AT-1. Plan of Subdivision Version D 386 Agar Road Coronet Bay Permit 150268

AT-2. 386 Agar Road Coronet Bay Locality Plan AT-3. Flora and Fauna Assessment 386 Agar Road Coronet Bay Permit 150268

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment, and No Net Loss Analysis 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Habitat Zone A Habitat Zone B

Habitat Zone E Habitat Zone J

April 2016

1 REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Prepared by Katherine Smedley

PRACTICAL ECOLOGY Pty Ltd ACN: 082 911 377 ABN: 88 082 911 377 PO Box 228 Preston VIC 3072 (2B Stott Street Preston Vic 3072) P: 9484 1555 F: 9484 9133 www.practicalecology.com.au

Acknowledgments: Matt Brosnan Client (acting for landholder)

Alice Ewing Fieldwork

Colin Broughton Map production

Karen McGregor Map production

Prepared for: Brosnan Engineering PE project BRO 2074 Solutions Pty Ltd number:

Version Date Reviewer/Authorised by Notes 0.1 15/07/2015 Alice Ewing Draft for internal review 0.2 27/08/2015 Matt Brosnan Draft for client review 1.0 28/08/2015 N/a Final for submission to Council 2.0 11/04/2016 N/a NLA revisions due to DELWP comments 3.0 13/04/2016 N/a Finalisation of revised report

© Copyright: Unless otherwise agreed in writing, this report is the intellectual property of Practical Ecology Pty Ltd. It is designed to be used exclusively by the person or organisation that commissioned it. Permission must be sought prior to reproduction of any portion of this document, and every effort made to ensure proper referencing of this document.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Contents

1. DELWP REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 6 2. INTRODUCTION 8 2.1 Aims 8 2.2 Property Location and Description 9 3. METHODS 10 3.1 Ecological Vegetation Classes 10 3.2 Flora 10 3.2.1 Review of Existing Information 10 3.2.2 Limitations 10 3.3 Fauna 11 3.3.1 Review of Existing Information 11 3.3.2 New information and Limitations 11 3.4 Mapping 11 4. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 12 4.1 Ecological Vegetation Classes 12 4.2 Habitat Hectare Assessments 13 4.3 Descriptions of the Habitat Zones 13 4.3.1 Habitat Zone A 13 4.3.2 Habitat Zone B 15 4.3.3 Habitat Zone C 15 4.3.4 Habitat Zone D 16 4.3.5 Habitat Zone E 17 4.3.6 Habitat Zone F 17 4.3.7 Habitat Zones G, H and I 18 3.3.8 Habitat Zone J 19 3.3.9 Habitat Zone K 19 3.3.10 Habitat Zone Road Reserve (RR) 20 4.4 Scattered Trees 20 4.5 Flora 22 4.5.1 State or Nationally Significant Flora Species 22 4.5.2 DELWP Modelled Habitat for Flora 22 4.6 Fauna 23 4.6.1 State or Nationally Significant Fauna Species 24 4.6.2 DEPI Modelled Habitat for Fauna 24 5. RELEVANT POLICY AND LEGISLATION 25 5.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 25 5.2 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 25 5.2.1 Threatened Species 26 5.2.2 Potentially Threatening Processes 26 5.3 Planning and Environment Act 1987 27 5.3.1 State Planning Policy Framework 27 5.3.2 Zoning 27 5.3.3 Overlays 29 5.3.4 Bushfire Prone Area 29 5.3.5 Clause 52.17 29 5.4 Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 30 6. MINIMISING BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS: DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 31

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7. NO NET LOSS ANALYSIS 33 6.1 Risk-based Pathway 33 6.1.1 Location risk 34 6.1.2 Extent of Losses from Proposed Subdivision: Habitat Zones & Scattered Trees 34 7.1.1 Extent of Losses from Proposed Subdivision: Canopy Trees in HZs 36 7.1.2 Application Requirements to Remove Native Vegetation 37 7.1.3 Application Requirements 38 7.3.1 Offset Targets 39 7.7 Offset Strategy for the Proposed Removal of Native Vegetation 45 8. REFERENCES 48 APPENDIX 1 - FLORA SPECIES LIST 49 APPENDIX 2: SIGNIFICANT FLORA SPECIES DATABASE RECORDS 51 APPENDIX 3: SIGNIFICANT FAUNA SPECIES DATABASE RECORDS 53 APPENDIX 4: PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST 71 APPENDIX 5: FIRST PARTY OFFSET MANAGEMENT COMMITMENTERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

TABLES Table 1. EVC units occurring at 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay 12 Table 2. Habitat Hectare Data for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay 14 Table 3. Tree Classification for EVCs at Site 20 Table 4. Scattered Tree Census for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay 21 Table 5. Summary of plant species recorded 22 Table 6. DEPI modelled rare or threatened flora species’ habitats on site 23 Table 7. Fauna and Habitat observed within the Site 23 Table 8. DELWP modelled rare or threatened fauna species’ habitats on site 24 Table 9. Declared Noxious weeds occurring within the Site 30 Table 10. Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts 32 Table 11. Determining risk-based pathway 33 Table 12. Extent of Native Vegetation Loss due to proposed Subdivision 35 Table 13. Extent of Scattered Tree loss due to proposed Subdivision 35 Table 14. Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts 38 Table 15. Summary of native vegetation to be removed 39 Table 16. Offsets required if a permit is granted 40 Table 17. Site eligibility criteria 41 Table 18. Habitat gain scoring for rehabilitation of vegetation onsite. 44 Table 19. Balance of losses and gains on-site 45 Table 20. Habitat gain scoring for rehabilitation of vegetation onsite. 47

Figures Figure 1. Looking south across site, ...... 9 Figure 2. Looking towards dwellings situated along Agars Road, along the western perimeter of the site ..... 9 Figure 3. Habitat Zone A ...... 15

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Figure 4. Habitat Zone B ...... 15 Figure 5. Habitat Zone C ...... 16 Figure 6. Habitat Zone D ...... 16 Figure 7. Habitat Zone E ...... 17 Figure 8. Habitat Zone F ...... 17 Figure 9. Habitat Zone G ...... 18 Figure 10. Habitat Zone H ...... 18 Figure 11. Habitat Zone I ...... 18 Figure 12. Habitat Zone J ...... 19 Figure 13. Habitat Zone K ...... 19 Figure 14. Habitat Zone RR ...... 20 Figure 15. Scattered Tree 1 ...... 21 Figure 16. Scattered Tree 2 ...... 21 Figure 17. Scattered Tree 3 ...... 21 Figure 18. Scattered Tree 4 ...... 21 Figure 19. Location risk for vegetation to be removed ...... 34

MAPS Map 1. Ecological Assessment: Existing Site Conditions ...... 73 Map 2. Habitat Zones and the Proposed Subdivision layout with 50m Buffer Zone ...... 74 Map 3. Original Plan of Subdivision ...... 75

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

1. DELWP REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

On 6th November 2015, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) issued a letter regarding Planning Permit application 150368, the 63 lot subdivision and vary or remove existing easement and vegetation removal; 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay; Lot 2 PS714078 and Lot 1 PS714076.

The comments and request for further information outlined in the DELWP letter have been copied below, along with responses to these comments which are provided in this REVISED report. Only the comments which required a specific response and the request for further information have been copied and responded to below.

As documented in this report, an application has been submitted to remove some native vegetation, whilst retaining the majority of vegetation within the site, as documented in this Flora and Fauna Assessment (refer to Sections 5 and 6).

An offset strategy has now been incorporated in Section 7.7 of this REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment (April 2016).

The requirement for a 50m buffer between a dwelling and offset site, does not affect the amount of vegetation which was proposed to be retained within the site in the October 2015 Flora and Fauna Assessment. However it does affect the amount of area available within the site available for on- site offsets.

A revised Map 2 depicts the retained vegetation, the lots with their defined building envelopes and the 50m buffer between the edges of the building envelopes and the retained native vegetation. Retained native vegetation within the 50m buffer will be managed for its’ conservation values, but will not be utilised for on-site offsets.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Retained native vegetation outside of the 50m buffer will be utilised as on-site offsets, and will also be managed for its’ conservation values.

Section 7.7 Offset Strategy discusses the long term viability of the offset sites and who will manage the designated reserves/offset sites.

The Offset Strategy is provided in Section 7.7 of this REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

2. INTRODUCTION

Practical Ecology Pty Ltd was commissioned by Brosnan Engineering Solutions Pty Ltd, to undertake a flora and fauna assessment as part of the proposed subdivision of 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay into a multi-lot residential subdivision.

Currently the site is a vacant lot that contains two small dams, several patches of remnant vegetation, four scattered trees and a large area of cleared land that is used for grazing. The site is currently entered off Agar Road. There is an undeveloped road reserve along the southern perimeter of the site.

There is a strip of residential blocks that have mostly been developed along the western perimeter, between the site itself and Agar Road.

Practical Ecology Pty Ltd received confirmation to proceed with consultancy services, as outlined in the fee proposal dated 10th February 2015, in mid-May 2015.

2.1 Aims

The site assessment and this report aims to provide:

 a description of the existing site conditions

 the compilation of a list of vascular plants observed across the study site

 a description of the existing and/or original Ecological Vegetation Classes found within the site and assessment based on the Habitat Hectares scoring method

 a review of relevant literature, flora and fauna records and habitat conditions on the site to determine the occurrence of significant flora and fauna

 an assessment of priority weeds with proposed directions for hygiene, control and ongoing management

 discussion of relevant ecological legislation in relation to the proposed development

 provision of expert opinion on avoiding and minimising ecological impacts as a result of any vegetation removal associated with the proposed subdivision,

 a No Net Loss analysis, and

 the provision of mapping to illustrate necessary information, including existing conditions and the proposed management zones under the development proposal.

At a later stage, an Offset Management Plan will be required to address the management of the on- site offsets located within the two reserves in the site.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

2.2 Property Location and Description

The study site is located within the Bass Coast Shire Council, just to the south of the built up area of Coronet Bay. Aside from the strip of dwellings along Agar Road/the western perimeter of the site, the site is surrounded by farming land. It is 20.172 hectares in area.

The northern end of the site is the highest point, from which the site then slopes downwards to the southern perimeter.

Along the eastern perimeter of the site, there is a fairly continuous strip of native vegetation that occurs both within the site and in the properties to the north and east of the site. There are also ‘islands’ of native vegetation within the site that have been subjected to grazing by cattle, and four scattered trees.

The largest patches of native vegetation have been fenced, whilst the ‘islands’ of native vegetation are not fenced and are easily accessible by cattle. There was evidence that cattle had been recently grazing within the fenced native vegetation areas of the site.

Whilst the undeveloped road reserve has been cleared of native vegetation, there is vegetation growing along the southern fence line between the site and the road reserve. This strip of vegetation has been fenced and has not been subject to recent grazing.

Figure 1. Looking south across site, Figure 2. Looking towards dwellings situated along Agars Road, along the western perimeter of the site Looking from the north-east corner of site, across the paddocks and Habitat Zone H, towards Westernport Bay

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

3. METHODS

The site was traversed on foot and by vehicle on the 3rd June 2015 by two ecological consultants. The site was visually assessed for flora species, vegetation communities/EVCs, faunal habitat, aspect, specific site conditions, current and potential subdivision/development and management impacts and general threats to the vegetation. A flora list was compiled as per the taxonomy outlined in Section 2.2 below.

3.1 Ecological Vegetation Classes

The on-site vegetation was assessed for both its type and quality. Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) are a vegetation classification system, which define plant communities into common types that occur in similar environmental conditions throughout Victoria. Each vegetation type is identified on the basis of its floristic composition (the plant species present), vegetation structure (i.e. woodland, grassland, saltmarsh), landform (i.e. gully, foothill, plain) and environmental characteristics (i.e. soil type, climate).

DELWP EVC mapping (DELWP 2015) was accessed to assess the EVCs likely to occur on the site. EVCs were then identified in the field according to observable attributes including dominant and characteristic species consistent with the benchmark descriptions (DEPI 2013).

3.2 Flora

Plant taxonomy used in this report are generally in accordance with Walsh & Stajsic (Walsh and Stajsic 2008) and/or Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DEPI 2013).

3.2.1 Review of Existing Information

Existing information in the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA, DELWP 2015X) for a five kilometre radius around the site was obtained to determine any significant flora species recorded in the general area.

3.2.2 Limitations

As indigenous and introduced flora species grow, flower and seed at differing times throughout the year, not all species are ever evident at the one time. This is especially relevant for grassy and herbaceous species. Therefore comprehensive flora surveys require numerous site assessments over all seasons. The following considerations should be made regarding the limitations of the flora survey:

 some species, particularly orchids, lilies and other herbaceous species that can only be observed for a limited period of time, may not have been recorded during the present assessment

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

 flora surveys were undertaken over a short period of time (one day) and focussed on the areas of the site containing native vegetation.

Considering these limitations, it is thought that the flora survey is adequate for the planning permit application, as large areas of the site have been cleared, and there has been some vegetation modification, particularly through extended periods of grazing.

3.3 Fauna

Animal taxonomy is consistent with the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DEPI 2013).

3.3.1 Review of Existing Information

Existing information on the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) for a five kilometre radius around the site was obtained to determine any significant fauna species recorded in the general site area.

3.3.2 New information and Limitations

No specific fauna surveys were undertaken for this study; however, some incidental observations were recorded. The habitat assessment relies upon making judgements on the suitability of habitat present within the site. Potential habitat values considered include:

 old hollow-bearing trees

 intact EVCs, including the understorey strata

 connectivity to other remnant vegetation (in the surrounding blocks)

 water bodies, wetlands or wet depressions, and

 dense vegetation

3.4 Mapping

Geographical positioning data collection in the field for the purposes of map display was carried out using a combination of a handheld GPS device, aerial photography and existing site survey plans. Determination of vegetation boundaries was undertaken using a combination of GPS data and ground-truthing with aerial photography.

Due to inaccuracy with GPS data the mapping should be considered approximate only.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

This section presents the ecological information recorded across the site.

4.1 Ecological Vegetation Classes

The vegetation within and surrounding the site has been broadly mapped by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) as EVC 3: Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland or EVC 53: Swamp Scrub. The major differences between these two EVCs are topography, soil drainage (poor or well-drained) and canopy species.

Within the site, it was determined that two EVCs were present based topography (higher or lower areas within the site), dominant canopy species (dominated by Swamp Paperbarks Melaleuca ericifolia or eucalypts), density of canopy (dense or open), and diversity of shrub and groundstorey species present. At the time of the site assessment, the site was generally quite dry although there was evidence that the site could become waterlogged during wetter periods.

Based on canopy and shrub species, topography and moisture content of the soil within the site; it was determined that the patches of remnant vegetation within the site represented two distinct EVCs: EVC 3: Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland and EVC 53: Swamp Scrub.

The study site falls within the Gippsland Plain Bioregion (DELWP 2015 [online]).

Refer to Table 1 below for general descriptions of these two EVC units.

Table 1. EVC units occurring at 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Bioregion EVC No. EVC Conservation General Description Status

A low, grassy or bracken-dominated eucalypt forest or open Damp woodland to 15m tall with a large shrub layer and ground layer rich in Sands herbs, grasses and orchids. 3 Vulnerable Herb-rich Occurs mainly on flat or undulating areas on moderately fertile, Woodland relatively well-drained, deep sandy or loamy topsoils, over heavier subsoils (duplex soils) (DSE 2014).

Closed scrub to 8m tall at low elevations on alluvial deposits along streams or on poorly drained sites with higher nutrient availability. The EVC is dominated by Swamp Paperbark Melaleuca ericifolia (or sometimes Woolly Tea-tree Leptospermum lanigerum) which often Swamp forms a dense thicket, out-competing other species. 53 Endangered Scrub Occasional emergent eucalypts may be present. Where light penetrates to the ground level, a moss/lichen/liverwort or herbaceous ground cover is often present. Dry variants have a grassy/herbaceous ground layer (DSE 2007).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4.2 Habitat Hectare Assessments

Overall the site assessment determined that there were 12 Habitat Zones within the site.

The twelfth Habitat Zone occurred in the thin plantation between the site and the Government Road Reserve at the southern end of the site. This Habitat Zone consisted of Swamp Paperbarks and planted eucalypts. Utilising Google Earth and viewing aerial photographs from 2007, the Swamp Paperbarks were growing within the site then, based on this, it was determined that even though the patch is only a thin linear strip, it is probable that this strip does contain remnant vegetation.

The habitat hectare assessment data for each of these Habitat Zones is presented in Table 2 on the following page.

Refer to Map 1 (at the end of this report) for the location of the Habitat Zones within the site.

4.3 Descriptions of the Habitat Zones

A general description of the vegetation and species that occur within each Habitat Zone is provided below.

4.3.1 Habitat Zone A

Habitat Zone A was an ‘island’ of Swamp Scrub vegetation, surrounded by grazing land located near the southern, lower end of the site. This remnant patch was unfenced and could be accessed by cattle. Only three indigenous species, along with a few fungi specimens, were observed in the zone: Swamp Paperbarks (95% of the indigenous species present), one Blackwood Acacia melanoxylon and a few small patches of Weeping Grass Microlaena stipoides. The groundstorey was dominated by exotic pasture grasses with scattered weeds such as Hawthorn *Crataegus monogyna, Spear Thistle *Cirsium vulgare and Scotch Thistle *Onopordum acanthium.

The patch had an open canopy (there was little recruitment as cattle had been grazing on the young regenerating Swamp Paperbarks), and the patch was very moist and grassy.

The patch had little species diversity and was considered to be of poor ecological quality, however, it still met the criteria for consideration of a remnant patch as outlined in the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI 2013).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 2. Habitat Hectare Data for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Ecological Vegetation Class SS SS DSHrW SS DSHrW SS SS SS SS DSHrW SS SS Habitat Zones A B C D E F G H I J K RR Large Old Trees N/a N/a 5 N/a 5 N/a N/a N/a N/a 5 N/a N/a Tree Canopy Cover 2 2 2 2 4 2 0 2 0 5 4 0

Lack of Weeds 2 2 0 4 4 4 2 2 2 7 7 2 Site Condition Understorey 5 15 10 15 10 15 5 5 5 15 15 5 Recruitment 1 10 3 5 3 5 1 1 1 5 5 5 Organic Matter 2 4 4 5 4 5 2 2 2 5 5 5

Logs N/a N/a 5 N/a 5 N/a N/a N/a N/a 5 N/a N/a Subtotal 12 33 29 31 35 31 10 12 10 47 36 17 Multiplier to Standardise Score for Treeless EVCs 1.15 1.15 N/a 1.15 N/a 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 N/a 1.15 1.15 Revised Subtotal 13.8 37.95 N/a 35.65 N/a 35.65 11.5 13.8 11.5 N/a 41.4 19.55

Patch Size 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 Landscape Neighbourhood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Context Distance to Core Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Habitat Score 14.8 39.95 30 37.65 37 37.65 12.5 14.8 12.5 49 43.4 21.55 Habitat Score (out of 1.0) 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 Area of Habitat Zone (ha) 0.50 1.64 0.33 0.47 0.63 0.04 0.20 0.38 0.09 0.72 0.34 0.17 Habitat Hectares (area x habitat score) 0.050 0.656 0.1 0.188 0.252 0.016 0.020 0.038 0.009 0.360 0.136 0.034

Bioregion GP GP GP GP GP GP GP GP GP GP GP GP EVC Conservation Status E E V E V E E E E V E E No. of Large Old Trees in each Habitat Zone - - 2 - 3 - - - - 6 - -

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Descriptions of the Habitat Zones (continued)

4.3.2 Habitat Zone B

Habitat Zone B (HZB) was located near the south-east corner of the site, within its lowest point. The patch was part of a larger fenced area of remnant vegetation along the southern and eastern perimeters of the site. Even though the vegetation was fenced, there was evidence that cattle had recently grazed within the fenced area.

As with HZA, HZB was patch of Swamp Scrub, however, this patch was drier underneath, had a more dense canopy, there was lots of recruitment of the Swamp Paperbarks, there was moss patches, and a small, sunken ephemeral wetland patch. There were also some large patches of Blackberry *Rubus fruticosus subsp agg, rabbit burrows and lots of rabbit scrapings.

Aside from the dense canopy of Swamp Paperbarks, there was also numerous other scattered indigenous species including Large Kangaroo Apple Solanum laciniatum, Small-leaved Clematis Clematis microphylla, Weeping Grass, Black Wattle Acacia mearnsii, Rush Juncus spp, Hedge Wattle Acacia paradoxa, Austral Bracken Pteridium escalentum, Prickly Moses Acacia verticillata and Rough Fireweed Senecio hispidulus.

The main weeds were Blackberry (with some large patches present), Bridal Creeper *Asparagus asparagoides, Spear Thistle and Sweet Pittosporum #Pittosporum undulatum. The groundstorey was still dominated by exotic pasture grasses.

Figure 3. Habitat Zone A Figure 4. Habitat Zone B

4.3.3 Habitat Zone C

This patch occurs in the south-east corner of the site and along the eastern perimeter into the adjacent site. It is part of the large fenced area. It is a linear strip of Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland that was characterised by a row of large old eucalypts; Coast Manna Gums Eucalyptus viminalis subsp. pryoriana (along the former fence line that extended into the adjacent property), then a strip of dense shrubs with lots of Inkweed *Phytolacca octandra and Blackberry, that was covered by Wonga Wonga Vine Pandorea

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay pandorana in areas. Bracken was growing along the edges of the dense strip of shrubs, and scattered Rush and Thatch Saw-sedge Gahnia radula where growing around the large eucalypts.

Indigenous species included Rush, Swamp Paperbarks, Thatch Saw-sedge, Hedge Wattle, Prickly Tea- tree Leptospermum continentale, Bracken, Kangaroo Apple and Weeping Grass.

The main weeds were Mirror Bush *Coprosma repens, Inkweed, Agapanthus *Agapanthus praecox, Bridal Creeper and Blackberry. The groundstorey underneath the large old eucalypts was dominated by exotic pasture grasses.

The patch had some species diversity and was considered to be in moderate ecological quality, aside from the dense strip of woody and creeping weeds.

4.3.4 Habitat Zone D

Habitat Zone D represents another patch of Swamp Scrub that was a transition between the more dense Swamp Scrub recorded in HZB and the patch of Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland located uphill of, and adjacent to, HZD. This patch was also located within the large fenced area of vegetation in the south- east corner of the site.

HZD had a more open canopy, with some larger patches of Weeping Grass with either Kidney Weed Dichondra repens or moss in areas in the open areas outside of the Swamp Paperbarks.

There was Bracken and Sweet Vernal-grass *Anthoxanthum odoratum growing under many of the Swamp Paperbarks.

The main weeds were Inkweed, Sweet Vernal-grass and Panic Veldt-grass * Ehrharta erecta var. erecta.

The patch had some species diversity and was considered to be in moderate ecological quality.

Figure 5. Habitat Zone C Figure 6. Habitat Zone D

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4.3.5 Habitat Zone E

Habitat Zone E is a large patch of Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland that contains numerous eucalypts, including three classed as Large Old Trees. This patch was also within the large fenced area in the south-east corner of the site. The patch has a good diversity of indigenous species, some indigenous groundstorey species and lots of logs. There was evidence that the patch had been grazed recently.

Indigenous species included Narrow-leaf Peppermint Eucalyptus radiata s.l., Bracken, Kangaroo Apple, Thatch Saw-sedge, Hedge Wattle, Rush, Common Raspwort Gonocarpus tetragynus, Swamp Paperbark and Weeping Grass. Weeds included Inkweed, Sweet Pittosporum, Gorse *Ulex europaeus, Sweet Vernal- grass, Mirror Bush and Brown-top Bent *Agrostis capillaris.

The patch had good species diversity and was considered to be in good ecological quality.

4.3.6 Habitat Zone F

A thin, triangular strip of Swamp Scrub located uphill of Habitat Zone E. This strip continued into the adjacent property. It was also located within the larger fenced area, which included vegetation within the adjacent property to the east.

The patch had a dense canopy of Swamp Paperbarks with a few emergent eucalypts (Narrow-leaf Peppermints). The patch also contained some Bracken and Hedge Wattles. The main weeds were Gorse and Panic Veldt-grass.

The patch had low species diversity and was considered to be in moderate ecological quality.

Figure 7. Habitat Zone E Figure 8. Habitat Zone F

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4.3.7 Habitat Zones G, H and I

Three ‘island’ patches of Swamp Scrub, that were unfenced and located in the pasture/grazing area, where cattle could access the patches and graze on the Swamp Paperbark seedlings and understorey species.

All three Habitat Zones had little species diversity and were all considered to be of poor ecological quality, but all still met the criteria for consideration as remnant patches.

Habitat Zone G

This patch was very open and degraded with a pasture understorey. It only contained two indigenous species Swamp Paperbarks and Rush. The main weeds were Spear Thistle, Inkweed and Blackberry.

Habitat Zone H

There were three indigenous species present Swamp Paperbarks, Prickly Tea-tree and Rush. The main weeds were Sweet Vernal-grass, Spear Thistle, Blackberry and Briar Rose *Rosa rubiginosa.

This patch had a denser canopy than HZG, as the large shrubs were growing closer together.

Habitat Zone I

There were three indigenous species present Swamp Paperbarks, Rush and Bracken. The main weeds were Spear Thistle, Cape Weed *Arctotheca calendula and Giant Nettle *Urtica dioica.

This patch was very degraded, with an open canopy. Most of the Swamp Paperbarks were dead.

Figure 9. Habitat Zone G Figure 10. Habitat Zone H

Figure 11. Habitat Zone I

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

3.3.8 Habitat Zone J

Habitat Zone J is located in the north-east corner of the site. It is a patch of Damp Sands Herb-rich Woodland. It is the best quality Habitat Zone within the site that contains numerous Large Old Trees, a high cover of indigenous groundstorey vegetation, lots of regenerating shrubs/trees/seedlings and numerous logs.

Indigenous species include Coast Manna Gum, Messmate Eucalyptus obliqua, Swamp Paperbark, Bracken, Prickly Tea-tree, Common Heath Epacris impressa, Spiny-headed Mat-rush Lomandra longifolia, Rough Fireweed, Greenhood orchids Pterostylis spp, and moss and lichen.

Weeds include Sweet Pittosporum, Gorse, Bridal Creeper, Inkweed, Asparagus Fern *Asparagus scandens and Panic Veldt-grass.

This patch had the best ecological condition within the site, with an intact canopy and groundstorey layer. There was evidence of wombat burrows and habitat for other ground dwelling fauna.

3.3.9 Habitat Zone K

Habitat Zone K is located in the north-east corner of the site. It is a patch of dense Swamp Scrub that surrounds HZJ.

HZK was considered to be the best patch of Swamp Scrub within the site. The Swamp Paperbarks were in good health, there were few weeds, good recruitment and a high moss and Bracken cover.

Indigenous species included Swamp Paperbarks, Bracken, Rush, Blackwoods, Prickly Tea-trees, Weeping Grass and moss. The main weeds were Sweet Pittosporum, Sweet Vernal-grass and Blackberry.

Both Habitat Zones J and K were fenced and there was no evidence of recent grazing.

This patch had the in very good ecological condition, with an intact canopy and groundstorey layer.

Figure 12. Habitat Zone J Figure 13. Habitat Zone K

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

3.3.10 Habitat Zone Road Reserve (RR)

Habitat Zone RR (Road Reserve) is the patch located in the fenced plantation adjacent to the Government Road Reserve along the southern perimeter of the site.

As outlined previously, this patch contains Swamp Paperbarks and planted eucalypts.

There is some recruitment within the patch as it is fenced and has not been grazed.

The indigenous species include Swamp Paperbarks, Rush and Mistletoe Amyema spp. Weeds include Blackberry, Radiata Pine *Pinus radiata and Panic Veldt-grass.

The patch had little species diversity and was considered to be of poor ecological quality but met the criteria for consideration as a remnant patch outlined in the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI 2013).

Figure 14. Habitat Zone RR

4.4 Scattered Trees

Four scattered trees were recorded outside the Habitat Zones. All four scattered trees were located within the pasture/grazing areas of the site. Some of the trees had fences around their trunk.

Table 3 shows the tree classification by diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) for EVC 3: Damp Sands Herb- rich Woodland.

Table 3. Tree Classification for EVCs at Site

DBH of: EVC No. EVC Very Large Old Large Old Tree Medium Old Tree Small Tree Tree

3 Damp Sands Herb-rich ≥ 100 cm ≥ 70 cm to <100cm ≥55cm to <70cm ≥15cm to <55cm Woodland

The location, species and DBH of the scattered trees is outlined in Table 4 on the next page.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Overall 11 Large Old Trees (LOTs) were mapped in Habitat Zones C (two LOTs), E (three LOTs) and J (six LOTs). Information regarding these LOTs is not provided in Table 4 below.

If the tree has more than one stem, only the DBH of the larger stem is presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Scattered Tree Census for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

PE Tree Common Name Botanical Name Diameter Comments Number at Breast  Retained or Lost? height (dbh) 1 Narrow-leaf Eucalyptus radiata s.l. ~75cm Located in smaller Lot (less than 0.4ha)- lost Peppermint 2 Narrow-leaf Eucalyptus radiata s.l. ~80cm Located in smaller Lot (less than 0.4ha)- lost Peppermint Lying along ground- hard to measure 3 Narrow-leaf Eucalyptus radiata s.l. ~95cm Located in smaller Lot (less than 0.4ha)- lost Peppermint 4 Narrow-leaf Eucalyptus radiata s.l. ~90cm Located in smaller Lot (less than 0.4ha)- lost Peppermint

Figure 15. Scattered Tree 1 Figure 16. Scattered Tree 2

Figure 17. Scattered Tree 3 Figure 18. Scattered Tree 4

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4.5 Flora

A total of 67 plant taxa were recorded in the site during this survey of which 30 were indigenous (44%) and 37 (56%) were introduced or naturalised outside their natural range. Appendix 1 lists all flora species recorded within the site. Table 5 below summarises plant taxa recorded in the study area during this survey.

Table 5. Summary of plant species recorded

Flora Status Number of Taxa

Indigenous vascular species 30

Exotic species 36

Native species outside of natural range 1

TOTAL 67

4.5.1 State or Nationally Significant Flora Species

Of the 30 indigenous species recorded within the site, no species were of state or national significance. Due to vegetation fragmentation and vegetation clearing across the Bass Coast municipality and surrounds, most indigenous flora species are considered to be of at least local significance.

A search for state or nationally significant flora species recorded within 5 km of the site area in the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) revealed nine significant flora species had previously been recorded in the general area. Details of these species are given in Appendix 2.

Appendix 2 lists the significant flora species recorded in the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (VBA) and their likelihood of occurrence within the study area. The categories utilised to determine Likelihood of Occurrence are presented below:

Nil: No habitat requirements are available on site. Low: Few aspects of habitat requirements are met on site. Moderate: Some aspects of habitat requirements are met on site. High: Optimal habitat present.

All nine species were considered to have No or only a Low likelihood of occurrence within the site, due to the modified habitat.

4.5.2 DELWP Modelled Habitat for Flora

The Biodiversity Impact and Offset Requirements (BIOR) report that will be generated for the site may state that the DELWP habitat modelling indicates that there is habitat available for some threatened flora species for the site. If so, these species will be listed with comments regarding the suitability of the available habitat within the site for each of these species.

DELWP habitat modelling indicates that habitat is provided for eight rare or threatened flora species, as outlined in the BIOR report for the site (DELWP 2015) . Table 6 below details these species.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 6. DEPI modelled rare or threatened flora species’ habitats on site

Common name Scientific name Comments Sticky Wattle Acacia howittii These three species have been planted throughout Bog Gum Eucalyptus kitsoniana this region and is considered to be naturalised on Spotted Gum Corymbia maculata sites where it does occurs Clover Glycine Glycine latrobeana Does not occur on-site Dune Wood Sorrel Oxalis rubens Does not occur on-site Giant Honey-myrtle Melaleuca armillaris subsp. armillaris This species has been planted throughout the region and is considered to be naturalised where it occurs Maroon Leek-orchid Prasophyllum frenchii Does not occur on-site Austral Crane’s-bill Geranium solanderi var. solanderi s.s. Does not occur on-site

4.6 Fauna

Fieldwork undertaken throughout the site involved a visual assessment of habitat elements; especially those suitable for significant species, as well as incidental observations of indigenous fauna utilising the site. None of the species observed were significant species.

Considering that the site contains part of a larger patch of native vegetation, it is possible that the general area is still utilised by many native fauna species. Without intense, targeted fauna surveys it is not possible to predict what species are still utilising the general site area.

The main focus with regards to fauna during the assessment was the consideration of the site’s potential to provide fauna habitat. During the fieldwork we heard frogs (one species) and numerous bird calls, and observed (or saw signs of) several common (native and feral) mammal species including Eastern Grey Kangaroos, Swamp Wallabies, rabbits and foxes. The habitat observed in the site included:

 leaf litter

 tree canopies, and trees with small and large hollows

 patches of understorey vegetation

 moist depressions, drainage lines and small dams

 grassy understorey vegetation, and

 some large logs.

Table 7 outlines the type of fauna species recorded in relation to fauna habitat observed within the site.

Table 7. Fauna and Habitat observed within the Site

Habitat Type Fauna utilising the Habitat

Birds Large Old Trees Arboreal mammals (potentially possums and bats)

Open grassed areas Eastern Grey Kangaroos observed in this area

Bushland Footprints and scats observed along perimeter of bushland (wallabies and foxes).

Dam / wet depressions Frogs heard

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

4.6.1 State or Nationally Significant Fauna Species

No fauna of state or national significance were recorded during the site inspection.

A total of 70 state or nationally significant fauna species are recorded within a five-kilometre radius of the study area in the VBA. Details of these species are given in Appendix 3.

One species is considered to have a Low-Moderate likelihood of using the habitat on-site: the Common Long-necked Turtle Chelodina longicollis. One other species, the White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus is considered to have a Moderate likelihood of using the habitat on-site. Both of these species are listed on the Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria (DSE 2013).

The Likelihood of Occurrence categories in Section 3.5.1 were also utilised for significant fauna species

4.6.2 DEPI Modelled Habitat for Fauna

DELWP habitat modelling indicates that habitat is provided for 13 rare or threatened flora species, as outlined in the Biodiversity Impact and Offset Requirements (BIOR) report for the site (DELWP 2015). Table 8 below details these species.

Table 8. DELWP modelled rare or threatened fauna species’ habitats on site

Common Name Scientific Name Comments Lewin’s Rail Lewinia pectoralis pectoralis No suitable habitat available

Hardhead Aythya australis No suitable habitat available

Grey Goshawk Accipiter novaehollandiae novaehollandiae Foraging habitat only

White-bellied Sea-Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster Foraging habitat only

Square-tailed Kite Lophoictinia isura Foraging habitat only

Black Falcon Falco subniger Foraging habitat only

Chestnut-rumped Heathwren Calamanthus pyrrhopygius No to minimal suitable habitat available

Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus Foraging habitat only

Lace Monitor Varanus varius No suitable habitat available

Swamp Skink Lissolepis coventryi No to minimal suitable habitat available

Glossy Grass Skink Pseudemoia rawlinsoni No to minimal suitable habitat available

Southern Toadlet Pseudophryne semimarmorata No to minimal suitable habitat available

Dwarf Galaxias Galaxiella pusilla No suitable habitat available

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

5. RELEVANT POLICY AND LEGISLATION

The following section explores relevant policy and legislation pertaining to ecology within the site from the national through to the local level.

5.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act

The EPBC Act 1999 applies to sites where proposed developments or projects may have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance.

Under the EPBC Act, a proponent must refer proposed actions that may require approval to the Commonwealth Environment Minister (or delegate). The Minister then decides which assessment and reporting option is applied. The Minister may approve a ‘controlled action’ allowing the development to proceed provided conditions are applied to mitigate significant impacts protected by this act.

The significant species records obtained from the database search for a 5km radius around the site determined that there was no EPBC listed flora species and 20 EPBC listed fauna species that have been recorded in a 5km radius around the site.

Only one of these species, the White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus was considered to have a Moderate likelihood of using the habitat on-site.

In Australia, the White-throated Needletail is almost exclusively aerial, from heights of less than 1 m up to more than 1000 m above the ground. Because they are aerial, it has been stated that conventional habitat descriptions are inapplicable. In Australia, White-throated Needletails almost always forage aerially, at heights up to 'cloud level', above a wide variety of habitats, ranging from heavily treed forests to open habitats, such as farmland, heathland or mudflats {Higgins, 1999}.

Our likelihood of occurrence assessment for threatened fauna species (refer to Appendix 3) determined that there was Nil or Low habitat requirements for any of the other 19 threatened fauna species within the site. The vast majority of these species were shorebird species associated with the nearby Westernport Bay.

Relevance to proposal

As an ‘aerial’ species, it is unlikely that the proposed subdivision will have a significant impact on the White-throated Needletail.

The proposed subdivision of the site is not likely to have a significant impact on any other EPBC-listed species, nor any other matters of environmental significance protected under the Act.

5.2 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988

The Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (FFG Act) was legislated to ensure the continued survival of all Victorian species of flora and fauna and all Victorian communities of plants and animals. The FFG Act provides a number of ways to help achieve its objectives including:

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

 listing of threatened taxa, communities of flora or fauna and potentially threatening processes, and creation of Action Statements and Management Plans for all listed taxa communities of flora or fauna and processes

 declaration of a Critical Habitat if the habitat is critical for the survival of a species or a community of flora or fauna, if listed as Critical Habitat, the Minister for Environment may then make an Interim Conservation Order (ICO) to conserve the Critical Habitat

 protection of flora and fauna through listing offences such as penalties relating to not following an ICO and taking, trading in, keeping, moving or processing protected flora without a licence. Although this does not apply to taking listed flora species from private land.

The Department of Environment, Land, water and Planning (DELWP) is the referral authority for matters under the FFG Act.

5.2.1 Threatened Species

There are no flora species, and 17 fauna species listed under the FFG Act 1988 recorded within a 5 km radius of the site. The Likelihood of Occurrence assessment for threatened fauna species in Appendix 3 determined that there was Nil to Low likelihood of occurrence of any of the fauna species utilising the available habitat within the site.

Relevance to proposal

The FFG Act does not apply to any listed flora and fauna species occurring on private land, unless it is listed as critical habitat, which this site is not.

Some provisions of the FFG Act are applicable on private land through an Interim Order by the Planning Minister it is contains critical habitat.

The FFG Act is not applicable to the proposed subdivision of the site.

5.2.2 Potentially Threatening Processes

Schedule three of the FFG Act 1988 lists numerous Potentially Threatening Processes. These processes have been identified as a threat to the survival of one or more species of flora or fauna or a community. A number of threatening processes operate across Victoria and across all land tenures while some are specific to a defined locality.

Many of the Potentially Threatening Processes listed under the FFG Act are operating throughout the area. Within the study area Potentially Threatening Processes that are occurring or could potentially occur include:

 collection of native orchids

 habitat fragmentation as a threatening process for fauna in Victoria

 invasion of native vegetation by blackberry *Rubus fruticosus sp. agg.

 invasion of native vegetation by ‘environmental weeds’

 loss of coarse woody debris from Victorian native forests and woodlands

 predation of native wildlife by the cat, *Felis catus

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

 predation of native wildlife by the introduced red fox *Vulpes vulpes

 reduction in biomass and biodiversity of native vegetation through grazing by the rabbit *Oryctolagus cuniculus

 spread of Sweet Pittosporum #Pittosporum undulatum in areas outside its natural distribution.

Relevance to proposal

There are no specific legislated prescriptions under the FFG Act related to Potentially Threatening Processes occurring on this site.

5.3 Planning and Environment Act 1987

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 establishes the framework for planning the use, development and protection of land in Victoria in the present and long-term interests of all Victorians. This includes providing the structure for and administering the implementation of Planning Schemes. The following section considers relevant sections of the Planning Scheme.

5.3.1 State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 12 Environmental and Landscape Values

Clause 12 of the planning scheme recognises that planning:

 should help to protect the health of ecological systems and the biodiversity they support (including ecosystems, habitats, species and genetic diversity) and conserve areas with identified environmental and landscape values.

 must implement environmental principles for ecologically sustainable development that have been established by international and national agreements.

 should protect sites and features of nature conservation, biodiversity, geological or landscape value.

Clauses of particular relevance include:

 Clause 12.01-1 Protection of biodiversity

 Clause 12.01-2 Native vegetation management

Relevance to proposal

The objectives of these clauses are considered in Sections 5 and 6 of this report that relate to avoiding and minimising impacts to biodiversity.

5.3.2 Zoning

The site is zoned 32.03 Low Density Residential Zone (LDRZ). The purpose of this zone includes:

 To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

 To provide for low density residential development on lots, which in the absence of reticulated sewerage can treat and retain all wastewater.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

32.03-3 Subdivision

A permit is required to subdivide land. Each lot must be at least the area specified for the land in a schedule to this zone. Any area specified must be at least:

 0.4 hectare for each lot where reticulated sewerage is not connected. If no area is specified, each lot must be at least 0.4 hectare.

 0.2 hectare for each lot with connected reticulated sewerage. If no area is specified, each lot must be at least 0.2 hectare.

A permit may be granted to create lots smaller than 0.4 hectare if the subdivision:

 Excises land which is required for a road or a utility installation.

 Provides for the re-subdivision of existing lots and the number of lots is not increased.

Relevance to the Proposal

No schedules apply to this site.

The site is currently 20.172 hectares. The subdivision proposal is to subdivide the land into 63 lots. Each lot is greater than 0.2 hectares in size.

This meets the objectives of the Low Density Residential Zone.

32.03-6 Decision guidelines

General

Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:

 The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies

Subdivision

 The protection and enhancement of the natural environment and character of the area, including the retention of vegetation and faunal habitat and the need to plant vegetation along waterways, gullies, ridgelines and property boundaries.

 The availability and provision of utility services, including sewerage, water, drainage, electricity, gas and telecommunications.

 In the absence of reticulated sewerage:

o The capability of the lot to treat and retain all wastewater in accordance with the State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) under the Environment Protection Act 1970

o The benefits of restricting the size of lots to the minimum required to treat and retain all wastewater in accordance with the State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria).

o The benefits of restricting the size of lots to generally no more than 2 hectares to enable lots to be efficiently maintained without the need for agricultural techniques and equipment.

 The relevant standards of Clauses 56.07-1 to 56.07-4.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Relevance to the Proposal

This report does not comment on the Decision Guidelines which relate to the provision of utility services and reticulated sewerage.

With regards to ‘the protection and enhancement of the natural environment and character of the area including the retention of vegetation and faunal habitat and the need to plant vegetation along waterways, gullies, ridgelines and property boundaries’, the subdivision layout has been altered to retain the majority of native vegetation within the site. Refer to Sections 5 and 6 of this report for further details.

5.3.3 Overlays

There are no planning overlays that apply to the site.

5.3.4 Bushfire Prone Area

The site is within a designated Bushfire Prone Area. Special bushfire construction requirements apply. Planning provisions may apply.

There are Planning Guidelines available for Subdivisions in Bushfire Prone Areas produced by the Country Fire Authority (CFA) that are provided for developers (CFA 2010). These Guidelines include information on Statutory Requirements, including the referral of subdivision proposals in Bushfire Prone Areas to the CFA and generally apply to all subdivision proposals. While the CFA may not be a referral authority under Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, they are able to provide advice under Section 52. Council would also have the legal power to consider bushfire safety issues under Clause 13.05 of the Bass Coast Planning Scheme.

Clause 13.05-1 Bushfire

This clause seeks to strengthen community resilience to bushfire. The overarching strategy is to ‘prioritise the protection of human life over other policy considerations in planning and decision- making in areas at risk from bushfire and to apply the precautionary principle in decision making’ and ‘where appropriate, apply the precautionary principle to planning and decision-making when assessing the risk to life, property and community infrastructure from bushfire’.

Relevance to proposal

Consideration of the bushfire risk will need to be incorporated into the proposed subdivision layout.

5.3.5 Clause 52.17

Under Clause 52.17, a permit is required to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation on sites greater than 0.4 hectares. Clause 52.17 requires a planning permit for the removal of native vegetation (exemptions apply). The purpose of the clause (amongst others) is to minimise impacts on Victoria’s biodiversity from the removal of native vegetation and to manage native vegetation to minimise land and water degradation.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Application requirements and decision guidelines are listed within the Clause. Applications may fall into a low, moderate or high risk pathway depending on the location and extent of vegetation removed. The application requirements and decisions depend on the relevant risk pathway. Referral to DELWP, under Clause 66.02, may be required for an application to remove native vegetation; e.g. if clearing is greater than 0.5 ha or the application follows the high-risk pathway.

This report, and in particular, Section 7: No Net Loss Analysis; seeks to respond to this Clause.

5.4 Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994

The study area supports seven weeds that are declared noxious under the Catchment and Land Protection (CaLP) Act 1994 for the Port Phillip Catchment. Plants occurring on this list are known to or have the potential to result in detrimental environmental or economic impact.

Under the CaLP Act, declared noxious weeds are categorised into four groups depending on their known and potential impact and specific circumstances for each region. These categories are:

o State Prohibited Weeds (S) are either currently absent in Victoria or are restricted enough to be eradicated. The Victorian Government is responsible for their control.

o Regionally Prohibited Weeds (P) in the Port Phillip Catchment Management Authority (CMA) area these weeds are not necessarily widespread but have the potential to become widespread. It is expected that weeds that meet this criteria can be eradicated from the region. For weeds considered to be Regionally Prohibited it is the responsibility of the land owner to control these weeds on their land but not on adjacent roadside reserves.

o Regionally Controlled Weeds (C) are usually widespread but it is important to prevent further spread. It is the responsibility of the landowner to control these weeds on their property and on adjacent roadside reserves.

o Restricted Weeds (R) include plants that pose unacceptable risk of spreading in the State or other Australian states and are considered to be a serious threat to primary production, Crown land, the environment and/or community health if they were traded in Victoria. Trade in these weeds and there propagules, either as plants, seeds or contaminants in other material is prohibited.

The follow table lists the declared noxious weeds observed on site.

Table 9. Declared Noxious weeds occurring within the Site

Scientific Name Common Name Control Category

*Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle C

*Cratageus monogyna Hawthorn C

*Rosa rubiginosa Sweet Briar C

*Rubus fruticosus spp. agg. Blackberry C

*Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle C

*Ulex europaeus Gorse C

*Watsonia meriana var. bulbillifera Wild Watsonia C

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

6. MINIMISING BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS: DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

The following steps have been taken to ensure that impacts on biodiversity from the removal of native vegetation have been minimised and finalise the extent of native vegetation to be removed.

Original Proposal

Prior to the initial site assessment, an initial draft plan of subdivision had been prepared for the site that did not account for retaining much of the native vegetation within the site. This original draft plan proposed the following areas within the site:

 Total site area- 20.172 ha  Total area of lots within the site- 15.700 ha  Total area of roads within the site- 2.449 ha  Drainage reserve- 1.662 ha  Tree Conservation Reserve- 0.361 ha

This initial draft plan highlighted that 1.3129 ha (13,129 m2) of native vegetation was at risk of removal within the drainage reserve area. The drainage reserve was located in the south-east corner of the site, covering all or parts of Habitat Zones A, B, C and D. Refer to Map 3 for the Original Plan of Subdivision

Following Site Assessment

Following the site assessment, the map of habitat zones and scattered trees across the site was presented to the client with recommendations to minimise the proposed native vegetation impacts.

The results of the site assessment, and the recommendations, resulted in a second and then third proposed plan of subdivision (15021/PPS) that has considered the location, extent and quality of the native vegetation cover across the site. The third plan of subdivision (refer to Map 2 at the back of this report) has resulted in an amended subdivision layout with the following areas within the site:

 Total site area- 20.172 ha  Total area of lots within the site- 63 lots 2000 m2 or above in area (approximately 13-14 ha)  Total area of roads within the site- unsure  Drainage reserve - n/a (it has been removed from the plan of subdivision)  Reserves- 1.12 ha + 3.38 ha = 4.5 ha (this area includes most of the Habitat Zones (all or some of Habitat Zones A, B, C, D, E, J and K), buffers and some open space)

Proposed Native Vegetation Losses

Based on the condition of vegetation during the site assessment, it was recommended as much of the ‘core’ area of vegetation in the south-east and along the eastern perimeter of the site be retained, which included Habitat Zones B, C, D, E, F, J and K. These Habitat Zones were connected to other patches of remnant vegetation; they had the highest species diversity and were of better ecological quality.

The poorer quality vegetation was located in Habitat Zones A, G, H and I. These were all ‘islands’ of vegetation in poor ecological quality with low species diversity and limited connectivity to other patches of remnant vegetation. Due to their poor ecological values, these patches could be removed to

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay accommodate the proposed subdivision layout if required. There were also four scattered trees, mostly in poor condition, located near Habitat Zones H and I which could also be removed to accommodate the proposed subdivision layout if required.

The current plan of subdivision proposed to remove all of Habitat Zones A, G, H and I (refer to Map 2).

The four scattered trees will be located in Lots less than 0.4 ha, so they will be considered lost even if the future landholders choose to retain them.

Approximately a third of Habitat Zone E is proposed for removal to accommodate the road reserve and portions of Lots 13, 35 and 36. All of Habitat Zone F is proposed for removal to accommodate Lots 11 and 12. Whilst Habitat Zone F is located at the rear of these lots, as the lots are less than 0.4 ha this vegetation is considered lost even if the future landholders choose to retain it. Approximately 95 % of Habitat Zone RR will be removed to provide access for the lots along the southern perimeter of the site, and for the second entrance into the subdivision.

Steps to Minimise Vegetation

The site assessment determined that there was 5.34 hectares of remnant vegetation within the site, plus four scattered trees. The original draft plan of subdivision is likely to have resulted in the loss of approximately 4.5 to 5 hectares of this vegetation.

The current plan of subdivision, which was drafted following the site assessment, proposes the loss of approximately 1.44 hectares of vegetation, plus the four scattered trees.

The revision of the original plan of subdivision has resulted in the retention of 3.68 hectares of native vegetation within the site. This vegetation is the better quality vegetation, with the greatest species diversity and connectivity between the patches.

Refer to Map 2 for the third plan of subdivision, which depicts the proposed retained vegetation in two reserves, and the vegetation proposed for removal.

Table 10 below details the steps that have been applied to minimise the biodiversity impacts of the proposed subdivision:

Table 10. Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts

Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts

 Avoids clearing by re-drafting the plan of subdivision to retain the higher quality, connected patches of native vegetation along the eastern site perimeter  Avoids clearing of native vegetation by retaining the better quality vegetation in two reserves, which are located in the north-east and south-east of the site, along the eastern perimeter.  Avoids clearing of native vegetation by locating the majority of the proposed lots in the already cleared paddocks  Minimises impacts by proposing to remove the lower quality vegetation, whilst retaining the higher quality vegetation  Minimises impacts by ensuring the majority of both reserves are surrounded (buffered) by roads  Minimises impacts through the preparation of a Land Management Plan to guide vegetation and habitat management within the two reserves

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7. NO NET LOSS ANALYSIS

A permit is required to remove native vegetation on the site, as per Clause 52.17 of the planning scheme; this section outlines the responses to this Clause as a result of the proposed subdivision of the site into 65 lots.

The objective for the permitted clearing of native vegetation under Clause 52.17 and detailed in Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI 2013) is that it results in no net loss to Victoria’s biodiversity. Thus, where native vegetation is permitted to be removed, an offset is to be provided that is considered equivalent to the contribution to Victoria’s biodiversity that is made by the native vegetation to be removed.

6.1 Risk-based Pathway

An application to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation must be classified as one of the following risk-based pathways:

 low  moderate, or  high.

The application requirements and decision guidelines in Clause 52.17 must be applied in accordance with the correct pathway. To determine the risk-based pathway, the following risks are considered in relation to the native vegetation proposed to be removed:

 the location risk, and  the extent risk.

Table 11. Determining risk-based pathway

Source: Table 3 and 4, Permitted clearing of native vegetation - Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI 2014)

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

6.1.1 Location risk

The location risk has been determined by DELWP for all locations in Victoria. Native vegetation will be in either location A, B or C.

The vegetation to be removed is in location A, B and C. If more than one location risks apply to vegetation proposed for removal the higher letter is to be used, as this represents an area with a higher risk. Figure 19 below shows the location risk.

Figure 19. Location risk for vegetation to be removed

Source: Biodiversity Interactive Mapping; Location Risk (DELWP 2015)

6.1.2 Extent of Losses from Proposed Subdivision: Habitat Zones & Scattered Trees

Losses as a result of the proposed subdivision will result in the removal of areas of remnant vegetation identified as remnant patches (Habitat Zones), as well as four scattered tree losses. Further details on these losses are provided in Sections 3.3 and 3.4; and in Table 12 on the next page.

Losses from remnant patches will include the siting of lots less than 0.4 hectares over several patches of remnant vegetation, where 100 % of the vegetation currently present within the Habitat Zones is considered lost.

The four scattered tree losses are due to the siting of lots less than 0.4ha over/around the four scattered trees. Scattered tree losses are considered to be 100 % loss of a tree, which is equated to 0.07 ha per tree.

The Tables on the next page (Tables 12 and 13) provide an indication of losses of Habitat Zones and scattered trees to facilitate the subdivision of the site.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 12. Extent of Native Vegetation Loss due to proposed Subdivision

Habitat Habitat Area of Zone Zone score loss (ha) Extent of loss % loss

Almost complete loss of native vegetation as a result A 15 0.403 82 of subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Partial loss of native vegetation as a result of E 37 0.161 26 subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Complete loss of native vegetation as a result of F 38 0.041 100 subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Complete loss of native vegetation as a result of G 13 0.205 100 subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Complete loss of native vegetation as a result of H 15 0.383 100 subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Complete loss of native vegetation as a result of I 13 0.095 100 subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Almost complete loss of native vegetation as a result RR 22 0.156 95 of subdivision. Each lot is less than 0.4 ha.

Total loss 1.444

Table 13. Extent of Scattered Tree loss due to proposed Subdivision

Loss Tree Number Site Assessed Area of Loss (ha) % loss Condition Score

Scattered Tree 1 0.200 0.070 100

Scattered Tree 2 0.200 0.070 100

Scattered Tree 3 0.200 0.070 100

Scattered Tree 4 0.200 0.070 100

Total loss 0.28

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7.1.1 Extent of Losses from Proposed Subdivision: Canopy Trees in HZs

The most recent iteration of the Biodiversity Assessment Handbook- Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation (DELWP May 2015 Version 1), was released by DELWP on 1/06/2015.

Within this version of the Handbook, to comply with Australian Standard (AS 4970-2009), it is required that:

Survey plans include the location of all individual trees or groups of trees and other vegetation, and the location of trees on land adjacent to the development that may be impacted by the development

The location of canopy trees within Habitat Zones adjacent to proposed development, whose root zones may extend into the development zones, must be located to allow adequate planning and consideration of impacts.

In simple terms: “trees within a remnant patch of treed native vegetation to be retained will be assumed lost, if the encroachment into the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is greater than 10 per cent, or is inside the Structural Root Zone (SRZ)”. Therefore, trees will be considered lost if impacts to them are greater than 10 per cent, or is inside the Structural Root Zone (SRZ); unless confirmed by an arborist as otherwise.

If a tree is considered lost by the arborist or deemed lost due to encroachment in excess of what the standard provides, that has not been assessed, then:

 a scattered tree it will be given a condition score of 0.2,

 a tree within a patch (canopy tree) it will be given the habitat score of the patch

Relevance to Proposal

As the plan of subdivision proposed 63 lots, all of which will be less than 0.4 hectares, any vegetation remaining within these lots will be considered lost even if it is retained, as its long term security cannot be guaranteed.

With regard to canopy trees in the Reserves, none are located within 15 metres of the Reserve boundaries that are adjacent to development zones such as road reserves/future Lots, so there will be no impacts within 10% of the TRZs of these trees.

To ensure that none of the TRZs of the canopy trees growing near the edges of the two reserves are impacted by development in the adjacent Lots and road reserves (Lots 6 and 13 in particular), the perimeters of all the reserves have been adjusted to ensure there is a 15m buffer between the trees and the reserve perimeters. These adjustments occurred between the second and third Plan of Subdivisions.

Therefore no canopy trees growing near the perimeters of either reserve will have their TRZs potentially encroached by development in the adjacent lots or road reserves.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

High risk-based Pathway

As the vegetation is within both locations A and B, and greater than 1 ha is to be removed; the proposed clearing within the site is determined to have a High risk based pathway.

Figure 1. Risk-based pathways for proposed vegetation removal on site

Source: Table 3 – Permitted clearing of native vegetation Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI 2013c).

7.1.2 Application Requirements to Remove Native Vegetation

The Biodiversity assessment guidelines (DEPI 2013) present the application requirements to remove native vegetation under Clause 52.17 and whether these have been meet:

No. Application requirements Provided/response 1 The location of the site of native vegetation to be removed. This includes the Yes No N/a address of the property. 2 A description of the native vegetation to be removed including:  whether the native vegetation is a remnant patch, or scattered trees Yes No N/a  the area of any remnant patches of native vegetation  the number of any scattered trees. 3 Maps or plans containing the following information:  north point and property boundaries  all areas of native vegetation, clearly showing the native vegetation to be removed (including any area that the Country Fire Authority has recommended for removal or management for fire protection Yes No N/a purposes)  all scattered trees to be removed  location where photographs were taken, and the direction from which they were taken. 4 Recent photographs (dated) of the native vegetation to be removed. Yes No N/a 5 Where the purpose of removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation is to create defendable space, a statement is required that explains why removal, destruction or lopping of native vegetation is necessary. The statement must Yes No N/a have regard to other available bushfire risk mitigation measures. This requirement does not apply to the creation of defendable space in conjunction with an application under the Bushfire Management Overlay. 6 A copy of any property vegetation plan that applies to the site. Yes No N/a 7 Details of any other native vegetation that was permitted to be removed on the same contiguous parcel of land with the same ownership as the native Yes No N/a vegetation to be removed, where the removal occurred in the five year period before the application to remove native vegetation is lodged. 8 The strategic biodiversity score of the native vegetation to be removed. Yes No N/a

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Application requirements Provided/response 9 The offset requirements should a permit be granted to remove native Yes No N/a vegetation.

7.1.3 Application Requirements

A High risk-based pathway application must complete the permit application checklist and also include:

 A habitat hectare assessment report of the native vegetation that is to be removed.

o This is provided in Sections 3.2 and 3.3 of this report

 A statement outlining what steps have been taken to minimise the impacts of the removal of native vegetation on biodiversity.

o This is provided in Section 5

 An assessment of whether the proposed removal of native vegetation will have a significant impact on Victoria’s biodiversity, with specific regard to the proportional impact on habitat for any rare or threatened species.

o This is provided in the BIOR report dated 21/08/2015; which will be submitted with this report.

 An offset strategy that details how a compliant offset will be secured to offset the biodiversity impacts of the removal of native vegetation.

o The offsets will be located on-site

o An Offset Management Report will need to be prepared

The following sections provide these requirements; the completed permit application checklist for a moderate risk-based pathway application is provided in Appendix 4.

7.2 Minimising impacts to biodiversity

The steps that have been undertaken to minimise impacts to biodiversity are provided in Section 5 of this report. Table 15 below has been copied from Section 5, Table 10; and details the steps that have been applied to minimise biodiversity impacts of the proposed subdivision.

Table 14. Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts

Steps taken to minimise biodiversity impacts

 Avoids clearing by re-drafting the plan of subdivision to retain the higher quality, connected patches of native vegetation along the eastern site perimeter  Avoids clearing of native vegetation by retaining the better quality vegetation in two reserves, which are located along the eastern perimeter of the site, to the north and south  Avoids clearing of native vegetation by locating the majority of the proposed lots in the already cleared paddocks  Minimises impacts by proposing to remove the lower quality vegetation whilst retaining the higher quality vegetation  Minimises impacts by ensuring the majority of both reserves are surrounded by roads  Minimises impacts through the preparation of a Land Management Plan to guide vegetation and habitat management in the two reserves

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7.3 Biodiversity Impacts and Offset Requirements

The Biodiversity impacts and offset requirements report provided by DELWP (2015)) fulfils the requirement for an assessment as to whether the proposed removal of native vegetation will have a significant impact on Victoria’s biodiversity, with specific regard to the proportional impact on habitat for any rare or threatened species.

A summary of the report is given in Table 16 and the full report (dated 21/08/2015) will be submitted with this report.

This summary has not altered for the 1/04/2016 report revision, required to address DELWP’s request for further information.

Table 15. Summary of native vegetation to be removed

Summary Item Result Risk-based pathway High Total extent 1.735 ha Remnant patches 1.453 ha Scattered trees 4 trees Location risk B Strategic biodiversity score of all marked native vegetation 0.465

7.3.1 Offset Targets

If a permit is granted to remove the marked native vegetation, the permit condition will include the requirement to obtain a native vegetation offset. To calculate the required offset amount, the biodiversity equivalence scores are aggregated to the proposal level and multiplied by the relevant risk multiplier. Offset also have required attributes:

Specific offsets must be located in the same species habitat as that being removed, as determined by the habitat importance map for that species.

The offset requirements for the proposed subdivision are outlined in Table 16 below.

These requirements have altered since the October 2015 report, due to the amendments made to the way that specific offsets are calculated for clearing sites, that was announced by DELWP on 21/10/2015. When the native vegetation removal data for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay was re- submitted to DELWP, the 2/11/2015 BIOR report (Biodiversity Impacts and Offset Requirements report) had reduced the amount of specific offset requirements for the Green Leek-orchid and also added a small amount of general offset requirements.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 16. Offsets required if a permit is granted

Clearing site Offset requirements Offset biodiversity Risk Offset amount type equivalence multiplier (biodiversity Offset attributes score equivalence units) General 0.010GBES 1.5 0.015 general Offset must be within the Port Phillip and units Westernport CMA or Bass Coast Shire Council offset must have a minimum strategic biodiversity score of 0.466 Specific 0.146SBES 2 0.292 specific Offset must provide habitat for 502702 Green units Leek-orchid Prasophyllum lindleyanum

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7.4 Offset Strategy Requirements

As defined by DEPI (2013c) applications that follow the moderate risk-based pathway must include an offset strategy in the application for a permit to remove native vegetation.

Offsets can be either:

 First party – located on land owned by the landholder who is proposing to remove the native vegetation

 Third party – located on land owned by a third party

The offsets that are required to account for vegetation clearing on site are to be achieved by creating first party offsets on-site.

7.4.1 Site eligibility

There are particular criteria that a site must comply with to be eligible as an offset (DEPI 2013c). A site that is not eligible cannot be used as an offset. The eligibility criteria are detailed and assessed in Table 17 below.

Table 17. Site eligibility criteria

Eligibility Details Proposed offset criteria An area of native vegetation will be eligible to be an offset if there are no current and future land use(s) identified that are incompatible with managing native vegetation for conservation. There is no current or future land Current land Incompatible current and future land use include fuel reduction uses proposed that are incompatible use and future activities, horse-riding, cycling or motorised vehicle use off established with managing this vegetation for land use tracks, infrastructure easements and other ongoing land uses that are conservation. likely to degrade vegetation condition or restrict improvement in vegetation condition. An area of native vegetation is eligible to be an offset if it has not already been used to offset the clearance of native vegetation or species The proposed offset is not currently Existing offsets habitat required by Victorian regulations. being currently used to offset or existing An area of vegetation will be eligible if it is not subject to a current vegetation loss elsewhere and is not agreements agreement under an incentive or grant program to undertake actions under an incentive or grant which are equivalent to the landowner commitments specified within the program. Gain Scoring Manual. An area of native vegetation is eligible to be an offset if the landowner can control significant threats to the condition of the native vegetation. Such threats include those associated with: • high levels of continued nutrient run off There are no significant threats to Threats to • secondary salinity with a high likelihood of the effect increasing the condition of native vegetation native • continuing significant erosion which is uncontrollable without present within the proposed Offset vegetation affecting native vegetation that are beyond the landowner’s condition • significant invasion from pest animals such as rabbits, deer, goats ability to manage. and pigs • extensive die-back or other plant diseases • planned disturbance regimes incompatible with native vegetation objectives such as fuel reduction burning or flooding.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Eligibility Details Proposed offset criteria There are various standards of security required for different offset types. For a first party general offset, an area of vegetation on freehold land will be eligible if ‘Offset security standard A’ is implemented. For a first party specific offset, an area of vegetation on freehold land will be Offset Security Standard A is eligible if ‘Offset security standards A and B’ are implemented. applicable as a first party general Offset Security Standard A requires entry into a security agreement that offset is to be provided, as such an Security meets the following security standards: agreement under Section 173 of the 1. Contains a legally enforceable provision Planning and Environment Act 1987 2. Has no termination date will be registered on the land title. 3. Is implemented by a statutory body that are party to the Agreement with the Secretary to DEPI for implementing offsets on freehold land. Offset Security Standard B requires a security agreement is registered on the land title. For an area of native vegetation to be eligible, the landowner must agree An Offset Management Plan that Minimum to the inclusion of minimum, ongoing commitments as detailed in a 10 details on-going management for a management year management plan. 10 year period will be prepared at a requirements later date. Revegetation must be done in accordance with the minimum planting standard specified in Appendix 2 of the Native Vegetation Gain Scoring Manual. Revegetation sites must meet the Revegetation following size requirements: No revegetation is proposed.

• be at least 1 hectare in size • have an average width of at least 20 metres • have a perimeter to area ratio of 1:20.

7.4.2 Landholder commitments to generate site gain

The following commitments will form part of the security agreement that will be registered, with a 10-year management plan, on the land title under Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

Minimum commitments:

 protect remnant vegetation

 retaining all standing trees (dead or alive)

 ensuring that weed cover does not increase beyond the current level

 monitoring for any new and emerging weeds and eliminate them to < 1% cover

 retention of leaf litter

 retention of logs and fallen timber

 the exclusion of stock

 the control of rabbits.

Additional commitments:

. eliminate all woody weeds to <1% cover.

Note that detailed information on management of vegetation within the proposed Offset Zones will be provided in the Offset Management Plan that will be prepared at a later date.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7.4.3 Determining site gain

The Native Vegetation Gain Scoring Manual (DEPI 2013a) details the methods for calculating how site gain will be achieved. Note that as the offset actions are to include commitments beyond the minimal requirements the gain calculator DELWP provides for first party general offsets cannot be used.

Table 18 on the next page below outlines the expected gains in habitat hectares over a 10 year period due to the landholder commitments detailed in Section 7.4.2 above as determined by Native Vegetation Gain Scoring Manual (DEPI 2013c). Gains calculated include:

. prior management gain

. security gain

. maintenance and improvement gains.

To determine the amount of gain available for a general offset, the site gain is multiplied by the site’s strategic biodiversity score:

Gain General biodiversity equivalence units = site gain × strategic biodiversity score

The offsets required within this site are both general and specific offsets:

 Specific offsets must be located in the same species habitat as that being removed, as determined by the habitat importance map for that species.

 General offsets can be located anywhere within the Port Phillip and Westernport CMA area or within the Bass Coast Shire Council area, as long as they have the minimum strategic biodiversity score.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 18. Habitat gain scoring for rehabilitation of vegetation onsite.

Habitat Zone / Offset Zone A B C D E J K Bioregion GP GP GP GP GP GP GP

EVC Name (initials) SS SS DSHrW SS DSHrW DSHrW SS

Max

ain/ha

Current Current Current Current Current Current Current

gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha g gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/

condition condition condition condition condition condition condition

Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance

Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement

Large Trees 10 N/a N/a 5 N/a 5 5 N/a

Tree Canopy Cover 5 2 0.4 2 0.4 2 0.4 2 0.4 4 0 5 0 4 0

Understorey 25 5 0.5 1.25 15 1.5 2.5 10 1 2.5 15 1.5 2.5 10 1 2.5 15 1.5 2.5 15 1.5 2.5

Lack of Weeds 15 2 2 2 2 0 2 4 2 4 2 7 2 7 2

Recruitment 10 1 0.1 2 10 1 0 3 0.3 2 5 0.5 2 3 0.3 2 5 0.5 2 5 0.5 2

Organic Litter 5 2 0.2 2 4 0.4 2 4 0.4 2 5 0.5 0 4 0.4 2 5 0.5 0 5 0.5 0 Scores Logs 5 N/a N/a 5 5 0 N/a 5 5 0 5 5 0 N/a

Treeless Vegetation 1.15 1.15 1 1.15 1 1 1.15 Multiplier Current 35.6 (Standardised) Site 75 13.8 37.95 29 35 47 41.4 5 Condition Score Unstandardised subtotal of gains 0.8 7.65 2.9 6.9 6.7 8.9 2.5 6.9 6.7 8.5 7.5 6.5 2.5 6.9

Site Conditioner Standardiser (for 1.25 1.25 - 1.25 - - 1.25 Gains) Standardised Summary Maintenance + 10.56 12.25 15.6 11.75 15.2 14 11.75 Improvement Gain/Ha Prior Mgt Gain/Ha (10% of Current 1.4 3.8 2.9 3.6 3.5 4.7 4.1 Standardised Site Condition Score) Security Gain/Ha (10% of Current 1.4 3.8 2.9 3.6 3.5 4.7 4.1 Standardised Site Condition Score) Total Gain points/Ha 13.36 19.85 21.4 18.95 22.2 23.4 19.95 Decimal overall site gain/ha 0.134 0.196 0.214 0.186 0.222 0.234 0.196 Size of offset zone (Ha)^ 0.09 1.64 0.33 0.47 0.47 0.72 0.34 Overall site gain in Habitat Hectares 0.012 0.321 0.071 0.087 0.104 0.168 0.067

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

7.5 Balance of No Net Loss Analysis

Due to the changes in offset requirements if native vegetation removal is approved, the information presented in Table 18 has also altered from the October 2015 report.

As detailed in Table 19 below, there is not enough Specific Biodiversity Equivalence Units (SBEU); there is a deficit of -0.010 SBEU. However there is a surplus of 0.287 General Biodiversity Equivalence Units (GBEU).

Table 19. Balance of losses and gains on-site

Clearing site Offset site (Remnant patch gains) Outcome

Strategic Strategic Balance Balance Habitat Gain Gain Biodiversity Target/s Offset Zones Biodiversity Surplus/ Surplus/ Zones (SBEU) (GBEU) Score Score Deficit (SBEU) Deficit (GBEU)

1) 0.292 specific habitat for Green A, B, C, D, E, 0.282-0.292 0.302- 0.015 6 0.465 Leek-orchid 0.465 0.282 0.302 J and K = -0.010 = 0.287 2) 0.015 general units

7.6 Future use of surplus offsets

The remaining potential General Biodiversity Equivalence Units offset credits available within the Offset Zone; and potentially available within the Bushland Conservation Zone; are surplus to those actually required to offset the proposed subdivision.

As such the owners reserve the right to use these potential GBEU credits for offsets that may be required in the future by either the owners or for purchase by a third party.

7.7 Offset Strategy for the Proposed Removal of Native Vegetation

If the application to remove native vegetation is approved, the majority of specific habitat for the Green Leek- orchid can be provided on-site, whilst all of the general units can also be provided for on-site. The remaining deficit of 0.010 specific habitat units for the Green Leek-orchid will be sourced through a third party.

A Management Plan for both the Bushland Conservation and Offset Zones will be prepared as a component of the Planning Permit Conditions.

First Party Offset Site:

All of the specific habitat available in Habitat Zones B, C, D, E, J and K will be utilised to provide the specific habitat requirements for the Green Leek-orchid. There will be a small deficit in the specific habitat requirements for the Green leek-orchid, this will be meet through an off-site offset, and is outlined below.

A very small amount of the available general units in Habitat Zone J will be utilised to provide the 0.015 General Biodiversity Equivalence Units (GBEUs).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Both the SBEUs and GBEUs will be secured on-site with a Section 69 agreement. The offset Zones within the site do meet the eligibility requirements (outlined in Table 17), and reiterated below:

 There is no current or future land uses proposed for the Offset Zones that are incompatible with managing the vegetation within them for conservation. This includes no proposed fuel reduction activities, horse- riding, cycling or motorised vehicle use off established tracks, infrastructure easements and other ongoing land uses that are likely to degrade vegetation condition or restrict improvement in vegetation condition.

 The proposed offset is not currently being currently used to offset vegetation loss elsewhere and is not under an incentive or grant program.

 There are no significant threats to the condition of native vegetation present within the proposed Offset that are beyond the landowner’s ability to manage.

 Offset Security Standard A is applicable as a first party general offset is to be provided, as such an agreement under Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 will be registered on the land title.

 An Offset Management Plan that details on-going management for a 10 year period will be prepared at a later date.

 No revegetation is proposed.

Third Party Offset:

The 0.010 deficit in specific habitat for the Green leek-orchid will be met via a third party off-site offset. Three providers of specific habitat for the Green Leek-orchid have been sourced, and one of these offsets will be purchased, once the proposed removal of native vegetation is approved, and this Offset Strategy has also been approved.

Buffer Requirements between Dwellings and Offset Sites:

As depicted in the revised Map 2, a 50m buffer has been provided between the edges of building envelopes of the lots surrounding the proposed Offset and Bushland Conservation Zones.

Therefore only the retained native vegetation outside of the 50m buffer zones is proposed for use as Offset Zones.

The retained native vegetation within the 50m buffer will still be managed, as a Bushland Conservation Zone; it just will not be available for use as Offset Zones.

Management of the First Party Offset Zones:

The landholder/developer will manage both the Bushland Conservation and Offset Zones for the first ten years of the offset period.

After the first ten years, the Bass Coast Shire Council will assume on-going management responsibility for both the Bushland Conservation and Offset Zones.

A discussion was held with a Bass Coast Shire Council Statutory Planning Officer (Bimal Narayan) on 12/04/2016, and verbal agreement was provided that the Bass Coast Shire Council agrees to take on the longer term management of the reserves once the 10 year offset period ends.

This agreement has not been provided in writing at this stage.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Table 20. Habitat gain scoring for rehabilitation of vegetation onsite.

Habitat Zone / Offset Zone A B C D E J K Bioregion GP GP GP GP GP GP GP

EVC Name (initials) SS SS DSHrW SS DSHrW DSHrW SS

ance

Max

Current Current Current Current Current Current Current

gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha gain/ha

condition condition condition condition condition condition condition

Maintenance Mainten Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance

Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement Improvement

Large Trees 10 N/a N/a 5 N/a 5 5 N/a

Tree Canopy Cover 5 2 0.4 2 0.4 2 0.4 2 0.4 4 0 5 0 4 0

Understorey 25 5 0.5 1.25 15 1.5 2.5 10 1 2.5 15 1.5 2.5 10 1 2.5 15 1.5 2.5 15 1.5 2.5

Lack of Weeds 15 2 2 2 2 0 2 4 2 4 2 7 2 7 2

Recruitment 10 1 0.1 2 10 1 0 3 0.3 2 5 0.5 2 3 0.3 2 5 0.5 2 5 0.5 2

Organic Litter 5 2 0.2 2 4 0.4 2 4 0.4 2 5 0.5 0 4 0.4 2 5 0.5 0 5 0.5 0 Scores Logs 5 N/a N/a 5 5 0 N/a 5 5 0 5 5 0 N/a

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

8. REFERENCES

Australian Plants Society Maroondah Inc (2001) Flora of DEWHA (2010) Species Profile and Threats Database. Melbourne A guide to the indigenous plants of the Greater Department of Environment Water Heritage and the Arts. Melbourne area. Hyland House Publishing Pty Limited, Accessed via: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- Flemington, Victoria. bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl

Costermans, L. (2010) Native Trees and Shrubs of South- DSE (2011) Defining an acceptable distance for tree retention eastern Australia. Reed New Holland, Sydney. during construction activities - Technical information sheet, September 2011. Department of Sustainability and DELWP (May 2015) Version 1: Biodiversity assessment Environment, State Government of Victoria, East Melbourne. handbook- Permitted clearing of native vegetation. Victorian Government Department of Environment, land, water and Higgins, P.J. (eds) (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Planning, Melbourne. Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Four - Parrots to Dollarbird. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. DELWP (2015). Biodiversity Interactive Maps. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Government of Muyt A (2001). Bush Invaders of South-East Australia; A Guide Victoria. Accessed via: to the Identification and Control of Environmental Weeds http://mapshare2.dse.vic.gov.au/MapShare2EXT/imf.jsp?site= found in South-East Australia. Meredith: RG and FJ Richardson. bim Oates A and Taranto M (2001) Vegetation Mapping of the Port DELWP (2015). Biodiversity Impact and Offset Requirements Phillip and Western Port Region, Department of Natural (BIOR) report for 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay. Victorian Resources and Environment, Melbourne. Government Department of Environment, land, water and Standards Australia (2009) AS3959-2009 Construction of Planning, Melbourne. buildings in bushfire-prone areas (incorporating Amendment DEPI (2013) Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Nos 1,2 and 3). Third edition (reissued incorporating Biodiversity assessment guidelines. Victorian Government Amendment 3 Nov 2011) ed. SAI Global, Sydney. Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Walsh, NG. & Entwisle, TJ. (1994) Flora of Victoria: Ferns and Melbourne. Allied Plants, Conifers and Monocotyledons. Inkata Press, DEPI (2013) Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) Benchmarks for Melbourne. each Bioregion. Department of Environment and Primary Walsh, NG. & Entwisle, TJ. (1996) Flora of Victoria: Industries, Government of Victoria. Accessed via: Dicotyledons Winteraceae to Myrtaceae. Inkata Press, http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/conservation-and- Melbourne. environment/native-vegetation-groups-for- victoria/ecological-vegetation-class-evc-benchmarks-by- Walsh, NG. & Entwisle, TJ. (1999) Flora of Victoria: bioregion Dicotyledons Cornaceae to Asteraceae. Inkata Press.

DEPI (2013) Victorian Biodiversity Atlas. Department of Walsh, NG. & Stajsic, V. (2008) A Census of the Vascular Plants Environment and Primary Industries, Government of Victoria. of Victoria. 8 edn. Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne, Accessed via: https://vba.dse.vic.gov.au Melbourne, Victoria.

Personal Communications: Matt Brosnan- Project Engineer

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

APPENDIX 1 - FLORA SPECIES LIST

FERNS AND ALLIES Family Botanical name Common Name Dennstaedtiaceae Pteridium esculentum Austral Bracken Selaginellaceae Selaginella uliginosa Swamp Selaginella

MONOCOTYLEDONS Family Botanical name Common Name Alliaceae * Agapanthus praecox subsp. orientalis Agapanthus Araceae Lemna disperma Common Duckweed Asparagaceae * Asparagus asparagoides Bridal Creeper Asparagaceae * Asparagus scandens Asparagus Fern Cyperaceae Gahnia radula Thatch Saw-sedge Iridaceae * Romulea rosea Onion Grass Iridaceae * Watsonia meriana var. bulbillifera Bulbil Watsonia Juncaceae Juncus pallidus Pale Rush Orchidaceae Pterostylis spp. Greenhood Poaceae * Agrostis capillaris Brown-top Bent Poaceae * Anthoxanthum odoratum Sweet Vernal-grass Poaceae Bromus spp. Brome Poaceae * Cenchrus clandestinus Kikuyu Poaceae * Ehrharta erecta var. erecta Panic Veldt-grass Poaceae * Holcus lanatus Yorkshire Fog Poaceae * Lolium perenne Perennial Rye-grass Poaceae Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides Weeping Grass Poaceae * Paspalum dilatatum Paspalum Poaceae * Phalaris aquatica Toowoomba Canary-grass Xanthorrhoeaceae Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush

DICOTYLEDONS Family Botanical name Common Name Asteraceae * Arctotheca calendula Cape weed Asteraceae * Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle Asteraceae * Hypochaeris radicata Flatweed Asteraceae * Senecio angulatus Climbing Groundsel Asteraceae Senecio spp. Groundsel Asteraceae * Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle Asteraceae * Sonchus asper s.l. Rough Sow-thistle Asteraceae * Taraxacum officinale spp. agg. Garden Dandelion Bignoniaceae Pandorea pandorana subsp. pandorana Wonga Vine Caryophyllaceae * Stellaria media Chickweed Convolvulaceae Dichondra repens Kidney-weed Ericaceae Epacris impressa Common Heath Fabaceae * Trifolium repens var. repens White Clover

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Family Botanical name Common Name Fabaceae * Ulex europaeus Gorse Gentianaceae * Centaurium erythraea Common Centaury Geraniaceae Geranium spp. Crane's Bill Haloragaceae Gonocarpus tetragynus Common Raspwort Loranthaceae Amyema pendula Drooping Mistletoe Mimosaceae Acacia mearnsii Black Wattle Mimosaceae Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood Mimosaceae Acacia paradoxa Hedge Wattle Mimosaceae Acacia verticillata Prickly Moses Myrsinaceae * Lysimachia arvensis (Red-flowered Scarlet Pimpernel variant) Myrtaceae Eucalyptus obliqua Messmate Stringybark Myrtaceae # Eucalyptus pauciflora subsp. pauciflora White Sallee Myrtaceae Eucalyptus radiata s.l. Narrow-leaf Peppermint Myrtaceae Eucalyptus viminalis subsp. pryoriana Coast Manna-gum Myrtaceae Leptospermum continentale Prickly Tea-tree Myrtaceae # Melaleuca ericifolia Swamp Paperbark Oxalidaceae Oxalis perennans Grassland Wood-sorrel Phytolaccaceae * Phytolacca octandra Red-ink Weed Pittosporaceae # Pittosporum undulatum Sweet Pittosporum Plantaginaceae * Plantago lanceolata Ribwort Polygonaceae * Acetosella vulgaris Sheep Sorrel Polygonaceae * Rumex spp. (naturalised) Dock (naturalised) Ranunculaceae Clematis microphylla s.l. Small-leaved Clematis Ranunculaceae Ranunculus sessiliflorus Annual Buttercup Rosaceae * Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn Rosaceae * Rosa rubiginosa Sweet Briar Rosaceae * Rubus fruticosus spp. agg. Blackberry Rubiaceae * Coprosma repens Mirror Bush Rubiaceae * Galium aparine Cleavers Solanaceae Solanum laciniatum Large Kangaroo Apple Solanaceae * Solanum nigrum s.l. Black Nightshade Urticaceae * Urtica dioica Giant Nettle

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

APPENDIX 2: SIGNIFICANT FLORA SPECIES DATABASE RECORDS

Records provided below are sourced from the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DELWP 2015.

Likelihood Data No. Date last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name of Habitat and species notes FFG

EPBC source records record Reasoning Origin VROT occurrence r # Acacia howittii Sticky Wattle VBA 1 2004 Low One record, Indigenous to the Tarra Valley and surrounds, limited habitat, central Gippsland, Victoria. It is also widely and outside cultivated. Prefers moist forests and sheltered normal areas (Tame 1992, pp. 79-80). distribution range VU X Amphibromus River Swamp EPBC n/a n/a Nil No records Moist soils, usually confined to permanent fluitans Wallaby-grass within 5km, no swamps, and tolerates inundation. Mainly suitable habitat distributed along Murray River, it is rarer in present southern Victoria (Australian Plants Society Maroondah 2001, p. 449; Walsh and Entwisle 1994). Largely restricted in greater Melbourne to seasonal wetlands and mudflats of River Red Gum swamps of the Lower Yarra and Plenty/Merri volcanic plains north of Melbourne (Cam Beardsell pers. comm.) r Atriplex paludosa Marsh Saltbush VBA 8 2011 Nil No suitable Found in Midlands, Volcanic Plains, Otway Plains subsp. paludosa habitat present and Gippsland Plains also SA and Tas. Locally common on fringes of coastal and near-coastal saltmarshes west from Wilsons Promontory (where apparently absent): e.g. French Island, Tooradin, Werribee, Queensland, Port Fairy. Fruits most of the year (Walsh and Entwisle 1996, p. 142). r Avicennia marina Grey Mangrove VBA 8 1996 Nil No suitable subsp. australasica habitat present VU L v Glycine latrobeana Clover Glycine EPBC n/a n/a Low No records Widespread, infrequent populations in southern within 5km, no Victoria (Walsh and Entwisle 1996). Plains suitable habitat Grassland and Woodlands in moist well drained present soils (Australian Plants Society Maroondah 2001).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Likelihood Data No. Date last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name of Habitat and species notes FFG

EPBC source records record Reasoning Origin VROT occurrence EN L e Prasophyllum Maroon Leek- EPBC n/a n/a Low No records Infrequent, widespread populations in south frenchii orchid within 5km, western Victoria. Grasslands heathlands and limited suitable grassy woodlands on moist well drained soils, habitat present including roadsides or rail reserves (Jeanes and Backhouse 2006). VU e Prasophyllum Dense Leek- VBA 3 1991 Low Few records, spicatum orchid little to no suitable habitat VU L P Pterostylis cucullata Leafy Greenhood EPBC n/a n/a Low No records Widespread but sporadic across southern Victoria, within 5km, mostly near the coast, with several occurrences in limited suitable Montane areas in the east. In coastal locations it habitat present grows in scrubs on sand dunes, while in Montane areas it grows in moist foothill and Montane forest on slopes and river flats. Once abundant along the coast but now rare, with many populations lost to development (Jeanes and Backhouse 2006). VU L v Xerochrysum Swamp EPBC n/a n/a Low No records Found in the Midlands, Wannon, Volcanic Plains palustre Everlasting within 5km, and Gippsland Plains regions and in SA and Tas. limited suitable Occurs in lowland swamps usually on black habitat present cracking clay soils, scattered from near the south Australia border northwest of Portland to Bairnsdale district, but rare due to habitat depletion. Flowers November to March (Walsh and Entwisle 1999, p. 750).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

APPENDIX 3: SIGNIFICANT FAUNA SPECIES DATABASE RECORDS

Records provided below are sourced from the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DELWP 2015).

Likelihood of Occurrence: Nil: No habitat requirements are available on site. Low: Few aspects of habitat requirements are met on site. Moderate: Some aspects of habitat requirements are met on site. High: Optimal habitat present.

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence vu Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper 7 1987 Low Few records, little Regular, widespread but mostly uncommon summer to no habitat migrant to Australia (Aug-May) (Pizzey and Knight available 2007). Wide range of coastal or inland wetlands, with varying levels of salinity. Mainly muddy margins of rocky shores of wetlands; often around estuaries and deltas of streams; also lakes, pools, billabongs, reservoirs, dams and claypans; associated with mangroves. Large coastal mudflats are not favoured (Higgins and Davies 1996). vu Anas rhynchotis Australasian VBA 17 1996 Low Few records, little The Australasian Shoveler occurs mainly on large well Shoveler to no habitat vegetated wetlands and lakes, occasionally including available areas with saline waters. Populations are found in higher numbers on permanent, well-vegetated freshwater swamps with areas of open water. This species nests in grass nests on the ground, usually in dense cover and near water (Marchant and Higgins 1990; Pizzey and Knight 2007).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence L nt Anseranas Magpie Goose VBA 2 1902 Low Old records, little Most of the populations of this species have been re- semipalmata to no habitat introduced. They breed colonially and build platform available nests over water, usually among tall rushes or reed beds. The Magpie Goose feeds by digging in mud or by up-ending in shallow water, they have also been see grazing and digging well away from water (Marchant and Higgins 1990). EN L cr Anthochaera Regent Honeyeater EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Occurs mainly in box-ironbark forests and woodlands phrygia to no habitat north of the Great Divide. There are historical and available recent isolated records from drier parts of south- eastern Victoria. Highly nomadic, their movements are determined by the flowering of eucalypts (DSE 2003a). Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little The Fork-tailed Swift is a migratory species occurring to no habitat throughout Australia between October-April. This available insectivorous species is almost entirely aerial. Occur over inland plains, often over cliffs or beaches, also over settled areas. Feed aerially, and probably also roost aerially, although rarely seen to land (Higgins 1999; Pizzey and Knight 2007). Ardea ibis Cattle Egret EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little The Cattle Egret is widespread throughout coastal and to no habitat hinterland Australia, with a stronghold in SE Australia. available It is a winter-spring migrant in Victoria, where it frequents stock paddocks/pasture, croplands, wetlands/drains, coastal mudflats, and tips (Pizzey and Knight 2007). L vu Ardea modesta Eastern Great Egret VBA/EPBC 57 2006 Low Few records, little Eastern Great Egret is widespread in Australia and has to no habitat been observed in a wide range of wetland habitats available including swamps and marshes; margins of rivers and lakes; damp or flooded grasslands, pastures or agricultural lands; reservoirs; sewage treatment ponds; drainage channels; salt pans and salt lakes; salt marshes; estuarine mudflats, tidal streams; mangrove swamps; coastal lagoons; and offshore reefs (DEWHA 2010).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence vu Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone VBA/EPBC 154 2008 Nil Few records, little Breeds high Arctic: migrates to all s. continents. to no habitat Regular summer migrant (Aug-April) to coastal available Australia and Tas.; some inland. May overwinter. Habitat: tidal reefs and pools; weed-covered rocks, pebbly, shelly and sandy shores with stranded seaweed; mudflats; occasionally inland on shallow waters, sewage ponds, commercial saltfields, open or ploughed ground. (Pizzey and Knight) vu Aythya australis Hardhead VBA 10 2001 Low Few records, little Hardheads inhabit deep to shallow wetlands with open to no habitat water and fringing emergent vegetation (Pizzey and available Knight 2007). The species feeds by diving in deep water and occasionally by dabbling just under the water surface (Rogers 1990). Nests are built in thick vegetation (e.g. reeds, lignum, cumbungi), usually over water (Halse et al. 2005; Rogers 1990). These birds are most common in the wetland systems of inland Australia (Halse et al. 2005). Birds do visit Victoria from these areas in spring and summer, returning as the northern wetlands is replenished by rain (Halse et al. 2005). However, some birds are present in Victoria all year round depending on the suitability of the wetland (Pizzey and Knight 2007). vu Biziura lobata Musk Duck VBA 42 1993 Low Few records, little Usually seen in small numbers on the deep waters of to no habitat well vegetated fresh to saline lakes, swamps and available occasionally shallow inlets and bays. Nests formed in low vegetation in areas sheltered by surrounding vegetation (Marchant and Higgins 1990; Pizzey and Knight 2007). EN L en Botaurus Australasian Bittern EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little This species is part nocturnal and forages over water in poiciloptilus to no habitat dense cover, sometimes from platforms in wetland available vegetation. Habitat is usually tall reed beds, sedges, rushes, cumbungi or lignum. Also occurs on rice fields, drains in tussocky paddocks and occasionally on saltmarshes and brackish wetlands. Nests are shallow saucers on trampled water plants (Pizzey and Knight 2007).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence en Calidris canutus Red Knot VBA/EPBC 6 1986 Nil Few records, little Summer migrants to Vic from their Arctic breeding to no habitat grounds in Siberia and Alaska. Young non-breeding available birds may remain during winter, especially in Corner Inlet and hundreds in similar habitat in Port Phillip Bay (mainly Queenscliff and Mud Islands). Small flocks irregularly occur elsewhere along the coast and there are a few inland records (e.g. round saline lakes near Colac). Red Knots feed by probing in soft sand or mud at the edge of water or while wading. During high tides they may move to nearby lakes, sewage lagoons and floodwaters to continue feeding, although usually they roost with other waders on spits and islets. en Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper VBA/EPBC 134 2006 Nil Few records, little Summer migrants to Victoria from Arctic breeding to no habitat grounds (Aug-April). This species is found in a range of available wetland habitats; tidal mudflats, saltmarsh, saltfields, fresh to saline wetlands, both coastal (most) and inland. Also visits sewage ponds (Pizzey & Knight 2007). nt Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper VBA 1 1986 Low Few records, little Summer migrant (Aug-April) (Pizzey and Knight 2007). to no habitat Mainly shallow fresh to saline wetlands; usually coastal available but are occasionally found inland. Habitat includes coastal lagoons, estuaries, bays, swamps, lakes, inundated grasslands, saltmarshes, river pools, creeks, floodplains and artificial wetlands. Forage in shallow water or soft mud at the edges of wetlands and often close to low fringing or emergent vegetation (Higgins and Davies 1996). Calidris ruficollis Red-necked Stint EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A to no habitat available

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence L en Calidris tenuirostris Great Knot VBA/EPBC 4 1989 Nil Few records, little Summer migrants to Vic. From breeding grounds in to no habitat Siberia. Occasionally, small numbers stay overwinter. available Flocks occur regularly on intertidal mudflats in Port Phillip Bay and Corner Inlet. Small numbers occasionally seen elsewhere along coast or, rarely, at inland sites. Often associate with other Knots. Feed from soft mud or sand in shallow water. Charadrius Double-banded EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A bicinctus Plover to no habitat available cr Charadrius Greater Sand Plover VBA/EPBC 4 2008 Nil Few records, little Also known as the Large Sand Plover. They are summer leschenaultii to no habitat migrants to Vic from their central Asian breeding available grounds. Non-breeding birds have been recorded here occasionally during winter. During summer, small numbers of birds (usually fewer than 10) regularly occur on intertidal mudflats at Queenscliff and Mud Islands in Port Phillip Bay, at Tortoise Head and Rama Island in Western Port, and in Corner Inlet. In these places they usually accompany flocks of Mongolian Plovers and can be difficult to identify. Individuals or groups of two or three Great Sand Plovers occasionally occur elsewhere along the coast (i.e. Bunyip River and Yallock Creek in Western Port). These plovers catch their food from the surface of mud or sand. cr Charadrius Lesser Sand Plover VBA/EPBC 8 2008 Nil Few records, little Also known as the Mongolian Plover. Summer migrants mongolus to no habitat to Vic from their northern hemisphere breeding available grounds. Usually coastal, in littoral and estuarine environments; rarely inland around terrestrial wetlands. Feed mostly on freshly exposed intertidal sandflats and mudflats of estuaries, beaches, banks, spits and bars of sand or shells. Roosts on beaches, banks, spits and bars of sand or shells on beaches or in estuarine lagoons near feeding grounds (Marchant and Higgins 1993).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence dd Chelodina Common Long- VBA 1 2001 Low- Only one record, Distributed throughout south eastern Australia, Coastal longicollis necked Turtle Moderate little to no habitat Rivers of Victoria, occurs in a broad range of habitats available including permanent riverine waterholes, lakes, farm dams and shallow temporary ponds, greatest abundance in shallow , ephemeral waterholes or in bodies of water that are remote from remanent rivers, often in the absence of other turtle species. Able to distribute overland. {Kennet, 2009 #11099} nt Chlidonias Whiskered Tern VBA 3 1989 Low Few records, little This is mainly a summer migrant to Victoria, although hybridus javanicus to no habitat some remain here over winter. They inhabit shallow available freshwater swamps and fresh or brackish lakes, favouring areas with emergent vegetation. The Whiskered Tern build nests on the water in colonies among flooded or emergent vegetation (Pizzey and Knight 2007). L en Coturnix chinensis King Quail VBA 4 1987 Low Few records, little Most recent reports are from French Island, where to no habitat found in low treeless heaths with moist rushy available depressions. Feed and nest on the ground among dense low vegetation. There are few breeding records for Victoria but in 19th century they nested in areas which are now suburbs of Melbourne. Some past sightings were from coastal heaths where they might still occur, e.g. Mallacoota, Wilsons Promontory and near Portland. The draining of wet heaths in the past has eliminated King quail from some areas e.g. near Melbourne. L en Egretta garzetta Little Egret VBA 5 1987 Low Few records, little Inhabits terrestrial wetlands and shallow margins of nigripes to no habitat tidal estuaries and inland lakes and rivers. Feed in available shallow water and nest colonially, often with other waterbirds. Stick-nests are usually built in trees over water, although occasionally in reed beds (Marchant and Higgins 1990).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence VU L en Galaxiella pusilla Dwarf Galaxias EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Occurs in vegetated margins of slow-flowing coastal to no habitat creek backwaters, drains and swamps, often with dense available aquatic macrophytes. Ephemeral sites require seasonal flooding and linkages to other more permanent populations for population replenishment; therefore wetland connectivity may be critical to survival. Rare in Victoria, however more abundant in the south-east of the state in Mornington Peninsula & Western Port areas (Allen, Midgley and Allen 2002; Museum Victoria 2006). nt Gallinago Latham's Snipe VBA/EPBC 4 1980 Low Few records, little Latham’s Snipe is a migratory species. The species hardwickii to no habitat migrates to Victoria from breeding grounds in Japan. In available Victoria this species is widely distributed in a range of habits including heavily vegetated freshwater swamps, and pools or ditches in heaths or subalpine herblands (Pizzey and Knight 2007). Also occurs in small ephemeral wetlands such as wet depressions after floods recede. Generally roosts in thick vegetation during the day, sometimes under shrubs away from wetlands, and will feed in swamps at night. They are occasionally seen feeding during the day. This species feeds by probing in soft mud and rarely moves far from concealing vegetation (Higgins and Davies 1996). nt Haematopus Sooty Oystercatcher VBA 11 1986 Nil Few records, little Strictly marine coastal and usually within 50m of the fuliginosus to no habitat shore. Habitat includes rocky intertidal shorelines with available little vegetation, coral reefs and sandy beaches near intertidal mudflats. Commonly breed and roost on offshore islands. Also roost on reefs and wavecut platforms (Marchant and Higgins 1993).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence L vu Haliaeetus White-bellied Sea- VBA/EPBC 11 2000 Low Few records, little Occurs along the coast, especially the forested coasts leucogaster Eagle to no habitat of the East Gippsland Plains, on coastal islands, round available coastal lakes and along some inland rivers and lakes. Catch prey on, or near, the water's surface and also takes refuse from fishing boats. On land they feed from the ground on carrion or occasionally catch live prey. Builds stick-nests in tall eucalypts, particularly River Red Gum, Forest Red Gum and Southern Mahogany. Clearing of forests and woodlands along the coast, near coastal lakes, and along the Murray River, threatens this species. In the Gippsland Lakes region more than half of the known nest sites are on private lands (DSE 2003d). Occurs across a range of forests and woodlands throughout Victoria (DSE 2003d). L cr Heteroscelus Grey-tailed Tattler VBA/EPBC 98 2008 Nil Few records, little Sheltered coasts with estuaries, tidal mudflats, brevipes to no habitat mangroves, wave-washed rocks and reefs (Pizzey and available Knight 2007). Usually forage in shallow water on hard intertidal substrates such as reefs, rock platforms, in rock pools and among rocks and coral rubble over which water may surge (Higgins and Davies 1996). vu Hirundapus White-throated VBA/EPBC 4 1979 Moderate Few records, little In Australia, the White-throated Needletail is almost caudacutus Needletail to no habitat exclusively aerial, from heights of less than 1 m up to available, but more than 1000 m above the ground. Because they are could occur in aerial, it has been stated that conventional habitat airspace above descriptions are inapplicable. In Australia, White- terrestrial habitat throated Needletails almost always forage aerially, at heights up to 'cloud level', above a wide variety of habitats ranging from heavily treed forests to open habitats, such as farmland, heathland or mudflats (Higgins 1999). L nt Hydroprogne Caspian Tern VBA 86 2006 Low Few records, little Mostly sheltered coastal embayments, including caspia to no habitat harbours, lagoons, inlets, bays, estuaries and river available deltas, usually with sandy or muddy margins. Will use artificial wetlands, including reservoirs, sewage ponds and saltworks (Higgins and Davies 1996).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence EN L nt Isoodon obesulus Southern Brown EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little The Southern Brown Bandicoot is both active during the obesulus Bandicoot to no habitat day and night. It is found in forest, heath and shrub available communities. It shelters in a nest of vegetation beneath dense cover, it eats fungi, tubers and arthropods (Menkhorst and Knight 2001; Paull 2008). nt Larus pacificus Pacific Gull VBA 220 2006 Low Few records, little The Pacific Gull is one of the largest gulls within the pacificus to no habitat Australian and New Zealand territories, confined to the available coast where flocks occur on intertidal mudflats and nearby rubbish tips in Port Phillip Bay, Western Port and Corner Inlet, with smaller numbers elsewhere on estuaries, along beaches and on other intertidal habitats (Higgins and Davies 1996). This species breeds mainly on islands in Bass Strait and off Tasmania. Some smaller numbers breed on islands off Wilsons Promontory. Their nests are built on the ground on the tops of steep-sided islands (Higgins and Davies 1996). EN L en Lathamus discolor Swift Parrot VBA/EPBC 2 1987 Low Few records, little The Swift Parrot is a winter migrant to Victoria (Swift to no habitat Parrot Recovery Team 2001). Arriving from their available breeding areas in Tasmania, however small numbers of non-breeding birds may remain here during summer (Higgins 1999; Swift Parrot Recovery Team 2001). They are nomadic, and follow the flowering of trees and psyllid infestations. In Victoria their distribution is centred on box-ironbark forests, but they are often seen in town parks and occur sporadically elsewhere in dry forests, dry woodlands and wooded farmlands but are seldom seen in treeless areas, rainforests or wet forests (Higgins 1999; Pizzey and Knight 2007). Feed mainly in winter-flowering plants, especially Red Ironbarks and ornamental trees and shrubs (Higgins 1999; Swift Parrot Recovery Team 2001).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence L vu Lewinia pectoralis Lewin's Rail VBA 2 1980 Nil Few records, little Inhabits densely vegetated, fresh, brackish or saline pectoralis to no habitat wetlands, usually with areas of standing water. Use available long tussocky grass, reeds, rushes, sedges or bracken and are occasionally found amongst tangled clumps of weeds such as Blackberries and Lantana (Marchant and Higgins 1993). EN L cr Lichenostomus Helmeted VBA 1 1867 Nil Few records, little Mostly confined to narrow patches of tall remnant melanops cassidix Honeyeater to no habitat eucalypt forest and woodland along streams or in available surrounding swampland dominated by Swamp Gum, with thickets of Scented Paperbark Melaleuca squarrosus and Woolly Tea-tree Leptospermum lanigerum in understorey, or with reeds and sedges. In winter individuals sometimes move onto nearby more open forest dominated by Swamp Gum, or mixed Green Scent-bark, Messmate and Narrow-leaved Peppermint with diverse dense heath understorey (Higgins, Peter and Steele 2001). Limicola falcinellus Broad-billed EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A Sandpiper to no habitat available Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed Godwit EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A to no habitat available

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence VU L en Litoria raniformis Growling Grass VBA/EPBC 1 undated Nil-Low One old record, The species often inhabits water bodies with a diverse Frog old little to no habitat assemblage of aquatic vegetation, including emergent record available species such as sedges (Gahnia spp.), submergent species such as curly pondweed (Potamogeton spp.), floating species such as water ribbon (Triglochin spp.) and filamentous algae (Hamer and Organ 2006; Heard, Robertson and Scroggie 2004). The aquatic vegetation provides sites for male frogs to call from, sites for eggs to be deposited and relatively safe development, and food and shelter for tadpoles. Dense submergent vegetation is especially important to protect eggs and tadpoles from predation (Heard, Robertson and Scroggie 2004). However, it is also known to occur in ditches, dams and swamps or sheltering under discarded debris near those sites (Tyler and Knight 2009, pp. 38-39). Monarcha Black-faced EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Inhabits rainforests, eucalypt woodlands; coastal melanopsis Monarch to no habitat scrubs; damp gullies in rainforest, eucalypt forest; available when migrating more open woodland (Pizzey and Knight 2007). Occurs along the eastern-Australian coast (Simpson and Day 2000/2001). Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little The Satin Flycatcher migrates to southern parts of to no habitat Victoria during the spring/summer months. It is available generally found in many habitat types including wet sclerophyll and woodland particularly along watercourses (Higgins, Peter and Cowling 2006). CR L cr Neophema Orange-bellied VBA/EPBC 8 1986 Nil Few records, little Breeds in south west Tasmania and are winter migrants chrysogaster Parrot to no habitat to Victoria where they are usually present from late available March to early Nov, inhabiting coastal habitats such as bays and estuaries in saltmarshes, herbland or low shrublands (Higgins 1999). Much of their winter habitat have been altered and saltmarshes in low rainfall areas have been developed for uses such as salt extraction. Illegal trapping has also reduced numbers.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence L en Ninox connivens Barking Owl VBA 1 1993 Low One record, little Occurs in dry woodlands, wooded farmlands and dry connivens to no habitat forests in the 500-800mm annual rainfall zone and available extend into semi-arid areas in River Red Gum forests along the Murray River. Hollow dependent species (Higgins 1999; Pizzey and Knight 2007). vu Numenius Eastern Curlew VBA/EPBC 159 2008 Nil Few records, little Common summer migrant to Australia (Aug-May) madagascariensis to no habitat (Pizzey and Knight 2007). Sheltered coasts, especially available estuaries, embayments, harbours, inlets and coastal lagoons, with large intertidal mudflats or sandflats. Mainly forages on soft sheltered intertidal sandflats or mudflats, open and without vegetation; also on saltflats and in saltmarsh (Higgins and Davies 1996). Numenius minutus Little Curlew EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A to no habitat available vu Numenius Whimbrel VBA/EPBC 8 1987 Nil Few records, little A regular summer migrant (Aug-April). Prefers phaeopus to no habitat intertidal mudflats of sheltered coasts, harbours, available lagoons, estuaries and river deltas. Occasionally on sandy beaches, coral or rocky islets, reefs and platforms exposed at low tide. Forages on intertidal mudflats and along muddy banks of estuaries or coastal lagoons either in unvegetated areas or among mangroves. Roosts in mangroves or trees (Higgins and Davies 1996; Pizzey and Knight 2007).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence nt Nycticorax Nankeen Night VBA 1 1978 Low One record, little The Nankeen Night Heron has a widespread caledonicus hillii Heron to no habitat distribution in wetlands throughout Australia, available particularly in the north, south, and southwest. This species inhabits shorelines of lakes and rivers, estuaries, terrestrial wetlands and grasslands. Particularly those sheltered by tall ground vegetation and/or trees, with shallow, slow-moving water. Breeds in colonies, usually in the crown or canopy of trees, in forks or on horizontal boughs; also in reed beds or atop shrubs. In Victoria, most numerous in the Murray River region, and in smaller numbers in more coastal/near-coastal regions (Marchant and Higgins 1990; Pizzey and Knight 2007). VU vu Pachyptila turtur Fairy Prion VBA 2 1978 Nil Few records, little The Fairy Prion is a pelagic species of subtropic and to no habitat subantarctic seas. It is abundant in south-eastern available Australian waters, and is commonly seen offshore over the continental shelf. This species has a few, small breeding colonies on Australian shores, near Portland, Wilson's Promontory, and on some Bass Strait islands (Marchant and Higgins 1990). Pandion cristatus Eastern Osprey EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Range: coasts and islands of Australia: now rare or to no habitat absent far s. NSW, Vic, Tas, Bass Strait and far se. SA, available though breeds Yorke and Eyre Pens. and Kangaroo Island (SA). Breeds n. From c. Newcastle-L. Macquarie (NSW); all coastal Q: Gt Barrier Reef; n. Australia and WA, possibly except Eight Mile Beach. To Kangaroo Island (SA). Sedentary; dispersive, Cosmopolitan. Habitat: coasts, estuaries, bays, inlets; islands and surrounding waters; coral atolls, reefs, lagoons, rock cliffs, stacks. Ascends larger rivers particularly in north, but also Murray River, SA; ventures far inland. {Pizzey & Knight 2007, p.138}

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence nt Phalacrocorax Black-faced VBA 1 2000 Nil Marine species, Restricted to the coast; seen around, and on, offshore fuscescens Cormorant no suitable islands or rocky reefs, as well as on nearby artificial habitat structures such as piles, jetties, platforms or buoys. Will catch their food while swimming beneath the surface. Nests on rocky sites on offshore islands. Roost on islands, offshore rocks, sandbanks, navigation beacons and jetties (Marchant and Higgins 1990). nt Phalacrocorax Pied Cormorant VBA 168 2006 Low Largely This species is most often found along the coast, varius marine/riverine however are known to use inland wetlands including species, no billabongs, deep and open swamps and rivers (large suitable habitat freshwater and saline wetlands). They nest in colonies, building platforms nests in mangroves or other trees (Marchant and Higgins 1990; Pizzey and Knight 2007). nt Platalea regia Royal Spoonbill VBA 101 2006 (Present) Observed flying The Royal Spoonbill inhabits the shallow parts of fresh overhead - and saline wetlands; these birds are gregarious in small species is unlikely flocks. They are mostly common on intertidal mudflats to make in coastal bays. Their stick-nests are built in reeds, significant use of shrubs or trees, singly or in loose colonies and are habitat within the often seen with other species (Marchant and Higgins site itself. 1990). nt Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis VBA 1 1977 Low One record, little Found in terrestrial wetlands, occasionally wet to no habitat grasslands and sheltered marine habitats. Forages in available shallow water over soft substrate or on grassy or muddy verges of wetlands, preferring those that provide a variety of depths. Will use brackish and occasionally saline wetlands, mangroves and mudflats (Marchant and Higgins 1990; Pizzey and Knight 2007). vu Pluvialis fulva Pacific Golden VBA/EPBC 83 2008 Low Could occur, but Sandy, muddy or rocky shores, estuaries and lagoons, Plover prefers open reefs, saltmarsh, and short grass in paddocks and areas with more crops. Usually coastal, including offshore islands and dense, wet rarely found inland. Roosts near feeding areas on sandy grassy/herbaceou beaches and spits, rocky points, islets and exposed s groundcover for reefs; sometimes under vegetation (Marchant and high tide roosts - Higgins 1993). limited habitat available

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence en Pluvialis squatarola Grey Plover VBA/EPBC 7 1994 Nil Few records, little Summer migrants to Vic from their breeding grounds in to no habitat the Arctic (Pizzey and Knight 2007). Almost entirely available coastal with some records on inland wetlands. Habitat includes marine shores, inlets, estuaries and lagoons near intertidal mudflats or sandflats for feeding. Roosts on unvegetated sandbanks or spits on beaches and lagoons and estuaries (Marchant and Higgins 1993). vu Pseudemoia Glossy Grass Skink VBA 1 1974 Low One old record, Inhabits swamp and lake edges, salt-marshes and rawlinsoni little to no habitat boggy creeks with dense vegetation (Wilson and Swan available 2008). EN L en Pseudomys fumeus Smoky Mouse EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Patchy, ephemeral populations in Victoria. Although to no habitat recorded in subalpine to coastal dune areas, habitat is available linked to dietary requirements. Epacrids that provide berries and flowers and legumes that provide seeds are typical of suitable habitat. Underground fungi (truffles) are important in winter while seeds and fruit are important in summer. Invertebrates are taken when available (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008a). L vu Pseudomys New Holland Mouse EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Occurs in heathlands, woodlands, open forest and novaehollandiae to no habitat paperbark swamps and on sandy, loamy or rocky soils. available Coastal populations show a preference for sandy substrates with a heath understorey, leguminous shrubs less than 1m high and sparse ground litter. Habitat for burrowing is likely to be an important factor in species distribution (Van Dyck and Strahan 2008a). vu Pseudophryne Southern Toadlet VBA 2 1980 Low Could occur, but The Southern Toadlet can be found in dry forest, semimarmorata only two older woodland, shrubland, grassland and heaths. It shelters records, and under leaf litter and other debris in moist soaks and limited habitat depressions. Their eggs are spawned in shallow available burrows under organic litter in low areas close to water (Hero, Littlejohn and Marantelli 1991).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence VU L vu Pteropus Grey-headed EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Eastern coastal Australia from Gladstone in Qld to poliocephalus Flying-fox to no habitat South Gippsland and Melbourne in Vic, rare influxes available further west and south. Rarely more than 200km inland. In warmer months gathers in very large camps, usually in dense forest in gullies; population more dispersed in winter. Size of camps fluctuates in response to local food supplies; in south numbers fluctuate in regular pattern, being highest in late summer-autumn and lowest in winter (Menkhorst and Knight 2001). Rhipidura rufifrons Rufous Fantail EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little In Victoria, the Rufous Fantail mainly inhabits the to no habitat undergrowth of temperate rainforests, and wetter available eucalypt forests and gullies, but also occur in paperbark thickets, sub-inland/coastal scrub, along watercourses and within parks/gardens. On migration it is seen at a wide range of locations from farmland to built up streets (Pizzey and Knight 2007). VU L cr Rostratula australis Australian Painted EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Generally uncommon in Australia and scattered records Snipe to no habitat in Victoria. Uses terrestrial shallow freshwater available (occasionally brackish) wetlands; ephemeral and permanent: lakes, swamps, claypans, inundated or waterlogged grassland or saltmarsh, dams, rice crops, sewage farms and bore drains with rank emergent tussocks of grass, sedges, rushes or reeds, or samphire; often with scattered clumps lignum, canegrass or tea-tree (Marchant and Higgins 1993). L vu Sternula albifrons Little Tern EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little The Little Tern is both a breeder and migrant visitor to to no habitat Australia. It mainly inhabits sheltered coastal waters; as available it mostly forages in shallow waters in bays, inlets, estuaries, lakes, and lagoons - if out at sea, usually not further than 50m. This species particularly favours habitat with exposed sandpits, sandbanks, or ocean beaches nearby (Higgins and Davies 1996; Pizzey and Knight 2007).

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence VU L en Sternula nereis Fairy Tern VBA 44 2006 Nil-Low Largely coastal Mostly sheltered coastal embayments, including nereis species, no harbours, lagoons, inlets, bays, estuaries and on ocean suitable habitat beaches. Also fresh or saline near-coastal terrestrial wetlands, including lakes and salt-ponds. Nests above high-water mark on sheltered beaches, spits, bars, banks and ridges, usually of sand but also of shell-grit or coral; either on mainland or on inshore islands (Higgins and Davies 1996). L en Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck VBA 2 1993 Low Few records, little Terrestrial wetlands with shallow productive waters or to no habitat soft mud at wetland edges. In breeding range (Lake available Eyre and Murray-Darling Basin) densely vegetated waters, particularly flood water swamps and creeks vegetated with lignum. In coastal regions, prefer swamps and lakes with dense thickets of Melaleuca, Casuarina or Leptospermum (Marchant and Higgins 1990). vu Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Summer migrants to Aust from their breeding grounds to no habitat in northern Asia. In Vic they are scarce visitors to available shallow freshwater swamps, large farm dams, sewage farms and receding floodwaters, with a concentration of records from the Mid Murray Valley. The records from Port Phillip Bay refer to a few individuals at Seaford Swamp, on lakes near Geelong and on well- vegetated shallow lagoons at Werribee Sewage Farm. These sandpipers usually occur along or in groups of up to five birds, sometimes among other waders such as Sharp-tailed Sandpipers. Wood Sandpipers feed from mud among scattered vegetation, in shallow water or along shores (Higgins and Davies 1996). Tringa incana Wandering Tattler EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little #N/A to no habitat available

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

No. Likelihood Data Last Likelihood

Scientific name Common name record of Habitat and Species Notes FFG EPBC source record Reasoning DELWP s occurrence vu Tringa nebularia Common VBA 87 2006 Nil Largely Habitat: mudflats, estuaries, saltmarshes, margins of Greenshank coastal/wetland lakes, wetlands, claypans, fresh and saline; commercial species, limited saltfields, sewage ponds. Regular, widespread summer suitable habitat migrant to Aust. And Tas. (Sept-April). Mostly coastal but inland in suitable habitat. Some overwinter. (Pizzey and Knight 2007, p.178) vu Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper EPBC n/a n/a Nil-Low No records, little Salt, brackish, or freshwater wetlands, sewage ponds, to no habitat commercial saltfields, bore drains, mangroves, tidal available mudflats, estuaries, regular summer migrant (aug – may), mostly to coastal Aust, widespread but very scattered throughout inland (Pizzey & Knight 2007). en Varanus varius Lace Monitor VBA 1 1995 Low Could occur, but Occurs in well-timbered areas, from dry woodlands to only one record, cool temperate southern forests. Arboreal, ascending and limited large trees when disturbed. Forages widely. Clutches of habitat available eggs are laid in arboreal or terrestrial termite mounds (Wilson and Swan 2008). L en Xenus cinereus Terek Sandpiper VBA/EPBC 5 2008 Nil Few records, little Scarce summer migrants to Vic. From their breeding to no habitat grounds in northern Russia. During the Atlas period available (1973-1986), records giving precise dates were made only from Nov to Mar, but in Western Port birds often remain until early May and some occasionally stay all winter. Small numbers (up to 10 birds) occur on intertidal mudflats in Western Port and Corner Inlet; occasionally birds are recorded elsewhere, mainly on the western side of Port Phillip Bay. Forages on mangrove-lined mudflats and occasionally on mudflats round saltpans or drying sewage lagoons. They roost in spits, islets or mangroves.

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

APPENDIX 4: PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST Moderate and High Risk-Based Pathway

Application Requirement Met By Provided with Application?

Location of native vegetation to be removed BA Report Provided in this ecological assessment

Description of native vegetation to be BA & BIOR Provided in this ecological assessment removed (area of patch, number of Reports scattered trees) Refer to BIOR Report (dated 21/08/2015)

Maps and plans of the native vegetation to BA Report Provided in this ecological assessment be removed

Recent dated photographs of native BA & BIOR Provided in this ecological assessment vegetation to be removed Reports Native vegetation is proposed for removal in Habitat Zones A, E, F, G, H and I.

Photographs of these Habitat Zones are provided in Section 3.3

Photographs of the four scattered trees are provided in Section 3.4

Topographic information, saline discharge Applicant Provided in this ecological assessment areas and areas of existing erosion General site description provided in Section 1.2

N/a for saline and erosion

Copy of property vegetation plan Applicant N/a

Defendable space statement Applicant N/a

Details of other native vegetation that was Applicant N/a permitted to be cleared on the same property with the same ownership in the five year period before the application is lodged

Strategic biodiversity score of the BA & BIOR Refer to BIOR Report (dated 21/08/2015) vegetation to be removed Reports

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Application Requirement Met By Provided with Application?

Offset requirement if removal is permitted BIOR Refer to BIOR Report (dated 21/08/2015) Reports

Habitat hectare assessment Applicant Provided in this ecological assessment

Refer to Table 2

Statement outlining how impacts on Applicant Provided in this ecological assessment biodiversity have been minimised Refer to Section 5

Assessment of whether the removal will BIOR Refer to BIOR Report (dated 21/08/2015) have a significant impact on Victoria’s Reports biodiversity, with specific regard to the proportional impact on rare or threatened species

An offset strategy detailing how offset will Applicant To be prepared at a later date be secured

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Map 1. Ecological Assessment: Existing Site Conditions

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Map 2. Habitat Zones and the Proposed Subdivision layout with 50m Buffer Zone

REVISED Flora and Fauna Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis: 386 Agar Road, Coronet Bay

Map 3. Original Plan of Subdivision