Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project Goulburn Murray Water Connections Project

Environmental Report

R01 | Final 16b 18 December 2017

Envir onmental Report Goulburn Murray Water C onnecti ons Project

Environmental Report

Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project

Project no: IS182561 Document title: Environmental Report Document No.: R01 Revision: Final V16b Date: 14 November 2017 Client name: Goulburn Murray Water Connections Project Client no: Client Reference Project manager: Dustin Lavery Author: Simon Treadwell, Sarah Heard, Rhonda Butcher File name: R01_TRLBP_Environmental Report_Final V16b.docx

Jacobs Australia Pty Limited

80A Mitchell St PO Box 952 Bendigo VIC 3552 Australia T +61 3 5444 1861 F +61 3 5444 1862 www.jacobs.com

© Copyright 2017 Jacobs Australia Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.

Limitation: This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ Client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any third party.

Document history and status

Revision Date Description By Review Approved

V1 28/04/2016 Draft Chapter 1 and 2 to GMW Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V5 16/05/2017 Draft report to GMW Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V6 17/05/2017 Draft report to consultative committee Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V8 19/06/2017 Draft Chapter 1,2 and 3 to GMW Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V9 21/06/2017 Draft report to GMW Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V10 23/06/2017 Draft to DELWP/ DEE Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V12 31/07/2017 Draft to GMW Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V13 1/08/2017 Draft to DELWP Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V14 10/08/2017 Draft to DELWP/ DEE Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V15 27/10/2017 Draft to DELWP Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery Dustin Lavery

V16 14/11/2017 Draft report for public consultation Sarah Heard Simon Treadwell Dustin Lavery

V16b 20/12/2017 Minor edits Pat Feehan

V16b 8/2/2018 Final Pat Feehan

R01 i Environmental Report

Contents Executive Summary ...... 5 Introduction ...... 5 Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project ...... 5 Project objectives and activities ...... 6 Approvals process ...... 7 Project environment ...... 8 Assessment criteria and impact assessment ...... 8 Evaluation of impacts and benefits ...... 8 Specific impacts and benefits on MNES...... 9 Specific impacts and benefits on other significant environmental values ...... 10 Proposed mitigation and management actions ...... 10 Operational management ...... 10 Construction management...... 13 Summary ...... 13 1. Introduction ...... 17 1.1 Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project (TRLBP) ...... 17 1.1.1 Project objectives ...... 18 1.2 Project proponent ...... 18 1.2.1 Environmental Policy ...... 18 1.2.2 GMW Connections Project Approval and Construction Environmental Management Framework .. 18 1.2.3 Victorian State Government referral – Environment Effects Act 1978 ...... 19 1.2.4 Commonwealth Government referral - Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ...... 20 1.2.5 Bilateral agreement ...... 21 1.2.6 Proceedings under Commonwealth or State law ...... 21 1.3 Consultation process ...... 21 1.4 Purpose of the Environmental Report (this report) ...... 22 2. Project description ...... 23 2.1 Kerang Lakes Bypass Project ...... 23 2.1.1 Options analysis ...... 25 2.2 Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project ...... 26 2.2.1 Project location ...... 26 2.2.2 Current operation ...... 31 2.2.3 Options Assessment ...... 33 2.2.4 Developing the preferred water regime ...... 34 2.2.5 Description of construction and operation ...... 39 3. Project environment ...... 44 3.1 Surrounding wetlands ...... 44 3.2 Proposed area of impact ...... 54 3.2.1 Surrounding land use ...... 54

R01 ii Environmental Report

3.2.2 Habitat ...... 54 3.2.3 Matters of National Environmental Significance ...... 56 3.2.4 EVCs and Plants ...... 57 3.2.5 Animals ...... 60 3.2.5.1 Birds...... 60 3.2.5.2 Fish, frogs and turtles ...... 61 3.2.6 Summary ...... 63 3.3 Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site ...... 63 3.3.1 Listing criteria ...... 63 3.3.2 Ecological character of Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site ...... 66 4. Impacts assessment ...... 68 4.1 Short term impacts (construction phase) ...... 70 4.2 Medium term impacts (establishment phase) ...... 80 4.2.1 Overall impacts ...... 80 4.2.2 Assessment of proposed water regime effectiveness ...... 81 4.2.3 Feasibility of vegetation recovery ...... 84 4.3 Long term impacts (operational phase) ...... 85 4.3.1 Impacts on ecological communities, habitats and process ...... 85 4.3.2 Impacts on threatened species ...... 89 4.3.2.1 Birds...... 89 4.3.2.2 Fish, frogs and turtles ...... 92 4.3.2.3 Plants ...... 96 4.3.3 Threats to achieving objectives ...... 97 4.3.4 Risks to Ramsar ecological character ...... 101 4.3.4.1 Assessment against Ramsar listing criteria ...... 102 4.3.4.2 Assessment against Limits of Acceptable Change ...... 102 4.4 Risk mitigation and contingency measures ...... 104 4.4.1 Salinity ...... 104 4.4.2 Acid sulfate soil ...... 105 5. Environmental Management Plan ...... 110 5.1 Management objectives...... 110 5.2 Environmental Watering Plan ...... 111 5.2.1 Management actions ...... 112 5.2.2 Adaptive management and contingency actions ...... 113 5.2.3 Monitoring ...... 113 5.3 Construction Environmental Management Plan ...... 116 5.4 Offset requirements ...... 118 5.4.1 Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation ...... 118 5.4.2 EPBC Act 1999 Offsets ...... 121 5.5 Governance ...... 122 6. Other considerations ...... 123

R01 iii Environmental Report

6.1 Social and economic impacts and benefits ...... 123 6.2 Flood impacts ...... 123 6.3 Other approvals and conditions ...... 124 6.4 Stakeholder and public consultation ...... 124 6.4.1 Investigation phase ...... 125 6.4.2 Indigenous consultation ...... 126 6.4.3 Future engagement ...... 127 7. Synthesis / overall outcome ...... 128 7.1 Impacts on MNES ...... 128 7.2 Impacts on other significant environmental values ...... 128 7.3 Cumulative impacts and benefits ...... 129 7.4 Summary ...... 130 8. References ...... 131

Appendix A. TRLBP investigations and studies undertaken to date Appendix B. GMW Environmental Policy Appendix C. Review committee membership Appendix D. Third Reedy Lake Mapping Appendix E. Conceptual cross section of Third Reedy Lake Appendix F. Standard design drawings Appendix G. Threatened plants and animals present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake Appendix H. Construction mitigation actions

R01 iv Environmental Report

Executive Summary

Introduction The objective of this Environmental Report is to address the conditions specified in the Victorian Minister for Planning’s decision under the Environment Effects Act 1978 and the Department of Environment and Energy’s decision that the Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project (TRLBP) is a controlled action under section 75 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. Preparation of an Environmental Report is part of the assessment process and the content of this report is consistent with the Bilateral Agreement scope provided to GMW by DELWP (References: 2016R03 & EPBC 2016/7760).

Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project

The Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project (TRLBP) will reinstate a more natural watering regime to Third Reedy Lake (part of the Kerang Lakes Ramsar complex of wetlands). The project will generate environmental benefits and reduce current water losses. The water regime will change from permanently full to three to four year wetting and drying cycles. This will be achieved by constructing a channel (1.4 km) and associated infrastructure to disconnect the lake from the Torrumbarry Irrigation System and provide a planned environmental watering regime for the lake. Water savings of approximately 1600 ML/year will be generated.

As part of the Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) Connections Project, the Kerang Lakes Bypass Project (KLBP) was one of the ‘Special Projects’ identified in the Stage 2 Business Case. The project proposed to remove a number of Kerang Lakes from the Torrumbarry Irrigation System (TIS) to achieve water savings and develop a more natural, variable water regime that will enhance the environmental values of the Ramsar listed Kerang Wetlands (North Central CMA, 2014).

The KLBP Business Case recommended that Third Reedy Lake be bypassed; however, the remaining lakes in the investigation did not meet the Business Case criteria and therefore were not recommended to be further investigated. The project is therefore now referred to as the Third Reedy Lake Bypass project (TRLBP). The KLBP Business Case was submitted to the Commonwealth and State Governments. In May 2015, the GMW Connections Project was advised by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP), acting on advice from the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Energy (DEE), that:

 The KLBP satisfies the due diligence criteria for State Priority projects. The draft due diligence report recommends the project proceed to seek approvals under Commonwealth and State Government environmental legislation.

 It is expected that identified knowledge gaps and risks associated with the proposed changes will be addressed as part of the environmental approval process (these relate mainly to the potential for emergence of acid sulfate soils and saline groundwater intrusion).

 If the outcomes of the approvals process do not have a material impact on the scope of the project, DELWP and DEE have agreed that the project will proceed.

Third Reedy Lake is a 250 hectare wetland, located approximately ten kilometres north-west of Kerang. The area occupied by the lake is 234 ha and the remaining 16 ha includes fringing public land, not all of which is vegetated. The wetland forms part of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site which was designated under the Convention of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention) as a Wetland of International Importance (Ramsar wetland) in 1982 (North Central CMA, 2014). The Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site covers 9,419 ha and is made up of 23 distinct wetlands. The inclusion of Third Reedy Lake into the TIS in the 1920s has altered its natural water regime which under natural conditions would have been intermittent, receiving water irregularly during flood events in the cooler

R01 5 Environmental Report

winter months of wet years. Under current regulated conditions, the lake is maintained as a permanent wetland, receiving good quality fresh water inflows from Middle Reedy Lake to the south. The lake provides water to Little Lake Charm via the Torrumbarry No. 7 channel and irrigation areas in the north via the Torrumbarry No. 1/7 channel (North Central CMA, 2014).

Project objectives and activities

The overarching objectives of the TRLBP are to: 1) Enhance the environment of Third Reedy Lake and its contribution to the associated Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site through delivery of a more natural water regime 2) Provide for water savings through reduction in current water losses in the TIS. This will be achieved by constructing a bypass channel (1.4 km) and associated infrastructure to disconnect the lake from the irrigation system and provide a planned environmental watering regime for the lake aimed at enhancing environmental values. GMW customers who currently extract water directly from the lake will be reconnected to the adjacent irrigation system. The construction component of the TRLBP is considered minor compared to the planned environmental watering regime as it includes standard channel and pipeline works within predominantly previously disturbed land, whereas operations includes changing the water regime of Third Reedy Lake. The change in water regime associated with TRLBP has the potential to impact on existing ecological values in lake, but also represents significant opportunity to enhance the environmental values in the lake and in this regard the environmental benefits exceed the potential impacts. Under the proposed TRLBP, Third Reedy Lake will be disconnected from the TIS and a water regime will be provided to the lake that “restores Third Reedy Lake to a deep freshwater marsh wetland type (dominated by Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC 813)) able to support recruitment of River Red Gums and promoting a diverse and extensive range of habitat suitable for a variety of waterbirds” (North Central CMA, 2014). The proposed water regime will include 3 phases:  Establishment phase;  Long term operational phase; and  Optional intermediate rise (partial filling)

The establishment phase provides a wetting and drying regime to promote River Red Gum establishment across Third Reedy Lake by allowing for seed release, seed strike and establishment of seedlings. This establishment phase will include a series of low level fills and will require adaptive management depending on the response from River Red Gum recruitment.

After an initial establishment phase, Third Reedy Lake will be filled once in every four years to 74.00 mAHD with every third fill (i.e. once every 12 years) to 74.56 mAHD (equivalent to current full supply level). The wetland will be maintained at 74.56 mAHD for a 31day period to maintain Black Box and recruit River Red Gums. An option for an intermediate partial filling to about 73.2 mAHD with a duration of 31 days has been included in the third year of each cycle for ecological purposes (e.g. maintain permanent habitat for frogs and turtles) or for contingency purposes (e.g. salt, blackwater and acid sulfate soil flushing/ dilution events required) if deemed necessary based on monitoring outcomes. This preferred water regime will change Third Reedy Lake from a permanent freshwater lake with little water level fluctuations to something more closely resembling its natural wetting and drying cycle. The preferred water regime provides a water regime that is intermittent, allowing the lake to dry out in accordance with an Environmental Watering Plan to be developed when the TRLBP is fully approved (GMW, 2016a). Figure E1 illustrates the modelled water level in the lake associated with the preferred regime (including the intermediate partial filling to 73.2 mAHD in the third year of every cycle) and the % of lake bed area inundated with the water levels.

R01 6 Environmental Report

Figure E1: Modelled water level under preferred regime (including intermediate rise) from Gippel, C. J (2015)

Approvals process

GMW referred the TRLBP to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) under the EE Act 1978 on 27 June 2016. On 31 August 2016, the Minister for Planning (the Minister) decided that an Environment Effects Statement (EES) is not required for the TRLBP, subject to conditions including preparation of an Environmental Report to be prepared in consultation with a Consultative Committee and opportunities for public comment. GMW also referred the TRLBP to the Department of Environment and Energy (DEE) on 25 August 2016. On 21 October 2016, GMW received advice from DEE that the TRLBP is a controlled action under the EPBC Act 1999, as it was assessed as likely to have a significant impact on Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES).

Assessment of the project under the EPBC Act 1999 is to be via the accredited Environmental Report process under the EE Act 1978, as set out in Schedule 1 (part 5) of the Bilateral (Assessment) Agreement between the Commonwealth and the State of Victoria under section 45 of the EPBC Act 1999 (the Bilateral Agreement).

The Environmental Report must be consistent with conditions under the EE Act 1978 that sufficiently describes the project and assesses the likely relevant impacts and benefits, as well as describe any feasible alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce relevant impacts. The Environmental Report will also need to address specific requirements of the Bilateral Agreement under the EPBC Act 1999, including matters technically beyond those formally required under the conditions set under the EE Act 1978.

At the conclusion of the accredited process, the Minister for Planning will provide an “Assessment Report” to the Australian Government Minister for Environment and Energy, which will inform the Minister’s decision on whether the project is approved, refused or approved with conditions under the EPBC Act 1999.

R01 7 Environmental Report

Project environment

Assessment of the connection between Third Reedy Lake and the surrounding wetlands in the landscape determined that whilst a number of wetlands are connected to Third Reedy Lake, their connection to the broader Ramsar site and wetland system will be retained via the Third Reedy Lake bypass channel and therefore the only hydrological change in the connected system will occur at Third Reedy Lake. There are some potential water quality related impacts on downstream wetlands (e.g. Little Lake Charm (and Scotts Creek), Lake Charm, Racecourse Lake and Kangaroo Lake) during flushing events at Third Reedy Lake due to their connection with Third Reedy Lake, however, water will only be operationally released to these lakes when water quality (EC) within Third Reedy Lake is within an acceptable range according to a detailed operational management plan. Therefore, the proposed area of impact associated with TRLBP is defined as Third Reedy Lake (including the fringing wetland and riparian vegetation) and the proposed bypass channel and its associated construction footprint.

A total of 23 species of conservation significance1 were identified as being present or likely to be present at Third Reedy Lake, based on habitat suitability, and for which detailed impact and benefit assessment should be undertaken. These species included nine birds, six fish, one reptile and seven plants. There are other species of conservation significance within the broader Kerang Wetlands site, but detailed assessment of those species was not required because they have not been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, and the lake does not provide suitable habitat for those species.

Assessment criteria and impact assessment

The Bilateral Agreement requires a review and description of all the foreseeable environmental effects, including environmental benefits, of the project addressing matters related to the Ramsar characteristics of Third Reedy Lake and impacts on threatened flora and fauna. The assessment has been broken into 3 timeframes associated with construction and operation of the TRLBP: 1) Short term – impacts and benefits associated with the construction of the TRLBP infrastructure 2) Medium term – impacts and benefits associated with the establishment phase of the proposed water regime 3) Long term – impacts and benefits associated with the long term operation of the proposed water regime

The assessment has also been tailored to show impacts and benefits to: 1) Those 23 plant and animal species identified as being present or likely to be present at Third Reedy Lake. 2) The ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and the contribution Third Reedy Lake makes to that character. 3) Critical Components, Processes and Services that could benefit or be impacted upon by the proposed change in water regime. Furthermore, within the operations phase, the risk to benefits is assessed based on the likelihood of successful implementation of the new hydrological regime and success of establishment of the target vegetation communities (termed the establishment phase). In this context, there are a) risks to the successful establishment of the target vegetation and b) risks to predicted long term benefits if the target vegetation cannot be established.

Evaluation of impacts and benefits

The potential short term impacts associated with the construction phase of TRLBP are related to damage to plants and animals that occur within the construction footprint of the proposed bypass channel, new regulating structures and associated areas required for construction access etc. Whilst the construction phase of the TRLBP will include native vegetation removal (and offsets), this removal will not impact any Matters of National Environmental Significance or other regional or local threatened species and will not result in a negative change

1 Defined within the Bilateral Agreement as any “…native flora and fauna species listed in any “threatened” category or part of any listed “threated” community under relevant legislation (at the local, regional, state, national and international scale) or in relevant DELWP advisory lists”.

R01 8 Environmental Report

in ecological character that impacts on the contribution of Third Reedy Lake to the overall character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site.

There is a high degree of confidence that if the target Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC is restored the overall condition of Third Reedy Lake will improve in terms of increased diversity of wetland plants, increased habitat complexity and increased opportunities for feeding and breeding for a range of waterbirds, albeit perhaps different from those that currently frequent the lake.

There is some uncertainty about the exact vegetation composition that will establish and the time it will take for establishment. It could take many years for the target Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC to establish. Monitoring and careful water regime manipulation will be required to ensure seedling growth will not be impacted by unintended inundation. Weed management and active revegetation may also be required to assist with successful vegetation recovery.

In the medium to long term (establishment and operation phase), individual species present at the current wetland that could be impacted by the altered hydrological regime are native fish, Murray River turtle and some waterbirds that prefer permanently inundated conditions. However, none of these species are likely to be impacted at a broader landscape scale and overall risks are considered low. Furthermore, actions are identified to avoid and minimise impacts, such as provision of fish passage, manipulation of the water regime to encourage fish to leave the drying lake and provision of intermediate filling if monitoring indicates this is necessary.

Third Reedy Lake in its current condition does not make a critical contribution to any of the criteria under which the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site qualifies for Ramsar listing. The proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake are not considered likely to impact on any listing criteria. Several of the Critical Components Process and Services (CPS) for the lake will be permanently altered as a result of changes in hydrology, and potential salinity that exceed the current Limits of Acceptable Change (LACs). This will constitute a change in character of the Third Reedy Lake, but not the overall character of the Ramsar site. The proposed changes are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lake makes to the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar site character.

At a broader landscape scale, the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake will result in significant water savings, some of which will become available for environmental use. This water will be managed by the Commonwealth and Victorian Environmental Water Holder and will be used to implement the proposed water regime for Third Reedy Lake, but can also be available as environmental water for other wetlands. In this context, the benefits gained as a result of the TRLBP extend beyond Third Reedy Lake itself to other wetlands in the Kerang Lakes system and elsewhere. This water can be used in a strategic way to provide drought refuge across the landscape and compensate for any climate change impacts that may occur in the future.

In addition to the specific impacts and benefits, there are a number of threats to achieving the project objectives, namely from weeds impacting on ability to successfully establish the target EVC and increased salinity and acid sulfate soils. There is some uncertainty about how these threats would manifest, but there is high confidence in the ability to manage these threats through a management framework that includes adaptive management and contingency measures to address the identified risks.

Specific impacts and benefits on MNES

There are five MNES that are present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake and therefore may be impacted by the TRLBP including four EPBC Act 1999 listed species (Silver Perch, Murray Hardyhead, Murray Cod, Chariot Wheels) and the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site.

Impact assessment has demonstrated that the impact to the four EPBC Act 1999 listed species is all considered very low due to the absence of records in recent surveys (Silver Perch and Murray Hardyhead) and some populations being stocked (Murray Cod). The only known location of Chariot Wheels is 5 km south of Third Reedy Lake (near First Reedy Lake) and therefore the impact to Chariot Wheels is also considered very low, specifically:

R01 9 Environmental Report

 Silver Perch has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 1981, however they have been recorded more recently in the flowing channels connecting lakes throughout the region. They are a riverine species that prefer flowing waters, so their presence in the lakes is likely to be a consequence of their movement through the connected system and it is considered that the lakes do not provide core habitat for this species. If Silver Perch are moving through the current system of lakes and channels, they will still be able to move between hydrologically connected lakes and wetlands upstream and downstream of Third Reedy Lake via the new bypass channel, even when Third Reedy Lake itself is isolated from the current system. On this basis, the bypassing of Third Reedy Lake will not interrupt regional scale fish movement. This connection will not be interrupted, so the overall risk to Silver Perch is considered very low.  Murray Hardyhead has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake, although a single individual has been recorded in Middle Reedy Lake in 2013 and there are known populations in other lakes in the region. However, repeated targeted surveys have not detected Murray hardyhead in Third Reedy Lake and it is considered that the lack of aquatic plants and the relatively low salinity levels in Middle and Third Reedy Lakes (compared to locations where Murray hardyhead flourish) mean Third Reedy Lake in its current form does not provide suitable long term habitat for the species.  Murray Cod has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 2006. Murray Cod is stocked in neighbouring First Reedy Lake and records from Third Reedy Lake are likely to be of stocked individuals. The lake in its current condition does not provide ideal breeding habitat for Murray Cod, which prefer flowing water for breeding, although individuals will survive in impoundments. Overall the lakes are considered to not provide core habitat for this species. Murray Cod are a mobile species and individuals that are present in the lake may be encouraged to move out of the lake during initial drawdown (i.e. when the inlet regulator is still open). The bypass system will continue to allow fish to move through system of connected lakes and wetlands. Overall risk to native (not-stocked) populations is considered very low  Chariot wheels have not been recorded at third Reedy Lake, the nearest known individual is located 5 km south of Third Reedy Lake (near First Reedy Lake) and therefore the impact to Chariot Wheels is also considered very low.

The proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lakes makes to the Kerang Lakes Ramsar character.

There is no significant impact on MNES present or potentially present in the project environment and therefore offsets are not required to help compensate for residual impacts on the MNES as part of the TRLBP.

Specific impacts and benefits on other significant environmental values

There are a number of site and local significant species which include species listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee (FFG) Act 1988 that are present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake The impact to all significant species, except for the Murray River Turtle was considered low to very low, in fact for many of these species there will be moderate benefit as changed water regime will provide increase in habitat.

The impact to the Murray River Turtle was assessed as moderate. They prefer permanent inundation; hence the lake may not provide preferred habitat. However, they are likely to move between nearby habitats during wet and dry phases, and are present in large numbers at nearby wetlands (e.g. Middle Reedy, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake), therefore the risk is moderate at the site scale but low risk at the landscape scale.

Proposed mitigation and management actions

Operational management Operational management of Third Reedy Lake and its water regime (including establishment and long term operational phases) will be guided by the preparation of an Environmental Watering Plan (EWP) developed by GMW. Development of the EWP will occur once the TRLBP has been fully approved.

R01 10 Environmental Report

The EWP will outline the operational management of Third Reedy Lake and its water regime, including establishment and on-going operation phases, and will build on the work completed by North Central CMA (2014). The EWP will include management objectives and water regime requirements for the lake, mitigation actions, including adaptive management and contingency actions, to manage the risks associated with TRLBP, operational requirements for delivery of environmental water, procedures for environmental monitoring (long term and intervention), auditing and reporting and roles and responsibilities for the operation and management of the lake.

A number of risks associated with the operation of the proposed water regime were identified. Mitigation actions including adaptive management and contingency actions can overcome or substantially reduce these risks. Table E1 summarises the key risks and mitigation measure for managing those risks. The effectiveness of mitigation measures is provided in more detail in the report.

Table E1: Key risks and mitigation actions to minimise risks

Value /threat Risk Mitigation action Modified Rating risk

Ecological communities

Failure to High  Include management actions in EWP to that maximise the likelihood of regeneration of High successfully Impact the target EVC. benefit establish  Mature surrounding River Red Gums and other Indicator Species to offer seed source target (Target EVC is already present in the location). Intermittent  Implement an establishment phase water regime of initial filling to 74.2-74.56 mAHD Swampy followed by a series of intermediate filling to a depth of Woodland 0.3 to 0.5 m to encourage River Red Gum germination and growth. (EVC 813)  Monitor the establishment of species as part of adaptive management process, ensuring filling is timed to not drown seedlings before they can cope with inundation.  Undertake weed control where needed to increase EVC 813 establishment.  Active planting (e.g. plugging) and manual dispersal of seed if monitoring indicates regeneration is not occurring as predicted.  Control of public access and stock to minimise erosion and degradation of dry bed areas.

Fish Moderate  Included management actions in EWP that maximise the likelihood of fish being able to Very low impact leave Third Reedy Lake during the drawdown phase and to allow for opportunistic impact colonisation during the filling phase.  Manage the transition from filling to drawdown to provide flow related cues that encourage fish that have entered the wetland to exit the wetland before it becomes isolated from the connected supply system.  Monitor drawdown and undertake translocation if required for key species stranded or captured in carp screen (i.e. Murray hardyhead).  Promote fish passage through the Reedy Lakes/Loddon River/Pyramid Creek in order to ensure community is connected at a landscape scale.  Fish passage (vertical slot fishway) will be provided on the bypass channel regulator, allowing fish movement between Middle Reedy Lake to the south and Little Lake Charm, Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake to the north west.  Salvage dead fish if necessary (e.g. carp) to reduce odour.

Waterbirds

Impacts on Moderate  If significant waterbird breeding occurs during a wet phase, through a contingency Moderate waterbird Impact management approach extend the duration of the wet phase to allow bird breeding and benefit breeding fledging to be completed should be considered. This would need to take into account success water availability, and the significance of any breeding event, including whether an event was significant at the broader landscape scale.

R01 11 Environmental Report

Value /threat Risk Mitigation action Modified Rating risk  Proposed water regime will encourage greater diversity of habitat to support future breeding events.  Consider managing external threats if predation of nests is a problem.

Turtles

Murray River Moderate  Turtle species particularly Common Long-necked Turtle are likely to move to nearby Low Turtle Impact wetland/Lake (e.g. First and Middle Reedy Lakes) if drying phase is introduced (Howard impact et al. 2013). Ensure appropriate management action to assist movement, particularly during drawdown phase.  For Murray River Turtle movement is less well understood and may require translocation if turtles become trapped during the initial dry phase.  Monitor and consider benefits of implementing the partial filling to maintain conditions for turtle or implement translocation for stranded individuals if required.  Avoid complete drying in winter, when turtles are hibernating – it gets too cold and adults may die.  Drying in summer / autumn represents a lower risk because individuals are more likely to move to nearby inundated habitats at this time.  Consider managing external threats including fox predation of egg in order to maximise breeding success during wet phases.

Threats

Depleted Moderate  Monitor organic matter accumulation on the dry lake bed. Low Impact Impact dissolved  If excessive growth of non-native, terrestrial weeds on the bed of the lake is occurring oxygen and contributing to organic matter build up consider weed control and removal of impacts on excessive organic material to reduce organic matter accumulation. aquatic biota  Monitor DO during filling. If DO falls rapidly and remains low (< 4mg/L) across the during filling majority of the lake, consider maintaining a flow through the lake for a period of time phase until DO increases above critical level. (blackwater)  Avoid filling of the lake during warm weather in order to avoid warm water temperatures which increases rates of organic matter decomposition and also reduces the amount of oxygen that can be dissolved in the water (% saturation).

Increased High  Include monitoring, adaptive management and contingency procedures for wetland Low salinity due to Impact operations in the EWP. Impact saline  Monitor wetland salinity during drawdown. If wetland salinity increases above critical groundwater thresholds for the target EVC (~4,500 µS/cm) then implement contingency actions to discharge to increase the flow of fresher water into the wetland to provide a flushing flow. Flushing to the lake about 73.0 mAHD is possible and very achievable at 74.0 (Lake is full at 74.56mAHD, during the empty at 72.9 mAHD). The volumes required to support flushing have not yet been drying phase determined and are highly dependent on wetland salinity levels.  Provide adequate dilution with bypass water to prevent increases in salinity in downstream environments during flushing events.  Monitor local groundwater levels and salinity. If groundwater levels are high and saline, then consider avoiding wetland drawdown if it would result in excessive ingress of saline groundwater to the wetland (e.g. time drawdown periods to coincide with lower groundwater levels i.e. during dry periods across the landscape).  Monitor vegetation health and adjust water regime and operations plan accordingly if excessive salinity appears to be impacting on vegetation health.  Monitor vegetation during the dry phase for salt indicator/ tolerant plants and any signs of salinity discharge on the edge and banks of the lake.

Exposure of High  Include monitoring, adaptive management and contingency procedures for wetland Low soils to Impact operations in EWP. Impact oxygen

R01 12 Environmental Report

Value /threat Risk Mitigation action Modified Rating risk creating acid  Monitor wetland pH and heavy metal concentrations. If pH falls below critical thresholds sulfate soils and/or heavy metal concentrations increase, then implement contingency actions to during dry increase the flow of fresher water into the wetland to provide a flushing flow. Flushing to phase and about 73.0 mAHD is possible and very achievable at 74.0 (Lake is full at 74.56mAHD, decreased pH empty at 72.9 mAHD). The volumes required to support flushing have not yet been on rewetting determined and are highly dependent on wetland pH levels.  Provide adequate dilution with bypass water to prevent increases in salinity in downstream environments during flushing events.  Apply agricultural lime if acid forms on sections of the lake bed.

Construction management

Construction activities associated with Third Reedy Lake will be managed under the provisions of the GMW Connections Project’s CEMF (a condition of previous environmental approvals and approved by the Minister for Planning) and will be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Connections Project Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Environmental impacts associated with the construction phase of TRLBP are related to damage to plants and animals that occur within the construction footprint of the proposed bypass channel, new regulating structures and associated areas required for access, laydown etc. The CEMP includes the development of a Site Environmental Control Map which will identify individual site environment controls (e.g. native vegetation, MNES or cultural heritage sensitive areas, approved laydown areas and site access routes).

Summary

The proposed water regime for Third Reedy Lake should result in the successful establishment of Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC across the majority of the lake. An assessment of benefits and impacts identified that, provided vegetation recovery is successful, there are a range of benefits including increased vegetation and habitat diversity for a range of animals, including increased foraging opportunities for waterbirds. While a range of threatened species have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, the lake does not provide critical habitat for any EPBC Act 1999 or FFG Act 1988 listed threatened species, and overall the impact on threatened species is considered low. Even so, appropriate management is required through the development and implementation of an EWP which will outline management actions, monitoring and contingency arrangements in the event of unintended outcomes (e.g. failure of target vegetation to establish or standing of animals during drying phases) and management of potential threats (e.g. acid sulfate soil activation or unacceptable increases in salinity).

Third Reedy Lake in its current condition does not make a critical contribution to any of the criteria under which the Kerang Wetlands qualifies for Ramsar listing. The proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake are not considered likely to impact on any listing criteria and are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lakes makes to the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site character. At a broader landscape scale, the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake will result in significant water savings, some of which will become available for environmental use. A portion of the water saved will be used to implement the proposed water regime at Third Reedy Lake and the remaining water will be available as environmental water for other wetlands and rivers. In this context, the benefits gained as a result of the TRLBP extend beyond Third Reedy Lake itself to other wetlands in the Kerang Wetlands system and elsewhere.

R01 13 Environmental Report

Important note about your report

In preparing this report, Jacobs has relied upon, and presumed accurate, any information (or confirmation of the absence thereof) provided by the Client and/or from other sources. Except as otherwise stated in the report, Jacobs has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of any such information. If the information is subsequently determined to be false, inaccurate or incomplete then it is possible that our observations and conclusions as expressed in this report may change.

Jacobs derived the data in this report from information sourced from the Client (if any) and/or available in the public domain at the time or times outlined in this report. The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions or impacts of future events may require further examination of the project and subsequent data analysis, and re- evaluation of the data, findings, observations and conclusions expressed in this report. Jacobs has prepared this report in accordance with the usual care and thoroughness of the consulting profession, for the sole purpose described above and by reference to applicable standards, guidelines, procedures and practices at the date of issue of this report. For the reasons outlined above, however, no other warranty or guarantee, whether expressed or implied, is made as to the data, observations and findings expressed in this report, to the extent permitted by law.

This report should be read in full and no excerpts are to be taken as representative of the findings. No responsibility is accepted by Jacobs for use of any part of this report in any other context.

This report has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of, the Client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the Client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this report by any third party.

R01 14 Environmental Report

Glossary

Adaptive management The integration of monitoring, management activities and review of operations to effectively manage identified and/or emerging risks in order to maximise environmental outcomes.

Change in ecological The human induced adverse alteration of any ecosystem component, process character and or ecosystem benefit/service (from Butcher et al. 2015)

Ecological character The combination of the ecosystem components, processes and benefits/services that characterise the wetland at a given point in time (from Butcher et al. 2015)

Kerang Bypass Lakes First Reedy Lake, Middle Reedy Lake, Third Reedy Lake, Little Lake Charm (and Scott’s Creek) and Racecourse Lake.

Kerang Lakes A system of over 100 permanent and intermittent aquatic ecosystems comprising freshwater lakes, swamps and marshes, and saline and hypersaline lakes, located near Kerang in Northern Victoria.

Kerang Wetlands A cluster of 23 distinct wetlands in the Kerang Lakes system stretching from Lake Ramsar Site Tutchewop, northwest of Kerang, to Hird Swamp in the southeast. Includes Kangaroo Lake, Racecourse Lake, Lake Charm, Little Lake Charm (and Scott’s Creek), Reedy Lake, Middle Reedy Lake, Third Reedy Lake, Kerang Weir, Town Swamp, Johnson Swamp, Hird Swamp, Lake Cullen, Lake Tutchewop, Lake William, Lake Kelly, Little Lake Kelly, Stevenson Swamp, Lake Bael Bael, First Marsh, Second Marsh, Third Marsh, Foster Swamp and Cemetery Swamp.

Matters of National Matters of National Environmental Significance protected under Part 3 of the Environmental Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. For this project, Significance it includes wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B) and listed threatened species and communities.

Project environment The area impacted by the Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project which includes Third Reedy Lake (including the fringing wetland vegetation) and the proposed bypass channel and associated construction footprint.

Reedy Lakes complex First Reedy, Middle Reedy and Third Reedy Lake and their associated fringing wetland vegetation.

Third Reedy Lake Third Reedy Lake and its associated fringing wetland vegetation.

Wise Use Wise use of wetlands is the maintenance of their ecological character, achieved through the implementation of ecosystem approaches, within the context of sustainable development (from Butcher et al. 2015)

R01 15 Environmental Report

Abbreviations

BAR Biodiversity Assessment Report

BIOR Biodiversity Impact and Offset Requirements

CEMF Connections Project Construction Environmental Management Framework

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

CHMP Cultural Heritage Management Plan

CPS Critical Components, Processes and Services

DEE Department of Environment and Energy

DELWP Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

DO Dissolved oxygen

DST Decision Support Tool

EVC Ecological Vegetation Community

EES Environment Effects Statement

EE Act 1978 Environment Effects Act 1978

EPBC Act 1999 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

EWP Environmental Watering Plan

FFG Act 1988 Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988

GMID Goulburn Murray Irrigation District

GMW Goulburn Murray Water

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

KLAN Kerang Local Aboriginal Network

KLBP Kerang Lakes Bypass Project

LAC Limits of Acceptable Change

MNES Matters of national environmental significance

NCWS North Central Waterway Strategy

North Central CMA North Central Catchment Management Authority

NPV Net Present Value

NVIM National Vegetation Information Management

TIS Torrumbarry Irrigation System

TRLBP Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project

WCMF Water Change Management Framework

R01 16 Environmental Report

1. Introduction

1.1 Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project (TRLBP)

As part of the Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) Connections Project Stage 2 Business Case that was prepared by the State Government and approved by the Commonwealth Government, a number of projects were included as ‘special environmental projects’. These projects were considered as opportunities for environmental enhancement and were identified by a number of environmental agencies within Victoria including the Catchment Management Authorities and then included in the Business Case.

The Kerang Lakes Bypass Project (KLBP) is one of the ‘special environmental projects’ identified in the Stage 2 Business Case. The project proposed to remove a number of Kerang Lakes from the Torrumbarry Irrigation System (TIS) to return the wetlands to a more natural wetting/drying regime, as well as to construct connecting channels to facilitate environmental watering of lakes. The key focus of this project was environmental enhancement.

A Business Case for the KLBP was developed in 2015 (RMCG, 2015) to assess the feasibility of constructing bypass channels around First Reedy, Middle Reedy and Third Reedy Lakes, Little Lake Charm (and Scott’s Creek) and Racecourse Lake, all located within the Kerang Lakes wetland system. The KLBP Business Case was submitted to the Commonwealth and State Governments. In May 2015, the GMW Connections Project was advised by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP), acting on advice from the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Energy (DEE), that:

 If the outcomes of the approvals process do not have a material impact on the scope of the project, DELWP and DEE have agreed that the project will proceed.

The TRLBP proposes to reinstate a more natural water regime to Third Reedy Lake by undertaking works and measures to disconnect the lake from the Torrumbarry Irrigation System (TIS), generating environmental benefits for the lake and reducing current water losses in the Goulburn Murray Irrigation District (GMID). The proposal is that the water regime at the lake will change from permanently full to four-year wetting and drying cycles, and that the drying cycle will result in the lake being progressively revegetated with native vegetation (naturally, but if required through intervention), which will provide habitat for native animals and waterbirds. This will be achieved by constructing a bypass channel (1.4 km) and associated infrastructure to disconnect the lake from the irrigation system and provide a planned environmental watering regime for the lake aimed at enhancing environmental values. GMW customers who currently extract water directly from the lake will be reconnected to the adjacent irrigation system. In addition to the environmental benefits, the proposal will also generate water savings through reduced evaporation losses and more efficient water delivery to customers. The water savings achieved as part of the TRLBP will contribute to the overall GMW Connections Project Stage 2 water savings target, which will be owned by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder and used to improve the health of priority wetlands and waterways.

R01 17 Environmental Report

The key investigations and studies undertaken in relation to TRLBP and used throughout this Environmental Report are summarised in Appendix A and are publicly available via http://www.connectionsproject.com.au/kerang-lakes-bypass-project-referral-documents/.

1.1.1 Project objectives

1.2 Project proponent

The project proponent is GMW. The organisation’s environmental policy and environmental management system and the key environmental approvals and documentation frameworks are described below.

1.2.1 Environmental Policy

The GMW Environmental Policy states the authority’s commitment to the prevention of pollution, environment protection and sustainability initiatives. The policy statement is attached in Appendix B.

1.2.2 GMW Connections Project Approval and Construction Environmental Management Framework The GMW Connections Project (then known as the Northern Victoria Irrigation Renewal Project, or NVIRP) was referred under the Victorian Environment Effects (EE) Act 1978 on the 16 February 2009. The Minister for Planning determined on the 14th April 2009 that an environment effects statement was not required for the project, subject to six conditions. The conditions covered construction and operational impacts associated with the GMW Connections Project. At present the implementation of the TRLBP sits outside this approval framework (GMW, 2016b). However, it is expected that the TRLBP will be implemented in accordance with the broader GMW Connections Project approval framework (Figure 1-1).

A comprehensive suite of environmental management protocols and documents were developed in response to the EE Act 1978 conditions for the Connections Project including the establishment of a Construction Environmental Management Framework (CEMF) under which the GMW Connections Project has subsequently operated (Figure 1-1). The CEMF is a subsidiary to the GMW Environmental Policy and the GMW Connections Project Environmental Management System and was approved by the Minister for Planning in May 2009. Further details on the CEMF are provided in Section 5.3. The construction activities associated with TRLBP will be managed under the provisions of the existing GMW’s Connections Project’s CEMF and associated Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The operational management of Third Reedy Lake and its water regime (including establishment and long term operational phases) will also be guided by the preparation of an Environmental Watering Plan (EWP) developed by GMW. Further details on the EWP are provided in Section 5.2.

R01 18 Environmental Report

GMW Approval Environmental Policy

Connections Environmental Project Approval Management System

Construction Water Change Environmental Management Management Framework Framework

Capital Connections Environmental Works Commitments

Environmental Environmental Commitments Commitments Processes, methodologies Ministerial Connections & procedures Strategies & Protocol - addressing values Approval Protocols and risks - preparing Native environmental Vegetation watering plans Management - monitoring, Strategy reporting & auditing Flora & Fauna Management Strategy Cultural Heritage Environmental Strategy Watering Plans Communication & Consultation Protocol

Construction Offset Assessment Environmental Management Management Plan report Plan Departmental Site Approval Environmental Control Maps*

*approved as directed in EMP

Figure 1-1: GMW Connections Project environmental documentation structure (GMW, 2013)

1.2.3 Victorian State Government referral – Environment Effects Act 1978 GMW referred the TRLBP to the DELWP under the EE Act 1978 on 27 June 2016. The scope of the referral included the key construction and operational components of the TRLBP as follows:

The construction components of the project as referred include:

1) Constructing a bypass channel 2) Replacing an existing channel with a pipeline

R01 19 Environmental Report

3) Disconnecting Third Reedy Lake from the irrigation system 4) Installing structures to allow environmental watering that more closely resembles the lake’s former, natural water regime. The operational components of the referred TRLBP involves the long-term management of Third Reedy Lake’s water regime to achieve environmental objectives and channel and pipeline operation to deliver irrigation water to GMW customers.

On 31 August 2016, the Minister for Planning (the Minister) decided that an Environment Effects Statement (EES) is not required for the TRLBP, subject to the following conditions: a) The proponent must prepare an Environmental Report to the satisfaction of the Minister for Planning (or delegate), which describes: i. The likely impacts of the project and the intended environmental benefits of the project, relative to the ecological values provided by Third Reedy Lake both currently and historically, in the context of its listing under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Significance; ii. The nature of and rationale for the proposed water regime, including scope for adaptive management; iii. Potential impacts on native fauna species listed in any “threatened” category or part of any listed “threatened” community under legislation or in relevant DELWP Advisory Lists; iv. Measures for managing and protecting native fish which might occupy or colonise the lake; v. Measures for managing variable water quality in the lake over time; vi. Results of an acid sulfate soil sampling and analysis program covering the bed of the lake and options for managing acid sulfate soils which may be present; and vii. Any other foreseeable adverse effects of the project and proposed measures for management of those effects. b) The report must be prepared in consultation with DELWP, the Shire of Gannawarra and the North Central Catchment Management Authority. c) The Environmental Report must be released for public comment for at least 10 business days. d) Following the receipt of any public comments, the proponent must provide a response to the issues raised by the public submissions to the Minister for Planning (or delegate). e) Project works (other than investigative works to inform the preparation of the Environmental Report) may not commence before revisions to incorporate the project are made and approved to the Environmental Management Framework and relevant subordinate strategies and plans for the GMW Connections Project.

The Minister’s decision states that the reasons for the decision are:

 “The project’s potential environmental effects are not sufficiently significant or complex to warrant requirement of an Environment Effects Statement relative to the considerations set down in the Ministerial Guidelines for assessment of environmental effects under the Environment Effects Act 1978.

 However, the project is unusual and environmentally sensitive in that it seeks to create environmental benefits by significantly altering the ecological character of a wetland listed under the international Ramsar Convention. This necessitates a robust and transparent process to demonstrate that the environmental risks of the project are clearly understood and addressed, and that the likelihood that the project will achieve the intended benefits will justify statutory decisions on the project.”

1.2.4 Commonwealth Government referral - Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 GMW also referred the TRLBP to the DEE on 25 August 2016. On 21 October 2016, GMW received advice from DEE that the TRLBP is a controlled action under the EPBC Act 1999, as it was assessed as likely to have a

R01 20 Environmental Report

significant impact on the following matters of national environmental significance (MNES), which are protected under Part 3 of the EPBC Act 1999:

 Wetlands of international importance (sections 16 and 17B), and

 Listed threatened species and communities (sections 18 and 18A). Therefore, the TRLBP requires assessment and approval under the EPBC Act 1999 before it can proceed. Assessment of the project under the EPBC Act 1999 is to be via the accredited Environmental Report process under the EE Act 1978, as set out in Schedule 1 (part 5) of the Bilateral (Assessment) Agreement between the Commonwealth and the State of Victoria under section 45 of the EPBC Act 1999 (the Bilateral Agreement).

1.2.5 Bilateral agreement The Environmental Report to be developed under the Bilateral Agreement must be consistent with conditions under the EE Act 1978 (Section 1.2.3) that sufficiently describes the project and assesses the likely relevant impacts and benefits, as well as describe any feasible alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce relevant impacts.

The Environmental Report will also need to address specific requirements of the Bilateral Agreement under the EPBC Act 1999, including matters technically beyond those formally required under the conditions set under the EE Act 1978. The required scope of the Environmental Report to address these requirements (under both the Bilateral Agreement and No EES conditions) has been provided to GMW (References: 2016R03 & EPBC 2016/7760) by DELWP in the form of a scoping document (referred to herein as the Environmental Report scope).

This scoping document forms the basis for the structure of the TRLBP Environmental Report (this report).

1.2.6 Proceedings under Commonwealth or State law Although unrelated to the TRLBP, a requirement in the Environmental Report scope is to “detail any proceedings under a Commonwealth or State law for the protection of the environment or the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources against the organisation proposing to take the project”. The GMW Connections Project has received a warning for contravening Section 142 of the EPBC Act 1999 (ref 2009/5123) in April 2016. This related to identification by independent audit of two non-compliances of actions that should have been undertaken in accordance with GMW’s Water Change Management Framework.

GMW has addressed this warning. The DEE noted that investigations were completed in relation to these non- compliances and corrective actions implemented, and that it is unlikely the environment was impacted as a result of these actions.

1.3 Consultation process

A condition of the Minister for Planning’s decision that an EES is not required for the TRLBP is that the Environmental Report be prepared in consultation with DELWP, the Shire of Gannawarra and the North Central Catchment Management Authority (CMA).

In order to address this condition GMW established a Consultative Committee consisting of representatives from each of these organisations (members listed in Appendix C). The consultative committee was involved in scoping the Environmental Report and has reviewed the draft of the report.

In addition, the GMW Connections Project Expert Review Panel (members listed in Appendix C) was engaged by GMW to provide technical review of the TRLBP key investigations and reports. The Expert Review Panel has reviewed and commented on the scope of the Environmental Report and the draft of the report.

Following the completion of the Environmental Report, to the satisfaction of the Minister for Planning, GMW is required to advertise the Report for public comment for at least 10 business days, consistent with requirements under part 5 of the Bilateral Agreement. Any public comments received are to be addressed and included as an addendum to this Report, and submitted to DELWP and the Minister for Planning. This consultation process, along with previous public consultation in regards to the TRLBP, is discussed in more detail in Section 6.4.

R01 21 Environmental Report

The Minister for Planning then provides the Environmental Report to the Australian Government Minister for the Environment and Energy, which will inform the Minister’s decision on whether the project is approved, refused or approved with conditions under the EPBC Act 1999.

1.4 Purpose of the Environmental Report (this report) The purpose of this Environmental Report is to satisfy the requirements of the:

 Conditions under which the Victorian Minister for Planning permits the TRLBP to proceed without requiring an EES  DEE decision that the TRLBP is a controlled action under section 75 of the EPBC Act 1999.

The Environmental Report (this report) is consistent with the Bilateral Agreement scope and is structured as follows:  Section 2 describes the study area and details of the TRLBP as referred including description of current infrastructure and current and proposed operating conditions.  Section 3 details the current environment with a particular focus on threatened species listed in the bilateral agreement scope and the ecological character and listing criteria for the Kerang Wetland Ramsar Site.  Section 4 summarises and evaluates the risks of the TRLBP.  Section 5 evaluates the proposed mitigations measures and their effectiveness at addressing identified risks. This section also presents an adaptive management framework for the TRLBP and identifies key contingency measures and offsets that may be required.  Section 6 details other considerations of the TRLBP, including social and economic impacts and benefits and consultation undertaken as part of the development of the TRLBP.  Section 7 provides an overall synthesis of predicted outcomes for Third Reedy Lake under the proposed watering regime, including an evaluation of the overall impacts and how these can be managed through appropriate mitigation measures, and how the benefits predicted to occur offset potential impacts.

R01 22 Environmental Report

2. Project description

2.1 Kerang Lakes Bypass Project The KLBP was originally one of the ‘Special Projects’ identified in the GMW Connections Project Stage 2 Business Case. The project proposed to remove irrigation demand and develop a variable water regime that will enhance the environmental values of the Ramsar listed Kerang Wetlands (North Central CMA, 2014).

The Kerang Lakes are a system of over 100 permanent and intermittent wetlands comprising freshwater lakes, swamps and marshes, and saline and hypersaline lakes, located near Kerang in Northern Victoria (Figure 2-1). A cluster of 23 distinct wetlands in the Kerang Lakes system stretching from Lake Tutchewop, northwest of Kerang, to Hird Swamp in the southeast form the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and are listed in the Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia and, as such, are of national and international significance (see Section 2.2.1 for a more detailed description). The majority of the wetlands in the Kerang Lakes system would have filled intermittently prior to European settlement, however a number were regulated as part of the development of the TIS in 1925 and as a result became permanent freshwater lakes. Wetlands regulated as part of the TIS, such as Third Reedy Lake, are part of the TIS water delivery system and used as a water storage. Changing the water regime from naturally intermittent to permanent resulted in adverse impacts on their ecological condition. In addition, water losses resulted due to evaporation and seepage. The development of the KLBP commenced in 2011 and was developed in two phases (Figure 2-2).

Phase 1 was the investigation phase. This considered disconnecting five of the Kerang Lakes from the TIS and reinstating a more natural water regime. The five lakes included First Reedy, Middle Reedy and Third Reedy Lakes, Little Lake Charm (and Scott’s Creek) and Racecourse Lake (including Bertram’s Lake), located to the north-west of Kerang, in land that is mainly used for farming and rural living (DoE, 2015). Phase 1 included stakeholder engagement and examined the details, feasibility, benefits and costs of options. Phase 1 was in two distinct sub-phases. Phase 1a included investigations for all five lakes (First, Middle and Third Reedy, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake) using four generic watering scenarios. This aimed to test the feasibility of the bypass. Phase 1b included further, more detailed, investigation to understand the implications of the recommended watering scenario for each lake. This led to Little Lake Charm being removed from scope due to the risk associated with salinisation, and the present state of knowledge on Middle Reedy Lake which supports a significant breeding site for colonially nesting waterbirds was deemed insufficient for adequate risk management (RMCG, 2015). Phase 2 became the Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project. To date, this has involved seeking environmental approvals. Detailed design and construction will follow.

R01 23 Environmental Report

Figure 2-1: Kerang Lakes system locality diagram

R01 24 Environmental Report

Figure 2-2: Kerang Lakes Bypass Project phases – prior to operations commencing (adapted from RMCG, 2015). Solid outlines = completed . Hatched outlines = to be completed.

2.1.1 Options analysis As part of the KLBP Phase 1 investigations (including the KLBP Business Case) a comprehensive analysis was completed of a range of options including works at individual lakes and combinations of lakes. This assessed:  The technical feasibility of constructing bypass infrastructure  The cost of the infrastructure and other works required  The water savings that would be generated  The social and environmental benefits and costs  Risks and issues associated with the initiative  Governance and project delivery requirements. The options assessed included:  Option 1 - Standalone: Bypassing each lake on a standalone basis:  Option 1A - First Reedy Lake  Option 1B - Middle Reedy Lake  Option 1C - Third Reedy Lake  Option 1D - Racecourse entire lake  Option 1E – Racecourse Lake - Bertram’s Lake  Option 2: Bypassing all four lakes together - First Reedy, Middle Reedy, Third Reedy, and the whole of Racecourse (Option 1D)

R01 25 Environmental Report

 Option 3: Bypassing all four lakes with the Bertram’s Lake option (First Reedy Lake, Middle Reedy Lake, Third Reedy Lake, and Option 1E)  Option 4: Bypassing Third Reedy Lake with the Bertram’s Lake option (Option 1E). The possibility of lowering the lakes by one metre during the non-irrigation season rather than disconnecting the Lakes from the TIS was raised as a potential option during stakeholder consultation. Whilst this remains a management option for non-bypassed lakes, it was not considered a viable option for consideration in the options assessment due to minimal water savings achieved and minor ecological benefits. The options analysis identified only one of these options as meeting the assessment criteria, that being Option 1C (Third Reedy Lake). This option was:  acceptable from a risk management perspective;  offered relatively high Net Present Value (NPV) to the community as a whole for the Commonwealth Government’s investment in the GMW’s Connections Project;  fell within the budget approved in principle by the Commonwealth for the Special Project;  met the water savings cost-effectiveness criteria required for the Commonwealth’s investment; and  offered environmental benefits (RMCG, 2015).

2.2 Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project

2.2.1 Project location

Third Reedy Lake is a 250 ha wetland, approximately ten kilometres north-west of Kerang (Figure 2-3). The lake is 234 ha and the remaining 16 ha includes fringing public land, not all of which is vegetated. It has a volume of 2459 ML at full supply level. The wetland forms part of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, which was designated under the Convention of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention) as a Wetland of International Importance (Ramsar wetland) in 1982 (North Central CMA, 2014). The Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site covers 9,419 ha and is made up of 23 distinct wetlands of seven types (Table 2-1).

The diversity of wetland types is one of the critical components of the ecological character for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. The site is recognised for its diversity of permanent and temporary wetlands, including permanent open freshwater lakes, permanent freshwater marshes, freshwater tree-dominated wetlands, shrub- dominated wetlands, intermittent saline/brackish lakes, permanent saline/hypersaline lakes and part of one wetland functions as a wastewater treatment area (summarised in Table 2-1 and illustrated in Figure 2-3). The wetlands are situated at the junction of three large river systems, and receive water from the Murray River (via the TIS), and the Avoca and Loddon Rivers (North Central CMA, 2016). The value of Third Reedy Lake in relation to the overall Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site is presented in Section 3).

R01 26 Environmental Report

Figure 2-3: Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site wetland types

R01 27 Environmental Report

Table 2-1: Ramsar wetland types and four hydrological categories as given in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Action Plan (Source: North Central CMA, 2016, Butcher and Hale 2016). O = permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares), Tp = Permanent freshwater marshes / pools, W = shrub-dominated wetlands, Ts = Seasonal / intermittent freshwater marshes, R = Seasonal / intermittent saline / brackish/ alkaline marshes / pools, Q = Permanent saline / brackish / alkaline lakes, P = Seasonal/ intermittent/ freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares)

Hydrological category Wetland Wetland type Regulated freshwater Kangaroo Lake O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) permanent wetlands Racecourse Lake O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) Lake Charm O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) Little Lake Charm/ Scott’s O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) Creek Reedy Lake O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) Tp - Permanent freshwater marshes/pools Middle Reedy Lake

Third Reedy Lake O - Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 hectares) Regulated freshwater Kerang Weir W - Shrub-dominated wetlands intermittent wetlands Town Swamp W - Shrub-dominated wetlands Ts -Seasonal/intermittent freshwater marshes Johnson Swamp W - Shrub-dominated wetlands Ts - Seasonal/intermittent freshwater marshes Hird Swamp W - Shrub-dominated wetlands R - Seasonal/ intermittent saline/ brackish/ alkaline Lake Cullen marshes/ pools Saline/ sewerage Lake Tutchewop Q - Permanent saline/brackish/alkaline lakes disposal and drainage Lake William Q - Permanent saline/brackish/alkaline lakes wetlands Lake Kelly Q - Permanent saline/brackish/alkaline lakes Little Lake Kelly Q - Permanent saline/brackish/alkaline lakes R - Seasonal/ intermittent saline/ brackish/ alkaline marshes/ pools Fosters Swamp Q - Permanent saline/brackish/alkaline lakes Wastewater treatment area Unregulated freshwater R - Seasonal/ intermittent saline/ brackish/ alkaline Stevenson Swamp1 intermittent wetlands marshes/ pools P - Seasonal/intermittent freshwater lakes (over 8 Lake Bael Bael hectares) P - Seasonal/intermittent freshwater lakes (over 8 First Marsh hectares) Second Marsh W - Shrub-dominated wetlands Third Marsh W - Shrub-dominated wetlands Cemetery Swamp W - Shrub-dominated wetlands 1Stevensons Swamp was noted as freshwater in DSE 2004 and saline in DSE 2010.

Third Reedy Lake is the most northerly site in the Reedy Lakes Complex (comprising First, Middle and Third Reedy Lakes) and has been held artificially full (between full supply level (FSL) of 74.56 m AHD and 74.2 m AHD) since its inclusion into the TIS (SKM, 2010). The bathymetry of Third Reedy Lake ((Figure 2-4) and Table 2-2) shows a maximum depth of 1.66 metres (bed elevation 72.9m AHD2)

The bed of the lake is relatively flat, with only minor variations in depth (North Central CMA, 2014) and it has relatively steep sides; 50% of the area of the lake bed has a level of 73.3 -73.4 mAHD.

2 There are inconsistencies in various reports about the elevation of the floor of Third Reedy Lake (e.g. 72.8m AHD, 73.2m AHD, 72.77m AHD, 73.17m AHD, 72.9m AHD) however the differences are not material in terms of lake area or volume. This report uses 74.56 as full supply level and 72.9 as bed level.

R01 28 Environmental Report

Table 2-2 Third Reedy Lake elevation, area volume

Cumulative Elevation mAHD Area ha Cumulative area (%) Volume ML volume (%)

72.9 0.02 0.0% 0.01 0.0%

73 0.05 0.0% 0.04 0.0%

73.1 0.12 0.1% 0.12 0.0%

73.2 11.11 4.8% 2.67 0.1%

73.3 76.53 33.3% 38.61 1.6%

73.4 124.59 54.1% 135.01 5.5%

73.5 152.59 66.3% 272.63 11.1%

73.6 174.32 75.7% 435.64 17.7%

73.7 187.41 81.4% 616.31 25.1%

73.8 199.02 86.5% 809.59 32.9%

73.9 206.59 89.8% 1012.64 41.2%

74 211.51 91.9% 1221.77 49.7%

74.1 215.21 93.5% 1435.18 58.4%

74.2 218.42 94.9% 1652.00 67.2%

74.3 221.63 96.3% 1872.03 76.1%

74.4 224.86 97.7% 2095.28 85.2%

74.5 228.10 99.1% 2321.76 94.4%

74.56 230.13 100.0% 2459.23 100.0%

R01 29 Environmental Report

Figure 2-4: Third Reedy Lake Bathymetry

R01 30 Environmental Report

Third Reedy Lake receives regulated water diverted from the Murray River at Torrumbarry Weir, which flows into the National Channel, Kow Swamp, Pyramid Creek and Kerang Weir. Flows pass along Washpen Creek and into Reedy Lake, which spills into Middle Reedy Lake and then into Third Reedy Lake (North Central CMA, 2016). Water from the lake is then supplied to irrigation channels to the west (Torrumbarry No 7 Channel) and north (Torrumbarry No 1/7 Channel). Third Reedy Lake is small in volume and area compared to the much larger downstream lakes (Lake Charm, Kangaroo Lake, Lake Boga). The lake is also a direct source of irrigation supply for five GMW customers and is used for some boating and fishing activities by the local community (GMW, 2016a).

Unregulated flood flows originating from the Loddon River (via Washpen Creek), and flood water from Wandella Creek can also enter the system, initially into First Reedy Lake and then once full, flood waters travel to Middle Reedy Lake then onto Third Reedy Lake.

A levee bank (up to 1.5m high) and vehicle access track exists around the south-west edge of the lake between the inlet structure on the creek linking Middle and Third Reedy Lakes and the outlet structure to the Torrumbarry No 7 channel. The track and levee provide a clear boundary between public land around the lake and the adjacent farmland. The track is clearly shown in the large scale map in Appendix D.

2.2.2 Current operation

The inclusion of Third Reedy Lake into the TIS altered its water regime, which under natural conditions would have been intermittent, receiving water irregularly during floods in the cooler winter months of wet years. Being at the end of the Reedy Lake complex, Third Reedy Lake would have been the last lake to receive flood waters, so in some years floods that entered First Reedy would not have reached Third Reedy Lake. Hence of the three lakes, Third Reedy Lake would have had the driest regime, followed by Middle Reedy and then First Reedy, which would have had the wettest regime. The lake is now permanently inundated, receiving good quality fresh water inflows from Middle Reedy Lake to the south.

The lake provides water to Little Lake Charm and beyond via the Torrumbarry No. 7 channel and irrigation areas in the north via the Torrumbarry No. 1/7 channel. Scott’s Creek, to the west of the lake, can also engage during flood events. Figure 2-5 shows the location of these key inlet/ outlets (North Central CMA, 2014). Water levels in Third Reedy Lake are maintained at a maximum of 74.56 m AHD (full supply level) and a minimum of 74.2 m AHD, with the lake operating above 74.47 m AHD for 95% of the time and a level of 74.56 m AHD for 50% of the time. The wetland is kept at full supply level between 1 August and 31 January. After 31 January, the lake can be drawn down for irrigation purposes by up to 30 cm and in some cases, generally at the end of the irrigation season, the wetland can be further drawn down by evaporation (North Central CMA, 2014).

As part of the North Central CMA (2014) investigation, conceptual cross sections were developed to illustrate the various components of the lake under the current water regime/ operating regime. These cross sections are provided in Appendix E.

R01 31 Environmental Report

Figure 2-5: Third Reedy Lake key operational features

R01 32 Environmental Report

2.2.3 Options Assessment

Three options for TRLBP were assessed as part of the KLBP Business Case (RMCG, 2015):

 Option 1: Do-nothing

 Option 2: Lake by-pass

 Option 3: Lowered full supply level Each option was assessed against four selection criteria: water savings, environmental benefits, environmental impact and cost per megalitre of water saved. A summary of the assessment detailed in the KLBP Business Case (RMCG, 2015) is provided in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3: Third Reedy Lake options assessment (adapted from GMW, 2016b)

Option Water Savings Environmental benefits Environmental impacts Cost per ML of water saved Option 1: No water savings No environmental Moderate environmental Not applicable. Do-nothing generated. Significant benefit. impacts annual losses from the There has recently been Dead stands of trees will lake (Gippel, C. J 2012 some decline in the be lost due to rotting, estimated condition of Third Reedy impacting on habitat 2,675 ML) represents Lake (loss of wetland available for aquatic fauna substantial economic loss vegetation). This existing and roosting and nesting to the region. environmental condition of for waterbirds lake would be retained (or further decline). Option 2: Significant water Significant Low-moderate Acceptable. Lake By-pass savings generated for the environmental benefits. environmental impacts Provides cost effective area. Improvement in ecological Some aquatic fauna may generation of water Water savings of function of wetland due to become stranded during savings and positive approximately reinstating a wetting-drying drying phase (e.g. fish and benefit cost ratio. 1,600ML/year will be regime more closely turtles). Potential for water generated aligned with the lakes quality to decrease after natural behaviour. drying phase (e.g. salinity, DO and ASS). Management actions could mitigate these impacts. Option 3: Minimal water savings Minimal environmental Moderate environmental Not acceptable. Lowered full generated. benefits. Minimal impacts Water savings generated supply level Limited due to evaporation improvement in ecological Dead stands of trees will not high enough to meet losses being the main function due to the drying be lost due to rotting, costs. water savings driver and cycle being applied to only impacting on habitat lowering the full supply a small area of the lake. available for aquatic fauna level does not address and roosting and nesting this. for waterbirds

Based on the condition assessment provided in Rakali Consulting (2013) and a review of the project by the GMW Expert Review Panel, it was considered that Third Reedy Lake has suffered ecological decline as a result of the artificial water regime , however it is now to be in a reasonably stable state. Re-instating a wetting-drying regime would mean Third Reedy Lake would have a water regime more closely aligned with its natural one, and could be expected to increase the conservation value of the lake (illustrated in Figure 2-6). Therefore, the do-nothing scenario was not considered an acceptable outcome for the lake (GMW, 2016b).

R01 33 Environmental Report

Figure 2-6: Possible future trajectories following a step change deterioration in lake condition (RMCG, 2015) Option 3, lowering full supply level, was considered at the request of the GMW Expert Review Panel. This option was not viable due to it generating only minimal water savings and only a minor ecological benefit because a drying cycle would only be applied to a small area of the lake (e.g. drawing down Third Reedy Lake by 1 metre would still result in around 75% of the lake being permanently inundated) (GMW, 2016b).

Therefore Option 2, bypassing Third Reedy Lake, was identified as the preferred option because it ranked the highest in relation to the four selection criteria (Table 2-3) and was subsequently carried on for further investigation as part of the TRLBP. The implementation of this option will lead to a number of benefits to the lake, including:

• Increased area of a deep freshwater marsh wetland type (intermittent), with a corresponding decrease in the area of permanent open freshwater. This increase will return the lake to a more natural state • Restoration of habitat, including aquatic herbs, sedges and rushes, Black Box fringing wetland vegetation, Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC, and River Red Gums • Improved waterbird breeding and feeding opportunities • Restored ecological processes associated with intermittent drying to promote biodiversity (GMW, 2016b). However, it was also recognised that the introduction of drying regime has the potential to impact on some current values, including native fish and turtles that are favoured by permanent inundation, and could have adverse water quality outcomes, such as elevated salinity, low dissolved oxygen and activation of acid sulfate soils (Table 2-2).

2.2.4 Developing the preferred water regime

A preferred water regime for Third Reedy Lake was determined based on the implementation of KLBP Option 2, bypassing Third Reedy Lake. This was based on previous work by North Central CMA (2012) who developed alternative wetland water regime scenarios for all the lakes proposed to be bypassed as part of the KLBP, and from previous work by SKM (2010) and KBR (2011). These water regime scenarios are provided in (Table 2-4).

Table 2-4: Third Reedy Lake proposed water regime scenarios (North Central CMA, 2014)

Wetland scenario Regime Dry - episodic Frequency of wetting: 1 in 4 years Timing: Winter/Spring Depth: FSL 74.56 mAHD Duration: up to 10 months (allow to dry naturally) Deep Freshwater Marsh – intermittent Frequency of wetting: 2 in 3 years Timing: Winter/Spring filling Depth:

R01 34 Environmental Report

Wetland scenario Regime  Year 1 - 74.56 mAHD  Year 2 - 74.2 mAHD  Year 3 - no fill Duration: 7-10 months Open Freshwater Lake – semi- Frequency of wetting: annually permanent Timing: Fill Winter/Spring Depth: FSL – 74.56 mAHD Duration: 12 months – allow to evaporate by 0.8m (to 73.74mAHD) at least two years in a row Open Freshwater Lake – permanent No change

North Central CMA (2014) undertook a risk and benefit assessment for each of the four wetland water regime scenarios identified and modelled in North Central CMA (2012). The assessment considered the risks and benefits associated with the lake’s Ramsar status, threatened species, EVCs, salinity and potential acid sulfate soils (summary of assessment provided in Table 2-5). Based on this assessment the preferred water regime was episodic to intermittent.

The assessment identified that any change in water regime from the current permanent open freshwater lake will provide a benefit to the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site through improving the habitat available at Third Reedy Lake. North Central CMA (2014) stated that whilst the majority of negative changes are likely to have already occurred and the lake is probably now in a state of equilibrium, the loss of stands of dead trees due to rotting resulting from permanent inundation would have a significant impact on habitat available for aquatic fauna and roosting and nesting for waterbirds. Therefore, any change to the water regime from a permanent or near permanent water regime will benefit the lake and the habitat available.

This assessment also identified the need for additional investigations on frogs, turtles, salinity and acid sulfate soils to ensure that the re-introduction of a drying regime does not impact negatively on the wetland’s current environmental values.

Table 2-5: Assessment of impacts/benefits associated with each water regime scenario at Third Reedy Lake. Red = preferred water regime based on assessment. (Source: North Central CMA, 2014)

Water regime scenario Ramsar Biota EVCs/ flora Salinity Acid criterion Birds Fish Frogs/ sulfate turtles soils Dry - episodic      /   Deep Freshwater Marsh      _  – intermittent Open Freshwater Lake –      _  semi-permanent No change – Permanent _ _ _* _ _ _ _ open freshwater lake KEY:  Benefit  Negative impact likely - No change expected * native fish community placed under increased pressure from  Additional investigations, management required significant Carp population

To more clearly define the preferred water regime for Third Reedy Lake, management, ecological and hydrological objectives were defined (North Central CMA 2014). Previous management objectives recommended for the lake were used in conjunction with the current and future ecological values and its natural water regime, to define the future management objective for Third Reedy Lake as:

“Achieve projected water savings (approximately 1.6GL/year) whilst providing a water regime that restores Third Reedy Lake to a deep freshwater marsh wetland type (dominated by Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC 813)) able to support recruitment of River Red Gums and promoting a diverse and extensive range of habitat suitable for a variety of waterbirds” (adapted from North Central CMA, 2014).

R01 35 Environmental Report

Ecological objectives and hydrological requirements for Third Reedy Lake were then developed and are given below (Table 2-6).

Table 2-6: Proposed ecological objectives for Third Reedy Lake (Source: North Central CMA, 2014).

Ecological Objectives Justification Hydrological requirement Habitat objectives 1.1 Maintain health of existing Black Supports waterbird breeding (nests, Fill to full supply level (74.56 mAHD) in late Box fringing wetland vegetation hollows, fallen timber etc.). Also provides winter or early spring. This level will not flood (within Intermittent Swampy Woodland shade to instream habitat and the existing the trees, but will provide water to the bank soil EVC) Black Box population to be sustained. profile. 1.2 Restore opportunities for River Red Gums provide important Promote recruitment opportunities for River recruitment of River Red Gum trees waterbird habitat and woody debris. Red Gum by inundating once in every 2-4 through body of wetland years for a period of 2-4 months (Roberts and Marston, 2011). Ensure period of summer- autumn drying (Lloyd et al. 1993 in DSE, 2004). 1.3 Restore diverse understory Understory Intermittent Swampy Woodland Lignum generally requires inundation once in Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC assemblage (i.e. Tangled lignum, salt every 3-5 years for a period of 3-7 months vegetation (i.e. lignum and sedge bush etc.) provides important duck and (Roberts and Marston, 2011). communities) in the body of the waterfowl habitat, fish species (when wetland able to withstand fluctuating inundated), invertebrates, turtles and frogs water levels and a food source for aquatic and terrestrial herbivores. Also filters water. Species/ community objectives 2.1 Restore waterbird breeding Linked to habitat objectives 1.1 and 1.2. Generally, the significant species currently at opportunities Provide a range of habitat types suitable for Third Reedy Lake are stimulated by flooding waterbird nesting, resting and breeding. between September and May and require permanent water under nests for 5 to 12 months 2.2 Restore waterbird feeding Linked to habitat objective 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 Provide suitable habitat as per habitat opportunities which includes providing terrestrial and objectives ensuring slow recession of water aquatic insects/ macroinvertebrates and level. plant matter. 2.3 Provide opportunistic turtle and Linked to habitat objective 1.3 and species Expose shallower areas to promote diversity of frog feeding and breeding objective 2.2. aquatic plants for feeding opportunities. Process objectives 3.1 Maintain connectivity between Facilitates dispersal of seeds, micro and Ensure connectivity remains under Reedy Lakes macro organisms, fish, frogs and turtles. modernisation. Ensure water regimes are Also maintains water quality through managed across all three Reedy Lakes to exchange of water. ensure dispersal can take place. 3.2 Restore ecological process A diversity of biological and chemical Some fluctuations in water level at littoral zone associated with intermittent drying process takes place during drying phase (specific requirements dependent on species). i.e. germination, aeration of sediments, increased organic matter input, promotes diverse habitat types (i.e. drawdown zones during drying) etc.

The preferred water regime was then developed by GMW, in close collaboration with the GMW Connections Project’s Expert Review Panel and the North Central CMA, and informed by the water regime recommended in North Central CMA (2014). This included an optional intermediate rise during year three to meet frog and turtle habitat requirements.

The environmental watering proposed for Third Reedy Lake aims to return the lake to a deep freshwater marsh wetland (Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC) dominated by River Red Gums with a sedge and lignum understory and a fringing Black Box community. Being the furthest downstream in the Reedy Lakes series,

R01 36 Environmental Report

Third Reedy Lake would have been the driest of the three, and is likely to have been an intermittent wetland before inclusion in the irrigation supply system. Therefore, the proposed water regime is considered to closely resemble its natural wetting and drying cycle.

The proposed water regime is provided in Table 2-7 together with a comparison of the current water regime, Figure 2-7 illustrates the modelled water level for the preferred regime (including the intermediate partial filling to 73.2 mAHD in the third year of every cycle) and the % of lake bed area inundated with the water levels. The water regime assumes that regulated water is the sole input. In reality, unregulated flood flows will occur from time to time.

Table 2-7: Current and proposed environmental watering regime (GMW, 2016 a, b, North Central CMA 2014)

Current water regime Proposed Environmental Watering Regime (as described in Section 2.2.2) Phase Description

Irrigation regulation Full Establishment An establishment phase is proposed to provide opportunities for establishment Supply Level (74.56 of River Red Gums across the lake floor by allowing for seed release, seed mAHD). strike and establishment of seedlings. The regime will include: Permanent freshwater  Filling the wetland to between 74.2m-74.56m AHD and allowing the lake to lake with minimal dry by natural drawdown. fluctuations of water  A series of low level fills (approximately 0.3m to 0.5m deep) to follow the level between 74.2 – drawdown period to encourage establishment of River Red Gums. 74.56 mAHD The establishment phase will require monitoring to assess the response of River Red Gum recruitment. This regime may be needed for two to three cycles; however, the duration of the establishment phase will depend on when the desirable number of saplings have established. Furthermore, once germination occurs, subsequent filling will need to be carefully managed to avoid drowning seedlings before they are large enough to cope with deeper inundation.

Long Term - operational The long term operational regime will provide a watering regime that returns Third Reedy Lake to a deep freshwater marsh wetland type dominated by River Red Gums with a sedge and lignum understory and fringing Black Box community. The regime will include three 4-year wetting and drying cycles:  Cycles One and Two:  Year 1 – Filling event (rising to 74.0 mAHD) and commencing drawdown  Year 2 – No filling event. Natural drawdown occurring. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry climatic years and lake bed likely waterlogged in wet climatic years.  Year 3 – No filling event. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry periods – dry in dry periods (see year 2 description)  Year 4 – No filling. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry periods (see year 2 description)  Cycle Three:  Year 1 – Filling event (rising to 74.56 mAHD) and being held for 31 days to maintain Black Box and recruit River Red Gums and allow a flushing flow for salt, blackwater or acid sulfate soil management (if required).  Year 2 – No filling event. Natural drawdown occurring. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry periods. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry climatic years and lake bed likely waterlogged in wet climatic years.

R01 37 Environmental Report

Current water regime Proposed Environmental Watering Regime (as described in Section 2.2.2) Phase Description  Year 3 – No filling event. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry periods (see year 2 description).  Year 4 – No filling event. Climate conditions will control wet/ dry periods (see year 2 description).

Optional intermediate rise An option for an intermediate rise to about 73.2 mAHD with a duration of 31 days has been included in the third year of each cycle for ecological purposes (e.g. habitat required for frogs and turtles) or for contingency purposes (e.g. salt, blackwater and acid sulfate soil flushing/ dilution events required) if deemed necessary based on monitoring outcomes.

Figure 2-7: Modelled water level under preferred regime (including intermediate rise) from Gippel, C. J (2015) After an initial establishment phase, Third Reedy Lake will be filled once in every four years to 74.00 mAHD with every third fill (i.e. once every 12 years) to 74.56 mAHD (equivalent to the current full supply level). The wetland will be maintained at 74.56 mAHD for a 31day period to maintain Black Box and recruit River Red Gums. Management intervention will also be required to ensure the salinity tolerances of ecological objectives (i.e. River Red Gum) are not exceeded and that the system can respond to variable climate and associated hydrological conditions (e.g. storms and floods). Further details on adaptive management and contingency measures are provided in Section 5.2.2) (GMW, 2016a, b).

This preferred water regime will change Third Reedy Lake from a permanent freshwater lake with minor water level fluctuations to something more closely resembling its natural wetting and drying cycle. The preferred water regime provides a water regime that is intermittent, allowing the lake to dry out in accordance with the EWP (to be developed – see Section 5.2). This water regime will reflect the flow requirements typically required for River Red Gums (GMW, 2016a). The conceptual cross sections that were developed as part of the North Central CMA (2014) investigation and provided in Appendix E illustrate the various components of the lake under the proposed water regime.

R01 38 Environmental Report

2.2.5 Description of construction and operation The two main components for the delivery and operation of the TRLBP are:

 Construction of infrastructure to enable management of Third Reedy Lake’s water regime  Operations – long term management of the lake’s water regime to achieve environmental objectives as well as channel and pipeline operation to deliver water to GMW customers.

The construction component of the TRLBP is considered minor compared to the operations as it includes standard channel and pipeline works within predominantly previously disturbed land, whereas operations includes changing the water regime of Third Reedy Lake.

Construction

In order to deliver the preferred option for TRLBP (Section 2.2.3) and the preferred environmental watering regime (Section 2.2.4) the key construction activities and infrastructure required are outlined in Table 2-8 and Table 2-9 respectively. The infrastructure is to be constructed over a six-month period (approximate). The start date for works has not been confirmed, this will be dependent on the timing of approvals and development of detailed design. Currently construction is planned to begin in mid-2018 and to be completed by the end of that year.

The infrastructure has been designed to preliminary standard, appropriate to allow estimation of costs for input into the KLBP Business Case (RMCG, 2015). The drawings in Appendix F provide typical set-out of channel, control regulators, isolation regulator, pump station and fishway. Detailed design will be undertaken after the TRLBP is fully approved.

GMW has been undertaking irrigation infrastructure works for around 100 years. The irrigation and construction components proposed for the TRLBP are consistent with the standard irrigation infrastructure works (e.g. construction of channels, pipelines and regulators) undertaken by GMW.

Table 2-8: TRLBP construction activity components

Component Type Preliminary site/works preparation Site establishment, survey, site set out, floating (transport of machinery by floats), mobilisation Environmental offsets - secure Preparation; Clearing and grubbing Land acquisition, legalities (crown land and landholder land) Construct channel - Bulk earthworks Topsoil stripping Channel excavation Compacted Bank Construction Class 3 crushed rock Topsoiling Construct Associated Infrastructure Inline regulators New vertical gates (between Middle and Third Reedy Lakes) Flow measurement Bridge at Third Reedy Lake (regulator access) Fishways Pump Station and Pipeline Coffer dams Demobilisation Site clean-up, including decommissioning of existing pump station. Fencing Landholder connections Connect existing GMW customers to pipeline

R01 39 Environmental Report

Table 2-9: TRLBP infrastructure and construction components (GMW, 2016b)

Component Type Purpose Construction footprint (approximate) Third Reedy Lake Upgrade Enable delivery of the preferred water regime by: 50m x 30m Isolation Regulator  isolating the lake from the TIS  controlling flows being diverted into Third Reedy Lake. New vertical gates to be installed. No provision for fish passage to be provided as operation of isolation regulator is essentially either open or closed. Third Reedy Lake New In line regulator (TR3) to divert flows from Middle Reedy 50m x 30m Bypass Offtake Lake into the new bypass channel Third Reedy Lake New Vertical slot fishway in in-line regulator to allow fish 15m x 20m Bypass Fishway passage to and from Middle Reedy Lake into the bypass channel Third Reedy Lake New Transfer flows of up to 750ML/day around Third Reedy 1,400m x 50m – channel Bypass Channel Lake and back to the Torrumbarry No 7 channel. ~ 7ha – temporary A small area (~7 ha) of adjacent private land (farmland) construction base including will be acquired for construction of the bypass channel. site hut, laydown of (Other infrastructure will be constructed on land already materials, vehicle parking (to managed by G-MW). be removed at completion of Channel to be fenced. construction phase) Occupational New Allow vehicular access across the bypass channel for With channel Bridge maintenance Torrumbarry No 1/7 New Pump water out of the Torrumbarry No 7 channel into the 40m x 40m Channel Pump new pipeline to supply landowners previously supplied Station from the 1/7 channel Torrumbarry No 1/7 New Pressurised pipeline of approximately 1100m in length 10 metres either side of the Pipeline in existing used to supply customers previously supplied from the existing Torrumbarry No 1/7 channel footprint Torrumbarry No 1C/7 channel. channel Torrumbarry No 1/7 Decommission Following construction of the Torrumbarry No 1/7 1100 m x 20-30 m channel Pipeline, the existing channel will be decommissioned and site levelled. Existing Decommission Removal of existing pump station at the north end of Third 30 m x 10m Torrumbarry No 1/7 Reedy Lake and levelling of site. channel pump station Native vegetation Removal of maximum 6.8 ha of native vegetation 6.8 ha (Section 5.4.1 removal (depending on final design) to enable construction of provides assumptions and infrastructure above, refer to Section 5.4.1 for further details of offset) details on native vegetation removal and offsets.

The proposed construction footprint shown in Figure 2-8 is based on a nominal 50 m for the new bypass channel (25 m either side of the centre line of the proposed channel) and 20 m for the pipeline (10 m either side of the centre line of the existing channel) due to no detailed design currently being available for the TRLBP infrastructure.

The bypass channel will be an earthen channel with a bed width of 7 m, corresponding to a typical width between inside bank crests of about 17 m. 1V:2H bank batters have been adopted (Appendix F), with a nominal water depth in the channel of 1.8 m. The 1.8 m water depth was determined to be the optimum profile to minimise earthworks and reduce the risk of intersecting the local groundwater table during construction.

Channel banks have been designed with nominally 600 mm freeboard. This gives a constructed channel width (banks and access track) of around 25 m. This does not allow for working room during construction for topsoil stockpiling and other working requirements. Typically, the design bank level is within 500 mm of natural surface, therefore requiring minimal compacted banks to be constructed. However, there is a large volume of cut to be distributed in spoil banks and as exported fill.

R01 40 Environmental Report

The actual location of the proposed channel within the nominal 50m wide footprint will be determined during detailed design and will be contingent on the outcomes of cultural heritage assessments and requirements to distribute fill. The channel construction footprint has been kept to within reasonable limits and its siting has been selected to minimize disturbance of the strip of vegetation around the edge of Third Reedy Lake and to maximise its placement on land that has been used for farming for many years.

A number of options were assessed for the location of the TRLBP infrastructure (i.e. the bypass route). There are two main options, locating infrastructure on the eastern side of the lake and locating infrastructure on the western side of the lake. The preferred location was selected so as to avoid existing habitat values that fringe the lake and any other sites of sensitivity (e.g. cultural heritage), minimising the length and extent of footprint (i.e. reducing impact area and requirement for land acquisition) and the location of existing irrigation infrastructure. The preferred option was for the bypass infrastructure to be constructed on the western side of the lake (Figure 2-8). The key benefits of this route are:  Provides the smallest construction footprint  Utilises existing channel along the north-western margin of the lake for the pipeline  The channel alignment is located predominantly in disturbed agricultural land  Avoids the lunette located on the eastern margins of the lake (cultural heritage sensitivity)  Enables integration with existing irrigation infrastructure. A number of options were considered when selecting the infrastructure for the Torrumbarry No. 1/7 channel and the bypass channel. The Torrumbarry No. 1/7 requires a capacity of 145 ML/day and both a pipeline option and channel options were assessed. It was concluded that a pump and pipeline was the better option as this has the lowest overall capital cost and whole of life cost; construction of a channel on a new alignment would involve considerable disruption to the environment and properties (and potential issues with ingress of saline groundwater as the route passes through saline areas) and a pump station would still have been required to lift water from the Torrumbarry No. 7 channel into the new channel. Therefore, the pipeline option was selected as it will result in less construction disturbance. The proposed pipeline has a diameter of 1200 mm for a capacity of 145 ML/day.

The bypass channel requires a capacity of 750 ML/day. Earthen channel technology (construction, maintenance and operation) in the region is well understood and the bypass channel is consistent with other channels in the region. These suit the low grades available. Given the capacity required (750 ML/day) and likely very large pipeline size and associated pumping capital and operating cost, a pipeline option for the bypass was not a feasible option.

Construction activities will be managed under the provisions of the existing GMW’s Connections Project’s CEMF (Section 1.2.2) and will be undertaken by the contractor in accordance with the requirements of the project’s CEMP (Section 5.3).

R01 41 Environmental Report

Figure 2-8: Third Reedy Lake Bypass Proposed Infrastructure (Source: adapted from GMW 2016a)

R01 42 Environmental Report

Operation The key operational activities for the TRLBP are:

1. Management of the water regime of Third Reedy Lake 2. Operation of the bypass channel 3. Operation of pump and pipeline 4. Environmental management. 1. Management of the water regime of Third Reedy Lake The water regime for Third Reedy Lake will be managed in accordance with an EWP, further details are provided in Section 5.2.

2. Operation of the bypass channel: GMW has the ability to operate regulators and offtakes across the irrigation system from their local operation centres using radio controlled, solar powered technology; this is called remote operation. As part of the remote operation of Third Reedy Lake, GMW will remotely operate and manage the TIS so that water can:

 enter Third Reedy Lake from Middle Reedy Lake in accordance with the requirements of the EWP at rates and times determined via the EWP.  pass irrigation supplies for TIS customers around Third Reedy Lake, further downstream to Lake Charm and Kangaroo Lake and beyond through the proposed bypass channel from Middle Reedy Lake. This will generally be during the irrigation season (August 15 to May 15), but can also occur at other times of the year depending on operation of downstream storages that are part of the Victorian Mid-Murray Storages (GMW, 2016b). It should be noted that passing irrigation supplies around Third Reedy Lake to Lake Charm and Lake Kangaroo will not change their water regime, as they are both currently connected to the TIS. Management of flood flows will also continue to be managed in line with existing accepted protocols. 3. Environmental management: The existing GMW Connections Project Water Change Management Framework (WCMF) will be adapted to manage the operation of Third Reedy Lake through preparation of an EWP (Section 5.2). Identification, management and control of the potential impacts associated with the construction of the TRLBP will be managed through preparation of an CEMP for the project (Section 5.3). Environmental water delivery will be managed and supplied in accordance with the Victorian environmental watering framework outlined in Section 5.2.

All management arrangements for Third Reedy Lake as part of the operation of the TRLBP are described in detail in Section 0, including details of the EWP and CEMP for the project.

R01 43 Environmental Report

3. Project environment The TRLBP environment can be defined as the area potentially impacted by the TRLBP which includes Third Reedy Lake, the connected wetlands in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar site and the broader Kerang wetlands system, and the proposed bypass channel and its associated construction footprint. A number of field investigations have been undertaken to understand the project environment, in particular the wetland dependent flora and fauna values at Third Reedy Lake. The surveys are publicly available at http://www.connectionsproject.com.au/kerang-lakes-bypass-project-referral-documents/. These investigations have included:

 EVC mapping, Index of Wetland Condition assessments and collection of flora and fauna data (Rakali Consulting 2013).  Fauna (fish, birds, frogs, turtle, macroinvertebrate) investigations (Biosis 2013).  Targeted surveys for Murray hardyhead (Sharpe 2014).  Flora and fauna assessment and some ground-truthing of previous investigations (SKM 2013a). These investigations were relied on to determine the current presence and the likelihood of occurrence of species at Third Reedy Lake. Details on the reliability of information within the documents and an assessment as to whether the surveys were consistent with the EPBC Act 1999 assessment guidelines or other best practice guidelines where available are provided in Appendix A.

In addition, North Central CMA (2014) developed extensive flora and fauna species lists based on the first three surveys above, plus information from Ho et al. (2006), SKM (2001), SKM (2010) and Birdlife Australia.

These investigations and survey data were used together with data from the Atlas of Living Australia, Victorian Biodiversity Atlas (DELWP, 2016a), Cook and Bayes (2014), CMA unpublished data, Annual Summer Waterfowl counts (DELWP unpublished), Kingsford et al. (2014) and Butcher and Hale (2016) to provide a more comprehensive review of the ecological values present at Third Reedy Lake.

The following sections provide details of the important ecological communities, plants and animals in relation to the project environment and within the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site boundary for Third Reedy Lake:

 Section 3.1 provides a description of the surrounding environment and an assessment of wetlands hydrologically connected to Third Reedy Lake, including the likelihood for potential impacts to these connected wetlands.  Section 3.2 provides a general description of the area of impact (e.g. Third Reedy Lake) including habitat available, identifies Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) that may be present based on the Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST), species listed in the Bilateral Agreement and general information on the plant and animal values known to be or potentially present in the assessment area (full species lists are provided in Appendix G).  Section 3.3 compares the attributes of the Third Reedy Lake that contribute to the ecological character of the broader Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, and the predicted changes likely associated with the TRLBP.

3.1 Surrounding wetlands Third Reedy Lake is ecologically and hydrologically linked to some aquatic ecosystems within the Kerang Lakes wetlands system, notably First and Middle Reedy Lakes and the Loddon River (upstream), and Little Lake Charm, Scott’s Creek, Little Lake Charm and Kangaroo Lake (downstream).Consideration of the hydrological connection of Third Reedy Lake with the aquatic ecosystems in the broader landscape is needed for determining the potential impacts of TRLBP at the site and regional scale.

Linkages with wetlands further downstream along the River Murray (eg Hattah Kulkyne) are slight. Regulated flows through Third Reedy Lake are delivered to GMW customers in the TIS or to downstream areas via Mid Murray storages and the River Murray. Unregulated flows (floods) through Third Reedy Lake may or may not

R01 44 Environmental Report

reach the Murray, depending on the size of the flood, where they combine with flows from higher upstream in the Murray system.

An assessment of the connection between Third Reedy Lake and the surrounding wetlands was done to determine whether there are any physical or hydrological threat pathways associated with the TRLBP. Figure 3-1 illustrates the location of wetlands in the project environment and their proximity to Third Reedy Lake. A summary of this assessment (Table 3-1) indicates that whilst a number of wetlands are hydrologically connected to Third Reedy Lake under current conditions, their connection to the broader Ramsar site and wetland system will be retained via the Third Reedy Lake bypass channel and therefore Third Reedy Lake will be the only wetland that experiences hydrological change.

There are some potential water quality related impacts on downstream wetlands (e.g. Little Lake Charm (and Scotts Creek), Lake Charm, Racecourse Lake and Kangaroo Lake). This is because there is potential that water in Third Reedy Lake could occasionally be of poor quality as a result of elevated salinity, low dissolved oxygen or low pH (Table 4-14), and that if this water was released to downstream environments there could be potential impacts on those environments. However, water will only be operationally released to these lakes from Third Reedy Lake when water quality is within an acceptable range. This will be achieved by passing water through Third Reedy Lake to provide dilution (see Section 4.4.1).

The proposed construction footprint (Figure 2-8) is within the immediately vicinity of Third Reedy Lake and therefore any physical impacts associated with the construction will also only occur at Third Reedy Lake. Based on this assessment, a detailed risk assessment will only be undertaken at Third Reedy Lake (see Section 4.1). This potential impact area and the values present are discussed further in Chapter 3.2.

Table 3-1: Assessment of connection with Third Reedy Lake (green = connection but no physical or hydrological impact pathway, orange = connection and hydrological impact pathway present, white = no physical or hydrological connection pathway, or very remote).

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) Surrounding wetlands First Reedy 2.4 196  Diversions from the Connected via Physical impacts: Lake (Kerang Murray River through irrigation system. Approx. 2.4km from construction footprint Wetlands Kow Swamp, Pyramid Upstream of Third therefore no potential physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Creek. Reedy Lake Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third  Floodwater from the Reedy Lake, therefore no water regime Loddon River change and no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Middle 0.6 196  Diversions from the Connected via Physical impacts: (Second Murray River through irrigation system. Approx. 200-500m from construction Reedy Lake) Kow Swamp, Pyramid Upstream of Third footprint therefore no potential physical (Kerang Creek, Reedy Lakes. Reedy Lake impacts. Wetlands  Floodwater from the Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third Ramsar Site) Loddon River Reedy Lake and will be connected to Lake Charm and Kangaroo Lake and beyond via the proposed bypass channel therefore no water regime change and no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on

R01 45 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Third Reedy - 234  Diversions from the N/A Construction impacts: Construction Lake (Kerang Murray River through footprint within proximity of the lake, Wetlands Kow Swamp, Pyramid therefore impact assessment and Ramsar Site) Creek, Reedy Lakes. mitigation undertaken (Section 4.1)  Floodwater from the Water regime impacts: Change in water Loddon River regime and occasional increase in salinity, therefore impact assessment and mitigation undertaken (Section 4.3). MNES impact: Physical or hydrology threat pathway identified, therefore impact assessment and mitigation of MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site undertaken (Section 4.3). Little Lake 5 113  Diversions from the Connected via Construction impacts: Approx. 5 km from Charm, Murray River through irrigation system. construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang Kow Swamp, Pyramid Downstream of physical impacts. Wetlands Creek, Reedy Lakes, Third Reedy Lake. Water regime impacts: Downstream of Ramsar Site) Torrumbarry No. 7 Third Reedy Lake and will continue to Channel to Little Lake receive diversions from Middle Reedy Charm. Lake via the proposed bypass channel.  Floodwater from the May be occasional increase in salinity (up Loddon River to 100 EC increase), however this is a low risk due to the ability to deliver dilution flows to mitigate any risk (Section 4.4). No potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Lake Charm, 5 520  Diversions from the Connected via Physical impacts: (Kerang Murray River through irrigation system. Approx. 5km from construction footprint Wetlands Kow Swamp, Pyramid Downstream of therefore no potential physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Creek, Reedy Lakes, Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Torrumbarry No. 7 Third Reedy Lake and will be connected to Channel to Little Lake Middle Reedy Lake via the proposed Charm. bypass channel, therefore, no water  Floodwater from the regime change and no potential Loddon River hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Racecourse 7 234  Diversions from the Connected via Physical impacts: Approx. 5 km from Lake, Murray River through irrigation system. construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang Kow Swamp, Pyramid Downstream of physical impacts. Wetlands Creek, Reedy Lakes, Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Ramsar Site) Torrumbarry No. 7 Third Reedy Lake and will continue to receive diversions from Middle Reedy

R01 46 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) Channel to Little Lake Lake via the proposed bypass channel. Charm. May be occasional increase in salinity (up  Floodwater from the to 100 EC increase), however this is a low Loddon River risk due to the low concentrations and the ability to deliver dilution flows to mitigate any risk (Section 4.4). No potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Kangaroo 9 984  Diversions from the Connected via Physical impacts: Approx. 5 km from Lake (Kerang Murray River through irrigation system. construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands Kow Swamp, Pyramid Downstream of physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Creek, Reedy Lakes, Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Torrumbarry No. 7 Third Reedy Lake and will continue to Channel to Little Lake receive diversions from Middle Reedy Charm. Lake via the proposed bypass channel.  Floodwater from the May be occasional increase in salinity (up Loddon River to 100 EC increase), however this is a low risk due to the low concentrate and the ability to deliver dilution flows to mitigate any risk (Section 4.4). No potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Kerang Weir ~7 46  Overbank flows from Connected via Physical impacts: Approx. 7 km from (Kerang the Loddon River irrigation system construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands  Backed up flows from and during floods.. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) the Kerang Weir, Upstream of Third Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third 300m downstream of Reedy Lake. Reedy Lake and no hydrological the wetland. connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Town Swamp ~10 80  Overbank flows from No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 10 km from (Kerang the Loddon River Upstream of Third construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands  Backed up flows from Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) the Kerang Weir, Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third 300m downstream of Reedy Lake and no hydrological the wetland. connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on

R01 47 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Johnsons 26 411  Regulated: No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 26 km from Swamp Western section: Upstream of Third construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang flows from Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Wetlands Torrumbarry 4/7/2 Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third Ramsar Site) channel (capacity of Reedy Lake and no hydrological 160 ML/day) connection, therefore, no potential outfalling to an hydrological impact. environmental water MNES impact: delivery conduit (80 No physical or hydrology threat pathway ML/day) and therefore no potential impact on  Natural: MNES or the ecological character of the West and eastern Ramsar site. section: Significant overbank flooding from Pyramid Creek (>2,000 ML/day) required to overtop banks Hird Swamp 31 344  Regulated: No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 26 km from (Kerang Western section: Upstream of Third construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands Regulated flow from Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Torrumbarry 1/7/2 Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third channel. Maximum Reedy Lake and no hydrological outfall rate to the connection, therefore, no potential wetland is 50ML/day. hydrological impact. Eastern section: MNES impact: 375mm siphon from No physical or hydrology threat pathway western section and therefore no potential impact on  Natural: MNES or the ecological character of the West and eastern Ramsar site. section: Significant overbank flooding from Pyramid Creek (>2,000 ML/day) required to overtop banks Lake Cullen 7 632  Regulated flow from Connected via Physical impacts: Approx. 7 km from (Kerang irrigation channel irrigation system. construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands linking to Racecourse Downstream of physical impacts. Ramsar Site) and Kangaroo Lakes Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and will continue to receive managed diversions from irrigation channel, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore, no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site.

R01 48 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) Lake 17 752  Barr Creek Drainage Only connected to Physical impacts: Approx. 17 km from Tutchewop Diversion Scheme Third Reedy Lake construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang  Groundwater during very major physical impacts. Wetlands interactions floods. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Ramsar Site) Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and only connected Third Reedy Lake. during very major floods, therefore project will not impact water regime. Not in same local groundwater system as Third Reedy Lake, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore, no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Lake William 14 96  Barr Creek Drainage No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 14 km from (Kerang Diversion Scheme Downstream of construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands  Groundwater Third Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) interactions Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection. Not in same local groundwater system as Third Reedy Lake, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Lake Kelly 12 270  Barr Creek Drainage No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 12 km from (Kerang Diversion Scheme Downstream of construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands  Groundwater Third Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) interactions Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection. Not in same local groundwater system as Third Reedy Lake, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Little Lake 12 60  Barr Creek Drainage No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 12 km from Kelly (Kerang Diversion Scheme Downstream of construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands  Groundwater Third Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Ramsar Site) interactions Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection. Not in same local groundwater system as Third Reedy Lake, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on

R01 49 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Fosters 11 225  Treated wastewater No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 11 km from Swamp discharge from Upstream of Third construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang Kerang Waste Water Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Wetlands Treatment Plant Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third Ramsar Site)  Urban stormwater Reedy Lake and no hydrological  Regional and local connection, therefore, no potential surface water run-off hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Stevensons 2.5 80  Overflow from Scotts Only connected to Physical impacts: Approx. 2.5 km from Swamp Creek but only in very Third Reedy Lake construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang large floods. during very major physical impacts. Wetlands floods. Hydrological impacts: Downstream of Ramsar Site) Downstream of Third Reedy Lake and only connected Third Reedy Lake. during very major floods, therefore project will not impact water regime. Not in same local groundwater system as Third Reedy Lake, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore, no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Lake Bael 12 647  Flow from the Avoca No Connection. In Physical impacts: Approx. 12 km from (Kerang River adjacent construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands catchment to physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: In adjacent catchment to Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. First Marsh 13 780  Flow from the Avoca No Connection. In Physical impacts: Approx. 13 km from (Kerang River via Lake Bael adjacent construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands Bael catchment to physical impacts. Ramsar Site) Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: In adjacent catchment to Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on

R01 50 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Second 13 238  Flow from the Avoca No Connection. In Physical impacts: Approx. 13 km from Marsh River via Lake Bael adjacent construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang Bael and First Marsh catchment to physical impacts. Wetlands Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: In adjacent Ramsar Site) catchment to Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Third Marsh 13 1,205  Flow from the Avoca No Connection. In Physical impacts: Approx. 13 km from (Kerang River via Lake Bael adjacent construction footprint therefore no potential Wetlands Bael and First Marsh catchment to physical impacts. Ramsar Site) and Second Marsh Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: In adjacent catchment to Third Reedy Lake and no hydrological connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Cemetery ~10 89  Overbank flows from No Connection. Physical impacts: Approx. 10 km from Swamp Pyramid Creek Upstream of Third construction footprint therefore no potential (Kerang  Stormwater Reedy Lake. physical impacts. Wetlands  Overflow from Hydrological impacts: Upstream of Third Ramsar Site) Fosters Swamp via Reedy Lake and no hydrological drain (in large floods) connection, therefore, no potential hydrological impact. MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Additional wetlands of importance identified in PMST Banrock 300-400km 1,375  Murray River via Inlet Very remote Physical impacts: station downstream Creek connection.. 300- Approx. 300-400km downstream of wetland  Overbank flows from 400km construction footprint therefore no potential complex Murray River downstream of physical impacts.  Groundwater Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: interactions No plausible impact; Site is 300-400km downstream, not directly connected and is beyond the boundary of groundwater effects can reasonably be expected to be detected, therefore, no potential hydrological impact MNES impact:

R01 51 Environmental Report

Lake/ Distance Area Current Water Source Connection with Potential impact from TRLBP Wetland (approx.) (ha) (North Central CMA, Third Reedy from Third 2017) Lake Reedy Lake (km) No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Hattah- 150-200km 955  Murray River via Very remote Physical impacts: Kulkyne downstream Chalka Creek connection. 150- Approx. 150-200km downstream of Lakes  Overbank flows from 200km construction footprint therefore no potential Ramsar site Murray River downstream of physical impacts. Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: No plausible impact; Site is 150-200km downstream, not directly connected and is beyond the boundary of groundwater effects can reasonably be expected to be detected, therefore, no potential hydrological impact MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. Riverland 300-400km 30,600  Murray River, its Very remote Physical impacts: Ramsar site downstream backwaters and connection.. 300- Approx. 300-400km downstream of tributaries 400km construction footprint therefore no potential downstream of physical impacts. Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: No plausible impact; Site is 300-400km downstream, not directly connected and is beyond the boundary of groundwater effects can reasonably be expected to be detected, therefore, no potential hydrological impact MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site. The Coorong, 300-400km 140,500  Murray River Very remote Physical impacts: and Lakes downstream  Southern Ocean connection. 300- Approx. 300-400km downstream of Alexandrina  Groundwater 400km construction footprint therefore no potential and Albert interactions downstream of physical impacts. Ramsar site Third Reedy Lake. Hydrological impacts: No plausible impact; Site is 300-400km downstream, not directly connected and is beyond the boundary of groundwater effects can reasonably be expected to be detected, therefore, no potential hydrological impact MNES impact: No physical or hydrology threat pathway and therefore no potential impact on MNES or the ecological character of the Ramsar site.

R01 52 Environmental Report

Figure 3-1: Project environment – surrounding wetlands

R01 53 Environmental Report

3.2 Proposed area of impact

As discussed in Section 3.1, Third Reedy Lake is the only wetland in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and broader Kerang Wetlands complex that has the potential to be impacted by the TRLBP. Therefore, the proposed area of impact associated with TRLBP can be defined as Third Reedy Lake (including the fringing wetland and riparian vegetation) and the proposed bypass channel and its associated construction footprint (Figure 3-2). The following sections provide a general description of the project environment within the proposed area of impact.

3.2.1 Surrounding land use

The wetland sits in a regional setting of cleared agricultural land. The intensity of agricultural use varies from annual surface and sub-surface irrigation, perennial irrigation, and dryland cropping and grazing (GMW, 2016a).

3.2.2 Habitat The area has undergone significant change since European settlement, due to land use (e.g. conversion of native vegetation to farming land and stock use), introduction of pest species (e.g. rabbits and foxes), construction of the Kerang Weir in the 1880s, and regulation of Third Reedy Lake which changed the lake’s hydrology from intermittent to permanent with a maximum depth of approximately 1.66m. These changes have resulted in a significant change to the habitat available at the site and ecological values.

Despite the changes, Third Reedy Lake is habitat for a range of fauna due to the presence of a narrow band of fringing wetland vegetation, abundant snags and permanent open water (North Central CMA, 2014). The deepest part of the lake is open water, with no aquatic vegetation. Abundant dead River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) are distributed across the shallow open water zone and the riparian margin is largely complete with continuous fringing macrophytes (Biosis, 2013). Section 3.2.4 and 3.2.5 provides information on the plants and animals that utilise the range of habitat available at Third Reedy Lake.

An Index of Wetland Condition assessment in 2013 determined that against pre-European benchmarks, Third Reedy Lake was in poor condition, but the lake vegetation was in moderate condition when assessed against EVC benchmarks for the vegetation that has established at the wetland since regulation (North Central CMA, 2016). There is currently no regular water quality monitoring program at Third Reedy Lake. The nearest monitoring station is on the Loddon River at Kerang. Water quality in Third Reedy Lake is assumed to approximate the quality of the Loddon River site because both are influenced by flows of water from the River Murray via deliveries for the TIS. Data extracted from the Victorian Water Management System (VWMS) indicates high turbidity, occasionally high salinity (EC), high Total Nitrogen (TN) levels dominated by organic nitrogen (TKN) and very low levels of nitrates (NOX), high level of Total Phosphorus (TP), but relatively low levels of Filterable Reactive Phosphorus (FRP). Values for TP, TN and turbidity exceed Victorian State Environment Planning Policies (Waters of Victoria) objectives (GMW, 2016a).

R01 54 Environmental Report

Figure 3-2: TRLBP area of potential impact

R01 55 Environmental Report

3.2.3 Matters of National Environmental Significance A Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST) search based on a 2.5 km radius from the centre of Third Reedy Lake was undertaken as part of the EPBC Act 1999 referral submitted to DEE (GMW, 2016b). A summary of the PMST search is provided in Table 3-2. The Bilateral Agreement (Section 1.2.5) also specifically identifies MNES that may be present at Third Reedy Lake and these have also been provided in Table 3-2. The following sections provide more detailed description of these MNES and an assessment of their likelihood of being present at Third Reedy Lake.

Table 3-2: PMST search based on 2.5 km radius from the centre of Third Reedy Lake and EPBC Act 1999 listed species specifically identified in the Bilateral Agreement.

EPBC Criteria PMST Bilateral Agreement World Heritage Properties None None National Heritage Places None None  Banrock station wetland complex Kerang wetlands  Hattah-Kulkyne lakes Wetlands of International  Kerang wetlands Importance:  Riverland  The Coorong, and lakes Alexandrina and Albert wetland Great Barrier Reef Marine Park: None None Commonwealth Marine Area: None None  Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and None Murray-Darling Depression Bioregions  Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands of South-eastern Australia Listed Threatened Ecological  Natural Grasslands of the Murray Valley Communities* Plains  White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland (White Box Woodland) community Flora species Flora species  Austrostipa wakoolica  Winged Pepper-cress (Lepidium  Winged Pepper-cress (Lepidium monoplocoides) monoplocoides)  Chariot Wheels (Maireana cheelii)  Chariot Wheels (Maireana cheelii)  Slender Darling-pea (Swainsona murrayana)  Slender Darling-pea (Swainsona Birds murrayana)  Australian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) Birds  Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea)  Australian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus)  Eastern Great Egret (Ardea modesta)  Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta)  White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus  Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor) leucogaster)  Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata)  Hardhead (Aythya australis)  Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus)  Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus)  Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis)  Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula  Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis) australis)  Regent Parrot (Polytelis anthopeplus Listed Threatened Species* Frogs monarchoides)  Growling Grass Frog (Litoria raniformis)  Supurb Parrot (Polytelis swainsonii)  Brown Toadlet (Pseudophryne bibroni  Painted Honeyeater (Grantiella picta) Mammals Frogs  South-eastern Long-eared Bat  Growling Grass Frog (Litoria raniformis) (Nyctophilus corbeni)  Brown Toadlet (Pseudophryne bibroni)  Greater Glider (Petauroides volans) Fish Reptiles  Silver Perch (Bidyanus bidyanus)  Striped Legless Lizard (Delma impar)  Murray Hardyhead (Craterocephalus Fish fluviatilis)  Silver Perch (Bidyanus bidyanus)  Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii)  Murray Hardyhead (Craterocephalus  Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica) fluviatilis)  Flathead Galaxias (Galaxias rostratus)  Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii)  Freshwater Catfish (Tandanus tandanus)  Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica)  Flathead Galaxias (Galaxias rostratus),

R01 56 Environmental Report

EPBC Criteria PMST Bilateral Agreement  Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus) None  Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus)  Yellow Wagtail (Motacilla flava)  Satin Flycatcher (Myiagra cyanoleuca)  Great Egret, White Egret (Ardea alba) Listed Migratory Species*  Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis)  Latham's Snipe, Japanese Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii)  Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia)  Painted Snipe (Rostratula benghalensis [sensulato]) * denotes that additional species (not in PMST but known from site) were added (GMW, 2016b)

3.2.4 EVCs and Plants

The current vegetation communities and records of individual species has been described by Rakali Consulting (2013) and Cook and Bayes (2014).

Mapping of Ecological Vegetation Communities (EVCs) (Rakali Consulting, 2013 and Cook and Bayes, 2014) has identified three freshwater EVCs associated with the lake (Tall Marsh – EVC821, Intermittent Swampy Woodland – EVC813 and Aquatic Herbland – EVC 653) (Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-3). The freshwater EVCs identified at Third Reedy Lake have a combined cover of 3,278 hectares within the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, occurring at Little Lake Charm, Lake Charm, Kangaroo Lake, Racecourse Lake, the Reedy Lake Complex, Lake Bael Bael and the Avoca Marshes, Hird Swamp and Johnson Swamp. The extent of freshwater EVCs at Third Reedy Lake is less than 10% of that found across the 23 Ramsar wetlands (Rakali Consulting, 2013).

Table 3-3: Ecological vegetation communities recorded at Third Reedy Lake (from Rakali Consulting, 2013)

EVC No.: EVC Bioregional General vegetation description (Rakali, 2013) Name Conservation Status (Victorian Riverina) EVC653: Aquatic Not listed for Victorian Small, localised areas of Aquatic Herbland occur in association with Tall Marsh. Herbland Riverina (Vulnerable Species included: Ludwigia peploides subsp. montevidensis (Clove-strip), in Murray Fans Myriophyllum papillosum (Robust Water-milfoil) Persicaria decipiens (Slender bioregion) Knotweed) EVC813: Depleted Overstorey of Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gum), with an understorey Intermittent including Duma florulenta (Tangled Lignum), Rhagodia spinescens (Hedge Swampy Woodland Saltbush), Cressa australis (Rosinweed), Cyperus gymnocaulos (Spring Flat-sedge) and Sporobolus mitchellii (Rat-tail Couch). Littoral species Eleocharis acuta (Common Spike-rush), Amphibromus nervosus (Veined Swamp Wallaby-grass), Eragrostis infecunda (Barren Cane-grass) and Carex tereticaulis (Poong’ort) are locally dominant. Includes a range of herbs characteristic of seasonal inundation including Marsilea drummondii (Common Nardoo), Senecio runcinifolius (Tall Fireweed) and the rare Asperula gemella (Twin-leaf Bedstraw). EVC821: Tall Marsh Depleted Occurs around the wetland perimeter; dominated by reeds, rushes and sedges. Typha orientalis (Broad-leaf Cumbungi) and Typha domingensis (Narrow-leaf Cumbungi) often formed mixed stands with Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani (River Club-rush); with small patches of Juncus ingens (Giant Rush) and occasionally Phragmites australis (Common Reed).

Third Reedy Lake itself has a high density and abundance of dead River Red Gums (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) across the entire shallow open water zone, which is devoid of aquatic vegetation; although, it is noted that in the 1990s, the open water zone had abundant of Robust Water-milfoil (Myriophyllum papillosum) and Clove-strip (Ludwigia peplodies subsp. montevidensis) (North Central CMA, 2014). Emergent vegetation (Tall Marsh EVC821) fringes the open water area with Typha spp. and Juncus spp. extending for approximately 50 metres from the edge of the wetland to depths of about 0.3-0.7 metres. Small (<10 m2) patches of rushes and aquatic herbs are present in some isolated areas (e.g. a small depression on the south-east boundary of the lake). The riparian fringe around Third Reedy Lake is characterised by River Red Gum and Black Box (Eucalyptus

R01 57 Environmental Report

largiflorens) overstorey, with a shrubby understorey (predominantly Tangled Lignum (Duma florulenta) (Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC813).

Seven species of conservation significance have been recorded or are potentially present at Third Reedy Lake, including the Flora and Fauna Guarantee (FFG) Act 1988 listed Winged Water-starwort (Callitriche umbonata) (Table 3-4). These species also occur around Middle and First Reedy Lakes (Cook and Bayes 2014). A number of other threatened species are potentially present but have not been recorded in the area of potential impact (e.g. the EPBC Act 1999 listed Chariot Wheels, Winged Peppercress and Slender Darling-pea). An assessment of the habitat preferences for each species has been undertaken to determine their likelihood of occurrence at Third Reedy Lake, this includes an assessment of any critical habitat identified in a species recovery plan or habitat listed on the Register of Critical Habitat under the EPBC Act 1999.

Appendix G provides a full list of species recorded or potentially present at the Ramsar site and the Reedy Lake complex.

Table 3-4 Plants of conservation significance recorded at Third Reedy Lake or potentially present at the lake and for which detailed impact assessment is required (white = presence highly unlikely; shaded = presence likely or possible).

Common

Name Scientific Name / Vic advisory FFG # EPBC @ Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Twin-leaf Asperula Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali r Bedstraw gemella Consulting 2013) Flat-top Atriplex lindleyi Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali k Saltbush subsp. lidleyi Consulting 2013) Winged Callitriche Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Water- r, L umbonata Consulting 2013) starwort Duma horrida Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Spiny Lignum r subsp. Horrida Consulting 2013) Winged Lepidium En,L En Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Lake or bypass area. Peppercress* monoplocoides Chariot Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Lake or bypass area but has been

Maireana cheelii V,L V wheels* recorded south west of First Reedy Lake (Rakali Consulting 2013). Sclerolaena Dark Roly- Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali muricata var. k poly Consulting 2013) muricata Senecio Branching cunninghamii r Recorded associated with existing Tall Marsh (EVC) (Rakali Consulting 2013) Groundsel var. cunninghamii Slender Swainsona En,L V Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Lake or bypass area. Darling-pea* murrayana * Species specifically included in the Bilateral Agreement #Vic Advisory / FFG: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable, r – rare, NT – near threatened, k - insufficient known / L – listed, I – rejected for listing as threatened; taxon invalid @EPBC: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable

R01 58 Environmental Report

Figure 3-3: Mapped EVCs associated with the current water regime of the lake (Rakali, 2013). .

R01 59 Environmental Report

Rakali Consulting (2013) also investigated whether four threatened ecological communities identified by the EPBC Act 1999 Protected Matters Search Tool (http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/protected-matters-search- tool and see Table 3-5) as potentially present were actually present, and found no intact remnants within the project environment.

Table 3-5: Threatened ecological communities potentially within the project environment

Listed threatened ecological communities Status Finding Rakali Consulting (2013) Buloke Woodlands of the Riverina and Murray-Darling Endangered Terrestrial community occurs in the local area; no Depression Bioregions intact remnants were observed within the proposed bypass area. Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands Endangered Terrestrial community that occurs in the region, but no and Derived Native Grasslands of South-eastern intact remnants were observed within the proposed Australia bypass area. Natural grasslands of the Murray Valley plains Critically Terrestrial community that occurs in the region, but no Endangered intact remnants were observed within the proposed bypass area. White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Critically Not known from the local area and no intact remnants Woodland and Derived Native Grassland Endangered were observed within the proposed bypass area.

3.2.5 Animals

Third Reedy Lake has a range of habitats, the principal ones being its extensive fringing aquatic vegetation, abundant snags used for perching, basking and roosting, and permanent open water used for foraging by piscivores. Fauna surveys undertaken at Third Reedy Lake and the broader Kerang Lakes system include Ho et al. 2006; SKM 2010; Rakali Consulting, 2013; Biosis, 2013; DEPI, 2013a and BirdLife Australia records (http://birdlife.org.au).

3.2.5.1 Birds

Thirty two (32) waterbird species have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake; this includes fish-eaters, shoreline foragers, deep-water foragers and waders. Species of conservation value (i.e. listed threatened species and/or species listed on International migratory bird agreements) include Eastern Great Egret (Ardea modesta), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster), Caspian Tern (Anas caspia) and Musk Duck (Biziura lobata). There are no records of significant waterbird breeding events; most records appear to relate to foraging or fly-over observations. Four terrestrial birds of conservation significance are potentially found at Third Reedy Lake.

Table 3-6 summarises bird species of conservation significance recorded or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake. Appendix G2 gives a full list of species of conservation significance recorded at the Ramsar site and the Reedy Lakes complex.

Table 3-6 Birds of conservation significance recorded at Third Reedy Lake or potentially present at the lake and for which detailed impact assessment is required (white = presence highly unlikely; shaded = presence likely or possible). * indicates species listed in Bilateral Agreement.

Common

Name Scientific Name / Vic advisory FFG # EPBC @ International ^ treaty Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Waterbirds Intermediate Ardea intermedia En,L Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake Egret Eastern Ardea modesta Vu,L Eastern Great Egret have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). Great Egret* Hardhead* Aythya australis V Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake.

R01 60 Environmental Report

Common

Name Scientific Name / Vic advisory FFG # EPBC @ International ^ treaty Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Musk Duck Biziura lobata Vu Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Recorded in Ramsar site, but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Is restricted Australasian Botaurus En, L En to wetland habitats where it prefers dense reedbeds (Biosis 2013) that are not Bittern* poiciloptilus present at Third Reedy Lake. Red Knot Calidris canutus En EN Y Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake Curlew Calidris Not recorded at Third Reedy Lake, but may occasionally be present along the En CE Y Sandpiper* ferruginea drainage system to the west of Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). Calidris Great Knot En,L CE Y Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake tenuirostris Greater Charadrius CE V Y Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake Sand Plover leschenaultii Little Egret Egretta garzetta En,L Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Gull-billed Gelochelidon En,L Y Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake Tern nilotica White-bellied Haliaeetus V,L Y Previously recorded in the general vicinity Third Reedy Lake (fly-over records). Sea Eagle* leucogaster Numenius Eastern madagascariensi Vu CE Y Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake Curlew s Nankeen Nycticorax NT Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Night-heron caledonicus Pied Phalacrocorax NT Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake Cormorant varius Royal Platalea regia NT Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Spoonbill Australian Recorded within Ramsar area, but not specifically from Third Reedy Lake. Rostratula Painted CE,L En Prefers range of wetland shallow habitats rather than open water habitats (Biosis australis Snipe* 2013). Caspian Sterna caspia NT,L Y Previously recorded at Third Reedy Lake. Tern Terrestrial species Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake, or broader Ramsar Site. Preferred habitat Painted is terrestrial, including River Red Gum woodlands. Grantiella picta Vu,L Honeyeater* (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/470- conservation-advice.pdf). Plains- Pedionomus Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Preferred Ce,L CE wanderer* torquatus habitat is treeless plains (Commonwealth of Australia 2016). Polytelis Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake, or broader Ramsar Site. Preferred habitat Regent anthopeplus Vu,L V is terrestrial, including River Red Gum woodlands. Current breeding habitat and Parrot* monarchoides distribution is west of Swan Hill (Baker-Gabb, D and Hurley, V. 2011). Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake, or broader Ramsar Site Superb Polytelis Preferred habitat is red gum forests and box woodlands with current breeding En,L Vu Parrot* swainsonii habitat and distribution along the Murray River around the Edwards River / Barmah Forest and into NSW (Baker-Gabb, 2011).

3.2.5.2 Fish, frogs and turtles

Table 3-7 summarises aquatic fauna of conservation significance recorded or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake.

R01 61 Environmental Report

Ten native and six exotic fish species have been recorded in Third Reedy Lake. The most abundant fish species recorded in the most recent survey by Biosis (2013) was the exotic Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio) (37% of catch abundance and 99% of the biomass), followed by the common and widespread native Carp Gudgeon (Hypseleotris compressa) (30% of catch abundance but just 0.02% of biomass). Other abundant species include Australian Smelt (Retropinna semoni) and Flathead Gudgeon (Philypnodon grandiceps). Of the native species, previously recorded, five are of conservation significance (Murray Cod, Silver Perch, Freshwater Catfish, Golden Perch, Flat Headed Galaxias). Of these, all are listed under the FFG Act 1988 and Murray Cod, Silver Perch and Flat Headed Galaxias are also listed under the EPBC Act 1999. However, Murray Cod (and Golden Perch) are likely to be the result of stocking (Hunt et al. 2010), Silver perch have not been recorded since 2006, although they were recorded in the connecting channel between Third Reedy and Middle Reedy Lakes in 2013 (Biosis 2013) and are assumed to be occasionally present in the lake. Flat Headed Galaxias have not been recorded since 1963 and are believed to be locally extinct (North Central CMA, 2014). A single Murray hardyhead (FFG Act 1988 and EPBC Act 1999 listed) was recorded in Middle Reedy Lake in 2013 (Biosis, 2013), but follow up targeted surveys failed to find any Murray hardyhead in either Middle Reedy Lake or Third Reedy Lake (Sharpe, C. 2014). Two turtle species, the FFG Act 1988 listed Murray River Turtle (Emydura macquarii) and Common Long- necked Turtle (Chelodina longicollis), have also been recorded at Third Reedy. Although the Murray River Turtle was recorded in high numbers in 2006 (total of 19 individuals), no individuals were caught during the survey by Biosis (2013) and only one Common Long-necked Turtle was recorded compared to three by Ho et al. (2006).

Three common frog species have been recorded, however, the Bilateral Agreement has identified that habitat for the FFG Act 1988 listed Brown Toadlet (Pseudophryne bibronii) also may be present in the project environment.

A total of 14 macroinvertebrates families were recorded at Third Reedy Lake in a recent Biosis (2013) survey compared to 15 by Ho et al. in 2006. Compared to the 2006 survey, the macroinvertebrate taxa recorded in 2013 are substantially different, with a lack of aquatic molluscs (Planorbidae and Physidae) and some dipteran larvae (Ceratopogonidae and Sciomyzidae). However, the change in assemblage may be attributed to non- ideal weather conditions for macroinvertebrates during the survey conducted in February-March 2013 compared to the 2006 surveys which were undertaken over a longer five month period from November to March (GMW, 2016a).

Table 3-7 Aquatic fauna of conservation significance recorded at Third Reedy Lake or potentially present at the lake and for which detailed impact assessment is required (white = presence highly unlikely; shaded = presence likely or possible). * indicates species listed in Bilateral Agreement.

Common

Name Scientific Name / Vic advisory FFG # EPBC @ Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Fish Bidyanus Silver Perch* V,L CE Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. bidyanus Has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake despite numerous surveys, but was recorded Murray Craterocephalus Ce,L En in Middle Reedy Lake (1 individual in 2013 – Biosis 2013) so potential to be present in Hardyhead* fluviatilis Third Reedy Lake, Craterocephalus Unspecked stercusmuscarum L Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Hardyhead+ fulvus Not recorded in the Kerang Lakes since 1963 (First Reedy Lake) (North Central CMA, Flathead Galaxias 2014). While they may be present in the broader landscape (Biosis 2013), they have not V,I Ce Galaxias* rostratus been detected in numerous recent surveys at Third Reedy Lake and are considered locally extinct. Maccullochella Murray Cod* V,L V Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. peelii

R01 62 Environmental Report

Common

Name Scientific Name / Vic advisory FFG # EPBC @ Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Golden Macquaria NT,I Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Perch ambigua Not been recorded in the Kerang Lakes and the last recorded Macquarie Perch west of Macquarie Macquaria En,L En Torrumbarry Weir was in 1949 (Cadwallader 1977) and is considered extinct from the Perch* australasica area. Freshwater Tandanus En, L Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Catfish* tandanus Frogs Growling Litoria raniformis En, L V Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake but suitable habitat may be present Grass Frog Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Prefers grasslands and forests were eggs are laid Brown Pseudophryne En, L under leaf litter and tadpoles develop in wet depressions and is not reliant on permanent Toadlet* bibronii wetlands. Turtles Murray River Emydura V Recorded in low numbers in Third Reedy Lake. Turtle* macquarii

3.2.6 Summary

In summary, the fauna at Third Reedy Lake includes seventy-three bird species, two native turtles, three native frogs and ten native fish species (North Central CMA, 2016), of which ten waterbirds and five fish species as well as one turtle are listed. Seven plants of conservation significance have also been recorded. However, all of the species that are of conservation significance also occur more broadly across the region, including in and around Middle and First Reedy Lakes. Third Reedy Lake is not regarded as critical habitat for any of the species recorded. A full list of species recorded at the Ramsar site and the Reedy Lake complex is provided in the Appendix G.

Impacts of a changed hydrological regime on species of conservation significance recorded or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake, including those listed in the Bilateral Agreement are assessed in Section 4.

3.3 Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site As discussed in Section 2.2.1, Third Reedy Lake is located within a broader complex of wetlands which are listed as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention.

3.3.1 Listing criteria

The Ecological Character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site has been previously described (KBR 2011) and has been recently amended (Butcher and Hale 2016). The following listing criteria and Limits of Acceptable Change are based on the amended character description of Butcher and Hale (2016).

The Kerang Lakes Ramsar Site meets criteria 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Butcher and Hale 2016). The following describes the attributes for which the site meets each criterion, and where known, the contribution of Third Reedy Lake to each criterion. At the end of the section a summary of the potential impact of TRLBP on the listing criteria is presented.

Criterion 2: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities.

R01 63 Environmental Report

This criterion is only applied to wetland dependent flora and fauna that are regularly supported. Kerang Wetland Ramsar Site meets this criterion as it regularly supports two waterbird species listed under the EPBC Act 1999 and / or International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List:  Australasian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) – Endangered (EPBC Act 1999 and IUCN)  Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea) – Critically endangered (EPBC Act 1999).

The Australasian Bittern has only been recorded from Hird and / or Johnsons Swamp in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2014, 2015 and 2016. Whilst habitat for this species is present at Third Reedy Lake (i.e. Tall Marsh) the bird has not been recorded at the lake. Recent sightings at Lake Cullen (17 individuals in 2017) are likely to be dispersing juveniles.

Curlew Sandpipers are a migratory species which typically favour estuarine and coastal habitats and occur only on some inland wetlands. The Kerang Lakes are one of the more significant inland areas utilised by the species in Victoria. Within the Ramsar site there are 150 records from the 1970s to 2015 (Butcher and Hale 2016). Between 1980 and 2015 they were recorded in 69% of years (data from the Atlas of Living Australia and the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas cited in Butcher and Hale 2016). They have been recorded at Fosters Swamp, Kangaroo Lake and Lakes Cullen, Kelly and Tutchewop.

This criterion does not apply to Third Reedy Lake as there are no records of either the Australasian Bittern or the Curlew Sandpipers.

Criterion 3: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports populations of plant and/or animal species important for maintaining the biological diversity of a particular biogeographic region.

The Kerang Wetland Ramsar site meets this criterion on the basis of waterbird diversity (Butcher and Hale 2016).

Assessment of the biodiversity values of the sites is at the scale of the bioregion, which is the Murray-Darling drainage division. The number of wetland dependent bird species recorded at Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site is 86 (this includes species that regularly occur as well as vagrants and isolated records). The Kerang Wetlands is the second most species rich Ramsar site, with respect to waterbirds, in the bioregion after The Coorong, and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert Wetland Ramsar site (118 waterbird species; O’Connor et al. 2012). In addition, data collected between 2010 and 2012 indicates that Kerang region was among the most species rich of waterbird sites in the bioregion, ranking in the top 20 sites for each year and at number four in 2012 (Kingsford et al. 2014; Butcher and Hale 2016.

Data sets specific to the Reedy Lake system are limited making it difficult to assess the contribution that Third Reedy Lake makes to this criterion. For example, eBird (http://ebird.org/content/australia/) has only two checklists specific to Third Reedy Lake identifying 19 waterbird species present compared to 50 checklists with 43 species, and 49 checklists with 43 species at First and Middle Reedy Lakes respectively.

A change in hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake, if the TRLBP proceeds, will potentially alter the species mix at the lake as the foraging, roosting and breeding habitat will change (see comments under criterion 4), Figure 3-4 shows the Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project would result in a slight reduction in the area of regulated permanent freshwater wetlands and a slight increase in the area of regulated freshwater intermittent wetlands). There is no change in hydrological regime or area for any other wetland type in the Kerang Lakes Ramsar Site.

It is highly unlikely that this will involve either a loss or gain in species numbers across the whole site because the change will not significantly alter the relative areas of the wetland types present within the Ramsar site

R01 64 Environmental Report

Figure 3-4: Area of different wetland types in the Kerang Lakes Ramsar Site pre and post Third Reedy Lake Bypass Project.

Criterion 4: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports plant and/or animal species at a critical stage in their lifecycles, or provides refuge during adverse conditions.

This criterion is met for supporting critical life stages of waterbirds, including during migration, by providing drought refuge, supporting breeding and moulting in waterfowl.

Twenty-three international migratory species have been recorded from the Ramsar site with five utilising the site on a regular basis. None of these species have been recorded from Third Reedy Lake and the proposed changes are unlikely to affect this aspect of the criterion.

The Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site supports Australian Shelduck (Tadorna tadornoides) and Musk duck (Biziura lobata) during the critical life stage of moulting. These species aggregate on the open waters of the permanent lakes during moult of primary flight feathers, when the birds are vulnerable to predators (KBR 2011). Australian shelduck have been recorded from Third Reedy Lake but there are no records for Musk duck. The relative importance of Third Reedy Lake as a moulting site is unknown.

Butcher and Hale (2016) report that 28 species of waterbird breed within the Ramsar site and is significant for colonial nesting species at the bioregion scale (Kingsford et al. 2014). In 2016 large numbers of Australian White Ibis (Threskiornis molucca) and Straw necked ibis bred at Middle Reedy Lake (North Central CMA unpublished data). It is not anticipated that changes to Third Reedy Lake would negatively affect this aspect of the criterion.

Third Reedy Lake is one of a number of permanent wetlands within the Ramsar site that are maintained as water storages (e.g. Reedy Lake complex, Lake Charm, Kangaroo Lake). These permanent wetlands provide drought refuge, particularly for waterbirds. During years of below average rainfall, as many as 55,900 waterbirds have been recorded within the Ramsar site (Butcher and Hale 2016). Specific abundances for Third Reedy are not available so the relative contribution to Third Reedy in providing vital habitat in dry years is not known.

R01 65 Environmental Report

Overall the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake are not considered likely to reduce the capacity of the Ramsar site to support critical life stages of waterbirds, and that the Ramsar site will continue to support migrating waterbirds, provide drought refuge, waterbird breeding and moulting, through the availability of more than 2000 ha of regulated freshwater permanent wetlands (Figure 3-4).

Criterion 5: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds.

Complete multi-year counts of waterbirds across all wetlands within the Kerang Lake Ramsar Site are rare. Despite this, there is some evidence that the site regularly supports > 20,000 waterbirds. Data pooled from all sources indicates that between 1977 and 2016, the annual maximum count exceeded 20,000 on 18 occasions (46 % of years). While this falls below the two thirds of seasons requirement to meet this criterion, the average maximum abundance (1977 to 2016) is 31,600 (Butcher and Hale, 2016). This indicates that the Ramsar site meets this criterion with respect to average annual maximum abundance, despite a lack of consistent counts across the Ramsar site. TRLBP could possibly impact negatively or positively in relation to the site meeting this criterion (the issue of consistent counts is a separate matter). Given that there are no significant waterbird breeding events for Third Reedy and that most observations are of birds flying over, the chance of the future water regime compromising this whole-of-site criterion seem quite remote.

Criterion 6: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 1% of the individuals in a population of one species or subspecies of waterbird. The history of records for species occurring within the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site is insufficient to determine if Criterion 6 is met. There are few dedicated counts and only records since 2003. The Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site may support 1% of the population of Australasian bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) at Johnson and Hird Swamps (Butcher and Hale, 2016), however it is unlikely to be present at Third Reedy Lake as there are no records for it at the lake.

3.3.2 Ecological character of Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site

Ecological character of Ramsar sites in Australia is described by identifying critical components, processes and services (and benefits) (CPS). Critical CPS are defined as those (DEWHA, 2008): 1) that are important determinants of the site’s unique character; and 2) that are important for supporting the Ramsar criterion under which the site was listed; and 3) for which change is reasonably likely to occur over short to medium time scales (less than 100 years); and 4) that will cause significant negative consequences if change occurs.

The critical CPS for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site have been identified as (KBR 2011, Butcher and Hale 2016):  Hydrology  Salinity  Vegetation diversity  Waterbird abundance  Waterbird diversity  Waterbird feeding  Supports a diversity of wetland types  Supports threatened species

For each of the critical CPS listed above, Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) have been set at the point that represents a potential change in the critical CPS (LAC provided in Section 4.3.4.2, Table 4-16). This typically

R01 66 Environmental Report

represents a threshold value beyond which would be a significant difference to the benchmark. Benchmark is set at the time of listing and described in the Ecological Character Description (see KBR 2011, Butcher and Hale 2016). LAC are derived only from variables that describe the critical CPS (e.g. abundance, diversity, reproductive success, ecological connectivity, and/or flow regime). LAC are not synonymous with management triggers. The exceedance of a LAC does not automatically mean a change in character has occurred, but that it may require investigation to determine whether there has been a change in ecological character.

The Bilateral Agreement requires an assessment of the potential benefits and impacts of TRLBP in the context of the relevant listing criteria for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. This assessment is provided in Section 4.3.4, including an assessment of the potential for LACs to be exceeded, consequence for CPS and implications for listing criteria.

R01 67 Environmental Report

4. Impacts assessment

The Bilateral Agreement requires a review and description of all the foreseeable environmental effects of the TRLBP on values, including MNES (i.e. matters related to the Ramsar characteristics of Third Reedy Lake and EPBC Act 1999 listed flora and fauna), and on other threatened flora and fauna of local regional and state conservation significance. The assessment has been broken into 3 timeframes associated with construction and operation of the TRLBP: 1) Short term – impacts associated with the construction of the TRLBP infrastructure (< 1 year). 2) Medium term – impacts associated with the establishment phase of the proposed water regime (0-15 years timeframe). 3) Long term – impacts associated with the long-term operation of the proposed water regime (15 years onwards).

The assessment has also been tailored to show impacts to: 1) Those species identified in Section 3.2 as being present or likely to be present at Third Reedy Lake. 2) The ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and the contribution Third Reedy Lake makes to that character. 3) Critical Components, Processes and Services that could benefit or be impacted by the proposed change in water regime.

Impacts are based on an analysis of risk pathways associated with 1) direct impacts from construction activities and 2) changed hydrological regime and consequent impacts on critical habitat or life history requirements, and any related water quality impacts (e.g. salinity or pH). It should be noted that there are no medium or long term impacts associated with construction and therefore only short term impacts have been assessed for construction activities.

Furthermore, within the medium and long term phases, the risks to values are assessed based on the likelihood of successful implementation of the new hydrological regime and success of establishment of the target vegetation communities (termed the establishment phase). In this context, there are a) risks to the successful establishment of the target vegetation and b) risks to values if the target vegetation cannot be established.

For consistency with previous assessments, the assessment reported here has adopted (with some slight modifications as outlined below) the risk framework used by North Central CMA (2014). This assessment was based on that used by Ecological Associates (2010) and uses the same principles and steps as the Australian/New Zealand Standard for Risk Assessment (AS/ NZS ISO 31000).

The assessment uses a qualitative approach to evaluate the impacts of an altered hydrological regime with the level of risk defined based on exposure and consequence (Table 4-1) (definitions of exposure and consequence, taking into consideration the likelihood/extent of potential exposure and EPBC Act 1999 significant impact criteria, are provided in Table 4-2 and Table 4-3).

Impacts/risks rated low or very low are considered to be acceptable and do not require mitigation. However, for moderate, high and very high impacts/risks, mitigation measures are required. Mitigation of some potential impacts may be inherent in the changed hydrological regime (i.e. the changed hydrological regime is expected to benefit many of the values over the long term). For other potential impacts (e.g. salinity increases), specific mitigation/contingency measures may be required if impacts are deemed unacceptable. Criteria for the extent to which benefits offset risks are summarised in Table 4-4 and Table 4-5. A revised risk rating is determined based on implementing the mitigation measures, including where the new hydrological regime is expected to benefit values. Mitigation measures and revised risk ratings are provided in Section 4.4.

R01 68 Environmental Report

Table 4-1: Matrix for defining risk to values / objectives associated with altered water regime

Impact / risks Consequence High Medium Low Low Moderate Low Very low / no impact

Minor High Moderate Low

Moderate Very high High Moderate

Exposure

Strong Very high Very high High

Table 4-2: Exposure and consequence rating descriptions (adapted from NCCMA 2014 and MNES Significant impact guidelines)

Risk Component Rating Description

Low  Exposure is remotely likely and/or weak and/or occurs to an insignificant spatial extent.  Only occurs in exceptional circumstances Minor  Exposure is rare and/or mild and/or occurs in a localised or patchy spatial extent.  Could occur in a few circumstances but not expected. Exposure  Exposure is common and/or intense and/or occurs broadly. Moderate  Could occur  Evidence to support it will happen Strong  Exposure is frequent or constant and/or intense and/or widespread.  Is expected to occur in most circumstances.  Minimal or no loss of habitat considered critical for the survival of a population Low  Area affected negligible compared to area of total population  Moderate modification, destruction, removal or decrease of local habitat, however not considered critical for survival of a significant population as a whole Consequence Medium  Population in other locations not impacted  Loss of connectivity between habitats at a local scale  Loss of habitat considered critical for the survival of a significant population High  Major reduction or loss of significant population  Serious and significant impact on Matter of National Environmental Significance

Table 4-3 Summary of impact descriptions

Rating Impact

Very low  No reasonable prospect that existing values will be impacted.  Localised impacts on species that are common and widespread across the landscape. Low  No specific risk management actions required  Loss of species of local or regional conservation significance at the site scale but with no consequence for the species at the regional (Ramsar site) scale  The threat (e.g. salinity or acid sulfate soils) has the potential to occur but it is not likely to cause significant Moderate environmental harm.  Impacts can be easily mitigated  Benefits associated with changed hydrological regime offset impacts.  Impact on EPBC Act 1999 or FFG Act 1988 listed species / communities at the site scale but with no consequence for the species at the regional (Ramsar site) scale.  The threat (e.g. salinity or acid sulfate soils) will occur and will have harmful consequences or objectives will be High significantly compromised.  Risk management is essential but is likely to be successful at mitigating impacts.  Benefits associated with changed hydrological regime may partially offset some impacts. Very High  Impact on EPBC Act 1999 or FFG Act 1988 listed species / communities at the site scale and with consequence for the species at the regional (Ramsar site) scale.  The threat is likely to occur and will have very harmful consequences.  Risk management may not be sufficient to mitigate impacts.  Benefits associated with changed regime not sufficient to offset impacts

R01 69 Environmental Report

Table 4-4: Benefit rating descriptions

Risk Component Rating Description

Low  Exposure is remotely likely and/or weak and/or occurs to an insignificant spatial extent.  Only occurs in exceptional circumstances Minor  Exposure is rare and/or mild and/or occurs in a localised or patchy spatial extent.  Could occur in a few circumstances but not expected. Exposure  Exposure is common and/or intense and/or occurs broadly. Moderate  Could occur  Evidence to support it will happen Strong  Exposure is frequent or constant and/or intense and/or widespread.  Is expected to occur in most circumstances.  Minimal or no improvement in habitat considered critical for the survival of a population Low  Area affected negligible compared to area of total population  Increase in extent of common habitat, however not considered critical for survival MNES Consequence Medium  Improvement in ecological character at the local (Third Reedy Lake) scale  Increased connectivity between habitats at a local scale  Increase in extent of habitat considered critical for the survival of MNES High  Significant improvement in ecological character that contributes to broader Ramsar site.

Table 4-5 Summary of benefit descriptions

Rating Benefit

 No benefit occurs  Target EVC does not establish Very low  No increase in habitat diversity or increase in diversity of plants and animals  No increase in species specific habitat  Target EVC does not establish but alternative vegetation provides some increased habitat diversity that could Low support requirements for common species  Target EVC is established across some of the lake bed Moderate  Localised increases in habitat diversity that could support requirements for some threatened species  Some increase in plant and animal diversity  Target EVC is established across majority of lake bed  Increased habitat diversity across whole of lake bed that would directly translate to increased abundance of High threatened species  Increased diversity of plants and animals across site  Restoration of ecological processes associated with wetting and drying at the site scale Very High  Widespread improvement in condition that also extends beyond the local scale (i.e. benefits extend to whole of Ramsar site).  Significant increase in habitat critical to the survival of threatened species

4.1 Short term impacts (construction phase) As discussed in Section 2.2.5, the irrigation and construction components for the TRLBP are consistent with the standard irrigation infrastructure works routinely undertaken by GMW and therefore any impacts to environmental values and the appropriate measures required to be undertaken to avoid and minimise risks associated with construction are well understood and documented in existing procedures. The potential environmental impacts associated with the construction phase of TRLBP are related to damage to plants and animals that occurs within the construction footprint of the proposed bypass channel, new regulating structures and associated areas required for access, laydown etc. Currently there is no detailed design for the TRLBP infrastructure; therefore, a conservative 20 m wide construction footprint at the proposed pipeline (10 m either side of the centre line of the existing channel) and a 50 m wide construction footprint for the new channel (25 m either side of the centre line of the proposed channel) have been adopted. Where this buffer was not possible (e.g. along the embankment of the lake on the channel alignment) the buffer was moved to still encompass a width of 50 m. Figure 4-1 illustrates the proposed construction footprint for the TRLBP.

Figure 4-1 indicates that the proposed pipeline alignment is within an existing irrigation channel in order to minimise the impact on the environment. The proposed channel alignment is predominantly in cleared agricultural land, however some native vegetation is present within the alignment corridor which may need to be

R01 70 Environmental Report

removed during construction. Flora and fauna surveys (Rakali Consulting, 2013 and Jacobs, 2013) within the proposed construction footprint confirm this and recorded two EVCs and four threatened or rare species within the construction footprint (see Figure 4-2 and Figure 4-3). The four threatened species are listed under the FFG Act 1988 but not the EPBC Act 1999 and therefore are not considered MNES, but are assessable under state legislation.

Potential impact pathways for construction related impacts include direct disturbance (i.e. ground disturbance and vegetation removal) and indirect impacts (e.g. sediment in runoff from disturbed sites, fragmentation of remaining habitats, increase in edge effects). An initial project environmental risk assessment has been undertaken as part of the development of this Environmental Report (Table 4-6). This assessment shows that the unmitigated construction risks are:  Disturbance to native flora and fauna without approval  Erosion and/ or sedimentation of existing channels, waterbodies or drainage lines  Potential disturbance of Aboriginal cultural heritage artefacts or places without approval  Dust emissions from stockpiles and vehicle movements impacting sensitive receptors  Introduction and/or spread of pests, weeds and pathogens  Noise and vibration caused by machinery, vehicles, generators or construction works impacting sensitive receptors or disturbance to native fish populations and their breeding  Inadequate management of contaminated soils  Contamination of soil or water from fuels, oils, chemicals or hazardous substances (e. g. solvents)  Bushfire or grassfire due to escape of sparks from machinery (e.g. welding, grinding, cutting), vehicles or other construction equipment.  Local traffic congestion, dust and mud on roads disrupting local residents

Table 4-7 summarises the outcomes for the EVC and threatened species identified as present at Third Reedy Lake. This was based on the location of these species within the construction footprint and the habitat preferences for each species.

R01 71 Environmental Report

Figure 4-1: Proposed construction footprint for TRLBP

R01 72 Environmental Report

Figure 4-2: EVCs and rare and threated species recorded at Third Reedy Lake in relation to the TRLBP construction (northern pipeline section)

R01 73 Environmental Report

Figure 4-3: EVCs and rare and threated species recorded at Third Reedy Lake in relation to the TRLBP construction (southern channel section)

R01 74 Environmental Report

Table 4-6 Unmitigated construction related risks- based on entire footprint Activity Aspect Risk description Unmitigated impacts Exposure Consequence Risk Site establishment Potential for removal, destruction or modification of native flora and fauna habitat (based on activities Moderate Medium High regional vegetation mapping) Clearing of access and construction areas Dust emissions from the clearance of access or construction areas may reduce air quality Minor Low Low

Vehicles or machinery introducing and or spreading of noxious or declared weeds and Minor Medium Moderate pathogens (including Phytopthera cinnamomi and Chytrid fungus) around site and off-site Visual change to existing landscape conditions and Landowners, residents and community disturbed or concerned Minor Low Low values Transport and Incompetent operation of vehicles or machinery causing damage or loss of native flora, habitat Minor Medium Moderate mobilisation of and collision with fauna equipment, materials Incompetent operation of vehicles or machinery causing erosion of lake /channel embankments Minor Medium Moderate and staff to or from Operation of heavy and disruption to drainage lines construction sites vehicles, machinery or Spills, leaks or release of hazardous substances causing soil or water contamination and other vehicles Minor Medium Moderate damage to native flora, habitat and fauna Vehicles or machinery introducing and or spreading of noxious or declared weeds and Minor Medium Moderate pathogens (including Phytopthera cinnamomi and Chytrid fungus) around site and off-site

Traffic conflicts or collisions and disturbances to other road users, residents and fauna Minor Medium Moderate Increased traffic movement on local road Damage to roads external to construction sites Minor Medium Moderate networks Dust emissions from heavy vehicles movements and mobilisation of machinery may reduce air Minor Medium Moderate quality

Atmospheric emissions released into the air and general reduction in amenity Minor Medium Moderate

Vehicle or machinery Bushfire or grassfire due to escape of sparks from vehicle exhausts or machinery during Minor Medium Moderate exhaust mobilisation

Disturbance and damage to native flora, habitat and fauna Minor Low Low

Heavy vehicle General operation of Incompetent heavy vehicle, machinery or equipment operation causing disturbance, damage or Minor Medium Moderate movements, heavy vehicles, loss of native flora, habitat and fauna earthworks, machinery or equipment Incompetent heavy vehicle, machinery or equipment operation causing soil erosion and Minor Medium Moderate embankment collapse.

R01 75 Environmental Report

Activity Aspect Risk description Unmitigated impacts Exposure Consequence Risk excavation, and other Spills, leaks or release of fuels, oils, chemicals or hazardous substances causing soil or water Minor Medium Moderate construction works degradation/contamination and damage or loss of native flora, habitat or fauna Incompetent heavy vehicle, machinery or equipment operation causing destruction or Minor Medium Moderate modification of aquatic flora, habitat or fauna Vehicles or machinery introducing and or spreading of noxious or declared weeds and Minor Medium Moderate pathogens (including Phytopthera cinnamomi and Chytrid fungus) around site and off-site

Atmospheric emissions released into the air and general reduction in amenity Minor Low Low

Vehicle or machinery Disturbance and damage to native flora, habitat and fauna Minor Medium Moderate exhaust Bushfire or grassfire due to escape of sparks from vehicle exhausts or machinery during Minor Medium Moderate construction Storage, handling and use of fuels, oils, Spills, leaks or release of fuels, oils, chemicals or hazardous substances (i.e. solvents) causing Minor Medium Moderate chemicals or hazardous soil or water degradation/contamination and damage or loss of native flora and fauna substances Spills, leaks or release of fuels, oils or chemicals during open trench excavation causing Minor Medium Moderate groundwater degradation or contamination Heavy vehicle, machinery or equipment operation introducing and or spreading of noxious or declared weeds and pathogens (including Phytopthera cinnamomi and Chytrid fungus) around Minor Medium Moderate site and off-site

Dust emissions from excavation, and construction may reduce air quality Minor Low Low

Small ground dwelling fauna become trapped in open excavations Minor Medium Moderate

Disturbance to local residents and fauna as a result of noise and vibration Minor Low Low Excavation activities Unidentified contaminated soil leading to inappropriate disposal or reuse Minor Medium Moderate

Loss, destruction or modification of native flora, habitat and fauna from in appropriately located, Moderate Medium High covered or managed stockpiles Dust emissions from stockpiles which are not appropriately located, covered or managed Minor Low Low causing reduced air quality Inappropriate stockpiling of topsoil and subsoil preventing reestablishment of native flora or Minor Medium Moderate pasture/crops Sediment discharge to surface water during high rainfall periods resulting in sedimentation of Minor Medium Moderate drainage lines or Lake and impacts to aquatic native aquatic species

R01 76 Environmental Report

Activity Aspect Risk description Unmitigated impacts Exposure Consequence Risk Pouring concrete Spills, leaks or release of concrete may cause disturbance to local flora, fauna and habitats Minor Medium Moderate foundations and/or degradation/contamination of soil or water

Disturbance or damage to native flora, habitat and fauna Minor Medium Moderate

Disturbance to local residents and fauna as a result of noise and vibration Minor Low Low

Installation of control Disturbance to native fish populations and their breeding as a result of noise and vibration Minor Medium Moderate structures and associated infrastructure Unidentified contaminated soil leading to inappropriate disposal or reuse Minor Medium Moderate

Bushfire or grassfire due to escape of sparks from welding, cutting or operation of other Minor Medium Moderate machinery Bushfire or grassfire due to installation, refurbishment or alterations to electricity supply Minor Medium Moderate infrastructure Sediment discharge to surface water run-off during high rainfall periods leading to sedimentation Inadequate site drainage and impacts to native fish populations and their breeding (i.e. silt in runoff smothering their gills Minor Medium Moderate and eggs) Materials transport and Construction material contaminated with weeds or pathogens (including Phytopthera cinnamomi Minor Medium Moderate storage and Chytrid fungus) and/or pests causing introduction or spread of species Excessive noise and/or Disturbance to local residents and fauna as a result of noise and vibration Minor Low Low vibration Discovery of new cultural heritage sites or relics Damage or destruction of cultural heritage items or relics Moderate Medium High Inadequate protection of known cultural heritage Damage or destruction of cultural heritage items or relics Moderate Medium High sites or relics Waste management Inappropriate storage or disposal of wastes leading to soil or water degradation or contamination Minor Medium Moderate

Inappropriate storage or disposal of construction material causing litter Minor Low Low

Levelling of site at Levelling of site Reinstatement of contaminated topsoil with weeds or pathogens (including Phytopthera completion of Minor Medium Moderate cinnamomi and Chytrid fungus) causing spread weed/disease species construction

R01 77 Environmental Report

Table 4-7: Short term impacts on significant environmental values within the construction footprint

Impact

Conservation Impact consequence Exposure Overall risk Common Name status Description of potential outcome rating Ecological Vegetation Communities EVC mapping suggest this EVC covers the whole construction footprint. On this basis, 5.4 Ha of Chenopod Low Minor Bioregional Woodland has the potential to be impacted which translates to a moderate risk under the risk-assessment Conservation pathway detailed in the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEP, 2013b). Area potentially Where possible, Status (Victorian impacted is small & any exposure will be Riverina) - However, surveys (Rakali,2013) show the EVC to be fragmented and restricted in distribution to the southern impact will be offset so avoided through Chenopod Vulnerable boundary of the footprint area. The area is also used for agriculture and existing vegetation is degraded. consequence to detailed design. If Woodland community as a whole exposure does occur, it Low (EVC103) Final bypass channel design will aim to first avoid any impact on existing vegetation and if this is not possible, is low is minor in the context

minimise impacts to the lowest practicable extent. Any removal of this EVC that may be required for of the community as a construction of the bypass channel will be offset in accordance with Victoria’s native vegetation permitted whole. clearing regulations (see Section 5.4.1 for further details)).

Even if there are localised impacts on this EVC it will not impact the EVC across the broader landscape. Intermittent Bioregional Low Minor Swampy Conservation Woodland (EVC Status (Victorian Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC is currently restricted to the fringes of the lake but extends in to the Where possible, 813) Riverina) - construction footprint in some areas. However, using a conservative assessment of actual works within the Area potentially exposure will be Depleted footprint of 10m either side of pipeline and 25m either side of bypass channel centre line, direct impacts on this impacted is small & any avoided through Low EVC will be avoided. This will be further refined through detailed design and any removal of this EVC that may impact will be offset so detailed design. If be required will be offset in accordance with Victoria’s native vegetation permitted clearing regulations (see consequence to exposure does occur, it Section 5.4.1 for further details). community as a whole is minor in the context is low of the community as a whole. Birds Low Low Eastern Great The Eastern Great Egret requires large River Red Gums for nesting (Jacobs, 2013). The construction footprint Egret FFG (En), is predominantly in cleared or disturbed land with minimal large trees. The detailed design will avoid the Loss of potential nesting Large RRG will not be Very Low (Ardea Vic Advisory (L)* removal of large River Red Gums that provide roosting and nesting habitat for threatened bird species, habitat, but there is no removed modesta) therefore there is unlikely to be any short-term impacts on this species. recorded nesting in this habitat at this location Royal Spoonbill FFG (NT) Low Low (Platalea regia) The Royal Spoonbill requires large River Red Gums for nesting (Jacobs, 2013). The construction footprint is predominantly in cleared or disturbed land with minimal large trees. The detailed design will avoid the removal Loss of potential nesting Large RRG will not be Very low of large River Red Gums that provide roosting and nesting habitat for threatened bird species, therefore there habitat, but there is no removed is unlikely to be any short-term impacts on this species. recorded nesting in this habitat at this location Plants Flat-top Has been recorded on the edge of the construction footprint for the bypass channel (i.e. 25m from the Low Low FFG (k) Very low Saltbush proposed centreline of the channel on the edge of the Lake). The construction footprint is a conservative

R01 78 Environmental Report

Impact

Conservation Impact consequence Exposure Overall risk Common Name status Description of potential outcome rating estimate and the detailed design will avoid known locations of threatened species so there is unlikely to be any Loss of individuals, Individuals will not be impacts on individuals of this species. fragmentation, but removed individuals will be identified and protected in exclusion zones

Low Low

FFG (V), Vic Winged Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Lake or in the construction footprint area. In Victoria, the No individuals recorded Species not recorded Advisory (L), Very low Pepper-cress nearest known records are >40 km from Third Reedy Lake (Mavromihalis 2010). in footprint, nearest within impact area EPBC (En) recorded individual will not be impacted. Low Low Chariot Wheels* Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Lake or bypass area. It has been recorded south west of No individuals recorded Species not recorded Very low (Maireana First Reedy Lake (~ 5 km south of Third Reedy Lake) (Rakali Consulting 2013). in footprint, nearest within impact area cheelii) recorded individual will not be impacted. Low Low Branching Groundsel Branching Groundsel is present at Third Reedy Lake in association with Tall Marsh. Individual have been Loss of individuals, Individuals will not be (Senecio recorded on the edge of the pipeline and bypass channel construction foot prints. The construction footprint is fragmentation, but removed FFG (r) Very low cunninghamii a conservative estimate and the detailed design will avoid known locations of threatened species so there is individuals will be var. unlikely to be any impacts on individuals of this species. identified and protected cunninghamii) in exclusion zones

Low Low

Slender No individuals recorded Species not recorded Slender Darling-pea is associated with heavy soils in grassland and box woodland areas (Commonwealth of Darling-pea* in footprint, nearest within impact area FFG En, L Australia undated). They are not associated with permanent water bodies and have not been recorded at Very low Swainsona recorded individual will EPBC (V) Third Reedy Lake – no suitable habitat exists around Third Reedy Lake (Rakali Consulting, 2013). murrayana not be impacted.

R01 79 Environmental Report

The only ‘high’ environmental risk rating is related to potential impacts associated with vegetation removal and damage or destruction of cultural heritage items or relics within the construction footprint (Table 4-6). The impact rating associated with vegetation removal was based on regional scale vegetation mapping that indicated the potential for native vegetation to be present in the construction footprint area. However, surveys and mapping revisions have shown much of the area that is mapped as native vegetation is cleared for agriculture (Jacobs 2016, Rakali 2013). While potential risks to native vegetation were identified as high, further detailed assessment has refined these risks (Table 4-7).

The impact rating for cultural heritage items or relics is based on the construction footprint being an area of cultural heritage sensitivity. A Cultural Heritage Management Plan will be developed for the project (if approved) to avoid any disturbance to cultural heritage items or relics within the project area. More information is provided in Section 6.4.2.

The refined assessment (Table 4-7) shows that no plants listed under the EPBC Act 1999 have been recorded within the construction footprint. There is potential for mobile animals, notably birds and frogs, to occasionally be present in the footprint area, but the area does not provide critical habitat for any EPBC Act 1999 listed animals. Therefore, no EPBC Act 1999 offsets are required for construction activities. Some of the native vegetation within the construction footprint is of state conservation significance, impacts to this vegetation will be avoided or minimised through the detail design phases and any vegetation removal required will be offset under Victoria’s native vegetation permitted clearing regulations.

4.2 Medium term impacts (establishment phase)

4.2.1 Overall impacts

As part of the proposed watering regime for the TRLBP, the establishment phase provides opportunities for establishment of River Red Gums across the lake floor by allowing for seed release, seed strike and establishment of seedlings. The regime includes filling the wetland to between 74.2m-74.56m AHD and allowing the lake to dry by natural drawdown and undertaking a series of low level fills (approximately 0.3m to 0.5m deep) following the drawdown period to encourage establishment of River Red Gums.

Impact pathways are through changes in water regime that have a direct negative impact on a value or alter cues for life history responses. Altered water regime may also result in changes in water quality that could exceed tolerance of species present, for example increases in salinity, activation of acid and low dissolved oxygen (blackwater). It is difficult to assess the medium-term impacts of the TRLBP on matters related to the Ramsar characteristics of Third Reedy Lake and impacts on threatened flora and fauna due to the likely outcomes of the establishment phase on these values being dependent on whether a species is actually present or not during this establishment phase. The assessment of impacts in Section 4.3 takes into consideration both the impacts associated with the establishment phase and the long term operational phase irrespective of whether a species that is likely to occur at Third Reedy Lake is present during the establishment phase or not. As such, this assessment provides a worst-case scenario of medium term impacts. Therefore, the medium-term impacts are considered to be covered as part of the long-term impact assessment provided in Section 4.3.

Of particular focus during the establishment phase will be the risk associated with changes in salinity, acid sulfate soils and blackwater events which are likely to pose the greatest risk during the first drawdown event. There is some uncertainty about how these risks would manifest, however these risks will be closely managed through a monitoring and adaptive management approach (Section 5.2) and mitigation measures include provisioning for a flushing flow to improve water quality and the application of agricultural lime to any acid sulfate soil hot spots. There risks are discussed in more detail in Section 4.3 as part of the long-term impacts.

The likelihood of impacts occurring hinges on the success of regeneration of the target EVC Intermittent Swampy Woodland during this establishment phase. If establishment is successful, then impacts will be reduced. Two approaches to evaluating the likelihood of success are used:

R01 80 Environmental Report

1) a comparison of the proposed water regime with the recommended water regime for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC documented by Frood and Papas (2016) in a guide to the water regime and salinity ranges of Victorian wetland Ecological Vegetation Classes. 2) An evaluation of feasibility of vegetation recovery using a recently developed Decision Support Tool (DST) by Roberts et al (2017) that asks a series of questions related to the target EVC, hydrology, threats etc. The outcome of the tool is an evaluation of the feasibility of vegetation recovery.

4.2.2 Assessment of proposed water regime effectiveness

Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC813) is a Eucalypt (+/- Acacia) dominated woodland with (variously shrubby) rhizomatous sedgy-turf grass understorey, at best development dominated by flood-stimulated species in association with flora tolerant of inundation (Frood and Papas 2016). Indicator species include River Red Gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis, shrubs such as Tangled Lignum Duma florulenta and understory species including a range of grasses, sedges and forbs tolerant of flooding (Frood and Papas 2016).

Frood and Papas (2016) note that “composition and hydrology of this EVC vary according to context (e.g. on riverine flats versus lake verges). Depth of inundation can occasionally just exceed one metre, especially in transitions towards Lake Bed Herbland (EVC 743) in lacustrine (lake) situations. If hyposaline conditions occur, then they are only at the lower end of the range (e.g. during drawdown in lacustrine situations)”.

The recommended water regime and salinity range for this EVC (Table 4-8) is for inundation frequency to range from intermittent (3-7 years in 10) to episodic (<3 years in 10) with a 1-6 month duration. Inundation can occasionally be longer than six months, but not permanent. The preferred depth range is 30-100 cm with occasional inundation >100-200 cm. Preferred salinity range is <3,000 µS/cm but will tolerate temporary and brief periods of high salinity.

If the EVC is flooded for longer than six months (e.g. where this EVC occurs in shallow lakes, it can be transitional to other EVCs, such as Tall Marsh [EVC 821], Aquatic Herbland [EVC 653] or Lake Bed Herbland [EVC 743]), adequate dry periods are important to provide recovery time (Frood and Papas 2016). Moreover, in zones subject to deeper and more prolonged inundation (e.g. with components of Aquatic Herbland [EVC 653] or Lake Bed Herbland (EVC 743]), trees are sparser, and inundation can potentially last up to nine months as an absolute maximum. In these habitats, it is desirable to have a break of a year or more from inundation (Frood and Papas 2016). If flooding is longer than nine months, then Tall Marsh and/or Aquatic Herbland are more likely to dominate.

The recommended water regime for Third Reedy Lake (Table 2-8) is within the preferred regime for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC presented in Table 4-8. A 1 in 4 year inundation is equivalent to a 2.5 year in 10 year filling cycle, which places it in the episodic category. If the option for a partial filling to 73.2 m AHD in the third year of each cycle is adopted (for adaptive management reasons), the inundation frequency increases to 5 in 10 years, which places it within the intermittent category.

Table 4-8: Recommended water regime and salinity range for EVC 813 Intermittent Swampy Woodland (Frood and Papas 2016)

Phase context of EVC representation Continuous Frequency of inundation Category Description EVC Preference Intermittent Inundated 3-7 years in every 10 Common Episodic Inundated less than 3 years in every 10 Common Maximum event duration Duration of waterlogging Duration of inundation EVC Preference 1 – 6 months 1 – 6 months Common > 6 months (but not permanent) Occasional Water depth Category Range (cm) EVC Preference Shallow to medium 30 – 100 Common Medium to deep > 100 – 200 Occasional

R01 81 Environmental Report

Salinity Category Range (mg/L) EVC Preference Fresh 0 – 3,000 Common Hyposaline > 3,000 – 10,000 Occasional

Modelling (Gippel, C.J., 2015) indicates that the duration of inundation varies across the lake bed. Figure 4-4 shows modelled storage levels for the period 1934-2010. The proportion of bed area inundated for five different duration categories (Figure 4-5) varies from around 3% of the bed area for <3 months per inundation event, ~50% of the bed area will experience 3-6 months inundation per event to ~35% of the bed area for 6-9 months per event (i.e. within the preferred duration for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC). However, ~10% of the bed area will experience, on average, 9-12 months inundation per inundation event (<0.5% of the lake bed could experience permanent inundation).

This analysis was based on the preferred water regime for Third Reedy Lake (Scenario 13 in Gippel, C. J, 2015) which includes an optional partial filling to about 73.2 mAHD in year 3 of each cycle. Under this scenario around ~10% of the lakebed (up to an elevation of 73.2 mAHD) could experience inundation of ~25 cm for a duration that is longer than the preferred duration for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC, and in these areas the vegetation community composition may tend towards Aquatic Herbland (EVC 653), Lake Bed Herbland (EVC 107), or Tall Marsh. If the partial filling event is not delivered (or only delivered in some cycles in accordance with an adaptive management plan) then more of the bed area will experience a regime suitable for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC, increasing the likelihood of achieving the objective for the target EVC across a larger area of the lake bed.

R01 82 Environmental Report

Figure 4-4: Modelled storage water level for Scenario 13 (including intermediate filling) (adopted for Business Case) from Gippel, C. J (2015)

Figure 4-5: Average proportion of bed area inundated under different inundation duration categories relevant to EVC types under Scenario 13 (including intermediate filling) (based on data from Gippel, C. J (2015)

From a salinity perspective, modelling indicates that during the drawdown phase salinity could increase, particularly if the local groundwater level is high compared to lake level (e.g. during wet periods) (URS 2014). Modelling for Scenario 13 (the adopted water regime) suggests that the 50th%ile salinity increase is likely to be around 500 µS/cm and the 80th%ile salinity increase is likely to be ~3,300 µS/cm. Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC prefers salinity <3,000 mg/L (equivalent to ~4,500 µS/cm), but can tolerate temporary and brief increases in salinity above 3,000 mg/L (Table 4-8). The outcome is that the salinity range in the wetland is likely to be suitable for the majority of time. However, it is recommended that management intervention through a monitoring and adaptive management approach be undertaken if salinity increases for a prolonged period of time above the 3,000 mg/L (4,500 µS/cm).

R01 83 Environmental Report

The proposed water regime for the Third Reedy Lake bypass project is broadly consistent with the recommended regime for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC documented by Frood and Papas (2016). Provided potential salinity impacts can be managed there is a good likelihood that that the recommended water regime will be suitable to support to the target EVC across the majority (up to 90%) of the lake, possibly with the exception of the deepest parts of the lake if the duration of inundation regularly exceeded 9 months (i.e. if the optional intermediate filling event occurs regularly). In these areas (~10% of the wetland area) the vegetation community may include species more indicative of Aquatic Herbland, Lakebed Herbland or Tall Marsh.

4.2.3 Feasibility of vegetation recovery

Successful establishment of the target EVC (or similar) is critical to the success of TRLBP in terms of the predicted benefits of the project. The likelihood of, or time taken for, successful establishment cannot be assumed or overlooked. An establishment water regime has been proposed, but it is unclear whether this regime is appropriate. The establishment regime will need to be tailored to 1) provide conditions conducive to germination and 2) provide conditions conducive to seedling growth prior to subsequent inundations (i.e. to avoid drowning seedlings). Monitoring will be required to assess t natural re-generation and decisions will need to be made as to if and when active revegetation (e.g. direct seeding, plugging etc.) would be required. The establishment phase is proposed to take up to 12 years based on 3 4-year cycles but monitoring will be needed to determine if establishment has been successful and when the long-term water regime can be commenced. Furthermore, 12 years is not long enough for mature River Red Gums to develop, so establishment needs to be considered in terms of the regime and time needed to ensure that River Red Gums can reach a stage where they can survive and ultimately mature under the proposed long-term regime, rather than as representing an endpoint in itself.

Finally, success itself in terms of what constitutes an acceptable vegetation community needs to be determined. It may be that Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC does not establish but this does not mean that the project itself is not successful. Alternative vegetation communities may still provide a diverse habitat and conditions suitable for an increased diversity of waterbirds.

In order to determine the broad likelihood of success, a wetland vegetation recovery DST (Roberts et al 2017) was used to evaluate the likelihood of successful restoration of Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC 813). The tool asks seven questions addressing habitat suitability, potential for passive regeneration, and establishment potential for the target EVC. Answers to questions are provided in Table 4-9.

Table 4-9: Wetland vegetation recovery potential (based on Roberts et al 2017) Question Response

1. Do the tolerances of the target EVC match the Likely – proposed hydrological regime is suitable for the target EVC. hydrological characteristics of the target area? 2. Does the target EVC match the Wetland Likely – target EVC is already present at the site and is an important Landscape and Component for that part of EVC type with the landscape. Victoria? 3. Is passive regeneration feasible in the target Possible - most indicator species are already present; some seed area? bank is likely to be present within the existing site or could reach the site from adjacent area (via inflowing water). 4. Is assisted regeneration of Indicator Species Possible – most indicator species are likely to be available as seed feasible in target area? source or seedlings if required 5. Is the target area free of biotic constraints on Unlikely – target area is likely to experience weed growth and establishing the target EVC? potential mud foragers (carp) that could prevent the target EVC from establishing. 6. Can the biotic constraints on establishment be Likely – weed control, stock exclusion, public access to the drying managed? wetland and carp management are also possible. 7. Are there ways to establish the target EVC if Likely – more advanced River Red Gums could be planted across biotic constraints cannot be effectively the site, but the establishment of ground cover species may still be managed? difficult.

The outcome of the evaluation indicated the proposed water regime is likely to match that required by the target EVC (Intermittent Swampy Woodland), the target EVC matches the wetland landscape and the target EVC is currently present within the target area (fringing the existing lake). However, there is some uncertainty about whether passive regeneration will be successful, and if not assisted regeneration will be required (in the form of active revegetation). Moreover, the area is likely to contain a number of biotic constraints, including weeds and

R01 84 Environmental Report

occasional presence of carp (during the inundation phases), which may reduce establishment potential. Hence weed control, and possibly carp control, may be required to manage biotic constraints and increase the likely success of establishment.

Overall the evaluation indicates that recovery of the target EVC is likely to be successful, but some intervention may be required to in the form of active revegetation (seeding and/or pugging) and in the management of biotic constraints (weeds, carp, public access/disturbance). It is uncertain how long it will take for the target EVC to establish. Monitoring will be required to: 1) determine if and when active intervention is required 2) manage the water regime to avoid inundating emerging vegetation until it can cope with inundation 3) manage biotic constraints 4) decide when vegetation has established to the point that the long-term hydrological regime can be implemented.

4.3 Long term impacts (operational phase)

The assessment of long term impacts is based on an assumption that the implementation of the proposed water regime is successful at establishing a vegetation community consistent with Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC across the majority of the lake bed. Impacts are assessed at a community and individual species scale, and on the characteristics of the wetland that contribute to Ramsar status.

4.3.1 Impacts on ecological communities, habitats and process

Assuming the establishment phase is successful there are low to very low risks to ecological communities currently present at the lake and low risks to habitats, feeding and breeding opportunities for the majority of waterbird species recorded or potentially present at the lake (Table 4-10). However, the assessment also identified a range of potential risks, including moderate impacts on waterbird breeding success if drying occurs before chicks have fledged and death of fish and turtles (high impact) if complete drying occurs and individuals cannot exit the lake (Table 4-10).

R01 85 Environmental Report

Table 4-10: Impacts for ecological communities, habitat, feeding and breeding opportunities and ecological processes Value Status Nature of outcomes Consequence Exposure risk rating

Ecological communities Chenopod Bioregional Low Low Woodland Conservation Chenopod Woodland EVC is on the southern side of the lake but above the current full supply level. (EVC103) Status Water level does not extend into this area therefore changes to water level within wetland will not Area of existing EVC will Existing EVC will not Very low (Victorian impact on this zone. There is potential for a slight expansion of chenopod woodland into areas around not be impacted by altered be exposed to Riverina) - the lake margin as a drying regime is introduced, but overall benefits are considered very low. hydrological regime changed regime Vulnerable Intermittent Bioregional Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC is currently restricted to the fringes of the lake. The proposed Low Low Swampy Conservation water regime aims to maintain conditions for this community and if successful will result in a significant Woodland (EVC Status expansion in area of this community at Third Reedy Lake. Also, a number of threatened plants are New water regime aims to Area of existing EVC 813) (Victorian associated with Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC at Third Reedy Lake, so expansion of this EVC expand this EVC beyond is small compared to Very low Riverina) - could benefit those species. At a landscape scale, the total area of restoration is relatively small and its current extent area that will benefit Depleted would not constitute a very high benefit (i.e. does not contribute habitat critical to the survival of threatened species across the landscape), so the overall benefit is considered high. Tall Marsh Bioregional Low Minor (EVC 821) Conservation Tall Marsh currently occurs around the lake perimeter. Tall Marsh prefers permanent inundation with Status only slight variability in water level. There may be some reduction in the existing areas of Tall Marsh, EVC in existing location Redistribution is at the (Victorian however, it is also likely that Tall Marsh could establish in deeper areas of the lake where the duration will experience a changed local (TRL) scale but Riverina) - of inundation may be too long for Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. Furthermore, Tall Marsh regime that could result in not significant at Low Depleted occurs extensively in other nearby (<5 km away) lakes (e.g. First and Middle Reedy) and any changes a redistribution, but it will landscape scale (i.e. in the area and distribution of Tall Marsh at Third Reedy Lake will not represent a significant change at continue to be present at does not extend to the landscape level of this EVC. the lake but in a new other locations within location. the Ramsar site) Habitat Diversity of Includes a Expansion of Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC will increase the diversity and complexity of Low Low understory number of Vic understory vegetation in the bed of the wetland (compared to current open water with no macrophyte vegetation in Advisory listed community). This will also result in an increase in habitat diversity and complexity for a range of New water regime aims to Area of existing EVC Very low bed of wetland species. species. Assuming successful establishment of the target EVC, the increased diversity and complexity increase diversity is small compared to is expected to occur across the majority of the lake bed, so the overall benefit is expected to be high. area that will benefit Feeding and breeding opportunities Waterbird Includes a Low Minor An increase in habitat complexity, and over time, increased abundance of River Red Gums, could breeding number of provide increased opportunities for waterbird breeding during periods of inundation. Furthermore, success FFG listed TRL is not regarded as Potential impact is inundation acts as a stimulus for breeding for some waterbirds. However, it may take many years for species significant for waterbird only at local (TRL) conditions to become conducive to successful breeding. The success of breeding and recruitment will breeding. Birds that do scale and does not depend on how the water regime is managed with respect to depth and duration of inundation and Low breed at TRL do not affect other wetlands drawdown rates. If breeding occurs but drawdown is too rapid, nests or fledglings for some species contribute to Ramsar where significant bird could be abandoned leading to a negative outcome. However, if breeding does occur and the water status breeding that regime is managed proactively to promote breeding success, then overall outcomes would be contributes to Ramsar moderate to high. status occur.

R01 86 Environmental Report

Value Status Nature of outcomes Consequence Exposure risk rating

Waterbird Includes a Wetlands are highly productive during the re-wetting and drawdown phase. Wetting and drying Low Minor feeding number of regimes will create a range of different waterbird feeding opportunities that could benefit different FFG listed bird species at different points in the wetting and drying cycle. Even if the target EVC does not establish, it TRL is not regarded as Potential impact is species is expected that the proposed regime will increase the diversity of feeding opportunities compared to significant for waterbird only at local (TRL) the current regime. However, it is not clear which species will specifically benefit. It is unlikely the new feeding. Birds that do scale and does not Low regime will significantly enhance conditions for critical threatened species but will create an overall feed at TRL do not affect other wetlands increased opportunity for a range of species that already exist within the area, especially for species contribute to Ramsar that contributes to that might have breeding colonies at nearby (< 5 km away) permanent lakes (e.g. Middle Reedy, Little status Ramsar status occur. Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake). Frog feeding Incudes FFG Low Low and breeding listed Brown Increased habitat complexity and a complex wetting and drying regime will create a range of Toadlet. hydrological habitats suitable for difference frog species. Three common species are already present Species recorded at TRL Altered regime will at Third Reedy Lake and it is expected that conditions will be enhanced for these species. It is unclear are common and improve conditions for Very low if new species would colonise lake – this would depend on a source of recruits in connected widespread frog breeding environments.

Turtle feeding Incudes FFG Medium Minor and breeding listed Murray Common Long Necked Turtle and Murray River Turtle are present in Third Reedy Lake. Common River turtle. Long Necked Turtle is an adaptable species that can also move to more favourable habitats if A drying regime will impact Potential impact is conditions dictate. However, Murray River Turtle are less mobile and require permanent inundation for on suitability for species only at local (TRL) Moderate long term survival. The change regime at Third Reedy Lake may make conditions less desirable for that require permanent scale and does not turtles, and this is considered to represent a moderate impact at a local level, but a high risk at a water contribute to Ramsar species level for Murray River Turtle (see Table 4-12 below). status

Lowland Includes FFG A range of native fish have been recorded in Third Reedy Lake, including some species that are listed Medium Minor Riverine Fish and EPBC on the Lowland Riverine Fish Community of the Southern Murray-Darling Basin. All individuals will be Community of listed fish impacted by a dry phase. Individuals that do not exit the wetland during the drawdown phase may die A drying regime will impact Potential impact is the Southern species as the wetland dries (depending on whether full drying occurs). On this basis, there is a high risk to on suitability for species only at local (TRL) Murray-Darling individuals present in the lake and some connectivity between wetlands is important during the drying that require permanent scale and does not Basin phase to help fish move to refuge sites upon drying. Upon re-wetting Third Reedy will be a highly water, but lake is not contribute to Ramsar Moderate productive environment for fish and will recolonise with individuals from nearby connected locations critical habitat. status (especially via Middle Reedy Lake). Despite the high risk to individuals trapped in the drying lake, the species present at Third Reedy Lake are also present more broadly across the landscape and Third Reedy Lake is not critical habitat for any of these species so risk to the fish community at the individual species scale and at the regional scale the risks are low (also see Table 4-12 below for individual species impacts and see Section 4.4 for general risk mitigation and residual risk assessment). Ecological processes Ecological Most studies suggest that the drying and oxidation of wetland and lake bed sediments promotes the Low Low process, mineralisation (breakdown) of organic nitrogen and phosphorus that is stored in the sediments into nutrient and more readily available, inorganic forms. Upon rewetting the inorganic (bioavailable) forms are produced Current regime does not Any existing organic matter and released to the water column (see SKM 2013a). support diversity of processes occur at Very low cycling The actual amounts of nutrients released from sediment on re-wetting will depend on multiple factors, ecosystem process small scale within the such as the amount of organic material present in the sediment, the oxygen profile that establishes on current zone of water re-wetting etc. level variability.

R01 87 Environmental Report

Value Status Nature of outcomes Consequence Exposure risk rating

Nutrients released on re-wetting may help promote rapid macrophyte growth within the newly flooded wetland, or in the absence of macrophytes, may contribute to the development of algal growth. However, this does not necessarily represent a risk to ecological values as wetting and drying regimes promote more productive and diverse ecosystems than permanent inundation (Boulton and Brock 1999). So overall risks from altered nutrient and carbon dynamics is considered low, and is indeed one of the benefits of introducing a drying regime.

R01 88 Environmental Report

4.3.2 Impacts on threatened species

Potential impacts on threatened species identified as present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake (from Section 3.2) is based on the consequence to that species of any impact and their likely exposure. The assessment has considered the likelihood of particular species being present at Third Reedy Lake, and whether Third Reedy Lake provides critical habitat for the species that is not found elsewhere and where any impacts at Third Reedy Lake would materially impact on the species survival, both at Third Reedy Lake or elsewhere (e.g. in connected environments). Furthermore, the extent to which Third Reedy Lake contributes to Ramsar site character and whether impacts associated with changed hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake would impact more broadly on Ramsar character or limits of acceptable change, were also considered. The definition of critical habitat is that presented in the EPBC Act 1999 Significant Impact Guidelines, and refers to areas that are necessary (DoE 2013):  for activities such as foraging, breeding, roosting, or dispersal  for the long-term maintenance of the species or ecological community (including the maintenance of species essential to the survival of the species or ecological community, such as pollinators)  to maintain genetic diversity and long term evolutionary development, or  for the reintroduction of populations or recovery of the species or ecological community. This may include habitat identified in a recovery plan as habitat critical for that species; and/or habitat listed on the Register of Critical Habitat under the EPBC Act 1999 (DoE 2013). Where there are records for the species at Third Reedy Lake the likelihood of being affected is based on whether the species regularly occurs at the site and if the proposed changes would result in loss of the habitat and or species from the lake.

The significance of impacts is assessed using the guidelines for assessment of MNES (DoE 2013). An action is likely to have a significant impact on a critically endangered or endangered species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will (DoE 2013):

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

4.3.2.1 Birds Table 4-11 summarises the impacts for birds identified as present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake. Of the species considered for assessment, low or very low impacts were predicted for waterbirds on the basis that Third Reedy Lake in its current condition does not provide critical habitat for the long-term survival of any critically endangered or endangered species, and changes to the condition will not mean a species is likely to decline. Indeed, for some waterbirds, the proposed water regime could improve conditions and ultimately benefit those species by providing more diverse foraging and breeding habitat. Specifically, for waterbird species identified in the bilateral agreement for assessment, there are low risks to Australian painted snipe, Australasian Bittern, Eastern Great Egret, White-bellied Sea Eagle, Hardhead and Curlew Sandpiper because Third Reedy Lake in its current condition does not provide ideal habitat for these species (see Table 4-11 for details).

R01 89 Environmental Report

An assessment was also made of potential impacts on four threatened terrestrial species listed on the Bilateral Agreement as requiring assessment: Regent Parrot, Superb Parrot, Painted Honeyeater and Plains Wanderer. None of these species have been recorded in the vicinity of Third Reedy Lake, the habitat that is currently present at the lake is not suitable for these species, and if they were present, their preferred habitat will not be affected by an altered water regime at the lake (see Table 4-11 for details).

Table 4-11: Summary of potential long-term outcomes for birds Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk The Australasian Bittern has been recorded at various locations within Low Low the Kerang Lakes Ramsar site (Hird and Johnsons Swamp and Lake Cullen. The presence of Australasian bittern contributes to the Ramsar Current regime Not recorded listing criteria 2 (Butcher and Hale 2016). does not in the vicinity The preferred habitat for this species is dense reed beds, some of which provide critical of Third Reedy is present at Third Reedy Lake (i.e. Tall Marsh), but the species has not habitat. Lake been recorded at Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013) and Third Reedy Lake Australasian does not currently support this species and hence does not contribute to Very low Bittern* the Ramsar site with regards to Listing Criteria 2. A change in hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake may change the distribution of Tall marsh, but Tall marsh is still expected to remain at Third Reedy Lake. Furthermore, the altered hydrological regime at TRL will not alter the hydrological regime or availability of suitable habitat at other wetlands where Australian Bittern has been recorded. Hence there will be no impact on this species, or the contribution it makes to the Ramsar listing criteria 2. Recorded within Ramsar area, but not specifically from Third Reedy Low Low Lake. Prefers a range of shallow wetland habitats, specifically shallow and exposed mud flats. Avoids deep open water areas and dense Current regime Not recorded reeds (Biosis 2013). Preferred habitat is currently not present at Third does not in the vicinity Reedy Lake (Butcher and Hale 2016) – the current permanently support this of Third Reedy Australian inundated regime means there are no shallow/exposed mudflats and species or Lake. New Painted Very low the margins of the lake is dominated by reeds. Permanent inundation of provide critical regime may Snipe* naturally temporary wetlands is a threat to this species habitat. improve (http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- habitat. bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=77037). The proposed altered hydrological regime will not impact existing individuals and will potentially create improved habitat. Caspian Terns feed primarily on fish which will be impacted by the Low Minor proposed regime (Rogers and Ralph, 2010). However, Caspian tern has not been recorded at Third Reedy Lake since 1998, furthermore, Current regime Potential Caspian suitable foraging habitat will remain in the landscape within close does not impact is only Low Tern proximity to Third Reedy Lake, so overall impacts are considered low. provide critical at local (TRL) Altered water regime is unlikely to result in an increase in habitat habitat. scale suitable for this species. Not recorded in Third Reedy Lake, but may occasionally be present Low Low along the drainage system to the west of Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). Preferred habitat includes tidal mud flats and drying ephemeral Current regime Not recorded Curlew lake margins does not in the vicinity Very low Sandpiper* (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/85 provide critical of Third Reedy 6-conservation-advice.pdf). Third Reedy Lake does not provide habitat. Lake preferred or critical habitat for this species and an altered hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake will not impact on this species. The Eastern Curlew is found on intertidal mudflats and sandflats, often Low Low with beds of seagrass, on sheltered coasts, especially estuaries, mangrove swamps, bays, harbours and lagoons Current regime Not recorded (http://www.birdlife.org.au/bird-profile/eastern-curlew). They have been does not in the vicinity recorded at the Ramsar site but not specifically from Third Reedy Lake. provide critical of Third Reedy Eastern There have been no records of this species post Ramsar listing and habitat. Lake Very low Curlew they are not considered to contribute to current characteristics (Butcher and Hale 2016). Records from inland systems are most likely to be of individuals resting on their migration to coastal areas (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/84 7-conservation-advice.pdf). Third Reedy lake in its current form does not provide shallow mudflat habitats favoured by this species. Eastern Great Egret has been recorded at Third Reedy Lake (Biosis Low Minor 2013). They prefer permanent waterbodies, but also frequent shallows of deep permanent wetlands and semi-permanent swamps. The Current regime Potential Eastern proposed regime will move the site to an intermittent wetland, which will does not impact is only Low Great Egret* also impact on fish which is their primary food source (Rogers and provide critical at local (TRL) Ralph, 2011). Although the regime will shift the lake from permanent to habitat. scale intermittent, an increase in the diversity of littoral zone vegetation as well as nesting and breeding habitat (i.e. flooded trees) may make Third

R01 90 Environmental Report

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk Reedy Lake a more desirable breeding location during wet phases. Permanent wetlands will remain at the landscape scale. Risks are considered low with potential benefits associated with more diverse littoral zones that could improve conditions for this species on some occasions. Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Low Low Their preferred habitat is sandy estuaries with tidal mudflats (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/86 Current regime Not recorded Great Knot Very low 2-conservation-advice-05052016.pdf), which are not present at Third does not in the vicinity Reedy Lake. Records from Kerang Lakes are likely to be of resting provide critical of Third Reedy individuals during migrations to coastal areas. habitat. Lake Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Low Low Their preferred habitat is sandy estuaries with tidal mudflats Greater Sand (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/87 Current regime Not recorded Very low Plover 7-conservation-advice-05052016.pdf), which are not present at Third does not in the vicinity Reedy Lake. Records from Kerang Lakes are likely to be of resting provide critical of Third Reedy individuals during migrations to coastal areas. habitat. Lake Gull-billed Terns are found in freshwater swamps, brackish and salt Low Low lakes, beaches and estuarine mudflats, floodwaters, sewage farms, irrigated croplands and grasslands (http://www.birdlife.org.au/bird- Current regime Not recorded Gull-billed profile/gull-billed-tern). They have been recorded at the Ramsar site but does not in the vicinity Very low Tern not specifically from Third Reedy Lake. Although their nomadic nature provide critical of Third Reedy means they are likely to be present from time to time. Feeding occurs habitat. Lake over water, which will still remain within the broader Ramsar site. Low Minor Hardheads prefer wetlands with abundant aquatic vegetation and deep

water for foraging. The regime will increase the variability of the wetland Current regime Potential reducing open water opportunities (Rogers and Ralph, 2011). Hardhead does not impact is only Hardhead* has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 2006. Although the Low provide critical at local (TRL) regime will reduce the depth of the wetland (reducing open water habitat. scale. Species foraging opportunities) it will increase the diversity of vegetation which is not recorded important for nesting but overall benefits are likely to be low. since 2006. Intermediate Egret has been recorded in the Ramsar site but there are Low Low no known records Third Reedy Lake. They prefer shallow wetlands and billabongs with extensive vegetation. Although the regime will shift the Current regime Not recorded lake from permanent to intermittent, an increase in the diversity of littoral does not in the vicinity Intermediate zone vegetation as well as nesting and breeding habitat (i.e. flooded provide critical of Third Reedy Very low Egret trees) may make Third Reedy Lake a more desirable breeding location habitat. Lake during wet phases. Permanent wetlands will remain at the landscape scale. Risks are considered low with potential benefits associated with more diverse littoral zones that could improve conditions for this species on some occasions. Little Egret inhabits tidal mudflats and salt and freshwater wetlands. Low Minor They forage in shallow water, feeding on invertebrates fish and amphibians. Colonial nesting occurs over water Current regime Potential (http://birdlife.org.au/bird-profile/Little-Egret). Although the regime will does not impact is only Little Egret shift the lake from permanent to intermittent, an increase in the diversity provide critical at local (Third Low of littoral zone vegetation could provide an increase in forage habitat for habitat. Reedy Lake) this species and also an increase in the abundance of suitable food scale resources, especially invertebrates and amphibians during wet phases resulting in a potential benefit for this species. Low Minor Musk Ducks are almost entirely aquatic and prefer stable conditions

with abundant aquatic vegetation. They nest over deep water and dive Current regime Potential up to 6 m in search of aquatic invertebrates (Rogers and Ralph, 2011). does not impact is only The changed water regime means Third Reedy Lake may not provide Musk Duck provide critical at local (TRL) Low suitable habitat under all occasions. However, Musk Duck has not been habitat. scale. recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 2006 and even under the current Species not regime the lake does not provide ideal habitat (i.e. too shallow) so recorded since overall risks are considered low. 2006. Nankeen Nightherons are nocturnal feeders that utilise well vegetated Low Minor littoral zones with tall emergent vegetation. Although they prefer permanent wetlands they have been observed on temporary Current regime Potential waterbodies. They nest in trees, shrubs and reed beds and feed on does not impact is only aquatic animals, particularly fish, frogs and insects (Rogers and Ralph, provide critical at local (Third Nankeen 2011). The proposed regime may impact on feeding opportunities. habitat. Reedy Lake) Low Night-heron Crome (1988) (cited in Rogers and Ralph, 2011) documented that scale Nankeen night heron breeding is triggered by flooding and that there is an increase in success following a few months of drying. The regime will promote these conditions, particularly stimulating flooding upon re- wetting and could result in improved habitat conditions for this species on some occasions.

R01 91 Environmental Report

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake, or broader Ramsar Site. Low Low Preferred habitat is terrestrial, including River Red Gum woodlands. Painted (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/47 Current regime Not recorded Very low Honeyeater* 0-conservation-advice.pdf). Third Reedy Lake does not provide does not in the vicinity preferred or critical habitat for this species and an altered hydrological provide critical of Third Reedy regime at Third Reedy Lake will not impact on this species habitat. Lake Pied Cormorants prefer stable water levels typical of permanent Low Minor freshwater wetland systems and feed primarily on fish and crustaceans (Rogers and Ralph, 2011). The proposed regime will result in a drying Current regime Potential phase which will impact on fish. The proposed regime will reduce Pied does not impact is only Pied Cormorant use of Third Reedy Lake. Suitable foraging habitat will provide critical at local Third Low Cormorant remain in the landscape within close proximity to Third Reedy Lake and habitat. Reedy Lake regeneration of River Red Gums may provide suitable nesting habitat at scale times when Third Reedy Lake is inundated so overall impact is considered low. Low Low Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake.

Preferred habitat is treeless plains (Commonwealth of Australia 2016). Plains- Current regime Not recorded Third Reedy Lake does not provide preferred or critical habitat for this Very low wanderer* does not in the vicinity species (Butcher and Hale 2016) and an altered hydrological regime at provide critical of Third Reedy Third Reedy Lake will not impact on this species. habitat. Lake Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Low Low Their preferred habitat is sandy estuaries with tidal mudflats (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/85 Current regime Not recorded Red Knot Very low 5-conservation-advice-05052016.pdf), which are not present at Third does not in the vicinity Reedy Lake. Records from Kerang Lakes are likely to be of resting provide critical of Third Reedy individuals during migrations to coastal areas. habitat. Lake Not known from Third Reedy Lake. Current breeding habitat and Low Low distribution is west of Swan Hill (Baker-Gabb, D and Hurley, V. 2011). Preferred habitat is terrestrial, including River Red Gum woodlands Current regime Not recorded Regent (Baker-Gabb, D and Hurley, V. 2011). Third Reedy Lake does not does not in the vicinity Very low Parrot* provide preferred or critical habitat for this species (Butcher and Hale provide critical of Third Reedy 2016) and an altered hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake will not habitat. Lake impact on this species. The Royal Spoonbill inhabits shallow freshwater and saltwater wetlands, Low Minor intertidal mud flats and wet grasslands, including permanent and temporary inland waters. Preferred food resources include fish, Current regime Potential crustaceans and other invertebrates in depths to ~40 cm. Colonial does not impact is only nesting occurs over water or in dense reedbeds provide critical at local Third Royal (http://birdlife.org.au/bird-profile/royal-spoonbill). Although the regime habitat. Reedy Lake Low Spoonbill will shift the wetland from permanent to intermittent an increase in the scale diversity of littoral zone vegetation, including an increase in the area of shallow habitat as drawdown occurs could provide an increase in foraging habitat for this species and also an increase in the abundance of suitable food resources. Not known from Third Reedy Lake. Preferred habitat is red gum forests Low Low and box woodlands with current breeding habitat and distribution along Superb the Murray River around the Edwards River / Barmah Forest and into Current regime Not recorded Very low Parrot* NSW (Baker-Gabb, 2011). Third Reedy Lake does not provide does not in the vicinity preferred or critical habitat for this species and an altered hydrological provide critical of Third Reedy regime at Third Reedy Lake will not impact on this species. habitat. Lake White-bellied Sea Eagle has been recorded in the general vicinity of Low Minor Third Reedy Lake (fly-over records) but is not known to breed in lake (Biosis 2013). White-bellied sea eagles are opportunistic carnivores Current regime Potential White-bellied (eating a mix of birds, mammals, reptile and fish) and forage over large does not impact is only Low Sea Eagle* areas. While a dry phase may reduce feeding opportunities, they are provide critical at local (Third not reliant solely on permanent inundation and suitable feeding and habitat. Reedy Lake) breeding habitat remains within the immediate landscape. Risk are scale considered low. * Species specifically included in the Bilateral Agreement

4.3.2.2 Fish, frogs and turtles Fish A number of native fish including Golden Perch, Unspecked Hardyhead, Australian Smelt, Carp Gudgeon and Bony Bream have been recently recorded in Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). Murray Cod, Silver Perch and Freshwater Catfish have been previously recorded. The proposed hydrological regime will not permanently support fish if complete drying occurs during the dry phase. However, it is possible that a small permanent pool

R01 92 Environmental Report

may be retained (depending on specific watering scenarios) and some individuals may persist in this pool (if present). During filling phases fish will be able to re-enter the lake from the adjacent system and may persist for several years prior to the next dry phase. Even so, there is the potential for fish deaths to occur if individuals present in the lake cannot escape during the drawdown phase, but at a species specific scale the impacts are considered low to very low (Table 4-12). With reference to species identified in the bilateral agreement for assessment (i.e. Murray Hardyhead, Murray Cod, Silver Perch, Freshwater Catfish, Flatheaded Galaxias and Macquarie Perch), there is low to very low risks. Specifically:  Macquarie Perch has not been recorded west of Torrumbarry Weir since 1949 (Cadwallader 1977) and is considered extinct in the region with all known populations located east of the Loddon catchment and outside of the Kerang Lakes region. The revised Ramsar character description considers the site to not regularly support this species (Butcher and Hale 2016). An altered hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake will not impact on known populations of this species.  Flatheaded Galaxias has not been recorded in the Kerang Lakes since 1963 (First Reedy Lake) (North Central CMA, 2014). They have not been detected in numerous recent surveys at Third Reedy Lake and are considered locally extinct with all known populations now located east of the Loddon catchment and outside of the Kerang Lakes catchment (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/84745-conservation-advice- 05052016.pdf). The recently revised Kerang Lakes Ramsar criteria declared that they are not present within the site and that an altered hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake will not impact on known populations of this species (Butcher and Hale 2016).  Murray Hardyhead has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake, although a single individual has been recorded in Middle Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013) and there are known populations in other lakes in the region. However, repeated targeted surveys have not detected Murray Hardyhead in Third Reedy Lake and Sharpe (2014) considered that the lack of aquatic plants and the relatively low salinity levels in Middle and Third Reedy Lakes (compared to locations where Murray Hardyhead flourish) mean Third Reedy Lake in its current form does not provide suitable long term habitat for the species and the revised Ramsar character description considers the site to not regularly support this species (Butcher and Hale 2016). Recovery plan actions for Murray Hardyhead focus on maintaining water supply and conditions in those locations where Murray Hardyhead are known to persist (Backhouse et al. 2008).  Freshwater Catfish has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 1981. Freshwater Catfish prefer dense aquatic vegetation, and the lake has not supported extensive submerged vegetation since the 1990s (North Central CMA, 2014 and see Section 3.2.4). Hence it is considered the lake in its current form no longer provides suitable habitat for this species and the lack of submerged vegetation probably explains it’s absence from the lake.  Silver Perch has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 1981, however they have been recorded more recently in the flowing channels connecting lakes throughout the region. They are a riverine species that prefer flowing waters, so their presence in the lakes is likely to be a consequence of their movement through the connected system and it is considered that the lakes do not provide core habitat for this species (Butcher and Hale 2016). If Silver Perch are moving through the current system of lakes and channels, they will still be able to move between hydrologically connected lakes and wetlands upstream and downstream of Third Reedy Lake via the new bypass channel, even when Third Reedy Lake itself is isolated from the current system – maintain movement opportunities is a key requirement for Silver Perch recovery (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/76155-conservation-advice.pdf). On this basis, the bypassing of Third Reedy Lake will not interrupt regional scale fish movement. This connection will not be interrupted, so the overall risk to Silver Perch is considered very low.  Murray Cod has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 2006 (Biosis 2013). Murray cod is stocked in neighbouring First Reedy Lake and records from Third Reedy Lake are likely to be of stocked individuals. The lake in its current condition does not provide ideal breeding habitat for Murray Cod, which prefer flowing water for breeding, although individuals will survive in impoundments. Overall the lakes are considered to not provide core habitat for this species (Butcher and Hale 2016). Murray Cod are a mobile species and individuals that are present in the lake may be encouraged to move out of the lake during initial drawdown (i.e. when the inlet regulator is still open). The bypass system will continue to allow fish to move through system of connected lakes and wetlands. Overall risk to native (not- stocked) populations is considered very low

R01 93 Environmental Report

A number of common and widespread species are currently present in Third Reedy Lake (e.g. Unspecked hardyhead, Australian smelt), these species are likely to recolonise from connected wetlands during inundation so at a species level impacts are also considered low. For all species, including those not recently recorded in Third Reedy Lake but probably still present in the region (e.g. Silver Perch and Freshwater Catfish), opportunities for movement throughout the system will be retained as the new bypass channel will be built to include fish passage opportunities. There will also be opportunities for movement into and out of Third Reedy Lake at various points in the filling and drawdown cycles. At certain times the quality of water in Third Reedy Lake may decline (e.g. from low dissolved oxygen, high salinity or low pH) (see Section 4.3.3) and this could also impact on the fish present in the lake, or in downstream connected environments. However, mitigation measures are proposed that will address these issues and minimise the likelihood of poor water quality conditions, especially elevated salinity and low pH (see Section 4.4). Moreover, mitigation measures are designed to avoid the risk of poor quality water leaving Third Reedy Lake and subsequently impacting on downstream environments where fish are present. On this basis, risks to downstream connected environments are considered low. Frogs No threatened frogs have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, and those that are present are common species that are likely to benefit from the proposed regime. With reference to species listed in the bilateral agreement (Growling Grass Frog and Brown Toadlet), Third Reedy Lake contains some suitable habitat around the lake margins for these species, but there are no records at the site of either Growling Grass Frog or Brown Toadlet (Biosis 2013). The most recent, nearest, records for Growling Grass Frog are from 1961 at a location south of First Reedy Lake (>5 km from Third Reedy Lake) and for Brown Toadlet are from 1947 (Biosis 2013). The revised character description considers these species unlikely to be present at the site (Butcher and Hale 2016). A change in hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake may improve habitat quality for both species by increasing wetland plant diversity and introducing a variable hydroperiod. There will be no impacts on other nearby wetlands, so permanent water will remain in the landscape. Turtles Two turtle species have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake (Common Long Necked Turtle and Murray River Turtle). Murray River Turtle were listed in the bilateral agreement for assessment (This species has been recorded in low numbers and is presumed to maintain a small population in the lake. They prefer permanent inundation, but may move to new habitat during the drying phase. However, complete drying should be avoided in winter because hibernating adults may die from exposure to cold conditions, and management actions may be required to minimise impacts on individuals where possible (See Section 4.4). However, the species is more widely present across the landscape and impacts at Third Reedy Lake will not constitute a significant impact on this species at the species population or landscape scale (see Table 4-12 for details).

Table 4-12: Summary of potential long-term outcomes for fish, frogs and turtles

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk Silver Perch are a riverine species that prefers fast flowing rivers and Low Low major anabranch systems (Merrick 1996). They occasionally inhabit lake environments following large floods, but these are not preferred A drying regime Potential habitats (Mallen-Cooper 2001). The proposed regime may not may impact on impact is only permanently support this species if complete drying occurs. However, if suitability for at local (TRL) a permanent pool remains some individuals may persist (if present). species that scale. Species Silver Perch has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake, despite require not recorded repeated surveys, since 1981, but have been recorded in the connecting permanent water, since 1981, channel between TRL and Middle Reedy lake (Biosis 2013). Silver but lake is not but is present Silver Perch are a mobile species and individuals that may be present in the critical habitat. in connecting Very low Perch* lake may be encouraged to move out of the lake during initial drawdown channel. (i.e. when the inlet regulator is still open). If Silver Perch are moving Opportunities through the current system of lakes and channels, they will still be able for movement to move between hydrologically connected lakes and wetlands upstream through and downstream of Third Reedy Lake via the new bypass channel, even system will not when Third Reedy Lake itself is isolated from the current system. On be interrupted. this basis, the bypassing of Third Reedy Lake will not interrupt regional scale fish movement. This connection will not be interrupted, so the overall risk to Silver Perch is considered very low. Murray Hardyhead prefer still open-water wetlands, billabong, lake and Low Low Murray backwater habitats, particularly saline ephemeral deflation basins Hardyhead Very low (Lintermans 2007). Murray Hardyhead is present in several lakes in the A drying regime Potential * Kerang region, including Lakes Cullen, Round Lake and Lake Kelly, but may impact on impact is only

R01 94 Environmental Report

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk these wetlands are not directly hydrologically connected to Third Reedy suitability for at local (TRL) Lake. Murray Hardyhead was recorded in Middle Reedy Lake (1 species that scale. individual in 2013 – Biosis 2013). Further extensive survey (>2000 net require Species not hours) in 2014 failed to detect Murray Hardyhead in Middle or Third permanent water, recorded Ready Lake (Sharpe 2014). Sharpe (2014) considered that the lack of but lake is not despite aquatic plants and the relatively low salinity levels in Middle and Third critical habitat. targeted Reedy Lakes (compared to locations where Murray hardyhead flourish) surveys mean Third Reedy Lake does not provide suitable long term habitat for the species, but it cannot be categorically concluded that they are not present. The proposed regime may not permanently support this species if complete drying occurs. However, if a permanent pool remains some individuals may persist (if present).

Given the low likelihood of occurrence and the lack of suitable habitat, the risk is considered very low. Unspecked Hardyhead prefer still and slow flowing vegetated habitats in Low Minor billabongs, wetlands, lakes and backwaters. Unspecked Hardyhead were recorded in low numbers in Third Reedy Lake in 2014 (Sharpe A drying regime Potential 2014). The small size of the species may limit its ability to move to more may impact on impact is only favourable conditions. This would result in the loss of individuals suitability for at local (TRL) trapped within the lake if complete drying occurs. However, if a species that scale, but Unspecked permanent pool remains some individuals may persist. Although require species are Low Hardyhead Unspecked Hardyhead is FFG Act 1988 listed, it is common and permanent water, known to be widespread in the connected wetlands (e.g. Middle Reedy Lake – see but lake is not present Sharpe 2014), so sources of recruits are locally available and likely to re- critical habitat. enter Third Reedy Lake during filling cycles. On this basis, the risk to individuals is high but at a population scale overall risk is low and the lake will continue to provide opportunistic habitat for small bodied native fish during inundation phases. Flatheaded Galaxias are a relatively uncommon, lowland species Low Minor restricted to the Murray River and its major tributaries. Preferred habitat is backwaters, billabongs and lagoons with abundant vegetation A drying regime Species not (McDowall and Fulton 1996; Allen et al. 2002). Despite numerous may impact on recorded since recent surveys, they have not been recorded in the Kerang Lakes since suitability for 1963, so no Flatheaded 1963 (First Reedy Lake) (North Central CMA, 2014). Current known species that longer Low Galaxias locations of Flatheaded Galaxias are all in the mid and upper Murray require considered to River. Although generally considered to be locally extinct, some permanent water, be present. wetlands within the Kerang Lakes system do provide suitable habitat but lake is not and it is possible that they are still present in the system. However, the critical habitat. lack of records at Third Reedy Lake suggest the overall risk is considered very low. Murray Cod has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake since 2006 Low Low (Biosis 2013). Murray cod is stocked in neighbouring First Reedy Lake and records from Third Reedy Lake are likely to be of stocked A drying regime Potential individuals. The lake in its current condition does not provide ideal may impact on impact is only breeding habitat for Murray Cod, which prefer flowing water for breeding, suitability for at local (TRL) Murray although individuals will survive in impoundments. Murray Cod are a species that scale. Very low Cod* mobile species and individuals that are present in the lake may be require Species encouraged to move out of the lake during initial drawdown (i.e. when permanent water, maintained by the inlet regulator is still open). The bypass system will continue to allow but lake is not stocking fish to move through system of connected lakes and wetlands. Overall critical habitat. risk to native (not-stocked) populations is considered very low. Low Low The proposed regime will not permanently support this species due to a

complete drying phase. No individuals were recorded in Third Reedy A drying regime Potential Lake in 2014 (Sharpe 2014). Golden perch is stocked in neighbouring may impact on impact is only First Reedy Lake and records from Third Reedy Lake are likely to be of suitability for at local (TRL) Golden stocked individuals. Golden perch are a mobile species and individuals species that scale. Very low Perch that are present in the lake may be encouraged to move out of the lake require Species is during initial drawdown (i.e. when the inlet regulator is still open). The permanent water, stocked in the bypass system will continue to allow fish to move through system of but lake is not system. connected lakes and wetlands. Overall risk to native (not-stocked) critical habitat. populations is considered very low.

Freshwater Catfish prefer still wetland, billabong and lagoon habitats Low Low with abundant aquatic vegetation. The proposed regime may not permanently support this species if complete drying occurs. However, if A drying regime Species not Freshwater a permanent pool remains some individuals may persist (if present). may impact on recorded since Very low Catfish* However, Freshwater Catfish has not been recorded in Third Reedy suitability for 1981, so no Lake, despite repeated surveys, since 1981 (Biosis 2013). Furthermore, species that longer the lake in its current condition does not provide ideal breeding habitat require considered to for Freshwater Catfish because of the lack of submerged vegetation, permanent water, be present.

R01 95 Environmental Report

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk which is required for nest-building. Overall risk is considered very low but lake is not since species is not expected to be currently present in the lake. critical habitat. Murray River Turtle have been recorded in low numbers in Third Reedy Medium- Minor Lake (Biosis 2013). They prefer permanent inundation and but may move to new habitat during a drying phase. An apparent decline in A drying regime Potential Murray River Turtles at Third Reedy Lake has been attributed to nest may impact on impact is only Murray and juvenile predation (Biosis 2013). There are potential impacts on suitability for at local (TRL) River remaining Murray River turtles at Third Reedy Lake, however they are species that scale Moderate Turtle* present in larger numbers at nearby wetlands (e.g. Middle Reedy, Little require Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake) (Biosis 2013); these habitats will not permanent water. be affected by the changed regime. There are moderate risks at the site scale but low risks at the landscape scale (see Section 4.4 for risk mitigation and residual risk assessment). Frogs Growling Grass Frog prefer shallow habitats with abundant floating Low Low vegetation. TRL contains some suitable habitat around the lake margins, but there have been no records of growling grass frog at TRL A drying regime Species not Growling (Biosis 2013). The most recent, nearest records are from 1961 at a may improve recorded at Grass location south of First Reedy Lake >5 km from Third Reedy Lake. A conditions for this TRL, or in Very low Frog* change in hydrological regime at Third Reedy Lake may improve habitat species (and general area quality for Growling Grass Frogs by increasing wetland plant diversity frogs in general). since 1961. during inundation phases. There will be no impacts on other nearby wetlands, so permanent water will remain in the landscape. Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Prefers grasslands and forests Low Low were eggs are laid under leaf litter and tadpoles develop in wet depressions and is not reliant on permanent wetlands. Third Reedy A drying regime Species not Brown Lake does not provide suitable habitat in its current form, although the may improve currently Very low Toadlet wooded margins of the lake may provide suitable habitat. A changed conditions for this recorded at water regime that increases the diversity of vegetation and provides a species (and TRL. variable hydroperiod may benefit this species if it present. frogs in general). * Species specifically included in the Bilateral Agreement

4.3.2.3 Plants A number of plant species were listed on the bilateral agreement for assessment (Chariot Wheels, Winged Peppercress and Slender Darling-pea). Of these, only Chariot Wheels has been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, along with a number of other threatened plants, in association with the remnant Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime aims to expand the area of Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC at the lake, so risks to these species is considered very low (Table 4-13). Indeed, the change in hydrological regime is likely to benefit the majority of species present and provide opportunities for new species to colonise. Where Chariot wheels have been recorded, specific actions are proposed to ensure that construction activities do not impact on individuals (see Section 4.1). Winged peppercress and Slender darling-pea have not been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, furthermore, existing habitat at Third Reedy Lake is not suitable for these species (see Table 4-13 for details).

Table 4-13: Summary of potential long-term outcomes for plants

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk Low Low Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime New water regime Preferred habitat will Twin-leaf aims to expand areas of Intermittent Swampy aims to expand EVC be expanded, so Very low Bedstraw Woodland EVC hence there is a potential benefit to that this species is exposure to any this species. associated with impact is low

Low Low Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime New water regime Preferred habitat will Flat-top aims to expand areas of Intermittent Swampy aims to expand EVC be expanded, so Very low Saltbush Woodland EVC hence there is a potential benefit to that this species is exposure to any this species. associated with impact is low

Low Low Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Winged water- Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime Very low Starwort New water regime Preferred habitat will aims to expand areas of Intermittent Swampy aims to expand EVC be expanded, so

R01 96 Environmental Report

Common Name Description of potential outcome Consequence Exposure Risk Woodland EVC and retain variable wetting and drying that this species is exposure to any so there is a potential benefit to this species. associated with impact is low

Low Low Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime New water regime Preferred habitat will Spiny Lignum aims to expand areas of Intermittent Swampy aims to expand EVC be expanded, so Very low Woodland EVC hence there is a potential benefit to that this species is exposure to any this species. associated with impact is low

Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Low Low Lake or bypass area. In Victoria, the species is only recorded in the Hattah-Kulkyne National Park Species is not reliant Species not (between Lake Hattah and Lake Bulla), on the Murray on current regime, recorded within River floodplain in Barmah State Park and near Reedy and could be benefit impact area Lagoon in the Gunbower Reserve, in the Stony Plain by a change in regime Bushland Reserve near Sea Lake, in Wyperfeld National Park and in the West Wail Flora and Fauna Reserve, north-west of Horsham (Mavromihalis 2010). All sites are >40 km from Third Reedy Lake. Winged The Winged Peppercress grows at sites that are Very low Pepper-cress seasonally wet, either through periodic flooding or where rainfall runoff collects, and a regular wetting and drying regime is probably required to maintain an open habitat and facilitate seed germination. Many shallow freshwater marshes have been drained, while other sites have prolonged inundation through irrigation supply and runoff, reducing the availability of suitable habitat for the species. If present, the proposed change in hydrological could benefit the species.

Not recorded in direct association with Third Reedy Low Low Lake or bypass area. It has been recorded south Chariot west of First Reedy Lake (~ 5km south of Third Reedy Species is not reliant Species not Very low Wheels* Lake) (Rakali Consulting 2013). A change in water on current regime recorded within regime will not impact this species, so risk is very low. impact area Low Low Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. The proposed water regime New water regime Preferred habitat will Dark Roly-poly aims to expand areas of Intermittent Swampy aims to expand EVC be expanded, so Very low Woodland EVC hence there is a potential benefit to that this species is exposure to any this species. associated with impact is low

Low Low Branching Groundsel is present at Third Reedy Lake

in association with Tall Marsh. However, it can grow New water regime will Preferred habitat will Branching in wet or dry soils (Walsh 1999). The proposed water not significantly alter not be impacted so Very low Groundsel regime will retain variable wetting and drying which area this EVC species exposure to any should continue to support Branching Groundsel so is associated with impact is low there is a potential benefit to this species.

Slender Darling-pea is associated with heavy soils in Low Low grassland and box woodland areas (Commonwealth of Australia undated). They are not associated with Species is not reliant Species not Slender permanent water bodies and have not been recorded on current regime recorded within Very low Darling-pea* at Third Reedy Lake – no suitable habitat exists impact area around Third Reedy Lake (Rakali Consulting, 2013). A change in hydrological regime at TRL will not impact this species. * Species specifically included in the Bilateral Agreement

4.3.3 Threats to achieving objectives

A range of biotic and abiotic threats have been identified that could impact on the success of the proposed restoration activities at Third Reedy Lake (see Table 4-14 for details). Of these threats, excessive weed growth during the dry phase represents a potential high impact because weeds could impact on the establishment of the target EVC across the site. Acid sulfate soils and intrusion of saline groundwater pose high impacts as Third Reedy Lake dries, and reduced dissolved oxygen presents a potential risk during filling, especially if there is a large amount of organic material present in the bed of the lake.

R01 97 Environmental Report

Poor water quality can impact on aquatic biota present during both drying and filling phases, especially if the tolerances (e.g. salinity and dissolved oxygen tolerance) are exceeded. Furthermore, if water quality did deteriorate in Third Reedy Lake there is a risk to downstream environments if that water was released from the lake in an uncontrolled manner. To address these potential risks, a range of mitigation measures have been identified that effectively managing the risks and hence avoid the potential for detrimental impacts, especially on downstream values (see Section 4.4).

R01 98 Environmental Report

Table 4-14: Biotic and abiotic threats associated with a changed water regime Threat Description of outcomes Consequence Exposure Risk rating Biotic threats Failure to Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC and associated species are currently restricted to the fringes of the High Minor successfully lake. The proposed water regime aims to improve conditions for this community. However, there are risks establish target associated with potential for poor recruitment and regeneration of Indicator Species due to lack of seedbank Success of project is Potential impact is Intermittent Swampy and as a result of the extended inundation and excessive weed growth that outcompetes native species. reliant on Target EVC only at local (TRL) High Woodland EVC The consequences of not successfully establishing the target EVC are high because all other outcomes are establishing scale and does not reliant on the success of vegetation recovery (see Section 4.4 for risk mitigation and residual risk extend to Ramsar assessment). site Weeds Weed colonisation has the potential to impact on the regeneration of the target EVC. Weeds are present High Minor throughout the system and the highly connected nature of the waterways means there are likely to be continued supply of weed seeds and propagules. A drying regime may allow colonisation of weeds which Ability for target EVC to Potential impact is prevent regeneration of native species – although subsequent inundation is likely to help control terrestrial successfully establish only at local (TRL) weeds. However, some species are promoted through intermittent flooding, including the native Typha and could be impacted by scale. Phragmites, which have been identified as a significant problem in other wetlands within the Kerang weeds Wetlands Ramsar Site (i.e. Johnson Swamp and Hird Swamp) that have intermittent watering regimes High (Dalby-Ball et al. 2000). The current growth/spread of species such as Typha is suppressed under the current permanent regime. However, these species could spread under an intermittent regime and may reduce growth of other native flood-dependent understory species (i.e. sedges, rushes, grasses, herbs) including rare and threatened species. On this basis, the colonisation of the lake bed by weeds that could impact on the regeneration potential of the target EVC represents a high level of risk that requires active management (see Section 4.4 for risk mitigation and residual risk assessment). Non-native fish Exotic fish, namely carp, dominate the fish biomass at Third Reedy Lake. Although a drying regime may kill Medium Minor carp and other exotic fish, carp are very mobile and will rapidly recolonise the wetland during the inundation phase. Furthermore, Carp are able to tolerate highly variable conditions more so than most native species Exotic species may impact Potential impact is Moderate (e.g. as the wetland dries). Carp may also pose a risk to successful vegetation recovery during the on target EVC and native only at local (TRL) inundation phase through disturbance of sediments (Roberts et al 2017). species scale. Depleted dissolved Inundation of the dry wetland may result in an initial decline in dissolved oxygen as organic matter that has Low- Medium Minor oxygen impacts on accumulated on the wetland floor is inundated and decomposition commences. An assessment of the risks aquatic biota during of blackwater conditions developing in the filling phase indicates that an initial reduction in DO is likely but Threat is a common Potential impact is filling phase the magnitude and duration of low DO depends on the starting load of organic matter, temperature and the occurrence in wetlands, only at local (TRL) (blackwater) lake level at the commencement of inundation: the more organic matter present, the higher the temperature but could impact on scale. and the lower the lake level, the greater the decline in DO at the commencement of filling and the longer the sensitive biota if present Low- duration of low DO conditions (SKM 2013a). moderate The actual risk to values from low DO during filling depends on whether native fish and other biota enter the lake during the filling phase and are consequently exposed to low DO conditions (SKM 2013a). Risks can be reduced by timing filling to avoid warm weather conditions and maintaining opportunities for fish that enter the lake during filling to also move back out of the lake if conditions are not suitable. The impacts posed by the threat are considered low to moderate depending on the response / tolerance of biota present. Abiotic threats Acid sulfate soils The potential for acid sulfate soils to form in Third Reedy Lake has been identified (URS, 2013b). Further High Minor High investigation through additional analysis has been completed and risks further quantified (Jacobs, 2017).

R01 99 Environmental Report

Threat Description of outcomes Consequence Exposure Risk rating Sampling indicated the presence of acid sulfate soils, though the distribution of soils with a high potential for Ability to achieve project Potential impact is acid generation was relatively low due to internal buffering within the sediments. At the whole of Third objectives could be only at local (TRL) Reedy Lake scale the generation of acid sufficient to cause wide scale impacts was considered a low risk. compromised if threat scale and does not But there are isolated pockets within Third Reedy Lake where there is a higher potential for acid generation occurs extend to Ramsar and hence localised high risk. Moreover, as the wetland dries the potential for elevated heavy metals, site especially chromium, has been identified as a high risk to values. However, the lake water (and inflowing water) is alkaline, so it has a moderate buffering capacity. This means any acid generated is likely to be rapidly neutralised, especially during inflow periods, which will limit likelihood of low pH conditions developing. Even so, the threat posed by acid sulfate soils is considered high and requires mitigation measures to be developed (see Section 4.4 for risk mitigation and residual risk assessment. Salinity It is possible that groundwater intrusion may occur at Third Reedy Lake during drying phase when the High Minor regional groundwater levels are high (URS, 2013a and 2014). This could be exacerbated by accumulation of salt in the bed of the wetland during each cycle resulting in a long-term increase in wetland salinity. Ability to achieve project Potential impact is High salinity has the potential to impact on the target EVC by exceeding tolerance for vegetation growth. objectives could be only at local (TRL) High salinity also has the potential to impact on fish and frogs that may be present in the lake, or in compromised if threat scale and does not High downstream reaches if high salinity lake water is released to downstream environments, for example, if occurs extend to rest of flushing is used as a technique to manage elevated salinity. On this basis, the threat posed by elevated Ramsar site salinity is considered high and requires mitigation (see Section 4.4 for risk mitigation and residual risk assessment). Erosion and loss of Exposure of bare soil during the drying phase has the potential to cause loss of topsoil. Furthermore, upon Low Minor top-soil rewetting there is a risk of mobilising dry sediment that creates unacceptable turbidity. However, wind driven erosion of dry lake beds is a natural process that is important for the maintenance of these wetland Threat is a natural Potential impact is types. process, but excessive only at local (TRL) Erosion is also possible due to disturbance from uncontrolled public access and stock. Exclusion of stock, erosion caused through scale and does not Low management of public access and the establishment of appropriate vegetation on the lake bed and disturbance could impact extend to rest of exclusion of people, vehicles and stock will reduce this threat. on success of target EVC Ramsar site establishment

R01 100 Environmental Report

4.3.4 Risks to Ramsar ecological character

The change in hydrology at Third Reedy Lake, particularly the introduction of a dry phase, results in a change in water regime that exceeds the current hydrology LAC (Table 4-16) (Butcher and Hale 2016) and this is likely to alter some of the current characteristics of the wetland. However, this does not equate to a negative change in ecological character to the overall character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. An assessment of the impact of TRLP on meeting the Ramsar listing criteria by considering the relative contribution that Third Reedy Lake makes to the status of Kerang Lakes being a Wetland of International Importance was presented in Section 3.3.1 above. An assessment of potential change in ecological character is presented in the following sections detailing:

 An assessment against the 2017 LAC for critical components, processes and services which constitute part of the character of the Ramsar site, and

 An assessment regarding the significance of impact and change in ecological character for the Ramsar site using the Guidance for determining Significance of Impact for MNES.

These activities are summarised in Figure 4-6 in relation to the process for assessing a change in ecological character at Ramsar sites.

Figure 4-6 Approach to assessing potential change in ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site (modified from DEWHA 2009). The standard approach is encompassed by the activities in the blue box. The red shaded boxes are the process undertaken for TRLBP and include the approvals process and the EPBC Act 1999 referral process. Grey shaded boxes are not

R01 101 Environmental Report

relevant to the TRLBP. Green shaded boxes are Ramsar related documentation/activities used to inform the development of this report.

4.3.4.1 Assessment against Ramsar listing criteria The Ramsar criteria currently met by the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and the potential for these criteria to be impacted by the TRLBP were reviewed above (Section 3.3.1) and are summarised in Table 4-15. This assessment builds on the assessment undertaken for the EPBC Act 1999 referral (GMW, 2016a). It is important to note that the assessment focuses on the loss of criteria as this would constitute a negative change in character. The negative change in salinity (EC) is related to unacceptable change in one or more of the critical components, processes or services (CPS) that make up ecological character – not directly with whether or not the site meets one or more of the criteria currently met. However, in identifying critical CPS, the values that contribute to meeting the criteria are taken into account. the TRLBP could result in some criteria being ‘strengthened’, for example if more EPBC Act 1999 listed species were supported at the lake, this would be considered a positive outcome and is addressed in Section 4.2. Overall the assessment against the listing criteria suggests that all criteria currently met will still be met post TRLBP.

Table 4-15: Summary of outcomes of TRLBP on meeting Ramsar site listing criteria Listing Contribution to Ramsar site listing criterion Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site Third Reedy Lake – current Third Reedy – post TRLBP – current 1 Not met Not met - none Whilst there will be improved representation of pre- irrigation wetland types across the Ramsar site, the changes to Third Reedy Lake will not result in this criterion being met. 2 Met for two species No contribution Currently there are no regularly supported nationally Australasian Bittern (Botaurus or internationally listed wetland dependent species poiciloptilus), Endangered present at Third Reedy Lake, so the TRLBP will (EPBC and IUCN); Curlew have no negative outcome on this listing criterion. Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea), Critically endangered (EPBC). 3 Met for waterbird diversity in Contributes – supports Limited or no negative outcome on this criterion. terms of species richness and commonly encountered feeding guilds species and feeding guilds. 4 Met for provision of vital habitat Contributes to breeding and Potential loss of moulting site and refuge for for moulting, refuge from harsh refuge during below average waterbirds in below average rainfall periods. conditions, migratory species, rainfall/drought periods. Breeding records are inadequate for Third Reedy and breeding of waterbirds. Limited to no contribution to Lake to make a judgement if TRLBP would affect supporting migratory species. this aspect of the listing criterion. TRLBP is unlikely to impact on the support of migratory birds as there are no records of the five priority species at Third Reedy Lake (see Butcher and Hale 2016). 5 Met for supporting large Contributes in a small way – There may be potential impacts on waterbird abundances of waterbirds. lake not known for supporting abundances, but this is not considered likely to large numbers, but site specific mean the criterion is no longer met. Waterbirds will information is limited. still use the site, just a potentially different suite of species. 6 Met for supporting 1% of No contribution. No negative outcome on this criterion Australasian bittern. 7 Not met Not met - none The changes to Third Reedy Lake will not result in this criterion being met. 8 Not met Not met - none The changes to Third Reedy Lake will not result in this criterion being met 9 Not met Not met - none It is highly unlikely the changes to Third Reedy Lake will not result in the criterion being met

4.3.4.2 Assessment against Limits of Acceptable Change

The potential for change in the ecological character of Third Reedy Lake and the larger Ramsar site is assessed within the context that it is ecologically and hydrologically linked to Middle and First Reedy Lakes and other aquatic ecosystems within the Kerang region. Site specific information is provided where known. Consideration of the wetting and drying patterns of the aquatic ecosystems in the broader landscape are relevant in terms of determining the potential impacts attributable to the TRLBP at the site and regional scale. Other than for hydrology and salinity, the LAC have been written for the whole Ramsar site. The assessment of potential change in ecological character is based on a change at the whole of site level.

R01 102 Environmental Report

Significance of impact under the EPBC Act 1999 guidelines is judged as impacts on ecological character of a Ramsar site. Under the EPBC Act 1999 an action is likely to have a significant impact on the ecological character of a declared Ramsar wetland if there is a real chance or possibility that it will result in (DOE, 2013): 1) areas of the wetland being destroyed or substantially modified, 2) a substantial and measurable change in the hydrological regime of the wetland, for example, a substantial change to the volume, timing, duration and frequency of ground and surface water flows to and within the wetland, 3) the habitat or lifecycle of native species, including invertebrate fauna and fish species, dependent upon the wetland being seriously affected, 4) a substantial and measurable change in the water quality of the wetland – for example, a substantial change in the level of salinity, pollutants, or nutrients in the wetland, or water temperature which may adversely impact on biodiversity, ecological integrity, social amenity or human health, or 5) an invasive species that is harmful to the ecological character of the wetland being established (or an existing invasive species being spread) in the wetland.

Of the five EPBC Act 1999 significance criteria, 2 and 3 are the most likely to occur and result in an impact on the ecological character of the Ramsar site – i.e. will affect one or more of the critical CPS. An assessment of a potential change in character is presented in Table 4-16.

Table 4-16 Summary of critical CPS associated Limits of Acceptable Change, and assessment of potential change in character Critical CPS LAC (from Butcher and Hale 2016) Assessment for a potential change of character (Butcher and Hale 2016) Hydrology LAC specific to Third Reedy Lake: LAC: Certain to be exceeded. However, the preceding Third Reedy Lake: permanently inundated, water risk assessments and mitigation measures indicate level to not be > 74.8 m AHD or < 74.2 m AHD for that risks to existing values are acceptable. more than two years in a row. Furthermore, the changed hydrological regime is judged to be a positive change. Ecological Character: Positive change, but not likely to constitute a change in character at the Ramsar site level. Considered positive as returning the hydrology to a more natural regime. Risks to specific values have been identified and mitigation measures proposed. Values potentially at risk do not contribute to current listing criteria. Salinity LAC specific to Third Reedy Lake: LAC: Only likely to exceed the LAC during the Salinity levels to be less than 4,000 EC (µS/cm) drawdown phase when the lake is less than 75% full, when lake is more than 75% full* and even then, only under certain circumstance (URS, 2014), so, technically, the LAC is unlikely to be exceeded. Ecological Character: Will be retained as a freshwater wetland. However, there may be a need to intervene if salinity levels approach the LAC in summer drying periods. Vegetation diversity LAC set for the whole Ramsar site: LAC: unlikely to be exceeded. The total extent of the following vegetation Ecological Character: Positive change with increase communities will not be less than: in freshwater herb/grass/sedge/forb and an increase in  Freshwater herb/grass/sedge/forb – 2,400 area of Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC. Species hectares richness at Third Reedy is likely to increase as a  Brackish herb/grass/sedge/forb – 450 hectares wetting and drying cycle promotes species diversity.  Samphire – 220 hectares  Lignum dominated – 1,170 hectares  Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC – 975 hectares The species richness of native wetland dependent plant species will not be less than 125. Waterbird LAC set for the whole Ramsar site: LAC: Possibly LAC may be exceeded. Currently there abundance The 10 year rolling average for annual maximum are no data for assessing contribution of Third Reedy waterbirds is not < 10,000 Lake to meeting this LAC. Ecological Character: Possible change to ecological character of the site. Waterbird diversity LAC set for the whole Ramsar site: LAC: Unlikely the LAC will be exceeded. Total annual species richness of wetland dependent Ecological Character: no change birds shall not be less than 22.

R01 103 Environmental Report

Critical CPS LAC (from Butcher and Hale 2016) Assessment for a potential change of character (Butcher and Hale 2016) Waterbird breeding LAC set for the whole Ramsar site: LAC: Unlikely that LAC will be exceeded as waterbird No more than 10 consecutive years in which there breeding has not been identified as significant at Third are no colonial nesting events of at least 1000 nests Reedy Lake. in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. Species may It is important to note that Third Reedy Lake may be include any of the following: important as a foraging area for colonial nesting  Australasian Darter (Anhinga novaehollandiae) species at First and Middle Reedy Lakes.  Australian White Ibis (Threskiornis molucca) Ecological Character: No direct change in character,  Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) but importance as a foraging area for nesting species  Pied Cormorant (Phalacrocorax varius) is a knowledge gap.  Royal Spoonbill (Platalea regia)  Straw-necked Ibis (Threskiornis spinicollis).  Yellow-billed Spoonbill (Platalea flavipes) Supports a diversity See LAC for hydrology, salinity and vegetation. LAC: Likely to be exceeded based on changes to of wetland types hydrology. Ecological Character: Neutral to positive change – as will become an intermittent wetland similar to others within the Ramsar site. Supports threatened LAC set for whole of Ramsar site: LAC: Unlikely the LAC will be exceeded. species Australasian Bittern (Botaurus poiciloptilus) present Ecological Character: Third Reedy Lake does not in five out of 10 years in Hird and / or Johnsons contribute to the listing criteria, so no change in Swamp. ecological character is expected. New regime and Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea) recorded more diverse wetland vegetation may enhance within the Ramsar site in no less than five years out conditions for these species. of 10. * The salinity LAC has low confidence that if triggered would constitute a change in character, but insufficient additional data could be sourced to develop new LAC for these critical CPS (Butcher and Hale 2016).

The proposed changes will result in a change in character for Third Reedy Lake, as several of the critical CPS for the lake will be permanently altered. The proposed changes are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ (Table 4-16). Hydrological changes at Third Reedy Lake will not result in hydrological changes at any other lake within the Ramsar site, even those currently hydrologically connected. This is because the new bypass channel with enable the hydrological regime of Third Reedy lake to be manipulated independently of the hydrological regime in all other lakes, which will remain as current.

On this basis, an altered hydrological regime and potential change in character of Third Reedy Lake does not translate to an impact at the Ramsar site scale, nor on any of the criteria for Ramsar listing.

4.4 Risk mitigation and contingency measures

Mitigation actions for each moderate, high or very high risk to environmental values identified in Section 4.3 have been developed to prevent or minimise these risks (Table 4-17). These mitigation actions have been selected based on their effectiveness to manage the risk and practicality. For each potential impact a revised risk rating is provided based on the effectiveness and likelihood of the proposed mitigation measure reducing the consequence and /or exposure of threats to environmental values. In some cases, the mitigation measure not only reduces the risk but also results in benefits to the value by reducing current threats.

The mitigation actions for Third Reedy Lake will be finalised and documented as part of a detailed Environmental Water Plan (EWP). This will clearly describe the variables to be managed, the timing of the implementation of actions and the roles and responsibilities associated with the actions (See Section 5 for details of the EWP development and monitoring requirements). Construction activities associated with Third Reedy Lake will be managed under the Connections Project CEMP.

With specific reference to high risks associated with salinity and Acid Sulfate Soil impacts, modelling has been completed as to the effectiveness of management actions at mitigating risks as described below.

4.4.1 Salinity Dilution and flushing by natural floods or by managed flushing are the two most likely mechanisms salt concentrations and loads in the Lake can be kept within desirable limits.

R01 104 Environmental Report

Salt flushing means the dilution by less saline inflow and downstream transport of lake water to achieve acceptable limits. The aim is to ensure that downstream lake water EC remains within acceptable limits for irrigation (<700 EC (MDBA 2010)). This limit will also be acceptable for aquatic species (fish, frogs, turtles, etc.) that may be present in downstream environments. In the absence of natural flushing from unregulated flows, elevated EC levels can be managed operationally. Advice from GMW suggests flushing from Third Reedy Lake is possible down to about 73.0 mAHD and very achievable at 74.0 (the lake is full at 74.56 mAHD and empty at 72.9 mAHD). This provides plenty of scope to flush salt from Third Reedy Lake with minimal downstream EC impact (GMW 2016b – EPBC Act 1999 referral). Water and salt flushed from Third Reedy Lake can be shandied using the bypass channel. Varying the proportions of lake water and bypass channel water provides the means of keeping EC in downstream environments within acceptable limits. Simple modelling suggests increases to EC in Kangaroo Lake, downstream, can be limited to <100 EC. Increases in Little Lake Charm and the 1/7 channel may be higher, but can be maintained below irrigation guideline values, and hence still protect ecological values. Shandying rates can be manipulated until acceptable outcomes are achieved (GMW 2016b – EPBC Act 1999 referral). The modelling suggests there will be times when flushing will need to be maintained for longer than 30 days to ensure downstream impacts are minimised. This emphasises the need for adaptive management of water regimes (around the proposed water regime) depending on climatic conditions, unregulated flows and groundwater behaviour. Specifically, the need to:  Actively manage flushing to limit downstream impacts  Manage lake levels to avoid groundwater and salt ingress during periods of high surrounding groundwater levels. Operational rules and a plan to manage flows and salinity in the lake will need to be developed, taking into consideration:  Groundwater levels under, and adjacent to, the Third Reedy Lake (slow rate variable)  Flow rates and EC in the bypass channel (fast rate variable)  EC in Third Reedy lake (slow rate variable)  EC in Kangaroo Lake and other downstream environments (slow rate variable). The rate of change of the EC in the various environments will determine the temporal scale at which salinity impacts can be managed. Providing salinity can be monitored and managed, variation in salinity levels assessed above should not present ecological risks to Third Reedy Lake itself, or downstream environments. Mitigation and management of potential effects on water environments will be guided by preparation of an EWP. The EWP will outline the operational management of Third Reedy Lake and its watering regime, including management objectives and water regime requirements for the lake, management actions (including adaptive management and contingencies), environmental monitoring (long term and intervention) and roles and responsibilities. Section 5.2 provides more details.

4.4.2 Acid sulfate soil An assessment of the potential risks that acidic, metalliferous leachate poses to aquatic ecosystems was undertaken (Jacobs 2017). The risks were found to be:  Low to moderate for soils  Low for groundwater  Low to high for surface water Implementation of a robust monitoring program (detailed in Section 5.2.3) and the development of contingency measures as informed by this monitoring, means that each of these risks can be reduced to low. Contingency measures that can be adopted to manage the risks from acid sulfate soils include:  If monitoring and analysis of soils indicate exposure of acid sulfate soils on the lake bed, the application of agricultural lime should be considered for the management of concentrated areas of acid sulfate soils. If concentrated acid sulfate soils are more wide-spread, neutralisation of the generated acidity via the re-wetting of sediments with alkaline water should be undertaken. Water in the irrigation supply system is naturally alkaline and is a suitable source water for re-wetting and neutralising sediments (Jacobs 2017).

R01 105 Environmental Report

 If monitoring of soil pore water/shallow ground water identifies water quality parameters, dissolved major ions and dissolved metals as exceeding guideline limits for aquatic ecosystems then flooding of the lake should be undertaken as necessary to induce flushing and dilution of water to meet the guidelines (ANZECC/ARMCANZ, 2000).

R01 106 Environmental Report

Table 4-17: Mitigation actions and residual risk for risks rated moderate, high or very high in Section 4.3 Value /threat Nature of risk Risk Mitigation actions Residual risk Rating Ecological communities Failure to Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC and High  Mature surrounding River Red Gums and other Indicator Species to offer High benefit successfully associated species are currently restricted to the seed source (Target EVC is already present in the location). establish target fringes of the lake. The proposed water regime  Implement an establishment phase water regime of initial filling to 74.2- Actions have a high likelihood of success Intermittent Swampy aims to improve conditions for this community. 74.56 mAHD followed by a series of intermediate filling to a depth of 0.3 to based on similar actions at other Woodland (EVC 813) However, there are risks associated with 0.5 m to encourage River Red Gum germination and growth. locations. The techniques for vegetation potential for poor recruitment and regeneration  Monitor the establishment of species as part of adaptive management management and establishment are well of Indicator Species due to lack of seedbank process, ensuring filling is timed to not drown seedlings before they can understood, tested and effective. and as a result of the extended inundation. cope with inundation. Furthermore, excessive weed growth during the  Undertake weed control where needed to increase EVC 813 establishment. dry phase may outcompetes native species.  Active planting (e.g. plugging) and manual dispersal of seed if monitoring indicates regeneration is not occurring as predicted.  Control of public access and stock to minimise erosion and degradation of dry bed areas.  Include the management actions described above in the EWP to maximise the likelihood of regeneration of the target EVC. Fish A range of native fish have been recorded in Moderate  Included management actions in EWP that maximise the likelihood of fish Very low Third Reedy Lake, including some species that being able to leave Third Reedy Lake during the drawdown phase and to are listed on the Lowland Riverine Fish allow for opportunistic colonisation during the filling phase. Actions have a high likelihood of success Community of the Southern Murray-Darling  Manage the transition from filling to drawdown to provide flow related cues based on similar actions at other Basin. All individuals will be impacted by a dry that encourage fish that have entered the wetland to exit the wetland before locations. Techniques for enabling fish phase. Individuals that do not exit the wetland it becomes isolated from the connected supply system. passage are well understood and will be during the drawdown phase may die as the  Monitor drawdown and undertake translocation if required for key species incorporated into the design of new wetland dries (depending on whether full drying stranded or captured in carp screen (i.e. Murray Hardyhead). regulating structures to ensure occurs). On this basis there are risks to  Promote fish passage through the Reedy Lakes/Loddon River/Pyramid opportunities for fish movement are individuals present in the lake and some Creek in order to ensure the fish community is connected at a landscape optimised. connectivity between wetlands is important scale. during the drying phase to help fish move to  Fish passage (vertical slot fishway) will be provided on the bypass channel The bypass channel will ensure that all refuge sites upon drying. regulator, allowing fish movement between Middle Reedy Lake to the south other lakes within the system remain and Little Lake Charm, Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake to the north west. connected with unrestricted fish passage. Upon re-wetting Third Reedy will be a highly  Salvage dead fish if necessary (e.g. carp) to reduce odour. productive environment for fish. Fish will be able to recolonise with individuals from nearby connected locations (especially via Middle Reedy Lake).

R01 107 Environmental Report

Value /threat Nature of risk Risk Mitigation actions Residual risk Rating Waterbirds Impacts on waterbird An increase in habitat complexity, and over Moderate  If significant waterbird breeding occurs during a wet phase, through a Moderate benefit breeding success time, increased abundance of River Red Gums, contingency management approach extending the duration of the wet phase could provide increased opportunities for to allow bird breeding and fledging to be completed should be considered. The ability to adaptively manage the waterbird breeding during periods of inundation. This would need to take into account water availability, and the significance water regime, and particularly the ability Furthermore, inundation acts as a stimulus for of any breeding event, including whether an event was significant at the to control the rate of drawdown through breeding in some waterbirds. However, it may broader landscape scale. It should be undertaken no more than one in ten the use of supplementary inflows, will be take many years for conditions to become years. effective at maintaining or extending the conducive to successful breeding. The success  Proposed water regime will encourage greater diversity of habitat to support duration of the wet phase if necessary to of breeding and recruitment will depend on how future breeding events. protect bird breeding events. the water regime is managed with respect to  Consider managing external threats if predation of nests is a problem. depth and duration of inundation and drawdown rates. If breeding occurs but drawdown is too rapid, nests or fledglings could be abandoned leading to a negative outcome. Turtles Murray River Turtle Murray River Turtle have been recorded in low Moderate  Ensure appropriate pathway to assist movement of Murray River Turtle, Low numbers in Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). particularly during drawdown phase. Translocation may be required if turtles They prefer permanent inundation. However, become trapped during the dry phase. A partial filling is proposed to help they may move to new habitat during a drying  Monitor and consider benefits of implementing the partial filling to maintain manage potential risks to turtles. The phase conditions for turtles or implement translocation for stranded individuals if partial filling will maintain a permanently required. inundated area within the lake, or avoid  Avoid complete drying in winter, when turtles are hibernating – it gets too drying in winter, that would allow turtles cold and adults may die. (and potentially fish) to persist through  Drying in summer / autumn represents a lower risk because individuals are drying phases. Monitoring will be more likely to move to nearby inundated habitats at this time undertaken to help inform if the partial  Consider managing external threats including fox predation of eggs in order filling is required. to maximise breeding success during wet phases. Threats Depleted dissolved Inundation of the dry wetland can result in an Moderate  Monitor organic matter accumulation on the dry lake bed Low oxygen impacts on initial decline in dissolved oxygen as organic  If excessive growth of non-native, terrestrial weeds on the bed of the lake is aquatic biota during matter that has accumulated on the wetland occurring and contributing to organic matter build up consider weed control Inflows of high quality water during filling filling phase floor is undated and decomposition commences. and removal of excessive organic material to reduce organic matter should be sufficient to maintain well (blackwater) An assessment of the risks of blackwater accumulation. oxygenated water. In the initial filling conditions developing in the filling phase  Monitor DO during filling. If DO falls rapidly and remains low (<4 mg/L) stages (from dry) there will be few aquatic indicates that an initial reduction in DO is likely across the majority of the lake, consider maintaining a flow through the lake organisms present that would be affected but the magnitude and duration of low DO for a period of time until DO increases above critical level. by low DO. Those that do enter upon depends on the starting load of organic matter  If flow through is to be implemented, ensure suitable mixing with high quality initial filling should be able to remain and the lake level at the commencement of water via the bypass channel to prevent low DO water from Third Reedy within the inflow zone where good water inundation: the more organic matter present and Lake entering the downstream lakes (i.e. bypass channel can be used to quality will be present – hence their the lower the lake level, the greater the decline provide dilution and mixing of water leaving Third Reedy Lake in order to exposure to low DO will be low. in DO at the commencement of filling and the protect downstream environments).

R01 108 Environmental Report

Value /threat Nature of risk Risk Mitigation actions Residual risk Rating longer the duration of low DO conditions (SKM  Fill lake in autumn-winter. Avoid filling of the lake during warm weather in Where flow through is provided, mixing 2013a). order to avoid warm water temperatures which increases rates of organic with good quality water via the bypass The actual risk to values from low DO during matter decomposition and also reduces the amount of oxygen that can be channel will prevent poor quality water filling depends on whether native fish and other dissolved in the water (% saturation). entering downstream environments – biota enter the lake during the filling phase and hence there will be low risk to connected are consequently exposed to low DO conditions ecosystems downstream of Third Reedy (SKM 2013a). Lake. Increased salinity It is possible that groundwater intrusion may High  Include monitoring, adaptive management and contingency procedures for Low due to saline occur at Third Reedy Lake during drying phase wetland operations in the EWP. groundwater (driven by regional climate) when the regional  Monitor wetland salinity during drawdown. If wetland salinity increases Modelling has demonstrated that flushing discharge to the lake groundwater levels are high (URS, 2013a and above critical thresholds for the target EVC (~4,500 µS/cm) then implement flows are likely to be very effective at during the drying 2014). This could be exacerbated by contingency actions to increase the flow of fresher water into the wetland to managing elevated salinity, if it occurs. phase accumulation of salt in the bed of the wetland provide a flushing flow. Flushing to about 73.0 mAHD is possible and very Furthermore, the ability to mixing outflows during each cycle resulting in a long term achievable at 74.0 (Lake is full at 74.56mAHD, empty at 72.9 mAHD). The from Third Reedy Lake with high quality increase in wetland salinity. flows required to support flushing have not yet been determined and are water via the bypass channel means that highly dependent on wetland salinity levels. any outflow will be effectively diluted and  Monitor local groundwater levels and salinity. If groundwater levels are high represents a low risk to downstream and saline then consider avoiding wetland drawdown if it would result in ecosystems. excessive ingress of saline groundwater to the wetland (e.g. time drawdown periods to coincide with lower groundwater levels i.e. during dry periods across the landscape).  Monitor vegetation health and adjust watering regime and operations plan accordingly if excessive salinity appears to be impacting on vegetation health.  Monitor vegetation during the dry phase for salt indicator/ tolerant plants and any signs of salinity discharge on the edge and banks of the lake. Exposure of soils to The potential for acid sulfate soils to form in High  Include monitoring, adaptive management and contingency procedures for Low oxygen creating acid Third Reedy Lake has been identified (URS, wetland operations in EWP. sulfate soils during 2013b). Further investigation through additional  Monitor wetland pH and heavy metal concentrations. If pH falls below Modelling (Jacobs 2017) suggests that dry phase and analysis has been completed and risks further critical thresholds and/or heavy metal concentrations increase, then low pH can be effectively managed decreased pH on quantified (Jacobs 2017). Sampling indicated implement contingency actions to increase the flow of fresher water into the through manipulation of the water regime rewetting the presence of acid sulfate soils, although the wetland to provide a flushing flow. Flushing to about 73.0 mAHD is possible and the use of flushing flows. Inflow distribution of soils with a high potential for acid and very achievable at 74.0 (Lake is full at 74.56mAHD, empty at 72.9 water is relatively alkaline and will rapidly generation was relatively low. At the whole of mAHD). The flows required to support flushing have not yet been buffer / neutralise any low Ph. wetland scale the generation of acid sufficient to determined and are highly dependent on wetland pH levels. They will be Furthermore, water leaving Third Reedy cause wide scale impacts was considered a low determined as part of monitoring and any response to low pH, however, Lake can be mixed with freshwater from risk. But there are isolated pockets where there modelling indicates that flow manipulation has a high likelihood of success the bypass channel, which ensures that is a higher potential for acid generation and (Jacobs 2017). risks to downstream environments from hence localised high risk.  Apply agricultural lime if acid forms on sections of the lake bed. water leaving Third Reedy Lake remain low.

R01 109 Environmental Report

5. Environmental Management Plan Currently a number of different management plans and activities direct the management of Third Reedy Lake. The 2014-22 North Central Waterway Strategy (NCWS) provides an overarching management plan for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site that sits within the framework for management of Ramsar sites in Australia and the State of Victoria (North Central CMA, 2016). This includes a program of management activities for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, including Third Reedy Lake. As part of the NCWS, a detailed monitoring, evaluation, reporting and improvement (MERI) plan will be developed for Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site to support adaptive management from planning to strategy completion.

The Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Action Plan 2016-2024 will provide a detailed monitoring program of the ecological character and threats to the ecological character of the site. The Action Plan recommends specific management actions at each wetland (including Third Reedy Lake), provides a framework for strong coordination of management activities amongst the various site managers and stakeholders and a framework for monitoring, evaluation, reporting and improvement (North Central CMA, 2016).

Further management of Third Reedy Lake is required specific to TRLBP, this management will aim to prevent or minimise to acceptable levels the environmental risks identified in Section 4. As such, the following sections outline the basis of an Environmental Management Plan for Third Reedy Lake as part of the TRLBP, setting the framework for management, mitigation and monitoring of relevant impacts of the TRLBP, including governance arrangements and any provisions for independent environmental auditing. The EMP will cover the construction, establishment and operation phases of the TRLBP, including adaptive management of the water regime by the preparation of an Environmental Watering Plan (EWP) and Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Preparation of the EMP and associated EWP and CEMP will begin once the TRLBP has been fully approved.

5.1 Management objectives

As part of the development of the preferred water regime for Third Reedy Lake (Section 2.2.4), a management objective was developed which considered previous management objectives recommended for the lake, ecological values (current and future) and the wetland’s historic natural regime:

Ecological objectives and hydrological objectives were also developed in North Central CMA (2014) based on achieving the management objective for Third Reedy Lake and are critical for the development of mitigation and monitoring measures at the lake. These objectives are summarised in Table 2-6 in Section 2.2.4.

With regards to maintaining or improving the ecological character of a Ramsar site, managers are encouraged to consider the Australian Ramsar management principles when developing management arrangements, including (DSEWPaC 2012):

 Managing the Ramsar site(s) to maintain ecological character through applying the principles of wise use and sustainable resource management. This may be through the development and implementation of a management plan or system for the site.

 Having procedures and monitoring in place to detect if any threatening processes are likely to, or have altered the site’s ecological character. This will help to identify if there are any actual or likely changes to ecological character of the site.

 Taking action to manage or remediate Ramsar sites that have undergone an actual or likely change in ecological character.

R01 110 Environmental Report

Managers are also encouraged to (DSEWPaC 2012):

 report any actual or likely changes in ecological character to the Australian Government,

 undertake required site level updates and reporting as required,

 seek guidance and assistance about managing and representing the needs of wetlands, if required,

 inform the Australian and relevant State Governments of any intention to transfer ownership or otherwise sell land on which the wetland is situated, and

 notify future land managers of the property’s Ramsar status, should the property be sold or otherwise change ownership.

5.2 Environmental Watering Plan

The TRLBP will generate approximately 1,600 ML/ yr nett water savings to be returned to the Commonwealth and managed by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder. Water to provide for Third Reedy Lake’s future water regime will be managed by the Victorian Environmental Water Holder and formalised through the preparation of an EWP.

The EWP will be based on the existing GMW Connections Project WCMF, which includes provision for preparation of EWPs in specific circumstances. The WCMF has been used by GMW Connections Project to prepare a number of EWPs compliant with the requirements of 2009 Approvals framework (Section 1.2.2).

Implementation of the EWP will be guided by the Victorian environmental watering program planning and management framework (Figure 5-1). The water regime will be achieved by operation, by GMW, of existing and proposed water management infrastructure (regulators) (GMW, 2016b) at Third Reedy Lake. The EWP will outline the operational management of Third Reedy Lake and its water regime, including establishment and on- going operation phases, and will build on the work done by North Central CMA (2014). The EWP will include:

 Management objectives and water regime requirements for the lake. These have already been developed as part of the TRLBP investigations are described in Section 2.2.4 and 5.1

 Management actions, including adaptive management and contingency actions, to manage the risks associated with TRLBP. The key risks and management considerations include:

 Specific fauna management including waterbird, fish, frog and turtle management

 Specific flora management including ecological vegetation communities

 Revegetation to enhance success of establishing the target EVC

 Salinity risks

 Blackwater (low dissolved oxygen) risks

 Acid sulfate soil risks

A summary of the management actions and adaptive management and contingencies are provided in Section 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 These will be further refined through the development of the EWP and roles and responsibilities assigned.

R01 111 Environmental Report

 Operational requirements for delivery of environmental water. This will include the operation of the TIS to deliver water to Third Reedy Lake through associated infrastructure.

 Procedures for environmental monitoring (long term and intervention), auditing and reporting. These will be further refined through the development of the EWP and a monitoring program developed and implemented.

 Roles and responsibilities for the operation and management of the lake. These will be assigned as part of the collaborative process of developing the EWP. The name of the authority responsible for approving each mitigation measure or monitoring program will also be undertaken as part of the development of the EWP.

Figure 5-1: Victorian environmental watering program planning framework (Source: VEWH, 2016)

5.2.1 Management actions

A number of benefits and impacts were identified as part of the risk assessment for the objective of restoring Third Reedy Lake to a deep freshwater marsh wetland type (dominated by Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC) (refer to Section 4). Mitigation actions for each moderate, high or very high risk to environmental values were also developed (see Section 4.4). The mitigation measures are aimed at preventing or minimising key risks by reducing the likelihood and/or severity of impact of individual threats, and have been selected based on their effectiveness and practicality.

R01 112 Environmental Report

The mitigation actions for Third Reedy Lake will be finalised and documented as part of the development of the EWP and will clearly describe the variables to be managed, the timing of the implementation of actions and the roles and responsibilities associated with the actions. 5.2.2 Adaptive management and contingency actions

An adaptive management approach to the management of risks at Third Reedy Lake is required. Adaptive management in the context of this project is the integration of monitoring, management activities and review of operations to effectively manage identified and/or emerging risks in order to maximise environmental outcomes for Third Reedy Lake consistent with objectives of the overall project. If monitoring reveals that objectives are not being met, then an adaptive management philosophy allows for the modification of operations in light of lessons learned through the monitoring and review process.

Adaptive management should be informed by a comprehensive monitoring program that describes the variables to be managed, and the hypothesised links between the hydrological regime and intended outcomes (or ecological objectives).

Adaptive management and contingency actions based on mitigation measures outlined in Section 4.4 should be incorporated in to the EWP. In addition to addressing the risk identified in Section 4, the adaptive management and contingency actions included in the EWP will also consider the management of broader landscape processes that may impact Third Reedy Lake e.g. flooding.

The EWP will clearly describe the variables to be managed, critical thresholds and the roles and responsibilities associated with the monitoring. The scheduling of regular reviews and updates of the EWP (including monitoring and management actions) will also be documented in the EWP.

5.2.3 Monitoring

Monitoring is required to demonstrate the short-term and long-term environmental response of the changed water regime implemented as part of TRLBP against the project objectives. Monitoring is also required to facilitate adaptive management of Third Reedy Lake and identify if contingency measures are needed to mitigate risks.

The Victorian Waterway Management Strategy (DELWP, 2016b) provides a framework for maintaining or improving condition of rivers, estuaries and wetlands and provides guidance around monitoring of condition and the effects of management activities. Two types of monitoring recommended are:

 Long term condition monitoring

 Intervention monitoring.

The following sections provide monitoring recommendations for each of these two monitoring types. The frequency and timing of the monitoring will be tailored to each target species and undertaken in accordance with the EPBC Act 1999 monitoring guidelines or other best practice guidelines.

Currently there is no structured monitoring program that occurs at Third Reedy Lake or consistently across the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. A review of monitoring programs across Victoria’s Ramsar sites is currently being undertaken by DELWP and as a result a specific monitoring plan will be developed for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site and together with the Kerang Lakes Ramsar Action Plan this monitoring could be incorporated into the monitoring proposed in the Third Reedy Lake EWP.

Long term condition monitoring

Long term condition monitoring will provide information on the long term environmental outcomes of the TRLBP and whether implementation of the TRLBP is progressing towards the management objective for Third Reedy Lake (Section 5.1) and assessing any change in ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. It

R01 113 Environmental Report

also provides an opportunity to check for ‘collateral’ ecological changes not addressed in the planning process such as changes in non-target species or unexpected changes in boundaries of EVCs.

The long term condition monitoring required for Third Reedy Lake is provided in Table 5-1 and focuses on the ecological objectives for the site detailed in Table 2-6 to demonstrate any change in condition over time. Long term condition monitoring is also recommended in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site Action Plan (North Central CMA, 2016) and therefore this monitoring undertaken as part of the Action Plan has been assumed to provide condition and species presence and abundance monitoring in addition to those specific to Third Reedy Lake (Table 5-1).

Table 5-1: Suggested long-term condition monitoring for Third Reedy Lake Monitoring focus Monitoring question Method When Wetland condition Has there been an overall  Undertake condition Every four years (i.e. rehabilitation in the condition of the assessment and compare to before each wetting cycle) wetland as a result of the changed Rakali Consulting, 2013 water regime? assessment Habitat objectives 1.1 Maintain health of Has there been maintenance of the  Undertake vegetation condition Every four years (i.e. existing Black Box fringing existing Black Box vegetation as a surveys. Results should be before each wetting cycle) wetland vegetation (within result of the changed water regime? compared against Rakali Intermittent Swampy Consulting (2013) assessment. Woodland EVC) 1.2. Restore opportunities Has there been an increase in the  Undertake on-ground survey of Every four years (i.e. for recruitment of River recruitment of River Red Gum in the presence and abundance of before each wetting cycle) Red Gum trees through the body of the Lake? River Red Gum. body of wetland 1.3 Restore diverse Has there been an increase in  Undertake vegetation condition Every four years (i.e. understory Intermittent diversity of understory vegetation in surveys. Results should be before each wetting cycle) Swampy Woodland the body of the Lake? compared against Rakali vegetation (i.e. lignum and Consulting (2013) assessment. sedge communities) in the body of the wetland Species/ community objectives 2.1 Restore waterbird Is there a range of habitat types  As per habitat objectives, Annual (in line with breeding opportunities available suitable for waterbird undertake comprehensive Ramsar Action Plan) resting, resting and breeding? vegetation condition surveys. Should be undertaken  Interaction with other annual when there is water in the monitoring undertaken as part lake. 2.2 Restore waterbird Does the habitat available provide of the Kerang Wetlands Annual (in line with feeding opportunities terrestrial and aquatic/ Ramsar Site Action Plan (North Ramsar Action Plan) macroinvertebrates and plant Central CMA, 2016) (e.g. bird Should be undertaken matter food sources? surveys including abundance when there is water in the and diversity. lake. Provide opportunistic turtle Is there a range of habitat types  As per habitat objectives, Every four years (i.e. and frog feeding and available suitable for turtle and frog undertake comprehensive after each wetting and breeding. feeding and breeding? vegetation condition surveys. drying cycle)  Interaction with other annual Should be undertaken monitoring undertaken as part when there is water in the of the Kerang Wetlands lake. Ramsar Site Action Plan (e.g. Survey of birds, frogs and turtles including abundance and diversity). Process objectives Maintain connectivity Is the connectivity between Reedy  As per habitat objectives, Every four years (i.e. between Reedy Lakes Lakes maintained to: undertake comprehensive after each wetting and  Facilitate dispersal of seeds, vegetation condition surveys drying cycle) micro and macro organisms, fish,  Interaction with other annual frogs and turtles monitoring undertaken as part  Maintain water quality? of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site Action Plan (e.g. Survey of birds, frogs and turtles including abundance and diversity).

R01 114 Environmental Report

Intervention monitoring

Intervention monitoring (Table 5-2) focuses on collecting data about the short and long-term effects of management actions detailed in Section 5.2.1 and aims at providing continual improvement of the management of Third Reedy Lake. The data collated is a vital component of the adaptive management approach and in some cases identifies the need for contingency measures.

Table 5-2: Suggested intervention monitoring for Third Reedy Lake Monitoring focus Monitoring question Method When Habitat objectives 1.1 Maintain health of Is the drying phase of Third Reedy  Visual surveys through photo Before and after each existing Black Box fringing resulting in a decrease/ increase of point monitoring and rapid drying phase. wetland vegetation (within existing Black Box fringing wetland condition assessments Intermittent Swampy vegetation?  Compare against previous Woodland EVC) survey results (Rakali 1.2. Restore opportunities Is the drying phase resulting in Consulting, 2013) for recruitment of River recruitment of River Red Gum trees Red Gum trees through in the body of the lake? body of wetland 1.3 Restore diverse Is the drying phase resulting in understory Intermittent restoration of lignum and sedge Swampy Woodland communities in the body of the vegetation (i.e. lignum and lake? sedge communities) in the body of the wetland Species/ community objectives 2.1 Restore waterbird Is the drying phase resulting in  As per habitat objectives above, Annual (in line with breeding opportunities increased waterbird breeding? If so, undertake habitat condition Ramsar Action Plan) which species? surveys. Should be undertaken 2.2 Restore waterbird Is the drying phase resulting in  Ad-hoc visual monitoring. when there is water in the feeding opportunities increased waterbird feeding at the  Interaction with other annual lake. lake? Increased species richness? monitoring undertaken as part Provide opportunistic turtle Is there a range of habitat types of the Kerang Wetlands and frog feeding and available suitable for turtle and frog Ramsar Site Action Plan (e.g. breeding. feeding and breeding? Survey of birds, frogs and turtles including abundance and diversity). Process objectives Maintain connectivity Is the system being operated to  Based on operational activities On-going at appropriate between Reedy Lakes ensure connectivity between Reedy time intervals. Lakes? Salinity risk Groundwater salinity Is the change in water regime  Utilise groundwater monitoring On-going at appropriate resulting in damage to aquatic and data from around the edge of time intervals. terrestrial ecosystem due to the lake (State Observation groundwater levels being at or Network Bores). above the base of the lake? Surface water salinity Is the change in water regime  Water quality monitoring On-going at appropriate resulting in a risk to aquatic and (salinity) of surface water at time intervals. Timing to terrestrial ecosystem due to salinity several locations across the focus on drying phase levels in the lake being above lake. acceptable limits? Acid Sulfate Soils risks Soil: pH change in soil and Is the drying phase resulting in a  Visual monitoring of iron On-going at appropriate mobilisation of metals into risk to aquatic and riparian hydroxide staining (could be time intervals. Particular soil pore water ecosystems as a result of pH facilitated by drone imaging) focus during the initial change in soil and mobilisation of  Soil pH field tests and water pH drying phase of the lake. metals into soil pore water? in any standing pools (potentially installation of Groundwater: pH change in Is the drying phase resulting in a piezometers for sampling or groundwater and risk to aquatic and riparian sampling soil pore water at set mobilisation of metals into ecosystems as a result of pH locations) groundwater change in groundwater and mobilisation of metals into groundwater? Surface water: pH change Is the drying phase resulting in a  Visual monitoring of iron in surface water and risk to aquatic ecosystems as a hydroxide staining (could be mobilisation of metals into result of pH change in surface facilitated by drone imaging) surface water water and mobilisation of metals  Monitoring of surface water pH into surface water? and dissolved major ions and metals at several locations with

R01 115 Environmental Report

Monitoring focus Monitoring question Method When respect to lake depth (fixed sampling locations could be set up and sampled using a pump from the lake shore or sampling from a boat or zodiac). Other risks Blackwater Is the wetting phase resulting in a  Water quality monitoring During wetting phase risk to aquatic ecosystems as a (dissolved oxygen) of surface result of a decline in dissolved water profile at several oxygen? locations across the lake. Flooding Is regional flooding occurring where  Monitoring of weather On-going at appropriate Third Reedy Lake could assist with warnings time intervals. flood mitigation? Fish Are fish trapped in the drying  Interaction with any fish Prior to draining of lake wetland? monitoring undertaken as part During drying phase Is translocation required? of the Kerang Wetlands (visual monitoring) and Is the removal of dead fish Ramsar Site Action Plan during filling (water quality) required? (North Central CMA, 2016).  Visual monitoring to identify critical species for translocation  Visual monitoring of extent of dead Carp  Water quality of surface water at several locations across the lake.

5.3 Construction Environmental Management Plan Whilst the assessment has indicated that construction will have no impacts on MNES and no significant impact on the EVCs present or any other species of state conservation significance, the existing GMW Connections Project CEMF (Ministerially approved) will be adapted to identify, manage and control any potential construction impacts associated with the construction phase of TRLBP. This will include identification of environmental risks in the construction phase and the site management and mitigation actions and controls to be implemented by GMW and the contractors to ensure that construction impacts are classified as low (including no go zones). This will be undertaken after the TRLBP is fully approved and the detailed design of the infrastructure has been undertaken and construction activities confirmed.

Contractor(s) will be required to undertake a further risk review prior to site mobilisation to review and update the environmental risk register in accordance with the contracted work package and to reduce the identified risks. Contractor(s) will be required to periodically review and update the environmental risk register as necessary for the contracted work package, but at a minimum the register will be reviewed following any change to project design, construction methodology or following any environmental incident.

The CEMF provides the framework for environmental management of physical works, including a framework for managing impacts, assigning accountabilities and monitoring, reporting and auditing of relevant activities and environmental outcomes. It provides the environmental commitments, strategies and protocols for undertaking capital and on farm works which include compliance with applicable Regional River Health Strategies, relevant Regional Catchment Strategies and Victoria’s Native Vegetation Framework. Implementation of these is achieved via the GMW Connections Project Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and a Connections Protocol which is a key protocol in the CEMF (GMW, 2015).

In summary, the CEMF contains the following strategies, plans and protocols:

 Native Vegetation Management Strategy, describing how the GMW Connection Project will manage and control the potential impacts on native vegetation from capital works. The native vegetation Offset Management Strategy and associated plans are subsidiary to this strategy

 Flora and Fauna Management Strategy, describing how the GMW Connection Project will manage and control the potential impacts on Commonwealth and state listed flora and fauna from capital works

R01 116 Environmental Report

 Cultural Heritage Management Strategy, describing how the GMW Connection Project will manage and control the potential impacts on Aboriginal cultural heritage from capital works

 Capital Works Environmental Management Plans, setting out the specific management controls for a particular program of modernisation (e.g. TRLBP)

 Connections Protocol, describing how potential environmental impacts will be identified and how landholders and their contractors will be guided in managing the environmental approvals for the connections program

 Communication and Consultation Protocol (GMW, 2013). The GMW Connections Project conducts internal audits against the requirements of the CEMF. In addition, an independent environmental audit of the activities and outcomes of each program of modernisation is conducted annually. The Secretary DELWP, or delegate, and the Minister for Planning, or delegate, is consulted in confirming the detailed scope of the audit. The independent auditor is agreed with the Secretary DELWP. The audit findings are provided to DELWP (GMW, 2015).

As detailed in Section 4.1, there are a number of potential environmental impacts from construction activities. In order to mitigate these impacts, mitigation measures will be included in the CEMP and will be implemented throughout the construction footprint for the duration of the project construction timeframe. Appendix H provides a list of mitigation measures that could be used to avoid and minimise the impacts identified in Section 4.1. Alternative measures to achieve the same objectives may be used by the contractor, however any alternative measures will be required to be approved by GMW. Contingencies actions will also be included in the CEMP to manage unlikely events such as extreme weather (i.e. bushfires or flooding).

The CEMP will also include the development of a Site Environmental Control Map (SECM) which will identify areas requiring protection and will detail any site specific environmental or cultural heritage controls. A SECM will include as relevant:

 Site layout including approximate dimensions of the construction footprint;

 ‘Exclusion areas’ i.e. native fauna habitat, MNES or indigenous native vegetation requiring protection; any cultural heritage sensitivity areas (or as defined in a CHMP);

 Any indigenous native vegetation / trees approved for removal (including exotic or non-indigenous trees);

 Any other specific measures to protect or to mitigate potential impacts on matters of MNES in or near the works area;

 Any declared weed / disease / acid sulfate soil areas (refer to desktop assessment information);

 Site access;

 Any laydown or silt disposal areas;

 Any wash / clean down or refuelling areas; and

 Any council or VicRoads road reserve or Crown Land areas (marked up with any relevant items above). The contractor is responsible for preparing and approving the SECM and ensuring that works are undertaken in accordance with the SECM. If the SECM is altered in the site-set up or construction phase, it must re-submitted for approval and changes communicated to site personnel where there are additional environmental or cultural heritage matters to manage.

R01 117 Environmental Report

5.4 Offset requirements

5.4.1 Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation

Any native vegetation offsets required under Victoria’s native vegetation permitted clearing regulations for TRLBP will be managed under the existing GMW Connections Project arrangement for securing offsets. An initial assessment of potential native vegetation offsets has been undertaken (Jacobs, 2016) and found that native vegetation will be removed as part of the TRLBP. Annual Offset Management Plans are prepared by GMW Connections to address the offset requirements in accordance with Victoria’s native vegetation permitted clearing regulations (GMW, 2015). The Flora and Fauna Management Strategy included in the CEMF documents the process for developing OMPs. Any native vegetation removal associated with the TRLBP construction activities will therefore be managed in accord with the CEMF.

There will be native vegetation removal as part of the TRLBP construction phase (Section 2.2.5), therefore the project will require native vegetation offsets. SKM (2013c) undertook a net gain assessment as part of the KLBP investigations. This involved a field and net gain assessment and was updated by (Jacobs, 2016) who undertook an assessment of off-set requirements for the TRLBP using the Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines.

Given detailed design has not been completed for the TRLBP infrastructure, the construction area (as applied in Jacobs, 2016) assumes a 20 m wide construction footprint at the proposed pipeline (10 m either side of the existing channel) and a 50 m wide construction footprint for the new channel (Figure 5-2). Any native vegetation present within this footprint is assumed to be removed, this is considered to be worst case scenario and total vegetation loss is likely to be less and as such the offset requirements will be confirmed when detailed design is completed.

The Native Vegetation Information Management (NVIM) system was used to generate a Biodiversity Assessment Report (BAR) for vegetation removals. The total extent of vegetation loss associated with this project is 6.8 ha of remnant vegetation and five scattered trees. The total vegetation loss calculated is based on the impact area provided and is summarised in Table 10.

Table 5-3: Remnant Vegetation identified within the impact area (GMW, 2016a)

Ecological Vegetation Class Loss (ha)

Riverine Chenopod Woodland (EVC 103) 5.4

Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC 813) 1.4

Total 6.8

The vegetation removal is entirely within Location risk A and combined with greater than 1 ha of native vegetation removal means the proposed works are considered to be Moderate risk under the risk-assessment pathway detailed in the Biodiversity Assessment Guidelines (DEPI, 2013b). A shapefile has been submitted to DELWP and offset requirements have been provided in the Biodiversity Impact and Offset Requirements Report (BIOR).

Based on the details of the BIOR report, the TRLBP will require removal of 6.727 ha of native vegetation. An offset of 2.536 General Biodiversity Equivalence Units of a minimum Strategic Biodiversity Score of 0.454 within North Central CMA or Gannawarra Shire Council areas must be sought. Consideration of threatened species under the Victorian Advisory Lists, the FFG Act 1988 and the EPBC Act 1999 is determined by DELWP and provided as specific offsets. No specific offsets are required for this project based on the BIOR after being determined by DELWP.

The proposed water regime for Third Reedy Lake should positively impact on the diversity and abundance of understory species in the wetland body and therefore it is expected that the loss of native vegetation by construction activities will be offset, in part at least, by the improvement in quality of native vegetation achieved

R01 118 Environmental Report

through re-instatement of the lake's natural water regime (or a more natural water regime). Any offset requirements that cannot be met by reinstating the water regime will be achieved through the standard GMW Connections Project offset management process outlined in the CEMF (by which appropriate offsets are provided) (GMW, 2016a).

R01 119 Environmental Report

Figure 5-2: native vegetation offset assessment (Jacobs, 2016). Numbers represent five scattered trees.

R01 120 Environmental Report

5.4.2 EPBC Act 1999 Offsets

Under the EPBC Act 1999, offsets are required to compensate for the residual adverse impacts of an action on any MNES. Offsets are not required where the impacts of a proposed action are not thought to be significant or could reasonably be avoided or mitigated (Commonwealth of Australia, 2012). The EPBC Act 1999 Environmental Offset Policy (Commonwealth of Australia, 2012) provides a description of the role of offsets within the broader environmental impact assessment process under the EPBC Act 1999 (Figure 5-3). Based on the decision tree provided in Figure 5-3, an assessment as to whether offsets are required under the EPBC Act 1999 has been undertaken.

As described in Section 1.2.4, TRLBP was referred to the DEE on 25 August 2016. Advice received from DEE was that the TRLBP is a controlled action under the EPBC Act 1999, as it was assessed as likely to have a significant impact on MNES (wetlands of international importance and listed threatened species and communities).

As part of the risk assessment (refer to Section 4), impacts associated with the construction and operation phase of TRLBP were identified and mitigation actions for each moderate, high or very high risk to environmental values were developed to prevent or minimise these risks (Section 5.2.1). During the construction phase, whilst vegetation is required to be removed, as described in Section 5.4.1 this vegetation is within the EVC class of Riverine Chenopod Woodland and Intermittent Swampy Woodland and therefore does not include any MNES. An assessment of the presence of MNES in the construction footprint (Section 4.1) also confirms that no MNES are present within the construction footprint, including significant habitat for MNES.

As identified in Section 3.2.3, there are MNES present or potentially present in the project environment that may be impacted during the operation phase of the TRLBP. These species are Silver Perch, Murray Hardyhead, Murry Cod and Chariot Wheels. An assessment of the impacts and benefits of the TRLBP to these species was undertaken in Section 4.3. The impact associated with the TRLBP for all the EPBC Act 1999 listed species present or potentially present was assessed as very low, as was the benefit. For the fish, Silver perch and Murray Hardyhead have not been recorded in the lake for many years and therefore are considered not to be currently present and the Murray Cod population at Third Reedy Lake is stocked and therefore any impacts on native populations are very low. Even though the impact to these fish is considered very low, as part of the EWP for Third Reedy Lake, management actions associated with fish management (detailed in Section 5.2.1) will be included to maximise the likelihood of fish being able to leave Third Reedy Lake during the drawdown phase.

The impacts of TRLBP on Chariot Wheels is also considered very low due to this species generally associated with the Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC which is likely to expand in area as a result of operation phase of the TRLBP (i.e. change in water regime).

An assessment of the operation phase on the ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site was also undertaken (Section 4.3.4) and concluded that the TRLBP is expected to provide ecological benefits in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lakes makes to the Kerang Lakes Ramsar Site character. On this basis, any risks to the Ramsar Site associated with the TRLBP are considered acceptable.

It is therefore assessed that there is no significant impact on MNES present or potentially present in the project environment and therefore offsets are not required to help compensate for residual impacts on the MNES as part of the TRLBP.

R01 121 Environmental Report

Figure 5-3: The role of offsets within the broader environmental impact assessment process (Source: Commonwealth of Australia, 2012).

5.5 Governance

There are a number of stakeholders involved in the management of Third Reedy Lake and the broader Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. Discussions around future management of the lake have been undertaken as part of the EE Act 1978 and EPBC Act 1999 referrals (GMW, 2016 a, b).

Third Reedy Lake is currently on public land managed by GMW. Discussions with DELWP and Parks Victoria indicate that Third Reedy Lake public land could be classified Nature Conservation Reserve post project implementation with management coordinated by both stakeholders in conjunction with similar nearby public land areas. A process to finalise roles and responsibilities for the operation and management of the lake will be undertaken as part of the development of an EWP (detailed in Section 5.2) and as such, will be implemented once the TRLBP has been fully approved.

R01 122 Environmental Report

6. Other considerations

6.1 Social and economic impacts and benefits The KLBP Business Case (RMCG, 2015) outlined the social and economic impacts and benefits for the project and was supported by a more detailed social and impact assessment (RMCG, 2013) of the KLBP. During the course of the assessment, a range of community responses were collected, however it should be noted that the responses received were based on a scenario of all lakes being bypassed (i.e. KLBP), which is quite different to the final proposal of bypassing Third Reedy Lake only (i.e. TRLBP).

In relation to the TRLBP, the assessment found that:

1. Third Reedy Lake is used by the local community and a wider tourist population for a range of recreational activities including fishing and boating. The main fishing area is the outlet from Third Reedy Lake and RMCG (2013) estimated that there are approximately 300 visits to the lake by locals per year for fishing and 215 per year by visitors. In terms of boating, RMCG (2013) estimated that there are approximately 10 visits to the lake each year for boating and 10 from visitors. These uses and users would suffer some reduction in their utility as a result of the proposed program, as the lake would be dry more often, limiting access and use. The disbenefit would be small however due to the local substitution opportunities, i.e. tourists can go to Reedy Lake or Middle Lake if Third Reedy Lake is unavailable due to the new variable water regime.

2. The largest continuing disbenefit is from the potential loss in amenity values for neighbouring residents as the lake enters the drying cycles and the water retreats away from the lake fronting properties. A benefit is however that the lower lake level provides a potential flood mitigation benefit (RMCG, 2015). The social and economic impact is small relative to the financial cost of the project, and the value of the water savings GMW, 2016b. The KLBP Business Case (RMCG, 2015) estimated the environmental benefits of the project at $6.25 million which were discounted to a 2014/15 price base, of $4.77 million, assuming the benefits were not realised until 2017/18.

It should also be noted that although minor water based recreation impacts will occur as the lake enters drying phases (e.g. fishing and swimming), this will be substituted by an increase in other recreational activities (e.g. walking, sightseeing and bird watching) (GMW, 2016a). There will also be some employment opportunities associated with the TRLBP. These include roles for GMW irrigation management and within existing organisations for site management (e.g. Parks Victoria and the North Central CMA) and there are also potential employment opportunities if tourism increases in the area. Local contractors will also be engaged by GMW to undertake the construction works associated with project.

6.2 Flood impacts

Third Reedy Lake currently provides flood storage and passage in the area. SKM (2014) considered the potential flooding impacts of the implementation of the preferred regime at the lake. The channel alignments selected for the TRLBP effectively run parallel with the direction of overland flows during a flood event. On this basis, the anticipated impact of the bypass channel on flooding events has been assessed to be minor. This assessment is based on the topographical information available from the LIDAR survey and some aerial photography taken during a moderate flood event and as such a flood study has not been undertaken to support this assessment (GMW, 2016b).

Regulator structures have been designed to either retain flood flows using the gates at control structures, or be overtopped during events for open/close structures. As part of the TRLBP, there will also be an opportunity to utilise the spare capacity in the lake to attenuate flooding events throughout the complex. Therefore, the existing flooding operation plan for the Reedy Lakes complex will be updated to reflect the change in operation and include a process for Third Reedy Lake to act as additional storage during floods as required. The use of Third Reedy Lake during flood events may result in water with reduced quality entering the lake from the Loddon River or Wandella Creek (e.g. hypoxic floodwater). The delivery of a flushing event to Third Reedy Lake can be used as a contingency measure to manage reduced water quality as a result of flooding.

R01 123 Environmental Report

If the TRLBP proceeds to detailed design then any impact on flooding would be considered as part of the planning permit application (further information on additional approvals included in Section 6.3).

6.3 Other approvals and conditions Consistent with approvals given to the GMW Connections Project, it is proposed construction activities will utilise the GMW Connections Project Incorporated Document August 2015 as listed in the Shire of Gannawarra Planning Scheme. Consideration of other approvals outside the Project’s Incorporated Document include:

 Review certificates of title to identify any, covenants/ easements/ encumbrances/ restrictions which may impact on potential approvals.

 Review of desktop specialist assessment reports (including referral documents, cultural heritage desktop assessment and net gain assessment) undertaken with regard to planning approval triggers and other approvals

 Consult with issuing agency and identify other primary and secondary approvals that may be required (e.g. a works on waterways approval under the Water Act 1989, or a public land manager consent under Crown Land (Reserves) Act 1978) for the project.

 Identify any additional technical assessments that may be necessary for the preparation of any approvals (e.g. Cultural Heritage Management Plan).

This desktop assessment will be undertaken after the approval of the Environmental Report and form the basis for the planning and approvals process for the TRLBP.

6.4 Stakeholder and public consultation

The TRLBP (including the KLBP investigations) has involved significant public and stakeholder engagement to date, including direct engagement with potentially affected landholders, a range of working groups involving government and non-government entities and dissemination of information on the progress of the project. The main groups involved in engagement activities are listed in Table 6-1. Consultation in regards to this Environmental Report has been previously detailed in Section 1.3.

Table 6-1 Main groups involved in engagement activities Group Purpose Membership Environmental Provide advice on assessment approaches and the Includes agencies which will be responsible for Technical Advisory development of the documents outlined in the ongoing delivery and review of management Committee (ETAC) of Connections Project Water Change Management and mitigation measures the GCP Framework. Expert Review Panel Provides advice to the Minister for Water, the The ERP consists of Jane Roberts and Terry (ERP) Secretary, DELWP and the GCP in relation to the Hillman, independent consultants experienced conditions of the Minister for Planning’s ‘no in the relationships between hydrology and Environment Effects Statement’ decision (i.e., that no ecology, and in evaluating the ecological EES was required subject to conditions). Although this consequences of changing hydrology. decision does not apply to the KLBI, the ERP was used for the project. They provided advice on matters including:  environmental management  advice on environmental water investigation reports.

Project Reference Oversaw preparation of investigation reports. Representatives of: Group. Technical review role. PRG members participated in  GMW sub project steering committees.  Shire of Gannawarra  DEDJTR Fisheries  DELWP (Water and Catchments, Region and Planning)  GMW Connections Project  North Central CMA

R01 124 Environmental Report

Group Purpose Membership  Aboriginal Victoria /Indigenous (Corresponding)  Parks Victoria (Corresponding) Scientific Review Panel Provided quality assurance and methodological critique Experts in specific fields that are relevant to the (SRP) regarding the development of the water regime lakes. Also present were GMW staff proposals at the technical report stage. This Panel was responsible for overall project delivery, and NC charged with ensuring that: CMA staff responsible for the development of  the ecological objectives are scientifically sound; the Technical Reports.  the proposed regimes are appropriate to achieve the ecological objectives;  other issues are considered; and  the recommendations will mitigate the expected impact.

Community Advisory Advised the GMW CP on the implementation of the Key Selection Criteria for membership of the Group KLBP Investigation which provided local understanding CAG (as stated on the Nomination Form) were: and experience.  Demonstrated links to local community, community groups or user groups  Knowledge of the Kerang Lakes which may include their ecology, social values and historical background.  The CAG comprised 9 members with representatives of the Barapa Barapa and Wamba Wamba communities also invited to join the group.

The outcomes of this engagement is documented in Feehan Consulting (2015a) and indicated that initially when the project was the KLBP and considered bypassing five of the Kerang Wetlands (First Reedy, Middle Reedy and Third Reedy Lakes, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake) the community had significant concerns about the project; however towards the finish of the investigation, when the scope reduced to Third Reedy Lake (TRLBP) and following extensive community engagement the community was more accepting of project outcomes and in some cases supported the TRLBP. The initial stakeholder concerns included:  Trust in Government agencies, including GMW, to effectively allocate on-going resources and to manage risks such as lake salinization, dust, pest plants and animals, acid sulfate soils etc.; this is a legacy of history issue with the community having long memories about impacts of earlier projects that had been vigorously opposed by the community  Concern about potential loss in land value and tourism if lakes are not kept permanently full; and  Wanting the community to be involved in the implementation of the project (if it does proceed), including wanting to be empowered to develop the tourism potential of the lakes (Feehan Consulting, 2015a). These concerns were mitigated to a substantial extent by the refinements in project scope, particularly:  Removing First and Middle Reedy Lake, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake from scope;  The intention of community members, GMW, Council, DEPI and other agencies to form a collaborative, community-based arrangement for future management of some or all of the lakes. These discussions are underway at present, so the terms of reference and membership of that group are not yet resolved.

6.4.1 Investigation phase

A number of consultation activities were undertaken during the investigation phase of both the KLBP and the TRLBP (early 2012 and mid 2014). Table 6-2 summarises communication and engagement activities undertaken and details the main groups in involved.

R01 125 Environmental Report

Table 6-2 Summary of Communication and Engagement activity types (See Table 5 in Feehan Consulting (2015) for detailed list of activities) Activity type Description Comment Community Advisory To advise the Connections Project on the 9 community members; 10 meetings; provided Group implementation of the Kerang Lakes Bypass with detailed information about investigation Investigation project to provide local understanding and activities. experience. Project Reference To provide advice to GMW on development and Comprised 10 agency and municipal Group implementation of components of the project, and to representatives; 14 meetings; considered facilitate the development of the value for money detailed information about investigation assessment. activities. Newsletters Provide general information about the project and Distributed in electronic or hard copy to investigations. circulation list x6 Contributions to Lake Chatter (newsletter of Lakes Community) Letters Responses to letter received from the public. As required Fact sheets Provide information about the project. x5, widely circulated Media articles To local print and electronic media Various Briefings Shire of Gannawarra x6 GMW Water Service Committee Various interactions North Central CMA Kerang Local Aboriginal Network Agencies (regional, State and Commonwealth) One on One Drop in sessions for interested people to meet project Five sessions (2 hour) Kerang and Lake discussions discuss and discuss issues. Charm. Advertised in local print media. 13 attendees One on one Face to face meetings with landholders potentially 6 potentially affected landholders. discussions affected by bypass channel alignment. Shopfronts Drop in sessions for members of the public to meet Advertised in local print media. project staff and discuss issues July 2013 – total of 3 sessions at Kerang Library (25 attendees) December 2013 – 2 sessions at Kerang Library (8 attendees) October 2014 – 1 session at Kerang Library; 1 at Lake Charm Hall (total of 11 attendees) Project reports Hard copies made available at Kerang Library. Provided as reports finalized. Electronic copies lodged with State Government Library. Meetings Public meeting – Lake Charm ~ 50 attendees (28/11/2012) Public meeting Kerang ~ 40 attendees (23/1/2013) Regular interactions at Kerang Lakes Community Development Group meetings Preliminary social and Amongst other things, documented community views of interview with 35 stakeholders economic impacts the preliminary stages of the project. study

Many community concerns have been mitigated by the refinements in the TRLBP scope however it is likely that there will continue to be a range of views on the project’s merits. GMW will continue to provide local stakeholders the opportunity for engagement.

On-going stakeholder support will depend significantly on the establishment of trust in the on-going risk management of the lakes, and engaging the community effectively in their development and care (GMW 2016a).

6.4.2 Indigenous consultation

SKM, 2013b undertook a cultural heritage assessment as part of the KLBP investigation phase. The assessment looked at a number of different options and the cultural heritage sensitivity of these options. The TRLBP area is predominantly within an area of cultural heritage sensitivity and the assessment identified a 1 km long section along the southwestern bank of Third Reedy Lake as having archaeological potential due to indications of Aboriginal cultural material observed in the form of small fragments of burnt clay material The assessment therefore concluded that a mandatory Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) will be required and a Notice of Intent to prepare a CHMP has been lodged with the Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria and the owners or occupiers of any land within the area to which the CHMP relates have been notified. There is

R01 126 Environmental Report

currently no Registered Aboriginal Party under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006, therefore the CHMP will be submitted for approval to the Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria.

Aboriginal stakeholder consultation and participation as part of the assessment was undertaken via phone, email and meetings. The BBNAC (Barapa Barapa Nations Aboriginal Corporation) and BBNTG (Barapa Barapa Native Title Group) are key managers of the site and have indicated a willingness to participate in meetings and field assessments for the standard phases of the CHMP and ongoing management of the site.

Informal discussions have occurred via the Kerang Indigenous Network (also known as Local Aboriginal Network (KLAN). The Kerang LAN was established in May 2011 KLAN is made up of Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal community members and has partnerships with a range of Aboriginal and mainstream community organisations, businesses and Government Departments who provide support to the local Aboriginal community. The KLAN is working towards formalising and strengthening their relationships with people such as Local Government Departments, Gannawarra Shire Council and other organisations and businesses to promote, educate and create opportunities with working partnerships. This will help in the process of consultation with the local Aboriginal community as part of the development of the CHMP.

6.4.3 Future engagement

During the detailed design, construction and operation of the TRLBP engagement activities will continue to be undertaken with the key stakeholders as detailed in Section 6.4.1 and 6.4.2. GMW will manage the future engagement associated with the design and construction and the site manager will undertake stakeholder engagement after the completion of these stages. The details of this engagement will be included in the EWP.

R01 127 Environmental Report

7. Synthesis / overall outcome

There is a high degree of confidence that if the target EVC is restored the overall condition of the wetland will improve in terms of increased diversity of wetland plants, increased habitat complexity and increased opportunities for feeding and breeding for a diverse range of waterbirds. However, there is some uncertainty about the exact vegetation species composition that will establish and the time it will take for establishment. Individual animal species present at the current wetland that could be impacted by the altered hydrological regime are native fish, Murray River Turtle and some waterbirds that prefer permanently inundated conditions. However, none of these species will be impacted at a population or broader landscape scale. Indeed, there will be a range of benefits to many species, especially waterbirds and frogs because the variable hydrological regime will create a more diverse range of habitats and hydroperiods for these species. The boost in wetland productivity following re-wetting will also contribute to diverse macroinvertebrate fauna and provide opportunities for fish during the inundation phases.

In addition to the species-specific impacts and benefits, there are a number of threats to achieving the project objectives, namely from weeds impacting on ability to successfully establish the target EVC and increased salinity and acid sulfate soils. There is some uncertainty about how these risks would manifest, but there is high confidence in the ability to manage these risks through a management framework that includes adaptive management and contingency measures to address the identified risks.

Specific outcomes of the altered regime in relation to MNES and other environmental values are summarised below.

7.1 Impacts on MNES

As identified in Section 3, there are five MNES that are present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake and therefore may be impacted by the TRLBP. These MNES include:

 Four EPBC Act 1999 listed species (Silver perch, Murray hardyhead, Murray cod, Chariot wheels).

 Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site.

The impact and benefit assessment has demonstrated that the impact to the three EPBC Act 1999 listed fish species is all considered very low due to the absence of records in recent surveys (Silver Perch and Murray Hardyhead) and some populations being stocked (Murray Cod). The only known location of Chariot Wheels is 5 km south of Third Reedy Lake (near First Reedy Lake). Chariot Wheels is generally associated with damp conditions like those suited to Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC and with this EVC likely to expand in area as a result of operation phase of the TRLBP the impact to Chariot Wheels is considered very low.

In regards to the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site, the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake means several of the CPSs for the lake will be permanently altered as a result of changes in hydrology and potential salinity that exceed the current LACs. This will constitute a change in character of the wetland. But, the proposed changes are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lakes makes to the Kerang Lakes Ramsar character. Furthermore, the changes are confined to, and managed within, Third Reedy Lake itself and do not extend to other lakes in the system – these other lakes will retain their current hydrological regimes and will also remain connected to each other via the new bypass channel around Third Reedy Lake. On this basis, any risks are considered acceptable and no specific offsets are required to compensate for potential risks.

7.2 Impacts on other significant environmental values

In addition to the MNES, there are a number of site and local significant species, including species listed under the FFG Act 1988, that are present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake and therefore may be impacted by the TRLBP. The impact to all significant species, except for the Murray River Turtle was considered low to very low, in fact for many of these species there will be moderate benefit as changed water regime will provide increase in habitat.

R01 128 Environmental Report

The impact to the Murray River Turtle was assessed as high due to their preferred habitat being permanent inundation and their limited ability to move to a new habitat during a drying phase. These species are present in large numbers at nearby wetlands (e.g. Middle Reedy, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake) (Biosis 2013), therefore the risk is high at the site scale but low risks at the landscape scale. Mitigation of this localised impact, including provision of intermediate filling, translocation of stranded individuals and predator management, may be required to reduce the impact to low.

7.3 Cumulative impacts and benefits

Table 7-1 provides a summary of the potential medium and long-term outcomes for threatened species, ecological communities, habitat, feeding and breeding opportunities and ecological processes associated with the TRLBP. Overall moderate to high benefits are predicted in terms of increase in habitat diversity for a range of birds, restoration of ecological processes associated with wetting and drying, including nutrient and organic matter cycling and pulsed wetland productivity when compared with a permanently inundated system. The overall impacts are predicted to be predominantly low to very low with the exception of moderate to high impacts on turtles if complete drying occurs and individuals cannot exit the lake.

Table 7-1: Summary of potential medium and long-term outcomes for threatened species, ecological communities, habitat, feeding and breeding opportunities and ecological processes

Value Scientific Name Status Impact Benefit Ecological communities Chenopod Woodland N/A Bioregional Conservation Status Very low Very low (EVC103) (Victorian Riverina) - Vulnerable Intermittent Swampy N/A Bioregional Conservation Status Very low High Woodland (EVC 813) (Victorian Riverina) - Depleted Tall Marsh (EVC 821) N/A Bioregional Conservation Status Low Low (Victorian Riverina) - Depleted Habitat Diversity of understory N/A Includes a number of Vic Advisory listed Very low High vegetation in bed of wetland species Feeding and breeding opportunities Waterbird breeding success N/A Includes a number of FFG listed Low Moderate species Waterbird feeding N/A Includes a number of FFG listed bird Low Moderate species Frog feeding and breeding N/A Incudes FFG listed Brown Toadlet. Very low Moderate Turtle feeding and breeding N/A Incudes FFG listed Murray River turtle. Moderate Very low Lowland Riverine Fish N/A Includes FFG and EPBC listed fish Community of the Southern species Low Very low Murray-Darling Basin Ecological processes Ecological process, nutrient N/A N/A Very low High and organic matter cycling Birds Eastern Great Egret* Ardea modesta FFG (En), Vic Advisory (L) Low Moderate Hardhead* Aythya australis FFG (Vu) Low Low Musk Duck Biziura lobate FFG (Vu) Low Low Little Egret Egretta garzetta FFG (En), Vic Advisory (L) Low Moderate White-bellied Sea Eagle* Haliaeetus leucogaster FFG (V), Vic Advisory (L) Low Low FFG (NT) Nankeen Night-heron Nycticorax caledonicus Low Moderate

Pied Cormorant Phalacrocorax varius FFG (NT) Low Low Royal Spoonbill Platalea regia FFG (NT) Low Moderate Caspian Tern Sterna caspia FFG (NT), Vic Advisory (L) Low Very low Fish Silver Perch* Bidyanus bidyanus FFG (V), Vic Advisory (L), EPBC (CE) Very low Very low Murray Hardyhead* Craterocephalus fluviatilis FFG (Ce), Vic Advisory (L), EPBC (En) Very low Very low Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum Unspecked Hardyhead+ Vic Advisory (L) Low Very low fulvus Murray Cod* Maccullochella peelii FFG (V), Vic Advisory (L), EPBC (V) Very low Very low Golden Perch Macquaria ambigua FFG (NT), Vic Advisory (I), Very low Very low Freshwater Catfish* Tandanus tandanus FFG (En), Vic Advisory (L), Very low Very low Reptiles Murray River Turtle* Emydura macquarii FFG (V) High Very low

R01 129 Environmental Report

Value Scientific Name Status Impact Benefit Plants Twin-leaf Bedstraw Asperula gemella FFG (r) Very low Moderate Flat-top Saltbush Atriplex lindleyi subsp. lidleyi FFG (k) Very low Moderate Winged Water-starwort Callitriche umbonata FFG (r), Vic Advisory (L) Very low Moderate Spiny Lignum Duma horrida subsp. Horrida FFG (r) Very low Moderate

Chariot Wheels* Maireana cheelii FFG (V), Vic Advisory (L), EPBC (V) Very low Very low Dark Roly-poly Sclerolaena muricata var. muricata FFG (k) Very low Moderate Senecio cunninghamii var. Branching Groundsel FFG (r) Very low Moderate cunninghamii * Species specifically included in the Bilateral Agreement + Unspecked Hardyhead was not included in the April 2013 release of the Advisory List of Threatened Vertebrate Fauna in Victoria (DSE, 2013). The species has been reassessed as abundant across many locations within Victoria, however it is currently gazetted under FFG (March 2017). Vic Advisory / FFG: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable, r – rare, NT – near threatened, k - insufficient known / L – listed, I - rejected for listing as threatened; taxon invalid EPBC: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable ^International treaty: Y – listed under one or more international migratory bird agreements

In addition to the benefits outlined in Table 7-1, at a broader landscape scale, the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake will result in a benefit due to the significant water savings, some of which will become available for environmental use. This water will be managed by the Commonwealth and Victorian Environmental Water Holder and will be used to implement the proposed water regime for Third Reedy Lake, but can also be available as environmental water for other wetlands. In this context, the benefits gained as a result of TRLBP extend beyond Third Reedy Lake itself to other wetlands in the Kerang Lakes system and elsewhere. This water can be used in a strategic way to provide drought refuge across the landscape and compensate for any climate change impacts that may occur in the future.

7.4 Summary

The proposed water regime for Third Reedy Lake should result in the successful establishment of Intermittent Swampy Woodland EVC across the majority of the lake.

Provided vegetation recovery is successful, there are a range of benefits including increased vegetation and habitat diversity for a range of animals, including increased foraging opportunities for waterbirds. While a range of threatened species have been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, the lake does not provide critical habitat for any EPBC Act 1999 or FFG Act 1988 listed threatened species, and overall the impact on threatened species is considered low. Even so, appropriate management is required through the development and implementation of an EWP which will outline management actions, monitoring and contingency arrangements in the event of unintended outcomes (e.g. failure of target vegetation to establish or standing of animals during drying phases) and management of potential threats (e.g. acid sulfate soil activation or unacceptable increases in salinity).

Third Reedy Lake in its current condition does not make a critical contribution to any of the criteria under which the Kerang Wetlands qualifies for Ramsar listing. The proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake are unlikely to impact on any listing criteria and are expected to provide ecological gains in terms of increased biodiversity values, and therefore are considered ‘positive’ in terms of the overall contribution the Third Reedy Lakes makes to the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site character. At a broader landscape scale, the proposed changes to Third Reedy Lake will result in significant water savings, some of which will become available for environmental use. A portion of the water saved will be used to implement the proposed water regime at Third Reedy Lake and the remaining water will be available as environmental water for other wetlands and rivers. In this context, the benefits gained as a result of the TRLBP extend beyond Third Reedy Lake itself to other wetlands in the Kerang Wetlands system and elsewhere.

R01 130 Environmental Report

8. References

Allen, G. R., S. H. Midgley, and M. Allen. 2002. Field Guide to the freshwater fishes of Australia. Western Australia Museum, Perth. ANZECC and ARMCANZ (2000) Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality. Volume 1, The Guidelines (Chapters 1–7). October 2000.

Backhouse, G., Lyon, J. and Cant, B. 2008a. National Recovery Plan for the Murray Hardyhead Craterocephalus fluviatilis. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne.

Baker-Gabb, D. and Hurley, V.G. (2011). National Recovery Plan for the Regent Parrot (eastern subspecies) Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. Baker-Gabb, D. (2011). National Recovery Plan for the Superb Parrot Polytelis swainsonii. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne.

Biosis (2013). Kerang Lakes Fauna Assessment- Draft report. Prepared for the North Central Catchment Management Authority. Biosis Pty Ltd, Melbourne.

BirdLife Australia. BirdLife Australia Atlas Database. Accessed at http://www.birdlife.org.au/ Brooks, S., Cottingham, P., Butcher, R., and Hale, J. (2013). Murray-Darling Basin Aquatic Ecosystem Classification: Stage 2 report. Peter Cottingham & Associates report to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office and Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Canberra.

Butcher, R. Hale, J., and Brooks, S. (2015) A guide to the management of Ramsar wetlands in Victoria. Internal report prepared for the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

Butcher, R. and Hale, J. (2016) Addendum to Ecological Character Description for the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. East Melbourne (https://www.water.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/85456/Kerang-Wetlands-Ramsar-Site-Ecological- Character-Description-Addendum.pdf). .Cadwallader, P. L. (1977). J.O. Langtry's 1949-1950 Murray River investigations. Fisheries and Wildlife Papers of Victoria. No. 13.

Clunie, P. (2010). Description of the ecological character of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. Department of Sustainability and Environment.

Cook, D and Bayes, E (2014). Kerang Ramsar and other significant wetlands monitoring project 2014. Report prepared for North Central Catchment Management Authority.

Commonwealth of Australia undated Approved Conservation Advice for Swainsona murrayana (Slender Darling-pea) (s266B of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999).

Commonwealth of Australia (2012). Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 – Environmental Offsets Policy.

Commonwealth of Australia (2016). National Recovery Plan for the Plains-wanderer (Pedionomus torquatus). Department of Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) (2016a). Victorian Biodiversity Atlas. Biodiversity Info. Victorian State Government, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Melbourne. Accessed at https://vba.dse.vic.gov.au.

Department of Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) (2016b). Overview of Waterway Management in Victoria: Fact Sheet 6. March 2016. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning.

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2013). Matters of National Environmental Significance, Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

R01 131 Environmental Report

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015). Kerang Lakes Bypass Project – Draft Due Diligence Assessment Report. Prepared by Southern Water Infrastructure Section, Department of the Environment.

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2017a). Macquaria australasica in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed May 2017.

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2017b). Polytelis swainsonii in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed May 2017.

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2017c). Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed May 2017.

Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) (2013a). Fish stock report. Retrieved 5 July 2013, from the Department of Environment and Primary Industries: http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/fisheries/about- fisheries/fish-stocking-reporting.

Department of Environment and Primary Industries (DEPI) (2013b). Permitted clearing of native vegetation: Biodiversity assessment guidelines. Department of Environment and Primary Industries. East Melbourne

Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2009). National Guidelines for Notifying Change in Ecological Character of Australian Ramsar Sites (Article 3.2). Module 3 of the National Guidelines for Ramsar Wetlands—Implementing the Ramsar Convention in Australia. Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra

Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (2004). Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site: Strategic Management Plan. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne.

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC) (2012). Australian Ramsar Site Nomination Guidelines. Module 4 of the National Guidelines for Ramsar Wetlands—Implementing the Ramsar Convention in Australia. Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra.

Ecological Associates (2010). Gunbower Forest Hipwell Road channel ecological benefit and risk analysis- final report. Prepared for the North Central Catchment Management Authority. Ecological Associates Pty Ltd, Malvern, SA

Feehan Consulting (2015a). Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation - Engagement and Communications. working draft report, GMW Connections Project. Frood, D. and Papas, P. (2016). A guide to water regime, salinity ranges and bioregional conservation status of Victorian wetland Ecological Vegetation Classes. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research. Technical Report Series No. 266. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Heidelberg, Victoria.

Gippel, C. J. (2012). Preliminary hydrological modelling for Kerang Lakes bypass investigation project. Fluvial Systems Pty Ltd, Stockton. Goulburn-Murray Water, Shepparton, September.

Gippel, C.J. (2015). Results of Third Reedy water savings modelling 26 August 2014 (amended 12 March 2015). Report for GMW

Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) (2012). Lake Boga Drying Lake Contingency Plan. Goulburn Murray Water

Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) (2013). Connections Project Water Change Management Framework. Version 3. May 2013. Goulburn Murray Water

R01 132 Environmental Report

Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) (2015). GMW Connections Project Construction Environmental Management Framework. July 2015. Goulburn Murray Water

Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) (2016b). Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999referral document. Goulburn Murray Water

Goulburn Murray Water (GMW) (2016a). Environment Effects Act 1978 referral document. Goulburn Murray Water.

Ho, S., Roberts, J., Cheers, G., Suitor, L. (2006). Development and application of an ecological monitoring and mapping program for targeted Kerang Lakes. Report prepared for the North Central Catchment

Ingram, B.A., C.G. Barlow, J.J. Burchmore, G.J. Gooley, S.J. Rowland & A.C. Sanger (1990). Threatened native freshwater fishes in Australia - some case histories. Journal of Fish Biology. 37:175-182.

Jacobs (2016). Third Reedy Lake Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation. Memo report from Rebecca Sutherland 19 February 2016 including BIOR, GMW Connections Project.

Jacobs (2017). Third Reedy Lake Acid Sulfate Soil Study – Interpretive Report. Report for Goulburn Murray Water

Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) (2011). Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site: Ecological Character Description. Draft reported prepared for the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Kellogg Brown and Root, St Kilda.

Kingsford, R., Bino, G., Porter, J., and Brandis, K. (2014). Waterbird Communities in the Murray-Darling Basin, 1983-2012. Australian Wetlands, Rivers and Landscapes Centre, University of New South Wales, Canberra, ACT.

Lintermans, M. 2007. Fishes of the Murray-Darling Basin: An introductory guide. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra.

Mallen-Cooper, M. 2001. Fish passage in off-channel habitats of the lower Murray River. Report prepared by Fishway Consulting Services for Wetland Care Australia

Mavromihalis, J. (2010a). National Recovery Plan for the Chariot Wheels Maireana cheelii. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne.

Mavromihalis, J. (2010b). National Recovery Plan for the Winged Peppercress Lepidium monoplocoides. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne. McDowall, R. M. and W. Fulton. 1996. Family Galaxiidae: galaxids. Pages 52-77 in R. M. McDowall, editor. Freshwater fishes of south-eastern Australia. Reed Books, Sydney.

Merrick, J. R. 1996. Family Terapontidae: freshwater grunters or perches. Pages 164-167 in R. M. McDowall, editor. Freshwater fishes of south-eastern Australia. Reed Books, Sydney

Ministry of Conservation (1982). Wetlands Nominated by the State of Victoria for Inclusion on the List of Wetlands of International Importance. State Government of Victoria, East Melbourne, Victoria.

Murray–Darling Basin Authority (2010). Detailed Assessment of Acid Sulfate Soils in the Murray–Darling Basin: Protocols for sampling, field characterisation, laboratory analysis and data presentation. MDBA Publication No. 57/10, 58 pp.

North Central CMA (2012). Alternative Water Regimes for Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation Project – Phase 1. North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly.

R01 133 Environmental Report

North Central CMA (2014). Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation Project Technical Report – Third Reedy Lake, North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly.

North Central CMA (2016). Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Action Plan 2016-2024 Draft. North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly.

O’Connor, J., Rogers, D., and Pisanu, P. (2012). Monitoring the Ramsar status of the Coorong, Lakes and Murray Mouth: a case study using birds. South Australian Department for Environment and Natural Resources, Adelaide.

Rakali (2013). Ecological Vegetation Class Assessment for the Reedy Lake system, Little Lake Charm and Racecourse Lake surrounding areas in the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site. Report prepared for the North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly.

Ramsar Convention (2009). Strategic Framework for the List of Wetlands of International Importance, Third edition, as adopted by Resolution VII.11 (COP7, 1999) and amended by Resolutions VII.13 (1999), VIII.11 and VIII.33 (COP8, 2002), IX.1 Annexes A and B (COP9, 2005), and X.20 (COP10, 2008).

Ramsar Convention (2012). Resolution XI.8 Annex 2. Strategic Framework and guidelines for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971) – 2012 revision adopted by Resolution XI.8 (2012).

RMCG (2013) Preliminary Assessment: Social and Economic Impacts of the Proposed Kerang Lakes Bypass. Report to Goulburn Murray Water, 22 August.

RMCG (2015). Business Case: Kerang Lakes Bypass Project. Report for Goulburn Murray Water.

Roberts, J. and Marston, F. (2011). Water Regime for Wetland and Floodplain Plants: A Source Book for the Murray-Darling Basin. National Water Commission, Canberra, ACT.

Roberts, J., Casanova, M., Morris, K. and Papas, P. (2017). The Feasibility of Wetland Vegetation Recovery: User Guide for a Decision Support Tool. Version 0b (1st February 2017). Prepared for DELWP.

Rogers, K. and T. Ralph (2011). Floodplain wetland biota in the Murray-Darling Basin. Water and habitat requirements, CSIRO Publishing. Sharpe C, Stuart, I., Stanislawski, K and Parker, A. (2016). The Gunbower Forest Fish Exit Strategy; Implementation and Monitoring. A technical report for the North Central Catchment Management Authority by CPS Enviro P/L. DRAFT

Sharpe, C. (2014). Kerang Lakes Murray hardyhead Survey, March 2014. CPS Environmental Research Technical Report for Goulburn-Murray Water, April 2014. 10 pp.

SKM (2001). Reedy Lakes environmental status report. A report for the North Central Catchment Managment Authority (working document)

SKM (2010). Environmental water regime requirements of the Kerang Lakes. Reported prepared for Goulburn- Murray Water.

SKM (2013a). Kerang Lakes Preliminary Blackwater Risk Assessment. Final Report. Tatura, Goulburn-Murray Water.

SKM (2013b). Kerang Lakes Bypass Project Cultural Heritage Field Assessment Report, Goulburn-Murray Water Connections Project.

SKM (2013c). Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation. Net Gain Assessment. Version E, Goulburn-Murray Water Connections Project.

R01 134 Environmental Report

SKM (2014). Kerang Lakes Bypass Project. Preliminary investigation design. Phase 2 report for G-MW Connections Project The Atlas of Living Australia. Accessed at http://www.ala.org.au.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015) Conservation advice Grantiella picta, painted honeyeater. URS (2013a). Further hydrogeological risk assessment: Third Reedy Lake and Racecourse Lakes. Letter to Ross Plunkett, G-MW Connections Project 4 October 2013.

URS (2013b). Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation: Acid Sulfate Soil Risk Assessment. Report prepared for the Goulburn-Murray Water Connections Project. Tatura.

URS (2014). Further hydrogeological risk assessment: Third Reedy Lake. Letter dated 12 September 2014 to GMW

VEWH (2016). The Victorian Environmental Water Plan – Seasonal Watering Plan 2016-2017. Prepared by the Victorian Environmental Water Holder.

Walsh, N.G. (1999). Senecio. In: Walsh, N.G.; Entwisle, T.J. (eds), Flora of Victoria Vol. 4, Cornaceae to Asteraceae. Inkata Press, Melbourne.

Watt, A. (2013). Biodisparity in fish communities in the Coorong, and Lakes Alexandrina and Albert Ramsar site. Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia.

R01 135 Environmental Report

Appendix A. TRLBP investigations and studies undertaken to date All reports publicly available at http://www.connectionsproject.com.au/kerang-lakes-bypass-project-referral- documents/ Source of information How recent How the How the reliability of the Assessment against is the reliability of the information was tested EPBC Assessment information information was Guidelines tested Biosis (2013). Kerang Lakes Fauna 2013 Report was The late summer survey of Fish surveys were Assessment. Report for the North reviewed by amphibians and avifauna conducted in accordance Central Catchment Management ERP, CAG, PRG is outside of the peak with Guidelines for Authority and Goulburn-Murray Water and SRP; makes breeding activity period for detecting fish listed as substantial use of certain species and as threatened under the earlier work and such these faunal groups Environment databases. may be under-represented Protection and Biodiversity in the current surveys. Conservation Act 1999. Timing of surveys were Rapid Bioassessment conducted to occur within (RBA) sampling method the survey season of the (EPA 2003) was utilised to previous assessment collect macroinvertebrates conducted by Ho et al. (2006), although the previous surveys were staggered over a longer period, each lake was assessed once Feehan (2016). Drying lake case 2015 Internal review Based on conclusions from N/A studies and literature review. Draft. a range of case studies and scientific literature. Feehan Consulting (2015). Kerang 2015 This is a collation No uncertainties – N/A Lakes Bypass Investigation - of engagement statement of fact Engagement and Communications. and working draft report, GMW communication Connections Project. activities Newsletters undertaken as Fact sheets part of the investigation Feehan Consulting (2015). Third 2015 Internal review Internal working paper. N/A Reedy Lake Bypass: potential impacts and benefits on the ecological character (EC) of the Kerang Wetlands Ramsar Site - discussion paper (draft). Goulburn Murray Water Connections Project. Feehan, P. (2015). Kerang Lakes 2015 Internal review Internal working paper. N/A Bypass Investigation Third Reedy Lake Based on outcomes of bypass – salinity impacts and salinity modelling and management Working Draft. water savings estimates and assumptions therein. Proposes a framework for assessing and managing risks that result from the interaction of a number of factors occurring concurrently. GHD (2014). Kerang Lakes Bypass 2014 Peer review N/A Investigation. Peer Review of Bypass Infrastructure and Costing. Goulburn Murray Water Connections Project. GHD (2015). Proposal for Kerang 2015 Peer reviewed by Proposal only N/A Lakes Bypass Project. Third Reedy Webb 2016 Lake Acid Sulfate Soil Assessment. 12 June 2015. Gippel, C. (2014). Results of Third 2014 Internal review N/A Reedy water savings modelling. v5. 26 August 2014., For Goulburn-Murray Connections Project. Gippel, C. J., (2013). Preliminary 2013 Report was The SWET water balance N/A hydrological modelling for Kerang reviewed by CAG modelling concept was Lakes bypass investigation project. and PRG initially developed to

R01 Environmental Report

Source of information How recent How the How the reliability of the Assessment against is the reliability of the information was tested EPBC Assessment information information was Guidelines tested Fluvial Systems Pty Ltd, Stockton. accurately predict water Goulburn-Murray Water, Shepparton, savings potential at September. individual wetlands in the River Murray System. After development of the SWET modelling approach was completed in 2005, it was reviewed by technical representatives of state and commonwealth agencies responsible for management of the River Murray System, and then endorsed as a suitable modelling procedure for listings on The Living Murray Developmental Register. Gippel, C. J., 2014, Modelling preferred 2014 Report was N/A hydrological regimes for Kerang Lakes reviewed by CAG bypass investigation project. Fluvial and PRG Systems Pty Ltd, Stockton. Goulburn- Murray Water, Tatura.

Jacobs (2017). Third Reedy Lake Acid 2017 Report was John Webb is Associate Investigation undertaken in Sulfate Soil Study – Interpretive reviewed by ERP Professor, Environmental accordance with the Report. Report for Goulburn Murray and TRLBP Geoscience at Latrobe Murray Darling Basin Water Consultative University, Melbourne. Authority guidelines Committee His research interests for assessing acid sulfate Peer reviewed by include focus on improving soils in the Murray Darling Webb 2016 treatment procedures for Basin acid mine drainage and understanding the formation of acid sulfate soils Jacobs (2016). Third Reedy Lake 2016 Internal review N/A Permitted Clearing of Native Vegetation. Memo report from Rebecca Sutherland 19 February 2016 including BIOR, GMW Connections Project.

Kerang Lakes Bypass Business Case 2015 Internal review Agency report. N/A Due diligence assessment (DoE) North Central CMA (2014), Kerang 2014 Report was Some assumptions and N/A Lakes Bypass Investigation Project – reviewed by identified risks addressed Ramsar and Landscape Scale CAG, PRG and by salinity assessment and Considerations, Prepared for the ERP proposed ASS Goulburn Murray Water Connections assessment. Project, North Central Catchment Management Authority, Huntly, Victoria North Central CMA (2014) Kerang 2014 Report was Provides the basis for N/A Lakes Bypass Investigation Project reviewed by water savings estimates; Technical Report – Third Reedy Lake, CAG, PRG and makes assumptions about North Central Catchment Management SRP and ERP the appropriate water Authority, Huntly. Version 11, 14 regime to achieve January. objectives. Undertakes extensive analysis of risk and benefits. Rakali Consulting Pty Ltd (2013) 2013 Report was Due to the cryptic nature Vegetation mapping was Ecological Vegetation Class reviewed by and seasonal growth undertaken by field survey Assessment for the Reedy Lake CAG, PRG and cycles of certain plants in combination with the system, Little Lake Charm and SRP and animals, ecological interpretation of high Racecourse Lake and surrounding surveys are often unable resolution satellite areas in the Kerang Wetlands to detect all species imagery. The presence or Ramsar Site. Report prepared for present at a particular site. absence of EPBC Act North Central Catchment As fieldwork for this study 1999 Matters of National Management Authority, version 5.0, was carried out in Environmental July. February and March 2013, Significance and FFG Act only flora and fauna that species and communities were observed within the were assessed.

R01 Environmental Report

Source of information How recent How the How the reliability of the Assessment against is the reliability of the information was tested EPBC Assessment information information was Guidelines tested study areas over this The condition of each period were recorded. wetland was determined Ecological surveys can using the Index of Wetland also be limited by project Condition (IWC) constraints including short Method. timeframes for survey, and it is probable that Vegetation Assets, States additional flora and fauna and Transitions (VAST) species would be recorded framework was used to given a greater sampling classify vegetation and effort. habitat according to its degree of modification from a natural state. RMCG (2013) Preliminary Assessment: 2013 Report was N/A Social and Economic Impacts of the reviewed by CAG Proposed Kerang Lakes Bypass. and PRG Report to Goulburn Murray Water, 22 August. Sharpe, C. (2014). Kerang Lakes 2014 Report was Survey specifically Targeted search in Murray Hardyhead Survey, March reviewed by CAG targeted Murray accordance with 2014. Final Report, CPS Environmental and PRG Hardyhead. The timing of Guidelines for detecting Research for the G-MW Connections the survey is considered fish listed as threatened Project. not to have greatly under the Environment influenced the likelihood of Protection and Biodiversity detecting Murray Conservation Act 1999. hardyhead in either Middle or Third Reedy lake. The timing of the present surveys (early autumn) occurred during the period when abundances have been recorded as relatively high at other locations SKM (2013). Kerang Lakes Bypass 2013 N/A Investigation. Net Gain Assessment. Version E, Goulburn-Murray Water Connections Project SKM (2013). Kerang Lakes Bypass 2013 Report was Based on limited field N/A Project Cultural Heritage Field reviewed by CAG investigations. Assessment Report, Goulburn-Murray and PRG Water Connections Project. SKM (2013), Kerang Lakes Preliminary 2013 Report was Outlined risks associated N/A Blackwater Risk Assessment. Final reviewed by CAG with a range of scenarios. Report. Tatura, Goulburn-Murray and PRG. Based Water. on most recent scientific papers. SKM (2014), Kerang Lakes Bypass 2014 Report was Preliminary design only. N/A Project preliminary infrastructure reviewed by CAG Detailed design required design Phase 2 report. 12 February and PRG and before project can peer review proceed. (GHD 2014) URS (2013). Further hydrogeological 2013 Report was Bores used in the analysis N/A risk assessment: Third Reedy Lake reviewed by CAG were not situated in ideal and Racecourse Lakes. Letter to Ross and PRG locations; data only Plunkett, G-MW Connections Project 4 available over 24 years. October 2013. Monte-Carlo modelling approach attempts to deal with a range of uncertainties. Based on a number of modelling assumptions, including the relationship between bore and lake levels. URS (2013)., Kerang Lakes Bypass 2013 Report was Uncertain; further field N/A Investigation: Acid Sulfate Soil Risk reviewed by work and assessment Assessment. Report prepared for the CAG, PRG and proposed. Goulburn-Murray Water Connections SRP and peer Project. Tatura. review (see Webb (2013)

R01 Environmental Report

Source of information How recent How the How the reliability of the Assessment against is the reliability of the information was tested EPBC Assessment information information was Guidelines tested URS (2013). Kerang Lakes Bypass 2013 Report was Bores used in the analysis N/A Investigation: Monte Carlo reviewed by were not situated in ideal Hydrogeological Risk Analysis: Salinity. CAG, PRG and locations; data only Report prepared for the Goulburn- SRP and peer available over 24 years. Murray Water Connections Project. review (see Monte-Carlo modelling Tatura. Webb (2013) approach attempts to deal with a range of uncertainties. URS (2013). Kerang Lakes Bypass 2013 Report was Based on best available N/A Investigation Project. Hydrogeological reviewed by knowledge and Risk Assessment: Conceptual Model CAG, PRG and information. Bores used in and Project Summary Report. Report SRP and peer the analysis were not prepared for the Goulburn-Murray review (see situated in ideal locations; Water Connections Project. Tatura. Webb (2013) data only available over 24 years. URS (2014). Further hydrogeological 2014 Bores used in the analysis N/A risk assessment - Third Reedy Lake. were not situated in ideal Letter report dated 12 September locations; data only 2014. For G-MW Connections Project. available over 24 years. Monte-Carlo modelling approach attempts to deal with a range of uncertainties. Based on a number of modelling assumptions including the relationship between bore and lake levels. Webb, J. (2013). Review of URS 2013 Peer review John Webb is Associate N/A Kerang Lakes Bypass Investigation Professor, Environmental Reports for G-MW Connections Geoscience at Latrobe Project, Latrobe University. University, Melbourne. His research interests include focus on improving treatment procedures for acid mine drainage and understanding the formation of acid sulfate soils. Webb, J. (2016). Review of GHD 2016 Peer review John Webb is Associate N/A proposal: Third Reedy Lake acid Professor, Environmental sulfate soil assessment. 27 July 2016. Geoscience at Latrobe University, Melbourne. His research interests include focus on improving treatment procedures for acid mine drainage and understanding the formation of acid sulfate soils

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix B. GMW Environmental Policy

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix C. Review committee membership

C.1 Expert Review Panel

Member Organisation

Dr Jane Roberts Independent consultants experienced in the relationships between hydrology and ecology, and in evaluating the ecological consequences of changing hydrology Terry Hillman

C.2 Consultative Committee

Member Organisation

Jack Krohn Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

Andrea Kelleher Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

Janet Holmes Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

Michelle Maher North Central Catchment Management Authority

Ross Stanton Goulburn Murray Water (Operations)

Geoff Rollinson Gannawarra Shire Council

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix D. Third Reedy Lake Mapping

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix E. Conceptual cross section of Third Reedy Lake

E.1 A conceptual cross section of Third Reedy Lake showing current conditions (Source: North Central CMA, 2014)

R01 Environmental Report

E.2 A conceptual model of the littoral zone of Third Reedy Lake under current regime (Source: North Central CMA, 2014)

R01 Environmental Report

E.3 A conceptual cross section of Third Reed Lake under proposed regime (Source: North Central CMA, 2014)

R01 Environmental Report

E.4 A conceptual model of the littoral zone of Third Reedy Lake under proposed regime (Source: North Central CMA, 2014)

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix F. Standard design drawings

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix G. Threatened plants and animals present or potentially present at Third Reedy Lake

G.1 Plants

Data sources: Atlas of Living Australia, NC CMA unpublished data, Victorian Biodiversity Atlas, Rakali Consulting (2013), Biosis (2013)). Key: EPBC/IUCN status: NT = near threatened, Vu = vulnerable, En = endangered, CE = critically endangered. Vic Advisory / FFG: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable, R – rare, NT – near threatened, k - insufficient known / L – listed, I – rejected for listing as threatened; taxon invalid. * species listed in bilateral agreement. Common Name Scientific Name Vic advisory EPBC/ Location of record Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Included in / FFG IUCN assessment First Middle Third Twin-leaf Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Asperula gemella R Yes Bedstraw • • • Consulting 2013) Atriplex lindleyi Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Flat-top Saltbush K Yes subsp. Lindleyi • • • Consulting 2013) Winged Water- Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Callitriche umbonata R Yes starwort • • Consulting 2013) Cynodon dactylon Native Couch K Terrestrial species, not recorded in direct impact area, not included in risk No var. pulchellus • Duma horrida subsp. Recorded associated with existing Intermittent Swampy Woodland (EVC) (Rakali Spiny Lignum R Yes Horrida • • • Consulting 2013) Eragrostis Cane Grass V Amphibious species, not recorded in impact area, not included in risk assessment. No australasica • Dwarf Brooklime Gratiola pumelo R • Amphibious species, not recorded in impact area, not included in risk assessment. No Winged Peppercress is associated with seasonally wet soils (Mavromihalis 2010b). It is not associated with permanent water bodies and has not been recorded at Third Reedy Winged Lepidium Lake, although there is a possibility of presence in the landscape west of Third Reedy En,L En Yes Peppercress* monoplocoides Lake (Rakali Consulting 2013). The likelihood of impacts is very low. The introduction of a wetting and drying regime may benefit the species and increase areas potentially available for colonisation. Not present in impact area, not included in risk assessment Damp lands species - Chariot Wheels are associated with heavy clay soils that are seasonally wet (Mavromihalis 2010a). They are not associated with permanent water Chariot Wheels* Maireana cheelii V,L Vu • bodies and have not been recorded at Third Reedy Lake, but they have been recorded Yes south west of First Reedy Lake (Rakali Consulting, 2013) and hence are included in the risks assessment because of proximity to Third Reedy Lake. Waterbush Myoporum montanum R • Terrestrial species, not recorded in direct impact area, not included in risk No Swamp Buttercup Ranunculus undosus V • • Amphibious species, not recorded in impact area, not included in risk assessment. No Sclerolaena muricata Dark Roly-poly K Terrestrial species, not recorded in direct impact area, not included in risk assessment. No var. muricata • • • Spear-fruit Sclerolaena V Terrestrial species, not recorded in direct impact area, not included in risk No Copperburr patenticuspis •

R01 Environmental Report

Common Name Scientific Name Vic advisory EPBC/ Location of record Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake Included in / FFG IUCN assessment First Middle Third Floodplain Senecio R Damplands species - Not recorded in study area, not included in risk assessment No Fireweed campylocarpus • Damplands species - Branching Groundsel is present at Third Reedy Lake in associated Branching Senecio cunninghamii with Tall Marsh. However, it can grow in wet or dry soils (Walsh 1999). The proposed R Yes Groundsel var. cunninghamii • • water regime will retain variable wetting and drying which should continue to support Branching Groundsel. Slender Darling-pea is associated with heavy soils in grassland and box woodland areas (Commonwealth of Australia undated). They are not associated with permanent water Slender Darling- Swainsona E,L Vu bodies and have not been recorded at Third Reedy Lake – no suitable habitat exists Yes pea* murrayana around Third Reedy Lake (Rakali Consulting, 2013). Not present in impact area, not included in risk assessment.

G.2 Birds recorded at the Ramsar site and Reedy Lake complex

Data sources: Atlas of Living Australia, NC CMA unpublished data, Victorian Biodiversity Atlas, Annual Summer Waterfowl counts (DELWP unpublished) and Kingsford et al. 2014; Butcher and Hale (2016). Key: EPBC/IUCN status: NT = near threatened, Vu = vulnerable, En = endangered, CE = critically endangered. Vic Advisory / FFG: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable, R – rare, NT – near threatened, k - insufficient known / L – listed, I - rejected for listing as threatened; taxon invalid. International treaty: CMS = Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, C = China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement, J = Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement, R = Republic of Korea-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement. * species listed in bilateral agreement. Vic Location of record EPBC/ Inter. Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN treaty First Middle Third assessment FFG site Australian Reed Acrocephalus Common species with widespread distribution, not • • • • No Warbler (Acrocephalus) australis included in risk assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos V • No ,R assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Chestnut Teal Anas castanea • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Grey Teal Anas gracilis • • • • No included in risk assessment Australasian Widespread distribution, not recorded at Third Reedy Anas rhynchotis V • • No Shoveler Lake, not included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Pacific Black Duck Anas superciliosa • • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Australasian Darter Anhinga novaehollandiae • • • • No included in risk assessment Recorded at Third Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). They Eastern Great Ardea (Casmerodius) prefer permanent waterbodies, but also frequent shallows V,L • • • • Yes Egret* modesta of deep permanent wetlands and semi-permanent swamps.

R01 Environmental Report

Vic Location of record EPBC/ Inter. Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN treaty First Middle Third assessment FFG site Common species with widespread distribution, not Great Egret Ardea alba C • • No included in risk assessment Not known from study area, not included in risk Intermediate Egret Ardea intermedia E,L • • No assessment White-necked Common species with widespread distribution, not Ardea pacifica • • • • No Heron included in risk assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres V • No ,R assessment Previously recorded from Third Reedy lake. Prefers abundant aquatic vegetation and deep water for foraging Hardhead* Aythya australis V • • • • Yes (Rogers and Ralph, 2011). Changed regime may reduce the depth of the wetland for foraging. Musk Duck Biziura lobata V • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Recorded in Ramsar site, but not recorded from Third En Australasian Reedy Lake. Is restricted to wetland habitats where it Botaurus poiciloptilus E, L (EPBC), • • Yes Bittern* prefers dense reedbeds (Biosis 2013) that are not CE (IUCN) present at Third Reedy Lake. Sharp-tailed CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Calidris acuminata • No Sandpiper ,R assessment EN(EPBC), CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Red Knot Calidris canutus E • Yes En (IUCN) ,R assessment Not known from the study area but may occasionally be present along the drainage system to the west of Third CE CMS,C,J Reedy Lake (Biosis 2013). Preferred habitat includes Curlew Sandpiper* Calidris ferruginea E (EPBC), • Yes ,R tidal mud flats and drying ephemeral lake margins NT (IUCN) (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/s pecies/pubs/856-conservation-advice.pdf). Not known from study area, not included in risk Pectoral Sandpiper Calidris melanotos NT CMS,J,R • No assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis • No ,R assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Long-toed Stint Calidris subminuta NT • No ,R assessment CE CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris E,L (EPBC), • Yes ,R assessment NT (IUCN) Greater Sand CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Charadrius leschenaultii CE VU(EPBC) • Yes Plover ,R assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Red-capped Plover Charadrius ruficapillus • No included in risk assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Oriental Plover Charadrius veredus • No ,R assessment

R01 Environmental Report

Vic Location of record EPBC/ Inter. Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN treaty First Middle Third assessment FFG site Australian Wood Common species with widespread distribution, not Chenonetta jubata • • • • No Duck included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Whiskered Tern Chlidonias hybrida NT • • • • No included in risk assessment White-winged Black CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Chlidonias leucopterus NT • No Tern ,R assessment Chroicocephalus Common species with widespread distribution, not Silver Gull • • • No novaehollandiae included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Swamp Harrier Circus approximans • • • No included in risk assessment Cladorhynchus Common species with widespread distribution, not Banded Stilt • • No leucocephalus included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Brown Treecreeper Climacteris picumnus NT • • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Black Swan Cygnus atratus • • • No included in risk assessment Little Egret Egretta garzetta E,L • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Common species with widespread distribution, not White-faced Heron Egretta novaehollandiae • • • • No included in risk assessment Black Fronted Common species with widespread distribution, not Elseyornis melanops • • • No Dotterel included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Red-kneed Dotterel Erythrogonys cinctus • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Eurasian Coot Fulica atra • • • • No included in risk assessment Not known from study area, not included in risk Latham’s Snipe Gallinago hardwickii NT,N CMS,J,R • No assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Dusky Moorhen Gallinula tenebrosa • • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Buff-banded Rail Gallirallus philippensis • • • No included in risk assessment Not known from study area, not included in risk Gull-billed Tern Gelochelidon nilotica E,L C • • No assessment Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake or broader study area. Preferred habitat is terrestrial, including River Red Painted Grantiella picta V,L Gum woodlands Yes Honeyeater* (http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/s pecies/pubs/470-conservation-advice.pdf). Not known from study area, not included in risk Brolga Grus rubicunda V, L • • No assessment White-bellied Sea Haliaeetus leucogaster V,L C • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake Yes Eagle*

R01 Environmental Report

Vic Location of record EPBC/ Inter. Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN treaty First Middle Third assessment FFG site Not known from study area, not included in risk Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus • No assessment Recorded in Ramsar site, but not recorded from Third Australian Little Reedy Lake. Is restricted to wetland habitats where it Ixobrychus dubius E,L • No Bittern prefers dense reedbeds (Biosis 2013) that are not present at Third Reedy Lake. CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa V • No ,R assessment Malacorhynchus Common species with widespread distribution, not Pink-eared Duck • • No membranaceus included in risk assessment Little Pied Common species with widespread distribution, not Microcarbo melanoleucos • • • • No Cormorant included in risk assessment CE Numenius CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Eastern Curlew V (EPBC), • Yes madagascariensis ,R assessment En (IUCN) Nankeen Night- Nycticorax caledonicus NT • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes heron Not known from study area, not included in risk Blue-billed Duck Oxyura australis E, L • No assessment Recorded in Ramsar site but not recorded from Third Plains-wanderer* Pedionomus torquatus Ce,L CE • Reedy Lake. Preferred habitat is treeless plains Yes (Commonwealth of Australia 2016). Common species with widespread distribution, not Australian Pelican Pelecanus conspicillatus • • • • No included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo • • • • No included in risk assessment Little Black Common species with widespread distribution, not Phalacrocorax sulcirostris • • • • No Cormorant included in risk assessment Pied Cormorant Phalacrocorax varius NT • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake Yes Red-necked CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Phalaropus lobatus • No Phalarope ,R assessment CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Ruff Philomachus pugnax • No ,R assessment Yellow-billed Common species with widespread distribution, not Platalea flavipes • • • • No Spoonbill included in risk assessment Royal Spoonbill Platalea regia NT • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake Yes Not known from study area, not included in risk Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus NT CMS • • No assessment Pacific Golden CMS,C,J Not known from study area, not included in risk Pluvialis fulva V • No Plover ,R assessment

R01 Environmental Report

Vic Location of record EPBC/ Inter. Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN treaty First Middle Third assessment FFG site Great Crested Common species with widespread distribution, not Podiceps cristatus • • No Grebe included in risk assessment Hoary-headed Poliocephalus Common species with widespread distribution, not • • • No Grebe poliocephalus included in risk assessment Not known from Third Reedy Lake. Current breeding habitat and distribution is west of Swan Hill (Baker-Gabb, Polytelis anthopeplus Regent Parrot* V,L Vu D and Hurley, V. 2011). Preferred habitat is terrestrial, Yes monarchoides including River Red Gum woodlands (Baker-Gabb, D and Hurley, V. 2011). Not known from Third Reedy Lake. Preferred habitat is red gum forests and box woodlands with current breeding Superb Parrot* Polytelis swainsonii E,L Vu habitat and distribution along the Murray River around Yes the Edwards River / Barmah Forest and into NSW (Baker-Gabb, 2011). Common species with widespread distribution, not Purple Swamphen Porphyrio porphyrio • • • • No included in risk assessment Australian Spotted Common species with widespread distribution, not Porzana fluminea • No Crake included in risk assessment Not known from study area, not included in risk Ballion’s Crake Porzana pusilla V, L • No assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Spotless Crake Porzana tabuensis • No included in risk assessment Recurvirostra Common species with widespread distribution, not Red-necked Avocet • • • No novaehollandiae included in risk assessment Recorded within Ramsar area, but not specifically from Australian Painted En, E Third Reedy Lake. Habitat will not be impacted. Prefers Rostratula australis CE,L • • Yes Snipe* (IUCN) range of shallow wetland habitats rather than open water habitats (Biosis 2013). Fly over records for third Reedy Lake. Feeds primarily Caspian Tern Sterna caspia NT,L J • • • • on fish which will be impacted by the proposed regime Yes (Rogers and Ralph, 2010). Not known from study area, not included in risk Freckled Duck Stictonetta naevosa E,L • No assessment Tachybaptus Common species with widespread distribution, not Australasian Grebe • • No novaehollandiae included in risk assessment Australian Common species with widespread distribution, not Tadorna tadornoides • • • • No Shelduck included in risk assessment Australian White Common species with widespread distribution, not Threskiornis molucca • • • • No Ibis included in risk assessment Common species with widespread distribution, not Straw-necked Ibis Threskiornis spinicollis • • • • No included in risk assessment

R01 Environmental Report

G.3 Threatened aquatic animals recorded at the Ramsar site and Reedy Lake complex

Data sources: Atlas of Living Australia, NC CMA unpublished data, Victorian Biodiversity Atlas, Biosis (2013), Sharpe (2014) Key: EPBC/IUCN status: NT = near threatened, Vu = vulnerable, En = endangered, CE = critically endangered. Vic Advisory / FFG: Ce – critically endangered, En – endangered, V – vulnerable, R – rare, NT – near threatened, k - insufficient known / L – listed, I - rejected for listing as threatened; taxon invalid. * species listed in bilateral agreement. Vic Location of record EPBC/ Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN First Middle Third assessment FFG site Fish Not recorded in the Kerang Lakes since 1963 (First Reedy Lake) (North Flathead Galaxias rostratus Vu,I Ce • • (1968) Central CMA, 2014). Have not been detected in numerous recent Yes Galaxias* surveys at Third Reedy Lake and are considered locally extinct. Freshwater Tandanus tandanus En,L • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Catfish* Murray cod* Maccullochella peelii Vu,L Vu • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Has not been recorded in Third Reedy Lake despite numerous surveys, Murray Craterocephalus Ce,L En • • but was recorded in Middle Reedy Lake (1 individual in 2013 – Biosis Yes Hardyhead* fluviatilis 2013) so potential to be present in Third Reedy Lake. Silver Perch* Bidyanus bidyanus Vu,L Ce • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Not been recorded in the Kerang Lakes and the last recorded Macquarie Macquarie Macquaria australasica En,L En • (1949) Perch west of Torrumbarry Weir was in 1949 (Cadwallader 1977) and is Yes Perch* considered extinct from the area. Golden Perch Macquaria ambigua NT,I • • • • Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Yes Previously recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Craterocephalus Unspecked stercusmuscarum L • • • • Yes Hardyhead fulvus

R01 Environmental Report

Vic Location of record EPBC/ Included in Common Name Scientific Name advisory / Ramsar Likelihood of presence at Third Reedy Lake IUCN First Middle Third assessment FFG site Frogs Growling grass Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake, previously recorded near First Litorai raniformus Vu, L V • Yes frog* Reedy Lake in 1961. Not recorded from Third Reedy Lake. Prefers grasslands and forests Pseudophryne Brown toadlet En,L were eggs are laid under leaf litter and tadpoles develop in wet Yes bibronii depressions and is not reliant on permanent wetlands. Reptiles Murray River Emydura macquarii Vu • • • • Recorded in low numbers in Third Reedy Lake. Yes Turtle*

R01 Environmental Report

Appendix H. Construction mitigation actions

Table 8-1: Tools or techniques for mitigating the potential environmental risks associated with construction

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility

Management of flora and fauna

Protection of native vegetation: Pre-construction Contractor  Construction footprint, including lay down areas and amenities are to be defined and clearly identified on site plans. All activities to be contained to the designated and during construction work zone construction  Vehicle access should be limited to existing access tracks, where possible, and other designated areas. Site access points and access tracks are to be located to avoid any impact to remnant vegetation and significant trees  Vegetation in road reserves should be protected as far as practicable, even in treeless areas  High visibility fencing around native vegetation prior to commencement of construction works and maintained throughout the project. Areas of native vegetation in the vicinity of the work sites are identified on the site maps  Reinstate all habitat such as rocks, dead standing trees and fallen timber  Avoid bark scarring which may cause rot and disease in trees Protection of trees: Pre-construction Contractor  Use hand digging methods where the use of mechanical excavators may cause damage to trees, above or below ground, and at such other locations as may be and during reasonably requested by GMW or Contractor construction  Trees which have been identified as significant are to be identified and protected to prevent accidental damage. Tree protection zones are to be established.  Any tree limbs that must be trimmed to allow for equipment movement or construction works should be undertaken by a suitably qualified arborist Protection of native fauna: During Contractor  Construction methodology is to be developed in order to minimise open excavation3 or trench periods construction  Contractors shall not handle any fauna at all, but should contact an appropriately trained wildlife specialist to attend the work site and carry out the capture and removal protocols provided by GMW  Appropriately trained wildlife specialist to be on call throughout the project timeframe  All site personnel shall be site inducted in the protocols for when an animal is detected and for the handling a release of native animals Overnight management of excavations for native fauna: During Contractor  Where possible any open excavations are to be covered construction  Where excavations remain open overnight, a thorough search for the presence of native fauna shall be conducted each morning (within the first 3 hours after sunrise and prior to the commencement of construction)  Should construction and inspections cease for a period of 24 hrs or more and excavations remain open, sloped fauna exit points shall be provided no steeper than 2:1 Protection of aquatic flora and fauna: During Contractor  Construction footprint to be defined and clearly identified on site plans. All activities to be contained to the designated construction work zone construction  Ensure that all construction works comply with NCCMA guidelines and are undertaken in accordance with relevant Works On Waterways permit

3 An excavation will be deemed as anything deeper than 0.3 m and greater than 0.25 m2 in area.

R01 Environmental Report

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility

Management of weeds, pests and diseases

Weed management: During Contractor  Identify weeds in project footprint prior to works based on those known to occur in the project area. construction  If weeds are disturbed / removed, appropriately bury weeds on site or at dispose of at a licensed receiving facility.  Keep to designated access tracks and laydown areas.  If contact with noxious weeds by any earthmoving plant, equipment and vehicles is unavoidable prior to entering the site, physical removal is required. Complete regular physical clean downs on all machinery i.e. shovel clean-down.  Vehicle access should be limited to existing access tracks, where possible, and other designated areas, as identified on site plans  Ensure rock and other materials used for construction purposes is free of soil, seed and plant material before being taken to the work sites and again before being taken from the work sites on completion of the project  Minimise the movement of soil between work sites  Practice vehicle hygiene to avoid spread of weeds especially following works in weed contaminated areas. Under the Catchment and Land Protection Act 1994 (Sect. 71) a person needs to ensure they maintain vehicle hygiene when moving any equipment or machinery onto or along a roadway. Transport of weeds or weed seeds is an offence  Soil and spoil must be covered during transport where the load is not considered secure (at the discretion of the super intendent) and disposed of in an approved location. Approval from DELWP is required to dispose of noxious weeds capable of germinating, or to deposit on land noxious weeds or weed seeds, other than in landfill.  Obtain soil and gravel from weed free sites. A DELWP permit is required to use soil, sand or gravel which could result in the transfer of noxious weeds  Dispose of any weeds likely to set seed or re-shoot by burning on-site (subject to fire prevention) or at a designated dump site (cover during transport) Pests and Disease Management: During Contractor  Minimise the movement of soil between work sites construction  Soil and spoil must be covered during transport where the load is not considered secure (at the discretion of the super intendent) and disposed of in an approved location Soil and material management  Before starting works strip the topsoil Pre-construction Contractor  Spoil to be placed in trucks where possible (entering the site by reversing along the nominated excavation footprint) and stockpiled at the agreed location  Locate soil stockpiles on cleared areas, away from existing embankments, drainage lines, native vegetation, waterways or access roads. Where the stockpile is to be and during placed, remove weeds by scalping or spraying construction  Do not mix weed free and weedy topsoil  Install temporary sediment and erosion control measures appropriate for the work site such as sedimentation fences, diversion drains and sediment traps (e. g. sediment traps, sandbags and rock / geofabric). Temporary erosion controls should remain in place until long-term erosion control methods are established and functioning (if necessary)  Sediment and erosion control measures should be designed in accordance with GMW EMS (including GMW Environmental Handbook and GMW Environmental Guidelines) and EPA Publications: Best Practice Environmental Management: Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites (EPA Publication 480) and Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control (EPA Publication 275)  Conduct weekly inspections of all sediment and erosion control measures during construction and until reinstatement measures are established. Checks should occur immediately (i.e. within 24 hrs) after rain events exceeding 5 mm  In all areas where soil is to be disturbed and reinstated, the topsoil should be scraped and stored separately to all other soil with a separation of no less than 1 m  Excavated spoil to be reused where possible. Surplus spoil, imported fill and contaminated sediment to be stored and disposed of appropriately Surface water and groundwater protection

R01 Environmental Report

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility

Surface water protection: During Contractor  Minimise the extent to which any soil disturbance occurs as part of site preparation activities and for the storage of plant, equipment and other materials. construction  Implement appropriate silt/sediment control measures to prevent input of materials into waterways, drainage lines and channels  Locate any stockpiles of topsoil and other excavated materials in locations where the potential for input of silt/ sediment into waterways, drainage lines and channels is minimised  Prevention methods including bunded areas for refuelling of machinery to reduce the risk of contaminants to surface water runoff  To minimise soil disturbance and erosion, ensure that all construction works comply with EPA publications; Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites (EPA Publication 480) and Construction Techniques for Sediment Pollution Control (EPA Publication 275)  Construction methods for works on or near waterways will adhere to any approvals granted by North Central CMA for the project Groundwater protection: During Contractor  Construction footprint will be minimised and therefore there will be minimal groundwater inception and demand for dewatering operations. The period of construction will construction be short term and localised  Develop contingency measures with minimal impact on the resource in the event of groundwater interception during construction  In the unlikely event where groundwater seepage results in a significant volume of water, prepare a groundwater dewatering plan to document minimisation, reuse, monitoring and disposal options  Prevention methods including bunded areas for refuelling of machinery to reduce the risk of contaminants to groundwater Water quality monitoring: Pre-construction Contractor  Water quality monitoring is required to be undertaken during any construction works that have potential to impact water quality and during  The Contractor must prepare a water quality monitoring program in accordance with ANZECC guidelines: Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine construction Water Quality (ANZECC 2000 Guidelines) and/or State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) and GMW EMS and procedures  The water quality monitoring program will also adhere to any approval granted by North Central CMA for the project (i.e. works on waterways permit/s) Works near waterways  Pump stations and discharge infrastructure to be located as far as practicable from any levee or waterway embankment to minimise disturbance to the riparian zone

 Sediment control devices must not impede fish passage past the work site  Construction methods for works near or in waterways will adhere to any approval granted by North Central CMA for the project Contaminated soils  The potential discovery of contaminated soils will be minimised through shallow excavation, trenching and directional drilling. Any contaminated soil detected will be During Contractor appropriately managed and disposed of in line with Environment Protection (Industrial Waste Resource) Regulations 2009, EPA Industrial Waste Guidelines and other EPA guidelines construction  Soil contaminated with asbestos and asbestos containing products will be appropriately managed and disposed of in accordance with GMW EMS and procedures (including P15 Asbestos and Asbestos Containing Products)  The storage of plant, equipment and other materials should be limited to designated areas Dust and air quality  Minimise the extent of the work site required to be stripped at any one time During Contractor  Complete site stripping when potential for dust generation is low; if not viable implement appropriate dust suppression measures  Implement appropriate dust suppression measures such as applying water or crushed rocks as required; instigating speed limit for construction vehicles on unsealed construction roads.  Reduce intensity of construction works if dust generation is becoming problematic  Stockpile slopes should be no greater than 2:1, unless covered with geotextile or revegetated

R01 Environmental Report

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility  Implement appropriate measures to minimise visible emissions from vehicles and machinery, consistent with EPA publication: Environmental Guidelines for Major Construction Sites (EPA Publication 480) Noise and vibration  Before work begins consult with affected landowners and/or occupiers to inform them of the project schedule and project contact details including 24-hour contact details Pre-construction Contractor  Notify nearby residences of any planned and unavoidable out of hours works five days in advance  Implement appropriate measures to minimise noise consistent with EPA publications; Noise Control Guidelines (EPA Publication 1254,) and Environmental Guidelines for and during Major Construction Sites (EPA Publication 480) construction  All construction plant and equipment used on the works must, in addition to other requirements, be:  fitted with properly maintained noise suppression devices in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations  be maintained in an efficient condition  operated in a proper and efficient manner Heritage management  Implement any conditions, recommendations and any contingency measures contained within the project Cultural Heritage Management Plan (to be developed when Pre-construction Contractor project is approved) and during construction

Waste management  A suitable waste collection and recycling system with appropriate signage shall be implemented to ensure adequate facilities are available on-site to minimise the amount Pre-construction Contractor of the waste being disposed to landfill and to prevent litter generation  Any waste concrete is to removed and disposed off- site. and during  Litter inspections shall be conducted regularly and action taken to remove litter where identified construction  Portable toilets shall be maintained by a specialised Contractor(s) to minimise leaks and spills to the environment  Prescribed waste shall be removed from the construction site on a progressive basis and not allowed to stockpile unduly Storage and handling of chemicals and fuels

Storage of chemicals and fuels: Pre-construction Contractor  Determine classification of materials and clearly label substances before bringing on site and during  Maintain on site a register of hazardous materials used/stored on site, including Material Safety Data Sheets construction  Any fuel, oil and chemicals on site shall be located away from waterway areas  No bulk chemicals, fuels or oils are to be stored on site  Storage on site of small quantities required for small tools and equipment is acceptable so long as it is contained within a mobile, aboveground spill containment unit  Minimise the quantity of fuel and chemicals present on site at all times by only bringing materials specifically required on site  Maintain bunds, and vandal prevention systems around any storage units to standards specified in the EPA publication: Bunding Guidelines (EPA Publication 347)  Designated construction equipment wash down and refuelling areas should contain sufficient bunding and contamination control measures to prevent spills entering waterways  Vehicles and equipment is to be checked daily to ensure there are no oil, fuel or other liquids leaking Refuelling: Pre-construction Contractor  All personnel responsible for refuelling machinery on work sites are to be trained in the re-fuelling protocols and spill response procedures prior to commencing work on and during site construction  Refuelling shall not take place within 30 m of a drainage line, waterway other sensitive area (where practical)

R01 Environmental Report

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility  The person responsible for refuelling shall be in direct control of the fuelling operation at all times. Under no circumstances is the refuelling allowed to occur unattended  During refuelling a portable tray is to be used to prevent on-ground spill if there is no designated bunded refuelling area Spill response: Pre-construction Contractor  Induction materials to contain spill response information (location of spill kits & how to clean up spills) for all personnel and during  Hydrocarbon spill kits are to be present on site at all times and easily accessible. Personnel are to be trained in the use of spill kits construction  Immediately contain and clean up any fuel or chemical spills and report them to the contract supervisor at GMW (who is to report them to the land manager)  All spills or leaks of fuels or chemicals are to be cleaned up and the site remediated to original condition Hazardous waste material: Pre-construction Contractor  Asbestos or other hazardous waste detected on site will be appropriately managed and disposed of in line with Environment Protection (Industrial Waste Resource) and during Regulations 2009, EPA Industrial Waste Guidelines and other EPA guidelines construction  Asbestos and asbestos containing products will be appropriately managed and disposed of in accordance with GMW EMS and procedures (including P15 Asbestos and Asbestos Containing Products) Fire management  No fires shall be lit in the open Pre-construction, Contractor  Provide firefighting equipment, as required, to ensure the safety of people, property and the environment  Obey fire restrictions. No cutting, welding, grinding or other activities likely to generate fires may be undertaken in the open on “total fire ban” days during  When there is a risk of fire being caused by “hot work” (such as welding) ensure that all personnel are adequately trained with regard to fire prevention, safety and basic construction and firefighting skills. All such personnel and vehicles involved in such activities shall be adequately equipped with firefighting equipment and safety gear post-construction

Public safety and amenity

Traffic Management: Pre-construction Contractor  A Traffic Management Plan including but not limited to the following: and during  Location of tracks to be used construction  Vehicle exclusion zones (cultural, environmental and the existence of existing infrastructure may determine these areas)  Location of refuelling and vehicle maintenance  Management of weeds and pathogens (wash down areas)  Timing and location of road/track closures and type and location of signage for closures.  Management of tracks for dust suppression and inclement weather  Safety (Registration and roadworthy of vehicles, seatbelts, etc.)  Communications of the Traffic Management Plan to all those on site  The Traffic Management Plan must be prepared in accordance with the Road Management Act 2004 and in consultation with Swan Hill Rural City Council (evidence of this consultation must form part of the plan). The plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced traffic engineer  Site access points and roads are to be located so as to minimise the impact on nearby residences, cultural heritage sites and flora and fauna habitat  Vehicle access should be limited to existing access tracks, where possible, and other designated areas, as identified on site plans  Following heavy rainfall, the contractor will consult with Parks Victoria regarding the trafficability of roads and tracks and schedule for recommencing work. In addition:  No new tracks around boggy areas are permitted.  No new drainage lines or cut off drains are to be constructed.  Blading off wet material on the tracks resulting in (1) windrows on the outer edge and (2) widening of the track is not permitted.

R01 Environmental Report

Mitigation Action Timing Responsibility

Public management: Pre-construction, Contractor  Public prohibited from entering work sites, unless wearing suitable personal protection equipment and accompanied by a senior staff member. Appropriate signage to be during erected at site offices construction

Public management: Pre-construction Contractor  Before work begins consult with affected landowners and/or occupiers to inform them of the project schedule, project contact details, including out of hours contacts, access requirements, etc.

Site reinstatement  Reinstate/rehabilitate disturbed areas as soon as possible Pre-construction Contractor  Areas where vegetation has been removed from roads, Crown land, private land or otherwise disturbed will be top soiled in accordance with what existed prior to construction and during construction

R01