Appendix D-1 Aquatic Ecology

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project

Aquatic Ecology Assessment

Prepared for:

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Ensham Resources Pty Ltd

frc environmental

PO Box 2363, Wellington Point QLD 4160 Telephone: + 61 3286 3850 Facsimile: + 61 3821 7936 frc reference: 190312 frc environmental

Document Control Summary

Project No.: 190312 Status: Final Report Project Director: Carol Conacher Project Manager: Andrew Bentley Title: Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment Project Team: A. Bentley, B. Cook, C. Conacher, M. McMahon Client: AECOM Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Ensham Resources Pty Ltd Client Contact: Jared Brook Date: 5 August 2021 Edition: 190312Rvi Checked by: Carol Conacher Issued by: Andrew Bentley

Distribution Record

AECOM Australia Pty Ltd: as .pdf and word.doc

This work is copyright.

A person using frc environmental documents or data accepts the risk of: 1 Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original signed hard copy version; and

2 Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by frc environmental.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment Y:\Projects\2021\210702_ID_Ensham_RFI\Report\Sent_Final_21-08-05_AB\AE\190312Rvi_AE.docx frc environmental

Abbreviations

AECOM AECOM Australia Pty Ltd Ensham Ensham Resources Pty Ltd MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance mm millimetres DAWE Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment km kilometres ML Mining Lease MDL Mineral Development Licence LOM Life of Mine EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 DotE Department of the Environment EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1994 EV Environmental Values EP Regulation Environmental Protection Regulation 2008 ERA Environmentally Relevant Activities EPP (WWB) Environmental Protection (Water and Wetland Biodiversity) Policy 2019 HEV High Ecological Value WQO Water Quality Objectives VM Act Vegetation Management Act 1999 NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1992 Fisheries Act Fisheries Act 1994 MSES Matters of State Environmental Significance REMP Receiving Environment Monitoring Program DES Department of Environment and Science °C degrees centigrade mg milligrams L litre μS microsiemens cm centimetre NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Abbreviations Contd.

µg micrograms TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Al Aluminium As Arsenic B Boron Cr Chromium Co Cobalt Cu Copper Fe Iron Pb Lead Mn Manganese Hg Mercury Mo Molybdenum Ni Nickel Se Selenium Ag Silver U Uranium V Vanadium Zn Zinc m metre AS Australian Standard QA/QC Quality assurance / quality control WQA Water Quality Australia DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection DNRM Department of Natural Resources and Mines AUSRIVAS Australian River Assessment System DSEWPC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Pollution and Communities O/E Observed to Expected

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Abbreviations Contd.

DERM Department of Environment and Resource Management ALA Atlas of Living Australia FoS Factor of Safety EA Environmental Authority DNRME Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy DSEWPC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities SQO Sediment Quality Objective

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Contents

Executive Summary i

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Project Description 1

2 Key Legislation and Policy 3

2.1 Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 3

2.2 Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994 4

2.3 Environmental Protection (Water and Wetland Biodiversity) Policy 2019 5

2.4 Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 6

2.5 Queensland Vegetation Management Act 1999 6

2.6 Queensland Fisheries Act 1994 7

3 Methodology 8

3.1 Desktop Approach 8

3.2 Field Survey 8

3.3 Assessment of Environmental Values 19

3.4 Impact Assessment 20

4 Environmental Values of Watercourses 22

4.1 Aquatic Matters of National Environmental Significance 22

4.2 State-level Protected Matters Relevant to Aquatic Ecology 23

4.3 Water Quality 32

4.4 Sediment Quality 41

4.5 Aquatic Habitat and Natural Flow Regime 44

4.6 Aquatic Biota of the Project Study Area 48

4.7 Assessment of Aquatic Ecological Value 59

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

5 Aquatic Ecological Impact and Mitigation Assessment 60

5.1 Sources of Potential Impact on Aquatic Ecological Values 60

5.2 Risk-based Impact Assessment 66

5.3 Assessment of Potential Impacts to Aquatic MNES Species 69

6 Conclusions 71

7 References 73

Appendix A MNES Search Results

Appendix B Description of white-throated snapping turtle (Elseya albagula)

Appendix C Description of Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops)

Appendix D Site Habitat Sheets

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Tables

Table 3.1 Aquatic ecology survey sites. 10

Table 3.2 River habitat bioassessment scores used to derive overall habitat condition categories. 16

Table 3.3 Growth forms of aquatic plants growing in water. 17

Table 3.4 Default biological guidelines for macroinvertebrates. 18

Table 3.5 Criteria used to assess environmental value of each site 19

Table 3.6 Ratings used to assess the likelihood of potential impacts 21

Table 3.7 Ratings used to assess the consequence of potential impacts 21

Table 3.8 Environmental risk matrix 21

Table 4.1 Water quality at each site in November 2019 34

Table 4.2 Sediment quality at each site in November 2019 42

Table 4.3 Per cent cover of aquatic plants in and out of water at each site in November 2019. 50

Table 4.4 Macroinvertebrate indices for samples collected from edge habitat in November 2019. 54

Table 4.5 Fish caught at each site in November 2019. 57

Table 4.6 Turtles caught at each site in November 2019. 58

Table 5.1 Subsidence monitoring schedule and trigger levels 63

Table 5.2 Ratings used to assess the likelihood of potential impacts. 67

Table 5.3 Ratings used to assess the consequence of potential impacts. 67

Table 5.4 Environmental risk matrix. 67

Table 5.5 Risk-based Impact Assessment 68

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Figures

Figure 1.1 Existing Ensham Operations and Proposed Project Study Area. 2

Figure 3.1 Rainfall since January 2017 at the Emerald Airport weather station (station 35264). 9

Figure 3.2 Project Study Area and Aquatic Ecological Survey Sites 11

Figure 4.1 Category B Regulated Vegetation 25

Figure 4.2 Category C Regulated Vegetation 26

Figure 4.3 Category R Regulated Vegetation 27

Figure 4.4 Regulated Vegetation Within 100 m from Wetland 28

Figure 4.5 High Ecological Significance Wetlands 29

Figure 4.6 Queensland Wetland Data 30

Figure 4.7 Queensland Waterways for Waterway Barrier Works 31

Figure 4.8 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Potential 46

Figure 4.9 Stream flow at DNRME gauging station 130219a 47

Figure 4.10 Flow duration curve for DNRME gauging station 130219a 47

Figure 5.1 Existing and proposed Ensham Mine infrastructure (Sourced from Figure 4.2 of Chapter 4 of the EIS submission). 61

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment frc environmental

Executive Summary frc environmental was commissioned by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM), on behalf of Ensham Resources Pty Ltd (Ensham), to assess the potential impact of the proposed Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project (the Project) on aquatic ecological values, in support of the impact assessment for the Project.

The scope of this aquatic ecology study is to:

 describe the aquatic ecological values of watercourses and sensitive aquatic environmental receptors in and surrounding the Project (Project study area)

 identify the potential sources of adverse ecological impact from the Project on aquatic ecological values, and

 assess the impact of the Project on aquatic ecological values using risk-based impact assessment and the significant impact criteria.

The aquatic ecological value of the Nogoa River and its tributaries was assessed as high, as aquatic Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) are known to occur within the Nogoa River and the main channel provides favourable habitat for foraging and potential habitat for breeding.

The aquatic ecological value of Winton Creek was assessed as moderate, as Winton Creek provides favourable habitat for common species of fish and invertebrates, noting that in- stream aquatic habitat is often restricted to temporary, isolated pools.

The aquatic ecological value of Boggy Creek, Corkscrew Creek and Mosquito Creek was assessed as low - moderate, as these were dry at the time of the survey and are unlikely to provide habitat for fish or aquatic invertebrates most of the year based on their high degree of ephemerality.

Regulated vegetation types occur in the riparian zone and watercourses of the Project study area and watercourses provide important corridors for fish passage during times of flow.

The following potential sources of impact on aquatic ecological values associated with the Project were identified:

 subsidence  physical disturbance of watercourses  localised contamination of watercourses from spills of hydrocarbons and chemicals from vehicles and machinery

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment i frc environmental

 cumulative impacts of the Project interacting with nearby operational mines and proposed mining projects (e.g. Kestrel Coal Project, Wilton and Fairhill Project and Curragh Project).

All sources of impact were assessed as having a low risk of adverse impact to aquatic ecological values as:

 the Project will operate using the same bord and pillar mining method associated with existing operations, with the maximum predicted subsidence (40 mm) less than the DAWE estimated seasonal variation in surface levels as a result of changes in soil moisture content (50 mm)

 real-time and annual monitoring for subsidence will be completed as per the Subsidence Management Plan (SMP), with trigger levels and alert to actions identified where potential for significant mine related subsidence is identified  there will be no new surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse, no increase in mine traffic on the surface and no increase in surface construction or surface disturbance within the Project study area as a result of the Project, and  proposed mine-affected water releases and ongoing water quality, sediment quality and aquatic ecology monitoring will be managed under the EA conditions of existing operations to ensure the protection of EVs within the receiving environment.

Two aquatic MNES species are known to occur within the waterways of the Project study area (white throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle), however the Project is highly unlikely to have a significant impact on their population as there will be:

 no new surface infrastructure or clearing of riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat  no change in the release process for mine affected water from existing operations  very low likelihood of subsidence, with the predicted maximum subsidence (40 millimetres (mm)) also unlikely to form a barrier for freshwater turtle dispersal, particularly as it is less than the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) estimated seasonal variation in surface levels as a result of changes in soil moisture content (50 mm)  no impact on water level or flow in the Nogoa River, with flow dependent on the release of irrigation water by Sunwater from the Fairbairn Dam upstream

Thus, populations of these MNES species are sufficiently isolated from the Project study area to have no risk of direct or indirect impact from the Project.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment ii frc environmental

1 Introduction frc environmental was commissioned by AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (AECOM), on behalf of Ensham Resources Pty Ltd (Ensham to assess the potential impacts of the proposed Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project (the Project) on aquatic ecological values, in support of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Project.

The scope of this aquatic ecology study is to:

 describe the aquatic ecological values of watercourses and sensitive aquatic environmental receptors of the Project study area

 identify the potential sources of adverse ecological impact from the Project on aquatic ecological values

 assess the impact of the Project on aquatic ecological values using risk-based impact assessment and the significant impact criteria.

1.1 Project Description

Ensham Mine is an existing open-cut and underground bord and pillar coal mine located approximately 35 kilometres (km) east of Emerald in Queensland (Figure 1.1). The Project proposes to increase the life of the existing underground operations by extending the underground bord and pillar mine into an area identified as the Project Site (zones 1, 2, and 3) commencing from within Mining Lease (ML) 7459, ML 70326, ML 70365, and ML 70366 to an area west of ML 70365 within part of Mineral Development License (MDL) 217 (Figure 1.1). The Project will produce at up to approximately 4.5 million tonnes per annum and would extend the Ensham Life of Mine (LOM) by up to nine years to approximately 2037. The extension of the underground operation using existing infrastructure means that no surface construction or surface disturbance will be required to facilitate the Project. Therefore, activities in relation to surface construction, surface disturbance or associated with existing operations were not assessed in this assessment.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 1 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 1978

reek ck C Red Ro

B o g g y C

C lo s e d Ro ad ML 700029 ML 700028

d a o

l l ML 70049 i

t s e r F W o ryi yu F ng n Pan C a re Ro e k ad S S

° ° 4 4 . . 3 3

2 C 2 ri nu E m n C s re h ek a m R o a d M o squito Creek

N ogoa Riv er

Zone 2 Cattle Creek Nogoa River ML 70326 ML 70367 Zone 1 Fitzroy Basin

ML 7460

ML 7459 ML 7460 ML 70365

B o gg Nogo y a Ri C ver r e e k

k ree d Winton C d a a o o R

R s g n ia i s in h s u o r a C B

e l i

R Zone 3

70366

M a

D r uckp i on a ds Ro ad C reek Mackenzie River

screw Creek Cork C

k o ee r m d C a e t o s t r R R u h iv s S a nd e d r

D C aprico Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, rn Hig hway and the GIS User Community 148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Road Network a

Project Site B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r h y R w Existing Operations D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

l y r o y Local Road p a m w h e g D n i e Other Mining Leases t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m

oa w e d o n Styx Basin D Dysart k t a a Basin e l Watercourse P R o Figure 1.1 Clermont a B Middlemount d G e r R e ie ly g d i Lake/Reservoir o a z v Ensham Existing Operations a ry o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

d w c r o a a y

and Proposed Project Site M Basin R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

Jericho m A Duaringa SOURCES Cooper l e p Fitzroy Basin t © Copyright Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) 2001, 2004, 2006 Creek h Springsure r R Basin a i PO Box 2363 © The State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) 2019 v e v C i e Wellington Point © The State of Queensland (Department of National Parks, Sport and Racing) 2019 r R e a r e o Rolleston Q 4160 Australia k g D a aws C o B rcoo o n H a ig ay r h w N n

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 2.5 5 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 06 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:100,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_1.1_21-07-29_AB.mxd W frc environmental

2 Key Legislation and Policy

2.1 Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) provides the legal framework for the protection and management of nationally and internationally threatened flora and fauna (including migratory species), ecological communities, internationally important wetlands, heritage places, the Great Barrier Reef, and Commonwealth marine areas, which are collectively defined as MNES. Water resources in relation to coal seam gas and large mining projects, and nuclear actions, are also regulated under the EPBC Act.

The EPBC Act provides protection for threatened flora, fauna and ecological communities by:

 identifying and listing of species and ecological communities as threatened  developing conservation advice and recovery plans for listed species and ecological communities  developing a register of critical habitat  recognising key threatening processes  where appropriate, reducing the impacts of these processes through threat abatement plans and non-statutory threat abatement advices, and by

 requiring approval for certain actions or activities that will, or are likely to, have a significant impact on an MNES or other protected matter.

Thirty-seven threatened species of freshwater fish species, seven threatened freshwater turtle species and 16 species of freshwater invertebrate (i.e. 13 crayfish, two mussels and one stonefly)1 are listed under the EPBC Act. Of these, two species of turtle were identified in the EPBC Act online search tool as potentially occurring in the Project study area (See Appendix A).

The EPBC Act provides guidance on whether an action (e.g. a proposed development) is likely to have a significant impact on a MNES. Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1

1 EPBC Act list of threatened fauna (https://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- bin/sprat/public/publicthreatenedlist.pl?wanted=fauna); viewed November 2019.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 3 frc environmental

(Department of the Environment (DotE), 2013) provide guidance, in the form of assessment criteria, in relation to significant impacts on threatened species under the EPBC Act.

An action is likely to have a significant impact on a threatened species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:

 lead to a long-term decrease in the size of a population (important population for vulnerable species)  reduce the area of occupancy of the species (important population of a vulnerable species)  fragment an existing population (important population of a vulnerable species) into two or more populations  adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species  disrupt the breeding cycle of a population (important population of a vulnerable species)  modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline  result in invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable species becoming established in the endangered, critically endangered or vulnerable species’ habitat  introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, and / or  interfere with the recovery of the species.

Where assessment identifies that an action will have a significant impact on a threatened species, then the action will be determined as a ‘controlled’ action and require appropriate environmental assessment within the approval application process. If the assessment identifies that an action is not likely to have a significant impact on a MNES, or have a significant impact if taken in a ‘particular manner’, it does not require approval under the EPBC Act and is a ‘not-controlled’ action.

2.2 Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994

The Queensland Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act) provides the legislative framework for ecologically sustainable development in Queensland, requiring people, companies and government to take all reasonable and practical steps to protect Environmental Values (EVs) i.e. avoid harm to the environment. The EP Act provides a

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 4 frc environmental

range of mechanisms to achieve this objective, including establishing Environmental Protection Policies that present the strategies for protecting EVs.

The Environmental Protection Regulation 2008 (EP Regulation), pursuant to the EP Act, specifies Environmentally Relevant Activities (ERAs) that are considered to have the potential to cause environmental harm. ERAs may require an environmental assessment to be prepared as part of the development application process. Resource development, including coal mines, includes ERAs listed under the EP Regulation.

2.3 Environmental Protection (Water and Wetland Biodiversity) Policy 2019

The Environmental Protection (Water and Wetland Biodiversity) Policy 2019 (EPP (WWB)) is a strategy for achieving the object of the EP Act (in relation to water EVs). The EPP (WWB):

 identifies High Ecological Value (HEV) waters  identifies EV and management goals for water  provides water quality guidelines and Water Quality Objectives (WQO) to enhance or protect the identified EV  provides a framework for decision making in relation to Queensland waters  requires monitoring of, and reporting on, the condition of Queensland waters.

EVs for Queensland waters include the protection of aquatic ecosystems. The components of aquatic ecosystems to be protected are generally specified under the EPP (WWB) for a given waterway if WQOs have been listed under Schedule 1 of the EPP (WWB). For example, the EPP (WWB) may require existing (i.e. 20th, 50th and 80th percentiles) water quality, habitat, biota (fish and macroinvertebrates, flow and riparian areas to be protected for HEV waters. For other waters, the EPP (WWB) generally requires:

 the median concentration of several independent samples to achieve the scheduled WQO for the appropriate water type for physico-chemical water quality parameters

 the 95th percentile concentration of several independent samples to achieve the National WQO for the appropriate water type for toxicant water quality parameters, and  riparian vegetation to achieve the applicable vegetation code under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 5 frc environmental

A defensible assessment of the EVs for water within the framework established by the EPP (WWB) for water would also include assessment of protected matters relevant to aquatic ecology, such as matters protected under the EPBC Act, but also matters protected under Queensland legislation, including the Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act), Fisheries Act 1994 (Fisheries Act) and VM Act2.

2.4 Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992

The NC Act provides for the conservation of Queensland’s nature by declaring and managing a protected area network, protecting threatened species (wildlife) and their habitats, regulating the taking of wildlife and co-ordinating nature conservation with Traditional Owners and other land owners. Several freshwater species are protected wildlife under the NC Act.

Protected wildlife listed under the NC Act must be protected from threatening processes, and critical habitat for protected wildlife is required to be protected to the greatest extent possible.

2.5 Queensland Vegetation Management Act 1999

The VM Act, as updated by the Vegetation Management and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2018, regulates the clearing of vegetation to conserve threatened regional ecosystems, protect biodiversity and maintain ecological processes, amongst other purposes.

The VM Act provides for the chief executive to certify various classes of regulated vegetation maps, with regulated vegetation a Matter of State Environmental Significance (MSES). Classes of vegetation under the VM Act include: vegetation that is remnant and / or threatened (category B), high value regrowth vegetation (category C) or regrowth vegetation in a wetland, watercourse or drainage feature area within a Great Barrier Reef catchment (category R). Vegetation in wetland areas and vegetation intersecting a watercourse is also regulated vegetation under the VM Act. Vegetation clearing and development is regulated for Category R vegetation areas, and Riverine Protection Permits are required to clear vegetation in watercourses.

2 These and other protected matters also comprise MSES, which are components of Queensland’s biodiversity of state interest defined under the State Planning Policy and the Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014. MSES comprise certain EVs protected under Queensland Legislation, including the EP Act, NC Act, Fisheries Act and VM Act.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 6 frc environmental

2.6 Queensland Fisheries Act 1994

The Fisheries Act provides for the management and protection of fisheries resources, including regulating development that might impact declared fish habitat areas, and fish passage. Several fish species of special interest are listed as ‘no take’ species under the Fisheries Act, including Australian lungfish.

Fisheries resources, including declared fish habitat areas which are MSES, contribute to the EVs of waterways and wetlands.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 7 frc environmental

3 Methodology

3.1 Desktop Approach

A desktop approach was used to provide a description of the aquatic ecology and aquatic EVs of the Project study area. This included review of:

 aquatic MNES under the EPBC Act  aquatic matters protected under Queensland legislation, including: − threatened freshwater species under the NC Act − features that support fisheries resources (e.g. waterway barrier risk layer), pursuant to the Fisheries Act − wetland protection areas as shown on the map of Referable Wetlands under the EP Regulation − HEV waters as defined under the EPP (WWB), and − freshwater-dependent regulated vegetation, listed under the VM Act.  mapped aquatic ecological features, including floodplains, wetlands and surface- expression ground-water dependent ecosystems

 hydrological data recorded at DNRME gauging station 130219a (Nogoa River at Duck Ponds)

 relevant literature, including published and unpublished technical reports, scientific papers, and conservation advice statements for any MNES identified  relevant studies supplied by Ensham, including recent Receiving Environment Monitoring Program (REMP) reports, and  data contained in frc environmental’s in-house bio-physical database.

3.2 Field Survey

Survey Design

The survey was completed in the pre-wet season, 4 – 9 November 2019, with minimal rainfall in the month leading up to the survey (5.6 mm) and the last significant rainfall event approximately four months prior (18.2 mm on 5 July 2019) (Figure 3.1).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 8 frc environmental

The assessed aquatic ecological components were:

 water quality measured in situ  water quality measured in the laboratory  sediment quality measured in the laboratory  aquatic habitat  aquatic plants  macroinvertebrates  fish  turtles.

The study design comprised assessment of all aquatic ecological components at six sites, and aquatic habitat, aquatic plants and in-situ water quality at an additional four sites within the Project study area (Figure 3.2; Table 3.1).

160

140

120

100

60 Daily Rainfall Daily Rainfall (mm)

Jul-17 Jul-18 Jul-19

Oct-18 Apr-19 Oct-19 Apr-17 Oct-17 Apr-18

Jan-18 Jun-19 Jan-17 Jun-17 Jun-18 Jan-19

Mar-17 Mar-18 Feb-19 Feb-17 Feb-18 Mar-19

Sep-17 Nov-17 Aug-18 Dec-18 Aug-19 Dec-19 Aug-17 Dec-17 Sep-18 Nov-18 Sep-19 Nov-19

May-17 May-18 May-19 Figure 3.1 Rainfall since January 2017 at the Emerald Airport weather station (station 35264).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 9 frc environmental

Table 3.1 Aquatic ecology survey sites.

Full Aquatic Site Site Description Latitude Longitude Aquatic Habitat Survey Only

WC1 Winston Creek upstream at -23.487101 148.411265 ✓ the Lagoon WC2 Winston Creek downstream -23.497200 148.488881 ✓ within Mining Lease BC1 Boggy Creek upstream of -23.337400 148.523577 ✓ Mining Lease BC2 Boggy Creek upstream of -23.485800 148.508537 ✓ confluence with Nogoa River within Mining Lease NR1 Nogoa River at Bridge Flats -23.430201 148.335144 ✓ Rd upstream of Mining Lease NR2 Nogoa River at upstream -23.442101 148.456393 ✓ Mining Lease boundary MP5 Nogoa River at downstream -23.496700 148.514902 ✓ Mining Lease boundary MP6 Mackenzie River at Rileys -23.543501 148.605288 ✓ Crossing Rd downstream of Mining Lease UNC2 Nogoa River tributary -23.448700 148.409682 ✓ upstream of Mining Lease MP2 Nogoa River tributary within -23.481600 148.472669 ✓ the Mining Lease

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 10 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a BC1 d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng R P o anC a re B d e r k id g E k S e S n e ° F s e ° h r 4 la 4 . a . t C 3 s m 3

2 2 R y o R g a o g

d a o M B o d sq uito Cre ek oa River NR1 Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r he n r esaC ML g r NR2 r e ML 70326 ov ek 70367 e C r UNC2 re e k e v oa e k i R d s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o r n rr F e a a ML iv nw R S e ML 7460 e d M en z i o 70365 MP2 d ack C oa WC1 g R C BC2 sin nton re WC2 os W i ek Cr s

e l i

d MP5

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 o D R s MP6 a i

n ML 70366 i

h r ive u R a ie B nz Cor e M ksc Mac k a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Survey Sites Road Network a

Major Watercourse B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Full Aquatic Survey Highway o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r Minor Watercourse y R h w D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

l y r o y Aquatic Habitat Only Main Road p a m w h Lake/Reservoir e g D n i e t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m Local Road e

oa w Project Site d o n Styx Basin D Dysart k t Basin a a Basin e l P R o Protected Area Clermont a Existing Operations B Middlemount d Figure 3.2 G R e r e ie ly g d z i Other Reserve a or a v y o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Project Study Area and Aquatic Ecological Survey Sites Other Mining Leases d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 06 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_3.2_21-07-29_AB.mxd W frc environmental

Survey Methods

Water Quality

Water quality was measured by frc environmental at all sites that held water, in accordance with the Queensland Monitoring and Sampling Manual (Department of Environment and Science (DES), 2018).

Water quality was measured in situ using a calibrated In-Situ smarTROLL multi-parameter water quality meter. The following parameters were assessed:

 water temperature (degrees centigrade (°C))  pH  dissolved oxygen (milligrams (mg)/ litre (L) and per cent saturation)  electrical conductivity (microsiemens (μS)/ centimetre (cm))  turbidity (Nephelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU)).

Turbidity (NTU) was measured approximately 0.3 m below the water’s surface using a calibrated HACH 2100Q portable turbidity meter.

Water samples collected by frc environmental were analysed by a NATA-accredited laboratory for:

 major ions (sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, hardness, chloride, sulfate, alkalinity) (µg/L)

 nutrients (total nitrogen, total Kjeldahl nitrogen, oxides of nitrogen (nitrate and nitrite), ammonia, total phosphorous and reactive phosphorous (micrograms (µg)/L)  total dissolved and suspended solids (mg/L)  turbidity, pH and conductivity  oil and grease (Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX) and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) (µg/L)  total and dissolved metals and metalloids (Aluminium (Al), Arsenic (As), Boron (B), Chromium (Cr), Cobalt (Co), Copper (Cu), Iron (Fe), Lead (Pb), Manganese (Mn), Mercury (Hg), Molybdenum (Mo), Nickel (Ni), Selenium (Se), Silver (Ag), Uranium (U), Vanadium (V), Zinc (Zn)) (µg/L)

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 12 frc environmental

Water samples at each site were collected 0.3 metres (m) below the water’s surface, and as close to the mid-channel as possible. In accordance with Australian Standard (AS) AS5667 Water Quality Sampling, and the Monitoring and Sampling Manual 2009 (DES 2018) field sampling was undertaken by suitably trained and competent personnel. Quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) measures included:

 collecting water quality samples and measurements before any other sampling, to ensure that the results were not compromised by disturbance of stream bed sediments  wearing powderless gloves when collecting all water samples, with care taken not to touch the inside of any sampling containers, or to place open bottles / jars or their lids onto the ground or other surfaces

 collecting water samples straight into the sample bottle provided by the analytical laboratory

 collecting a field blank to assess handling during transport and handling and analysis in the laboratory  collecting a field replicate at site MP5 to assess within site variation  filtering water samples on site for analysis of dissolved metals and metalloids  storing and transporting samples in accordance with the appropriate holding conditions and times for each parameter (as defined by the analytical laboratory)

 completing a chain of custody for all samples sent to the laboratory for analysis.

Water quality was compared to WQO presented in:

 Australian & New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh & Marine Water Quality (Water Quality Australia (WQA), 2018)

 Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (DES 2009)  Queensland’s Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (Water) Policy 2009 relating to the Lower Nogoa/Theresa Creek sub-basin (Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP), 2013).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 13 frc environmental

Sediment Quality

Sediment quality was assessed by frc environmental in November 2019 in accordance with the Monitoring and Sampling Manual 2009 (DES 2018).

Sediment samples were collected from the channel bed at each site, with samples collected from accreting sections of bed, where possible. Sediment was collected from the top 0.3 m of sediment using a stainless-steel trowel and transferred directly to the sampling jar provided by the analytical laboratory. The potential for cross-contamination of samples was minimised by washing the sampling equipment between sites and field staff wearing disposable powderless gloves when sampling.

Sediment samples were analysed by a NATA-accredited laboratory for the following parameters:

 particle size distribution  total metals (Al, As, B, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Pb, Mn, Hg, Mo, Ni, Se, Ag, U, V, Zn) (mg/kg).

A field replicate was collected at site MP5 for QA/QC purposes and to assess within-site variation.

Aquatic Habitat

The in-stream habitat attributes and condition were assessed using a method based on the Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS) protocol described in the Queensland AUSRIVAS Sampling and Processing Manual (Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM), 2001a). The following parameters were assessed:

 channel shape and pattern

 bank slope, composition, stability and vegetative cover

 bed substrate composition and stability

 in-stream habitat features, including submerged or emergent aquatic plants, large woody debris, undercut banks, boulders  water velocity, depth and width  riparian vegetation composition, extent and condition.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 14 frc environmental

A Riverine Bioassessment Score DNRM (2001b) was calculated for each site where macroinvertebrates were collected. This score is a numerical index of aquatic habitat condition that enables a direct comparison of habitat quality between sites. The method scores habitat quality from zero to 20 for each of nine criteria:

 substrate or available cover  embeddedness  water velocity and depth  channel alteration  bed scouring and deposition  pool: riffle and run: bend ratio  bank stability  bank vegetative stability  streamside vegetation cover.

The sum of the scores for each criterion gives the overall habitat score. This was used to allocate sites to one of four categories (Table 3.2):

 excellent habitat condition (overall score > 110)  good habitat condition (overall score 75 to 110)  moderate habitat condition (overall score 39 to 74)  poor habitat condition (overall score ≤ 38).

The Riverine Bioassessment method was designed for perennially flowing stream and river systems in southern Australia, and as such is not directly applicable to ephemeral systems in Queensland or non-flowing waterbodies; using this method, even pristine ephemeral streams or wetlands are rarely classed as being in excellent condition. Nonetheless it is a useful system for comparing between sites where macroinvertebrates have been collected within a region.

Existing disturbances to riparian vegetation, bed and bank stability, flow and instream habitat were noted, including the presence of any existing barriers to fish passage.

Photographs of aquatic habitat were taken to establish a record of current condition.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 15 frc environmental

Table 3.2 River habitat bioassessment scores used to derive overall habitat condition categories.

Habitat Category Category Score Range

Excellent Good Moderate Poor

Bed substrate or available cover 16–20 11–15 6–10 0–5 Embeddedness 16–20 11–15 6–10 0–5 Water velocity and depth 16–20 11–15 6–10 0–5 Channel alteration 12–15 8–11 4–7 0–3 Bed scouring & deposition 12–15 8–11 4–7 0–3 Pool: riffle and run: bend ratio 12–15 8–11 4–7 0–3 Bank stability 9–10 6–8 3–5 0–2 Bank vegetative stability 9–10 6–8 3–5 0–2 Streamside vegetation cover 9–10 6–8 3–5 0–2 Total (Habitat Bioassessment 111–135 75–110 39–74 0–38 Score for the Site)

Aquatic Plants

Aquatic plants were surveyed at each site using a timed meander survey (i.e. 15 – 20 minutes per site) across in-stream and riparian habitats, as recommended in the DES (2019a) Flora Survey Guidelines – Protected Plants. Plants were identified to species if they were flowering, otherwise they were identified to genus. It was noted if plants were growing in the water, in the dry in-stream or in riparian areas. The growth form of plants growing in water was recorded (Table 3.3).

There are no published biological objectives for aquatic plants to compare results against.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 16 frc environmental

Table 3.3 Growth forms of aquatic plants growing in water.

Growth Form Description

Submerged Submerged aquatic plants are rooted in the bed of the stream or wetland, with leaves totally covered by water most of the time. Some species may have underwater flowers, whereas other species may require water levels to decrease to trigger flowering and have flowers above the water level. Attached floating Attached floating aquatic plants are rooted in the bed of the stream or wetland, with leaves typically floating on top of the water. Flowers are usually above the water. Free floating Free floating plants float on top of the water, or in the water column, with roots trailing into the water column. Flowers are typically above the water. Emergent Emergent plants are rooted in the bed of the stream or wetland, with leaves and flowers above the water.

Macroinvertebrates

Macroinvertebrates were sampled from edge habitat at each site that was holding water during the field survey using the AUSRIVAS sampling method as described in the AUSRIVAS manual (DNRM 2001a) and the Monitoring and Sampling Manual (DES 2018). Samples were collected by disturbing a 10 m long section of edge habitat with a standard triangular-framed dip net (250 μm mesh size), preserved using ethanol, and transported to frc environmental’s biological laboratory.

In the laboratory, samples were sorted, identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level (in most instances family) and counted in accordance with Chessman (2003). For QA/QC procedures, macroinvertebrates in 10% of the samples were re-identified and re-counted and 10% of the data was re-entered by an ecologist other than the one who completed the original identifications and data entry. If any errors were found, then this process was repeated until no errors were found or they were within the accepted range (< 5% DES 2018; final error rates in our laboratory are consistently < 2%).

Standard freshwater macroinvertebrate indices were calculated for macroinvertebrate communities in edge habitat: taxonomic richness, PET (Plecoptera / Ephemeroptera / Trichoptera) richness, and SIGNAL 2 (Stream Invertebrate Grade Number – Average Level) scores.

The macroinvertebrate indices were compared to the biological objectives for moderately disturbed waters in the lower Nogoa/Theresa Creek (DES 2009) (Table 3.4).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 17 frc environmental

Table 3.4 Default biological guidelines for macroinvertebrates.

Index Edge Habitat

Taxonomic richness 23 – 33 PET richness 2 – 5 SIGNAL-2 Scores 3.31 – 4.20

Fish and Turtles

Fish were surveyed using a combination of fyke nets and seine netting depending on the conditions at the site, in accordance with recommendations in the Commonwealth’s Survey Guidelines for Australia’s Threatened Fish (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC), 2011), Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey Guidelines for Queensland (which includes turtles) and the Commonwealth’s Survey Guidelines for Australia’s Threatened Reptiles. Fish and turtles were sampled under General Fisheries Permit No. 199434 and Animal Ethics Approval No. CA 2018/08/1224 held by frc environmental.

Fish and turtles were identified to species and counted, with native species released unharmed to the place of capture and pest species euthanised using methods approved under our animal ethics approval.

The WQO for fish is based on a ratio of the number of Observed to Expected (O/E) native species, which should be at least 1 (i.e. O/E ≥ 1) (DEHP 2013). The number of expected species is the number of species caught on 50% or more survey events.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 18 frc environmental

The number of expected species of native fish in the Lower Nogoa/Theresa Creek Sub- basin main trunk is 8 (DEHP 2013). That is, to achieve the WQO for the Lower Nogoa River main trunk the observed number of native species is ≥ 8. The native fish species found to be present ≥ 50% of sampling events were:

 Melanotaenia splendida (eastern rainbowfish)  Nematolosa erebi (bony bream)  Ambassis agassizii (Agassiz’s glassfish)  Macquaria ambigua oriens (yellowbelly)  Scortum hillii (leathery grunter)  Tandanus tandanus (eel-tailed catfish)  Hypseleotris sp. (carp gudgeon)  Leiopotherapon unicolor (spangled perch).

The WQO for the number of species of exotic fish in the Lower Nogoa River main trunk is no more than one exotic fish species (Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM), DERM 2011; DEHP 2013). The exotic fish Poecilia reticulata (guppy) was the only exotic fish species found to be present in the Nogoa River main trunk.

There are no published biological objectives for turtles.

3.3 Assessment of Environmental Values

The aquatic EVs of the Project study area were assessed using the criteria in Table 3.5. In- stream and riparian areas were assessed separately.

Table 3.5 Criteria used to assess environmental value of each site

Aquatic Ecological Value Criteria/Description

High Known or likely occurrence of aquatic MNES and/or aquatic MSES Moderate Aquatic MNES and MSES unlikely to occur, however suitable habitat for non-listed aquatic species of turtles and fish is present Low Ephemeral watercourse without refugial pools; limited aquatic habitat features present; likely to provide low quality habitat for non-listed aquatic species during high flow events only.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 19 frc environmental

3.4 Impact Assessment

The assessment of impacts comprised:

 a risk-based assessment, with the level of risk being an outcome of the consequence and likelihood of the potential impact (refer to Table 3.6 to Table 3.8)

 specific assessment of potential impacts to aquatic MNES using the Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 (DoTE 2013).

To determine the applicable aquatic MNES species and ecological communities, the EPBC Protected Matters database was searched on 22 November 2019 (Appendix A) and the following aquatic MNES were listed as occurring in the Project study area:

 white-throated snapping turtle (Elseya albagula) (critically endangered)  Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) (vulnerable).

All other MNES that the EPBC search identified were considered to be outside the scope of this study (i.e. not aquatic species). Further information on other MNES can be found in AECOM (2020).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 20 frc environmental

Table 3.6 Ratings used to assess the likelihood of potential impacts

Rating Likelihood of potential impacts

High Almost certain or high likelihood of the impact occurring; has occurred recently in a similar scenario; likely to happen commonly. Moderate Likely or probably could happen; would not happen very commonly. Low Possible but unlikely to happen; would happen rarely if at all.

Table 3.7 Ratings used to assess the consequence of potential impacts

Rating Consequence of potential impacts

High Catastrophic, irreversible or critical long-term environmental harm or loss; significant harm or loss of sensitive components of the environment; significant harm or loss of protected components of the environment, such as protected wetlands or MNES. Moderate Significant short-term but reversible harm of sensitive components of the environment; minor environmental harm to protected components of the environment, such as protected wetlands or MNES. Low Unfavourable impact with no lasting harm to the environment, excluding sensitive and protected components of the environment.

Table 3.8 Environmental risk matrix

Likelihood

Low Moderate High

High Moderate High High

Moderate Low Moderate High

Low Low Moderate Consequence Low

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 21 frc environmental

4 Environmental Values of Watercourses

4.1 Aquatic Matters of National Environmental Significance

White-Throated Snapping Turtle

The white-throated snapping turtle (Elseya albagula) is listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act and endangered under the NC Act. This species is restricted to the Fitzroy, Burnett and Mary Basins, and adjacent coastal basins (e.g. Kolan and Gregory-Burrum systems) (Hamann et al. 2007). This species is a habitat specialist, preferring permanent, flowing, clear and well oxygenated water with moderate to high cover of aquatic habitat (i.e. large woody debris and undercut banks) (Todd et al. 2013). Within the greater Fitzroy, Burnett and Mary river catchments, this species has been recorded almost exclusively in close association with permanent flowing stream reaches that are typically characterised by a sand-gravel substrate with submerged rock crevices, undercut banks and/or submerged logs and fallen trees (Hamann et al. 2007). The principal threat to white-throated snapping turtles in all three catchments is the excessive loss of eggs and hatchlings due to predation from predators such as feral animals (e.g. foxes, dogs, pigs and cats) and native animals (e.g. water rats and lizards) (DAWE 2014; 2020). Trampling of nests by cattle is also a major threat. The recovery of the white-throated snapping turtle is managed by the ‘National Recovery Plan for the White-Throated Snapping Turtle (Elseya albagula)’ (DAWE 2020). The objectives of the recovery plan are to ensure a self-sustaining healthy population structure in all catchments in which the white-throated snapping turtle occurs, and enhance the condition of habitat across the white-throated snapping turtle’s range to maximise survival and reproductive success. A full description of white-throated snapping turtle is presented in Appendix B.

The white-throated snapping turtle was last recorded adjacent to the Project Site in 1998 at Duckponds, Nogoa River (Atlas of Living Australia (ALA), 2019; DES 2019c), a waterbody that is no longer present. However, it is considered likely that a population of white-throated snapping turtle is still present within the main channel of the Nogoa River within the Project study area, where there are permanent pools, flows are regular (i.e. flows occur 99% of the time; gauging station 130219A (Department of Natural Resource Management and Energy (DNRME), 2019)) and extensive aquatic habitat is present. As a population of white- throated snapping turtle is likely to be present, it is recommended that the Project works with DES and other regional bodies to integrate the goals of the National Recovery Plan and enhance the condition of habitat and maximise survival and reproductive success of the white-throated snapping turtle within the Project study area.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 22 frc environmental

Fitzroy River Turtle

The Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) is listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act and vulnerable under the NC Act. This species is restricted to the Fitzroy River Basin (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA), 2008), where it occurs in permanent freshwater rivers from the Fitzroy Barrage to Theodore Weir and Duck Ponds, upstream of the Comet-Mackenzie River confluence, as well as through Marlborough Creek (Limpus et al. 2007). It has also been found in isolated permanent waterholes on the Connors River (Limpus et al. 2007; frc environmental 2010). However, the species is not known to inhabit small farm dams or ephemeral waterways (Limpus et al. 2007). A full description of Fitzroy River turtle is presented in Appendix C.

The Fitzroy River turtle was last recorded adjacent to the Project Site in the Nogoa River in 1998 (ALA. 2019; DES 2019c). However, it is considered likely that a population of Fitzroy River turtle still remains within the main channel of the Nogoa River within the Project study area, where there are permanent pools, flows are regular (i.e. flows occur 99% of the time; gauging station 130219A (DNRME 2019)) and the aquatic habitat is consistent with the preference for the species.

4.2 State-level Protected Matters Relevant to Aquatic Ecology

White-throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle are threatened species, protected under the NC Act (see Section 5.1 for further description of these species).

The riparian vegetation of the Project study area is mapped as regulated vegetation intersecting a watercourse, with some riparian vegetation also mapped as category B (Figure 4.1), category C (Figure 4.2) and category R (Figure 4.3) vegetation. Small patches of regulated vegetation within 100 m of a wetland occur upstream of the Project Site on Boggy Creek and Nogoa River and downstream of the Project Site on Mackenzie River, but do not occur in the Project Site (Figure 4.4).

Mapped High Ecological significance wetlands, which are protected under the EPP (WWB), are present upstream of the Project Site on Boggy Creek, Corkscrew Creek and Nogoa River, but do not occur in the Project Site (Figure 4.5). The watercourses of the Project study area are mapped riverine wetlands (Figure 4.6).

The relevant fisheries resource in the Project study area, protected under the Fisheries Act, relates to the provision of fish passage and the associated risks to fish passage from waterway barrier works on different sizes watercourses. Watercourses of the Project Site range from stream order 8 (Nogoa River) to stream order 3 (Mosquito Creek), with the Mackenzie River (stream order 8) downstream and Winton Creek (stream order 7) adjacent

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 23 frc environmental

to the Project Site. The main stem of watercourses within the Project study area are mapped as having major (mapped as purple: Nogoa River, Mackenzie River, Comet River and the downstream reach of Winton Creek and Boggy Creek), high (mapped as red: Mosquito Creek, Corkscrew Creek and the upstream reach of Boggy Creek and Winton Creek) and moderate (mapped as amber: unnamed tributaries of the Nogoa River) risk of impact to fish passage by waterway barrier works (Figure 4.7). Smaller upstream tributaries of these watercourses have low (mapped as green) risk of impact from waterway barrier works.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 24 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Road Network a

Project Site Major Watercourse B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r Minor Watercourse y R h w Existing Operations D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

l y r o y Main Road p a m w h Lake/Reservoir e g D n i e Other Mining Leases t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m

Local Road e

oa w d o n Styx Basin D Dysart k t Basin a a Basin e l Category B Regulated Vegetation P R o Protected Area Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.1 G R e r e ie ly g d z i Other Reserve a or a v y o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Category B Regulated Vegetation d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.1_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Road Network a

Project Site Major Watercourse B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r Minor Watercourse y R h w Existing Operations D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

l y r o y Main Road p a m w h Lake/Reservoir e g D n i e Other Mining Leases t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m

Local Road e

oa w d o n Styx Basin D Dysart k t Basin a a Basin e l Category C Regulated Vegetation P R o Protected Area Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.2 G R e r e ie ly g d z i Other Reserve a or a v y o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Category C Regulated Vegetation d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.2_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Road Network a

Project Site Major Watercourse B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r Minor Watercourse y R h w Existing Operations D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

l y r o y Main Road p a m w h Lake/Reservoir e g D n i e Other Mining Leases t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m

Local Road e

oa w d o n Styx Basin D Dysart k t Basin a a Basin e l Category R Regulated Vegetation P R o Protected Area Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.3 G R e r e ie ly g d z i Other Reserve a or a v y o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Category R Regulated Vegetation d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.3_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

Project Site Major Watercourse Road Network a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project a

B c ru c G

Highway r H Minor Watercourse e g Coppabella Existing Operations o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r h y R w D F a Moranbah i y i Main Road t

ev v z

e r e o

Lake/Reservoir l y r o y Other Mining Leases p a m w h e g D Local Road n i e t H v a s e l lo n p

Basin Burdekin R m

Regulated Vegetation Within 100m from Wetland oa w e d o n Styx Basin D Dysart Protected Area t k a a Basin e l P R o Other Reserve Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.4 G R e r e ie ly g d i o a z v a ry o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Regulated Vegetation Within 100 m from Wetland d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.4_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Road Network a

Project Site Major Watercourse B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o Minor Watercourse ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r R h Existing Operations y w D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r e o

Main Road l y r o y p a m w Lake/Reservoir h e g D Other Mining Leases i n e t H v a s el Local Road l o n p

Burdekin R m

oa w e d o n Styx Basin Basin D Dysart k t High Ecological Signficance Wetlands a a Basin e l P Protected Area R o Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.5 G R e r Other Reserve e ie ly g d i o a z v a ry o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

High Ecological Significance Wetlands d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.5_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina Project Site Wetland System - Water Bodies Major Watercourse Road Network s

a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project a

B Riverine Waterbodies Highway c ru c Minor Watercourse G Existing Operations e

r H eg Coppabella Lacustrine Waterbodies Main Road o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r R h Lake/Reservoir y w D F a Other Mining Leases Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r Palustrine Waterbodies Local Road e o

l y r o y p a m w Basin h e g D i Wetland System - Regional Ecosystems n e Protected Area t H v a s e l lo n p

Burdekin R m

oa w e Riverine RE d o n Styx Other Reserve Basin D Dysart k t a a Basin e l P R Palustrine RE o Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.6 RE 1-50% wetland (mosaic units) G R e r e ie ly g d i o a z v a ry o n Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Queensland Wetland Data d w c r o a a y

M R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.6_21-07-29_AB.mxd W 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

Road Network a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project Project Site Major Watercourse a

B c ru c G

r H eg Coppabella Highway o Minor Watercourse ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r Existing Operations y R h w D F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r Main Road e o

l y r o y p a Lake/Reservoir m w h Other Mining Leases e g D n i e t H v a s e Local Road lo l n p

Burdekin R m

oa w e d o n Styx Basin Basin D Dysart Waterway Barrier Works - Risk of Impact t k a a Basin e l Protected Area P R o Clermont a Low B Middlemount d Figure 4.7 G R e r Other Reserve e ie ly g d i o a z v a ry o n Moderate Hig inum R e n h Cr k e

Queensland Waterways for Waterway Barrier Works d w c r o a a y

M High R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Major Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

Jericho m A Duaringa SOURCES Cooper l e p Fitzroy Basin t © Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) 2001, 2004, 2006 Creek h Springsure r R Basin a i PO Box 2363 © The State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) 2019 v e v C i e Wellington Point © The State of Queensland (Department of National Parks, Sport and Racing) 2019 r R e a r e o Rolleston Q 4160 Australia © The State of Queensland (Department of Agriculture and Fisheries) 2019 k g D a aws C o B rcoo o n H a ig ay r h w N n

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.7_21-07-29_AB.mxd W frc environmental

4.3 Water Quality

Water quality measured within the scope of this aquatic ecology study was similar to results recorded in previous REMP surveys (4T Consultants 2012; Hydrobiology 2014; 2016b; a; 2017; 2018; 2019). The previous REMP surveys undertaken in the vicinity of the Project are therefore appropriate for the determination of water quality in this assessment and adequate for the ongoing monitoring of impacts to the receiving environment as a result of existing operations. Water quality within the Project study area is characterised with:

 electrical conductivity naturally high throughout the Project study area  turbidity and total suspended solids high, particularly in Boggy Creek and following recent rainfall

 total aluminium, iron and copper was frequently high and likely a natural occurrence for the region

 nutrient concentrations variable and dependent on recent flows and local agricultural practices.

Results from the November 2019 survey show that for sites holding water (Table 4.1):

 the pH of water was higher than the WQO at site WC1 when measured in-situ and higher than the WQO at both sites on Winton Creek (WC1 and WC2) when analysed in the laboratory  electrical conductivity exceeded the WQO at all sites that held water  the per cent saturation of dissolved oxygen was higher than the WQO at sites WC1 and UNC2 and lower than the WQO at sites MP5, WC2, NR1 and MP2  turbidity was higher than the WQO at sites WC1 and NR1  total nitrogen was higher than the WQO at all sites  ammonia was higher than the WQO at both sites on Winton Creek  filterable reactive phosphorous was higher than the WQO at sites MP5 and WC2  total phosphorous was higher than the WQO at all sites  total suspended solids was higher than the WQO at all sites  sulfate was higher than the WQO at sites MP5 and WC1  total aluminium and copper were higher than the WQO at all sites  total lead, nickel and zinc was higher than the WQO at site WC1  total chromium was higher than the WQO at both sites on Winton Creek, and

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 32 frc environmental

 dissolved copper was higher than the WQO at site WC2.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 33 frc environmental

Table 4.1 Water quality at each site in November 2019

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

Physical-Chemical

temperature (in-situ) °C – – 27.74 25.19 24.45 27.33 26.14 27.89 31.9 24.51

pH (in-situ) pH units – 6.5–8.5c 9.4 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.7 7.3 8.3 7.6

pH pH units – 6.5–8.5 c 8.9 8.6 – 8.2 8.5 – – –

electrical conductivity (in- μS/cm – 340 c 1,749 546 523 686 1,997 1,195 641 3,876 situ)

electrical conductivity μS/cm – 340 c 1,600 480 – 660 1,800 – – –

dissolved oxygen mg/L – – 26.31 5.67 5.13 6.73 6.38 7.82 11.41 5.85

dissolved oxygen % saturation – 85–110 c >200 69 63 87 81 102 160 72

turbidity (in-situ) NTU – 50 c 765 35 224 18 20 22 >1,000 22

c turbidity NTU – 50 290 10 – 11 15 – – – Nutrients

total nitrogen µg/L 100 500 c 27,000 11,000 – 900 900 – – –

nitrate (as N) µg/L 20 700 a <20 <20 – 50 50 – – –

nitrite (as N) µg/L 20 – <20 <20 – <20 <20 – – –

nitrite + nitrate (as N) µg/L 50 60 c <50 <50 – <50 <50 – – – (oxidised N)

ammonia (as N) µg/L 10 10 c 580 150 – <10 <10 – – –

– not analysed grey shading denotes values that were not compliant with the applicable WQO gold shading denotes values where the LOR is greater than the applicable WQO Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 34 frc environmental

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

total Kjeldahl nitrogen (as µg/L 100 – 27,000 11,000 – 900 900 – – – N)

filterable reactive µg/L 10 20 c <10 80 – <10 80 – – – phosphorus

total phosphorus µg/L 20 50 c 640 110 – 120 140 – – –

water hardness mg CaCO3/L 5 – 290 150 – 180 310 – – – Total Suspended and Dissolved Solids

total suspended solids mg/L 1 10 c 370 20 – 14 16 – – –

total dissolved solids mg/L 10 – 1,000 280 – 340 1,100 – – – Major Cations and Anions

calcium mg/L 0.1 160 b 67 35 – 37 52 – – –

magnesium mg/L 0.1 160 b 29 15 – 21 44 – – –

potassium mg/L 0.1 – 16 14 – 10 8.8 – – –

sodium mg/L 0.1 – 230 47 – 68 260 – – –

chloride mg/L 1 – 400 34 – 100 690 – – –

sulfate mg/L 2 25 c 130 < 5 – 22 58 – – –

total alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L – 72 230 – 180 250 – – –

carbonate mg/L 1 – 13 13 – < 10 12 – – –

hydroxide mg/L 1 – < 20 < 20 – < 20 < 20 – – –

bicarbonate mg/L – 59 210 – 180 240 – – –

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

Total Metals and Metalloids

aluminium (pH.>6.5) µg/L 50 55 a 9,200 1,000 – 390 500 – – –

arsenic (V) µg/L 1 13 a 12 4 – 3 4 – – –

boron µg/L 5 370 a 210 160 – 110 120 – – –

chromium (VI) µg/L 1 1.0 a 11.0 2.0 – 1.0 1.0 – – –

cobalt µg/L 1 – 10 2 – <1 <1 – – –

copper µg/L 1 1.4 a 11.0 2.0 – 2.0 2.0 – – –

iron µg/L 50 – 12,000 1,800 – 450 580 – – –

lead µg/L 1 3.4 a 7.0 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

manganese µg/L 1 1900 a 1,200 270 – 65 92 – – –

mercury µg/L 0.1 0.06 a <0.1 <0.1 – <0.1 <0.1 – – –

molybdenum µg/L 1 – 15 <5 – <5 <5 – – –

nickel µg/L 1 11 a 23 6 – 3 3 – – –

selenium µg/L 1 5 a 2 2 – <1 <1 – – –

silver µg/L 1 0.05 a <5 <5 – <5 <5 – – –

uranium µg/L 1 – <5 <5 – <5 7 – – –

vanadium µg/L 1 100 a 56 7 – 8 9 – – –

zinc µg/L 5 8.0 a 53.0 7 – <5 <5 – – –

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

Dissolved Metals and Metalloids

aluminium µg/L 50 55 a <50 <50 – <50 <50 – – –

arsenic µg/L 1 13 a 4 3 – 2 3 – – –

boron µg/L 50 370 a 150 110 – 70 80 – – –

chromium µg/L 1 1.0 a <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

cobalt µg/L 1 – 3 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

copper µg/L 1 1.4 a <1 2.0 – <1 <1 – – –

iron µg/L 50 – <50 70 – <50 <50 – – –

lead µg/L 1 3.4 a <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

manganese µg/L 5 1900 a 510 100 – 25 27 – – –

mercury µg/L 0.1 0.06 a <0.1 <0.1 – <0.1 <0.1 – – –

molybdenum µg/L 5 – 8 <5 – <5 <5 – – –

nickel µg/L 1 11 a 7 4 – 2 2 – – –

selenium µg/L 1 5 a 1 1 – <1 <1 – – –

silver µg/L 5 0.05 a <5 <5 – <5 <5 – – –

uranium µg/L 5 – <5 <5 – <5 7 – – –

vanadium µg/L 5 100 a <5 <5 – 6 7 – – –

zinc µg/L 5 8.0 a <5 <5 – <5 <5 – – –

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TRH >C10-C16 µg/L 25 – 80 <50 – <50 <50 – – –

TRH >C10-C16 less µg/L 50 – 80 <50 – <50 <50 – – – Naphthalene (F2)

TRH >C10-C40 (total)* µg/L 100 – 480 200 – <100 <100 – – –

TRH >C16-C34 µg/L 100 – 400 200 – <100 <100 – – –

TRH >C34-C40 µg/L 100 – <100 <100 – <100 <100 – – –

TRH C6-C10 µg/L 20 – 20 <20 – <20 <20 – – –

TRH C6-C10 less BTEX µg/L 20 – 20 <20 – <20 <20 – – – (F1) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TPH C6-C9 µg/L 20 – 20 <20 – <20 <20 – – –

TRPH C10-14 µg/L 50 – <50 <50 – <50 <50 – – –

TRPH C15-28 µg/L 100 – 300 200 – <100 <100 – – –

TRPH C29-36 µg/L 100 – <100 <100 – <100 <100 – – –

Sum of TRPH (C10-C36) µg/L 100 – 300 200 – <100 <100 – – – BTEX

benzene µg/L 1 950 a <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

toluene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

ethyl benzene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

m+p xylenes µg/L 2 – <2 <2 – <2 <2 – – –

o-xylene µg/L 1 350 a <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

xylenes - total µg/L 3 – <3 <3 – <3 <3 – – – Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons

acenaphthene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

acenaphthylene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

anthracene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

benz(a)anthracene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

benzo(a)pyrene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

Benzo(b&j)fluoranthene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

benzo(g,h,i)perylene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

Benzo(k)fluoranthene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

chrysene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

dibenz(a,h)anthracene µg/L 2 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

fluoranthene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

fluorene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

naphthalene µg/L 1 16 a <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

phenanthrene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

Parameter Units LOR WQO WC1 WC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

9/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 4/11/19 9/11/19 8/11/19

pyrene µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – –

total PAH µg/L 1 – <1 <1 – <1 <1 – – – a WQO sourced from the Australian & New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh & Marine Water Quality (ANZG 2018) b WQO sourced from the Queensland Water Quality Guidelines (DES 2009) c WQO sourced from the Queensland’s Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (Water) Policy 2009 relating to the Lower Nogoa/Theresa Creek sub-basin (DEHP 2013).

4.4 Sediment Quality

Sediment quality measured within the scope of this aquatic ecology study was similar to results recorded in previous REMP surveys (4T Consultants 2012; Hydrobiology 2014; 2016b; a; 2017; 2018; 2019). The previous REMP surveys undertaken in the vicinity of the Project are therefore appropriate for the determination of sediment quality in this assessment and adequate for ongoing monitoring of impacts to the receiving environment as a result of existing operations. Sediment quality within the Project study area is characterised with (Table 4.2):

 total concentration of nickel frequently exceeding the Sediment Quality Objective (SQO) at sites within each catchment, and

 total concentration of aluminium, iron, manganese and vanadium in sediment frequently high at most sites but with no available SQO.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 41 frc environmental

Table 4.2 Sediment quality at each site in November 2019

WC1 WC2 BC2 NR2 MP5 Parameter Units LOR WQOa 9/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19

Particle Size Distribution >2000 Micron % 0.1 – 2.3 1.4 4.5 4.4 1.6 1000-2000 Micron % 0.1 – 2.1 1.4 5.8 1.9 3.1 500-1000 Micron % 0.1 – 2.1 3 15 12 5.3 250-500 Micron % 0.1 – 2.4 2.9 20 18 8.8 125-250 Micron % 0.1 – 2.8 6.1 26 26 23 63-125 Micron % 0.1 – 1.6 6.4 7.7 12 8.9 <63 Micron % 0.1 – 87 79 22 26 50

Moisture Content % 1 – 27 62 26 32 33 Metals and Metalloids Aluminium mg/kg 5 – 36,000 32,000 18,000 25,000 24,000 Arsenic mg/kg 2 20 3.2 3.1 6 5.6 4.3 Boron mg/kg 5 – <5 6.2 6.5 <5 <5 Chromium mg/kg 5 80 40 41 66 53 49 Cobalt mg/kg 5 – 14 18 20 21 18 Copper mg/kg 5 65 25 23 24 22 26 Iron mg/kg 20 – 36,000 33,000 39,000 37,000 33,000 Lead mg/kg 5 50 9.8 11 12 8.7 10

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 42 frc environmental

WC1 WC2 BC2 NR2 MP5 Parameter Units LOR WQOa 9/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19 7/11/19 9/11/19

Manganese mg/kg 5 – 540 570 590 770 660 Mercury mg/kg 0.1 0.15 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Molybdenum mg/kg 5 – < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Nickel mg/kg 5 21 33 33 38 43 41 Selenium* mg/kg 5 – < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 Silver mg/kg 1 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 1 Uranium* mg/kg 10 – < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 < 10 Vanadium mg/kg 10 – 61 56 88 64 66 Zinc mg/kg 5 200 75 67 58 60 60 grey shading denotes values that were not compliant with the applicable WQO a WQO sourced from the Water Quality Australia Toxicant Default Guideline Values for Sediment Quality (ANZG 2018)

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 43 frc environmental

4.5 Aquatic Habitat and Natural Flow Regime

Desktop Results

The Project is located on the Nogoa River floodplain, with a series of well-defined braided channels of the Nogoa River intersecting the Project study area from the west to the east. Other watercourses within the Project study area are typically well-defined channels that follow an irregular sinuous pattern (refer to Map 4.1). There are no high ecological value waters or surface expression groundwater dependent ecosystems in the Project study area (Figure 4.8). There are mapped lacustrine and palustrine wetlands in the Project study area, but relatively few mapped wetlands in the Project Site (refer to Map 5.6). The watercourses of the Project study area are mapped as a riverine wetlands with the Nogoa River, Mosquito Creek, Winton Creek, Corkscrew Creek and other Nogoa River tributaries mapped as riverine regional ecosystems in their riparian zones.

Land use in the Project study area is dominated by low intensity dryland cattle grazing with some irrigation/cropping also prevalent between the Nogoa River and Winton Creek. Much of the native catchment and riparian vegetation has been cleared, with stock access to watercourses contributing to bank erosion at some locations.

Flow in the Nogoa River occurs approximately 99% of the time, with flows dependent on the release of irrigation water by Sunwater from the Fairbairn Dam upstream. Flow intensity can therefore vary significantly throughout the day, with water levels increasing by more than 0.5 m when release flows are increased. Flows in Winton Creek, Boggy Creek, Mosquito Creek and Corkscrew Creek are likely to be infrequent short-duration events, following significant rainfall. Consequently, these watercourses are highly ephemeral, and aquatic habitat is dominated by small isolated pools within the channel interspersed with large areas of dry stream bed, with larger pools typically found in artificial waterbodies. Larger pools are likely to be perennial or near-perennial and important refugial habitat for aquatic fauna. Smaller shallower pools provide aquatic habitat for briefer periods after rainfall.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 44 frc environmental

Field Survey Results

Detailed habitat descriptions are presented in Appendix E, with a summary of aquatic habitat features including:

 flow of water at each site was variable, with: − moderate flow in the main channel of the Nogoa and Mackenzie Rivers (sites NR1, NR2, MP5 and MP6)

− low or no flow in the tributaries of the Nogoa River (sites MP2 and UNC1) − small shallow isolated pools at sites within Winton Creek (WC1 and WC2), and

− no water in Boggy Creek.  substrate had a high proportion of rocky substrate (such as bedrock, boulders and cobble) at sites MP5 and MP6 and a high proportion of sand at site NR2, but was mostly comprised of silt/clay at all other sites

 cover of large wood debris (i.e. logs and branches) and fine organic matter (i.e. twigs and leaves) was typically low, but moderate at sites NR2 and MP2  in-stream vegetation was present at sites WC2 (submerged and floating) and MP5 (submerged)  the condition of riparian vegetation was moderate to highly disturbed at most sites, with low cover of native Eucalyptus trees comprising the canopy at most sites except WC1 where riparian vegetation was mostly removed; and

 pasture grasses and herbaceous weeds dominated the ground stratum.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 45 148.4° E 148.6° E ML 7007 ML 70061 d oa uart R St unt M o o rd Creek M G un ya d r t h a S urc a bil Creek n t h o e u C yn v a i r ig R K l t l B B r e e u C d ML 1789 Co ora Creek ree f o o o o

d oor r k r g a C o d l o i

o ra Creek W K e

R S ir S

° R °

r o

2 a 2 . a d .

3 Y e 3

a k 2 n 2

Ya s n R i oa L d e Road ry Min Grego Back Creek Fa R d irhill a oa ML 1923 o d R ML 700043

d s Y e a n Y andy C d a S ree d n k R ML 70330 u oa C d

d a o ML 70302 R le a v ily L C o o ML 70301 ML 1978 roora Cr e e k Fitzroy Basin

B k r o ree B C e g C el ong ek R ck c g ed Ro y C r e e k

ML ML 700029 Clo se 70481 d R o a d ML 700028 Cri ke nu ML ac nzi m F M e Cr R Go e W r iver rdonst y o e y 70049 i ne k u C reek na ng P R anC oa r d ee k

E k S S

B n e

° r s e ° i h r 4 d 4 . . g a C

3 e m 3 2 F y 2 l R g a o g

ts a o M B R o d o s a q d uito Cre ek oa River Nog Zone 2 Creek B Cattle u T r h n e r r C ML esa ve g re i ro ML 70326 e R ve ek 70367 nzi C r cke re e a k e v oa e k i R d M s e R r

d y Zone 1

e C a l a o y Nog o R d a o n rr F a wa ML S en ML 7460 d o 70365 d C oa g R C sin nton re os W i ek Cr s

e l i

R d

a d o a

o R R s s

e d n e Zone 3 l o h p c k

o d c

L a u ML 7459 r o D e iv R R s zie a acken i M n ML 70366 i

B Cor M ksc a rew d Cr r e a i ek a o C R r

s e e d k n

d d S S

a a n Hig ° Ca cor hway ° o p i o r r 6 ico ap 6 . rn H C . R R ig 3 h 3 w ay 2 ko Creek 2 n e n l Ya

o d

o n

d u

i R

B rst Cre ek hu T nd o a l m S i e

C r e e k k e e Mckenzie Road r C

e r

d T

e R g

r a

e b

v d i b

a R a o t R C ina e or er m d iv o en t R a e Gl m C o o M C ht ile Creek R Ei g Tr a B iu f o m

a u p

l n h

a C

d re

e a

k r Gem y Amaroo State Road Mile Creek Nine C Forest re e k

148.4° E 148.6° E

LEGEND Glenden Pioneer Basin0 50 Km

I Sarina s

Project Site Major Watercourse Road Network a Plane Basin

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project a

B c ru c G Highway e Minor Watercourse r H eg Coppabella Existing Operations o ig Aquatic Ecological Assessment r h y R w D Main Road F a Moranbah i y i t

ev v z

e r Lake/Reservoir e o

l y r Other Mining Leases o a y p m w h Local Road e g D n i e t H v a s el Basin l o n p

Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Potential Burdekin R m

oa w e d o n Styx Protected Area Basin D Dysart k t a a Basin High potential GDE - from regional studies e l P R o Other Reserve Clermont a B Middlemount d Figure 4.8 Low potential GDE - from national assessment G R e r e ie ly g d i o a z v a ry o n Hig inum R e Low potential GDE - from regional studies n h Cr k e

Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Potential d w c r o a a y M Moderate potential GDE - from national assessment R

i v Emerald C Blackwater Moderate potential GDE - from regional studies Alpha way e h Capricor

C ig o n r a rn H Highwa pr ic o y

Jericho m A Duaringa SOURCES Cooper l e p Fitzroy Basin t © Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) 2001, 2004, 2006 Creek h Springsure r R Basin a i PO Box 2363 © The State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy) 2019 v e v C i e Wellington Point © The State of Queensland (Department of National Parks, Sport and Racing) 2019 r R e a r e o Rolleston Q 4160 Australia © Commonwealth of Australia (Bureau of Meteorology) 2019 k g D a aws C o B rcoo o n H a ig ay r h w N n

SCALE R a r

i v v o er n 0 5 10 Tambo L D a PROJECTION n e P 07 3286 3850 r v d e e s

iv lo DATE DRAWN BY VERSION Coordinate System: GCS GDA 1994 b E [email protected] o R p ro m u e

Kilometres n

g o

2021-07-29 AB 07 Datum: GDA 1994 t

www.frcenv.com.au h a

l i g R Units: Degree Warrego Basin g re

h o w r Scale: 1:200,000 @ A3 a

a Condamine-Balonne Basin d a y Document Path: Z:\Utility\Mappings\Mappings\2019\190312_AEC_Ensham\Workspaces\190312_Fig_4.8_21-07-29_AB.mxd W frc environmental

Figure 4.9 Stream flow at DNRME gauging station 130219a

Figure 4.10 Flow duration curve for DNRME gauging station 130219a

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 47 frc environmental

4.6 Aquatic Biota of the Project Study Area

Aquatic Plants

Desktop Results

Aquatic plant communities of the region are typically species-poor and have low per cent cover, which is likely due to the naturally harsh environmental conditions of the ephemeral watercourses in the region. The Nogoa River sub-catchment covers an area of 27,690 km2 upstream of the Project study area, and is home to ~104 wetland indicator plant species (WetlandInfo). Submerged aquatic plants were uncommon due to ephemeral nature of the watercourses, with species with emergent growth form dominating aquatic plant communities, including smartweeds (Persicaria spp.), rushes (Typha spp., Eleocharis spp. and Juncus spp.), lignum (Duma florulenta) and sedges (Cyperus spp.). However, the permanent water present within the Nogoa River and its’ channels provide habitat for aquatic plants not of emergent growth form, with floating species such as lilies (Nymphoides indica and Nymphaea caerulea), nardoo (Marsilea spp.) and azolla (Azolla pinnata), and submerged species such as pondweed (Potamogeton spp.), bladderwort (Utricularia caerulea) and Vallisneria (Vallisneria nana) known to inhabit that catchment (Wetland info).

None of the recorded aquatic plant species are listed as threatened species under the Commonwealth’s EPBC Act or Queensland’s NC Act.

Hymenachne (Hymenachne amplexicaulis), which is a restricted biosecurity matter under Queensland’s Biosecurity Act 2014, is known from the region.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 48 frc environmental

Field Survey Results

The aquatic plant survey found (Table 4.3):

 aquatic plants at each site and aquatic plants in water at sites MP5, MP6 and WC2  17 aquatic plant species, with six species in water and 14 species out of water  the cover of aquatic plants at each site ranged from 2 (site BC1) to 151 (site WC1), with cover high at site WC1 due to aquatic plants growing on-top of each other in the riparian vegetation  three common aquatic plants species, with attenuated smartweed (Persicaria attenuata) and lignum (Duma florulenta) relatively widespread and ferny azolla (Azolla pinnata) found only at site WC2  aquatic plants were mostly on dry bed and banks, with in-stream cover only higher at sites MP5 (high cover of curly pondweed; Potamogeton crispus) and WC2 (high cover of ferny azolla).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 49 frc environmental

Table 4.3 Per cent cover of aquatic plants in and out of water at each site in November 2019.

Taxa Name Common Name Growth Site Form* WC1 WC2 BC1 BC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

In water

Azolla pinnata ferny azolla F 90

Lemnoideae duckweed F 5

Lomandra longifolia long-leaved mat-rush E 2

Ludwigia peploides water primrose F 0.5

Persicaria attenuata attenuated smartweed E 1 Potamogeton crispus curly pondweed S 30

Out of water

Cyperus difformis rice flat-sedge E 1.1

Cyperus exaltatus giant sedge E 1 3

Cyperus sp. flat-sedge sp. E 1 5 1 0.5

Duma florulenta lignum E 30 31 2 5 4 23 3

Eclipta prostrata white eclipta E 9 Hymenachne water stargrass E 33 amplexicaulis

Juncus usitatus common rush E 0.5 1 1 1

Leersia hexandra swamp rice-grass E 7

Lomandra longifolia long-leaved mat-rush E 1 8 15 2 20 7

Ludwigia peploides water primrose F 2 3 Persicaria attenuata attenuated smartweed E 90 7 1 45

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 50 frc environmental

Taxa Name Common Name Growth Site Form* WC1 WC2 BC1 BC2 NR1 NR2 MP5 MP6 UNC2 MP2

Persicaria decipiens slender knotweed E 1 1

Persicaria lapathifolia pale knotweed E 2 0.5 1 Typha sp. bulrush E 25 2 * F: Floating, E: Emergent, S: Submerged

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 51 frc environmental

Macroinvertebrates

Aquatic macroinvertebrates of the region are dominated by insects (frc environmental unpublished data; 4T Consultants 2012; Hydrobiology 2014; 2016b; a; 2017; 2018; 2019) and include:

 seven families of beetles (Coleoptera)  seven families of flies and midges (Diptera)  four families of bugs (Hemiptera)  four families of dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata)  three families (sensitive taxa) of mayflies (Ephemeroptera)  seven families (sensitive taxa) of caddisflies (Trichoptera).

Other macroinvertebrate taxa recorded in in the region include:

 four families of mussels and clams (Bivalvia)  earthworms (Oligochaeta)  flatworms (Dugesiidae)  leeches (Hirudinea)  mites (Acarina), and  four families of crustacea (Decapoda): − glass shrimp (Atyidae) − isopods (Cirolanidae) − copepods (Copepoda) − freshwater prawns (Palaemonidae).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 52 frc environmental

REMP monitoring data for Ensham from 2010 to 2019 for five sites within Project study area had (4T Consultants 2012; Hydrobiology 2014; 2016b; a; 2017; 2018; 2019):

 abundance ranging from: − 36 to 416 in run/composite habitat − 78 to 322 in edge habitat.  taxonomic richness ranging from: − 6 to 28 in run/composite habitat − 7 to 28 in edge habitat.  PET richness ranging from: − 0 to 10 in run/composite habitat − 0 to 7 in edge habitat.  SIGNAL-2 scores ranging from: − 2.47 to 4.60 in run/composite habitat − 2.71 to 4.43 in edge habitat.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 53 frc environmental

Field Survey Results

The macroinvertebrate data show that (Table 4.4):

 the abundance of macroinvertebrates was highest at sites WC1 (1,012 macroinvertebrates) and WC2 (1,337 macroinvertebrates) on Winton Creek, but PET richness and Signal-2 Scores were lower than at sites on the Nogoa River (MP5 and NR2)

 Taxonomic richness was typically lower than the default biological objective range, with taxonomic richness only within the guideline range at site WC2, and

 PET richness and SIGNAL-2 scores were lower than the default biological objective range at both sites on Winton Creek, where aquatic habitat was restricted to isolated pools.

Macroinvertebrate data within the scope of this aquatic ecology study was similar to results recorded in previous REMP surveys undertaken in the vicinity of the Project and is therefore appropriate for the determination of the macroinvertebrate community in this assessment and adequate for the ongoing monitoring of impacts to the receiving environment as a result of existing operations.

Table 4.4 Macroinvertebrate indices for samples collected from edge habitat in November 2019.

Site Macroinvertebrate Indices

Abundance Taxonomic PET richness SIGNAL-2 richness Score

Default biological objective – 23 – 33 2 – 5 3.31 – 4.20 WC1 1012 13 0 2.64 WC2 1337 26 1 2.85 NR2 741 20 5 3.46 MP5 896 18 3 3.43 Grey shading indicates a result lower than the guideline range

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 54 frc environmental

Fish

Desktop Results

Eighteen native species of fish are known from the region3 (frc environmental unpublished data; DES 2019c; b):

 Agassiz's glassfish (Ambassis agassizii)  barred grunter (Amniataba percoides)  longfin eel (Anguilla reinhardtii)  flyspecked hardyhead (Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum)  empire gudgeon (Hypseleotris compressa)  carp gudgeon (Hypseleotris spp.)  spangled perch (Leiopotherapon unicolor)  golden perch (Macquaria ambigua)  eastern rainbowfish (Melanotaenia splendida splendida)  southern purplespotted gudgeon (Mogurnda adspersa)  bony bream (Nematalosa erebi)  blue catfish (Neoarius graeffei)  Hyrtl's catfish (Neosilurus hyrtlii)  sleepy cod (Oxyeleotris lineolata)  Rendahl’s catfish (Porochilus rendahli)  leathery grunter (Scortum hillii)  freshwater longtom (Strongylura krefftii), and  freshwater catfish (Tandanus tandanus).

These are all common species that are tolerant of relatively harsh environmental conditions (e.g. variable flow, fluctuating water quality) that are typical of ephemeral watercourses of the region. All species are potadromous (i.e. they migrate to various extents within freshwaters), except Empire gudgeons which are diadromous (i.e. migrate between

3 An additional nine species were listed to be within the Nogoa River catchment, but not in the vicinity of the Project Area, these include: Aru gudgeon, flathead gudgeon, mouth almighty, silver perch, Murray cod, barramundi, bullrout, Pacific blue eye and southern saratoga.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 55 frc environmental

freshwater and saltwater), longfin eels which are catadromous (i.e. migrate to marine habitat to breed) and blue catfish which are anadromous (i.e. migrate to freshwater habitat to breed). None of these species are listed as threatened species under the EPBC Act or NC Act.

Field Survey Results

The fish survey result show (Table 4.5):

 twelve native fish species and two exotic fish species (eastern Gambusia and platy) were caught

 Agassiz’s glassfish, carp gudgeon and eastern rainbowfish were the most widespread species, occurring at each site

 eastern rainbowfish (770 individuals), carp gudgeon (298 individuals) and flyspecked hardyhead (190 individuals) were the most abundant species

 native fish species richness at sites WC2 and MP5 were below the default biological guideline value (expected richness of  8 native species), with bony bream, eel- tailed catfish and spangled perch not recorded at sites WC2 and MP5 and yellowbelly (Macquaria ambigua oriens) and leathery grunter (Scortum hillii) not recorded at any site, and

 exotic fish species richness at site WC2 did not comply with the default biological guideline value (expected richness of  1 exotic species), with two species recorded at the site.

All native species are common and widespread in the region, and none are listed species. Eastern Gambusia is a restricted biosecurity matter under the Queensland Biosecurity Act 2014.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 56 frc environmental

Table 4.5 Fish caught at each site in November 2019.

Site Taxa Name Common Name WC2 NR2 MP5

Native Fish Ambassis agassizii Agassiz's glassfish 4 4 48 Amniataba percoides barred grunter 0 1 0 Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum flyspecked hardyhead 29 161 0 Hypseleotris spp. carp gudgeon 3 2 293 Leiopotherapon unicolor spangled perch 0 1 0 Melanotaenia splendida splendida eastern rainbowfish 85 675 10 Mogurnda adspersa purplespotted gudgeon 0 0 4 Nematalosa erebi bony bream 0 20 0 Neoarius graeffei blue catfish 0 1 0 Neosilurus hyrtlii Hyrtl's catfish 0 1 2 Porochilus rendahli Rendahl's catfish 0 3 0 Tandanus tandanus freshwater catfish 0 2 0

Native species Abundance 121 871 357 Native Species Richness 4 11 5

Exotic Fish Gambusia holbrooki eastern Gambusia 1 0 44 Xiphophorus maculatus platy 0 2 1

Exotic species Abundance 1 2 45 Exotic Species Richness 1 1 2 grey shading denotes results that did not comply with the default biological guideline value

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 57 frc environmental

Turtles

Desktop Assessment

Five species of turtle are known from the region: eastern long-necked turtle (Chelodina longicollis), Krefft’s river turtle (Emydura macquarii krefftii), broad-shelled river turtle (Chelodina expansa), Fitzroy River turtle and white-throated snapping turtle (DES 2019; wildlife online; frc environmental unpublished data). The white-throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle are listed as critically endangered (white-throated snapping turtle) and vulnerable (Fitzroy River turtle) under the Commonwealth’s EPBC Act and are expected to still inhabit the main channels of the Nogoa River where permanent water is present. However, the white-throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle are unlikely to inhabit other smaller watercourses in the Project study area, such as Winton Creek, Boggy Creek, Corkscrew Creek and Mosquito Creek.

Field Survey Results

Seven Krefft’s river turtles (Emydura Macquarii krefftii) were caught in November 2019, with a majority (six individuals) caught at site NR2 (Table 4.6). No turtles were caught at site WC2, where the water level and available habitat was unfavourable for a turtle population.

Table 4.6 Turtles caught at each site in November 2019.

Site Taxa Name Common Name WC2 NR2 MP5

Emydura macquarii krefftii Krefft's river turtle 0 6 1

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 58 frc environmental

4.7 Assessment of Aquatic Ecological Value

The aquatic ecological value of the Nogoa River and its’ tributaries was assessed as high using the criteria presented in Table 3.5, as aquatic MNES are known to occur within the Nogoa River and the main channel provides favourable habitat for foraging and potential habitat for breeding.

Regulated vegetation types occur in the riparian zone and watercourses of the Project study area and watercourses provide important corridors for fish passage during times of flow.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 59 frc environmental

5 Aquatic Ecological Impact and Mitigation Assessment

5.1 Sources of Potential Impact on Aquatic Ecological Values

The Project will use existing infrastructure of the existing operations, with no additional surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse, surface construction or surface disturbance within the Project study area. The Project will include the construction of 2 flares each in Zone 2 and Zone 3 (Figure 5.1), The proposed locations of the flares . were selected so as not to require the clearing of vegetation and to provide an appropriate buffer from the nearest waterways (i.e. at least one kilometre. The major phases of the Project are:

 project operation  decommissioning and rehabilitation.

The following potential sources of impact on aquatic ecological values associated with the Project were identified:

 subsidence  physical disturbance of watercourses  localised contamination of watercourses from spills of hydrocarbons and chemicals from vehicles and machinery  cumulative impacts of the Project interacting with nearby operational mines and proposed mining projects (e.g. Kestrel Coal Project, Wilton and Fairhill Project and Curragh Project).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 60 frc environmental

Figure 5.1 Existing and proposed Ensham Mine infrastructure (Sourced from Figure 4.2 of Chapter 4 of the EIS submission).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 61 frc environmental

Subsidence

Underground mining operations associated with the Project are proposed beneath the lower reaches of Mosquito Creek, the Nogoa River main channel and a number of tributaries of the Nogoa River. Subsidence of these watercourses may result in lowered sections of stream bed with abrupt changes in bed level or bank failure and in-filling of the channel. This may alter natural water flow patterns and restrict the movement of fish, especially during low flow conditions, potentially resulting in fish being stranded in impacted areas.

The Project will operate using the same bord and pillar mining method associated with existing operations, with a regular array of stable coal pillars and roadways. The subsidence predictions for the Project coal pillars have been verified to a high level of confidence using information from the existing bord and pillar operations at Ensham. Using a minimum pillar Factor of Safety (FoS) of 1.6, the subsidence is predicted to be less than 40 mm in the Project study area, with subsidence a result of elastic compression of the strata (i.e. compression due to the additional load on the pillars after the coal has been extracted).

The predicted subsidence as a result of the Project is less than the DAWE estimated seasonal variation in surface levels as a result of changes in moisture content (50 mm), and is therefore unlikely to form surface cracks or significant depressions in surface topography where ponding of the surface water may occur. This is consistent with experience for existing operations where no surface cracking or ponding has been observed above the operating bord and pillar mine areas.

Monitoring for subsidence within waterways that provides for fish passage will be completed as outlined in the Subsidence Management Plan. Specifically, subsidence monitoring at Ensham will comprise:

 LIDAR  real time GPS monitoring  general surface inspections (including watercourse inspection) if monitoring indicates exceedance of one or more subsidence trigger levels, and  groundwater monitoring to determine whether EA trigger levels have been exceeded.

The monitoring schedule and trigger level for each of the monitoring components is detailed in the SMP and summarised in Table 5.1. Where surface levels indicate the potential for significant subsidence within a waterway (i.e. change in elevation greater than the trigger levels), and the potential to be the result of mining activities, an investigation including a visual inspection will be undertaken by Ensham. Where the investigation supports that the elevation change within a waterway is associated with mining, then a detailed investigation

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 62 frc environmental

will be completed by a suitably qualified fish passage biologist and, where warranted, an investigation report will be prepared and submitted to the Administering Authority and landowner/land occupier. The investigation report will include recommendations for rehabilitation and restoration works to restore fish passage and waterway habitat, if necessary.

Table 5.1 Subsidence monitoring schedule and trigger levels

Monitoring/Survey Who by How often Trigger Levels

LIDAR Technical Annual >0.3 m for cracking clay soils Services / Survey >0.4 m for other soils as shown in the SMP Fixed GPS Technical Real Time 50 mm Services / Survey Surface Surveying Technical As per land As per land compensation Services / Survey compensation agreements agreements Underground Survey Daily As per Strata Control Management Surveying Plan Surface Environmental Annual (if Water ponding, new gully erosion Inspections investigation and / or changes to Nogoa River is triggered) banks (that may indicate an impact to fish passage) determined from LIDAR Groundwater Environmental Quarterly Refer to Schedule C of Ensham’s EA Monitoring conditions for groundwater quality and water level triggers

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 63 frc environmental

Physical Disturbance of Watercourses

The aquatic ecological value of the watercourses of the Project study area ranged from low to high, with ecological value generally highest where permanent aquatic habitat suitable for aquatic MNES species was present (i.e. the main channels of the Nogoa River). However, isolated pools within ephemeral watercourses of the Project study area also provide important refugial habitat for both aquatic and terrestrial biota, particularly during dry periods. Operational works in relation to the Project have the potential to alter the condition of watercourses of the Project study area through disturbances such as the release of mine-affected water or physical disturbance within or adjacent to the watercourse.

The Project will minimise and/or have no impact on watercourses of the Project study area as:

 there will be no proposed new surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse and no proposed clearing of riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat

 there will be no change in the release process for mine affected water from the existing operations, with no change proposed in existing conditions as per the EA of existing operations  monitoring of impacts to watercourses of the Project study area will continue to be completed as per current REMP conditions; the REMP will be revised to include a new upstream monitoring point (upstream of Zone 1) as described in Chapter 10 Surface Water Resources  no impact on water level or flow within the Nogoa River or its’ tributaries, and  no deposition of spoil or other fine materials that may increase the concentration of mobile sediments within the watercourses.

Localised Contamination of Watercourses

Fuels, oils and other chemicals (e.g. lubricants and solvents) required for the operation of vehicles and machinery or maintenance of underground operations are toxic to aquatic flora and fauna at relatively low concentrations. Spilt fuel is most likely to enter watercourses via an accidental spill on the roads or when there are construction or operational activities adjacent to watercourses and/or groundwater. A significant fuel spill (in the order of tens or hundreds of litres) is likely to have a locally significant impact on both flora and fauna, with the size of spill and the volume of water being the most significant factors influencing the

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 64 frc environmental

length of stream impacted. Other wastes associated with vehicle and machine maintenance also have the potential to contribute to the degradation of aquatic ecosystems.

The Project will operate using the same procedures and requirements associated with the existing operations, specifically existing Environmental Impact Management Plans (EIMP; EIMP.06.00.03 Water Management and Minimisation Plan and EIMP.05.00.02 Hydrocarbons), Standard Operating Procedures (SOP; SOP.09.01.04 Using Hazardous Substances) and relevant legislative requirements and Australian Standards. In particular, refuelling will be completed in designated bunded areas away from watercourses and spill response procedures will be followed.

The Project proposes the construction and operation of 4 new coal seam drainage flares in Zones 2 and 3 to ensure a safe working environment in the underground areas. Coal seam drainage flares produce small amounts of oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide and residual unburnt hydrocarbons that if released in close proximity to watercourses can pollute aquatic environments, impacting the health and productivity of fisheries resources. To minimise the risk of contamination to watercourses of the Project study area, all coal seam drainage flares are to be constructed and operated greater than 100 m from any watercourse with the closest drainage flare proposed to be greater than one km from the nearest watercourse (Figure 5.1).

As there will be no new surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse, no increase in mine traffic on the surface and no increase in surface construction or surface disturbance within the Project study area as a result of the Project, it is therefore unlikely that there will be an increased risk of localised contamination of watercourses.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 65 frc environmental

Cumulative Impacts

Cumulative impacts of the Project with nearby operational mines and proposed mining projects (specifically Kestrel Coal Project, Wilton and Fairhill Project and Curragh Project) on water quality in the Nogoa River and the drawdown of the alluvial water table:

 proposed mine-affected water releases will be managed within an existing and overarching strategic framework for management of cumulative impacts of mining activities (i.e. Model Water Conditions for Mines in the Fitzroy Basin and the EPP (WWB) for the Fitzroy Basin); thus, the proposed management approach for mine water is expected to have negligible cumulative impact on surface water quality and associated environmental values

 changes in flows in the Nogoa River due to drawdown of the water table and loss of catchment area from the multiple mining operations would be undetectable as flow is managed by Sunwater from the Fairbairn Dam upstream.

5.2 Risk-based Impact Assessment

The risk assessment determined the level of risk as an outcome of the consequence and likelihood of the potential impact (Table 5.2 to Table 5.4). The 5 x 3 risk matrix (Table 5.4) gives risk scores ranging between one and 15, with risk being:

 low, when the score is < 5  medium, when the score is > 5 but < 10, and  high, when the score is > 10.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 66 frc environmental

Table 5.2 Ratings used to assess the likelihood of potential impacts.

Rating Likelihood of occurrence

Very high (5) Almost certain to occur frequently High (4) Probably would happen sometimes to frequently Moderate (3) Could happen sometimes Low (2) Remote possibility of occurring or not expected to occur Very low (1) Definitely would not happen at all

Table 5.3 Ratings used to assess the consequence of potential impacts.

Rating Consequence of potential impacts

High Catastrophic, irreversible or critical long-term environmental harm or loss; significant harm or loss of sensitive components of the environment; significant harm or loss of protected components of the environment, such as protected wetlands or MNES. Moderate Significant short-term but reversible harm of the environment; minor environmental harm to sensitive or protected components of the environment, such as protected wetlands or MNES. Low Unfavourable impact with no material harm to the environment and no impact on sensitive or protected components of the environment.

Table 5.4 Environmental risk matrix.

Likelihood

Very High Very Low (1) Low (2) Moderate (3) High (4)

(5)

Low (1) 1 2 3 4 5

Moderate (2) 2 4 6 8 10

3 6 9 12 15 Consequence High (3)

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 67 frc environmental

Table 5.5 Risk-based Impact Assessment

Source of Potential Mitigation Consequence of Impact Likelihood of Impact Mitigated Risk Impact to Aquatic Ecosystem EV

Subsidence The Project will operate using the same bord and pillar mining method associated with the existing operations Moderate (2) Very Low (1) Low (2 x 1 = 2) using a minimum pillar FoS of 1.6. Watercourses of the Project study Not expected to occur given the Subsidence within waterways that provide for fish passage will be monitored as per the Subsidence area have high ecological values but mining method and proposed Management Plan, with visual and detailed investigations to be completed where significant subsidence is harm of the environment reversible Subsidence Management Plan identified. and non-permanent

Physical disturbance no proposed new surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse and no proposed clearing of Moderate (2) Very Low (1) Low (2 x 1 = 2) of watercourses riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat Watercourses of the Project study Not expected to occur given that no change in the release process for mine affected water from the existing operations, with conditions as per area have high ecological values but there will be no new infrastructure the EA of existing operations, and monitoring of impacts to watercourses of the Project study area will be harm of the environment reversible within or adjacent to a watercourse, completed as per current REMP conditions; the REMP will be revised to include a new upstream monitoring and non-permanent no increase in mine traffic on the point (upstream of Zone 1). surface and no increase in surface

construction or surface disturbance within the Project study area

Localised All applicable materials will be stored and handled in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements Moderate (2) Very Low (1) Low (2 x 1 = 2) contamination of and Australian Standards, including but not limited to the provisions of: Watercourses of the Project study Not expected to occur given that watercourses from AS 3780:2008 – The storage and handling of corrosive substances area have high ecological values but there will be no new infrastructure spills of harm of the environment reversible within or adjacent to a watercourse, hydrocarbons and AS 1940:2017 – The storage and handling of flammable and combustible liquids and non-permanent no increase in mine traffic on the chemicals from Refuelling will be in designated bunded areas away from watercourses surface and no increase in surface vehicles and construction or surface disturbance machinery Spill response procedures will be followed within the Project study area Coal seam drainage flares will be constructed >100 m from any watercourse

Cumulative Impacts Disturbing only areas needed for Project operations, with land profiles within the high banks of waterways that Moderate (2) Low (2) Low (2 x 2 = 4) temporarily disturbed, other than those within the permanent development footprint, promptly restored to pre- Watercourses of the Project study Not expected to occur given work profiles. area have high ecological values but mitigations Water will be managed in accordance with the existing operations water management plans and EA release harm of the environment reversible criteria which are designed to protect watercourse EVs, with mine-affected water releases managed within an and non-permanent existing and overarching strategic framework for management of cumulative impacts of mining activities (i.e. Model Water Conditions for Mines in the Fitzroy Basin and the EPP (WWB) for the Fitzroy Basin).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 68 frc environmental

5.3 Assessment of Potential Impacts to Aquatic MNES Species

An action is likely to have a significant impact on a threatened species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:

Although two aquatic MNES species are known to occur within the waterways of the Project study area (white-throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle), the Project is highly unlikely to have a significant impact on their population as there will be:

 no new surface infrastructure or clearing of riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat  no change in the release process for mine affected water from the existing operations

 very low likelihood of subsidence, with the occurrence of subsidence within the waterway monitored and managed as part of the Subsidence Management Plan and the predicted maximum subsidence (40 mm) unlikely to form a barrier for freshwater turtle dispersal, and

 no impact on water level or flow in the Nogoa River, with flow dependent on the release of irrigation water by Sunwater from the Fairbairn Dam upstream.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 69 frc environmental

Thus, populations of these MNES species are sufficiently isolated from the Project to have no risk of direct or indirect impact from the Project. The mitigations described above further reduce any risk of indirect impacts.

Although the Project is expected to have no direct or indirect impact on the populations of these MNES species, some recovery actions to improve the recovery of the species are proposed. Specifically, the Project will control predation of eggs through the management of the wild dog, feral pig and fox population within the Project Site, as part of the Weed and Feral Animal Management Plan. Within mining areas (i.e. under Ensham’s responsibility), cattle and vehicle access to the Nogoa River bank will also be reduced during the breeding season to protect nests from trampling. Water quality and habitat quality within the Nogoa River main branch will also be managed as per existing operations with:

 the release of mine affected water managed as per the EA conditions of existing operations

 weeds managed as part of the Weed and Feral Animal Management Plan within mining areas of the Project study area

 no proposed clearing of riparian vegetation  no proposed works that may reduce the in-stream habitat, and  cattle and vehicle access to the Nogoa River bank reduced within mining areas of the Project study area.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 70 frc environmental

6 Conclusions

Regulated vegetation types occur in the riparian zone and watercourses of the Project study area and watercourses provide important corridors for fish passage during times of flow.

The following potential sources of impact on aquatic ecological values associated with the Project were identified:

 subsidence  physical disturbance of watercourses  localised contamination of watercourses from spills of hydrocarbons and chemicals from vehicles and machinery, and

 cumulative impacts of the Project interacting with nearby operational mines and proposed mining projects (e.g. Kestrel Coal Project, Wilton and Fairhill Project and Curragh Project).

All sources of impact were assessed as having a low risk of adverse impact to aquatic ecological values as:

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 71 frc environmental

 real-time and annual monitoring for subsidence will be completed as per the SMP, with trigger levels and alert to actions identified where potential for significant subsidence is identified

 there will be no new surface infrastructure within or adjacent to a watercourse, no increase in mine traffic on the surface and no increase in surface construction or surface disturbance within the Project study area as a result of the Project, and  proposed mine-affected water releases and ongoing water quality, sediment quality and aquatic ecology monitoring will be managed under the EA conditions of existing operations to ensure the protection of EVs within the receiving environment.

Two aquatic MNES species are known to occur within the waterways of the Project study area (white-throated snapping turtle and Fitzroy River turtle), however the Project is highly unlikely to have a significant impact on their population as there will be:

 no new surface infrastructure or clearing of riparian vegetation or aquatic habitat  no change in the release process for mine affected water from the existing operations  very low likelihood of subsidence, with the occurrence of subsidence within the waterway monitored and managed as part of the Subsidence Management Plan and the predicted maximum subsidence (40 mm) unlikely to form a barrier for freshwater turtle dispersal, and  no impact on water level or flow in the Nogoa River, with flow dependent on the release of irrigation water by Sunwater from the Fairbairn Dam upstream.

Thus, populations of these MNES species are sufficiently isolated from the Project to have no risk of direct or indirect impact from the Project. Although the Project is expected to have no direct or indirect impact on the populations of these MNES species, some recovery actions to improve the recovery of the species are proposed. Specifically, the Project will control predation of eggs through the management of the wild dog, feral pig and fox population within the Project Site, as part of the Weed and Feral Animal Management Plan. Within mining areas (i.e. under Ensham’s responsibility), cattle and vehicle access to the Nogoa River bank will also be reduced during the breeding season to protect nests from trampling. Water quality and habitat quality within the Nogoa River main branch will also be managed as per existing operations.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 72 frc environmental

7 References

4T Consultants, 2012, Ensham Resources Pty Ltd Receiving Environment Monitoring Program: Biannual Review, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

AECOM, 2020, Matters of National Environmental Significance, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty. Ltd.

ALA., 2019, Atlas of Living Australia, http://www.ala.org.au accessed November.

ANZG, 2018, Australian & New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh & Marine Water Quality, https://www.waterquality.gov.au/anz-guidelines accessed January 2020.

Cann, J., 1998, Australian Freshwater Turtles, Beaumont Publishing Pty Ltd, Singapore.

Chessman, B., 2003, 'New sensitivity grades for Australian river macroinvertebrates', Australian Journal of marine and Freshwater Research 54: 95-103.

Cogger, H.G., Cameron, E.E., Sadlier, R.A. & Eggler, P., 1993, The Action Plan for Australian Reptiles, http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/action/reptiles/index.html.

DAWE, 2014, Approved conservation advice Elseya albagula White-throated snapping turtle, report prepared for Department of the Environment.

DAWE, 2015, Rheodytes leukops in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra, http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat accessed May 2016.

DAWE, 2020, National Recovery Plan for the White-throated Snapping Turtle (Elseya albagula), report prepared for Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment.

DEHP, 2013, Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009 Nogoa River Sub-basin Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives Basin No. 130 (part), including all waters of the Nogoa River Sub-basin, report prepared for Department of Environment and Heritage Protection.

DERM, 2011, Dawson River Sub-basin Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives, September 2011, http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/environmental_management/water/environmental_va lues_environmental_protection_water_policy/schedule_1_of_epp_water_includin g_plans/fitzroy_scheduled_evs_wqos.html.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 73 frc environmental

DES, 2009, Queensland Water Quality Guidelines 2009, Version 3, report prepared for Queensland Deparment of Environment and Science.

DES, 2018, Monitoring and Sampling Manual: Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 2009, report prepared for Queensland Department of Environment and Science.

DES, 2019a, Flora Survey Guidelines - Protected Plants, report prepared for Wildlife and Threatened Species Operations.

DES, 2019b, Species lists, https://environment.ehp.qld.gov.au/report-request/species-list/.

DES, 2019c, WetlandInfo, https://wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/.

DEWHA, 2008, Approved Conservation Advice for Rheodytes leukops (Fitzroy Tortoise), report prepared for Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

DNRM, 2001a, Australia-Wide Assessment of River Health: Queensland AUSRIVAS Sampling and Processing Manual, report prepared for Commonwealth of Australia and QLD Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

DNRM, 2001b. Queensland Australian River Assessment System (AUSRIVAS). Sampling and Processing Manual, August 2001. Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Brisbane.

DNRME, 2019, Water Monitoring Information Portal, https://water- monitoring.information.qld.gov.au/host.htm.

DoTE, 2013, Matters of Environmental Significance: Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1, report prepared for Australian Government.

DSEWPC, 2011, Survey Guidelines for Australia’s threatened fish, report prepared for Commonwealth of Australia.

EHP, 2011, Fitzroy River Turtle, http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals- az/fitzroy_river_turtle.html accessed November.

Franklin, C., 2000, 'Aquatic respiration and diving in the freshwater turtle, Rheodytes leukops', Journal of Physiology 523. frc environmental, 2008, Blackwater Creek Diversion, Aquatic Ecology; Impact Assessment and Baseline Monitoring, report prepared for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 74 frc environmental

frc environmental, 2010, Connors River Dam Fitzroy River Turtle Survey, August 2010, report prepared for SunWater.

GHD, 2015, Lower Fitzroy River Infrastructure Project Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) technical report June 2015, report prepared for Gladstone Area Water Board and SunWater.

Gordos, M., Franklin, C. & Limpus, C., 2004, 'Effect of water depth and water velocity upon the surfacing frequency of the bimodally respiring freshwater turtle, Rheodytes leukops', Journal of Experimental Biology 207: 3099-3107.

Hamann, M., Schauble, C.S., Limpus, D.J., Emerick, S.P. & Limpus, C.J., 2007. Management Plan for the conservation of Elseya sp. [Burnett River] in the Burnett River Catchment. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency: Brisbane.

Heppell, S.S., Crowder, L.B. & D., T.C., 1996, 'Models to evaluate headstarting as a management tool for long-lived turtles', Ecological Applications 6: 556-565.

Hydrobiology, 2014, Ensham Mine REMP: Annual Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Hydrobiology, 2016a, Ensham Mine: 2014/2015 Receiving Environment Monitoring Program Annual Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Hydrobiology, 2016b, Ensham Mine: 2015/2016 Receiving Environment Monitoring Program Annual Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Hydrobiology, 2017, Ensham Coal Mine: 2016/2017 Annual REMP Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Hydrobiology, 2018, Ensham Coal Mine: 2017/2018 Annual REMP Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Hydrobiology, 2019, Ensham Coal Mine: 2018/2019 REMP Report, report prepared for Ensham Resources Pty Ltd.

Legler, J.M. & Cann, J., 1980, 'A new genus and species of a chelid turtle from Queensland, Australia', Contributions in Science, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 342: 1-18.

Limpus, C., 2008. A biological review of Australian marine turtle species. 4. Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz). Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 75 frc environmental

Limpus, C.J., Limpus, D.J., Parmenter, C.J., Hodge, J., Forest, M. & McLachlan, J., 2011, The Biology and Management Strategies for Freshwater Turtles in the Fitzroy Catchment, with particular emphasis on Elseya albagula and Rheodytes leukops: A study initiated in response to the proposed construction of Rookwood Weir and the raising of Eden Bann Weir, report prepared for report prepared for Department of Environment and Resource Management.

Norris, A. & Low, T., 2005, Review of the management of feral animals and their impact on biodiversity in the Rangelands: A resource to aid NRM planning, report prepared for Pest Animal Control CRC,.

Priest, T., (1997), Bimodal respiration and dive behaviour of the Fitzroy River Turtle, Rheodytes leukops, BSc Honours Thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Todd, E.V., Blair, D., Farley, S., Farrington, L., Fitzsimmons, N.N., Georges, A., Limpus, C.J. & Jerry, D.R., 2013, 'Contemporary genetic structire reflects historical drainage isolation in an Australian snapping turtle, Elseya albagula', Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 169: 200-214.

Tucker, A.D., Limpus, C.J., Priest, T.E., Cay, J., Glen, C. & Guarino, E., 2001, 'Home ranges of Fitzroy River turtles (Rheodytes leukops) overlap riffle zones: potential concerns related to river regulation', Biological Conservation 102: 171-181.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment 76

Appendix A MNES Search Results

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment A1 frc environmental

Appendix B White-throated snapping turtle (Elseya albagula)

Description

The white-throated snapping turtle (Elseya albagula) is one of the largest short-necked freshwater turtles in Australia. Adults of this species are large and heavily built. Females are larger than males, however males have a longer tail length than females (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2007). Straight carapace length for adult males ranges from 15.6 cm to 29.2 cm, while the average carapace length for adult females ranges from 26.1 cm to 40.1 cm (Limpus et al. 2007).

The size of white-throated snapping turtles also varies between geographic locations; however, the cause of this variation is unknown (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2007). Female white-throated snapping turtles are distinguished from similar species by irregular white or cream markings on the face, and the shell margin is strongly serrated on juveniles (DAWE 2014).

Status Under Commonwealth and State Legislation

The white-throated snapping turtle is listed as critically endangered under the EPBC Act and endangered under the NC Act.

Distribution

The white-throated snapping turtle is restricted to the Fitzroy, Mary and Burnett river catchments in Queensland (DAWE 2014; 2020). The species has also been recorded in:

 small coastal river adjacent basins, including the Kolan and Gregory-Burrum systems (Hamann et al. 2007);

 impoundments upstream of weirs such as Eden Bann Weir and Glebe Weir (Limpus et al. 2007); and

 the spring-fed pools of the Dawson River (Hamann et al. 2007; frc environmental 2008).

There has been a severe decrease in the abundance of immature white-throated snapping turtles in wild populations throughout the Fitzroy, Mary and Burnett river catchments (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus 2008; Limpus et al. 2011; DAWE 2020). The wild population

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B1 frc environmental

is composed primarily of aging adults in each catchment, and there has been a substantial failure to recruit new adults into the breeding populations due to nest predation by a range of exotic and native predators, with only:

 0.5% of adults being new recruits to the breeding population in the Fitzroy River catchment (211 adult females examined);

 0.9% of adults being new recruits to the breeding population in the Burnett River catchment (an additional 0.9% of the adults were identified to their 2nd breeding season of the 331 adult females that were examined); and  1.1% of adults being new recruits to the breeding population in the Mary River catchment (of the 175 adult females that were examined) (DAWE 2014; 2020).

Genetic studies indicate some distinction between the population of white-throated snapping turtles in the Fitzroy River catchment and populations in the Mary and Burnett river catchments. This indicates these populations have been separated for a long time and could be considered Evolutionary Significant Units (Todd et al. 2013; DAWE 2014).

Habitat

White-throated snapping turtles are habitat specialists that prefer permanent, clear, well oxygenated water that is flowing and contains shelter (e.g. large woody debris and undercut banks) (EHP 2011; Todd et al. 2013). The species has also been recorded in non-flowing waters, such as impoundments, but only in low numbers (DAWE 2014). Within the greater Fitzroy, Burnett and Mary river catchments, this species has been recorded almost exclusively in close association with permanent flowing stream reaches that are typically characterised by a sand-gravel substrate with submerged rock crevices, undercut banks and/or submerged logs and fallen trees (Hamann et al. 2007). Capture records suggest that white-throated snapping turtles are rarely found in reaches without such refuge (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2007). Across its distribution, individuals have been recorded from both shallow flowing pools and deeper slow flowing pools (Hamann et al. 2007).

White-throated snapping turtles are rarely present in water bodies that are isolated from flowing streams, such as farm dams or sewage treatment plants, suggesting that the species does not move extended distances over dry land (Hamann et al. 2007). However, white-throated snapping turtles have been observed walking short distances from drying waterholes to nearby water bodies (Limpus et al. 2007).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B2 frc environmental

Ecology

The life history of white-throated snapping turtles is characterised by a long life span and slow growth to maturity (DAWE 2014). The age at first breeding is approximately 15 to 20 years (Limpus et al. 2011). Breeding occurs once per year, mostly during autumn and winter, with adult females breeding in each successive year unless the turtle has been injured or debilitated, or riverine habitat has been altered (e.g. water extraction, drought or weeds) (EHP 2011; DAWE 2014). Females generally nest on sandy banks, although nests have been observed on loose gravels and soils. Females lay a single clutch of eggs during the breeding season, with an average of 14 eggs per clutch (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2011). Nests are generally laid in areas of low canopy cover and in areas of dense grass cover; however, dense weeds at the water’s edge may limit suitability of potential nesting banks (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2011). Nests are an average of 16.6 m from the water’s edge, with eggs laid in deep chambers (greater than 20 cm in depth) and on banks with a slope of up to 26.5º (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2011). However, nests have been recorded up to 60 m from the water (Hamann et al. 2007). White-throated snapping turtles will repeatedly use specific areas of banks over multiple years (Limpus et al. 2007).

There is no parental care, and egg and small juvenile survival is typically low (Heppell et al. 1996; Hamann et al. 2007). There is abundant evidence of nesting in all three river basins (i.e. Fitzroy, Burnett and Mary River Basins), but most eggs are lost to predation or trampling by stock (Hamann et al. 2007; Limpus et al. 2011). The population growth or decline rate is highly responsive to changes in adult survivorship, rather than changes in egg or juvenile survivorship (Heppell et al. 1996). Nonetheless, where egg predation rates are high, population growth rate will be constrained.

White-throated snapping turtles feed primarily on aquatic plants along with fruits and leaves from overhanging riparian vegetation (Limpus et al. 2007). They may also eat periphyton, freshwater bivalves and insects, particularly when plant food resources are limited (Limpus et al. 2007).

Little is known of the movement patterns of these turtles in the greater Fitzroy River catchment. However, in the Burnett River they generally have small home ranges of less than 500 m and have limited spatial and temporal movements (Hamann et al. 2007).

Threats

A summary of the threatening processes and their priority for the recovery of the White- throated snapping turtle population is provided in Table B.1. The principal threat to white- throated snapping turtles in all three catchments is the excessive loss of eggs and

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B3 frc environmental

hatchlings due to predation (DAWE 2014; 2020). Primary predators include feral (e.g. foxes, dogs, pigs and cats) and native (e.g. water rats and lizards) animals. Trampling of nests by cattle is also a major threat.

An additional threat to this species includes limited suitable habitat, which is highly fragmented across its distribution range due to dams and weirs. Waterway impoundments, such as dams, barrages and weirs, also form significant barriers to the passage of freshwater turtles. The number of dead and injured turtles can be much greater in pools immediately downstream of weirs than in pools distant from weirs, presumably a result of turtles being swept downstream and over impoundments during major and sudden water releases (Hamann et al. 2007).

Other threats to this species are:

 stocking of fish into dam impoundments for recreational fishing;  recreational fishing resulting in hook injuries;  trampling and crushing by cattle and vehicles crossing rivers  boat strike;  loss of nesting habitat to weed infestation in the riparian zone;  dense aquatic weeds in the waterways;  water extraction for agriculture and irrigation; and  climate change (Limpus et al. 2011).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B4 frc environmental

Table B.1 White-throated snapping turtle threatening processes and their priority

Drivers Threatening process Impact on species (stress) Priority*

Prevalence of predators Predation at nesting sites  Excessive loss of eggs and hatchlings 1

Livestock, people and Trampling and crushing at nesting  Loss of eggs and hatchlings 1 vehicles accessing nesting sites banks

Land use activities and Loss/ degradation of riparian and in-  Reduced water quality (increased turbidity, higher nutrient loads, 2 riparian management stream habitat altered pH)  Loss of shading, in-stream habitat structures, aquatic and riparian vegetation

 Loss of nesting habitat

River regulation Construction and existence of dams  Injury and mortality at impoundment structures 2 and weirs  Obstruction of movement  Loss of riparian vegetation

Operation of dams and weirs, and  Changes to in-stream habitat, nesting habitat and water quality 2 water flow management due to altered flow regimes  Inundation of nesting banks downstream of impoundments with water releases

Extended drought periods  Reduction in water quality, breeding rates and increased mortality 2 exacerbated by water storage and  Reduction in access to nest banks, breeding partners and habitat extraction for juvenile turtles

Climate change Increased temperatures and extreme  Lower hatching success and hatchling fitness 3 weather events  Reduced diving duration and increased predation risk

 Lower flows  More intense flood events

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B1 frc environmental

Drivers Threatening process Impact on species (stress) Priority*

Cattle and vehicles crossing Trampling and crushing in-stream  Injury and mortality to adults 3 rivers

Prevalence of invasive plants Aquatic weeds  Obstruction of access to nesting habitat 3 Spread of weeds through  Loss of nesting habitat people and animals  Reduction in food supply from native plants

 Invasive macrophytes affecting food supply  Changed water quality

Recreation Recreational fishing and boating  Injury and mortality 3  Increased in-stream predation pressure from stocked fish * Priority is based on the severity of the threat and the capacity for ameliorating the threat Source: DAWE (2020)

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B2 frc environmental

Recovery Actions

The recovery of the white-throated snapping turtle is managed by the ‘National Recovery Plan for the White-Throated Snapping Turtle (Elseya albagula)’ (DAWE 2020). This plan, in conjunction with the approved conservation advice (DAWE 2014), outlines the conservation requirements for the species across its range, actions to be taken to ensure the long-term viability of the species in nature and the parties responsible for undertaking appropriate recovery actions.

The objectives of the recovery plan are to:

 ensure a self-sustaining healthy population structure in all catchments in which the white-throated snapping turtle occurs, and

 enhance the condition of habitat across the white-throated snapping turtle’s range to maximise survival and reproductive success.

 The strategies to achieve the plan’s objectives are to: Substantially improve the recruitment of hatchlings and juveniles into the population

 Decrease adult/subadult mortality and injury rates, and reduce barriers to movement along riverine habitats  Improve stream flow and habitat quality throughout the species’ distribution  Increase public awareness and participation in conservation of the species and its habitat, and

 Improve the collation and availability of data to inform recovery actions.

The first 3 strategies directly address the key threats to the white-throated snapping turtle population, while the 4th strategy contributes to the species’ recovery. The last (5th) strategy is vital to assess the recovery of the white-throated snapping turtle population and effectiveness of recovery actions and adaptive management strategies listed in the plan.

Occurrence in and Surrounding the Project Site

The white-throated snapping turtle was last recorded within the Project study area in 1998 at Duckponds, Nogoa River (ALA. 2019; DES 2019c), a waterbody that is no longer present. However, it is considered likely that a population of white-throated snapping turtle is still present within the main channel of the Nogoa River within the Project study area, where there are permanent pools, flows are regular (i.e. flows occur 99% of the time; gauging station 130219A (DNRME 2019)) and extensive aquatic habitat is present.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B0 frc environmental

Recovery Actions Implemented in and Surrounding the Project Site

Although there are no estimated direct or indirect impacts to the main channel of the Nogoa River (where white-throated snapping turtles are expected to occur) as a result of the Project, some recovery actions to improve the recovery of the species are proposed. These include:

 Substantially improve the recruitment of hatchlings and juveniles into the population − Action 1f: Ensham will continue to manage the feral animal population within the Project Site to minimise predation of eggs within the Project study area

− Action 1k: If feral animal populations are not able to be controlled, Ensham will collaborate with DES or other regional bodies to implement a predator control program in or around identified key nesting sites  Decrease adult/subadult mortality and injury rates, and reduce barriers to movement along riverine habitats

− No applicable actions as no infrastructure that may impact on turtle passage is located within the Project study area

 Improve stream flow and habitat quality throughout the species’ distribution − Action 3d: Ensure that water releases maintain adequate water quality; the release of water will be managed as per the EA conditions of existing operations and impacts monitored as part of the current REMP − Action 3f: Reduce the impact of pest/exotic plants on nesting and aquatic habitat; weeds will be managed within mining areas of the Project study area as part of the Weed and Feral Animal Management Plan

− Action 3g: Reduce the incidence of riparian clearing; there will be no clearing of riparian vegetation within the Project study area

− Action 3h: Reduce the extent of cattle and vehicle accessing the stream banks of the Nogoa River within mining areas of the Project study area;

− Action 3k: Improve in-stream habitat; no works will be completed within the main channel of the Nogoa River that may reduce in-stream habitat present  Increase public awareness and participation in conservation of the species and its habitat − Not applicable action for the Project study area.  Improve the collation and availability of data to inform recovery actions.

− Not applicable action for the Project study area.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B1 frc environmental

References

ALA., 2019, Atlas of Living Australia, http://www.ala.org.au accessed November. DAWE, 2014, Approved conservation advice Elseya albagula White-throated snapping turtle, report prepared for Department of the Environment. DAWE, 2020, National Recovery Plan for the White-throated Snapping Turtle (Elseya albagula), report prepared for Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. DES, 2019, WetlandInfo, https://wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/. DNRME, 2019, Water Monitoring Information Portal, https://water- monitoring.information.qld.gov.au/host.htm. EHP, 2011, Fitzroy River Turtle, http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals- az/fitzroy_river_turtle.html accessed November. frc environmental, 2008, Blackwater Creek Diversion, Aquatic Ecology; Impact Assessment and Baseline Monitoring, report prepared for Parsons Brinckerhoff Australia Pty Ltd. Hamann, M., Schauble, C.S., Limpus, D.J., Emerick, S.P. & Limpus, C.J., 2007. Management Plan for the conservation of Elseya sp. [Burnett River] in the Burnett River Catchment. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency: Brisbane. Heppell, S.S., Crowder, L.B. & D., T.C., 1996, 'Models to evaluate headstarting as a management tool for long-lived turtles', Ecological Applications 6: 556-565. Limpus, C., 2008. A biological review of Australian marine turtle species. 4. Olive Ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz). Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane. Limpus, C.J., D.J., L., Parmenter, C.J., Hodge, J., Forrest, M.J. & McLachlan, J.M., 2007, Proposal for raising Eden Bann Weir and construction of Rookwood Wier – An assessment of the potential implications and mitigation measures for Fitzroy Turtles (Elseya albagula and Rheodytes leukops), report prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland Government. Limpus, C.J., Limpus, D.J., Parmenter, C.J., Hodge, J., Forest, M. & McLachlan, J., 2011, The Biology and Management Strategies for Freshwater Turtles in the Fitzroy Catchment, with particular emphasis on Elseya albagula and Rheodytes leukops: A study initiated in response to the proposed construction of Rookwood Weir and

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B2 frc environmental

the raising of Eden Bann Weir, report prepared for report prepared for Department of Environment and Resource Management. Todd, E.V., Blair, D., Farley, S., Farrington, L., Fitzsimmons, N.N., Georges, A., Limpus, C.J. & Jerry, D.R., 2013, 'Contemporary genetic structire reflects historical drainage isolation in an Australian snapping turtle, Elseya albagula', Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 169: 200-214.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment B3 frc environmental

Appendix C Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops)

Description

Fitzroy River turtles (Rheodytes leukops) are distinguished by a white inner ring around the eye, a pale yellow or cream belly, and large, pointed conical tubercles on their shell and neck (DEWHA 2008). While few studies have specifically examined the size distribution of this turtle across its range, there are significant differences in the size of adults from populations at different locations (Limpus et al. 2007). These differences were attributed to independent factors (for example, environmental differences between locations) and indicate that Fitzroy River turtle populations are not uniform across the greater Fitzroy River Basin (Limpus et al. 2007).

Adult male Fitzroy River turtles have slightly longer tail length than adult females (Limpus et al. 2007). Carapace length alone is not a reliable indication of sex, as there is considerable overlap in the size ranges of adult males and females; however, when used in conjunction with tail length (beyond the carapace), adults can be assigned to a sex with relative certainty (Limpus et al. 2007). In general, adult males have an approximate straight carapace length range of 20 cm to 26 cm, while adult females have an approximate range of 20–28 cm (Limpus et al. 2007).

Status Under Commonwealth and State Legislation

The Fitzroy River turtle is listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act and vulnerable under the NC Act.

Distribution

The Fitzroy River turtle is restricted to the Fitzroy River Basin (DEWHA 2008). The species occurs in permanent freshwater rivers from the Fitzroy Barrage to Theodore Weir and Duck Ponds, upstream of the Comet-Mackenzie River confluence, as well as through Marlborough Creek (Limpus et al. 2007). It has also been found in isolated permanent waterholes on the Connors River (Limpus et al. 2007; frc environmental 2010). The species is not known to inhabit small farm dams or ephemeral waterways (Limpus et al. 2007).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C1 frc environmental

Habitat

Fitzroy River turtles occur in flowing rivers with large deep pools with rocky, gravelly or sandy substrates connected by shallow riffle areas (Cogger et al. 1993; Tucker et al. 2001; DEWHA 2008). Riffle zones are an important habitat for the Fitzroy River turtle, with the home ranges of individuals typically overlapping these habitats (Tucker et al. 2001), possibly due to increased foraging success in these habitats (Legler & Cann 1980) or a greater efficiency of respiration in highly oxygenated waters (Priest 1997; Franklin 2000; Gordos et al. 2004). However, under low-flow conditions, or as riffle zones become seasonally ephemeral, the Fitzroy River turtle retreats to deeper pool habitat, or even isolated waterholes, next to riffle zones (Tucker et al. 2001; Limpus et al. 2007).

Riffle zones are likely to be ephemeral throughout most of the range of the Fitzroy River turtle, therefore this species should not be considered a riffle zone specialist (Limpus et al. 2007). Using riffle habitat to forage for abundant food sources such as benthic invertebrates and algae during the wet season and early dry season allows the turtles to take up nutrients and build fat reserves for the dry season, which is essential when preparing to breed (Limpus et al. 2007). Fitzroy River turtles captured from riffle zones tend to be larger than those found in pools and this may be an indicator of better health or condition of turtles in riffle zones, potentially reflecting greater feeding opportunities in riffles (M. Gordos, Conservation Manager, NSW DPI pers. com. July 2007). Therefore, while large, slow- flowing pools can support populations of Fitzroy River turtles these pools are likely to have a lower carrying capacity than reaches containing riffle habitat (Limpus et al. 2007).

Ecology

The age at first breeding for Fitzroy River turtles is approximately 15 to 20 years (Limpus et al. 2011). Females can lay multiple clutches of eggs each year between September and November, averaging 60 to 70 eggs per clutch (EHP 2011; GHD 2015). Female Fitzroy River turtles nest on sandy or loam banks that are free from extensive weeds, and which form during floods (Limpus et al. 2007). Nests are an average of 5.6 m back from the water’s edge, with some observed up to 15 m away (Cogger et al. 1993; Cann 1998; Limpus et al. 2007). Eggs are typically laid in deep chambers, with an average depth of 14.7 cm to the top egg and 20.7 cm to the bottom of the nest (Limpus et al. 2007). Nesting success is negatively influenced by habitat degradation and poor health of individuals (Limpus et al. 2007).

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C2 frc environmental

Home ranges vary widely among individuals, however, on average, Fitzroy River turtles appear to have a local mean range of 562 m (Tucker et al. 2001). Individual turtles can have long sedentary periods, ranging from 3 to 24 hours. When active, movement is on average 20 m per day, with a range of 0 to 350 m per day (Tucker et al. 2001).

Under low flow events, or as riffle zones became seasonally ephemeral, or dry completely, female Fitzroy River turtles retreat to deeper sections of pool habitats adjacent to riffle zones (Tucker et al. 2001). No seasonal movement patterns have been observed for this species. It has been reported that the current population of Fitzroy River turtles is likely to consist entirely of adults, with no recruitment of juveniles (Norris & Low 2005; DEWHA 2008).

Threats

The main threat to Fitzroy River turtle populations is the loss and disturbance of habitat from agriculture, mining, damming of rivers and pollution of habitats (Cogger et al. 1993). Dams and weirs within the Fitzroy River catchment also pose a threat to the preferred habitat of this species as they form large impoundments and reduce the natural condition of riffles throughout the year (Tucker et al. 2001).

Waterway impoundments, such as dams, barrages and weirs, also form significant barriers to the passage of freshwater turtles. The number of dead and injured turtles can be much greater in pools immediately downstream of weirs than in pools distant from weirs, presumably a result of turtles being swept downstream and over impoundments during major and sudden water releases (Hamann et al. 2007).

Predation of eggs by feral (e.g. foxes, dogs, pigs and cats) and native (e.g. water rats and lizards) animals (DEWHA 2008) is also a significant threat.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C3 frc environmental

Recovery Actions

There is currently no recovery plan for the Fitzroy River turtle; however, recovery actions identified by the Commonwealth and State agencies include:

 feral animal and weed control through eradication or control plans;  habitat improvement by managing grazing and by managing waterways;  habitat protection through: − stock management in riparian areas; − riparian rehabilitation projects; − maintenance and protection of nesting banks; − maintenance of stream flow and connectivity between impoundments; and − improving water quality in the lower Fitzroy River catchment.  improving recruitment of hatchlings; and  encouraging boat owners to look out for, and avoid turtles (DAWE 2015).

Occurrence in the Project Study Area

The Fitzroy River turtle was last recorded within the Project study area in the Nogoa River in 1998 (ALA. 2019; DES 2019c). However, it is considered likely that a population of Fitzroy River turtle still remains within the main channel of the Nogoa River within the Project study area, where there are permanent pools, flows are regular (i.e. flows occur 99% of the time; gauging station 130219A (DNRME 2019)) and the aquatic habitat is consistent with the preference for the species.

Recovery Actions Implemented in and Surrounding the Project Site

Recovery actions proposed as part of the management of the white-throated snapping turtle will also improve the population viability and recovery for the Fitzroy River turtle.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C4 frc environmental

References

ALA., 2019, Atlas of Living Australia, http://www.ala.org.au accessed November. Cann, J., 1998, Australian Freshwater Turtles, Beaumont Publishing Pty Ltd, Singapore. Cogger, H.G., Cameron, E.E., Sadlier, R.A. & Eggler, P., 1993, The Action Plan for Australian Reptiles, http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/action/reptiles/index.html. DAWE, 2015, Rheodytes leukops in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra, http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat accessed May 2016. DES, 2019, WetlandInfo, https://wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/. DEWHA, 2008, Approved Conservation Advice for Rheodytes leukops (Fitzroy Tortoise), report prepared for Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. DNRME, 2019, Water Monitoring Information Portal, https://water- monitoring.information.qld.gov.au/host.htm. EHP, 2011, Fitzroy River Turtle, http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/animals- az/fitzroy_river_turtle.html accessed November. Franklin, C., 2000, 'Aquatic respiration and diving in the freshwater turtle, Rheodytes leukops', Journal of Physiology 523. frc environmental, 2010, Connors River Dam Fitzroy River Turtle Survey, August 2010, report prepared for SunWater. GHD, 2015, Lower Fitzroy River Infrastructure Project Fitzroy River turtle (Rheodytes leukops) technical report June 2015, report prepared for Gladstone Area Water Board and SunWater. Gordos, M., Franklin, C. & Limpus, C., 2004, 'Effect of water depth and water velocity upon the surfacing frequency of the bimodally respiring freshwater turtle, Rheodytes leukops', Journal of Experimental Biology 207: 3099-3107. Hamann, M., Schauble, C.S., Limpus, D.J., Emerick, S.P. & Limpus, C.J., 2007. Management Plan for the conservation of Elseya sp. [Burnett River] in the Burnett River Catchment. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency: Brisbane. Legler, J.M. & Cann, J., 1980, 'A new genus and species of a chelid turtle from Queensland, Australia', Contributions in Science, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 342: 1-18.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C5 frc environmental

Limpus, C.J., D.J., L., Parmenter, C.J., Hodge, J., Forrest, M.J. & McLachlan, J.M., 2007, Proposal for raising Eden Bann Weir and construction of Rookwood Wier – An assessment of the potential implications and mitigation measures for Fitzroy Turtles (Elseya albagula and Rheodytes leukops), report prepared for Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland Government. Limpus, C.J., Limpus, D.J., Parmenter, C.J., Hodge, J., Forest, M. & McLachlan, J., 2011, The Biology and Management Strategies for Freshwater Turtles in the Fitzroy Catchment, with particular emphasis on Elseya albagula and Rheodytes leukops: A study initiated in response to the proposed construction of Rookwood Weir and the raising of Eden Bann Weir, report prepared for report prepared for Department of Environment and Resource Management. Norris, A. & Low, T., 2005, Review of the management of feral animals and their impact on biodiversity in the Rangelands: A resource to aid NRM planning, report prepared for Pest Animal Control CRC,. Priest, T., (1997), Bimodal respiration and dive behaviour of the Fitzroy River Turtle, Rheodytes leukops, BSc Honours Thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Tucker, A.D., Limpus, C.J., Priest, T.E., Cay, J., Glen, C. & Guarino, E., 2001, 'Home ranges of Fitzroy River turtles (Rheodytes leukops) overlap riffle zones: potential concerns related to river regulation', Biological Conservation 102: 171-181.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment C6 frc environmental

Appendix D Site Habitat Sheets

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D1 frc environmental

Site WC1 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Winton Creek Water Type unregulated, intermediate watercourse

Date surveyed 9 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 33

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 7 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity low Riparian width 15–20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 0% Habitat present shallow pool Disturbance high Bank stability moderate cobble 0% Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape low / convex pebble 0% Weed species grasses

Hydrology gravel 0% Parthenium

Flow regime ephemeral sand 0% Hymenachne

Water depth 0.5 m silt / clay 100% In-stream disturbance Adjacent land use agriculture

Wetted width 1.5 m Deposits silt Flow modification raised bed profile DS Flow not flowing Bed stability severe aggradation Waterway barrier raised bed profile DS Channel width 6 m

Comments: Site is a wide shallow ‘lagoon’ formed from a raised bed profile at a road crossing downstream. The site was predominantly dry except for a series of small isolated shallow green pools in an irrigation channel cut into the left bank. The bed was comprised of heavily deposited silt, with large cracks formed as the bed as dried. Persicaria spp. and Typha sp. were extensive throughout the banks and bed, with a patch of Hymenachne present at the downstream end of the ‘lagoon’. Mollusc shells were observed throughout the dry bed.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D2 frc environmental

Site WC2 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Winton Creek Water Type unregulated, intermediate watercourse

Date surveyed 7 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 38

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 7 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity moderate Riparian width 10 m Pattern irregular meanders boulder 10% Habitat present shallow pool Disturbance high Bank stability low cobble 5% large woody debris Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape low–vertical / concave/convex pebble 5% floating aquatic plants Melaleuca

Hydrology gravel 5% submerged aquatic plants Weed species Parkinsonia

Flow regime ephemeral sand 10% Adjacent land use grazing

Water depth 0.5 m silt / clay 65% In-stream disturbance

Wetted width 3 m Deposits silt Flow modification bed level crossing DS Flow not flowing Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier bed level crossing DS Channel width 15 m bed stable at BLC

Comments: Site is comprised of a long shallow isolated pool with dense ferny Azolla covering ~95% of the water surface. Cattle access the site / pool and regularly disturb the highly mobile bed substrate (silt) into the water column. A bed level crossing is located at the downstream end of the site, where bed substrate is comprised of rocky substrate such as boulders, cobble and pebble. Some lignum was also present on the banks.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D3 frc environmental

Site BC1 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Boggy Creek Water Type unregulated, ephemeral watercourse

Date surveyed 7 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score –

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 3 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity – Riparian width 15 m Pattern irregular meanders boulder 5% Habitat present – Disturbance moderate Bank stability low – moderate cobble 5% Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape moderate–steep / concave pebble 20% Weed species grasses

Hydrology gravel 10% herbaceous weeds

Flow regime ephemeral sand 25% Adjacent land use native forest

Water depth – silt / clay 35% In-stream disturbance

Wetted width – Deposits silt Flow modification bed level crossing at site Flow – Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier bed level crossing at site Channel width 8 m

Comments: Site was comprised of a small meandering channel through a relatively undisturbed eucalypt forest. Site was dry at time of survey and showed no evidence of holding water for any prolonged period of time. The banks were steep with evidence of erosion throughout. A bed level crossing was present at the site and was the source for rocky substrate (pebbles) in the bed. Some Lomandra sp. was present on the dry bank – site was dry

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D4 frc environmental

Site BC2 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Boggy Creek Water Type unregulated, ephemeral watercourse

Date surveyed 9 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score –

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 4 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity – Riparian width 2 – 3 m Pattern irregular meanders boulder 0% Habitat present – Disturbance high Bank stability low cobble 0% Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape moderate–vertical / concave pebble 0% Weed species grasses

Hydrology gravel 0% Parthenium

Flow regime ephemeral sand 0% Adjacent land use mining lease

Water depth – silt / clay 100% In-stream disturbance native vegetation

Wetted width – Deposits silt Flow modification pipe culvert downstream Flow – Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier pipe culvert downstream Channel width 6 m

Comments: Site was comprised of a deep meandering channel through a highly disturbed eucalypt forest. Site was dry at the time of the survey but showed evidence of periodic flows after significant rainfall, with patches of erosion on the banks. A three-pipe culvert is present at the downstream end of the site. Lignum was observed on the dry bed and bank. – site was dry

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D5 frc environmental

Site NR1 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Nogoa River Water Type perennial watercourse

Date surveyed 7 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 66

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 8 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity moderate Riparian width 20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 10% Habitat present deep and shallow run Disturbance high Bank stability moderate cobble 5% large woody debris Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape low–vertical / concave/convex pebble 0% tree roots Weed species Noogoora burr

Hydrology gravel 5% terrestrial leaves & twigs Mexican poppy

Flow regime perennial sand 10% parthenium

Water depth 0.5 m silt / clay 70% In-stream disturbance sida

Wetted width 10 m Deposits silt Flow modification nil Adjacent land use native vegetation Flow slow–moderate (~0.05 m/s) Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier nil grazing Channel width 35 m

Comments: The site comprised a moderately flowing, mildly sinuous river channel with highly turbid and green water. The site was located at a concrete road bridge, with substrate mostly gravel/boulders at the bridge but silt elsewhere. Riparian vegetation was dominated by trees (eucalypts) with some isolated Lomandra sp., Persicaria sp., lignum and Juncus sp. in the understorey. A ~10 m dry flood channel was also present the right bank upstream of the crossing.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D6 frc environmental

Site NR2 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Nogoa River Water Type perennial watercourse

Date surveyed 7 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 55

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 8 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity moderate Riparian width 20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 0% Habitat present shallow and deep glide Disturbance high Bank stability moderate cobble 0% deep pool Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape moderate– pebble 0% large woody debris Melaleuca vertical / concave/convex

Hydrology gravel 0% filamentous algae Weed species Mexican poppy

Flow regime perennial sand 20% undercut banks castor oil plant

Water depth 0.7 m silt / clay 80% In-stream disturbance sida

Wetted width 10 m Deposits sand / silt Flow modification nil Adjacent land use grazing Flow slow–moderate (~0.3 m/s) Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier nil mining lease Channel width 30 m

Comments: Site is on the Nogoa River main channel at the upstream edge of the Mining Lease boundary. Flow was slow–moderate and maintained by Sunwater at the Fairbairn dam upstream. Banks showed signs of erosion due to access by cattle. Some sand bars are present in the middle of the channel where the water depth decreases. Large woody debris and filamentous algae provide habitat for aquatic fauna. Water was moderately turbid with a green tinge. Four flood channels were present behind the right bank.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D7 frc environmental

Site MP5 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Nogoa River Water Type perennial watercourse

Date surveyed 9 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 88

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 8 Composition bedrock 50% Habitat diversity high Riparian width 20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 0% Habitat present shallow riffle Disturbance moderate Bank stability moderate cobble 15% submerged aquatic plants Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape moderate–steep / convex pebble 5% bedrock and stable Melaleuca substrate

Hydrology gravel 5% deep run Weed species Parkinsonia

Flow regime perennial sand 15% large woody debris Parthenium

Water depth 0.9 m (raised by 0.5 m to 1.4 m silt / clay 10% In-stream disturbance Adjacent land use grazing overnight)

Wetted width 12 m Deposits sand and some silt Flow modification pipe culvert upstream mining lease Flow moderate (~0.05 m/s) Bed stability bed stable Waterway barrier pipe culvert upstream Channel width 30 m

Comments: Site is located on the main channel of the Nogoa River at the downstream edge of the mining lease. The water was shallow with riffle habitat present on the 8th of November, however the water level increased overnight by 0.5 m. Curly pondweed (Potamogeton crispus) was present in dense mats throughout the site where bedrock was not present. The banks showed signs of erosion where riparian vegetation was predominantly grasses. Water was slightly turbid with a green algal tinge.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D8 frc environmental

Site MP6 Region Mackenzie River Sub-Basin

Watercourse Mackenzie River Water Type perennial watercourse

Date surveyed 4 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 98

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 8 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity moderate–high Riparian width 20 m Pattern braided boulder 15% Habitat present shallow riffle Disturbance moderate Bank stability moderate cobble 10% deep run Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape moderate–steep / concave pebble 10% rocky substrate Melaleuca

Hydrology gravel 50% trailing bank vegetation Casuarina

Flow regime perennial sand 5% large woody debris Weed species grasses

Water depth 0.5 m silt / clay 10% In-stream disturbance herbaceous weeds

Wetted width 30 m Deposits silt Flow modification public made dam Adjacent land use recreational access Flow moderate (~0.05 m/s) Bed stability bed stable Waterway barrier nil grazing Channel width 50 m

Comments: Site is a wide shallow moderately flowing braided section of the Mackenzie River downstream of the confluence of the Nogoa River and Comet River. The site is intersected by a road bridge with a public made dam formed on the right bank channel upstream of the bridge and riffles present in all other channels. Substrate is comprised of gravel and other rocky substrate, with some isolated patches of silt/clay and sand. Groundstorey riparian vegetation is moderately reduced due to cattle grazing. Riparian vegetation is composed mostly of Casuarina and Melaleuca with a lignum and Lomandra sp. understorey.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D9 frc environmental

Site UNC2 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse unnamed tributary of Nogoa River Water Type perennial waterbody with restricted flow

Date surveyed 9 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 40

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 2 Composition bedrock 0% Habitat diversity Low Riparian width 20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 0% Habitat present shallow pool Disturbance high Bank stability low cobble 0% large woody debris Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape low–moderate / concave pebble 0% Weed species Parkinsonia

Hydrology gravel 0% Adjacent land use heavy agriculture

Flow regime intermediate sand 0%

Water depth 0.5 m silt / clay 100% In-stream disturbance

Wetted width 10 m Deposits silt Flow modification bunded road crossings upstream and downstream Flow not flowing Bed stability severe aggradation Waterway barrier bunded road crossings upstream and downstream Channel width 25 m

Comments: The site is comprised of a large isolated pool separated by bunded road crossings upstream and downstream of the site. Water was turbid and bed and banks composed of uncompacted silt and clay. Water is likely used for adjacent agricultural practices. Some large woody debris was present and may provide habitat for aquatic fauna.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D10 frc environmental

Site MP2 Region Nogoa River Sub-Basin

Watercourse anabranch of Nogoa River Water Type perennial waterbody

Date surveyed 8 November 2019 Habitat Bioassessment Score 63

Upstream View Downstream View

Channel Morphology Substrate Aquatic Habitat Riparian Zone

Stream order 8 Composition cement 8% Habitat diversity moderate Riparian width 20 m Pattern mildly sinuous boulder 15% Habitat present deep pool Disturbance high Bank stability moderate cobble 2% rock faces Dominant species eucalypt Bank shape steep / concave/convex pebble 3% large woody debris Melaleuca

Hydrology gravel 2% terrestrial leaves & twigs Weed species grasses

Flow regime perennial Sand 10% Parkinsonia

Water depth 0.8 m silt / clay 60% In-stream disturbance Adjacent land use grazing

Wetted width 8 m Deposits silt Flow modification pipe culvert crossing at site mining lease Flow slow (<0.01 m/s) Bed stability moderate aggradation Waterway barrier pipe culvert crossing at site Channel width 25 m

Comments: The site is on the southern anabranch of the Nogoa River that forms the ‘island’ within the mining lease. The site is intersected by a ~20 pipe culvert crossing, with the river slightly flowing through the bottom level of pipe culverts. The water was turbid with a green algal tinge. Some areas of the banks were impacted by cattle access with limited vegetation cover and evidence of erosion. Some Lomandra sp., Persicaria sp., Cyperus sp. and lignum was recorded on the banks but no aquatic plants were in the water.

Ensham Life of Mine Extension Project: Aquatic Ecology Assessment D11