62 Monitoring Threatened Species and Ecological Communities
provided thorough information on demographic parameters (average score for all
33 species: 2.3/5), while scores for monitoring coverage (2.6) and design quality
(2.6) were moderate. Few programs had strong links to management (only 9% of
species scored 5) and 24% of species with some form of monitoring received no
management. Metrics that scored particularly poorly were reporting of monitoring
information (1.7) and management linkages (1.6). The highest scoring metrics were
monitoring periodicity (annual monitoring was undertaken for 42% of species),
and coordination (48% of species’ monitoring was well coordinated through a
single organisation, generally ref lecting the limited distribution of many
threatened frog species).
Summing species scores across the nine monitoring evaluation metrics
(maximum possible score, 45), Critically Endangered species scored higher (29.4)
than Endangered (26.7) or Vulnerable (16.7) species. However, the difference
between groups was not statistically significant (Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis
of variance, P = 0.06), partially ref lecting small sample sizes (Table 5.2). Species
with current recovery plans scored higher (29.4) than species with recovery plans
in development (21.5), lapsed recovery plans (17.6) or no recovery plan (18.6) (Table
5.2), although the differences between groups was again not significant (Kruskal–
Wallis one-way analysis of variance, P = 0.14). There was limited difference in
average monitoring scores for species predominantly threatened by chytrid fungus
(22.6), compared to species impacted by other threats (20.8) (Table 5.2).
Approximately two-thirds of monitoring programs were undertaken by state
government agencies, with one-third of programs undertaken by university-based
researchers. Resources were the primary constraint impeding monitoring efforts
for over three-quarters of all species, and resource allocation has decreased over
Fig. 5.2. Summary of the extent and adequacy of monitoring for the 33 threatened Australian frog taxa.
The shading on each horizontal bar indicates the percentage of species in each score class, from 0 (no
monitoring, palest shading) to 5 (optimal monitoring, darkest shading).