Floristic Monitoring Report 2014

Prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited

31 March 2015 2014 Annual Floristic Monitoring Report

2014 Floristic Monitoring Report

PREPARED FOR Ulan Coal Mines Limited

PROJECT NO 13MUDECO-0038

DATE March 15

ITEM DETAIL Project Name Ulan Coal Mines Limited Floristic Monitoring Report 2014 Project Number 13MUDECO-0038 W:\Projects\Mudgee\13MUDECO\13MUDECO-0038 UCML Floristic Monitoring S 2013 to A File location 2015\2014 Spring\Report S14\Final Report Prepared by Rachel Murray, Sarah Dickson-Hoyle, Daniel Magdi Technical review Tammy Paartalu Approved by Dr Paul Frazier Status Final Version Number 2 Last saved on 31 March 2015

Acacia ausfeldii, Open Cut rehabilitation, ACQ3, BOBC6 taken by Sarah-Dickson Hoyle and Cover photo David Allworth, 2014.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with support from Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

Disclaimer This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Ulan Coal Mines Limited. The scope of services was defined in consultation with Ulan Coal Mines Limited, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should obtain up to date information. Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited.

Contents ...... ii

List of Figures...... iv

List of Tables ...... v

Abbreviations...... vi

1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Project Area ...... 2 1.2 Biodiversity Management Plan ...... 3 1.2.1 Ecological Management Domain Objectives...... 3 1.2.2 Flora monitoring...... 5

2 Methodology ...... 7 2.1 Floristic monitoring...... 7 2.1.1 Residual Vegetation Monitoring ...... 8 2.1.2 Revegetation/Regeneration Area Vegetation Monitoring...... 11 2.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring ...... 14 2.2 Landscape Function Analysis...... 16 2.2.1 Geographic Setting of the Site ...... 17 2.2.2 Landscape Organisation...... 18 2.2.3 Soil Surface Assessment...... 18 2.2.4 Vegetation Dynamics...... 19 2.3 Targeted Acacia ausfeldii surveys...... 21 2.4 Pivot fence tree-line monitoring...... 21 2.5 Weather conditions...... 24

3 Results...... 26 3.1 Floristic surveys ...... 26 3.1.1 EEC/CEEC communities ...... 26 3.1.2 Non EEC/CEEC communities ...... 27 3.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring ...... 47 3.2 Landscape function analysis ...... 47 3.2.1 Vegetation dynamics ...... 51 3.3 Acacia ausfeldii Surveys...... 52

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D ii 3.3.1 Highett Road Population...... 52 3.3.2 Highett & Marshall Road vegetation mapping...... 54 3.3.3 Open Cut Translocation Area Population...... 56 3.4 Pivot fence tree-line monitoring...... 58

4 Discussion & Recommendations...... 62 4.1 Floristic monitoring...... 62 4.1.1 EEC/CEEC communities ...... 62 4.1.2 Non EEC/CEEC communities ...... 63 4.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring ...... 64 4.1.3.1 Sites at which Floristic Based Subsidence Monitoring concluded in 2014 ...... 64 4.1.4 Weeds...... 67 4.1.5 Future Monitoring ...... 68 4.2 Landscape function analysis and vegetation dynamics ...... 68 4.2.1 Landscape function analysis ...... 68 4.2.2 Vegetation Dynamics...... 69 4.2.3 Recommendations...... 69 4.3 Acacia ausfeldii...... 69 4.3.1 Highett Road...... 69 4.3.2 Acacia ausfeldii translocation ...... 69 4.3.3 Literature Review...... 70 4.3.4 Open Cut Rehabilitation ...... 70 4.4 Pivot fence tree-line monitoring...... 70

5 References ...... 72

Appendix A: Flora List ...... 74

Figure 1.1: UCML Ecological Management Domains ...... 6

Figure 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites ...... 10

Figure 2.2: Revegetation/Regeneration vegetation monitoring sites ...... 13

Figure 2.3: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites ...... 15

Figure 2.4: LFA monitoring sites ...... 20

Figure 2.5: Pivot fence tree-line areas ...... 23

Figure 3.1: Native species richness in EEC/CEEC sites...... 42

Figure 3.2: Exotic species richness in EEC/CEEC sites...... 43

Figure 3.3: Native species richness in non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration sites ...... 44

Figure 3.4: Exotic species richness in non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration sites...... 45

Figure 3.5: Acacia ausfeldii extent - Highett Road population ...... 55

Figure 3.6: Acacia ausfeldii – Location of AA1 and AA2 translocation plots ...... 57

Figure 3.7: Number of seedling, sapling, and mature individuals - Acacia ausfeldii translocation plots..58

Figure 3.8: Healthy trees comparison against 75% healthy target ...... 60

Figure 3.9: Distribution of tree health ...... 61

Figure 3.10: Distribution of tree species...... 61

Figure 4.1: Native species richness ...... 66

Figure 4.2: Exotic species richness...... 66

Figure 4.3: Pivot fence tree-line replanting area ...... 71

Table 2.1: Modified Braun-Blanquet Crown Cover-Abundance Scale...... 7

Table 2.2: Residual vegetation monitoring sites ...... 9

Table 2.3: Revegetation/regeneration vegetation monitoring sites...... 11

Table 2.4: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites ...... 14

Table 2.5: LFA analogue and rehabilitation sites ...... 16

Table 2.6: Acacia ausfeldii rating definitions ...... 21

Table 2.7: Weather conditions...... 24

Table 3.1: Floristic survey summary ...... 28

Table 3.2: Noxious weeds and dominant exotic species summary ...... 46

Table 3.3: Landscape Organisation summary ...... 48

Table 3.4: Soil Surface Assessment summary ...... 50

Table 3.5: Vegetation Dynamics summary ...... 52

Table 3.6: Condition and reproductive ratings summary – Highett Road population...... 53

Table 3.7: Floristic summary - Highett Road sites ...... 53

Table 3.8: Pivot Fence tree-line planting numbers and health...... 58

Table 4.1: Recommended management actions for noxious and other weeds...... 67

ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION

BMP Biodiversity Management Plan

BROMP Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan

CEEC Critically Endangered Ecological Community

DP&I Department of Planning and Infrastructure

DSEWPAC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

DotE Department of the Environment

EEC Endangered Ecological Community

ELA Eco Logical Australia

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

LFA Landscape Function Analysis

LO Landscape Organisation

Mtpa Million tonnes per annum

OEH Office of Environment and Heritage

PCQ Point Centered Quarter

SSA Soil Surface Assessment

TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

UCML Ulan Coal Mines Limited

XCN Xstrata Coal NSW

1 Introduction

In 2010 the Ulan Coal Continued Operations Project was given Project Approval (PA 08_0184) by the New South Wales (NSW) Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I, now the New South Wales Department of Planning & Environment) under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) and was determined by Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC) (now the Department of the Environment (DotE)), to be a controlled action under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). In November 2010, DSEWPaC granted approval under the EPBC Act (ref 2009/5252).

Ulan Coal Mines Limited (UCML) developed a Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan (BROMP) to address the requirements of EPBC Ref: 2009/5252 and Condition 44, Schedule 3 of the Project Approval (PA 08_0184) (granted under Part 3A of the NSW EP&A Act). The BROMP was approved on 18 January 2011.

The BROMP was revised to become the Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) (ULN SD PLN 0026), which includes the Offset Management Program (OMP) (ULN SD ANN 0048), and re-submitted on 22 December 2011. The revised BMP was approved on 22 March 2012. The BMP includes a framework for ecological monitoring and associated reporting (refer to Section 1.2.2).

The BMP was subsequently revised as a result of the Land and Environment Court final orders, issued on 5 April 2012. Revisions were submitted on 30 November 2012, 30 April 2013 and during April 2014.

On 2 May 2013, Xstrata merged with Glencore to become Glencore Xstrata.

The BMP requires that an Annual Flora Monitoring Report is prepared and included within the UCML Annual Review Report in accordance with Condition 3, Schedule 5 of PA 08_0184.

Eco Logical Australia (ELA) was engaged by UCML to prepare the 2014 Annual Floristic Monitoring Report for the Project Area, in line with the requirements of the BMP.

This Annual Floristic Monitoring Report provides details of the methodology and results obtained during the flora monitoring conducted during 2014. This report also includes a discussion of comparisons with previous monitoring periods, management actions recommended to be implemented during 2015 and changes that could be made to improve the quality and relevance of the data collected through the monitoring program.

1.1 PROJECT AREA The Ulan Coal Mine (UCM) is situated in the central west of NSW. It is located in the Mid-Western Regional Council (MWRC) Local Government Area (LGA) near the village of Ulan; approximately 38 km north-northeast of Mudgee and 19 km northeast of Gulgong. UCM is a joint venture between Glencore Coal Pty Limited (90%) and Mitsubishi Development (10%). Glencore Coal Assets Australia (GCAA) maintains management responsibility for UCM. The mining operations at Ulan are one of a number of mining assets owned and/or managed by Glencore.

The UCM Project Area comprises a total of 13,435 hectares (ha), made up of:

 Open Cut Mining – approximately 239 ha of the recently approved open cut operations;  Previous Mining and Surface Infrastructure Areas – approximately 1,004 ha of previous open cut mining areas that have a combination of rehabilitation areas and final voids that remain to support future mining activities (water storage, tailings disposal, underground access etc.), the rehabilitation makes up 500 ha of this area;  Residual Project Area – the remainder of the Project Area (approximately 10,711 ha) that is not subject to the current project. This includes large areas that have been previously undermined, agricultural grazing land, irrigation pivots and large areas of remnant native vegetation; and  Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, including: o Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area – 991 ha o Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area – 232 ha o Brokenback Conservation Area – 58 ha o Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area – 211 ha o Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor – 124 ha.

1.2 BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN UCML developed a BMP to satisfy the requirements of Condition 44, Schedule 3 of the Project and to satisfy the requirements of the DotE Approval (EPBC Ref: 2009/5252). This BMP was approved on 22 March 2012.

The BMP (ULN SD PLN 0026), which includes the Offset Management Program (OMP) (ULN SD ANN 0048), was re-submitted in 2014 and approved by the DotE on 14 November 2014.

The purpose of the BMP is to describe the ecological management strategies, procedures, controls and monitoring programs and associated reporting that are to be implemented for the management of flora and fauna within the Project Area.

The BMP represents the framework for the overall Biodiversity Management Structure. As part of this structure, the Integrated Mining Operations Plan (ULN SD PLN 0079), OMP and Bushfire Management Plan (ULN SD ANN 0053) were developed to support the implementation of the BMP.

The BMP divides the Project Area into 10 ecological management domains in order to assist in refining targeted ecological management requirements. These ecological management domains include:

1) Open Cut Domain 2) Surface Infrastructure Domain 3) Residual Project Area Domain 4) Salinity Offset Area Domain 5) Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain 6) Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain 7) Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain 8) Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor 9) Brokenback Conservation Domain 10) Spring Gully Cliffline Management Domain.

1.2.1 Ecological Management Domain Objectives The BMP establishes objectives for the post-mining rehabilitation areas (Open Cut Domain), the Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain and each offset domain within the Project Area (Figure 1.1). Objectives for these domains include:

 Open Cut Domain: o To create a stable final landform with acceptable post-mining land use capability, being self-sustaining native vegetation communities characteristic of the pre-mining composition; o To rehabilitate and revegetate the post-mining areas progressively over the life of the mine, as soon as practicable after mining disturbance and reforming of the landscape; o To minimise the disturbed area at any point in time; o To use the indicative revegetation strategy developed within the Ulan Coal EA (Umwelt 2009) to return self-sustaining native vegetation communities to the post-mining open cut area; o To rehabilitate the post-mining Open Cut Disturbance Area with the aim of emulating the pre-mining environment, and enhancing local and regional ecological linkages across the Project Area and adjoining areas; o To use local provenance species for revegetation works, unless conditions such as seed availability or climate require the use of species from a wider region;

o To re-establish a variety of vegetation types to increase the value of this revegetation for fauna species, particularly threatened species; o To undertake revegetation works that aim at reducing the representation of Unimproved Pasture within the post-mining landscape, replacing this with woodland and forest communities, to provide increased fauna habitat within the post-mining Open Cut Disturbance Area; o To undertake post-mining landscaping with species characteristic of Grey Box Woodland and Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone communities; and o To include Acacia ausfeldii in revegetation works for the rehabilitation of the post- mining Open Cut Disturbance Area.

 Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain: o To improve the overall aesthetic appearance of the diversion, particularly for sections of the diversion that are highly visible from Ulan Road; o To improve the surface drainage controls and vegetation establishment; o To increase the geomorphic features and ecological integrity of the diversion where feasible; o To implement erosion control measures; o To strive for a positive improvement on water quality exiting the diversion; and o To gain community and government acceptance of the proposed stability works.

 Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area: o To provide an immediate, long-term and direct offset for vegetation impacted as a result of the Project; o To protect and improve areas of White Box Woodland Endangered Ecological Community (EEC)/Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) vegetation; o To protect and improve vegetation and habitat connectivity throughout the Project Area; o To protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly for threatened fauna species; o To ensure all management actions within this area are supplementary to, and do not duplicate, the existing commitments to the Salinity Offset Area; and o To provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective.

 Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor; o to provide a vegetated corridor linking the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain and Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain; o to protect and improve vegetation and habitat connectivity throughout the Project Area; o to provide an immediate, long-term and direct offset for vegetation lost as a result of the clearing activities of the Project; o to protect and improve areas of Box Gum Woodland EEC/CEEC within the Project Area; o to protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly for threatened fauna species; and o to provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective.

 Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area: o To provide an immediate, long-term and direct offset for vegetation lost as a result of the clearing activities of the Project; o To protect and improve areas of White Box Woodland EEC/CEEC within the Project Area; o To protect and improve vegetation and habitat connectivity throughout the Project Area; o To protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly for threatened fauna species; and

o To provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective;

 Brokenback Conservation Area and Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area: o To provide for the protection and management of cliffline areas (including associated cave habitat) to compensate for that which will be removed as part of the Open Cut Disturbance Area, as well as that which may be subject to subsidence-related impacts, such as rock fall; o To protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly cliffline areas for habitat specific threatened fauna species; and o To provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective.

1.2.2 Flora monitoring A comprehensive flora monitoring program was developed to assess the performance of biodiversity management measures and to determine whether both Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas are progressing towards meeting the specific condition improvement targets.

The BMP outlines a monitoring program that is aimed at:

 Providing a scientific basis for defining rehabilitation objectives and for developing closure criteria and a rehabilitation program that will facilitate lease relinquishment following closure;  Assessing the long-term stability and functioning of re-established ecosystems within post- mining rehabilitation areas, as well as revegetated areas within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas;  Facilitating continuous improvement in rehabilitation and revegetation practices;  Recording and documenting changes in retained vegetation within the Residual Project Area and Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, through comparison with baseline data from permanent monitoring sites and comparison with predictions in the EA (Umwelt 2009);  Recording and documenting changes in the structure, composition and condition of revegetation within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, over time;  Assessing the biogeochemical functioning of the landscape in post-mining rehabilitation areas (and suitable residual vegetation monitoring sites) using Landscape Function Analysis (LFA);  Determining if the impacts on key threatened species are consistent with predictions in the EA (Umwelt 2009);  Assessing progressive changes to flora and fauna species assemblages within the Approved Project Disturbance Areas and Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas over time; and  Ensuring the ecological integrity/function of the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas are maintained or improved as a result of ongoing management practices.

This report provides details of the flora species and ecological communities present within the Project Area and will be used to inform results of and suggested improvements to management actions across the Project Area.

Monitoring undertaken during autumn, spring and summer 2014 presented within this report fulfils the fourth monitoring period under the BMP. Monitoring undertaken during autumn, spring and summer 2014 includes:

 Flora – data for all floristic survey sites  LFA sites – with vegetation dynamics undertaken at new sites or sites affected by bushfire  Targeted Acacia ausfeldii surveys  Pivot fence tree-line monitoring.

Figure 1.1: UCML Ecological Management Domains

2 Methodology

Monitoring during 2014 was undertaken in accordance with the methods and survey techniques prescribed in Section 4 of the BMP and are consistent with monitoring methods used in previous years.

Floristic monitoring was undertaken by David Allworth, Sarah Dickson-Hoyle, Ben Martin and Kurtis Lindsay of ELA. Floristic monitoring was undertaken between 12 May and 6 June 2014, and 21 October to 30 October 2014, 11 November 2014, 17 November to 20 November 2014, 25 November to 28 November 2014, 1 and 2 December 2014 and the 28 January 2015.

2.1 FLORISTIC MONITORING Floristic monitoring was undertaken at 78 sites across the project area (Figures 2.1-2.3) during 2014 and included:

 35 floristic sites assessed in autumn 2014  35 floristic sites assessed in spring 2014  8 floristic sites assessed in both autumn and spring 2014

The monitoring consisted of collecting specific biotic and abiotic data at all 78 sites. Floristic monitoring has been split into three targeted categories:

 Residual vegetation monitoring;  Revegetation/regeneration area vegetation monitoring;  Floristic-based subsidence area monitoring.

Eleven new floristic monitoring sites were established in 2014. Within each floristic quadrat, data was collected in a manner consistent with previous monitoring periods (ELA 2013).

The monitoring approach involves systematic and repeatable surveys methods that are undertaken at permanent monitoring plots of 20 m x 20 m quadrats. These quadrats are identified by permanent metal star pickets in each corner and tagged with metal tags. These plots are used to record species diversity and structural composition.

Plots are sampled using systematic, semi-quantitative, repeatable techniques, the Modified Braun- Blanquet Cover-abundance method (Braun-Blanquet 1927, Poore 1955, Austin et al. 2000) (Table 2.1), to ensure data are comparable over time with as little observer bias as possible.

Table 2.1: Modified Braun-Blanquet Crown Cover-Abundance Scale

Class Cover-abundance Scale* Growth Form Dependent

1 Few individuals (less than 5% cover) Herbs, sedges and grasses: <5 individuals

Shrubs and small trees: <5 individuals

2 Many individuals (less than 5% cover) Herbs, sedges and grasses: ≥ 5 individuals

Shrubs and small trees: ≥ 5 individuals

Class Cover-abundance Scale* Growth Form Dependent

Medium-large overhanging tree

3 5% – less than 20% cover -

4 20% – less than 50% cover -

5 50% – less than 75% cover -

6 75% – 100% cover -

Note: * Modified Braun-Blanquet scale (Braun-Blanquet 1927, Poore 1955; Austin et al. 2000)

Photo monitoring points were also established within each of the permanent monitoring plots, to enable visual assessment of changes over time. The monitoring surveys assessed the following vegetation characteristics:

 floristic composition (including cover and abundance of species) and structure;  general health of vegetation;  evidence of natural regeneration;  occurrence and abundance of weed species;  presence of threatened or other significant species;  signs of disturbance, either by stock or humans;  evidence of feral animals; and  any observable impacts of the Project, such as the effectiveness of fencing and weed control actions.

Due to the number of monitoring plots required, groups of plots are monitored seasonally (in the same season each year), enabling the collection of comparable seasonal data.

All vascular plant species that were observed in the plots are presented in Appendix A. Most taxa were identified in the field. Those unable to be identified in the field were collected for later identification using a microscope and a combination of field guides, the Flora of New South Wales (Harden 1992; 1993; 2002; The Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust 2012) and by comparison with herbarium specimens held in the Public Reference Collection of the National Herbarium of NSW in Sydney.

2.1.1 Residual Vegetation Monitoring Residual vegetation monitoring continued at 40 permanent vegetation plots, including 15 established within the Residual Project Area, four within the Surface Infrastructure Area, one within the Brokenback Conservation Area, one within the Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area, eight within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area, six within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor Area and four within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (Table 2.2 and Figure 2.1). In addition to these sites, a new residual monitoring plot was established within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area and baseline data collected during autumn 2014 (BOBE10).

Table 2.2: Residual vegetation monitoring sites

Site Numbers by Location Bobadeen East Bobadeen Corridor Brokenback Spring Surface Vegetation Type Bobadeen (BOB) Residual (RPA) (BOBE) (BOBC) (BB) Gully (SG) Infrastructure (SI) Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Spr Aut Spr Spr Aut Spr Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB6 BOBC1 BOBC2 RPA13 SI2 Grey Box Woodland RPA7 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on BOB3 BOBE3 RPA1 RPA2 BOB7 BOBE4 BOBC5 SI1 Sandstone BOB8 BOBE10* RPA4 RPA5 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone + Scribbly Gum Woodland SI4 - Heathland on Sand Modified White Box Woodland BOBC6 SI3 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest BOB2 on Alluvium/Colluvium Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on RPA3A BOB5 BOBC4 Alluvium/Colluvium RPA15 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on RPA10 Alluvium/Colluvium (regenerating) Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland RPA6 RPA9 SG1 on Sand Plateaux Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on BOBC3 BB1 Sandstone Slopes Unimproved Pasture RPA14A White Box Woodland BOB4B BOB1 BOBE1 RPA12 RPA11 White Box Woodland Grassland RPA8A Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland BOBE2 *Indicates a new residual vegetation floristic site in 2014. Aut = Autumn; Spr = Spring

Figure 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites

2.1.2 Revegetation/Regeneration Area Vegetation Monitoring Revegetation/Regeneration monitoring continued at 23 permanent vegetation plots: nine within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area, five within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area, two within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor Area, six within the Open Cut and one within the Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain (Table 2.3 and Figure 2.2).

Four new sites were established in autumn 2014 and three new sites established in spring 2014. Two new sites were located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area, two within Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area, one within Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor Area, one within Goulburn River Rehabilitation Area and one within the Acacia ausfeldii Translocation Area within the Open Cut (Table 2.3 and Figure 2.2).

BOB15A was originally established during spring 2011 within unimproved pasture, and after a review of the site vegetation mapping it was found to be located within regenerating Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone. The site was then relocated in spring 2014 into unimproved pasture (derived Rough-barked Apple Open Forest Grassland) and renamed BOB15B.

Table 2.3: Revegetation/regeneration vegetation monitoring sites

Location & Site Numbers Bobadeen Bobadeen East Bobadeen Corridor Open Cut (OC) Goulburn Vegetation Type (BOB) (BOBE) (BOBC) River (GRRD) Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Acacia ausfeldii AA1* Translocation Blakely’s Red Gum BOBC9* OC5 Open Forest Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB14 (regenerating) Derived Native BOBC7 BOBC8 Grassland Ironbark Open Forest Complex on BOB11A BOB16 Sandstone Modified White Box BOBE7A BOBE9 BOB19* Woodland BOBE8 BOBE12* Rehabilitation Pre OC4 GRR 1997 OC7 D1 Rehabilitation Post OC3 1997 OC6 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest OC1 on Alluvium/Colluvium Rough-barked BOB13B Apple Open Forest BOB15B Grassland Rough-barked BOBE5

Location & Site Numbers Bobadeen Bobadeen East Bobadeen Corridor Open Cut (OC) Goulburn Vegetation Type (BOB) (BOBE) (BOBC) River (GRRD) Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Aut Spr Apple Open Forest (regenerating) Unimproved GRR BOB10A Pasture D2* White Box BOBE11* Woodland White Box BOB12 BOB9 Woodland BOB18* BOB17 Grassland Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland BOBE6 Grassland

* Indicates a new revegetation/regeneration floristic site in 2014 Aut = Autumn; Spr = Spring

Figure 2.2: Revegetation/Regeneration vegetation monitoring sites

2.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring Floristic based subsidence monitoring continued at five sites (Table 2.4) above underground mining areas to monitor the impact of subsidence on vegetation through surveying for any changes in floristic composition and structure. All floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites were surveyed during both spring and autumn surveys if they were established purely for subsidence monitoring purposes.

Three new floristic based subsidence monitoring plots were established above each longwall panel not already being monitored as part of the residual vegetation monitoring during autumn 2014 (Figure 2.3). FBS6 was established above Longwall 2, FBS7 was established above Longwall W7, while FBS8 was established above Longwall 29.

Floristic-based subsidence post-mining monitoring concluded at sites FBS1, FBS2, FBS3 and RPA8A during spring 2014.

Table 2.4: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites

Site Number Longwall Panel Vegetation Type

Ulan #3 Underground Mine

FBS1 Longwall ‘C’ Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

FBS2 Longwall ‘F’ Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

FBS3 Longwall ‘E’ Scribbly Gum – Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland

RPA8A Longwall 26 White Box Woodland Grassland

FBS4 Longwall 27 Rough-barked Apple – Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland

RPA12 Longwall 28 White Box Woodland

FBS8 Longwall 29 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

BOB12 Longwall W3 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest Grassland

FBS7 Longwall W7 Box Gum Woodland Derived Native Grassland

Ulan West Mine

FBS5 Longwall 1 White Box Woodland

FBS6 Longwall 2 White Box Woodland

Figure 2.3: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites

2.2 LANDSCAPE FUNCTION AN ALYSIS LFA monitoring commenced in 2011, sampling occurred both within areas that were planned to, or had undergone rehabilitation, as well as at corresponding analogue sites representative of the vegetation communities undergoing rehabilitation.

During the 2014 monitoring, LFA monitoring continued at 15 analogue sites and 12 active rehabilitation sites across the Project Area. Additional baseline data was collected for seven sites that will undergo revegetation and rehabilitation works during Year 3 and Year 4 of the OMP revegetation plan (Table 2.5 and Figure 2.4). New rehabilitation sites were selected through aerial photography interpretation, focusing on areas that indicate that there was structural variation (ie. canopy, shrub and groundcover species) in the vegetation and the boundaries of revegetation areas.

LFA monitoring was consistent with the methods of Tongway and Hindley (2005) and described in ELA (2012).

Table 2.5: LFA analogue and rehabilitation sites

Residual Bobadeen Open Goulburn Bobadeen Bobadeen Corridor Project Vegetation Communities East Cut River (BOB) (BOBC) Area (BOBE) (OC) (GRRD) (RPA)

Analogue Site Number

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB3(A)

Grey Box Woodland RPA3(A)

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on BOB4(A) Sandstone

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland BOB1(A) RPA5(A)

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest BOB2(A) on Alluvium/Colluvium

GRRD1(A) Rough-barked Apple Open Forest BOBE1(A) RPA6(A) GRRD2(A)

She-oak Low Forest on Sandstone RPA1(A) Crests

Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on RPA4(A) Sandstone Slopes

White Box Woodland BOB5(A) RPA2(A)

Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland BOBE2(A)

Revegetation/Rehabilitation Site Number

AA1(R) Acacia ausfeldii Translocation AA2(R)*

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB2(R) BOBC2(R)

Residual Bobadeen Open Goulburn Bobadeen Bobadeen Corridor Project Vegetation Communities East Cut River (BOB) (BOBC) Area (BOBE) (OC) (GRRD) (RPA)

Modified White Box Woodland BOBC3(R)* BOBE2(R)*

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas OC3(R) (eastern portion)

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas OC2(R) (western portion) OC4(R)

OC5(R)* Post 2001 Rehabilitation Areas OC6(R)*

2009 Rehabilitation Areas OC1(R)

GRRD1(R) Rough-barked Apple Open Forest GRRD2(R) BOB1(R) White Box Woodland BOB3(R)* BOBC1(R) BOBE1(R) BOB4(R)* *Indicates a new LFA site in 2014

At each LFA site, a 50 m transect line was established between permanent transect start and end markers. Along each transect, LFA attributes were recorded on electronic field data sheets, namely:

 Landscape organisation

 Soil surface assessment

Vegetation dynamics were also assessed along each newly established LFA transect.

2.2.1 Geographic Setting of the Site For each new site established during LFA monitoring, a description of each site was recorded, including position in the landscape, GPS coordinates (GDA94 Zone 55), transect bearing, slope, aspect, vegetation type and land use. The following topographic classification was also used:

 Crest;

 Upper slope;

 Mid slope;

 Lower slope;

 Closed depression, or lake;

 Flat; and

 Open depression or stream channel.

2.2.2 Landscape Organisation Landscape organisation characterises and maps the spatial patterns of resource loss or accumulation at a site. The data that was collected recorded the patch/inter-patch parameters along each transect.

According to the LFA method, patches are long-lived/term features that obstruct or divert water flow and/or collect/filter out material from runoff (such as perennial ground cover, rocks > 10 cm, tree branches in contact with the soil) and where there is evidence of resource accumulation. Inter-patches are zones where resources such as water, soil materials and litter may be mobilised and freely transported either down slope when water is the active agent or down-wind when aeolian processes are active.

The following data was recorded for each patch/inter-patch along each transect:

 The distance and interval along the tape;  The patch width; and  The patch/inter-patch identification.

Rill survey was only completed where rills occurred, with the following recorded:  Rill base (e.g. Rocky, alluvium or gravel);  Start of rill along the tape;  Finish of rill along the tape;  Rill width; and  Rill depth.

Data was entered into the LFA spreadsheets and was used to calculate the results of the LFA.

2.2.3 Soil Surface Assessment Each patch/inter-patch type identified in the landscape organisation data log was subject to a soil surface property assessment according to the Soil Surface Assessment (SSA) Method, via a set of query zones located within a subsample of each patch and inter-patch type. In selecting query zones the following guidelines were observed:

 Observations of soil surface features were estimated on a linear basis through measuring the estimated distance of each feature covered within each particular query zone;

 The transect data record was used to select ‘query zones’ within each patch type, with query zones distributed along the full length of the transect;

 The assessment had a minimum of five query zones (replicates) of each patch/inter-patch type (where possible) to improve statistical reliability. If fewer than five examples were available for a given patch/inter-patch type, more than one query zone was located in a long single patch. Sampling of five replicates was not always possible due to paucity of a given patch/inter-patch type, with a common example being “log” patches that may have only occurred once along a given transect;

 Each query zone was sited symmetrically within the selected zone patch/inter-patch;

 The standard query zone length was 1 m. If the patch/inter-patch length was insufficient for a 1 m query zone, particularly where individual grass plants were patch zones, simple fractions of a metre were used;

 The boundary between two zones was avoided where possible, as is in some cases there is a gradual transition between zones. The boundary was used only where the start and/or end of the zone was very distinct.

Within each query zone the appropriate score for each of the following SSA indicators was recorded:

 Rain splash protection;  Perennial vegetation cover;

 Litter cover, origin and decomposition;

 Cryptogam cover;  Crust brokenness;

 Soil erosion type and severity;

 Deposited materials;  Soil surface roughness;

 Surface nature (resistance to disturbance);

 Slake test; and  Soil surface nature.

The LFA data sheets and spreadsheets were used to calculate the results of the SSA.

2.2.4 Vegetation Dynamics In newly established LFA sites, the Point Centred Quarter (PCQ) method was applied to the 50 m transects to assess vegetation dynamics. This involved establishing sampling points at regular 10 m intervals along the LFA transect line. At each sampling point, the distance to the four nearest “plants of interest” in each of the 4 quadrants around the tape were measured. The “plants of interest” were perennial ground cover, lower shrub layer (<1 m), upper shrub layer (>1 m) and tree species. A minimum sampling effort of 80 plants per “plants of interest group” is recommended in the LFA method, but this was not always possible within 50 m transect. For each plant the following was recorded:

 The sampling point;

 The point quarter (i.e. a, b, c or d moving in a clockwise direction from the top right side quadrant);

 Distance to the plant (to a maximum of 100 m);

 Plant species code;

 Height of the plant;

 Width, breadth and height to canopy (for grasses this was butt width, for shrubs and trees crown width was recorded); and CSIRO Ecosystem Function Analysis data sheets and spreadsheets (CSIRO, 2011) were used to calculate the results of the Vegetation Dynamics. Where ‘vacant quarters’ (no plant of interest within 100 m) existed, stem densities were adjusted using correction factors from Warde and Petranka (1981).

Figure 2.4: LFA monitoring sites

2.3 TARGETED ACACIA AUSFELDII SURVEYS Targeted Acacia ausfeldii monitoring was undertaken within a population of A. ausfeldii located along Highett Road. This land is located within UCML ownership and is approximately 1.5 km south-west of the southern extent of Open Cut Disturbance Area). Monitoring was also undertaken within the two A. ausfeldii translocation plots located within the Open Cut. The monitoring was undertaken during spring 2014 by ELA ecologists David Allworth and Sarah Dickson-Hoyle.

Within the Highett Road population, surveys targeted 100 previously tagged A. ausfeldii individuals and recorded the height and diameter at base and growth stage (seedling, sapling or mature shrub). Additional information was collected for each individual, including reproductive ratings and condition ratings. Table 2.6 below outlines the definition of the ratings.

Table 2.6: Acacia ausfeldii rating definitions

Rating

1 2 3 4 5

Severe Some dead Condition Rating Many dead stems Minor damage Healthy damage/dieback branches

Sparse - Reproductive Low – under 25% Moderate – 25 – High – 75 – 100% Nil occasional Rating of potential 75% of potential of potential flowers/fruit only)

Two floristic quadrats were assessed within the Highett Road A. ausfeldii population during spring 2014 (ACQ1 and ACQ2). Methods used for assessing these quadrats are consistent with the methods outlined in Section 2.1.

Data from the surveys was compared to the data previously collected in order to identify changes in the number and condition of individuals, threats to their persistence (such as weeds, grazing) and changes in surrounding floristic species assemblage and structure.

Within each of the A. ausfeldii translocation areas within the Open Cut, 50 A. ausfeldii individuals were numbered and tagged, and height, diameter at base and growth stage and condition ratings recorded using the ratings shown in Table 2.6. A 50 m transect was laid out through the centre of each plot and the Point Centred Quarter method (refer to Section 2.2.4 for methods) used to assess A. ausfeldii densities.

2.4 PIVOT FENCE TREE-LINE MONITORING In autumn 2014, a targeted survey of the pivot fence tree-lines was undertaken to determine the success and health of the tree plantings.

The pivot fence tree-lines were separated into 12 areas (Figure 2.5), with each area being labeled accordingly. Each area was traversed and each tree present counted and ranked to indicate their health. Health scores are shown below.

 0% indicated that the tree was dead or very close to dead  25% indicated that the tree was in very poor health but not quite dead (likely to die in the future)

 50% indicated that the tree was in average health and has a chance of survival  75% indicated that the tree was in good health but was not as healthy as could otherwise be  100% indicated that the tree was healthy and thriving.

Figure 2.5: Pivot fence tree-line areas

2.5 WEATHER CONDITIONS Weather conditions during the monitoring were considered adequate for the surveys. Temperatures were generally mild to warm, with minimal rainfall recorded during the monitoring, as shown in Table 2.7. Meteorological records (BoM, 2014) were taken from the nearest weather station at Gulgong Post Office.

Table 2.7: Weather conditions 9am Wind Min Temp Max Temp Rainfall 9am Date (Dir./Spd (°C) (°C) (mm) Temp (°C) (km/h) Autumn surveys 12/05/2014 6.9 21.0 0.8 12.0 SE 2 13/05/2014 7.3 20.2 0.0 13.6 SE 2

14/05/2014 7.1 21.1 0.0 12.0 NE 2

15/05/2014 4.5 21.2 0.0 9.5 E 2

16/05/2014 4.2 22.5 0.0 10.0 Calm

17/05/2014 3.5 21.5 0.0 11.5 NNE 2

18/05/2014 6 21.7 0.0 1.5 SW 2 19/05/2014 5.3 20.3 0.0 10.1 N2

20/05/2014 3.9 19.9 0.0 8.8 Calm

21/05/2014 4.7 23.5 0.0 10.4 Calm

22/05/2014 5.5 22.9 0.0 11.0 Calm

23/05/2014 4.8 22.0 0.0 8.1 N 2

24/05/2014 5.5 23.0 0.0 12.0 SW 2

25/05/2014 8.5 23.7 0.0 14.5 SW 2

26/05/2014 5 25.0 0.0 10.4 Calm

27/05/2014 8.2 22.9 0.0 15.1 NE 11 28/05/2014 9.2 19.2 3.8 14.4 W 7

29/05/2014 2.6 19.7 0.1 7.4 Calm 30/05/2014 5.3 18.0 0.0 13.7 E 4

31/05/2014 11 15.5 0.0 15.0 ENE 2 1/06/2014 7.5 14.9 11.4 11.5 SSE 2

2/06/2014 8 16.9 12.1 12.1 N 6

3/06/2014 4.8 13.9 0.4 8.3 W 2

4/06/2014 3.8 18.4 0.0 8.6 Calm

5/06/2014 4.8 18.8 0.0 8.2 NE 2

6/06/2014 6.4 18.0 0.0 13.4 SE 6

Spring surveys

21/10/2014 13 23.1 0.0 15.0 ENE 33

22/10/2014 8.4 28.0 0.0 14.6 ESE 15

23/10/2014 10.8 32.0 0.0 19.7 ESE 2

24/10/2014 16.5 34.5 0.5 21.0 ESE 9

25/10/2014 13.5 36.5 0.0 24.5 E2

26/10/2014 16.5 35.7 0.0 26.0 NE 2

9am Wind Min Temp Max Temp Rainfall 9am Date (Dir./Spd (°C) (°C) (mm) Temp (°C) (km/h) 27/10/2014 15.8 31.0 0.0 21.4 Calm

28/10/2014 NA 25.0 0.0 17.0 WSW 6

29/10/2014 NA 28.1 0.0 17.6 SW 2

30/10/2014 NA 31.7 0.0 18.6 SSW 3

11/11/2014 18.5 28.6 0.0 18.5 SE 37

17/11/2014 9.8 28.6 0.1 17.6 W2 18/11/2014 10.1 30.1 0.0 20.7 ESE 11 19/11/2014 13.1 30.7 0.0 19.6 NE 31

20/11/2014 14.9 34.9 0.0 21.7 NNE 4

25/11/2014 20.6 26.1 22.6 20.6 E2

26/11/2014 14.9 20.9 0.1 19.5 NE 11 27/11/2014 NA 28.6 0.0 22.0 E 2

28/11/2014 15.2 29.5 0.0 18.8 ENE 28

1/12/2014 18.7 29.9 8.2 21.5 ENE 2 2/12/2014 NA 33.6 0.9 23.3 ENE 11 29/01/2014 16.8 37.6 0 22.8 WNW

3 Results

3.1 FLORISTIC SURVEYS Floristic surveys identified a total of 381 species, including 304 native species, 62 introduced species and 15 species that could only be identified to genus level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced (Appendix A).

Total species richness varied within each floristic site from 12 species (BOB7 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone; FBS7 – Derived Native Grassland) to 52 species (OC5 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest). Native species richness varied within each floristic site ranging from six species (FBS7 – Derived Native Grassland) to 45 species (OC5 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest), while introduced species richness ranged from 0 species at multiple sites to 20 species (BOBE6 – Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland Grassland) (Table 3.1).

No additional threatened flora species listed under the EPBC Act or Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) were recorded during the 2014 survey.

As expected and observed during previous monitoring periods, structural diversity was greater within residual vegetation sites compared to revegetation/regeneration sites. Seventeen of the revegetation/regeneration sites had no canopy, and within these, mid-storey, if present, tended to consist solely of pioneer species, dominated by Cassinia arcuata (Sifton Bush). Regeneration of native canopy species was observed in nine revegetation/regeneration sites (OC3, OC7, BOB11A, BOB13B, BOB14, BOB16, BOB18, BOBC8 and BOBC9).

Declared noxious weeds within the MWRC LGA were recorded in 15 floristic sites during 2014 (Table 3.2). The most common noxious weed was Hypericum perforatum (St John’s Wort), which was recorded at 12 sites, with up to 5% cover. The remaining noxious weeds, including Opuntia sp. (Prickly Pear), Rubus ulmifolius (Blackberry), Senecio madagascariensis (Fireweed) and Xanthium sp. (Bathurst Burr) were each recorded at a limited number of sites. Both Prickly Pear and Fireweed were in low abundances and covers (<1%) and neither Bathurst Burr nor Blackberry ever occurred at greater than 5% cover. A number of non-declared exotic species, such as Carthamus lanatus (Saffron Thistle), Vulpia sp. (Fescue Grasses) and Trifolium sp. (Clovers) were recorded with relatively high cover across a number of sites; up to 50% cover in BOBC7 (Fescue Grass) and RPA8A (Clover). These dominant exotic species are highlighted in Table 3.2.

3.1.1 EEC/CEEC communities Native species richness (2012-2014) of both residual and revegetation/regeneration sites within EEC/CEEC (i.e. Box Gum Woodland variants) is presented in Figure 3.1. Of the 30 sites falling within these vegetation communities, 10 recorded a decrease in native species richness between 2013 and 2014, 15 recorded an increase (10 of which had previously declined from 2012-2013), and five were surveyed for the first time in 2014.

On average, native ground cover of revegetation/regeneration sites was higher than residual sites, and many revegetation/regeneration sites had higher native grass cover than residuals in their respective woodland communities. Ground cover in revegetation sites largely consisted of a number of native perennial grass species, most commonly Aristida ramosa, Austrodanthonia spp., Bothriochloa macra and Sporobolus spp. Native ground cover species richness in many of these sites (specifically,

regenerating/DNG Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest sites) was equal to or greater than that recorded in residual sites of the target vegetation community. Regenerating White Box Woodland sites tended to have lower native ground cover diversity than residual White Box Woodland sites, likely due to the history of clearance and grazing.

Trends in exotic species richness for sites located within an EEC are shown in Figure 3.2. Between 2013 and 2014, exotic species richness increased at 18 sites. Of all sites assessed, three sites (BOB17, BOB19, and BOBE6) had more than half of the species present at the site identified as exotic.

3.1.2 Non EEC/CEEC communities Following a reduction in native species richness across the majority of sites from 2012 to 2013, no consistent trend in species richness was observed between 2013 and 2014 for revegetation/rehabilitation sites (Figure 3.3). Five sites located within a non EEC/CEEC community increased in native species richness (BOBC7, BOBC8, BOB16, OC3 and BOB13B), three decreased (GRRD1, OC1 and BOBE5) and one remained stable (OC4). While seasonal variability in annual herbs can explain much of the loss in native species, both GRRD1 and OC1 saw decreased native perennial ground cover species between 2013 and 2014.

The majority of non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration sites increased in exotic species richness between 2013 and 2014 (Figure 3.4) while exotic species richness declined or remained stable at the majority (approximately 70%) of non EEC/CEEC residual sites. High percentages of exotic species richness did not always correlate with high exotic ground cover. Only two residual sites had high proportions of exotic ground cover; these were RPA14A (60%) and RPA15 (33% of total cover, 5% absolute cover). The remaining residual sites had less than 5% of total ground cover comprising of exotics.

Low total species richness was recorded in two pre-1997 rehabilitation sites (GRRD1 and OC4) with 50% of total species richness in both sites consisting of exotic ground cover species and annual grasses. Post-mining open cut rehabilitation sites (including GRRD1 and AA1) had more exotic species per site than modified/derived vegetation communities. BOB16 (Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone – regenerating) was the only non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration site in which no exotic species were recorded.

Table 3.1: Floristic survey summary

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Residual Vegetation Monitoring Eucalyptus blakelyi Canopy 12 0 Eucalyptus crebra Bobadeen Acacia paradoxa BOB6 Autumn 26 26 0 Mid-storey 5 0 Offset Cassinia arcuata Aristida vagans Ground 30 0 Gahnia aspera Eucalyptus blakelyi Canopy 12 0 Eucalyptus melliodora Bobadeen Acacia sp. BOBC1 Autumn 25 21 1 Mid-storey 20 0 Corridor Offset Cassinia arcuata Aristida ramosa Ground 60 <1 Aristida vagans Canopy Blakely’s Red Gum Open 20 0 Eucalyptus microcarpa Forest Bobadeen BOBC2 Spring 21 16 5 Mid-storey 5 0 Cassinia arcuata Corridor Offset Aristida ramosa Ground 80 <1 Microlaena stipoides

Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Residual RPA13 Spring 29 19 8 Project Area Aristida ramosa Ground 25 <5 Austrostipa scabra Eucalyptus blakelyi Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus macrorhyncha Surface Brachyloma daphnoides SI2 Spring 25 25 0 Mid-storey 20 0 Infrastructure Cassinia arcuata Arundinella nepalensis Ground 5 0 Microlaena stipoides

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E

Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus microcarpa

Residual Grey Box Woodland RPA7 Autumn 38 36 2 Mid-storey 10 0 Acacia verniciflua Project Area

Ground 20 <1 Aristida vagans

Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus fibrosa Bobadeen BOB3 Autumn 23 23 0 Mid-storey 50 0 Allocasuarina gymnanthera Offset Microlaena stipoides Ground 5 0 Phyllanthus spp. Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus fibrosa

Mid-storey 1 1 0 Callitris endlicheri Bobadeen BOB7 Spring 12 12 0 Offset Mid-storey 2 20 0 Acrotriche rigida Ironbark Open Forest Lomandra spp. Complex on Sandstone Ground 4 0 Joycea pallida Eucalyptus fibrosa Canopy 15 0 Callitris endlicheri Bobadeen BOBC5 Spring 20 20 0 Acrotriche rigida Corridor Offset Mid-storey 10 0 Calytrix tetragona Goodenia hederacea Ground 5 0 Microlaena stipoides Callitris endlicheri Canopy 20 0 Bobadeen Eucalyptus crebra BOBE3 Autumn 16 14 0 East Offset Cassinia quinquefaria Mid-storey 20 0 Acacia linearifolia

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Goodenia hederacea Ground 2 0 Lomandra sp. Eucalyptus crebra Canopy 15 0 Callitris endlicheri Bobadeen BOBE4 Spring 27 27 0 Mid-storey 5 0 Acrotriche rigida East Offset Goodenia hederacea Ground 1 0 Pomax umbellata Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus sparsifolia Bobadeen BOBE10 Autumn 14 13 0 Mid-storey 30 0 Acacia linearifolia East Offset Ground 1 0 Cleistochloa rigida Eucalyptus agglomerata Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus fibrosa Residual RPA1 Autumn 19 19 0 Mid-storey 25 0 Leucopogon muticus Project Area

Ground 10 0 Lomandra spp. Eucalyptus fibrosa Canopy 30 0 E. sparsifolia Mid-storey 1 Allocasuarina gymnanthera Residual 5 0 RPA2 Spring 19 19 0 Project Area Mid-storey 2 2 0 Leucopogon muticus

Ground 2 0 Lomandra confertifolia

Canopy 30 0 Eucalyptus fibrosa Residual RPA4 Autumn 18 18 0 Project Area Persoonia linearis Mid-storey 5 0 Podolobium illicifolium

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E

Ground 2 0 Lomandra sp. Eucalyptus agglomerata Canopy 25 0 Eucalyptus parramattensis Acacia doratoxylon Mid-storey 1 2 0 Residual Persoonia linearis RPA5 Spring 22 22 0 Project Area Boronia ledifolia Mid-storey 2 20 0 Leucopogon muticus Chleistochloa rigida Ground 12 0 Lomandra spp. Eucalyptus agglomerata Canopy 25 0 Eucalyptus dwyeri Surface Leucopogon muticus SI1 Autumn 26 26 0 Mid-storey 5 0 Infrastructure Persoonia linearis Entolasia sp. Ground 5 0 Cheilanthes sieberi Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus macrorhyncha

Ironbark Open Forest Mid-storey 1 5 0 Acacia linearifolia Bobadeen Complex on Sandstone BOB8 Autumn 24 23 0 Offset (regenerating) Mid-storey 2 5 0 Cassinia arcuata

Ground 60 0 Microlaena stipoides

Angophora floribunda Canopy 15 0 Ironbark Open Forest Eucalyptus blakelyi Complex on Sandstone + Surface Leptospermum Scribbly Gum Woodland - SI4 Autumn 33 32 1 Mid-storey 1 50 0 Infrastructure Heathland on Sand polygalifolium Plateaux Cassinia arcuata Mid-storey 2 20 0 Sannantha cunninghamii

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E

Ground 20 <1 Lomandra sp.

Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Narrow-leaved Ironbark Bobadeen Open Forest on BOB2 Spring 31 29 2 Mid-storey 10 0 Cassinia arcuata Offset Alluvium/Colluvium Aristida ramosa Ground 65 <1 Arundinella nepalensis Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus crebra

Mid-storey 1 1 0 Acacia implexa Bobadeen BOB5 Spring 29 29 0 Offset Cassinia arcuata Mid-storey 2 8 0 Leucopogon muticus Austrodanthonia sp. Ground 40 0 Aristida vagans

Canopy 15 0 Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple Bobadeen Open Forest on BOBC4 Spring 37 23 14 Mid-storey 5 0 Allocasuarina gymnanthera Corridor Offset Alluvium/Colluvium Aristida vagans Ground 85 5 Microlaena stipoides Angophora floribunda Canopy 32 0 Eucalyptus bridgesiana Eucalyptus melliodora Residual RPA3A Autumn 24 16 6 Acacia linearifolia Project Area Mid-storey 1 0 Angophora floribunda Microlaena stipoides Ground 99 1 Residual Angophora floribunda RPA15 Autumn 32 27 5 Canopy 20 0 Project Area Eucalyptus melliodora

Mid-storey 2 5 0 Brachyloma daphnoides Aristida sp. Ground 10 <5 Microlaena stipoides

Canopy 2 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Residual Angophora floribunda RPA10 Autumn 27 25 2 Mid-storey 5 0 Alluvium/Colluvium Project Area Cassinia sp. (regenerating) Aristida ramosa, Ground 50 <1 Bothriochloa macra

Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus crebra

Mid-storey 1 10 0 Allocasuarina gymnanthera Residual RPA6 Autumn 33 33 0 Project Area Cassinia arcuata Mid-storey 2 40 0 Leucopogon muticus Aristida ramosa Ground 5 0 Aristida vagans Scribbly Gum Woodland - Eucalyptus crebra Heathland on Sand Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus parramattensis Plateaux Eucalyptus rossii Residual RPA9 Spring 37 37 0 Bossiaea obcordata Project Area Mid-storey 10 0 Calytrix tetragona Arundinella nepalensis Ground 10 0 Lomandra glauca Canopy 5 0 Eucalyptus crebra Spring Gully SG1 Spring 24 24 0 Acacia doratoxylon Mid-storey 1 6 0 Acacia linearifolia

Canopy 40 0 Eucalyptus sparsifolia Bobadeen Olearia elliptica BOBC3 Autumn 38 33 4 Mid-storey 10 0 Corridor Offset Podolobium ilicifolium Lomandra sp. Ground 20 <1 Stringybark-Ironbark Microlaena stipoides Open Forest on Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus fibrosa Sandstone Slopes Allocasuarina gymnanthera Mid-storey 1 2 0 Brokenback Persoonia linearis BB1 Spring 29 29 0 Offset Mid-storey 2 35 0 Leucopogon muticus

Ground 2 0 Lomandra filiformis Aristida ramosa Residual Unimproved Pasture RPA14A Autumn 24 12 10 Ground 40 60 *Echium plantagineum Project Area *Trifolium repens Canopy 5 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Bobadeen BOB1 Spring 39 33 6 Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata Offset White Box Woodland Ground 60 <5 Aristida ramosa

Bobadeen Canopy 25 0 Eucalyptus albens BOB4B Autumn Offset 28 24 3 Ground 10 <1 Aristida vagans

Canopy 2 0 Eucalyptus albens Residual RPA11 Spring 35 19 15 Aristida ramosa Project Area Ground 55 10 Austrostipa scabra *Vulpia bromoides

Canopy 5 0 Eucalyptus moluccana Residual RPA12 Autumn 31 25 4 Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata Project Area Aristida vagans Ground 75 <1 Microlaena stipoides White Box Woodland Residual Aristida ramosa RPA8A Autumn 22 14 8 Ground 75 25 Grassland Project Area *Trifolium arvense Bobadeen Aristida ramosa BOBC6 Spring 28 15 11 Ground 70 20 Corridor Offset Sporobolus sp. Modified White Box Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus albens Woodland Surface SI3 Spring 25 13 11 Infrastructure Austrostipa aristiglumis Ground 85 5 Dichanthium sericeum Canopy 25 0 Eucalyptus albens

Yellow Box - Red Gum Bobadeen Acacia decora BOBE2 Spring 40 26 13 Mid-storey 6 0 Woodland East Offset Cassinia arcuata Aristida ramosa Ground 70 5 Microlaena stipoides Revegetation/Regenerating Vegetation Monitoring

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Bobadeen BOBC9 Autumn 31 23 5 Canopy 40 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Forest Corridor Offset Mid-storey 25 0 Cassinia arcuata Arundinella nepalensis Ground 80 <1 Microlaena stipoides Angophora floribunda Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Exocarpos strictus Open Cut OC5 Autumn 52 45 7 Mid-storey 10 0 Leucopogon muticus Aristida ramosa Ground 80 <1 Aristida vagans Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Blakely’s Red Gum Open Bobadeen BOB14 Spring 31 23 8 Mid-storey 4 0 Melaleuca thymifolia Forest (regenerating) Offset Ground 55 <5 Arundinella nepalensis

Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata Bobadeen BOBC7 Autumn 28 19 7 Corridor Offset Sporobolus creber Ground 40 60 Derived Native Grassland Vulpia bromoides*

Mid-storey 15 0 Cassinia arcuata Bobadeen BOBC8 Spring 23 15 5 Corridor Offset Sporobolus creber Ground 60 15 Vulpia bromoides* Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi

Ironbark Open Forest Bobadeen BOB11A Autumn 29 24 2 Mid-storey 2 0 Cassinia arcuata Complex on Sandstone Offset Aristida vagans Ground 80 <1 Arundinella nepalensis Ironbark Open Forest Bobadeen Eucalyptus fibrosa BOB16 Spring 28 28 0 Canopy 21 0 Complex on Sandstone Offset E. sparsifolia

Mid-storey 2 2 0 Acrotriche rigida Joycea pallida Ground 5 0 Lomandra spp.

Canopy 15 0 Eucalyptus spp. Acacia deanei OC3 Spring 29 20 9 Mid-storey 15 0 Dodonaea viscosa Austrostipa scabra Rehabilitation Post 1997 Open Cut Ground 5 5 Vulpia sp.*

Mid-storey 5 0 Acacia linearifolia OC6 Spring 23 14 9 Conyza sp.* Ground 5 5 Cynodon dactylon Mid-storey 1 3 0 Acacia linearifolia Goulburn River GRRD1 Spring 24 10 14 Mid-storey 2 3 0 Cassinia arcuata Rehabilitation Bothriochloa sp. Ground 10 15 Paspalum sp.*

Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata Rehabilitation Pre 1997 OC4 Autumn 20 9 11 Bothriochloa macra * Ground 60 10 Echium plantagineum

Open Cut Canopy 10 0 Corymbia maculata Acacia sp. OC7 Autumn 31 27 4 Mid-storey 25 0 Casuarina cunninghamiana Bidens pilosa* Ground 1 5 Echium plantagineum*

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E

Canopy 15 0 Angophora floribunda

Mid-storey 1 10 0 Acacia linearifolia Bobadeen BOB13B Spring 27 26 1 Offset Mid-storey 2 3 0 Cassinia arcuata Rough-barked Apple Aristida ramosa Open Forest Grassland Ground 35 <1 Gahnia aspera Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata Bobadeen BOB15B Spring 21 13 8 Aristida ramosa Offset Ground 40 <5 Bothriochloa macra Sporobolus elongatus Eucalyptus blakelyi Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus crebra Rough-barked Apple Acacia linearifolia Open Forest on Open Cut OC1 Autumn 29 24 5 Mid-storey 10 0 Pomaderris ferruginea Alluvium/Colluvium Aristida vagans Ground 40 <1 Arundinella nepalensis Acacia sp. Canopy 10 0 Rough-barked Apple Eucalyptus crebra Open Forest on Bobadeen BOBE5 Autumn 24 17 4 Mid-storey 5 0 Cassinia arcuata Alluvium/Colluvium East Offset (regenerating) Ground 85 <5 Microlaena stipoides Angophora floribunda Canopy 70 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi Goulburn River GRRD2 Autumn 25 17 7 Aristida ramosa Unimproved Pasture Rehabilitation Ground 80 <1 Cheilanthes sieberi Microlaena stipoides Bobadeen BOB10A Autumn 30 16 12 Mid-storey 1 0 Cassinia arcuata

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Offset Bothriochloa macra Ground 99 1 Microlaena stipoides Aristida ramosa Bobadeen White Box Woodland BOBE11 Autumn 29 25 4 Ground 98 2 Aristida vagans East Offset Sporobolus creber Bobadeen Eragrostis sp. BOB9 Spring 22 14 8 Ground 85 <5 Offset Sporobolus creber Bobadeen BOB12 Autumn 35 19 12 Ground 90 5 Bothriochloa macra Offset Bobadeen Aristida ramosa White Box Woodland BOB17 Spring 19 7 12 Ground 60 Offset Austrodanthonia sp. Grassland Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus albens Bobadeen BOB18 Autumn 34 27 3 Mid-storey <1 0 Acacia implexa Offset Aristida ramosa Ground 50 10 Echium plantagineum* Bobadeen Aristida ramosa BOB19 Spring 18 8 10 Ground 65 <5 Offset Sporobolus elongatus Bobadeen Asperula conferta BOBE7A Autumn 19 13 4 Ground 80 20 East Offset Cirsium vulgare * Modified White Box Bobadeen Aristida ramosa Woodland BOBE8 Autumn 32 18 12 Ground 95 <5 East Offset Bothriochloa macra Bobadeen Aristida ramosa BOBE9 Spring 30 16 14 Ground 70 15 East Offset Sporobolus elongatus Bobadeen Bothriochloa macra BOBE12 Spring 18 11 7 Ground 60 1 East Offset Sporobolus sp. Yellow Box - Red Gum Bobadeen BOBE6 Spring 32 11 20 Ground 65 20 Sporobolus elongatus Woodland Grassland East Offset Acacia ausfeldii Open Cut AA1 Spring 25 18 7 Ground 5 10 Vulpia sp.* translocation

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E

Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring (Spring 2014 results) Floristic Based Autumn/ Bothriochloa macra Derived Native Grassland Subsidence FBS7 12 6 6 Ground 65 <5 Spring Sporobolus sp. Plot Eucalyptus agglomerata Canopy 10 0 E. parramattensis Floristic Based Mid-storey 1 Acacia doratoxylon Autumn/ 20 0 Subsidence FBS1 29 29 0 Spring Plot Mid-storey 2 1 0 Leptospermum spp. Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Ground 1 0 Lomandra spp. Eucalyptus crebra Canopy 20 0 E. macrorhyncha Floristic Based Autumn/ Brachyloma daphnoides Subsidence FBS8 27 27 0 Mid-storey 5 0 Spring Cassinia arcuata Plot Lomandra filiformis Ground 10 0 Platysace ericoides Angophora floribunda Canopy 25 0 Eucalyptus crebra

Floristic Based Mid-storey 1 2 0 Persoonia linearis Autumn/ Subsidence FBS2 34 34 0 Scribbly Gum Woodland Spring Leucopogon muticus Plot Mid-storey 2 8 0 – Heathland on Sand Pultenaea microphylla Plateaux Aristida ramosa Ground 5 0 Lomandra glauca Eucalyptus crebra Floristic Based Canopy 12 0 Autumn/ E. parramattensis Subsidence FBS3 36 36 0 Spring Plot Mid-storey 1 3 0 Persoonia linearis

Total Total strata Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species Vegetation Community Site Type Site No. species cover (%) Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Calytrix tetragona Mid-storey 2 65 0 Sannantha cunninghamii Aristida ramosa Ground 8 0 Lomandra glauca Angophora floribunda Canopy 30 0 Eucalyptus blakelyi

Rough-barked Apple – Floristic Based Mid-storey 1 2 0 E. blakleyi Autumn/ Blakely’s Red Gum Subsidence FBS4 24 22 2 Spring woodland Plot Mid-storey 2 5 0 Cassinia arcuata Aristida ramosa Ground 70 <1 Arundinella nepalensis

Floristic Based Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus albens Autumn/ Subsidence FBS5 29 25 4 Spring Aristida spp. Plot Ground 75 <1 Austrostipa sp.

Canopy 20 0 Eucalyptus albens White Box Woodland Acacia implexa Floristic Based Mid-storey 1 10 0 Autumn/ E. albens (regenerating) Subsidence FBS6 26 20 6 Spring Plot Mid-storey 2 2 0 Cassinia arcuata Aristida sp. Ground 45 <5 Austrodanthonia sp.

40 2012

30 2013 20 2014

Native species richness speciesNative 10

0 SI2 (S) SI2 (S) SI3 *OC5 (A) *OC5 RPA8 (A) BOB6 BOB6 (A) BOB4 (A) BOB1 (S) *BOB9 (S) *BOB9 RPA13 (S) RPA11 (S) RPA12 (S) BOBE1 BOBE1 (S) BOBE2 (S) BOBC1 BOBC1 (A) BOBC2 (S) BOBC6 (S) *BOB11 (A) *BOB14 (S) *BOB10 (A) *BOB19 (S) *BOB12 (A) *BOB17 (S) *BOB18 (A) *BOBE7 (A) *BOBE7 (A) *BOBE8 (S) *BOBE9 (S) *BOBE6 *BOBC9 (A) *BOBC9 *BOBE11 (A) *BOBE12 (S) BRG OF BRG OF BRG WBW WBW (M) WB WG YBRGYBRG (reg) OFG W WG

Figure 3.1: Native species richness in EEC/CEEC sites

(A) Autumn; (S) Spring; *revegetation/regeneration site. BRG OF = Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest; (reg) = regenerating; BRG OFG = Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Grassland; WBW = White Box Woodland; WBW (M) = Modified White Box Woodland; WB WG = White Box Woodland Grassland; YBRG W = Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland; YBRG WG = Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland Grassland

40 2012 30 2013 20 2014

Exotic species richnessspeciesExotic 10

Figure 3.2: Exotic species richness in EEC/CEEC sites

(A) Autumn; (S) Spring; *revegetation/regeneration site. BRG OF = Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest; (reg) = regenerating; BRG OFG = Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Grassland; WB W = White Box Woodland; WBW (M) = Modified White Box Woodland; WB WG = White Box Woodland Grassland; YBRG W = Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland; YBRG WG = Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland Grassland

30 2012 2013 20 2014 Native species richness speciesNative 10

0 BOBC7 BOBC8 BOB16 GRRD1 OC4 (A) OC7 (A) OC3 (S) OC6 (S) OC1 (A) BOB13 BOB15 BOBE5 GRRD2 AA1(S) (A) (S) (S) (S) (S) (S) (A) (A) DNG IB OFC Rehab 1 Rehab 2 RBA OF RBA OF G RBA OF UIP AA (reg) (reg)

Figure 3.3: Native species richness in non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration sites (A) Autumn; (S) Spring. DNG = Derived Native Grassland; IB OFC (reg) = Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (regenerating); Rehab 1 = Rehabilitation Pre-1997; Rehab 2 = Rehabilitation Post-1997; RBA OF = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium; RBA OF G = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest Grassland; RBA OF (reg) = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (regenerating); UIP = Unimproved Pasture

40 2012 30 2013

20 2014 Exotic species richnessspeciesExotic 10

0 BOBC7 BOBC8 BOB16 GRRD1 OC4 (A) OC7 (A) OC3 (S) OC6 (S) OC1 (A) BOB13 BOB15 BOBE5 GRRD2 AA1(S) (A) (S) (S) (S) (S) (S) (A) (A) DNG IB OFC Rehab 1 Rehab 2 RBA OF RBA OF G RBA OF UIP AA (reg) (reg)

Figure 3.4: Exotic species richness in non EEC/CEEC revegetation/regeneration sites (A) Autumn; (S) Spring. DNG = Derived Native Grassland; IB OFC (reg) = Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (regenerating); Rehab 1 = Rehabilitation Pre-1997; Rehab 2 = Rehabilitation Post-1997; RBA OF = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium; RBA OF G = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest Grassland; RBA OF (reg) = Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (regenerating); UIP = Unimproved Pasture; AA = Acacia ausfeldii translocation

Table 3.2: Noxious weeds and dominant exotic species summary

Botanical name Common name Site(s) Cover (%)

Noxious weeds

BOB12, BOB17, BOB18, BOBE8, BOBE9, BOBE11, Hypericum perforatum St John’s Wort <5 OC4, OC6, OC7, FBS5, FBS6, GRRD1

Opuntia sp. Prickly Pear OC7, RPA15, GRRD1 <1

Rubus ulmifolius Blackberry BOB4B, RPA3A <5

Senecio madagascariensis Fireweed OC4 <1

Bathurst/South BOB12, BOBE8, BOBC3, Xanthium sp. American/Californian/ <5 RPA8A Cockle Burrs

Exotics (other) – dominants

Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle BOB19, BOBE6, BOBC6 5-20

Trifolium sp. Clovers BOBE1, BOBE9, BOBC6, 25-50 (RPA8A); RPA8A, RPA14A 5-20

Vulpia sp. Fescue Grasses BOBC7, BOBC8, OC3, 25-50 (BOBC7); RPA11 5-20

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 46 3.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring FBS3 and FBS4 showed a decrease in native species richness, with FBS4 having a reduction of 22 native species. This trend of reduced native species richness has generally been observed across all monitoring domains, including residual vegetation monitoring sites within the Residual Project Area, Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas. Therefore, this is unlikely to be attributable to subsidence impacts. Further, FBS5 showed an increase in native species richness with the total number of species increasing from 19 to 29 species between spring 2013 and spring 2014. The number of exotic species at this site increased from one to four, with the remainder of new species being native.

FBS7 and FBS8 were established in 2014 and therefore will be included in comparisons in future years.

3.2 LANDSCAPE FUNCTION ANALYSIS The average Landscape Organisation (LO) index at analogue sites was 0.92, compared to an average of 0.8 at revegetation/regeneration sites. However, the LO observed across all revegetation/regeneration sites ranged from as low as 0.22 (AA2(R)) to 1.0 (OC4(R), BOB1(R) and BOBE2(R)). Thirteen of the 19 revegetation/rehabilitation sites recorded LO indices within the range set by analogues, and a further three were within 10% of the lowest analogue value.

Both of the Acacia ausfeldii translocation plot LFAs recorded very low LO indices due to limited establishment of ground cover and a lack of non-vascular patch types (e.g. logs) integrated with the rehabilitation.

Litter and perennial ground cover dominated the majority of analogue sites, with averages of 55% and 28% respectively (Table 3.3). Bare soil contributed less than 10% on average to analogue site LO, and the remaining patch types were generally less than 5% of total cover. The exceptions to this were sites BOB1(A) and BOB2(A), which had 28% of dense rush and 32% cryptogam, respectively.

Similarly, the most common dominant patch types in the revegetation/regeneration sites were litter and perennial ground cover. However, the average ground cover percentage was higher (42%) in revegetation/regeneration sites compared to analogues, associated with a lower average litter cover (36%). In Grassland and Grassy Woodland revegetation/regeneration sites, it was observed that ‘litter’ predominantly consisted of annual plant species. The proportion of bare soil was highly variable, ranging from 0% at BOB1(R) and BOBE2(R), to 78% in site AA2(R), with an average across all sites of 19%. Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Corridor Area revegetation/regeneration LFA sites had amongst the lowest percentages of bare soil, associated with high litter and ground covers.

RPA6(A) had recently been affected by bushfire. The LO results for this monitoring site showed evidence of this through the presence of burnt litter.

Revegetation/regeneration sites had very limited extents of other patch types (tree/shrub, log, cryptogam, rock or other); average cover of each of these was less than 1.

Landscape Organisation (%)

Landscape Site No. Ground Tree/ Soil Litter Log Cryptogam Rock Other organisation cover Shrub index

Analogue Sites

RPA1(A) 1.5 91.5 0.3 5.6 0.8 - 0.3 - 0.99

RPA2(A) 3.3 73.0 20.3 - 0.3 - 3.1 - 0.97

RPA3(A) 7.9 69.6 19.8 2.7 - - - 0.92

RPA4(A) 15.7 76.8 - 0.8 4.1 - 2.6 - 0.84

RPA5(A) 9.9 79.5 5.8 1.8 3.0 - - - 0.90

12.5 + 78.3 RPA6(A) 2.4 - 0.6 1.8 - 4.3 - 0.98 (burnt litter)

BOB1(A) 21.5 48.2 2.0 - 0.3 - - 27.9 0.78

BOB2(A) 8.1 59.9 - 0.3 - 31.7 - - 0.92

BOB3(A) 2.6 23.0 74.1 0.2 - - - - 0.97

BOB4(A) 7.7 71.0 - 8.6 4.1 5.7 2.9 - 0.92

BOB5(A) 5.9 11.1 83.0 - - - - - 0.94

BOBE1(A) 15.0 81.3 - - 3.6 - - - 0.85

BOBE2(A) 6.1 28.5 65.6 1.9 - - - - 0.94

GRRD1(A) 1.1 3.0 74.2 - - - - 21.8 0.99

GRRD2(A) 6.8 18.2 75.0 - - - - - 0.93

Revegetation/Regeneration Sites

OC1(R) 48.1 10.9 34.4 - - 3.6 3.0 - 0.52

OC2(R) 7.3 80.2 1.9 - 1.3 8.2 1.1 - 0.93

OC3(R) 28.3 9.4 62.3 - - - - - 0.72

OC4(R) 0.3 84.6 13.4 0.04 0.3 - 1.6 - 1.00

OC5(R) 9.6 89.2 0.2 - 0.3 - 0.6 - 0.90

Landscape Site No. Ground Tree/ Soil Litter Log Cryptogam Rock Other organisation cover Shrub index

OC6(R) 24.1 75.1 0.3 0.5 - - - - 0.76

AA1(R) 69.0 11.6 14.2 4.9 - - 0.3 - 0.31

AA2(R) 77.9 6.9 14.4 0.1 0.7 - - - 0.22

BOB1(R) - 0.9 98.9 - - - 0.3 - 1.00

BOB2(R) 7.8 56.9 31.3 - 4.0 - - - 0.92

BOB3(R) 5.2 8.6 85. - 0.3 - 0.4 - 0.95

BOB4(R) 16.7 10.7 71.8 - - - 0.8 - 0.83

BOBC1(R) 8.0 32.8 58.9 0.4 - - - - 0.92

BOBC2(R) 5.6 13.6 73.2 - 7.6 - - - 0.94

BOBC3(R) 2.4 97.6 ------0.98

BOBE1(R) 18.9 21.0 60.1 - - - - - 0.81

BOBE2(R) - 11.5 88.5 - - - - - 1.00

GRRD1(R) 26.2 12.8 49.1 0.5 - - 11.4 - 0.74

GRRD2(R) 12.5 45.1 42.2 0.2 - - - - 0.88

The Soil Surface Assessment results indicate that the revegetation/regeneration sites stability indices for the three dominant patch types (bare soil, litter and perennial ground cover) were, on average, greater than those recorded in analogue sites (Table 3.4). These results also show improved stability within revegetation/regeneration sites when compared to results previously collected. Stability indices of litter and ground cover patches in all revegetation and regeneration sites fell within the range of values set by analogue sites, with only BOB2(R) recording a stability index for bare soil below the lower analogue value.

In contrast, both infiltration and nutrient cycling were, on average, lower for all patch types in revegetation/regeneration sites, compared to analogues, with the exception being ground cover nutrient cycling, which was on average slightly higher in revegetation/regeneration sites. In particular, infiltration indices for bare soil, and nutrient cycling indices for litter, were on average 16-17% higher in analogue sites. OC3(R) had consistently low infiltration values across all patch types, and low nutrient cycling associated with bare soil and litter, while AA2(R) infiltration values were lower than the lowest analogue for both litter and ground cover. Nutrient cycling for ground cover patches in revegetation/regeneration sites all fell within the range set by analogue values. Given that ground cover was the dominant patch type in the majority of these sites, this suggests that overall nutrient cycling is trending well in these rehabilitation areas.

Soil Surface Assessment – Zone Indices (%)

Site No. Stability Infiltration Nutrients

Soil Litter Ground Soil Litter Ground Soil Litter Ground cover cover cover

Analogue Sites

RPA1(A) 47.9 55.6 55.6 33.1 44.0 33.8 22.7 39.0 25.6

RPA2(A) 45.8 57.2 57.2 33.8 43.3 39.8 23.2 37.6 34.4

RPA3(A) 45.0 53.9 57.8 38.4 48.2 41.8 24.6 38.1 30.7

RPA4(A) 42.3 48.2 - 36.4 50.2 - 20.5 37.5 -

RPA5(A) 39.8 50.8 51.4 39.6 49.5 37.0 25.4 38.4 23.1

RPA6(A) 45.4 53.3 - 42.4 48.3 - 33.1 40.9 -

BOB1(A) 46.7 55.0 57.4 35.9 46.1 43.4 26.0 37.2 31.0

BOB2(A) 51.1 57.2 - 39.1 45.0 - 29.7 39.0 -

BOB3(A) 40.3 51.1 58.3 39.4 46.3 41.0 23.2 39.0 31.1

BOB4(A) 48.3 55.6 - 35.1 45.9 - 22.3 38.6 -

BOB5(A) 52.2 56.7 57.2 24.7 42.9 38.0 17.7 37.6 31.1

BOBE1(A) 41.4 53.3 - 32.1 45.4 - 21.8 38.5 -

BOBE2(A) 43.1 54.4 55.6 27.8 44.0 41.8 18.0 34.4 33.2

GRRD1(A) 52.8 59.7 62.8 26.0 44.8 39.3 12.8 37.7 30.4

GRRD2(A) 52.8 58.9 58.9 28.3 40.5 36.3 18.2 34.4 28.8

Rehabilitation/Regeneration Sites

OC1(R) 59.3 62.0 60.6 26.0 42.4 33.6 20.5 26.0 36.4

OC2(R) 45.4 55.0 62.5 34.8 44.3 44.4 21.7 37.2 37.2

OC3(R) 50.6 53.5 55.0 18.0 40.0 32.1 11.2 23.2 33.7

OC4(R) - 53.9 60.0 - 40.1 42.2 - 35.8 34.8

OC5(R) 48.3 55.6 60.7 30.3 46.1 33.0 20.9 21.8 39.5

OC6(R) 48.3 56.7 55.6 31.4 46.9 31.7 20.0 20.3 40.6

AA1(R) 50.6 58.3 59.4 26.1 39.1 35.2 15.3 32.5 25.1

AA2(R) 52.8 55.6 57.8 29.2 37.5 31.6 15.6 30.4 23.7

Site No. Stability Infiltration Nutrients

Soil Litter Ground Soil Litter Ground Soil Litter Ground cover cover cover

BOB1(R) - 52.8 56.7 - 37.3 34.9 - 30.2 27.0

BOB2(R) 38.9 52.8 54.4 32.0 48.2 41.2 18.0 37.6 28.3

BOB3(R) 45.6 59.4 57.8 26.8 41.9 35.2 18.6 36.2 27.4

BOB4(R) 45.6 55.0 58.9 28.8 40.2 35.2 15.8 32.5 27.4

BOBC1(R) 50.9 56.1 58.9 29.5 44.6 38.8 17.4 35.1 27.4

BOBC2(R) 48.1 55.0 57.8 27.7 41.6 39.1 15.1 29.7 27.9

BOBC3(R) 45.4 - 57.8 27.3 - 34.9 14.3 - 27.0

BOBE1(R) 46.1 58.3 60.0 37.0 42.2 38.1 22.8 34.4 28.8

BOBE2(R) - 54.4 55.6 - 44.0 41.8 - 34.4 33.2

GRRD1(R) 52.8 62.0 62.0 28.0 43.2 35.6 15.5 37.9 25.6

GRRD2(R) 50.0 56.9 59.7 27.9 41.3 33.3 16.0 33.1 26.4

3.2.1 Vegetation dynamics The Vegetation Dynamics results from newly established LFA monitoring sites showed low structural diversity in sites that have not yet undergone active rehabilitation (BOB3(R), BOBE2(R), BOBC3(R)) (Table 3.5).

OC5(R) and OC6(R), both in slightly older rehabilitation areas, had adequate densities of trees for grassy woodland/forest formation (Kerle 2005), however both had very low perennial ground cover (<1%).

A Vegetation Dynamics assessment of RPA6(R) was undertaken as a result of a controlled burn being undertaken within the bushland that this site was located in during late 2014. The BMP (Section 4.1.4) requires that the frequency of LFA monitoring may be altered if there is significant rainfall or a bushfire event occurs that would change landscape scores. Vegetation Dynamics for this site was not scheduled until spring 2015. The results of the Vegetation Dynamics undertaken for this site suggests that the fire impacted lower shrubs and ground cover. However, the survey found that regeneration of lower shrub and grass species was occurring. The upper shrub layer (>1 m) was found to be impacted by the bushfire in terms of both density and canopy. The average canopy density of the upper shrub layer was less than 15%, with a number of “canopies” consisting solely of young epicormic growth. Neither tree density nor tree canopy appeared to have been impacted, suggesting a lower intensity, non-crowning fire.

Site No. No. of Plants (per ha) Basal/butt area (m2/ha) Comments Shrubs Shrubs Trees Total Perennial (<1 m) (>1 m) ground cover

Recently burnt – reduction in RPA6(R) 2922 105 1466 4473 3 shrub and ground cover layers

Trees predominantly juvenile E. BOB3(R) 0 0 <1 <1 6734 albens suckers/natural regeneration

Trees are recently planted BOB4(R) 0 0 292 292 964 (rehabilitation area)

Mature remnant trees and BOBE2(R) 0 0 <1 <1 8374 mature regeneration

BOBC3(R) 0 6 1 7 4658 Mature remnant trees

Trees still juvenile AA2(R) 9 11751 612 12372 216 seedlings/saplings

Significantly greater tree stem OC5(R) 2329 6 102 2437 14 density in upper half of transect

OC6(R) 125 336 145 606 28

3.3 ACACIA AUSFELDII SURVEYS 3.3.1 Highett Road Population Acacia ausfeldii monitoring during spring 2014 continued the targeted monitoring of 100 individual specimens within the defined Highett Road population. The field survey collected data for a total of 56 individuals, consisting of two saplings and 54 mature plants. The remaining 44 individuals were either dead, or unable to be located (Figure 3.5). As such the trigger of a greater than 10% decrease in population size has been reached, as outlined in Table 4.8 of the BMP. This trigger was reached during 2013 and has not been reversed.

Of the 12 individuals lost from 2013, ten were found dead. One of these individuals was a seedling, five were saplings and four were recorded as mature plants in 2013. Two were unable to be located and therefore assumed dead.

The average height of mature individuals increased from 1.92 m in 2013 to 2.07 m in 2014, indicating continued growth.

The height of mature living individuals ranged from 0.2 m to 3.6 m, whilst the diameter of the main stem ranged from 0.8 cm 4.8 cm at the base. The two saplings present were recorded as having heights of 0.9 and 1.25 m and diameters at base of height of 0.8 cm and 2.7 cm.

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 52 Table 3.6 summarises the condition ratings and the reproductive ratings (flower and fruit) given to each mature individual and sapling assessed during the survey. Approximately 30% of individuals showed either severe dieback or many dead stems, and a further 63% showed minor damage or some dead branches. Very few individuals (four, or 7%) were assessed as being healthy.

Table 3.6: Condition and reproductive ratings summary – Highett Road population

Reproductive Ratings Reproductive Ratings Condition Ratings # (flower) ## (fruit) ## Maturity

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

Seedling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sapling 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Mature 2 14 20 14 4 5 22 13 14 0 54 0 0 0 0

Total 3 14 21 14 4 6 22 14 14 0 56 0 0 0 0

# Condition Rating: 1 – severe damage/dieback, 2 – many dead stems, 3 – some dead branches, 4 – minor damage and 5 – healthy ## Reproductive Rating: 1 – Nil, 2 – Sparse/occasional flowers or fruit only, 3 – Low/under 25% of potential, 4 – Moderate/25% to 75% of potential and 5 – High/75% to 100% of potential

ACQ1 and ACQ2 had higher total and native species richness compared to the average richness from all residual sites monitored, but relatively low canopy cover percentages (Table 3.7). Ground cover was sparse, consistent with observations from sites located in mature Ironbark and Stringybark forests and litter formed the dominant ground cover. Exotic species were present only in the ground layer, in low covers and abundances. Apart from evidence of historical logging (cut stumps and secondary growth), neither site showed signs of human-induced disturbances or weed invasion, however fallen trees in ACQ1 suggested windthrow. Regeneration of canopy species was observed in both sites.

Table 3.7: Floristic summary - Highett Road sites

Total Total strata Site Survey Native Exotic Structural Dominant species species cover (%) No. Season species species Layer (*exotic) number N E Angophora floribunda Canopy 10 0 Eucalyptus macrorhyncha Mid-storey 1 15 0 Callitris endlicheri ACQ1 Spring 38 33 5 Mid-storey 2 5 0 Acrotriche rigida Goodenia hederacea Ground 2 <1 Microlaena stipoides Canopy 5 0 Eucalyptus crebra

Mid-storey 1 20 0 Callitris endlicheri ACQ2 Spring 32 30 1 Acrotriche rigida Mid-storey 2 15 0 Exocarpos cupressiformis Austrostipa scabra Ground 2 <1 Microlaena stipoides

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 53 3.3.2 Highett & Marshall Road vegetation mapping During 2014, the Highett and Marshall Road properties (see Figure 1) were surveyed to determine the extent of Ausfeld’s Wattle within the remainder of the property and to provide an average density of the populations that were present (Eco Logical Australia, 2014b). The results of this survey showed that there were a number of stands of Ausfeld’s Wattle present. Of the individuals that were counted, it was estimated that there were approximately 2,000 individuals present within these properties. Further detail as to the distribution of these individuals is contained within Eco Logical Australia, 2014b.

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 55 3.3.3 Open Cut Translocation Area Population Spring 2014 surveys established monitoring of a subset (100 individuals, 50 per plot) of the Acacia ausfeldii population in the two A. ausfeldii translocation plots in the Open Cut (AA1 and AA2) (Figure 3.6).

All 100 individuals identified and tagged for monitoring were assessed as being healthy (condition rating 5). Of these 100 individuals, 61 were seedlings and 39 were saplings (Figure 3.7). No mature individuals were identified. Plot 1 (AA1) had a higher percentage of saplings compared to Plot 2 (66% compared to 12% respectively). Individuals in AA1 were taller on average than individuals in AA2 (94 cm compared to 52 cm respectively), and had larger diameters at base (average of 7.7 cm compared to 4.4 cm).

3.4 PIVOT FENCE TREE-LINE MONITORING The results of the targeted survey of the pivot fence tree-line plantings during autumn 2014 surveys are summarised below in Table 3.6. General observations from the results include:

 A total of 2279 trees were counted (38% of the number originally planted);  2221 trees were not found (62% of the number planted);  1734 (29%) of the total 6000 trees planted are considered to be at 50% health or greater;  Of the total number of trees counted, 76% are considered to be at 50% health or greater;  1032 (60%) of trees are considered to be at 50% health or greater are Eucalypts.

Table 3.8: Pivot Fence tree-line planting numbers and health

Health Area Tree Species Total 0-24% 25-49% 50-74% 75-99%

Eucalypt 21 39 75 82 217 Allocasuarina 5 8 18 24 55 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 8 45 76 48 177 Area 1 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 7 1 8 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 5 2 7 31 45 Allocasuarina 2 4 6 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 0 Area 2 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 0 Unknown 0

Eucalypt 23 36 52 40 151 Allocasuarina 1 3 4 23 31 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 9 8 17 21 55 Area 3 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 4 4 1 5 14 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 1 14 16 31 Allocasuarina 1 3 2 6 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 3 2 5 Area 4 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 1 3 3 7 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 9 10 16 28 63 Allocasuarina 1 3 4 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 1 3 8 9 21 Area 5 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 0 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 3 3 59 65 Allocasuarina 1 9 10 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 7 1 1 13 22 Area 6 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 1 1 2 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 11 11 21 16 59 Allocasuarina 2 1 2 8 13 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 7 9 23 5 44 Area 7 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 10 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 19 37 56 176 288 Allocasuarina 11 16 31 75 133 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 4 12 25 70 111 Area 8 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 1 2 4 7 14 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 11 18 49 150 228 Allocasuarina 2 4 1 77 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 27 4 15 5 51 Area 9 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 2 2 5 13 22 Unknown 2 2 Eucalypt 4 9 33 80 126 Area 10 Allocasuarina 3 1 4

Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 1 12 13 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 0 Unknown 0 Eucalypt 5 3 19 27 Allocasuarina 1 2 2 7 12 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 12 12 Area 11 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 0 Unknown 3 3 Eucalypt 1 5 15 21 Allocasuarina 1 10 11 Melaleuca/Callistemon Shrub 1 1 Area 12 Trees (other) 0 Acacia 2 2 Unknown 0

The pivot fence tree-line survey located 2,279 (38%) of the 6,000 trees originally planted. Figure 3.8 below illustrates the number of healthy trees identified during autumn 2013 and autumn 2014 against the targeted 75% healthy trees required by the Salinity Offset Management Program. The graph shows that the number of healthy trees required are not meeting the target, and also that the number of healthy trees identified in autumn 2014 has declined from autumn 2013. There was a decrease of 266 trees between autumn 2013 and autumn 2014 monitoring periods. This represents a loss of 10% of the trees between monitoring periods, and an overall loss of 42% of the original trees planted.

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0 A13 A14

No. Healthy Trees 75% Healthy Target

Figure 3.8: Healthy trees comparison against 75% healthy target In terms of overall health of the trees, the number of healthy trees identified has decreased by 172 since autumn 2013. In the 75-100% health category, the number of trees has declined by 332 trees, and the lowest health category (0-25%) also saw a decrease in the number of trees. However, the number of trees

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 A13

No. of TreesNo. of 600 A14 400

200

0 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Tree Health Category trees in both the 25-50% and 50-75% health category increased from autumn 2013 results (Figure 3.9 1600

1400

1200

1000

800 A13

No. of TreesNo. of 600 A14 400

200

0 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Tree Health Category

Figure 3.9).

1600

1400

1200

1000

800 A13

No. of TreesNo. of 600 A14 400

200

0 0-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Tree Health Category

Figure 3.9: Distribution of tree health Eucalypts dominated the tree species found within the pivot fence tree line areas with 1321 of the 2279 trees present identified as a Eucalypt (approximately 58%). Of these 1321 trees, 1032 were considered to be of 50% health or greater. The remaining species planted did not exhibit high establishment rates in comparison to the Eucalypt species present. Figure 3.10 below shows the distribution of trees species that were of 50% health or greater.

1000

800

600 A13

No. of TreesNo. of 400 A14

200

Figure 3.10: Distribution of tree species

Floristic and LFA monitoring provides data to determine if the objectives of the monitoring program and management actions outlined within the BMP are being met. This discussion and recommendations section provides background and analysis of the results obtained during the 2014 monitoring, discusses any changes over time from previous monitoring periods and provides recommendations to improve and enhance future monitoring and management actions to ensure management objectives are being met.

The floristic monitoring methods were consistent with those outlined within the BMP and previous monitoring surveys which ensures data can be compared with previously collected data and builds on knowledge gained from ecological monitoring since 1994.

The results of the 2014 floristic monitoring illustrate the difference between sites that are representative of vegetation communities (residual monitoring sites) and those sites that will or have undergone works for revegetation/rehabilitation.

The floristic monitoring addresses the aims established within the BMP to monitor within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas and report on changes within retained vegetation and revegetation areas. The structure, composition and condition of vegetation were recorded to address the aims of the monitoring program and any changes from previous years monitoring is discussed below.

Discussion as to whether the conditon and structure of revegetation/rehabilitation vegetation monitoring sites are trending towards the condition and structure of residual vegetation monitoring sites can not be made until such time as Performance and Completion Criteria for revegetation/rehabilitation has been developed. Discussion has been made providing a comparison between residual and revegetation/rehabilitation vegetation monitoring sites, however the success of revegetation or rehabilitation activities cannot be determined until the Performance and Completion Criteria have been set.

4.1 Floristic monitoring The 2014 floristic monitoring highlights the continuing differences between sites that are representative of vegetation communities (residual sites) and sites that will undergo or have undergone works for revegetation/rehabilitation. Discussion of the findings has been separated into EEC and non-EECs.

Ground preparation (ripping and mounding) for the 2014 tree planting was completed ready for planting, over an area of 16.5 hectares during 2014. However due to 36 months of lower than average rainfall, the survival rates of 2013 plantings have been poor; hence areas that were planned for revegetation during 2014 were postponed and will be undertaken during 2015. New sites that were located within revegetation/rehabilitation areas have been located within areas that will undergo revegetation during 2015.

4.1.1 EEC/CEEC communities 2014 results show that residual sites have, on average, a greater number of native species compared to revegetation/regeneration sites. Two residual (SI2 and BOBE1) and two revegetation/regeneration sites (BOB14 and BOB12) recorded large increases in native species richness in 2014, predominantly

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 63 due to the emergence of both annual and perennial herbs. For SI2, BOBE1 and BOB14 this reflected a recovery of species richness after large reductions observed between 2012 and 2013.

As canopy develops in these revegetation/regeneration sites, it is expected that increased shading will result in a thinning of the high grass cover and potentially an associated increase in native forb germination and diversity.

Within sites that recorded a reduction in native species richness greater than 20% (BOBC6, BOBE8, BOBE2), loss of herbaceous ground cover plants and for spring sites, perennial grasses were the primary causes. This trend was likely to be due to seasonal variations. Dry conditions and heavy macropod pressure observed during spring monitoring may have resulted in a number of grass species not being found. While the majority of revegetation/regeneration sites had a good representation of native perennial grass species (including Aristida spp., Bothriochloa spp. and Sporobolus spp.), they lacked the diversity of native perennial herbaceous species typical of many mature Box Gum Woodland remnants.

The majority of exotic species identified during surveys were annuals and present in low abundances and/or covers within EEC sites. Therefore, no additional management intervention is recommended except in sites where noxious weeds were identified (refer back to Table 3.2).

All sites within an EEC had a predominantly native ground cover. However, a higher level of exotic ground cover was observed in a number of sites (both residual and revegetation/regeneration) within White Box Woodland formations. These higher levels of exotic cover are likely due to a recent history of disturbance, in particular grazing, in these sites, which could have facilitated the invasion and spread of exotics. Exotics were recorded as one of the dominant ground cover species in both RPA8A (residual – Trifolium arvense) and BOBC6 (revegetation/regeneration – Echium plantagineum). Exotic cover in Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (including regenerating and DNG) sites was consistently low, between zero and five percent.

4.1.2 Non EEC/CEEC communities

The result obtained at BOB16 located within an Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone of no exotic species present is consistent with observations of no/low exotic richness in residual sites within Ironbark communities.

Grassland and grassy woodland sites (BOBC7, BOBC8, BOB13B, BOB15B, BOBE5 and GRRD2) had much higher ground cover than the regenerating Ironbark Open Forest Complex site (BOB16) and the majority of post-mining open cut rehabilitation sites. While Ironbark communities typically have sparse understoreys, the low level of ground cover observed in post-mining open cut rehabilitation sites (OC3, OC6, OC7 and AA1 in particular) indicates that rehabilitation has not always been successful in re- establishing strong groundcover. This may be of particular concern for future rehabilitation sites where the aim is to rehabilitate to specific grassy woodland communities. Seed mixes should include a range of native perennial grass species that include lower rates of stoloniferous grasses to ensure ground cover is established and maintained during early vegetation establishment. Topsoil should be managed in a way that improves soil health and fertility as this will assist in establishing groundcover species present within the seed bank in the topsoil. With the exception of these four sites, both total and native ground cover percentage cover in revegetation/regeneration sites was similar to those observed in residual sites.

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 64 The reduction in native perennial species observed at GRRD1 and OC1 was largely due to the loss of native grasses and herbs, which had previously been recorded in very low abundances (often fewer than five individuals). In the case of GRRD1, this may reflect the challenge of stable ground cover establishment on exposed, relatively steep slopes, and the impact of dry conditions. The most obvious loss from OC1 was Microlaena stipoides, consistently recorded as having a high cover but not recorded at all in 2014. While macropod grazing pressure may explain the loss or inability to identify a proportion of native grasses, this site should be closely monitored in following seasons, targeting these fluctuating species, to identify any persistent changes.

4.1.3 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring The performance criterion for subsidence with regards to biodiversity requires that mining operations are to have a negligible impact upon threatened species, populations, habitat or ecological communities. Condition 24 of the Ulan Coal Mines Ltd Project Approval (08_0184) states that “The proponent shall ensure that the project does not cause any exceedances of the performance measures”. The results from the monitoring indicate that the subsidence has had negligible effect upon the vegetation communities currently undergoing monitoring.

4.1.3.1 Sites at which Floristic Based Subsidence Monitoring concluded in 2014 As part of the monitoring requirements, each Florisitic Based Subsidence (FBS) site must be monitored one year prior to and two years following longwall mining. Conseqently, monitoring of some FBS sites concluded in 2014. The sections below discuss each floristic based subsidence monitoring location for which monitoring was concluded in 2014 and the impact that subsidence has had upon flora within these areas. Potential impacts that may occur to flora species as a result of subsidence include tree dieback as a result of root shear, trees falling over due to the presence of subsidence cracking, colonisation of exotic species in disturbed soils, vegetation dieback due to loss of water resources and increased erosion.

Based on the results obtained for these sites during the periods that monitoring was conducted, it has been deteremined that subsidence has caused negligible impact upon the biodiversity of these longwall panels in these locations.

FBS1 FBS1 was established in spring 2011 for the purpose of monitoring subsidence impacts upon biodiversity above Longwall C at Ulan #3 Underground Mine. It was located within an Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone vegetation community.

The number of native species found at FBS1 has declined over the period that it was monitored (Figure 4.1). However, given the lack of physical evidence of subsidence within this location, it is unlikely that this decline is as a result of subsidence. The decrease in native species is likely to be as a result of seasonal conditions as the region has experienced dry conditions in recent years. This is supported by the fact that the majority of residual sites also experienced reductions in native species richness between 2012/2013 and 2014, and that fluctuations up to 20% in species richness between years was not uncommon. There were no exotic species identified during monitoring surveys of this location (Figure 4.2).

Canopy cover has shown a minor increase over the period that monitoring has been undertaken. This trend was not seen for mid-storey cover with the percentage cover remaining consistently low at below 10%, and dropping to 1% from spring 2013 onwards. Given that there was little variation within the canopy and mid-storey it is unlikely that subsidence has impacted upon vegetation within this location.

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 65 FBS2 FBS2 was established in spring 2011 for the purpose of monitoring subsidence impacts upon biodiversity above Longwall F at Ulan #3 Underground Mine. It was located within a Scribbly Gum Woodland – Healthland on Sand Plateaux vegetation community.

The number of native species found at FBS2 has declined over the period that it was monitored (Figure 4.1). The decrease in native species is likely to be as a result of climate, as the region has experienced dry conditions in recent years. Numbers of exotic species remained low with no exotic species being identified throughout most of the monitoring periods (Figure 4.2).

The percentage of canopy cover at this site showed little variations across the monitoring periods. This trend was also seen for mid-storey species. No change in these trends suggests that there was no impact upon canopy and mid-storey species as a result of subsidence.

FBS3 FBS3 was established in spring 2012 for the purpose of monitoring subsidence impacts upon biodiversity above Longwall E at Ulan #3 Underground Mine. It was located within a Scribbly Gum Woodland – Healthland on Sand Plateaux vegetation community.

The native species richness has remained consistent at FBS3 over the 3 years that this site has been monitored (Figure 4.1). There were no exotic species identified at FBS3 throughout all monitoring periods (Figure 4.2).

Canopy cover remained reasonably constant at approximately 10%, with a slight increase to 12% seen during spring 2014 monitoring. The mid-storey cover for FBS3 showed an increase to 80% during the second year of monitoring undertaken, however, during spring 2014 the cover percentage decreased to the baseline percentage established during the first year of monitoring.

Based on the results presented above, there are no evident subsidence impacts at site FBS3.

RPA8A RPA8A was established in autumn 2012 for the purpose of monitoring subsidence impacts upon biodiversity above Longwall 26 at Ulan #3 Underground Mine. It was located within a White Box Woodland Grassland. RPA8A was originally established as a residual vegetation monitoring site to monitor vegetation within the residual project area. Data will continue to be collected from this location even though it is no longer required for determination of compliance with subsidence performance measures.

Native species richness remained consistent across all monitoring periods, with exotic species richness following a similar trend (Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2). Canopy and mid-storey cover within this location was non-existent given that this monitoring site is located within a grassland community. During 2014 this site was identified as having a high (up to 25%) cover of exotic Trifolium spp. – an increase in abundance since monitoring began – however the site remains dominated by a good diversity of native perennial grass species which appear stable.

FBS1 FBS2 FBS3 RPA8A

Figure 4.1: Native species richness

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Exotic species richness 0 Spring 2011 Autumn 2012 Spring 2012 Autumn 2013 Spring 2013 Autumn 2014 Spring 2014

FBS1 FBS2 FBS3 RPA8A

Figure 4.2: Exotic species richness

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 67 4.1.4 Weeds The 2014 monitoring survey identified weeds within both residual and revegetation/regeneration areas that should be targeted as part of noxious weed control. Bathurst Burr, Blackberry, and St John’s Wort have been eliminated successfully from a number of plots (BOB14, BOBE1, RPA3A, RPA14A, OC3 and SI3). However, they have persisted or emerged in a number of other plots (refer back to Table 3.2). Prickly Pear and Fireweed have both emerged during 2014. Management intervention, largely in the form of targeted spraying, will be required to reduce the extent and spread of these noxious weeds.

The suite of dominant exotic species has changed since 2013 monitoring. Dominant exotics recorded during 2014 were Spear Thistle, Fescue Grass, and Clovers, the majority of which were annuals. In particular, BOBC7 and RPA8A had high (25-50%) covers of Fescue Grass and Clover, respectively. It was observed that soil disturbance (ripping) in recently revegetated areas such as BOB19 had resulted in high densities of Spear Thistle along rip lines. Pre-planting weed control activities as per methods outlined within the OMP will assist with control of this occurrence and will reduce competition with planted seedlings. Specific management recommendations for controlling these weeds are presented in Table 4.1 below. Refer to Table 3.2 for identification of which sites these noxious and other weeds were present at. Management actions listed below should be implemented at those sites.

Table 4.1: Recommended management actions for noxious and other weeds

Botanical name Common name Action

Noxious weeds

Hypericum perforatum St John’s Wort Targeted spraying

Physical removal (manual), Opuntia spp. Prickly Pear targeted herbicide application (foliar or basal bark/cut stump)

Rubus ulmifolius Blackberry Targeted spraying

Senecio madagascariensis Fireweed Targeted spraying

Bathurst/South Selective herbicide application, Xanthium spp. American/Californian/ Cockle Burrs strategic slashing.

Exotics (other) – dominants

Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Monitor, minimise further ground disturbance. Implement pre-planting weed control. In large areas this species needs to be slashed before seeds are formed. Isolated infestations can be sprayed.

Vulpia spp. Fescue Grasses Monitor – action may be required if they dominate natives

Trifolium spp. Clovers Monitor – action may be required if they dominate natives

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 68 4.1.5 Future Monitoring Seasonal variation, particularly of grasses and annual herbs, can be expected in vegetation types on the slopes and ranges. It is important to continue monitoring vegetation in spring and autumn to ensure that seasonal species are noted, along with impacts from adverse weather and potential weed emergence.

Recommendations for the 2015 floristic monitoring program are listed below: a) For residual vegetation floristic sites that have had four years worth of data recorded, monitoring of these sites should be reduced to every three years after monitoring occurs in spring 2015. This will allow five years worth of data to be collected for these sites which will provide a baseline condition for these locations. However, should there be a major event such as fire, collection of annual data will need to occur and continue to be monitored annually until a new baseline condition has been established. b) Residual vegetation sites which have been monitored for five consecutive years will then undergo an annual visual inspection for identification of exotic species in order to continue to manage weeds effectively in addition to the three yearly full floristic monitoring. c) Rehabilitation / revegetation sites will continue to be monitored annually.

4.2 LANDSCAPE FUNCTION ANALYSIS AND VEGETATION DYNAM ICS 4.2.1 Landscape function analysis Results from 2014 LFA monitoring were compared against results from previous years’ monitoring in order to identify any sites that were potentially decreasing in terms of LO, stability, infiltration or nutrient cycling. New sites monitored during spring 2014 will form the basis for future monitoring and act as a reference point against which change can be measured.

Generally, LO in analogue sites has remained stable, with 2014 LO indices for each site within 10% of the value recorded in the site’s first year of monitoring. The exception to this is BOB1(A), where LO declined from 0.97 in 2011 to 0.78 in 2014 due to a decline in litter cover and a reduction in the extent of perennial ground cover.

Of the six revegetation/rehabilitation sites that recorded LO values below the minimum analogue value in 2014, all six were rehabilitation sites in either the post-mining open cut rehabilitation area or the Goulburn River rehabilitation domain (OC1(R), OC3(R), OC6(R), AA1(R), GRRD1(R) and GRRD2(R). The low LO in the Acacia ausfeldii translocation plots is not unexpected given the young age of this rehabilitation and the fact that seed was not applied to establish ground cover. The reduction in LO seen at BOB4(R) is likely due to recent ripping and revegetation, as rip lines increased the area of bare soil. It is expected that this will only be temporary and that ground cover will increase.

These results reflect the challenge of establishing stable ground cover and patch diversity in post- mining rehabilitation areas. Applying mulch, and relocating features such as logs and boulders, to rehabilitation areas, may help to increase landscape stability and organisation. However, emphasis should still be on establishing or maintaining perennial ground cover (of the type and extent suitable for the respective vegetation communities). This is supported by the fact that perennial ground cover provided stability and nutrient cycling indices within analogue ranges for all rehabilitation sites.

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 69 4.2.2 Vegetation Dynamics Results from Vegetation Dynamics assessments show that stem densities in modified woodland areas (e.g. Modified White Box Woodland) remain low with between 1-7 trees/ha, even in areas with some natural regeneration. Good structural diversity (low and high shrubs, and tree densities of >100/ha) was observed in OC5(Re) and the pre-1997 rehabilitation site OC6(Re). Ongoing monitoring will track changes in densities as these trees mature and potentially self-thin.

4.2.3 Recommendations Recommendations for the 2015 LFA and Vegetation Dynamics monitoring program follow from the recommendations presented in the 2013 monitoring report: a) A review of existing LFA sites should be undertaken to ensure that sites are located in areas that will undergo revegetation works during 2015 given that the revegetation activities in the offset areas are currently under review. This will allow sites to be established that will be comparable to analogue sites, and enable provision of recommendations based on results for improvement in soil disbursement and vegetation structural dynamics; b) If the BMP/OMP is reviewed during 2015, the current LFA program should be reviewed and sites obtaining little or no change over-time should be removed from the program, or their monitoring frequency reduced. c) Reactively capture data after an event such as significant rainfall or bushfire, to sample any changes in landscape function or vegetation structure; d) Where active regeneration of a site is undertaken, vegetation dynamics data should be collected following revegetation or during the next scheduled monitoring event.

4.3 ACACIA AUSFELDII 4.3.1 Highett Road The average height of mature individuals increased from 1.92 m in 2013 to 2.07 m in 2014, indicating continued growth. However, poor condition ratings and notes recording senescence or snapped stems reflect a continued decline in overall population health. As outlined in the 2013 monitoring report (ELA 2013), this is consistent with the apparent ecology of A. ausfeldii being a short-lived pioneer species.

4.3.2 Acacia ausfeldii translocation Data collected during spring 2014 will form the baseline for monitoring of the populations of Acacia ausfeldii within the two post-mining Open Cut translocation plots. Results indicate that there has been successful germination of A. ausfeldii seedlings from the topsoil seed bank and sub-soil root zone, and that these are developing into healthy saplings.

While the 50 individuals assessed in plot AA1 were individuals large enough to be tagged, it was observed that plot AA2 had a large number of very small seedlings in addition to the 50 that were assessed. This suggests that these areas are progressing towards, if not already, meeting the BMP requirement (Table 2.9) of a minimum of 150 plants.

Results from the Point Centred Quarter also indicate the difference in density of A. ausfeldii between the two plots, with AA2 having an estimated 6.5 times the density of recruits than AA1. However, it is expected that as the individuals in AA2 mature, there will also be natural attrition, resulting in a reduction in density. A. ausfeldii density in plot AA1 is approximately 1 plant per 25 m2, while the density of recruits in AA2 is greater than 1 plant per 5 m2 (the target density for A. ausfeldii plantings outlined in the BMP).

© ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIA P T Y L T D 70 4.3.3 Literature Review ELA completed a literature review of the ecology of Ausfeld’s Wattle during 2014 on behalf of UCML. The results of the review showed that the decline in overall health and abundance of the individuals present within the stand of Ausfeld’s Wattle located along the eastern side of Highett Road is consistent with the ecology of the species.

4.3.4 Open Cut Rehabilitation In addition to the translocation plots in the Open Cut, Ausfeld’s Wattle has been seen naturally regenerating within rehabilitation areas completed in 2013. A floristic monitoring site will be located within the 2013 rehabilitation areas during 2015.

4.4 PIVOT FENCE TREE-LINE MONITORING A number of sites showed evidence of stock disturbance during the monitoring surveys as well as damage to fencing and gates. In order to assist tree plantings to successfully establish, stock should be removed and excluded from these areas. This will require repair to damaged infrastructure and surveillance to ensure that stock do not re-enter these areas.

It is recommended that UCML review options for replanting of these areas to meet the requirements of the Salinity Offset Area and to enable the reestablishment of these areas to be sustainable over time.

5 References

Biodiversity Monitoring Services (2013) Ecological Monitoring Program for Ulan Mine 2012 – Terrestrial Fauna and Habitats. Report to Ulan Underground Coal Mine. January 2013.

Braun-Blanquet, J. (1927) Pflanzensoziologie. Springer, Vienna.

Brown, Enright & Miller 2003, Seed production and germination in two rare and three common co- occurring Acacia species from south-east Australia. Austral Ecology 28, 271-280.

Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) (2014) Daily Weather Observation, Gulgong: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW2054.latest.shtml

Burrow, G.E. (1999) A survey of 25 remnant vegetation sites in the South Western Slopes, New South Wales. Cunninghamia 6(2):283-314.

Eco Logical Australia (2012) Ulan Coal Mines Limited 2011 Annual Monitoring Report. Unpublished report prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

Eco Logical Australia (2013) Ulan Coal Mines Limited 2012 Annual Monitoring Report. Unpublished report prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

Eco Logical Australia (2014) Ulan Coal Mines Limited 2013 Annual Monitoring Report. Unpublished report prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

Eco Logical Australia (2014b) Highett & Marshall Road Vegetation Mapping. Unpublished report prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

Harden G (ed.) (1992) Flora of NSW Volume 2, UNSW Press, Sydney.

Harden G (ed.) (1993) Flora of NSW Volume 4, UNSW Press, Sydney.

Harden G. (ed.) (2002) Flora of New South Wales, Volume 2 revised edition, UNSW Press.

Orscheg, C.K. and Enright, N.J. (2011). ‘Patterns of seed longevity and dormancy in obligate seeding legumes of box-ironbark forests, south-eastern Australia’. Austral Ecology. 36: 185-194.

Poore, M. E. D. (1955) The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations. I. The Braun- Blanquet system. Journal of Ecology 42: 216-224.

Schneeman, B. and McElhinny, C. 2012. ‘Shrubby today but not tomorrow? Structure, composition and regeneration dynamics of direct seeded revegetation’. Ecological Management & Restoration. 13(3): 282-289.

The Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust (2012) PlantNET – the Plant Information Network System of The Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Sydney, Australia (version 2.0). http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au

Tongway, D.J. and Hindley, N.L. (2005) Landscape Function Analysis: Procedures for monitoring and assessing landscapes with special reference to mine sites and rangelands. CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Canberra, ACT.

Warde, W. and Petranka, J. W. (1981) A Correction Factor Table for Missing Point-Centred Quarter Data. Ecology. 62(2): 491-494

Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2009) Ulan Coal - Continued Operations Ecological Assessment. Appendix 8 of the Environmental Assessment. Report prepared for Ulan Coal.

Appendix A: Flora List

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Malvaceae Abutilon sp. Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia ausfeldii Ausfeld’s Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia baileyana Cootamundra Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia deanei Green Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia decora Western Silver Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia doratoxylon Lancewood Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia flexifolia Bent-leaf Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia gladiiformis Sword Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia implexa Hickory Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia leucolobia Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia linearifolia Narrow-leaved Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia paradoxa Kangaroo Thorn Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia penninervis Hickory Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia sp. Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia verniciflua Varnish Wattle Native Rosaceae Acaena ovina Native Rosaceae Acaena sp. Native Polygonaceae Acetosella vulgaris Sorrel Native Orchidaceae Acianthus sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Acrotriche rigida Native Pteridaceae Adiantum sp. Native Poaceae Aira cupaniana Exotic Poaceae Aira sp. Exotic Lamiaceae Ajuga australis Austral Bugle Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina diminuta Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina gymnanthera Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina luehmannii Bulloak Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina sp. Lesser Joyweed Native Amaranthaceae Alternanthera denticulata Native Amaranthaceae Amaranthaceae sp. Native Loranthaceae Amyema miquelii Native Loranthaceae Amyema sp. Native Myrsinaceae Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel Exotic Myrtaceae Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple Native Poaceae Aristida ramosa Purple Wiregrass Native Poaceae Aristida sp. Native Poaceae Aristida vagans Threeawn Speargrass Native Poaceae Aristida warburgii Native Anthericaceae Arthropodium minus Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Poaceae Arundinella nepalensis Reedgrass Native Rubiaceae Asperula conferta Common Woodruff Native Asteraceae Asteraceae spp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Astroloma humifusum Native Cranberry Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Astroloma sp. Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia spp. Wallaby Grass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia eriantha Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia monticola Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia pilosa Smooth-flower Wallaby Grass Native

Austrodanthonia racemosa Poaceae var. racemosa Native Poaceae Austrostipa densiflora Native Poaceae Austrostipa aristiglumis Plains Grass Native Poaceae Austrostipa scabra Speargrass Native

Austrostipa scabra subsp. Speargrass Poaceae falcata Native Poaceae Austrostipa spp. Native Poaceae Austrostipa verticillata Native Myrtaceae Baeckea sp. Native Cyperaceae Baumea sp. Native Asteraceae Bidens pilosa Cobblers Pegs Exotic Pittosporaceae Billardiera scandens Hairy Apple Berry Native Rutaceae Boronia ledifolia Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea buxifolia Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea obcordata Spiny Bossiaea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea prostrata Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea sp. Native Poaceae Bothriochloa macra Red Grass Native Poaceae Bothriochloa sp. Red Grass Native Sterculiaceae Brachychiton populneus Kurrajong Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Brachyloma daphnoides Daphne Heath Native Poaceae Briza minor Shivery Grass Exotic Poaceae Bromus diandrus Great Brome Exotic Poaceae Bromus molliformis Soft Brome Exotic Pittosporaceae Bursaria sp. Native Pittosporaceae Bursaria spinosa Blackthorn Native Myrtaceae Callistemon pinifolius Pine-leaved Bottlebrush Native Cupressaceae Callitris endlicheri Black Cypress Pine Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneata Mountain Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneifolia Purple Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis lappulacea Yellow Burr-daisy Native Myrtaceae Calytrix tetragona Common Fringe-myrtle Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Brassicaceae Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's Purse Exotic Cyperaceae Carex appressa Tall Sedge Native Cyperaceae Carex inversa Native Cyperaceae Carex sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Exotic Asteraceae Carthamus sp. Exotic Caryophyllaceae Caryophyllaceae sp. Exotic Asteraceae Cassinia arcuata Sifton Bush Native Asteraceae Cassinia quinquefaria Native Asteraceae Cassinia sp. Native Casuarinaceae Casuarina cunninghamiana Native Casuarinaceae Casuarina sp. Native Asteraceae Centaurea melitensis Maltese Cockspur Exotic Caryophyllaceae Cerastium glomeratum Exotic Adiantaceae Cheilanthes austrotenuifolia Rock Fern Native Adiantaceae Cheilanthes sieberi Native Adiantaceae Cheilanthes sp. Native Amaranthaceae - Goosefoot Chenopodioideae Chenopodium sp. Native Poaceae Chloris sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Chloris truncata Windmill Grass Native Poaceae Chloris ventricosa Plump Windmill Grass Native Asteraceae Chrysocephalum apiculatum Common Everlasting Native

Chrysocephalum Clustered Everlasting Asteraceae semipapposum Native Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle Exotic Poaceae Cleistochloa rigida Native Asteraceae Conyza sp. Fleabane Exotic Rutaceae Correa reflexa Common Correa Native Myrtaceae Corymbia maculata Native Crassulaceae Crassula colorata Native Crassulaceae Crassula sp. Native/Exotic Orchidaceae Cryptostylis sp. Native Asteraceae Cymbonotus lawsonianus Bears-ear Native Poaceae Cymbopogon refractus Barbed Wire Grass Native Poaceae Cynodon dactylon Couch Native Boraginaceae Cynoglossum sp. Native/Exotic Cyperaceae Cyperus sp. Native/Exotic Apiaceae Daucus glochidiatus Australian Carrot Native Apiaceae Daucus sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium varians Slender Tick-trefoil Native Phormiaceae Dianella longifolia Blueberry Lily Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Phormiaceae Dianella revoluta Blueberry Lily Native Phormiaceae Dianella sp. Native Poaceae Dichanthium sericeum Queensland Bluegrass Native Poaceae Dichelachne micrantha Shorthair Plumegrass Native Poaceae Dichelachne sp. Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra repens Kidney Weed Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra sp. A sensu Native Poaceae Digitaria breviglumis Native Poaceae Digitaria brownii Cotton Panic Grass Native Poaceae Digitaria diffusa Open Summer-grass Native Poaceae Digitaria parviflora Small-flowered Finger Grass Native Poaceae Digitaria sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Dillwynia sericea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Dillwynia sp. Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea sp. Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea triangularis Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea viscosa Sticky Hop-bush Native

Dodonaea viscosa subsp. Wedge-leaf Hop-bush Sapindaceae cuneata Native Droseraceae Drosera sp. Native Poaceae Echinopogon caespitosus Bushy Hedgehog-grass Native Poaceae Echinopogon ovatus Forest Hedgehog Grass Native Poaceae Echinopogon sp. Native Boraginaceae Echium plantagineum Paterson's Curse Exotic Boraginaceae Echium vulgare Vipers Bugloss Exotic Chenopodiaceae Einadia hastata Berry Saltbush Native Chenopodiaceae Einadia nutans Climbing Saltbush Native Chenopodiaceae Einadia polygonoides Native Chenopodiaceae Einadia sp. Native Poaceae Elymus scaber Native Poaceae Enteropogon acicularis Native Poaceae Entolasia sp. Native Poaceae Entolasia stricta Wiry Panic Native Poaceae Eragrostis benthamii Native Poaceae Eragrostis cilianensis Stink Grass Exotic Poaceae Eragrostis ciliaris Exotic Poaceae Eragrostis leptostachya Native Poaceae Eragrostis sp. Native Poaceae Eriochloa procera Native Geraniaceae Erodium crinitum Blue Storksbill Native Geraniaceae Erodium sp. Native/Exotic Myrtaceae Eucalyptus agglomerata Blue-leaved Stringybark Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus albens White Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus biturbinata Grey Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus blakelyi Blakely's Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus crebra Narrow-leaved Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus dwyeri Dwyer's Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus fibrosa Broad-leaved Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus macrorhyncha Red Stringybark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus melliodora Yellow Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus microcarpa Grey Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus moluccana Grey Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus parramattensis Parramatta Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus punctata Grey Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus rossii Inland Scribbly Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sparsifolia Narrow-leaved Ironbark Native Asteraceae Euchiton sp. Native Asteraceae Euchiton sphaericus Native Poaceae Eulalia aurea Native Santalaceae Exocarpos strictus Pale-fruit Ballart Native Cyperaceae Fimbristylis dichotoma Common Fringe-sedge Native Cyperaceae Gahnia aspera Rough Saw-sedge Native Rubiaceae Galium leptogonium Native Asteraceae Gamochaeta calviceps Cudweed Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta purpurea Purple Cudweed Exotic Geraniaceae Geranium solanderi Native Geranium Native Geraniaceae Geranium sp. Native/Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine clandestina Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine s sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Gompholobium huegelii Pale Wedge Pea Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus elatus Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus sp. Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus tetragynus Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus teucrioides Raspwort Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia hederacea Forest Goodenia Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia pinnatifida Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia sp. Native Proteaceae Grevillea ramosissima Native Proteaceae Grevillea sericea Pink Spider Flower Native Proteaceae Grevillea sp. Native Proteaceae Grevillea tritonata Native Proteaceae Hakea dactyloides Native Proteaceae Hakea sp. Native Haloragaceae Haloragis heterophylla Rough Raspwort Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Haloragaceae Haloragis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Hardenbergia violacea Purple Coral Pea Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia circumdans Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia diffusa Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia obtusifolia Hoary Guinea Flower Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia riparia Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia sp. Native Poaceae Hordeum sp. Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Hovea heterophylla Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Hovea sp. Native Apiaceae Hydrocotyle laxiflora Stinking Pennywort Native Clusiaceae Hypericum gramineum Small St John's Wort Native Clusiaceae Hypericum perforatum St John's Wort Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris radicata Catsear Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Indigofera sp. Native/Exotic Proteaceae Isopogon petiolaris Native Proteaceae Isopogon sp. Native Poaceae Joycea pallida Silvertop Wallaby Grass Native Juncaceae Juncus sp. Native Juncaceae Juncus usitatus Native Myrtaceae Kunzea parvifolia Native Asteraceae Lactuca serriola Exotic Anthericaceae Laxmannia gracilis Slender Wire Lily Native Brassicaceae Lepidium sp. Native/Exotic Cyperaceae Lepidosperma laterale Native Cyperaceae Lepidosperma sp. Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum arachnoides Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum parvifolium Native Leptospermum Tantoon Myrtaceae polygalifolium Native Leptospermum polygalifolium subsp. Myrtaceae transmontanum Native

Leptospermum Myrtaceae sphaerocarpum Native Restionaceae Lepyrodia scariosa Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon attenuatus Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon muticus Blunt Beard-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Lissanthe sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Lissanthe strigosa Peach Heath Native Poaceae Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass Exotic Poaceae Lolium sp. Exotic Lomandraceae Lomandra confertifolia Mat-rush Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Lomandraceae Lomandra filiformis Wattle Mat-rush Native

Lomandra filiformis subsp. Wattle Mat-rush Lomandraceae coriacea Native

Lomandra filiformis subsp. Pale Mat-rush Lomandraceae filiformis Native Lomandraceae Lomandra glauca Wattle Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra leucocephala Native Lomandraceae Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra multiflora Many-flowered Mat-rush Native

Lomandra multiflora subsp. Many-flowered Mat-rush Lomandraceae multiflora Native Juncaceae Luzula sp. Native Zamiaceae Macrozamia sp. Native Zamiaceae Macrozamia spiralis Native Zamiaceae Macrozamia subsecundus Native Chenopodiaceae Maireana decalvans Native Lamiaceae Marrubium vulgare White Horehound Exotic Myrtaceae Melaleuca thymifolia Thyme Honey-myrtle Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus erubescens Ruby Urn Heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus urceolatus Urn-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melicytus dentatus Native Lamiaceae Mentha satureioides Native Pennyroyal Native Poaceae Microlaena stipoides Weeping Grass Native Malvaceae Modiola caroliniana Red-flowered Mallow Exotic Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca elliptica Tree Broom-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca scoparia Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca sp. Native Brassicaceae Mustard sp. Exotic Asteraceae Olearia elliptica Sticky Daisy-bush Native Lamiaceae Oncinocalyx betchei Native Rubiaceae Opercularia diphylla Native Rubiaceae Opercularia hispida Native Cactaceae Opuntia stricta Prickly Pear Exotic Oxalidaceae Oxalis perennans Native Oxalidaceae Oxalis sp. Native Poaceae Panicum effusum Hairy Panic Native Scrophulariaceae Parentucellia sp. Exotic Caryophyllaceae Paronychia brasiliana Chilean Whitlow Wort Exotic Poaceae Paspalidium sp. Native Poaceae Paspalum dilatatum Paspalum Exotic Poaceae Paspalum sp. Paspalum Exotic Iridaceae Patersonia sericea Silky Purple-Flag Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Poaceae Pennisetum clandestinum Kikuyu Grass Exotic Proteaceae Persoonia curvifolia Native Proteaceae Persoonia linearis Narrow-leaved Geebung Native Caryophyllaceae Petrorhagia nanteuilii Exotic Caryophyllaceae Petrorhagia sp. Exotic Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus gunnii Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus hirtellus Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus occidentalis Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus sp. Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus virgatus Native Thymelaeaceae Pimelea sp. Rice Flower Native Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata Lamb's Tongues Exotic Plantaginaceae Plantago sp. Native/Exotic Apiaceae Platysace ericoides Native Apiaceae Platysace linearifolia Native Poaceae Poa labillardierei Tussock Grass Native Poaceae Poaceae sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Podolepis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Podolobium ilicifolium Prickly Shaggy Pea Native Caryophyllaceae Polycarpon sp. Exotic Rhamnaceae Pomaderris ferruginea Native Rhamnaceae Pomaderris sp. Native Rubiaceae Pomax umbellata Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera corymbosa Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera microphylla Native Portulacaceae Portulaca sp. Native Portulacaceae Portulaca oleracea Native Orchidaceae Prasophyllum sp. Native Orchidaceae Pterostylis revoluta Native Orchidaceae Pterostylis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea cinerascens Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea cunninghamii Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea microphylla Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea sp. Native Rosaceae Rubus sp. Native/Exotic Rosaceae Rubus ulmifolius Exotic Polygonaceae Rumex brownii Swamp Dock Native Polygonaceae Rumex dumosus Native Polygonaceae Rumex sp. Native/Exotic Lamiaceae Salvia reflexa Exotic Lamiaceae Salvia verbenaca Exotic Myrtaceae Sannantha cunninghamii Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Cyperaceae Schoenus apogon Common Bog-rush Native Cyperaceae Schoenus imberbis Native Cyperaceae Schoenus sp. Native Asteraceae Senecio madagascariensis Fireweed Exotic Asteraceae Senecio sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Setaria pumila Pale Pigeon Grass Exotic Malvaceae Sida corrugata Corrugated Sida Native Malvaceae Sida sp. Exotic Asteraceae Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle Exotic Brassicaceae Sisymbrium sp. Exotic Iridaceae Sisyrinchium sp. A. sensu Scourweed Exotic Solanaceae Solanum nigrum Black-berry Nightshade Exotic Solanaceae Solanum sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle Exotic Asteraceae Sonchus sp. Exotic Poaceae Sporobolus creber Western Rat-tail Grass Native Poaceae Sporobolus elongatus Slender Rat's Tail Grass Native Poaceae Sporobolus sp. Native Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia muricata Western Stackhousia Native Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia triflora Pink Five-Corners Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia tubiflora Red Five-Corner Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona galegifolia Smooth Darling-pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona sp. Native Asteraceae Tagetes minuta Stinking Roger Exotic Asteraceae Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Exotic Poaceae Themeda australis Kangaroo Grass Native Anthericaceae Tricoryne elatior Yellow Rush-lily Native Anthericaceae Tricoryne sp. Native Asteraceae Trifolium arvense Haresfoot Clover Exotic Asteraceae Trifolium campestre Hop Clover Exotic Asteraceae Trifolium repens White Repens Exotic Asteraceae Trifolium scabrum Rough Clover Exotic Asteraceae Trifolium sp. Exotic Asteraceae Triptilodiscus pygmaeus Common Sunray Native Urticaceae Urtica incisa Stinging Nettle Native Scrophulariaceae Verbascum sp. Exotic Verbenaceae Verbena bonariensis Purpletop Exotic Scrophulariaceae Veronica plebeia Trailing Speedwell Native Asteraceae Vittadinia cervicularis Native Asteraceae Vittadinia cuneata Fuzzweed Native

Family Scientific name Common name Native/Exotic

Asteraceae Vittadinia muelleri Native Asteraceae Vittadinia sp. Native Asteraceae Vittadinia sulcata Native Poaceae Vulpia bromoides Native Poaceae Vulpia sp. Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia communis Tufted Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia gracilis Sprawling Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia luteola Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia sp. Native Asteraceae Xanthium pungens Exotic Asteraceae Xanthium spinosum Bathurst Burr Native Asteraceae Xanthium sp. Native Xanthorrhoeaceae Xanthorrhoea johnsonii Johnson's Grass Tree Native Asteraceae Xerochrysum bracteatum Golden Everlasting Native

HEAD OFFICE SYDNEY ST GEORGES BASIN Suite 4, Level 1 Level 6 8/128 Island Point Road 2-4 Merton Street 299 Sussex Street St Georges Basin NSW 2540 Sutherland NSW 2232 Sydney NSW 2000 T 02 4443 5555 T 02 8536 8600 T 02 8536 8650 F 02 4443 6655 F 02 9542 5622 F 02 9264 0717

CANBERRA NEWCASTLE NAROOMA Level 2 Suite 17, Level 4 5/20 Canty Street 11 London Circuit 19 Bolton Street Narooma NSW 2546 Canberra ACT 2601 Newcastle NSW 2300 T 02 4476 1151 T 02 6103 0145 T 02 4910 0125 F 02 4476 1161 F 02 6103 0148 F 02 4910 0126

COFFS HARBOUR ARMIDALE MUDGEE 35 Orlando Street 92 Taylor Street Unit 1, Level 1 Coffs Harbour Jetty NSW 2450 Armidale NSW 2350 79 Market Street T 02 6651 5484 T 02 8081 2681 Mudgee NSW 2850 F 02 6651 6890 F 02 6772 1279 T 02 4302 1230 F 02 6372 9230

PERTH WOLLONGONG GOSFORD Suite 1 & 2 Suite 204, Level 2 Suite 5, Baker One 49 Ord Street 62 Moore Street 1-5 Baker Street West Perth WA 6005 Austinmer NSW 2515 Gosford NSW 2250 T 08 9227 1070 T 02 4201 2200 T 02 4302 1220 F 08 9322 1358 F 02 4268 4361 F 02 4322 2897