DOCSLIB.ORG

Cliff Head Development Cliff Head Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cliff Head Development Cliff Head Development Cliff Head Development Public Environmental Review and Draft Public Environmental Report April 2004 Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited Cliff Head Development Public Environmental Review and Draft Public Environmental Report April 2004 Version 2 Invitation to make a submission The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) invites people to make a submission on this proposal. If you are able to, electronic submissions emailed to the EPA Service Unit project officer would be most welcome. Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited ACN 083 143 383 proposes to produce oil from the recently discovered offshore Cliff Head oil field and process the crude oil onshore, south of Dongara. In accordance with the Western Australian Environmental Protection Act, a Public Environmental Review (PER) has been prepared which describes this proposal and its likely effects on the environment. The PER is available for a public review period of six weeks from Tuesday 13 April closing on Tuesday 25 May 2004. Comments from government agencies and from the public will help the EPA to prepare an assessment report in which it will make recommendations to government. Why write a submission? A submission is a way to provide information, express your opinion and put forward your suggested course of action—including any alternative approach. It is useful if you indicate any suggestions you have to improve the proposal. All submissions received by the EPA will be acknowledged. Submissions will be treated as public documents unless provided and received in confidence subject to the requirements of the Western Australian Freedom of Information Act, and may be quoted in full or in part in the EPA’s report. Why not join a group? If you prefer not to write your own comments, it may be worthwhile joining with a group interested in making a submission on similar issues. Joint submissions may help to reduce the workload for an individual or group, as well as increase the pool of ideas and information. If you form a small group (up to 10 people) please indicate all the names of the participants. If your group is larger, please indicate how many people your submission represents. Developing a submission You may agree or disagree with, or comment on, the general issues discussed in the PER or the specific proposals. It helps if you give reasons for your conclusions, supported by relevant data. You may make an important contribution by suggesting ways to make the proposal more environmentally acceptable. When making comments on specific elements of the PER: • clearly state your point of view; • indicate the source of your information or argument if this is applicable; • suggest recommendations, safeguards or alternatives. Points to keep in mind By keeping the following points in mind, you will make it easier for your submission to be analysed: • Attempt to list points so that issues raised are clear. A summary of your submission is helpful. • Refer each point to the appropriate section, chapter or recommendation in the PER. • If you discuss different sections of the PER, keep them distinct and separate, so there is no confusion as to which section you are considering. • Attach any factual information you may wish to provide and give details of the source. Make sure your information is accurate. Remember to include: • your name; • address; • date; and • whether and the reason why you want your submission to be confidential. Information in submissions will be deemed public information unless a request for confidentiality of the submission is made in writing and accepted by the EPA. As a result, a copy of each submission will be provided to the proponent but the identity of private individuals will remain confidential to the EPA. The closing date for submissions is: 25 May 2004 Submissions should ideally be emailed to: [email protected] OR addressed to: Environmental Protection Authority PO Box K822 OR Westralia Square PERTH 141 St George’s Terrace WA 6842 PERTH WA 6000 Attention: [Nick Woolfrey] Executive Summary Executive Summary Proponent ment of Conservation and Land Man- Development Proposal agement for honey and wax production, Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited (Roc), on be- Roc evaluated a range of configurations nature conservation and passive recrea- half of its joint venture partners in Com- before settling on the layout shown in tion. The Brand Highway links Perth to monwealth Petroleum Permit Area Figure ES6. These facilities comprise: Geraldton. It is also a major transport WA-286-P, proposes to develop the Cliff artery within the Mid West region of West- • An unmanned offshore production Head oil field located approximately 8.5 ern Australia, which comprises the shires wellhead platform supporting six pro- to 12 km offshore in water depths of 10 of Greenough and Irwin and the City of duction wells and two water injection to 20 m, 20 km south of Dongara, West- Geraldton. wells, with capability for two addi- ern Australia (Figure ES1). tional wells (Figure ES7). The wells Planning and Design Factors will be some 1,260 m deep and take This Document about 21 days each to drill and com- The spatial arrangement and design of The Cliff Head oil field lies in Common- plete. The location of the oil field re- project facilities follows current oil indus- wealth waters, but much of the infra- quired the platform to be located west try practice and reflects: structure of the development lies within (offshore) of Horseshoe Reef the territory of the State of Western Aus- • The characteristics of the oil itself. (Figure ES8). Periodic inspections tralia. Development approval will require The Cliff Head crude is a waxy plas- and maintenance will be supported environmental consents from both juris- tic solid at ambient temperatures and by a small personnel transport ves- dictions and this document is intended pressures with a pour point of 30°C sel based in Port Denison. to provide the environmental and social (Figure ES5). It will not flow unless it • An offshore pipeline with a nominal planning and impact assessment that is maintained hot. If it is allowed to internal diameter of 300 mm to carry these approvals require. cool inside the production well or pipe- produced hydrocarbons and water to line high-pressure injection may be shore for processing. Setting required to re-mobilise the product. •A return offshore pipeline with a nomi- The Cliff Head Development comprises • The location and nature of the reser- nal internal diameter of 300 mm to an offshore oil production platform, pipe- voir. The small size of the field and carry produced water back to the plat- lines to shore and an onshore process- its proximity to shore dictates a form for reinjection. ing plant. processing facility onshore as close as practicable. The low reservoir pres- • An electrical umbilical line and small The offshore environment is a mosaic of sure means that the crude will not umbilical lines to supply corrosion and limestone reefs and platforms, sandy flow naturally, and must be lifted by emulsion inhibitors to the production mobile seafloor and beds of algae and pumping. wells and hydraulic fluid (water) by seagrass. The project area is inshore of which to remotely operate the plat- the main whale migration routes, but • Sea conditions. Rough weather in form equipment. within an active rock lobster fishing area. shallow seas close to shore makes for high engineering costs for exposed • Two directionally drilled pipeline shore The coastline is a beach and foredune, structures. crossings under the beach and backed by secondary dunes grading into foredune. flat, sandy heath country inland (Figures • Land conditions. The linear features ES2 and ES3). The main cultural fea- of the beach/foredune and Beekeep- • Parallel production and water return tures are the 80-km linear Beekeeper’s er’s Nature Reserve cannot be pipelines across the secondary dunes Nature Reserve running parallel and just avoided, and need to be crossed with and heathland of Beekeepers’ Na- inshore from the coast, the Brand High- minimal disturbance and with the ture Reserve and under the railway way, the railway line (Figure ES4) and prospect of a feasible rehabilitation to the Arrowsmith Separation Plant. the now disused Westlime plant of after pipeline construction. Cockburn Cement Limited. • The Arrowsmith Separation Plant on • Engineering performance, loss pre- the previous industrial site of the The predominant economic activity in the vention, safety and environmental former Westlime plant (Figure ES9) project area is the rock lobster fishery. standards. some 3 km inland from the coast. The Beekeeper’s Nature Reserve is a C Class plant will separate the produced flu- nature reserve managed by the Depart- • Applicable laws. Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited Cliff Head Development PER v Executive Summary W ESTERN 28 30 00 S Houtman Abrolhos AUSTRALIA Islands Geraldton TP/15 29 00 00 S INDIAN OCEAN Dongara DEVELOPMENT AREA 29 30 00 S WA-286-P Beekeeper's Nature Reserve Western 30 00 00 S Australia 5 0 0 Geraldton m 2 0 0 m Perth 1 0 0 m Nature Reserve 30 30 00 S Cervantes Proposed Marine Reserve Petroleum Permit Area 0 10 20 30 40 50 Km 114 00 00 E 114 30 00 E 115 00 00 E Figure ES1 Regional locality map vi Cliff Head Development PER Roc Oil (WA) Pty Limited Executive Summary ids into gas, oil and water and serve as the control centre for the opera- tion. The gas will be used as fuel gas in the processing train, the oil is the product and the water will be sent by return pipeline for reinjection into the producing formation. Make-up water will be drawn from a saline aquifer to maintain reservoir pressure.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Western Australian Museum Foundation
    western australian museum ANNUAL REPORT 2005-2006 Abominable Snowman chatting with friends. This creature was a standout feature at an exhibition staged by animatronics specialist John Cox: How to Make a Monster: The Art and Technology of Animatronics. Photograph: Norm Bailey. ABOUT THIS REPORT This Annual Report is available in PDF format on the Western Australian Museum website www.museum.wa.gov.au Copies are available on request in alternate formats. Copies are archived in the State Library of Western Australia, the National Library Canberra and in the Western Australian Museum Library located at the Collection and Research Centre, Welshpool. For enquiries, comments, or more information about staff or projects mentioned in this report, please visit the Western Australian Museum website or contact the Museum at the address below. Telephone 9212 3700. PUBLISHED BY THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM Locked Bag 49, Welshpool DC, Western Australia 6986 49 Kew Streeet, Welshpool, Western Australia 6106 www.museum.wa.gov.au ISSNISSN 2204-61270083-8721 © Western Autralian Museum, 2006 Contents Letter of transmittal 1 COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS Message from the Minister 2 Highlights – Western Australian Museum 2005-06 3 Auditor’s opinion financial statements 39 The year in review – Chief Executive Officer 5 Certification of financial statements 40 MUSEUM AT A GLANCE 7 Notes to the financial statements 45 INTRODUCING THE Certification of performance indicators 73 8 WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM Key performance indicators 74 REPORT ON OPERATIONS THE WESTERN
    [Show full text]
  • Cape Range National Park
    Cape Range National Park Management Plan No 65 2010 R N V E M E O N G T E O H F T W A E I S L T A E R R N A U S T CAPE RANGE NATIONAL PARK Management Plan 2010 Department of Environment and Conservation Conservation Commission of Western Australia VISION By 2020, the park and the Ningaloo Marine Park will be formally recognised amongst the world’s most valuable conservation and nature based tourism icons. The conservation values of the park will be in better condition than at present. This will have been achieved by reducing stress on ecosystems to promote their natural resilience, and facilitating sustainable visitor use. In particular, those values that are not found or are uncommon elsewhere will have been conserved, and their special conservation significance will be recognised by the local community and visitors. The park will continue to support a wide range of nature-based recreational activities with a focus on preserving the remote and natural character of the region. Visitors will continue to enjoy the park, either as day visitors from Exmouth or by camping in the park itself at one of the high quality camping areas. The local community will identify with the park and the adjacent Ningaloo Marine Park, and recognise that its values are of international significance. An increasing number of community members will support and want to be involved in its ongoing management. The Indigenous heritage of the park will be preserved by the ongoing involvement of the traditional custodians, who will have a critical and active role in jointly managing the cultural and conservation values of the park.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phylogeny and Revised Classification of Squamata, Including 4161 Species of Lizards and Snakes
    BMC Evolutionary Biology This Provisional PDF corresponds to the article as it appeared upon acceptance. Fully formatted PDF and full text (HTML) versions will be made available soon. A phylogeny and revised classification of Squamata, including 4161 species of lizards and snakes BMC Evolutionary Biology 2013, 13:93 doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-93 Robert Alexander Pyron ([email protected]) Frank T Burbrink ([email protected]) John J Wiens ([email protected]) ISSN 1471-2148 Article type Research article Submission date 30 January 2013 Acceptance date 19 March 2013 Publication date 29 April 2013 Article URL http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/13/93 Like all articles in BMC journals, this peer-reviewed article can be downloaded, printed and distributed freely for any purposes (see copyright notice below). Articles in BMC journals are listed in PubMed and archived at PubMed Central. For information about publishing your research in BMC journals or any BioMed Central journal, go to http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/authors/ © 2013 Pyron et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. A phylogeny and revised classification of Squamata, including 4161 species of lizards and snakes Robert Alexander Pyron 1* * Corresponding author Email: [email protected] Frank T Burbrink 2,3 Email: [email protected] John J Wiens 4 Email: [email protected] 1 Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, 2023 G St.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Richness in Time and Space: a Phylogenetic and Geographic Perspective
    Species Richness in Time and Space: a Phylogenetic and Geographic Perspective by Pascal Olivier Title A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ecology and Evolutionary Biology) in The University of Michigan 2018 Doctoral Committee: Assistant Professor and Assistant Curator Daniel Rabosky, Chair Associate Professor Johannes Foufopoulos Professor L. Lacey Knowles Assistant Professor Stephen A. Smith Pascal O Title [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6316-0736 c Pascal O Title 2018 DEDICATION To Judge Julius Title, for always encouraging me to be inquisitive. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research presented in this dissertation has been supported by a number of research grants from the University of Michigan and from academic societies. I thank the Society of Systematic Biologists, the Society for the Study of Evolution, and the Herpetologists League for supporting my work. I am also extremely grateful to the Rackham Graduate School, the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology C.F. Walker and Hinsdale scholarships, as well as to the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Block grants, for generously providing support throughout my PhD. Much of this research was also made possible by a Rackham Predoctoral Fellowship, and by a fellowship from the Michigan Institute for Computational Discovery and Engineering. First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Dan Rabosky, for taking me on as one of his first graduate students. I have learned a tremendous amount under his guidance, and conducting research with him has been both exhilarating and inspiring. I am also grateful for his friendship and company, both in Ann Arbor and especially in the field, which have produced experiences that I will never forget.
    [Show full text]
  • Yannarie Salt Project Fauna Survey
    YYaannnnaarriiee SSaalltt PPrroojjeecctt FFaauunnaa SSuurrvveeyy Fauna and Fauna Assemblage Survey Prepared for Straits Salt Pty Ltd Prepared by SSeepptteemmbbeerr 22000055 Biota Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd Yannarie Salt Project Fauna and Fauna Assemblages Survey © Biota Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd 2005 ABN 49 092 687 119 14 View Street North Perth Western Australia 6006 Ph: (08) 9328 1900 Fax: (08) 9328 6138 Project No.: 261 Prepared by: G. Humphreys, Z. Hamilton, D. Kamien, R. Teale Checked by: G. Humphreys This document has been prepared to the requirements of the client identified on the cover page and no representation is made to any third party. It may be cited for the purposes of scientific research or other fair use, but it may not be reproduced or distributed to any third party by any physical or electronic means without the express permission of the client for whom it was prepared or Biota Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd. Cube:Current:261 (Straits Saltfield):Doc:Stage 2:Fauna:Fauna 7-9-05.doc 2 Yannarie Salt Project Fauna and Fauna Assemblages Survey Yannarie Salt Project Fauna and Fauna Assemblages Survey Contents 1.0 Introduction 6 1.1 Project Background and Assessment Context 6 1.2 Summary Project Description 6 1.3 Previous Fauna Surveys in the Locality 6 1.4 Study Area 9 1.5 Scope and Objectives of this Study 9 2.0 Survey Methodology 10 2.1 Survey Timing and Weather 10 2.2 Survey Team 10 2.3 Survey Methods and Sampling Effort 10 2.4 Survey Limitations 14 3.0 Project Area Regional Context and Fauna Habitats 15 3.1 Bioregion
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix K Vertebrate Fauna Survey Report
    Appendix K Vertebrate Fauna Survey Report VERTEBRATE FAUNA SURVEY COBURN MINERAL SAND PROJECT Prepared for URS Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Gunson Resources Limited By Ninox Wildlife Consulting May 2005 I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report has been prepared for Gunson Resources Limited and describes the results of vertebrate fauna surveys of the Coburn Mineral Sand (CMS) Project Area. The Project Area is situated near the Shark Bay World Heritage Property and its current land use is pastoral. The main study objectives of this study were to: assess the potential of the habitats in the Project Area to support a range of fauna species; produce an inventory of the vertebrate fauna recorded in the Project Area; review vertebrate fauna considered to be rare, threatened, vulnerable or geographically restricted; assess the relationships between vertebrate fauna and the vegetation communities of the Project Area in order to clearly identify any habitats of significance; review the zoogeographic region as a whole and assess the regional and local conservation status of the Project Area; based on all the above, assess the potential impact of mining and associated infrastructure on vertebrate fauna; and, produce a comprehensive analysis suitable for integration with the reports on landform, soils, flora and vegetation. The size and complexity of the study area and the condition of the access tracks were such that the fauna survey area had to be divided into two distinct zones. The northern sector of the Project Area, which was situated mainly within Hamelin Station, was sampled during September 2003. The southern sector (mainly Coburn Station) was sampled in April and October 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • Species List
    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Innovations and Island Colonization As Engines of Evolutionary Diversification: a Comparative Test with the Australasian Diplodactyloid Geckos
    doi: 10.1111/jeb.12261 Key innovations and island colonization as engines of evolutionary diversification: a comparative test with the Australasian diplodactyloid geckos J. GARCIA-PORTA* & T. J. ORD† *Institute of Evolutionary Biology (CSIC-Universitat Pompeu Fabra), Passeig Marıtim de la Barceloneta, Barcelona, Spain †Evolution and Ecology Research Centre, and the School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW, Australia Keywords: Abstract adaptive radiation; The acquisition of key innovations and the invasion of new areas constitute body size disparity; two major processes that facilitate ecological opportunity and subsequent evolutionary rate; evolutionary diversification. Using a major lizard radiation as a model, the lizard; Australasian diplodactyloid geckos, we explored the effects of two key padless; innovations (adhesive toepads and a snake-like phenotype) and the invasion snakelike phenotype; of new environments (island colonization) in promoting the evolution of toepads. phenotypic and species diversity. We found no evidence that toepads had significantly increased evolutionary diversification, which challenges the common assumption that the evolution of toepads has been responsible for the extensive radiation of geckos. In contrast, a snakelike phenotype was associated with increased rates of body size evolution and, to a lesser extent, species diversification. However, the clearest impact on evolutionary diversi- fication has been the colonization of New Zealand and New Caledonia, which were associated with increased rates of both body size evolution and species diversification. This highlights that colonizing new environments can drive adaptive diversification in conjunction or independently of the evolution of a key innovation. Studies wishing to confirm the putative link between a key innovation and subsequent evolutionary diversification must therefore show that it has been the acquisition of an innovation specifically, not the colonization of new areas more generally, that has prompted diversification.
    [Show full text]
  • SHIRE of EXMOUTH Ordinary Council Meeting – 30 MAY 2019
    SHIRE OF EXMOUTH Attachments Ordinary Council Meeting – 30 MAY 2019 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Report 12.2.2 - Attachment 1 HEALTH AND BUILDING SERVICES 5.5 – Temporary Accommodation - Caravans Adoption Date Meeting Council Decision 17/05/12 OCM 08-0512-10.1.4 Review Date Meeting Council Decision 22/11/18 OCM 04-1118 30/05/19 OCM Delegation No. Title PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to enable people to temporarily use caravan accommodation for short stays with relatives and friends or for accommodation whilst constructing a dwelling. POLICY Legislative Requirement: Caravan Parks and Camping Grounds Regulations 1997, Part 2 – Caravanning and camping generally, Regulation 11 – Camping other than at a caravan park or camping ground: (1) A person may camp – a) For up to 3 nights in any period of 28 consecutive days on land which he or she owns or has legal right to occupy, and may camp for longer than 3 nights on such if he or she has written approval under sub regulation (2) and is complying with that approval; b) For up to 24 consecutive ours in a caravan or other vehicle on a road side rest area; c) For up to 24 consecutive hours in a caravan or other vehicle on a road reserve in an emergency, unless to do so would cause a hazard to other road users or contravene and other written law with respect to the use of road reserve; d) On any other land which is – i.) Held by a State instrumentality in freehold or leasehold; or ii.) dedicated, reserved, or set apart under the Land Administration Act 1997 or any other written law, and placed under the care, control or management of a State instrumentality, in accordance with the permission of that instrumentality; or (e) on any unallocated Crown land or unmanaged reserve, in accordance with the permission of the Minister within the meaning of the Land Administration Act 1997, or a person authorised by the Minister to give permission under this paragraph.
    [Show full text]
  • Trieste Siesmic Survey Fauna Report V1
    Trieste 3D Seismic Survey: Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Survey and Black-Cockatoo Habitat Survey November 2017 Study area Prepared for: Lattice Energy Services Pty Limited Prepared by: Western Wildlife 8 Ridgeway Pl Mahogany Creek WA 6072 Ph: 0427 510 934 November 2017 Triest 3D Seismic Survey: Level 1 Fauna Survey, 2017 Executive Summary Introduction Lattice Energy Pty Limited (Lattice) is proposing to undertake an onshore three-dimensional (3D) seismic survey in Exploration Permit 320 in the North Perth Basin, Western Australia. The proposed survey is named the Trieste 3D Seismic Survey, and has the purpose of aiding in the identification of conventional gas reserves through mapping geological formations. On behalf of Lattice, Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd commissioned Western Wildlife to carry out a Level 1 vertebrate fauna survey of key areas of native vegetation within the seismic survey project area. The objectives of the Level 1 vertebrate fauna survey were to: • Identify the fauna habitats present in the study areas. • List the vertebrate fauna that were recorded in the study area and/or have the potential to occur in the study areas. • Identify species of conservation significance, or habitats of particular importance for fauna, that may occur in the study areas. • Identify the potential impacts the proposed seismic survey may have on fauna, particularly on fauna of conservation significance. This report details the findings of the fauna survey conducted in November 2017. Methods The fauna survey was undertaken in accordance with Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives (EPA 2016a), Environmental Factor Guidelines – Terrestrial Fauna (EPA 2016b), Technical Guide – Terrestrial Fauna Surveys (EPA 2016c), Technical Guide – Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment (EPA & DEC 2010) and EPBC Act Referral Guidelines for three threatened black cockatoos: Carnaby’s Cockatoo, Baudin’s Cockatoo and Forest Red- tailed Black-Cockatoo (DSEWPaC 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Phd Thesis, University of Wollongong
    Comparative phylogeography and diversity of Australian Monsoonal Tropics lizards Rebecca Jan Laver ORCID ID 0000-0002-6319-7213 Doctor of Philosophy January 2017 The School of BioSciences Faculty of Science The University of Melbourne Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Produced on archival quality paper Thesis Abstract Tropical savannah biomes cover ~20% of the world’s landmass, however the biodiversity encompassed within these environments and the underlying processes that have shaped it remain poorly understood. Recent increased research to address this knowledge gap have begun to reveal surprisingly high amounts of deep, geographically- structured diversity, much of which is cryptic or hidden within morphologically similar species complexes. These patterns are especially emphasized in vertebrate taxa which are intrinsically linked to rock escarpments and ranges that dissect the savannah woodlands and grasslands of many of these biomes, hinting at a role of heterogeneous topography in structuring diversity. The remote Australian Monsoonal Tropics (AMT) spanning the north of the Australian continent is a particularly vast, and relatively undisturbed, tropical savannah region. Recent increased surveys are revealing numerous new species and endemism hotspots, indicating we are only just beginning to uncover the true biodiversity levels within this biome. Not only is there a relative paucity of knowledge regarding the present diversity within this region, but there is also limited understanding of how this diversity came to be. Phylogeographic studies can assist us in establishing current patterns of diversity and their evolutionary significance within regions and biomes. Furthermore, by comparing and contrasting the patterns and timing of diversification within and between biomes for multiple ecologically diverse taxa, we can begin to elucidate the history of these biomes and the environmental processes that have shaped the diversity we observe today.
    [Show full text]
  • Reptiles of Dirk Hartog Island Mark Cowan (October 2018)
    Reptiles of Dirk Hartog Island Mark Cowan (October 2018) Dirk Hartog Island has a rich reptile fauna with over 40 species recorded. This is more species than most other Western Australian islands which is probably due, in part, to the large size of the island (620 km2), and to the relatively short time it has been isolated from the mainland. The species recorded on the island include four dragons (Family Agamidae), eight geckos (families Carphodactylidae, Diplodactylidae and Gekkonidae), five legless lizards (family Pygopodidae), fifteen skinks (family Scincidae), one goanna (family Varanidae), eight front fanged snakes (family Elapidae), one python (family Pythonidae) and one blind snake (family Typhlopidae). While no species are endemic to the island, a number are endemic to Western Australia with several of these having distributions restricted along the adjacent Western Australian coast or to the Shark Bay area. Species confined more or less to the Shark Bay area are Ctenophorus butloreum (Shark Bay Heath Dragon), Aprasia haroldi (Shark Bay Worm-Lizard), Ctenotus youngsoni (Shark Bay Sand Ctenotus) and, Lerista varia (Variable-striped Robust Slider). A fifth species, Egernia stokesii (Stokes’ Skink) has a subspecies (Egernia stokesii badia) occurring on Dirk Hartog Island that is a threatened species; listed as vulnerable under the WA Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and as endangered under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It is a relatively large and robust skink covered in small spiny scales and is approximately 190mm head-body length. It usually occupies rocky environments or hollow logs. The following pages show all but one of the recorded species, Demansia calodera (black-necked whipsnake).
    [Show full text]