Table of Contents

Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Penny West Works Approval Supporting Information 6 January 2021

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Section 1 Attachment 1A – Proof of Occupier Status ...... 1

Section 2 Attachment 1B – ASIC Company Extract ...... 2

Section 3 Attachment 2 ...... 3

Section 4 Attachment 3A – Environmental Commissioning Plan ...... 4

Section 5 Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities ...... 5 5.1 Background ...... 5 5.2 Dewatering and Discharge Requirements...... 6 5.2.1 Mine Dewatering ...... 6 5.2.2 Brines ...... 8 5.2.3 Use and Disposal of Mine Water and Brines ...... 9 5.3 Landfill ...... 9 5.4 WWTP and Wastewater Spray-field ...... 13

Section 6 Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation ...... 15

Section 7 Attachment 6A – Emissions and Discharges ...... 19 7.1 Magenta Pit ...... 19 7.2 Dewatering Discharge Infrastructure ...... 19 7.3 Landfill ...... 19 7.4 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Spray-field ...... 20

Section 8 Attachment 6B – Waste ...... 22 8.1 Inert Waste Type 1 ...... 22 8.2 Putrescible Waste ...... 22 8.3 Contaminated Materials ...... 22 8.4 Treated Sewage ...... 22 8.5 Discharge Water ...... 23

Section 9 Attachment 7 – Siting and Location ...... 24 9.1 Siting Context ...... 24 9.2 Specified Ecosystems ...... 24 9.2.1 Threatened and/or Priority Flora...... 25 9.2.2 Aboriginal and Other Heritage Sites ...... 26 9.2.3 Rivers, Lakes, Oceans and Other Bodies of Surface Water ...... 26

Section 10 Attachment 8 – Additional Information Submitted ...... 29 10.1 Attachment 8A – Hydrology and Hydrogeology Report (MWES 2020) ...... 29 10.2 Attachment 8B – Flora/Vegetation and Fauna Survey (Botanica Consulting 2020) ...... 30 10.3 Attachment 8C – Archaeological and Ethnographic Site Avoidance Survey (JCHMC 2020) ...... 31 Figures

Section 11 Attachment 9A – Proposed Fee for Works Approval ...... 32 11.1 Dewatering Fee ...... 32 11.2 Landfill Fee ...... 32 11.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Spray-field Fee ...... 32

Section 12 References ...... 33

Figures Figure 1 Magenta Pit Storage Curve ...... 7 Figure 2 Landfill Design ...... 11 Figure 3 Bioremediation Facility Conceptual Design ...... 12 Figure 4 Ecofarmer 250 Wastewater Treatment System Schematic ...... 14 Figure 5 Locations of Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4) in the Project Area...... 27 Figure 6 Locations of Aboriginal Heritage Sites within the Project Area ...... 28 Figure 7 Proposed Works Approval Application Fee ...... 32

Tables Table 5-1 Prescribed Premises Details ...... 5 Table 5-2 Proposed Works Schedule ...... 6 Table 5-3 Penny Dewatering Estimates ...... 8 Table 5-4 Penny Annual Water Balance ...... 9 Table 6-1 Penny Gold Project Stakeholder Engagement Register ...... 16 Table 7-1 Maximum Capacity and Normal Expected Site Load Design Details for the Wastewater Spray-field ...... 20 Table 8-1 Monitoring of Emissions to Land ...... 23 Table 9-1 Environmental Values...... 25

Document History & Status

Document History & Status

Revision Date issued Reviewed by Approved by Date approved Revision type A 24/12/2020 Jayben Lister Sonia Finucane 24/12/2020 Client Review B 06/01/2021 Sonia Finucane Sonia Finucane 06/01/2021 Submission to DWER

Last Saved: 6 January 2021 File Name: Penny West WAA Supporting Information Author: Kate Tarnowy Project Manager: Kate Tarnowy Client: Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Document Title: Penny West Works Approval Supporting Information Document Version: Rev_B Project Number: 1000880

Attachment 1A – Proof of Occupier Status

Section 1 Attachment 1A – Proof of Occupier Status

1 Penny West WAA Supporting Information MINING TENEMENT SUMMARY REPORT

MINING LEASE 57/180 Status: Live

TENEMENT SUMMARY

Area: 835.95000 HA Death Reason : Mark Out : 21/03/1990 09:50:00 Death Date : Received : 21/03/1990 15:30:00 Commence : 11/09/1990 Term Granted : 21 Years (Renewed)

CURRENT HOLDER DETAILS

Name and Address ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD

DESCRIPTION

Locality: YOUANGARRA Datum: Datum Situated 1100 metres bearing 302 degrees from TRIG POINT G57-4 Boundary: THENCE: 1560 metres bearing 70 degrees 100 metres bearing zero degrees 1250 metres bearing 90 degrees 4100 metres bearing 175 degrees 1140 metres bearing 265 degrees along fence 600 metres bearing 338 degrees 700 metres bearing 265 degrees 3170 metres bearing 338 degrees BACK TO DATUM Area : Type Dealing No Start Date Area Surveyed 20/10/2012 835.95000 HA Granted 11/09/1990 870.00000 HA Applied For 21/03/1990 870.00000 HA

SHIRE DETAILS

Shire Shire No Start End Area SANDSTONE SHIRE 7630 21/03/1990 835.95000 HA

Created 29/10/2020 15:18:17 Requested By: Hamish Penno/Page 1 of 1 MINING TENEMENT SUMMARY REPORT

MINING LEASE 57/196 Status: Live

TENEMENT SUMMARY

Area: 42.29500 HA Death Reason : Mark Out : 20/12/1990 14:25:00 Death Date : Received : 27/12/1990 11:15:00 Commence : 09/05/1991 Term Granted : 21 Years (Renewed)

CURRENT HOLDER DETAILS

Name and Address ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD

DESCRIPTION

Locality: YOUANGARRA Datum: Datum situated 2500 metres bearing 160 degrees from Trig Point G 57-4 Boundary: THENCE: 600 metres bearing 159 degrees 700 metres bearing 267 degrees along fenceline 600 metres bearing 339 degrees 700 metres bearing 87 degrees BACK TO DATUM Conditional Partial Surrender of Exploration Licence 57/160 Area : Type Dealing No Start Date Area Surveyed 20/10/2012 42.29500 HA Granted 09/05/1991 42.00000 HA Applied For 20/12/1990 42.00000 HA

SHIRE DETAILS

Shire Shire No Start End Area SANDSTONE SHIRE 7630 20/12/1990 42.29500 HA

Created 29/10/2020 15:20:10 Requested By: Hamish Penno/Page 1 of 1 Attachment 1B – ASIC Company Extract

Section 2 Attachment 1B – ASIC Company Extract

2 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Current & Historical Company Extract

Name: ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD ACN: 618 514 944

Date/Time: 17 July 2020 AEST 10:38:42 AM

This extract contains information derived from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) database under section 1274A of the Corporations Act 2001.

Please advise ASIC of any error or omission which you may identify. Current & Historical Company Extract ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 618 514 944

Organisation Details Document Number

Current Organisation Details Name: ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD 3E1845390 ACN: 618 514 944 ABN: 78618514944 Registered in: Western Australia Registration date: 11/04/2017 Next review date: 11/04/2021 Name start date: 11/04/2017 Status: Registered Company type: Australian Proprietary Company Class: Limited By Shares Subclass: Proprietary Company

Address Details Document Number

Current Registered address: Level 1, 130 Royal Street, EAST PERTH WA 6004 7EAY43163 Start date: 17/07/2020

Principal Place Of Level 1, 130 Royal Street, EAST PERTH WA 6004 7EAY43163 Business address: Start date: 30/06/2020

Historical Registered address: Suite 2, 827 Beaufort Street, INGLEWOOD WA 6052 7EAL72393 Start date: 04/06/2019 Cease date: 16/07/2020 Registered address: ENDEAVOUR CORPORATE, 'C /' Suite 8, 7 The 7E9692451 Esplanade, MOUNT PLEASANT WA 6153 Start date: 05/12/2017 Cease date: 03/06/2019 Registered address: BODEN CORPORATE SERVICES PTY LTD, 15 3E1845390 Lovegrove Close, MOUNT CLAREMONT WA 6010 Start date: 11/04/2017 Cease date: 04/12/2017 Principal Place Of Suite 2, 827 Beaufort Street, INGLEWOOD WA 6052 7EAL72393 Business address: Start date: 28/05/2019 Cease date: 29/06/2020 Principal Place Of Suite 1, 827 Beaufort Street, INGLEWOOD WA 6052 7EAB39444 Business address: Start date: 30/05/2018 Cease date: 27/05/2019 Principal Place Of Suite 21, 827 Beaufort Street, INGLEWOOD WA 6052 3E1845390 Business address: Start date: 11/04/2017 Cease date: 29/05/2018

17 July 2020 AEST 10:38:42 AM 1 Current & Historical Company Extract ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 618 514 944

Contact Address Section 146A of the Corporations Act 2001 states 'A contact address is the address to which communications and notices are sent from ASIC to the company'. Current Address: Suite 8, 7 The Esplanade, MOUNT PLEASANT WA 6153 Start date: 28/11/2017

Officeholders and Other Roles Document Number Director Name: TIMOTHY PETER MANNERS 7EAV05087 Address: 3 Doney Street, ALFRED COVE WA 6154 Born: 14/05/1969, GUILDFORD, UNITED KINGDOM Appointment date: 18/03/2020 Name: KEVIN JAMES LINES 7EAV05087 Address: 53 Cave Avenue, BRIDGEWATER SA 5155 Born: 21/05/1953, BATEMANS BAY, NSW Appointment date: 18/03/2020 Name: MARK WILLIAM ZEPTNER 7EAV05087 Address: 23 Willow Bank Entrance, GWELUP WA 6018 Born: 22/01/1970, KALGOORLIE, WA Appointment date: 18/03/2020 Secretary Name: RICHARD PEREGRINE HUGH JONES 7EAV05099 Address: 13 North Street, MOUNT LAWLEY WA 6050 Born: 11/05/1970, OTTOWA, CANADA Appointment date: 18/03/2020 Previous Director Name: ALEXANDER ROBERT HARRY HEWLETT 3E1845390 Address: 4 Callaghan Way, NORANDA WA 6062 Born: 29/06/1983, TOWNSVILLE, QLD Appointment date: 11/04/2017 Cease date: 06/05/2020 Name: PAUL ADAMS 7EAG88446 Address: 124 Hardey Road, GLEN FORREST WA 6071 Born: 08/07/1964, LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM Appointment date: 30/11/2018 Cease date: 06/05/2020 Previous Secretary Name: MARK EDWARD PITTS 7E9692451 Address: 7 Jennifer Way, ROSSMOYNE WA 6148 Born: 29/10/1961, EAST FREMANTLE, WA Appointment date: 28/11/2017 Cease date: 30/06/2020 Name: GRAEME RAYMOND BODEN 3E1845390 Address: 15 Lovegrove Close, MOUNT CLAREMONT WA 6010 Born: 20/07/1949, HOBART, TAS Appointment date: 11/04/2017 Cease date: 28/11/2017 17 July 2020 AEST 10:38:42 AM 2 Current & Historical Company Extract ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 618 514 944

Ultimate Holding Company Name: SPECTRUM METALS LIMITED 3E1845390 ACN: 115 770 226 ABN: 94115770226

Share Information

Share Structure

Class Description Number Total amount Total amount Document issued paid unpaid number

ORD ORDINARY SHARES 1 1.00 0.00 3E1845390

Members

Note: For each class of shares issued by a proprietary company, ASIC records the details of the top twenty members of the class (based on shareholdings). The details of any other members holding the same number of shares as the twentieth ranked member will also be recorded by ASIC on the database. Where available, historical records show that a member has ceased to be ranked amongst the top twenty members. This may, but does not necessarily mean, that they have ceased to be a member of the company.

Name: SPECTRUM METALS LIMITED ACN: 115 770 226 Address: Suite 1, 827 Beaufort Street, INGLEWOOD WA 6052

Class Number held Beneficially held Paid Document number

ORD 1 yes FULLY 7EAB39444

Documents

Note: Where no Date Processed is shown, the document in question has not been processed. In these instances care should be taken in using information that may be updated by the document when it is processed. Where the Date Processed is shown but there is a zero under No Pages, the document has been processed but a copy is not yet available.

Date received Form type Date Number of Effective Document processed pages date number

11/04/2017 201C Application For 11/04/2017 3 11/04/2017 3E1845390 Registration As A Proprietary Company

28/11/2017 484 Change To Company 28/11/2017 3 28/11/2017 7E9692451 Details 484B Change Of Registered Address 484E Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

25/06/2018 484 Change To Company 25/06/2018 2 25/06/2018 7EAB39444

17 July 2020 AEST 10:38:42 AM 3 Current & Historical Company Extract ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD ACN 618 514 944

Details 484C Change Of Principal Place Of Business (Address) 484A2 Change Member Name Or Address

06/12/2018 484E Change To Company 06/12/2018 2 06/12/2018 7EAG88446 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

28/05/2019 484 Change To Company 28/05/2019 2 28/05/2019 7EAL72393 Details 484B Change Of Registered Address 484C Change Of Principal Place Of Business (Address)

24/03/2020 484E Change To Company 24/03/2020 3 24/03/2020 7EAV05087 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

24/03/2020 484E Change To Company 24/03/2020 2 24/03/2020 7EAV05099 Details Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

27/05/2020 484E Change To Company 27/05/2020 2 27/05/2020 7EAW9031 Details Appointment Or 3 Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

10/07/2020 484 Change To Company 10/07/2020 2 10/07/2020 7EAY43163 Details 484B Change Of Registered Address 484C Change Of Principal Place Of Business (Address) 484E Appointment Or Cessation Of A Company Officeholder

***End of Extract of 4 Pages***

17 July 2020 AEST 10:38:42 AM 4 Attachment 2

Section 3 Attachment 2

3 Penny West WAA Supporting Information

Attachment 3A – Environmental Commissioning Plan

Section 4 Attachment 3A – Environmental Commissioning Plan

4 Penny West WAA Supporting Information

ECOFARMER 250

Wastewater Treatment System

Commissioning Plan

2.2 Purpose of the Commissioning Plan The purpose of the commissioning plan is to provide direction for the commissioning process during construction, providing resolution for issues such as roles and responsibilities, lines of communication and reporting, approvals, and coordination.

2.3 Commissioning Goals and Objectives Commissioning is a systematic process of ensuring that the systems perform according to the design intent and the owner’s operational requirements. All equipment and systems should be installed according to manufacturer’s recommendations and the best practices and standards of the industry.

Commissioning will include documenting the design intent, followed by activities in the construction, acceptance, and warranty phases of the project. The participation of the contractors in commissioning activities will follow the requirements defined in the specifications.

The three main goals of the commissioning process are:

1. Facilitate the final acceptance of the project at the earliest possible date.

2. Facilitate the transfer of the project to the owner’s maintenance staff.

3. Ensure that the operation of the sewerage treatment plant will meet the requirements of the Design.

Commissioning is also intended to achieve the following specific objectives:

• Document that equipment is installed and started per manufacturer’s recommendations.

• Document that equipment and systems receive complete operational checkout by installing personnel.

• Document system performance with thorough functional performance testing and monitoring.

• Verify the completeness of operations and maintenance materials.

• Ensure that the owner’s operating personnel are adequately trained on the operation and maintenance of the Sewerage treatment Plant.

Documents required to successfully complete the tabled site acceptance testing for include:

1. RWTS Electrical schematics DWG # XXXX

2. RWTS Electrical and instrumentation function description Doc #

3. RWTS process flow diagram DWG # RWTS

4. RWTS plan view and dimensional DWG #

5. RWS tank nozzle DWG # for balance, final effluent and waste activated

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

3 3

2.4 Commissioning Scope The following marked systems will be commissioned in this project. All general references to equipment in this document refer only to equipment that is to be commissioned.

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Prior to filling tanks check the following Check all poly tanks are located as per GA Check main reactor located as per GA Check all external drain valves on reactor Check all flanges for gaskets and fasteners and tighten Check all union connection for rubber o ring Hand tighten all UPVC unions Check all hard flanges have bellow installed Check all poly tanks are on a suitable base pad Check steel reactor footings as per design Check all lugged wafer valve connections Check rotation of 3 phase motors Pump Station 1 Pump well Client supplied and installed Sewage pump duty Sewage pump standby Low float switch High float switch Alternate contactors High-High level float switch Alarm light Control board Control board penetrations

Wire terminals

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

4 4

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Inlet Screen Tecknofangi RWTS – 3 mm stainless perforated screen 1 mesh Control Panel RWTS – Stainless board 1 Check all gland and cable penetrations to underside of switch board Check board mounting secured to unit strut bracketry Check all internal electrical components after transportation for din mounting Check all wire terminals secured and fastened and tightened Inlet flow control IFM flow switch installation and operation Commences rotation of screen when fluid passed Isolates rotation of screen after fluid complete Check mounting and mechanical installation Gear box Mounted securely to side of frame Engages rotation on flow switch signal Over run after flow has finished set through HMI Spray nozzles Check all sprays nozzles are secure in position Check pressure against nozzle Check nozzle spray pattern across screen Spray bar Check flow and pressure across spray bar Check and set the manual bleed valve Screen Inlet Pipework Check all entry pipe work secured and fastened Tighten all flange bolts as required Inspect all flanges for rubber gaskets Tighten all union type valves and single unions Screen Outlet Pipework Check all outlet pipe work secured and fastened Tighten all flange bolts as required Inspect all flanges for rubber gaskets Tighten all union type valves and single unions Collection/Rejection shoot Check correct installation of pipework

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

5 5

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Check all connection fastened and free of leaks

Check connection to WAS tank

IFM overflow switch IFM

Check mechanical installation

Check alarm functionality see alarm section

Wash down solenoid Check all entry pipe work secured and fastened

Tighten all flange bolts as required

Inspect all flanges for rubber gaskets

Wash down pump This is the common pump that recirculates treated water tank and also the irrigation pump Check piping connection from pump to valve

Check run and stop times on HMI screen

WAS Tank Tank As per Polymaster Drawing – PST50KL SG1.2

Inlet pipework Check for correct piping material Check for correct connection Check tank penetrations Interconnecting pipework Check pipe work from WAS pump inlet to tank WAS Tank Aerator Check aeration manifold in tank Check support of aeration manifold in tank Check blower security and mounting Drain Valve Valve fitted to correct flange and in closed position Tank Flanges Bellows fitted to all tank flanges and bolts checked

Balance Tank 1 Tank 1- Main storage As per Polymaster Drawing – PST50KL SG1.2

Tank 2 – Balance overflow As per Polymaster Drawing – PST50KL SG 1.2

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

6 6

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Level control IFM Snub face pressure transducer 0 - .4 bar Tank Flanges Bellows fitted to all tank flanges and bolts checked Overflow Pipework Overflow from Balance Tanks – By Client Tank Flanges Bellows fitted to all tank flanges and bolts checked

SBR Reactor 40ft steel shell Ladder access Aluminum access ladder to rear of reactor 1 Handrail system Aluminum top mid and kick rail system erected 1 set All set screws used and fastened securely All set screws fastened with anti sieze

Lids Aluminum lids working 3 Mag flow meter Balance inlet mag flow meter 1 Check direction of meter Check power indication on flow meter Check and calibrate instantaneous flow Check and calibrate totalizing value Balance transfer pump Grundfos SEV 80 1 Stainless steel base mounting 1 Check pump stability and security to base of floor Check in and outlet flanges fastened and secured Check all pipework in and out pump Balance fill valve Process systems MOV 50 mm Operates correctly as required through auto cycle Decant purge valve Process systems MOV 80 mm Operates correctly as required through auto cycle Decant suction valve Process systems Operates correctly as required through auto cycle Fixed decant Steel DN 150 pipe welded with inset holes drilled Check pipe security post transport Check water flow in decant phase of system Aeration manifold Steel DN 150 pipe welded with 2 inch FI sockets Check air venturies installed

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

7 7

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Check pipe security post transport Aeration/ mixing pump DE3U-MHN3 Hidrostal pump Check fastening of 100 mm gate suction valve Check fastening of pump to base frame and floor Check connection flanges to pump base and discharge fastened and free from leaks Check motor operation Check aeration pattern within aeration cycle Check mixing of tank within mixing anoxic phase Irrigation pump and Grundfos vertical multistage CRI 32 -10 hardware Check flanged in and out UPVC flanges Check gaskets are in place and fasteners secured Check suction pipework from reactor to pump Check installation of all MOV Check installation of suction screen Check discharge pipework Check stainless screen installation Check fastening of screen Check bag installed for commissioning 150 mic Check in and outlet flanges for water connection Check discharge pipework to treated water tank Check tank penetration and connection type Check suction for tank recirculation Check bellows and valves correctly mounted Check irri pump recirculation pipework Make connection to irrigation field pipework Aeration/ mixing pump DE3U-MHN3 Hidrostal immersible pump Check fastening of 100 mm gate suction valve Check fastening of pump to base frame and floor Check connection flanges to pump base and discharge fastened and free from leaks Aeration MOV Process systems Check automated operation through HMI

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

8 8

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Check valve opening and closing function Mixing MOV Process systems Check automated operation through HMI Check valve opening and closing function Air induction venturie Mazzie ISO GRPP 4091 4” Check for flow direction Check threaded inlet and outlet connection Check induction pipework on 2inch line Check mounting of air induction MOV Check mounting of venturie post transport WAS pump and MOV Combined Balance transfer pump Check parameters in HMI set for WAS transfer commissioning Check WAS MOV operation Check all pipework inlet and outlet of the valve Check pipe work to WAS tank UPVC grey Check penetration to WAS tank Chem injection valves Mazzie ISO 1583A 1.50” Check for correct flow direction Check for interconnecting induction tube Check for induction tube fastening Check for induction tube mounting Chem injection solenoids Burkert Viton 2/2 0330-A-03 FF PP Check for panel mounting of solenoid bank in SS enclosure Check all induction tubing secured to inlet of solenoid Check connection of all discharge tubing to venturi system Check all solenoids are identified Chem bund and tanks Grundfos 60 L chem storage tanks Check bund for overflow capacity Check drain bund prior to filling tank Check suction foot valve and weight

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

9 9

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Check suction connection to foot valve Check dosing line dual contained to solenoid bank Check all tanks and bunds are clearly labeled with id Check all lines are identified

Final Effluent Tank Tank As per Polymaster Drawing – PST50KL SG1.2 1

Transfer field pipework By Client 1 Level float device RWTS FLD 10M/W 1 High level Float switch Starts irrigation pump 1 Low level Float switch Stops Irrigation Pump 1 High-High Float Switch Stops operation of the decant process and 1 activates alarm

Irrigation field View field construction referencing site plan Check all pipe sizing Check all uprights for fastening Check all pipe and threaded connections Check all wobbler nozzles Check line filters installed Run pump test rotation of motor

Inspect field spray pattern comment as required

View appropriate fencing View appropriate signage Electrical and PLC All hardware secured to 1 mounting HMI screen 6-inch Allan Bradly 800 micro series in 1 enclosure on SBR 1 Check board locking mech

Check for board key onsite

Check electrical drawings 1 full set left in control cabinet

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

1010

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Check terminal numbering

List of timer blocks Aeration Mixing

Aeration

Mixing

Settling Decant WAS transfer timers Recirculation pump run time Screen wash down valve run Screen wash down valve off Screen over run timer

Standby timer sequence Commissioning engineer to complete

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

11 11

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

System Alarm Check Alarm List Test all alarms making sure they appear on the HMI and are signaled on local alarm light and Pump overloads siren Balance pump overload Aeration pump overload Mixing pump overload Irrigation overload Tank high level Balance tank SBR reactor tank high high Final effluent

Instrument alarm Screen Screen overflow alarm Check Alarm overview page

Hydrostatic Test WAS Tank Fill to operational level and allow to stand for 2 hr Balance Tank Overflow Balance

SBR

Final effluent tank

Wet weather storage

Pressure test pipe install Time KPA Connection to screen Termination point 1 made by client rising main Screen to balance tank Balance tank to pump WAS Pump to waste tank Irrigation pump to CCT WWS balance lines To be tested by in conjunction fill tank fill

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

1212

Acceptance Item Make / model and check list Qty Tested RWTS Client

Balance over flow To be tested by in conjunction fill tank fill WAS over flow To be tested by in conjunction fill tank fill Screen over flow To be tested by in conjunction fill tank fill

Miscellaneous Potable hose reel Some items supplied by clients not RWTS Pipe markers Tank stickers Tank level gauges Directional arrows Electrical Sign off by SA contractor Safety Shower Backflow devices Hard Copy Manual Electronic Manual Laminated Electrical Drawings Chemical Storage Site Bunding Site Fencing Site Signage

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

13 13

Irrigation design and layout

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

1414

Notable Details:

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

15 15

Comments:

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

1616

3. COMMISSIONING TEAM INFORMATION

Function Name Contact Info Operations Alex Roussetos - RWTS 0415 639 241 Project Manager Rob Lee - RWTS Mechanical Andrew Bunney – Add Bg

Commissioning Adam James – RWTS 0417267747 Planner Supervisor Layton Ryan – Add bg Electrical Peter Kitson – Add Bg Nicholas Duffield - RWTS 0408 888 783 ProgrammerEngineer Controls Nicholas Duffield - RWTS 0408 888 783

Contractor

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

17 17

4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

General Management Plan In general, the CP coordinates the commissioning activities and reports to the owner’s construction representative. The CP’s responsibilities, along with all other personnel’ commissioning responsibilities are detailed in the specifications. The Specifications will take precedence over this Commissioning Plan. All members work together to fulfil contracted responsibilities and meet the objectives of the Contract Documents.

4.1 General Descriptions of Roles

General descriptions of the commissioning roles are as follows:

CP: Coordinates the CX process, writes and/or reviews testing plans, directs and documents performance testing. PM: Facilitates and supports the CX process and gives final approval of the CX work. MM: Coordinates maintenance staff participation in commissioning activities. ELECT: Perform all relevant electrical checks to ensure safety of staff, and termination of all incoming power is correct. Check direction of all motors for correct direction of rotation prior to startup of systems in automatic mode of operation STAFF: Participate in commissioning tasks and performance testing, review O&M Documentation, and attend training. A/E: Are Included in Commissioning process via telephone communications, they approve O&M manuals and assist in resolving problems. EM: Equipment manufacturers and vendors provide documentation to facilitate the commissioning work and perform contracted start-up.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

1818

4.2 General Management Plan and Protocols The following protocols will be used on this project.

Issue Protocol For requests for information (RFI) The CP goes first through the PM. or formal documentation requests:

For minor or verbal information The CP goes direct to the informed party. and clarifications:

For notifying Personnel of The CP documents deficiencies through the PM, but may deficiencies: discuss deficiency issues with contractors prior to notifying the PM. For scheduling functional tests or The CP provides input and coordination of testing and training: training. Scheduling is done through the PM.

For scheduling commissioning The CP selects the date and schedules through the PM. meetings:

For making a request for The CP has no authority to issue change orders. significant changes: Any required changes in sequences of operations required to For making minor changes in correct operational deficiencies must be approved and specified sequences of documented by the PM and A/E team. The CP may operations: recommend to the PM changes in sequences of operation to improve efficiency or control. Personnel disagreeing with Resolve issues at the lowest level possible. First with the CP, requests or interpretations by the then with the PM. Some issues may require input from the A/E CP shall: team.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

19 19

5. COMMISSIONING PROCESS This section sequentially details the commissioning process by commissioning Step, task or activity. The Sewerage Treatment Plant is commissioned on Recycle/Bore water only and only after the completion of the commissioning process will raw effluent be introduced into the plant.

Step 1: Check correct reactor and container placement and that placement is correct as per GA drawing provided if applicable

Step 2:

Check all pipe placement and installation as per the GA provided, all flange bolts and threaded unions for tightness. All glued connections are to be inspected to ensure there are no unglued connections present. All pipe is secured and fasted to appropriate fixings and clamps.

Step 3: Inspect internal of the treatment plant to ensure no damage to pumps and pipework has occurred during transportation or installation.

Step 4: Inspect internal of plant room for any damage to any pumps or pipework, test all flanges and unions for fastening, and inspect pipework clipping system.

Step 5: Ensure all valves external on the reactor and external tanks are in the closed position. Fill reactor/s to normal operational level with recycled water. Check all connections at base of reactor to ensure no leaks are present. Perform hydrostatic test allowing reactor to stand for 2 hours. Check surrounding reactor and pipework for leaks after this time

Step 6: Pressure test all interconnecting pipework and record in above the table, photos of installation to be taken at this stage and filed for record keeping. As per AS 3500 Requirement, qualified plumber to sign off on installation and pressure testing.

Step 7: Energize the plant and bump test all motors for correct motor rotation this function must be completed by a qualified electrician proficient in the state the work is to be performed. An electrical test report certificate of currency. At this stage all site based management must be notified of an electrical installation and power on.

Step 8: View all base level parameters within the HMI and control. Commence the running of the treatment process through manual operation via HMI testing each function of the code.

Step 9: Test aeration pump for aeration pattern and mixer functionality. Test aeration pump ingress valve for activation upon aeration sequencing and shut off in mixing sequence. View internal of the aeration and anoxic chamber for effective aeration dispersal and mixing in anoxic zone.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

2020

Step 10: Test WAS/RAS pump sequence combined balance pump. Test valve operation and pump operation, view fluid passing through to WAS tank. Make provision through HMI set to commissioning phase.

Step 11: Test motorized decant valve and decant transfer pump operation, first sequence of the decant process will be the clearing of the decant rail back to balance as a first flush sequence through the MOV. Make provision through HMI.

Step 12:

Make sure the screen is secured to top of the treatment tank and that all the connecting pipework completed as per drawings. Test the operation of the inlet screen, rotation commencement on fluid upon water flow from pump station, check drum rotation, check and run clean water MOV for screen wash down. Test waste over flow capacitance switch on waste pipe overflow back to WAS tank. Inspect all pipework for leaks fasten all connection to and from the screen.

Step 13: Test sucrose additive vacume solenoid and venturi take up system

Step 14: Test Alum additive vacume solenoid and venturi take up system

Step 15: Test Soda Ash additive vacume solenoid and venturi take up system

Step 16: Test final chlorine vacume solenoid and venturi take up system for operation via the manual panel switch, test for float operation when in automated mode

Step 17: Inspect and run through PLC sequencing default setting should be programmed as follows

Step 18: Electrical Testing is performed by a competent inducted electrician on site as per the RWTS Electrical Test Sheets and associated JHA. Only after electrical testing approval and sign off from the Site electrician’s will power be introduced to the Main switchboard of the Treatment Plant.

Step 19: Plant and components switched to Automatic and Plant monitoring commences with programming changes made via the PM to suit site specific operating conditions. Adjust chemical dosing rates and double check residual chemical levels with field instruments.

Step 20: Perform calibration check on all analytical instrumentation using field instruments for verification, and adjust as required.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

21 21

Step 21: Complete site testing of effluent/nutrient quality and report findings:

Sample Type Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Ammonia as Nitrogen Nitrate as Nitrogen Phosphorous Alkalinity pH Turbidity Free Chlorine

System Settleability Test

SBR 1 5 Min 10 min 30 min Comment

Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 SBR 2 Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 SBR2 Test 1 Test 2 Test 3

Step 22: Commissioning complete, observe plant process and complete final client sign off documentation.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

2222

5.1 Design Intent Documentation The design requirements, relative to the sewage treatment Plant selected for commissioning, must be explicitly documented in order to establish a baseline of performance expectations to which the actual installed performance is compared. The commissioning provider, with the assistance of the Plant design team, prepares a Plant Operation Manual that documents the design intent for those systems selected for commissioning. The Plant Operation Manual reflects the underlying assumptions and requirements that become represented in the construction documents.

5.2 Submittals RWTS will provide the commissioning personnel with a set of equipment and system submittals. This equipment data includes installation and start-up procedures, O&M data, and performance data drawings. The Commissioning Team, notify persons responsible of any new design intent or operating parameter changes, added control strategies and sequences of operation, or other change orders that may affect commissioned systems required for site conditions.

5.3 Site Observation The PM/AE provides the commissioning agent with information regarding substitutions or change orders that may affect commissioned equipment or the commissioning schedule.

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

23 23

6. TRAINING RECORD

Date:

Plant Type: Plant Description:

RWTS Instructor:

Location:

Duration:

Methods Of Instructions (Tick Box)

Presentation Demonstration Interactive workshop On-the-job instruction

ATTENDANCE

Candidate Full Name Previous Training and RWTS Instructor Candidate Signature Current Competency comments and deemed Yes/No candidate competency

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

2424

7. HANDOVER DOCUMENTATION

Acceptance Description RWTS Client

Operational & maintenance manual – Hard Copy

Operational & maintenance manual – Electronic copy System commissioning

Client Personnel Training

RWTS representative name:

RWTS representative signature: Date:

Hand over sign off Client representative name:

Client representative signature: Date:

Position description:

Contact email:

Contact Phone:

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan

25 25

REMOTE WATER TREATMENT SERVICES | ECOFARMER 250 – Commissioning Plan 186 New Cleveland Road, Tingalpa, Queensland, 4173 2626 Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Section 5 Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

5.1 Background Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd (ZMPL), a 100%-owned subsidiary of Ramelius Resources Limited, is proposing to re-open the Penny West Gold Project (the Project) which is located approximately 140 km south-east of Mt Magnet within the Shire of Sandstone on mining tenements M57/180 and M57/196. Mining at the Penny West Project will commence with the Magenta pit, approximately 1.5 km north of the existing Penny West open pit (Att. 2). This is proposed to be small open cut pit approximately 30 m deep. Once the Magenta pit is completed, a cutback of the existing Penny West pit is proposed. Before the cutback can commence, the existing Penny West pit lake will need to be drained. The pit water will be used for construction and mining activities, with the surplus transferred to the Magenta pit. An underground portal will then be established within the Penny West pit and mining of the Penny North underground mine will commence. A mining camp will be constructed on site, along with a Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and landfill to support the camp, and a small bioremediation facility (Att. 2). This Works Approval is to enable mine dewatering and discharge, construction of the WWTP and landfill, and construction of a Reverse Osmosis (RO) plant and infrastructure required to discharge brines from the RO plant to Magenta pit. The boundaries of tenements M57/180 and M57/196 are the proposed prescribed premises boundary for this works approval application (Att. 2). The operational mine life is currently estimated at three years, with an additional one to two years of closure activities. The categories for each prescribed premises are presented in Table 5-1 and detailed in the sections below.

Table 5-1 Prescribed Premises Details

Classification Prescribed Premises Description (Schedule 1, Environmental Production or design capacity of Premises Protection Regulations 1987) (Schedule 1, Environmental Protection Regulation 1987) Category 6 Mine Dewatering: premises on which water is extracted and 50,000 tonnes or more per year discharged into the environment to allow mining of ore. See note below. Category 64 Class II or III putrescible landfill site: premises on which waste (as 20 tonnes or more per year determined by reference to the waste type set out in the document entitled “Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996” published by the Chief Executive Officer and as amended from time to time) is accepted for burial. Category 85 Sewage Facility: premises – More than 20 but less than 100 cubic (a) On which sewage is treated (excluding septic tanks); or metres per day (b) From which treated sewage is discharged onto land or into waters.

Note: It is understood from discussion with Koby Anderson from the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) on 6 January 2021 that there is no category for RO plants, so the discharge of brines from the proposed Penny RO plant to Magenta pit has been included in Category 6 as per advice from Koby Anderson. A schedule of the proposed construction, commissioning and time limited operations timeframe is provided in Table 5-2. There will be staged construction for each premises.

5 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Table 5-2 Proposed Works Schedule

Infrastructure Construction Commissioning Time Limited Operations Dewatering and discharge to May – June 2021 N/A Six month period from Magenta pit from Penny completion of construction West pit, and brines discharge from the RO plant to Magenta pit Landfill March – June 2021 N/A Six month period from completion of construction WWTP March – May 2021 June 2021 Six month period from completion of construction

5.2 Dewatering and Discharge Requirements

5.2.1 Mine Dewatering Mine dewatering requirements are well understood for the Project, with work on these requirements culminating in a final review and report completed by MWES (2020) which is presented in Attachment 8A. Total dewatering requirements can be considered as three components with estimates as follows: 1. Current existing Penny West Pit lake water storage of about 250,000 kL (independent of mining schedule). 2. Penny West and Penny North groundwater storage (water stored between current and final cone of drawdown) of about 500,000 kL (nearly independent of mining schedule).

3. Ongoing groundwater inflow of approximately 100 kL/d, increasing (erratically) to maximum 500 kL/d as underground development progresses toward 300 mRL (total volume is a function of the duration of mining). Dewatering activities are to be undertaken to allow underground mining of the Penny North deposit at the Penny West pit. Access to the Penny North deposit will be via a decline developed from a proposed cutback to the existing Penny West pit. The existing pit lake at Penny West contains approximately 250 ML of water, which will be pumped into the adjacent Magenta pit for storage when mining in Magenta Pit is complete. The existing Penny West pit lake water will also be used for construction and dust suppression purposes. Dewatering of the Penny West pit will require a maximum static lift of 85 m from the Penny West pit floor to the Magenta pit crest. A single stage in-pit pump with a 30 L/sec capacity will be required and a 2 km long, 110 mm wide DN200 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) pipe will follow access tracks from the Penny West pit to the discharge point at the Magenta pit. Once mining of the Magenta Pit is completed, the pit will be up to 1,000 m long and 400 m wide at the surface and have a maximum depth of 30 m. Storage capacity within the Magenta Pit is predicted to peak at 80 ML which occurs at 492 m Australian Height Datum (m AHD) and allows 2.5 m freeboard to the crest of the pit. Storage volumes of Magenta Pit is provided as Figure 1. Mine dewatering infrastructure will be constructed over the period of May 2021 to June 2021. ZMPL requests that a six- month period of time-limited operations be applied from the he completion of construction activities. This period will be used to calibrate discharge rates and water quality, given that the discharge water will be a combination of the pit lake (high salinity) and groundwater (low salinity).

6 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Source: Adapted from (MWES 2020) Figure 1 Magenta Pit Storage Curve

The dewatering operation is planned in two phases:

1. Phase one occurs over a planned 32 weeks, with open cut mining at the Magenta Pit taking nine weeks. Subsequent dewatering of the current Penny West pit lake into the finished Magenta Pit is proposed to commence in week 10. While dewatering of the Penny West Pit to the Magenta Pit is occurring, the Penny West cutback will be completed for the duration of phase one. At the completion of phase one, construction of all infrastructure required for underground operations will be completed.

2. Phase two includes the underground mining and dewatering of the new Penny mine and continues from week 32 to the end of a planned duration of three years. The dewatering estimates provided in Table 5-3 are based on conservative (high) estimates for groundwater components indicates a small net positive (excess) water for the operation (MWES, 2020). Use/disposal of surplus water is discussed in Section 5.2.4.

7 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Table 5-3 Penny Dewatering Estimates

Note: Underground mine feed and underground mine discharge are internal loops and do not contribute to balance totals (required to size pumps). Source: MWES (2020) Groundwater to be abstracted from the Penny mine is brackish being in the salinity range 1,900 – 5,800 mg/L. Variations within that range are likely to be depth controlled. Groundwater is not strongly preferentially associated with the mineralised zone so has relatively low metals concentrations. Pit lake sampling has been completed and has shown that the water is saline, reflecting evaporative concentration of groundwater major ion salts over the 28 years since mining. The pit lake pH has remained circum-neutral and there is no indication of enrichment of trace metal concentrations. Water chemistry data are provided in the MWES (2020) report (Attachment 8A).

5.2.2 Brines The proposed RO plant has been designed based on an estimated need of 240 L of potable water per person per day, for 80 people. This equates to production of just over 7 ML of potable water per year by the RO plant. At an extraction ratio of 3:1, the RO plant will need to be supplied with 28 ML/yr of raw water to provide 7 ML of potable water and will produce approximately 21 ML of brines per year. Based on an average raw water salinity of 4,500 mg/L, approximately 94,500 kg of salt per annum will be disposed to Magenta pit (assuming that all brines are disposed of to the pit).

8 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

5.2.3 Use and Disposal of Mine Water and Brines Water generated through mine dewatering and as brines from the RO plant will be disposed of in up to three ways, as follows:

▪ Used for construction and during mining (e.g. dust suppression) at the Project. ▪ Disposal to Magenta pit. ▪ Used during maintenance and upkeep of public gravel roads under agreement with the Shires. Storage in the Magenta Pit is projected to peak at approximately 80 ML (which is 2.5 m below the pit crest) before declining gradually due to evaporation (MWES, 2020). Therefore, the annual discharge limits under the Prescribed Premises Category 6 (to Magenta Pit) would be set at a maximum of 80 ML (maximum design capacity) plus 25% to allow for evaporation and seepage losses, which would equate to 100 ML/annum. A simplified breakdown for the three-year predicted operation based on mine water discharge only is provided in Table 5-4. In addition, approximately 21 ML of brines will be produced per annum. Where surplus water is produced, this will be diverted to an onsite HDPE-lined turkeys nest with a capacity of 30 ML, and will be used for dust suppression and other site needs at the Project. It will also be used to allow ZMPL to meet its obligations to maintain public gravel roads for access to and from the mine.

Table 5-4 Penny Annual Water Balance

Water Balance Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 (ML) (ML) (ML)

Dewatering requirement 443 314 314

Mine usage -326 -221 -221

Underground Losses -24 -63 -63

Balance 93 30 30

Source: Adapted from MWES (2020)

5.3 Landfill The construction and operation of a Class II putrescible landfill is proposed for the disposal of approximately 1,200 tonnes (t) of inert and putrescible waste annually to support the Penny Gold Project. Waste will generally be produced from the accommodation camp, located approximately 500 m to the east. The landfill will be a trench-and-fill site where a hole will be dug and back filled with waste using the excavated materials as cover, so that no waste is left exposed. Putrescible trenches will be 2 m in vertical height, 10 m in width and 30 m in length with a design capacity of 600 t and other trenches will be 2m in vertical height, 10 m in width and 15 m in length with a design capacity of 300 t (Figure 2). Each landfill trench will be in service for a two year period. Each two-year period will have a combined available disposal area of 2,400 t (1,200 t/year), but it is estimated approximately 1,019 t of waste per year will be disposed to the landfill. The landfill has been designed to meet the requirements as outlined in the Environmental Protection Regulations (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002. Waste will be covered regularly. The landfill will be constructed with a firebreak of at least 3 m around the boundary of the site and maintained throughout the life of the landfill. All tyres, hydrocarbons and contaminated parts, rags, filters, etc, will be removed from site to be disposed at an appropriate facility, therefore a lined trench will not be required. At

9 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

closure, all transportable buildings and workshop will be removed from site and there will be limited waste from closure activities to be disposed to landfill. Please see Attachment 6A for landfill emissions and discharges. The construction of the landfill will be undertaken over the period of March 2021 to June 2021. Environmental or other commissioning of the landfill will not be required. A six-month period of time-limited operations is requested beginning at the completion of construction activities. The landfill will be operational throughout operations and closure activities to support the camp and for disposal of demolished infrastructure during closure. A small bioremediation facility will be constructed near the landfill for the on-site treatment of hydrocarbon- contaminated soils (Figure 3). The facility will only accept soil for bioremediation from within the prescribed premises and will process less than 1,000 tonnes per annum, it is not defined as a prescribed premises requiring licencing under Part V of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. The facility will be constructed in accordance with the contaminated site’s guideline entitled Assessment and Management of Contaminated Sites, December 2014. The facility will be located:

▪ on flat level ground; ▪ within a bunded area (1 m height x 1 m wide) constructed with compacted in-situ clay material to a permeability of 1 x 10-8 m/s to 10-9 m/s, with unauthorised access prevented by a locked access gate; and

▪ away from sensitive receptors and environmental receptors.

10 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Figure 2 Landfill Design

11 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Figure 3 Bioremediation Facility Conceptual Design

12 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

5.4 WWTP and Wastewater Spray-field A WWTP is required for the on-site processing of sewage waste from the camp. Remote Water Treatment Services (RWTS) have been contracted to design and construct the WWTP. A schematic of the Ecofarmer 250 Wastewater Treatment System is provided as Figure 4. The WWTP comprises a treatment system, storage facilities and a dedicated disposal area (wastewater spray-field). The WWTP will be operating at approximately 30 m3/day, treating the equivalent of 250 L of wastewater per person per day (for a maximum village occupancy of up to 120 people). The wastewater spray-field is 12,000 m2 based on a site plan of 15,000 m2 allowing a 5 m high and low side buffer on the long and short side of the disposal area for some wind drift potential. Three separate rows of sprinklers at 15 m spacing (length by width) will be installed with 14 sprinklers per row, totalling 42 sprinklers. The system maximum hydraulic flow rate will be 50,000 L/day. Please see Attachment 6A for WWTP emissions and discharges. The Coerco Chemical, Process and Water storage tanks to be used for the WWTP are suitable for use in direct sunlight with ambient temperatures as high as 60 degrees. All raw materials are quality grade linear low-density polyethylene certified to AS/NZS4020:2002 and AS2070 Part 1 and Part 8 for food contact and all tanks are manufactured in guidance to Australian Tank Standard AS/NZS 4766:2006. The WWTP will be constructed over the period of March 2021 to June 2021. Environmental and other commissioning of the WWTP infrastructure will be expected to be undertaken between 1 June and 30 June 2021. A six-month period of time limited operations is requested that would commence at completion of construction (nominally July 2021) . The WWTP will remain operational throughout operations and closure activities to support the camp.

13 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 3B – Proposed Activities

Figure 4 Ecofarmer 250 Wastewater Treatment System Schematic

14 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation

Section 6 Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation

A Mining Proposal (MP) prepared in accordance with Statutory Guidelines for Mining Proposals and a Mine Closure Plan (MCP) prepared in accordance with Statutory Guidelines for Mining Closure Plans were submitted to the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) for review in December 2020. The MP and MCP have been prepared in parallel for the development of the Penny Gold Project including open pit mining of the Magenta deposit and underground mining of the Penny North deposit on tenements M57/180 and M57/196. A Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (CPS 9048/1) was granted on 22 October 2020 for the period from 14 November 2020 to 13 November 2025. The NVCP allows for the clearing of 250 ha of native vegetation on tenements M57/180 and M57/196. A 26D licence to construct or alter a well application was approved by the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) on 9 June 2020 (licence number CAW204408(1)). A 5C licence to take water (200,000 kl/annum) was approved by DWER on 23 November 2020 (GWL205133). These licences are in relation to the construction of a bore proposed for the abstraction of 200 ML per annum of ~5000 mg/L TDS groundwater to store in the turkeys nest pond during Project operations and for groundwater monitoring purposes. The Penny Gold Project stakeholder engagement register is provided in Table 6-1.

15 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation

Table 6-1 Penny Gold Project Stakeholder Engagement Register

Date Description of Consultation Stakeholder Discussion/Issues Raised Proponent Response and/or Stakeholder Response Resolution 9 June 2020 Meeting with Atley Station Trevor Hodshon Mining on the penny tenements, haulage, Need to enter into a mining Happy for the mine to pastoral lease holder contracting/ job opportunities, mining agreement (provide a standard proceed. Will review draft agreement, sources of water, cattle grids on the agreement), will provide first agreement. Unlikely to be able public road. right of refusal for all job and to provide road maintenance as contracting opportunities. no suitable equipment. Would appreciate other contracting opportunities. 9 June 2020 Meeting with Challa Station Ashley and Debbie Haulage, contracting/ job opportunities, sources Road maintenance and water Happy to quote on road pastoral lease holder Dowden of water, cattle grids on the public road. supply will be important. maintenance contracting opportunities, set a price per head of cattle if stock lost from collisions. 14 August Meeting with Shire Shire of Mount DC made ppt presentation on the project, public Is Shire interested in undertaking Looking forward to the project 2020 Councillors Magnet roads to be used and RAV system to sections the work? and further discussions. Will needing upgrading. Comments raised by need a public road use Councillors include: agreement. - road upgrade needed at the Sandstone Shire Shire is not interested in the end construction / road upgrade - RAV5 construction even though RAV10 rated work. Maybe could do the - standard is to be maintained maintenance. - plenty of construction water on the MM Shire side or could get water from Youanmi - very few bores -need Agreement to service and maintain Katie Hall - contractor for roads? based in Kalgoorlie.

16 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation

Date Description of Consultation Stakeholder Discussion/Issues Raised Proponent Response and/or Stakeholder Response Resolution 15 August Meeting with Shire Shire of Sandstone DC made ppt presentation on the project, public Answered all concern with road Looking forward to the project 2020 Councillors roads to be used and RAV system to sections standard designs on safety. and further discussions. Will needing upgrading. Comments raised by Unlikely that RMS would sell the need a public road use Councillors include: project given it is only a 3 year agreement. - we might use the road before the work is mine life. finished or don’t complete the upgrade to the shires standard - concerns about the caravans heading to Youanmi's old cemetery and townsite. Bad corners - what if new owners take control of Penny? Does the agreement change? - can the Youanmi corner be re-aligned as part of the upgrade? - send a copy of the ppt to Norbert. 15 August Meeting with Atley Station Kevin Hodshon Discussed draft Mining Access Agreement. Will revise the draft agreement Looking forward to receiving the 2020 pastoralist Further negotiations around compensation, in consideration of the points next reiteration of the employment and contracting opportunities, discussed. agreement with an aim to mine closure preferences, asset retention post- finalise. Generally acceptable of closure, stock value in the event of road-kills, mining taking place on the water sources, surface sheet flow station and the public roads considerations. being maintained. 9 August Email to DMIRS Matt Boardman Sent project information and requested a Mining Seeking confirmation that the Yes, happy for the applications 2020 Damien Montague Proposal pre-submission meeting. MP and NVCP applications can to be assessed while the L Daniel Endacott be accepted and assessed (but application process is not granted) while the L’s are still progressing. We allow this now pending. as standard for MPs anyway, in line with our new Administrative Procedures. These admin procedures deliberately do not mention NVCPs because we do them under delegation from DWER, however it makes sense to deal with this NVCP in the same fashion as the MP.

17 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 5 – Other Approvals and Consultation Documentation

Date Description of Consultation Stakeholder Discussion/Issues Raised Proponent Response and/or Stakeholder Response Resolution 29 October Zoom Meeting with DMIRS Matt Boardman PowerPoint presentation - pre-submission What additional requirements MMG MP amendment to 2020 Vanessa Pez meeting for the Mining proposal. are there? process external ore Tiffaney George Was the WRD signed off in 2010? MRF and AER data has to match the Disturbance Tables. 19 November Telephone call with Melanie DWER Consultation regarding licence amendment Ore from another source is The risks that were assessed as 2020 Bruckberger changes to the MMG Licence to process external proposed to be processed at part of granting the current ore. MMG, what DWER requirements licence may change and are there? therefore it is strongly recommended that a Licence Amendment be lodged to assess any new risks from the external ore. 23 Meeting with Atley Station Kevin Hodshon Further negotiations on mining access Explained our compensation Further consideration required September pastoralist agreement with the Pastoralist, new issue raised offer was higher than any from both parties. Investigations 2020 with the pastoralists' carbon scheme that may previous offer and was to needed on Carbon Scheme and affect new L tenement applications. compensate for his pastoral costs to compensate. income losses. As a listed company our responsibility is to Shareholders and not give away significant money for no real reason. Cannot set precedents for other projects which might be marginal. Verbal agreement on removal of most grids only 2- 3 of them required long-term. Much discussion on impact of airstrip clearing on L application areas and impact on Carbon Scheme.

18 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 6A – Emissions and Discharges

Section 7 Attachment 6A – Emissions and Discharges

7.1 Magenta Pit The Magenta pit floor is at an elevation 465 m AHD, or 7 m above the natural surrounding groundwater level. As water is discharged to the Magenta pit from the Penny West pit, the discharge rate will be regulated to prevent the water from going over a maximum of 492 m AHD. This provides a 2.5 m freeboard below the minimum crest level. Once the Penny West pit lake is depleted, after approximately 16 weeks, the water in the Magenta pit is expected to subside due to evaporation and seepage. Seepage rates are expected to be low due to:

▪ An absence of surficial transported alluvium (the only high potential transmissivity material). ▪ The pit shell will comprise clayey weathered mafic rocks. ▪ Unsaturated clayey saprolite has extremely low permeability. ▪ Mineral exploration drilling has not intersected any substantial groundwater (MWES 2020). Seepage will be directly vertical toward the water table until the water mounds up to the base of the pit. Lateral movement of solute away from the pit will be slower and less extensive than pressure mounding. Water quality impacts are unlikely to be measurable at a distance of more than 100 m from the pit crest over any practical post-closure timeframe and the pressure mound is expected to dissipate long before any significant lateral solute transport occurs (MWES 2020). The seepage risk is considered to be very low, due to the low permeability substrate and lack of any water resource or ecological receptor. Installing monitoring bores, cased to <440 m AHD, can monitor and provide an indicator of the need to implement seepage management measures. The peak storage volume of the Magenta pit is 80 ML, which occurs at 492.5 m AHD, or 2 m below the minimum pit crest level. Overtopping of transferred pit lake water is unlikely to occur as the Project is located high in the local and regional catchment systems, along and within the ridgelines and catchments divides, and natural stormwater drainage is away from the Project site in all areas (MWES 2020).

7.2 Dewatering Discharge Infrastructure Dewatering of the Penny West pit requires a maximum static lift of 85 m from the Penny West pit floor to the Magenta pit crest. Uncontrolled discharge causing environmental damage may arise from operational error, accident or other failure. Control measures to reduce the risk of pipeline failure will include:

▪ Design for low ex-pit pipeline pressure. ▪ Routing to avoid vehicle/machinery interactions. ▪ Bunding to eliminate vehicle/machinery interactions and contain any discharge. ▪ Operational measures – maintenance and inspections.

7.3 Landfill The depth to groundwater in the Project area is approximately 35-40 m. The landfill trenches will be dug to a depth of 2 m, so landfill will be located at least 30 m above groundwater. Waste types will be limited to putrescible and inert wastes, so seepage of deleterious landfill leachate will be unlikely. There will be no stockpiling of waste, it will be directly landfilled, processed through the bioremediation facility or removed from site for disposal at an appropriate facility.

19 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 6A – Emissions and Discharges

Stormwater will be directed away from the landfill via earthen bunding constructed around the landfill trenches. The Project is situated high in the local and regional catchment systems, along and within the ridgelines and catchment divides, and natural stormwater drainage is away from the Project site in all areas, so surface water flows are unlikely to affect the landfill site. The landfill will also be sited outside the 1:1000 year predicted flood zone. A sump or bunding to collect any stormwater or surface water that comes into contact with waste is to be constructed. Odour can impact comfort and amenity. The nearest human receptors will be the accommodation camp located approximately 500 m to the east. Waste will be covered regularly, in accordance with Environmental Protection (Rural Landfill) Regulations 2002, to limit the emission of odours that disturb sensitive receptors and attract fauna. The prevailing wind direction is from the east for most of the year, effectively blowing any odour away from the camp. Odours are not anticipated during the construction of the landfill. The boundary of the landfill site will be fenced to prevent access by native fauna, feral fauna and livestock and to prevent the release of windblown litter. Visual monitoring for any waste that gets washed, blown or spread by fauna from the landfill will be undertaken regularly. Any waste that is windblown will be returned to the landfill on a regular basis. Volumes of waste disposed to the landfill will be monitored and recorded. Dust emissions can be harmful to human health and can smother vegetation. Fugitive dust may be generated during earthmoving activities, excavations and landfill trench establishment. No significant point source emissions to air are expected during the construction works. Regular inspections and maintenance to collect/remove material if a potential dust risk is posed. The nearest sensitive receptor will be the accommodation camp located approximately 500 m to the east. The small bioremediation facility to be constructed near the landfill will be fenced to prevent fauna access. The facility will also be bunded to divert stormwater drainage and prevent the spread of any hydrocarbon-contaminated stormwater. Given the small area of the facility and the permeability of the base, leachate is not expected to be an issue and therefore a leachate collection system has not been designed into the facility. Dust emissions will be minimised through the use of water carts.

7.4 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Spray-field The system maximum design basis detail and normal/average site load expected due to the site accommodation capacity and nominated occupancy potential for the wastewater spray-field is described in Table 7-1 below.

Table 7-1 Maximum Capacity and Normal Expected Site Load Design Details for the Wastewater Spray-field

Design Detail Maximum Design Basis Normal/average Expected Site Load Hydraulic flow rate 50,000 L/day 30,000 L/day EP rating 200 EP (200 persons) 120 EP (120 persons) Hydraulic allowance per person per day 250 L/person/day 250 L/person/day Hydraulic application rate 4 mm/m2/day (allowable for location) 2.4 mm/m2/day Effluent disposal area nominated 1.25 ha 1.25 ha Phosphorous application rate 116.8 kg/ha/year 70.08 kg/ha/year Nitrogen loading rate 292 kg/ha/year 175.20 kg/ha/year Phosphorous output 8 mg/L or 0.4 kg/day or 146 kg/year N/A Total nitrogen output 20 mg/L or 1 kg/day or 365 kg/year N/A Phosphorous loading per hectare for 120 kg N/A location Nitrogen loading per hectare for 480 kg N/A location

20 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 6A – Emissions and Discharges

Effluent discharge will be managed to allow discharge to infiltrate or evaporate and prevent surface ponding or runoff. The evapotranspiration at the site is approximately 3,000 mm per annum. The combined irrigation is 2.4 mm per day or 865 mm per annum, so the actual migration of effluent water into the sub-soil structure will be minimal and provide limited benefit to the vegetation growing in the spray-field. The potential for ponding and runoff is also minimal. The spray-field is 12,000 m2, based on a site plan of 15,000 m2, and will be bunded by a 5 m high and low side buffer on the long and short side of the disposal area to allow for some wind drift potential. The spray-field will be constructed outside the 1:1000 year predicted flood zone. The 42 sprinklers will be spaced uniformly to provide satisfactory distribution during application of effluent to the nominated area, resulting in even application across the entire area. The actual hourly application rate for the effluent disposal area will be 1.5 mm/hour, resulting in an average of 1.6 hours (96 minutes) per day total operation time. The system will operate with a 10 minute on, 20 minutes off arrangement, resulting in a total time to irrigate all effluent across an entire day of 4.8 hours. This makes best use of the evaporation potential during the hottest part of the day, as well as reducing any runoff potential due to over application. The wastewater treatment plant will have three 36 kL wet weather storage tanks for treated effluent with a total storage capacity of up to 128,000 L. This provides contingency storage for up to 4.26 days of normal flow, at an average of 30,000 L/day site hydraulic load, if discharge is suspended to address any problems that may arise. Ongoing monitoring of effluent discharge quality and groundwater quality and levels will be conducted in accordance with AS/NZS 5667.10 for wastewater sampling and AS/NZS 5667.11 for groundwater sampling. Regular inspections of the WWTP and discharge infrastructure will be conducted, and maintenance performed where any equipment is found to be faulty or any leaks are detected.

21 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 6B – Waste

Section 8 Attachment 6B – Waste

The total volume of wase disposed to the landfill will not exceed 1,200 tonnes per annual period. Waste disposed to the landfill will be covered with the excavated inert and incombustible material to a sufficient depth to ensure the waste is completely covered and no waste is exposed. The waste will be covered monthly or as soon as practicable after deposit and prior to compaction. The Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 (as amended 2019) permits the following waste types for disposal in a Class II landfill: clean fill, inert waste type 1, uncontaminated fill, neutralised acid sulphate soil, putrescible wastes, contaminated solid waste meeting waste acceptance criteria specified for Class II landfills (where authorised under an Environmental Protection Act licence), inert waste type 2 (where authorised under an Environmental Protection Act licence), special wastes type 1, type 2 and type 3 (where authorised under an Environmental Protection Act licence). However, it is expected that only inert waste type 1 and putrescible wastes will be disposed to the landfill.

8.1 Inert Waste Type 1 The Landfill Waste Classification and Waste Definitions 1996 (as amended 2019) describes ‘Inert Waste Type 1’ as non- hazardous, non-biodegradable (half-life greater than two years) wastes containing contaminant concentrations less than Class I landfill acceptance criteria, but excluding paper and cardboard and materials that require treatment to render them inert (e.g. peat, acid sulphate soils). Approximately 800 tonnes of Inert Waste Type 1 will be disposed to the landfill for each year of the Project. This will comprise waste from Project operations and maintenance and closure. Only a limited amount of waste is expected to be disposed to the landfill from closure activities, where possible demountable buildings and workshops will be removed from site. Tyres, hydrocarbons and contaminated items such as parts, oily rags, etc, will be removed from site and disposed at an appropriate facility.

8.2 Putrescible Waste Components of the waste stream likely to become putrid – including wastes that contain organic materials such as food wastes or wastes of animal or vegetable origin, which readily bio-degrade within the environment of a landfill. Approximately 219 tonnes of Putrescible Waste (general solid waste) will be disposed to the landfill for each year of the Project. This will comprise waste from the camp at an estimated waste production rate of 5 kg/person/day at a maximum occupancy of 120 people.

8.3 Contaminated Materials Sources of contaminated material likely to be treated at the bioremediation facility include oil/hydrocarbon spills at workshops and refuelling bays, diggings out of sumps/sediment ponds and blown hoses during operation. Hydrocarbons are likely to include motor oil, diesel, lubricant, hydraulic oil, coolant and grease. Approximately 100 tonnes of contaminated materials are expected to be treated at the bioremediation facility for each year of the Project.

8.4 Treated Sewage Approximately 10,950 m3 per year, or 30 m3 per day, of treated sewage will be discharged to land in the wastewater spray-field each year from the WWTP. The wastewater spray-field will be surrounded by a perimeter bund and the area is sited outside the 1:1000 year predicted flood zone. The emission points include three rows of sprinklers at 15 m

22 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 6B – Waste

spacing (length by width) with 14 sprinklers per row and 42 sprinklers in total. Where the treated sewage is discharged to the wastewater spray-field from the emission points, it will be done so in accordance with the licence. The disposal area has been sited over land that is relatively flat, such that run-off is limited. Vegetation will be retained as far as practicable to assist with nutrient uptake. The size of the disposal area has been calculated to allow in situ soils to accommodate anticipated nutrient loads. The depth to groundwater within the disposal area has been reviewed to assess the risk of infiltration and contamination of local groundwater resources. Pumps and pipework will be selected, installed and maintained as per the suppliers’ specifications. Monitoring of wastewater discharge to land will be undertaken as per Table 8-1.

Table 8-1 Monitoring of Emissions to Land

Emission Point Parameter Units Averaging Period Frequency Reference WWTP Discharge Point Volumetric flow rate m3/day Monthly Continuous (cumulative) pH pH Spot Sample Quarterly Total Suspended Solids mg/L Biochemical Oxygen Demand Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus E. coli cfu/100 mL

8.5 Discharge Water Mine water and brines will be used for dust suppression and other purposes, as described in Section 5.2.3. Up to 80 ML will be discharged to the Magenta Pit in the first year of operations and up to 30 ML per year for the following two years as described in Attachment 3B if there is sufficient capacity within the pit (depending on evaporation rates, whether any losses occur to groundwater, etc) The dewatering pipeline will be bunded to reduce the risk of pipe failure and prevent uncontrolled discharge to the environment. Water discharged to the Magenta pit will be regulated to prevent the water from going over a maximum of 492 m AHD, this provides a 2.5 m freeboard below the minimum crest level. Seepage rates are expected to be low due to:

▪ An absence of surficial transported alluvium (the only high potential transmissivity material). ▪ The pit shell will comprise clayey weathered mafic rocks. ▪ Unsaturated clayey saprolite has extremely low permeability. ▪ Mineral exploration drilling has not intersected any substantial groundwater (MWES 2020). Monitoring bores will be installed cased to <440 m AHD to provide an indicator of the need to implement seepage management measures.

23 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

Section 9 Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

9.1 Siting Context The Project is located in the Southern Cross Province of Western Australia on the south-eastern part of the Yilgarn Craton. The Project is located on the Atley Pastoral Lease approximately 140 km south-east of Mt Magnet within the Shire of Sandstone. The nearest administrative centre is the town of Sandstone, 92 km to the north-west. The workforce will be accommodated at the onsite camp (see Attachment 2). There are no human receptors located within a 5 km boundary of the Project boundary. The Project area experiences the climate of the Eastern Murchison subregion, which is characterised as an arid climate with an annual rainfall of approximately 200 mm. The subregion is also characterised by internal drainage, extensive areas of elevated red desert sandplains of minimal dune development and undulating topography. The Project is located within an Archaean greenstone belt (the Youanmi greenstone belt) with gold mineralisation associated with steeply east dipping, quartz sulphide veins. The principal soil type is shallow earthy loam overlying red-brown hardpan, with shallow stony loams on hills and red earthy sands on sandplains (Botanica Consulting 2020). Regionally, the Project is located within the Lockhart River Catchment of the Swan Coastal Avon Basin River Region. The Project is situated at the upstream extent of an ephemeral tributary of Wakeman Creek, which drains west via salt flats to the Lockhart River. The Project area is within the proclaimed Avon River System surface water area. There are no watercourses listed under the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 (RIWI Act) within the Project area. A paleochannel to the north, east and west of the Project area is recharged by direct rainfall infiltration and creek infiltration during stream flow events. Groundwater in the Project area is generally neutral with salinity ranging from brackish to saline across the area and the water table is approximately 40 m below ground level. Vegetation is dominated by Mulga low woodlands on plains, reduced to scrub on hills, with a tree steppe of Eucalyptus spp. and Triodia spp. on sandplains. One significant flora species occurs in the Project area, Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4). No significant vegetation, Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs), Priority Ecological Communities (PECs) or Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDEs) occur within the Project area. There are no proposed or vested Conservation Reserves, DBCA managed or interest land, Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), Nationally Important or Ramsar Wetlands located within the Project area (Botanica Consulting 2020). Four conservation significant species are potentially present at the Project area, but only limited suitable nesting and breeding habitats are available in the Project. These species are likely to be transient through the Project area and significant impacts would be unlikely. Also due to a lack of suitable habitat, it is unlikely that subterranean fauna are present within the Project area (Botanica Consulting 2020). Eleven Aboriginal heritage sites of ethnographic and archaeological importance are present within the Project area and consist of artefact scatters, quarries, rock shelters and rock holes. The Project layout has been designed to avoid Aboriginal heritage sites (JCHMC 2020). There are no European heritage sites within or in close proximity to the Project area.

9.2 Specified Ecosystems Specified ecosystems are areas of high conservation value and special significance that may be impacted as a result of activities at, or emissions and discharges from the Project. Table 9-1 provides a summary of environmental receptors, in proximity from the Project, which have the potential to be impacted by the prescribed premises.

24 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

Table 9-1 Environmental Values

Specified Ecosystems Description Distance from the Premises Proposed Controls Environmentally Lake Barlee 39 km south-east N/A Sensitive Ecosystems Threatened Ecological No TECs identified N/A N/A Communities (TECs) within 100 km Threatened and/or None observed within N/A N/A Priority Fauna the Project area Threatened and/or Hemigenia exilis Locations are shown in Figure 5. The site layout has been designed Priority Flora (Priority 4) to avoid impacts to Hemigenia exilis Aboriginal and Other Aboriginal heritage Locations are shown in Figure 6. The site layout has been designed Heritage Sites sites to avoid impacts to Aboriginal heritage sites Public Drinking Water Sandstone Water 130 km north-east N/A Source Areas Reserve Rivers, Lakes, Oceans The Project is located N/A Stormwater will be directed away and Other Bodies of high in the local and from landfill and wastewater Surface Water, etc. regional catchment spray-field via earthen bunding system and does not constructed around the landfill intersect any surface trenches. water bodies. A sump or bunding to collect any stormwater or surface water that comes into contact with waste is to be constructed. Acid Sulphate Soils The Project is not N/A N/A (ASS) located in an area known to have ASS. Other There are no PECs, N/A N/A GDEs, significant vegetation, proposed or vested Conservation Reserves, DBCA managed or interest land, ESAs, Nationally Important or Ramsar Wetlands within the Project area.

9.2.1 Threatened and/or Priority Flora The Priority 4 flora Hemigenia exilis is known from several locations throughout the Project area (Figure 5). It has been observed on lower slopes and associated drainage lines of rocky breakaways. The two nearest DBCA records of this species are located approximately 80 km away to the east of the Project area. The locations of the Hemigenia exilis individuals have been recorded and the Project footprint, including the prescribed premises, has been designed to avoid impacts to the species (Botanica Consulting 2020). The Project is located high in the local and regional catchment systems, along and within the ridgelines and catchment divides, and natural stormwater drainage is away from the Project site in all areas. Little change to natural stormwater drainage is required at the site and any change to surface water flows is not expected to impact Hemigenia exilis.

25 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

9.2.2 Aboriginal and Other Heritage Sites Eleven heritage sites of archaeological and ethnographic importance, including one registered heritage site, have been identified in the Project area (Figure 6). These sites consist of artefact scatters, quarries, rock shelters and rock holes. The Marlinyu People approved works within the Penny Gold Project area subject to avoidance of the Aboriginal heritage sites. The Project footprint, including the prescribed premises, has been designed to avoid impacts to the Aboriginal heritage sites. No European heritage sites have been identified in the Project area.

9.2.3 Rivers, Lakes, Oceans and Other Bodies of Surface Water The Project is located high in the local and regional catchment systems, along and within the ridgelines and catchment divides, and natural stormwater drainage is away from the Project site in all areas. Stormwater will be directed away from landfill via earthen bunding constructed around the landfill trenches. A sump or bunding to collect any stormwater or surface water that comes into contact with waste is to be constructed. Contaminated water should not leave the site, however as there are no surface water bodies intersecting the Project area and the evaporation rate for the region is so high, it is highly unlikely that there would be an impact to any surface water areas.

26 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

Figure 5 Locations of Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4) in the Project Area

27 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 7 – Siting and Location

Figure 6 Locations of Aboriginal Heritage Sites within the Project Area

28 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Attachment 8 – Additional Information Submitted

Section 10 Attachment 8 – Additional Information Submitted

10.1 Attachment 8A – Hydrology and Hydrogeology Report (MWES 2020)

29 Penny West WAA Supporting Information Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Penny West Gold Project Mining Proposal Hydrogeology and Hydrology Report

Prepared for Ramelius Resources Ltd PO Box 6070 East Perth WA 6892

November 2020

Prepared MWES Consulting by

……………………………..

Principal Consultant

……………………………..

Version: Rev0 – 14 October 2020 Rev1 – 23 October 2020 Rev3 – 4 November 2020 Rev4 – 9 November 2020 Rev5 – 11 November 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of hydrological and hydrogeological investigations for the Penny West Gold Project. The main permanent surface disturbances at the end of mining will include a small oxide open pit (Magenta deposit), a larger hard rock pit being a cutback of the existing Penny West Open Pit, and the associated waste rock landforms. The majority of the ore will be mined from the proposed Penny North underground deposit. The proposed development is located high in the local and regional catchment system, along and within hundreds of metres of the ridgelines such that operational and post-closure surface water management and flooding considerations are negligible. Groundwater occurrence is limited to discrete structural and lithological basement zones forming compartmentalised minor basement aquifers. These minor aquifers conform to the local geology being steeply dipping, elongate along strike (north-south) and of very limited across-strike width. At the broader scale the narrow greenstone belt is an isolated hydrogeological domain, with no hydraulic connection across bounding faults to the encompassing (west and east) granitic terranes. Groundwater is brackish and the water table is at about 40 metres below ground level. There are no groundwater licensees or water reserves in the region. The closest recorded water bores are disused pastoral bores located 3 km east of the site. These are situated in a separate hydrogeological domain (granitoid basement terrane). Based on the depth to groundwater and limited groundwater occurrence, there is no potential for groundwater-related impacts to any known water resource or ecological receptor. The operational water balance, based on conservative (high) estimates for groundwater components indicates a small net positive (excess) for the operation. Following closure of the Penny West pit, a small final pit lake will form with a stable water level some 40 metres below the pit crest. The lake will become a local groundwater sink and there is no risk of groundwater or surface water discharge. Salinity will gradually increase over time due to evaporative concentration of discharging groundwater solute. Salinity will remain the major feature of the water and the major constraint on any beneficial use. Geochemical data indicates that pit lake acidification is not expected to occur. The base of the Magenta Pit is above the water table and no permanent pit lake will form there.

.

CONTENTS

Executive Summary ...... 5

1. Introduction ...... 3

2. Project Layout ...... 4

3. Baseline Conditions ...... 5 3.1. Climate 5 3.2. Regional Physiography and Land Use 8 3.3. Site Catchments, Hydrology and Flooding Risk 8

4. Geology ...... 11

5. Hydrogeology ...... 13 5.1. Regional Hydrogeology and Groundwater Use 13 5.2. Penny West Pit Lake 14 5.3. Groundwater Occurrence 14 5.4. Baseline Water Levels 16 5.5. Groundwater Quality 18

6. Dewatering Assessment ...... 19 6.1. Conceptual Hydrogeological Model 19 6.2. Dewatering Prognosis 19

7. Groundwater Management ...... 21 7.1 Mine Water Balance 21 7.2 Seepage from the Magenta Pit 23 7.3 Dewatering Discharge Infrastructure 25 7.4 Water Monitoring 25

8. Surface Water Management and Stormwater Controls ...... 26

9. Water Related Closure Considerations ...... 27

10. References ...... 27

Page i CONTENTS

TABLES

Table 1 – Rainfall IFD Statistics ...... 5 Table 2 – Penny West Water Levels May 2020 ...... 16 Table 3 – Water Cemistry ...... 18 Table 4 - Water Balance ...... 22

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Penny West Project Regional Location Plan ...... 3 Figure 2 – Project Layout ...... 4 Figure 3 - Rainfall Intensity Curves ...... 6 Figure 4 - Rainfall Intensity Curves for Rare Events ...... 7 Figure 5 – Catchment Boundaries, Ground Elevation and Natural Drainage ...... 9 Figure 6 – 1:1000 Year ARI Peak Flood Inundation Area ...... 10 Figure 7 – Local Geological Setting (Ivanic, 2014) ...... 11 Figure 8 – Total Magnetic Intensity and Basement Structure...... 12 Figure 9 – Groundwater Occurrence at Penny West ...... 15 Figure 10 – Projected Location of Water Table and Ground Level (0.5 m contour) ...... 17 Figure 11 - Penny West Pit, Distance Drawdown Plot for 30 May 2020 ...... 19 Figure 12 - Magenta Pit Storage Curve ...... 21 Figure 13 – Magenta Pit and Indicative Monitor Bore Locations ...... 24 Figure 14 – Penny West Drainage ...... 26

Page ii Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

1. INTRODUCTION

Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ramelius Resources Limited, is seeking approval for mining development at the Penny West project site (Figure 1). The site is located on M57/180 and M57/196, 27 km south of Youanmi and 3 km west of the Lake Barlee Youanmi Road. This report covers surface and groundwater-related matters in support of a mining proposal to the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS), as well as dewatering and hydrological information that will support a Works Approval application to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER). The Penny West deposit was discovered in 1989 and mined as an open-cut in 1991-92, with ore treatment at the Youanmi Plant. The proposed development includes a small new satellite pit on the Magenta deposit 2km north of Penny West Pit. There is a minor eastern cut-back to the historic (flooded) Penny West Pit, followed by development of an underground mine (Penny North) from an in-pit portal. Surface works include the normal components of a mining operation. Run-of-Mine ore will be trucked from the site for processing at Ramelius’ Mt Magnet Operation.

Figure 1 – Penny West Project Regional Location Plan

Page 3 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

2. PROJECT LAYOUT

Project components are shown in Figure 2. Of the new permanent landforms, the Magenta Pit and Waste Rock Landform (WRL) have an area of 7.7 hectares, and the Penny West cutback requires two WRL’s with a combined area of 20 hectares. The underground mine portal will be located within the existing Penny West Pit with development below the pit, in the footwall of the steeply east-dipping ore surfaces. Figure 2 – Project Layout

Page 4 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

3. BASELINE CONDITIONS

3.1. Climate

The climate is warm semi-arid with hot dry summers and cold winters. Rainfall statistics can be summarised as the average of those recorded at BoM stations at Paynes Find and Sandstone. The annual average is 267 mm and average monthly totals range from 10mm (October) to 25-35 mm in January-July. Pan evaporation data from Paynes Find show a seasonal range averaging between 2.5 and 11.9 mm per day with an average annual total of 2480 mm. Shorter duration rainfall intensity is described by the intensity-frequency-duration (IFD) statistics downloaded from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) Design Rainfall Data System, 2016. These are summarised in Table 1 and shown graphically in Figures 3 and 4.

Table 1 – Rainfall IFD Statistics

Duration Units Annual Exceedance Probability Return Period (years) 50% 10% 5% 1% = 100 500 1000 5 min 4.47 9.2 11.4 17.3 24 27.6 10 min 6.84 14.1 17.4 26.6 36.5 41.7 15 min 8.4 17.3 21.4 32.7 44.9 51.3 20 min 9.55 19.7 24.4 37.2 51.2 58.6 30 min 11.2 23.1 28.7 43.8 60.5 69.3 45 min 13 26.7 33.1 50.6 70.1 80.4 1 hour 14.3 29.3 36.4 55.6 77.2 88.6 1.5 hour 16.3 33.4 41.3 63.2 87.7 101 2 hour 17.9 36.5 45.2 69.1 95.7 110 3 hour 20.4 41.4 51.3 78.3 108 124 4.5 hour 23.4 47.2 58.4 89.2 122 140 6 hour 25.8 51.9 64.2 98 134 153 9 hour 29.5 59.4 73.7 112 153 175 12 hour 32.4 65.3 81.2 124 169 193 18 hour 36.8 74.4 93 142 195 222 24 hour 39.9 81.3 102 156 215 247 30 hour 42.2 86.6 109 167 235 270 36 hour 44 90.8 115 176 251 289 2 day 46.6 97.2 123 190 276 319 3 day 49.7 105 133 207 306 358 4 day 51.4 109 138 216 322 379 5 day 52.6 110 141 221 331 391 7 day 54.3 112 142 224 336 398

Considering the uplying location of the site, short duration events ( up to 30 minutes) are most relevant to stormwater water responses. Such events may be unpredictable and can potentially occur at any time of year.

Page 5 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

As shown in Table 1, rainfall totals tend to asymptote over periods over 7 days or longer and these greater totals may be relevant to site water storage management. Such extreme weekly/monthly totals are likely to relate to seasonally controlled cyclonic events which for this location typically arrive after a 2-3 day warning period. Historical cyclone tracks are shown at the BoM website and those passing near the Penny site have mostly made landfall near Carnarvon.

Figure 3 - Rainfall Intensity Curves

Page 6 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 4 - Rainfall Intensity Curves for Rare Events

Page 7 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

3.2. Regional Physiography and Land Use

The project site is located in Mid-West Rangeland district, on Atley pastoral lease and near the southern boundary of that property. The Continental-scale boundary between the Lake Moore and Raeside-Ponton catchments is located 6 km west of the site at an elevation of up to 538 m AHD. A broad spur extends south-east from the main divide and terminates in an area of low (10 m high) and narrow (500 m wide) north-south strike ridges. The project site is situated along the strike ridges at elevations up to 505 m AHD. Natural surface slopes range up to 10% locally near the strike ridges and less than 1-2% elsewhere. Sub-regional drainage terminates at Lake Noondie located 30-35 km to the east at an elevation of 413 m AHD. Locally, natural drainage from most of the project area is to the east with minor northern parts of the site draining north-northeast around the strike ridges The development is mostly on the Rangelands Land Type PSTAHA, which is described as “Stony plains; Acacia shrublands and halophytic shrublands”

3.3. Site Catchments, Hydrology and Flooding Risk

The development is located high in the local and regional catchment system, along and within hundreds of metres of the ridgelines and catchment divides as described above and as shown in Figure 5. Natural stormwater drainage is away from the project site in all areas. There are no incised or clearly defined creeklines of any substantial size. Stormwater discharge from most of the site coalesces to a broad east-draining swale. The 1:1000 flood level was estimated for selected drainage line cross sections as follows: • The time of concentration was calculated using the Bransby-Williams Equation. This was found to be in the range 10-20 minutes for the area mapped • The 1:1000 year rainfall intensity for the appropriate duration was selected from the IFD data (Table 1) • The 1:1000 year peak runoff was calculated using the rational method and assuming a runoff coefficient of 70% • Flood water levels were determined on cross sections using the Manning Equation and assuming a Manning Coefficient of 0.1 • The flood level was interpolated between calculated section lines based on the 0.5 metre contour data and by reference to aerial imagery The equations and assumptions are based on material presented in Maidment (1993) and from similar regional settings. Results are shown in Figure 6. Note that the extent of inundation shown has a duration of the order of 10 minutes and expected frequency of 1:1000 years. In general, the very small upstream catchment area ensures that none of the permanent landforms are in any way flood-prone.

Page 8 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 5 – Catchment Boundaries, Ground Elevation and Natural Drainage

Page 9 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 6 – 1:1000 Year ARI Peak Flood Inundation Area

Page 10 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

4. GEOLOGY

Penny West is situated at the south apex of the Youanmi Igneous Complex (greenstone belt) and within the eastern bounding Youanmi Shear Zone. The shear zone includes several major north- striking and steeply east-dipping dextral faults. Penny West is located between major shears and lithological packages conform to the shear zone geometry. The belt has a total width of 2 km at Penny West and broadens to the north. The eastern faulted granitic contact is located 1 km west of Penny West and Magenta. Figure 7 shows the geological context of the site imposed on the 1:100,000 geological map (Ivanic, 2014. Note comprehensive legend can downloaded with mapsheet at: https://geodocs.dmirs.wa.gov.au/Web/documentlist/3/Combined/P11DH%2F2).

Figure 7 – Local Geological Setting (Ivanic, 2014)

Page 11 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

High resolution aerial magnetics imagery (GSWA Geoview survey registered number 55475) is publicly available. The basement total magnetic intensity (TMI) clearly delineates the bounding faults and minor internal structures along with the north- strike ridge-forming high magnetic intensity mafic units (Figure 8) Figure 8 – Total Magnetic Intensity and Basement Structure

The major host rock type is gabbro. Local stratigraphy consists of, from west to east, a thick footwall meta dolerite/gabbro, a foliated felsic schist, interpreted to be a metamorphosed granodiorite intrusive unit, a foliated chloritic amphibolite, an ultramafic unit and a hanging wall meta mafic unit. Local stratigraphy consists of, from west to east, a thick footwall meta dolerite/gabbro, a foliated felsic schist, interpreted to be a metamorphosed granodiorite intrusive unit, a foliated chloritic amphibolite, an ultramafic unit and a hanging wall meta mafic unit. Gold mineralisation in the newly discovered underground Penny North deposit occurs within narrow, steeply, east dipping, quartz-sulphide lodes – nearly conformable with local stratigraphy. Lode thickness is generally from 1 to 3 metres, with some minor wider zones up to 5-6m. Lodes have extents of 200-300m in strike and dip.

Page 12 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

The quartz veins include a highly variable sulphide assemblage of pyrite, pyrrhotite, galena, chalcopyrite and sphalerite with some sulphide zones comprising 50 - 90% sulphide (pyrrhotite- pyrite). Lead anomalism is significant, with lode Pb grades of approximately 0.5 - 3% as Galena. Other potentially problematic metals in the ore such as As, Hg, Sb and Se are relatively low and all likely to be in sulphide form. No elevated metal values occur in the surrounding wall rock units. The mineralised lodes are largely hosted within the granodiorite unit or at the granodiorite- amphibolite contact. They slightly cross-cut stratigraphy and transgress into the amphibolite unit toward the north. The regolith profile at Penny West is relatively thin, reflecting the up-lying topographic location. Alluvial gravel and sand extends up to 10 m depth. weathering occurs to a depth of around 40-45m with base of complete oxidation (BoCO) at about 450 m AHD. There is a sharp transition at the base of the regolith with fresh rock about 10 m below BoCO. Almost all of the ore resource is classified as fresh rock, with the exception of a small volume of inferred ore at the north end of the Penny West pit. The Magenta deposit has similar quartz – sulphide lodes. Economic material appears restricted to the upper oxidised zones with grades weakening in fresh rock. Weathering depth is similar and host rocks are ultramafic and mafic meta units.

5. HYDROGEOLOGY

5.1. Regional Hydrogeology and Groundwater Use

There are no known operational groundwater supply bores in the Penny West area. Historic groundwater bores for pastoral supplies are the main source of regional groundwater information. The historic Youangarra Homestead is located 9 km north of Penny West and there is a network of now-disused bores at typical spacing of 4-5 km in the region. There is a consistent group of bores shown on geological and topographic maps. The same set of bores is listed in the DWER Water Information Reporting database. Apart for location, there is little information regarding the disused pastoral bores. The Youanmi 250,000 geological explanatory notes (Stewart, Williams & Elias, 1983) includes results of a 1979 sampling survey, with five results from the Penny area showing salinity in the range 1020-1300 mg/L. Note that pastoral bores typically sample small supplies from the shallowest and lowest salinity part of Goldfields aquifers. Abstraction at greater rates and penetration, including mine dewatering, typically generates more saline water. The closest and most relevant of the historic bore sites are Penny Bore (Well) and Speckling Patch Bore. Both are located downstream from the site on the Lake Barlee Youanmi Road. Penny Bore is 2.7 km east of Penny West Pit and Speckling Patch Bore 3.6 km northeast of Magenta. Both bores are located in areas of granitoid basement east of the Youanmi Shear Zone and not connected in any way to the geological units of the Penny area.

Page 13 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Yilgarn groundwater occurrence regionally relates to two main aquifer types. Bedrock groundwater is limited to discrete, typically narrow structures (fractured rock aquifers) set in an otherwise nearly impermeable rockmass. Fractured rock aquifers show an extreme range in transmissivity and storage, but typically show limited recharge. The second aquifer type is formed by unconsolidated Cenozoic sediments which infill an ancient more incised bedrock surface. The up-lying country of the Penny West site is mostly underlain by outcropping or shallow bedrock, such that only the bedrock aquifer type is relevant.

5.2. Penny West Pit Lake

The existing Penny West pit lake is mature and stable since dewatering was terminated some 28 years ago. Physical data includes:

Existing Pit Ground Level : 492 m RL Pit Floor elevation: 420 m RL Pit lake water level : 445.3 m (18 April 2020) Pit Lake surface area: 13.9 hectares Pit Lake volume: 250,000 kL

The mid-season lake water level represents the seasonal average. Using the annual average pan evaporation rate of 7 mm/day and assuming a combined pan and brine factor for the lake of 0.7, the average pit lake evaporation rate is calculated at 0.8 L/sec, which is assumed to balance the average groundwater inflow rate at the prevailing lake water level.

5.3. Groundwater Occurrence

Ramelius has completed close spaced RC in-fill drill programmes to delineate the Penny West (eastern down-dip extension) and the Magenta deposits. Groundwater occurrence in drillholes was sporadic, with many holes recording no water. At the Magenta deposit little groundwater was intersected. Collar locations for holes with substantial groundwater intersections are shown in Figure 9 along with basement structure and TMI image.

Page 14 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 9 – Groundwater Occurrence at Penny West

At Penny West, a zone of permeability was encountered below the BoCO in the hanging wall over a strike length of about 250 m centred on 6,807,000mN. Groundwater was intersected near the major regional fault midway between Penny West and Magenta and water supply bore RDRCW001 has been drilled at that site as follows: Location: 676,059 mE 6,800,009 mN Total Depth: 107 m Yield Zone: 33-107m BGL Yield: 4.7 L/sec Field Water Quality: EC = 7510 uS/cm, pH = 8.4

Page 15 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

5.4. Baseline Water Levels

Water levels were measured in accessible angled exploration holes on 30 May 2020. Drill azimuth is to the west against the east dipping sequence, so that drill collars are located east of mapped intersection locations. Results are summarised in Table 2 and Figure 10 (excludes SPWRC114 which is located on the Magenta Deposit 1.8 km north of the pit along strike).

Table 2 – Penny West Water Levels May 2020

Drawdown induced by pit lake evaporation was calculated from the water table elevation at the most distant hole (Magenta SPWRC114). The pit lake water level is apparently stable at about 445.5 m AHD - a drawdown of 12.3 m. Note that calculated drawdowns may be slightly overstated, since there is likely a slight north-south hydraulic gradient reflecting the topographic gradient.

Page 16 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 10 – Projected Location of Water Table and Ground Level (0.5 m contour)

Page 17 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

5.5. Groundwater Quality

The analysis results of seven water samples are summarised in Table 3. Locations are shown in Figure 10 except SPWRC114 which is at the Magenta Deposit (Figure 2). Table 3 – Water Cemistry

Sample Date 7/02/20197/02/2019 28/05/2020 28/05/2020 28/05/2020 28/05/2020 28/05/2020 Analysis Date 29/05/2020 29/05/2020 29/05/2020 29/05/2020 29/05/2020 Location PIT SOUTH PIT NORTH Penny Pit SPWRC159 SWPRC114 SPWRC073 SPWDD017 Reference EP1901135001 EP1901135002 245041-3245041-1245041-2245041-4245041-5 Laboratory ALS ALSMPLMPLMPLMPLMPL Physico-chemical ANALYTEUnits Detection TurbidityNTU0.1 0.5 310610230220 TDSmg/L5 2400024300 17,0004,4001,9005,5005,800 Elec. Cond. μS/cm 1 1560015800 25,0007,1003,3008,2008,400 pH 8.048.068.47.87.47.58.1 Hardnessmg/L3 2,800 680290 1,0001,000 Major Ions Sulphatemg/L1 10001000 1,100 270140320330 Fluoridemg/L0.16.96.44.72.11.31.52.4 Chloridemg/L1 84508380 8,3002,100 780 2,5002,700 Magnesium mg/L0.5 55055047011045150160 Calciummg/L0.5 3983993409340150140 Potassiummg/L0.5 1321346432143640 Sodiummg/L0.5 44404410 4,7001,200 570 1,3001,500 Total Metals Zinc mg/L0.001 0.0020.0170.0250.0230.017 Selenium mg/L0.001 0.0010.0020.0030.004<0.001 Nickel mg/L0.001 0.0030.0170.0540.0280.007 Manganese mg/L0.005 0.0110.170.130.170.36 Lead mg/L0.001 <0.0010.0130.0140.0180.012 Iron mg/L0.01 0.026.5 1011 6.5 Copper mg/L0.001 <0.0010.0080.0180.0140.007 Chromium mg/L0.001 <0.0010.0260.0970.0450.017 Cadmium mg/L0.0001 <0.00010.0001<0.00010.0003<0.0001 Arsenic mg/L0.001 <0.0010.0020.0030.0020.002 Aluminium mg/L0.01 0.014.15.55.63.9

Groundwater is brackish being in the salinity range 1900-5800 mg/L. Variations within that range are likely to be depth controlled (increasing salinity with depth). Major ion and trace element groundwater chemistry is unremarkable. Note that groundwater is not strongly preferentially associated with the mineralised zone, hence relatively low metals concentrations. Two phases of pit lake sampling have been completed. Groundwater is saline, reflecting evaporative concentration of groundwater major ion salts over the 28 years since mining. The pit lake water has remained circum-neutral and there is no indication of enrichment of trace metal concentrations.

Page 18 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

6. DEWATERING ASSESSMENT

6.1. Conceptual Hydrogeological Model

At the local scale, groundwater occurrence is limited to structurally and lithologically limited basement zones forming compartmentalised minor basement aquifers. The minor aquifers conform to the local geology being steeply dipping, elongate along strike ( north-south) and of very limited across-strike width. At the broader scale, the narrow greenstone belt is an isolated hydrogeological domain, with no hydraulic connection across bounding faults to the encompassing (west and east) granitic terranes.

6.2. Dewatering Prognosis

In the current quasi-steady state baseline condition, the pit lake is a groundwater sink whereby water discharges by evaporation. Ongoing concentration of water salinity since completion of mining in 1991 accounts for the higher pit lake salinity. The estimated average discharge rate is about 0.8 L/sec or 70 kL/d. The evaporative discharge maintains a clear and coherent cone of drawdown around the pit. Background water level is about 458 m AHD as indicated by the more distant water level measurement. The pit lake level varies little seasonally due to low rates of inflow and the April 18 measurement of 445.3 m AHD indicates total drawdown of about 12 metres. The distance-drawdown relationship for monitor bores located north and east of the pit (Figure 10) is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11 - Penny West Pit, Distance Drawdown Plot for 30 May 2020

0

2

4

6

8

10 Drawdown (m)

12

14

16 10 100 1000 Radial Distance from pit lake (m)

Page 19 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

The substantial drawdown induced at low discharge rates and relatively steep drawdown cone indicates low transmissivity in the host bedrock. Indicative transmissivity (T) can be calculated using the Jacob distance-drawdown method, where inputs are the discharge rate (Q) and the distance- drawdown plot log cycle gradient (del s) :

T = 2.3 Q/ (2 π del s)

Where: Q = 70 kL/d S = 9.5 m/cycle T = 3 sq m/d

The calculation confirms the indication of low transmissivity of the basement at the scale of hundreds of metres to kilometres. Higher transmissivity zones are indicated by sporadic higher drilling yields that occur at scale of 10’s to 100’s of metres. Considering that the pit lake evaporation drawdown is large and extends over the area of proposed development and of groundwater occurrence, the results show that large inflows to the proposed underground mine are unlikely to be sustained over lengthy periods (more than days-weeks) and should be avoidable if some advance dewatering is undertaken. Dewatering can be considered as three components with rough preliminary estimates as follows : 1. V1 = Pit water storage , about 250,000 kL (independent of mining schedule) 2. V2 = Groundwater storage (water stored between current and final cone of drawdown) = 500,000 kL (nearly independent on mining schedule) 3. V3 = Ongoing groundwater inflow: 100 kL/d, increasing (erratically) to maximum 500 kL/d as underground development progresses toward 300 m RL (total volume is a function of the duration of mining) Total dewatering (VT) is the sum of the three components and the required rate (Qd) is the volume over the duration of mining eg for a 3 year mine: VT = 250,000 + 500,000 + (3 . 365 . 3. 86.4) = 1034 ML Qd = VT/1095 days = 950 kL/d or 10 L/sec The dewatering rate estimate is considered to be most likely to be a conservative (high) value, since aquifer transmissivity is expe3cted to decline with distance from the mine, which would result in lower storage and inflow.

Page 20 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

7. GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT

7.1 Mine Water Balance

The development schedule includes two phases, Phase 1 has duration 32 weeks. This commences with open cut mining at Magenta with a total of 132,000 bcm mined over 9 weeks. Dewatering of the 250,000 kL in storage at Penny West commences in Week 10 after completion of the Magenta Pit. The Penny West pit cut-back will be completed during Phase 1 which also includes construction of all infrastructure required for underground operations. Phase 2 includes underground mining at the new Penny mine and continues from week 32 to a planned total project duration of 3 years. The Phase 1 discharge from Penny West storage will be used as a construction water supply with excess pumped to the Magenta Pit. Storage in the Magenta Pit is projected to peak at about 80 ML before declining gradually due to evaporation. The storage curve for Magenta Pit is shown in Figure 12. Peak storage volume of 80,000 kL occurs at 492 m AHD which is 2.5 m below the minimum pit crest level.

Figure 12 - Magenta Pit Storage Curve

During Phase 2 all scheduled mining is from the Penny Underground Mine. The water balance is summarised in Table 4, including the Volumes in storage before and after each Phase, along with the projected rates averaged over the duration each Phase.

Page 21 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Table 4 - Water Balance

Volume Phase 1 Volume Phase 2 Volume (ML) Rate (ML) Rate (ML) (L/sec) (L/sec) Pits/Mines Storage in Penny West 250 -12.9 0 0.0 0 Groundwater in Storage at Penny 500 1.5 471 6.3 0 Rainfall Input to Penny West Pit 0.7 0.7 Steady Groundwater Inflow to Penny 1.5 3.0 Evaporation at Magenta 0 -0.3 Storage in Magenta 0 4.2 81 0.0 58 Surface Surface Dust Suppression -1.4 -2.5 Site Construction -9.5 0.0 Other surface use -1.5 -4.5 U/G mine U/G Mine Feed 0.0 5.0 Mine losses 0.0 -2.0 U/G Mine discharge 0.0 13.0 Dewatering Balance Balance 4.2 1.0 Bore Balance Potable Feed from Bore 0.8 2.0 Potable Use -0.8 -2.0

The following water balance notes apply: • Green cells are fixed values • Blue cells are hydrological estimates • Yellow cells are project inputs • Red cells are calculated within the water balance • Phase 1 net positive (excess) water balance is storage in Magenta Pit • “Other surface use” includes workshops and backfill plant • Mine losses include evaporation from Pit and atmospheric losses from ventilation system • U/G mine feed is a positive value to the U/G mine discharge calculation • U/G mine feed recycled groundwater and is subtracted for the final “Dewatering Balance” • Potable feed is as required from water supply bore RDRCW001 The water balance, based on conservative (high) estimates for groundwater components indicates a small net positive (excess) water for the operation.

Page 22 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

7.2 Seepage from the Magenta Pit

The Magenta pit floor is at elevation 465 m AHD, or 7 metres above background water level. After mining is completed in dry conditions, recharge to the pit from Penny West will cause water levels to rise briefly to 492 m AHD. Water levels will then subside due to discharge by a combination of evaporation and seepage. Seepage rates are expected to be relatively low for the following reasons: • The pit is in an area of Archean outcrop. • There is an absence of surficial transported alluvium, which is the only potential high transmissivity material • Mineral exploration drilling has not intersected any substantial groundwater • The pit shell will comprise clayey weathered mafic rocks • Unsaturated clayey saprolite has extremely low permeability Any seepage from the pit will be directly vertical toward the water table until the water table mounds up to the base of the pit. The mound will cause a pressure response at the water table which is expected to be measurable over distances of a few hundred metres from the pit. Ground surface gradients and geological structure favours pressure transmission in north-northwest and south- southeast directions. Lateral movement of solute away from the pit will be very much slower and less extensive than pressure mounding. Water quality impacts are unlikely to be measurable at a distance of more than 100 m from the pit crest over any practical post-closure time frame. The pressure mound is expected to dissipate long before any significant lateral solute transport occurs. Considering the favourably low permeability substrate and lack of any water resource or ecological receptor, the seepage risk is considered to be very low. The seepage risk can be further mitigated by installing monitor bores at approximate locations shown in Figure 13, which shows the proposed site layout along with 0.5 m ground surface contours. The bores should be cased to < 440 m AHD.

Page 23 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

Figure 13 – Magenta Pit and Indicative Monitor Bore Locations

Page 24 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

7.3 Dewatering Discharge Infrastructure

Dewatering of Penny West pit involves a maximum static lift of 85 metres from the pit floor at 410 m AHD to the Magenta pit crest at 495 m. A single stage in-pit pump with a capacity of 30 L/sec will be suitable for the dewatering schedule. DN200 HDPE pipe will be adequate for the ex-pit portion of the transfer pipeline. For this configuration of pump capacity and pipe size, the pipeline pressure will be very low beyond the Penny West pit crest pipeline pressure. Transfer of saline water carries the risk of environmental damage arising from uncontrolled discharge through operational error, accident or other failure. Measures to control the risk of pipeline failure will include: • Design for low ex-pit pipeline pressure • Routing to avoid vehicle/machinery interactions • Bunding to eliminate vehicle/machinery interactions and contain any discharge • Operational measures: maintenance and inspections

7.4 Water Monitoring

Monitoring requirements will be aligned with the requirements of the Works Approval and Environmental Licence for dewatering discharge (Part V, Environmental Protection Act 1986), as well the Groundwater Abstraction Licence (Section 5c, Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914). It is anticipated that such monitoring requirements may include monitoring of monthly abstraction volumes from each source and appropriate water level and water quality monitoring as approved by DWER. Additional controls expected to be required for the use of Magenta Pit as a storage and transfer pond, including: • Cease to discharge water level: 492.5 m (minimum 2.0 m freeboard) • Regular inspection of water management infrastructure • Sampling and analysis of the discharge water quality • Monitoring bores to determine extent of any potential water level mounding and groundwater quality impacts

Page 25 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

8. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT AND STORMWATER CONTROLS

The site is situated along a ridgeline such that there are no requirements to contain or divert natural stormwater drainage either during operations or post-closure. Natural drainage east from the ridge to the north of the Penny West Pit, can be preserved by minor adjustments to the extent of the ROM pad and Borrow Pits to exclude excavation or material storage in the drainage swale area shown in Figure 14. Detailed site design and layout will incorporate clean/dirty runoff separation at stockpiles and industrial facilities. Considering the high sulphide content of the ore, this is particularly relevant at the ROM pads.

Figure 14 – Penny West Drainage

Page 26 Zebra Minerals Penny West Mining Proposal MWES November 2020

9. WATER RELATED CLOSURE CONSIDERATIONS

The water-related priorities for closure include: 1. Permanent bunding to exclude stormwater ingress to the pit voids 2. Mechanical integrity of WRD against stormwater erosion and dispersal

As is typical of Yilgarn mining pits, provided external stormwater is excluded, the post-closure pits will become a groundwater sink and there is no risk of groundwater or surface water discharge. The long term steady state pit lake water level at Penny West will be similar to the current baseline which is 446 m or 46 metres below the lowest pit crest elevation. The Magenta Pit floor is elevation is 465 m AHD which is above the regional water level and no permanent pit lake will form. Salinity of the Penny West pit lake will gradually increase over time due to evaporative concentration of discharging groundwater solute. Salinity will remain the major feature of the pit lake water and the major constraint on any possible beneficial use. Pit lake acidification is not expected to occur since the pit does not change substantially from the current and it’s geochemically stable baseline condition.

10. REFERENCES

Ivanic, 2014. Youanmi, WA Sheet 2640: GSWA 1:100 000 Geological Series Maidment, 1993. Handbook of Hydrology. McGraw Hill Murdie and Ivanic, 2017. Youanmi 2640, section C-D, 1:100 000 geological map, GSWA publication Stewart, Williams and Elias, 1983. Youanmi, 1:250 000 geological map explanatory notes, GSWA publication

Report Limitations

MWES Consulting (MWES) have prepared this report in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting profession. It is based on generally accepted practices and standards at the time it was prepared. No other warranty expresses or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. This report should be read in full. No responsibility is accepted for use of any part of this report in any context.

MWES has made no independent verification of this information beyond the agreed scope of works and MWES assumes no responsibility for any inaccuracies or omissions. No indications were found during our investigations that information reviewed at the time of our investigations that information contained in this report as provided to MWES was false. Whilst to the best of our knowledge information contained in this report is accurate, subsurface and groundwater conditions are subject to inherent unpredictability which may limit the ultimate accuracy of estimations presented in this report.

This report was prepared in November 2020 and is based on the conditions encountered and information reviewed at the time of preparation. MWES disclaims responsibility for any changes that may have occurred after this time.

Page 27 Attachment 8 – Additional Information Submitted

10.2 Attachment 8B – Flora/Vegetation and Fauna Survey (Botanica Consulting 2020)

30 Penny West WAA Supporting Information

Penny Reconnaissance Flora/ Vegetation and Fauna Survey Prepared for Ramelius Resources Limited

August 2020 Final

Prepared by: Botanica Consulting Pty Ltd PO Box 2027 Boulder WA 6432

Disclaimer This document and its contents are to be treated as confidential and are published in accordance with and subject to an agreement between Botanica Consulting (BC) and the client for whom it has been prepared and is restricted to those issues that have been raised by the client in its engagement of BC. Neither this document nor its contents may be referred to or quoted in any manner (report or other document) nor reproduced in part or whole by electronic, mechanical or chemical means, including photocopying, recording or any information storage system, without the express written approval of the client and/or BC.

This document and its contents have been prepared utilising the standard of care and skill ordinarily exercised by Environmental Scientists in the preparation of such documents. All material presented in this document is published in good faith and is believed to be accurate at the time of writing. Any person or organisation who relies on or uses the document and its contents for purposes or reasons other than those agreed by BC and the client without primarily obtaining the prior written consent of BC, does so entirely at their own risk. BC denies all liability in tort, contract or otherwise for any loss, damage or injury of any kind whatsoever (whether in negligence or otherwise) that may be endured as a consequence of relying on this document and its contents for any purpose other than that agreed with the client.

Quality Assurance An internal quality review process has been implemented to each project task undertaken by BC. Each document and its contents are carefully reviewed by core members of the Consultancy team and signed off at Director Level prior to issue to the client. Draft documents are submitted to the client for comment and acceptance prior to final production.

Document Job Number: 2020/69

Prepared by: Kelby Jennings Senior Environmental Consultant

Reviewed by: Andrea Williams Director Botanica Consulting

Approved by: Jim Williams Director Botanica Consulting

Contents Page No. Executive Summary 6 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Project Description ...... 1 1.2 Objectives ...... 1 2 Regional Biophysical Environment 3 2.1 Regional Environment ...... 3 2.2 Land Use ...... 3 2.3 Soils and Landscape Systems ...... 4 2.4 Regional Vegetation ...... 6 2.5 Conservation Values ...... 7 2.6 Climate ...... 7 2.7 Hydrology ...... 9 3 Survey Methodology 11 3.1 Desktop Assessment ...... 11 3.2 Field Assessment ...... 12 3.2.1 Flora Assessment ...... 12 3.2.2 Fauna Assessment ...... 12 3.2.3 Personnel involved ...... 13 3.2.4 Scientific licences ...... 13 3.3 Survey limitations and constraints ...... 13 4 Results 16 4.1 Desktop Assessment ...... 16 4.1.1 Flora ...... 16 4.1.2 Vegetation ...... 19 4.1.3 Fauna ...... 21 4.1.4 Conservation Areas ...... 24 4.2 Field Assessment ...... 26 4.2.1 Flora ...... 26 4.2.2 Vegetation Communities ...... 26 4.2.3 Vegetation Condition ...... 34 4.2.4 Significant Vegetation ...... 36 4.2.5 Fauna Habitat ...... 36 4.2.6 Significant Fauna ...... 41 4.3 Matters of National Environmental Significance ...... 41 4.3.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ...... 41 4.4 Matters of State Environmental Significance ...... 42 4.4.1 Environmental Protection Act WA 1986 ...... 42 4.4.2 Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 ...... 42 4.5 Native Vegetation Clearing Principles ...... 43 5 Bibliography 45 Appendix 1: Conservation Ratings BC Act and EPBC Act 47 Appendix 2: Significant Flora Likelihood Assessment 51 Appendix 3: Vegetation Condition Rating 57 Appendix 4: List of species identified within each vegetation type 58

Tables Table 2-1: Soil Landscape Systems within the survey area ...... 4

Table 2-2: Potential terrestrial GDE’s ...... 9 Table 3-1: Scientific Licences of Botanica Staff coordinating the flora survey ...... 13 Table 3-2: Limitations and constraints associated with the survey ...... 15 Table 4-1: Potentially occurring introduced flora ...... 16 Table 4-2: Significant flora with a high likelihood of occurrence ...... 17 Table 4-3: Threatened and Priority Ecological Community desktop results ...... 17 Table 4-4: Pre-European Vegetation Associations within the survey area ...... 19 Table 4-5: Likelihood of Occurrence – Fauna Species of Conservation Significance ...... 22 Table 4-6: Vegetation Community Descriptions and Extent ...... 28 Table 4-7: Vegetation Condition within the survey area ...... 34 Table 4-8: Main Terrestrial Fauna Habitats within the survey area ...... 38 Table 4-9: Assessment of development within the survey area against native vegetation clearing principles ...... 44

Graphs Graph 2-1: Monthly rainfall data (Yuinmery #12092) and average temperature data (Bulga Downs # 12239)(BoM, 2020) ...... 7

Figures Figure 1-1: Regional map of the survey area ...... 2 Figure 2-1: Map of Soil Landscape Systems within the survey area ...... 5 Figure 2-2: Surface Hydrology of the survey area ...... 10 Figure 4-1: DBCA records of significant flora and ecological communities ...... 18 Figure 4-2: Pre-European Vegetation Associations within the survey area ...... 20 Figure 4-3: Conservation Areas ...... 25 Figure 4-4: Vegetation communities and Priority flora ...... 33 Figure 4-5: Vegetation Condition within the survey area ...... 35 Figure 4-6: Main Terrestrial Fauna Habitats within the survey area ...... 40

Glossary Acronym Description BAM Act Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007, WA Government. BC Act Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016, WA Government. Botanica Botanica Consulting Pty Ltd. BoM Bureau of Meteorology. DAFWA Department of Agriculture and Food (now DPIRD), WA Government. Department of the Agriculture, Water and Environment (formerly known as DAWE DotEE), Australian Government. Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (formerly DPaW), DBCA WA Government. DEC Department of Environment and Conservation (now DBCA), WA Government. DER Department of Environment Regulation (now DWER), WA Government. Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (formerly DMP), WA DMIRS Government Department of the Environment and Energy (now known as DAWE), DotEE Australian Government. DoW Department of Water (now DWER), WA Government. DPaW Department of Parks and Wildlife (now DBCA), WA Government. Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, WA DPIRD Government Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (formerly EPA, DER and DWER DoW), WA Government EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986, WA Government. Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations 2004, EP Regulations WA Government. EPA Environmental Protection Authority, WA Government. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Australian EPBC Act Government. ESA Environmentally Sensitive Area. Ha Hectare (10,000 square meters). IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia. International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources – IUCN commonly known as the World Conservation Union. JAMBA Japan Australia Migratory Bird Agreement 1981. Km Kilometer (1,000 meters). NVIS National Vegetation Information System. PEC Priority Ecological Community. Ramelius Ramelius Resources Limited. TEC Threatened Ecological Community. WA Western Australia. WAHERB Western Australian Herbarium. WAM Western Australian Museum, WA Government.

Executive Summary Botanica Consulting (Botanica) was commissioned by Ramelius Resources Limited to undertake a reconnaissance flora/ vegetation and fauna survey of the Penny Project (referred to as the ‘survey area’) within mining tenements M57/180 and M57/196. The survey area occupies 902 ha, located approximately 129 km south-east of Mount Magnet, Western Australia (Figure 1-1). The survey was conducted on the 22nd May 2020 with the area traversed on foot and 4WD by two staff members. The survey is required to support a Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) application and mining proposal with regards to the development of the Penny Project.

The survey area lies within the Eastern Murchison (MUR1) subregion of the Murchison Bioregion, as defined by the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA). The Eastern Murchison subregion comprises the northern parts of the craton’s Southern Cross and Eastern Goldfields Terrains and is characterised by internal drainage and extensive areas of elevated red desert sandplains with minimal dune development. Salt Lake systems are associated with the occluded palaeodrainage system. Broad plains of red-brown soils and breakaway complexes as well as red sandplains are widespread. Vegetation is dominated by Mulga woodlands and is often rich in ephemerals, hummock grasslands, saltbush shrublands and Halosarcia shrublands (Cowan, 2001).

Prior to the field assessment a literature review was undertaken of previous flora and fauna assessments conducted within the local region. Documents reviewed included: • Ecologia Environmental (2019): Penny West Gold Project Biological Survey 2019, prepared on behalf of Spectrum Minerals Limited.

In addition to the literature review, searches of the following databases were undertaken to aid in the compilation of a list of significant flora potentially occurring within the survey area: • Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) Threatened and Priority Flora database (DBCA, 2020a); • DBCA Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities database (DBCA, 2020b); • WA Herbarium; • DBCA NatureMap database (DBCA, 2020c); and • EPBC Protected Matters search tool (DAWE, 2020a).

The database searches identified 206 vascular flora species as occurring within 40 km of the survey area, including ten introduced flora species. Dominant genera were Eucalyptus (18 species), Eremophila (18 species) and Acacia (14 species).

The assessment of the DBCA Threatened and Priority Flora databases, the NatureMap and Protected Matters searches and previous relevant literature identified a total 49 significant flora taxa recorded within a 100 km radius of the survey area. These consist of two Threatened taxa, sixteen Priority 1, two Priority 2, twenty-three Priority 3 and six Priority 4 taxa. These taxa were assessed for distribution and known habitat to determine their likelihood of occurrence within the survey area. The assessment identified two taxa with a high likelihood of occurrence. In addition, there were sixteen taxa with a possible likelihood, consisting of seven Priority 1, one Priority 2, seven Priority 3 and one Priority 4 taxa.

According to the results of the NatureMap search (DBCA, 2020c), a total of 125 vertebrate fauna taxa have been recorded within a 40 km radius of the survey area, consisting of 74 bird species, 10 mammals, 33 reptiles three amphibians and seven invertebrate species, including one introduced species (Mus musculus, House Mouse).

The assessment of the DBCA Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities database and the NatureMap and Protected Matters searches did not identify any Threatened Ecological Communities within 100km of the survey area. The DBCA database search identified one Priority Ecological Community, Yuinmery Calcrete (Priority 1), located approximately 40km north-east of the survey area.

The field survey identified 72 flora taxa within the survey area, representing 37 genera across 20 families. The most diverse genera were Acacia (13 species) followed by Eremophila (eight species) and Eucalyptus (four species). One significant flora species was recorded within the survey area: Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4). The survey confirmed the previous observations of this taxon by Ecologia (2019) for Q05 and Q09 but was unable to locate individuals or populations in the vicinity of Q04. The species was observed on the lower slopes and associated drainage lines of rocky breakaways. Two taxa; Triodia sp. and Lamiaceae sp., could not be identified to species level due to insufficient material, but are not considered to be potentially significant. One introduced flora species was recorded; Rumex vesicarius (Ruby dock).

No significant vegetation, including Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities, were identified within the survey area.

There are no proposed or vested Conservation Reserve located within the survey area.

There are no DBCA managed or interest land located within the survey area.

There are no Environmentally Sensitive Areas located within the survey area.

There are no Nationally Important or RAMSAR wetlands located within the survey area.

Botanica assessed the results of the desktop and field survey with regards to the native vegetation clearing principles listed under Schedule 5 of the EP Act. The assessment found that the proposed vegetation clearing activities are unlikely to be at variance with any of the clearing principles.

Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

1 Introduction 1.1 Project Description Botanica Consulting (Botanica) was commissioned by Ramelius Resources Limited to undertake a reconnaissance flora/ vegetation and fauna survey of the Penny Project (referred to as the ‘survey area’) within mining tenements M57/180 and M57/196. The survey area occupies 902 ha, located approximately 129 km south-east of Mount Magnet, Western Australia (Figure 1-1). The survey was conducted on the 22nd May 2020 with the area traversed on foot and 4WD by two staff members. The survey is required to support a Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) application and mining proposal with regards to the development of the Penny Project.

1.2 Objectives The flora assessment was conducted in accordance with the requirements of a reconnaissance flora survey as defined in Technical Guidance - Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment – December 2016 (EPA, 2016a). The objectives of the assessment were to: • gather background information on flora and vegetation in the target area (literature review, database and map-based searches); • identify significant flora, vegetation and ecological communities and assess the potential sensitivity to impact; • conduct a field survey to verify / ground truth the desktop assessment findings; • undertake floristic community mapping to a scale appropriate for the bioregion and described according to the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) structure and floristics; • undertake vegetation condition mapping; • assess the project area’s plant species diversity, density, composition, structure and weed cover, using NVIS classification system for vegetation description; • assess Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) and indicate whether potential impacts on MNES as protected under the EPBC Act are likely to require referral of the project to the Commonwealth DotEE; and • determine the State legislative context of environmental aspects required for the assessment.

The fauna assessment was conducted in accordance with the requirements for a Level 1 terrestrial fauna survey as defined in Technical Guidance - Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment – December 2016 (EPA, 2016b). The objectives of the assessment were to: • Gather background information on fauna in the survey area (literature review, database and map-based searches); • Delineate and characterise the faunal assemblages and fauna habitats present in the survey area; and • Assess the likelihood of significant fauna occurring within the survey area.

Botanica Consulting 1 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 1-1: Regional map of the survey area Botanica Consulting 2 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey 2 Regional Biophysical Environment 2.1 Regional Environment The survey area lies within the Eastern Murchison (MUR1) subregion of the Murchison Bioregion, as defined by the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA). The Eastern Murchison comprises the northern parts of the craton’s Southern Cross and Eastern Goldfields Terrains and is characterised by internal drainage and extensive areas of elevated red desert sandplains with minimal dune development. Salt Lake systems are associated with the occluded paleodrainage system. Broad plains of red-brown soils and breakaways complexes as well as red sandplains are widespread. Vegetation is dominated by Mulga woodlands and is often rich in ephemerals, hummock grasslands, saltbush shrublands and Halosarcia shrublands (Cowan, 2001).

In accordance with Beard (1990) the Murchison region, located in the Austin Botanical District within the Eremaean Province of WA, is defined by the vegetational expression of geological boundaries of the Yilgarn Block, described as Archaean granite with infolded volcanics and meta-sediments (greenstones) of a like age. The topography is undulating, with occasional ranges of low hills and extensive sandplains in the eastern half. The principal soil type is shallow earthy loam overlying red- brown hardpan, with shallow stony loams on hills and red earthy sands on sandplains. The western half of the region more or less coincides with the basin of the Murchison River, the eastern half embraces the drainage of former rivers, now dry, draining towards the Eucla Basin. Vegetation is predominantly mulga low woodland (Acacia aneura) on plains, reduced to scrub on hills, with a tree steppe of Eucalyptus spp. and Triodia basedowii on sandplains. The climate is arid, with summer and winter rains and an average annual precipitation of 200 mm.

2.2 Land Use The dominant land uses of the Eastern Murchison subregion include grazing native pastures (85.47%), unallocated crown reserves (11.34%), conservation (1.4%) and mining (1.79%) (Cowan, 2001). The survey area is located within the Atley Station Pastoral Lease (LA3114/873).

Botanica Consulting 3 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

2.3 Soils and Landscape Systems The survey area lies within the Murchison Province, which consists of hardpan wash plains and sandplains (with some stony plains, hills, mesas and salt lakes) on the granitic rocks and greenstone of the Yilgarn Craton. The Murchison Province is located in the inland Mid-west and northern Goldfields between three Springs, the Gascoyne River, Wiluna, Cosmo Newberry and Menzies Soil types consist of red loamy earths, red sandy earths, red shallow loams, red deep sands and red-brown hardpan shallow loams with some red shallow sands and red shallow sandy duplexes present. Vegetation communities are predominately Mulga shrublands with spinifex grasslands, with areas of bowgada shrublands, Eucalypt woodlands and halophytic shrublands (Tille, 2006). The Murchison Province is further divided into seven soil-landscape zones, with the survey area located within the Salinaland Plains Zone (279). The Salinaland Plains Zone comprises of sandplains (with hardpan wash plains and some mesas, stony plains and salt lakes) on granitic rocks (and some greenstone) of the Yilgarn Craton. Soils include red sandy earths, red deep sands, red shallow loams and red loamy earths with some red-brown hardpan shallow loams, salt lake soils and red shallow sandy duplexes. Vegetation consists of mulga shrublands with spinifex grasslands (and some halophytic shrublands and eucalypt woodlands). This zone is located in the northern Goldfields from Lakes Barlee and Ballard to Wiluna and Laverton (Tille, 2006).

The Salinaland Plains Zone is further divided into soil landscape systems, with the survey area located within five soil landscape systems, as shown in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-1, in accordance with soil landscape system mapping data (Government of Western Australia, 2019).

Table 2-1: Soil Landscape Systems within the survey area

Soil Landscape System Description Gently undulating sandplains with mixed tall shrublands and hummock Marmion System grasslands.

Hardpan plains with variable gravelly mantles and minor sandy banks Violet System supporting weakly groved mulga shrublands. Low greenstone hills with occasional lateritic breakaways and broad stony slopes, lower saline stony plains and broad drainage tracts; supporting Wiluna System sparse mulga and other acacia shrublands with patches of halophytic shrubs. Gently undulating stony plains and low rises with quartz mantles on Windarra System granite, supporting acacia-eremophila shrublands.

Sandy plains supporting tall shrublands of mulga and bowgada with Yowie System patchy wanderrie grasses.

Botanica Consulting 4 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 2-1: Map of Soil Landscape Systems within the survey area Botanica Consulting 5 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

2.4 Regional Vegetation The vegetation of the Murchison region is described by Tille (2006) as Mulga (Acacia aneura) shrublands and woodlands with gidgee (A. pruinocarpa), kurara (A. tetragonophylla), A. linophylla, bowgada (A. ramulosa), jam (A. acuminata), minniritchie (A. grasbyi), Senna spp. and Eremophila spp. which dominate the hardpan wash plains. Denser, taller mulga woodlands are found on groves while the sandy banks support mulga, bowgada and kurara shrublands with an understorey of wanderrie grasses (Eragrostis and Eriachne spp. and Monachather paradoxa). Snakewood (A. xiphophylla), bluebush (Maireana spp.) and saltbush (Atriplex spp.) grow on the saline drainage tracts.

The sandplains in the east support grasslands of hard spinifex (Triodia basedowii). These grasslands occur with an open tree and shrub steppe of mulga, marble gum (Eucalyptus gongylocarpa), mallees (E. kingsmillii, E. longissima, E. brachycorys and E. youngiana), bowgada and spinifex wattle (A. coolgardiensis). In places denser woodlands of mulga, spinifex wattle or mallee are found over the spinifex. On western sandplains shrublands are dominated by bowgada with cypress pine (Callitris columellaris), mallees (e.g. E. leptopoda and E. kingsmillii), mulga and Grevillea spp. On the yellow sandplains in the south-west are closed mixed shrublands with Melaleuca, Hakea, Calothamnus, Baeckea, Banksia prionotes, Allocasuarina. and Acacia spp. The mesas have bowgada, mulga and A. linophylla shrublands above the breakaways, while the footslopes support shrublands with saltbush (Atriplex spp.), Frankenia spp., Ptilotus spp. and Eremophila pterocarpa. The hilly terrain has shrublands of mulga, minniritchie, Eremophila spp. and cotton bush (Ptilotus obovatus). Hills in the far west have woodlands of York gum (Eucalyptus loxophleba), salmon gum (E. salmonophloia) and jam (Acacia acuminata). The stony plains support shrublands of mulga, gidgee, granite wattle (Acacia quadrimarginea), minniritchie, prickly wattle, snakewood, jam and Eremophila spp. in the valley floors there are shrublands of samphire (Halosarcia spp.), saltbush, sage (Cratystylis subspinescens) and Frankenia spp. surrounding salt lakes. Floodplains along the Murchison and its tributaries have shrublands of bluebush (Maireana spp.), saltbush and Frankenia spp., as well as mulga, prickly wattle and Acacia distans.

Botanica Consulting Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

2.5 Conservation Values The Murchison Bioregion contains 41 vegetation associations (hummock grasslands, succulent steppe or low woodlands) that have at least 85 per cent of their total extent in the bioregion. The Bioregion is rich and diverse in flora and fauna but most species are wide ranging and usually occur in adjoining regions. A snake (Pseudechis butleri) is the only known regionally endemic vertebrate species.

There are six wetlands of national importance in the Bioregion, all of which are salt lakes: Ballard, Barlee, Marmion, Wooleen, Breberle and Anneen. There is one wetland of regional importance within the Murchison Bioregion; the Mungawolagudgi Claypan on Muggon Station.

No ecosystems are listed as threatened under WA State legislation occur within the Murchison Bioregion, but 52 communities and vegetation associations are thought to be at risk for a variety of reasons. Grazing from livestock, goats and rabbits and changed fire regimes are the main threatening processes in the region, with clearing, impacts of mining, erosion and sedimentation also causing significant impacts.

2.6 Climate The climate of the Eastern Murchison subregion is characterised as an arid climate with summer and winter rainfall of approximately 200 mm annually (Beard, 1990). Rainfall data for the Yuinmery weather station (#12092, located approximately 37km north-east of the survey area) and Bulga Downs weather station (#12239, located approximately 99 km east-north- east of the survey area) is shown in Graph 2-1 (BoM, 2020a). Monthly mean maximum temperature at Bulga Downs ranges from 37.9ºC during January to 4.8ºC in July. Mean monthly rainfall ranges from 33.7 mm in February to 7.7 mm in October, whilst the mean annual rainfall is 245.1 mm. Significant rainfall was recorded January-March 2020, increasing the likelihood for the presence of ephemeral species and flowering material (Graph 2-1).

Climate Data 90 40 80 35

70 C) 30 0 60 25 50 20 40 30 15 Rainfall (mm) 20 10 Temperature Temperature ( 10 5 0 0 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May '19 '19 '19 '19 '19 '19 '19 '20 '20 '20 '20 '20

Average (1921-2019) 2019/20 Mean Maximum Temperature Mean Minimum Temperature

Graph 2-1: Monthly rainfall data (Yuinmery #12092) and average temperature data (Bulga Downs # 12239)(BoM, 2020)

Botanica Consulting Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

The EPBC Act also requires the compilation of a list of migratory species that are recognized under international treaties including the: • Japan Australia Migratory Bird Agreement 1981 (JAMBA)1; • China Australia Migratory Bird Agreement 1998 (CAMBA); • Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement 2007 (ROKAMBA); and • Bonn Convention 1979 (The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals).

Most but not all migratory bird species listed in the annexes to these bilateral agreements are protected in Australia as Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) under the EPBC Act. Descriptions of conservation significant species and communities are provided in Appendix 1.

1 Most but not all species listed under JAMBA are also specially protected under Specially Protected Species of the BC Act.

Botanica Consulting Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

2.7 Hydrology According to the Geoscience Australia database (2015), there are no permanent or non- perennial inland waters within the survey area. No permanent drainage lines occur within the survey area however multiple non-perennial drainage lines intersect the survey area. Drainage lines occurring within the survey area are illustrated in Figure 2-2. Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) includes biological assemblages of species such as wetlands or woodlands that use groundwater either opportunistically or as their primary water source. For the purposes of this report, a GDE is defined as any vegetation community that derives part of its water budget from groundwater and must be assumed to have some degree of groundwater dependency. According to the BoM Atlas of Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (BoM, 2020b) database, there are two low to medium-potential terrestrial GDEs located within the survey area, described below in Table 2-2 and spatially in Figure 2-2. Table 2-2: Potential terrestrial GDE’s

Region Landscape Geomorphology Description Potential Sandplains and hardpan wash Sandy plains supporting plains with outgoing drainage Salt shrublands of mulga and Low Lying and salt lakes, broken by ridges Low Lakes bowgada with patchy of metamorphic rocks and wanderrie grasses. granite. Gently undulating gravelly Sandplains and hardpan wash plains on greenstone, plains with outgoing drainage Salt laterite and hardpan, with Low Lying and salt lakes, broken by ridges Medium Lakes low stony rises and minor of metamorphic rocks and saline plains; supporting granite. groved mulga and bowgada

Botanica Consulting 9 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 2-2: Surface Hydrology of the survey area Botanica Consulting 10 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

3 Survey Methodology 3.1 Desktop Assessment Prior to the field assessment a literature review was undertaken of previous flora and fauna assessments conducted within the local region. Documents reviewed included: • Ecologia Environmental (2019): Penny West Gold Project Biological Survey 2019, prepared on behalf of Spectrum Minerals Limited.

In addition to the literature review, searches of the following databases were undertaken to aid in the compilation of a list of significant flora within the survey area: • DBCA Threatened and Priority Flora database (DBCA, 2020a); • DBCA Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities database (DBCA, 2020b); • WA Herbarium; • DBCA NatureMap database (DBCA, 2020c); and • EPBC Protected Matters search tool (DAWE, 2020a).

The Threatened and Priority Flora database search (Ref: 28-0620FL) and the EPBC Protected Matters search were conducted with a 100 km buffer from the project area due to the low number of records in the area. The Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities database search (Ref: 13-0720EC) and NatureMap search were conducted with a 40km radius from the centre of the survey area.

It should be noted that these lists are based on observations from a broader area than the assessment area (100 km radius) and therefore may include taxa not present. The databases also often include very old records that may be incorrect or in some cases the taxa in question have become locally or regionally extinct. Information from these sources should therefore be taken as indicative only and local knowledge and information also needs to be taken into consideration when determining what actual species may be present within the specific area being investigated.

The conservation significance of flora and fauna taxa was assessed using data from the following sources: • Environment Protection and Biodiversity and Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999. Administered by the Australian Government (DAWE); • Biodiversity Conservation (BC) Act 2016. Administered by the WA Government (DBCA); • Red List produced by the Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the World Conservation Union (also known as the IUCN Red List – the acronym derived from its former name of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources). The Red List has no legislative power in Australia but is used as a framework for State and Commonwealth categories and criteria; and • Priority Flora/ Fauna list. A non-legislative list maintained by DBCA for management purposes (fauna list released January 2019; flora list released December 2018).

Botanica Consulting 11 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

3.2 Field Assessment Botanica conducted a reconnaissance flora/ vegetation and fauna survey covering an area of 902 ha. The survey was conducted on the 22nd May 2020 with the area traversed on foot and 4WD by two staff members.

3.2.1 Flora Assessment Prior to the commencement of field work, aerial photography was inspected and obvious differences in the vegetation assemblages were identified. The different vegetation communities identified were then inspected during the field survey to assess their validity. A handheld GPS unit was used to record the coordinates of the boundaries between existing vegetation communities. At each sample point, the following information was recorded: • GPS location; • Photograph of vegetation; • Dominant taxa for each stratum; • All vascular taxa (including annual taxa); • Landform classification; • Vegetation condition rating; • Collection and documentation of unknown plant specimens; and • GPS location, photograph and collection of flora of conservation significance if encountered.

Unknown specimens collected during the survey were identified with the aid of samples housed at the BC Herbarium and Western Australian Herbarium. Vegetation was classified in accordance with NVIS classifications.

3.2.2 Fauna Assessment Vegetation and landform units identified during the flora assessment have been used to define broad fauna habitat types across the site. This information has been supplemented with observations made during the fauna assessment.

The main aim of the fauna habitat assessment was to determine if it was likely that any species of conservation significance would be utilizing the areas that maybe impacted on as a consequence of development at the site. The habitat information obtained was also used to aid in finalizing the overall potential fauna list.

As part of the desktop literature review, available information on the habitat requirements of the species of conservation significance listed as possibly occurring in the area was researched. During the field survey, the habitats within the study area were assessed and specific elements identified, if present, to determine the likelihood of listed threatened species utilizing the area and its significance to them.

Opportunistic observations of fauna species were made during all field survey work which involved a series of transects across the study area during the day including observations of bird species with binoculars. Secondary evidence of a species presence such as tracks, scats, skeletal remains, foraging evidence or calls were also noted if observed/heard.

Botanica Consulting 12 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

3.2.3 Personnel involved The field survey was conducted by two Botanica staff members; Jim Williams (Director/Principal Botanist, Diploma of Horticulture) and April Slater (Graduate Environmental Consultant, BSc. Conservation Biology).

3.2.4 Scientific licences Table 3-1: Scientific Licences of Botanica Staff coordinating the flora survey

Licensed staff Permit Number Valid Until FB62000108 (Licence to flora for scientific Jim Williams 27/05/2022 purposes)

3.3 Survey limitations and constraints It is important to note that flora surveys will entail limitations notwithstanding careful planning and design. Potential limitations are listed in

Botanica Consulting 13 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

.

The conclusions presented in this report are based upon field data and environmental assessments and/or testing carried out over a limited period of time and are therefore merely indicative of the environmental condition of the site at the time of the field assessments. Also, it should be recognised that site conditions can change with time. Information not available at the time of this assessment which may subsequently become available may alter the conclusions presented.

Some species are reported as potentially occurring based on there being suitable habitat (quality and extent) within the survey area or immediately adjacent. The habitat requirements and ecology of many of the species known to occur in the wider area are however often not well understood or documented. It can therefore be difficult to exclude species from the potential list based on a lack of a specific habitats or microhabitats within the survey area. As a consequence of this limitation, the potential species list produced is most likely an overestimation of those species that actually utilise the survey area for some purpose.

In recognition of survey limitations, a precautionary approach has been adopted for this assessment. Any flora and fauna species that would possibly occur within the survey area (or immediately adjacent), as identified through ecological databases, publications, discussions with local experts/residents and the habitat knowledge of the author, has been listed as having the potential to occur.

Botanica Consulting 14 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 3-2: Limitations and constraints associated with the survey

Potential Impact Variable Details on Survey The survey was conducted via 4WD and on foot. Numerous Access problems Not a constraint tracks were located within the survey area, providing ease of access. The BC personnel that conducted the survey were regarded as suitably qualified and experienced. Competency/ Not a constraint Coordinating Botanist/ Zoologist: Jim Williams Experience Data Interpretation: Jim Williams, Kelby Jennings, Lauren Pick and Greg Harewood.

Fieldwork was completed within the EPA’s recommended primary survey time period (i.e., 6-8 weeks post wet season Timing of survey, Not a constraint (March – June) for the Eremaean Province and was weather & season conducted following cyclonic rainfall received in January to February 2020. The area has been disturbed from exploration and cattle Area disturbance Not a constraint grazing; however, vegetation was mostly intact and comprised of native vegetation. Survey intensity was appropriate for the size/significance of the area with a reconnaissance survey completed to Survey Effort/ Extent Not a constraint identify vegetation types/fauna habitats and conservation significant species/communities. Threatened flora database searches provided by the DBCA were used to identify any potential locations of Threatened/Priority taxa.

Availability of BoM, DWER, DPIRD, DBCA and DotEE databases were contextual reviewed to obtain appropriate regional desktop information at a Not a constraint information on the biophysical environment of the local regional and local region. scale

Previous Flora/ Fauna surveys within the local area have been assessed for pertinent information and environmental context of the regional area. In the opinion of Botanica, the survey area was covered sufficiently in order to identify vegetation assemblages. Few annual species were present during the survey and many of the plants were not in flower. It is estimated that approximately 85% of the flora within the survey area were able to be fully identified. Completeness Minor constraint The vegetation types for this study were based on visual descriptions of locations in the field. The distribution of these vegetation communities/ fauna habitats outside the study area is not known, however vegetation types identified were categorised via comparison to vegetation distributions throughout WA specified in the NVIS Major Vegetation Groups (DotEE, 2017b).

Botanica Consulting 15 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4 Results 4.1 Desktop Assessment 4.1.1 Flora The NatureMap database search identified 206 vascular flora species as occurring within 40 km of the survey area, including seven introduced flora species. Significant genera were Eucalyptus (18 species), Eremophila (18 species) and Acacia (14 species).

4.1.1.1 Introduced Flora Results of the NatureMap and EPBC Protected Matters searches identified ten introduced flora (weed) species as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the survey area, one of which is listed by DAWE as a Weed of National Significance (WoNS) (Table 4-1). According to the Western Australian Organism List (WAOL) maintained by the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD), none of the introduced species are listed as a Declared Pest under the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management (BAM) Act 2007. Table 4-1: Potentially occurring introduced flora

Species WAOL Status WoNS

Chenopodium murale (Nettle-leaf Goosefoot) Permitted-s11 No Euphorbia terracina (Geraldton Carnation Weed) Permitted-s11 No Rostraria pumila Permitted-s11 No Rumex hypogaeus (Double Gee) Permitted-s11 No Rumex vesicarius (Ruby Dock) Not Listed No Schismus arabicus (Araby Grass) Permitted-s11 No Verbesina encelioides Permitted-s11 No Carrichtera annua (Ward's Weed) Permitted-s11 No Cenchrus ciliaris (Buffel-grass, Black Buffel-grass) Permitted-s11 No Lycium ferocissimum (African Boxthorn) Permitted-s11 Yes

Botanica Consulting 16 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.1.1.2 Significant Flora The assessment of the DBCA TPFL and WA Herbarium databases (DBCA, 2020a), the NatureMap (DBCA, 2020c) and Protected Matters searches (DAWE, 2020a) and previous relevant literature identified a total 49 significant flora taxa recorded within a 100 km radius of the survey area. These consist of two Threatened taxa, sixteen Priority 1, two Priority 2, twenty-three Priority 3 and six Priority 4 taxa (Appendix 2). These taxa were assessed for distribution and known habitat to determine their likelihood of occurrence within the survey area. The assessment identified two taxa with a high likelihood of occurrence (Table 4-2). In addition, there were 16 taxa with a possible likelihood, consisting of seven Priority 1 species, one Priority 2, seven Priority 3 and one Priority 4 taxa (Appendix 2). The locations of the DBCA database records are illustrated spatially in Figure 4-1. Table 4-2: Significant flora with a high likelihood of occurrence

Status Species Habitat Likelihood Euryomyrtus Yellow red sand/brown yellow sandy clay. Gravel High Priority 3 recurva pits, catchment slopes. Nearest record 26.2 km. Hemigenia Rocky breakaways, previously recorded in survey High Priority 4 exilis area.

4.1.1.3 Significant Ecological Communities The assessment of the DBCA Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities database (DBCA, 2020b), the NatureMap (DBCA, 2020c) and Protected Matters searches (DAWE, 2020a) did not identify any Threatened Ecological Communities recorded within 100km of the survey area. The DBCA database search identified one Priority Ecological Community, Yuinmery Calcrete (Priority 1), located approximately 40km north-east of the survey area (Figure 4-1). A description of the community is provided in Table 4-3. Table 4-3: Threatened and Priority Ecological Community desktop results

Status Name Description and Threats Yuinmery north calcrete groundwater assemblage types on Raeside palaeodrainage on Yuinmery Station. Unique Priority 1 Yuinmery Calcrete assemblages of invertebrates have been identified in the groundwater calcretes. Threats: mining

Botanica Consulting 17 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-1: DBCA records of significant flora and ecological communities

Botanica Consulting 18 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.1.2 Vegetation The Pre-European vegetation association dataset (DPIRD, 2018) indicates that the survey area is located predominately within the Barlee 18 vegetation association, with Barlee 485 occurring in the southern portion of the survey area. The extent of these vegetation associations within the survey area is displayed spatially in Figure 4-2, and association descriptions and their remaining extent, as specified in the 2018 Statewide Vegetation Statistics (DBCA, 2018) is provided in Table 4-4. Areas retaining less than 30% of their pre-European vegetation extent generally experience exponentially accelerated species loss, while areas with less than 10% are considered “endangered” (EPA, 2000). Although only a small portion of each vegetation association is protected within DBCA managed lands, both associations retain over 99% of their pre-European extent. Development within the survey area will not significantly reduce the extent of pre- European vegetation of these associations.

Table 4-4: Pre-European Vegetation Associations within the survey area

Pre- Pre-European % of Current extent Vegetation European extent within DBCA Floristic Description Association Extent (ha) remaining (%) managed lands

Mulga Acacia aneura and Barlee 18 19,892,306 99.75 2.13 associated species. Hummock grassland with scattered low trees over Barlee 485 215,963 99.99 - dwarf shrubs or mixed short grass and spinifex mixed species, Triodia spp.

Botanica Consulting 19 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-2: Pre-European Vegetation Associations within the survey area

Botanica Consulting 20 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey 4.1.3 Fauna According to the results of the NatureMap search (DBCA, 2020c), a total of 125 vertebrate fauna taxa have been recorded within a 40 km radius of the survey area, consisting of 74 bird species, 10 mammals, 33 reptiles three amphibians and seven invertebrate species, including one introduced species (Mus musculus, House Mouse).

4.1.3.1 Significant Fauna Fauna of conservation significance identified during the literature review as previously being recorded in the general area were assessed and ranked for their likelihood of occurrence within the survey area itself (Table 4-5). The rankings and criteria used were: • Would Not Occur: There is no suitable habitat for the species in the survey area and/or there is no documented record of the species in the general area since records have been kept and/or the species is generally accepted as being locally/regionally extinct (supported by a lack of recent records).

o Locally Extinct: Populations no longer occur within a small part of the species natural range, in this case within 10 or 20km of the survey area. Populations do however persist outside of this area.

o Regionally Extinct: Populations no longer occur in a large part of the species natural range, in this case within the northern goldfields region. Populations do however persist outside of this area.

• Unlikely to Occur: The survey area is outside of the currently documented distribution for the species in question, or no suitable habitat (type, quality and extent) was identified as being present during the field assessment. Individuals of some species may occur occasionally as vagrants/transients especially if suitable habitat is located nearby but the site itself would not support a population or part population of the species

• Possibly Occurs: Survey area is within the known distribution of the species in question and habitat of at least marginal quality was identified as likely to be present during the field survey and literature review, supported in some cases by recent records being documented in literature from within or near the survey area. In some cases, while a species may be classified as possibly being present at times, habitat may be marginal (e.g. poor quality, fragmented, limited in extent) and therefore the frequency of occurrence and/or population levels may be low.

• Known to Occur: The species in question has been positively identified as being present (for sedentary species) or as using the survey area as habitat for some other purpose (for non- sedentary/mobile species) during field surveys within or near the survey area. This information may have been obtained by direct observation of individuals or by way of secondary evidence (e.g. tracks, foraging debris, scats). In some cases, while a species may be classified as known to occur, habitat may be marginal (e.g. poor quality, fragmented, limited in extent) and therefore the frequency of occurrence and/or population levels may be low.

Botanica Consulting 21 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-5: Likelihood of Occurrence – Fauna Species of Conservation Significance

Conservation Status Likelihood of Species Habitat Description EPBC BC DBCA Occurrence Act Act Priority Possibly Occurs. Malleefowl VU VU - Scrublands and woodlands dominated by mallee and wattle species (DAWE, 2020b). Suitable habitat Leipoa ocellata likely to be present. Unlikely to Occur. Chuditch, Western Previously occurred throughout arid and semi-arid Australia, but is now restricted to south- Not recorded within Quoll VU VU west Western Australia. (DAWE, 2020b). Murchison Dasyurus geoffroii Bioregion. Possibly Occurs The Peregrine Falcon is found in most habitats, from rainforests to the arid zone, and at most aerially over survey Peregrine Falcon altitudes, from the coast to alpine areas. It requires abundant prey and secure nest sites, and area on very rare - OS - Falco peregrinus prefers coastal and inland cliffs or open woodlands near water, and may even be found occasions. No nesting on high city buildings (Birdlife Australia, 2018). suitable breeding habitat. Prefers muddy edges of shallow fresh or brackish wetlands, with inundated or emergent Migratory Shorebirds sedges, grass, saltmarsh or other low vegetation. This includes lagoons, swamps, lakes and Would Not Occur. MI IA - (Various species) pools near the coast, and dams, waterholes, soaks, bore drains and bore swamps, saltpans No Suitable Habitat. and hypersaline salt lakes inland (DAWE, 2020b). Would Not Occur. No documented Grey Wagtail Running water in disused quarries, sandy, rocky streams in escarpments and rainforest, MI IA - records in the Motacilla cinerea sewerage ponds, ploughed fields and airfields (Morecombe 2004). Murchison Bioregion. Would Not Occur. No documented Yellow Wagtail Occurs in a variety of damp or wet habitats with low vegetation, from rushy pastures, MI IA - records in the Motacilla flava meadows, hay fields and marshes to damp steppe and grassy tundra (Morecombe 2004). Murchison Bioregion. Most habitat records are of Triodia (Spinifex) grasslands and/or chenopod shrublands in the Unlikely to Occur. arid and semi-arid zones, or Astrebla spp. (Mitchell grass), shrubby samphire and chenopod No recent records Night Parrot associations, scattered trees and shrubs, Acacia aneura (Mulga) woodland, treeless areas EN CR - nearby, potential Pezoporus occidentalis and bare gibber are associated with sightings of the species. Roosting and nesting sites are habitat likely to be consistently reported as within clumps of dense vegetation, primarily old and large Spinifex marginal. (Triodia) clumps, but sometimes other vegetation types (DAWE, 2020b).

22 Botanica Consulting Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Conservation Status Likelihood of Species Habitat Description EPBC BC DBCA Occurrence Act Act Priority Confined to arid regions of Western Australia, the Northern Territory, and South Australia. In Western Australia, it is sparsely distributed from near Coolgardie in the west and the Murchison River to the east, and north to near the Fitzroy River in Western Australia and to Howell Ponds in the Northern Territory. It is believed that the population is mainly Unlikely to Occur. concentrated in the Great Sandy, Gibson, Tanami and Great Victoria Deserts, and in the Rarely recorded this Princess Parrot VU - P4 central ranges. It inhabits sand dunes and sand flats in the arid zone of western and central far south and no Polytelis alexandrae Australia, in open savanna woodlands and shrublands that usually consist of scattered recent records stands of Eucalyptus (including E. gongylocarpa, E. chippendalei and mallee species), nearby. Casuarina or Allocasuarina trees; an understorey of shrubs such as Acacia (especially A. aneura), Cassia, Eremophila, Grevillea, Hakea and Senna; and a ground cover dominated by Triodia species (DAWE, 2020b). Endemic to semi-arid south-west Western Australia (WA). It occurs in a number of severely fragmented populations in the central and northern Wheatbelt. Further north, the species Shield-backed Unlikely to Occur. occurs in more arid areas in the Midwest (e.g. large isolated ranges at Jack Hills, Weld Range Trapdoor Spider VU Suitable habitat and Blue Hills) and coastal areas of the Midwest e.g. Zuytdorp Station north of the Murchison Idiosoma nigrum unlikely to occur. River and Nanga Station south of Shark Bay). The arid Midwest populations are naturally fragmented or isolated because they persist only on ranges (DAWE, 2020b). Would Not Occur. Lesser Stick-nest Rat X VU Arid and semi-arid lands (DAWE, 2020b). Species considered Leporillus apicalis extinct. The hooded plover (western) occurs on the south-west Western Australian coast from Cape Thinornis rubricollis Would Not Occur. MI IA P4 Naturaliste to Eyre, and on inland lakes as far north as lakes Cowan, Moore and Yalgorup Hooded Plover Habitat not present. (DAWE, 2020b).

23 Botanica Consulting Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.1.4 Conservation Areas There are no proposed or vested Conservation Reserve located within the survey area.

There are no DBCA managed or interest land located within the survey area.

There are no Environmentally Sensitive Areas located within the survey area.

There are no Nationally Important or RAMSAR wetlands located within the survey area.

The closest significant environmental feature is Lake Barlee, located approximately 39 km south-east of the survey area. Lake Barlee is listed as an ESA and a Nationally Important Wetland. The closest conservation reserve is the Karroun Hill Nature Reserve, which is located approximately 91 km south-east of the survey area. An area of DBCA Interest, currently gazetted as UCL, is located approximately 36 km east of the survey area. A map showing areas of proposed and vested Conservation Reserves and ESA’s in relation to the survey area is provided in Figure 4-3.

Botanica Consulting 24 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-3: Conservation Areas

Botanica Consulting 25 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.2 Field Assessment 4.2.1 Flora The field survey identified 72 flora taxa within the survey area, representing 37 genera across 20 families. The most diverse genera were Acacia (13 species) followed by Eremophila (eight species) and Eucalyptus (four species). One significant flora species was recorded within the survey area: Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4). Two taxa, Triodia sp. and Lamiaceae sp., could not be identified to species due to insufficient material, but are not considered to be potentially significant.

4.2.1.1 Significant Flora According to the EPA Environmental Factor Guideline for Flora and Vegetation (EPA, 2016a) significant flora includes: • flora being identified as threatened or priority species; • locally endemic flora or flora associated with a restricted habitat type (e.g. surface water or groundwater dependent ecosystems); • new species or anomalous features that indicate a potential new species; • flora representative of the range of a species (particularly, at the extremes of range, recently discovered range extensions, or isolated outliers of the main range); • unusual species, including restricted subspecies, varieties or naturally occurring hybrids; and • flora with relictual status, being representative of taxonomic groups that no longer occur widely in the broader landscape.

No Threatened flora species were recorded within the survey area.

The field survey identified one significant flora species within the survey area: Hemigenia exilis (Priority 4). The survey confirmed the observations of the Ecologia (2019) survey for Q05 and Q09 but was unable to locate individuals or populations in the vicinity of Q04. The species was observed on the lower slopes and associated drainage lines of rocky breakaways.

Hemigenia exilis is described as an erect, multi-stemmed shrub, 0.5-2 m high. It produces blue to purple/white flowers in April or September to November and occurs in laterite breakaways and slopes (Florabase, 2020).

The two nearest DBCA database records, located approximately 80 km east of the survey area, were located on 1.) a rocky banded ironstone outcrop with orange brown skeletal to shallow sandy clay loam soils, associated with a vegetation community of Acacia burkittii, A. incurvaneura, A. caesaneura, A. tetragonophylla tall open shrubland over Philotheca brucei subsp. brucei, Scaevola spinescens, Hemigenia exilis and Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia sparse shrubland. The second record is described as 2.) occurring on the midslope of a low ridge, with red-brown clayey loam over ironstone and in association with open shrubland of Acacia cockertoniana and A. tetragonophylla over open shrubland of Scaevola spinescens and Eremophila latrobei subsp. latrobei and Eremophila georgei.

4.2.2 Vegetation Communities A total of seven vegetation communities were identified within the survey area. Vegetation community description and extent listed below in

Botanica Consulting 26 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-6 and illustrated spatially in Figure 4-4. Vegetation community descriptions and extents were determined from field survey results, aerial imagery interpretation and extrapolation of the communities identified in Ecologia (2019). Floristic species composition for each vegetation community is listed in Appendix 4.

Botanica Consulting 27 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-6: Vegetation Community Descriptions and Extent Broad Vegetation Floristic Area Area Vegetation Description (NVIS V) Landform Image Community Formation (ha) (%) (NVIS III)

Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa tall open Acacia tall shrubland; Dodonaea lobulata, Ptilotus Undulating VT01a open 245.7 27.2 obovatus mid-low open shrubland; Triodia Plains shrubland. rigidissima sparse hummock grassland.

Botanica Consulting 28 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Broad Vegetation Floristic Area Area Vegetation Description (NVIS V) Landform Image Community Formation (ha) (%) (NVIS III)

Eucalyptus Eucalyptus leptopoda subsp. arctata low open low woodland; Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa, VT01b Low rises. 37.8 4.2 open Baeckea elderiana tall open shrubland over woodland. Triodia rigidissima sparse hummock grassland.

Eucalyptus Eucalyptus clelandiorum low open woodland; low Acacia erinacea, Eremophila pantonii mid open VT02 Slight rises. 67.5 7.5 open shrubland; Olearia muelleri, Scaevola woodland. spinescens low sparse shrubland.

Botanica Consulting 29 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Broad Vegetation Floristic Area Area Vegetation Description (NVIS V) Landform Image Community Formation (ha) (%) (NVIS III)

Acacia burkittii tall open shrubland over Acacia tall Eremophila clarkei mid sparse shrubland over Undulating VT03 open 147.6 16.4 Olearia pimelioides, Prostanthera patens, Plains shrubland. Scaevola spinescens low sparse shrubland.

Eucalyptus clelandiorum (or E. longissima) low Eucalyptus open woodland over Acacia ramulosa var. low ramulosa, Acacia burkittii tall open shrubland Slight rises, VT04 18.1 2.0 open over Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia breakaways. woodland. over Eremophila pantonii mid-low open shrubland.

Botanica Consulting 30 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Broad Vegetation Floristic Area Area Vegetation Description (NVIS V) Landform Image Community Formation (ha) (%) (NVIS III)

Acacia ?aptaneura tall open shrubland; Acacia tall Eremophila clarkei, Eremophila latrobei subsp. Slight rises, VT05 open 164.7 18.3 latrobei, Melaleuca uncinata sens. lat. Mid open breakaways. shrubland. shrubland.

Acacia jennerae and Acacia ligulata tall open shrubland over Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. Acacia tall angustifolia and Baeckea elderiana open Drainage VT06 open 3.2 0.4 shrubland over Triodia sp. and Ptilotus obovatus Channel shrubland. var. obovatus low sparse shrubland/hummock grassland.

Botanica Consulting 31 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Broad Vegetation Floristic Area Area Vegetation Description (NVIS V) Landform Image Community Formation (ha) (%) (NVIS III) Macro- VT02- channels, Mosaic - 178.6 19.8 N/A VT04 outwash plains.

Totally Mining - - 38.8 4.3 Degraded Activities

Total - - 902.0 100.0

Botanica Consulting 32 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-4: Vegetation communities and Priority flora

Botanica Consulting 33 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.2.3 Vegetation Condition Based on the vegetation condition rating scale adapted from Keighery, 1994 and Trudgen, 1988 (Appendix 4), native vegetation within the survey area was rated as ‘good’ (Table 4-7; Figure 4-5). ‘Good’ condition depicts more obvious signs of damage caused by human activity since European settlement, including some obvious impact on the vegetation structure such as that caused by low levels of grazing and/or slightly aggressive weeds.

Areas associated with the rehabilitated waste dump and the old mining pit were rated as ‘degraded’ and ‘completely degraded’ respectively.

4.2.3.1 Introduced Flora The invasive weed species Ruby Dock (Rumex vesicarius) was recorded within the assessment area. Individuals were observed in association with the current mine pit (Figure 4-5). Table 4-7: Vegetation Condition within the survey area Condition Rating Area (ha) % Good 863.2 95.7 Degraded 22.9 2.5 Completely Degraded 15.9 1.8 Total 902.0 100.0

Botanica Consulting 34 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-5: Vegetation Condition within the survey area

Botanica Consulting 35 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.2.4 Significant Vegetation According to the EPA Environmental Factor Guideline for Flora and Vegetation (EPA, 2016b) significant vegetation includes:

• vegetation being identified as threatened or priority ecological communities; • vegetation with restricted distribution; • vegetation subject to a high degree of historical impact from threatening processes; • vegetation which provides a role as a refuge; and • vegetation providing an important function required to maintain ecological integrity of a significant ecosystem.

No significant vegetation, including Threatened and Priority ecological communities, were identified within the survey area. One Priority Ecological Communities (PEC) was identified from the DBCA database search, located approximately 43 km NE of the survey area (Figure 4-1). Although this community is considered as unlikely to occur within the survey area, this was outside the scope of the field survey, as this PEC is concerned with underground invertebrate assemblages.

4.2.5 Fauna Habitat The broad scale terrestrial fauna habitats within the survey area presented below are based on vegetation and associated landforms identified during the flora and vegetation assessment. The extent of the identified fauna habitats and a summary description of each are provided in

Botanica Consulting 36 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-8 below. The extent of fauna habitat within the survey area is shown spatially in Figure 4-6.

Botanica Consulting 37 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-8: Main Terrestrial Fauna Habitats within the survey area

Fauna Habitat Description Example Image

Open Acacia Shrubland

Approximate area: 561.1 ha (62.2%)

Open Eucalyptus Woodland

Approximate area: 123.4 ha (13.7%)

Mosaic: Acacia shrubland and Eucalyptus woodland

Approximate area: 178.7 ha (19.8%)

Botanica Consulting 38 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Fauna Habitat Description Example Image

Rehabilitated Waste Dump

Approximate area: 28.1 ha (3.1%)

Old Pit

Approximate area: 10.7 ha (1.2%)

Total: 902 ha

Botanica Consulting 39 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Figure 4-6: Main Terrestrial Fauna Habitats within the survey area

Botanica Consulting 40 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

4.2.6 Significant Fauna According to the EPA Environmental Factor Guideline for Terrestrial Fauna (EPA, 2016d) significant fauna includes: • Fauna being identified as a threatened or priority species; • Fauna species with restricted distribution; • Fauna subject to a high degree of historical impact from threatening processes; and • Fauna providing an important function required to maintain the ecological integrity of a significant ecosystem.

No significant fauna species were observed during the survey.

The current status of some species on site and/or in the general area is difficult to determine, however, based on the habitats present and, in some cases, direct observations or recent nearby records, the following species of conservation significance can be regarded as possibly utilising the survey area for some purpose at times, these being:

• Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) – Vulnerable (EPBC Act and BC Act) This species is occasionally recorded in the general area though most nearby records are over 10 years old and habitat appears very marginal/or unsuitable for breeding, however occasional transients could potentially occur. No evidence of malleefowl activity (inactive or active mounds, tracks, feathers or bird observations etc.) were observed within the survey area. Significant impact unlikely.

• Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) – OS (BC Act) The species potentially utilises some sections of the survey area as part of a much larger home range, though records in this area are rare and therefore it is only likely to be present very occasionally. No suitable breeding habitat. No significant impact likely.

It should be noted that while habitats onsite for one or more of the species listed above are considered possibly suitable, some or all may be marginal in extent/quality and therefore the fauna species considered as possibly occurring may in fact only visit the area for short periods as infrequent vagrants.

4.3 Matters of National Environmental Significance 4.3.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The EPBC Act protects matters of national environmental significance, and is used by the Commonwealth DAWE to list threatened taxa and ecological communities into categories based on the criteria set out in the Act (www.environment.gov.au/epbc/index.html). The Act provides a national environmental assessment and approval system for proposed developments and enforces strict penalties for unauthorised actions that may affect matters of national environmental significance. Matters of national environmental significance as defined by the Commonwealth EPBC Act include: • Nationally threatened flora species; • World heritage properties; • National heritage places;

Botanica Consulting 41 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

• Wetlands of international importance (often called ‘Ramsar’ wetlands after the international treaty under which such wetlands are listed); • Nationally threatened ecological communities; • Commonwealth marine area; • The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park; and • Nuclear actions (including uranium mining) a water resource, in relation to coal seam gas development and large coal mining development.

No matters of national environmental significance as defined by the Commonwealth EPBC Act were identified within the survey area.

4.4 Matters of State Environmental Significance 4.4.1 Environmental Protection Act WA 1986 The EP Act provides for the prevention, control and abatement of pollution and environmental harm, for the conservation, preservation, protection, enhancement and management of the environment. The Act is administered by The Department of Water and Environment Regulation (DWER), which is the State Government’s environmental regulatory agency.

Under Section 51C of the EP Act and the Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations (Regulations) WA 2004 any clearing of native vegetation in Western Australia that is not eligible for exemption under Schedule 6 of the EP Act 1986 or under the Regulations 2004 requires a clearing permit from the DWER or DMIRS. Under Section 51A of the EP Act 1986 native vegetation includes aquatic and terrestrial vegetation indigenous to Western Australia, and intentionally planted vegetation declared by regulation to be native vegetation, but not vegetation planted in a plantation or planted with commercial intent. Section 51A of the EP Act 1986 defines clearing as “the killing or destruction of; the removal of; the severing or ringbarking of trunks or stems of; or the doing of substantial damage to some or all of the native vegetation in an area, including the flooding of land, the burning of vegetation, the grazing of stock or an act or activity that results in the above”. Exemptions under Schedule 6 of the EP Act and the EP Regulations do not apply in ESAs as declared under Section 51B of the EP Act or TEC listed under State and Commonwealth legislation.

No evidence of the survey area containing any TEC or Threatened Flora or Fauna was found during the survey period. The survey area is not located within an ESA.

4.4.2 Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 This Act is used by the Western Australian DBCA for the conservation and protection of biodiversity and biodiversity components in Western Australia and to promote the ecologically sustainable use of biodiversity components in the State. Taxa are classified as ‘Threatened” when their populations are geographically restricted or are threatened by local processes (see following sections for Threatened definitions). Under this Act all native flora and fauna are protected throughout the State. Financial penalties are enforced under this Act if threatened species are collected without an appropriate license.

Under Section 54(1) of the BC Act, habitat is eligible for listing as critical habitat if: (a) it is critical to the survival of a threatened species or a threatened ecological community; and

Botanica Consulting 42 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

(b) its listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines.

No threatened species or critical habitat listed under the BC Act were recorded within the survey area.

4.5 Native Vegetation Clearing Principles Based on the outcomes from the survey undertaken, Botanica assessed the results of the desktop and field survey with regards to the native vegetation clearing principles listed under Schedule 5 of the EP Act (Table 4-9). The assessment found that the proposed vegetation clearing activities may be at variance with clearing principle (f).

Botanica Consulting 43 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Table 4-9: Assessment of development within the survey area against native vegetation clearing principles

Letter Principle Assessment Outcome Native vegetation should not be cleared if it:

Vegetation identified within the survey area is not Clearing is unlikely to be comprises a high level of (a) considered to be of high biological diversity and is at variance to this biological diversity. well represented in the local area. principle

comprises the whole or No significant fauna were observed within the survey part of, or is necessary for area. Majority of the survey area comprises of broad Clearing is unlikely to be (b) the maintenance of, a fauna habitats that are typical of those in the wider at variance to this significant habitat for fauna region. No water bodies (both perennial/ non- principle indigenous to WA. perennial) occur within the survey area.

includes, or is necessary No Threatened Flora taxa, pursuant to the BC Act Clearing is unlikely to be (c) for the continued existence and the EPBC Act were identified within the survey at variance to this of rare flora. area. principle

comprises the whole or part of or is necessary for Clearing is unlikely to be No TEC listed under the EPBC Act or by the BC Act (d) the maintenance of a at variance to this occur within the survey area. threatened ecological principle community (TEC). is significant as a remnant The survey area occurs within the pre-European Clearing is unlikely to be of native vegetation in an Beard vegetation association Barlee 18 and Barlee (e) at variance to this area that has been 485, each of which retains >99% of their original pre- principle extensively cleared European vegetation extent. is growing, in, or in There are no inland waters (lakes/ playas) or association with, an permanent drainage lines within the survey area. Clearing may be at (f) environment associated Multiple ephemeral drainage lines intersect the variance to this principle with a watercourse or survey area which were mostly associated within wetland vegetation community VT01a. Native vegetation should The survey area occurs within the pre-European not be cleared if the Beard vegetation association Barlee 18 and Barlee Clearing is unlikely to be clearing of the vegetation 485, each of which retains >99% of their original pre- (g) at variance to this is likely to cause European vegetation extent. Clearing within the principle appreciable land survey area is not likely to lead to land degradation degradation. issues such as salinity, water logging or acidic soils. Native vegetation should The survey area is not located within a conservation not be cleared if the area. The closest conservation reserve is the clearing of the vegetation Karroun Hill Nature Reserve, which is located Clearing is unlikely to be (h) is likely to have an impact approximately 91 km south-east of the survey area. at variance to this on the environmental Given the distance from the survey area, impacts to principle values of any adjacent or the environmental values of this conservation nearby conservation area. reserve are unlikely. Native vegetation should There are no inland waters (lakes/ playas) or not be cleared if the permanent drainage lines within the survey area. clearing of the vegetation Multiple ephemeral drainage lines intersect the Clearing is unlikely to be (i) is likely to cause survey area which were mostly associated within at variance to this deterioration in the quality vegetation community VT01a. Most rainfall is lost by principle of surface or underground evaporation or surface runoff. Only a small portion water. infiltrates the soil and recharges the groundwater. Native vegetation should Rainfall is unreliable and highly variable with an not be cleared if clearing average rainfall of 200mm and an evaporation rate Clearing is unlikely to be (j) the vegetation is likely to of 2461mm. The region and topography are not at variance to this cause, or exacerbate, the prone to flooding and does not contain ephemeral principle incidence of flooding water sources.

Botanica Consulting 44 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

5 Bibliography Beard, J.S., (1990). Plant Life of Western Australia, Kangaroo Press Pty Ltd, NSW. BoM, (2020a). Yuinmery and Balga Downs Climate Data, Bureau of Meteorology. Available: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate

BoM (2020b). Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems Atlas. Bureau of Meteorology Available: http://www.bom.gov.au/water/groundwater/gde/map.shtml Curry, P.J., Payne, A.L., Leighton, K.A., Hennig, P. and Blood, D.A. (1994). Technical Bulletin: An inventory and condition survey of the Murchison River catchment, Western Australia (No. 84). Department of Agriculture WA. Commonwealth of Australia, 2008: Rangelands 2008-Taking the Pulse, pp159-166, National Land and Water Resources Audit, Australian Government, August 2008 Cowan, M. (2001). A Biodiversity Audit of Western Australia’s 53 Biogeographical Region in 2001; Eastern Murchison (MUR1 –Eastern Murchison subregion) pp 466-479, Department of Conservation and Land Management, September 2001 DAFWA (2014). Soil Landscape System of Western Australia, Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia DAWE (2020a). Protected Matters Search Tool, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment, Australian Government. DAWE (2020b). Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment, Australian Government. DBCA (2018). 2018 Statewide Vegetation Statistics (formerly the CAR Reserve Analysis). Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions. DBCA (2020). NatureMap Database search, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions. DotEE (2012). Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA), Version 7, Department of the Environment and Energy. DotEE (2017). National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) Major Vegetation Groups, Version 4.2, Department of the Environment and Energy. DPIRD (2018). Pre-European Vegetation - Western Australia (NVIS Compliant Version GIS file), Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia DPIRD (2020). Declared Organism-database search, Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia. Available: http://www.biosecurity.wa.gov.au/

Ecologia Environmental (2019): Penny West Gold Project Biological Survey 2019, prepared on behalf of Spectrum Minerals Limited. EPA, (2000). Position Statement No. 2 Environmental Protection of Native Vegetation in Western Australia, Environmental Protection Authority EPA (2016a). Technical Guide - Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment – December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority. EPA (2016b). Technical Guide – Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment – December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority. Geoscience Australia (2015). Surface Hydrology GIS. Australian Government.

Botanica Consulting 45 Ramelius Resources Limited Penny West Project – Reconnaissance Flora & Fauna Survey

Government of Western Australia, (2019): Soil Landscape Mapping – Systems (DPIRD-064), mapping shapefiles obtained from data.wa.gov.au, last updated June 27, 2019 Keighery, B. J., (1994). Bushland Plant Survey: A guide to plant community survey for the community. Wildflower Society of Western Australia (Inc.), Nedlands. Tille, P. (2006). Soil Landscapes of Western Australia’s Rangelands and Arid Interior, Department of Agriculture and Food Western Australia

Botanica Consulting 46

Appendix 1: Conservation Ratings BC Act and EPBC Act

Definitions of Conservation Significant Species Code Category State categories of threatened and priority species Threatened Species (T) Listed by order of the Minister as Threatened in the category of critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable under section 19(1), or is a rediscovered species to be regarded as threatened species under section 26(2) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act). Critically Endangered Threatened species considered to be “facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial CR guidelines”. Listed as critically endangered under section 19(1)(a) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 20 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for critically endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for critically endangered flora. Endangered Threatened species considered to be “facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”. EN Listed as endangered under section 19(1)(b) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 21 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 2 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for endangered flora. Vulnerable Threatened species considered to be “facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium- term future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”. VU Listed as vulnerable under section 19(1)(c) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 22 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for vulnerable fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for vulnerable flora. Extinct species Listed by order of the Minister as extinct under section 23(1) of the BC Act as extinct or extinct in the wild. Extinct Species where “there is no reasonable doubt that the last member of the species has died”, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 24 of the BC EX Act). Published as presumed extinct under schedule 4 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for extinct fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for extinct flora. Extinct in the Wild Species that “is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalised population well outside its past range; and it has not been recorded in its known habitat or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite surveys over a time frame EW appropriate to its life cycle and form”, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 25 of the BC Act). Currently there are no threatened fauna or threatened flora species listed as extinct in the wild. If listing of a species as extinct in the wild occurs, then a schedule will be added to the applicable notice. Specially protected species Listed by order of the Minister as specially protected under section 13(1) of the BC Act. Meeting one or more of the following categories: species of special conservation interest; migratory species; cetaceans; species subject to international agreement; or species otherwise in need of special protection. Species that are listed as threatened species (critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable) or extinct species under the BC Act cannot also be listed as Specially Protected species. International Agreement/ Migratory Fauna that periodically or occasionally visit Australia or an external Territory or the exclusive economic zone; or the species is subject of an international agreement that relates to the protection of migratory species and that binds the Commonwealth; and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 15 of the BC Act). Includes birds that are subject to an agreement between the government of Australia and the governments of Japan (JAMBA), China (CAMBA) and The Republic of Korea (ROKAMBA), IA and fauna subject to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention), an environmental treaty under the United Nations Environment Program. Migratory species listed under the BC Act are a subset of the migratory animals, that are known to visit Western Australia, protected under the international agreements or treaties, excluding species that are listed as Threatened species. Published as migratory birds protected under an international agreement under schedule 5 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

Code Category Species of special conservation interest Fauna of special conservation need being species dependent on ongoing conservation intervention to prevent it becoming eligible for listing as threatened, and listing is otherwise in CD accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 14 of the BC Act). Published as conservation dependent fauna under schedule 6 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018. Other specially protected species Fauna otherwise in need of special protection to ensure their conservation, and listing is OS otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 18 of the BC Act). Published as other specially protected fauna under schedule 7 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018. Priority species Possibly threatened species that do not meet survey criteria, or are otherwise data deficient, are added to the Priority Fauna or Priority Flora Lists under Priorities 1, 2 or 3. These three categories are ranked in order of priority for survey and evaluation of conservation status so that consideration can be given to their declaration as threatened fauna or flora. Species that are adequately known, are rare but not threatened, or meet criteria for near threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened species or other specially protected fauna lists for other than taxonomic reasons, are placed in Priority 4. These species require regular monitoring. Assessment of Priority codes is based on the Western Australian distribution of the species, unless the distribution in WA is part of a contiguous population extending into adjacent States, as defined by the known spread of locations. Priority 1: Poorly-known species Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less) which are potentially at risk. All occurrences are either: very small; or on lands not managed for conservation, e.g. agricultural or pastoral lands, urban areas, road and rail reserves, gravel P1 reserves and active mineral leases; or otherwise under threat of habitat destruction or degradation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under immediate threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey. Priority 2: Poorly-known species Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less), some of which are on lands managed primarily for nature conservation, e.g. national parks, conservation P2 parks, nature reserves and other lands with secure tenure being managed for conservation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey. Priority 3: Poorly-known species Species that are known from several locations, and the species does not appear to be under imminent threat, or from few but widespread locations with either large population size or P3 significant remaining areas of apparently suitable habitat, much of it not under imminent threat. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from several locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and known threatening processes exist that could affect them. Such species are in need of further survey. Priority 4: Rare, Near Threatened and other species in need of monitoring (a) Rare. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed, or for which sufficient knowledge is available, and that are considered not currently threatened or in need of special protection but could be if present circumstances change. These species are usually P4 represented on conservation lands. (b) Near Threatened. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed and that are close to qualifying for vulnerable but are not listed as Conservation Dependent. (c) Species that have been removed from the list of threatened species during the past five years for reasons other than taxonomy. Commonwealth categories of threatened species Extinct EX Taxa where there is no reasonable doubt that the last member of the species has died. Extinct in the Wild Taxa where it is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalised population EW well outside its past range; or it has not been recorded in its known and/or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite exhaustive surveys over a time frame appropriate to its life cycle and form. Critically Endangered CR Taxa that are facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Endangered EN Taxa which are not critically endangered and is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria.

Code Category Vulnerable VU Taxa which are not critically endangered or endangered and is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as determined in accordance with the prescribed criteria. Conservation Dependent Taxa which are the focus of a specific conservation program the cessation of which would result in the species becoming vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered; or (b) the following subparagraphs are satisfied: (i) the species is a species of fish; CD (ii) the species is the focus of a plan of management that provides for actions necessary to stop the decline of, and support the recovery of, the species so that its chances of long term survival in nature are maximised; (iii) the plan of management is in force under a law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory; (iv) cessation of the plan of management would adversely affect the conservation status of the species.

Definitions of Conservation Significant Communities Category Category Code State categories of Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC) Presumed Totally Destroyed An ecological community will be listed as Presumed Totally Destroyed if there are no recent records of the community being extant and either of the following applies: PD • records within the last 50 years have not been confirmed despite thorough searches or known likely habitats or;

• all occurrences recorded within the last 50 years have since been destroyed. Critically Endangered An ecological community will be listed as Critically Endangered when it has been adequately surveyed and is found to be facing an extremely high risk of total destruction in the immediate future, meeting any one of the following criteria: The estimated geographic range and distribution has been reduced by at least 90% and is CR either continuing to decline with total destruction imminent, or is unlikely to be substantially rehabilitated in the immediate future due to modification;

The current distribution is limited i.e. highly restricted, having very few small or isolated occurrences, or covering a small area;

The ecological community is highly modified with potential of being rehabilitated in the immediate future. Endangered An ecological community will be listed as Endangered when it has been adequately surveyed and is not Critically Endangered but is facing a very high risk of total destruction in the near future. The ecological community must meet any one of the following criteria: The estimated geographic range and distribution has been reduced by at least 70% and is EN either continuing to decline with total destruction imminent in the short-term future, or is unlikely to be substantially rehabilitated in the short-term future due to modification; The current distribution is limited i.e. highly restricted, having very few small or isolated occurrences, or covering a small area; The ecological community is highly modified with potential of being rehabilitated in the short- term future. Vulnerable An ecological community will be listed as Vulnerable when it has been adequately surveyed and is not Critically Endangered or Endangered but is facing high risk of total destruction in the medium to long term future. The ecological community must meet any one of the following criteria:

VU The ecological community exists largely as modified occurrences that are likely to be able to be substantially restored or rehabilitated;

The ecological community may already be modified and would be vulnerable to threatening process, and restricted in range or distribution; The ecological community may be widespread but has potential to move to a higher threat category due to existing or impending threatening processes.

Category Category Code Commonwealth categories of Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC)

Critically Endangered CE If, at that time, an ecological community is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future (indicative timeframe being the next 10 years).

Endangered EN If, at that time, an ecological community is not critically endangered but is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future (indicative timeframe being the next 20 years). Vulnerable If, at that time, an ecological community is not critically endangered or endangered, but is VU facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium–term future (indicative timeframe being the next 50 years). Priority Ecological Communities (PEC) Poorly-known ecological communities P1 Ecological communities with apparently few, small occurrences, all or most not actively managed for conservation (e.g. within agricultural or pastoral lands, urban areas, active mineral leases) and for which current threats exist. Poorly-known ecological communities Communities that are known from few small occurrences, all or most of which are actively P2 managed for conservation (e.g. within national parks, conservation parks, nature reserves, State forest, un-allocated Crown land, water reserves, etc.) and not under imminent threat of destruction or degradation. Poorly known ecological communities Communities that are known from several to many occurrences, a significant number or area of which are not under threat of habitat destruction or degradation or: Communities known from a few widespread occurrences, which are either large or within P3 significant remaining areas of habitat in which other occurrences may occur, much of it not under imminent threat, or; Communities made up of large, and/or widespread occurrences, that may or not be represented in the reserve system, but are under threat of modification across much of their range from processes such as grazing and inappropriate fire regimes.

Ecological communities that are adequately known, rare but not threatened or meet P4 criteria for near threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened list. These communities require regular monitoring.

Conservation Dependent ecological communities

P5 Ecological communities that are not threatened but are subject to a specific conservation program, the cessation of which would result in the community becoming threatened within five years.

Appendix 2: Significant Flora Likelihood Assessment Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA) Habitat Ricinocarpos Shallow sandy soils on rocky June to not likely X - Low brevis banded ironstone outcrops. July to be present. Threatened Brown clay loam, silty sandy Not or clayey loam, ironstone, Tetratheca recorded X - jasperite. Mid-upper slopes, - Low paynterae in rock crevices, ridges and bioregion cliffs. Grows in skeletal soils on rocky hills and plains in open, Habitat June, Acacia-dominated shrubland. not likely Acacia lapidosa X 62.1 September Low Known only from a few to be to October populations in the vicinity of present. Mt Magnet. Red clayey sand over hard Habitat Aluta teres X 78.8 pan. Broad plain with September possibly Possible spinifex. present. Habitat Baeckea sp. Wialki October- not likely (G.M. Storr s.n. X 72.2 Yellow clay sand. Low November to be 4/10/1958) present. Priority 1 Habitat Deep yellow sand, laterite. July to not likely Banksia rosserae X X 75.7 Low Plains. October to be present. Habitat not likely to be Calothamnus Yellow/brown sand with X 102.9 July present, Low superbus pebbles. Sandplains. nearest record ~100km. Habitat Dampiera plumosa X X 64.4 Red sandy soils. October possibly Possible present

Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA) Habitat Darwinia sp. Dune, ironstone, yellow sand not likely Kirkalocka (M. X 73.8 dunes, crest of red sand - Low to be Crowhurst 296) dunes. present. Yellow sand with some Habitat ironstone or laterite gravel. August- Grevillea kirkalocka X X 73.7 possibly Possible Base of sandhill, beside September present track. Habitat Jacksonia X X 85.6 Red sand. November possibly Possible lanicarpa present Habitat Millotia falcata X 45.5 Sandy soils. Claypans. August possibly Possible present Habitat Pityrodia June to X X 92.3 Red sand. possibly Low canaliculata September present Habitat Pterostylis Low, flat granite. Run off to not likely X 92.5 - Low xerampelina salt lake. to be present. Habitat Ptilotus likely to X X 62.2 Red clay. November Possible procumbens be present Habitat Stenanthemum April to not likely X 94.3 Red clayey sand. Low mediale August to be present. Habitat Stenanthemum likely to X X 49.5 Rocky hillsides. - Possible patens be present Habitat Tecticornia Brown sandy clay. Undulating not likely X 92.3 - Low mellarium saline dunes. to be present.

Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA) Habitat Eucalyptus educta X 42.4 Shallow soils. Granite rocks. April possibly Possible present Habitat Priority 2 possibly Malleostemon sp. present, Adelong (G.J. X 102.8 Red sand. October Low nearest Keighery 11825) record >100km. Red-brown loams with ironstone rubble on surface, Habitat Acacia calcrete soils, laterite, quartz. not likely X 85.6 - Low burrowsiana Flats adjacent to to be watercourses, crests of low present. rises, breakaways. Habitat Stony red loam. Scree slopes May to not likely Acacia effusa X 82.2 Low of low ranges. August to be present. Habitat Red sand or stony gravel July to not likely Acacia subsessilis X 94.9 Low over ironstone. Rocky hills. August to be present. Priority 3 Sandy clay, loam, May to Habitat Alyxia tetanifolia X 45.4 concretionary gravel. June, possibly Possible Drainage lines, near lakes. November present. Habitat Angianthus Red clay or loamy soils. July to X 64.4 possibly Possible prostratus Saline depressions. September present Baeckea sp. Habitat London Bridge Gravel, sandstone. Rocky October- X X 31.2 possibly Possible (M.E. Trudgen breakaways and hills. November present 5393) Baeckea sp. Habitat Sandstone (C.A. not likely X X 94.3 Orange sand. Flats. October Low Gardner s.n. 26 to be Oct. 1963) present.

Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA) Habitat July to Bossiaea eremaea X X 38.5 Deep red sand. possibly Possible September present Calandrinia sp. Nearest Menzies (F. Hort et X 95.0 - - record Low al. FH 4100) 95km. Habitat September Yellow sand, sometimes with not likely Calytrix creswellii X 75.9 to Low lateritic gravel. Sandplains. to be December present. Habitat possibly Dicrastylis November- present, X 99.1 Red sand. Sandplain. Low linearifolia December nearest record ~100km. Habitat Eremophila not likely arachnoides subsp. X 87.0 Shallow loam over limestone. September Low to be arachnoides present.

Yellow red sand/brown yellow Habitat Euryomyrtus X X X 26.2 sandy clay.Gravel pits, - possibly High recurva catchment slopes. present Habitat January or not likely March or to be Grevillea Stony loam/clay. Ironstone X 102.8 September present, Low georgeana hilltops & slopes. to nearest November. record ~100km. Habitat August- Labichea eremaea X X 93.9 Red sand. possibly Possible September present

Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA) Melichrus sp. Habitat Bungalbin Hill (F.H. Clayey sand, dry orange X X 75.7 - possibly Low & M.P. Mollemans sand. present 3069) Habitat Petrophile Decaying & dissected granite not likely X X 85.6 September Low pauciflora breakaways. to be present. Habitat Philotheca August to X 86.9 Red sand. possibly Possible coateana September present Habitat Phyllanthus Red lateritic and sandy clay July to not likely X X 62.2 Low baeckeoides soils. Granite outcrops. September to be present. Habitat Gentle to steep slopes. Pterostylis virens X X 38.4 - possibly Possible Granitic sand over granite. present Habitat not likely to be Rinzia triplex X X 101.8 - - present, Low nearest record ~100km. Habitat Red sandy clay loam over not likely Styphelia sp. granite, granite outcrop; top to be Bullfinch (M. Hislop X 68.5 of lateritic breakaways. Dry, - present. Low 3574) brown shallow gravelly loam Now over laterite. Styphelia saxicola.

Distance to EPBC WA Ecologia nearest Flowering Status Taxon TPFL NatureMap Protected Habitat Notes Likelihood Herb (2019) record Period Matters (km) (DBCA)

Thryptomene sp. Habitat Crest, upper slope, ridge. Leinster (B.J. not likely X 82.8 Ironstone >50% outcropping - Low Lepschi & L.A. to be cover over ironstone. Craven 4362) present.

March to Habitat May or not likely Banksia arborea X 81.7 Stony loam. Ironstone hills. Low September to be to October present. Habitat December Eucalyptus not likely X X 71.2 Red sand. Ironstone slopes. or January Low formanii to be to April present. Habitat Goodenia Red loam or clay. Near August to not likely X 71.4 Low neogoodenia water. September to be Priority 4 present. Habitat Gravelly loam. Lateritic September not likely Grevillea erectiloba X 96.2 Low ridges. to October to be present. Loam, gravel. Along drainage Habitat Grevillea X X 49.9 lines and on rocky outcrops, - possibly Possible inconspicua creeklines. present April or Previously September recorded Hemigenia exilis X X 79.1 Rocky breakaways. High to in survey November area

Appendix 3: Vegetation Condition Rating Vegetation Condition South West and Interzone Botanical Provinces Eremaean and Northern Botanical Provinces Rating Pristine or nearly so, no obvious signs of disturbance Pristine or damage caused by human activities since N/A European settlement. Vegetation structure intact, disturbance affecting individual species and weeds are non-aggressive Pristine or nearly so, no obvious signs of damage Excellent species. Damage to trees caused by fire, the caused by human activities since European presence of non-aggressive weeds and occasional settlement. vehicle tracks. Some relatively slight signs of damage caused by Vegetation structure altered, obvious signs of human activities since European settlement. For disturbance. Disturbance to vegetation structure example, some signs of damage to tree trunks Very Good caused by repeated fires, the presence of some more caused by repeated fire, the presence of some aggressive weeds, dieback, logging and grazing. relatively non-aggressive weeds, or occasional vehicle tracks. Vegetation structure significantly altered by very More obvious signs of damage caused by human obvious signs of multiple disturbances. Retains basic activity since European settlement, including some vegetation structure or ability to regenerate it. Good obvious impact on the vegetation structure such as Disturbance to vegetation structure caused by very that caused by low levels of grazing or slightly frequent fires, the presence of very aggressive aggressive weeds. weeds, partial clearing, dieback and grazing.

Still retains basic vegetation structure or ability to regenerate it after very obvious impacts of human Poor N/A activities since European settlement, such as grazing, partial clearing, frequent fires or aggressive weeds.

Basic vegetation structure severely impacted by Severely impacted by grazing, very frequent fires, disturbance. Scope for regeneration but not to a state clearing or a combination of these activities. Scope approaching good condition without intensive for some regeneration but not to a state Degraded management. Disturbance to vegetation structure approaching good condition without intensive caused by very frequent fires, the presence of very management. Usually with a number of weed aggressive weeds at high density, partial clearing, species present including very aggressive species. dieback and grazing.

The structure of the vegetation is no longer intact and Areas that are completely or almost completely the area is completely or almost completely without without native species in the structure of their Completely native species. These areas are often described as vegetation; i.e. areas that are cleared or ‘parkland Degraded 'parkland cleared' with the flora comprising weed or cleared’ with their flora comprising weed or crop crop species with isolated native trees and shrubs. species with isolated native trees or shrubs.

Appendix 4: List of species identified within each vegetation type Family Taxa VT01 VT02 VT03 VT04 VT05 VT06 Ptilotus drummondii * * Amaranthaceae Ptilotus obovatus * Ptilotus polystachyus * Apocynaceae Marsdenia australis * * Angianthus tomentosus * Cephalipterum drummondii * Asteraceae Erymophyllum ramosum * Olearia muelleri * * Olearia pimeleoides * Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina acutivalvis * Enchylaena lanata * Enchylaena tomentosa * Maireana thesioides * Chenopodiaceae Maireana trichoptera * * Sclerolaena eriacantha * * Sclerolaena fusiformis * * Cupressaceae Callitris preissii * * Acacia jennerae * Acacia ligulata * Acacia andrewsii * Acacia aneura * * Acacia aptaneura * * * Fabaceae Acacia burkittii * * * Acacia caesaneura * * Acacia erinacea * * Acacia incurvaneura * * Acacia kalgoorliensis * * Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa * * *

Family Taxa VT01 VT02 VT03 VT04 VT05 VT06 Acacia tetragonophylla * * * * Acacia tysonii * Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia * * Senna stowardii * * * Frankeniaceae Frankenia cinerea * Brunonia australis * * Goodeniaceae Dampiera tenuicaulis * * * Scaevola spinescens * * * * * Hemigenia exilis * * * Lamiaceae sp. (indet) * Lamiaceae Prostanthera althoferi subsp. althoferi * Prostanthera patens * * Abutilon oxycarpum * Sida calyxhymenia * Malvaceae Sida sp. dark green fruits (S. van Leeuwen 22660) * Baeckea elderiana * * * Eucalyptus clelandiorum * * Eucalyptus concinna * Eucalyptus leptopoda subsp. arctata * Myrtaceae Eucalyptus longissima * Melaleuca leiocarpa * Melaleuca uncinata sens. lat. * * Aluta maisonneuvei * Austrostipa elegantissima * Austrostipa scabra subsp. scabra * * Poaceae Monachather paradoxus * Triodia rigidissima * Triodia sp. *

Family Taxa VT01 VT02 VT03 VT04 VT05 VT06 Polygonaceae *Rumex vesicarius Proteaceae Hakea preissii * Rutaceae Philotheca brucei subsp. brevifolia * Exocarpos aphyllus * Santalaceae Santalum spicatum * Dodonaea lobulata * * Sapindaceae Dodonaea rigida * * Eremophila congesta * Eremophila clarkei * * * * Eremophila forrestii subsp. forrestii * * Eremophila georgei * Scrophulariaceae Eremophila latrobei subsp. latrobei * * Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia * * * * * Eremophila oppositifolia subsp. angustifolia * Eremophila pantonii * * Violaceae Hybanthus floribundus *

Attachment 8 – Additional Information Submitted

10.3 Attachment 8C – Archaeological and Ethnographic Site Avoidance Survey (JCHMC 2020)

31 Penny West WAA Supporting Information

REPORT ON AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC SITE AVOIDANCE SURVEY OF ZEBRA MINERALS PTY LTD PENNY PROJECT

Prepared for Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd

JULY 2020

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

JCHMC Pty Ltd would like to acknowledge and thank Ramelius Project Geologist Volker Gartz, Field Geologist Robbie Money and the Marlinyu Ghoorlie Traditional Owners who participated in the survey.

DATUM

All spatial references for heritage places in this report are in GDA 94 (MGA Zone 50) and are accurate to 3m.

AUTHORSHIP

This report was prepared by John Cecchi.

REFERENCE

J. Cecchi 2020. Report On an Archaeological and Ethnographic Site Avoidance Survey Of Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Penny Project. Report prepared for Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd.

COPYRIGHT

JCHMC Pty Ltd acknowledges that the cultural heritage information contained in this document remains the intellectual property of the Traditional Owners consulted. This report and the cultural heritage information it contains are subject to copyright. This document may not be copied or reproduced in any form without prior written consent of the copyright holders, the Traditional Owners consulted, JCHMC Pty Ltd and Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd.

pg. 2

ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATION DEFINITION

ACMC Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee Act The Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) AHIS Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System AHS Aboriginal Heritage Survey A/S Artefact Scatter BIF Banded Iron Formation BoM Bureau of Meteorology BP Before Present (BP) before 1 January 1950 14C Radiocarbon. Carbon 14 isotope cal BP calibrated years or calendar years before 1 January 1950 DPLH Western Australian Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage GPS Global Positioning System HIS Heritage Information Submission Form ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites LGM Last Glacial Maximum MG Marlinyu Ghoorlie PAD Potential Archaeological Deposit Project Penny Gold Operations, located adjacent the existing Penny West Mine, approximately 150 kilometers southeast of Mt Magnet Register The Register of Aboriginal Sites, Western Australia Registrar The Registrar of Sites, Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage R/S Rock shelter s5 Section 5 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) s16 Section 16 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) s18 Section 18 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) TO Traditional Owners

pg. 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

i. Author: John Cecchi

ii. Project Name: Penny Gold Project

iii. Project Brief: Identify places that are likely to meet the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) (the Act) by undertaking an archaeological and ethnographic site avoidance field survey in consultation with MG Traditional Owners.

iv. Survey Area Location and Extent: Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd is planning on establishing gold mining operations adjacent Penny West Mine, approximately 150 kilometers southeast of Mt Magnet, in Western Australia. The survey area consists of approximately 13.5km² of land, encompassing M57/180, M57/196 and E57/1087.

v. Traditional Owners Consulted/Field Participants: The following MG stakeholders were consulted with regards to the Project and participated in an ethnographic and archaeological field survey:

 George Champion (Snr);

 George Champion (Jnr);

 Andrew Woods;

 Sariah Champion;

 Alfred Champion; and

 Charles Champion.

John Cecchi, Ian McCann and Liam Hotinski of JCHMC Pty Ltd were engaged as heritage consultants.

vi. Field Survey Dates: The field work and consultation for the Project was undertaken from 14 to 24 of July 2020.

vii. Methods: A search for previous surveys and recorded sites in the region was undertaken prior to the field survey in order to identify any known sites and previous heritage surveys. One site is listed on the DPLH Site Register as having been previously recorded within the Project. Prior to the commencement of the field inspection, the survey team members discussed the general cultural landscape and Aboriginal ethnographic values

pg. 4

that it may contain. To ensure systematic coverage for sites, transects were aligned east- west, north-south, or along the proposed access tracks with pedestrians spaced 20m apart. viii. Results: As a result of the ethnographic consultation and field survey:

. all the defined su r v e y area was assessed;

. ten new heritage sites of ethnographic and archaeological significance were identified and recorded to a site avoidance level;

. DPLH Site ID 4451 could not be relocated in the field; and . the MG people consulted approve works within the Project subject to avoidance of the newly recorded sites. ix. Discussion: It is postulated that given the ethnographic consultation and field survey any major Aboriginal heritage site/s would have been recorded during the survey. Given the results the MG stakeholders consulted approve the Project subject to avoidance of the sites recorded. Sites are protected under the Act whether Registered or yet unrecorded. The proponent should formulate and implement a plan to manage potential disturbances to sites of Aboriginal heritage and skeletal remains during ground works. Should ground works encounter buried Aboriginal cultural material or human skeletal remains the DPLH Site Registrar should be contacted, additionally for the latter the WA Police should be notified and works ceased until a proper inspection of the find/s has taken place. x. Conclusion: The Project should proceed as planned given avoidance to the sites recorded. A plan should be formulated to manage potential cultural material/skeletal finds during ground works. xi. Recommendations

 RECOMMENDATION 1 – Site Avoidance

The ten newly recorded sites ZM_PW_01 to ZM_PW_10 should remain undisturbed in situ.

 RECOMMENDATION 2- Penny Bore Site ID 4451

Given the current status of the site, works within the location given by the DPLH for Site ID 4451 should be undertaken only after consent under s18 of the Act is received.

pg. 5

 RECOMMENDATION 3- Further Archaeological and Ethnographic Consultation

Should the proponent require use of any of the newly recorded places of Aboriginal heritage (ZM_PW_01 to ZM_PW_10), under s18 of the Act, further ethnographic consultation and archaeological recording is warranted prior to an application.

 RECOMMENDATION 4- Earthworks Planning

Sites are protected under the Act whether Registered or yet unrecorded. Zebra Minerals should have a plan to mitigate potential disturbances to sites of Aboriginal heritage/skeletal material during ground works.

 RECOMMENDATION 5-Project Approval

An ethnographic consultation and systematic archaeological field survey has been undertaken over the Project and as a result ten new sites of Aboriginal heritage were identified within the proposed work areas, and one registered site could not be relocated in the field. Conditional upon avoidance of the ten sites recorded, the Aboriginal stakeholders recommend that the Project may proceed as planned.

pg. 6

Table 1. Table of Survey Results

DPLH ID Site Name Site Type Recoding Level Meets s5a Meets Meets Meets Meets s39(2) Meets Proposed Assessment s5b s5c s5d s39(3) Significance 4451 Penny Bore Artefact Scatter Unable to Yes No No No Yes No Not Assessed Registered locate Site - ZM_PW_01 Quarry, Artefact Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential scatter Site - ZM_PW_02 Artefact Scatter, Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Low-Moderate Potential Quarry, PAD Site - ZM_PW_03 Artefact Scatter, Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Rockshelter, Site PAD - ZM_PW_04 Artefact Scatter, Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Moderate to Potential Rockhole, High Site Quarry - ZM_PW_05 Artefact Scatter Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential Site - ZM_PW_06 Artefact Scatter, Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Rockshelter, Site PAD, Rockhole - ZM_PW_07 Rockhole Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Site - ZM_PW_08 Rockhole, Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Artefact Scatter Site - ZM_PW_09 Rockshelter, Site Avoidance Potentially No No No Potentially No Low Other PAD Heritage Place - ZM_PW_10 Quarry Site Avoidance Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential Site

pg. 7

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 4

 RECOMMENDATION 1 – Site Avoidance ...... 5

 RECOMMENDATION 2- Penny Bore Site ID 4451 ...... 5

 RECOMMENDATION 3- Further Archaeological and Ethnographic Consultation...... 6

 RECOMMENDATION 4- Earthworks Planning ...... 6

 RECOMMENDATION 5-Project Approval ...... 6

CONTENTS ...... 8

PART 1 – REPORT ...... 16

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 17

1.1. PROJECT BRIEF ...... 19

1.2. FIELD WORK DATES ...... 19

1.3. FIELD WORK PARTICIPANTS ...... 20

2. METHODS ...... 21

2.1 PRE-DESK TOP REVIEW ...... 21

2.1.1 AHIS SEARCH ...... 22

2.1.2 Registered SITE ID 4451 ‘Penny Bore’ ...... 22

2.2 INFIELD BRIEFING ...... 25

3.0 SURVEY METHODS ...... 25

pg. 8

3.1 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT ...... 25

4.0 RESULTS ...... 26

4.1 SURVEY AREA ...... 26

4.2 SURVEY RESULTS ...... 26

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ...... 29

5.1 SITE ID 4451 ‘Penny Bore’ ...... 30

6. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 31

6.1 RECOMMENDATION 1 – Site Avoidance ...... 31

6.2 RECOMMENDATION 2- Penny Bore Site ID 4451...... 31

6.2 RECOMMENDATION 3- Further Archaeological and Ethnographic Consultation ...... 31

6.4 RECOMMENDATION 4- Earthworks Planning ...... 31

6.5 RECOMMENDATION 5-Project Approval ...... 31

PART 2- NEWLY RECORDED SITES ...... 32

P2.1.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ ...... 33

P2.1.2 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 34

P2.1.3 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ MAPS ...... 35

P2.1.4 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 37

P2.2.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ ...... 43

P2.2.2 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 45

P2.2.3 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ MAPS ...... 46

P2.2.4 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 48

P2.3.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 3 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 54

P2.3.2 ‘ ZM_PW_03’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 56

P2.3.3 ‘ZM_PW_03’ MAPS ...... 57 pg. 9

P2.3.4 ‘ZM_PW_03’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 59

P2.4.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 4 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 64

P2.4.2 ‘ ZM_PW_04’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 65

P2.4.3 ‘ZM_PW_04’ MAPS ...... 66

P2.4.4 ‘ZM_PW_04’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 68

P2.5.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 5 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 73

P2.5.2 ‘ ZM_PW_05’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 74

P2.5.3 ‘ZM_PW_05’ MAPS ...... 75

P2.5.4 ‘ZM_PW_05’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 77

P2.6.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 6 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 79

P2.6.2 ‘ ZM_PW_06’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 80

P2.6.3 ‘ZM_PW_06’ MAPS ...... 81

P2.6.4 ‘ZM_PW_06’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 83

P2.7.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 7 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 86

P2.7.2 ‘ ZM_PW_07’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 87

P2.7.3 ‘ZM_PW_07’ MAPS ...... 88

P2.7.4 ‘ZM_PW_07’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 90

P2.8.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 8 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 92

P2.8.2 ‘ ZM_PW_08’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 93

P2.8.3 ‘ZM_PW_08’ MAPS ...... 94

P2.8.4 ‘ZM_PW_08’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 96

P2.9.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 9 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 98

P2.9.2 ‘ ZM_PW_09’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 99

P2.9.3 ‘ZM_PW_09’ MAPS ...... 100

P2.9.4 ‘ZM_PW_09’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 102

P2.10.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 1 0 ’ RECORDING FORM ...... 103

P2.10.2 ‘ ZM_PW_10’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 104

pg. 10

P2.10.3 ‘ZM_PW_10’ MAPS ...... 105

P2.10.4 ‘ZM_PW_10’ PHOTOGRAPHS ...... 107

APPENDIX A-ENVIRONMENTAL

BACKGROUND ...... 110

A.1 CLIMATE ...... 110

A.2 PALEOCLIMATE ...... 110

A.3 BIOGEOGRAPHIC REGION ...... 111

A.4 VEGETATION ...... 112

A.5 GEOLOGY ...... 112

APPENDIX B- ARCHAEOLOGICAL

BACKGROUND ...... 114

B.1 REGIONAL RESEARCH ...... 114

B.2 REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION ...... 115

APPENDIX C- ETHNOGRAPHIC

BACKGROUND ...... 117

C.1 ETHNO-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...... 117

C.2 NATIVE TITLE ...... 119

APPENDIX D- LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT . 120

D.1 DEFINITION OF ABORIGINAL SITE ...... 120

D.2 OFFENCES UNDER THE ACT ...... 121

pg. 11

APPENDIX E- SIGNED STATEMENTS OF ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION AND

CONDITIONAL PROJECT APPROVAL .... 122

APPENDIX F- REFERENCES ...... 123

Map 1. Locality Map ...... 17 Map 2. Aerial map of survey area...... 18 Map 3. Aerial map of Survey Results ...... 28 Map 4. Overview of ZM_PW_01 location...... 35 Map 5. Aerial map of ZM_PW_01 ...... 36 Map 6. Aerial Map of ZM_PW_02 Part A and Part B...... 46 Map 7. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_02 Part A and Part B...... 47 Map 8. Aerial map of ZM_PW_03...... 57 Map 9. Close up of ZM_PW_03...... 58 Map 10. Aerial map of ZM_PW_04...... 66 Map 11. Close up of ZM_PW_04...... 67 Map 12 Aerial Map of ZM_PW_06...... 81 Map 13. Close up of ZM_PW_06 Aerial map...... 82 Map 14. Aerial map of ZM_PW_07...... 88 Map 15. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_07...... 89 Map 16 Aerial map of ZM_PW-08...... 94 Map 17. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_08 ...... 95 Map 18. Aerial map of ZM_PW_09...... 100 Map 19. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_09...... 101 Map 20. Aerial map of ZM_PW_10...... 105 Map 21. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_10...... 106

pg. 12

Table 1. Table of Survey Results ...... 7 Table 2. Field Participants...... 20 Table 3. Previously recorded Site within the Project...... 22 Table 4. Relevant Heritage Survey Report...... 24 Table 5. Survey Results ...... 27

Plate 1 (L-R): Ian McCann, Andrew Woods, John Cecchi, George Champion (Jnr), George Champion (Snr), Charles Champion, Sariah Champion, Alfred Champion and Liam Hotinski. .20 Plate 2. Quartzite core and silcrete core. ZM_PW_01...... 37 Plate 3. Two silcrete flakes. ZM_PW_01...... 37 Plate 4. Silcrete artefacts at ZM_PW_01...... 38 Plate 5. Silcrete flake. ZM_PW_01...... 38 Plate 6. Quarried silcrete boulder. ZM_PW_01...... 39 Plate 7. Quarried silcrete outcrop. ZM_PW_01...... 39 Plate 8. Chert Retouched flake. ZM_PW_01...... 40 Plate 9. Retouched chert flake. ZM_PW_01...... 40 Plate 10. Quartz core. ZM_PW_01...... 41 Plate 11. View east of ZM_PW_01...... 41 Plate 12. View north of ZM_PW_01...... 42 Plate 13. View northeast of site. ZM_PW_01...... 42 Plate 14. View west of northern boundary of site. ZM_PW_01...... 42 Plate 15 BIF Core ...... 48 Plate 16. Retouched Chert flake...... 48 Plate 17. Dolerite flake...... 49 Plate 18. Silcrete core...... 49 Plate 19. View north of ZM_PW_02A...... 50 Plate 20. Drainage line at ZM_PW_02A...... 50 Plate 21. View south of ZM_PW_02A...... 50 Plate 22. Basal granite grindstone. ZM_PW_02B...... 51 Plate 23. Silcrete core. ZM_PW_02B...... 51 Plate 24. Quarried silcrete outcrop at ZM_PW_02B...... 52 Plate 25. Silcrete core...... 52 Plate 26. Silcrete artefacts...... 53 Plate 27. Quarried quartz boulder. ZM_PW_02B...... 53 pg. 13

Plate 28. Quartz, Clear Quartz and chert artefacts...... 59 Plate 29. Silcrete flake...... 59 Plate 30. Quartz flake...... 60 Plate 31. Silcrete flake...... 60 Plate 32. Looking north at main rockshelter...... 61 Plate 33. Close up of main rockshelter...... 61 Plate 34. Looking northwest from south part of ZM_PW_03...... 62 Plate 35. Looking north from southern boundary...... 62 Plate 36. Looking southeast at breakaways...... 62 Plate 37. Water catchment atop granite outcrop directly above breakaways...... 63 Plate 38. View north towards main rockshelter from atop granite outcrop...... 63 Plate 39. View of rockhole at ZM_PW_04...... 68 Plate 40. Rockhole. ZM_PW_04...... 68 Plate 41. L-R: Liam Hotinski and Charles Champion standing near rockhole...... 69 Plate 42. Range of artefacts at ZM_PW_04...... 69 Plate 43. Artefacts at ZM_PW_04...... 70 Plate 44. Chert flake...... 70 Plate 45. Clear quartz flake...... 71 Plate 46. Chert core...... 71 Plate 47. Looking north from silcrete quarry towards breakaway...... 72 Plate 48. Silcrete flake...... 72 Plate 49. Aerial map of ZM_PW_05...... 75 Plate 50. Close up of ZM_PW_05...... 76 Plate 51. Chert and silcrete artefacts. ZM_PW_05 ...... 77 Plate 52. Flakes at ZM_PW_05...... 77 Plate 53. View south of site...... 78 Plate 54. Access track through middle of site...... 78 Plate 55. Heritage team analysing artefacts...... 78 Plate 56. Quartz, chalcedony and chert artefacts within rockshelter dripline...... 83 Plate 57. Retouched quartz flake and clear quartz flake...... 83 Plate 58. Rockshelter at ZM_PW_06...... 84 Plate 59. Looking east at site...... 84 Plate 60. Looking northwest at site...... 85 Plate 61. View south from atop breakaway...... 85 Plate 62. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07...... 90

pg. 14

Plate 63. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07...... 90 Plate 64. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07...... 91 Plate 65. Rockhole at ZM_PW_08...... 96 Plate 66. Looking north from rockhole towards the existing east-west vehicle track...... 96 Plate 67. Looking south at ZM_PW_08...... 97 Plate 68 Rockshelter at ZM_PW_09...... 102 Plate 69. View from top of rockshelter...... 102 Plate 70. Quarry floor...... 107 Plate 71. Site ZM_PW_10...... 107 Plate 72. Silcrete flake...... 108 Plate 73. Silcrete artefacts...... 108 Plate 74. Silcrete flake...... 109

pg. 15

PART 1 – REPORT

pg. 16

1. INTRODUCTION

JCHMC Pty Ltd was commissioned to undertake an ethnographic and archaeological Aboriginal site avoidance survey of the Project. The Project is located adjacent the existing Penny West Mine, approximately 150 kilometers southeast of Mt Magnet (Map 1) and consists of land within the following areas:

 Penny Survey area (13.5 km²) (Map 2).

Map 1. Locality Map

pg. 17

Map 2. Aerial map of survey area.

pg. 18

1.1. PROJECT BRIEF

The purpose of the ethnographic and archaeological Aboriginal heritage site avoidance survey was to locate Aboriginal sites that are likely to meet the requirements of the Act.

The survey area listed above totals an area approximately 13.5 km².

To complete the brief JCHMC Pty Ltd was engaged to:

. undertake an ethnographic field survey with members of the MG Group;

. identify sites of archaeological and, or ethnographic significance and assess whether an identified site meets the criteria of the Act; and

. record the location and extent, and describe any Aboriginal heritage site that is identified using a systematic method of recording.

1.2. FIELD WORK DATES

The field work and consultation for the Project was undertaken between July 14 to 24 2020.

pg. 19

1.3. FIELD WORK PARTICIPANTS

The following people participated in field work for the project.

Table 2. Field Participants.

MG MEMBERS JCHMC

George Champion (Snr) John Cecchi

George Champion (Jnr) Ian McCann

Andrew Woods Liam Hotinski

Sariah Champion

Alfred Champion

Charles Champion

Plate 1 (L-R): Ian McCann, Andrew Woods, John Cecchi, George Champion (Jnr), George Champion (Snr), Charles Champion, Sariah Champion, Alfred Champion and Liam Hotinski.

pg. 20

The relevant background information regarding this Aboriginal heritage site avoidance survey can be found in the following appendices.

. Appendix A. - Environmental Background.

. Appendix B. - Archaeological Background.

. Appendix C. - Ethnographic Background.

. Appendix D. - Legislative Context.

. Appendix E. - Signed Statements of Aboriginal Consultation and Conditional Project Approval.

. Appendix F. - References.

2. METHODS

2.1 PRE-DESK TOP REVIEW

Prior to the commencement of fieldwork JCHMC undertook a detailed desktop review of the Survey Area. The purpose of desktop review was to address the following components of the project:

. identify any potential safety management and environmental issues;

. undertake appropriate GIS terrain (slope) analysis and mapping to inform a suitable survey strategy;

. identify any landscapes or other areas with higher ethnographic/archaeological potential or interest; and

. propose a specific survey strategy for the project with reference to the components identified through the review.

pg. 21

2.1.1 AHIS SEARCH

As part of the desktop study for this project, JCHMC undertook a search of the DPLH Register of Places and Objects through the online Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System (AHIS) and a review of relevant previous heritage reports held by JCHMC and the DPLH.

One ‘registered’ status heritage site was identified within the survey area (Table 3) and is detailed below.

No survey reports were identified as relevant by the DPLH AHIS. However sections of one report were included as part of the DPLH site file for Site ID 4451 which are summarised in Table 4.

Table 3. Previously recorded Site within the Project.

Site ID NAME STATUS TYPE Access Listed informants

4451 Penny Bore Registered Artefact Open Yamatji Marlpa Scatter Aboriginal Corporation and Darlot Native Title Group

2.1.2 Registered SITE ID 4451 ‘Penny Bore’

This is listed in the DPLH AHIS as an artefact scatter site located at 678041mE 6807551mN Zone 50, with the co-ordinates being listed as ‘unreliable’ by the DPLH AHIS. The site was entered in the permanent register having been assessed as meeting section 5(a) and 39(2)c of the Act by the ACMC.

The site was recorded in 1991 during an archaeological survey of a 0.3km² area where a pit and waste dump were proposed to be developed. The survey area likely corresponded to the current extent of the existing Penny West mine pit and waste dump although no maps were provided in the site file extract.

pg. 22

The site was recorded as a low density artefact scatter comprising mostly quartz and silcrete flakes, located adjacent a rise and 20m from a creek, next to a north-south aligned track. The report states that the site was situated 1.2km north-northwest of a fenceline on a track from Penny bore. Mud maps from the original recording show the scatter to be located 2.2km northeast of Penny bore.

The site comprised 33 artefacts within an area 50m x 20m and is described as being located in an open laterite plain vegetated by mulga scrub.

pg. 23

Table 4. Relevant Heritage Survey Report

SURVEY REPORT ID SURVEY TYPE REPORT REPORT TITLE AREA DESCRIPTION AUTHORS

- Archaeological O’Connor, R., Report on a survey for Aboriginal Information regarding this survey event was gleaned Quartermaine, G. sites Youangarra Prospect Mt from a few pages included in the DPLH site file for Site and Shaw, K. Magnet Area’. Unpublished report ID 4551.

prepared for Eastmet Limited The report extract references the survey area as 0.3km² of land near Youangarra. Although no maps are available it appears this survey was done over the then proposed Penny West open pit and waste dump within tenements M57/180 and M57/196. No sites were found within the proposed development envelope, the author claiming that the small size of the survey area and lack of water features influenced the survey results.

pg. 24

2.2 INFIELD BRIEFING

The Survey team undertook a project briefing prior to the commencement of field work. The purpose was to brief the members present about the survey scope and the proposed works and to discuss the proposed survey strategy for the Project, identify any landscapes with higher ethnographic/archaeological potential and identify any potential safety management and environmental issues.

3.0 SURVEY METHODS

The heritage site avoidance survey aimed to identify all Aboriginal heritage sites within the Project that may meet the requirements of the Act. To meet this objective, a consultation and field survey was undertaken over the survey area.

Prior to the commencement of the field inspection, the survey team members discussed the general cultural landscape and Aboriginal ethnographic values that it may contain. To ensure systematic coverage for sites, transects were aligned north-south, east-west or along the proposed access routes with pedestrians spaced 20m apart.

A reconnaissance to locate Site ID 4451 was undertaken by purposive pedestrian transects within 300m of the given GPS co-ordinates for the site and by assessment of the site file’s mud maps and site descriptions and, as part of the systematic coverage of the entire survey area.

3.1 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT

The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, The Burra Charter, 2013 (Burra Charter) and the associated series of Practice Notes provide a best practice standard for managing cultural heritage places in Australia (Australia ICOMOS 2020). The values assessed are aesthetic, historic, scientific, social and spiritual values.

Further assessment is applied for archaeological significance. The standard applied is based on a site’s representativeness and research potential (Bowdler 1984). Site significance is therefore

pg. 25

assessed on the basis of present knowledge of sites within the area, archaeological techniques, theory and method, all of which will invariably vary with time.

During the survey, the significance of archaeological sites was analysed in regards to its potential to answer the following research questions:

-When was the region initially occupied by Aboriginal people? What cultural shifts occurred in response to differing sea levels in the past?

-How did economies adapt to environmental and climate changes?

-How do occupational patterns reflect this?

-What stone tool technologies and reduction practices were employed in the area?

-What are the characteristics and what accounts for variables in stone tool production within assemblages and over time?

Overall these questions can generate knowledge on pre-historic human economies and environmental adaptation by exploring the relationships between certain areas and processes within the archaeological record.

4.0 RESULTS

4.1 SURVEY AREA

The Survey Area was assessed in its entirety.

4.2 SURVEY RESULTS

Ten sites of Aboriginal heritage were identified within the survey area and recorded to a site avoidance level (Table 4 and Map 3). The survey team was unable to relocate Site 4451 in the field.

pg. 26

Table 5. Survey Results

DPLH Site Name Site Type Recoding Level Meets s5a Meets Meets Meets Meets s39(2) Meets Proposed Assessment ID s5b s5c s5d s39(3) Significance 4451 Penny Bore Artefact Scatter Unable to Yes No No No Yes No Not Assessed Registered locate Site - ZM_PW_01 Quarry, Artefact Site Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential Site scatter Avoidance

- ZM_PW_02 Artefact Scatter, Site Yes No No No Yes No Low-Moderate Potential Site Quarry, PAD Avoidance

- ZM_PW_03 Artefact Scatter, Site Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Site Rockshelter, Avoidance PAD

- ZM_PW_04 Artefact Scatter, Site Yes No No No Yes No Moderate to Potential Site Rockhole, Avoidance High Quarry

- ZM_PW_05 Artefact Scatter Site Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential Site Avoidance - ZM_PW_06 Artefact Scatter, Site Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Site Rockshelter, Avoidance PAD, Rockhole

- ZM_PW_07 Rockhole Site Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Site Avoidance - ZM_PW_08 Rockhole, Site Yes No No No Yes No Moderate Potential Site Artefact Scatter Avoidance

- ZM_PW_09 Rockshelter, Site Potentially No No No Potentially No Low Other PAD Avoidance Heritage Place

- ZM_PW_10 Quarry Site Yes No No No Yes No Low Potential Site Avoidance

pg. 27

Map 3. Aerial map of Survey Results

pg. 28

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

From the desktop review it can be summarised that the majority of archaeological sites in the region are found along creeks and drainage lines and rocky outcrops. These features would have provided sources of water allowing Aboriginal groups to forage in the region for a variety of resources.

Individual camp sites in the form of artefact scatters have been identified in the past in the region near water sources and the artefact scatter and rockhole sites recorded during the survey support the high importance and significance the latter site types hold to MG people. Commonly, along breakaway features, overhangs and shelters can be found. Suitable ones, based on size and roof stability, are presumed by the TOs consulted to have been occupied by their ancestors and this significance is increased by the presence of artefacts and potential for stratified cultural deposits.

Sites recorded in the survey area comprised mostly rockholes and rockshelters with associated artefact scatters, followed by quarry sites. The quarry sites are located where seams of siliceous material outcrop at the surface, in this case silcrete commonly occurring in the survey area. These sites can contribute to an understanding of trade, reduction practices and stone tool technologies and are of ethnographic significance to the TOs consulted as they provide a tangible link to their ancestors.

Rockhole sites are of the utmost importance to the TOs consulted. As George Champion stated the ‘old people’:

“knew all of them [rockholes] very well, it was how they knew it was their country, it was how they travelled and knew about the land”.

The significance of rockholes in the region has been highlighted by both archaeological and ethnographic research. Extensive artefact scatters with complex assemblages and varied lithic types occur surrounding rockholes, with the ethnographic research indicating that much of the travelling routes to camp sites in the region were based on the size and location of rockholes. The current generation of TOs has deep feelings of custodianship towards these site types that is expressed by their wish is to see all rockholes recorded preserved in situ.

pg. 29

5.1 SITE ID 4451 ‘Penny Bore’

The location given by the DPLH site Register for the site was subject to purposive pedestrian transects for a 300m radius and as part of the entire survey area by probabilistic pedestrian transects spaced 20m apart. Only one quartz artefact was identified within 20m of the GPS co-ordinates given for this area. In order to assess the likely location of Site 4451 a qualitative assessment of the data presented in the original site recording forms and accompanying mud maps was undertaken. Two conclusions were made:

 the DPLH co-ordinates for the site may be incorrect; and

 the site is unlikely to be located using the available information given the inconsistencies and inaccuracies of the available information.

The prior conclusion is based on the site and environmental context description. The site was described as a low-density artefact scatter with 30 artefacts manufactured from silcrete and quartz, mainly flakes, within an area 20m x 50m. Within a 300m radius of the given location for the site only one quartz flake was identified and during the field survey no artefact scatters matching that description were recorded. The original recorder described the environmental context of the site as a lateritic plain, next to a creek and an adjacent rise. The landforms observed at the given GPS location comprised an open depression with no nearby creeks, drainage lines or rises, with a ground cover of quartz pebbles and cobbles covering 80% of the ground.

Attempts were made in the field to follow the directions on a mud map included in the site file showing a track from ‘Penny Bore’ on the east side of the Youanmi-Lake Barlee Road, heading east then north. No tracks matching that description were visible from the ground at the time of the survey. Conflicting information comes from two other maps, one depicting the site as being about 2.2km northwest as the crow flies from Penny Bore, whilst the other shows the site to the north of the proposed Penny West mine, possibly some 1.7km to the west of the current co-ordinates listed on the Register. Given the absence of detailed information and inconsistent locational information, and in view of the field results, the re-location attempts for Site 4451 were unsuccessful and the site’s location remains unknown.

pg. 30

6. RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 RECOMMENDATION 1 – Site Avoidance

The ten recorded sites ZM_PW_01 to ZM_PW_10 should remain undisturbed in situ. 6.2 RECOMMENDATION 2- Penny Bore Site ID 4451

Given the current status of the site, works within the location given by the DPLH for Site ID 4451 should be undertaken only after consent under s18 of the Act is received. 6.2 RECOMMENDATION 3- Further Archaeological and Ethnographic Consultation

Should the proponent require use of the newly recorded places of Aboriginal heritage (ZM_PW_01 to ZM_PW_10), under s18 of the Act, further ethnographic consultation and archaeological recording is warranted prior to an application. 6.4 RECOMMENDATION 4- Earthworks Planning

Sites are protected under the Act whether Registered or yet unrecorded. Zebra Minerals should have a plan to mitigate potential disturbances to sites of Aboriginal heritage/skeletal material during ground works. 6.5 RECOMMENDATION 5-Project Approval

An ethnographic consultation and systematic archaeological field survey has been undertaken over the Project and as a result ten new sites of Aboriginal heritage were identified within the proposed work areas, and one registered site could not be relocated in the field. Conditional upon avoidance of the ten sites recorded, the Aboriginal stakeholders recommend that the Project may proceed as planned.

pg. 31

PART 2- NEWLY RECORDED SITES

pg. 32

P2.1.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 678025 6809543 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Quarry

SECONDARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter TERTIARY SITE TYPE TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Silcrete outcrop on low rise SLOPE Flat to gently inclined SURFACE ELEMENTS & Red sands with areas of complete silcrete stones and cobbles ground cover, intermixed VEGETATION with ironstone and quartz gibber. Surface vegetated by sparse low bushes to 1m and sparse mulga trees to 1.5m EST. OF AVE. GROUND 90% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 80%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a localized east-west aligned outcrop of silcrete that has been subject to traditional quarrying activity. Artefacts at the site include silcrete boulders showing negative flake scarring, silcrete cores, flakes, broken flakes and flake fragments, with some quartz artefacts noted. Approximately 80 silcrete artefacts were observed within the western part of the site within an area 6m x 6m. Artefact densities varied from 0.1 artefact per m2² to 20 artefacts per m² with three discrete knapping areas. Other lithic types noted included one retouched chert flake, five quartz artefacts and one quartzite artefact.

DIMENSIONS 64m east-west by 34m north-south

Tot. Area (m²): 1,400 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform unit

Southern boundary – Change in landform unit

Eastern boundary – Change in landform unit

Western boundary – Change in landform unit DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

An all-terrain vehicle track borders the eastern and southern boundary of the site.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Good. INTEGRITY

pg. 33

P2.1.2 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has some aesthetic values as it represents a place associated with traditional TECHNICAL VALUE activities and exhibits various artefacts and scarred boulders stemming from tool making and raw resource procurement.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has little historical value from a scientific perspective. No specific people and events were identified with this place.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to address archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial and technological interest. The limited potential for stratified deposits and range of artefact types decreases this value.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified moderate social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people would have traditionally come to source raw lithics for production of stone tools.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a small outcrop of siliceous rock that has been subject to quarrying activities. The scientific, social and technical values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall, the site has good integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_01 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a SIGNIFICANCE technological and temporal interest regarding stone tool technologies, raw resource procurement, reduction strategies and traditional occupation of the region. Quarry sites have been commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a poor example of such a site type. ZM_PW_01 has moderate social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area.

The assessment of social, aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of low significance.

pg. 34

P2.1.3 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ MAPS

Map 4. Overview of ZM_PW_01 location.

pg. 35

Map 5. Aerial map of ZM_PW_01

pg. 36

P2.1.4 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 1 ’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 2. Quartzite core and silcrete core. ZM_PW_01.

Plate 3. Two silcrete flakes. ZM_PW_01.

pg. 37

Plate 4. Silcrete artefacts at ZM_PW_01.

Plate 5. Silcrete flake. ZM_PW_01.

pg. 38

Plate 6. Quarried silcrete boulder. ZM_PW_01.

Plate 7. Quarried silcrete outcrop. ZM_PW_01.

pg. 39

Plate 8. Chert Retouched flake. ZM_PW_01.

Plate 9. Retouched chert flake. ZM_PW_01.

pg. 40

Plate 10. Quartz core. ZM_PW_01.

Plate 11. View east of ZM_PW_01.

pg. 41

Plate 12. View north of ZM_PW_01.

Plate 13. View northeast of site. ZM_PW_01.

Plate 14. View west of northern boundary of site. ZM_PW_01.

pg. 42

P2.2.1 ‘ZM_P W _ 0 2 ’

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE Part a 678022 6810049

(GDA94 ZONE 50)

GRID REFERENCE Part b 678028 6810194

(GDA94 ZONE 50)

PRIMARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE Quarry

TERTIARY SITE TYPE PAD

OTHER Grinding material

TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Open depression on higher ground next to drainage line

SLOPE Flat to gently inclined

SURFACE ELEMENTS & Red sands with areas of some ironstone and quartz gibber. Surface vegetated by sparse low VEGETATION bushes to 1m and sparse mulga trees to 3-4m

EST. OF AVE. GROUND SURFACE VISIBILITY 70%

EST. OF ARCH. 70% VISIBILITY 70% SITE CHARACTERISTICS

pg. 43

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises an artefact scatter and quarry site divided into two parts. Part A of the site comprises an artefact scatter on the southern bank of a northeast-southwest drainage line comprising approximately 300 artefacts. Artefact types noted included flakes, cores, flake fragments, broken flakes, retouched flakes and formal tools including scrapers, points and blades. Lithic types were dominated by quartz, followed by quartzite, silcrete, BIF, clear quartz and tuff. Artefact densities of around 6 artefacts per m² were noted.

Part B of the site is located 70m to the north of Part A, interposed by an area of quartz cobbles and gravels. At Part B one large granite basal grindstone was identified in association with an artefact scatter comprising approximately 200 artefacts including flakes, cores, retouched flakes made from similar lithologies as those found within Part A.

On the southwestern sector of Part B a silcrete outcrop has evidence of quarrying in the form of boulders exhibiting negative flake scarring together with about 60 silcrete primary flakes and several cores.

187m northeast-southwest x 80m east-west DIMENSIONS (Part A) Total Area (m²): 10,750 88m east-west x 100m north-south DIMENSIONS (Part B) Total Area (m²): 7,338 Northern boundary – Change in landform unit BOUNDARIES Southern boundary – Change in landform unit Eastern boundary – Change in landform unit Western boundary – Change in landform unit

DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Good. INTEGRITY

pg. 44

P2.2.2 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has some aesthetic and technical values as it represents a place commonly TECHNICAL VALUE associated with traditional activities and exhibits various artefacts indicating a variety of activities, and scarred boulders stemming from tool making and raw resource procurement.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has little historical value from a scientific perspective. No specific people and events were identified with this place.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to address archaeological, temporal and scientific questions of a spatial and technological interest. The potential for stratified deposits and range of artefact types increases this value.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified moderate social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people would have traditionally come to source raw lithics for production of stone tools and as a good camping spot on soft sands adjacent a drainage channel.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a small outcrop of siliceous rock that has been subject to quarrying activities and some primary tool making, however it is also associated with an artefact scatter site with a variety of stone tools of different typologies and grinding material. The scientific, social and technical values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a good example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall, the site has good integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_02 has some potential to answer archaeological and scientific question of a SIGNIFICANCE technological and temporal interest regarding stone tool technologies, raw resource procurement, reduction strategies and traditional occupation of the region. Artefact scatter and quarry sites have not been commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a moderate example of such a site type. ZM_PW_02 has moderate social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area.

The assessment of social, aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of moderate significance.

pg. 45

P2.2.3 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ MAPS

Map 6. Aerial Map of ZM_PW_02 Part A and Part B.

pg. 46

Map 7. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_02 Part A and Part B.

pg. 47

P2.2.4 ‘Z M _ P W _ 0 2 ’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 15 BIF Core

Plate 16. Retouched Chert flake.

pg. 48

Plate 17. Dolerite flake.

Plate 18. Silcrete core.

pg. 49

Plate 19. View north of ZM_PW_02A

Plate 20. Drainage line at ZM_PW_02A.

Plate 21. View south of ZM_PW_02A.

pg. 50

Plate 22. Basal granite grindstone. ZM_PW_02B.

Plate 23. Silcrete core. ZM_PW_02B.

pg. 51

Plate 24. Quarried silcrete outcrop at ZM_PW_02B.

Plate 25. Silcrete core.

pg. 52

Plate 26. Silcrete artefacts.

Plate 27. Quarried quartz boulder. ZM_PW_02B.

pg. 53

P2.3.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 3 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 677720 6810597 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE PAD TERTIARY SITE TYPE Rockshelter OTHER Water Source TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Granite outcrop, Breakaway SLOPE Flat to gently inclined lower slopes with some steep inclines and overhangs SURFACE ELEMENTS & Gravel atop the granite outcrop with areas of bedrock. Bottom of breakaway features VEGETATION large granite boulders and an ironstone, quartz and silctete gibber over red sands. Vegetation at the site is minimal with some shrubs to 0.5m and trees to 1.5m

EST. OF AVE. GROUND 80% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 50%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a granite outcrop with several breakaway rockshelters to its southwest side. A dense artefact scatter comprising some 5,000 artefacts was located at the mid- lower slopes in front of the breakaways. The assemblage comprises flakes, cores, flake fragments, broken flakes, retouched flakes and formal tools such as scrapers, blades, and bladettes manufactured from a variety of lithics with quartz and clear quartz most prominent and includes silcrete, chert, BIF, tuff, chalcedony and quartzite artefacts. Artefact concentration mid slope peak at about 100 artefacts per m² over an area 30m long by 5 m wide at the front of the shelters and diminish to about 2 artefacts per m² thereafter. The main rockshelter has a southwest facing opening and is about 3m high at the dripline, 7m wide and 4.5m deep. Within the rockshelter floor several artefacts were noted including a large quartz flake, one quartz core and about 60 other artefacts. The rockshelter floor is level and the potential archaeological deposit inside the dripline measures 5m x 4m. The rockshelter floor soil profile comprises fine sands and silts, some pebbles and abundant animal scats, animal bones, and some organic plant material.

At the top of the granite outcrop, about 10m to the south east of the rockshelter several rockholes are present within the exposed bedrock capable of holding 10-15l of water after rains. Further water catchments atop the granite outcrop were noted at the northern extremity of the site. DIMENSIONS 200m north-south by 107m east west

Tot. Area (m²): 15,818

pg. 54

BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform unit

Southern boundary – Decrease in artefact density

Eastern boundary – Change in landform unit

Western boundary – Change in landform unit DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion and animal disturbance.

ASSESSMENT OF Some animal, water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – INTEGRITY Moderate.

pg. 55

P2.3.2 ‘ ZM_PW_03’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has aesthetic value featuring a prominent landform associated with a breakaway TECHNICAL VALUE section exhibiting rockshelters and rockholes. The MG people identified deep feelings towards this area stating that the granite outcrop is a ‘site’ as it is ‘part of a whole’, with the water catchment, camping and shelter components. The place has strong aesthetic values as it represents a place associated with traditional and current interest from traditional owners given its prominence in the landscape and ability to give the inhabitants vast views over the surrounding countryside. The site exhibits various artefacts and tools utilized in traditional activities including wood working and hunting demonstrating the place’s social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to address archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial, temporal and technological interest. The potential for stratified deposits and range of artefact types increases this value.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified high social values to the place and assessed it an important place where people would have traditionally come together to camp and use for its varied resources. Granite outcrops provided prominent look outs and the rockshelters and water catchment areas are associated with traditional economic subsistence strategies and repeated camping sites.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is not common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a granite outcrops with water catchments and a rockshelter associated with artefact scatters. The scientific, social and aesthetic values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a good example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has moderate integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_03 has potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, technological and SIGNIFICANCE temporal interest regarding stone tool technologies and traditional occupation of the region. Artefact scatter sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a good example of such a site type. ZM_PW_03 has social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area and is an areas that is still actively valued for its aesthetics and social significance.

The assessment of moderate social, aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of moderate significance.

pg. 56

P2.3.3 ‘ZM_PW_03’ MAPS

Map 8. Aerial map of ZM_PW_03.

pg. 57

Map 9. Close up of ZM_PW_03.

pg. 58

P2.3.4 ‘ZM_PW_03’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 28. Quartz, Clear Quartz and chert artefacts.

Plate 29. Silcrete flake.

pg. 59

Plate 30. Quartz flake.

Plate 31. Silcrete flake.

pg. 60

Plate 32. Looking north at main rockshelter.

Plate 33. Close up of main rockshelter.

pg. 61

Plate 34. Looking northwest from south part of ZM_PW_03.

Plate 35. Looking north from southern boundary.

Plate 36. Looking southeast at breakaways.

pg. 62

Plate 37. Water catchment atop granite outcrop directly above breakaways.

Plate 38. View north towards main rockshelter from atop granite outcrop.

pg. 63

P2.4.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 4 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 677239 6809623 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE Rockhole TERTIARY SITE TYPE Quarry OTHER Camp/Water Source TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Flat, Breakaways SLOPE Gently Inclined SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs VEGETATION

EST. OF AVE. GROUND 30% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 70%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION A large rockole measuring 80cm by 60cm by at least 40cm deep was located on an exposed granite extrusion at the given GPS Co-ordinates for the site. The rockhole is surrounded by over 2,000 artefacts within a 50m radius, with densities decreasing with distance from the rockhole. Artefacts types noted included flakes, broken flakes, cores, retouched flakes and mullers. Lithics present included quartz, silcrete, chert, BIF, chalcedony, dolerite and tuff. George Champion stated that rockholes were extremely significant to the MG as their ancestors “knew all of them [rockholes] very well, it was how they knew it was their country, it was how they travelled and knew about the land”.

To the south of the site, south of an east-west aligned breakaway, a localised outcrop of silcrete has been quarried. The quarry site contains over 600 artefacts within an area 45m east-west by 25m north-south.

DIMENSIONS 440m north-south by 200m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 73,560 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Southern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Eastern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Western boundary – Decrease in artefact densities DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some animal, water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Good. INTEGRITY

pg. 64

P2.4.2 ‘ ZM_PW_04’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has aesthetic value featuring a rockhole with evidence of repeated occupation. TECHNICAL VALUE The MG people identified this site as significant given the importance of rockholes in traditional lifeways. The place has strong aesthetic values as it represents a place associated with traditional and current interest from traditional owners and its association with past events and traditional socio-economic significance. The site exhibits various artefacts and tools utilized in traditional activities including wood working and hunting demonstrating the place’s social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has potential to address archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial, temporal and technological interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified high social values to the place and assessed it an important place where people would have traditionally come together to camp and use for its varied resources. Rockholes are recognised as extremely significant locations that would have enabled their ancestors to hunt and gather resources in the region. It was stated that traditionally Aboriginal life was based upon travelling from rockhole to rockhole and that it was up to the current generation to look after these places.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a rockhole associated with an artefact scatter. The scientific, social and aesthetic values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a good example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has good integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_04 has potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, technological and SIGNIFICANCE temporal interest regarding stone tool technologies and traditional occupation of the region. Artefact scatter sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a good example of such a site type. ZM_PW_04 has high social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area and is an areas that is still actively valued for its aesthetics and social significance.

The assessment of high social and moderate aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of moderate to high significance.

pg. 65

P2.4.3 ‘ZM_PW_04’ MAPS

Map 10. Aerial map of ZM_PW_04.

pg. 66

Map 11. Close up of ZM_PW_04.

pg. 67

P2.4.4 ‘ZM_PW_04’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 39. View of rockhole at ZM_PW_04.

Plate 40. Rockhole. ZM_PW_04.

pg. 68

Plate 41. L-R: Liam Hotinski and Charles Champion standing near rockhole.

Plate 42. Range of artefacts at ZM_PW_04.

pg. 69

Plate 43. Artefacts at ZM_PW_04.

Plate 44. Chert flake.

pg. 70

Plate 45. Clear quartz flake.

Plate 46. Chert core.

pg. 71

Plate 47. Looking north from silcrete quarry towards breakaway.

Plate 48. Silcrete flake.

pg. 72

P2.5.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 5 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 677076 6808872 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE - TERTIARY SITE TYPE - OTHER - TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Flat, Breakaways SLOPE Gently Inclined SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs VEGETATION EST. OF AVE. GROUND 70% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 70%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This is a low density artefacts scatter site containing approximately 1,000 artefacts. Artefact types included flakes, broken flakes, cores, flake fragments and retouched flakes. Artefact densities varied around the site, with an existing access track present through the middle of the site. Lithics at the site mostly comprise chert and silcrete.

DIMENSIONS 270m northwest-southeast by 190m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 33,160 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Southern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Eastern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Western boundary – Decrease in artefact densities DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion and vehicle track.

ASSESSMENT OF Some human, water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – INTEGRITY Moderate.

pg. 73

P2.5.2 ‘ ZM_PW_05’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has low aesthetic value. The MG people identified some significance as the cultural TECHNICAL VALUE material is associated with their ancestors. The site exhibits artefacts and tools utilized in traditional activities including wood working and hunting demonstrating some social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has limited potential to address archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial, temporal and technological interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified some social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people had camped previously. It was stated that artefact scatter are ubiquitous in the region and are associated with mundane traditional activities.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a low density artefact scatter located near a drainage line. The scientific, social and aesthetic values decrease the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural and human disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has moderate integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_05 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding stone tool technologies and traditional occupation of the region. Artefact scatter sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a poor example of such a site type. ZM_PW_05 has some social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area.

The assessment of low social, aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of low significance.

pg. 74

P2.5.3 ‘ZM_PW_05’ MAPS

Plate 49. Aerial map of ZM_PW_05.

pg. 75

Plate 50. Close up of ZM_PW_05.

pg. 76

P2.5.4 ‘ZM_PW_05’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 51. Chert and silcrete artefacts. ZM_PW_05

Plate 52. Flakes at ZM_PW_05.

pg. 77

Plate 53. View south of site.

Plate 54. Access track through middle of site.

Plate 55. Heritage team analysing artefacts.

pg. 78

P2.6.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 6 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 676122 6808667 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE Rockshelter TERTIARY SITE TYPE PAD OTHER Rockhole TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Flat, Breakaways SLOPE Gently to Moderately Inclined SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs VEGETATION

EST. OF AVE. GROUND 80% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 40%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a breakaway area where one rockshleter measuring 4m wide by 1.5m high and 3m deep was located. Several artefacts were observed within the dripline with an estimated potential archaeological deposit of 4m². A small rockhole was located atop the breakaway. The scree slope exhibits an artefacts scatter comprising some 1,000 artefacts manufactured from a variety of lithics including chalcedony, chert, quartz, clear quartz, BIF and dolerite, comprising artefacts types such as cores, flakes and retouched flakes. DIMENSIONS 110m north-south by 110m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 10,333 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform

Southern boundary – Decrease in artefact densities

Eastern boundary – Change in landform

Western boundary – Change in landform DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Good. INTEGRITY

pg. 79

P2.6.2 ‘ ZM_PW_06’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has moderate aesthetic value. The MG people identified the breakaway as a TECHNICAL VALUE significant landmark which would have provided a good camping spot for their ancestors as evidenced by the cultural material at the site. The site exhibits a variety of artefacts and tools utilized in traditional activities including wood working and hunting tools demonstrating some social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has moderate potential to address archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial, temporal and technological interest. The associated PAD increases this value.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified moderate social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people had camped previously. It was stated that artefact scatter are ubiquitous in the region and are associated with mundane traditional life but that both the rockshelter and rockhole added to this value.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a rockshelter with an associated PAD and an artefact scatter. The scientific, social and aesthetic values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a moderate example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has moderate integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_06 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding stone tool technologies and traditional occupation of the region. Artefact scatter sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a moderate example of such a site type. ZM_PW_06 has moderate social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits physical traces of the activities undertaken by their ancestors in the area.

The assessment of moderate social, aesthetic and scientific values suggest that this site is of moderate significance.

pg. 80

P2.6.3 ‘ZM_PW_06’ MAPS

Map 12 Aerial Map of ZM_PW_06..

pg. 81

Map 13. Close up of ZM_PW_06 Aerial map.

pg. 82

P2.6.4 ‘ZM_PW_06’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 56. Quartz, chalcedony and chert artefacts within rockshelter dripline.

Plate 57. Retouched quartz flake and clear quartz flake.

pg. 83

Plate 58. Rockshelter at ZM_PW_06.

Plate 59. Looking east at site.

pg. 84

Plate 60. Looking northwest at site.

Plate 61. View south from atop breakaway.

pg. 85

P2.7.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 7 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 677578 6809327 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Rockhole

SECONDARY SITE TYPE - TERTIARY SITE TYPE - OTHER - TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Hillock SLOPE Gentle incline SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs. Soils comprise gravel with skeletal sands. VEGETATION EST. OF AVE. GROUND 90% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 90%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a rockhole measuring 40cm by 20cm and approximately 45cm deep formed within a granite bedrock extrusion on a small hillock.

DIMENSIONS 60m north-south by 55m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 2,350 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform

Southern boundary – Change in landform

Eastern boundary – Change in landform

Western boundary – Change in landform DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Good. INTEGRITY

pg. 86

P2.7.2 ‘ ZM_PW_07’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has low aesthetic value. The MG people identified the rockhole as a significant TECHNICAL VALUE landmark which would have provided drinking water for their ancestors as they travelled through the area. The site does not exhibit material evidence of traditional occupation in the form of artefacts decreasing the social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to contribute to archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified moderate to high social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people would have travelled to in search of water.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a rockhole on granite bedrock. The scientific, social and aesthetic values decrease the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has good integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_07 has limited potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding traditional occupation of the region. Rockhole sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a poor example of such a site type. ZM_PW_07 has moderate social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits a natural feature that would have been of significance to their ancestors.

The assessment of low aesthetic and scientific values and moderate to high social value suggest that this site is of moderate significance.

pg. 87

P2.7.3 ‘ZM_PW_07’ MAPS

Map 14. Aerial map of ZM_PW_07.

pg. 88

Map 15. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_07.

pg. 89

P2.7.4 ‘ZM_PW_07’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 62. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07.

Plate 63. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07.

pg. 90

Plate 64. Rockhole. ZM_PW_07.

pg. 91

P2.8.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 8 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 677474 6810770 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Rockhole

SECONDARY SITE TYPE Artefact Scatter TERTIARY SITE TYPE - OTHER - TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Hillock SLOPE Gentle incline SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs. Soils comprise granite cobbles, pebbles and gravel with VEGETATION skeletal sands. EST. OF AVE. GROUND 90% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 90%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a rockhole measuring 1.5m by 1.3m and a minimum of 25cm deep formed within a granite bedrock extrusion on a small hillock. Approximately 600 artefacts were noted surrounding the rockhole comprising mainly silcrete and quartz artefacts. DIMENSIONS 170m north-south by 130m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 16,245 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Decrease in artefact density

Southern boundary – Decrease in artefact density

Eastern boundary – Decrease in artefact density

Western boundary – Decrease in artefact density DISTURBANCE East –west aligned vehicle track 10m north of rockhole. Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Moderate. INTEGRITY

pg. 92

P2.8.2 ‘ ZM_PW_08’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has some aesthetic value. The MG people identified the rockhole as a significant TECHNICAL VALUE landmark which would have provided drinking water for their ancestors as they travelled through the area. The site exhibits material evidence of traditional occupation in the form of artefacts increasing the social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to contribute to archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial and technical interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified moderate to high social values to the place and assessed it as a place that would have been known to their ancestors as they foraged and hunted in the area.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a rockhole on granite bedrock with an associated artefact scatter. The scientific, social and aesthetic values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural and human disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has moderate integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_08 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding traditional occupation of the region. Rockhole sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a moderate example of such a site type. ZM_PW_08 has moderate to high social values and is of importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits a natural feature that would have been of significance to their ancestors and exhibits evidence of past usage in the form of stone artefacts.

The assessment of aesthetic and scientific values and moderate to high social value suggest that this site is of moderate significance.

pg. 93

P2.8.3 ‘ZM_PW_08’ MAPS

Map 16 Aerial map of ZM_PW-08..

pg. 94

Map 17. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_08

pg. 95

P2.8.4 ‘ZM_PW_08’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 65. Rockhole at ZM_PW_08.

Plate 66. Looking north from rockhole towards the existing east-west vehicle track.

pg. 96

Plate 67. Looking south at ZM_PW_08.

pg. 97

P2.9.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 0 9 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 676261 6808122 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Rockshelter

SECONDARY SITE TYPE PAD TERTIARY SITE TYPE - OTHER - TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Hillock SLOPE Gentle incline SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs. Soils comprise granite cobbles, pebbles and gravel with VEGETATION skeletal sands. EST. OF AVE. GROUND 90% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 70%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a rockshelter measuring 1.2m high by 1.4m wide and 1m deep with a PAD of approximately 2m²

DIMENSIONS 70m north-south by 60m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 3,370 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform

Southern boundary – Change in landform

Eastern boundary – Change in landform

Western boundary – Change in landform DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Moderate. INTEGRITY

pg. 98

P2.9.2 ‘ ZM_PW_09’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has some aesthetic value. The MG people identified the rockshleter as a significant TECHNICAL VALUE landmark which would have provided shelter from inclement weather and afforded good views from atop the granite outcrop to the surrounding landscape. The site does not exhibit material evidence of traditional occupation in the form of artefacts decreasing the social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to contribute to archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial, temporal and technical interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified some social values to the place and assessed it as a place where people may have camped in as they foraged and hunted in the area.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a rockshelter within a breakaway. The scientific, social and aesthetic values decrease the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural and animal disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has moderate integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_09 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding traditional occupation of the region. Rockshelter sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a poor example of such a site type. ZM_PW_09 has some social values and is of some importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits a natural feature that may have been of significance to their ancestors.

The assessment of aesthetic, social and scientific values suggest that this site is of low significance.

pg. 99

P2.9.3 ‘ZM_PW_09’ MAPS

Map 18. Aerial map of ZM_PW_09.

pg. 100

Map 19. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_09.

pg. 101

P2.9.4 ‘ZM_PW_09’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 68 Rockshelter at ZM_PW_09.

Plate 69. View from top of rockshelter.

pg. 102

P2.10.1 ‘ Z M _ P W _ 1 0 ’ RECORDING FORM

LOCATION AND SITE TYPE

GRID REFERENCE 50 J 678430 6810625 (GDA94 ZONE 50) PRIMARY SITE TYPE Quarry

SECONDARY SITE TYPE - TERTIARY SITE TYPE - OTHER - TOPOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS LANDFORM Open Depression SLOPE Flat SURFACE ELEMENTS & Open mulga with low shrubs. Soils comprise silcrete cobbles, pebbles and gravel with VEGETATION red sands. EST. OF AVE. GROUND 70% SURFACE VISIBILITY EST. OF ARCH. VISIBILITY 70%

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

SITE DESCRIPTION This site comprises a localised silcrete outcrop 30m x 40m that has been subject to traditional quarrying activities. Artefacts densities varied at the site with maximum densities noted in the range of 30as/m². The site comprises about 3,000 artefacts. DIMENSIONS 80m north-south by 60m east-west

Tot. Area (m²): 4,590 BOUNDARIES Northern boundary – Change in landform

Southern boundary – Change in landform

Eastern boundary – Change in landform

Western boundary – Change in landform DISTURBANCE Natural disturbance present included water erosion.

ASSESSMENT OF Some water and weathering disturbance. Overall assessment of integrity – Moderate. INTEGRITY

pg. 103

P2.10.2 ‘ ZM_PW_10’ ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

AESTHETIC OR The site has low aesthetic value. The MG people identified the quarry as an area where TECHNICAL VALUE raw lithic was procured for tool manufacture. The site does exhibit material evidence of traditional occupation in the form of artefacts sourced from a locally occurring outcrop of silcrete increasing the social aesthetic and technical values.

HISTORICAL VALUE The site has limited historical value from a scientific perspective.

SCIENTIFIC VALUE The site has some potential to contribute to archaeological /scientific questions of a spatial and technical interest.

SOCIAL VALUE The MG representatives identified some social values to the place and assessed it as a place where their ancestors sourced and worked raw lithic to make tools used in everyday tasks as they hunted and gathered in the area.

SPIRITUAL VALUE No specific spiritual values are associated with this place.

RARITY This site type is common at both the local and regional levels.

REPRESENTATIVENESS This site type is comparable to other sites of its class, a quarry site located within an outcrop of siliceous stone. The scientific, social and aesthetic values increase the heritage value of the place. It is deemed that this place represents a moderate to poor example of this site type.

INTEGRITY Some natural and animal disturbances were noted at the site. Overall the site has good integrity.

STATEMENT OF ZM_PW_10 has some potential to answer archaeological/scientific question of a spatial, and SIGNIFICANCE technological interest regarding traditional occupation of the region. Quarry sites are commonly recorded in the region and this place provides a moderate to poor example of such a site type. ZM_PW_10 has some social values and is of some importance to Aboriginal people as the site exhibits an area of past traditional Aboriginal activity.

The assessment of aesthetic, social and scientific values suggest that this site is of low significance.

pg. 104

P2.10.3 ‘ZM_PW_10’ MAPS

Map 20. Aerial map of ZM_PW_10.

pg. 105

Map 21. Close up aerial map of ZM_PW_10.

pg. 106

P2.10.4 ‘ZM_PW_10’ PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 70. Quarry floor.

Plate 71. Site ZM_PW_10.

pg. 107

Plate 72. Silcrete flake.

Plate 73. Silcrete artefacts.

pg. 108

Plate 74. Silcrete flake.

pg. 109

APPENDIX A-ENVIRONMENTAL BACKGROUND

A.1 CLIMATE

The closest weather station is located 70km east of the Project at Cashmere Downs located at Latitude: 28.97 °S Longitude: 119.57 °E (BoM 2020). The study area experiences a semi-arid climate with 9 to 11 months of the year being dry and is characterised hot summers and mild winters. Mean maximum temperature for the hottest month occur in January at 36 °C with a mean minimum of 20.9 °C. Maximum temperatures exceeding 45 °C have been recorded for the region. Temperatures in July reach a mean maximum of 17.4 °C and a mean minimum of 6 °C. The area receives on average of 253mm of rain annually, fairly evenly distributed throughout the year, with slightly higher fall in the between February and July. Winter rainfall is usually associated with cold fronts, whilst summer thunderstorms provide the area with localised and variable rainfall during the summer months. Flooding is not uncommon during thunderstorms with one 24hr period event recording nearly 150mm of rain. Lowest rainfall for the area has been recorded at 0mm for nearly all the months of the year and the area is subject to droughts due to high temperatures and high evaporation rates (Beard 1981). A.2 PALEOCLIMATE

Throughout the Quaternary period studies have shown evidence for an expansion and contraction of the arid zone in response to changing climatic conditions with a peak in arid conditions during the Last Glacial Maximum (Smith 1987, 1989, Veth 1989, 1993a, 1995, O’Connor and Veth 2006).

The Pleistocene period lasting 50k BP to 35k BP would likely have presented warmer and wetter conditions than at present. Studies have shown that both tropical trade winds and westerlies in the period prior to 50k BP would have resulted in greater Indo-Australian monsoon activity (Cohen et al. 2012; Johnson et al. 1999). During this time it is postulated that mega-lakes would have formed in the interior with surface water widely available (Cohen et al 2011, De Dekker et al 2011).

A shift in climate has been proposed for the period after 25k BP to 17kBP (Hiscock 2008) with peaks in glacial conditions occurring from 18k to 14k BP (Veth 1993b and Marwick 2002). The last glacial

pg. 110

period and LGM is postulated to be characterised by lower sea-surface temperatures (Burroughs and Juggins 2005) and as being colder, windier and drier than today. These conditions and the resulting reduction of surface water and higher evaporation rates is postulated to have led to drying of great inland lakes, reduced faunal resources and expansion of the arid zone (O’Connor and Veth 2006). At this stage sea-levels are estimated to have been over 100m lower than at present rising to their current levels 4k to 6k BP (Chappel and Thom 1977).

The climate began to warm post LGM for a period of about 6k years before a shift of conditions. Sea levels began to rise and inundate then coastal areas to form islands such as the Dampier Archipelago and Barrow Island (Copp 2005) in the Pilbara and Rottnest Island off the Perth metropolitan area. A relative temporary reversal of conditions occurred during the Antarctic Cold Reversal, followed by a continued period of warmer and wetter climate coinciding with the re-appearance of the northern summer monsoon cycle and an increase in vegetation cover and mega-lake formation in central Australia (Wyroll & Miller 2001). A shift in climate has been noted between 5k to 4k BP with drier conditions prevailing and a cessation of the northwest monsoon at this period (Nott 2011, Dimitriades & Cranston 2001).

A wetter climate is postulated from between 4k to 2k BP, with arid conditions trending over the last 2k years to present.

A.3 BIOGEOGRAPHIC REGION

The survey area is wholly situated within the East Murchison subregion of the Murchison Bioregion described as (Cowan 2011):

The northern parts of the ‘Southern Cross and ‘Eastern Goldfields Terrains of the Yilgarn Craton. Characterised by its internal drainage, and extensive areas of elevated red desert sandplains with minimal dune development. Salt Lake systems associated with the occluded Paleodrainage system. Broad plains of red-brown sandplains. Vegetation is dominanted by Mulga Woodlands often rich in ephemerals; hummock grasses, saltbush shrublands and Halosarcia shrublands. Arid climate, with mainly winter rainfall (200mm).

pg. 111

A.4 VEGETATION

The project area lies within the Austin region in the Eremaean Botanical District (Beard 1990). The region is characterised by a low woodland of Acacia aneura (mulga). Trees or shrubs of Casuarina cristata (Belah) or Eucalyptus spp. (eucalypts) tend to replace mulga in zones of higher rainfall or where a deep friable soils occurs. The vegetation is low and open on shallow or salty soils. Where lime occurs close to the surface, the trees and tall shrubs are scattered and the main plant cover is formed by low shrubs of Maireana sedifolia (bluebush). This vegetation is described as lightly wooded succulent steppe with mulga persisting on hills, but reduced to relatively low shrubs. On Salt Lakes the succulent steppe becomes very lightly wooded with Atriplex spp. (saltbush). Both the mulga and the saltbush finally disappear on the bare beds of the salt lakes. Sandy soils are covered by Triodia basedowii (spinifex), forming a so-called shrub, or tree and shrub steppe. The scattered shrubs are composed mainly of a Eucalyptus youngiana (mallee) and are joined on deep sands in the north-east of region by scattered trees of E. gongylocarpa (Marble Gum).

A.5 GEOLOGY

The Project is located at the southern end of the Youanmi-Sandstone greenstone belt, locally known as the Youanmi Greenstone Belt, which forms part of the Southern Cross province of the Yilgarn Craton. The Southern Cross province of the Yilgarn Craton is characterised by basements of Archaean greenstone and granites and Proterozoic granite and gneiss intrusions (Beard 1990). Undulating uplands on granite pavements and low valleys of greenstone hills typify the geology of the region with granite outcrops commonly occurring. Red-brown loams and Aeolian sands occur in the broad valley floors interspersed with Eocene marine limestone plains. Gravelly sand plains and laterite breakaways occur in upper levels stemming from erosion of the lateritic duricrust (Cowan et al 2001).

The Youanmi Greenstone Belt is typified by metamorphosed, tholeiitic basalts and intrusives, with minor BIFs, porphyries and felsic, pyroclastic rocks (Radford and Boddington 2003).

Soils within the survey region fall within Soil-Landscape Zone Classification of the Salinaland Plains Zone of the Murchison District, which are described as (Tille 2006):

pg. 112

Sandplains (with hardpan wash plains and some mesas, stony plains and salt lakes) on granitic rocks (and some greenstone) of the Yilgarn Craton. Red sandy earths, Red deep sands, Red shallow loams and Red loamy earths with some Red-brown hardpan shallow loams, Salt lake soils and Red shallow sandy duplexes. Mulga shrublands with spinifex grasslands (and some halophytic shrublands and eucalypt woodlands). Located in the northern Goldfields from Lakes Barlee and Ballard to Wiluna and Laverton.

pg. 113

APPENDIX B- ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

B.1 REGIONAL RESEARCH

The survey region has not been the subject of much in-depth archaeological investigation. Current research trends focus on the initial occupation of the region, as well as human settlement patterns, in terms of Australia’s arid zone (Smith 1986, Veth 1989, 1993a, 1995) and climatic and environmental changes over time, with special attention to the adaptation to climatic conditions of the LGM and the effects of sea level changes (Veth 1989).

Some of the earliest dated sites in WA come from Barrow Island, some 64km offshore from Mardie Station in WA Pilbara Region, where at Boodie Cave cultural material has been dated to 53±5.4 KA (Veth et al. 2017, Ward et al 2017). Several rockshelters in the Hamersley and Chichester region have yielded cultural material dated to around 40,000 BP (Morse et al 2014, Dias & Rapley 2014).

Aboriginal colonisation theories for arid and semi-arid ecosystems have been widely debated. Smith (1988) has suggested that availability of water during an earlier lacustral phase would have allowed Aboriginal occupation of the interior of Australia by 12,000 BP. Occupation of desert lowlands before and during the last glacial maximum would have been abandoned until the amelioration in climate c.15,000 to 7,000 BP. Veth (2000) postulated a different model whereby the initial colonisation of the arid regions occurred during the more favorable climatic period of the late Pleistocene, from approximately 25,000 BP, with a retreat to less arid areas during the 22,000 to 13,000 BP period, and a re-occupation of marginal lands between 13,000 to 5,000 BP. From 5,000 to 1,500 BP all desert ecosystems are thought to have been inhabited due to a re-establishment of regional networks and an intensification of site occupation, ceremonial gatherings and long distance exchange (Veth 2000).

Both the Pleistocene and Holocene occupation of the arid region are not well understood with most of the information stemming from rockshelter sites, 80% of which are dated to the Holocene (Morse et al 2009). Whilst this has been seen as an intensification of site occupation it can be argued that this may be an overrepresentation of younger deposits caused by lack of preservation of older deposits and or higher probability of their destruction by subsequent occupations.

pg. 114

Several dated rockshelter sites within the survey region have yielded Holocene dates in the range of 2,000 BP near Leinster (Liberman et al 1977) and near Deception Hill (Cecchi 2017), and 1,570 BP at Windimurra (Harris 2002) to 500 BP near Hyden (Bowdler 1989 at Carina Rockshelter dated to c.500BP (Artefaxion 2009a) and at Windarling Rockshelter dated to 927 + 37BP (Artefaxion 2009b).

According to previous research, the archaeological mark of a rain-chasing model of occupation includes a higher number of low-density artefact scatters around ephemeral water sources and larger sites associated with more permanent water bodies.

B.2 REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION

Several rockshelters have been subject to archaeological excavation in the region indicating a sparse occupation over the last 2,000 years, including Mulka’s Cave some 240 kilometres southwest of the Project. The results of that excavation concluded that the site was occupied minimally, on few occasions, over the last 500 years (Bowdler et. al. 1989). Recent excavations surrounding Mulka’s Cave have yielded two dates of 6,000 BP and 8,000 BP respectively (Rossi 2013) indicating a much earlier occupation of the area.

Some 60km north of the Project, at Windimurra, Harris excavated a test pit to bedrock ending at a depth of 53cm. A hearth identified between 15 and 20cm below the surface was dated to 468±43 BP, whit the oldest occupation for the rockshelter was dated to 1572 + 45 BP (Harris 2002). Fifty-one artefacts were recovered, most of which comprised debitage, with only one utilised flake and one core fragment recovered. The main artefact lithology comprised quartz with a minor percentage of ironstone, chalcedony and chert artefacts.

Liberman et al. (1977) excavated a rockshelter 200 kilometres east of the Project, near Leinster, with stratified cultural deposits including a hearth between 5-10cm below the surface and hundreds of artefacts, including backed blades. Charcoal from the hearth was dated to 2160±105 BP.

Previously, excavations at a rockshelter near Windarling Peak, 148 kilometres southeast of the Project, recovered eleven stone artefacts dated to 900 BP (Artefaxion 2009a). The paucity of artefacts was interpreted as indicating an ephemeral or transitory occupation of the rockshelter.

pg. 115

Another rockshelter at Curragibbin Hill, approximately 168 kilometres south of the Project was excavated via a 1m² test pit dug to a depth of 48cm. Two lithic artefacts were recovered just below the surface and no other Aboriginal cultural material was identified (Artefaxion 2009b).

Some 200 kilometres southeast of the Project, the Carina Rockshelter was excavated to a maximum depth of 23 cm (Artefaxion 2009c). Seventy stone artefacts were excavated from three test pits totaling a surface area of 1m². Charcoal dating, although problematic given that samples gathered from the lowest layer were dated 100 years younger than those above, were assessed as evidencing Aboriginal occupation over the last 500 years. Given the number of artefacts identified and the absence of any cores, formal tools or Aboriginal cultural material, the rockshelter was assessed as having been utilized in an ephemeral or transitory manner.

A rockshelter near Deception Hill 120 kilomtres southeast of the Project was excavated by the author (Cecchi 2017) via three test pits covering a combined surface area of 1m² and recovered a total of 302 artefacts from surface to bedrock. The excavated material indicated that the rockshelter was utilised repeatedly and a variety of activities associated with hunter gatherer tasks were undertaken at the site. Faunal remains recovered from the test pits indicate a heavy reliance on medium sized marsupials and mammals such as wallabies, possums and bettongs and a minor reliance on larger game such as kangaroo with some evidence for consumption of lizards and other small marsupials. The assemblage as a whole was assessed as typical of the region, indicating that tool making, artefact reduction, tool usage and tool discard were occurring at the site. Initial occupation of the rockshelter was dated via radiocarbon samples to 1872±36 BP with an increase in activity until about 1051 ±19 BP and intermitted occupation until recent times. Both surface and excavated assemblages at the site showed similar compositions that are characterised by a high proportion of debitage and include retouched artefacts and cores. The retouched tool category indicates that a variety of scrapers were in use since 1872±36 BP and backing techniques employed from 1759 ±24 BP. No grinding material was identified at the site.

pg. 116

APPENDIX C- ETHNOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND

C.1 ETHNO-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Pre-European settlement the general area in which the Project is located was a transition zone between the Bibbulmun people of the Southwest and the tribal groups who inhabited the Desert regions of Australia's interior (collectively known nowadays as "Wangkayis" or "Wongis"). Thus, Bates (1944) notes that:

"...Southern Cross was the eastern border of Bibbulmun country. In 1909 all remaining members of its group had been drawn into the circumcised tribes on their eastern boundary, the last natives of Merredin and Burracoppin also having being circumcised before they died out."

Tindale (1974) refers to these intermediate people as the Kelamaia, but his field notes reveal that this was the name for the language spoken in that region, whereas Kubrun was the name of the people which he collected. In her field notes, published in 1985 by the National Library of Australia, Bates gives more detail in their regard, collected during a visit to that region in the early years of the century:

"...the name Karratjibbin has been applied to this nation as it was the term supplied by my Southern Cross informants, for their chief camping ground in that locality...the area over which this group extended ran from Mount Jackson in the north (about Lat. 30*20') through the Southern Cross district towards the Dundas area...The peculiar organisation existing amongst these people differentiates them from every other known tribe in the West. They possess a two-moiety system, which in this respect links them with their south-western neighbours, but with the important difference amongst the Karratjibbin people of each moiety marrying within itself and producing the other moiety...Whether the area of these people extends further than the limits mentioned, could not be ascertained in the short time allowed for investigation...I found the system among the Norseman district natives and in the Mount Jackson group. Their social organisation, customs, laws, initiation, etc., coincide with those of their eastern, north-eastern and south-eastern neighbours, with whom

pg. 117

they have traded their local products...The various groups composing the "nation" held rights of possession to certain water-holes, hills, soaks, springs, etc., the chief of which appeared to be Karratjibbin, Wilgauin (Mt. Jackson), Yogguragain (west of Karratjibbin), Kammining (north-west of Karratjibbin), Malyorning (?), Juwardain (near Mt. Jackson)...The Karratjibbin Nation borders the Bibbulmun on the north-east, and several of the latter were adopted into and circumcised by the Karratjibbin people.”

To the east of the above groups the country was occupied by the most westerly groups who inhabited the desert interior. In that area, social and linguistic similarity stretched in a wide arc from Oodnadatta in present-day South Australia, through the Great Victoria and Great Sandy Deserts, to the Fitzroy River in the northwest and the vicinity of Purnululu National Park in the northeast, extending partially into the present-day Northern Territory. To the south, and centered upon Norseman, Balladonia and Frasers Range, were located the Ngadju people.

Cultural practices and religious stories in the general Goldfields region were shared between neighbouring groups, although names of spiritual entities tended to be changed with transition from one culture-group to another. Aboriginal traditional religion is based on the land; its shrines, hymns and religious objects refer to topographic and other natural features. In such a religion, a degree of permanence and stability exists, which would not be the case were the religion based in man-made structures. In the general region in which the present study was carried out, the hymns and stories which are the link which binds the human to the natural (viewed, from an emic perspective, as supernatural) have been retained by a pivotal generation of elderly Aboriginal people. The existence and location of religious sites is therefore still known to the Aboriginal people. These sites, in the

Kalgoorlie/Coolgardie/Menzies area are related mainly to four mythic sagas, which are commemorated in song and story, namely:

(i) the Yina Kutjarra, two mythic human ancestors, carriers of Law and religion (known to neighbouring Wangkayi groups as Wati Kutjarra), who pursued an emu ancestor through the Kalgoorlie region;

(ii) the Tjilkamarta or echidna ancestor, a creative being;

(iii) the Nganamarra or mallee fowl ancestor, a creative being;

pg. 118

(iv) the Milyura or Pleiades, creative women ancestors (known to neighbouring Wangkayi groups as Kungkarangkara).

Generally, sites associated with these mythic sagas are either prominent rocky outcrops or water-sources.

C.2 NATIVE TITLE

Paragraph 2.18 of the Due Diligence Guidelines (DPLH 2020) issued by DPLH are relevant to deciding which persons or groups should be included in Aboriginal heritage surveys and consultations, as follows:

Information about the Aboriginal heritage of a particular area is best obtained in consultation with the relevant Aboriginal people for that area. Whilst there is no definitive list of Aboriginal people who should be consulted for an area, the Aboriginal Cultural Material Committee suggests that the following people at least should be consulted:

a. those who are determined native title holders;

b. those who are registered native title claimants;

c. persons named as informants on Aboriginal site recording forms held in the Register at DPLH;

d. any other Aboriginal persons who can demonstrate relevant cultural knowledge in a particular area.

The Marlinyu Ghoorlie are native title claimants and relevant cultural knowledge of the general area in which the Project will occur has been demonstrated in the course of previous heritage surveys.

pg. 119

APPENDIX D- LEGISLATIVE CONTEXT

D.1 DEFINITION OF ABORIGINAL SITE

The applicability of the Act depends on whether a place falls within the definition of ‘Aboriginal site’ (Site). A Site is defined in section 4 of the Act to mean ‘a place to which the Act applies, by operation of section 5’.

Section 5 of the Act defines a Site as:

(a) any place of importance and significance where persons of Aboriginal descent have, or appear to have, left any object, natural or artificial, used for, or made or adapted for use for, any purpose connected with the traditional cultural life of the Aboriginal people, past or present;

(b) any sacred, ritual or ceremonial site, which is of importance and special significance to persons of Aboriginal descent;

(c) any place which, in the opinion of the Committee, is or was associated with the Aboriginal people and which is of historical, anthropological, archaeological or ethnographical interest and should be preserved because of its importance and significance to the cultural heritage of the State;

(d) any place where objects to which this Act applies are traditionally stored, or to which, under the provisions of this Act, such objects have been taken or removed.

Section 28(1) of the Act establishes an Aboriginal Cultural Materials Committee (ACMC), the functions of which are set out in section 39 of the Act. One of the functions as stated in section 39(1)(a) of the Act is ‘to evaluate on behalf of the community the importance of place and objects alleged to be associated with Aboriginal persons’. Section 39(3) of the Act states that ‘associated sacred beliefs, and ritual or ceremonial usage, in so far as such matters can be ascertained, shall be regarded as the primary considerations to be taken into account in the evaluation of any place or object for the purposes of the Act”. The construction of the definition of Site and the applicability of the Act to a place, therefore largely rests on the ACMC’s evaluation.

In evaluating the importance of places and objects, the ACMC must take into consideration the factors set out in section 39(2) of the Act, namely:

(a) any existing use or significance attributed under relevant Aboriginal custom;

pg. 120

(b) any former or reputed use or significance which may be attributed upon the basis of tradition, historical association, or Aboriginal sentiment;

(c) any potential anthropological, archaeological or ethnographical interest; and

(d) aesthetic values.

The information provided by a recorder on a given area is central to the ACMC’s evaluation.

Procedurally, once the ACMC has assessed and advised that a place is a Site for the purposes of the Act, the place is to be Registered. The DPLH has the responsibility to uphold a Register of sites for public access. Areas of Aboriginal heritage may fall within the definition of a Site even though they do not appear on the Register because they are yet unknown, unreported or unassessed.

From an archaeological perspective, a site has been defined as a place that represents particular focus of past human activity (Pearson and Sullivan 1999) or as ‘any place that contains physical evidence of past human activity’ (Burke and Smith 2004: 63). In archaeology, research questions may determine what is referred to as a site.

In practical terms, with regards to artefact scatters, consultancy agencies have often formulated paradigms to define a Site based on artefact concentrations/numbers (i.e. defining artefact scatter sites as background scatter density x 3, or in certain instances employing arbitrary definitions such as six or more artefacts in relative close proximity). In the past it was not uncommon in Western Australia for single artefacts to be deemed a Site.

D.2 OFFENCES UNDER THE ACT

Under s15 of the Act it is obligatory to report to the Registrar of Aboriginal Sites all Aboriginal heritage places and or objects that may reasonably be suspected to apply.

Under s17 of the Act it is an offence to excavate, destroy, damage, conceal or in any way alter any Aboriginal site, unless with the authorization of the Registrar of Aboriginal Sites under s16 or the consent of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs under s18 of the Act.

pg. 121

APPENDIX E- SIGNED STATEMENTS OF ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION AND CONDITIONAL PROJECT APPROVAL

pg. 122

APPENDIX F- REFERENCES

Australian International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), Charters: Burra Charter, Practice Notes. Available online at https://australia.icomos.org/publications/charters/. Accessed 28.06.2019.

Bates, D. 1985, The Native Tribes of Australia, White, I. (ed.), Canberra: National Library of Australia.

Beard, J.S. 1990, Plant Life of Western Australia. Kangaroo Press Pty Ltd, NSW.

Bureau of Metereology (BoM) 2020, Cashmere Downs statistics. Commonwealth of Australia, Bureau of Metereology. Available online at http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_012022.shtml. Accessed 9.7.2020.

Burke, H. and Smith, C. 2004 The Archaeologist Field Handbook. Allen and Unwin, NSW.

Bowdler, S. 1984, “Archaeological significance as a mutable quality”, in Sullivan, S. and Bowdler, S. (eds.), Site Surveys and Significance Assessment in Australian Archaeology, pp. 1-9. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.

Bowdler, S. 1989, “A Test Excavation at Mulka’s Cave (Bates Cave), Near Hyden, W.A. DIA Heritage Survey Report ID 103685

Bordes, F., Dortch, C., Thibault, C., Raynal, J., and Bindon, P. 1983, “Walga Rock and Billibilong Spring” in Australian Archaeology, 17: 1-26.

pg. 123

Chappel, J. and Thom, B.G. 1977. Sea levels and coasts. In: J. Allen, J Golson and R. Jones (eds), Sunda and Sahul: Prehistoric Studies in Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia. Academic Press, London, pp.275-291.

Cecchi, J. 2017. Report on an archaeological excavation of Deception Hill 1. Unpublished report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific.

Cohen, T. Nanson, G. Jansen, J. Jones, B. Jacobs, Z., Treble, P. Price, D. May, J Smith, A. Ayliffe, L. Hellstrom, J. 2011. Continental aridification and the vanishing of Australia's megalakes. Geology 39, 167–170.

Cohen, T. Nanson, G. Jansen, J. Jones, B, Jacobs, Z., Larsen, J.R May, J. Treble, P. Price, D. Smith, A. 2012. Late Quaternary mega---lakes fed by the northern and southern river systems of central Australia: Varying moisture sources and increased continental aridity. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 356-357, 89–108.

Cowan, M. 2001, Murchison 1 (MUR 1 East Murchison subregion) Subregional description and biodiversity values, dated September 2001. Available online at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303274925_Murchison_1_MUR_1_East_Murchison_subre gion_Subregional_description_and_biodiversity_values_dated_September_2001. Accessed 22/07/2020.

Dias, A. & S. Rapley. 2014. New radiocarbon dates from the Chichester Range, Pilbara, Western Australia. Journal of the Australian Association of Consulting Archaeologists, 2014 Volume 2. Australian Association of Consulting Archaeologists Inc.

pg. 124

Dimitriades, S. and Cranston, P. 2001. An Australian Holocene climate reconstruction using Chironomidae from tropical volcanic maar lake. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimateology, Palaeoecology 176: 109-131.

Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage & Department of Premier and Cabinet 2020, Aboriginal Heritage Due Diligence Guidelines Version 3.0 30 April 2013. Available online at https://www.dplh.wa.gov.au/getmedia/74896bd3-4be3-49ed-be75-38ba72f10d72/AH-Due- diligence-guidelines. Accessed 26.06.2018.

Fordyce, B. 2009 Site Avoidance Heritage Survey of the proposed Chevron gas pipeline at Mardie station, WA. Unpublished report prepared for Chevron Gas.

Gould, R. 1977, Puntutjarpa Rockshelter and the Australian Desert Culture, Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 54 (1), New York.

Gould, R. 1968, “Preliminary Report on Excavations at Puntutjarpa Rockshelter, near Warburton Ranges, WA”, in Archaeological and Physical Anthropology in Oceania. 3: 161-181.

Harris, J. 2002, A Salvage Study of a Rockshelter and Artefact Scatter at Windimurra, Unpublished Report prepared for Vanadium Australia Pty Ltd.

Hiscock, P. 1984, “A preliminary report on the stone artefacts from Colless Creek Cave, Northwest Queensland”. Queensland Archaeological Research, 1:120-151.

Hiscock, P. 1988, Prehistoric settlement patterns and artefact manufacture at Lawn Hill, northwest Queensland. Unpublished PhD. Thesis, University of Queensland.

Hiscock, P. 2008, Archaeology of ancient Australia, Routledge, New York.

pg. 125

Johnson, B. Miller, G. Fogel, M. Magee, J. Gagan, M. & Chivas, A. 1999. 65,000 Years of Vegetation Change in Central Australia and the Australian Summer Monsoon. Science, 284(5417): 1150 1152.

Kendrick, P. & Stanley, F. 2001. Pilbara 4 (PIL4-Roebourne synopsis). In May, J. & McKenzie, N. (eds), A biodiversity audit of Western Australia’s 53 biogeographical subregions in 2002. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, WA, pp. 581-594.

Liberman, K.L., Maynard, G., and Novak, V. 1977. A Survey of Aboriginal Sites in the vicinity of the Agnew Nickel Mine. Unpublished report to the Department of Aboriginal Sites. Perth, W.A.

Marwick, B. 2002a. Inland Pilbara archaeology: A study of variation in Aboriginal occupation over time and space on the Hamersley Plateau. Master of Arts Thesis. University of Western Australia. Centre for Archaeology University of Western Australia.

Morse, K, Cameron, R. & Reyman, W. 2014. A tale of three caves: New dates for Pleistocene occupation in the inland Pilbara. Australian Archaeology 79:167-178.

Nott, J. 2011. A 6,000 year Tropical Cyclone Record from Western Australia. Quaternary Science Reviews, 30(56): 713-722.

O’Connor, S. & Veth, P. (2006). Revisiting the past: changing interpretations of Pleistocene settlement subsistence settlement subsistence and demography in northern Australia. In: Lilley, I [eds]. (I. Lilley, Ed.) Archaeology of Oceania: Australia and the Pacific Islands. Callton: Blackwell Publishing.

Pearson, M. and Sullivan, S. 1999, Looking after heritage places: the basics of heritage planning for Managers, Landowners and Administrators. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne

pg. 126

Playford, P.E. and Leech R.E.J. 1977, Geology and Hydrology of Rottnest Island, Report 6, Geological Survey of Western Australia.

Radford, N., and Boddington, T. 2003. Penny West Gold Deposit, Youanmi, WA. Co-operative Research Centre for Landscape Environments and Mineral Exploration. Available online at http://crcleme.org.au/RegExpOre/PennyWest.pdf. Accessed 9.7.2020.

Smith, M. 1986, “The Antiquity of Seedgrinding in Arid Australia” in Archaeology in Oceania, Vol. 21, No. 1, Papers Presented to John Mulvaney (Apr.,1986), pp. 29-39.

Smith, M.A. 1987. Pleistocene occupation in arid central Australia. Nature 228: 710-711.

Smith, M. A.1 989. The case for a resident human population in the central Australian ranges during full glacial aridity. Archaeology in Oceania 24: 93-105.

State Heritage WA, 2020. InHerit Place Number 08674 ‘Mardie Station’. Available online at http://inherit.stateheritage.wa.gov.au/Public/Inventory/PrintSingleRecord/2498a13e-726f-41f6- 81cc-a06b0a916681. Accessed 7.7.2020.

Tindale, N.B. 1974. Aboriginal tribes of Australia: their terrain, environmental controls, distribution, limits, and proper names, Canberra: Australian National University Press.

Tille, P. 2006. Soil-landscapes of Western Australia's rangelandsand arid interior. Resource management technical reports. Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development. Available online at https://researchlibrary.agric.wa.gov.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1294&context=rmtrAccessed 7.7.2020.

pg. 127

Veth, P. 1989. Islands in the interior: a model for the colonisation of Australia’s arid zone. Archaeology in Oceania 24:81–92.

Veth, P. 1993a. Islands in the interior: The dynamics of prehistoric adaptations within the arid zone of

Veth, P. 1993b. The Aboriginal occupation of the Montebello Islands, northwest Australia. Australian Aboriginal Studies 2:39-50.

Veth, P. 1995. Aridity and settlement in the northwest Australia. Antiquity:69 (1995) 733-46.

A Veth, P. 2000, “Origins of the Western Desert Language: Convergence in Linguistic and Archaeological Space and Time Models”, in Archaeology in Oceania, 35 (1): 11-19.

Veth, P. 2006b. Cycles of aridity and human mobility: risk minimisation among Late Pleistocene foragers of the Western Desert. In F. Sellet, R. Greaves, & P. Yu (Eds.), Archaeology and Ethnoarchaeology of Mobility. Tallahassee: University Press of Florida.

Veth, P., Ward, I. Manne, T, et al 2017. Early human occupation of a maritime desert, Barrow Island, North-West Australia. Quaternary Science Reviews, 19-29.

Ward, I., Veth, P. et al 2017. 50,000 years fo archaeological site stratigraphy and micromorphology in Boodie Cave, Barrow Island, Western Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 15, 344- 369.

pg. 128

Williams, I. R. 1968, Geological Survey of Western Australia: Yarraloola Western Austalia Sheet SF/50- 6, 1:250,00 Geological Series Explanatory Notes. Bureau of Mineral Resources, Geology and Geophysics.

Wyrwoll, K. & Miller, G. 2001. Initiation of the Australian summer monsoon 14,000 years ago. Quaternary International 83-85: 119-128.

pg. 129

Attachment 9A – Proposed Fee for Works Approval

Section 11 Attachment 9A – Proposed Fee for Works Approval

The proposed fee for this Works Approval Application is $3,451 (Figure 7).

Figure 7 Proposed Works Approval Application Fee

11.1 Dewatering Fee The dewatering infrastructure is predicted to cost $60,000 to construct: $20,000 for materials and $40,000 for the pump hire. As the maximum dewatering quantity discharge to Magenta pit will be 100,000 tonnes per year, it has been assigned 30 fee units.

11.2 Landfill Fee The construction of the landfill is predicted to cost $25,000 and will be accepting less than 5,000 tonnes per year. As such it has been assigned 24 fee units.

11.3 Wastewater Treatment Plant and Wastewater Spray-field Fee RWTS has costed the construction of the WWTP and Irrigation Spray-field at $245,000. The WWTP will have a maximum design capacity of 50 m3 per day and as such has been assigned 24 fee units.

32 Penny West WAA Supporting Information References

Section 12 References

Botanica Consulting (2020). Penny Reconnaissance Flora/Vegetation and Fauna Survey. Prepared for Ramelius Resources Limited, August 2020. JCHMC (2020). Report on an Archaeological and Ethnographic Site Avoidance Survey of Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Penny Project. Prepared for Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd, July 2020. MWES (2020). Zebra Minerals Pty Ltd Penny West Gold Project Mining Proposal Hydrogeology and Hydrology Report. Prepared for Ramelius Resources, November 2020.

33 Penny West WAA Supporting Information