60 Monitoring Threatened Species and Ecological Communities
species remains uncertain (e.g. the peppered tree frog L. piperata) and is the focus
of current investigations.
The assessment framework includes nine evaluation metrics against which
monitoring efforts for each species were scored. For each metric, a species was
scored between zero and five, where zero represented no monitoring and five
represented the best outcome for that metric (see Chapter 2). Short-term survey
efforts focused on locating frog populations were not considered to constitute
monitoring. In addition to the nine metrics in the framework, information was
also compiled on factors that inhibited monitoring efforts (e.g. limited knowhow,
funding, logistical constraints) and what type of organisation was involved in
monitoring. To ensure consistency, one researcher (BCS) completed the evaluation
for each species in conjunction with the relevant contact person(s). Despite the
team’s best efforts, it is possible that monitoring efforts for some species may have
been overlooked.
Results
This assessment identified that over one-quarter of Australia’s 33 threatened frog
fauna receive no targeted monitoring (27%). For species that receive some form of
monitoring (e.g. green and golden bell frog Litoria aurea; Fig. 5.1), the adequacy of
monitoring efforts in each of the nine metrics was highly variable (Fig. 5.2; Table
5.1). Many species consistently scored 1, 2 or 3 across each metric, indicating
suboptimal information of species trends (Fig. 5.2). Monitoring programs rarely
Fig. 5.1. The green and golden bell frog Litoria aurea is an example of a threatened amphibian that is being
monitored, with a total monitoring score of 30/45. Photo: B. Scheele.