DOCSLIB.ORG

Marsden Park North Precinct

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marsden Park North Precinct Marsden Park North Precinct Biodiversity and Riparian Corridors Assessment Prepared for Marsden Park North Release Group May 2018 Marsden Park North Precinct - Biodiversity and Riparian Corridors Assessment DOCUMENT TRACKING Item Detail Project Name Marsden Park North Precinct – Biodiversity and Riparian Corridors Assessment Project Number 13SYDECO-0050 David Bonjer Project Manager (02) 8536 8650 Level 6, 299 Sussex Street Sydney NSW 2000 Prepared by Danielle Adams-Bennett and Matthew Dowle Reviewed by David Bonjer and Meredith Henderson Approved by David Bonjer Status Draft Version Number 8 Last saved on 28 May 2018 Top left: Cumberland Plain Woodland; Top right: Dillwynia tenuifolia; Bottom left: Disturbed Cover photo woodland; Middle right: Pultenaea parviflora; Bottom right: Grevillea juniperina subsp. juniperina ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd. with support from Marsden Park Release Group. Disclaimer This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Marsden Park Release Group. The scope of services was defined in consultation with Marsden Park Release Group, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information. Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited. Template 08/05/2014 © ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ii Marsden Park North Precinct - Biodiversity and Riparian Corridors Assessment Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 Description of project .................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Study area .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Consultation .................................................................................................................................. 4 2 Statutory Planning Context ....................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Biodiversity Certification ............................................................................................................... 8 3 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1 Literature review ......................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.1 Likelihood of occurrence ............................................................................................................. 10 3.2 Field survey – Terrestrial ecology assessment .......................................................................... 10 3.2.1 Vegetation community validation and condition ......................................................................... 11 3.2.2 ENV and AHCVV ........................................................................................................................ 12 3.2.3 Threatened flora and fauna ........................................................................................................ 12 3.2.4 Survey limitations ....................................................................................................................... 12 3.3 Field Survey – Aquatic and riparian assessment ....................................................................... 13 4 Terrestrial Biodiversity values ................................................................................................ 16 4.1 Vegetation Communities and condition ...................................................................................... 16 4.1.1 Cumberland Plain Woodland (Shale Plains Woodland) ............................................................. 16 4.1.2 Shale Gravel Transition Forest ................................................................................................... 17 4.1.3 River-Flat Eucalypt Forest (Alluvial Woodland) .......................................................................... 18 4.1.4 Cooks River Castlereagh Ironbark Forest .................................................................................. 18 4.1.5 Castlereagh Scribbly Gum Woodland ........................................................................................ 18 4.1.6 Castlereagh Swamp Woodland .................................................................................................. 19 4.1.7 Freshwater Wetlands .................................................................................................................. 19 4.1.8 Exotic Grassland ........................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.9 Vegetation community and condition assessment area calculations ......................................... 20 4.2 Existing Native Vegetation .......................................................................................................... 25 4.3 Flora species .............................................................................................................................. 28 4.3.1 Threatened flora ......................................................................................................................... 28 4.3.2 Priority weeds and Weeds of National Environmetnal Significance (WoNS) ............................. 28 4.4 Fauna habitat .............................................................................................................................. 29 4.5 Terrestrial conservation significance .......................................................................................... 30 4.5.1 Biodiversity Value ....................................................................................................................... 30 © ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD iii Marsden Park North Precinct - Biodiversity and Riparian Corridors Assessment 4.5.2 Recovery potential ...................................................................................................................... 31 4.5.3 Cumberland Plain Woodland management viability analysis ..................................................... 31 4.6 Terrestrial Biodiversity Conservation Recommendations .......................................................... 36 4.6.1 Conservation of priority areas to maintain parity with the Sydney Region Growth Centres Biodiversity Certification Order ................................................................................................................ 36 4.6.2 Development Controls in the Growth Centres SEPP ................................................................. 37 4.6.3 Development Control Plans ........................................................................................................ 37 4.6.4 Ownership ................................................................................................................................... 37 4.6.5 Wetland habitat ........................................................................................................................... 38 5 Riparian and Aquatic Assessment ......................................................................................... 41 5.1 Context ....................................................................................................................................... 41 5.2 Top of bank mapping and condition assessment ....................................................................... 41 5.2.1 Riparian corridors ....................................................................................................................... 42 5.3 Aquatic and riparian habitat assessment ................................................................................... 45 5.3.1 Aquatic fauna habitat .................................................................................................................. 45 5.3.2 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) ............................................................................ 45 5.4 Aquatic conservation significance .............................................................................................. 45 5.5 Riparian Corridor Management Recommendations ................................................................... 48 5.5.1 Development Controls in the Precinct plan ................................................................................ 48 5.5.2 Riparian Ownership and Management Options ........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sydney Harbour a Systematic Review of the Science 2014
    Sydney Harbour A systematic review of the science 2014 Sydney Institute of Marine Science Technical Report The Sydney Harbour Research Program © Sydney Institute of Marine Science, 2014 This publication is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material provided that the wording is reproduced exactly, the source is acknowledged, and the copyright, update address and disclaimer notice are retained. Disclaimer The authors of this report are members of the Sydney Harbour Research Program at the Sydney Institute of Marine Science and represent various universities, research institutions and government agencies. The views presented in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of The Sydney Institute of Marine Science or the authors other affiliated institutions listed below. This report is a review of other literature written by third parties. Neither the Sydney Institute of Marine Science or the affiliated institutions take responsibility for the accuracy, currency, reliability, and correctness of any information included in this report provided in third party sources. Recommended Citation Hedge L.H., Johnston E.L., Ayoung S.T., Birch G.F., Booth D.J., Creese R.G., Doblin M.A., Figueira W.F., Gribben P.E., Hutchings P.A., Mayer Pinto M, Marzinelli E.M., Pritchard T.R., Roughan M., Steinberg P.D., 2013, Sydney Harbour: A systematic review of the science, Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Sydney, Australia. National Library of Australia Cataloging-in-Publication entry ISBN: 978-0-646-91493-0 Publisher: The Sydney Institute of Marine Science, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Available on the internet from www.sims.org.au For further information please contact: SIMS, Building 19, Chowder Bay Road, Mosman NSW 2088 Australia T: +61 2 9435 4600 F: +61 2 9969 8664 www.sims.org.au ABN 84117222063 Cover Photo | Mike Banert North Head The light was changing every minute.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Pimelea Spicata Pimelea Spicata Recovery Plan
    © Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), 2005 This work is copyright, however material presented in this plan may be copied for personal use or published for educational purposes, providing that any extracts are fully acknowledged. Apart from this and any other use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from the Department of Environment and Conservation. The NPWS is part of the Department of Environment and Conservation Department of Environment and Conservation 43 Bridge Street (PO Box 1967) Hurstville NSW 2220 www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au Requests for information or comments regarding the recovery program for Pimelea spicata should be directed to: The Director General, Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) C/- Coordinator Pimelea spicata recovery program Biodiversity Conservation Section, Metropolitan Branch Environment Protection and Regulation Division Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) PO Box 1967 Hurstville NSW 2220 Ph: (02) 9585 6678 Fax: (02) 9585 6442 Cover photograph: Pimelea spicata in flower growing amongst grasses at Mt Warrigal in the Illawarra Photographer: Martin Bremner This Plan should be cited as following: Department of Environment and Conservation (2005) Pimelea spicata R. Br. Recovery Plan. Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), Hurstville NSW. ISBN: 1 74137 333 6 DEC 2006/181 Approved Recovery Plan for Pimelea spicata Pimelea spicata Recovery Plan Executive summary This document constitutes the formal Commonwealth and New South Wales State Recovery Plan for the small shrub Pimelea spicata (Thymelaeaceae), and as such considers the conservation requirements of the species across its known range. It identifies the future actions to be taken to ensure the long-term viability of P.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Sydney Coastal Dry Sclerophyll Forest Litter on Fuels and Fire Behaviour in Hornsby Shire
    Effects of Sydney Coastal Dry Sclerophyll Forest Litter on Fuels and Fire Behaviour in Hornsby Shire Angela G. Gormley A thesis submitted to fulfil requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy School of Life and Environmental Sciences Faculty of Science The University of Sydney February 2019 ii Angela G. Gormley iii O! for a muse of fire, that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention Prologue The Life of King Henry V William Shakespeare iv Acknowledgements Most universities ban their students from setting fire to litter on the campus so it was necessary to transfer to the School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, halfway through my degree. My supervisors, Assoc. Prof. Tina Bell and Dr Malcolm Possell, solved all my problems during our first meeting. I appreciate their guidance with my research, their support and, they took my research in an interesting direction. I would like to thank Veronica Quintanilla Berjon for help with the burning experiments. The School of Life and Environmental Sciences provided me with the facilities and equipment that were necessary to support my research. I appreciate the financial assistance and networking opportunities provided by the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre. I appreciate the support of Amelia Jones and Michelle Brown from Hornsby Shire Council because they encouraged me to keep trying when it seemed impossible for my research to continue. They assisted me with access to sites, maps, accompanied me on my field trips and provided a lot of useful information. I would like to thank students and staff at the School of Life and Environmental Sciences and the Sydney Institute of Agriculture, The University of Sydney, because a friendly and sociable environment makes studying more enjoyable.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 NSW Landscape Architecture Award Winners
    20 17 NSW Landscape Architecture Awards Principal Corporate Partner Major Corporate Partners Supporting Corporate Partners Principal NSW Partners Major NSW Partners Supporting NSW Partners Jury Report NSW AILA Awards 2017 The NSW 2017 awards jury was a diverse group of 7 landscape architects and urban designers. It consisted of three male and four female jurors and represented academia, government, large and small private practice and the AILA. The jury made the decision to undertake site visits to a select group of projects and found this process essential in fully understanding projects and informing decision making. With the largest number of award entries ever received, the 2017 NSW awards offered a true indication of the breadth of project work being undertaken by landscape architects. There is no doubt that NSW is experiencing a time of massive urban restructuring. Urban centres are densifying, expanding and growing at speed. Grey is threatening green and landscape architects are working on challenges of social equity and environmental resilience across all scales. The debate about open space in the city, how much, what type and where, continues to underpin most strategic investigations, yet the voice is now charged with a growing ‘evidence base’ to argue for better quality, better connectivity and more trees. As urban centres expand and densify, they are also connecting, and mega scaled infrastructure projects are being reconceptualised by landscape architects as catalysts for change. Landscape architects across the state are turning infrastructure projects once seen as environmental threats into vital opportunities for large scale remaking, restoration and environmental stewardship of the vast landscapes which they cross and connect.
    [Show full text]
  • New M5 EIS Vol 2H App S Biodiversity Assessment
    New M5 Environmental Impact Statement Biodiversity Assessment Report Appendix S November 2015 WestConnex The New M5: Biodiversity Assessment Report DOCUMENT TRACKING Item Detail Project Name The New M5 Environmental Impact Assessment Project Number 14SYD_349 Meredith Henderson Project Manager 02 8536 8650 299 Sussex Street Sydney, NSW 2000 Prepared by Matthew Dowle, Meredith Henderson, Danielle Adams-Bennett Reviewed by Ryan Smithers Approved by Mark Adams Status FINAL Version Number 8 Last saved on 19 November 2015 This report should be cited as ‘Eco Logical Australia 2015. The New M5 - Biodiversity Assessment Report. Prepared for Roads and Maritime Services of NSW.’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with support from Roads and Maritime Services of NSW and AECOM. Disclaimer This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Roads and Maritime Services of NSW. The scope of services was defined in consultation with Roads and Maritime Services of NSW, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information. Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Assessment Report, Heathcote Ridge, West Menai
    STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT REPORT HEATHCOTE RIDGE, WEST MENAI November 2012 Prepared for Gandangara Local Aboriginal Land Council By Cumberland Ecology with input from BBC Consulting Planners and 1. PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 3 1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 3 1.1.1 Background........................................................................................................... 3 1.2 The Program ..................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Background........................................................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Proposed Development Concept ..................................................................... 5 1.3 Regional Context ............................................................................................. 12 1.4 Land Use Planning .......................................................................................... 13 1.4.1 Land to Which the SEPP Amendment will Apply ............................................ 13 1.4.2 Proposed Land Use Zones ................................................................................. 13 1.4.3 Principal Development Standards ................................................................... 14 1.4.4 Consent Authority ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Pyrmont Peninsula 1788 - 2008
    Transformations: Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula 1788 - 2008 John Broadbent Transformations: Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula 1788 - 2008 John Broadbent Sydney, 2010. Ecology of Pyrmont peninsula iii Executive summary City Council’s ‘Sustainable Sydney 2030’ initiative ‘is a vision for the sustainable development of the City for the next 20 years and beyond’. It has a largely anthropocentric basis, that is ‘viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and values’(Macquarie Dictionary, 2005). The perspective taken here is that Council’s initiative, vital though it is, should be underpinned by an ecocentric ethic to succeed. This latter was defined by Aldo Leopold in 1949, 60 years ago, as ‘a philosophy that recognizes[sic] that the ecosphere, rather than any individual organism[notably humans] is the source and support of all life and as such advises a holistic and eco-centric approach to government, industry, and individual’(http://dictionary.babylon.com). Some relevant considerations are set out in Part 1: General Introduction. In this report, Pyrmont peninsula - that is the communities of Pyrmont and Ultimo – is considered as a microcosm of the City of Sydney, indeed of urban areas globally. An extensive series of early views of the peninsula are presented to help the reader better visualise this place as it was early in European settlement (Part 2: Early views of Pyrmont peninsula). The physical geography of Pyrmont peninsula has been transformed since European settlement, and Part 3: Physical geography of Pyrmont peninsula describes the geology, soils, topography, shoreline and drainage as they would most likely have appeared to the first Europeans to set foot there.
    [Show full text]
  • Rickards Road Castlereagh – Central Lot
    Rickards Road Castlereagh – Central Lot Vegetation Management Plan Prepared for Enviro Waste Services Group Pty Ltd August 2017 Rickards Road Vegetation Management Plan DOCUMENT TRACKING Item Detail Project Name Rickards Road VMP – Central Lot Project Number 17WOL-6848 Jack Talbert Project Manager (02) 4021 2211 Level 2, Suite 204, 62 Moore Street Austinmer NSW 2515 Prepared by Rebecca Dwyer, Jack Talbert, Paul Price Reviewed by Andrew Whitford Approved by Andrew Whitford Status DRAFT Version Number 1 Last saved on 7 August 2017 Right: Cooks River Castlereagh Ironbark Forest within the VMP area, Top left: Dillwynia Cover photo tenuifolia, bottom right: Grevillea juniperina subsp. juniperina. Photos taken by Rebecca Dwyer March 2017 This report should be cited as ‘Eco Logical Australia 2017. Rickards Road – Central Lot Vegetation Management Plan. Prepared for Enviro Waste Services Group Pty Ltd. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with support from Paul Lemm Planning Consultant and Eddy Hawach from Enviro Waste Services Group Pty Ltd. Disclaimer This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Enviro Waste Services Group Pty Ltd. The scope of services was defined in consultation with Enviro Waste Services Group Pty Ltd, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information. Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report and its supporting material by any third party.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Islands in Fire-Prone Vegetation: Do Landscape Features
    Journal of Biogeography, 29, 677–684 Habitat islands in fire-prone vegetation: do landscape features influence community composition? Peter J. Clarke Department of Botany, University of New England, Armidale, Australia Abstract Aim, Location Landscape features, such as rock outcrops and ravines, can act as habitat islands in fire-prone vegetation by influencing the fire regime. In coastal and sub- coastal areas of Australia, rock outcrops and pavements form potential habitat islands in a matrix of fire-prone eucalypt forests. The aim of this study was to compare floristic composition and fire response traits of plants occurring on rocky areas and contrast them with the surrounding matrix. Methods Patterns of plant community composition and fire response were compared between rocky areas and surrounding sclerophyll forests in a range of climate types to test for differences. Classification and ordination were used to compare floristic composition and univariate analyses were used to compare fire response traits. Results The rock outcrops and pavements were dissimilar in species composition from the forest matrix but shared genera and families with the matrix. Outcrops and pavements were dominated by scleromorphic shrubs that were mainly killed by fire and had post-fire seedling recruitment (obligate seeders). In contrast, the most abundant species in the adjacent forest matrix were species that sprout after fire (sprouters). Main conclusions Fire frequency and intensity are likely to be less on outcrops than in the forest matrix because the physical barrier of rock edges disrupts fires. Under the regime of more frequent fires, obligate seeders have been removed or reduced in abundance from the forest matrix.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 Gas Drainage Noise Impact Assessment
    ASHTON COAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT – DA 309-11-2001 MOD 7 Appendix 1 Gas Drainage Noise Impact Assessment ASHTON COAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT – DA 309-11-2001 MOD 7 ASHTON COAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT – DA 309-11-2001 MOD 7 Appendix 2 Gas Drainage Air Quality Impact Assessment ASHTON COAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT – DA 309-11-2001 MOD 7 REPORT - FINAL ASHTON COAL LTD GAS DRAINAGE PROJECT – AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS ASSESSMENT Wells Environmental Services Job No: 5527 22 February 2011 A PEL Company PROJECT TITLE: ASHTON COAL LTD GAS DRAINAGE PROJECT – AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS ASSESSMENT JOB NUMBER: 5527 PREPARED FOR: Philip Burns WELLS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PREPARED BY: R. Kellaghan APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY: A.Todoroski DISCLAIMER & COPYRIGHT: This report is subject to the copyright statement located at www.paeholmes.com © Queensland Environment Pty Ltd trading as PAEHolmes ABN 86 127 101 642 DOCUMENT CONTROL VERSION DATE PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY 01 22.02.2011 R. Kellaghan J. Berry Queensland Environment Pty Ltd trading as PAEHolmes ABN 86 127 101 642 SYDNEY: Suite 2B, 14 Glen Street Eastwood NSW 2122 Ph: +61 2 9874 8644 Fax: +61 2 9874 8904 BRISBANE: Level 1, La Melba, 59 Melbourne Street South Brisbane Qld 4101 PO Box 3306 South Brisbane Qld 4101 Ph: +61 7 3004 6400 Fax: +61 7 3844 5858 Email: [email protected] Website: www.paeholmes.com 5527 Ashton Gas Drainage Stage 1 AQA Final V1.docx ii Ashton Coal Ltd Gas Drainage Project – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Wells Environmental Services | PAEHolmes Job 5527 ES1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed Ashton Gas Drainage Project involves the construction of 15 gas wells to allow surface to seam goaf drainage to improve the efficiency of the underground ventilation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Frankston Vegetation Study 2006
    Frankston Vegetation Study 2006 Project 05-5 Planning Review Prepared for: Frankston City Council Ecology Australia Pty Ltd Flora and Fauna Consultants 88B Station Street, Fairfield, Victoria, Australia 3078 Tel: (03) 9489 4191 Fax: (03) 9481 7679 www.ecologyaustralia.com.au [email protected] Copyright 2006 Ecology Australia Pty Ltd This publication is copyright. It may only be used in accordance with the agreed terms of the commission. Except as provided for by the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior written permission of Ecology Australia Pty Ltd. Document information This is a controlled document. Details of the document ownership, location, distribution, status and revision history and are listed below. All comments or requests for changes to content should be addressed to the document owner. Owner Ecology Australia Pty Ltd Author Sarah Bedggood, Lisa Crowfoot, Nina Roberts, Cherie Campbell, Jamie McMahon and Ann McGregor Location Frankston Vegetation Study 2006.doc Document History Status Changes By Date Draft Draft 0.1 Sarah Bedggood 07/04/06 Final Draft Draft 0.2 Sarah Bedggood 12/05/2006 Final final Sarah Bedggood 02/08/2006 Final Frankston Vegetation Study 2006 with maps & App 4.doc i Frankston Vegetation Study 2006 Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 2 2 Study Area 3 3 Methods 4 3.1 Literature review 4 3.2 GIS 4 3.3 Taxonomy 5 3.4 Field surveys 5 4 Vegetation 7 4.1 Ecological Vegetation Classes 7 4.2 EVC Descriptions 11 4.3 Significance of vegetation 34 5 Management Issues 36 6 Review of legislation and planning controls relating to native vegetation 39 6.1 Legislation and policies for native vegetation protection 39 6.2 Native vegetation protection in the Frankston Planning Scheme 48 7 Recommendations 51 8 Acknowlegements 53 9 References 54 Tables Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity and Riparian Assessment
    Biodiversity and Riparian Assessment West Schofields Precinct Prepared for NSW Department of Planning and Environment May 2018 West Schofields Precinct Biodiversity and Riparian Assessment DOCUMENT TRACKING Item Detail Project Name West Schofields Precinct Biodiversity and Riparian Assessment Project Number 17SYD-6190 and 15SYD-3282 David Bonjer Project Manager 02 8536 8670 Suite 1, Level 1, 101 Sussex St, Sydney NSW 2000 Prepared by Ian Dixon, Nicole McVicar, Matthew Dowle, Emily Bathgate and Belinda Failes Reviewed by David Bonjer Approved by David Bonjer Status Final Version Number 2 Last saved on 11 May 2018 Cumberland Plain Woodland and Grevillea juniperina subsp. juniperina West Schofields Cover photo Precinct. Photo by Matthew Dowle June 2016. This report should be cited as ‘Eco Logical Australia 2018. West Schofields Precinct Biodiversity and Riparian Assessment. Prepared for NSW Department of Planning and Environment’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with support from the NSW Department of Planning and Environment. Disclaimer This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and the NSW Department of Planning and Environment. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information. Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter.
    [Show full text]