Ecological Assessment

APPENDIX 5

Ecological Assessment

Orica Australia Pty Ltd

Ecological Assessment – Proposed Ammonium Nitrate Emulsion Production Facility, and Continued Operation of Orica Mining Services Technology Centre, Richmond Vale, NSW

December 2009

Ecological Assessment – Proposed Ammonium Nitrate Emulsion Production Facility, and Continued Operation of Orica Mining Services Technology Centre, Richmond Vale, NSW

Prepared by

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited

on behalf of

Orica Australia Pty Ltd

Project Director: Michelle Kirkman

Project Manager: Emma Lodge

Report No. 2586/R03/Final Date: December 2009

2/20 The Boulevarde PO Box 838 Toronto NSW 2283

Ph: 02 4950 5322 Fax: 02 4950 5737 Email: [email protected] Website: www.umwelt.com.au

Ecological Assessment Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ...... 1.1

1.1 Study Area and Description of Proposed Activity ...... 1.1 1.2 Objectives of Assessment ...... 1.2 1.3 Relevant Legislation ...... 1.2

2.0 Methods ...... 2.1

2.1 Literature Review ...... 2.1 2.1.1 Mitchell McCotter (1990) Environmental Impact Statement ...... 2.2 2.1.2 EDAW (1992) Technology Park Bushland Management Plan ...... 2.3 2.2 Flora Survey ...... 2.4 2.2.1 General Flora Survey ...... 2.4 2.2.2 Targeted Threatened Flora Species Searches ...... 2.4 2.3 Fauna Survey ...... 2.5 2.3.1 Diurnal Birds ...... 2.5 2.3.2 Diurnal Reptiles and Amphibians ...... 2.6 2.3.3 Nocturnal Mammals, Birds, Amphibians and Reptiles ...... 2.6 2.3.4 Habitat Assessment ...... 2.7 2.4 Vegetation Mapping ...... 2.7

3.0 Results ...... 3.1

3.1 Floristics ...... 3.1 3.1.1 General Flora ...... 3.1 3.1.2 Threatened Flora ...... 3.2 3.1.3 Rare or Threatened Australian Plants ...... 3.2 3.2 Vegetation Communities ...... 3.2 3.2.1 Endangered Ecological Communities ...... 3.3 3.3 Critical Habitat ...... 3.3 3.4 Endangered Populations ...... 3.3 3.5 Fauna Habitat ...... 3.4 3.6 Fauna Species ...... 3.4 3.6.1 Nocturnal and Diurnal Birds...... 3.4 3.6.2 Nocturnal and Diurnal Mammals ...... 3.5 3.6.3 Reptiles and Amphibians ...... 3.5 3.6.4 Threatened Fauna ...... 3.5

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 i Ecological Assessment Table of Contents

4.0 Impact Assessment ...... 4.1

4.1 NSW Legislative Considerations ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Fisheries Management Act 1994 ...... 4.2 4.1.2 State Environmental Planning Policies ...... 4.2 4.2 Key Threatening Processes ...... 4.3 4.3 Commonwealth Legislative Considerations ...... 4.4

5.0 Ecological Impact Avoidance and Mitigation ...... 5.1

6.0 Biodiversity Offsets ...... 6.1

6.1 Background ...... 6.1 6.2 Impacts Requiring Offsetting ...... 6.1 6.3 Proposed On-site Biodiversity Offset Area ...... 6.2 6.3.1 Existing Vegetation ...... 6.2 6.3.2 Value to Threatened Species ...... 6.2 6.3.3 Connectivity Values ...... 6.3 6.3.4 Management of Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area ...... 6.4 6.4 Alternatives to an Onsite Offset Area ...... 6.4 6.4.1 BioBanking ...... 6.4 6.4.2 Environmental Contributions ...... 6.5 6.4.3 Off-Site Offsetting Options ...... 6.5

7.0 Conclusions ...... 7.1

8.0 References ...... 8.1

FIGURES

1.1 Locality Plan ...... 1.1

1.2 Existing Operations, Proposed ANE Production Facility and Access Road ...... 1.1

1.3 Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area ...... 1.2

2.1 Survey Locations in Disturbance Footprint Area ...... 2.1

2.2 Survey Locations for Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area ...... 2.1

3.1 Vegetation Communities Recorded in Disturbance Footprint Area ...... 3.1

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 ii Ecological Assessment Table of Contents

3.2 Vegetation Communities Recorded in the Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area ...... 3.1

3.3 Threatened Species Recorded in Disturbance Footprint Area ...... 3.2

3.4 Threatened Species Recorded during Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area Surveys ...... 3.5

APPENDICES

A Ecological Values Assessment

B Flora Species List

C Fauna Species List

D Test for Ecological Significance under Part 3a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

E Assessment of Significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 iii Ecological Assessment Introduction

1.0 Introduction

Orica is seeking to obtain a new project approval for the existing operations at the Technology Centre and a proposed Ammonium Nitrate Emulsion (ANE) Production Facility (the Project). Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (Umwelt) has been commissioned by Orica to undertake an ecological survey and assessment of a proposed ANE Production Facility at Orica’s Mining Services Technology Centre (Technology Centre) at Richmond Vale in NSW The location of the Technology Centre is illustrated in Figure 1.1.

The ecological survey and assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act), the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act), the Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

1.1 Study Area and Description of Proposed Activity

The study area is defined as the Orica Technology Centre and is located within the Cessnock local government area (LGA). The land surrounding the Technology Centre is naturally vegetated and forms part of a large continuous area of forest that connects to the Sugarloaf State Conservation Area (SCA) to the south. There are several fire trails through the forest that provide access to the study area. The surrounding area encompasses a variety of land use activities including agriculture, bush land, rural residential area, rural industrial activities and transport corridors. Tasman Underground Mine is located approximately 2.5 kilometres to the south-east of the study area.

The disturbance footprint for the ecological assessment includes the proposed route of the access road, the Quarry Services Depot access road and the site of the proposed ANE Production Facility (refer to Figure 1.2). The existing operations at the Technology Centre have resulted in approximately 8 hectares of native vegetation being cleared; the proposed ANE Production Facility will result in an additional 8 hectares of vegetation clearance. The continuation of the existing operations at the Technology Centre has not been included in the disturbance footprint for this Project, as it is not proposed to modify the existing operations and no further ground disturbance or other impacts on flora or fauna are expected to result from the existing operations.

The disturbance footprint for the proposed ANE Production Facility, including the associated access road and bushfire buffer, is approximately 130 metres by 124 metres and will occupy an area of approximately 8 hectares. The proposed ANE Production Facility will include:

• chemical, fuel and product storage tanks;

• an ANE manufacturing plant;

• truck weighing, loading and unloading facilities;

• utilities including hot water, cooling water, chilled water and compressed air systems, electricity distribution cables and transformer;

• stormwater/spill management structures; and

• an office, control room, switch room, quality control laboratory and mixing laboratory.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 1.1

Ecological Assessment Introduction

The proposed ANE Production Facility will be surrounded by a 30 metre bushfire buffer zone (included within the disturbance footprint), and will be connected to Echidna Drive via a new access road approximately 13 metres wide including batters and approximately 1 kilometre long (Figure 1.2). An additional smaller minor access road will connect the proposed ANE Production Facility and access road to the existing Quarry Services Depot. The construction of the proposed ANE Production Facility and Quarry Services Depot access roads with the proposed ANE Production Facility will require clearing of vegetation within the study area, as illustrated in Figure 1.2.

Construction of the proposed ANE Production Facility and access roads would result in the clearing of approximately 8 hectares of native vegetation. The loss of vegetation will result a loss of fauna habitat features such as hollow bearing trees and woody debris. Security fencing around the facility will be installed. Existing fauna-friendly perimeter fencing of the Technology Centre boundary will remain in place, and no new fencing will be erected along the access roads. The construction of the proposed ANE Production Facility is expected to take approximately 12 months to complete.

As a result of the Project, vegetation, fauna habitat and threatened species that will be removed or impacted. This ecological assessment has taken into account the provision of appropriate offsets for the expected impact on threatened species, endangered populations, endangered ecological communities (EECs), or their habitats. The location of the proposed biodiversity offset area is displayed in Figure 1.3.

1.2 Objectives of Assessment

The objectives of the ecological survey and assessment are to:

• document the terrestrial flora species, vegetation communities and fauna habitats occurring within and adjacent to the subject site;

• identify the presence of, or potential presence of, threatened species, endangered populations or threatened ecological communities (TECs) listed under the relevant NSW and Commonwealth legislation;

• undertake an assessment of the significance of likely impacts from the Project on any threatened species, populations and ecological communities using the assessment criteria specified in the EP&A Act and EPBC Act;

• develop mitigation measures to ensure that any ecological impacts associated with the development are minimised; and

• provide appropriate offsets for the predicted impacts of the Project, to address impacts on the ecological features of the study area.

1.3 Relevant Legislation

The ecological survey and assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the NSW EP&A Act, the NSW TSC Act, the NSW FM Act and the Commonwealth EPBC Act.

Under Part 5A of the EP&A Act, an assessment of significance is required. An assessment of significance is applied to species, populations and ecological communities listed on Schedules 1, 1A and 2 of the TSC Act and Schedules 4, 4a and 5 of the FM Act. This project

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 1.2

Ecological Assessment Introduction

falls under Part 3A of the EP&A Act, and Parts 4 and 5 do not apply. Part 3A of the EP&A Act requires a Test for Ecological Significance relating to the potential impacts of the Project on listed threatened species, endangered populations or EECs. As a formal assessment method format is yet to be established by the relevant government authorities, an assessment that applies the key principles of the Part 5A assessment is used here to assess the potential for the Project to impact on threatened species, endangered populations or EECs within the study area. The Test for Ecological Significance used here focuses on the potential impact of the Project at a regional level.

The TSC Act provides for the conservation of threatened species, populations and ecological communities of animals and plants, and does not generally apply to fish. The Act also provides for habitats that are critical to the survival of those identified threatened species, populations and ecological communities. Identified species, populations, ecological communities and key threatening processes are listed in the Schedules to the Act. Provision is made for the preparation of recovery plans for listed threatened species, populations and ecological communities and threat abatement plans to manage key threatening processes. The Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) has responsibilities under the TSC Act.

The primary Act governing the management of fish and their habitat in NSW is the FM Act. The aim of the FM Act is to conserve threatened species, populations and ecological communities of fish and marine vegetation. The Department of Industry and Investment (DII) administers the FM Act, except for the parts of the Act that deal with the protection of aquatic habitats through creation and management of aquatic reserves, which is administered by DECCW.

Under the Commonwealth EPBC Act, approval of the Commonwealth Minister for the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) is required for any action that may have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance (NES). These matters are:

• listed threatened species and communities;

• migratory species protected under international agreements;

• Ramsar wetlands of international importance;

• the Commonwealth marine environment;

• World Heritage properties;

• National Heritage places; and

• nuclear actions.

The EPBC Act lists criteria that are used to determine whether an action is likely to have a significant impact on matters of NES. These criteria require consideration at the Development Application stage.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 1.3 Ecological Assessment Methods

2.0 Methods

The ecological survey was generally undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the DECCW’s Draft Threatened Biodiversity and Assessment Guidelines for Development and Activities (November 2004) and the Flora and Fauna Survey Guidelines: Lower Hunter Central Coast Region (2002).

The following tasks were undertaken during the assessment:

• a search of relevant ecological databases, including the DECCW Atlas of NSW Wildlife, and the DEWHA Protected Matters Database;

• a review of available ecological reports previously prepared for the local area, and of unpublished information and expert knowledge of the area;

• field surveys to confirm plant species, vegetation communities, fauna habitats and ecological values in the disturbance footprint and to mark habitat trees;

• an assessment of potential impacts; and

• development of an appropriate biodiversity offset package to address identified impacts, based on additional field survey.

The field surveys completed for the Project involved impact-based surveys of the disturbance footprint, as well as ground-truthing surveys of the proposed biodiversity offset area.

The surveys of the disturbance footprint were undertaken during the day on 3 December 2008 (from 10.00 am to 6.00 pm), during two nights on 3 December and 4 December (from 7.30 pm to 10.00 pm). Weather conditions at those times were clear, still and a temperature range from 15 to 30 degrees Celsius. The December 2008 Survey Area encompassed the disturbance footprint, as well as a 30 metre buffer around it (refer to Figure 2.1).

In June 2009 Orica altered the design proposed for the ANE facility, and a second round of survey was undertaken in July 2009 to account for the additional areas that had not previously been surveyed. Surveys were undertaken during the day on 2 July (from 12.00 pm to 5.00 pm) and 3 July (from 9.00 am to 3.00 pm), and during one night on 2 July (from 5.00 pm to 7.00 pm). Weather conditions at those times were clear with a light breeze and a temperature range from 15 to 20 degrees Celsius. Two Umwelt ecologists carried out the surveys. The July 2009 Survey Area encompasses the revised disturbance footprint, as well as a 10 metre buffer surrounding it.

In addition to surveys of the disturbance footprint for the Project, field surveys were completed within the proposed biodiversity offset area, to ground-truth existing regional vegetation mapping (NPWS 2000; House 2003) and to assess the existing habitat value to threatened species (see Figure 2.2). Surveys were completed on 30 September, 1 October and 7 October 2009.

2.1 Literature Review

The key ecological documents reviewed as part of this process were the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) completed by Mitchell McCotter in 1990 and the ensuing Technology Park Bushland Management Plan (EDAW 1992). The key ecological outcomes of each of these reports are discussed in the relevant sections below.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.1

Ecological Assessment Methods

2.1.1 Mitchell McCotter (1990) Environmental Impact Statement

This document addresses the original development application for the Mining Services Technology Park, and includes an assessment of the potential biological and ecological impacts of the proposal. A flora and fauna survey was completed in the site by Kevin Mills and Associates in 1990 (as reported in EDAW 1992). The scope of this survey was to:

• describe the vegetation and fauna of the site;

• compile a list of plant species and identify vegetation community types;

• compile a list of fauna species and identify wildlife corridors;

• locate, describe and assess any features of particular conservation importance;

• provide information on which to formulate landscape and bushland management plans; and

• make recommendations to minimise the impact of the proposal on the local flora and fauna.

Surveys were completed by foot over two days, and records made of flora and fauna species (or evidence thereof) encountered, as well as the delineation of vegetation communities and records of any other relevant natural features encountered. Fauna survey effort involved the documentation of all species encountered during field surveys, searches for evidence of presence (such as diggings, scats and footprints), some small mammal trapping, spotlighting and herpetofauna habitat searches.

A total of 181 plant species was recorded during these surveys, 91 per cent of which were native. No threatened plant species (as subsequently listed under the TSC Act) were recorded as part of this survey. Three vegetation communities were identified and mapped (on the basis of their structural and floristic characteristics), being:

• forest red gum open forest;

• ironbark – grey gum woodland/open forest; and

• smooth-barked apple – red bloodwood woodland.

None of these communities were recognised (at the time) as being of particular conservation significance, however it was noted that the forest red gum community was less common than the other communities as it:

‘is naturally less extensive and has often been cleared for agricultural pursuits because it occurs on the more fertile soils.’

The field surveys also recorded 74 fauna species within, or near to, the site. This list includes the following species, which have subsequently been listed as threatened under the schedules of the TSC Act:

• gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum);

• little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla);

• varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera); and

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.2 Ecological Assessment Methods

• brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae).

The threatened turquoise parrot (Neophema pulchella) was identified as a species ‘known or strongly suspected to occur on the site’ (Mitchell McCotter 1990), however it had not been recorded.

Two main fauna habitat types were identified, these being gully habitats (containing the forest red gum community) and the woodland/open forest habitats along the ridges and slopes. The site was also identified as being:

‘on the western edge of a broader corridor of bushland, extending northwards into the Hunter Valley from extensive State Forests south of Mt Sugarloaf. Although the site appears not to be at a critical location in the corridor it is, nonetheless, part of the wildlife corridor system of the district.’

As a result of this corridor function, the key recommendation of the report was that development:

• does not impinge on the E. tereticornis forest along Palmers Creek; and

• does not involve the introduction of barriers to the movement of fauna on the site, such as unnecessary clearing of the vegetation and the erection of unnecessary or extensive fencing.

2.1.2 EDAW (1992) Technology Park Bushland Management Plan

This Bushland Management Plan (BMP) was prepared in response to the requirements of the EIS (Mitchell McCotter 1990), and aimed to:

‘identify the values of the site as part of a major corridor and plan for their preservation.’

Additional ecological field surveys were completed for this BMP, and these resulted in the identification of:

• five vegetation communities, namely:

ƒ riparian open forest; ƒ woodland/forest on floodplains and gently undulating slopes; ƒ woodland on undulating slopes; ƒ woodland on floodplain and gently undulating slopes; and ƒ floodplain tall open forest;

• no threatened flora species, or listed rare or threatened Australian plants (ROTAPs) (as per Briggs and Leigh (1996);

• three threatened fauna species, being:

ƒ little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla); ƒ yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis); and ƒ yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris).

Each of these issues is considered further within this Ecological Assessment.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.3 Ecological Assessment Methods

2.2 Flora Survey

The following sections describe the methods employed for the flora component of the Project ecological assessment, during the surveys of the disturbance footprint (Figure 2.1) and the proposed biodiversity offset area (Figure 2.2).

The aims of the flora field survey were to:

• record the flora species diversity present within the study area, with particular emphasis on the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area;

• identify and characterise the different vegetation communities present within the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area;

• determine if any threatened flora species or endangered ecological communities are present or have potential to occur within the broader study area; and

• accrue sufficient information to enable an accurate assessment of the impacts of the Project on the ecological values of the proposed disturbance area and to determine if the proposed biodiversity offset area would appropriately offset the residual impact on flora species and vegetation communities.

2.2.1 General Flora Survey

The December 2008 and July 2009 surveys traversed the proposed disturbance footprint by foot, with an aim to survey 100 per cent of the two areas. The locations of significant species were marked using a handheld global positioning system (GPS). Vegetation communities, localised variations in topography and transitions between vegetation communities were noted. Two vegetation quadrats (20 metres x 20 metres) were established (locations are shown on Figure 2.1) and vascular plant species detected on the site were recorded.

The surveys of the proposed biodiversity offset area involved the same methodology outline above and included vegetation community mapping and the establishment of two vegetation quadrats (Figure 2.2).

All vascular plants recorded or collected were identified using keys and nomenclature in Harden (1992, 1993, 2000 & 2002) and Wheeler et al. (2002). Specimens that could not be identified or that were identified as significant were verified by the Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney.

Common names used follow Harden (1992, 1993, 2000 & 2002) where available, and draw on other sources such as local names where these references do not provide common names.

2.2.2 Targeted Threatened Flora Species Searches

Several threatened flora species are known to occur in the local area, and the following were targeted during surveys of the disturbance footprint, and the proposed biodiversity offset area:

• Tetratheca juncea;

• Rutidosis heterogama;

• leafless tongue-orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana);

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.4 Ecological Assessment Methods

• Acacia bynoeana;

• Callistemon linearifolius; and

• Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora.

A full list of the threatened flora species that potentially occur in the study area according to a search of the relevant ecological databases is given in Appendix A.

2.3 Fauna Survey

The following sections document the methods employed for the fauna component of the Project ecological assessment, during the surveys of the disturbance footprint (Figure 2.1) and the proposed biodiversity offset area (Figure 2.2).

Particular emphasis was placed on investigating the disturbance footprint, as this is where the potential impacts from the Project will be concentrated. Fauna surveys were also completed in the proposed biodiversity offset area. Fauna present in the broader study area were also recorded and form part of the impact assessment.

The aims of the fauna field survey were to:

• record the fauna species diversity present within the study area, with particular emphasis on the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area;

• identify and characterise the different habitat types present within the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area, and determine the likely fauna assemblage present (given that not all of the species present are likely to have been recorded during the fauna survey);

• determine if any threatened fauna species or endangered populations are present or have potential to occur within the broader study area; and

• accrue sufficient information to enable an accurate assessment of the impacts of the Project on the ecological values of the proposed disturbance area and to determine if the proposed biodiversity offset area would appropriately offset the residual impact on fauna species and their habitat.

A full list of the threatened fauna species potentially occurring in the region according to searches of relevant databases is given in Appendix A.

2.3.1 Diurnal Birds

The diurnal bird survey consisted of a slow walking transect the length of the disturbance footprint on 3 December 2008 and a 20 minute, 2 hectare bird survey on 2 July. Bird surveys were also completed within the proposed biodiversity offset area, involving meandering surveys throughout the offset area. Species were identified from characteristic calls and by observation, using 10 x 40 binoculars. Opportunistic observations of bird species were also recorded during all field surveys undertaken on 3 and 4 December 2008 and 2 and 3 July 2009.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.5 Ecological Assessment Methods

2.3.2 Diurnal Reptiles and Amphibians

A reptile search was undertaken in the disturbance footprint during the day on 3 December 2008 by upturning logs, rocks and litter debris for at least two hours between 1.00 pm and 3.00 pm. Opportunistic habitat searches were completed within the proposed biodiversity offset area. Calling amphibians were identified and recorded opportunistically during the day.

2.3.3 Nocturnal Mammals, Birds, Amphibians and Reptiles

The three nocturnal fauna surveys were undertaken over three nights on 3 and 4 December 2008 and 2 July 2009. The nocturnal surveys of the proposed biodiversity offset area included two spotlighting and call playback points, surveyed over two nights. Spotlight searches for mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians were undertaken using two 50 watt Lightforce spotlights for 0.5 hours throughout the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area by two ecologists on each night. An ephemeral drainage line was identified in the southern boundary of the study area providing valuable resources for all fauna groups, particularly amphibians.

Call playback techniques were used each night. Each call was played for a minimum of four minutes followed by a listening period of two minutes before the beginning of the next species call. Calls were broadcast using a 10 watt directional loud hailer. The following species were targeted with the call playback technique:

• yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis);

• koala (Phascolarctos cinereus);

• squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis);

• powerful owl (Ninox strenua);

• sooty owl (Tyto tenebricosa); and

• masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae).

Micro-bats were recorded using two Anabat echolocation detectors. One Anabat was placed on the proposed access road for two nights and a second Anabat was placed near the proposed ANE Production Facility (refer to Figure 2.1). Additionally, Anabats were used in two locations within the proposed biodiversity offset area, and were activated for two full nights of survey. Recorded bat calls were analysed by Fly By Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd. The echolocation calls of species were identified to one of three levels of confidence:

• definite;

• probable; and

• possible.

All three levels of identification confidence were treated as positive identifications for the purposes of this assessment.

Hair funnels were used to target terrestrial and arboreal mammals by collecting samples of hair on a sticky wafer attached to the roof of a baited funnel. The funnel dimensions are 140 millimetres at the entry and 40 millimetres at the baited end. This range in dimensions allows large and small mammals to enter the funnels thereby collecting hair samples on the

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.6 Ecological Assessment Methods

sticky wafer. Identification of species from hair samples is undertaken by Barbara Triggs of ‘Dead Finish.’.

Hair funnels were placed along a 150 metre transect through the two vegetation types in the disturbance footprint (refer to Figure 2.1). This part of the disturbance footprint was determined to have the highest quality habitat and be the most structurally and biologically diverse and therefore most likely to provide mammal results. The transect site represents the entire study area as the study area is considered to contain one stratification unit. The transect contained 20 terrestrial and 10 arboreal hair funnels. Half the terrestrial hair funnels were baited with meat and the other half, and the arboreal hair funnels were baited with a mix of honey, oats and peanut butter. A concentrated honey-water mixture was sprayed at the entry of the hair funnel to further attract animals to the funnels. The hair funnels remained out for six nights, resulting in a survey effort of 180 trap nights.

2.3.4 Habitat Assessment

Two habitat surveys were completed within the disturbance footprint (Figure 2.1), as well as a further two in the proposed biodiversity offset area (Figure 2.2). These assessed the quality of the potential habitat and resources for fauna, including threatened species.

The fauna habitat survey specifically targeted the presence of the following features:

• hollow-bearing trees and stags;

• fallen timber/logs;

• ground cover of rock outcrops;

• feed tree species; and

• wet areas and/or water bodies.

On 3 July 2009, all habitat trees and stags within the disturbance footprint were marked with yellow flagging tape and pink paint (with the letter ‘H’). Habitat trees are those that contain hollows, substantial loose bark, nests or drays.

2.4 Vegetation Mapping

The vegetation communities of the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area were mapped using aerial photography, published regional vegetation mapping (NPWS 2000; House 2003) and the results from the flora survey. Definitions of the EECs are from the final determinations from the Scientific Committee (DECC 2008).

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 2.7 Ecological Assessment Results

3.0 Results

3.1 Floristics

3.1.1 General Flora

The vegetation of the disturbance footprint and proposed biodiversity offset area is dominated by native species. A total of 243 plant species have been identified within the study area to date by Umwelt, Mitchell McCotter (1990) and EDAW (1992) (each reporting on a different survey area, although all fall within the study area boundary). This includes 22 introduced species, comprising approximately 9 per cent of the species recorded. A list of all plant species recorded is provided in Appendix B.

The disturbance footprint contains a gradient of vegetation types within the ecological communities known as Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest and a small area of Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland (Figure 3.1).

Within the Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest, slight differences in the dominant tree species were seen with changes in topography and soil type. Dominant trees were spotted gum (Corymbia maculata), broad-leaved ironbark (Eucalyptus fibrosa), grey gum (Eucalyptus punctata) and smooth-barked apple (Angophora costata). There was a shrubby understory dominated by native blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa subsp. spinosa), which varied in density. The groundcover was dominated by native forbs and grasses.

The small area (0.1 hectare) of Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland was dominated by smooth-barked apple (Angophora costata) and brown stringybark (E. capitellata). Other species included grey gum (E. punctata), spotted gum (Corymbia maculata) and red bloodwood (Corymbia gummifera). There was a dense shrubby understorey of (Leptospermum polygalifolium), Banksia spinulosa, and Melaleuca sieberi. The groundcover was dominated by native species such as Austrodanthonia spp. and Entolasia stricta.

The vegetation of the proposed biodiversity offset area (Figure 3.2) was broadly similar to that observed within the disturbance footprint, with the exception of an area of River-flat Eucalypt Forest identified along the western half of the proposed biodiversity offset area. This community is dominated by forest red gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis), rough-barked apple (Angophora floribunda) and narrow-leaved ironbark (E. crebra) in the canopy. A dense mid-storey (up to 8 metres in height) is dominated by Melaleuca nodosa, green wattle (Acacia irrorata subsp. irrorata), native blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa subsp. spinosa) and corkwood (Duboisia myoporoides). The understorey is dominated by large mock-olive (Notelaea longifolia), Melaleuca linariifolia, native blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa subsp. spinosa), coffee bush (Breynia oblongifolia) and orange bark (Maytenus silvestris).

The ground layer is dominated by weeping grass (Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides), basket grass (Oplismenus aemulus), tall saw-sedge (Gahnia clarkei), kidney weed (Dichondra repens) and blady grass (Imperata cylindrica var. major).

The proposed biodiversity offset area comprises the following vegetation communities:

• River-flat Eucalypt Forest – 7.5 hectares;

• Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest – 2.5 hectares; and

• Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland – 7.0 hectares.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.1

Ecological Assessment Results

3.1.2 Threatened Flora

Threatened plant species potentially occurring in the broader study area according to the literature review and expert knowledge of the area include:

• Tetratheca juncea;

• Rutidosis heterogama;

• leafless tongue-orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana);

• Acacia bynoeana;

• Callistemon linearifolius; and

• small-flower grevillea (Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora).

During the field survey, Tetratheca juncea was confirmed as being present within the disturbance footprint. This species is listed as vulnerable under both the TSC Act and EPBC Act. The location of the population of Tetratheca juncea is within the footprint of the ANE Production Facility and the surrounding 30 metre bushfire buffer zone (see Figure 3.3). There were approximately 50-100 individual plants occurring within the area shown.

Small-flower grevillea (Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora) was confirmed as present within the disturbance footprint. This species is listed as vulnerable under both the TSC Act and EPBC Act. The location of the population of Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora is within the footprint of the access road to the ANE Facility near the intersection with Echidna Drive (see Figure 3.3). There were approximately 300 stems counted within the area surveyed. This number does not necessarily represent the number of individual plants, as the species is known to shoot from rhizomes.

3.1.3 Rare or Threatened Australian Plants

Briggs and Leigh (1996) list species in Australia regarded to be a ‘Rare or Threatened Australian Plant’ (ROTAP). ROTAP species have no legal status and are not included in the impact assessment. Callistemon acuminatus is a ROTAP known to occur in the region and possibly occurs in the study area. A Callistemon individual was found, but as it was a juvenile, the species could not be confirmed. The plant could have been either Callistemon acuminatus or C. salignus. Callistemon salignus is not a ROTAP. The location of the plant is near the proposed access road to the Quarry Services Depot. It is likely that the plant will be affected by the proposed access road, however, the impact to the species will not be significant and is not considered further.

3.2 Vegetation Communities

Three vegetation communities occur in the region of the study area according to broad vegetation mapping (NPWS 2000, House 2003), these being: Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest; Alluvial Tall Moist Forest; and Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland. The survey confirmed that Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest and Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland occurs within the disturbance footprint. Surveys of the proposed biodiversity offset area confirmed the presence of Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest and Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland, however the mapped Alluvial Tall Moist Forest was determined to be River-flat Eucalypt Forest (Figure 3.2).

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.2

Ecological Assessment Results

3.2.1 Endangered Ecological Communities

Much of the vegetation of the disturbance footprint is mapped as the EEC Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest (NPWS 2000, House 2003) and the field survey confirmed this classification. Corymbia maculata and Eucalyptus fibrosa are co-dominant, with Eucalyptus punctata, Angophora costata, Corymbia gummifera and Eucalyptus acmenoides also present in the canopy layer. The shrub layer contains Bursaria spinosa subsp. spinosa and Acacia stricta, both species being diagnostic of the community. The ground layer contains the diagnostic species Goodenia rotundifolia, Entolasia stricta, Themeda australis and Panicum sp., as well as common species such as Lomandra multiflora subsp. multiflora, Aristida sp., Imperata cylindrica var. major and Xanthorrhoea sp. The vegetation of the disturbance footprint conforms to the NSW Scientific Committee final determination for the EEC.

The Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest is listed as an EEC under the TSC Act. Its distribution is restricted to a range of approximately 65 kilometres by 35 kilometres centred on the Cessnock-Beresfield area in the central and lower Hunter Valley and the remaining core is fragmented (Bell and Driscoll 2008). Remnants occur within the LGAs of Cessnock, Maitland, Singleton, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle, Port Stephens and Dungog, but may also occur elsewhere within the Sydney Basin bioregion.

Within the proposed biodiversity offset area, 7.5 hectares of River-flat Eucalypt Forest has been mapped, primarily located within and adjacent to the floodplain of the drainage line that runs along the western boundary of the study area. This vegetation is commensurate with the River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains EEC listed under the TSC Act. This EEC occurs in a number of LGAs, with some of the closest known occurrences being from Port Stephens, Maitland, Singleton, Cessnock, Lake Macquarie, Wyong, Gosford and Hawkesbury LGAs. The remaining extent of this EEC is likely to represent much less than 30 per cent of its original range. Approximately 2,000 hectares are known to remain in the lower Hunter region (DECCW 2009).

3.3 Critical Habitat

There is currently no critical habitat for flora species, populations or communities in proximity to the study area.

3.4 Endangered Populations

Four endangered populations listed under the TSC Act occur within the region surrounding the study area, being:

• tiger orchid (Cymbidium canaliculatum) within the Hunter Catchment;

• river red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) within the Hunter Catchment;

• weeping myall (Acacia pendula) within the Hunter Catchment; and

• Leionema lamprophyllum subsp. obovatum within the Hunter Catchment.

None of these endangered populations were recorded within the disturbance footprint or proposed biodiversity offset area during surveys, and there is no potential for these to occur.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.3 Ecological Assessment Results

3.5 Fauna Habitat

One broad habitat type was recognised within the study area, being Open Forest habitat. The habitat assessments revealed that the disturbance footprint contains high quality habitat for fauna species, including threatened species such as the yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis), powerful owl (Ninox strenua), little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis) and large- footed myotis (Myotis adversus). These species have also been recorded within the proposed biodiversity offset area, which has broadly comparable habitat features as the rest of the study area.

The canopy stratum provides potential perching, foraging and nesting habitat for a wide range of nectarivorous and insectivorous bird species, as well as arboreal mammals and micro-bats. The abundance of naturally occurring tree hollows ranging in size from small to large provides potential for large forest owls to forage or nest within the study area. Within the disturbance footprint recorded hollows occurred in a higher density overall to the proposed biodiversity offset area, which reflects the slightly younger age class of the vegetation within the proposed biodiversity offset area.

The understorey provides a range of habitat throughout the study area. Areas of open understorey provide foraging resources for micro-bats and woodland birds whereas the dense understorey provides refuge and foraging resources for small mammals and birds. The dense ground cover provides valuable foraging resources for macropods and refuge for small mammals, reptiles and amphibians.

An abundance of fallen timber was identified, particularly in the south of the disturbance footprint, which provides valuable refuge for many small mammal, reptile and amphibian species. An ephemeral drainage line was identified in the southern boundary of the disturbance footprint providing valuable resources for all fauna groups, particularly reptiles and amphibians. A small area of rock outcropping was identified in the south-eastern corner of the disturbance footprint. The rocks were of small size and potentially provide habitat for small reptile species.

In summary the quality of fauna habitat is higher at the southern end of the disturbance footprint, indicated by higher ground cover (litter, grasses, rocks) and a higher tree hollow density, stump density and number of standing dead trees. Within the proposed biodiversity offset area, the vegetation appears to be younger, however not significantly so. Hollow density was lower within the proposed biodiversity offset area, however such habitat resources were still present in the smaller size classes.

3.6 Fauna Species

The following sections outline the fauna species recorded during the surveys of the study area. A total of 149 fauna species has been identified within the study area by Umwelt, Mitchell McCotter (1990) and EDAW (1992) (each reporting on a different part of the study area). This includes 96 bird species, 10 amphibians, 6 reptiles and 30 mammals. A list of all fauna species recorded is provided in Appendix C.

3.6.1 Nocturnal and Diurnal Birds

A total of 103 bird species has been recorded during surveys (refer to Appendix C). The species recorded were dominated by typically woodland families such as the cuckoos (Cuculidae – 6 species recorded), honeyeaters (Meliphagidae – 9 species recorded) and pardalotes (Pardalotidae – 7 species recorded). A number of hollow-dependent species were

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.4 Ecological Assessment Results

also recorded, including the threatened brown treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus victoriae), gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum) and powerful owl (Ninox strenua).

3.6.2 Nocturnal and Diurnal Mammals

A total of 30 mammal species has been recorded to date (refer to Appendix C), including the threatened yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis) which has been detected on a number of occasions during nocturnal surveys. .

Thirteen of the mammal species recorded were bats, with 2 megachiropteran and 11 microchiropteran species being recorded.

Six of the mammal species recorded were introduced species.

3.6.3 Reptiles and Amphibians

Ten amphibians have been recorded within the study area, with the Myobatrachidae and Hylidae families being represented by 6 and 4 species respectively. Only 6 reptiles have been recorded, with the eastern water dragon (Physignathus lesueurii lesueurii) and red- bellied black snake (Pseudechis porphyriacus) being recorded on a number of occasions.

3.6.4 Threatened Fauna

The following threatened fauna species (with corresponding TSC listing) have been recorded within the study area (or immediate vicinity) (see Figures 3.3 and 3.4) during field surveys completed by Umwelt in 2009, EDAW in 1992 and Mitchell McCotter in 1990 (refer to Appendices B and C):

• gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum) (Vulnerable);

• little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla) (Vulnerable);

• powerful owl (Ninox strenua) (Vulnerable);

• scarlet robin (Petroica boodang) (Vulnerable – preliminary determination);

• varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera) (Vulnerable – preliminary determination);

• brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae) (Vulnerable);

• yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis) (Vulnerable);

• grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) (Vulnerable, also Vulnerable under EPBC Act);

• little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis) (Vulnerable);

• eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) (Vulnerable);

• large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) (Vulnerable, also Vulnerable under EPBC Act);

• large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus) (Vulnerable); and

• yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris) (Vulnerable).

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.5

Ecological Assessment Results

Of these, the locations of the gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum), little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla), scarlet robin (Petroica boodang), varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera) and brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae) are not known, as they were recorded in Mitchell McCotter (1990) or EDAW (1992), prior to them being listed under the TSC Act, and therefore point records were not displayed in those reports. It is likely, however, that these species would occur widely across the study area.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 3.6 Ecological Assessment Impact Assessment

4.0 Impact Assessment

4.1 NSW Legislative Considerations

A search of the DECCW and DEWHA ecological databases (described in Section 2.0 above) was undertaken prior to the field survey in order to identify threatened fauna species which have potential to occur within the study area and their distribution within the locality.

In total, two threatened plant species (Tetratheca juncea and Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora), two endangered ecological communities (Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest and River-flat Eucalypt Forest), 6 threatened bird species (including 2 preliminarily- listed species) and 7 threatened mammal species have been recorded in the study area. Other threatened species could potentially occur within the survey area given the quality of habitat present. Appendix A lists the range of threatened species, populations and ecological communities potentially at the survey area, the likelihood that they occur in the survey area and the potential for a significant impact from the Project.

For those values where there is potential for a significant impact from the Project, the ecological impact is further assessed by way of a Test for Ecological Significance, as presented in Appendix D. The following EEC and threatened species were assessed:

• Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest

• leafless tongue orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana);

• black-eyed Susan (Tetratheca juncea);

• small-flower grevillea (Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora);

• heath wrinklewort (Rutidosis heterogama);

• netted bottle brush (Callistemon linearifolius);

• glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami);

• gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum);

• little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla);

• powerful owl (Ninox strenua);

• sooty owl (Tyto tenebricosa);

• masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae);

• varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera);

• brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae);

• black-chinned honeyeater (eastern subspecies) (Melithreptus gularis gularis);

• scarlet robin (Petroica boodang);

• yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis);

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 4.1 Ecological Assessment Impact Assessment

• squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis);

• grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus);

• yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris);

• eastern free-tail bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis);

• little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis);

• eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis);

• eastern long-eared bat (SE form) (Nyctophilus timoriensis);

• large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri);

• eastern false pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis);

• large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus); and

• greater broad-nosed bat (Scoteanax rueppellii).

The proposed access road will result in some fragmentation of the habitat within the study area due to clearing within the disturbance footprint and also in the area between the existing access road and the proposed access road. The level of fragmentation created by the vegetation clearing is not expected to have a significant impact on the habitat values of the broader region.

The outcome of the Test for Ecological Significance for the listed threatened flora and fauna, and the Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest community is detailed in Appendix D. The assessment details that there is not likely to be a significantly impact as a result of the Project, providing that appropriate tree-clearing procedures and other relevant mitigation measures are followed.

4.1.1 Fisheries Management Act 1994

The area surrounding the proposed ANE Production Facility is traversed by a number of small creeks, some ephemeral, forming part of the Surveyors Creek catchment. The tributaries flow north to meet Surveyors Creek, which is located on the northern side of George Booth Drive. Surveyors Creek is part of the larger Wallis Creek catchment, which flows into the Hunter River downstream of Maitland.

The Hunter River drainage basin is not known to support any threatened species, populations or ecological communities listed under the FM Act, and therefore this Act is not relevant to this assessment. There is no potential for any threatened species listed under this Act to be affected by the proposed Project.

4.1.2 State Environmental Planning Policies

Cessnock LGA is listed under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 44 – Koala Habitat Protection as requiring consideration for koala habitat protection. Any development which relates to a site which occurs within a SEPP 44 specified LGA and affecting an area of 1 hectare or greater, must be assessed under SEPP 44.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 4.2 Ecological Assessment Impact Assessment

The species grey gum (Eucalyptus punctata) occurs in the study area and is listed in Schedule 1 of SEPP as a koala feed tree species. As the species does not constitute 15 per cent or more of the total number of trees in the upper or lower strata of the tree component of the study area, the area is not considered core koala habitat.

4.2 Key Threatening Processes

A key threatening process (KTP) is defined in the TSC Act as a process that threatens, or could threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological communities.

Something can be a key threatening process if it:

• adversely affects threatened species, populations or ecological communities; or

• could cause species, populations or ecological communities that are not currently threatened to become threatened.

The following TSC Act listed KTPs related to terrestrial ecology are relevant to the Project:

Clearing of Native Vegetation – Loss of vegetation destroys habitat, which causes a loss of biodiversity. Vegetation clearing also results in fragmentation, increased greenhouse gas emissions, increased edge habitat for invasive species, loss of leaf litter and fallen logs, loss of ecological function, and changes to soil biota.

The proposed Project will clear up to 8 hectares of native vegetation. Although habitat will be removed from within the disturbance footprint, it is unlikely that this loss of habitat will contribute to the loss of any species. As discussed in Section 3.5, the proposed access road will fragment the habitat within the study area and increase edge effects by clearing within the disturbance footprint and also the area between the existing access road and the proposed access road. The level of fragmentation and increased edge effects are not expected to have a significant impact on the habitat (see Appendix D).

Loss of Hollow-bearing Trees – Approximately 85 hollow bearing trees supporting a range of hollow sizes are expected to be removed, mainly from the southern section of the disturbance footprint. The KTP lists 40 threatened species reliant on tree hollows, 11 of which potentially occur or do occur in the study area. Potentially-affected species include (but are not limited to): yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis), powerful owl (Ninox strenua), masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), eastern false pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis) and eastern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus timoriensis). An assessment of the impacts of the Project on these species is included in Section 4.1 and Appendix D.

Removal of Dead Wood and Dead Trees – Approximately 20 standing dead trees (stags) are expected to be removed, mainly from the southern section of the disturbance footprint. There is an abundance of woody debris on the ground in various states of decay that would also be removed from the area to be cleared. Fauna that potentially occur in the study area and that are dead-wood dependent include (but are not limited to): common brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula), masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), eastern free-tail bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis), squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) and many invertebrates. An assessment of the impacts of the Project on these species is included in Section 4.1 and Appendix D.

There is also one KTP listed under the EPBC Act which relates to the Project, being Land Clearance. The Project will clear native vegetation (defined as vegetation in which native species constitute more than 70 per cent of the plant cover). The KTP applies when the

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 4.3 Ecological Assessment Impact Assessment

clearing adversely affects two or more listed threatened species or two or more listed threatened ecological communities. In the case of the Project, the land clearing will affect two threatened species listed under the EPBC Act (Tetratheca juncea and Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora); however, the clearing is not expected to adversely affect either species (see Section 5.0). There are no threatened ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act in the disturbance footprint. The land clearing will not likely cause a native species or ecological community to become threatened. Therefore, the EPBC Act KTP does not apply to the proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility.

4.3 Commonwealth Legislative Considerations

A search of the DEWHA Protected Matters Database identified 13 threatened fauna species, 6 threatened flora species and 12 migratory species (listed under the EPBC Act) known to occur or considered likely to occur, on the basis of habitat modelling within a 10 kilometre radius of the study area. One TEC, White Box – Yellow Box – Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland, may occur within the area of the search; however, it is not present in the study area and does not need to be considered further.

The migratory terrestrial and wetland species considered likely to occur within a 10 kilometre radius of the study area are listed in Table 4.1. According to an assessment of fauna habitat present in the disturbance footprint, four species have potential to occur. These species are not likely to use the disturbance footprint for breeding purposes.

Table 4.1 – Migratory Terrestrial and Wetland Species Listed Under the EPBC Act Potentially Occurring Within the Study Area

Scientific Name Common Name Potential to Occur Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle None Hirundapus caudacutus white-throated needletail None Merops ornatus rainbow bee-eater None Monarcha melanopsis black-faced monarch May occur Myiagra cyanoleuca satin flycatcher May occur Anthochaera phrygia regent honeyeater May occur Rhipidura rufifrons rufous fantail May occur Ardea modesta eastern great egret None Ardea ibis cattle egret None Gallinago hardwickii Latham’s snipe None Rostratula australis Australian painted snipe None Apus pacificus fork-tailed swift None

The threatened flora and fauna species listed under the EPBC Act that may occur in the study area are listed in Appendix A. Appendix A assessed the likelihood of these species occurring in the study area and the potential for significant impact from the proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility. Four EPBC Act listed flora species (Tetratheca juncea, Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora, Rutidosis heterogama and Cryptostylis hunteriana) and two threatened fauna species (large-eared pied bat and grey-headed flying fox) are potentially sensitive to the impact from the proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility and therefore an Assessment of Significance under Commonwealth legislation was undertaken (Appendix E). The assessment concluded that the proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility will not have a significant impact on Tetratheca juncea, Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora, Rutidosis heterogama, Cryptostylis hunteriana, large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) or grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus).

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 4.4 Ecological Assessment Ecological Impact Avoidance and Mitigation

5.0 Ecological Impact Avoidance and Mitigation

The loss of approximately 8 hectares of Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest, some Tetratheca juncea individuals and habitat and some Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora individuals and habitat by the proposed ANE Production Facility are assessed as not being significant. Standard mitigation measures that minimise the habitat disturbance outside the disturbance footprint such as sedimentation controls, having the Project site clearly marked and vehicle hygiene should be employed during construction.

In the case that clearing is carried out according to the following tree clearing procedures and the impact is contained within the development footprint, the impacts to hollow-dependent fauna occurring in the disturbance footprint are not expected to be significant as assessed under the relevant legislation. The following mitigation measures will minimise the potential for impact as a result of clearing native vegetation and hollow-bearing trees:

• Utility easements needing to be created should, where possible, follow existing fire trails/roads and other cleared areas to minimise vegetation clearing.

• Prior to any clearing operations being undertaken the limits of the clearing activities will be clearly marked, defined, and communicated to all relevant personnel.

• Where possible, undertake clearing during the months of March to August (inclusive) to avoid the breeding and nesting season of September to February.

• A pre-clearing fauna survey will be undertaken prior to any vegetation disturbance works. This survey will include:

ƒ a suitably qualified and experienced ecologist will be employed to assess and mark habitat trees (e.g. hollow-bearing trees) and other habitat structures (stags, logs and stumps); ƒ A survey during the early evening during which habitat trees will be observed using spotlights for a minimum of one hour to determine the trees most likely to contain birds and arboreal mammals; ƒ Anabat detectors will be placed in and underneath hollow bearing trees to detect any micro-bat species that may be using them.

• All vegetation not marked to be cleared will be cleared then left undisturbed for a period of 24 hours with a suitably experienced and licensed person present so that any displaced fauna can be managed appropriately.

• Vegetation that is marked will be shaken with a bulldozer or excavator and left undisturbed overnight prior to clearing. Following felling of habitat trees hollows will be searched for fauna. Felled trees will be subsequently left on the ground overnight to allow undetected fauna to move away from the site.

• To avoid potential impacts on breeding micro-bats as a result of clearing activities, it is recommended to avoid clearing during the general micro-bat breeding period of November to February. Where this is not possible a suitably experienced and licensed person will be present during the clearing of marked trees to appropriately manage any displaced micro-bats or micro-bat colonies not previously identified.

• An appropriate number of nest boxes will be erected in suitable areas such as adjoining habitat in order to mitigate the loss of hollow-bearing trees.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 5.1 Ecological Assessment Ecological Impact Avoidance and Mitigation

• Topsoil cleared during construction will be retained and re-used for revegetation and landscaping works where practicable to assist in the re-establishment of native species including threatened flora species.

• Sedimentation controls during construction to ensure that soil material does not leave the construction site and enter drainage lines and waterways.

• The security fencing for the proposed ANE Production Facility will be restricted to the building perimeter at the 30 metre fire break and will not require further vegetation clearing.

• Existing Technology Centre site perimeter fencing will remain untouched so as to allow fauna movement through the site.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 5.2 Ecological Assessment Biodiversity Offsets

6.0 Biodiversity Offsets

6.1 Background

It is expected by relevant agencies that for sites which support at least moderate condition native vegetation and fauna habitat, biodiversity offsetting should be provided to ameliorate the impacts of development. Over the course of the last 5-10 years biodiversity offsets have been used in NSW as an effective measure to ameliorate development impacts on biodiversity. While there are no consistent, universally applied guidelines, it is generally accepted that in principle biodiversity offsets should be:

• located as close as possible to the areas subject to impact, depending on the availability of such areas;

• appropriately monitored and managed for biodiversity outcomes;

• appropriately protected, usually involving at least re-zoning or subject to project approval conditions for life-of-operation management, and often involving covenants and other forms of in-perpetuity protection; and

• should usually be at least as large as the area impacted, and often larger (meaning agencies frequently require offset ratios greater than 1:1, with 2:1 being the most frequent outcome), particularly for vegetation or fauna habitat of significance, especially those that are listed as threatened under relevant legislation.

6.2 Impacts Requiring Offsetting

The development of the proposed offset package has been based on the impacts identified in Section 4 of this report, namely:

• clearing of up to 8 hectares of native vegetation, mostly comprising the EEC Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest;

• clearing of up to 100 individuals of Tetratheca juncea;

• clearing of up to 0.1 hectares of known habitat for Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora, containing a number of examples of this species;

• loss of approximately 85 hollow-bearing trees and fauna habitat as a result of this clearing; and

• minor habitat fragmentation, as a result of the linear nature of the Project.

As a result of the above expected impacts, a proposed biodiversity offset package has been developed to mitigate the impacts of the Project on threatened species, EECs, and their habitats. The development of this package has been based on an overall offset ratio of 2:1 for vegetation, and has focused on protecting vegetation and fauna habitat in an area that is adjacent to a formal conservation reserve, namely Sugarloaf SCA. It is proposed that the biodiversity offset area (once finalised) will be protected and managed in the long-term, with the aim of maintaining ecological features.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 6.1 Ecological Assessment Biodiversity Offsets

6.3 Proposed On-site Biodiversity Offset Area

The proposed on-site biodiversity offset area focuses on the protection of an area of approximately 17 hectares of native vegetation, containing similar ecological value to that which will be disturbed as a result of the Project. Preference has been paid to on-site offsetting options for this Project, as it provides for more efficient management options, and can take advantage of the existing connectivity to the secure habitats of the adjoining Sugarloaf SCA.

In defining the proposed biodiversity offset area, preference has been given to the protection of EEC vegetation, due to its ecological significance, relatively limited extent and the identified impact from the Project. The offsetting of EEC vegetation was prioritised over threatened flora species (being Tetratheca juncea and Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora) due to the existing extensive reservation levels of these species in the local area.

6.3.1 Existing Vegetation

The proposed offset area covers approximately 17 hectares of native vegetation that occurs in the south-western corner of the study area, adjoining Sugarloaf SCA. There is currently no operational use or major disturbances in this area, and it is fully vegetated and contiguous with adjoining native vegetation. This area comprises three vegetation communities, being:

• 7.5 hectares of River-flat Eucalypt Forest EEC;

• 2.5 hectares of Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest EEC; and

• 7.0 hectares of Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland.

The proposed biodiversity offset area contains two EECs, comprising approximately 59 per cent of the 17 hectares proposed for offsetting. While it is recognised that the proposed biodiversity offset area contains only a relatively small amount of the Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest EEC, the presence of the River-flat Eucalypt Forest EEC is an important alternative community to include in the offset package. The River-flat Eucalypt Forest EEC is much more highly threatened than the Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest EEC, is very poorly reserved, and has a much smaller mapped occurrence in the local region.

In addition to this, examples of intact River-flat Eucalypt Forest within large areas of contiguous vegetation (such as that within the study area), are uncommon. Most of the known remnants of this community exist as highly-modified remnant riparian vegetation, often with little to no vegetated connectivity. The River-flat Eucalypt Forest within the proposed biodiversity offset area is currently connected to the northern boundary of Sugarloaf SCA, and this runs north along the boundary of the study area, towards the Buchanan area.

6.3.2 Value to Threatened Species

No threatened flora species were recorded during surveys of the proposed biodiversity offset area, however it is highly likely that both Tetratheca juncea and Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora do occur in this area, particularly in the Coastal Plains Smooth-barked Apple Woodland, as this contains typical habitat for these species. A number of threatened fauna species were recorded within the proposed biodiversity offset area, or in adjoining similar habitats. These species were:

• little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla);

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 6.2 Ecological Assessment Biodiversity Offsets

• powerful owl (Ninox strenua);

• yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis);

• grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus);

• yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris);

• large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri);

• little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis);

• eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis); and

• large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus).

Due to the similarity of habitat across the study area (and broader area), it is likely that these highly mobile species would occur within similar forested habitats of the area. In particular, the heavily vegetated habitats to the south of the study area that run into Sugarloaf SCA and further south into Heaton and Awaba State Forests would be used by such species.

Particular habitat resources that would be used by these species include hollows of all sizes and the prolific flowering resources of the eucalypt species present in the area. At the time of survey, the flowering of the forest red gums (Eucalyptus tereticornis) was being heavily exploited by yellow-bellied gliders (Petaurus australis) and grey-headed flying-foxes (Pteropus poliocephalus), both of which were recorded within the proposed biodiversity offset area (and broader area) in relatively high numbers. Perhaps consequentially, the powerful owl (Ninox strenua) was also recorded on a number of occasions, and it is likely the area supports numerous prey species for large forest owls such as this.

The numerous threatened micro-bat species recorded throughout the area is also to be expected, given the habitat quality and foraging resources available.

6.3.3 Connectivity Values

One of the key values of the proposed offset area is its existing vegetated connectivity to the Sugarloaf SCA. This adjoining conservation area contains similar vegetation and habitat value to those of the study area, where they adjoin in the southern parts of the study area. In the draft vegetation mapping of the Sugarloaf SCA, Bell and Driscoll (2009) identify the vegetation communities adjoining this part of the study area as comprising:

• Sugarloaf Uplands Smooth-barked Apple Forest;

• Hunter Valley Moist Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest;

• Hinterland Spotted Gum-Red Ironbark Forest; and

• Alluvial Tall Moist Forest (although this is not fully visible in the draft report).

Such communities are very similar to those identified within the study area, and are likely to provide similar habitat values to those in the proposed biodiversity offset area.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 6.3 Ecological Assessment Biodiversity Offsets

6.3.4 Management of Proposed Biodiversity Offset Area

In order to ensure the proposed biodiversity offset area is effective in addressing the identified impacts of the Project, it is necessary to ensure that its ecological value is not affected by the Project, and that such ecological value is maintained as part of the ongoing management and monitoring of the biodiversity offset area.

The ongoing management of the biodiversity offset area will be determined through consultation with the relevant government authorities and may include measures such as:

• identification of the means of protection for the area, e.g. conservation agreement, conservation zoning, transfer to the national estate etc;

• habitat management through measures such as the installation of nest boxes;

• maintenance of the area as necessary e.g. weeding; and

• monitoring to determine if the existing management of the area is sufficient to maintain and improve the ecological condition of the area over time, and to recommend actions where appropriate to ensure the protection and enhancement of habitat in this area.

6.4 Alternatives to an Onsite Offset Area

6.4.1 BioBanking

Recently the NSW Government developed the BioBanking scheme to enable a more consistent approach to biodiversity offsetting. It forms an alternative approach against which developments can be assessed and through which developers can achieve appropriate biodiversity offsetting without having ongoing management or legal responsibility for the offset areas. Participation in BioBanking is voluntary and the potential for utilising this recently developed and still evolving option is discussed below.

The BioBanking scheme works though applying a rule-based approach to determining the likely impact a development will have on biodiversity, and through then calculating the number of biodiversity credits (comprising ecosystem credits and/or threatened species credits) that are required to be purchased to offset the development’s impact. The credits are purchased from registered BioBanking Sites and the funds generated from the purchase are used by the BioBanking site manager(s) to achieve a set of previously-agreed management actions at that site(s). This process is known as credit retirement, and once the developer has purchased all of the necessary credits, their development has been offset and they have no further responsibility to any biodiversity offsetting requirements. BioBanking sites will be protected, managed and funded in-perpetuity.

It is acknowledged that BioBanking is a relatively new scheme that does not yet include a functioning credit market, and as such cannot be fully included in or applied to the planning and assessment of this Project. Despite the immaturity of the credit market for this scheme, the concepts applied to its outcomes have been adopted as part of the biodiversity offset package, in order to allow the informed planning and inclusion of appropriate mitigation and offsetting measures into the Project.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 6.4 Ecological Assessment Biodiversity Offsets

6.4.2 Environmental Contributions

Another offsetting option available to the Project is that of the provision of an environmental contribution payment. This option comes in the form of the payment of an agreed sum under the BioBanking Scheme that contributes to the management of formal BioBanking sites, formed under the scheme.

Because of the availability of appropriate on-site offsetting opportunities, this option has not been further considered.

6.4.3 Off-Site Offsetting Options

The option of finding suitable on-ground offsetting on lands outside of the subject site has not been considered in detail for this Project, primarily as a result of the preferred option that exists within the subject site. Should such options prove undesirable, consideration will be paid to searching for suitable sites that satisfy offsetting requirements, and that are available for such a program. Suitable areas could be purchased and managed as biodiversity offsets, or purchased and donated to the DECCW conservation reserve system.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 6.5 Ecological Assessment Conclusions

7.0 Conclusions

The field survey revealed that the study area contains the threatened ecological community Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest (as listed under the TSC Act). The proposed impact on the community is assessed as not being significant due to the small area that will be affected and the relatively large area of the community occurring in the region and protected in reserves.

A number of threatened species have been detected during surveys, being: gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum), little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla), powerful owl (Ninox strenua), scarlet robin (Petroica boodang), varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera), brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae), yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis), grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus), little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis), eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis), large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri), large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus) and yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris).

The Test for Ecological Significance concluded that, subject to the use of appropriate mitigation measures described in this report, the proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility will not have a significant impact on threatened species, populations or communities, or their habitat.

It is proposed to establish a biodiversity offset area in the south-western part of the study area to offset residual ecological impacts on threatened species and their habitats. This proposed biodiversity offset area comprises 17 hectares of native vegetation within the study area, containing known habitat for a number of threatened species, as well as two EEC communities. Due this ecological significance, this proposed biodiversity offset area is considered to be an appropriate measure to offset the residual impacts of the Project. The existing contiguity with Sugarloaf SCA is an additional benefit to the establishment of this area as a long-term offset, as it ensures the existing vegetated connectivity of the vegetation within the study area to protected habitat in the local area.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 7.1 Ecological Assessment References

8.0 References

Anstis, M. (2002). Tadpoles of South-eastern Australia. Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Barker, J., Grigg, G. C. & Tyler, M. J. (1995). A Field Guide to Australian Frogs. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Sydney.

Bell, S A J and Driscoll, C. (2008). Vegetation of the Cessnock-Kurri Region, Survey, Classification and Mapping, Cessnock LGA, New South Wales, Department of Environment and Climate Change (NSW), Sydney.

Bell, S A J and Driscoll, C. (2009). Draft Vegetation and floristics of Sugarloaf State Conservation Area, Lake Macquarie, New South Wales.

Botanic Gardens Trust 2009. PlantNET – The Plant Information Network System of Botanic Gardens Trust, Sydney, Australia (version 2.0). accessed January 2009.

Briggs, J.D. and Leigh, J.H, 1996. Rare or Threatened Australian Plants. CSIRO, Canberra.

Churchill, S. (1998). Australian Bats. Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Cogger, H. G. (1994). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. Reed Books, Chatswood.

Cronquist, A. (1981). An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants. Columbia University Press, New York.

Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) (2008). Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest in the Sydney Basin Bioregion, NSW Scientific Committee Final Determination. [online: www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au]

Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (2009) NSW Threatened Species Website, accessed 15 October 2009. http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2005). Tetratheca juncea listing advice under the EPBC Act, 7 September 2005 [accessed online: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/tetratheca- juncea.html]

EDAW (1992) Technology Park George Booth Drive Buchanan: Bushland Management Plan.

Harden, G J editor (1992). Flora of New South Wales. Volume 3. Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney & New South Wales University Press, Sydney.

Harden, G J editor (1993). Flora of New South Wales. Volume 4. Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney & New South Wales University Press, Sydney.

Harden, G J editor (2000). Flora of New South Wales. Volume 1. 2nd edition. New South Wales University Press and Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney.

Harden, G J editor (2002). Flora of New South Wales. Volume 2. Revised edition. Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney & New South Wales University Press, Sydney.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 8.1 Ecological Assessment References

House, S (2003). Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Biodiversity Conservation Strategy, Technical Report, Digital Aerial Photo Interpretation and Updated Extant Vegetation Community Map, May 2003. Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy, Callaghan, NSW.

Menkhorst, P. and Knight, F., 2004. A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.

Mitchell McCotter (1990) Mining Services Technology Park. Environmental Impact Statement.

Murray, M., Bell, S., Hoye, G. (2002). Flora and fauna survey Guidelines: Lower Hunter Central Coast Region 2002. Lower Hunter & Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy, NSW.

New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service (2000). Vegetation Survey, Classification and Mapping: Lower Hunter and Central Coast Region. Version 1.2. A Project undertaken for the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy. Sydney Zone, NPWS, Hurstville.

Robinson, M. (1998). A Field Guide to Frogs of Australia. Australian Museum/Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Slater, P, Slater, P. and Slater, R. (1989). The Slater Field Guide to Australian Birds. Weldon Publishing, Sydney.

Strahan, R. (1995). The Mammals of Australia. Australian Museum. Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Swan, G., Shea, G. & Sadlier, R. (2004). A Field Guide to Reptiles of New South Wales. Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Weigel, J. (1990). Australian Reptile Park’s Guide to Snakes of South-East Australia. Weigel Postscript.

Wheeler D. J. B., Jacobs S. W. L. and Whalley R. D. B. (2002). Grasses of New South Wales, 3rd Edition. The University of New England, Armidale.

Wilson, S. and Swan. G. (2003). A Complete Guide to Reptiles of Australia. Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2586/R03/Final December 2009 8.2

APPENDIX A

Ecological Values Assessment

Appendix A - Ecological Values Assessment

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? Flora Species lobed blue-grass V (EPBC) Grows in woodlands and Regionally recorded across Not known to The subject site does No Bothriochloa grasslands on poorer soils. much of the central and occur in not provide suitable biloba upper Hunter Valley with conservation habitat for this fewer records in the lower reserves. species and it has not Hunter but as far east as been recorded at the Maitland. site. There is no potential for a significant impact on this species. white-flowered E (TSC) This species usually occurs Restricted to eastern NSW Not known to The subject site does No wax plant E (EPBC) on the edge of dry rainforest where it is distributed from occur in not provide suitable Cynanchum vegetation. Brunswick Heads on the conservation habitat for this elegans north coast to Gerroa in the reserves. species and it has not Illawarra region. The species been recorded at the has been recorded as far site. There is no west as Merriwa in the upper potential for a Hunter Valley. significant impact on this species. painted diuris V (TSC) Sclerophyll forest among Muswellbrook LGA is the Not known to The subject site does No Diuris tricolor V (EPBC) grass, often with Callitris. eastern limit of the known occur in not provide suitable Sandy soils, either on flats or range and the only recorded conservation habitat for this small rises. occurrence in the Sydney reserves. species and it has not Basin Bioregion. been recorded at the site. There is no potential for a significant impact on this species.

2586/R03/AA 1

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? Lasiopetalum V (TSC) The species typically grows in This species occurs in the Mt Not known to The subject site does No longistamineum V (EPBC) rich alluvial deposits and Dangar – Gungal area within occur in not provide suitable flowers in spring. Little is Merriwa and Muswellbrook conservation habitat for this known about this species’ LGAs. Three sites are reserves. species and it has not ecology or biology. recorded within Goulburn been recorded at the River NP. site. There is no potential for a significant impact on this species. austral toadflax V (TSC) This species occurs in This species is found in very Not known to The subject site does No Thesium V (EPBC) grassland or grassy woodland small populations scattered occur in not provide suitable australe and is often found in damp across eastern NSW, along conservation habitat for this sites in association with the coast, and from the reserves. species and it has not kangaroo grass (Themeda Northern to Southern been recorded at the australis). This species is a Tablelands. It is also found in site. There is no root parasite that takes water Tasmania, Queensland and potential for a and some nutrient from other in eastern Asia. Occurs also significant impact on plants, especially kangaroo at Anvil Hill, NSW. this species. grass. Bynoes wattle, V (EPBC) Occurs in heath or dry Occurs in central eastern Yengo NP The species has not No tiny wattle E (TSC) sclerophyll forest on sandy NSW, from Morisset to the Olney SF been recorded in the soils. Seems to prefer open, Illawarra region and west to subject site; however, Acacia Lake Macquarie sometimes slightly disturbed the Blue Mountains. It has it could occur there. bynoeana SCA sites such as trail margins, recently been found in the Despite this, there is

edges of roadside spoil Colymea and Parma Creek no potential for a mounds and in recently burnt areas west of Nowra, and in significant impact on areas. the Kurri Kurri, Cessnock and this species. Ellalong areas in the lower Hunter Valley.

2586/R03/AA 2

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? leafless tongue- V (TSC) This species appears to This species is known to This species is The subject site does Yes orchid V (EPBC) favour moist soils on the flat occur in the Karuah Manning not known to provide suitable coastal plains. Occupies and Wyong CMA sub-regions occur within any habitat for this Cryptostylis ROTAP hunteriana swamp heath, but also in in the Hunter - Central Rivers conservation species, although it sclerophyll forest and region. reserves within has not been

woodland, often on sandy the region. recorded at the site. soils. Typically found in The species is communities containing potentially sensitive Eucalyptus haemastoma, to the proposed E. capitellata and Corymbia development. gummifera. small-flower V (EPBC) Grows in sandy or light clay Sporadically distributed Werakata NP The species occurs in Yes grevillea V (TSC) soils usually over thin shales. throughout the Sydney Basin Werakata SCA the subject site. The Grevillea Occurs in a range of with the main occurrence species is potentially parviflora subsp. vegetation types from heath centred around Picton, Appin sensitive to the parviflora and shrubby woodland to and Bargo (and possibly proposed open forest and a range of further south to the Moss development. altitudes from flat, low-lying Vale area). Separate areas to upper slopes and populations are also known ridge crests. Often occurs in further north from Putty to open, slightly disturbed sites Wyong and Lake Macquarie such as along tracks. on the Central Coast and Cessnock and Kurri Kurri in the Lower Hunter.

2586/R03/AA 3

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? eastern E (EPBC) Habitat requirements are Occurs from south-east This species is The species has not No underground V (TSC) poorly understood and no Queensland to south-east not known from been recorded in the orchid particular vegetation type has NSW. In NSW, currently any conservation subject site; however, Rhizanthella been associated with the known from fewer than 10 reserves in the it could occur there. slateri species, although it is known locations, including near region. There is no potential to occur in sclerophyll forest. Bulahdelah, the Watagan for a significant

Highly cryptic given that it Mountains, the Blue impact on this grows almost completely Mountains, Wisemans Ferry species. below the soil surface, with area, Agnes Banks and near flowers being the only part of Nowra the plant that can occur above ground. Therefore usually located only when the soil is disturbed. black-eyed V (EPBC) Low open forest, woodland, Confined to coastal districts Heaton SF The species occurs in Yes Susan V (TSC) heathland and moist forest, from Bulahdelah to Lake Awaba SF the subject site and is with a shrub understorey and Macquarie. Furthest inland potentially sensitive Tetratheca Munmorah SCA juncea grassy groundcover on low occurrences are at Buttai, to the development. nutrient soils. Generally near Mt Sugarloaf. Lake Macquarie prefers well-drained slopes SCA (often south-facing) and Sugarloaf SCA ridges, although it also found on upper and mid-slopes and occasionally in gullies.

2586/R03/AA 4

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? heath V (TSC) Occurs mostly in heath, often In coastal districts from Werakata NP The subject site does Yes wrinklewort V (EPBC) along disturbed roadsides, Maclean to the Hunter Valley Werakata SCA provide suitable and also in open forest, and inland to Torrington. It habitat for this Rutidosis Glenrock SCA heterogama primarily in coastal districts. has also been recently species. Although the recorded at Cooranbong on records could not be the Central Coast and located, we extensively around the understand that this Cessnock district. species may have been previously recorded at or within the vicinity of the site. netted bottle V (TSC) Typically grows in dry Recorded from the Georges Werakata NP The subject site does Yes brush sclerophyll forest on the coast River to the Hawkesbury Heaton SF provide suitable and adjacent ranges River in the Sydney area, and habitat for this Callistemon linearifolius north to the Nelson Bay area species. Although the of NSW. records could not be located, we understand that this species may have been previously recorded at or within the vicinity of the site. Parramatta red V (EPBC Typically grows on deep, low- There are two separate meta- Werakata NP The subject site does No gum V (TSC) nutrient sands, often those populations, in the Kurri Kurri Werakata SCA not provide suitable subject to periodic inundation. and Tomago areas. habitat for this Eucalyptus Heaton SF parramattensis Occurs in dry sclerophyll species and it has not subsp. woodland with dry heath been recorded at the decadens understorey and also as an site. There is no emergent in dry or wet potential for a heathland. significant impact on this species.

2586/R03/AA 5

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? Endangered Ecological Communities

Lower Hunter EEC (TSC) This EEC occurs in the central The EEC is restricted to a This EEC has This EEC occurs at Yes Spotted Gum – to lower Hunter Valley, range of approximately 65 been recorded in the site and is Ironbark Forest principally on Permian kilometres by 35 kilometres Werakata NP and potentially sensitive geology. centred on the Cessnock – Sugarloaf SCA. to the development. Beresfield area. Endangered Populations weeping myall EP (TSC) Grows on major river There are 17 confirmed and This species is The population does No Acacia pendula floodplains on heavy clay four unconfirmed naturally not known from not occur in the soils, sometimes as the occurring remnants of the A. any conservation subject site. dominant species and forming pendula population in the reserves in the low open woodlands. Within Hunter catchment. These region. the Hunter catchment it range as far east as typically occurs on heavy Warkworth, and as far west soils, sometimes at the as Kerrabee, west of Sandy margins of small floodplains, Hollow. Acacia pendula is but also in more undulating not known to occur naturally locations remote from further north than the floodplains, such as at Jerrys Muswellbrook-Wybong area. Plains. Eight planted A. pendula populations (not naturally occurring) have been recorded in the Hunter, and it is likely that numerous more planted populations occur.

2586/R03/AA 6

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? river red gum EP (TSC) River red gums are located on The Hunter population occurs This species is The population does No Eucalyptus the banks and floodplains of from the west at Bylong, not known from not occur in the camaldulensis watercourses on alluvial soils. south of Merriwa, to the east any conservation subject site. This endangered population at Hinton, on the bank of the reserves in the may occur with Eucalyptus Hunter River. It has been region. tereticornis, Eucalyptus recorded in the LGAs of melliodora, Casuarina Lithgow, Maitland, Mid- cunninghamiana subsp. Western Regional, cunninghamiana and Muswellbrook, Port Angophora floribunda. Stephens, Singleton and Upper Hunter. tiger orchid EP (TSC) This species occurs within dry The population of Cymbidium This species is The population does No Cymbidium sclerophyll forests and canaliculatum in the Hunter not known from not occur in the canaliculatum woodlands of tablelands and Catchment is at the south- any conservation subject site. western slopes, growing in eastern limit of the reserves in the hollows of trees. It is usually geographic range for this region. found occurring singly or as a species. single clump, typically between two and six metres above the ground. Leionema EP (TSC) There is currently only one The Hunter Catchment This species is The population does No lamprophyllum known location in the Hunter population of L not known from not occur in the subsp.obovatum Catchment where L. lamprophyllum subsp. any conservation subject site. lamprophyllum subsp. obovatum occurs east of reserves in the obovatum is found. The total Maitland near Pokolbin in the region. number of mature individuals Hunter Valley. It occurs at the of L. lamprophyllum subsp. north-east limit of the obovatum in the Hunter geographic range for this Catchment population is taxon, approximately 350 km estimated to be very low with from other known only 4 individuals currently occurrences of the taxon to known. the south-west, primarily south of Tidbinbilla Range in the Canberra area.

2586/R03/AA 7

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? Fauna stuttering frog E (TSC) This species is found near The stuttering frog occurs Barrington Tops The subject site does No Mixophyes V (EPBC) streams in rainforest and wet, along the east coast of NP not provide suitable balbus tall open forest in the foothills Australia from southern Killarney NR habitat for this and escarpments on the Queensland to north-east species and it has not Watagans NP eastern side of the Great Victoria. been recorded at the

Dividing Range. The site. There is no stuttering frog breeds in potential for a streams during summer after significant impact on heavy rain. Outside of the this species. breeding season adults live in deep leaf litter and thick overstorey vegetation on the forest floor. giant-barred frog E (EPBC) This species forages amongst This species occurs from the Watagans NP The subject site does No Mixophyes E (TSC) deep, damp litter in rainforest, coast and ranges from south- not provide suitable iterates moist eucalypt forest and eastern Queensland to the habitat for this nearby dry eucalypt forest at Hawkesbury River in NSW. species and it has not elevations below 1000 m. been recorded at the They breed around shallow, site. There is no flowing rocky streams from potential for a late spring to summer. significant impact on this species. Littlejohns V (TSC) Occurs along permanent Distribution includes the Olney SF The subject site does No treefrog V (EPBC) rocky streams with thick plateaus and eastern slopes not provide suitable Litoria littlejohni fringing vegetation associated of the Great Dividing Range habitat for this with eucalypt woodlands and from Watagans NP (90 km species and it has not heaths among sandstone north of Sydney) south to been recorded at the outcrops. Buchan in Victoria. site. There is no potential for a significant impact on this species.

2586/R03/AA 8

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? broad-headed E (TSC) Nocturnal. Shelters in rock The broad-headed snake is Olney SF The subject site does No snake V (EPBC) crevices and under flat largely confined to Triassic Yengo NP not provide suitable Hoplocephalus sandstone rocks on exposed and Permian sandstones, habitat for this bungaroides cliff edges during autumn, including the Hawkesbury, species and it has not winter and spring. Moves from Narrabeen and Shoalhaven been recorded at the the sandstone rocks to groups, within the coast and site. There is no shelters in hollows in large ranges in an area within potential for a trees within 200 m of approximately 250 km of significant impact on escarpments in summer. Sydney. this species. square-tailed V (TSC) Found in a variety of timbered Scattered records of the Not known to The subject site does No kite habitats including dry species throughout the state occur in not provide suitable Lophoictinia woodlands and open forests. indicate that the species is a conservation habitat for this isura Shows a particular preference regular resident in the north, reserves. species and it has not for timbered watercourses. north-east and along the been recorded at the major west-flowing river site. There is no systems. potential for a significant impact on this species. black-breasted V (TSC) Lives in a range of inland Found sparsely in areas of Werakata NP The subject site does No buzzard habitats, especially along less than 500 mm rainfall, not provide suitable Hamirostra timbered watercourses which from north-western NSW and habitat for this melanosternon is the preferred breeding north-eastern South Australia species and it has not habitat. Hunts over grasslands to the east coast at about been recorded at the and sparsely timbered Rockhampton, then across site. There is no woodlands. northern Australia south potential for a almost to Perth, avoiding only significant impact on the Western Australian this species. deserts.

2586/R03/AA 9

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? glossy black- V (TSC) Habitat for this species The glossy black-cockatoo Yengo NP The subject site Yes cockatoo includes forests on low- has a sparse distribution Killarney NR provides suitable nutrient soils, specifically along the east coast and habitat for this Calyptorhynchus Werakata NP lathami those containing key adjacent inland areas from species, however it Allocasuarina feed species. western Victoria to Watagans NP has not been They will also eat seeds from Rockhampton in Queensland. Lake Macquarie recorded. The eucalypts, angophoras, In NSW, it has been recorded SCA species is potentially acacias, cypress pine and as far inland as Cobar and sensitive to the hakeas, as well as eating Griffith. proposed insect larvae. Breeding occurs development, as it is in autumn and winter, with hollow-dependent. large hollows required. gang-gang V (TSC) In summer this species occurs In NSW this species occurs Yengo NP The species has Yes cockatoo in tall mountain forests and from the south east coast to Werakata NP been recorded in the Callocephalon woodlands, particularly in the Hunter region and inland Watagans NP vicinity of the subject fimbriatum heavily timbered and mature to the Central Tablelands and site. The species is wet sclerophyll forests. In South-west Slopes. potentially sensitive winter this species moves to to the proposed drier more open eucalypt development, as it is forests and woodlands. It hollow-dependent. favours old growth trees for nesting and roosting. little lorikeet V (TSC) This species can be found in This species is distributed Yengo NP The species has Yes Glossopsitta dry-open eucalypt forests and from just north of Cairns, Pokolbin SF been recorded in the woodlands, and have been around the east coast of vicinity of the subject pusilla Olney SF identified in remnant Australia down to Adelaide. site. The species is Werakata SCA vegetation, old growth In NSW this species is found potentially sensitive vegetation, logged forests, from the coast to the western Werakata NP to the proposed and roadside vegetation. The slopes of the Great Dividing Sugarloaf SCA development, as it is little lorikeet usually forages in Range, extending as far west hollow-dependent. small flocks, not always with as Albury, Dubbo, Parkes birds of their own species. and Narrabri. They nest in hollows, mostly in living smooth-barked apples.

2586/R03/AA 10

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? swift parrot E (TSC) This species often visits box- In NSW this species has Werakata NP The subject site does No Lathamus E (EPBC) ironbark forests, feeding on been recorded from the Lake Macquarie not provide suitable discolor nectar and lerps. In NSW, western slopes region along SCA habitat for this typical tree species in which it the inland slopes of the Great species and it has not forages include mugga Dividing Range, as well as been recorded at the ironbark, grey box, swamp forests along the coastal site. There is no mahogany, spotted gum, red plains from southern to potential for a bloodwood, narrow-leaved red northern NSW. significant impact on ironbark, forest red gum and this species. yellow box. powerful owl V (TSC) The powerful owl inhabits a The powerful owl occurs in Yengo NP The species has Yes Ninox strenua range of vegetation types, eastern Australia, mostly on Werakata NP been recorded in the from woodland and open the coastal side of the Great vicinity of the subject Killarney NP sclerophyll forest to tall open Dividing Range, from south site. The species is wet forest and rainforest. It western Victoria to Bowen in Lake Macquarie potentially sensitive generally requires large tracts Queensland. SCA to the proposed of forest or woodland habitat Wallarah NP development, as it is but can occur in fragmented hollow-dependent. landscapes as well. The species breeds and hunts in open or closed sclerophyll forest or woodlands and occasionally hunts in open habitats. It roosts by day in dense vegetation. barking owl V (TSC) Habitat for this species The barking owl is distributed Werakata NP The subject site does No Ninox connivens includes dry forests and sparsely throughout Watagans NP provide suitable woodlands, often in temperate and semi-arid habitat for this association with hydrological areas of mainland Australia, species and it could features such as rivers and however it is most abundant occur there. swamps. in the tropical north. Most However, it was not records for this species occur recorded and there is west of the Great Dividing no potential for a Range. significant impact on this species.

2586/R03/AA 11

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? sooty owl V (TSC) This species has a restricted The sooty owl has a disjunct Watagans NP The subject site Yes Tyto tenebricosa habitat, requiring rainforest distribution through coastal Pokolbin SF provides suitable and wetter eucalypt forests and near-coastal eastern habitat for this Heaton SF near the coast and adjacent Australia, from central species, however it mountain ranges. Sooty owls Queensland to central Watagans NP has not been roost among rainforest foliage, Victoria Olney SF recorded. The hollows, and entirely in caves species is potentially and overhangs in some sensitive to the territories. Home ranges are proposed estimated at between 600 and development, as it is 800 hectares. Nests in large hollow-dependent. hollows in old trees, or rarely in caves. masked owl V (TSC) This species is generally The masked owl occurs Pokolbin SF The subject site Yes Tyto recorded from open forest sparsely throughout the Killarney NR provides suitable habitat with sparse mid-storey continent and nearby islands, habitat for this novaehollandiae Watagans NP but patches of dense, low including Tasmania and New species, however it ground cover. It is also Guinea. Werakata SCA has not been recorded from ecotones Lake Macquarie recorded. The between wet and dry eucalypt SCA species is potentially forest, along minor drainage sensitive to the lines and near boundaries proposed between forest and cleared development, as it is land. hollow-dependent. brown V (TSC) Typical habitat for this species This species occurs over Werakata NP The species has Yes treecreeper includes drier forests, central NSW, west of the Awaba SF been recorded in the (eastern subsp.) woodlands and scrubs with Great Dividing Range and vicinity of the subject Climacteris fallen branches; river red sparsely scattered to the east site. The species is picumnus gums on watercourses and of the divide in drier areas potentially sensitive victoriae around lake-shores; paddocks such as the Cumberland to the proposed with standing dead timber; Plain of Western Sydney, and development, as it is and margins of denser in parts of the Hunter, hollow-dependent. wooded areas. This species Clarence, Richmond and prefers areas without a dense Snowy River valleys. understorey.

2586/R03/AA 12

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? speckled V (TSC) The speckled warbler occurs Patchy distribution throughout Yengo NP The subject site does No warbler in eucalypt-dominated south-eastern Queensland, Werakata NP not provide suitable communities that have a eastern half of NSW and into habitat for this Chthonicola Awaba SF saggitata grassy understorey, leaf litter Victoria, as far west as the species and it has not and shrub cover, often on Grampians. been recorded at the rocky ridges or in gullies. site. There is no potential for a significant impact on this species. regent E (TSC) This species generally occurs Once recorded between Werakata NP The subject site does No honeyeater E (EPBC) in temperate eucalypt Adelaide and the central Yengo NP not provide suitable Anthochaera woodlands and open forests coast of Queensland, its Werakata SCA habitat for this of south eastern Australia. It is range has contracted species and it has not phrygia Olney SF commonly recorded from box- dramatically in the last 30 been recorded at the ironbark eucalypt years to between north- site. There is no associations, wet lowland eastern Victoria and south- potential for a coastal forests dominated by eastern Queensland. significant impact on swamp mahogany, spotted The subject site is within the this species. gum and riverine casuarina known distribution of this woodlands. An apparent species. preference exists for the wettest, most fertile sites within these associations, such as creek flats, river valleys and foothills.

2586/R03/AA 13

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? black-chinned V (TSC) Occupies mostly upper levels The subspecies is Yengo NP The subject site does Yes honeyeater of drier open forests or widespread, from the Werakata NP provide suitable (eastern woodlands dominated by box tablelands and western habitat for this subspecies), and ironbark eucalypts, slopes of the Great Dividing species. Although the Melithreptus especially mugga Ironbark Range to the north-west and records could not be gularis gularis (Eucalyptus sideroxylon), central-west plains and the located, we white box (Eucalyptus Riverina. It is rarely recorded understand that this albens), grey box (Eucalyptus east of the Great Dividing species may have microcarpa), yellow box Range, although regularly been previously (Eucalyptus melliodora) and observed from the Richmond recorded at or within forest red gum (Eucalyptus River district. It has also been the vicinity of the site. tereticornis). Also inhabits recorded at a few scattered open forests of smooth- sites in the Hunter, Central barked gums, stringybarks, Coast and Illawarra regions. ironbarks and tea-trees. painted V (TSC) Inhabits Boree, Brigalow and The greatest concentrations Not known to The subject site does No honeyeater Box-Gum Woodlands and of this species and almost all occur in not provide suitable Grantiella picta Box-Ironbark Forests. breeding occur on the inland conservation habitat for this slopes of the Great Dividing reserves. species and it has not Range in NSW, Victoria and been recorded at the southern Queensland. During site. There is no the winter it is more likely to potential for a be found in the north of its significant impact on distribution. this species.

2586/R03/AA 14

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? grey-crowned V (TSC) Open box-gum woodlands on Occurs throughout northern Yengo NP The subject site does No babbler the slopes. Box-cypress-pine and south-eastern Australia. Werakata NP not provide suitable and open box woodlands on In NSW, this species occurs habitat for this Pomatostomus temporalis alluvial plains. Also found in on the western slopes of the species and it has not temporalis acacia shrubland and Great Dividing Range and on been recorded at the adjoining areas. the western plains reaching site. There is no as far west as Louth and Hay. potential for a It also occurs in woodlands in significant impact on the Hunter Valley and in this species. several locations on the north coast of NSW. The Survey Area is not at the limit of this species’ known distribution. varied sittella PD V The varied sittella can The varied sittella is a Yengo NP The species occurs in Yes Daphoenositta (TSC) typically be found in eucalypt sedentary species that Werakata NP the subject site. The forests and woodlands, inhabits the majority of species is potentially chrysoptera Corrabare SF especially of rough-barked mainland Australia with the sensitive to the species and mature smooth- exception of the treeless Pokolbin SF proposed barked gums with dead deserts and open grasslands. Olney SF development, as branches, it can also be Its NSW distribution is Werakata SCA foraging and identified in mallee and acacia basically continuous from the breeding habitat will woodlands. This species coast to the far west. be impacted. builds a cup shaped nest made of plant fibres and spiders webs which is placed at the canopy level in the fork of a living tree.

2586/R03/AA 15

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? diamond firetail V (TSC) Habitat includes a range of The diamond firetail occurs Yengo NP The subject site does No Stagonopleura eucalypt dominated through central and eastern Werakata SCA not provide suitable communities with a grassy NSW, north into southern and habitat for this guttata understorey, including central Queensland and species and it has not woodland, forest and mallee. south through Victoria to been recorded at the It appears that populations are South Australia. In NSW it site. There is no unable to persist in areas mainly occurs west of the potential for a where there are no vegetated Great Dividing Range, significant impact on remnants larger than 200 although populations are this species. hectares. known from drier coastal areas such as the Cumberland Plain and the Hunter, Clarence, Richmond and Snowy River valleys. hooded robin V (TSC) This species occupies a range This form of the hooded robin Werakata NP The subject site does No (south-eastern of eucalypt woodlands, acacia is distributed throughout Yengo NP not provide suitable form) shrublands and open forests. south-eastern Australia, from habitat for this Melanodryas In temperate woodlands it central Queensland to the species and it has not cucullata favours open areas adjoining Spencer Gulf, South been recorded at the cucullata large woodland blocks, with Australia. This form occurs site. There is no areas of dead timber and throughout NSW except for potential for a sparse shrub cover. In semi- the north-west, where it significant impact on arid western NSW, the intergrades with the northern this species. hooded Robin favours open form M. cucullata picata. woodlands of belah, rosewood, mulga and cypress.

2586/R03/AA 16

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? scarlet robin PD V This robin can be found in The scarlet robin can be Yengo NP The species occurs in Yes Petroica (TSC) woodlands and open forests found in south-eastern Werakata NP the subject site. The from the coast through to Australia, from Tasmania to species is potentially boodang Olney SF inland slopes. The birds can the southern end of sensitive to the sometimes be found on the Queensland, to western proposed eastern fringe of the inland Victoria and south SA. development, as plains in the colder months of In NSW it is found throughout foraging and the year. Woody debris and the eastern areas of the breeding habitat will logs are both important state, no further than 500 km be impacted. structural elements of its from the coast. habitat. It forages from low perches on invertebrates either on the ground or in woody debris or tree trunks. spotted-tailed V (TSC) Habitat for this species is In NSW the spotted-tailed Killarney NP The subject site does No quoll E (EPBC) highly varied, ranging from quoll occurs on both sides of Uffington SF not provide suitable sclerophyll forest, woodlands, the Great Dividing Range, habitat for this Dasyurus Pokolbin SF maculatus coastal heathlands and with the highest densities species and it has not rainforests. Records exist occurring in the north east of Werakata SCA been recorded at the from open country, grazing the state. It occurs from the Corrabare SF site. There is no lands and rocky outcrops. coast to the snowline and Yengo NP potential for a Suitable den sites including inland to the Murray River. significant impact on hollow logs, tree hollows, Watagans NP this species. rocky outcrops or caves. Olney SF Heaton SF Watagan SF Awaba SF Lake Macquarie SCA

2586/R03/AA 17

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? koala V (TSC) This species inhabits eucalypt The koala has a fragmented Monkerai NR The species has not No Phascolarctos forest and woodland, with distribution throughout Killarney NR been recorded in the suitability influenced by tree eastern Australia, with the subject site; however, cinereus Werakata NP species and age, soil fertility, majority of records from NSW it could occur there. climate, rainfall and occurring on the central and Watagans NP There is no potential fragmentation patterns. The north coasts, as well as some Uffington SF for a significant species is known to feed on a areas further west. It is Yengo NP impact on this large number of eucalypt and known to occur along inland species. Pokolbin SF non-eucalypt species, rivers on the western side of however it tends to specialise the Great Dividing Range. Werakata SCA on a small number in different Corrabare SF areas. Eucalyptus tereticornis, Olney SF E. punctata, E. cypellocarpa, E. viminalis, E. microcorys, Heaton SF E. robusta, E. albens, Awaba SF E. camaldulensis and Watagan SF E. populnea are some Lake Macquarie preferred species. SCA yellow-bellied V (TSC) Occur in tall mature eucalypt The yellow-bellied glider is Yengo NP The species occurs in Yes glider forest generally in areas with found along the eastern coast Werakata NP the subject site and is high rainfall and nutrient rich to the western slopes of the potentially sensitive Petaurus Watagans NP australis soils. Forest type preferences Great Dividing Range, from to the development, vary with latitude and southern Queensland to Pokolbin SF as it is hollow- elevation; mixed coastal Victoria. Corrabare SF dependent. forests to dry escarpment Watagan SF forests in the north; moist coastal gullies and creek flats Heaton SF to tall montane forests in the Olney SF south.

2586/R03/AA 18

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? squirrel glider V (TSC) Inhabits a variety of mature or The species is widely though Yengo NP The subject site Yes Petaurus old growth habitats, including sparsely distributed in Werakata NP provides suitable norfolcensis box, box-ironbark woodlands, eastern Australia, from habitat for this Uffington SF river red gum forest, and northern Queensland to species, however it blackbutt-bloodwood forest western Victoria. Werakata SCA has not been with heath understorey. It Olney SF recorded. The prefers mixed species stands Lake Macquarie species is potentially with a shrub or acacia mid- SCA sensitive to the storey, and requires abundant proposed tree hollows for refuge and Wallarah NP development, as it is nest sites. hollow-dependent. long-nosed V (TSC) Inhabits coastal heaths and This species is found on the Killarney NR The subject site does No potoroo dry and wet sclerophyll south-eastern coast of Heaton SF not provide suitable forests. Dense understorey Australia, from Queensland to habitat for this Potorous Olney SF tridactylus with occasional open areas is eastern Victoria and species and it has not an essential part of habitat, Tasmania, including some of been recorded at the and may consist of grass- the Bass Strait islands. In site. There is no trees, sedges, ferns or heath, NSW it is generally restricted potential for a or of low shrubs of tea-trees to coastal heaths and forests significant impact on or melaleucas. A sandy loam east of the Great Dividing this species. soil is also a common feature. Range. grey-headed V (TSC) This species occurs in Grey-headed flying-foxes are Yengo NP The species has Yes flying-fox V (EPBC) subtropical and temperate found within 200 km of the Werakata NP been recorded on the rainforests, tall sclerophyll eastern coast of Australia, subject site. There Pteropus Pokolbin SF poliocephalus forests and woodlands, from Bundaberg in are no flying-fox heaths and swamps as well Queensland to Melbourne in Werakata SCA camps on the site. as urban gardens and Victoria. Watagan SF The species is cultivated fruit crops. Olney SF potentially sensitive Roosting camps are generally to the proposed located within 20 km of a Yengo NP development. regular food source and are Lake Macquarie commonly found in gullies, SCA close to water, in vegetation with a dense canopy.

2586/R03/AA 19

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? yellow-bellied V (TSC) This species forages for The yellow-bellied sheathtail- Yengo NP The species has Yes sheathtail bat insects, flies high and fast bat is a wide-ranging species been recorded in the Saccolaimus over the forest canopy, but found across northern and vicinity of the subject flaviventris lower in more open country. It eastern Australia. In the most site. The species is forages in most habitats southerly part of its range - potentially sensitive across its very wide range, most of Victoria, south- to the proposed with and without trees; and western NSW and adjacent development, as it is appears to defend an aerial South Australia - it is a rare hollow-dependent. territory. It roosts singly or in visitor in late summer and groups of up to six, in tree autumn. There are scattered hollows and buildings; in records of this species across treeless areas they are known the New England Tablelands to use mammal burrows. and North West Slopes. eastern freetail- V (TSC) This species occurs in dry The eastern freetail-bat is Yengo NP The subject site Yes bat sclerophyll forest and found along the east coast Werakata NP provides suitable woodland east of the Great from south Queensland to habitat for this Mormopterus Werakata SCA norfolkensis Dividing Range. It roosts southern NSW. species, however it mainly in tree hollows but will Awaba SF has not been also roost under bark or in Olney SF recorded. The man-made structures. species is potentially sensitive to the proposed development, as it is hollow-dependent. little bentwing- V (TSC) Prefers moist eucalypt forest, Occurs in coastal north- Werakata NP This species was Yes bat rainforest or dense coastal eastern NSW and eastern Uffington SF recorded at the banksia scrub. This species Queensland. subject site. There is Miniopterus Werakata SCA australis roost in caves, tunnels and no breeding habitat sometimes tree hollows during Awaba SF present for this the day, and at night forage Lake Macquarie species. The species for small insects beneath the SCA is potentially sensitive canopy of densely vegetated Wallarah NP to the proposed habitats. development.

2586/R03/AA 20

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? eastern V (TSC) This species hunts in forested Eastern bentwing-bats occur Yengo NP This species was Yes bentwing-bat areas and uses caves as the along the east and north-west Werakata NP recorded at the primary roosting habitat, but coasts of Australia. subject site. There is Miniopterus Uffington SF schreibersii also uses derelict mines, no breeding habitat Olney SF oceanensis storm-water tunnels, buildings present for this and other man-made Awaba SF species. The species structures. It forms discrete Lake Macquarie is potentially sensitive populations centred on a SCA to the proposed maternity cave that is used development. annually in spring and summer for the birth and rearing of young. eastern long- V (TSC) Inhabits a variety of Overall, the distribution of the Not known to The subject site Yes eared bat (SE vegetation types, including south eastern form coincides occur in provides suitable form) mallee, bulloak Allocasuarina approximately with the conservation habitat for this Nyctophilus luehmanni and box eucalypt Murray Darling Basin with the reserves. species, however it timoriensis dominated communities, but it Pilliga Scrub region being the has not been is distinctly more common in distinct stronghold for this recorded. The box/ironbark/cypress-pine species. species is potentially vegetation that occurs in a sensitive to the north-south belt along the proposed western slopes and plains of development, as it is NSW and southern hollow-dependent. Queensland. Roosts in tree hollows, crevices, and under loose bark.

2586/R03/AA 21

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? large-eared pied V (TSC) The large-eared pied bat is This species has a Yengo NP This species was Yes bat V (EPBC) generally found in a variety of distribution from south Watagan NP recorded at the drier habitats, including dry western Queensland to NSW subject site. There is Chalinolobus Pokolbin SF dwyeri sclerophyll forests and from the coast to the western no breeding habitat woodlands, however, it slopes of the Great Dividing Awaba SF present for this probably tolerates a wide Range. Olney SF species. The species range of habitats. It tends to is potentially sensitive roost in the twilight zones of to the proposed mines and caves, generally in development. colonies or common groups. eastern false V (TSC) Habitat for this species This species has a range Yengo NP The subject site Yes pipistrelle includes sclerophyll forest. It from south eastern Werakata NP provides suitable prefers wet habitats, with Queensland, through NSW, habitat for this Falsistrellus Heaton SF tasmaniensis trees over 20 metres high, Victoria and into Tasmania, species, however it and generally roosts in tree and occurs from the Great Olney SF has not been hollows or trunks. Dividing Range to the coast. Lake Macquarie recorded. The SCA species is potentially sensitive to the proposed development, as it is hollow-dependent. large-footed V (TSC) This species generally roosts The large-footed myotis is Uffington SF The species has Yes myotis in groups of 10 - 15 close to found in the coastal band Pokolbin SF been recorded in the water in caves, mine shafts, from the north-west of subject site. The Myotis adversus Werakata NP hollow-bearing trees, Australia, across the Top End species is potentially stormwater channels, and south to western Victoria. Awaba SF sensitive to the buildings, under bridges and It is rarely found more than Olney SF proposed in dense foliage. It forages 100 km inland, except along development, as it is over streams and pools major rivers. hollow-dependent. catching insects and small fish by raking its feet across the water surface.

2586/R03/AA 22

Species, Legal Specific Habitat Distribution in Relation to Reservation in Occurrence in Detailed Communities Status Subject Site the Region Subject Site and Assessment or Populations Potential for of Significant Impact Significance Required? greater broad- V (TSC) The greater broad-nosed bat The greater broad-nosed bat Yengo NP The subject site Yes nosed bat appears to prefer moist is found mainly in the gullies Werakata NP provides suitable environments such as moist and river systems that drain habitat for this Scoteanax Pokolbin SF rueppellii gullies in coastal forests, or the Great Dividing Range, species, however it rainforest. They have also from north-eastern Victoria to Werakata SCA has not been been found in gullies the Atherton Tableland. It Awaba SF recorded. The associated with wet and dry extends to the coast over Olney SF species is potentially sclerophyll forests and open much of its range. In NSW it sensitive to the

woodland. It roosts in hollows is widespread on the New proposed in tree trunks and branches England Tablelands, however development, as it is and has also been found to it does not occur at altitudes hollow-dependent. roost in the roofs of old above 500 m. buildings. eastern cave bat V (TSC) This species is a cave- The eastern cave bat is found Yengo NP The subject site does No Vespadelus roosting bat that is usually in a broad band on both sides Pokolbin SF not provide suitable found in dry open forest and of the Great Dividing Range habitat for this troughtoni woodland, near cliffs or rocky from Cape York to Kempsey, species and it has not overhangs. It has been with records from the New been recorded at the recorded roosting in disused England Tablelands and the site. There is no mine workings, occasionally in upper north coast of NSW. potential for a colonies of up to 500 The western limit appears to significant impact on individuals, and is be the Warrumbungle Range, this species. occasionally found along cliff- and there is a single record lines in wet eucalypt forest from southern NSW, east of and rainforest. the ACT.

Key: TSC = Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995; EP = Endangered Population EPBC Act = Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999; SCA = State Conservation Area E = Endangered; NP = National Park; V = Vulnerable; NR = Nature Reserve. PD = Preliminary Determination; EEC = Endangered Ecological Community; CEEC = Critically Endangered Ecological Community;

2586/R03/AA 23

APPENDIX B

Flora Species List

Appendix B - Flora Species List

The following list was developed from surveys of the subject site detailed in Section 2.0 of the main report, as well as species documented in the EIS (Mitchell McCotter 1990) and Bushland Management Plan (EDAW 1992). It includes all species of vascular plants observed in the subject site during fieldwork. Not all species are readily detected at any one time of the year, therefore the list will not necessarily include all plant species likely to occur in the subject site. Many species flower only during restricted periods of the year, and some flower only once in several years. In the absence of flowering material, many of these species cannot be identified, or even detected.

Names of classes and families follow a modified Cronquist (1981) System.

Any species that could not be identified to the lowest taxonomic level are denoted in the following manner:

sp. specimens that are identified to genus level only;

asterisk (*) denotes species not indigenous to the study area; subsp. subspecies; and var. variety.

√ indicates the relevant species was recorded during surveys.

All vascular plants recorded or collected were identified using keys and nomenclature in Harden (1992, 1993, 2000 & 2002) and Wheeler et al. (2002). Where known, changes to nomenclature and classification have been incorporated into the results, as derived from PlantNET (Botanic Gardens Trust 2009), the on-line plant name database maintained by the National Herbarium of New South Wales.

Common names used follow Harden (1992, 1993, 2000 & 2002) where available, and draw on other sources such as local names where these references do not provide a common name.

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Cycadopsida (Cycads) Zamiaceae Macrozamia communis burrawang √ √ Filicopsida (Ferns) Adiantaceae Adiantum aethiopicum common maidenhair √ √ √ Cheilanthes distans bristly cloak fern √ Cheilanthes sieberi subsp. poison rock fern √ Sieberi Blechnaceae Doodia aspera rasp fern √ Dennstaedtiaceae Pteridium esculentum bracken √ √ Pteridaceae Pteris tremula tender brake √

2586/R03/AB 1

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Magnoliopsida (Flowering Plants) – Liliidae (Monocots) Anthericaceae Arthropodium sp. √ Thysanotus sp. fringe lilly √ Cyperaceae Baumea articulata √ Carex appressa √ √ *Cyperus eragrostis √ Cyperus sp. √ Eleocharis acuta √ Gahnia clarkei tall saw-sedge √ √ Gahnia sieberana √ Lepidosperma laterale variable saw-sedge √ √ Ptilothrix deusta √ √ Doryanthaceae Doryanthes excelsa Gymea lily √ √ Iridaceae Patersonia sericea silky purple-flag √ Juncaceae Juncus continuus √ Juncaginaceae Triglochin procera water ribbons √ Lomandraceae Lomandra glauca glaucus mat-rush √ √ Lomandra longifolia spiny-headed mat-rush √ √ √ Lomandra multiflora subsp. many-flowered mat- √ √ √ multiflora rush Lomandra obliqua fishbones √ √ √ Luzuriagaceae Geitnoplesium cymosum scrambling lily √ √ Orchidaceae Cymbidium suave snake orchid √ Dipodium sp. √ Phormiaceae Dianella caerulea var. blue flax-lily √ √ producta Dianella longifolia var. blueberry flax-lily √ longifolia Dianella revoluta blueberry lily √ Poaceae *Andropogon virginicus whisky grass √ √ Aristida sp. √ Aristida vagans threeawn speargrass √ Austrodanthonia caespitosa ringed wallaby grass √ Austrodanthonia fulva wallaby grass √ Austrostipa sp. √ *Axonopus fissifolius narrow-leaved carpet √ grass *Chloris gayana Rhodes grass √ Cymbopogon refractus barbed wire grass √ √ Cynodon dactylon common couch √ √ Dichelachne micrantha shorthair plumegrass √

2586/R03/AB 2

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Echinopogon caespitosus tufted hedgehog grass √ var. caespitosus Echinopogon ovatus forest hedgehog grass √ Eragrostis leptostachya paddock lovegrass √ Entolasia marginata bordered panic √ Entolasia stricta wiry panic √ √ √ *Hyparrhenia hirta Coolatai grass √ Imperata cylindrica var. blady grass √ √ √ major Microlaena stipoides var. weeping grass √ √ √ stipoides Oplismenus aemulus basket grass √ √ Panicum simile two-colour panic √ *Paspalum urvillei vasey grass √ Paspalum orbiculare ditch millet √ Poa labillardieri tussock grass √ Tetarrhena juncea wiry ricegrass √ √ Themeda australis kangaroo grass √ √ √ Xanthorrhoeaceae Xanthorrhoae resinosa grass tree √ Xanthorrhoea sp. grass tree √ Magnoliopsida (Flowering Plants) – Magnoliidae (Dicots) Acanthaceae Brunoniella australis blue trumpet √ Pseuderanthemum variable pastel flower √ √ Aphanopetalaceae Aphanopetalum resinosum gum vine √ Apiaceae Centella asiatica pennywort √ √ Hydrocotyle laxiflora stinking pennywort √ Hydrocotyle tripartita pennywort √ Apocynaceae *Araujia sericifera mothplant √ Parsonsia straminea monkey rope √ √ Asteraceae *Bidens pilosa cobbler's pegs √ √ Cassinia aculeata √ *Cirsium vulgare spear thistle √ √ *Conyza bonariensis flaxleaf fleabane √ √ *Gnaphalium sphaericum cudweed √ Eclipta platyglossa √ Helichrysum diosmifolium √ Helichrysum semipapposum √ *Hypochaeris radicata catsear √ √ Lagenifera stipitata slender lagenophora √ Ozothamnus diosmifolius white dogwood √ Senecio hispidulus hill fireweed √

2586/R03/AB 3

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) *Senecio madagascariensis fireweed √ Sigesbeckia orientalis Indian weed √ √ *Sonchus oleraceus common sowthistle √ Vernonia cinerea var. cinerea √ Bignoniaceae Pandorea pandorana subsp. wonga wonga vine √ √ pandorana Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia communis tufted bluebell √ Wahlenbergia gracilis sprawling bluebell √ Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina littoralis black sheoak √ √ Celastraceae Maytenus silvestris orange bark √ √ Clusiaceae Hypericum gramineum small St Johns wort √ Commelinaaceae Commelina cyanea native wandering Jew √ Convolvulaceae Convolvulus erubescens √ Dichondra repens kidney weed √ √ Polymeria calycina √ Dilleniaceae Hibbertia aspera rough Guinea flower √ √ Hibbertia sp. √ Ericaceae Acrotriche divaricata √ √ (Styphelioideae) Astroloma humifusum native cranberry √ Epacris pulchella wallum heath √ √ Leucopogon ericoides pink beard-heath √ Leucopogon juniperinus √ √ Leucopogon sp. √ Lissanthe strigosa subsp. peach heath √ √ strigosa Monotoca scoparia √ Euphorbiaceae Glochidion ferdinandi cheese tree √ √ Phyllanthus hirtellus spurge √ Phyllanthus occidentalis spurge √ Fabaceae (Faboideae) Bossiaea prostrata √ Bossiaea rhombifolia subsp. √ √ rhombifolia Daviesia squarrosa √ Daviesia ulicifolia gorse bitter pea √ √ √ Daviesia umbellulata √ √ Desmodium brachypodum large tick-trefoil Desmodium rhytidophyllum √ √ Desmodium varians slender tick-trefoil √ Dillwynia parvifolia √ Dillwynia retorta √ Glycine clandestina twining glycine √ √

2586/R03/AB 4

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Glycine tabacina √ Gompholobium pinnatum pinnate wedge pea √ Hardenbergia violacea false sarsaparilla √ √ Indigofera australis Australian indigo √ Jacksonia scoparia dogwood √ √ Kennedia rubicunda dusky coral pea √ Mirbelia rubiifolia heathy mirbelia √ Mirbelia speciosa √ Podolobium ilicifolium prickly shaggy pea √ √ Pultenaea euchila √ Pultenaea flexilis graceful bush-pea √ √ √ Pultenaea linophylla √ √ √ Pultenaea paleacea chaffy bush-pea √ Pultenaea retusa notched bush-pea √ Pultenaea rosmarinifolia √ Pultenaea spinosa √ Pultenaea villosa hairy bush-pea √ √ Fabaceae Acacia elongata swamp wattle √ √ √ (Mimosoideae) Acacia falcata sickle wattle √ √ Acacia fimbriata fringed wattle √ Acacia filicifolia fern-leaved wattle √ Acacia implexa hickory wattle √ Acacia irrorata subsp. green wattle √ √ √ irrorata Acacia linearis √ Acacia longifolia Sydney golden wattle √ √ Acacia mearnsii black wattle √ Acacia myrtifolia red-stemmed wattle √ √ √ Acacia stricta straight wattle √ √ Acacia ulicifolia prickly Moses √ √ Geraniaceae Geranium solanderi native geranium √ Geranium sp. √ Goodeniaceae Goodenia bellidifolia √ √ Goodenia hederacea forest goodenia √ Goodenia heterophylla √ Goodenia paniculata branched goodenia √ Goodenia rotundifolia √ Haloragaceae Gonocarpus tetragynus √ Gonocarpus teucrioides raspwort √ Haloragis heterophylla rough raspwort √

2586/R03/AB 5

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Hypoxidaceae Hypoxis hygrometrica golden weather-grass √ Lamiaceae Plectranthus parviflorus cockspur flower √ Lobeliaceae Lobelia dentata √ Pratia purpurascens whiteroot √ √ Loganaceae Mitrasacme polymorpha √ Malvaceae *Modiola caroliniana red-flowered mallow √ Sida corrugata corrugated sida √ *Sida rhombifolia Paddys lucerne √ Menispermaceae Stephania japonica snake vine √ √ Moraceae Ficus coronata sandpaper fig √ √ Myoporaceae Eremophila debilis winter apple √ Myrsinaceae Myrsine howittiana Brush muttonwood √ Myrtaceae Angophora bakeri narrow-leaved apple √ √ √ Angophora costata smooth-barked apple √ √ √ Angophora floribunda rough-barked apple √ √ √ Backhousia myrtifolia grey myrtle √ √ Callistemon linearifolius √ √ Callistemon linearis narrow-leaved √ √ bottlebrush Callistemon rigidus stiff bottlebrush √ Callistemon salignus willow bottlebrush √ √ Corymbia gummifera red bloodwood √ √ √ Corymbia maculata spotted gum √ √ √ Eucalyptus acmenoides white mahogany √ √ Eucalyptus canaliculata grey gum √ √ √ Eucalyptus capitellata brown stringybark √ √ √ Eucalyptus crebra narrow-leaved ironbark √ √ Eucalyptus eugenioides thin-leaved stringybark √ Eucalyptus fibrosa broad-leaved ironbark √ √ √ Eucalypttus globoidea white stringybark √ √ √ Eucalyptus piperita Sydney peppermint √ Eucalyptus punctata grey gum √ √ Eucalyptus resinifera subsp. red mahogany √ √ √ resinifera Eucalyptus tereticornis forest red gum √ √ √ Kunzea ambigua tick bush √ Leptospermum polygalifolium √ √ √ Leptospermum trinervium √ √ √ Melaleuca linariifolia √ √ √ Melaleuca nodosa √ √ Melaleuca sieberi √ √ √

2586/R03/AB 6

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Melaleuca stypheloides prickly-leaved tea-tree √ Melaleuca thymifolia thyme-leaved √ √ paperbark Sannantha pluriflora √ Oleaceae Notelaea longifolia large mock-olive √ √ Oxalidaceae Oxalis corniculata √ Oxalis perennans √ Passifloraceae *Passiflora edulis common passionfruit √ √ Phyllanthaceae Breynia oblongifolia coffee bush √ √ Poranthera ericifolia √ √ Pittosporaceae Billardiera scandens appleberry √ √ Bursaria spinosa subsp. native blackthorn √ √ √ spinosa Plantaginaceae Plantago debilis native plantain √ *Plantago lanceolata lamb's tongues √ √ Plantago sp. √ Veronica calcina hairy speedwell √ Polygonaceae Persicaria decipens slender knotweed √ √ Rumex brownii swamp dock √ Primulaceae *Anagallis arvensis scarlet/blue pimpernel √ Proteaceae Banksia spinulosa hairpin banksia √ √ √ Conospermum sp. √ Grevillea linearifolia linear-leaf grevillea √ Grevillea parviflora subsp. small-flower grevillea √ parviflora Hakea sericea needlebush √ √ Isopogon anemonifolius broad-leaf drumsticks √ √ Persoonia levis broad-leaved geebung √ √ √ Persoonia linearis narrow-leaved √ √ √ geebung Ranunculaceae Clematis aristata old man's beard √ Clematis glycinoides headache vine √ Ranunculus inundatus river buttercup √ √ Ranunculus plebeius forest buttercup √ Rosaceae Rubus parvifolius native raspberry √ √ Rubus sp. √ √ Rubiaceae Galium gaudichaudii rough bedstraw √ Galium sp. √ Morinda jasminioides sweet morinda √ Opercularia aspera coarse stinkweed √ Opercularia diphylla stinkweed √

2586/R03/AB 7

Family/Subfamily Scientific Name Common Name EIS Umwelt BMP (Mitchell 2009 (EDAW McCotter 1992) 1990) Pomax umbellata pomax √ √ Rutaceae Phebalium squamulosum √ subsp. squamulosum Santalaceae Exocarpos cupressiformis native cherry √ √ Exocarpos strictus dwarf cherry √ Sapindaceae Dodonaea triquetra large-leaf hop-bush √ √ Solanaceae Duboisia myoporoides corkwood √ *Solanum nigrum blackberry nightshade √ √ Solanum pungetium eastern nightshade √ Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia nuda √ Stylidiaceae Stylidium graminifolium grass triggerplant √ √ Thymelaeaceae Pimelea linifolia subsp. √ √ linifolia Tremandraceae Tetratheca juncea black-eyed Susan √ Ulmaceae Trema tomentosa var. viridis posion peach √ Verbenaceae *Lantana camara lantana √ √ *Verbena bonariensis purpletop √ √ Violaceae Hybanthus monopetalus slender violet-bush √ Melicytus dentatus tree violet √ Vitaceae Cayratia clematidea native grape √ √

2586/R03/AB 8

APPENDIX C

Fauna Species List

Appendix C - Fauna Species List

The following list was developed from surveys of the subject site detailed in Section 2.0 of the main report. It includes all species of vertebrate fauna observed on the subject site during fieldwork.

The following abbreviations or symbols are used in the list:

x Identified from visual sighting or characteristic call; C “Confident” identification by Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd; P “Probable” identification by Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd; Po “Possible” identification by Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd; MAR Listed marine species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act); MIG Listed migratory species under the EPBC Act; V Vulnerable under Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act); PD (V) Preliminary determination as a Vulnerable species listed under Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act).

Birds recorded were identified using descriptions in Slater et al. (2003) and the scientific and common name nomenclature of Birds Australia. Reptiles recorded were identified using keys and descriptions in Cogger (2000), Swan et al. (2004), Weigel (1990) and Wilson & Swan (2008) and the scientific and common name nomenclature of Cogger (2000).

Amphibians recorded were identified using keys and descriptions in Cogger (2000), Robinson (1998), Anstis (2002) and Barker et al. (1995) and the scientific and common name nomenclature of Cogger (2000). Mammals recorded were identified using keys and descriptions in Strahan (2002) and Menkhorst & Knight (2004) and the scientific and common name nomenclature of Strahan (2002).

2586/R03/AC 1

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

BIRDS Phasianidae Coturnix pectoralis stubble quail MAR x Anatidae Cygnus atratus black swan MIG x Anas superciliosa Pacific black duck MIG x x Podicipedidae Tachybaptus Australasian grebe x novaehollandiae Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax little pied cormorant x melanoleucos Phalacrocorax carbo great cormorant x

Ardeidae Ardea modesta eastern great egret MAR x Ardea ibis cattle egret MAR x Egretta novaehollandiae white-faced heron x Threskiornithidae

Threskiornis spinicollis straw-necked ibis MAR x Accipitridae Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle MAR x & MIG Aquila audax wedge-tailed eagle MIG x Falconidae Falco cenchroides nankeen kestrel MAR x & MIG Rallidae Porphyrio porphyrio purple swamphen x Gallinula tenebrosa dusky moorhen x Fulica atra Eurasian coot x Charadriidae Vanellus miles masked lapwing MIG x x Turnicidae Turnix varius painted button-quail x Columbidae Phaps chalcoptera common bronzewing x Geopelia striata peaceful dove x x Geopelia humeralis bar-shouldered dove x x Leucosarcia wonga pigeon x x melanoleuca

2586/R03/AC 2

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

Podargidae Podargus strigoides tawny frogmouth x Aegothelidae Aegotheles cristatus Australian owlet-nightjar x Apodidae Hirundapus caudacutus white-throated needletail MAR x & MIG Cacatuidae Calyptorhynchus yellow-tailed black- x x funereus cockatoo Callocephalon gang-gang cockatoo V x fimbriatum Psittacidae Trichoglossus rainbow lorikeet x haematodus Glossopsitta concinna musk lorikeet x Glossopsitta pusilla little lorikeet V x x x Platycercus eximius eastern rosella x x Cuculidae Eudynamis scolopacea common koel MAR x Scythrops channel-billed cuckoo MAR x novaehollandiae Chalcites basalis Horsfields bronze-cuckoo MAR x Chalcites lucidus shining bronze-cuckoo MAR x Cacomantis pallidus pallid cuckoo MAR x Cacomantis flabelliformis fan-tailed cuckoo MAR x x Strigidae Ninox strenua powerful owl V x Ninox novaeseelandiae southern boobook MAR x & MIG Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus mystacalis white-throated nightjar MAR x Halcyonidae Dacelo novaeguineae laughing kookaburra x x Todiramphus macleayii forest kingfisher MAR x Todiramphus sanctus sacred kingfisher MAR x Meropidae Merops ornatus rainbow bee-eater MAR x & MIG Coraciidae Eurystomus orientalis dollarbird MAR x

2586/R03/AC 3

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

Climacteridae Corombates white-throated treecreeper x x leucophaeus Climacteris picumnus brown treecreeper (eastern V x victoriae subsp.) Maluridae Malurus cyaneus superb fairy-wren x x Malurus lamberti variegated fairy-wren x Acanthizidae Sericornis frontalis white-browed scrubwren x Calamanthus chestnut-rumped x pyrrhopygia heathwren Pardalotidae Pardalotus punctatus spotted pardalote x x Pardalotus striatus striated pardalote x Gerygone mouki brown gerygone x Acanthiza pusilla brown thornbill x x Acanthiza lineata striated thornbill x Acanthiza nana yellow thornbill x Acanthiza reguloides buff-rumped thornbill x x Meliphagidae Meliphaga lewinii Lewins honeyeater x x Philemon corniculatus noisy friarbird x x Manorina melanophrys bell miner MIG x x x Manorina melanocephala noisy miner x x Myzomela sanguinolenta scarlet honeyeater x Lichenostomus chrysops yellow-faced honeyeater x x x Lichenostomus yellow-tufted honeyeater MIG x melanops Lichenostomus fuscus fuscous honeyeater x Melithreptus lunatus white-naped honeyeater x Monarchidae Myiagra rubecula leaden flycatcher x Myiagra inquieta restless flycatcher x Monarcha melanopsis black-faced monarch MAR x Grallina cyanoleuca magpie-lark MAR x Petroicidae Microeca leucophaea jacky winter x Petroica boodang scarlet robin (PD) x V Petroica rosea rose robin x Eopsaltria australis eastern yellow robin x x Pachycephalidae Falcunculus frontatus crested shrike-tit MIG x x x

2586/R03/AC 4

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

Pachycephala pectoralis golden whistler x x Pachycephala rufiventris rufous whistler x x x Colluricincla harmonica grey shrike-thrush x x Dicruridae Rhipidura rufifrons rufous fantail MAR x x Rhipidura fuliginosa grey fantail x x Rhipidura leucophrys willie wagtail x Eupetidae Psophodes olivaceus eastern whipbird x x Neosittidae Daphoenositta varied sittella PD V x chrysoptera Campephagidae Coracina black-faced cuckoo-shrike MAR x x novaehollandiae Coracina papuensis white-bellied cuckoo-shrike MAR x Coracina tenuirostris cicadabird MAR x & MIG Oriolidae Oriolus sagittatus olive-backed oriole x Artamidae Artamus cyanopterus dusky woodswallow x Cracticus torquatus grey butcherbird x Gymnorhina tibicen Australian magpie x Cracticus nigrogularis pied butcherbird x Strepera graculina pied currawong x x Strepera versicolor grey currawong x Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian raven x x Sturnidae Sturnus vulgaris* common starling x Nectariniidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum mistletoebird x Estrildidae Taeniopygia bichenovii double-barred finch x Neochmia temporalis red-browed finch x x Zosteropidae Zosterops lateralis silvereye MAR x x Hirundinidae Hirundo neoxena welcome swallow MAR x Hirundo nigricans tree martin MAR x Pycnonotidae Pyconotus jocosus red-whiskered bulbul x

2586/R03/AC 5

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

AMPHIBIANS Myobatrachidae Crinia signifera common eastern froglet x x Limnodynastes ornatus ornate burrowing frog x Limnodynastes peronii striped marsh frog x Limnodynastes spotted marsh frog x tasmaniensis Pseudophryne bibronii Bibrons toadlet x Pseudophryne coriacea red-backed toadlet x Hylidae Litoria fallax green reed frog, dwarf tree x frog Litoria freycineti Freycinet’s frog x Litoria latopalmata broad-palmed frog x Litoria peronii Perons tree frog x REPTILES Varanidae Varanus varius lace monitor x Agamidae Physignathus lesueurii. eastern water dragon x x x lesueurii Scincidae Eulamprus quoyii eastern water skink x Lampropholis guichenoti garden skink x Elapidae Pseudechis porphyriacus red-bellied black snake x x Pseudonaja textilis eastern brown snake x MAMMALS Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus short-beaked echidna x x Dasyuridae Antechinus stuartii brown antechinus x x x Vombatidae Vombatus ursinus common wombat x Petauridae Petaurus australis yellow-bellied glider V x x Petaurus breviceps sugar glider x x Pseudocheiridae Pseudocheirus common ringtail possum x peregrinus Phalangeridae Trichosurus vulpecula common brushtail possum x Macropodidae Macropus giganteus eastern grey kangaroo x

2586/R03/AC 6

Scientific Name Common Name Conservation EIS Umwelt BMP Status (Mitchell (2009) (EDAW TSC EPBC McCotter 1992) Act Act 1990)#

Wallabia bicolor swamp wallaby x Pteropodidae Pteropus poliocephalus grey-headed flying-fox V V x Pteropus scapulatus little red flying-fox x Rhinolophidae Rhinolophus eastern horseshoe-bat C megaphyllus Emballonuridae Saccolaimus flaviventris yellow-bellied sheathtail bat V P x Molossidae Nyctinomus australis white-striped freetail-bat C Vespertilionidae Miniopterus australis little bentwing-bat V P,C Miniopterus schreibersii eastern bentwing-bat V Po oceanensis Chalinolobus dwyeri large-eared pied bat V V C,P Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's wattled bat Po,P,C Chalinolobus morio chocolate wattled bat C Myotis adversus large-footed myotis V Po,P,C Scotorepens orion eastern broad-nosed bat Po,P,C Vespadelus vulturnus little forest bat C,P Muridae Hydromys chrysogaster water-rat x Rattus fuscipes bush rat x *Rattus rattus black rat x x *Mus musculus house mouse x Canidae *Vulpes vulpes fox x x Felidae *Felis catus cat x x Leporidae *Oryctolagus cuniculus rabbit x Suidae *Sus scrofa pig x

Note: # Indicates species ‘likely to occur on the site’.

2586/R03/AC 7

APPENDIX D

Test for Ecological Significance under Part 3a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Appendix D - Test for Ecological Significance Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Part 3A of the EP&A Act requires a test for ecological significance relating to the potential impacts of the Project on listed threatened species, endangered populations or TECs. As a formal assessment method format is yet to be established by the relevant government authorities, an assessment that applies the key principles of the Section 5A assessment is used here to assess the potential for the Project to impact on threatened species, endangered populations or TECs within the study area. The Test for Ecological Significance used here focuses on the potential impacts of the Project at the regional level.

A Test for Ecological Significance is provided below for those identified threatened species, endangered populations or TECs considered (within Appendix A) to have the potential to be impacted by the Project. The list includes species which are the subject of recent Preliminary Determinations by the NSW Scientific Committee to list as threatened species under the TSC Act. The following TEC and species are assessed:

• Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest;

• leafless tongue orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana);

• black-eyed Susan (Tetratheca juncea);

• small-flower grevillea (Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora);

• heath wrinklewort (Rutidosis heterogama);

• netted bottle brush (Callistemon linearifolius);

• glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami);

• gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum);

• little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla);

• powerful owl (Ninox strenua);

• sooty owl (Tyto tenebricosa);

• masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae);

• varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera);

• brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae);

• black-chinned honeyeater (eastern subspecies) (Melithreptus gularis gularis);

• scarlet robin (Petroica boodang);

• yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis);

• squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis);

• grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus);

2586/R03/AD 1

• yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris).

• eastern free-tail bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis);

• little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis);

• eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis);

• eastern long-eared bat (SE form) (Nyctophilus timoriensis);

• large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri);

• eastern false pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis);

• large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus); and

• greater broad-nosed bat (Scoteanax rueppellii).

Test for Ecological Significance under EP&A Act

Endangered Ecological Community

Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest a) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the endangered ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The Project will require the removal of 8 hectares of this vegetation community. Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest occurs in the central to lower Hunter Valley, principally on Permian geology. It is restricted to a range of approximately 65 kilometres by 35 kilometres centred on the Cessnock – Beresfield area. Remnants of this community occur within the LGAs of Cessnock, Maitland, Singleton, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle, Port Stephens and Dungog, but may also occur elsewhere within the Sydney Basin bioregion.

The loss of 8 hectares of this community from a study area that is dominated by the same vegetation is not likely to represent the loss of a significant area of known habitat. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate this community from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of this EEC with adjoining EEC within Sugarloaf SCA. b) Whether the endangered ecological community, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest has been recorded in Werakata NP and Sugarloaf SCA. The study area adjoins Sugarloaf SCA, on its northern boundary. Considering the limited range of Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest, it is likely that this indicates reasonable representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region.

2586/R03/AD 2

c) Whether the endangered ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.

Lower Hunter Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest has a relatively restricted distribution, and would be very close to the limit of this distribution within the study area.

Threatened Species

Leafless tongue orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

This species has not been identified in the study area, although suitable habitat is available for the species to be potentially present. The Project will directly impact on 8 hectares of potential habitat for this species, however this impact is not likely to be of a magnitude that will place a local viable population of the species at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species is not known to occur within any conservation reserves within the region. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is known to occur in the Karuah, Manning and Wyong CMA sub-regions in the Hunter – Central Rivers CMA region. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Black-eyed Susan (Tetratheca juncea) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

It is estimated that approximately 100 individuals of this species will be removed by the Project. This represents approximately one third of the extent of known records of this species within the study area, however the entire study area has not been surveyed in detail for this species. The population of this species that occurs (at least partly) within the study area is assumed to be a viable population, and it is likely to be contiguous with other populations or individuals in the region. Despite the loss of part of the population of this species within the study area, the known extent of this species within the local area, and broader area is likely to be such that this loss will not be significant. It is not likely that the

2586/R03/AD 3

Project will disrupt a local viable population of the species, such that it is placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including up to 100 individuals of this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species has been recorded from numerous conservation reserves in the region, being: Heaton SF, Awaba SF, Munmorah SCA, Lake Macquarie SCA, Glenrock SCA and Sugarloaf SCA. It is likely that this comprises adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is known to be confined to coastal districts from Bulahdelah to Lake Macquarie. The furthest inland occurrences of this species are known from Buttai, near Mt Sugarloaf. Given the location of the study area, it is likely that these records are at, or approaching the western limits of, the known distribution of this species.

Small-flower grevillea (Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

It is estimated that approximately 300 stems of Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora occur in the study area, however the entire study area has not been surveyed in detail for this species. The true population size for this species within the study area is not fully known, as this plant can sucker readily from rhizomes, making stem counts inaccurate at times. The population identified within the study area is assumed to be viable, even though it occurs in an area that is regularly slashed for the transmission line easement. These individuals would be considered part of a local population known to occur in the Kurri Kurri region. The total area of occupancy of the species is estimated at 5,500 hectares, although the accuracy of this estimate is low due to limited ground-truthing. The Project will remove approximately 0.1 hectares of known habitat for this species, however this is not likely to impact on this species such that a local viable population is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including up to 0.1 hectares of known habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate

2586/R03/AD 4

areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species has been recorded from Werakata NP and Werakata SCA. Given the known distribution of the species, this is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is sporadically distributed throughout the Sydney Basin, with the main known occurrence centred around Picton, Appin and Bargo (and possibly further south to the Moss Vale area). Separate populations are also known further north from Putty to Wyong and Lake Macquarie on the Central Coast and Cessnock and Kurri Kurri in the Lower Hunter. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution of this species.

Heath wrinklewort (Rutidosis heterogama) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Suitable habitat is available for the species to be potentially present and although the records could not be located, we understand that the species may occur at or within the vicinity of the site The Project will directly impact on 8 hectares of potential habitat for this species, however this impact is not likely to be of a magnitude that will place a local viable population of the species at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species is known to occur within the following conservation reserves within the region: Werakata NP, Werakata SC and Glenrock SCA. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is known to occur in coastal districts from Maclean to the Hunter Valley and inland to Torrington. It has also been recently recorded at Cooranbong on the Central Coast and extensively around the Cessnock district. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 5

Netted bottle brush (Callistemon linearifolius) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Suitable habitat is available for the species to be potentially present and although the records could not be located, we understand that the species may occur at or within the vicinity of the site The Project will directly impact on 8 hectares of potential habitat for this species, however this impact is not likely to be of a magnitude that will place a local viable population of the species at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species is known to occur within the following conservation reserves within the region: Werakata NP and Heaton SF. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is known to occur from the Georges River to the Hawkesbury River in the Sydney area, and north to the Nelson Bay area of NSW. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Glossy black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the glossy black-cockatoo has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA.

2586/R03/AD 6

c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The glossy black-cockatoo has been recorded from Yengo NP, Killarney NR, Werakata NP, Watagans NP and Lake Macquarie SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The glossy black-cockatoo has a sparse distribution along the east coast and adjacent inland areas from western Victoria to Rockhampton in Queensland. In NSW, it has been recorded as far inland as Cobar and Griffith. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Gang-gang cockatoo (Callocephalon fimbriatum) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The gang-gang cockatoo was recorded within the EIS surveys in 1990 (Mitchell McCotter 1990), although the location of this record is not known. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The gang-gang cockatoo has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP and Watagan NP. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

In NSW, the gang-gang cockatoo occurs from the south east coast to the Hunter region and inland to the Central Tablelands and South-west Slopes. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 7

Little lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The little lorikeet was recorded within the EIS surveys in 1990 (Mitchell McCotter 1990), although the location of this record is not known. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The little lorikeet has been recorded from Yengo NP, Pokolbin SF, Olney SF, Werakata SCA, Werakata NP and Sugarloaf SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The little lorikeet is distributed from just north of Cairns, around the east coast of Australia down to Adelaide. In NSW this species is found from the coast to the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range, extending as far west as Albury, Dubbo, Parkes and Narrabri. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Powerful owl (Ninox strenua) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

This species has been heard calling on a number of occasions within, or in the immediate vicinity of the study area. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate

2586/R03/AD 8

areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The powerful owl has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Killarney NP, Lake Macquarie SCA and Wallarah NP. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The powerful owl occurs in eastern Australia, mostly on the coastal side of the Great Dividing Range, from south western Victoria to Bowen in Queensland. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Sooty owl (Tyto tenebricosa) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the sooty owl has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The sooty owl has been recorded from Watagan NP, Pokolbin SF, Heaton SF and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation of this species within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The sooty owl has a disjunct distribution through coastal and near-coastal eastern Australia, from central Queensland to central Victoria. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution of this species.

2586/R03/AD 9

Masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the masked owl has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The masked owl has been recorded from Pokolbin SF, Killarney NR, Watagan NP, Werakata SCA and Lake Macquarie SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The masked owl occurs sparsely throughout the continent and nearby islands, including Tasmania and New Guinea. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Varied sittella (Daphoenositta chrysoptera) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The varied sittella was recorded within the EIS surveys in 1990 (Mitchell McCotter 1990), although the location of this record is not known. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate

2586/R03/AD 10

areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The varied sittella has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Corrabare SF, Pokolbin SF, Olney SF and Werakata SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The varied sittella is a sedentary species that inhabits the majority of mainland Australia with the exception of the treeless deserts and open grasslands. Its NSW distribution is basically continuous from the coast to the far west. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Brown treecreeper (eastern subsp.) (Climacteris picumnus victoriae) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The brown treecreeper was recorded within the EIS surveys in 1990 (Mitchell McCotter 1990), although the location of this record is not known. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The brown treecreeper has been recorded from Werakata NP and Awaba SF. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The brown treecreeper occurs over central NSW, west of the Great Dividing Range and sparsely scattered to the east of the divide in drier areas such as the Cumberland Plain of Western Sydney, and in parts of the Hunter, Clarence, Richmond and Snowy River valleys. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 11

Black-chinned honeyeater (Melithreptus gularis gularis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The black-chinned honeyeater has been recorded previously in the vicinity of the study area, however not during the recent surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species has been recorded from Yengo NP and Werakata NP. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The eastern subspecies of the black-chinned honeyeater is widespread, from the tablelands and western slopes of the Great Dividing Range to the north-west and central-west plains and the Riverina. It is rarely recorded east of the Great Dividing Range, although regularly observed from the Richmond River district. It has also been recorded at a few scattered sites in the Hunter, Central Coast and Illawarra regions. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Scarlet robin (Petroica boodang) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The scarlet robin has been recorded within the study area. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature

2586/R03/AD 12

that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The scarlet robin can be found in south-eastern Australia, from Tasmania to the southern end of Queensland, to western Victoria and south SA. In NSW it is found throughout the eastern areas of the state, no further than 500 kilometres from the coast. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The yellow-bellied glider has been recorded in the study area, by way of call identification on a number of occasions. It is likely that the vegetation in the study area provides suitable habitat for this species, as would the adjoining vegetated habitats. The project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Within the region, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Watagan NP, Pokolbin SF, Corrabare SF, Werakata NP, Watagan SF, Heaton SF and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The yellow-bellied glider is found along the eastern coast to the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range, from southern Queensland to Victoria. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 13

Squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the squirrel glider has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Within the region, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Uffington SF, Werakata NP, Werakata SCA, Olney SF, Lake Macquarie SCA and Wallarah NP. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The species is widely though sparsely distributed in eastern Australia, from northern Queensland to western Victoria. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

This species was recorded on a number of occasions within the study area, from call identifications and sightings. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of foraging habitat for this species, however no camp sites were recorded. Thus, the Project will not impact on roosting or breeding habitat for this species. The project is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature

2586/R03/AD 14

that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The grey-headed flying-fox has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Pokolbin SF, Werakata SCA, Watagan NP, Olney SF, Yengo NP and Lake Macquarie SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The grey-headed flying-fox is found within 200 kilometres of the eastern coast of Australia, from Bundaberg in Queensland to Melbourne in Victoria. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

This species was recorded within the study area as part of the BMP (EDAW 1992), although the location of this record is unknown. The species has also been recorded by Umwelt (2009). The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

The yellow-bellied sheathtail bat has been recorded from Yengo NP. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The yellow-bellied sheathtail bat is a wide-ranging species found across northern and eastern Australia. In the most southerly part of its range – most of Victoria, south-western NSW and adjacent South Australia - it is a rare visitor in late summer and autumn. There are scattered records of this species across the New England Tablelands and North West Slopes. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 15

Eastern freetail-bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the eastern freetail-bat has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Within the region, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Werakata SCA, Awaba SF and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation of this species within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The eastern freetail-bat is found along the east coast from south Queensland to southern NSW. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Little bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The little bentwing-bat has been recorded within the study area. The study area is not likely to contain breeding habitat for this limestone cave-dependent species. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (comprising foraging and potential transitory roosting habitat only), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and transitory roosting habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate

2586/R03/AD 16

areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species has been recorded from Werakata NP, Uffington SF, Werakata SCA, Awaba SF, Lake Macquarie SCA and Wallarah NP. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species is known to occur along coastal north-eastern NSW and eastern Queensland. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Eastern bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The eastern bentwing-bat has been recorded within the study area. The study area is not likely to contain breeding habitat for this limestone cave-dependent species. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (comprising foraging and potential transitory roosting habitat only), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and transitory roosting habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Uffington SF, Olney SF, Awaba SF and Lake Macquarie SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

Eastern bentwing-bats occur along the east and north-west coasts of Australia. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 17

Eastern long-eared bat (SE form) (Nyctophilus timoriensis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the eastern long-eared bat has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species is not known to occur in conservation reserves. This is not likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

Overall, the distribution of the south eastern form of this species coincides approximately with the Murray Darling Basin with the Pilliga Scrub region being the distinct stronghold for this species. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The large-eared pied bat has been recorded within the study area. The study area is not likely to contain breeding habitat for this cave-dependent species. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (comprising foraging and potential transitory roosting habitat only), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not

2586/R03/AD 18

impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

This species has been recorded from numerous conservation reserves in the region, being: Yengo NP, Watagan NP, Pokolbin SF, Awaba SF and Olney SF It is likely that this comprises adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The large-eared pied bat has a distribution from south western Queensland to NSW from the coast to the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Eastern false pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the eastern false pipistrelle has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Werakata NP, Heaton SF, Olney SF and Lake Macquarie SCA. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

This species has a range from south-eastern Queensland, through NSW, Victoria and into Tasmania, and occurs from the Great Dividing Range to the coast. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

2586/R03/AD 19

Large-footed myotis (Myotis adversus) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The large-footed myotis has been recorded from the study area. The study area is likely to contain foraging and breeding habitat for this species. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of suitable habitat for this species (comprising foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and transitory roosting habitat) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species has been recorded from Uffington SF, Pokolbin SF, Werakata NP, Awaba SF and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The large-footed myotis is found in the coastal band from the north-west of Australia, across the Top End and south to western Victoria. It is rarely found more than 100 kilometres inland, except along major rivers. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Greater broad-nosed bat (Scoteanax rueppellii) a) Whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a local viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Although suitable high quality open forest habitat is present within the study area, the greater broad-nosed bat has not been recorded during surveys. The Project will result in the loss of 8 hectares of potentially suitable habitat for this species (including potential foraging and breeding habitat), however this is not likely to impact in a local viable population of the species, such that it is likely to be placed at risk of extinction. b) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of the threatened species, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed, or isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas.

The loss of 8 hectares of native vegetation (including potential foraging and breeding habitat for this species) within the study area is not likely to result in the modification or removal of a significant area of known (or potential) habitat for this species. The Project is not of a nature that will isolate potential habitat for this species from currently interconnecting or proximate

2586/R03/AD 20

areas. Importantly, the Project will not impact on the current connectivity of habitat for this species with adjoining habitat within Sugarloaf SCA. c) Whether the species, or its habitat, are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.

Regionally, this species has been recorded from Yengo NP, Pokolbin SF, Werakata NP, Werakata SCA, Awaba SF and Olney SF. This is likely to comprise adequate representation within the conservation reserves (or similar protected areas) in the region. d) Whether the species is at the limit of its known distribution.

The greater broad-nosed bat is found mainly in the gullies and river systems that drain the Great Dividing Range, from north-eastern Victoria to the Atherton Tableland. It extends to the coast over much of its range. In NSW it is widespread on the New England Tablelands, however it does not occur at altitudes above 500 m. The study area is not at the limit of the known distribution for this species.

Key Threatening Processes a) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.

There are currently 31 key threatening processes (KTPs) listed under the Schedules of the TSC Act, as well as seven listed under the Schedules of the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Those KTPs with the potential to increase or be exacerbated by the Project are discussed below.

• Clearing of Native Vegetation – Loss of vegetation destroys habitat, which causes a loss of biodiversity. Vegetation clearing also results in fragmentation, increased greenhouse gas emissions, increased edge habitat for invasive species, loss of leaf litter and fallen logs, loss of ecological function, and changes to soil biota. The proposed access roads and ANE Production Facility will clear up to 8 hectares of native vegetation. Although habitat will be destroyed in this localised area, it is unlikely that loss of habitat will contribute to the loss of any species. The proposed access road will fragment the habitat within the study area and increase edge effects by clearing within the survey area and also the area between the existing access road and the proposed access road. The level of fragmentation and increased edge effects are not expected to have a significant impact on the habitat.

• Loss of Hollow-bearing Trees – Approximately 85 hollow bearing trees supporting a range of hollow sizes are expected to be lost, mainly from the southern section of the survey area. The KTP lists 40 threatened species reliant on tree hollows, 11 of which potentially occur or do occur in the study area. Potentially-affected species include: yellow-bellied glider (Petaurus australis), powerful owl (Ninox strenua), masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), eastern false pipistrelle (Falsistrellus tasmaniensis) and eastern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus timoriensis).

• Removal of Dead Wood and Dead Trees – Approximately 20 standing dead trees (stags) are expected to be lost, mainly from the southern section of the study area. There is an abundance of woody debris on the ground in various states of decay that would also be removed from the area to be cleared. Fauna that potentially occur on the site and that are dead-wood dependent include: common brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula), masked owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), eastern freetail-bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis), squirrel glider (Petaurus norfolcensis) and many invertebrates.

2586/R03/AD 21

Critical Habitat a) Will critical habitat be affected? The following listings are currently present on the critical habitat register: • Critical habitat declaration – final ƒ Gould's Petrel; ƒ Little Penguin population in Sydney's North Harbour; ƒ Mitchell's Rainforest Snail in Stotts Island Nature Reserve; and ƒ Wollemi Pine. • Critical habitat recommendation – pending finalisation ƒ Bomaderry zieria within the Bomaderry bushland; ƒ Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub Endangered Ecological Community; and ƒ Wollemia nobilis (the Wollemi Pine).

None of these areas of declared critical habitat will be affected by the Project, either directly or indirectly.

Conclusion

The Project does not have the potential to result in a significant impact on threatened species or endangered ecological communities within the study area.

2586/R03/AD 22

APPENDIX E

Assessment of Significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

Appendix E - Assessment of Significance under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

Both small grevillea (Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora) and black-eyed Susan (Tetratheca juncea) are listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act. Based on field survey, the presence of these species in the subject site is confirmed.

The leafless tongue-orchid (Cryptostylis hunteriana) and heath wrinklewort (Rutidosis heterogama) are listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act. Neither species was detected during the survey; however, suitable habitat for both occurs on the site.

The grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) and large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri) were recorded on the site. Both are listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act.

The aim of this assessment is to determine whether the proposed development is likely to have a significant impact on these species, as listed matters of national environmental significance (MNES). The Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1 provides Significant Impact Guidelines for MNES (May 2006) and these are addressed separately below.

The proposed development will involve clearing approximately eight hectares of native vegetation. The population of Grevillea parviflora var parviflora affected by the development covers an area of 0.1 hectares and less than 300 plants. The population of Tetratheca juncea affected by the development covers an area of 0.1 hectares and less than 100 individuals. The plants and their habitat would be removed by the development.

For the grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) and large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri), approximately 8 hectares of foraging habitat will be removed by the development. No flying-fox camps or cave habitats were recorded on the site, so breeding and roosting habitat for these species will not be impacted.

Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora

The Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora population on the subject site is considered part of an important population for the species in the Kurri Kurri region because it is a disjunct population of the species. However, it is likely not a key source population for breeding or dispersal, and not necessary to maintain genetic diversity.

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

The proposed development will remove less than 300 stems, which will not lead to a long- term decrease in the size of an important population.

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

The development will reduce the area occupied by the population by 0.1 hectares.

2586/R03/AE 1

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The proposed development will not fragment the population into 2 or more populations due to the small area affected.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The habitat for the species occurring in the subject site is not critical to the survival of the species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

The proposed development will not disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The proposed development will destroy local habitat within the development footprint; however, the species is not likely to decline in the greater region due the habitat loss of 0.1 hectares.

• Result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The proposed development will not result in invasive species becoming established in the habitat that will remain adjacent to the development footprint due to the mitigation measures to prevent weeds and feral animals from being introduced.

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

The impact on the population by the proposed development will not interfere with the recovery of the species.

Tetratheca juncea

The Tetratheca juncea population on the subject site is considered an important population for the species in the region because it is near the limit of its range. However, it is likely not a key source population for breeding or dispersal, and not necessary to maintain genetic diversity.

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

The proposed development will remove less than 100 individuals, which will not lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population.

2586/R03/AE 2

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

The development will slightly reduce the area occupied by the population.

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The proposed development will not fragment the population into two or more populations. The development will affect the edge of one small population.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The habitat for the species occurring in the subject site is not critical to the survival of the species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

The proposed development will not disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The proposed development will destroy local habitat within the development footprint; however, the species is not likely to decline in the greater region due the habitat loss of 0.1 hectares.

• Result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The proposed development will not result in invasive species becoming established in the habitat that will remain adjacent to the development footprint due to the mitigation measures to prevent weeds and feral animals from being introduced.

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

The impact on the population by the proposed development will not interfere with the recovery of the species.

Cryptostylis hunteriana

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

If the species does occur in the subject site, the population would not be considered an important population for the species in the region because it would likely not be a key source population for breeding or dispersal, not necessary to maintain genetic diversity or near the limit of its range.

2586/R03/AE 3

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

If the species does occur in the subject site, the population would not be considered an important population for the species in the region.

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The proposed development would not fragment a population of Cryptostylis hunteriana into two or more populations.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The habitat for the species occurring in the subject site is not critical to the survival of the species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

A population on the subject site would not be considered an important population for the species in the region. The proposed development would not disrupt the breeding cycle of the larger regional population.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The proposed development will destroy local habitat within the development footprint; however, the species is not likely to decline in the greater region due the small size of the habitat loss.

• Result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The proposed development will not result in invasive species becoming established in the habitat that will remain adjacent to the development footprint due to the mitigation measures to prevent weeds and feral animals from being introduced.

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

Any potential impact on a population by the proposed development will not interfere with the recovery of the species.

Rutidosis heterogama

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

If the species does occur in the subject site, the population would not be considered an important population for the species in the region because it would likely not be a key source

2586/R03/AE 4

population for breeding or dispersal, not necessary to maintain genetic diversity or near the limit of its range.

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

If the species does occur in the subject site, the population would not be considered an important population for the species in the region.

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The proposed development would not fragment a population of Rutidosis heterogama into two or more populations.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The habitat for the species occurring in the subject site is not critical to the survival of the species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

A population on the subject site would not be considered an important population for the species in the region. The proposed development would not disrupt the breeding cycle of the larger regional population.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The proposed development will destroy local habitat within the development footprint; however, the species is not likely to decline in the greater region due the small size of the habitat loss.

• Result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The proposed development will not result in invasive species becoming established in the habitat that will remain adjacent to the development footprint due to the mitigation measures to prevent weeds and feral animals from being introduced.

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

Any potential impact on a population by the proposed development will not interfere with the recovery of the species.

Grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)

The grey-headed flying-foxes recorded within the subject site are not likely to form a distinct population (or sub-population) of the species. This highly mobile species is not near the limit of its range within the subject site, nor is it likely to be a key source population for breeding or dispersal, and it is not necessary to maintain genetic diversity.

2586/R03/AE 5

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

The grey-headed flying-foxes recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of this species.

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

The grey-headed flying-foxes recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of the species.

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The grey-headed flying-foxes recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not fragment an existing important population into two or more populations.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The foraging habitat contained within the site is not critical to the survival of this species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

The grey-headed flying-foxes recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. No camp/breeding habitat was recorded on the site. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population of this species.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not modify, destroy, remove or 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 vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The development will not result in invasive species that are harmful to this species becoming established in its habitat.

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

The development will not interfere substantially with the recovery of the grey-headed flying- fox.

2586/R03/AE 6

Large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri)

The large-eared pied bats recorded within the subject site are not likely to form a distinct population (or sub-population) of the species. This highly mobile species is not near the limit of its range within the subject site, nor are they likely to be a key source population for breeding or dispersal, and are not necessary to maintain genetic diversity.

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

• Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species

The large-eared pied bats recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of this species.

• Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of a species

The large-eared pied bats recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not reduce the area of occupancy of an important population of the species.

• Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations

The large-eared pied bats recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not fragment an existing important population into 2 or more populations.

• Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species

The foraging habitat contained within the site is not critical to the survival of this species.

• Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population

The large-eared pied bats recorded within the site do not constitute an important population of the species. No breeding or roosting habitat for this cave-dependent species was recorded on the site. The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population of this species.

• Modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline

The removal of 8 hectares of foraging habitat from the subject site will not modify, destroy, remove or 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 vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat

The development will not result in invasive species that are harmful to this species becoming established in its habitat.

2586/R03/AE 7

• Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline

No diseases that affect the species would be introduced by the proposed development.

• Interfere substantially with the recovery of the species

The development will not interfere substantially with the recovery of the large-eared pied bat.

Conclusion

The proposed development will not have a significant impact on the EPBC listed species Grevillea parviflora var. parviflora, Tetratheca juncea, Rutidosis heterogama, Cryptostylis hunteriana, grey-headed flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) or large-eared pied bat (Chalinolobus dwyeri).

2586/R03/AE 8