0 15.8 22.8 0.0 19.9 11.7 2.0 9.9 3.1 16.5 3.4 3.4 9.0 11.9 7.2 22.6 24.0 26.7 14.4 3.8 1.3 7.8 18.8 24.2 30.6 16.1 1.7 0.8 8.0 47.9 0.18 0.43 0.09 6.0 47.5 0.14 0.35 0.05

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

4

frc environmental

Habitat Bioassessment Scores

Habitat Bioassessment Score datasheets (DNRM 2001) were used to numerically assess nine criteria to one of four categories: excellent, good, moderate and poor. The sum of the numerical rating from each category produced an overall habitat assessment score. Each site was given an indicative overall condition category, based on the following total habitat assessment score categories: Excellent >110; Good 75 ­ 110; Moderate 39 ­ 74; and Poor 38. Condition categories were based on the minimum possible score required for each criteria to be scored within that condition category (Table 1.3).

Table 1.3 Habitat bioassessment scores used to derive overall condition categories. Minimum Possible Score Within Each Condition Category Excellent Bottom cover substrate / available 16 16 16 12 12 12 9 9 9 111 Good 11 11 11 8 8 8 6 6 6 75 Moderate 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 3 39 Poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Habitat Variable

Embeddedness Velocity / depth category Channel alteration Bottom scouring & deposition Pool / riffle, run / bend ratio Bank stability Bank vegetative stability Streamside cover Total

Determining Site Locations for the Flora and Fauna Survey

Using the known habitat preferences for each species (Table 1.2) and the Habitat Bioassessment Scores (Table 1.3), we identified locations on each creek with suitable habitat for crimson-spotted rainbowfish and purple-spotted gudgeons. These locations had the highest Habitat Bioassessment Scores, as well as the highest proportion of the preferred habitat for each species. These sites were surveyed during the flora and fauna survey.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

5

frc environmental

1.3

Water Quality

Water quality was measured at each site using a Hydrolab QUANTA water quality meter. The following parameters were measured:

· · · · ·

water temperature (°C) conductivity (µS/cm) pH dissolved oxygen (DO; % saturation), and turbidity (NTU, Nephelometric Turbidity Units).

1.4

Aquatic Flora

Macrophytes were assessed along a 100 m reach at each site. We recorded the following:

· · ·

the presence of all native and exotic macrophytes the percent coverage of each species at each site, and the percent coverage of submerged, floating (free-floating or rooted) and emergent macrophytes.

Percent coverage refers to the area of substrate (bed or bank) covered by vegetation. Due to the physical overlap of emergent, floating and submerged growth forms, total percent coverage could exceed 100%. Photographs of macrophytes were taken at each site and species were identified in the field, where practical. The Census of Queensland Flora 2007 (Queensland Herbarium 2007) was used to classify macrophytes as native or exotic.

1.5

Macroinvertebrate Communities

Sample Collection

Aquatic macroinvertebrates play a major role in the ecology of rivers, and aquatic invertebrate diversity is crucial to the maintenance of a healthy ecosystem. In Australia, AusRivAS (the Australian River Assessment System), a standardised sampling and predictive modelling system, is used to assess the biological health of rivers.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

6

frc environmental

Macroinvertebrates have been selected as the key indicator group for the bio-assessment of the health of Australia's streams and rivers under the AusRivAS Program. The Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) use the AusRivAS system as a part of their biological monitoring program of the freshwaters of Queensland. A standard AusRivAS macroinvertebrate sample was collected from edge habitat at each site in accordance with the Queensland AusRivAS sampling manual (DNRM 2001). A standard triangular-framed, cone-shaped net with 250 µm mesh was used to collect all samples. Five replicated macroinvertebrates samples were also collected from edge habitat at each site, to enable us to determine whether there has been a change in macroinvertebrate communities over time. Although releasing fish to the creeks is unlikely to result in a significant change in macroinvertebrate communities, a quantitative sampling design will enable us to detect other impacts (e.g. from pollutants from anthropogenic sources), which may also impact fish communities. A quantitative sampling design will not only substantially improve our interpretation of the condition and current impacting processes of the macroinvertebrates of the study area; but will provide a baseline (`pre-impact') data set upon which to base future monitoring. This data will be incorporated into the monitoring program.

Sample Processing

Samples were frozen and returned to frc environmental's Brisbane benthic laboratory where they were sorted, counted and identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level (in most instances family), to comply with AusRivAS standards and those described in Chessman (2003a).

Data Analysis

A number of indices have been developed for freshwater macroinvertebrate communities to provide an indication of ecosystem health, as described below. For each sample, taxonomic richness, PET richness and SIGNAL 2 scores were calculated. These indices were used to provide an indication of the current ecological health of both Hilliards and Tingalpa creeks, and to make comparisons between them. The results from this study were compared to the biological guidelines outlined in the QWQG for slightly to moderately disturbed streams in south-east Queensland (Table 1.4) (DERM 2009).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

7

frc environmental

Table 1.4 Indicator

QWQG biological guidelines for south-east Queensland (DERM 2009). Biological Guideline for Lowland Freshwaters 22 4 4

Taxonomic richness PET richness SIGNAL 2 score

Taxonomic Richness

Taxonomic richness is the number of taxa (typically families) in a sample. Taxonomic richness is the most basic and unambiguous diversity measure, and is considered to be one of the most effective. It is however, affected by arbitrary choice of sample size and location. Where all samples are considered to be of equal size, species richness index is considered to be a useful tool when used in conjunction with other indices. Richness does not take into account the relative abundance of each taxa, so rare taxa have as much `weight' as common ones.

PET Richness

While some groups of macroinvertebrates are tolerant of pollution and environmental degradation, others are sensitive to these stressors (Chessman 2003a). The Plecoptera (stoneflies), Ephemoptera (mayflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies) are referred to as PET taxa, and they are particularly sensitive to disturbance. There are typically more PET families at sites with good habitat and water quality than at degraded sites, and PET taxa are often the first to disappear when water quality or environmental degradation occurs (EHMP 2004). The lower the PET score, the greater the inferred degradation.

SIGNAL 2 Scores

SIGNAL (Stream Invertebrate Grade Number -- Average Level) scores are also based on the sensitivity of each macroinvertebrate family to pollution or habitat degradation. The SIGNAL system has been under continual development for over 10 years, with the current version known as SIGNAL 2. Each macroinvertebrate family has been assigned a grade number between 1 and 10 based on their sensitivity to various pollutants. A low number means that the macroinvertebrate is tolerant of a range of environmental conditions, including common forms of water pollution (e.g. suspended sediments and nutrient enrichment).

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

8

frc environmental

SIGNAL 2 scores are weighted for abundance, such that the relative abundance of tolerant or sensitive taxa can be taken into account (instead of only the presence / absence of these taxa). The overall SIGNAL 2 score for a site is based on the total of the SIGNAL grade (multiplied by the weight factor) for each taxa present at the site, divided by the total of the weight factors for each taxa at the site. SIGNAL 2 scores should be interpreted in conjunction with the number of families found in the sample. This can be achieved using a SIGNAL 2 / Family bi-plot (Chessman 2003b). The plots are divided into quadrants, with each quadrant indicative of particular conditions (Figure 1.1). Quadrant boundaries for the SIGNAL 2 / Family bi-plot used for this study are based on the QWQG (DERM 2009) for slightly to moderately disturbed streams in central Queensland. Recently, an alternative approach has been recommended, which includes boundary setting for each study (Chessman 2003b). This technique would require considerable sampling (in effect calibration) within the region. Interpretation of the bi-plot with regard to quadrant boundaries should therefore be approached with caution.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

9

frc environmental

Figure 1.1

The quadrant diagram for the family version of SIGNAL 2 (Chessman 2003b).

1.6

Fish Communities

Fish communities were surveyed using a combination of backpack electrofishing, baited traps and nets. Electrofishing was the preferred method and was undertaken at all sites. Sampling effort is presented in Table 1.5. Electrofishing was conducted using a Smith-Root LR-24 backpack electrofisher to target fish and macrocrustacean communities. Field sampling followed the methods used in the south-east Queensland Ecological Health Monitoring program (EHMP 2007), adapted

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

10

frc environmental

where appropriate to suit local conditions. All available habitat units (i.e. riffle, run, pool) were fished at each site. Electrofishing was conducted in accordance with the Australian Code of Electrofishing Practice 1997, under General Fisheries Permit No. 54790 and 140240 and Animal Ethics Approval No. CA 2009/03/343 issued to frc environmental. At all sites, samples were also collected using five small (2 mm mesh) baited traps, which are designed to capture fish. In addition, two (40 mm mesh) cathedral traps, which are designed to capture turtles, were also used.

Data Analysis

For each site, the taxonomic richness and total abundance was determined.

1.7

Turtles Communities

Two large baited cathedral traps were set along the bank and adjacent to cover (vegetation, snags etc.). The design of the traps is consistent with traps used by the Department of Environment and Resource Management's (DERM's) turtle research group, and consisted of a series of collapsible chambers (totalling approximately 3.5 m in height, 0.7 m in diameter) with two one-way entrances in the lower baited chamber. Traps were deployed so that the top of the chamber was positioned to allow turtles access to the surface to breathe. Traps were closely monitored by team members, to ensure that no turtles or other air-breathing species became entangled or trapped below the surface. The sampling of turtles was conducted under Animal Ethics Approval No. CA 2009/03/343 and Scientific Purposes Permit WISP05080608 issued to frc environmental.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

11

frc environmental

Table 1.5 Site T1 Method

Sampling effort at each site. Habitat run, riffle & pool pool pool run, riffle & pool pool pool pool pool pool run & pool pool pool run, riffle & pool pool pool run, riffle & pool pool Date 16/04/10 Time In 0830 Time Out 0930 Settings 200 V, 12%, 30 Hz ­ ­ 250 V, 12%, 30 Hz ­ ­ ­ 250 V, 12%, 30 Hz ­ 150 V, 12%, 3­0 Hz ­ ­ 200 V, 12%, 30 Hz ­ ­ 100 V, 12%, 30 Hz ­ Effort 588 seconds

backpack electrofishing baited (x5) traps

16/04/10 16/04/10 16/04/10

0810 0810 1100

0940 0940 1140

7.5 hours 3 hours 468 seconds

cathedral trap T2 backpack electrofishing baited (x5) traps

16/04/10 16/04/10 24/06/10 24/06/10 24/06/10 15/04/10 15/04/10 15/04/10 16/04/10

1050 1050 1330 1400 1330 1230 1200 1200 1335

1230 1230 1530 1530 1600 1330 1400 1400 1445

8.3 hours 3.2 hours 4 hours 307 seconds 5 hours 200 seconds 10 hours 4 hours 468 seconds

cathedral trap T4 backpack electrofishing baited (x4) traps

cathedral trap H2 backpack electrofishing baited (x5) traps

cathedral trap H7 backpack electrofishing baited (x5) traps

16/04/10 16/04/10 16/04/10

1330 1330 1605

1530 1530 1642

10 hours 4 hours 378 seconds

cathedral trap H8 backpack electrofishing baited (x5) traps

16/04/10

1600

1700

5 hours

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

12

frc environmental

2

References

Chessman, B., 2003a, 'New sensitivity grades for Australian river macroinvertebrates', Australian Journal of marine and Freshwater Research 54: 95-103. Chessman, B., 2003b. Signal 2 A Scoring System for Macro-Invertebrates ('water-bugs') in Australian Rivers. Monitoring River Health Initiative Technical Report Number 31. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. DERM, 2009. Queensland Water Quality Guidlines Version 3 September 2009. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Brisbane DNRM, 2001. Queensland Australian River Assessment System (AusRivAS). Sampling and Processing Manual. Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Rocklea. EHMP, 2004. Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 2002-2003, Annual Techniqual Report. Moreton Bay Waterways and Catchment Partnership, Brisbane. EHMP, 2007. Ecosystem Health Monitoring Program 2005-2006, Annual Technical Report. South East Queensland Healthy Waterways Partnership, Brisbane. EPA, 2007, Queensland Water Quality Guidelines 2006, Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane. Pusey, B.J., Kennard, M. & Arthington, A., 2004, Freshwater Fishes of North-Eastern Australia, CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, pp. 684. Queensland Herbarium, 2007, Census of the Queensland Flora 2007, Brisbane, pp. 298.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment ­ Appendix A

13

frc environmental

Appendix B

Table 1 Site Tingalpa Creek

T1

Aquatic Habitat of the Survey Sites

Description of the chosen survey sites. Description Photograph

This site was shallow (0.4 m) and was comprised of runs, pools and riffles. The stream had moderate flow and was approximately 4 m wide with sloping, and stable banks. Instream habitat included woody debris, trailing bank vegetation and undercut banks. The substrate was dominated by gravel and pebbles, but also included silt / clay, sand and cobbles. The riparian zone was dense and wide (>30 m) and was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. An upstream culvert and large woody debris could create barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow. This site was shallow (0.3 m) and was comprised of runs, pools and riffles. The stream had moderate flow and was 5 m wide with sloping, and stable banks. Instream habitat included woody debris, trailing bank vegetation and undercut banks. The substrate was dominated by gravel and pebbles, but also included silt / clay, sand and cobbles. The riparian zone was wider on the left bank (>30 m) than the right bank (15 m) and was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. An upstream culvert could create a barrier to fish passage during periods of low flow.

Looking downstream from the left bank 29/03/10.

T2

Looking downstream from the right bank 29/03/10.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment­ Appendix B

1

frc environmental

Site

T4

Description

This site was shallow (0.3 m) and was comprised of pools with very little flow. The stream was 6 m wide with sloping, and stable banks. Instream habitat included woody debris, submerged and emergent macrophytes and trailing bank vegetation. The substrate was dominated by fines (silt / clay and sand), but also included gravel and pebbles. The riparian zone was wide (>30 m) and was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. A downstream culvert could create a barrier to fish passage during periods of low flow.

Photograph

Looking downstream from the right bank 29/03/10.

Hilliards Creek

H2 This site was of moderate depth (0.5 m) and had moderate flow. The stream had run and pool habitat and was 4 m wide with sloping, stable banks. Instream habitat included submerged macrophytes, woody debris and trailing bank vegetation. The substrate was dominated by sand and gravel, but also included silt / clay, pebbles and cobbles. The riparian zone was wider on the left bank (20 m) than the right bank (15 m) and was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. Logs and an upstream culvert could create barriers to fish passage during periods of low flow. This site was of moderate depth (0.5 m) and had moderate flow. The narrow (3.5 m) stream had pools, runs and riffles. While some banks were vertical, they were stable due to high streamside vegetation cover. Instream habitat included woody debris and trailing bank vegetation. The substrate was dominated by sand and gravel, but also included silt / clay, pebbles and cobbles. The riparian zone was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. An upstream culvert and concrete wall could create barriers to fish passage during periods of moderate to low flow.

Looking upstream from the right bank 29/03/10.

H7

Looking upstream from the right bank 29/03/10.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment­ Appendix B

2

frc environmental

Site

H8

Description

This site was deep (0.7 m) with moderate flow, and it consisted of runs, pools and riffles. The site had a narrow (3 m) channel with sloping and vertical, stable banks. Instream habitat included woody debris, undercut banks and trailing bank vegetation. The substrate was dominated by sand and gravel, but also included silt / clay, pebbles and cobbles. The riparian zone was wide (>30 m) and was dominated by trees, shrubs and grasses. Logs could create natural barriers to fish passage during periods of moderate to low flow.

Photograph

Looking upstream from the right bank, 29/03/10.

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment­ Appendix B

3

Table 2 Habitat Variable

Habitat data for each site. Average for Sites in South East Queensland CrimsonSpotted Rainbowfish PurpleSpotted Gudgeons T1 T2 T3 T4 H1 Sites

H2

H4

H5

H7

H8

H10

Site Characteristics Stream width (m) Riparian cover (%) Gradient (%) Mean depth (m) Mean velocity 3 (m /s) Substrate (%) Mud Sand Fine gravel Coarse gravel Cobble Rocks Bedrock

8 47.9 0.18 0.43 0.09

6 47.5 0.14 0.35 0.05

4 70 1 0.4 0.17

5 60 0.5 0.3 0.19

3 70 1 0.1 0.00

6 50 0.25 0.3 0.03

6 20 1 0.8 0.23

4 30 0.5 0.5 0.23

4 20 1 0.66 0.31

15 30 0.5 1.7 0.16

3.5 40 0.5 0.5 0.20

3 60 0.5 0.7 0.23

2 20 0.5 0.3 0.03

7.2 22.6 24 26.7 14.4 3.8 1.3

7.8 18.8 24.2 30.6 16.1 1.7 0.8

5 5 50 30 10 0 0

5 10 35 40 10 0 0

10 10 20 30 25 5 0

45 30 20 5 0 0 0

20 70 10 0 0 0 0

10 35 35 15 5 0 0

50 30 10 10 0 0 0

40 30 15 10 5 0 0

5 5 40 40 5 5 0

5 5 45 40 5 0 0

45 30 20 5 0 0 0

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment­ Appendix B

4

Habitat Variable

Average for Sites in South East Queensland CrimsonSpotted Rainbowfish PurpleSpotted Gudgeons T1 T2 T3 T4 H1

Sites

H2

H4

H5

H7

H8

H10

Instream Habitat (%) Open water Macrophytes Filamentous algae Overhanging vegetation Submerged vegetation Emergent vegetation Leaf litter Large woody debris Small woody debris Undercut banks Root masses 16 13.6 7.4 1.8 3.7 1.8 11.9 5.6 4 15.8 22.8 0 19.9 11.7 2 9.9 3.1 16.5 3.4 3.4 9 11.9 50 10 0 20 0 10 15 10 5 10 5 50 10 0 15 0 10 15 10 5 5 5 5 10 0 15 0 5 20 2 3 0 2 60 40 0 15 30 10 15 5 10 5 5 60 15 0 5 10 5 10 10 5 5 5 50 10 0 10 10 5 5 10 5 10 5 10 65 0 10 60 5 5 5 10 5 5 50 45 0 5 40 10 5 5 5 0 5 50 10 0 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 10 50 5 0 10 5 10 5 5 10 5 10 60 0 0 10 0 15 5 5 10 5 5

Fish, Creeks & Us: Trial Phase, Potential Release Location Assessment­ Appendix B

5

Information

73 pages

Find more like this

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

711131


You might also be interested in

BETA