DOCSLIB.ORG

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT Version 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT Version 3 YALYALUP Mineral Sands Project ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT Version 3 Date: 20 May 2020 EPA ASSESSMENT NO: 2141 Document Ref: DMS-YAL-ERD-002-V3 Doral Mineral Sands Pty Ltd ABN 18 096 342 451 ACN 096 342 451 Lot 7 Harris Road, Picton WA 6229 Tel:+61 8 9725 5444 Fax:+61 8 9725 4557 Email: [email protected] Website: www.doral.com.au INVITATION TO MAKE A SUBMISSION The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) invites people to make a submission on environmental review of this proposal. Doral Mineral Sands Pty Ltd proposes to develop, mine, rehabilitate and decommission the Yalyalup Mineral Sands Mine. The Proposal includes the development of mine pits and associated infrastructure, wet concentration processing plant, solar evaporation ponds, groundwater abstraction and water management infrastructure and process water dam. The life of mine is expected to be 4 to 5 years. The Environmental Review Document (ERD) has been prepared in accordance with the EPA’s Procedures Manual (Part IV Divisions 1 and 2). The ERD is the report by the proponent on their environmental review which describes this proposal and its likely effects on the environment. The ERD is available for a public review period of [4] weeks from 15 June 2020 closing on 12 July 2020. Information on the proposal from the public may assist the EPA to prepare an assessment report in which it will make recommendations on the proposal to the Minister for Environment. Why write a submission? The EPA seeks information that will inform the EPA’s consideration of the likely effect of the proposal, if implemented, on the environment. This may include relevant new information that is not in the ERD, such as alternative courses of action or approaches. In preparing its assessment report for the Minister for Environment, the EPA will consider the information in submissions, the proponent’s responses and other relevant information. Submissions will be treated as public documents unless provided and received in confidence, subject to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 1992. Why not join a group? It may be worthwhile joining a group or other groups interested in making a submission on similar issues. Joint submissions may help to reduce the workload for an individual or group. If you form a small group (up to 10 people) please indicate all the names of the participants. If your group is larger, please indicate how many people your submission represents. Developing a submission You may agree or disagree with, or comment on, the information in the ERD. When making comments on specific elements in the ERD: • Clearly state your point of view and give reasons for your conclusions. • Reference the source of your information, where applicable. • Suggest alternatives to improve the outcomes on the environment. What to include in your submission Include the following in your submission to make it easier for the EPA to consider your submission: • Your contact details – name and address. • Date of your submission. • Whether you want your contact details to be confidential. • Summary of your submission, if your submission is long. • List points so that issues are clear, preferably by environmental factor. • Refer each point to the page, section and if possible, paragraph of the ERD. • Attach any reference material, if applicable. Make sure your information is accurate. The closing date for submissions is: 12 July 2020 The EPA prefers submissions to be made electronically via the EPA’s Consultation Hub at https://consultation.epa.wa.gov.au. Alternatively, submissions can be: • Posted to: Chairman, Environmental Protection Authority, Locked Bag 33, Cloisters Square WA 6850, or • Delivered to the Environmental Protection Authority, Level 4, The Atrium, 168 St Georges Terrace, Perth 6000. If you have any questions on how to make a submission, please contact the EPA Services at the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation on 6364 7000. SCOPING CHECKLIST TASK REQUIRED WORK SECTION NO. EPA Factor 1: Flora and Vegetation 1 Undertake flora and vegetation surveys in accordance with Technical Appendix 4 Guidance – Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment (EPA, 2016d) in areas that are likely to be directly or indirectly impacted as a result of the Proposal. 2 Undertake a detailed review of soil information from existing exploration 4.2.3 drilling/assay data, depth to groundwater, proposed dewatering extents, Appendix 4 and specific water dependency of flora species/ecosystems within the area predicted to be impacted by the Proposal (i.e. dewatering). 3 Describe the existing flora and vegetation within areas potentially directly 4.2.3 or indirectly affected by the proposal including regional context. This will Appendix 4 include work to relocate or confirm the absence of previous records of significant flora. 4 Assess the cumulative direct and indirect impacts (such as direct clearing, 4.2.3 drawdown of groundwater dependent ecosystems, weeds, fragmentation 4.2.5 of vegetation, altered fire regime and dust) associated with the proposal to flora and vegetation by conducting quantitative analysis. This will Figures 4-1 to 4-7 include: • A summary of the known regional distribution of vegetation units. • The total area (in ha) of each vegetation unit within areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by the Proposal. • The area (in ha) of each vegetation unit to be impacted (directly or indirectly) in a ‘worst case’ scenario. • Maps illustrating the known recorded locations of conservation significant species. • Identification of vegetation units which may be Threatened or Priority Ecological Communities (TECs/PECs). This will include consultation with DBCA to determine whether any vegetation units potentially directly or indirectly affected by the Proposal are representative of State listed TECs/PECs. • Identification of any significant flora species within areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by the Proposal. • For each conservation significant species/community, including MNES, within areas potentially directly or indirectly affected by the Proposal, provide where possible: TASK REQUIRED WORK SECTION NO. • Baseline information on their distribution (including know occurrences), ecology and habitat preferences at the Site level; • Information on the conservation value of each habitat type from a local and regional perspective; • If a population of a conservation significant species is present on the site, its size and the importance of that population from a local and regional perspective; • Map of weed and phytophthora dieback occurrences in areas likely to be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposal. 5 Provide figures and tables showing the predicted extent of loss of 4.2.5 vegetation and significant flora species from both direct and indirect Figures 4-1 to 4-7 impacts. 6 Provide discussion of the proposed management, monitoring and 4.2.6 mitigation methods to be implemented to demonstrate that the design of Appendix 4E (GDE) the proposal has addressed the mitigation hierarchy to avoid and minimise impacts to flora and vegetation. Appendix 5 (ASS) Appendix 7E (GWOS) 7 Provide details of the inherent and residual impacts to flora and 4.2.7 vegetation before and after applying the mitigation hierarchy and identify Section 6 whether the residual impacts are significant by applying the Significant residual Impact Model in the WA Environmental Offsets Guideline (Government of Western Australia, 2014). 8 Quantify any significant residual impacts by completing the Offset Section 6 Template, spatially defining the area of ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ native Appendix 11 vegetation that will be disturbed as a result of the Proposal and propose an appropriate offsets package that demonstrates application of the WA Environmental Offsets Policy (Government of Western Australia, 2011) and Guideline (Government of Western Australia, 2014). 9 Prepare a Mine Closure Plan consistent with Guidelines for Preparing Mine Appendix 3 Closure Plans (DMP and EPA, 2015) which considers the proposed rehabilitation methodologies to achieve successful progressive rehabilitation of all disturbed areas by mining to the agreed end landuse. 10 Provide a statement of how the proponent considers the EPA’s objective 4.2.7 for this factor has been addressed. EPA Factor 2: Terrestrial Fauna 11 Conduct a desktop study and Level 1 Fauna Survey in accordance with Appendix 6A Technical Guidance – Terrestrial Fauna Surveys (EPA, 2016g) and Technical TASK REQUIRED WORK SECTION NO. Guidance – Sampling Methods for Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna (EPA, 2016h) for Terrestrial Fauna within the Development Envelope. In addition, the desktop assessment and Level 1 survey will include consideration of fauna values associated with the creek system immediately to the west of the Development Envelope. 12 Conduct a targeted Western Ringtail Possum assessment in areas 4.3.3 containing suitable habitat within the Development Envelope in Appendix 6A accordance with relevant EPA and Commonwealth guidance. 13 Conduct a targeted Black Cockatoo assessment in areas containing 4.3.3 suitable habitat within the Development Envelope in accordance with Appendix 6A and 6B relevant EPA and Commonwealth guidance. 14 Describe the terrestrial fauna including conservation significant and 4.3.3 migratory species that occur or likely to occur within the Development Envelope. 15 Conduct targeted surveys for any other significant species, communities or Appendix 6A habitats identified by the desktop study and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scott River Ironstone Association (Update)
    Interim Recovery Plan No. 339 Scott River Ironstone Association (update) Interim Recovery Plan 2015-2020 Department of Parks and Wildlife, Kensington April 2015 Foreword Interim Recovery Plans (IRPs) are developed within the framework laid down in Department of Parks and Wildlife Policy Statements Nos. 44 and 50 (CALM 1992; CALM 1994). The Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM) formally became the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) in July 2006 and the Department of Parks and Wildlife in July 2013 (the Department). Recovery plans outline the recovery actions that are required to urgently address those threatening processes most affecting the ongoing survival of threatened taxa or ecological communities, and begin the recovery process. The Department is committed to ensuring that threatened ecological communities are conserved through the preparation and implementation of recovery plans or interim recovery plans and by ensuring that conservation action commences as soon as possible after listing. This plan will operate from April 2015 but will remain in force until withdrawn or replaced. It is intended that, if the community is still listed after five years, the need for an updated plan will be evaluated. This plan was approved by the Director of Science and Conservation on 7 April 2015. The provision of funds identified in this plan is dependent on budgetary and other constraints affecting the Department, as well as the need to address other priorities. This plan replaces IRP no. 217 Scott River Ironstone Association 2004-2009 by R. Luu and V. English. Information in this plan was accurate at December 2014. Plan preparation: This reviewed and updated plan was prepared by Jill Pryde (Department of Parks and Wildlife).
    [Show full text]
  • Waterloo Urban and Industrial Expansion Flora and Fauna Survey
    Shire of Dardanup Waterloo Urban and Industrial Expansion Flora and Fauna Survey March 2015 Executive summary This report is subject to, and must be read in conjunction with, the limitations set out in Section 1.4 and the assumptions and qualifications contained throughout the Report. The Greater Bunbury Strategy and Structure Plan identified a potential significant urban expansion area located to the east of the Eaton locality and an industrial expansion area in Waterloo, in the Shire of Dardanup. The Shire of Dardanup (the Shire) and the Department of Planning have commenced preparation of District Structure Plans (DSP) for the urban expansion area and the industrial expansion area. The DSP will be informed by several technical studies including flora and fauna surveys. The Shire has commissioned GHD Pty Ltd (GHD) to undertake a flora and fauna survey and reporting for the Project. The Project Area is situated in the locality of Waterloo in the Shire of Dardanup. The Project Area includes the urban development area to the north of the South- west Highway (SWH) and the industrial development area to the south of the SWH. GHD undertook a desktop assessment of the Project Area and a flora and fauna field assessment with the first phase conducted from 13 to 14 August, 2014 and the second phase conducted from 29 to 31 October 2014. The purpose of this assessment was to identify the parts of the Project Area that have high, moderate and low ecological values so that the Shire can develop the DSP in consideration of these ecological values. This assessment identified the biological features of the Project Area and the key results are as follows.
    [Show full text]
  • Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey at the Yalyalup Proposed Mine Area
    APPENDIX 1: LEVEL 1FLORA AND VEGETATION SURVEY Report of a Level 1 Flora and Vegetation survey at the Yalyalup Proposed Mine Area Prepared for Doral Mineral Sands February 2016 PO Box 1180 Bunbury WA 6231 9721 1377 | [email protected] Ecoedge Review Version Origin Review release Issue date date approval V1 M. Strang R. Smith 16/02/2016 V2 R. Smith M. Strang 22/02/2016 V3 M. Strang R. Smith 25/02/2016 V4 R. Smith M. Strang 26/02/2016 Final C. Bovell M. Strang M. Strang 02/03/2016 draft (DMS) 2 | P a g e Executive Summary Ecoedge was engaged by Doral Mineral Sands in September 2015 to undertake a Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey of remnant vegetation within the proposed mining area at Yalyalup. The Project Area, which totalled 1,546 ha, contained about 78 ha of remnant native vegetation. The field assessment was carried out on 16th September and 13th and 14th October 2015 The field assessment was carried out on 16th September, 13th and 14th October 2015 and 18th February 2016 in accordance with the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Guidance Statement 51, “Terrestrial Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia” (EPA, 2004). All areas of remnant native vegetation within the Project Area were visited on foot or by vehicle and data on plant species composition and vegetation condition was collected at 105 sites. The survey resulted in the identification of one hundred and forty-nine taxa of vascular plants, of which 57 taxa (38%) were introduced species.
    [Show full text]
  • Australind Wastewater Treatment Plant
    Australind Wastewater Treatment Plant Flora, vegetation and fauna survey FINAL Prepared for Water Corporation by Strategen November 2018 Australind Wastewater Treatment Plant Flora, vegetation and fauna survey FINAL Strategen is a trading name of Strategen Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd Level 1, 50 Subiaco Square Road Subiaco WA 6008 ACN: 056 190 419 November 2018 Limitations Scope of services This report (“the report”) has been prepared by Strategen Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd (Strategen) in accordance with the scope of services set out in the contract, or as otherwise agreed, between the Client and Strategen. In some circumstances, a range of factors such as time, budget, access and/or site disturbance constraints may have limited the scope of services. This report is strictly limited to the matters stated in it and is not to be read as extending, by implication, to any other matter in connection with the matters addressed in it. Reliance on data In preparing the report, Strategen has relied upon data and other information provided by the Client and other individuals and organisations, most of which are referred to in the report (“the data”). Except as otherwise expressly stated in the report, Strategen has not verified the accuracy or completeness of the data. To the extent that the statements, opinions, facts, information, conclusions and/or recommendations in the report (“conclusions”) are based in whole or part on the data, those conclusions are contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of the data. Strategen has also not attempted to determine whether any material matter has been omitted from the data. Strategen will not be liable in relation to incorrect conclusions should any data, information or condition be incorrect or have been concealed, withheld, misrepresented or otherwise not fully disclosed to Strategen.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 14112 Abutilon Sp. Hamelin (A.M
    NameID Taxon Status Rank Criteria EPBC 14115 Abutilon sp. Cape Range (A.S. George 1312) 2 14112 Abutilon sp. Hamelin (A.M. Ashby 2196) 2 14110 Abutilon sp. Onslow (F. Smith s.n. 10/9/61) PN 1 43021 Abutilon sp. Pritzelianum (S. van Leeuwen 5095) PN 1 14114 Abutilon sp. Quobba (H. Demarz 3858) 2 14155 Abutilon sp. Warburton (A.S. George 8164) 1 14044 Acacia adinophylla 1 16110 Acacia alata var. platyptera 4 13074 Acacia alexandri 3 14046 Acacia ampliata 1 14047 Acacia amyctica 2 3210 Acacia anarthros 3 14048 Acacia ancistrophylla var. perarcuata 3 3219 Acacia anomala T VU C2a VU 13073 Acacia aphanoclada 1 3220 Acacia aphylla T VU C2a VU 14049 Acacia aprica T CR B1ab(iii,v)+2ab(iii,v) EN 14050 Acacia arcuatilis 2 3221 Acacia argutifolia 4 14051 Acacia aristulata T EN B1+2c; C2a EN 12248 Acacia ascendens 2 14052 Acacia asepala 2 14725 Acacia ataxiphylla subsp. ataxiphylla 3 14687 Acacia ataxiphylla subsp. magna T EN B1ab(iii,iv,v)+2ab(iii,iv,v); C2a(i); D EN 19507 Acacia atopa 3 14053 Acacia auratiflora T VU C2a(i) EN 3230 Acacia auricoma 3 14054 Acacia auripila 2 12249 Acacia awestoniana T CR C2a(ii) VU 31784 Acacia barrettiorum 2 41461 Acacia bartlei 3 3237 Acacia benthamii 2 14611 Acacia bifaria 3 3243 Acacia botrydion 4 13509 Acacia brachyphylla var. recurvata 3 12250 Acacia brachypoda T VU B1ab(ii,iii,v)+2ab(ii,iii,v) EN 29571 Acacia bromilowiana 4 11655 Acacia browniana var. glaucescens 2 31072 Acacia burrowsiana 3 12251 Acacia caesariata T VU D1 3250 Acacia calcicola 4 3252 Acacia campylophylla 3 16115 Acacia capillaris 2 14055 Acacia carens 2 14058 Acacia cerastes 1 14059 Acacia chapmanii subsp.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuytsia WESTERN AUSTRALIA's JOURNAL of SYSTEMATIC BOTANY ISSN 0085–4417
    Nuytsia WESTERN AUSTRALIA'S JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC BOTANY ISSN 0085–4417 Keighery, G.J. Six new and rare species of Darwinia (Myrtaceae) from Western Australia Nuytsia 19(1): 37–52 (2009) All enquiries and manuscripts should be directed to: The Managing Editor – NUYTSIA Western Australian Herbarium Telephone: +61 8 9334 0500 Dept of Environment and Conservation Facsimile: +61 8 9334 0515 Locked Bag 104 Bentley Delivery Centre Email: [email protected] Western Australia 6983 Web: science.dec.wa.gov.au/nuytsia AUSTRALIA All material in this journal is copyright and may not be reproduced except with the written permission of the publishers. © Copyright Department of Environment and Conservation G.J.Nuytsia Keighery, 19(1): 37–52Six new (2009) and rare species of Darwinia (Myrtaceae) 37 Six new and rare species of Darwinia (Myrtaceae) from Western Australia Greg J. Keighery Western Australian Wildlife Research Centre, Department of Environment and Conservation, PO Box 51, Wanneroo, Western Australia 6065 Abstract Keighery, G.J. Six new and rare species of Darwinia (Myrtaceae) from Western Australia. Nuytsia 19(1): 37–52 (2009). Darwinia chapmaniana Keighery, D. foetida Keighery, D. ferricola Keighery, D. nubigena Keighery, D. polychroma Keighery and D. whicherensis Keighery are newly described. All of these species are endemic in south-west Western Australia and are considered endangered under the Western Australian Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. Introduction Darwinia Rudge (Myrtaceae) is an endemic Australian genus of c. 70 species. It is part of a closely related group of genera (Actinodium Schauer, Chamelaucium Desf., Darwinia, Verticordia DC. and Pileanthus Labill.) which have diversified in southern Western Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Lot 1 South West Highway Proposal for Sand Extraction
    SJ Roadworks Sand Extraction Project Annex 7 Supporting Document May 2015 Table of contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Project description ........................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Project location ................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Project background ......................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Assumptions and limitations ............................................................................................ 3 2. Proposed clearing action and impact assessment details........................................................... 0 2.1 Proposed clearing action ................................................................................................. 0 2.2 Surveys reports and methodologies, of the matter/s of NES prescribed through the EPBC Act controlled action decision .......................................................................... 0 2.3 The likely relevant impacts of the action on matters of NES prescribed through the EPBC Act controlled action ........................................................................................ 1 2.4 Feasible alternatives to the proposed action .................................................................... 1 2.5 Description and cost
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Advice on 15/07/2016
    THREATENED SPECIES SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Established under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 The Minister’s delegate approved this Conservation Advice on 15/07/2016. Conservation Advice Darwinia whicherensis Abba bell Conservation Status Darwinia whicherensis (Abba bell) is listed as Endangered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwlth) (EPBC Act) effective from the 16 July 2000. The species was eligible for listing under the EPBC Act at that time as, immediately prior to the commencement of the EPBC Act, it was listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of the Endangered Species Protection Act 1992 (Cwlth). Abba bell is listed as Critically Endangered under Western Australia’s Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. The main factors that are the cause of the species being eligible for listing in the Endangered category are that the species is known from a single wild population comprising a very low number of mature individuals, and the very restricted area of occupancy of the species. Description Abba bell is an erect or sometimes spreading shrub, up to 70 cm tall x 40 cm wide. The leaves are linear, 3 - 5 mm long, triangular in cross-section, crowded at the end of branches, and bent backwards (Keighery 2009).This feature of the leaves distinguishes the species from the similar species Darwinia oederoides. The flowers are enclosed by red and green bracts that are arranged in several rows. The ribbed floral tube is brown, 3 mm long, with small triangular lobes. The petals are about 1 mm long, and there is a red, 10 - 16 mm long curved style.
    [Show full text]
  • Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey – Collie-Lake King Road Between SLK 64.5 – 71, Bowelling Curves
    Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey – Collie-Lake King Road between SLK 64.5 – 71, Bowelling Curves Prepared for Main Roads WA Revised 13 November 2014 Ecoedge Environmental Pty Ltd t: 08 97211377 PO Box 1180 Bunbury, 6231 Western Australia [email protected] ABN: 89 136 929 989 Ecoedge Review Version Origin Review release Issue date date approval v6 TB MS, RS 11/11/2014 v7 RS MS 12/11/2014 V8 RS MS 13/11/2014 Final draft RS, MS 13/11/2014 MS (released 13/11/2014 MS to MRWA) Final 2 | P a g e Executive Summary Ecoedge was engaged by Main Roads in August 2014 to undertake a Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey of remnant vegetation along the Collie-Lake King Road (Coalfields Road) - Bowelling curves SLK 64.5-71.0, in the Shire of West Arthur. Main Roads WA is conducting investigations for the future widening and re-alignment of Collie-Lake King Road. The initial survey of northern and southern alignment options was undertaken in September, 2014. A revised and expanded survey area of the southern alignment option was assessed in late October 2014 for two reasons. Firstly, a population of Leucopogon subsejunctus (Priority 2) had been found within the initial survey area and it was hoped to identify the extent of the species so as to assess and minimise the impact if removal of some specimens could not be avoided. In the interests of clarity, the initial survey area (37.3 ha) will be referred to as Area “A” and the expanded survey area (58.4 ha), which encompassed the southern alignment of the initial survey area, will be referred to as Area “B”.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Flora and Vegetation Survey Report (Ecoedge, 2020A)
    EPBC 2020/8800 - Bussell Highway Duplication Stage 2 Proposal – January 2021 Appendix C: Flora and Vegetation Survey Report (Ecoedge, 2020a) Document No: D21#37247 Page 66 of 70 Detailed and Targeted Flora and Vegetation Survey along Bussell Highway, Hutton Road to Sabina River (32.10 – 43.92 SLK) Updated 2020 Prepared for Main Roads WA December 2020 PO Box 9179, Picton WA 6229 0484 771 825|[email protected] 1 | Page Review Release Version Origin Review Issue date date approval V1 C. Spencer R. Smith 8/02/2019 V2 R. Smith C. Spencer 27/02/2019 Final D. Brace 1/3/2019 Ecoedge 13/3/2019 Draft Final MRWA Updated 2020 R. Smith & Draft Va D. Brace 18/11/2020 Ecoedge 5/12/2020 C. Spencer Final C. Spencer D. Brace 18/12/2020 Ecoedge 20/12/2020 Draft Va Final Va Main Roads Ecoedge 22/12/2020 Ecoedge 22/12/2020 2 | Page Final Va Executive Summary Ecoedge was engaged by Main Roads Western Australia initially in 2013 to undertake a flora and vegetation survey along Bussell Highway between Hutton Road to the Sabina River (32.10-43.92 SLK). Since then, additional surveys have been undertaken in 2014, 2016, 2018 and 2020. The results of all these surveys have been compiled into this one report. The 2013 survey was a reconnaissance and targeted survey across an approximately 72.4 ha survey area. The 2016 survey was a targeted survey for the priority 3 listed Verticordia attenuata. The 2018 survey was a detailed, reconnaissance and targeted survey. The detailed component sought to assign Gibson et al., (1994) floristic community types to the 2013 vegetation units and thereby determine their formal TEC/PEC conservation status.
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Commercial Harvesting of Protected Flora in Western Australia 1 July 2013 – 30 June 2018 ______
    Management of Commercial Harvesting of Protected Flora in Western Australia 1 July 2013 – 30 June 2018 __________________________________________________________________ For submission under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 June 2013 Department of Environment and Conservation Published by the Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation June 2013. Department of Environment and Conservation 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1.2 SCOPE OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN 1.3 REASON FOR WILDLIFE HARVEST 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY OF TARGET SPECIES 2.2 CONSERVATION STATUS OF TARGET SPECIES 2.3 LEGISLATIVE BASIS FOR MANAGEMENT 2.3.1 Western Australian State Legislation 2.3.2 Federal Legislation 3 THREATS AND ISSUES 3.1 DIEBACK DISEASE CAUSED BY PHYTOPHTHORA SPECIES 3.1.1 Disease Management 3.1.2 Control Of Access 3.1.3 Phytosanitary Measures 3.1.4 Coordination of Phytophthora Dieback Management and Research 3.2 AERIAL CANKER 3.3 FIRE 3.4 LAND CLEARING 3.5 MINING 3.6 SALINITY 3.7 WEEDS 3.8 MYRTLE RUST 4 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THIS MANAGEMENT PLAN 5 MANAGEMENT 5.1 MANAGEMENT MEASURES 5.1.1 Licences 5.1.1.1 Crown land 5.1.1.2 Private land 5.1.2 Endorsements 5.1.2.1 Endorsements on Crown land managed by DEC 5.1.2.2 Endorsements on other vested Crown lands or reserves 5.1.2.3 Endorsements on unallocated Crown land and unmanaged reserves 5.1.2.4 Taxon-specific endorsements 5.1.2.5 Quotas 5.1.3 Conservation Reserves 5.1.4 Declared Rare
    [Show full text]
  • Species List
    SWAFR - Hopper & Gioia (2004) - All Vascular Plant Taxa Paul Gioia, Science and Conservation Division, Department of Parks and Wildlife Report generated on 22/06/2016 11:17:17 AM This analysis uses the SWAFR boundary generated from a site classification analysis by Hopper & Gioia (2004). Data for this report were derived from a snapshot taken from WAHERB on 18/05/2015 for Gioia & Hopper (2016) paper. Criteria for data extraction and analysis were: 1. All vascular plants 2. Species-rank names where the typical subspecies also existed were renamed to the typical subspecies to avoid counting duplicate taxa 3. All vascular plant taxa with current names, including weeds Note: 1. This report contains information generated from intersecting the supplied polygon layer LOCAL_SWFHG04 with the point species occurrence layer WAHERB_FILT_ALL. 2. Endemism is calculated based on the records available to this analysis and is not necessarily authoritative. Regions reported on: Region Name Hectares SWAFR - Hopper & Gioia (2004) 29,954,654.4 1 2 3 1 2 3 NameID Species Cons End WA NameID Species Cons End WA 39 14049 Acacia aprica T Y Y SWAFR - Hopper & Gioia (2004) 40 37260 Acacia aptaneura 1 4889 Abutilon cryptopetalum 41 14050 Acacia arcuatilis P2 Y Y 2 19708 *Abutilon grandifolium Y 42 3221 Acacia argutifolia P4 Y 3 4902 Abutilon oxycarpum 43 14051 Acacia aristulata T Y Y 4 43020 Abutilon oxycarpum subsp. Prostrate (A.A. Y 44 12248 Acacia ascendens P2 Y Mitchell PRP 1266) 45 14052 Acacia asepala P2 Y 5 4903 *Abutilon theophrasti Y 46 3225 Acacia ashbyae 6 16106 Acacia acanthaster Y 47 15467 Acacia assimilis subsp.
    [Show full text]