Appendix 11 Flora & Fauna Assessment Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited
Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations: Flora and Fauna Assessment
July 2003
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1.1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 1.1 1.2 PROJECT AREA ...... 1.1 1.3 PREVIOUS SURVEYS ...... 1.1 1.4 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT...... 1.1
2.0 METHODS ...... 2.1 2.1 PREVIOUS STUDIES ...... 2.1 2.1.1 1992 South Bulga Colliery EIS ...... 2.1 2.1.2 1999 Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS ...... 2.1 2.1.3 2000 South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS ...... 2.2 2.1.4 2001 Beltana No. 1 EIS ...... 2.3 2.1.5 2002 Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS ...... 2.4 2.2 CURRENT SURVEY...... 2.4 2.2.1 Flora...... 2.4 2.2.2 Fauna...... 2.5 2.3 SURVEY EFFORT IN THE PROJECT AREA...... 2.7
3.0 FLORA OF THE PROJECT AREA...... 3.1 3.1 VEGETATION OF THE REGION ...... 3.1 3.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ...... 3.1 3.2.1 Mixed Eucalypt Woodland ...... 3.1 3.2.2 Ironbark/Spotted Gum Woodland ...... 3.2 3.2.3 Grey Box/Grey Gum/Spotted Gum Woodland...... 3.2 3.2.4 Woodland (Dry Rainforest Elements) ...... 3.2 3.2.5 Casuarina Woodland ...... 3.3 3.2.6 Warkworth Sands Woodland ...... 3.3 3.2.7 Pastoral Grassland ...... 3.3 3.2.8 Aquatic Vegetation...... 3.3 3.2.9 Cropland...... 3.4 3.3 THREATENED FLORA SPECIES...... 3.4 3.4 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF THREATENED FLORA...... 3.4 3.5 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF ENDANGERED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES ...... 3.5
4.0 FAUNA OF THE PROJECT AREA...... 4.1 4.1 GENERAL FAUNA HABITAT ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Pastoral Grassland Habitat...... 4.1 4.1.2 Aquatic Habitat...... 4.1 4.1.3 Woodland Habitat ...... 4.1
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 i Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Table of Contents
4.2 SITE RECORDS ...... 4.2 4.2.1 Avifauna ...... 4.2 4.2.2 Herpetofauna ...... 4.2 4.2.3 Mammals...... 4.3 4.3 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES ...... 4.3 4.3.1 Masked Owl – Tyto novaehollandiae...... 4.3 4.3.2 Speckled Warbler – Pyrrholaemus sagittatus...... 4.3 4.3.3 Grey-crowned Babbler – Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis ...... 4.3 4.3.4 Hooded Robin - Melanodryas cucullata cucullata ...... 4.3 4.3.5 Diamond Firetail – Stagonopleura guttata ...... 4.4 4.3.6 Eastern Freetail Bat - Mormopterus norfolkensis ...... 4.4 4.3.7 Common Bent-wing Bat – Miniopterus schreibersii...... 4.4 4.4 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF THREATENED FAUNA...... 4.4
5.0 IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL...... 5.1 5.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY...... 5.1 5.1.1 Underground Mining ...... 5.1 5.1.2 Surface Infrastructure ...... 5.1 5.1.3 Habitat Creation and Conservation...... 5.1 5.2 IMPACT ON FLORA...... 5.2 5.2.1 Underground Mining Area...... 5.2 5.2.2 Surface Facilities...... 5.3 5.3 IMPACT ON FAUNA HABITAT...... 5.3 5.3.1 Underground Mining Area...... 5.3 5.3.2 Surface Infrastructure ...... 5.4 5.4 IMPACT ON THREATENED SPECIES...... 5.4 5.4.1 Commonwealth Legislation...... 5.4 5.4.2 State Legislation ...... 5.6
6.0 MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS ...... 6.1 6.1 GENERAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ...... 6.1 6.1.1 Management of Endemic Fauna Species...... 6.1 6.2 MANAGEMENT OF WARKWORTH SANDS WOODLAND...... 6.2 6.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF PASTURE ...... 6.2 6.4 ESTABLISHMENT OF VEGETATION AND FAUNA MOVEMENT CORRIDORS AND A VOLUNTARY CONSERVATION AREA...... 6.3 6.5 RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF RIPARIAN VEGETATION ...... 6.5 6.6 ESTABLISHMENT OF AQUATIC HABITAT ...... 6.5 6.7 MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE ...... 6.5 6.7.1 Threatened Species Monitoring...... 6.5 6.7.2 Revegetation Monitoring...... 6.6 6.7.3 Vegetation and Fauna Movement Corridor Monitoring...... 6.7
7.0 REFERENCES...... 7.1
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 ii Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Table of Contents
FIGURES
1.1 Locality Plan ...... 1.1
1.2 Aerial View of the Project Area...... 1.1
1.3 Proposed Conceptual Mining Area and Infrastructure...... 1.1
2.1 Survey Areas...... 2.1
2.2 Current Survey Effort (Umwelt 2002) ...... 2.4
3.1 Vegetation Communities and Threatened Species Locations...... 3.1
5.1 Areas of Disturbance ...... 5.1
5.2 Proposed Habitat Corridors and Conservation Area ...... 5.1
6.1 Monitoring Locations ...... 6.5
APPENDICES
A Flora Species List
B Fauna Species List
C Eight Part Tests
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 iii Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited (BCM) plans to develop the Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations (the project) in an area formerly approved for mining within the existing Bulga Complex mining lease boundary, and in additional areas to the west and southeast of Bulga Complex (Figure 1.1). The project will involve underground mining, establishment of additional surface infrastructure and continued use of existing infrastructure.
Bulga Complex is located approximately 12 kilometres southwest of Singleton, 1 kilometre north of Broke and 1.5 kilometres east of Bulga, in the upper Hunter Valley of New South Wales (Figure 1.1). BCM operates the Bulga Complex which comprises three existing coal mining operations: the South Bulga Colliery (SBC); Bulga Open Cut Mine (BOC); and Beltana No.1 Underground Mine (Beltana) (Figure 1.2). The Complex also includes associated coal preparation and rail transportation facilities.
The objectives of the project are to:
provide access to the coal resource for the next 27 years;
improve efficiency of underground coal extraction;
maximise the use of existing infrastructure;
maintain continuity of coal production and provide ongoing employment opportunities; and
conduct mining in an environmentally responsible manner.
It is proposed to achieve these objectives by:
underground mining in up to four seams with annual production of up to 14 Mt, with maximum Bulga Complex production of up to 15 Mtpa;
construction of new amenities, offices, overland coal conveyors and associated transfer stockpiles;
continued use of the existing coal handling and preparation plant (CHPP) and rail loading facilities at increased production levels; and
planning for decommissioning and rehabilitation of the Bulga Complex on completion of mining.
1.2 PROJECT AREA
The project area for the flora and fauna assessment includes the Bulga Complex (5,128 hectares), approximately 340 hectares of agricultural land to be undermined to the west of the Bulga Complex and approximately 160 hectares to be undermined to the southeast of Bulga Complex (Figure 1.3). The area to the west of Bulga Complex is privately- owned land utilised for agricultural activity. The area to the southeast is Commonwealth land utilised for defence purposes (Singleton Army Training Area).
1.3 PREVIOUS SURVEYS
Five recent surveys of the project area have been incorporated into this flora and fauna assessment (refer to Section 2.1).
The methods used during these surveys are outlined in Section 2.3. The descriptions of flora and fauna of the project area are consolidated in Sections 3 and 4, respectively.
1.4 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
This flora and fauna assessment has been prepared by Umwelt to provide information about the potential impact of the proposal on native flora and fauna occurring in the project area. Vegetation communities, flora and fauna species and fauna habitat present in the project area have been identified. The assessment also addresses potential impacts on any threatened species that may occur in, or in the general vicinity of the project area.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 1.1
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Introduction
The objectives of the flora and fauna assessment were to:
record the flora and fauna communities in the project area;
identify any threatened or regionally significant flora and fauna, particularly those listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (NSW) and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth);
assess the impact that the project would have on the flora and fauna communities recorded in the project area; and
provide management recommendations to minimise flora and fauna impacts associated with the project.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 1.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
2.0 METHODS
The results of the recent fieldwork in the current survey area and previous studies conducted throughout the project area (Figure 2.1), have been combined to present a comprehensive record of all flora and fauna recorded in the project area. Vegetation communities (Section 3.2) were ground-truthed during reconnaissance surveys, and details of species composition from previous studies were analysed to produce a comprehensive assessment of all communities found throughout the project area.
2.1 PREVIOUS STUDIES
Five studies have been recently undertaken throughout the project area as part of the following environmental impact statements (EIS):
South Bulga Colliery EIS (Mitchell McCotter 1992);
Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999);
South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS (ERM 2000);
Beltana No. 1 Underground Coal Mine EIS (Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 2001); and
Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS (HLA-Envirosciences Pty Limited 2002).
These studies each involved a comprehensive flora and fauna assessment of their respective study areas (refer to Figure 2.1).
2.1.1 1992 South Bulga Colliery EIS
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process for the development of SBC (Mitchell McCotter 1992). The study area is outlined in Figure 2.1.
2.1.1.1 Flora
Field studies were undertaken on the site to identify vegetation patterns on an association basis. Associations were defined as a series of plant communities that have the same structural characteristics and the same species as dominants in the uppermost stratum. The majority of plant species were identified on site, with some further off-site verification required. Reference was made to flora surveys carried out on the mine area and surrounding land for the environmental impact statements prepared for the Saxonvale Mine and Bulga Mine (BHP 1980; Mitchell McCotter 1990).
2.1.1.2 Fauna
A list of fauna species known or expected to occur on the mine area was compiled from two previous studies of the SBC area and adjacent area: Saxonvale Mine Development EIS (BHP 1980); and Bulga Coal Project EIS (Mitchell McCotter 1990). These two previous studies were prepared from knowledge of the habitats present and the findings of a number of local fauna studies. At the time of writing (1992), only two of these species were considered “vulnerable and rare”. Potential habitat for the threatened Spotted-tailed Quoll (Dasyurus maculatus) and the threatened Brush-tailed Rock Wallaby (Petrogale penicillata) was considered to occur on the site.
Currently a total of eight of the species listed in the 1992 assessment as “known or expected to occur on the mine area” are considered to be threatened, and all have been assessed in this report under the provisions of the eight part test (Appendix C).
2.1.2 1999 Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process for continued operation of BOC (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999). The study area was west of Broke Road from the Bulga Pit in the north to the proposed overburden emplacement area in the south (refer to Figure 2.1).
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.1
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
2.1.2.1 Flora
Flora field investigations were conducted over six days in January, July, November and December 1997, and January and February 1998. These investigations were supplemented by a search of the NSW Rare or Threatened Australian Plants database (ROTAP) for the Cessnock 1:100000 map sheet and a literature review.
Vegetation analysis involved a general description of the plant communities using qualitative field observations. Field surveys involved the sampling of distinct vegetation communities within 20 metre x 20 metre sampling quadrats and along transects. Surveys were concentrated in areas of remnant and/or regenerating native vegetation. The effects of seasonality were reduced by sampling at different times of the year.
2.1.2.2 Fauna
The assessment of fauna occurring, or likely to occur, in the study area was based on: fauna survey involving direct and indirect searches; a search of the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) Atlas of NSW Wildlife database for the Cessnock 1:100000 map sheet; and a literature review of local studies.
Field fauna surveys were undertaken in representative habitat over January, July, November and December 1997, and January and February 1998. Surveys were undertaken over different seasons to limit the effects of seasonality, and to target threatened species detectable at certain times of the year, in particular microchiropteran bats and the Green and Golden Bell Frog. Species were sampled by: opportunistic survey at each of the survey areas; hair sampling tubes set in woodland habitat for 13 nights; spotlighting along foot transects and from a vehicle through open paddocks for a total of 13 person hours; diurnal bird observation; broadcast of pre-recorded Masked Owl and Powerful Owl calls; collection of scats and searches for tracks and scratch marks; diurnal ground searches; and recording and computer analysis of echolocation calls of microchiropteran bats. Scat and hair analysis was undertaken by Barbara Triggs, a recognised expert in this field.
2.1.3 2000 South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process for a southeast extension to SBC (ERM 2000). The study area was located in the southeastern portion of the project area (refer to Figure 2.1).
2.1.3.1 Flora
Flora assessment conducted for the southeast extension included the proposed mine extension area and an area within the existing mining lease bounded by Broke Road to the west and SBC surface infrastructure to the north. Flora field investigations were conducted over two days on 8 and 9 June 1999. Database searches of the NSW ROTAP database and NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife were conducted for the Cessnock 1:100000 map sheet, aerial photograph analysis was made, and a literature review of local studies was conducted.
Vegetation analysis involved a general description of plant communities using quantitative field observations. Vegetation communities were sampled using 20 metre x 20 metre sampling quadrats and transects. The likelihood of overlooking species was minimised by reviewing other local studies carried out in different seasons over a number of years.
2.1.3.2 Fauna
The assessment of fauna in the southeast extension was based on a fauna survey involving:
direct and indirect searches;
fauna trapping;
opportunistic sightings;
hair tube analysis;
spotlighting;
diurnal bird observations;
broadcast of pre-recorded owl calls;
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
collection of scats;
searches for tracks and scratch marks; and
recording and computer analysis of microchiropteran bat echolocation calls.
In order to supplement the fauna survey a search of the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife database was conducted along with a review of previous studies.
Fauna trapping was conducted over 10 days and 11 nights in March and April 1999. Fifty-five hair sampling tubes were set in woodland habitats between 31 March and 14 April 1999. Traps were placed in trees, logs, under rocks and on the ground.
Fifty-five watt spotlights were used for a total of 10 hours over three nights along foot transects in woodlands, Monkey Place Creek and open paddocks. Nocturnal birds were surveyed during spotlighting and by broadcast of pre-recorded calls of the Masked Owl, Barking Owl and Powerful Owl. Searches were made for indirect evidence of owls such as whitewash and regurgitated pellets.
Diurnal birds were observed opportunistically during other activities, and identified by direct sightings and/or identification of calls. Diurnal ground searches were undertaken for indirect evidence of animals. Scat and hair analysis was undertaken by Barbara Triggs, a recognised expert in this field.
2.1.4 2001 Beltana No. 1 EIS
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process for Beltana (Umwelt 2001). The study area is outlined in Figure 2.1.
2.1.4.1 Flora
Preliminary mapping of the vegetation communities was undertaken using aerial photographs taken in 1997. The NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife was searched, and local studies were reviewed. Fieldwork was undertaken in May 2000 to ground- truth the results of the initial mapping phase. Twelve walking transects were undertaken to determine species composition and the level of disturbance of the vegetation, to identify any threatened species present, and assess habitat quality. The walking transects were approximately 200 metres and 800 metres in length and covered each of the vegetation communities identified.
Nine 20 metre x 20 metre vegetation survey plots were completed in randomly selected areas within each of the vegetation communities. Information was gathered about species abundance and cover, canopy height, crown separation ratio and percentage foliage cover. Eight aquatic vegetation survey points were also completed, where aquatic and fringing vegetation was identified, and information was gathered about community composition, structure and species abundance. Samples of any unknown species were collected and dried for later identification, and were sent to the Royal Botanic Gardens in Sydney for identification if required.
2.1.4.2 Fauna
A search of the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife was conducted, and local studies were reviewed, to identify fauna species known to occur in the area, and to create a list of potentially occurring threatened species. Fieldwork was undertaken over five days during May 2000.
Four owl call playback sessions were conducted; the calls of the Powerful Owl, Masked Owl, Sooty Owl and Barking Owl were played, following the same methodology as outlined in Section 2.2.2.1. A further 16 person hours of spotlighting was completed, during which nocturnal birds were targeted. Spotlighting was generally undertaken between 6.00 pm and 11.00 pm
Diurnal bird surveys were conducted over five days, during both the morning and evening, for a total of 14 person hours.
Targeted diurnal searches were conducted for reptile and amphibian species in likely habitat areas throughout the project area. Nine search areas were sampled for a total of 6.5 person hours. A total of five nocturnal person hours were completed, with approximately 45 minutes of recordings taken for later analysis.
Mammals in the project area were identified through: trapping; hair funnels; spotlighting; scat searches; and ultrasonic bat recordings. Trapping was undertaken over four nights, with 160 trap nights of Elliot class ‘A’, 40 trap nights of Elliot class ‘B’, eight trap nights of cage traps, and 40 trap nights of hair funnels. Hair funnels were also used both on the ground and mounted on trees, with the majority on trees.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.3 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
Searches for evidence of mammal use were conducted, with scats collected and analysed as required. Six 45 minute duration ultrasonic bat detection transects were conducted using the Anabat II system developed by Titley Electronics, Ballina NSW.
2.1.5 2002 Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS
A flora and fauna assessment was undertaken as part of the environmental impact assessment process for the proposed Redbank 2 Power Plant (HLA-Envirosciences 2002). The study area is outlined in Figure 2.1.
A search of the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife was conducted, and local studies were reviewed, to identify flora and fauna species and vegetation communities known to occur in the area.
2.1.5.1 Flora
Detailed field survey was conducted on 19 October 2001 and 20 June 2002. Eleven 20 metre x 20 metre vegetation plots were surveyed in the broad vegetation communities defined by aerial photography. Vegetation communities were described using a pro forma based on the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy system (NPWS 2000).
2.1.5.2 Fauna
Field survey was conducted in October 2001. Small terrestrial mammals were surveyed by setting three transects of 25 Elliot ‘A’ traps, spaced approximately 10 metres apart. Medium sized arboreal mammals were surveyed by placing eight Elliot ‘B’ traps approximately 2 metres above the ground on the trunks of hollow-bearing trees. A total of 225 trap nights of Elliot ‘A’ traps, and 24 trap nights of Elliot ‘B’ traps was undertaken.
Bat echolocation calls were recorded for 30 minutes on each of four consecutive nights. Nocturnal amphibian surveys were conducted for 30 minutes on each night. Spotlighting was undertaken for at least one hour on each night. Calls of the Squirrel Glider, Masked Owl, Barking Owl and Powerful Owl were played through a megaphone, followed by quiet listening for any response. Searches of likely microhabitat areas were made for reptiles. Bird surveys were conducted for 30 minute periods during both the morning and at midday. All evidence of fauna species was noted, such as bone, feathers and scats.
2.2 CURRENT SURVEY
Flora and fauna fieldwork in the part of the project area not previously surveyed was undertaken by Umwelt from 4 to 7 November 2002. The fieldwork concentrated on the previously unsurveyed area to the west of Bulga Complex (372 hectares) (the survey area) (Figure 2.1). Small mammal trapping, bird surveys, reptile and amphibian searches, bat recording, owl call playback, spotlighting and intensive vegetation surveys were undertaken in this area (Section 2.1). During this period, reconnaissance vegetation, bird, reptile and amphibian surveys were conducted throughout the rest of the project area. Reconnaissance surveys were considered adequate as intensive flora and fauna surveys have been carried out throughout this area in recent years by HLA-Envirosciences (2002), Umwelt (2001), ERM (2000), ERM Mitchell McCotter (1999) and Mitchell McCotter (1992) (refer to Section 2.1).
2.2.1 Flora
Prior to the commencement of field studies in the survey area, preliminary mapping of the vegetation communities in the project area was undertaken using recent aerial photography (April 2002). A search of the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife database was conducted for the area within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area, to identify threatened flora species that have been previously recorded within the area (refer to Section 3.5). A review of literature addressing local flora was also completed, to identify general vegetation communities. The results of the preliminary mapping phase were subsequently ground-truthed and vegetation boundaries adjusted as required.
The flora field surveys were undertaken from 5 to 7 November 2002. Eleven walking transects were undertaken in each of the vegetation communities identified during preliminary mapping. These walking transects were conducted to determine species composition and the level of disturbance of the vegetation, to identify any threatened flora species occurring in the survey area, and to assess habitat quality. The walking transects were between approximately 50 metres and 200 metres in length (refer to Figure 2.2).
Five 20 metre x 20 metre vegetation survey plots were completed in randomly selected areas within each of the vegetation communities (refer to Figure 2.2). Within each of these 20 metre x 20 metre plots, ten 1 metre x 1 metre quadrats were assessed to gather information about species abundance and cover. The information was recorded on
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.4
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
standard survey sheets. Each of the species occurring in the larger plot areas was recorded. Samples of all unknown species were collected in the field and were pressed and dried for later identification. Any unidentified plant species were sent to the Royal Botanic Gardens in Sydney for identification. Data from the survey area was consolidated with data from previous surveys to form a flora species list for the project area (Appendix A).
In addition to the five standard vegetation survey plots, two aquatic vegetation survey plots were completed (refer to Figure 2.2). Within these plots aquatic vegetation and fringing vegetation such as rushes were recorded, and community composition, structure, and species abundance were noted. As with the terrestrial vegetation survey, samples of all unknown species were collected for later identification.
Vegetation communities were classified according to Specht et al (1974 cited in McDonald et al 1990) (refer to Section 3.2). During flora surveys information was gathered to generally describe habitat quality and identify evidence of past disturbance of the project area.
2.2.2 Fauna
Prior to the commencement of field studies in the survey area, a search of the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife database was conducted for the area within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area, to identify fauna species that have been previously recorded within the area. A review of literature addressing local fauna was also undertaken, enabling a list of threatened species potentially occurring in the area to be compiled (refer to Section 4.4). Survey methods were designed to include appropriate techniques to identify any threatened species that may potentially occur in the survey area. The survey was conducted in dry and warm weather conditions from 4 to 7 November 2002. Data from the survey area was consolidated with data from previous surveys to form a fauna species list for the project area (Appendix B).
2.2.2.1 Birds
Nocturnal Birds
Two owl call playback sessions were conducted during the survey period (Figure 2.2). Spotlighting was also conducted to identify nocturnal bird species in the survey area. Each call playback session generally followed the methodology recommended in Forest Fauna Surveys et al (1997). The calls played were that of the Powerful Owl, Masked Owl and Barking Owl. Each session commenced with a quiet listening period of approximately 15 minutes, followed by playback of the first owl call through a directional loud hailer at 10 watts. The broadcast of each owl call was followed by a quiet listening period of five minutes, and then by approximately five minutes of spotlighting in the vicinity of the playback site. Following completion of playback, a further 10 to 15 minutes of spotlighting were conducted in the area surrounding the playback site. A further 10 person hours of spotlighting was completed in survey area, during which nocturnal bird species were targeted.
Searches for whitewash, possible nesting hollows, and regurgitated pellets were made throughout the survey area during all aspects of fieldwork, and during reconnaissance of other parts of the project area.
Diurnal Birds
Diurnal bird surveys were undertaken during morning and evening from 4 to 7 November 2002 throughout the study area (Figure 2.2). Surveys were conducted in eucalypt and casuarina woodland, grassland, dams and dried creek beds, in order to assess species diversity across the range of habitats available within the study area. Each survey lasted 20 to 30 minutes, with two observers. Species were identified from characteristic calls and by observation, using 10 x 40 binoculars. Bird surveys were conducted for a total of five person hours.
Opportunistic observations were recorded during other aspects of the field survey, particularly during the checking of trap lines each morning (refer to Section 2.2.2.3) and during reconnaissance of other parts of the project area.
2.2.2.2 Herpetofauna
Targeted diurnal searches for reptile and amphibian species were conducted in likely habitat areas throughout the survey area (Figure 2.2). Each search was undertaken by two personnel in an area of approximately 0.5 hectares for 15 to 20 minutes, resulting in a total sampling effort of approximately five diurnal person hours. During each search, likely microhabitats were examined, such as under rocks, logs, tree bark, ground litter and in wet soak areas. The diurnal searches were typically conducted between 11.00 am and 4.00 pm.
Nocturnal amphibian searches were also conducted. Three sites in and around dams and drainage lines were specifically targeted (Figure 2.2). At each site, low watt hand-held torches were used to examine in and around the waterbodies, including fringing vegetation and other likely microhabitats. Species were identified from the vocalisation of males and by observation. All searches were undertaken in fine and mild weather conditions; the area was, however,
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.5 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
very dry. A total of approximately three nocturnal person hours were completed. Opportunistic observations, both nocturnal and diurnal, were recorded during other aspects of the field survey, and during reconnaissance in other parts of the project area.
2.2.2.3 Mammals
A range of techniques was used to identify the mammal species occurring in the survey area, including trapping, hair funnels, spotlighting, scat searches and ultrasonic bat recording.
Mammal Trapping
Trapping was conducted for three nights, along three trap lines set in three different habitats: grazed open eucalypt woodland; casuarina woodland; and along a natural drainage line surrounded by casuarina woodland and pasture. Table 2.1 indicates the total number of traps used during the survey and Figure 2.2 indicates the location of the trap lines.
Table 2.1 – Number of Mammal Trap Nights used in Survey Area
Trap Type Trap Nights Elliot class ‘A’ 90 Elliot class ‘B’ 36 Cage Traps 18 Hair Funnels 12 Total Trap Nights 156
Elliot ‘A’ traps and Elliot ‘B’ traps were set as ground traps in order to sample ground-dwelling fauna populations. Traps were set at intervals of 10 to 20 metres along the trap lines. Bedding material was placed in each trap to ensure any captured animals were able to maintain body temperature. Elliot traps were not set on trees to target arboreal fauna due to the general lack of hollow bearing trees within the survey area. Arboreal fauna were targeted by the placement of hair funnels within the survey area (refer to Figure 2.2).
Hair funnels were mounted on eucalypt trees in the open woodland at a height of approximately 2.5 metres. Where possible, trees with hollows or scratch marks were selected for mounting. Hair funnels were not set in the casuarina woodland, or along the natural drainage line, due to a lack of substantially sized trees and a lack of hollows. Hair funnels are a modification of hair tubes, which are shaped to allow hair from mammals of any size to be captured for later analysis.
Elliot ‘A’ and Elliot ‘B’ traps and hair funnels were baited with a standard mix of rolled oats, honey and peanut butter, providing a nutritious meal for any captured mammals. Cage traps were set with the standard mix and sardine cat food. A honey emulsion (comprising honey and water) was sprayed daily onto each tree containing a hair funnel. The honey emulsion was also sprayed on nearby trees to act as an attractant.
Spotlighting was conducted on foot using a 50 watt hand-held spotlight. A total of 10 person hours of spotlighting were conducted over three consecutive nights. Spotlighting was undertaken generally between 8.00 pm and 10.00 pm.
Searches for evidence of mammal use were also conducted, with scats collected and analysed as required. Trees were also examined for scratch marks and other evidence of use by arboreal mammals. All hair and scat analysis was undertaken by Barbara Triggs of ‘Dead Finish’, Victoria. All opportunistic mammal observations made during other aspects of the survey, and during reconnaissance in other parts of the project area, were also recorded.
Microchiropteran Bats
Three ultrasonic bat detection transects using the Anabat II system developed by Titley Electronics, Ballina NSW, were conducted shortly after dusk on 4 and 6 November 2002. Each of these walking transects was 45 minutes in duration. All detected calls were recorded on tape for later analysis. Transects covered all vegetation communities identified in the survey area (refer to Figure 2.2). A 50 watt hand-held spotlight was used during the transects to locate any megachiropteran bat species present. All Anabat recordings were analysed by Glenn Hoye of Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.6 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Methods
2.3 SURVEY EFFORT IN THE PROJECT AREA
The six surveys undertaken within the project area have been conducted throughout the full range of seasons, resulting in an adequate coverage of the project area. Table 2.2 summarises the survey effort and the periods in which the most recent five surveys were undertaken.
Table 2.2 - Survey Effort for Flora and Fauna Surveys
Study Bulga Open Cut South Bulga Beltana No 1 Redbank 2 Current Survey Total Effort Continued Colliery South- Underground Power Plant EIS (2002) Mining EIS east Extension Coal Mine EIS (2002) (1999) EIS (2000) (2001)
Timing of field surveys Jan, July, Nov June 1999 (flora); May 2000 October 2001 Nov 2002 All seasons and Dec 1997; March and April and June 2002 surveyed Jan and Feb 1999 (fauna) 1998 Vegetation walking Undertaken Undertaken 12 7 11 >30 transects Vegetation survey plots Undertaken Undertaken 9 11 5 >25 Aquatic vegetation Unknown Unknown 8 Unknown 2 10 surveys Owl call playback Masked Owl and Masked Owl, 4 locations; 4 locations; 2 locations; Owl call playback Powerful Owl Barking Owl and Masked, Barking, Masked Owl, Masked Owl, has been Powerful Owl Powerful and Barking Owl and Barking Owl and undertaken Sooty Owls Powerful Owl Powerful Owl throughout project area Diurnal bird survey Undertaken Undertaken 14 person hrs 4 hrs 5 person hrs >23 hrs Diurnal Not undertaken Not undertaken Nine areas for Undertaken 5 person hrs >11.5 hrs reptile/amphibian 6.5 person hrs searches Nocturnal amphibian Not undertaken Not undertaken Six sites for 5 2 person hrs Three sites for 3 10 hrs searches person hrs person hrs Mammal trapping Not undertaken 11 nights 4 nights 4 nights 3 nights 22 nights Trapping Elliot class ‘A’ Not undertaken Unknown 160 trap nights 225 trap nights 90 trap nights 475 trap nights Trapping Elliot class ‘B’ Not undertaken Unknown 40 trap nights 24 trap nights 36 trap nights 100 trap nights Cage traps Not undertaken Unknown 8 trap nights Not undertaken 18 trap nights 26 trap nights Hair sampling Unknown number 770 trap nights 40 trap nights Not undertaken 12 trap nights >835 trap nights for 13 nights Spotlighting 13 person hrs 10 person hrs 16 person hrs 4 hrs plus 10 person hrs 53 hrs Squirrel Glider call playback Ultrasonic bat recording Undertaken Undertaken Six transects for Four locations for Three transects >8.75 hrs 4.5 hrs 2 hrs for 2.25 hrs Scat collection and Undertaken Undertaken Undertaken Undertaken Undertaken Undertaken other ground searches throughout project area
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 2.7 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
3.0 FLORA OF THE PROJECT AREA
3.1 VEGETATION OF THE REGION
Approximately 99 per cent of the lowlands between Murrurundi and Branxton have been cleared or dramatically altered, therefore remnant woodland communities in the region are generally considered significant (Bell 1993). This is particularly true of the lower slopes and valley floodplain areas, which are subject to intensive agricultural use. Similar land use patterns also occur in the vicinity of the project area, which is surrounded by agricultural land, open cut coal mines and patches of remnant vegetation.
Three large national park areas occur in close proximity to the project area to the south and west, (Yengo, Wollemi and Goulburn River National Parks). These national parks contain large areas of native vegetation, extending south to the western suburbs of Sydney and joining the Blue Mountains National Park. These areas provide a range of high quality flora and fauna habitats, and are known to provide habitat for a number of locally occurring threatened species (NPWS Website, accessed 5 December 2002). A smaller, yet significant area of national park also exists to the northeast of the project area (Mount Royal and Barrington Tops National Park complex). Combined, these national parks contain significant areas of remnant vegetation and important fauna habitats, providing potential habitat for a range of fauna species, particularly threatened species, which are impacted by widespread habitat removal.
Several state forests also exist in region of the project area and although these areas cannot be considered to be conservation reserves, they do play an important role in providing habitat for a range of native species. These state forests include the Belford and Cessnock State Forests to the east of the project area, and the Pokolbin, Aberdare, Corrabare and Wattagan State Forests to the south. Combined, these state forests provide significant potential habitat for locally occurring flora and fauna species.
The Commonwealth-owned Singleton Army Training Area contains a large area of high quality bushland that provides habitat for a range of threatened species (Hyder Consultants 1998). The Singleton Army Training Area contains vegetated mountainous terrain in the “Vere” area, located in the southeastern corner of the project area, and large contiguous areas of Eucalypt woodland. The training area provides a range of habitat types, for a range of flora and fauna species, and its large size provides habitat for animals with large home ranges.
A large area of remnant vegetation unsuitable for agricultural, residential or other forms of development exists to the south of Broke along the Broken Back Range. This area provides significant habitat for locally occurring flora and fauna species and is also considered likely to provide potential habitat for a range of locally occurring threatened species; however, it cannot be considered a conservation area. The areas of remnant vegetation in the wider area have been extensively cleared, primarily for agricultural purposes. Corridor linkages between these remnants have generally also been removed for agricultural purposes. The lack of movement corridors somewhat reduces the fauna habitat potential of a number of these areas; however, the remnants are still significant on local and regional scales.
3.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
Nine vegetation communities have been recorded in the project area (refer to Figure 3.1). Levels of disturbance in these communities range from high over much of the project area, to low on the steep slopes of the southeastern portion of the project area. Cattle grazing, mining activity and past land clearance has disturbed much of the project area, and resulted in large areas of pastoral grassland broken by relatively small patches of regrowth woodland with a minimal understorey. Land in the southeastern portion of the project area is steep and cattle are not grazed through the area. Woodland in this portion of the project area is therefore of higher quality, with an intact understorey, a more diverse range of species, and less encroachment by introduced species.
3.2.1 Mixed Eucalypt Woodland
Mixed Eucalypt Woodland is distributed in relatively small pockets throughout the project area (Figure 3.1). The dominant species found in this woodland are Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) and Grey Box (E. moluccana). Small-scale differences in the abundance of either of these dominant species are due to past selective logging of Narrow- leaved Ironbarks. The Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) is a sub-dominant species in the Mixed Eucalypt Woodland. Over much of the project area, this Mixed Eucalypt Woodland is regenerating in small patches surrounded by pastoral grassland, and cattle are grazed through the woodland. Therefore understorey vegetation is minimal, encroachment of introduced species such as Prickly Pear (Opuntia stricta) and Fireweed (Seneco madagascariensis) is common, and the woodland is considered to be highly disturbed.
Broad-leaved Ironbark (E. fibrosa) is also present in some areas of this community. Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata) and Kurrajong (Brachychiton populneus subsp. populneus) are common canopy species in well-drained, periodically
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.1
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
moist locations in the southeastern portion of the project area. The threatened Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina) is present in small numbers in this community to the north of the northeastern portion of the project area (refer to Figure 3.1).
The percentage foliage cover indicates that the community is classified as woodland, tending to open woodland. The upper canopy is comprised primarily of immature and medium aged trees, with few mature trees present, and height generally to 25 metres. Several mistletoe species including Amyema cambagei are present in the upper canopy.
A sub-canopy of variable density and composition occurs in this community, with species including Bull Oak (Allocasuarina luehmannii), Black Cypress Pine (Callitris endlicheri) and White Feather Honeymyrtle (Melaleuca decora). The shrub layer is often absent due to grazing pressure, but when present is dominated by Acacia spp. and Heathy Parrot Pea (Dilwynia retorta). Regenerating White Feather Honeymyrtle and Bull Oak are also present in the shrub layer. In the southeastern portion of the project area, the shrub layer is to an average height of 5 metres, and is dominated by Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa), Forest Oak (Allocasuarina torulosa) and Bulloak (A. luehmannii).
Groundcover is often sparse in the Mixed Eucalypt Woodland, but is dominated by Threeawn Speargrass (Aristida ramosa), Slender Rats Tail Grass (Sporobolus creber), Mulga Fern (Cheilanthes sieberi), Fireweed (Seneco madagascariensis) and Browns Lovegrass (Eragrostis brownii). Other commonly occurring species are Purple Lovegrass (Eragrostis sp.), Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis), Tall Bluebell (Wahlenbergia stricta), Scurvy Weed (Commelina cyanea), Yellow Burr Daisy (Calotis lappulaceae) and White Clover (Trifolium repens). A number of introduced species are present including African Boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum), which is listed as a noxious weed. In the southeastern portion of the project area, groundcover is dominated by Sticky Daisy Bush (Olearia elliptica), Grevillea arenaria and Fan Wattle (Acacia amblygona).
3.2.2 Ironbark/Spotted Gum Woodland
The distribution of the Ironbark/Spotted Gum Woodland is mainly restricted to the southeastern portion of the project area (Figure 3.1). The woodland is dominated by Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata), Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) and Broad-leaved Ironbark (E. fibrosa). Canopy height is approximately 20 metres, and foliage projection cover is approximately 20 per cent.
The community has been heavily cleared and has little to no understorey. The shrub layer is to an average height of 5 metres, and is dominated by Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa) and juvenile Black Cypress Pine (Callitris endlicheri). Generally the groundcover is less than one metre high and dominated by Sticky Daisy Bush (Olearia elliptica).
3.2.3 Grey Box/Grey Gum/Spotted Gum Woodland
A small area in the southeastern portion of the project area is dominated by Grey Box (Eucalyptus moluccana), Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata), and Grey Gum (E. punctata) (Figure 3.1). This community merges with Mixed Eucalypt Woodland and Ironbark/Spotted Gum Woodland, however the presence of Grey Gum as a dominant species distinguishes this small community from those surrounding it. It is located on well-drained, skeletal soils on low to moderate slopes. Canopy height is approximately 25 to 30 metres, and foliage projection cover is approximately 50 per cent.
The sub-canopy is dominated by juvenile eucalypt species to an average height of 10 metres. The shrub layer is to 3 metres and is dominated by Sticky Daisy Bush (Olearia elliptica) and Choretrum sp. Groundcover is dominated by Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis), Wallaby Grass (Danthonia linkii) and Cycads (Macrozamia sp.). Groundcover is generally less than one metre high with approximately 50 to 60 per cent cover.
3.2.4 Woodland (Dry Rainforest Elements)
This community is found in the southeastern portion of the project area on south-facing slopes of approximately 30 degrees and shallow soil (Figure 3.1). Dominant species are the Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata) and Rough- Barked Apple (Angophora floribunda). Canopy height is approximately 20 to 30 metres, and foliage projection cover is approximately 70 per cent.
The sub-canopy is dominated by Kurrajong (Brachychiton populneus subsp. populneus) and Native Willow (Acacia salicina), to an average height of 10 to 15 metres and with foliage projection cover of approximately 80 per cent. The shrub layer is dominated by Mock Olive (Notelaea longifolia), Blackthorn (Bursaria spinosa), and Sticky Daisy Bush (Olearia elliptica), to an average 5 metres high. Groundcover is dominated by Coffee Bush (Breynia oblongifolia) and Common Maidenhair Fern (Adiantum aethiopicum), and is generally less than 0.5 metres high, covering approximately 10 to 20 per cent of the ground.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
3.2.5 Casuarina Woodland
Small areas of Casuarina Woodland are found in the project area, principally located along creeks and ephemeral drainage lines (Figure 3.1). The community has been heavily cleared in the past and is now disturbed by cattle grazing. The upper stratum is generally dominated by Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) or Bull Oak (Allocasuarina luehmannii), but a limited number of Rough-barked Apple (Angophora floribunda) and Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) are also present in some areas. Canopy height generally varies from 8 to 15 metres.
Very few scattered Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) occur through the Casuarina Woodland, with a minimal shrub layer of juvenile Swamp Oak or Bull Oak. Groundcover is sparse due to the dense mat of Oak needles. Common species of groundcover include Threeawn Speargrass (Aristida ramosa), Couch (Cynodon dactylon), Lomandra spp. and Barbed Wire Grass (Cymbopogon refractus).
3.2.6 Warkworth Sands Woodland
A small area (approximately 8 hectares) of Warkworth Sands Woodland was identified within the project area (Figure 3.1). Surveys conducted for the Bulga Coal Project (Mitchell McCotter 1990), and additional surveys conducted for the current assessment, identified a remnant of this community to the east of Charlton Road, in the northwest of the project area. Aeolian sand deposits at the confluence of the northern drainage line and Wollombi Brook, which could potentially support Warkworth Sands Woodland, were surveyed and found not to constitute Warkworth Sands Woodland.
The community is comprised of woodland to open woodland with scattered remnant overstorey species including Rough- barked Apple (Angophora costata) and Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis). A sub-canopy layer of Coastal Banksia (Banksia integrifolia) and scattered Bull Oak (Allocasuarina luehmannii) was identified, with shrubs such as Melaleuca decora and Acacia filiciformis. Common ground cover plants include Pimelia sp, and Fireweed (Senecia madagascariensis).
3.2.7 Pastoral Grassland
The majority of the project area is vegetated with Pastoral Grassland containing a mix of native and introduced grasses and groundcover species (Figure 3.1). The Pastoral Grassland generally lacks tree and shrub vegetation. Scattered individuals of Eucalypt and Bull Oak do occur in some areas. The community shows little variability in species composition and abundance throughout. The community is generally dominated by Threeawn Speargrass (Aristida ramosa), Red Grass (Bothriochloa macra), Tall Windmill Grass (Chloris ventricosa), Windmill Grass (Chloris truncata), Slender Rats Tail Grass (Sporobolus creber), Browns Lovegrass (Eragrostis brownii) and Purple Lovegrass (Eragrostis lacunaria).
A range of other species is also present, including the introduced species Plantain (Plantago lanceolata), Common Sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceus), Rhodes Grass (Chloris gayana), Fireweed (Seneco madagascariensis), White Clover (Trifolium repens), Yellow Burr Daisy (Calotis lappulacea) and Bindii (Soliva sessilis). A limited number of native groundcover species also occur including Love Creeper (Glycine tabacina), Tall Bluebell (Wahlenbergia stricta) and Mulga Fern (Cheilanthes siberi). Groundcover typically ranged from 80 to 90 per cent with some bare areas occurring due to stock and other disturbance. Weed species generally account for a high proportion of the species recorded in the Pastoral Grassland community.
The Pastoral Grassland community exhibits signs of grazing pressure by domestic species (particularly cattle), pest species (including rabbits and hares), and by native species (particularly kangaroos). Grazing patterns also appear to have affected species abundance, with non-preferred graze dominant in some areas. The Pastoral Grassland also appears to be subject to periodic impact from agricultural activities including ploughing and weed control practices.
3.2.8 Aquatic Vegetation
Aquatic vegetation occurs in the project area in both natural and constructed waterways (Figure 3.1). Shallow areas of drainage lines are dominated by sedges and rushes, with the weed species Juncus acutus found in high densities in many locations. Other species commonly occurring in drainage lines include Common Rush (Juncus usitatus) and Spike Rush (Eleocharis acuta). In areas where drainage lines are deeper and more defined, emergent vegetation is dominant, including Common Reed (Phragmites australis) and Cumbungi (Typha orientalis). Numerous aquatic species including Water Ribbons (Triglochin rheophilum) and Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum sp.) are also present.
The presence and distribution of species in the stock watering dams is dependent on the amount and depth of water available. Shallow dams are dominated by sedges and rushes such as Juncus usitatus, Cyperus difformis, C. gracilis and Eleocharis acuta. Water-logged areas on the verges of dams are dominated by Water Couch (Paspalum distichum), Kikuyu (Pennisteum clandestinum) and Purple Lovegrass (Eragrostis lacunaria). Larger and deeper dams have an array
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.3 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
of aquatic vegetation including Water Ribbons (Triglochin rheophilum), Large-leaved Nardoo (Marsilea mutica), Ferny Azolla (Azolla pinnata) and Swamp Lily (Ottelia ovalifolia). The stock watering dams are heavily impacted by stock, which reduces the habitat quality of these vegetation associations.
3.2.9 Cropland
Cropland is located in the western portion of the project area (Figure 3.1), on privately owned land. The Cropland consists of vineyards and olive groves, which provide little habitat for native species of flora or fauna. A mixture of native and introduced grasses and other groundcover species exist within the Cropland areas, with a high number of weed species. The grass and other groundcover species found in the Cropland community are the same as those found in the Pastoral Grassland community (refer to Section 3.2.6). Only a small number of scattered Eucalypt trees are found in this community.
3.3 THREATENED FLORA SPECIES
No threatened flora species have been identified within the project area. Three relatively young individuals of the Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina) are located immediately to the north of the northeastern portion of the project area (HLA- Envirosciences 2002) (refer to Figure 3.1). One of these trees is mature enough to flower. An additional 26 individuals have been identified approximately 500 metres to the north of the northeastern portion of project area, however the extent of this population has not yet been fully determined (HLA-Envirosciences 2002). The location of these trees is also shown on Figure 3.1.
3.4 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF THREATENED FLORA
A number of threatened flora species are known to occur in the vicinity of the project area. Several of these species are considered unlikely to occur in the project area, as potential habitat for these species is generally limited. A list of the threatened flora species recorded within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife), is included in Table 3.1 with an indication of their likelihood of occurrence within the project area and whether assessment under Section 5A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) is required.
Table 3.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Flora
Species Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence
Olearia cordata Shrub to 2 metres. Grows in dry sclerophyll forest Inappropriate soil landscapes within the project area and open shrubland, on sandstone, chiefly from prevent this species from occurring. As the project Wisemans Ferry to Wollombi. area is not considered to provide potential habitat for this species, assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is not warranted. Dilwynia tennuifolia Erect shrub 0.6-1 metre. Grows in dry sclerophyll A lack of appropriate substrate prevents this species woodland on sandstone, shale or laterite, from the from occurring in the project area. As the project Cumberland Plain, Blue Mountains to Howes Valley area is not considered to provide potential habitat area. for this species, assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is not warranted. Melaleuca Shrub or small tree 2-5 metres, rarely to 10 metres. A lack of heath communities within the project area groveana Grows in heath, often in exposed sites, restricted to prohibits this species from occurring. As the project higher areas in coastal districts north from Port area is not considered to provide potential habitat Stephens. for this species, assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is not warranted. Darwinia biflora An erect or spreading shrub to 80 cm. Grows in A lack of associated heath vegetation prevents this heath on sandstone or in the understorey of species from occurring in the project area. As the woodland on shale-capped ridges. project area is not considered to provide potential habitat for this species, assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is not warranted. A Red Grass Erect or decumbent caespitose perennial to 1 metre This species has not been recorded in the project Bothriochloa biloba high, with racemes having white or purplish hairs. area, however potential habitat is considered to Grows in woodland on poorer soils. exist. An assessment of the potential impact of the proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.4 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
Table 3.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Flora (cont)
Species Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence
Pokolbin Mallee Mallee to 6 metres with smooth grey or grey-brown The distribution of this species is known to be Eucalyptus pumila bark, shedding in short ribbons. Grows in limited, and the habitats of the project area do not sclerophyll shrubland, and is known from a single meet the species’ known requirements. The stand on skeletal soil on sloping sandstone near species was not found in the study area and is Pokolbin. considered unlikely to occur. As the project area is not considered to provide potential habitat for this species, assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is not warranted. Slaty Red Gum A tree to 30 metres with smooth white or grey bark The species has been recorded immediately to the Eucalyptus glaucina which sheds in large plates or flakes. It occurs in north of the project area (HLA-Envirosciences grassy woodland on deep, moderately fertile and 2002). An assessment of the potential impact of the well-watered soils. It is considered by Harden proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C. (1991) to be locally frequent but very sporadic. It is generally distributed near Casino, and from Taree to Broke. It has been recorded in the Singleton Army Training Area (Hyder Consultants 1998). Eucalyptus fracta Tree to 15 metres or mallee to 3-5 metres growing This species has not been recorded in the project in sandy skeletal soils on wind-swept ridges. Grows area, however potential habitat is considered to in dry sclerophyll forest associations. All regional exist. An assessment of the potential impact of the records are known from the northern areas of the proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C. Broken Back Range (NSW Botanic Gardens pers comm). White-flowered Stemmed climber or twiner that grows in rainforest This species has not been recorded in the project Wax Plant gullies, scrub and scree slopes. Cynanchum area, however potential habitat is considered to Cynanchum elegans elegans occurs mainly at the ecotone between dry exist. An assessment of the potential impact of the subtropical rainforest and sclerophyll proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C. forest/woodland communities. The species has been recorded in the Singleton Army Training Area (Hyder Consultants 1998). Illawarra A perennial terrestrial orchid that grows among This species has not been recorded in the project Greenhood Orchid grass in sclerophyll forest. The Milbrodale sub- area, however potential habitat is considered to Pterostylis gibbosa population occurs at 150 to 160 metres elevation, exist. An assessment of the potential impact of the on soils derived from Triassic sedimentary rocks of proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C. the Narrabeen group. Associated vegetation is open woodland dominated by Narrow-leaved Ironbark and Grey Box with Black Cypress Pine present as a sub-dominant.
References: Harden, 1991, 1992, 1993, 2000 and NSW NPWS Threatened Species Profiles.
3.5 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF ENDANGERED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES
Two endangered ecological communities (EEC) and one regionally significant community which has been nominated for listing as an EEC, have been identified as existing in the general vicinity of the project area. An assessment of the likelihood of occurrence of the communities in the project area has been undertaken. The three communities assessed are the: Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest EEC in the Sydney Basin and New South Wales North Coast Bioregions; Warkworth Sands Woodland EEC in the Sydney Basin Bioregion; and the regionally significant Wollombi Red Gum – River Oak Woodland.
The Wollombi Red Gum – River Oak Woodland has been nominated for listing as an EEC under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Wollombi Brook flows through the north eastern portion of the project area and the River Oak (Casuarina cunninghamiana) dominated banks conform to the description of the nominated Wollombi Redgum – River Oak Woodland, as described by NPWS (2000). The riparian remnants within the proposed disturbance area do not conform to the description of this community. NPWS (2000) states that this community is known to occur on alluvium associated with Wollombi Brook and its major tributaries. The minor drainage lines occurring in the project area cannot be considered to be major tributaries of Wollombi Brook.
The description of this community authored by NPWS (2000) is as follows. “Wollombi Red Gum – River Oak Woodland occurs on alluvium associated with the Wollombi Brook and its major tributaries including Dubbo Gully south of Mangrove Creek. It is characterised by stands of River She-oak (Casuarina cunninghamiana) along high-energy banks, but is superseded in areas of higher stability by open forest dominated by Rough-barked Apple (Angophora floribunda). The
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.5 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Flora of the Project Area
Rough-barked Apple variation intergrades with Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) in close proximity to the river, and is replaced by Cabbage Gum (Eucalyptus amplifolia) and Thin-leaved Stringybark (Eucalyptus eugenioides) at greater distances. A dense layer of herbs and grass are present and dominated by Basket Grass (Oplismenus aemulus), Weeping Grass (Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides), Entolasia marginata and Hedgehog Grass (Echinopogon ovatus). In areas of high stability and increasing clay content, such as in the upper reaches of the catchment, a dense cover of Snow-in-summer (Melaleuca lineariifolia) can occur. Exotic herbs are often present due to a high level of disturbance. A sparse mid-storey of pioneer species such as Native Peach (Trema aspera) and Indian-weed (Sigesbeckia orientalis) combines with some dry rainforest species such as Grey Myrtle (Backhousia myrtifolia).”
An assessment of the impact of the proposal on Wollombi Redgum – River Oak Woodland is provided in Section 5.2.1.3.
The Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest in the Sydney Basin and New South Wales North Coast Bioregions has recently been listed as an EEC under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest extends from Muswellbrook to the Lower Hunter where it appears on gentle slopes arising from depressions. Much of its former extent has been depleted for agricultural activities. Vegetation in the northern and southern drainage lines within the project area cannot be considered remnants of this EEC. The vegetation is highly degraded, lack definitive shrub layers and have a ground layer that is consistent with the surrounding pastoral grassland community. Much of the riparian corridor has been cleared as a result of agricultural practices. The remaining community consists of scattered trees and clumps of trees that without substantial rehabilitation and management are unlikely to recover to form a definitive riparian corridor.
The description of this community authored by NPWS (2000) is as follows. “Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest is an open forest that characterises simple open depressions and drainage flats on the Permian Sediments of the Hunter Valley floor. An array of Eucalypts occurs, with the most frequently recorded being Forest Red Gum and Grey Gum (Eucalyptus punctata). It is not uncommon that Rough-barked Apple, Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra), Grey Box (Eucalyptus moluccana) and Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata) appear where the assemblage grades with the surrounding Spotted Gum - Ironbark Forests. The mid-strata are generally open with sparse shrubs of Breynia (Breynia oblongifolia), Bearded Heath (Leucopogon juniperinus), Daviesia ulicifolia, and Dogwood (Jacksonia scoparia). More obvious is the consistent layer of grasses and herbs: Weeping Grass; Barbed Wire Grass (Cymbopogon refractus); Tufted Hedgehog Grass (Echinopogon caespitosus var. caespitosus); Mulga Fern (Cheilanthes sieberi); and White Root (Pratia purpurascens).”
An eight part test to determine the impacts of the proposal on potentially occurring Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest is provided in Appendix C.
The Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion has recently been listed as an EEC under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. The community has been recorded within the project area; with surveys conducted for the Bulga Coal Project (Mitchell McCotter 1990) and additional surveys conducted for the current project identifying a regenerating remnant example of this community to the east of Charlton Road, in the northwest of the project area, outside the proposed disturbance area. This area has been heavily disturbed by mining and unrestricted grazing. The majority of the community mapped in 1990 was approved for open cut mining and subsequently destroyed by BOC operations. Aeolian sand deposits at the confluence of the northern drainage line and Wollombi Brook, which could potentially support Warkworth Sands Woodland, were surveyed and found not to constitute Warkworth Sands Woodland.
The description of this community as detailed in the Final Determination of the NSW Scientific Committee (NPWS 2002b) is as follows. “The Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion is the name given to the ecological community occurring on aeolian sand deposits, now mainly confined to a small area near Warkworth, about 15 km south east of Singleton. This ecological community is currently known to occur in the local government area of Singleton but may also occur elsewhere in the Bioregion. The community is generally of woodland to low woodland structure with trees of Rough-barked Apple and Coastal Banksia (Banksia integrifolia), and shrubs and ground species including Acacia filicifolia, Bracken (Pteridium esculentum), Blady Grass (Imperata cylindrica), Daphne Heath (Brachyloma daphnoides) and Melaleuca thymifolia. Warkworth Sands Woodland occupies sand dunes thought to be of Pleistocene age, generally 1-6 m high, resting on a river terrace.”
An eight part test to determine the impacts of the proposal on Warkworth Sands Woodland is provided in Appendix C.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 3.6 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
4.0 FAUNA OF THE PROJECT AREA
4.1 GENERAL FAUNA HABITAT
Three general fauna habitat areas occur in the project area: pastoral grassland habitat; woodland habitat; and aquatic habitat. Each of these habitat areas is generally degraded due to disturbances from the surrounding agricultural activities, activities associated with adjacent mining, and through other human activities such as clearing, rubbish dumping and firewood cutting. The habitat areas do, however, provide habitat for a range of native species as well as domestic and pest species. The woodland habitat in the southeastern portion of the project area is of a less degraded nature and consequently has a higher fauna habitat value, as it has undergone limited tree-felling and no grazing or clearing activities.
4.1.1 Pastoral Grassland Habitat
The high level of disturbance in the pastoral grassland vegetation community has resulted in poor potential fauna habitat with use by a limited number of native fauna species. Potential fauna habitat exists only for species suited to the utilisation of degraded areas, including a number of bird species such as the Australian Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen), Australian Raven (Corvus coronoides) and Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala), and grazing mammals such as the Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus). Several domestic and pest species were also observed in pastoral grassland including cattle, the European Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) and the Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Raptors such as the Nankeen Kestrel (Falco cenchroides) and owls utilise pastoral grassland to hunt prey, and use isolated large trees as perches from which to spy prey.
4.1.2 Aquatic Habitat
A range of permanent waterbodies (farm dams) and ephemeral drainage lines exist in the project area. The project area contains a series of surface subcatchments that drain to Monkey Place Creek and Wollombi Brook via a number of unnamed ephemeral tributaries or to Loders and Nine Mile Creeks via the Bulga Complex water management system. Each of the subcatchments is relatively small and as a consequence only generates intermittent and short duration flows, even under substantial rainfall conditions. Potential habitat for fin-fish is very limited due to the ephemeral nature of the drainage lines. However, during periods of flow and subsequent pooling of water, the streambed and vegetated edge ecosystems provide potential habitat for invertebrates, particularly insect larvae and species tolerant of varying environmental conditions.
Farm dams and ephemeral drainage lines offer habitat to a number of other native and introduced fauna species. Woody debris and emergent, floating and fringing vegetation increase the habitat value of a waterbody for invertebrates, aquatic reptiles, amphibians and birds. Twelve frog species have been recorded in the aquatic habitat throughout the project area. Many birds have also been recorded including the Australian Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata) and Black Swan (Cygnus atratus). Fauna species abundance and diversity was observed to be generally greater in farm dams compared to natural drainage lines. This is likely to be due to the farm dams offering a larger area of permanent water than the natural drainage lines. The drainage lines were observed to be affected by erosion, particularly due to stock impacts.
4.1.3 Woodland Habitat
Eucalypt and Casuarina woodlands in the project area vary in fauna habitat quality from the low quality of regrowth open woodland with a grazed groundcover and shrub layer, to relatively intact woodland with a higher habitat quality. Regrowth open woodland is distributed throughout much of the project area. Few mature trees are present, and therefore few tree hollows are available for fauna use. Surrounding land has been cleared for pasture, and cattle are grazed through the woodland, thus the groundcover and shrub layer is minimal. This lack of vegetation limits the diversity of fauna found in these areas. There is a paucity of ground-dwelling fauna habitat except for fallen branches and limited leaf litter. The Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus), Yellow-footed Antechinus (Antechinus flavipes) and Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) were recorded in grazed open woodland. Two threatened bird species and two threatened microchiropteran bat species were also recorded in this habitat: the Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis); Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus sagittatus); Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis); and Common Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus schreibersii). All four of these species are listed as Vulnerable on Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.
The relatively intact woodland comprises only a small portion of the project area, located in the southeastern corner of the project area. Much of this area is owned by the Commonwealth (Singleton Army Training Area), and is not grazed. Limited tree-felling has been undertaken in this woodland, and therefore more tree hollows are present. Stags, hollows and shedding bark provide habitat for a range of birds, arboreal mammals, bats and reptiles. The woodland habitat in this area is more closed and comprises substantial groundcover and shrub layers, thus providing higher quality foraging and
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.1 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
nesting habitat for many fauna species including small mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles. These fauna species also utilise the leaf litter, fallen bark and fallen branches of the woodland for foraging and nesting resources.
It is in this relatively intact woodland habitat that the Common Wallaroo (Macropus robustus), Swamp Wallaby (Wallabia bicolor), Common Wombat (Vombatus ursinus), Superb Lyrebird (Menura novaehollandiae), Little Lorikeet (Glossopsitta pusilla) and Yellow-tufted Honeyeater (Lichenostomus melanops) have been recorded. Four microchiropteran bat species have also been recorded in this woodland habitat. This woodland could also provide potential habitat for threatened species. It is contiguous with a large area of similar quality habitat in the Singleton Army Training Area, which enables it to support species with large home ranges.
4.2 SITE RECORDS
A full list of all species recorded in the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area is presented in Appendix B, with details of which species have been recorded in the various surveys of the project area.
These fauna site records are compiled from the current and previous flora and fauna surveys undertaken throughout the project area. Results from previous surveys undertaken by Mitchell McCotter and Associates (1990), ERM Mitchell McCotter (1999), ERM (2000), Umwelt (2001), HLA-Envirosciences (2002), and the current survey undertaken by Umwelt in November 2002 are included here. The study undertaken for the SBC EIS by Mitchell McCotter (1992) provided a composite list of “species known or expected to occur”, and therefore has not been included in this section, but has been included in the full fauna species list (Appendix B).
4.2.1 Avifauna
A total of 101 bird species have been recorded in the project area, five of which are threatened (refer to Section 4.3).
The Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus sagittatus) and Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis) have both been recorded during several surveys in the project area. Both species are listed as Vulnerable on Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. In the November 2002 survey by Umwelt these species were recorded in Casuarina Woodland in the northwestern portion of the project area (refer to Section 4.3).
Numerous other woodland birds have been recorded within the project area, including the Galah (Eolophus roseicapillus), Eastern Rosella (Platycerus adscitus eximius), White-winged Chough (Corcorax melanorhamphos), Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala), Australian Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen), Yellow Thornbill (Acanthiza nana), Spotted Pardalote (Pardalotus punctatus), Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike (Coracina novaehollandiae), and Pied Butcherbird (Cracticus nigrogularis).
Species recorded in grassland habitat include the Crested Pigeon (Ocyphaps lophotes), Superb Fairy-wren (Malurus cyaneus), Magpie-lark (Grallina cyanoleuca), Willie Wagtail (Rhipidura leucophrys), Australian Raven (Corvus coronoides), Welcome Swallow (Hirundo neoxena) and Australian Pipit (Anthus australis).
Waterbirds and waders recorded in waterbodies throughout the project area include the Grey Teal (Anas gracilis), Pacific Black Duck (Anas superciliosa), Australian Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata), Black Swan (Cygnus atratus), Little Pied Cormorant (Phalacrocorax melanoleucos), Dusky Moorhen (Gallinula tenebrosa), Great Egret (Ardea alba), White-faced Heron (Egretta novaehollandiae), Yellow-billed Spoonbill (Platalea flavipes), Red-necked Stint (Calidris ruficollis) and Red-capped Plover (Charadrius ruficapillus).
Raptors recorded in the project area include the Brown Goshawk (Accipiter fasciatus), Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax), Black-shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris), White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster), Brown Falcon (Falco berigora) and Nankeen Kestrel (Falco cenchroides).
The Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides) and Southern Boobook (Ninox boobook) are the only nocturnal birds to be recorded in the project area, except for the tentative recording of the threatened Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) (ERM 2000) (refer to Section 4.3).
4.2.2 Herpetofauna
Twelve amphibian species have been recorded in the project area. These species include the Common Eastern Froglet (Crinia signifera), Spotted Marsh Frog (Lymnodynastes tasmaniensis), Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) and Peron’s Tree Frog (Litoria peronii). The Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog has been recorded during all studies discussed in this
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
section, indicating its widespread distribution throughout the project area. No threatened amphibian species have been recorded within the project area.
Fourteen reptile species have been recorded in the project area. These species include the Eastern Snake-necked Turtle (Chelodina longicollis), Jacky Lashtail (Amphibolurus muricatus), Eastern Water Dragon (Physignathus lesueurii), Lace Monitor (Varanus varius) and Yellow-faced Whipsnake (Demansia psammophis). No threatened reptile species have been recorded within the project area.
4.2.3 Mammals
Twenty-five species of mammal have been recorded in the project area, of which eight are introduced species. Evidence of the Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) occurs throughout the project area. Cattle are grazed throughout much of the project area, and their impact on vegetation and drainage lines is highly detrimental.
Ten species of microchiropteran bat have been recorded including the threatened Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis) and Common Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus schreibersii) (refer to Section 4.3). The White-striped Freetail Bat (Nyctinomus australis), Gould’s Wattled Bat (Chalinolobus gouldii), Southern Forest Bat (Vespadelus regulus) and Little Forest Bat (Vespadelus vulturnus) have all been recorded in at least two surveys in the project area.
The most common mammal recorded throughout the project area in all surveys was the Eastern Grey Kangaroo (Macropus giganteus). Also recorded in the project area were the Yellow-footed Antechinus (Antechinus flavipes), Common Dunnart (Sminthopsis murina), Red-necked Wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus) and Swamp Wallaby (Wallabia bicolor).
4.3 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES
Five bird species and two microchiropteran bat species listed as Vulnerable on Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 have been recorded in the project area. The Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus sagittatus), Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis), Hooded Robin (Melanodryas cucullata cucullata) and Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata) have been recorded. The Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis) and Common Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus schreibersii) have also been recorded. The locations of threatened species recorded in the Bulga Complex are shown on Figure 3.1.
4.3.1 Masked Owl – Tyto novaehollandiae
The Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) was tentatively recorded from a call heard in the southeastern portion of the project area, on the southern side of the Vere in the Singleton Army Training Area, during a survey for the Southeast Extension of SBC (ERM 2000) (see Figure 3.1).
4.3.2 Speckled Warbler – Pyrrholaemus sagittatus
The Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus sagittatus) has been recorded during field observations in the survey area, Beltana No. 1 Mine area, and BOC area (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999; Umwelt 2001) (see Figure 3.1). During the November 2002 survey of the project area, two Speckled Warblers were observed in Casuarina Woodland in the survey area, and an additional two were observed in Casuarina Woodland between Bulga Pit and Broke Road.
4.3.3 Grey-crowned Babbler – Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis
The Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis) has been recorded during field observations in the survey area, Beltana area (Umwelt 2001), BOC area, (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999); and Redbank 2 Power Plant site (HLA-Envirosciences 2002) (see Figure 3.1). During the November 2002 survey of the project area, a group of four Grey-crowned Babblers was observed in Casuarina Woodland in the survey area.
4.3.4 Hooded Robin - Melanodryas cucullata cucullata
A historical record of the Hooded Robin (Melanodryas cucullata cucullata) is known from the BOC mining area (Mitchell McCotter and Associates 1990). The details of the record are not known.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.3 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
4.3.5 Diamond Firetail – Stagonopleura guttata
A historical record of the Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata) is known from the BOC mining area (Mitchell McCotter and Associates 1990). The details of the record are not known.
4.3.6 Eastern Freetail Bat - Mormopterus norfolkensis
The Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis) was recorded during the survey for the Beltana No. 1 Mine (Umwelt 2001). The recorded call was identified with ‘probable” confidence by Glenn Hoye of Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Limited, an independent bat expert. The call was recorded during one transect through Grey Box/Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland (see Figure 3.1).
4.3.7 Common Bent-wing Bat – Miniopterus schreibersii
The Common Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus schreibersii) was recorded during the surveys for the Beltana No. 1 Mine (Umwelt 2001), and BOC (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999). The call recorded during the Umwelt 2001 survey was confidently identified by Glenn Hoye of Fly by Night Bat Surveys Pty Limited. The call was recorded during two transects through Grey Box/Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland (see Figure 3.1).
4.4 LIKELIHOOD OF OCCURRENCE OF THREATENED FAUNA
A number of threatened fauna species are known to occur in the vicinity of the project area. Several of these species are considered unlikely to occur in the project area, as potential habitat for these species is generally limited. A list of the threatened fauna species recorded within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife), is included in Table 4.1 with an indication of their likelihood of occurrence within the project area and whether assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is required.
Table 4.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Fauna
Species Ecology and Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence Red-crowned Toadlet Seems to be restricted to the Hawkesbury The species has been recorded in Singleton Army Pseudophryne australis Sandstone and may be found beside temporary Training Area. As the project area is considered creeks, gutters, and soaks within this area, and to provide potential habitat for this species, under logs and rocks. Breeds in damp leaf litter. assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is provided in Appendix C. Green and Golden Bell Occurs in large permanent swamps and ponds The project area provides potential habitat for this Frog with plenty of emergent vegetation, especially species. An assessment of the potential impact Litoria aurea bullrushes. It will occasionally inhabit ornamental of the proposal on this species is provided in ponds and farm dams where these are close to Appendix C. the preferred habitat. Black-necked Stork Found in coastal wetlands, mangroves, tidal The species is not expected to occur in the Ephippiorhynchus mudflats, floodplains, open woodlands, irrigated project area, as preferred habitat is not present. asiaticus lands, bore-drains, sub-artesian pools, farm dams Therefore assessment under Section 5A of the and sewage ponds. Nest consists of a large flat EP&A Act is not warranted. pile of sticks, grass or rushes placed high and exposed in tall live and dead trees. Red-tailed Black- Preferred habitat is tall open forests, woodlands, The project area provides potential habitat for this Cockatoo grasslands, scrublands, floodplains, and River species. An assessment of the potential impact Calyptorhynchus banksii Red Gums on watercourses. Nests in tree of the proposal on this species is provided in hollows, usually high above the ground. Appendix C. Glossy Black- Feeds on She-oaks in woodlands, forests, and The project area provides potential habitat for this Cockatoo timbered watercourses. Nest consists of a layer species. An assessment of the potential impact Calyptorhynchus lathami of woodchips in a large hollow, often high above of the proposal on this species is provided in the ground. Appendix C. Powerful Owl Preferred habitat consists of open forest, The project area provides potential habitat for this Ninox strenua woodland, riparian habitat and closed forest. species. An assessment of the potential impact Extensive home range (up to 1000 hectares) of the proposal on this species is provided in generally within 200 kilometres of coast. Nests Appendix C. on decayed debris in a large hollow in trunk or large branch.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.4 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
Table 4.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Fauna (cont)
Species Ecology and Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence Masked Owl Preferred habitat consists of forests, woodlands The species was tentatively recorded from the Tyto novaehollandiae and farmlands with large trees, and adjacent southern side of the Vere in the project area cleared country. Also found in timbered (ERM 2000). Assessment of the potential impact watercourses, paperbark woodlands and caves. of the proposal on this species is provided in Nests in hollow eucalypts or in caves. Roosts by Appendix C. day in tree hollows and thick foliage. Hunts by night in woodlands, clearings, open plains; prey includes possums, rabbits and currawongs. Sooty Owl Found in deep, moist gullies in eucalypt forest, The project area does not provide suitable habitat Tyto tenebricosa usually with big, old, smooth-barked gums and an for this species; it lacks moist gullies and understorey of tree ferns and Lilly Pilly. May associated attributes. It is considered highly move to drier forest to hunt. Nests in hollow unlikely that the Sooty Owl would utilise the trunks of eucalypts over 30 metres high. project area. No assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is considered necessary. Brown Treecreeper Drier forests, woodlands, scrubs, with fallen The project area provides potential habitat for this (eastern subsp.) branches; river red gums on watercourses and species. An assessment of the potential impact Climacteris picumnus around lake-shores; paddocks with standing dead of the proposal on this species is provided in victoriae timber; and margins of denser wooded areas. Appendix C. Nest of grass usually in tree hollow 3-10 metres or higher, or in stump or fence post. Speckled Warbler Inhabits eucalypt and cypress woodlands with a The species has been recorded in the project Pyrrholaemus sagittatus grassy understorey on the slopes west of the area. An assessment of the potential impact of Great Dividing Range, with populations also the proposal on this species is provided in occurring in drier coastal areas such as the Appendix C. Hunter Valley. Preferred foraging habitat is in areas with a combination of open grassy patches, leaf litter and shrub cover. Uncommon, sedentary. Painted Honeyeater Inhabits mistletoes in eucalypt forests/woodlands, The project area provides potential habitat for this Grantiella picta Black Box on watercourses, Box/Ironbark/ Yellow species. An assessment of the potential impact Gum woodlands, paperbarks, casuarinas, mulga, of the proposal on this species is provided in other acacias and trees on farmland. Nomadic. Appendix C. Black-chinned Found predominantly west of the Great Dividing The project area provides potential habitat for this Honeyeater (eastern Range. Seasonally nomadic. Mainly found in species. An assessment of the potential impact subsp.) woodlands containing Box-Ironbark associations of the proposal on this species is provided in Melithreptus gularis and River Red Gum. Also known from drier Appendix C. gularis coastal woodlands including those of the Hunter Valley. Does not persist in remnants less than 200 hectares in area. Feeds on arthropods, nectar and lerp from eucalypt foliage and bark. Regent Honeyeater Temperate eucalypt woodlands and open forests The project area provides potential habitat for this Xanthomyza phrygia including forest edges. Associations of Red species. An assessment of the potential impact Ironbark, White Box, Yellow Box, Yellow Gum and of the proposal on this species is provided in Red Box appear essential. Swamp Mahogany Appendix C. and River Oak may be used locally. Hooded Robin The species occupies a wide range of eucalypt This species has previously been recorded in the (southeast form) woodlands, Acacia shrublands and open forest. project area (Mitchell McCotter and Associates Melanodryas cucullata In temperate woodlands, the species favours 1990). An assessment of the potential impact of cucullata open areas adjoining large woodland blocks, with the proposal on this species is provided in areas of dead timber and sparse shrub cover. Appendix C. Diamond Firetail The Diamond Firetail occupies eucalypt The Diamond Firetail has previously been Stagonopleura guttata woodlands, forests and mallee where there is a recorded in the project area (Mitchell McCotter grassy understorey. Firetails build bottle-shaped and Associates 1990). An assessment of the nests in trees and bushes, and forage on the potential impact of the proposal on this species is ground, largely for grass seeds and other plant provided in Appendix C. material, but also for insects. Grey-crowned Babbler Known from isolated populations within the The species has been recorded in the project (eastern subsp.) Hunter Valley and occurs in open woodlands area. An assessment of the potential impact of Pomatostomus dominated by mature eucalypts, with regenerating the proposal on this species is provided in temporalis temporalis trees, tall shrubs and an intact ground cover of Appendix C. grass and forbs. This species is insectivorous and forages in leaf litter and on the bark of trees.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.5 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
Table 4.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Fauna (cont)
Species Ecology and Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence Spotted-tailed Quoll Partly arboreal and nocturnal. Inhabits rainforest, The project area provides potential habitat for this Dasyurus maculatus open forest, woodland, coastal heathland and species. An assessment of the potential impact inland riparian forest. Occurs to the snowline and of the proposal on this species is provided in inland to the western plains. Den sites have been Appendix C. recorded in caves, rock crevices and hollow logs. Koala Habitat consists of eucalypt forest and woodlands The project area does not provide potential Koala Phascolarctos cinereus containing particular species including Red Gum, habitat as assessed under SEPP 44 (refer to Grey Gum, Manna Gum, Tallowwood, and Section 5.4.2.2). Food species are not present in Swamp Mahogany. adequate quantity to support the Koala in the project area. No assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is considered necessary. Yellow-bellied Glider Prefers tall, mature forests in regions of high The project area lacks the tall, mature forest Petaurus australis rainfall. Roosts in a den in a hollow branch, habitat that this species prefers. The closest usually in a living, smooth-barked eucalypt. A record of the species is 15.5 kilometres southwest variety of eucalypt species are required to provide of the project area, in a large area of contiguous year-round foraging resources in the species’ forest in the Hunter Range. It is considered highly large home range of between 30 and 65 hectares. unlikely that the Yellow-bellied Glider would utilise the project area. No assessment under Section 5A of the EP&A Act is considered necessary. Squirrel Glider Occurs in wet and dry sclerophyll forests and The project area provides potential habitat for this Petaurus norfolcensis woodlands, nests in tree hollows and feeds on species. An assessment of the potential impact insects, acacia gum and eucalypt sap released by of the proposal on this species is provided in incising the bark. The species has a home range Appendix C. of 20 to 30 hectares. Brush-tailed Rock- Found in rocky sites in sclerophyll forests with a The project area provides potential habitat for this wallaby grassy understorey. This species shelters in species. An assessment of the potential impact Petrogale penicillata caves, rocky crevices and dense stands of of the proposal on this species is provided in Lantana during the day. Most commonly, sites Appendix C. occupied by this species have a northerly aspect. Grey-headed Flying- Roost sites (camps) are commonly formed in The project area provides potential habitat for this fox gullies, typically not far from water and usually in species. An assessment of the potential impact Pteropus poliocephalus vegetation with a dense canopy cover. Feeds on of the proposal on this species is provided in a wide variety of flowering and fruiting plants, Appendix C. including blossoms of eucalypts, banksias, figs and palms. Yellow-bellied Found in rainforests, sclerophyll forests and The project area provides potential habitat for this Sheathtail Bat woodlands, this species roosts alone or with up to species. An assessment of the potential impact Saccolaimus flaviventris 10 others in large hollow trees, the abandoned of the proposal on this species is provided in nests of Sugar Gliders or in buildings. It hunts Appendix C. high above the forest canopy and in clearings. Migratory in southern Australia. Eastern Freetail-bat Habitat preferences are unclear, with most This species was recorded in the project area in Mormopterus records from dry eucalypt forest and woodland Grey Box/Narrow-leaved Ironbark woodland norfolkensis east of the Great Dividing Range. Has also been (Umwelt 2001). An assessment of the potential recorded flying low over a rocky river through impact of the proposal on this species is provided rainforest and wet sclerophyll forest. in Appendix C. Predominantly tree roosting; however, it has been recorded roosting in a roof with other bat species. Large-eared Pied Bat Typically roosts in caves, mine tunnels and the The project area provides potential habitat for this Chalinolobus dwyeri abandoned, bottle-shaped mud nests of Fairy species. An assessment of the potential impact Martins. Found in a variety of drier habitats, of the proposal on this species is provided in including the dry sclerophyll forests and Appendix C. woodlands to the east and west of the Great Dividing Range. It probably forages for small insects below the forest canopy. Eastern False Known from few records but has been shown to The project area provides potential habitat for this Pipistrelle be tree roosting. The size and shape of the species. An assessment of the potential impact Falsistrellus species’ wings indicate that the species is of the proposal on this species is provided in tasmaniensis probably highly mobile, with a comparatively large Appendix C. foraging range. It is not very manoeuvrable and probably forages above the forest canopy, in open woodland or over water.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.6 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Fauna of the Project Area
Table 4.1 – Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Fauna (cont)
Species Ecology and Habitat Requirements Likelihood of Occurrence Common Bentwing-bat Occurs in wet and dry sclerophyll forests and This species was recorded in the project area in Miniopterus schreibersii rainforests. This species generally hunts above Grey Box / Narrow-leaved Ironbark woodland the forest canopy, and roosts in caves, mine (Umwelt 2001) and in Bulga Pit and overburden tunnels and buildings. emplacement areas (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999). An assessment of the potential impact of the proposal on this species is provided in Appendix C. Greater Broad-nosed Tree hollow roosting species which inhabits the The project area provides potential habitat for this Bat gullies and river systems draining the Great species. An assessment of the potential impact Scoteanax rueppellii Dividing Range, extending to the coast over much of the proposal on this species is provided in of its range. Habitats range from woodland Appendix C. through to moist and dry eucalypt forest to rainforest. Flies slowly between the canopy and understorey of forests, in paddocks and above water. Known to prey on beetles and other large, slow-flying insects. Evidence suggests that it also preys on other bat species.
References: Mammals – Cronin (1991), Menkhorst & Knight (2001), Strahan (1998); Frogs – Robinson (1995); Birds – Pizzey & Knight (1997), Hollands (1991).
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 4.7 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
5.0 IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL
5.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
5.1.1 Underground Mining
The project would result in a varying degree of subsidence within the mining area, ranging from 0 to 3 metres in each seam. Due to seam dipping, subsidence impacts are predicted to be greatest where the cover depths are lower, particularly in the central and northern mining areas east of Charlton Road, and in the northern drainage system (Figure 5.1). Indications are that works will be required in areas with depth of cover of less than 80 metres to remediate rib-line fractures within 20 metres to 40 metres of the longwall chain pillars. Significant surface cracking is expected to occur within pastoral grassland and woodland communities in this area; however the extent of cracking is not expected to cause tree failure. In forested areas, soil amelioration work will be conducted by small machinery in order to minimise tree disturbance. Over the remainder of the project area, the depth of cover is greater and therefore lower levels of subsidence cracking are predicted.
Water management strategies will be implemented to lessen the impact of subsidence on drainage lines within the project area (Figure 5.1), as discussed in the Surface Water Assessment (Appendix 6 of the EIS) and summarised in Section 7.2 of the EIS main text. In-channel works will be required along most of the northern channel system located east and west of Charlton Road above the central and northern mining areas, to minimise the potential for surface water inflow to underground workings and to maintain surface drainage.
The channel will incorporate a range of habitat features such as pool and riffle sequences, and endemic vegetation will be restored along the length of the channel to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat as a result of drainage line remediation. The area of disturbance for these works is shown in Figure 5.1.
The southern channel system located above the southern mining area will also require cut and fill earthworks to maintain a free-draining channel (Figure 5.1). Surface water inflow to underground workings is not a concern in this area due to the greater depth of cover, and therefore major remediation and diversion will not be necessary.
Minor cut and fill works may also be required in a number of first and second order drainages within the project area, and some farm dams may be affected.
Subsidence remediation of Charlton, Cobcroft, Fordwich and Broke Roads will also be required at various stages throughout the project. These works will be restricted to the respective road reserves (Figure 5.1).
No subsidence remediation works are likely to be required on tributaries of Monkey Place Creek or on Commonwealth land.
5.1.2 Surface Infrastructure
A number of overland conveyors, a coal stockpile, two access roads and various buildings will be located generally within areas that have been significantly disturbed by ongoing mining activities. The total construction area is approximately 35 hectares, of which approximately seven hectares are located in areas not previously disturbed by open cut mining.
Minor surface infrastructure, which includes the dewatering bore(s) and gas extraction plant(s), will be located on pastoral land at the western and southern extents of the proposed underground mining area (Figure 5.1). The exact location of this infrastructure is subject to further in-seam exploration work. The site disturbance associated with this infrastructure will be limited to the clearance of small areas of pasture and isolated trees, where unavoidable. As the exact location of the proposed boreholes is not known at this time, pre-clearance surveys will be undertaken at a later date to ensure significant habitats are not disturbed by the bores.
No surface infrastructure is proposed to be constructed on Commonwealth land.
5.1.3 Habitat Creation and Conservation
As part of the long term rehabilitation of Bulga Complex, it is proposed to construct approximately 240 hectares of habitat corridors throughout the project area (Figure 5.2). These corridors will have a minimum width of 100 metres to minimise edge effects and will link areas of remnant vegetation in the Singleton Army Training Area to the riparian vegetation of Wollombi Brook.
There will also be a 58 hectare Voluntary Conservation Area (VCA) established adjacent to Wollombi Brook (Figure 5.2). The location of this VCA is primarily governed by its high archaeological value; however, it also contains approximately
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.1
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
25 hectares of Mixed Eucalypt Woodland. The vegetation within the VCA is currently considered to be relatively poor quality; however, management of the area through the removal of cattle will result in improved ecological function within the Bulga Complex landscape. The VCA will provide an important area of flora and fauna habitat in the future, and its location adjacent to Wollombi Brook improves the value of the planned habitat corridors through the conservation of varying communities and habitats. The VCA is considered to provide an important area of habitat for the range of threatened woodland bird species that have been recorded within the project area.
5.2 IMPACT ON FLORA
5.2.1 Underground Mining Area
The woodland vegetation communities found in the project area are generally characteristic of the communities found in the region, with Narrow-leaved Ironbark and Narrow-leaved Ironbark/Grey Box vegetation the dominant associations recorded throughout the area (ERM Mitchell McCotter 1997; ERM Mitchell McCotter 1999; Gunninah 1997; Resource Planning 1993; Umwelt 2000). The floral diversity of the vegetation remnants in the project area is similar to other vegetation remnants in the region, with the communities not considered to be floristically significant. The forested vegetation areas do, however, have some significance due to the fact that a large portion of the region has been cleared of remnant native vegetation in the past.
Although each patch of remnant vegetation in the project area has some significance due to the high percentage of cleared pastoral areas in the region, it is considered that the potential alteration of small areas of vegetation under the proposal would not be significant on a local or regional scale, particularly taking into account the relatively large area of unaffected vegetation within the project area and in the surrounding areas. Similarly, the potential changes in community composition and relative species abundance is not considered to be significant due to the large areas of vegetation which will remain unaffected by the proposal and the floristic similarity of other areas of remnant vegetation occurring in the wider area.
5.2.1.1 Woodland Communities
The project is predicted to result in up to a total of 8 metres of subsidence after the mining of four seams, in areas with shallow depths of cover that have not been subject to open cut mining. In these areas surface cracking is predicted and minor disturbance to the shrub and ground layers is likely to occur during remediation works. The total area of woodland within the subsidence remediation zone (refer to Figure 5.1) is 18 hectares.
Although the areas predicted to require intensive surface remediation are generally not located within woodland areas, provision has been made to use small machinery in remediation and reshaping works in order to limit potential disturbance to woodland communities. This provision will limit the clearing of overstorey vegetation, and ensure minimal disturbance within the already highly disturbed shrub and ground layers. In the event that hollow-bearing trees require removal, the hollows will be relocated into adjoining vegetation or nest boxes will be installed to ensure no net loss of roosting or nesting habitat.
There will be a net increase in the area of woodland occurring within the project area, due to the progressive creation of habitat corridors during the life of the project and the establishment of a 58 hectare VCA adjacent to Wollombi Brook (refer to Section 5.1.3).
5.2.1.2 Pastoral Grassland
Pastoral grassland is the most widespread community within the project area and the proposed continuation of underground mining will not significantly impact on this community. Rib-line fractures occurring within this community will be remediated with a range of agricultural practices such as ripping and tilling. These practices are expected to have minimal impact on the floristic diversity of the community. Subsidence remediation is not expected to result in the net loss of pastoral grassland. There will be an increase in the area of pastoral grassland occurring within the project area as substantial areas disturbed by BOC mining will be progressively rehabilitated during the life of the project.
The water management strategies would also include limited excavation of ponded areas in order to freely drain the site. As a result there will be no substantial ponding of water within the pastoral grassland areas.
5.2.1.3 Aquatic and Riparian Habitat
Subsidence remediation works will be required along the two unnamed tributaries of Wollombi Brook (northern and southern drainage lines). The vegetation associations recorded along the northern drainage line which flows through the current Beltana underground mining area are considered to be highly degraded, lack definitive shrub layers and have a ground layer that is consistent with the surrounding pastoral grassland community. Much of the riparian corridor has
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
been cleared as a result of agricultural practices. The remaining community consists of scattered trees and clumps of trees that without substantial rehabilitation and management are unlikely to recover to form a definitive riparian corridor. In order to ameliorate the further degradation of this community, revegetation along the drainage lines will be undertaken following remediation works. This will result in a net gain of this community in the project area. The species utilised in the revegetation of the drainage line will be endemic species known to occur locally within that community.
Water management strategies will be implemented to prevent ponding within the drainages affected by subsidence including the creation of a temporary diversion channel to carry flows during channel stabilisation works within the northern drainage line. The drainage line in this area will be reshaped with minimal impact to riparian vegetation, where possible. The temporary diversion channel would adequately replace any aquatic habitat that is lost in the reshaping of the existing drainage line, with no net loss of habitat predicted. Flows will be returned to the original drainage line after longwall mining in the area has been completed.
The southern drainage system will require cut and fill earthworks to maintain a free-draining channel. This remediation will be carried out with minimal impact to riparian vegetation, where possible.
The project will not impact on Wollombi Brook and its vegetation associations. Vegetation associated with Wollombi Brook (Wollombi Redgum – River Oak Woodland) is considered to be regionally significant, and has been nominated for listing as an EEC.
There is no predicted long term impact on existing farm dams and minor drainage lines.
5.2.2 Surface Facilities
There will be a negligible impact on flora as a result of the construction and operation of surface infrastructure. The small amount of vegetation (approximately 7 hectares) that will be removed for the construction of the conveyors, buildings, stockpile and boreholes is not considered to be significant in terms of floristic structure, size, or quality, in a local or regional context.
The proposed establishment of gas drainage and dewatering boreholes on pastoral land at the western and southern extents of the proposed underground mining area is not considered to constitute a significant impact on the flora of the project area, as construction will be in areas of pastoral grassland. Pastoral grassland is widely represented throughout the project area and region, and is not considered to be a sensitive community.
5.3 IMPACT ON FAUNA HABITAT
5.3.1 Underground Mining Area
The proposal is generally considered unlikely to have a significant impact on the fauna habitat in the project area, with only a relatively small area of forested and pastoral grassland habitat potentially affected by subsidence remediation works, as discussed in Sections 5.1 and 5.2. The proposal would also have only a minimal impact on the aquatic habitats in the project area as discussed below (Section 5.3.1.2). The potential impacts of the proposal on the threatened species identified as occurring or potentially occurring in the project area are fully assessed in Appendix C.
5.3.1.1 Pastoral Grassland Habitat
The pastoral grassland in the project area offers only poor quality fauna habitat for a limited number of native fauna species suited to the utilisation of degraded areas (refer to Section 4.1). It is not considered to provide core habitat for the majority of locally occurring native fauna species. Large areas of pastoral grassland occur throughout the project area, and the surrounding locality. The subsidence impacts in pastoral grassland are predicted to be limited to surface cracking, and apart from the areas where the depth of cover is less than 80 metres it is not expected to require intensive surface remediation.
Fauna species that are reliant on pastoral grassland habitat include grazing mammals such as the Eastern Grey Kangaroo, numerous birds such as the Australian Pipit, and pest species such as the European Red Fox. The impact on these species as a result of the proposed development is expected to be negligible, as there will be a net increase in pastoral grassland habitat, and minimal subsidence remediation impacts.
5.3.1.2 Aquatic Habitat
The impact of the proposed development on aquatic habitat is restricted to subsidence remediation works in drainage lines and farm dams. The proposed underground mining is likely to result in surface cracking within some ephemeral
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.3 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
drainage lines (Figure 5.1). The remediation of subsidence within drainage lines and the creation of a diversion channel in the northern drainage system will result in the temporary removal of approximately one hectare of aquatic habitat from the drainage lines and farm dams. Construction of a temporary diversion channel to carry flows during channel stabilisation and rehabilitation works will adequately maintain the natural flow regimes within the northern channel system.
Changes in the drainage patterns of the project area as a result of subsidence may result in the establishment of new wet soak areas, however, there will be no net loss of aquatic habitat in the project area (refer to Section 5.4.2.3).
Fauna species that are reliant on aquatic habitat include amphibians, waterbirds and reptiles such as the Eastern Snake- necked Turtle (refer to Section 4.1). The project will not significantly impact upon the habitat of these fauna species (refer to Section 5.4.2.3).
5.3.1.3 Woodland Habitat
The majority of the woodland communities in the project area offers only limited and highly degraded habitat for the range of endemic species which occur or have the potential to occur, as outlined in Section 4.1. The range of species known to occur within these woodland communities would not be significantly affected by the proposed development, as limited subsidence remediation works are predicted for woodland areas. Subsidence cracking will be repaired with minimal disturbance to the woodland communities (refer to Section 5.2.1.1), thereby limiting the impact on fauna species utilising these areas.
Higher quality fauna habitat exists in the woodland communities in the southeast of the project area. The range of species known to occur in this area will not be significantly affected by the proposed development. Subsidence cracking is not predicted in this area due to the high depth of cover, and therefore subsidence remediation works are unlikely to be required. Potential bat roosting habitat within the rock crevices of the Vere may be affected by subsidence due to opening and closing of rock fissures; however, there is expected to be no net loss of habitat associated with mining in this area.
5.3.2 Surface Infrastructure
The majority of the surface infrastructure is proposed to be constructed in areas previously disturbed or proposed to be disturbed by open cut mining activities, and areas of highly degraded vegetation which have been shown to support limited fauna populations. Works outside these disturbed areas are likely to affect approximately 0.5 hectares of woodland habitat, approximately 0.1 hectares of aquatic habitat and 6 hectares of pasture. Therefore the construction and operation of surface infrastructure will have no significant impact on the fauna communities known to occur in the project area.
5.4 IMPACT ON THREATENED SPECIES
5.4.1 Commonwealth Legislation
Under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), approval of the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment is required for any action that may have a significant impact on matters of national environmental significance. These matters are:
World Heritage properties;
Ramsar wetlands;
cetaceans, migratory species, threatened species, critical habitats or ecological communities listed in the EPBC Act;
Commonwealth land, marine areas or reserves; and
nuclear actions.
As part of the project is located beneath Commonwealth land, and Environment Australia has determined that the project is a controlled action, the potential impact of the proposal on Commonwealth land must be assessed. As discussed in Section 5.1, there is unlikely to be any surface disturbance for subsidence remediation or surface infrastructure construction on Commonwealth land. Subsidence ranging between 0 and 2 metres is likely to occur, but will not result in any significant change to the existing drainage or vegetation.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.4 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
Other matters of national environmental significance of relevance to the project are threatened and migratory species. In order to determine whether there is likely to be a potentially significant impact on threatened species, the EPBC Act list of threatened species, critical habitats, and ecological communities was reviewed. It was found that only one listed item applies to the project area: the Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina) is listed as Vulnerable and is present immediately north of the project area. The Slaty Red Gum has been identified by HLA-Envirosciences (2002) to the north of the northeastern portion of the project area, to the north of the Saxonvale rail loop (Figure 3.1), in an area which will not be impacted by the project. Under the provisions of the eight part test it was found that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the Slaty Red Gum (refer to Appendix C).
The following bird species have been recorded in the project area, and are listed as “migratory species” under the EPBC Act:
Grey Teal (Anas gracilis)
Pacific Black Duck (Anas superciliosa)
Australian Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata)
Black Swan (Cygnus atratus)
Great Egret (Egretta alba = Ardea alba)
Brown Goshawk (Accipiter fasciatus)
Wedge-tailed Eagle (Aquila audax)
Black-shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris)
White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster)
Brown Falcon (Falco berigora)
Nankeen Kestrel (Falco cenchroides)
Red-necked Stint (Calidris ruficollis)
Black-winged Stilt (Himantopus himantopus)
Red-capped Plover (Charadrius ruficapillus)
Black-fronted Dotterel (Elseyornis melanops)
Red-kneed Dotterel (Erythrogonys cinctus)
Masked Lapwing (Vanellus miles)
Australian Reed-Warbler (Acrocephalus australis)
Rufous Songlark (Cincloramphus mathewsi).
The project will not modify, destroy or isolate an area of important habitat for any of these listed migratory bird species. Important habitat is defined under the EPBC legislation as:
habitat utilised by a migratory species occasionally or periodically within a region that supports an ecologically significant proportion of the population of the species, or
habitat utilised by a migratory species which is at the limit of the species’ range, or
habitat within an area where the species is declining.
It is considered that the woodland, pastoral grassland and aquatic habitats in the project area, including on Commonwealth land, do not provide an important area of habitat, as defined under the legislation, for the listed migratory species recorded in the project area. No known roosting or nesting habitat will be significantly impacted under the
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.5 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
proposal, as there will be no significant surface disturbance associated with underground mining, and surface facilities will be primarily constructed in previously disturbed areas. As discussed in Section 5.3, the project will not result in a net loss of any type of fauna habitat present in the project area, including on Commonwealth land. The project area does not provide habitat for any ecologically significant proportion of a migratory bird population and none of the species are either at the limit of their range or known to be in decline in the area.
On this basis, it is considered that there will be no significant impact on the ecological values of Commonwealth land to be undermined by the project and no significant impact on migratory or threatened species present within the project area.
5.4.2 State Legislation
5.4.2.1 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995
Threatened Species
Eight part tests are required under Section 5A of the EP&A Act to assess impacts of the project on those species listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Eight part tests have been undertaken for those threatened species that have been recorded in the project area, and those species for which potential habitat is considered to be present (refer to Tables 3.1 and 4.1). Eight part tests are included in Appendix C.
It was found on the basis of the eight part tests that it is unlikely that there would be a significant impact on any species, population or ecological community currently listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. Therefore a species impact statement is not required for the project.
No currently listed endangered populations or areas of critical habitat have been recorded in the project area.
Endangered Ecological Communities
The project area does provide known habitat for Warkworth Sands Woodland and suitable habitat for Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest. The vegetation within the areas that provide potential habitat for Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest is highly degraded and the structure and composition of existing vegetation can not be considered to fit the description of this EEC (refer to Section 3.5). The area of potential habitat for Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest (the northern drainage system) will be affected by subsidence remediation drainage works. Habitat reconstruction in this area will target species that comprise the Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest in an effort to develop this endangered community.
Surveys conducted for the Bulga Coal Project (Mitchell McCotter 1990) and additional surveys conducted for the current assessment identified a remnant of this community to the east of Charlton Road, in the northwest of the project area. Aeolian sand deposits at the confluence of the northern drainage line and Wollombi Brook, which could potentially support Warkworth Sands Woodland, were surveyed and found not to constitute Warkworth Sands Woodland. The Warkworth Sands Woodland within the project area is outside the limit of proposed disturbance and therefore the project will not result in a disruption to the lifecycle of the community such that it would be placed at risk of extinction.
Threatened Flora
One threatened flora species has been recorded immediately to the north of the project area: the Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina). No threatened flora species have been recorded within the project area. Eight part tests have been undertaken for the Slaty Red Gum and the following species that have the potential to occur in the project area: A Red Grass (Bothriochloa biloba); Eucalyptus fracta; White-flowered Wax Plant (Cynanchum elegans); and Illawarra Greenhood Orchid (Pterostylis gibbosa) (Appendix C).
The conservation status of the threatened flora species assessed is inadequately known. It is considered unlikely that these species are adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. Several of the potentially-occurring threatened species would be at the limit of their known distribution if they occurred in the project area. The Slaty Red Gum would be near the south-western limit of its known distribution in the project area. Any Eucalyptus fracta would be close to its only known occurrence, and the Illawarra Greenhood Orchid would be at the limit of its known distribution, as it is only known from three sites in the Illawarra; one site near Nowra; and one site at Milbrodale in the Hunter Valley.
It was found that the project would not disrupt the life cycle of any of these species such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. Impacts of the project would be restricted to the disturbance of small areas of open woodland and pastoral grassland habitats, which are both common and widely distributed in the project area and surrounds. Therefore it is considered that potential habitat of these species would not be removed in significant amounts, or be isolated from any currently interconnecting or proximate habitat areas as a result of the project.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.6 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
Threatened Fauna
Five bird species and two microchiropteran bat species listed as Vulnerable on Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 have been recorded in the project area. The Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), Speckled Warbler (Pyrrholaemus sagittatus), Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis), Hooded Robin (Melanodryas cucullata cucullata), Diamond Firetail (Stagonopleura guttata), the Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis), and Common Bent-wing Bat (Miniopterus schreibersii) have been recorded (refer to Section 4.3).
Eight part tests have been undertaken for the seven threatened species that have been recorded, and the 17 species that have the potential to occur in the project area (Appendix C).
Records of these threatened species in conservation reserves in the region are rare, and based on this it is considered unlikely that any of the species are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region. High quality conserved habitat is available for these species in Yengo, Goulburn River and Wollemi National Parks.
Several potentially-occurring threatened species would be at the limit of their known distribution if they were identified in the project area, but none of the recorded threatened species is at its limit in the project area.
It was found that the project would not disrupt the life cycle of any of these species such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. Impacts of the project would be restricted to the disturbance of small areas of open woodland, aquatic and pastoral grassland habitats, which are common and widely distributed habitats in the project area and surrounds. Therefore it is considered that potential or known habitat of these species would not be removed in significant amounts, or be isolated from any currently interconnecting or proximate habitat areas as a result of the project.
Key Threatening Processes
The "loss of biodiversity as a result of loss and/or degradation of habitat following clearing and fragmentation of native vegetation" or the "clearing of native vegetation" is recognised as a major factor contributing to loss of biological diversity (NPWS 2001). In New South Wales since 1788 at least 61 per cent of the original native vegetation has been cleared, thinned or substantially or significantly disturbed (Environment Protection Authority 1997).
Some examples of the impacts of the clearing of native vegetation on biological diversity are:
destruction of habitat results in loss of local populations of individual species;
fragmentation of habitat;
expansion of dryland salinity;
riparian zone degradation;
increased greenhouse gas emissions;
increased habitat for invasive species;
loss of leaf litter layer;
loss or disruption of ecological function; and
changes to soil biota (NPWS 2001).
The removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation and surface facility construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a significant loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. The project includes the construction of habitat corridors to compensate for this small loss of habitat.
Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands is recognised as a major factor contributing to loss of biological diversity and ecological function in aquatic ecosystems, including floodplains (NPWS 2002a). In New South Wales since 1788 most of the original aquatic ecosystems have had major modification of their flow regime through river regulation by damming, or altered flows in channels or on floodplains through draining, extraction and diversion of water. Alteration of natural flow regimes in rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands has a variety of impacts which include:
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.7 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
reduction of habitat due to change in area, frequency and duration of flooding of floodplains and terminal wetlands;
increased flows causing more permanent flooding of some wetlands;
riparian zone degradation through altered flow patterns;
increased habitat for invasive species; and
loss or disruption of ecological function (NPWS 2002a).
Disruption of ecological processes may continue long after initial flow alteration, causing continued decline in biological diversity (NPWS 2002a).
The subsidence remediation works are not expected to have a significant long-term impact on the aquatic ecosystems of the un-named tributaries draining the project area. The re-creation of habitat and habitat enhancement proposed is expected to result in an improved aquatic ecosystem within the project area, ensuring the ecological function of the tributaries within the project area in the long term. Larger systems such as Wollombi Brook and Monkey Place Creek will not be significantly impacted by the project.
There is a preliminary determination to list the removal of dead wood, dead trees and logs as a key threatening process. The removal is recognised as a major factor contributing to the loss of biological diversity (NPWS 2002b). The proposed subsidence remediation works and surface infrastructure construction are not expected to involve the removal of a substantial amount of dead wood, dead trees or logs. However, it is recommended that if removal is unavoidable, these resources should be placed back on the ground in the vicinity of their original location to provide ground fauna habitat.
5.4.2.2 SEPP 44 Assessment
The project is subject to assessment under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 44 (Koala Habitat Protection) as it lies in a local government area listed in Schedule 1 of the policy. SEPP 44 aims to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation that provide habitat for the Koala, to ensure permanent free- living populations over their present range and to reverse the current trend of population decline. Any development application in an identified local government area, affecting an area of 1 hectare or greater, must be assessed under the policy.
Assessment under SEPP 44 is based on an initial determination of whether the land constitutes potential Koala habitat. This is determined by assessing whether the eucalypt species present in Schedule 2 of the policy constitute 15 per cent or more of the total number of trees in the upper or lower strata of the tree component. If potential Koala habitat is present, the area must be further assessed to determine if the land is core Koala habitat.
The species listed in Schedule 2 of the policy are listed in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 – Species of Eucalypt listed in Schedule 2 of SEPP 44
Scientific Name Common Name Eucalyptus tereticornis Forest Red Gum Eucalyptus microcorys Tallowwood Eucalyptus punctata Grey Gum Eucalyptus viminalis Ribbon or Manna Gum Eucalyptus camaldulensis River Red Gum Eucalyptus haemastoma Broad Leaved Scribbly Gum Eucalyptus signata Scribbly Gum Eucalyptus albens White Box Eucalyptus populnea Bimble Box or Poplar Box Eucalyptus robusta Swamp Mahogany
The Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) and Grey Gum (Eucalyptus punctata) have both been recorded in the project area. The Forest Red Gum is scattered throughout much of the project area, but is never a dominant canopy species. The distribution of Grey Gum is restricted to a small area, approximately 1 kilometre by 200 metres, of northerly- facing slope in the southeastern portion of the project area, dominated by Grey Box, Spotted Gum and Grey Gum. This area is isolated by surrounding woodland which does not contain Koala habitat. Both the Forest Red Gum and Grey Gum
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.8 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Impacts of the Proposal
constitute less than 15 per cent of canopy species in the project area. Therefore the project area does not provide potential Koala habitat and no further assessment is required.
No evidence of Koala utilisation of the project area has been found during the fauna surveys undertaken in the project area. There are also no historical records of the Koala occurring in the project area, although limited regional historic records do exist. Therefore SEPP 44 does not place any constraints on the project.
5.4.2.3 Fisheries Management Act 1994
The Threatened Species Schedules of the Fisheries Management Act 1994 comprise lists of endangered species, populations and ecological communities and species presumed extinct, vulnerable species, and key threatening processes. An eight part test has been undertaken to assess impacts of the project on those items listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 and is included in Appendix C.
The Schedules were reviewed, and it was found that the Hunter River drainage basin is outside the known distribution of the species, populations and ecological communities listed. Therefore none of the listed species, populations and ecological communities is expected to occur in the project area, and none would be impacted by the project.
Key threatening processes listed include: the introduction of fish to fresh waters within a river catchment outside their natural range; the removal of large woody debris; the degradation of native riparian vegetation along New South Wales watercourses; and the installation and operation of instream structures and other mechanisms that alter natural flow regimes of rivers and streams.
The project is likely to result in surface cracking and ponding within two ephemeral drainage lines. Some farms dams may also be affected. The remediation of subsidence within drainage lines will result in the temporary removal of approximately two hectares of aquatic habitat from the drainage lines and farm dams. Construction of a temporary diversion channel to carry flows during channel stabilisation and rehabilitation works in the northern drainage line (Figure 5.1) will adequately maintain the natural flow regime.
Riparian vegetation will remain substantially unaffected under the proposal, as the subsidence remediation works will potentially affect a total area of 5 hectares of riparian vegetation. There will be no removal of large woody debris or introduction of fish in the existing or temporary drainage lines.
The temporary diversion channel will be constructed prior to commencement of rehabilitation works in the northern channel system and will be in place until the northern channel is stabilised. It is considered that the establishment of a temporary stabilised diversion channel prior to subsidence remediation works will adequately compensate for the loss of natural aquatic habitat during channel rehabilitation works. This temporary loss of natural habitat is considered to be not significant, as it has been found that the existing natural habitat does not support threatened aquatic flora or fauna. Additionally, the terrestrial threatened species known to occur or to potentially occur in the project area will be provided with adequate alternative habitat in the diversion channel.
The construction of a levee bank and diversion channel at the downstream end of the channel to reduce backwater flooding from Wollombi Brook will result in the disruption of fish passage. This levee bank and channel will be designed to convey runoff around areas that may potentially be affected by subsidence and back into the existing drainage line downstream of the mining operation. The diversion channel will be progressively constructed and stabilised prior to undermining of the northern drainage line over each of the respective downstream longwall panels. This will effectively maintain water flow through the affected catchment areas, maintaining the uninhibited movement of aquatic fauna along the drainage lines during periods of flow, but will limit the potential for migration upstream into the drainage line from Wollombi Brook. The construction of the levee bank and diversion channel is considered unlikely to significantly reduce the availability of habitat for fin fish in the project area as suitable similar habitat will be retained in similar ephemeral drainage lines located elsewhere within and surrounding the project area and in the immediate vicinity.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 5.9 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
6.0 MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
6.1 GENERAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES
A range of management strategies will be used by BCM to limit any impact on endemic flora and fauna in the project area. The strategies will include:
management of noise and dust to minimise impacts to adjoining vegetation communities and fauna as currently addressed in the BCM Noise Management Plan (Umwelt 2002f) and BCM Dust Management Plan (Umwelt 2002b);
vermin, feral animal, and noxious weed control as currently addressed in the BCM Land Management Plan (Umwelt 2002d);
management of pasture to maintain productivity and ground coverage, and management of remnant vegetation to provide fauna habitat as currently addressed in the BCM Land Management Plan (Umwelt 2002d);
soil conservation achieved through maintenance of ground cover as currently addressed in the BCM Land Management Plan (Umwelt 2002d) and the BCM Landscape and Revegetation Management Plan (Umwelt 2002e);
rehabilitation of disturbed areas with local indigenous species as currently addressed in the BCM Landscape and Revegetation Management Plan (Umwelt 2002e) and BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c);
use of local indigenous species in landscaped areas, and the linkage and integration of new areas with existing landscaped areas to improve ecological function and provide habitat as currently addressed in the BCM Landscape and Revegetation Management Plan (Umwelt 2002e);
management of erosion and sedimentation to ensure that adjoining vegetation communities and aquatic systems are not disturbed as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c) and BCM Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Umwelt 2002f);
management of surface water to ensure that adjoining vegetation communities, aquatic systems and associated fauna are not disturbed as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c);
management of fire regime as currently addressed in the BCM Bushfire Management Plan (Umwelt 2002a);
management of heavy machinery use to minimise impacts on flora and fauna as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c);
the use of small equipment in subsidence remediation activities within woodland areas;
management of the timing of clearing activities, and the method of salvage for medium to large trees, in order to minimise potential impacts on hollow-dependent fauna as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c) (refer to Section 6.1.1);
adaptive management, as required, if a previously unrecorded or assessed threatened species is identified in the project area during construction, operational or remediation works as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c);
creation of temporary aquatic habitat in the northern channel system during creek restoration works, including riparian and aquatic vegetation as currently addressed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c) and draft Beltana Stream Remediation Plan (Umwelt, in prep);
ongoing monitoring and maintenance of all revegetation works and habitat enhancement activities; and
creation of habitat corridors linking isolated remnant vegetation stands and a VCA in the northwest of the project area (refer to Figure 5.2 and Section 6.3).
6.1.1 Management of Endemic Fauna Species
If subsidence remediation in woodland communities requires the removal of hollow-bearing trees, the following clearing procedure will be used to minimise the impact on endemic fauna.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.1 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
1. Clearing will be undertaken, where practicable, during the months of September, October, March, April and May, in order to minimise impacts on hollow-dependant fauna, especially threatened fauna.
2. Within the area of clearing, hollow-bearing trees and other habitat structures such as stags, logs and stumps will be marked to prevent accidental clearing.
3. Any threatened flora and fauna species identified in the pre-clearance inspections that had not been previously identified in the EIS will be investigated.
4. Vegetation surrounding the marked habitat structures will be cleared and the marked structures left undisturbed for a period of 24 hours.
5. Marked, hollow-bearing trees will be shaken prior to felling using a bulldozer and then left for a short period to allow any fauna using the hollows to be observed.
6. Hollow-bearing trees will be slowly pushed over using a bulldozer, with care taken to avoid damage to hollows, or preferably, will be supported by a wire rope, whilst being felled.
7. Following felling each of the identified hollows will be examined for injured fauna.
8. Where practical, felled trees will be left for a 24-hour period prior to removal in order to allow fauna to move into adjoining vegetation of their own volition.
9. Where it is not practicable to leave felled trees overnight, nocturnal species which do not immediately move into adjoining vegetation will be captured and kept in a warm, dark and quiet place prior to nocturnal release within the same vegetation community from which they were captured.
10. Captured nocturnal animals will be released on the day of capture and will not be held for extended periods of time.
11. Suitable hollows and other habitat structure including logs, stumps and stags suitable for relocation.
12. Hollows intended for re-erection will be removed using a chainsaw and then capped with marine plywood.
13. Logs, stumps, stags and hollows intended for ground habitat will be cut into sections, as required and relocated to suitable habitat areas.
14. In the event that injured fauna are identified, individuals will be immediately taken to the nearest veterinarian or certified wildlife carer for treatment.
If felled hollows cannot be relocated into adjoining vegetation a nest box will be installed to ensure that disturbance will not result in a net loss of arboreal habitat.
6.2 MANAGEMENT OF WARKWORTH SANDS WOODLAND
The Warkworth Sands Woodland in the northwest of the project area is to be managed for conservation. Specific management requirements for the community will include:
the exclusion of cattle and prevention of unrestricted access by fencing;
ongoing management of weeds and pests;.
management of the fire regime in the community to restrict the occurrence of high intensity burns but to allow infrequent burns of moderate intensity to set seed; and
linking the community to other vegetation remnants through the establishment of vegetation and fauna movement corridors (refer to Section 6.4).
6.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF PASTURE
Areas of pastoral grassland affected by subsidence remediation works will be stabilised and revegetated. After surface soil amelioration and tillage is completed for any given area, revegetation will commence as soon as practicable. The
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.2 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
proposed method of sowing will be via conventional spreading using agricultural broadcasting equipment. Table 6.1 presents a guide to the pasture species and application rates that may be used for pastoral grassland revegetation. All legumes will be inoculated and lime pelleted prior to seeding.
Table 6.1 - Pasture Species and Application Rates
Rate (kg/ha) Species Spring/Summer Autumn/Winter Japanese Millet 15 5 Ryecorn/ Oats 5 15 Rhodes Grass 10 10 Couch Grass 10 8 Wimmera Ryegrass 5 10 White Clover 10 10 Sub Clover 5 8 Lucerne 8 5
6.4 ESTABLISHMENT OF VEGETATION AND FAUNA MOVEMENT CORRIDORS AND A VOLUNTARY CONSERVATION AREA
The Synoptic Plan: Integrated Landscapes for Coal Mine Rehabilitation in the Hunter Valley of NSW (Department of Mineral Resources 1999) provides “a basis for development of a long term integrated strategy for the rehabilitation of mines”. The Synoptic Plan conceptualises opportunities for revegetation of mine areas that will achieve the regional objectives of:
visual amenity;
biodiversity; and
sustainable after-use.
Biodiversity can be promoted by establishing more diverse ecosystems in rehabilitation. The Synoptic Plan states that this can be achieved through:
planting understorey as well as trees;
planting a variety of species;
creating a number of landforms;
creating a diversity of habitats;
placement of logs and rocks in rehabilitated areas to increase habitat diversity and provide shelter for fauna;
planting species that flower at different times of the year; and
linking rehabilitated treed areas to remnant native vegetation.
In keeping with the Synoptic Plan, it is recommended that isolated stands of remnant vegetation be linked through vegetation corridors. It is also proposed that a VCA be established in the northwest of the project area (refer to Figure 5.2). Establishment of the corridors and enhancement of the floristic values of the Conservation Area will involve modifying the current rehabilitation techniques to emulate an appropriate vegetation community such as Mixed Eucalypt Woodland. Appropriate species composition is provided in Table 6.2.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.3 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
Table 6.2 – Habitat Corridor Species List
Species Common Name Height Range Trees and Shrubs Acacia falcata A Wattle 3-5 metres Acacia longissima A Wattle 2-5 metres Acacia brownii A Wattle 0.3-1 metre Allocasuarina luehmanii Bull-Oak 5-15 metres Allocasuarina torulosa Forest Oak To 8 metres Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple To 30 metres Brachychiton populneum Kurrajong To 20 metres Bursaria spinosa Blackthorn To 8 metres Casuarina glauca Swamp Oak 8-20 metres Corymbia maculata Spotted Gum To 45 metres Eremophila debilis Winter Apple 1 rarely 2 metres Eucalyptus albens White Box To 25 metres Eucalyptus dawsonii Slaty Gum To 30 metres Eucalyptus molucanna Grey Box To 25 metres Eucalyptus punctata Grey Gum To 35 metres Eucalyptus tereticornis Forest Red Gum To 50 metres Exocarpus cupressiformis Native Cherry To 8 metres Indigofera australis Indigo To 2.5 metres Grasses and Groundcovers Aristida personata A Wire Grass 0.6-1.2 metres Aristida ramosa Three-awn Speargrass To 1.2 metres Bothriochloa macra Red Grass To 1 metre Chloris truncata Windmill Grass To 0.5 metre Danthonia richardsonii A Wallaby Grass To 1 metre Danthonia tenuiur A Wallaby Grass To 1.1 metres Desmodium brachypodum Large Tick Trefoil To 60 cm Desmodium varians Slender Tick Trefoil 15-50 cm Dichelachne micrantha Shorthair Plumegrass To 1.2 metres Glycine tabacina Slender Glycine Scrambler Hardenbergia violacea Purple Twining Pea Scrambler Lomandra filiformis Mat-rush 10-30 cm Stipa aristiglumis Plains Grass To 2 metres Themeda australis Kangaroo Grass To 1.2 metres Aquatic Vegetation Cyperus difformis Dirty Dora 10-50 cm Cyperus polystachyos 10-60 cm Cyperus gracilis Umbrella Sedge 10-40 cm Eleocharis acuta Spike-rush 10-60 (rarely 90) cm Juncus usitatus Common Rush 40-110 cm Schoenoplectus Rush 50-100 cm mucronatus
Techniques would incorporate planting a shrub understorey, and spreading leaf litter, rocks, branches and logs for seedling and fauna shelter. A conceptual plan of potential habitat corridors is provided on Figure 5.2. The habitat corridors will link isolated areas of vegetation and result in improved fauna habitat. The corridors will link the high quality fauna habitats of the Singleton Army Training Area through to the riparian vegetation of Wollombi Brook and beyond.
Rehabilitation of the site will consider the establishment of the Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest EEC and the regionally significant community Wollombi Red Gum – River Oak Woodland in consultation with the NPWS. The rehabilitation of appropriate sites with communities known to be in decline in the Hunter will result in increased habitat complexity for
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.4 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
fauna species within the Bulga Complex and will improve the knowledge relating to the re-establishment and rehabilitation of endangered ecological communities.
BCM will refer to the DMR’s Synoptic Plan when planning rehabilitation, landscaping and habitat areas to ensure compatibility with its aims and objectives, enabling a regionally coordinated approach to corridors. A detailed closure plan, including revegetation of the final landform, will be prepared at least five years prior to closure of Bulga Complex.
6.5 RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF RIPARIAN VEGETATION
As part of the establishment of vegetation and fauna movement corridors, riparian vegetation associated with the northern drainage system will be rehabilitated to create a continuous riparian corridor which will link remnant woodland within Bulga Complex to the riparian habitats of Wollombi Brook. The re-establishment of riparian vegetation will reinstate the riparian community which is within an area previously occupied by the EEC Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest.
The rehabilitation process will begin once the remediation works within the system are completed. Rehabilitation will aim to re-instate this EEC with species selection based on the community description provided by NPWS (2000). The re- instatement of the community will result in a net gain in Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest within the project area in the long term.
6.6 ESTABLISHMENT OF AQUATIC HABITAT
Channel stabilisation works in the northern channel system will require the establishment of a temporary diversion channel. The diversion channel will be constructed to divert flows away from the natural channel during remediation works in a similar manner to that approved for Beltana. The diversion channel will be planted with endemic riparian, aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation to provide stabilisation of the system and provide habitat for species dependant on riparian ecosystems such as frogs. A list of riparian and aquatic flora species suitable for rehabilitation is included in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c) and reproduced in Table 6.2. Further habitat enhancement requirements for the diversion channel include the provision of pool and riffle sequences, snags and meanders.
6.7 MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE
Monitoring requirements are detailed in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c). Monitoring includes regular assessment of revegetated areas, remnant vegetation and aquatic habitats by Bulga Complex environmental staff. It is proposed to include monitoring of threatened species known to occur in the project area on an annual basis. The monitoring will allow an ongoing assessment of the impact of mining operations on threatened species.
The Environment Manager will coordinate an annual monitoring program to assess the adequacy of management measures and the success of rehabilitation techniques. Areas of remnant vegetation will be used as control sites for comparison of the results of rehabilitation. Monitoring details are provided in the BCM Flora and Fauna Management Plan (Umwelt 2002c). Appropriate amelioration measures will be undertaken in the event that the monitoring program identifies areas of concern.
6.7.1 Threatened Species Monitoring
As the project is considered unlikely to significantly impact endemic fauna populations, a wide range of fauna monitoring is not required. Monitoring is proposed to specifically target threatened species previously recorded or considered likely to occur within the project area. The results of the monitoring will be analysed and compared to previous monitoring results to determine population trends. In the event that negative trends are identified indicating the decline of particular threatened species, further assessment of the impacts of mining will be undertaken and appropriate amelioration measures determined.
It is proposed to establish five threatened bird monitoring locations for annual monitoring of threatened bird species and habitat for the life of the project (Figure 6.1). It is recommended that three diurnal census points be sampled annually. Monitoring Point 5 located in the southeastern portion of the project area will also be sampled for the Masked Owl which was tentatively recorded during a previous survey. The recommended census points are located generally where threatened species have previously been recorded.
Threatened microchiropteran bats will also be sampled along a series of pre-determined transects shown on Figure 6.1. Five Anabat transects will be established for annual monitoring to allow comparison between previous years and surveys.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.5
Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
Warkworth Sands Woodland EEC identified in the northwestern portion of the project area will also be monitored for the life of the mine. A fixed vegetation quadrat and photographic monitoring point will be established in order to sample community composition and the ongoing natural regeneration of the community. Monitoring will also include an assessment of weed infestations and feral animal impacts, and the condition of fencing.
In the event that further threatened species are found to occur within the project area the monitoring program will incorporate surveys to adequately assess and monitor these species.
The results of the threatened species monitoring will be reported in the annual environmental management report (AEMR). The results of the monitoring will be reviewed annually and the timing, placement and requirements of the monitoring will be reviewed every five years as currently addressed in the Flora and Fauna Management Plan review period.
6.7.2 Revegetation Monitoring
Revegetation monitoring will be undertaken by the Environmental Manager or delegate. Monitoring will initially be undertaken three months after planting, followed by six months, and then twelve months and annually thereafter. The monitoring will identify any areas of land degradation and will allow for the identification of priority areas for degradation prevention and rehabilitation.
The monitoring will include regular checks of the following aspects:
revegetation germination rates;
plant health;
feral animals and the need for control;
weed infestation and the need for control;
requirements for additional planting to be undertaken;
the need for further fertilisation;
requirement for application of lime or gypsum to control pH and improve soil structure;
erosion and the need for repair of eroded areas;
fire management – fire suppression or fire encouragement;
the quality and effectiveness of fencing;
signs of disturbance, either by animals or humans; and
the success of any management programs implemented following previous monitoring inspections.
Monitoring results will be assessed and utilised in the continual improvement and refinement of rehabilitation techniques and will be reported as part of the AEMR. In the event that monitoring reveals unsatisfactory progress the Environmental Manager will organise maintenance of the site. Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to:
replanting failed and unsatisfactory plantings;
repairing erosion;
fire management;
pest and weed control;
maintenance and repair of fencing;
fertiliser application;
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.6 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations Management Requirements
application of lime or gypsum to control pH and improve soil; and
appropriate and effective stabilisation of all rehabilitated slopes.
Weed and vermin control will be conducted as currently addressed in the existing BCM Land Management Plan (Umwelt 2002d), which requires:
regular site inspections to identify areas of weed infestation and type of weed species;
development and implementation of an eradication plan applicable to the circumstances, which may include manual removal, spot spraying, boom spraying, aerial spraying or biological control;
maintenance of regular contact with neighbouring property owners to attempt to eradicate weed species from the surrounding area;
minimisation of vegetation disturbance by reducing the number of tracks and using the same routes;
minimisation of clearing and other disturbance of vegetation associated with civil works;
early establishment and maintenance of vigorous grasses and native trees particularly during rehabilitation of overburden dumps; and
regular maintenance of topsoil stockpiles to eradicate weed infestation.
The results of rehabilitation monitoring, weed and vermin control, and flora and fauna management will be included in the AEMR.
6.7.2.1 Monitoring of Aquatic Habitats
The condition of the northern drainage line and the temporary diversion channel above the northern and central mining areas will be monitored annually, to identify any deterioration in habitat quality. The monitoring inspections will assess the following characteristics and will be recorded on a standard recording sheet:
general health of the aquatic vegetation;
occurrence and abundance of weed species;
signs of disturbance;
any observable impacts of the disturbance such as the effectiveness of sediment and erosion control structures;
the habitat attributes of the aquatic vegetation; and
the presence of amphibian and reptile species utilising the habitat.
6.7.3 Vegetation and Fauna Movement Corridor Monitoring
Monitoring of vegetation and fauna movement corridors will be limited initially to the monitoring of vegetation re- establishment as described in Section 6.6.2. The requirement for monitoring the effectiveness of the corridor in providing fauna habitat will be determined once the corridor is established and will be detailed in the AEMR, as required.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 6.7 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations References
7.0 REFERENCES
Bell, S., 1993. A brief survey of the vegetation of the Hunter Valley Floor. Prepared for National Parks and Wildlife Service, Upper Hunter District.
Benson, J., 1989. Establishing priorities for the conservation of rare or threatened plants and plant associations in New South Wales. In The Conservation of Threatened Species and their Habitats. Eds. M. Hicks and P. Eiser. Proceedings of a National Conference, March 1987. Australian Committee for IUCN Occasional Papers 2: 17-82.
BHP (Broken Hill Proprietary Company Limited), 1980. Saxonvale Mine Development Environmental Impact Statement.
Cronin, L., 1991. Key Guide to Australian Mammals, Reed Books Australia, Victoria.
Environment Protection Authority, 1997. New South Wales State of the Environment, Environment Protection Authority, Chatswood, NSW.
ERM, 2000. South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1999. Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 1991. Flora of New South Wales, Volume 2, New South Wales University Press, Kensington, NSW.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 1992. Flora of New South Wales, Volume 3, New South Wales University Press, Kensington, NSW.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 1993. Flora of New South Wales, Volume 4, New South Wales University Press, Kensington, NSW.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 2000. Flora of New South Wales, Volume1, Revised Edition, University of New South Wales Press, Sydney.
HLA-Envirosciences, 2002. Redbank 2 Power Plant Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for NP Power 2 Pty Limited, Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited and AIDC Australia Limited.
Hollands, D., 1991. Birds of the Night. Owls, Frogmouths and Nightjars of Australia, Reed Books, Balgowlah, NSW.
Hyder Consultants, 1998 Singleton Military Area Resource Assessment. Prepared for Department of Defence.
McDonald, R.C., Isbell, R.F., Speight, J.G., Walker, J. and Hopkins, M.S., 1990. Australian Soil and Land Survey Field Handbook, Second Edition, Inkata Press, Melbourne.
Menkhorst, P. and Knight, F., 2001. A field guide to the Mammals of Australia, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.
Mitchell McCotter and Associates, 1990. Bulga Coal Project Environmental Impact Statement.
Mitchell McCotter, 1992. South Bulga Colliery Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Oakbridge Limited and Saxonvale Coal Limited.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2000. Vegetation Survey, Classification and Mapping for the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Region. Technical report prepared for the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy (LHCCREMS), Newcastle, NSW.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001. Final Determination – Clearing of Native Vegetation, NPWS, Hurstville, NSW.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002a. Final Determination – Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands, NPWS, Hurstville, NSW.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002b. Final Determination – Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion, NPWS, Hurstville, NSW.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002c. Preliminary Determination – Removal of dead wood, dead trees and logs, NPWS, Hurstville, NSW.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 7.1 Flora and Fauna Assessment for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations References
NSW Department of Mineral Resources, 1999. Synoptic Plan Integrated Landscapes for Coal Mine Rehabilitation in the Hunter Valley of NSW.
Pizzey, G. and Knight, F., 1997. The Field Guide to the Birds of Australia, Harper Collins Publishers, Sydney.
Robinson, M., 1995. A Field Guide to Frogs of Australia – from Port Augusta to Fraser Island including Tasmania, Reed Books, Chatswood, NSW.
Specht, R.L., Specht, A., Whelan, M.B. and Hegarty, E.E., 1995. Conservation Atlas of Plant Communities in Australia. Centre for Coastal Management, Lismore, in association with Southern Cross University Press.
Strahan, R. (ed), 1998. The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2001. Beltana No. 1 Underground Coal Mine Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002a. Bushfire Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002b. Dust Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002c. Flora and Fauna Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002d. Land Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002e. Landscape and Revegetation Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited, 2002f. Noise Management Plan. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited 1468/R04/V4 July 2003 7.2
APPENDIX A
Flora Species List
Flora Species List
The following is a list of the flora species recorded in the Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations project area.
Introduced – Refers to exotic species that have been introduced to the project area.
No threatened flora species have been recorded in the project area.
Nomenclature is consistent with Harden (1991, 1992, 1993, 2000).
Family / Genus Species Common Name Status ACANTHACEAE Brunoniella australis Blue Trumpet ADIANTACEAE Adiantum aethiopicum Common Maidenhair Fern AIZOACEAE Galenia pubescens Galenia Introduced ALISMATACEAE Damasonium minus Starfruit Nothoscordum gracile Onion Weed ANACARDIACEAE Schinus areira Pepper Tree Introduced ANTHERICACEAE Dichopogon fimbriatus Nodding Chocolate Lily APIACEAE Centella asiatica Pennywort Ciclospernum leptophyllum Slender Celery Introduced Trachymene incisa subsp. incisa ASCLEPIDACEAE Gomphocarpus fruticosus Narrow leaf Cotton Bush Introduced Gomphocarpus physocarpus Balloon Cotton Bush Introduced ASTERACEAE Aster subulatus Bushy Starwart / Wild Aster Introduced Bidens pilosa Cobblers Pegs Introduced Brachycome angustifolia A Daisy Calotis cuneifolia Purple Burr Daisy Calotis lappulaceae Yellow Burr Daisy Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Introduced Cassinia arcuata Sifton Bush Chrysocephalum apiculatum Yellow Buttons Chrysocephalum semipapposum Clustered Everlasting Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle Introduced Conyza bonariensis Flax-leaf Fleabane Introduced Cotula australis Common Catula Cotula coronopifolia Water Buttons Introduced Falcelis retusa Introduced Gnaphalium sphaericum Common Cudweed Hypochoeris glabra Smooth Catsear Introduced Hypochoeris radicata Catsear Introduced Olearia elliptica Sticky Daisy Bush Onopordum acanthium Scotch Thistle Introduced Ozothamus diosmifolius White Dogwood Schkuhria pinnata ssp. Dwarf Marigold Introduced abrotanoides Senecio lautus subsp. Variable Groundsel dissectifolius Senecio madagascariensis Fireweed Introduced Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle Introduced Soliva sessilis Bindii Introduced Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle Introduced Silybum marianum Variegated Thislte Introduced Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Introduced Vittadinia cuneata Fuzzweed AZOLLACEAE Azolla pinnata Ferny Azolla BIGNONIACEAE Pandorea pandorana Wonga Wonga Vine BLECHNACEAE Doodia aspera Rasp Fern 1468/R04/V4/AA 1 Family / Genus Species Common Name Status BORAGINACEAE Heliotropium amplexicaule Blue Heliotrope Introduced BRASSICACEAE Lepidium pseudohyssopifolium CACTACEAE Opuntia aurantiaca Tiger Pear Introduced Opuntia stricta var. stricta Prickly Pear Introduced CAMPANULACEAE Wahlenbergia communis Tufted Bluebell Wahlenbergia stricta Tall Bluebell CARYOPHYLLACEAE Petrorhagia nanteuilii Proliferous Pink Introduced CASUARINACEAE Allocasuarina luehmannii Bull-oak Allocasuarina torulosa Forest Oak Casuarina glauca Swamp She-oak CHENOPODIACEAE Einadia trigonos subsp. trigonos Fishweed Maireana microphylla Eastern Cottonbush CLUSIACEAE Hypericum granineum Small St Johns Wart COMMELINACEAE Commelina cyanea Scurvy Weed Tradescantia albiflora Wandering Jew Introduced CONVOLVULACEAE Convolvulus arvensis Bindweed Introduced Convolvulus erubescens Australian Bindweed Dichondra repens Kidney Weed CUPRESSACEAE Callitris endlicheri Black Cypress Pine CYPERACEAE Cyperus difformis Dirty Dora Cyperus polystachyos Cyperus gracilis Umbrella Sedge Eleocharis acuta Spike-rush Eleocharis pusilla Fimbristylis dichotoma A Sedge Gahnia aspera A Sedge Schoenoplectus mucronatus Rush DILLENIACEAE Hibbertia fasciculata Hibbertia sp. EPACRIDACEAE Astroloma humifusum Native Cranberry Epacris sp. Lissanthe strigosa Peach Heath Monotoca scoparia EUPHORBIACEAE Breynia oblongifolia Coffee Bush Phyllanhus virgatus Phyllanthus
1468/R04/V4/AA 2 Family / Genus Species Common Name Status FABACEAE Bossiaea buxifolia Daviesia genistifolia Broom Bitter Pea Daviesia ulicifolia Desmodium varians Slender Tick Trefoil Dillwynia retorta Heathy Parrot Pea Gompholobium minus Dwarf Wedge Pea Glycine clandestina species complex Glycine microphylla Love Creeper Glycine tabacina Slender Glycine Hardenbergia violacea False Sarsparilla Indigofera australis Jacksonia scoparia Dogwood Kennedia prostrata Running Postman Kennedia rubicunda Red Kennedy Pea Lotus sp. Medicago polymorpha Burr Medic Pultenaea cunninghamii Pultenaea micophylla Smooth Darling Pea Trifolium repens White Clover Introduced Trifolium subterraineum Subterrainean Clover Introduced GENTIANACEAE Centaurium erythraea Common Centaury Introduced Centaurium spicatum Spike Centaury Centaurium tenuiflorum Introduced GERANIACEAE Geranium solanderi Cutleaf Cranesbill GOODENIACEAE Goodenia bellidifolia Goodenia rotundifolia Goodenia sp. HALORAGACEAE Gonocarpus sp. Myriophyllum sp. A Watermilfoil HYDROCHARITACEAE Ottelia ovalifolia Swamp Lily JUNCACEAE Juncus acutus Spiny Rush Introduced Juncus usitatus Common Rush JUNCAGINACEAE Triglochin rheophilum Water Ribbons Triglochin microtubersom LAURACEAE Cassytha sp. LOMANDRACEAE Lomandra confertifolia Lomandra filiformis Wattle Mat-rush Lomandra glauca Pale Mat-rush Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush Lomandra multiflora Many-flowered Mat-rush LORANTHACEAE Amyema cambagei Mistletoe Amyema miquelii Mistletoe Amyema pendulum spp. Mistletoe longifolium Muellerina eucalyptoides Mistletoe MALVACEAE Sida corrugata Sida rhombifolia Paddy’s Lucerne Introduced Sida spinosa MARSELEACEAE Marsilea mutica Large-leaved Nardoo MELIACEAE Melia azedarach White Cedar
1468/R04/V4/AA 3 Family / Genus Species Common Name Status MIMOSOIDEAE Acacia filiciformis Acacia amblygona Fan Wattle Acacia brownii A Wattle Acacia decurrens Sydney Green Wattle Acacia falcata A Wattle Acacia longissima A Wattle Acacia parvipinnula Silver-stemmed Wattle Acacia podalyriifolia Queensland Silver Wattle Acacia salicina Native Willow MORACEAE Ficus sp. Fig MYOPORACEAE Eremophila Debilis Winter Apple; Amulla Myoporum montanum Western Boobialla MYRTACEAE Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple Callistemon sp. Bottlebrush Corymbia maculata Spotted Gum Eucalyptus crebra Narrow–leaved Ironbark Eucalyptus dawsonii Slaty Box Eucalyptus fibrosa Broad-leaved Ironbark Eucalyptus moluccana Grey Box Eucalyptus parramattensis Parramatta Red Gum Eucalyptus punctata Grey Gum Eucalyptus tereticornis Forest Red Gum Melaleuca decora White Feather Honeymyrtle Melaleuca lineariifolia Snow-In-Summer Melaleuca nodosa Ball Honeymyrtle Melaleuca styphelioides Prickle-leaved Tea Tree OLEACEAE Notelaea longifolia Mock Olive Notelaea microcarpa Native Olive Olea europaea spp. africana Common Olive Introduced ONAGRACEAE Ludwigia peploides subsp. Water Primrose Introduced montevidensis ORCHIDACEAE Acianthus exsertus Mosquito Orchid Corybas sp. Helmet Orchid Dendrobium linguiforme Tongue Orchid Dendrobium speciosum Rock Lily Diuris alba Diuris tricolor Double Tails Microtis unifolia Common Onion Orchid Petrostylis sp. OXALIDACEAE Oxalis perennans Oxalis Oxalis sp. Oxalis PHORMIACEAE Dianella caerulea var. caerulea Blue Flax Lily Dianella longifolia var. longifolia Dianella revoluta Mauve Flax Lily PITTOSPORACEAE Billardiera sp. Appleberry Bursaria spinosa Blackthorn PLANTAGINACEAE Plantago lanceolata Plantain Introduced
1468/R04/V4/AA 4 Family / Genus Species Common Name Status POACEAE Aristida calycina Three-awn Speargrass Aristida ramosa Three-awn Speargrass Aristida vagans Bearded Oats Austrodanthonia linkii Wallaby Grass Austrodanthonia linkii ssp. fulva Wallaby Grass Introduced Austrodanthonia longifolia Long-leaved Wallaby Grass Austrodanthonia racemosa A Wallaby Grass Austrodanthonia richardsoni A Wallaby Grass Introduced Austrodanthonia teniour A Wallaby Grass Introduced Avena barbata Pitted Bluegrass Introduced Axonopus affinis Narrow-leaved Carpet Grass Bothriochloa decipiens Red Grass Bothriochloa macra Redleg Grass Briza minor Shivery Grass Bromus cartharticus Prairie Grass Chloris gayana Rhodes Grass Chloris truncata Windmill Grass Chloris ventricosa Tall Windmill grass Cymbopogon refractus Barbed Wire Grass Cynodon dactylon Common Couch Dichanthium sericeum subsp. Queensland Bluegrass sericeum Dichelachne micrantha Shorthair Plumegrass Echinopogon caespitosus Tufted Hedgehog Grass Echinopogon ovatus Forest Hedgehog Grass Entolasia stricta Wiry Panic Eragrostis brownii Browns Lovegrass Eragrostis lacunaria Purple Lovegrass Eriochloa psuedoacrotricha Early Spring Grass Imperata cylindrica var. major Blady Grass Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides Weeping Grass Panicum effusum Hairy Panic Panicum similie Two-coloured Panic Paspaladium distans Paspalum dilatatum Paspalum Introduced Paspalum distichum Water Couch Pennisetum clandestinum Kikuyu Grass Introduced Phragmites australis Common Reed Setaria gracilis Slender Pigeon Grass Introduced Sporobolus creber Slender Rats Tail Grass Stenotaphrum secundatum Buffalo Grass Introduced Stipa scabra Speargrass Stipa verticillata Slender Bamboo Grass Themeda australis Kangaroo Grass Vulpia myuros Rat’s-tail Fescue Introduced POLYGONACEAE Persicaria decipiens Slender Knotweed Persicaria lapathifolium Pale Knotweed Persicaria sp. Polygonum sp. Wireweed Introduced Rumex crispus Curled Dock Introduced POTAMOGETONACEAE Pomatogeton tricarinatus Floating Pondweed PRIMULACEAE Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel Introduced PROTEACEAE Banksia integrifolia Coastal Banksia Grevillea arenaria Grevillea montana Hakea sericea Narrow-leaf Geebung Persoonia linearis ROSACEAE Rubus discolor Blackberry Introduced RUBIACEAE Asperula conferta Common Woodruff Galium migrans SALICACEAE Salix fragilis Crack Willow Introduced
1468/R04/V4/AA 5 Family / Genus Species Common Name Status SANTALACEAE Choretrum sp. Exocarpus cupressiformis Native Cherry SAPINDACEAE Dodonaea viscosa Hop Bush SCROPHULARIAECAE Linaria pellisseriana Pelissers Toadflax Introduced SINOPTERIDACEAE Cheilanthes austrotenuifolia Rock Fern Cheilanthes distans Bristly Cloak Fern Cheilanthes sieberi subsp. sieberi Mulga Fern SOLANACEAE Lycium ferocissimum African Boxthorn Introduced Solanum nigrum Blackberry Nightshade Introduced Solanum prinophyllum Forest Nightshade Introduced STERCULIACEAE Brachychiton populneus subsp. Kurrajong populneus THYMELAEACEAE Pimelea linifolia TYPHACEAE Typha orientalis Cumbungi VERBENACAE Lantana camara Lantana Introduced Lantana sp. Lantana Introduced Verbena bonariensis Common Purpletop Introduced Verbena sp. Introduced VIOLACEAE Viola hederacea Native Violet ZAMIACEAE Macrozamia communis Burrawang
1468/R04/V4/AA 6
APPENDIX B
Fauna Species List
Fauna Species List
The fauna list has been compiled from NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife records for the local area and studies undertaken within the project area. All species listed have been recorded within a 20 kilometre radius of the centre of the project area in the NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife (as of November 2002), except for those in bold type.
The “Study” column indicates which species have been recorded within the project area, and during which study each species was recorded; the studies are listed in the footer of each page. The South Bulga Colliery EIS (Mitchell McCotter, 1992), referred to as “5” in the Study column, included species expected to occur as well as those recorded on site. All other studies refer only to species recorded on site.
E1 = Endangered under Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995 V = Vulnerable under Schedule 2 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995 P = Protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1979 U = Unprotected
Scientific Name Common Name Status Study AMPHIBIANS Crinia signifera Common Eastern Froglet P 2, 4, 6 Limnodynastes dumerilii Bullfrog P Limnodynastes ornatus Ornate Burrowing Frog P 4 Limnodynastes peronii Striped Marsh Frog P Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Spotted Marsh Frog P 1, 3, 5, 6 Limnodynastes sp. 4 Neobatrachus sudelli Painted Burrowing Frog P Pseudophryne australis Red-crowned Toadlet V Uperoleia fusca Dusky Toadlet P Uperoleia laevigata Smooth Toadlet P 3, 6 Uperoleia tyleri Tyler's Toadlet P 2 Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog P 5 Litoria dentata Keferstein's Tree Frog P Litoria fallax Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Litoria latopalmata Broad-palmed Frog P 3, 4, 6 Litoria lesueuri Lesueur's Frog P 3 Litoria peronii Peron's Tree Frog P 1, 3, 5, 6 Litoria phyllochroa Leaf Green Tree Frog P 4 Litoria verreauxii Verreaux's Tree Frog P 3, 5 REPTILES Chelodina longicollis Eastern Snake-necked Turtle P 4, 5, 6 Diplodactylus vittatus Eastern Stone Gecko P Nephrurus levis Three-lined Knob-tail P Oedura lesueurii Lesueur's Velvet Gecko P Phyllurus platurus Broad-tailed Gecko P Underwoodisaurus milii Thick-tailed Gecko P Delma fraseri Fraser's Delma P Delma plebeia Leaden Delma P Lialis burtonis Burton's Snake-lizard P Amphibolurus muricatus Jacky Lashtail P 3, 4 Physignathus lesueurii Eastern Water Dragon P 3, 5 Pogona barbata Eastern Bearded Dragon P 5, 6
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 1 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Tympanocryptis diemensis Mountain Heath Dragon P Varanus varius Lace Monitor P 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Anomalopus swansoni Punctate Worm-skink P Bassiana platynota Red-throated Cool-skink P Carlia tetradactyla Southern Rainbow-skink P Cryptoblepharus virgatus Cream-striped Shinning-skink P Ctenotus robustus Robust Ctenotus P 1 Ctenotus taeniolatus Copper-tailed Ctenotus P 5 Egernia modesta Eastern Ranges Rock-skink P Egernia saxatilis Black Crevice-skink P Egernia striolata Tree-crevice Skink P 5, 6 Egernia whitii White's Rock-skink P Egernia sp. Skink P 5 Eulamprus quoyii Eastern Water-skink P 3 Lampropholis delicata Dark-flecked Garden Sunskink P 2 Lampropholis guichenoti Pale-flecked Garden Sunskink P Lampropholis sp. Garden Sunskink P 4 Lerista bougainvillii South-eastern Slider P Lygisaurus foliorum Tree-base Litter-skink P Morethia boulengeri South-eastern Morethia Skink P 6 Niveoscincus coventryi Southern Forest Cool-skink P Saiphos equalis Yellow-bellied Three-toed Skink P Saproscincus mustelinus Weasel Shadeskink P Tiliqua scincoides Common Bluetongue P Ramphotyphlops wiedii Brown-snouted Blind Snake P 6 Boiga irregularis Eastern Brown Tree Snake P Acanthophis antarcticus Southern Death Adder P Demansia psammophis Yellow-faced Whipsnake P 4 Furina diadema Red-naped Snake P 5 Notechis scutatus Mainland Tiger Snake P Pseudechis guttatus Spotted Black Snake P Pseudechis porphyriacus Red-bellied Black Snake P 5, 6 Pseudonaja textilis Eastern Brown Snake P 5 Vermicella annulata Eastern Bandy-bandy P 4 BIRDS Alectura lathami Australian Brush-turkey P Coturnix pectoralis Stubble Quail P 6 Coturnix ypsilophora Brown Quail P 2 Coturnix sp. Quail P 1, 5 Anas castanea Chestnut Teal P Anas gracilis Grey Teal P 2 Anas rhynchotis Australasian Shoveler P Anas superciliosa Pacific Black Duck P 1, 3, 5, 6 Aythya australis Hardhead P Biziura lobata Musk Duck P Chenonetta jubata Australian Wood Duck P 2, 4, 5 Cygnus atratus Black Swan P 1, 2 Dendrocygna eytoni Plumed Whistling-Duck P 5 Tadorna tadornoides Australian Shelduck P Podiceps cristatus Great Crested Grebe P Poliocephalus poliocephalus Hoary-headed Grebe P 5
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 2 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Tachybaptus novaehollandiae Australasian Grebe P 5 Anhinga melanogaster Darter P Phalacrocorax carbo Great Cormorant P 5 Phalacrocorax melanoleucos Little Pied Cormorant P 2, 5 Phalacrocorax sulcirostris Little Black Cormorant P Phalacrocorax varius Pied Cormorant P Pelecanus conspicillatus Australian Pelican P Ardea alba Great Egret P 2 Ardea ibis Cattle Egret P Ardea intermedia Intermediate Egret P Ardea pacifica White-necked Heron P 3, 5 Egretta garzetta Little Egret P Egretta novaehollandiae White-faced Heron P 2, 4, 5 Platalea flavipes Yellow-billed Spoonbill P 1 Threskiornis spinicollis Straw-necked Ibis P 1 Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus Black-necked Stork E1 Accipiter cirrocephalus Collared Sparrowhawk P Accipiter fasciatus Brown Goshawk P 2 Accipiter novaehollandiae Grey Goshawk P Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle P 2, 3, 5 Aviceda subcristata Pacific Baza P Circus assimilis Spotted Harrier P Elanus axillaris Black-shouldered Kite P 2, 5 Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle P 2 Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite P Milvus migrans Black Kite P Falco berigora Brown Falcon P 1, 5 Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel P 1, 2, 4, 5 Falco longipennis Australian Hobby P 5 Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon P Fulica atra Eurasian Coot P Gallinula tenebrosa Dusky Moorhen P 2, 5 Porphyrio porphyrio Purple Swamphen P 1 Turnix varia Painted Button-quail P 5 Turnix velox Little Button-quail P Calidris ruficollis Red-necked Stint P 1 Himantopus himantopus Black-winged Stilt P 1, 5 Charadrius ruficapillus Red-capped Plover P 1 Elseyornis melanops Black-fronted Dotterel P 4, 5 Erythrogonys cinctus Red-kneed Dotterel P 1 Vanellus miles Masked Lapwing P 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Sterna bergii Crested Tern P 3 Columba livia Rock Dove U 5 Chalcophaps indica Emerald Dove P Geopelia humeralis Bar-shouldered Dove P Geopelia placida Peaceful Dove P Leucosarcia melanoleuca Wonga Pigeon P Macropygia amboinensis Brown Cuckoo-Dove P Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon P 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Phaps chalcoptera Common Bronzewing P 3, 4, 5, 6 Phaps elegans Brush Bronzewing P 3
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 3 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Streptopelia chinensis Spotted Turtle-Dove U Cacatua galerita Sulphur-crested Cockatoo P 1 Callocephalon fimbriatum Gang-gang Cockatoo P Calyptorhynchus banksii Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo V Calyptorhynchus funereus Yellow-tailed Black-Cockatoo P Calyptorhynchus lathami Glossy Black-Cockatoo V Eolophus roseicapillus Galah P 1, 2, 4, 5 Nymphicus hollandicus Cockatiel P Alisterus scapularis Australian King-Parrot P Glossopsitta pusilla Little Lorikeet P 3 Platycercus adscitus eximius Eastern Rosella P 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Platycercus elegans Crimson Rosella P Psephotus haematonotus Red-rumped Parrot P 1, 5 Trichoglossus haematodus Rainbow Lorikeet P 2, 3 Cacomantis flabelliformis Fan-tailed Cuckoo P 3, 5 Chalcites basalis Horsfield's Bronze-Cuckoo P 6 Chalcites lucidus Shining Bronze-Cuckoo P Chalcites osculans Black-eared Cuckoo P Cuculus pallidus Pallid Cuckoo P 1, 6 Cuculus saturatus Oriental Cuckoo P Scythrops novaehollandiae Channel-billed Cuckoo P Centropus phasianinus Pheasant Coucal P 5 Ninox boobook Southern Boobook P 1 Ninox strenua Powerful Owl V Tyto alba Barn Owl P 5 Tyto novaehollandiae Masked Owl V 3(tentative) Tyto tenebricosa Sooty Owl V Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth P 1, 3, 4, 5 Eurostopodus mystacalis White-throated Nightjar P Aegotheles cristatus Australian Owlet-nightjar P 5 Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift P Hirundapus caudacutus White-throated Needletail P Alcedo azurea Azure Kingfisher P 5 Dacelo novaeguineae Laughing Kookaburra P 1, 2, 4, 5 Todiramphus sanctus Sacred Kingfisher P 5 Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater P 5 Eurystomus orientalis Dollarbird P 1, 4 Menura novaehollandiae Superb Lyrebird P 1 Climacteris erythrops Red-browed Treecreeper P Climacteris picumnus victoriae Brown Treecreeper (eastern subsp.) V 5 Cormobates leucophaeus White-throated Treecreeper P 1, 3, 4, 5 Malurus cyaneus Superb Fairy-wren P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Malurus lamberti Variegated Fairy-wren P 2 Pardalotus punctatus Spotted Pardalote P 1, 3, 5, 6 Pardalotus punctatus xanthopyge [Yellow-rumped Pardalote] P Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote P 4 Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Yellow-rumped Thornbill P 1, 5, 6 Acanthiza lineata Striated Thornbill P 5, 6 Acanthiza nana Yellow Thornbill P 1, 2, 5 Acanthiza pusilla Brown Thornbill P 1 Acanthiza reguloides Buff-rumped Thornbill P
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 4 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Gerygone fusca Western Gerygone P 1 Gerygone mouki Brown Gerygone P Gerygone olivacea White-throated Gerygone P Origma solitaria Rockwarbler P Pyrrholaemus sagittatus Speckled Warbler V 1, 2, 4, 5 Sericornis frontalis White-browed Scrubwren P 2, 4, 5 Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill P 2, 5 Acanthagenys rufogularis Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater P Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris Eastern Spinebill P Anthochaera carunculata Red Wattlebird P Anthochaera chrysoptera Little Wattlebird P Entomyzon cyanotis Blue-faced Honeyeater P Epthianura tricolor Crimson Chat P Grantiella picta Painted Honeyeater V Lichenostomus chrysops Yellow-faced Honeyeater P 1, 5 Lichenostomus fuscus Fuscous Honeyeater P 4 Lichenostomus leucotis White-eared Honeyeater P 3 Lichenostomus melanops Yellow-tufted Honeyeater P 3, 5 Lichenostomus penicillatus White-plumed Honeyeater P 5 Manorina melanocephala Noisy Miner P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Manorina melanophrys Bell Miner P Meliphaga lewinii Lewin's Honeyeater P 3, 5 Melithreptus brevirostris Brown-headed Honeyeater P 5, 6 Melithreptus gularis gularis Black-chinned Honeyeater (eastern V subsp.) Melithreptus lunatus White-naped Honeyeater P 5 Myzomela sanguinolenta Scarlet Honeyeater P Philemon corniculatus Noisy Friarbird P 1, 2, 3, 5 Phylidonyris nigra White-cheeked Honeyeater P Plectorhyncha lanceolata Striped Honeyeater P 2 Xanthomyza phrygia Regent Honeyeater E1 Eopsaltria australis Eastern Yellow Robin P 5 Melanodryas cucullata cucullata Hooded Robin (south east form) V 5 Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter P 4 Petroica boodang Scarlet Robin P Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin P 2, 5 Petroica rosea Rose Robin P Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis Grey-crowned Babbler (eastern V 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 subsp.) Cinclosoma punctatum Spotted Quail-thrush P Psophodes olivaceus Eastern Whipbird P 5 Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella P 1, 4, 5 Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush P 1, 2, 3, 5 Falcunculus frontatus Eastern Shrike-tit P Pachycephala pectoralis Golden Whistler P 1, 2, 3 Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler P 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Monarcha melanopsis Black-faced Monarch P Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher P Myiagra inquieta Restless Flycatcher P 2, 5 Myiagra rubecula Leaden Flycatcher P 5
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 5 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Rhipidura rufifrons Rufous Fantail P Coracina maxima Ground Cuckoo-shrike P Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Coracina papuensis White-bellied Cuckoo-shrike P Coracina tenuirostris Cicadabird P Lalage leucomela Varied Triller P 5 Lalage tricolor White-winged Triller P Oriolus sagittatus Olive-backed Oriole P Artamus cyanopterus Dusky Woodswallow P 4 Artamus personatus Masked Woodswallow P 3 Artamus superciliosus White-browed Woodswallow P Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird P 2, 5, 6 Gymnorhina tibicen Australian Magpie P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Strepera graculina Pied Currawong P 1, 2, 3, 5 Strepera versicolor Grey Currawong P Corvus coronoides Australian Raven P 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Corvus mellori Little Raven P Corvus orru Torresian Crow P 3 Corcorax melanorhamphos White-winged Chough P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Ptilonorhynchus violaceus Satin Bowerbird P Anthus australis Australian Pipit P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Carduelis carduelis European Goldfinch U Neochmia temporalis Red-browed Finch P 1, 4 Stagonopleura guttata Diamond Firetail V 5 Taeniopygia bichenovii Double-barred Finch P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Taeniopygia guttata Zebra Finch P Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird P 6 Cheramoeca leucosternus White-backed Swallow P 3, 5 Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow P 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 Petrochelidon ariel Fairy Martin P 1, 5 Petrochelidon nigricans Tree Martin P 5 Acrocephalus australis Australian Reed-Warbler P 1, 6 Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark P 1, 5 Cisticola exilis Golden-headed Cisticola P Megalurus timoriensis Tawny Grassbird P Zosterops lateralis Silvereye P 1, 5 Zoothera dauma Unindentified Ground Thrush P Acridotheres tristis Common Myna U 1, 2 Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling U 1, 2, 5, 6 MAMMALS Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna P 5 Antechinus flavipes Yellow-footed Antechinus P 2, 5 Antechinus stuartii Brown Antechinus P Dasyurus maculatus Spotted-tailed Quoll V 5 Sminthopsis murina Common Dunnart P 4, 5 Phascolarctos cinereus Koala V Vombatus ursinus Common Wombat P 1, 3, 5 Petaurus australis Yellow-bellied Glider V
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 6 Scientific Name Common Name Status Study Petaurus breviceps Sugar Glider P 5 Petaurus norfolcensis Squirrel Glider V Pseudocheirus peregrinus Common Ringtail Possum P 5 Trichosurus vulpecula Common Brushtail Possum P 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 Macropus giganteus Eastern Grey Kangaroo P 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Macropus robustus Common Wallaroo P 3, 5 Macropus rufogriseus Red-necked Wallaby P 2, 5 Petrogale penicillata Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby V 5 Wallabia bicolor Swamp Wallaby P 3 Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying-fox V Rhinolophus megaphyllus Eastern Horseshoe-bat P Mormopterus norfolkensis Eastern Freetail-bat V 2 Mormopterus planiceps Little Mastiff-bat P 2 Mormopterus sp. Freetail-bat 1, 4 Nyctinomus australis White-striped Freetail-bat P 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 Chalinolobus dwyeri Large-eared Pied Bat V Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat P 1, 2, 3, 4 Chalinolobus morio Chocolate Wattled Bat P 3 Falsistrellus tasmaniensis Eastern False Pipistrelle V Miniopterus schreibersii Common Bentwing-bat V 2, 4 Nyctophilus geoffroyi Lesser Long-eared Bat P Nyctophilus gouldi Gould's Long-eared Bat P Nyctophilus sp. Long-eared Bat P 4 Scoteanax rueppellii Greater Broad-nosed Bat V Scotorepens orion Eastern Broad-nosed Bat P Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat P 2 Vespadelus darlingtoni Large Forest Bat P Vespadelus regulus Southern Forest Bat P 2, 4 Vespadelus sp. Unidentified Eptesicus P Vespadelus vulturnus Little Forest Bat P 3, 4 Pseudomys novaehollandiae New Holland Mouse P Rattus fuscipes Bush Rat P 5 INTRODUCED MAMMALS Mus musculus House Mouse U 3, 4, 5, 6 Rattus rattus Black Rat U 5 Lepus capensis Brown Hare U 4, 6 Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit U 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Canis lupus Dingo, domestic dog U 3, 4, 5 Vulpes vulpes Fox U 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Felis catus Cat U 4 Sus scrofa Feral Pig U 5, 6 Equus caballus Horse U Bos taurus European cattle U 1, 2, 4
Study: 1 = 2002 Survey for Bulga Coal Continued Underground Operations; 2 = 2001, Umwelt (Australia) Pty Ltd, Beltana No. 1 Mine EIS; 3 = 2000, ERM, South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension EIS; 4 = 1999, ERM Mitchell McCotter, Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining EIS; 5 = 1992, Mitchell McCotter, South Bulga Colliery EIS (NB: this study included species expected to occur on the site); 6 = 2002, HLA-Envirosciences, Redbank 2 Power Plant EIS.
1468/R04/V4/AB 7
APPENDIX C
Eight Part Tests
Eight Part Tests
1) Bothriochloa biloba – A Red Grass a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Harden (1993) describes Bothriochloa biloba as an erect or decumbent caespitose perennial to 1 metre high, with racemes having white or purplish hairs. The species grows in woodland on poorer soils. The species has not been recorded in the project area, but it has been recorded within 20 kilometres (NPWS Atlas, accessed November 2002). The project area is considered to provide potential habitat for this species, however there is a low likelihood of occurrence due to past disturbances and current grazing pressures. The proposed development could potentially involve a small amount of clearance or disturbance of potential habitat during the construction of surface infrastructure and subsidence remediation works. However, disturbance to the potential habitat would be minimal, as large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered within and adjacent to the project area. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for Bothriochloa biloba. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for Bothriochloa biloba. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with other areas of woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Infrastructure construction and subsidence remediation works would disturb a minimal amount of potential habitat, but not further isolate any known habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of Bothriochloa biloba is inadequately known. It is considered unlikely that these species are adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region.
1468/R04/V4/AC 1 g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
Bothriochloa biloba has recently been recorded in several locations throughout the Hunter Valley, and in New South Wales; the species is known from the North Coast, Central Coast, Northern Tablelands, Northern Western Slopes, Central Western Slopes, Northern Western Plains, and it is also in Queensland (Harden, 1993). Therefore any population potentially occurring in the project area would not be at the limit of its known distribution.
2) Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina) and Eucalyptus fracta a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Three relatively young individuals of the Slaty Red Gum (Eucalyptus glaucina) are located immediately to the north of the northeastern portion of the project area on the site of the proposed Redbank 2 Power Plant, north of the Saxonvale rail loop (HLA-Envirosciences, 2002) (refer to Figure 3.1). These three trees are located in Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) – Grey Box (E. moluccana) – Bull Oak (Allocasuarina luehmannii) woodland, and one is mature enough to flower.
An additional 26 individuals have been identified approximately 500 metres to the north of the northeastern portion of project area in woodland containing Eucalyptus glaucina and Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) and potentially intermediate species, however the extent of this population has not yet been fully determined (HLA-Envirosciences, 2002). This population is considered viable due to the presence of flowers and buds and many juveniles and saplings (HLA- Envirosciences, 2002).
No Slaty Red Gum have been identified within the project area. The project will not impact on the areas to the north where the Slaty Red Gum has been identified. Therefore the project would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction.
The Slaty Red Gum has also been recorded by Hyder Consultants (1998) in woodland in the Singleton Military Area adjoining the southeastern portion of the project area, and therefore may occur within this portion of the project area, even though soils are generally of low fertility. Minimal disturbance is expected in the southeastern portion of the project area; it is highly unlikely that subsidence remediation would be required. Therefore no viable population would be placed at risk of extinction as a result of the proposed development.
Eucalyptus fracta has been recently described from New South Wales (Hill, 1997). It is known only from State Forests on parts of the northern escarpment of the Broken Back Range, near Cessnock, where it is restricted to shallow soils along the upper escarpment of a steep sandstone range. Eucalyptus fracta has not been recorded during surveys of similar habitat in nearby areas. Potential habitat exists on the escarpments in the southeastern portion of the project area, where it is highly unlikely that subsidence remediation would be required. Therefore no viable population would be placed at risk of extinction as a result of the proposed development.
1468/R04/V4/AC 2 b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
No known habitat for the Slaty Red Gum or Eucalyptus fracta has been identified in the project area. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Slaty Red Gum or Eucalyptus fracta. The potential habitat present in the project area is contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area, and is unlikely to require subsidence remediation works. Therefore no known or potential habitat would be isolated under the proposal. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of the Slaty Red Gum and Eucalyptus fracta is inadequately known. It is considered unlikely that these species are adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Slaty Red Gum is found near Casino and from Taree to Broke (Harden, 1991). It is also known from north of the project area (HLA-Envirosciences, 2002), the Singleton Military Area (Hyder Consultants, 1998), and the Cessnock area (ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1997). The species would be near the south-western limit of its known distribution in the project area.
Eucalyptus fracta is known only from the northern escarpment of the Broken Back Range, near Cessnock. Any local population in the project area would be close to its only known occurrence
1468/R04/V4/AC 3 3) White-flowered Wax Plant - Cynanchum elegans and Illawarra Greenhood Orchid - Pterostylis gibbosa a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Harden (1991) describes White-flowered Wax Plant (Cynanchum elegans) as a stemmed climber or twiner that grows in rainforest gullies, scrub and scree slopes. Cynanchum elegans occurs mainly at the ecotone between dry subtropical rainforest and sclerophyll forest/woodland communities (NPWS, 2002b). It has been recorded in the Singleton Military Area (Hyder Consultants, 1998) and has the potential to occur in the gullies and on the slopes in the southeastern portion of the project area. It has not been recorded in the project area.
The Illawarra Greenhood Orchid (Pterostylis gibbosa) is a perennial terrestrial orchid that grows among grass in sclerophyll forest. The species in presently known from five locations: three sites in the Illawarra; one site near Nowra; and one site at Milbrodale in the Hunter Valley. All known sub-populations of the orchid occur in open forest or woodland on flat or gently sloping land with poorly drained soils. The Milbrodale sub-population occurs at 150 to 160 metres elevation, on soils derived from Triassic sedimentary rocks of the Narrabeen group. Associated vegetation is open woodland dominated by Narrow-leaved Ironbark and Grey Box with Black Cypress Pine present as a sub-dominant. The understorey at this location contains dense stands of the native shrub, Dodonaea cuneata. The orchid is deciduous and only visible above the ground between late summer and spring (NPWS, 2002c). Potential habitat occurs in the southeastern portion of the project area.
Minimal disturbance is expected in the southeastern portion of the project area; it is highly unlikely that subsidence remediation would be required. Therefore no viable population of either of these species would be placed at risk of extinction as a result of the proposed development. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for Cynanchum elegans or the Pterostylis gibbosa. The potential habitat present in the southeastern portion of the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for Cynanchum elegans or the Pterostylis gibbosa. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works elsewhere in the project area would disturb a minimal amount of vegetation, and therefore not isolate any potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW.
1468/R04/V4/AC 4 f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of Cynanchum elegans and the Pterostylis gibbosa is inadequately known. Cynanchum elegans has been recorded from the following conservation reserves: Illawarra Escarpment State Recreation Area and Berkeley Islands Nature Reserve in the Illawarra Area; Wollemi National Park and Goulburn River National Park (NPWS, 2002b). Pterostylis gibbosa has been recorded from one conservation reserve, Worrigee Nature Reserve, near Nowra (NPWS, 2002c). It is considered unlikely that these two species are adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
Cynanchum elegans is restricted to eastern New South Wales where it is recorded from 86 locations. The known geographic range of the species extends from Yabbra State Forest (north- east of Tenterfield) in the north to Gerroa in the south and west to Merriwa in the Upper Hunter (NPWS, 2002b). Therefore, any population found in the project area would not be at the limit of its known distribution.
Pterostylis gibbosa is presently known from five locations: three sites in the Illawarra; one site near Nowra; and one site at Milbrodale in the Hunter Valley (NPWS, 2002c). Therefore, any population found in the project area would be at the limit of its known distribution.
4) Endangered Ecological Communities
Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest
The 8 Part Test has been applied to assess the impact of the proposed development on the endangered ecological communities considered to potentially occur within the project area. While the 8 Part Test is not wholly applicable to the assessment of Endangered Ecological Communities, the test is the legislative instrument used to test for significant impacts. Therefore in this case the ‘threatened species’ in fact refers to the endangered ecological community. a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest in the Sydney Basin and New South Wales North Coast Bioregions has recently been listed as an endangered ecological community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995. Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest extends from Muswellbrook to the Lower Hunter where it appears on gentle slopes arising from depressions. Much of its former extent has been depleted for agricultural activities. Hunter Lowland Red Gum Forest is an open forest that characterises simple open depressions and drainage flats on the Permian Sediments of the Hunter Valley floor. An array of Eucalypts occurs, with the most frequently recorded being Forest Red Gum and Grey Gum (Eucalyptus punctata). It is not uncommon that Rough-barked Apple, Narrow-leaved Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra), Grey Box (Eucalyptus moluccana) and Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata) appear where the assemblage grades with the surrounding Spotted Gum - Ironbark Forests. The mid-strata are generally open with sparse shrubs of Breynia (Breynia
1468/R04/V4/AC 5 oblongifolia), Bearded Heath (Leucopogon juniperinus), Daviesia ulicifolia, and Dogwood (Jacksonia scoparia). More obvious is the consistent layer of grasses and herbs: Weeping Grass; Barbed Wire Grass (Cymbopogon refractus); Tufted Hedgehog Grass (Echinopogon caespitosus var. caespitosus); Mulga Fern (Cheilanthes sieberi); and White Root (Pratia purpurascens) (NPWS, 2000).
The northern and southern drainage lines within the project area cannot be considered remnants of this endangered ecological community. The remnants are highly degraded, lack definitive shrub layers and have a ground layer that is consistent with the surrounding pastoral grassland community. Much of the riparian corridor has been cleared as a result of agricultural practices. The remaining community consists of scattered trees and clumps of trees that without substantial rehabilitation and management is unlikely to recover to form a definitive riparian corridor.
Subsidence remediation will be most substantial along the drainage lines that drain to Wollombi Brook via two unnamed tributaries (northern and southern drainage lines). The vegetation associations recorded along the northern drainage line which flows through the current Beltana underground mining area are considered to be highly degraded, lack definitive shrub layers and have a ground layer that is consistent with the surrounding pastoral grassland community. Much of the riparian corridor has been cleared as a result of agricultural practices. The remaining community consists of scattered trees and clumps of trees that without substantial rehabilitation and management is unlikely to recover to form a definitive riparian corridor. Water management strategies would be implemented to mitigate the impact of subsidence on the environment, involving the creation of a temporary diversion channel to carry flows during channel stabilisation works within the northern drainage line. The drainage line in this area would be reshaped with minimal impact to riparian vegetation where possible. The temporary diversion channel would adequately replace any aquatic habitat that is lost in the reshaping of the existing drainage line, with no net loss of habitat predicted. Flows will be returned to the original drainage line after longwall mining in the area has been completed. The southern drainage system will require cut and fill earthworks to maintain a free-draining channel. This remediation will be carried out with minimal impact to riparian vegetation, where possible.
In order to ameliorate the further degradation of this community, revegetation along the drainage lines will be undertaken following remediation works (refer to Section 6). This would result in a net gain of this community in the project area. The species utilised in the revegetation of the drainage line will be endemic species known to occur within the Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest, as described by NPWS (2000). As a result of the proposed impact amelioration measures, the project will result in a net gain of Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest and the viability of any potentially occurring remnants of this EEC will not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The study area does not comprise known habitat of this EEC. A significant area of habitat will be created as part of subsidence remediation and site rehabilitant. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The subsidence remediation does not involve clearing within drainage lines. Known habitat will not be isolated by the proposal.
1468/R04/V4/AC 6 e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
Currently only a small area (less than 2% of total) of Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest in the Sydney Basin and NSW North Coast Bioregions is included in National Parks and Wildlife Service estate in the Lower Hunter (Wereketa) National Park. The majority of the remainder of the community is not on public land (NPWS, 2002). g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The proposal involves alterations to the natural flow regimes of the two drainage lines that area likely to require subsidence remediation. The impact is expected to be short term and the rehabilitation of the drainages lines upon completion of the remediation works is considered to outweigh the short term alteration to flow. Flow will be returned to the drainage lines once subsidence remediation works are complete. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest in the Sydney Basin and NSW North Coast Bioregions has been recorded from the local government areas of Maitland, Cessnock and Port Stephens (in the Sydney Basin Bioregion) and Muswellbrook and Singleton (in the NSW North Coast Bioregion) but may occur elsewhere in these bioregions (NPWS, 2002). The community is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
5) Endangered Ecological Communities
Warkworth Sands Woodland
The 8 Part Test has been applied to assess the impact of the proposed development on the endangered ecological community Warkworth Sands Woodland, recorded in the northwestern portion of the project area. While the 8 Part Test is not wholly applicable to the assessment of Endangered Ecological Communities, the test is the legislative instrument used to test for significant impacts. Therefore in this case the ‘threatened species’ in fact refers to the endangered ecological community. a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion has recently been listed as an endangered ecological community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995. Surveys conducted for the Bulga Coal Project (Mitchell McCotter, 1990), and additional surveys conducted for the current assessment, identified a regenerating example of this community to the east of Charlton Road, in the northwest of the project area. Aeolian sand deposits at the confluence of the northern drainage line and Wollombi Brook, which could potentially support Warkworth Sands Woodland, were inspected and found not to constitute Warkworth Sands Woodland.
The description of this community as detailed in the Final Determination of the NSW Scientific Committee (NPWS, 2002e) is as follows. “The Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion is the name given to the ecological community occurring on aeolian sand deposits, now
1468/R04/V4/AC 7 mainly confined to a small area near Warkworth, about 15 km south east of Singleton. This ecological community is currently known to occur in the local government area of Singleton but may also occur elsewhere in the Bioregion. The community is generally of woodland to low woodland structure with trees of Rough-barked Apple and Coastal Banksia (Banksia integrifolia), and shrubs and ground species including Acacia filicifolia, Bracken (Pteridium esculentum), Blady Grass (Imperata cylindrica), Daphne Heath (Brachyloma daphnoides) and Melaleuca thymifolia. Warkworth Sands Woodland occupies sand dunes thought to be of Pleistocene age, generally 1-6 m high, resting on a river terrace.”
A small area of aeolian sands occurs within the project area, which supports Warkworth Sands Woodland. The occurrence is outside the limit of disturbance and therefore the project will not significantly impact on any potentially occurring remnant of this community. There are no known or potentially occurring remnants of this community within the proposed disturbance area and therefore a potentially occurring remnant of Warkworth Sands Woodland will not be placed at risk of extinction as a result of the project. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area comprises known habitat of this EEC but this community is outside the area of disturbance. As there will be no disturbance to the EEC, a significant area of known habitat will not be removed as a result of the project. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area comprises known habitat of this EEC. The project will not result in the isolation of remnant vegetation. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
No areas of Warkworth Sands Woodland occur within a conservation reserve. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region.
1468/R04/V4/AC 8 h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
This ecological community is currently known to occur in the local government area of Singleton but may occur elsewhere in the Bioregion. Due to the restricted nature of the community the remnant identified in the project area would be considered to be at the limit of its distribution.
6) Red-crowned Toadlet - Pseudophryne australis a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Red-crowned Toadlet has not been recorded in the project area, despite comprehensive amphibian surveys; however, potential habitat is considered to exist.
The Red-crowned Toadlet shows considerable ecological specialisation. Suitable habitat follows the interface of Hawkesbury Sandstone and shale, e.g. the Wianamatta and Narrabeen Shales. Individuals are found below sandstone ridges, generally where shale lenses are weathering at the base of cliff lines. The species deposits eggs in terrestrial nests beneath rocks and logs or in leaf litter. The Toadlet relies on rainfall to wash the partially developed tadpoles into ephemeral creeks for completion of the reproductive cycle (NPWS, 2002d). Breeding congregations occur deep in grass and debris beside non-perennial creeks, gutters etc. in sandstone areas; at other times individuals disperse and are found under rocks, logs etc. on sandstone ridges (Cogger, 2000).
Under the proposal, disturbance of potential habitat for the Red-crowned Toadlet may occur due to subsidence remediation works, however provision of alternative aquatic habitat during remediation of drainage lines is proposed to mitigate impacts on fauna. Therefore the life cycle of this species is not likely to be disrupted such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
No known habitat of the Red-crowned Toadlet is present in the project area. The proposal would not modify or remove an area of known habitat. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
No known habitat of the Red-crowned Toadlet is present in the project area, and therefore the proposal would not result in an area of known habitat becoming isolated from other nearby areas. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW.
1468/R04/V4/AC 9 f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
There have been 31 recordings of the Red-crowned Toadlet in Wollemi National Park, and 16 in Yengo National Park (NPWS Website, accessed 04/12/02). However, there is a lack of records for this species elsewhere, and it is considered that the Red-crowned Toadlet is not adequately represented in conservation areas in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Red-crowned Toadlet’s range coincides with the Hawkesbury Sandstone geology of the Sydney Basin Bioregion, including densely populated areas of Sydney. Known records are distributed in a belt around, but not on the Cumberland Plain (NPWS, 2002d). Therefore the species would not be at the limit of its known distribution if present in the project area.
7) Green and Golden Bell Frog – Litoria aurea a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Green and Golden Bell Frog has not been recorded in the project area, despite comprehensive amphibian surveys; however, potential habitat is considered to exist.
The Green and Golden Bell Frog was formerly a commonly encountered species, well known to locals throughout its range. However, species numbers have dramatically declined in recent years to the stage where it is now listed as Endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995. The species typically occurs in large permanent swamps and ponds with plenty of emergent vegetation, especially bullrushes. It is active by day and by night and will occasionally inhabit ornamental ponds and farm dams, where these occur close to preferred habitat areas (Robinson, 1995). The species has a distinctive call and is usually heard from August through to January (Robinson, 1995).
A comprehensive study into the habitat requirements of the Green and Golden Bell Frog by Pyke and White (1996) involved examining almost all known locations of the frog in NSW. The study determined that for a location to support a population of the Green and Golden Bell Frog in NSW it should have the following attributes:
there should be a grassy area reasonably near to any water bodies, and other nearby vegetation should be woodland or lower in maximum height; the substrate should be sand (alluvial) or rock; the water bodies should be still, shallow, ephemeral and unpolluted. Such water bodies are most likely to occur in areas which experience disturbance (either natural or unnatural) and where surface water runoff from local unpolluted area collects to form temporary ponds; the water bodies should be unshaded and free of Gambusia and other predatory fish;
1468/R04/V4/AC 10 there should be aquatic plants present, preferably Typha sp.; and there should be a range of possible diurnal shelter sites available, including vegetation and rocks.
The Green and Golden Bell Frog has not been recorded within the project area, despite comprehensive surveys of potential habitat. Under the proposal, disturbance of potential habitat may occur due to subsidence remediation works, however provision of alternative aquatic habitat during remediation of drainage lines is proposed to mitigate impacts on fauna. Therefore the life cycle of this species is not likely to be disrupted such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
No known habitat of the Green and Golden Bell Frog is present in the project area. The proposal would not modify or remove an area of known habitat. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
No known habitat of the Green and Golden Bell Frog is present in the project area, and therefore the proposal would not result in an area of known habitat becoming isolated from other nearby areas. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The Green and Golden Bell Frog has been recorded in Ben Boyd National Park, Botany Bay National Park, Hat Head National Park, Jervis Bay National Park, Kooragang Island Nature Reserve, Killalea State Recreation Area, Myall Lakes National Park, Nadgee Nature Reserve, Seven Mile Beach National Park and Towra Point Nature Reserve (NPWS, 1999b). However, it is considered that the Green and Golden Bell Frog is not adequately represented in conservation areas in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region.
1468/R04/V4/AC 11 h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Green and Golden Bell Frog is distributed in NSW from near Byron Bay in the north to the Victorian border in the south (White and Pyke, 1996). The species also occurs in the East Gippsland area of Victoria, extending from the border with NSW to Lake Wellington (Gillespie, 1996). Therefore the species would not be at the limit of its known distribution if present in the project area.
8) Red-tailed Black Cockatoo – Calyptorhynchus banksii and Glossy Black-Cockatoo – Calyptorhynchus lathami a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Glossy Black-Cockatoo has not been recorded in the project area, however, a number of local records exist. The closest record is 10 km west of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). Potential foraging habitat exists in the project area, as the Glossy Black-Cockatoo feeds on Allocasuarina seeds and prefers woodland dominated by Allocasuarina spp. or open sclerophyll forests or woodlands with a middle stratum of Allocasuarina spp. below a Eucalyptus spp. or Angophora spp. canopy (Higgins, 1999). The species nests in tree hollows, commonly in eucalypts, with one, rarely two eggs laid on a bed of chips and splinters of wood, decayed wood or thin strips of bark. Potential nesting hollows are rare in the project area. The breeding season is typically from March to August, however, young from replacement clutches may fledge as late as October (Higgins, 1999). No Glossy Black-Cockatoos have been observed in the project area, and searches of Allocasuarina spp. stands throughout the project area have yielded no evidence of feeding, with no chewed cones found. The project area provides a limited number of nesting hollows for the species and no evidence of a breeding population has been identified.
No Red-tailed Black-Cockatoos have been recorded in the project area, however, there is one record of 20 birds observed in 1988 15.5 km south-southwest of the centre of the project area. Habitat preferences include tall open forests, woodlands, grasslands, scrublands, floodplains, river margins, wetlands, and river red gums of watercourses. The species feeds in foliage and on the ground and nests on decayed debris in tree-hollows, usually high above the ground. The species is sedentary; seasonally nomadic, part-migratory (Pizzey and Knight, 1997).
Potential habitat disturbance will be restricted to disturbance of small amounts of open woodland and pastoral grassland for infrastructure construction and subsidence remediation. It is not proposed to remove substantial areas of potential foraging habitat of Allocasuarina spp. stands, open woodland or pastoral grassland, or potential nesting tree hollows. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of either of these species such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Glossy Black-Cockatoo or Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo, with the nearest local records approximately 10 km to the west and 15.5 km to the
1468/R04/V4/AC 12 south-southwest respectively. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Glossy Black-Cockatoo or Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. These species are highly mobile, and therefore their ability to disperse to adjacent habitat would be unaffected by the proposed development. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in potential habitat becoming further isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works elsewhere in the project area would disturb a minimal amount of vegetation, and therefore not isolate any potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The Glossy Black-Cockatoo has been recorded in various conservation reserves locally, and throughout eastern and central NSW, including the Barrington Tops, Yengo, Watagans and Wollemi National Parks (NPWS Website, accessed 4 December 2002). However, it is considered likely that the species is not adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region.
There are no records of the occurrence of the Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo in conservation reserves in the region (NPWS Website, accessed 4 December 2002). It is considered likely that the species is not adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Glossy Black-Cockatoo is distributed along the east coast and immediate inland districts from western Victoria to Rockhampton in Queensland. The species is found as far west as Cobar and Griffith in NSW and also occurs in isolated populations on King Island in Bass Strait and Kangaroo Island in South Australia (NPWS, 1999a). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the study area.
The Red-tailed Black-Cockatoo is distributed through tropical north Australia, from Kimberley in Western Australia through most of Queensland. The species is a casual visitor in northeastern New South Wales, regular south to the Darling River in western New South Wales, and casual further south and east to Ivanhoe, Nyngan and Narrabri. The species also occurs in the Northern Territory, Western Australia and the South Australia – Victoria border. The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area, although it is outside its core foraging habitat.
1468/R04/V4/AC 13 9) Powerful Owl – Ninox strenua and Masked Owl – Tyto novaehollandiae a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Powerful Owl has not been recorded in the project area, despite targeted surveys for this species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one record of the Powerful Owl, approximately 16 km southeast of the centre of the project area, made in 1993 (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The Powerful Owl inhabits wet and hilly sclerophyll forest with dense gullies adjacent to more open forest. The species will also occur in smaller, drier forest, provided that there are some large tree hollows and an adequate supply of prey (Hollands, 1991). The species nests on decaying debris in a hollow trunk or limb 8 metres to 20 metres or more high in a forest tree (Pizzey and Knight, 1997). Most of the project area lacks adequate tree hollows for nesting and lacks large trees for roosting, except for the more forested southeastern corner of the project area. This corner is the most likely part of the project area to contain potential roosting or nesting habitat, and there is predicted to be negligible surface disturbance from the development in this area.
The Powerful Owl hunts from perches, mainly on slow-moving arboreal mammals and large birds. Mammalian prey recorded includes the Brushtail Possum, Antechinus, Rabbit and House Mouse (Hollands, 1991), which have all been recorded in the project area, therefore the project area is considered to provide potential foraging habitat for the Powerful Owl. The impact of subsidence remediation and infrastructure construction is considered unlikely to significantly impact on any Powerful Owl using the project area as foraging habitat, as the potential habitat of the project area would not be significantly altered.
The Masked Owl was tentatively recorded in the project area from a call heard from the southern side of the Vere in the Singleton Military Area during field assessment for the South-east Extension of South Bulga Colliery (ERM, 2000). Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one record of the Masked Owl approximately 19.5 km south-southeast of the centre of the project area, made in 1995 (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species typically inhabits dry open sclerophyll forest, woodland, and farmlands with large trees. The Masked Owl hunts by night in open areas including clearings and open plains, preying on mammals including Antechinus and Brushtail Possums, birds, reptiles and insects (Hollands, 1991). Therefore the project area provides potential foraging habitat for the Masked Owl. The open areas of potential foraging habitat would not be significantly affected by subsidence remediation or infrastructure construction, and therefore the proposed development would not adversely impact any locally occurring Masked Owl.
The Masked Owl roosts by day in tree hollows and thick foliage, and nests in a large hollow of a living or dead tree. The nesting tree is often isolated, either standing alone, or standing higher than the surrounding trees (Hollands, 1991). There is limited potential nesting and roosting habitat in the project area. Subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction would not significantly reduce any potential habitat.
The project would not result in a significant impact on the potential foraging habitat, potential roosting habitat, or potential nesting habitat of the Powerful Owl or Masked Owl. The development would therefore not result in disruption to the life cycle of either owl species in the project area and does not place either at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area.
1468/R04/V4/AC 14 c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The proposed development would result in modification of a small amount of potential and known habitat of the Powerful Owl and Masked Owl respectively. Large areas of open woodland and grassland pasture located in the project area and in adjacent areas would remain unaffected by the proposal, and therefore no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
Known habitat is present in the project area for the Masked Owl, and potential habitat is present for the Powerful Owl. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. These species are highly mobile, and therefore their ability to disperse to adjacent habitat would be unaffected by the proposed development. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore the proposal is not likely to isolate any known habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
It is considered likely that these large forest owls are not adequately represented in conservation areas in the region. The Powerful Owl is known from a total of 24 records in Wollemi, Yengo and Barrington Tops National Parks. The Masked Owl is known from a total of 13 records in Barrington Tops, Wollemi, Watagans and Yengo National Parks (NPWS Website, accessed 4 December 2002). g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Powerful Owl is distributed in southeastern Australia, confined to forests of the Great Dividing Range and through to the coast between the Victorian - South Australian border and Rockhampton in Queensland. The species is also found to the west of the Great Dividing Range in Central Victoria (Hollands, 1991). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Masked Owl is known to occur along the Australian east coast from Cape York to Tasmania. The species also occurs in northern areas of the Northern Territory and in northern and southern areas of Western Australia (Hollands, 1991). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
1468/R04/V4/AC 15 10) Woodland Birds Brown Treecreeper (eastern subsp.) – Climacteris picumnus victoriae Speckled Warbler – Pyrrholaemus sagittatus Painted Honeyeater – Grantiella picta Black-chinned Honeyeater (eastern subsp.) – Melithreptus gularis gularis Regent Honeyeater – Xanthomyza phrygia Grey-crowned Babbler (eastern subsp.) – Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis Hooded Robin (south-eastern form)– Melanodryas cucullata cucullata Diamond Firetail – Stagonopleura guttata a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Brown Treecreeper has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there are two records of the Brown Treecreeper, approximately 7 km southeast and 17.5 km southwest of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The Brown Treecreeper is an insectivorous bird that occupies eucalypt woodlands, particularly open woodland lacking a dense understorey. It is sedentary and nests in tree hollows within permanent territories, breeding in pairs or communally in small groups (Noske, 1991). The species forages on tree trunks and on the ground amongst leaf litter and on fallen logs for ants, beetles and larvae (Noske, 1979). This species appears unable to maintain viable populations in remnants less than 200 ha and its abundance decreases as remnant size decreases (Barrett et al., 1994).
The Speckled Warbler was recorded in open woodland in the northwest and centre of the project area. Potential impacts of the proposal on these areas would be restricted to a small amount of vegetation clearance for construction of surface infrastructure and potential subsidence remediation works. The Speckled Warbler inhabits eucalypt and cypress woodlands with a grassy understorey on the slopes west of the Great Dividing Range, with populations also occurring in drier coastal areas such as the Hunter Valley. The preferred foraging habitat of this species is areas with a combination of open grassy patches, leaf litter and shrub cover. They forage on the ground and in the understorey for arthropods and seeds. The species is sedentary, living in pairs or trios and nesting on the ground in grass tussocks, dense litter and fallen branches. Home ranges vary from 6-12 hectares (NPWS, 2001c).
The Painted Honeyeater has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one record of the Painted Honeyeater, approximately 5 km south-southeast of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species inhabits mistletoes in eucalypt forests and woodlands, Black Box on watercourses, Box/Ironbark/Yellow Gum woodlands, paperbarks, casuarinas, mulga, other acacias and trees on farmland. The species is nomadic (Pizzey and Knight, 1997).
The Black-chinned Honeyeater has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one record of the Black-chinned Honeyeater, approximately 6.5 km southeast of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The eastern form of the Black-chinned Honeyeater is found predominantly west of the Great Dividing Range in a narrow belt through New South Wales into southern Queensland, and south into Victoria and South Australia. In NSW, the species is mainly found in woodlands containing Box/Ironbark associations and River Red Gum. The species is also known from drier coastal woodlands, including those of the Hunter Valley. The species does not persist in remnants of less than 200 hectares. The Black-
1468/R04/V4/AC 16 chinned Honeyeater feeds on arthropods, nectar and lerp from eucalypt foliage and bark (NPWS, 2001a). The species is seasonally nomadic (Pizzey and Knight, 1997).
The Regent Honeyeater has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there are two records of the Regent Honeyeater; one record of 2 birds approximately 8 km west and another record of 6 birds 11 km east of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The Regent Honeyeater is known to occur in temperate eucalypt woodlands and open forests including forest edges where it feeds on nectar and arthropods. Associations of Red Ironbark, White Box, Yellow Box, Yellow Gum and Red Box appear essential (Pizzey and Knight, 1997). When conditions are favourable, breeding may sporadically occur throughout the species’ range. Nests are frequently located in Red Ironbark and Red River Gum but may also be in other eucalypts, mistletoe clumps and casuarinas (NPWS, 1999c). The Regent Honeyeater occurs in the Hunter in Spotted Gum – Ironbark Forest.
The Grey-crowned Babbler has been recorded in open woodland in the northeast and northwest of the project area. Four nests were recorded in woodland in the northeast of the project area (HLA- Envirosciences, 2002); this woodland will not be impacted by the current proposal. The eastern subspecies of the Grey-crowned Babbler is known from isolated populations within the Hunter Valley and occurs in open woodlands dominated by mature eucalypts, with regenerating trees, tall shrubs and an intact ground cover of grass and forbs. The species breeds co-operatively in sedentary family groups of 2-13 birds, building conspicuous dome-shaped nests. The species is insectivorous and forages in leaf litter and on the bark of trees (NPWS, 2001b).
The Hooded Robin was recorded in the project area during surveys undertaken in 1989 for Bulga Open Cut (Mitchell McCotter, 1990), however the locations and communities in which the species was recorded is not known. The majority of the habitats within the Bulga Open Cut mining area had been disturbed prior to the species’ listing as a vulnerable species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one other record of the Hooded Robin, approximately 16.5 km north- northwest of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species occupies a wide range of eucalypt woodlands, acacia shrublands and open forests (Blakers et al., 1984). In temperate woodlands, the species favours open areas adjoining large woodland blocks, with areas of dead timber and sparse shrub cover (Fitri and Ford, 1997). Hooded Robins live in small family groups of pairs or trios, and build cup-shaped nests. Home ranges are relatively large, and averaged 18 ha for birds from the New England Tableland (Fitri and Ford, 1997). The species feeds on the ground by pouncing on insects, and forages in areas with a mix of bare ground, ground cover and litter (Blakers et al., 1984).
The Diamond Firetail was recorded in 1989 in surveys conducted for the Bulga Coal Mine (Mitchell McCotter, 1990), however the locations and communities in which the species was recorded are not known. The majority of the habitats within the Bulga Open Cut mining area have been disturbed prior to the species’ listing as a vulnerable species. The species has not been recorded within a 20 km radius of the project area on the Atlas of NSW Wildlife. The Diamond Firetail is a brightly coloured finch that occupies eucalypt woodlands, forests and mallee where there is a grassy understorey. Firetails build bottle-shaped nests in trees and bushes, and forage on the ground, largely for grass seeds and other plant material, but also for insects (Blakers et al. 1984; Read, 1994). In NSW, the species occurs predominantly west of the Great Dividing Range, although populations are known from drier coastal areas such as the Cumberland Plain of western Sydney and the Hunter, Clarence, Richmond and Snowy River valleys.
The proposed development could potentially involve a small amount of clearance or disturbance of potential (or known in the case of the Speckled Warbler and Grey-crowned Babbler) habitat for these threatened forest birds, for the construction of surface infrastructure and subsidence remediation works. However, the amount of disturbance to any potentially occurring threatened forest bird would be minimal, as unaltered areas of this potential habitat are common in the project area and local area. Therefore the life cycle of any potentially occurring threatened forest bird is not likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of any species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
1468/R04/V4/AC 17 b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The proposed development would result in the modification of a small amount of ‘known habitat’ of the Speckled Warbler and Grey-crowned Babbler. The woodland habitat is common throughout the project area, and the region, and therefore a significant area of known habitat would not be modified in a regional or local context. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
Known habitat of the Speckled Warbler and Grey-crowned Babbler occurs in the project area. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. These species are highly mobile, and therefore their ability to disperse to adjacent habitat would be unaffected by the proposed development. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore the project is not likely to further isolate any known or potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
There is little information available regarding the occurrence of these threatened forest birds in conservation reserves in the region. All of the species have been recorded in Wollemi National Park except the Painted Honeyeater and Grey-crowned Babbler, and all have been recorded in Goulburn River National Park except the Painted Honeyeater and Hooded Robin (NPWS Website, accessed 4 December 2002). The Brown Treecreeper and Regent Honeyeater have been recorded in Yengo National Park (NPWS Website, accessed 4 December 2002). However, none of these threatened woodland birds are considered to be adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The eastern subspecies of the Brown Treecreeper is distributed through central NSW on the western side of the Great Dividing Range and sparsely scattered to the east of the Divide in drier
1468/R04/V4/AC 18 areas such as the Hunter Valley (NPWS, 2002a). The species is therefore at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Speckled Warbler is distributed from south-eastern Queensland, through central and eastern NSW to Victoria (NPWS, 2001c). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Painted Honeyeater is a spring-summer breeding migrant to southeast Australia, east to Brisbane and the Hunter River, to the western slopes and Riverina, central Victoria and south to the Grampians and Wangaratta. Winter dispersal is northwards to the York Peninsula (Pizzey and Knight, 1997). Therefore the species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The eastern subspecies of the Black-chinned Honeyeater is distributed from southern Queensland, through NSW in a narrow belt, into Victoria and South Australia. It is known from coastal woodlands of the Cumberland Plain, Western Sydney, and in the Hunter, Richmond and Clarence Valleys (NPWS, 2001a). Therefore the species is at the eastern limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Regent Honeyeater occurs throughout eastern NSW, therefore it is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area (NPWS, 1999c).
The eastern subspecies of the Grey-crowned Babbler occurs on the western slopes and plains of NSW, and in isolated populations in coastal woodlands on the North Coast, in the Hunter Valley and on the South Coast near Nowra (NPWS, 2001b). The species is present in the lower Hunter Valley at Seaham, with large populations known from near Warkworth, Camberwell and Greta (HLA-Envirosciences, 2002) Therefore the species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
The southeastern form of the Hooded Robin is distributed throughout southeastern Australia, from Central Queensland, to Spencer Gulf, South Australia. This form occurs throughout NSW except for the northwest of the state where it inter-grades with the smaller northern form of the Hooded Robin (Schodde and Mason, 1999). Therefore the species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
The Diamond Firetail is distributed through central and eastern NSW, extending north into southern and central Queensland and south through Victoria to the Eyre Peninsula, South Australia. In NSW, the species occurs predominantly west of the Great Dividing Range, although populations are known from drier coastal areas such as the Cumberland Plain of western Sydney and the Hunter, Clarence, Richmond and Snowy River valleys (Blakers et al. 1984, Schodde & Mason 1999). Therefore the species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
11) Spotted-tailed Quoll – Dasyurus maculatus a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Spotted-tailed Quoll has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area there are two records of the Spotted-tailed Quoll, approximately 17.5 km north-northeast, and 19 km west of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species utilises a variety of habitats including sclerophyll forest and woodlands, coastal heathlands and rainforests. Occasional sightings have been made in open country, grazing lands, rocky outcrops and other treeless areas. The species habitat requirements include suitable den sites (such as hollow logs, tree hollows, rock outcrops or caves) and an abundance of food (such as birds and small mammals). Individuals also require large areas of relatively intact vegetation through which to forage (NPWS, 1999d).
1468/R04/V4/AC 19 The most likely potential habitat for the Spotted-tailed Quoll is located in the southeastern portion of the project area, where little impact from the proposal is predicted. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Spotted-tailed Quoll, with the nearest local record approximately 17.5 km to the north-northeast. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Spotted-tailed Quoll. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any potentially occurring individuals, as the species is known to be highly mobile (NPWS, 1999d). The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in potential habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion of the project area. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The Spotted-tailed Quoll has been recorded in numerous conservation reserves throughout eastern NSW (NPWS, 1999d). However, it is considered unlikely that the species is adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation and conveyor construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region.
1468/R04/V4/AC 20 h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Spotted-tailed Quoll occurs on both sides of the Great Dividing Range, and the southern subspecies occurs from southeast Queensland to Tasmania (NPWS, 1999d). Therefore the species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
12) Squirrel Glider – Petaurus norfolcensis a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Squirrel Glider has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there are two records of the Squirrel Glider, approximately 12 km north-northwest, and 15.5 km southwest of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species occurs in wet and dry sclerophyll forests and woodlands, and nests in tree hollows. Home ranges are generally between 20 and 30 hectares. Squirrel Gliders live in family groups comprising one mature adult male, one or more females and their associated offspring. The species feeds on insects, acacia gum and eucalypt sap released by incising the bark.
The project area contains woodland that could provide potential foraging habitat for the Squirrel Glider, but much of the woodland is regrowth and therefore lacks potential nesting hollows, except for more mature woodland in the southeastern portion of the project area. The proposed development could potentially involve a small amount of clearance or disturbance of potential habitat during the construction of surface infrastructure and subsidence remediation works. However, disturbance to the species would be minimal, as large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered within and adjacent to the project area. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Squirrel Glider, with the nearest local record approximately 12 km north-northwest. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Squirrel Glider. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in potential habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly
1468/R04/V4/AC 21 unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of the Squirrel Glider is not adequately known in the region. The species has been recorded in the following National Parks: Blue Mountains; Brisbane Waters; Tooloom; Border Ranges; Mount Warning; and Warrumbungle (NPWS, 1999e). However, it is considered unlikely that the species is adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Squirrel Glider is sparsely distributed along the east coast and immediate inland areas from western Victoria to north Queensland. The species is found inland as far as the Grampians in Victoria and the Pillaga and Coonabarabran areas of New South Wales (NPWS, 1999e). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
13) Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby – Petrogale penicillata a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there are four records of the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby, approximately 9.5 km west-southwest, 10 km southeast, 11 km and 12 km west of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002). The species has been recorded on the basis of scats from three escarpments in the southern section of the Singleton Military Area, adjacent to the project area (Hyder Consultants, 1998). The species is found in suitable rocky areas in a wide variety of habitats, including rainforest gullies, wet and dry sclerophyll forest, open woodland and rocky outcrops in semi-arid country. Most commonly, the species occupies sites with a northerly aspect, allowing the animals to sun themselves in the morning and evening. Sites with numerous ledges, caves and crevices are favoured, these providing numerous daytime rest areas with multiple escape routes. Studies have shown the species feeds mainly on grasses and forbs but also eats a significant amount of browse. Seeds, fruit and flowers are eaten opportunistically (Eldridge and Close, 1998).
Potential habitat for the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby exists on the steep slopes in the southeastern portion of the project area. The proposed development is not predicted to result in any site disturbance in this area. Disturbance to the species would be minimal, as large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered within and adjacent to the project area. Therefore the
1468/R04/V4/AC 22 proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in potential habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any potential habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby is not adequately known in the region. Two Brush-tailed Rock-wallabies have been recorded in Barrington Tops National Park, four in Goulburn River National Park, four in the Watagans National Park, 24 in Wollemi National Park and 12 in Yengo National Park. However, it is considered unlikely that the species is adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The distribution of the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby extends from southeastern Queensland through eastern New South Wales into eastern Victoria. The species also occurs in western Victoria (Eldridge and Close, 1998). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
1468/R04/V4/AC 23 14) Grey-headed Flying Fox – Pteropus poliocephalus a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Grey-headed Flying Fox has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is only one record of the Grey-headed Flying Fox, a record of 200 individuals made in 2000, approximately 17 km northeast of the centre of the project area (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002).
The Grey-headed Flying Fox is a large flying fox that forages on a variety of flowering and fruiting plants, and is consequently responsible for the seed dispersal of many rainforest species. This species feeds on plants such as native figs and palms, banksias and eucalypts. Roost sites or ‘camps’ are located within gullies, typically not far from water, usually in vegetation with a dense canopy. Roost sites are important as these are the places where mating, birth and rearing of young occurs, in addition to providing daytime refuge from predators (Tidemann, 1998).
The project area may provide potential foraging habitat (eucalypts) for the Grey-headed Flying Fox. The proposed development could potentially involve a small amount of clearance or disturbance of this potential foraging habitat during the construction of infrastructure and subsidence remediation works. However, disturbance to the species would be minimal, as large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered in the project area and adjacent area. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of this species and a viable population would not be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Grey-headed Flying Fox, with the nearest local record approximately 17 km to the northeast. The potential habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area does not provide known habitat for the Grey-headed Flying Fox. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals. These species are highly mobile, and therefore their ability to disperse to adjacent habitat would be unaffected by the proposed development. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in potential habitat becoming isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any potential habitat.
1468/R04/V4/AC 24 e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The Grey-headed Flying Fox has been recorded in numerous conservation reserves along the east coast of New South Wales including the Barrington Tops National Park (NPWS, 2001d). However, it is considered unlikely that the species is adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Grey-headed Flying Fox is distributed along the coastal belt from Bundaberg in Queensland to Melbourne (NPWS, 2001d). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
15) Tree Roosting Microchiropteran Bats Eastern Freetail Bat – Mormopterus norfolkensis Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat – Saccolaimus flaviventris Eastern False Pipistrelle – Falsistrellus tasmaniensis Greater Broad-nosed Bat – Scoteanax rueppellii a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Eastern Freetail Bat was identified in the west of the project area with ‘probable’ certainty from echolocation call recordings. The Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat, Eastern False Pipistrelle and Greater Broad-nosed Bat have not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential habitat for these species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is records of the Eastern Freetail Bat 1.5 km to the northwest, the Eastern False Pipistrelle 15.5 km to the west-southwest and 20 km to the southwest, and the Greater Broad-nosed Bat 15.5 km to the southwest and 17.5 km to the east-southeast (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002).
The Eastern Freetail Bat is a fast flier, usually hunting above the forest canopy, but also taking insects on the ground. The species’ habitat preferences are unclear, however most records are from dry eucalypt forest and woodland east of the Great Dividing Range, from southern New South Wales to southeastern Queensland. The species has also been recorded flying low over a rocky river through rainforest and wet sclerophyll forest. The Eastern Freetail Bat is predominantly tree roosting, however it has been recorded roosting in a roof with other bat species. Little is known of the reproductive characteristics of the species; however, the capture of a number of females and no males at one site suggests that the sexes separate, perhaps for the birth and raising of young (Allison and Hoye, 1998).
1468/R04/V4/AC 25 The Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat is known to roost in tree hollows or other similar structures. The species is usually solitary and is thought to be migratory in southern Australia (Richards, 1998). Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bats are known from fewer than ten sites in the Hunter Region (Forest Fauna Surveys and Eastcoast Flora Surveys, 2001), although the species is distributed over much of eastern and northern Australia. Richards (1998) considers the species to be rare in widespread habitat, and suggests that the apparent rarity of the species is probably due to its flying so high and fast that it is seldom collected.
The Eastern False Pipistrelle is highly manoeuvrable and probably forages above or within the forest canopy, in open woodland or over water, with swift direct flight. Due to the size and shape of its wings, the species is expected to be highly mobile, with a comparatively large foraging range (Phillips, 1998). The Eastern False Pipistrelle roosts communally, in single-sex groups, in tree hollows or rarely in caves (Jenolan Caves, NSW) (Menkhorst and Knight, 2001).
The Greater Broad-nosed Bat preys on beetles and other large, slow-flying insects, flying slowly at a height of 3-6 metres. Recent evidence indicates that it also preys on other bats. The Greater Broad-nosed Bat is a tree hollow roosting species which inhabits the gullies and river systems draining the Great Dividing Range, but also extends to the coast over much of its range. Habitats range from woodland through to moist and dry eucalypt forest to rainforest. Little is known of the reproductive cycle of the species; however, females congregate at maternity sites, located in suitable trees, where they appear to exclude males for the birth and raising of the single young in January (Hoye and Richards, 1998).
It is considered unlikely that the proposed development would have a significant impact on the life cycle of any of these threatened tree roosting microchiropteran bat species. The proposed development could potentially involve a small amount of clearance or disturbance of potential foraging habitat during the construction of infrastructure and subsidence remediation works. However, disturbance to the species would be minimal, as large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered within and adjacent to the project area. The vegetation in the area of infrastructure construction is regrowth, and therefore generally lacks tree hollows suitable for roosting. Therefore the proposed development would not disrupt the life cycle of these species such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area provides known habitat for the Eastern Freetail Bat, and potential habitat for the Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat, Eastern False Pipistrelle and Greater Broad-nosed Bat. The habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area provides known habitat for the Eastern Freetail Bat, and potential habitat for the Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat, Eastern False Pipistrelle and Greater Broad-nosed Bat. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals of these species. All species are highly mobile and are able to exploit the foraging resources of unaltered proximate vegetation communities. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in habitat becoming further isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military
1468/R04/V4/AC 26 Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any known habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of microchiropteran bats is inadequately known. The Eastern Freetail Bat, Eastern False Pipistrelle and Greater Broad-nosed Bat have been recorded in low numbers in Wollemi and Barrington Tops National Parks (NPWS Website, accessed 5 December 2002). The Eastern False Pipistrelle and Greater Broad-nosed Bat have also been recorded in Yengo National Park, and the Eastern Freetail Bat in Tomaree National Park (NPWS Website, accessed 5 December 2002). There are few records of the Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat in the region. It is considered unlikely that any of these species are adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Eastern Freetail Bat occurs throughout eastern Australia from Cooktown to southwest Victoria, and inland to the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range (Menkhorst and Knight, 2001). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
The Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat is known to occur in all mainland states and territories. It is distributed throughout all of NSW and Victoria, and the majority of Queensland and the Northern Territory (Richards, 1998). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Eastern False Pipistrelle occurs along the coastal strip and Great Dividing Range of New South Wales, extending south to southeastern South Australia and Tasmania, and north to southeastern Queensland (Menkhorst and Knight, 2001). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
The Greater Broad-nosed Bat occurs from the Atherton Tableland in tropical Queensland to northeastern Victoria, with the species’ stronghold in the gullies and river systems of the Great Dividing Range (Hoye and Richards, 1998). The species is not at the limit of its distribution in the project area.
1468/R04/V4/AC 27 16) Threatened Cave Roosting Microchiropteran Bats Large-eared Pied Bat – Chalinolobus dwyeri Common Bent-wing Bat – Miniopterus schreibersii a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Common Bent-wing Bat was confidently identified from echolocation call recordings in areas of degraded Grey Box/Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland in the western part of the project area. It has also been recorded in the Bulga Pit and overburden emplacement areas. The Large-eared Pied Bat has not been recorded in the project area, although the area is considered to provide potential foraging habitat for the species. Within a 20 km radius of the project area, there is one record of the Large-eared Pied Bat 14 km to the west-southwest (NPWS Atlas of NSW Wildlife, accessed November 2002).
The Common Bent-wing Bat is a cave roosting species, known to roost in old mines, stormwater channels and comparable structures including occasional buildings. Typically, it is found in well-timbered valleys where it forages above the tree canopy on small insects. At the beginning of spring, adult females move from scattered roosts to specific nursery caves that retain or provide high temperature and humidity. Disturbance of these nursery caves may place the survival of widespread populations in jeopardy. The species is also vulnerable to disturbance of roosts used for hibernation, with frequent disturbance increasing winter mortality (Dwyer, 1998).
The Common Bent-wing Bat has been recorded in several locations in the Hunter Valley, including several sites in the upper Hunter (Forest Fauna Surveys Pty Ltd and Eastcoast Flora Surveys, 2001). The species is distributed along the entire eastern and southeastern coast of Australia from Cape York to South Australia, and is also found in northern areas of Western Australia and the Northern Territory. The Common Bent-wing Bat also occurs in Europe, Africa and Asia (Dwyer, 1998). Dwyer (1998) regards the species as abundant.
A small area of known foraging habitat for the Common Bent-wing Bat would be disturbed during infrastructure construction and potential subsidence remediation works. However, large areas of similar habitat would remain unaltered within and adjacent to the project area. Potential roosting habitat may exist in the southeastern portion of the project area where rock overhangs and cracks have been identified. Potential impacts from the proposal in this area are limited to subsidence of up to approximately 2 metres. Subsidence may cause expansion and/or closure of cracks and fissures that provide potential roosting habitat. Crack closure has the potential to threaten roosting bats. However, cracking may also increase the amount of roosting habitat available. Areas of similar potential roosting habitat are available adjacent to the area subject to subsidence. No subsidence remediation works are likely to be required in this area. Therefore it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would have a significant impact on the life cycle of the Common Bent-wing Bat, such that a viable local population is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Large-eared Pied Bat typically roosts in caves, mine tunnels and the abandoned, bottle-shaped mud nests of Fairy Martins. It is found in a variety of drier habitats, including dry sclerophyll forests and woodlands to the east and west of the Great Dividing Range. Isolated records from sub-alpine woodland and at the edge of rainforest and moist eucalypt forest suggest that the species may occupy a greater diversity of habitats than has so far been recorded. It probably forages for small insects below the forest canopy (Hoye and Dwyer, 1998).
A local population of Large-eared Pied Bat was recorded during surveys undertaken for extension of mining operations at Mount Thorley (ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1995). Though no occurrence of the bat has been recorded in the project area, potential foraging habitat is present. Proposed disturbance to this potential foraging habitat is considered to be minimal, and large areas of similar potential habitat would remain unaltered in the project area and adjacent area. Potential roosting habitat may exist in the southeastern portion of the project area where rock overhangs and cracks have been identified. Potential impacts from the proposal in this area are limited to subsidence of
1468/R04/V4/AC 28 up to approximately 2 metres. Subsidence may cause expansion and/or closure of cracks and fissures that provide potential roosting habitat. Crack closure has the potential to threaten roosting bats. However, cracking may also increase the amount of roosting habitat available. Areas of similar potential roosting habitat are available adjacent to the area subject to subsidence. No subsidence remediation works are likely to be required in this area. Therefore it is unlikely that the proposed development would disrupt the life cycle of the Large-eared Pied Bat such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
Currently, only a few specific populations have been identified as endangered under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, none of which are relevant to the project area. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
The project area provides known foraging habitat for the Common Bent-wing Bat and potential habitat for the Large-eared Pied Bat. The habitat present in the project area is floristically similar to the general habitat in the region and there is to be no substantial removal of vegetation under the proposal. Therefore, no significant area of known habitat would be modified or removed under the proposal. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
The project area provides known foraging habitat for the Common Bent-wing Bat and potential habitat for the Large-eared Pied Bat. The proposed development would not act as a barrier to the movement of any locally occurring individuals of these species. Both species are highly mobile and are able to exploit the foraging resources of unaltered proximate vegetation communities. The vegetation communities present in the project area are generally distinct areas of woodland surrounded by pastoral grassland, which therefore means that any subsidence remediation works or infrastructure construction would not result in habitat becoming further isolated. The vegetation communities present in the southeastern portion of the project area are contiguous with woodland in the Singleton Military Area. Potential subsidence remediation works are highly unlikely in the southeastern portion. Therefore, the project is not likely to further isolate any known habitat. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat designated under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 are located within this area of NSW. f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
The conservation status of cave roosting microchiropteran bats is inadequately known. One recording of the Large-eared Pied Bat has been made in Yengo National Park, one in the Watagans National Park, and 18 recordings have been made in Wollemi National Park (NPWS Website, accessed 5 December 2002).
The Common Bent-wing Bat has been recorded in low numbers in the Barrington Tops, Wollemi and Yengo National Parks and the Lake Macquarie and Munmorah State Recreation Areas (NPWS Website, accessed 5 December 2002). An over-winter roost of this species occurs at Pilchers Hill Nature Reserve near Dungog, while other roosts occur in abandoned mines in Copeland Tops Flora Reserve (Forest Fauna Surveys and Eastcoast Flora Surveys, 2001).
Available records indicate that the Large-eared Pied Bat and the Common Bent-wing Bat are not adequately represented in conservation reserves in the region.
1468/R04/V4/AC 29 g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The clearing of native vegetation that results in a loss of biodiversity has recently been listed as a key threatening process. However the removal of a small amount of open woodland and pastoral grassland for potential subsidence remediation works and infrastructure construction is not considered to constitute a key threatening process, as it would not result in a loss of biodiversity. This vegetation is common and widely distributed in the local area and region. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
The Common Bent-wing Bat occurs throughout the coastal strip of Eastern Australia, extending from Cape York to Adelaide. The species is also found in the northern regions of the Northern Territory and Western Australia (Dwyer, 1998). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
The Large-eared Pied Bat occurs from near Rockhampton in central coastal Queensland to Bungonia in southern New South Wales (Hoye and Dwyer, 1998). The species is not at the limit of its known distribution in the project area.
17) Items listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the life cycle of the species is likely to be disrupted such that a viable population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
No species currently listed as Endangered or Vulnerable under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 has been identified or is likely to occur in the project area, as the Hunter River drainage basin is outside the known distribution of those species listed. Therefore, the life cycle of any threatened species is highly unlikely to be disrupted such that a viable population would be placed at risk of extinction. b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population is likely to be disrupted such that the viability of the population is likely to be significantly compromised.
No endangered population currently listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 has been identified or is likely to occur in the project area, as the Hunter River drainage basin is outside the known distribution of those listed. Therefore no disruption to any endangered population is likely. c) In relation to the regional distribution of the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community, whether a significant area of known habitat is to be modified or removed.
No known habitat for threatened species listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 exists within the project area. d) Whether an area of known habitat is likely to become isolated from currently interconnecting or proximate areas for a threatened species population or ecological community.
No known habitat for threatened species listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 exists within the project area. e) Whether critical habitat will be affected.
No areas of critical habitat have currently been designated under the Fisheries Management Act 1994.
1468/R04/V4/AC 30 f) Whether a threatened species, population or ecological community, or their habitats are adequately represented in conservation reserves (or other similar protected areas) in the region.
None of the threatened species, populations or ecological communities currently listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 or their habitats are considered to be adequately represented in conservation reserves. g) Whether the development or activity proposed is of a class of development or activity that is recognised as a threatening process.
The proposed development is not specifically recognised as a key threatening process under the Fisheries Management Act 1994. Refer to Section 5.4.2.3 of the report for a discussion of the key threatening processes and the proposed mitigation measures to minimise disturbance of aquatic habitat. h) Whether any threatened species, population or ecological community is at the limit of its known distribution.
No threatened species, population or ecological community currently listed under the Fisheries Management Act 1994 has been identified or is likely to occur in the project area, as the Hunter River drainage basin is outside the known distribution of those listed.
18) References
Allison, F.R. and Hoye, G.A., 1998. Eastern Freetail Bat. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Barrett, G.W., Ford, H.A. and Recher, H.F. 1994. Conservation of woodland birds in a fragmented rural landscape. Pacific Conservation Biology 1, 245-256.
Blakers, M., Davies, S.J.J.F. and Reilly, P.N., 1984. The Atlas of Australian Birds, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Cogger, H.G., 2000. Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia, Reed New Holland, Sydney.
Dwyer, P.D., 1998. Common Bent-wing Bat. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Eldridge, M.D.B. and Close, R.L., 1998. Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1995. Extension of Mining at Mount Thorley Operations Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Mount Thorley Operations.
ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1997. Review of Environmental Factors for Proposed Upgrading of MR 220, Cessnock. Prepared for Cessnock City Council.
ERM Mitchell McCotter, 1999. Bulga Open Cut Continued Mining Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Ltd.
ERM, 2000. South Bulga Colliery Southeast Extension Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited.
Fitri, L. and Ford, H., 1997. Status, habitat and social organisation of the Hooded Robin, Melanodryas cucullata in the New England Region of New South Wales. Australian Birdwatcher 17, 142-155.
1468/R04/V4/AC 31 Forest Fauna Surveys Pty Ltd and Eastcoast Flora Surveys, 2001. Flora and Fauna Survey Guidelines, Version 2.0, Prepared for Lake Macquarie City Council.
Gillespie, G.R., 1996. Distribution, habitat and conservation status of the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea (Lesson, 1829) (Anura: Hylidae) in Victoria. Australian Zoologist 30: 199-207.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 1991. Flora of New South Wales, Volume 2, New South Wales University Press, Kensington, NSW.
Harden, G.J. (ed.), 1993. Flora of New South Wales, Volume 4, New South Wales University Press, Kensington, NSW.
Hill, K.D., 1997. New species in Angophora and Eucalyptus (Myrtaceae) from New South Wales. Telopea 7, 97-109.
Higgins, P.J. (ed.), 1999. Handbook of Australia, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds – Volume 4 Parrots to Dollarbirds, Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
HLA-Envirosciences, 2002. Redbank 2 Power Plant Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for NP Power 2 Pty Limited, Bulga Coal Management Pty Limited and AIDC Australia Limited.
Hollands, D., 1991. Birds of the Night. Owls, Frogmouths and Nightjars of Australia, Reed Books, Balgowlah, NSW.
Hoye, G.A. and Dwyer, P.D., 1998. Large-eared Pied Bat. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Hoye, G.A. and Richards, G.C., 1998. Greater Broad-nosed Bat. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Hyder Consultants, 1998. Singleton Military Area Resource Assessment. Prepared for Department of Defence.
Menkhorst, P. and Knight, F., 2001. A field guide to the Mammals of Australia, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.
Mitchell McCotter and Associates, 1990. Bulga Coal Project Environmental Impact Statement.
Noske, R.A., 1979. Co-existence of three species of treecreepers in north-eastern New South Wales. Emu 79, 120-128.
Noske, R.A., 1991. A demographic comparison of cooperatively breeding and non-cooperative treecreepers (Climacteridae). Emu 91, 73-86.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1999a. Threatened Species Information – Glossy Black-cockatoo, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1999b. Threatened Species Information – Green and Golden Bell Frog, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1999c. Threatened Species Information – Regent Honeyeater, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1999d. Threatened Species Information – Spotted-tailed Quoll, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1999e. Threatened Species Information – Squirrel Glider, NPWS, Hurstville.
1468/R04/V4/AC 32 (NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2000. Vegetation Survey, Classification and Mapping for the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Region. Technical report prepared for the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy (LHCCREMS), Newcastle, NSW.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001a. Final Determination – Black-chinned Honeyeater (eastern subspecies), NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001b. Final Determination – Grey-crowned Babbler (eastern subspecies), NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001c. Final Determination – Speckled Warbler, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2001d. Threatened Species Information – Grey-headed Flying Fox, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002a. Final Determination – Brown Treecreeper (eastern subspecies), NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002b. Threatened Species Information – Cynanchum elegans, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002c. Threatened Species Information – Pterostylis gibbosa, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002d. Final Determination – Red-crowned Toadlet, NPWS, Hurstville.
(NPWS) NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, 2002e. Final Determination – Warkworth Sands Woodland in the Sydney Basin Bioregion, NPWS, Hurstville, NSW.
Phillips, W., 1998. Eastern False Pipistrelle. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan. New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Pizzey, G. and Knight, F., 1997. The Field Guide to the Birds of Australia, Harper Collins Publishers, Sydney.
Pyke G.H. and White, A.W., 1996. Habitat requirements for the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea (Anura: Hylidae). Australian Zoologist 30: 224-232.
Read, J.L., 1994. The diet of three species of firetail finches in temperate South Australia. Emu 94: 1-8.
Richards, G.C., 1998. Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Robinson, M., 1995. A Field Guide to Frogs of Australia – from Port Augusta to Fraser Island including Tasmania, Reed Books, Chatswood, NSW.
Schodde, R. and Mason, I.J., 1999. The directory of Australian Birds: Passerines, CSIRO, Melbourne.
Tidemann,C.R., 1998. Grey-headed Flying Fox. In: The Mammals of Australia, Revised Edition, ed. R. Strahan, New Holland Publishers, Sydney.
Umwelt, 2001. Beltana No.1 Underground Coal Mine Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared for Bulga Coal Management Pty Ltd.
White, A.W. and Pyke G.H., 1996. Distribution and conservation status of the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria aurea in New South Wales. Australian Zoologist 30 (2): 177-189.
1468/R04/V4/AC 33