GINKGO MINE MODIFICATION – CRAYFISH DEPOSIT FAUNA ASSESSMENT
Rainbow Bee-eater, listed as Migratory under the EPBC Act (photo by Andrew Lothian)
Field Survey and Fauna Assessment
A Report by Biodiversity Monitoring Services, November 2012
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT i
GINKGO MINE MODIFICATION – CRAYFISH DEPOSIT FAUNA ASSESSMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Section Section Title Page Number Number 1.0 BACKGROUND 1 2.0 STUDY AREA 6 3.0 SURVEY SITES WITHIN THE MODIFICATION AREA 8 4.0 SURVEY GUIDELINES 11 5.0 APPROACH TO SURVEY 11 6.0 METHODOLOGY 13 6.1 Fauna Sampling 13 6.2 Survey Effort 19 6.3 Habitat Characteristics 20 6.4 Statistical Analysis 21 6.5 Use of Indices 21 7.0 RESULTS 24 7.1 Fauna 24 7.1.1 Fauna Listings 24 7.1.2 Fauna in the Study Area 25 7.2 Threatened Species 30 7.3 Application of Environment Protection and Biodiversity 34 Conservation Act 1999 to Fauna Known or Expected to Occur within Modification 7.4 Habitat 37 8.0 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS 40 8.1 Loss of Vegetation 41 8.2 Disturbance by Noise and Dust 43 8.3 Vehicle Movement 43 8.4 Fauna and Artificial Lighting 43 8.5 Introduced Fauna 44 8.6 Bushfire Risk 44 8.7 Cumulative Impact Assessment 44 8.7.1 Loss of Native vegetation 44 8.7.2 Loss of Habitats 44 8.7.3 Threatened Fauna 45 9.0 MEASURES TO AVOID AND MITIGATE IMPACTS 45 10.0 PROPOSED BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA 49 10.1 Background 49
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT ii
Section Section Title Page Number Number 10.2 Comparison between Modification Area and Biodiversity 49 Offset Area 10.2.1 Species Richness of Faunal Groups 51 10.2.2 Simpson’s Index of Diversity 52 10.2.3 Evenness of Occurrence of Species within an Area 52 10.2.4 Capture Rates of Individual Species 55 10.2.5 Contribution to the Faunal Assemblages by Threatened 55 Species and Species Dependent upon Woodland 10.2.6 Habitat Characteristics 56 10.2.7 Habitat Complexity Scores 57 10.2.8 Threatened Fauna 58 10.2.9 Other factors 58 10.3 Conclusion 59 11.0 OFFSET MEASURES 60 11.1 Offset area proposal management, security, monitoring 60 and auditing 11.1.1 Proposed Management Plan 60 11.1.2 Monitoring 60 11.1.3 Independent Audits 61 11.1.4 Completion Criteria 61 11.1.5 Strategic Benefit of the Offset Area 61 11.1.6 Ecosystem Resilience 61 11.1.7 Existing Infrastructure 62 11.3 Reconciliation of the Proposed Offset Strategy against 63 OEH Offset Principles 11.4 Ecological Gains of the Proposed Offset 64 12.0 REFERENCES 65
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT iii
Section Section Title Page Number Number Appendix 1 SUMMARY OF TECHNIQUES TO BE USED DURING 67 THE SURVEY OF STUDY AREA Appendix 2 FAUNA LOCATED DURING THE SURVEY OF MLA 68 AND HAUL ROAD AREAS Appendix 3 FAUNA LOCATED WITHIN STUDY AREA 74 Appendix 4 SIGHTING NUMBERS OF BIRDS WITHIN EACH AREA 81 DURING A SIX DAY SURVEY PERIOD Appendix 5 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS UPON THREATENED 83 SPECIES Appendix 6 BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT 110
FIGURES
Figure Figure Title Page Number Number 1 Modification Layout including Haul Road Route to and 3 Within Gingko Mine 2 Vegetation Communities within the Modification 7 3 Habitats within the Modification Area 8 4 Locations of Main Survey Sites within the Modification and 10 Haul Road Survey Area 5 Sampling Score Sheet Used to Calculate Habitat 24 Complexity 6 Biodiversity Indices for Birds and Reptiles 27 7 Threatened Species in or Near Modification Area 32 8 Distribution Records of Delma australis 33 9 Habitat Characteristics at Each Site 38 10 Habitat Complexity Scores 40 11 Comparison of the Survey Efforts between the 51 Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas 12 Biodiversity Indices for Birds and Reptiles 53 13 Mean Values of Habitat Characteristics for Modification 57 and Biodiversity Offset Areas 14 Habitat Complexity Scores 58
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT iv
TABLES
Table Table Title Page Number Number 1 Main Sites Selected at Modification Area and Haul Road 9 Area 2 Weather at Pooncarie during Survey Period 12 3 Survey Efforts within Each Area in Trap-Days, Camera- 20 days and person-days 4 Species Richness at Snapper Mine and the Modification 26 5 Biodiversity Indices for Study Area, MLA and Haul Road 27 Area 6 Threatened Species Located in Modification Area 30 7 Fauna Species of National Environmental Significance that 35 could occur within the Modification 8 Habitat Characteristics of the Detailed Survey Sites 37 9 Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites in Modification 39 Area 10 Percentage of Habitat Lost within Modification Area 42 11 Biodiversity Indices for Modification Area and Biodiversity 53 Offset Area 12 Proportion of Woodland Dependent and Declining Birds 56 in Each Area 13 Mean Values of Habitat Characteristics for Modification 56 and Biodiversity Offset Areas 14 Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites 58 15 Sightings of Pest Species in Both Areas 59 16 Reconciliation of Offset Strategy against OEH Principles 63
PLATES
Plate Plate Title Page Number Number 1 Tree-mounted Tomahawk Traps at a patch of Old Trees 14 at Site CD06 2 CD04 Site showing tree-mounted Glider Tube 15 3 Remote Camera at Bait Station 16 4 Pit Trap Line Established at CD01 Site 17 5 CD05 Site with line of Reptile Funnels 18 6 Shingleback Lizards Inspecting a bait Station at CD04 26 (Oakland) Site 7 Sand Goanna at CD01(Dune South) Site 62
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT ES-1
GINKGO MINE MODIFICATION – CRAYFISH DEPOSIT FAUNA ASSESSMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
1) A large area (Study Area) containing low sand dunes with mallee-spinifex, woodland of Black Box, woodland of Black Oak, Chenopod shrubland and grassland was surveyed for fauna in the summer of 2011 and the winter of 2012 using a range of techniques recommended by NSW and Federal guidelines.
2) A total of 76 bird, 13 native mammal, eight introduced mammal, 21 reptile and four amphibian species were located within the Study Area. The assemblage of fauna is representative of the region, particularly in terms of bird and reptile fauna.
3) No small native ground fauna were located and this is possibly due to the disturbed nature of the area and the presence of numbers of introduced competitors (House Mouse) and predators (Feral Cat and Red Fox). Feral Goat numbers were also high within the area.
4) A total of seven species listed as Vulnerable or Endangered under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act were located within Study Area. These were the Little Eagle, Major Mitchell's Cockatoo, Varied Sittella, Hooded Robin, Inland Forest Bat, Little Pied Bat and Marble-headed Delma.
5) The development of the Modification Area will result in the potential loss of 760 ha of vegetation, comprising 268.5 ha spinifex-dune habitat, 73 ha Black Box/Black Oak woodland and the remainder grassland and shrubland. This loss represents approximately 0.033% of the extent of vegetation in the surrounding region.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT ES-2
6) Other impacts would include noise and dust generation, increased vehicle movement, attraction of introduced species and creation of artificial lighting. Such impacts are considered minor and appropriate mitigation measures can be put into place to reduce any such impacts.
7) The loss of habitats, particularly the spinifex-dune habitat and a small number of hollow-bearing trees may impact upon the resident fauna. In particular, species with small home ranges may be affected, including the Marble-headed Delma.
8) The creation of a Biodiversity Offset Area will help mitigate the impacts from the loss of habitats in the Modification and Haul Road Areas. The proposed Biodiversity Offset Area occupies 2,594 ha and comprises similar habitats to that within the Modification Area.
9) The Modification, Haul Road and Biodiversity Offset Areas were surveyed for fauna and it was possible to assess the biodiversity values of the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas to determine whether the offset would adequately compensate for the disturbance of the deposit area.
10) Analyses of the results from the surveys showed that there are no significant differences in the fauna assemblages and habitats between the Modification Area and the Biodiversity Offset Area.
11) Mitigation measures are provided, together with guidelines for a management plan for the Biodiversity Offset Area aimed to improve the biodiversity values of this area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 1
GINKGO MINE MODIFICATION – CRAYFISH DEPOSIT FAUNA ASSESSMENT
Field Survey and Biodiversity Offset Fauna Assessment
A Report by Biodiversity Monitoring Services, November 2012
1.0 BACKGROUND
Bemax Resources Limited (Bemax) operates the Ginkgo Mineral Sands Mine (the Ginkgo Mine) which is located approximately 170 kilometres (km) to the south of Broken Hill in western New South Wales. Heavy mineral concentrate from the Ginkgo Mine is transported to the Bemax-owned Mineral Separation Plant (the MSP) in Broken Hill. Bemax propose to develop and mine a new mineral sands deposit (the Crayfish deposit) located approximately 6km to the east of the Ginkgo Mine within the Proposed Mining Leases Application (MLA) I. The Crayfish deposit would be developed to maximise the utilisation of existing infrastructure at the Ginkgo Mine.
The Crayfish deposit predominantly lies above the natural water table and consequently will be a dry mining operation. Conventional dry mining methods will be employed for both the overburden stripping and ore extraction at site. Dry mining of the ore will incorporate dozers pushing the ore to front end loaders which subsequently feed the ore into a hopper of a screening unit. The ore would be fluidised in a dry mining unit to be pumped as slurry to the pre-concentrator plant to produce an initial concentrate. The concentrate would be delivered from the Crayfish deposit site by road to the Ginkgo mine site to complement the feed to the Ginkgo Wet Plant Concentrator. Overburden removal ahead of mining will be done by conventional load, haul, and dump method utilising a combination of truck and excavator fleet. During the development stage, overburden will be stockpiled off path to a maximum of 20 meters above natural surface.
A tailings dam will need to be constructed off-path to accommodate initial sand residue from mining.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 2
Once mining has progressed sufficiently along the mine path, tailings and overburden will be returned directly on path behind the mining operation to fill the mining void. In some areas of the mining void, the height of back fill material will reach a maximum of 10 meters above natural surface level to maintain sufficient working area for the mining equipments.
The Ginkgo Mine Modification – Crayfish deposit (the Modification) will be designed to integrate with the nearby Ginkgo operations. The Ginkgo facilities will be utilised as much as possible to limit further construction. For example, the Ginkgo camp and administration offices will be shared. Concentrate from the Modification will be delivered to the Ginkgo Wet Plant Concentrator. The haulage route to Broken Hill from Ginkgo will be the same.
Water for mineral processing will be derived through a series of bores from the local saline groundwater. Except for the water lost due to tailings, infiltration, evaporation, loss in ore, and for dust suppression, process water will be recovered and recirculated back into the processing plant. A haul road will need to be constructed from the Modification to Ginkgo. This will be approximately 10.2 kilometres in length, of which 4.2 km will be within the Modification area and 6 km within the existing Gingko Mine. Power for Crayfish will be accessed from the Ginkgo 22Kv transmission line which is approximately 12 km from Crayfish. The dry mining operation at the Modification is planned to proceed at a rate of 1,000tph with a mine life of 4.7 years in conjunction with continued mining at Ginkgo and Snapper. The overall plan of the Modification is given in Figure 1.
Campaign vegetation clearance and soil stripping of disturbance areas would be undertaken prior to the commencement of construction activities. Where practicable, soil stripping would be undertaken as a two pass operation to separate topsoil (containing higher levels of organic matter) from subsoil material which would be stockpiled in separate windrows.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 3
Where practicable, the top 5 to 10 centimetres (cm) of topsoil would be salvaged separately to the rest of the topsoil, to maintain the integrity of the cryptogamic soil crust and seed bank for rehabilitation.
Figure 1: Modification Layout including Haul Road Route to and Within Gingko Mine
Relevant to this study, the main activities associated with the development would include:
• mining of the Crayfish deposit using dry mining method; • establishment and operation of a concentrator unit on site; • construction of a haul road and transmission line between the Project and the Ginkgo mine site.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 4
In addition, it is necessary to undertake an assessment of any Biodiversity Offset area nominated as part of the Project. The proposed offset study area occupies 2,594 ha. The area aims at preserving similar vegetation to that which will be cleared for the proposed modification, as well as aiming at preserving communities of higher conservation value (i.e. Black Box).
The proposed developments are within an area of land located between the Darling River and the existing Gingko Mine. The extent of the land to include the above developments is within the Mallara property and is considered as the Study Area in this report. The developments within the Study Area are the Modification Disturbance Area, containing the Infrastructure Corridor (haul road and power line) and the proposed Biodiversity Offset Area. A broad area was assessed for the proposed haul road as originally the route had not been precisely determined. An area slightly larger than the Modification Disturbance Area was surveyed (i.e. the proposed MLA) to allow for any changes during the development of the proposal.
Previous fauna surveys of the area surrounding the Modification are described in Appendix D Snapper Mineral Sands Project Fauna Assessment (Western Research Institute and Resource Strategies, February 2007). Most relevant are two surveys undertaken at Gingko Mine, one by Mount King Ecological Surveys in 2001 and another by the Western Research Institute in 2006. Fifteen Threatened species located within the Gingko Mine and surrounding area during these surveys were: • Painted Burrowing Frog (Neobactrachus pictus); • Jewelled Gecko (Diplodactylus elderi); • Crowned Gecko (Diplodactylus stenodactylus); • Wedgesnout Ctenotus (Ctenotus brooksi); • Western Blue-tongued Lizard (Tiliqua occipitalis); • Freckled Duck (Stictonetta naevosa); • Blue-billed Duck (Oxyura australis); • Grey Falcon (Falco hypoleucos); • Square-tailed Kite (Lophoictinia isura); • Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo (Cacatua leadbeateri); • Regent Parrot (eastern subsp.) (Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides); • Barking Owl (Ninox connivens); • Hooded Robin (south-eastern form) (Melanodryas cucullata cucullata);
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 5
• Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis); • Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus); • Inland Forest Bat (Vespadelus baverstocki); and • Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris). One of these species does not possibly occur in the area (Painted Burrowing Frog) and the Grey-crowned Babbler found in the region is the western form and not listed as Threatened.
A recent paper on the fauna of Dune Mallee woodlands in south-western NSW (Lower Murray Darling CMA, Val et al, 2012) covers land to the west of the Study Area and provides a picture of fauna use in the mallee habitats. These extensive surveys located 21 Threatened Species, some which could occur in the Study Area and have been added to Table A2.
Fauna Assessment of the Modification is made under Section 75W Part 3a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (EP&A Act). A fauna assessment under Section 75W Part 3a of the EP&A Act follows the Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment (DEC and NSW Department of Primary Industries [DPI], 2005). The objectives of the fauna assessment are to:
• report the methods and results of baseline survey work; • identify the magnitude, nature and significance of impacts from the Project on terrestrial and aquatic fauna species including threatened species, populations and ecological communities listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act (TSC Act), Fisheries Management Act and Environmental Protection of Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act); • and propose and assess impact avoidance, mitigation and offset measures to address potential impacts of the Project.
This report describes the fauna located within the Modification Area, as well as assessing the potential impacts upon fauna populations, especially those listed under the NSW TSC Act and the Commonwealth EPBC Act.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 6
An assessment is also provided of the Biodiversity Offset Area, in terms of the suitability of the habitats and fauna to replace that potentially disturbed within the Modification.
2.0 STUDY AREA
The study area comprises the land within the Modification Area, the study area of the proposed haul route and the proposed Biodiversity Offset Area, as well as the land surrounding these three areas. The survey concentrated on the main development and offset areas, but the land surrounding these areas was traversed either by vehicle or on foot.
Landforms found on and near the study area are described by Florasearch (2012) as low hills, sand ridges, depressed open plains and playa plains. No water courses were located within study area but some small ‘run off’ areas associated with the low dunes were noted.
According to the flora report for the Modification, the following vegetation communities are described:
• Black Oak – Western Rosewood Woodland • Chenopod Mallee Woodland/Shrubland • Irregular Dune Mallee Woodland/Shrubland • Derived Austrostipa Grassland • Derived Chenopod Herbland/Turpentine Shrubland • Depression Herbfield
Some of these vegetation communities are considered to be disturbed as well as undisturbed. Figure 2 shows the distribution of vegetation communities within the Modification area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 7
Figure 2: Vegetation Communities within the Modification (from Florasearch, 2012)
On the basis of habitat classes, the Study Area could be divided into low sand dunes with mallee-spinifex; woodland of Black Box; woodland of Black Oak; Chenopod shrubland and grassland. Some habitats showed signs of previous clearing, with young tree predominating, whilst there are stands of mature trees in some parts (particularly Black Box). The habitats within the Modification Area are given in Figure 3.
Numerous tracks have been established within the Modification area and surrounds for exploratory and other purposes as well as maintenance tracks within the currently grazed paddocks in the offset area and these provided access to all parts of the Study Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 8
Figure 3: Habitats within the Modification Area
3.0 SURVEY SITES WITHIN THE MODIFICATION AREA
Although the entire area was surveyed visually, five sites were established that provided detailed information about the fauna inhabiting the Modification Area. Stratification of the sites was based on habitat classes and all classes were sampled. Selected survey techniques were used at other sites to ensure all variations in habitat condition were sampled. The sites are listed in Table 1, together with a brief description of the habitat sampled. The locations of the sites are given in Figure 4.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 9
Table 1: Main Sites Selected at Modification Area and Haul Road Area
Site Site Habitats Sampled Number Name Easting1 Northing Dune Mallee-spinifex on Dunes CD01 South 625258 6302740 Mallee-spinifex on Dunes Dune CDO2 North 623309 6303760 Shrubland with mature Mulga CD03 (within Haul Road Survey Area) Mulga Hill 622311 6305282 CD04 Oakland 624796 6302597 Black Oak Woodland Shrubland with spinifex CD05 Shrub 623944 6303030 Mature Shrubland with mature Black Box CD06 Box 625957 6302779 trees
One site, CD03 (Mulga Hill), is outside the boundaries of the Modification. At the time of the survey an extension to the Modification was proposed and this included land to the north-west. However, CD03 is located within the area assessed for the proposed Haul Road. The remaining sites are within the MLA and sample land within both proposed extraction areas and land where infrastructure, stockpiling and emplacements will occur.
1 As WGS84, MGA
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 10
Figure 4: Locations of Main Survey Sites within the Modification and Haul Road Survey Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 11
4.0 SURVEY GUIDELINES
Survey guidelines have been developed and issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and by the Federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC). Although these guidelines are not a legal requirement when undertaking surveys, they do provide a set of techniques that ensure that the full range of terrestrial vertebrate fauna is sampled. A summary of the survey guidelines is given in Appendix 1, together with an indication of those used in the current survey. Some additional techniques have been added to cover species that may occur (e.g. glider tubes for Western Pygmy-possum) and are techniques developed since the guidelines have been released.
It can be seen that the majority of survey techniques were used in the Modification Project. No mist nets were used, as these are usually associated with water bodies and none were found within the surveyed areas. No nest boxes were used as these require a longer period of time to be successful.
5.0 APPROACH TO SURVEY
Five of the sites listed in Table 1 were used to survey for fauna in considerable detail i.e. all terrestrial vertebrate groups were surveyed using a wide range of equipment and techniques (these are described in Section 6.0). Other sites were used for specific techniques targeting individual fauna groups. Arboreal marsupials were targeted at the CD06 site using tree-mounted cage traps, and micro-bats were targeted using a harp trap at a site along a newly created access track in the Modification Area. In addition, call broadcasting for nocturnal birds was undertaken at numerous sites within both areas as were the use of Anabat recorders for micro-bats.
The Modification and Haul Road Areas and much of the surrounding land were inspected and the location, number and habitat association of any fauna species located was recorded.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 12
Any water bodies (e.g. tanks) were inspected and waterbirds and amphibians searched for. Spotlighting transects were undertaken throughout the Study Area, either from vehicle or on foot.
The surveys were undertaken by Dr Martin Denny and Andrew Lothian between 27th October and 4th November 2011 and between 7th and 14th June 2012 using NPWS Scientific Licence No. S10282 and ACEC Approval No. AW96/033.
The weather during the first and second survey periods was relatively clear with warm days but cold overnight. The weather data from Pooncarie weather station is given in Table 2.
Table 2: Weather at Pooncarie during Survey Period
Minimum Maximum Rainfall Date temperature (°C) temperature (°C) (mm) 10/27/2011 12.8 32.4 0 10/28/2011 17.1 35.5 0 10/29/2011 15.2 24.5 7.4 10/30/2011 10.8 22.6 0 10/31/2011 8.8 22.2 0 11/1/2011 9.4 29 0 11/2/2011 11.6 26.8 0 11/3/2011 12.1 28 0 11/4/2011 12.4 32 0 6/7/2012 1.4 14.5 0 6/8/2012 2 15.4 0 6/9/2012 2.3 14.9 0 6/10/2012 3 16 0 6/11/2012 1 17.4 0 6/12/2012 1.3 17.4 0 6/13/2012 2.1 20.8 0 6/14/2012 5.2 20.3 0.2
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 13
6.0 METHODOLOGY
The survey methods follow, as closely as possible, the guidelines developed and issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and by the Federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC).
6.1 Fauna Sampling a. Elliott Trapping
Twenty-five small (8x10x33 cm) Elliott traps were laid in straight lines for five days through the habitats at each site. This is equivalent to 100 trap nights over four consecutive nights at each site. The traps were baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat, and a small piece of dacron was placed within each trap (as protection against the cold). A freezer bag was placed over the end of each trap to prevent the contents becoming wet from rain. At each trap site a description of the physical characteristics of the habitat within a one metre radius was noted. This information is used in the analysis of habitat values.
To sample any small arboreal mammals, five small Elliott traps were mounted on trees at equal distances along each transect (20 trap nights over five consecutive days at each site). Aluminium tree mounts were attached to trees and a baited Elliott trap attached to the mount. The tree trunk and trap were sprayed with a honey-water mixture to assist in attracting any nectar or sap feeding arboreal mammals. Again, dacron and freezer bags were used to combat the cold and wet conditions.
b. Cage Traps
Tomahawk cage traps were laid on the ground and on trees at each site (see Plate 1). The number of Tomahawk traps varied at each site according to the presence of trees sufficiently large to hold a cage trap.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 14
A large Elliott trap was placed at each site (4 trap-nights). The large Elliott traps and the Tomahawk traps were baited with chicken, apple and muesli bar.
Plate 1: Tree-mounted Tomahawk Traps at a patch of Old Trees at Site CD06
c. Spotlighting
Two forms of spotlighting transect were undertaken. Tracks within the Modification area were spotlighted from a moving vehicle. In addition, spotlighting on foot was undertaken at the detailed fauna survey sites, particularly through the Spinifex clumps.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 15 d. Hair Funnels
Hair funnels (from Faunatech) were used instead of large and small hair tubes. The design of the tapered hair funnels is such that both large and small animals can be detected by a single funnel. Five hair funnels were set out at each site for four nights and baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat. Where possible, some of the hair funnels were set onto ‘habitat trees’ (these are considered to be trees that showed signs of use by arboreal marsupials and have obvious hollows). e. Glider Traps
Tree-mounted plastic tubes were used to capture small arboreal mammals (e.g. Western Pygmy-possum). These act as vertically mounted pit traps and were baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and honey. Two traps were placed at each site (see Plate 2).
Plate 2: CD04 Site showing tree-mounted Glider Tube
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 16 f. Remote Cameras
Digital Scouting Cameras with infrared illumination were set up at each site and run for 3 to 5 days. In addition, a remote camera was set up at a small bait station to record any fauna attracted to the bait (see Plate 3).
Plate 3: Remote Camera at Bait Station
g. Bird Surveys
In addition to the results obtained from general observations and spotlighting, listening and observing periods were undertaken at all sites. A 30 minute search was used where the observer walked around each site, as well as observing and listening for calls from a single point. At each site up to four periods of observation were undertaken (two in the morning and two in the late afternoon).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 17 h. Call Broadcasting
Calls of several species of nocturnal bird were broadcast during the night in the general area. Calls were broadcast through a megaphone for approximately five minutes, with a ten minute listening time. Calls from the Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua), Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides), Barking Owl (Ninox connivens), Eastern Grass Owl (Tyto capensis), Australian Owlet-nightjar (Aegotheles cristatus), Barn Owl (Tyto alba), Southern Boobook (Ninox boobook) and the Spotted Nightjar (Eurostopodus mystacalis) were broadcast.
i. Pitfall Traps
Pit traps were constructed from a 20L bucket and combined with a 20m drift-fence made from fly-screen wire mesh (see Plate 4). These were used where the ground could be dug to a depth to accommodate the buckets. Pit traps were established at three sites and used for five days.
Plate 4: Pit Trap Line Established at CD01 Site
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 18 j. Reptile Funnel Traps
Reptile funnel traps are basically an enlarged rectangular fish trap (about 75cm long and 18cm wide) made from plastic netting over a wire frame with a funnel at each end. Each trap uses a screen of sun-shade cloth to protect any captures. The traps are usually laid out in association with a drift fence and can be either placed with the fence joining the funnel at each end, or the funnels can be placed alongside the drift fence. It is usual to place a funnel on each side of the fence, thus ensuring a greater catch (not necessarily a more diverse catch) than if having a funnel placed within the drift fence. A line of Reptile Funnels was established at the CD05 Site, where the ground was too hard to allow for the construction of pits (see Plate 5).
Plate 5: CD05 Site with line of Reptile Funnels
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 19 k. Herpetological Searches
Systematic searches for reptiles and amphibians were undertaken within each habitat type at each survey site. Litter was raked and rocks and logs turned over. Loose bark was prised from the trunks of dead trees. Each search takes approximately 30 minutes and was repeated at each site. Searches for amphibians took place at night using spotlights (particularly after the one day of rain) and recognition of characteristic calls. Spotlighting searches were also attempted for reptiles, particularly in clumps of spinifex.
l. Bat Call Detection
An Anabat II Bat Detector with a Compact Flash Storage ZCAIM was placed at each site for one night and any recorded bat calls analysed by Glenn Hoye, FBN Bat Surveys PL.
m. Animal Track Recognition
Areas of sand on tracks were inspected for evidence of animal movement. Paw prints and other animal signs were identified and recorded. n. Opportunistic Observations
Any sightings of fauna were recorded whilst moving throughout the survey area and located using a Global Positioning System (GPS). Any scats were collected and their contents analysed.
6.2. Survey Effort
The survey efforts expended within the Modification and Haul Road Areas are given in Table 3.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected] GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 20
Table 3: Survey Efforts within Each Area in Trap-Days, Camera-days and Person-days
Survey CD01 CD02 CD04 CD05 CD06 Modification Haul TOTAL Technique Area Total Road EFFORT Ground Elliott Traps 100 100 100 100 0 400 100 500 Tree- mounted 20 20 20 20 0 80 20 100 Elliott Traps Tomahawk 4 0 4 4 12 24 16 40 Traps Large Elliott Traps 0 4 4 4 0 12 8 20 Pit Traps 16 16 16 0 0 48 0 48 Glider 8 8 8 0 0 24 16 40 Funnels Hair Funnels 20 20 20 20 0 80 20 100 Remote 5 10 10 5 030 camera- 5 35 Cameras camera- camera- camera- camera- days camera- camera- days days days days days days Reptile 8 8 8 8 4 36 person- 8 42 Search person- person- person- person- person- days person- person- days days days days days days days Bird Counts 8 8 8 8 4 36 person- 8 42 person- person- person- person- person- days person- person- days days days days days days days Harp Trap 2 days 0 2 days Anabat 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day 0 4 days 1 day 5 days Spotlighting 66 km; 3 hrs 6.5 hrs
6.3 Habitat Characteristics
As each Elliott trap was laid, a description of the trap site was recorded. A description was recorded of the upper, middle and lower storey vegetation, as well as the ground cover, within an area formed by a one metre radius around each trap. For example, if 15 trap sites out of a trap line of 20 Elliott traps contains a shrub, then it is estimated that the shrub cover in that survey site is 75%.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 21
6.4 Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was undertaken using SigmaPlot 11.0 and Primer 6.1.6, with the following tests applied where necessary: 1. To compare between more than two groups of results a One Way ANOVA was used. 2. To compare between two groups of results then either a Student t-test or a Paired t-test was used. 3. If the data to be analysed was not normally distributed, then either a non- parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test or a Kruskal-Wallis One Way Analysis of Variance on Ranks was used. 4. To determine the extent of similarity between the Modification Area and Biodiversity Offset Area a Bray Curtis Similarity and Spearman Rank Order Correlation analyses were used.
6.5 Use of Indices
Most fauna monitoring surveys produce a species list that shows what animals are found within a specified area. However, a list alone does not provide the necessary criteria to determine whether an activity is affecting fauna populations over time.
Consequently, it is important to provide a set of criteria that can be used to compare fauna populations within an area over time and between areas i.e. temporally and spatially. The criteria must be relatively simple, easy to interpret and the processes required to develop each criteria must be consistent and repeatable. To ensure such criteria are used in the long-term monitoring of fauna within mine areas, a set of quantifiable indices have been developed and adopted for this project. The indices are a set of single values, changes in which indicate changes in the fauna populations and their habitats. These changes can then be related to changes in environmental factors, such as climate, land use and landform.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 22
The detailed surveys can provide sufficient information to establish a series of indices that can be used as ‘monitoring trigger points’ i.e. single values that can be used to determine whether any significant changes have occurred in fauna populations over time. Indices that were used in this project were:
. Species richness of faunal groups . Simpson’s Index of Dominance . Evenness of occurrence of species within an area . Capture rates of individual species . Contribution to the faunal assemblages by threatened species and species dependant upon woodland . Habitat complexity scores a. Species richness of faunal groups This is the number of species located within each fauna group at each site during each survey b. Simpsons Index of Dominance Total numbers and species richness (number of species per site) are the simplest measures used to determine biodiversity of a site. However, these indices miss the information that some species may be rare and others common. The Simpson’s Index of Dominance (D) takes into account both the abundance patterns and the species richness of a community. This index measures the probability that two individuals randomly selected from a sample will belong to the same species (or some category other than species). c. Evenness Score An evenness score is also calculated. Evenness is a measure of the relative abundance of different species making up the richness of an area. A low value for evenness means that the sample is dominated by a large number of one or two species. A high evenness value means that most species in the sample have a similar abundance.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 23
A high value is indicative of a well maintained population of fauna as an even distribution of species means there is sufficient resources for a high diversity of species to be supported. A low value indicates that, although there may be high numbers of animals in a population there are few species as the numbers are dominated by one or two species and many others are not represented. This indicates that the resources may not be sufficient to allow some species to survive. d. Capture rates of individual species
Normally this index would be represented by the % trapping rates of small native mammals within an area. However, only the introduced House Mouse was trapped within the Study Area and these have been used to determine the extent of occupancy by this species. It is also possible to use the number of individuals of each bird species sighted within the Modification Area and Biodiversity Offset Area to compare occupancy rates. As the survey effort within each Area was approximately similar the results from the surveys are comparable. e. Contribution to the faunal assemblages by threatened species, species dependant upon woodland and by declining species
Lists are available of bird species that are considered to be declining and/or woodland dependent. These lists are used to calculate the proportion of birds located within an area that are considered to be under threat. The higher the proportion, then the greater the value that can be placed on the present habitat in the area. f. Habitat complexity scores
Measurements of habitat characteristics derived from trap site descriptions have been used to provide an index of habitat complexity that can be helpful in determining changes over time of the habitats surveyed over an area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 24
One system used to assess habitat values is that developed by Catling and Burt (1995), called the Habitat Complexity Score. This system scores the following parameters: Tree cover, tall and low shrub cover, ground cover, logs/rocks and litter cover. The scores range from 0 to 3, with a maximum score of 18. A sampling scoring sheet is shown in Figure 5.
Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Total 0-10% 10-20% cover 20-50% cover >50% cover cover Tree canopy Tall shrub cover (2 – 4m) Short shrub cover (0.5 – 2m) Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 1-10% 10-40% cover 40-70% cover >70% cover cover Ground herbage Logs/rocks Litter
SCORE
Figure 5: Sampling Score Sheet Used to Calculate Habitat Complexity Scores
7.0 RESULTS
7.1 Fauna
7.1.1 Fauna Listings
A total of 77 bird, 13 native mammal, eight introduced mammal, 19 reptile and four amphibian species were located within the Study Area during the two surveys. Of this assemblage, 59 bird, 11 native mammal, five introduced mammal, 19 reptile and one amphibian species were located within the Modification Area and Haul Road Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 25
A list of fauna species located within the Modification Area and Haul Road Area, together with the complete list of fauna located within the Study Area, is given in Appendix 2. 7.1.2 Fauna in the Study Area
Although the assemblages of birds and reptiles were robust, the numbers and diversity of non-bat native mammals were low. This was partly due to the disturbed nature of the land (grazed and cleared over the years) and the large numbers of House Mice occupying the Study Area at the time of the survey (74 records). There were also high numbers of Feral Goats as well as rabbits, cats (14 records) and Red Foxes (37 records). Such numbers of introduced competitors and predators could have resulted in a suppression of small native ground mammals. However, the number of bat species was high, with two species captured by harp trap and the remainder identified from Anabat recordings. Only one frog species was located within the Modification Area. A Sudell’s Frog was captured in a pit trap after a small fall of rain. The remaining species were associated with tanks and wet areas within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
The range of bird species was high with some groups strongly represented (only 72 bird species were recorded within the Lower Murray Darling CMA by Val et al, 2012). Raptors and nocturnal birds were commonly encountered and this phenomenon is possibly associated with the high numbers of House Mice found in the Modification Area. Mean trapping rates for the House Mouse in this Area was 17.8 per 100 trap nights (range 7% to 35%). Eight raptor species and five nocturnal bird species were located, with relatively high numbers of Barn Owls seen at night (six flew into a call broadcasting site). Other diverse groups were the honeyeaters (feeding upon flowering shrubs and mallee), water birds (at tanks) and upper foliage gleaners (e.g. thornbills).
The range of reptile species was high, although the numbers were low for most species. However, there were high numbers of the Mallee Dragon (41 recorded), nearly all associated with the spinifex covered dunes, but only single sightings of the different species of gecko and most of the skinks.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 26
Unusually, no snakes were located although two species of brown snake were reported at the Gingko Mine area. The overnight temperatures were low during the survey and this may have kept some reptiles from moving around at night.
Plate 6: Shingleback Lizards Inspecting a bait Station at CD04 (Oakland) Site
The fauna survey for the Snapper Mine Project undertaken in 2006 resulted in a similar assemblage of species as that located during the present survey at the Modification (Snapper Mineral Sands Environmental Assessment Appendix D Fauna Assessment ). The relative species numbers are given in Table 4.
Table 4: Species Richness at Snapper Mine and the Modification
Fauna Group Snapper Mine Modification Native Mammals 16 13 Birds 53 77 Reptiles 22 20 Amphibians 0 4
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 27
Biodiversity indices could be calculated for birds and reptiles for the Study Area, as well as within the Modification Area and Haul Road Areas. These are given in Table 5 and shown in Figure 6.
Table 5: Biodiversity Indices for Study Area, MLA and Haul Road Area
Biodiversity Study Area MLA Haul Road Area Index Birds Evenness 0.767 0.796 0.875 Simpson’s Index of 0.934 0.911 0.932 Diversity Numbers Recorded 4207 869 297 Species Richness 77 46 30 Reptiles Evenness 0.722 0.603 na Simpson’s Index of 0.789 0.632 na Diversity Numbers Recorded 98 70 na Species Richness 19 19 na
Figure 6: Biodiversity Indices for Birds and Reptiles
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 28 a. Bird Evenness and Simpson’s Index of Diversity
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 Evenness 0.5 Simpson's Index of Diversity 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Study Area Crayfish Deposit Area Haul Road Area b. Bird Numbers
Numbers Recorded
4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 Numbers Recorded 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Study Area Crayfish Deposit Area Haul Road Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 29 c. Bird Species Richness
Birds
90 80 70 60 50 Species Richness 40 30 20 10 0 Study Area Crayfish Deposit Area Haul Road Area d. Reptile Evenness and Simpson’s Index of Diversity
Reptiles
0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6
0.5 Evenness 0.4 Simpson's Index of Diversity 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Study Area Crayfish Deposit Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 30 e. Reptile Numbers and Species Richness
Reptiles
120
100
80 Numbers Recorded 60 Species Richness 40
20
0 Study Area Crayfish Deposit Area
A non-parametric Mann-Whitney Rank Sum Test shows no significant differences between the biodiversity indices for birds or for reptiles from the Modification Area and overall Study Area.
7.2 Threatened Species
A total of seven species listed as Vulnerable or Endangered under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act were located within the Modification Area. These are listed in Table 6 and their locations are given in Figure 7.
Table 6: Threatened Species Located in Modification Area
Scientific Name Common Name Status Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle V Lophochroa leadbeateri Major Mitchell's Cockatoo V Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella V Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat V Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat V Delma australis Marble-headed Delma E
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 31
The raptor would utilize a wide area of land as their home range and was probably attracted to the general area because of the abundance of House Mice. A Black- breasted Buzzard was observed about 20km north of the survey area but was not included in Table 6. The Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo also have a wide range and would be associated with flowering mallee. They could possibly use the larger hollows in the Black Box and Mulga trees for nesting. The Varied Sittella is an upper forage feeder and is commonly found in patches of woodland. The Little Pied Bat was located at all sites within the Modification Area and the Inland Forest Bat at CD03, CD05, CD02 as well as along an access track.
The capture of the three specimens of the Marble-headed Delma within the Study Area (two within the Modification Area) provided new records for the general area. This pygopod with distinctive head markings was pit-trapped at CD02 and CD04. The habitats where the species was found were spinifex covered dunes and open plains with Black Oak (within an area of spinifex). The Marble-faced Delma (= Marble-faced Snake- lizard) is listed as Endangered in NSW under the NSW TSC Act. According to the final determination of the NSW Scientific Committee, the Marble-faced Delma is distributed from southern Western Australia, through South Australia and the south of the Northern Territory, to north-western Victoria and western New South Wales (NSW). In NSW, the species occurs at scattered locations within two disjunct populations: in central-western NSW in the vicinity of Round Hill and Yathong Nature Reserves and the South-western corner of NSW. There has been a recent record from an area near Silverton in spinifex on rocky hills (Sass et al, 2011). Although not previously recorded from the Pooncarie area, there are numerous records from surrounding areas (see Figure 8) and it is not considered threatened in Victoria (Swan and Watharow, 2005). Two voucher specimens of this species have been lodged at the Australian Museum.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 32
Figure 7: Threatened Species in or Near the Modification
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 33
Figure 8: Distribution Records of Delma australis (OEH Records accessed 5.7.12)
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 34
7.3 Application of Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to Fauna Known or Expected to Occur within Modification
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) requires an assessment to determine whether an action is likely to have a significant impact on a matter of national environmental significance. Consequently, all actions are subject to an assessment and approval process. Matters of National Environmental Significance (NES) identified in the EPBC Act are:
• World Heritage properties;
• Ramsar wetlands;
• Nationally threatened species and ecological communities;
• Migratory species;
• Commonwealth marine areas, and
• Nuclear actions.
An inquiry to the online database for the EPBC Act, on the Environment Australia web site (http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc), provided an EPBC Act Protected Matters Report. This showed that there are 12 migratory species, 15 threatened species and 10 Marine (Overfly) species known from an area of 20km radius surrounding the Modification. These are listed in Table 7. An assessment whether each of these species would occur within the Modification Area and whether any species could be affected by the development follows.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 35
Table 7: Fauna Species of National Environmental Significance that could occur within the Modification
a. Threatened Species
BIRDS Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) Vulnerable Species Regent Parrot (eastern) (Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides) Vulnerable Species Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis) Vulnerable Species
FISH Murray Hardyhead (Craterocephalus fluviatilis) Endangered Species Murray Cod (Maccullochella peelii) Vulnerable Species
MAMMALS South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni) Vulnerable Species b. Migratory Species
Migratory Marine Birds
Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus) Great Egret, White Egret (Ardea alba) Cattle Egret (Ardea ibis)
Migratory Terrestrial Species
White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster) White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus) Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus)
ASSESSMENT UNDER THE EPBC Act
1. Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Mallee or woodland with abundant litter Likelihood of Occurrence: No records of the Malleefowl in or near the Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 36
2. Regent Parrot (eastern) (Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Floodplain woodland, riparian Likelihood of Occurrence: No preferred habitat in the Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
3. Australian Painted Snipe (Rostratula australis)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Wetlands Likelihood of Occurrence: No preferred habitat in the Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
4. Murray Hardyhead and Murray Cod
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Riverine Likelihood of Occurrence: No large bodies of water in Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
5. South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Woodland for foraging and roosting Likelihood of Occurrence: No records of the South-eastern Long-eared Bat in or near the Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Likely to be low, as only small loss of preferred habitat
6. White-bellied Sea-Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Near water Likelihood of Occurrence: Wide ranging species but no preferred habitat in Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 37
7. White-throated Needletail (Hirundapus caudacutus)
Distribution: Within range Broad Habitat Preferences: Aerial Likelihood of Occurrence: Wide ranging species that could forage in Modification Expected Impacts from Development: Low
8. Rainbow Bee-eater (Merops ornatus)
Distribution: Within range, migratory Broad Habitat Preferences: Near water Likelihood of Occurrence: Known to occur in Modification during summer months Expected Impacts from Development: Low, as only a small loss of preferred foraging and nesting habitats
7.4 Habitat
The wildlife habitat condition and values were assessed using the structural integrity of the vegetation and ground cover at each detailed survey site (see Section 6.3). Table 8 provides information about the habitat characteristics of all the detailed survey sites within the three areas and Figure 9 illustrates these values.
Table 8: Habitat Characteristics of the Detailed Survey Sites a. MLA
% Cover CD01 CD02 CD05 CD04 Tree Cover 56 56 16 56 Tall Shrub Cover 0 64 60 8 Tall Sapling Cover 24 16 0 12 Low Shrub Cover 24 56 80 84 Low Sapling Cover 8 8 0 0 Spinifex Cover 84 56 0 16 Grass Cover 24 28 12 20 Forb Cover 56 68 96 76 Litter Cover 80 88 68 64 Log Cover 32 8 8 40
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 38 b. Haul Road Area
% Cover CD03 Tree Cover 72 Tall Shrub Cover 12 Tall Sapling Cover 4 Low Shrub Cover 92 Low Sapling Cover 0 Spinifex Cover 0 Grass Cover 24 Forb Cover 92 Litter Cover 100 Log Cover 60
Figure 9: Habitat Characteristics at Each Site a. Upper and Middle Storey
100 90 80 70 CD01 60 CD02 50 CD05 40 CD04 30 CD03 20 10 0 Tree Cover Tall Shrub Tall Sapling Low Shrub Low Sapling Cover Cover Cover Cover
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 39 b. Lower Storey and Ground Cover
120
100
80 CD01 CD02 60 CD05 CD04 40 CD03
20
0 Spinifex Cover Grass Cover Forb Cover Litter Cover Log Cover
A non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis One Way Analysis of Variance on Ranks shows no significant differences between the habitat characteristics at each site. The Habitat Complexity Scores (see Section 6.4e) for the five detailed survey sites within the Modification range between 12 and 15. The maximum score is 18, indicating moderate habitat complexity scores. The values are given in Table 9 and Figure 10.
Table 9: Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites in the Modification Area
CD01 CD02 CD05 CD04 CD03 Mean Score 15 13 12 14 15 13.8
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 40
Figure 10: Habitat Complexity Scores
Habitat Complexity Score
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CD01 CD02 CD05 CD04 CD03 Mean
The Habitat Complexity Scores are lowest for CD05 (Shrub) Site and highest for CD03 and CD01 (Dune-Spinifex) Sites.
8.0 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS
The extent of the development upon the fauna populations within the Modification Area needs to examine several potential impacts. The Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment, issued by Department of Environment And Conservation and Department Of Primary Industries (July 2005) identifies important factors and/or heads of consideration that must be considered by proponents and consultants when assessing potential impacts on threatened species, populations, or ecological communities, or their habitats for development applications assessed under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An assessment under these guidelines is provided as Appendix 5 of this report.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 41
8.1 Loss of Vegetation
760 ha of vegetation would be cleared or modified within the Modification. This comprises the following losses from each vegetation community:
Community Disturbance Community Name Number Area (ha) 1 Black Box Woodland 21.5 2 Black Oak - Western Rosewood Woodland 16 2a Black Oak - Western Rosewood Woodland - Disturbed 26 3 Black Oak – Pearl Bluebush Woodland 9.5 4 Chenopod Mallee Woodland / Shrubland 253 4a Chenopod Mallee Woodland / Shrubland - Disturbed 46.5 5 Dune Mallee Shrubland 262.5 5a Dune Mallee Shrubland - Disturbed 6 6 Pearl Bluebush Shrubland 2 7 Austrostipa Grassland* 62 8 Turpentine Tall Open Shrubland* 45.5 9 Depression Herbfield* 9.5 Total 760 * Derived community
The MLA boundary is 974 Ha.
Clearing native vegetation is a key threatening process listed under the TSC Act and the EPBC Act and is recognised as a key factor contributing to the loss of biological diversity. The final determination of the NSW Scientific Committee describes the impacts from loss and/or degradation of habitat following clearing and fragmentation of native vegetation. These can include increases in land salinisation, alteration of riparian zones, increased edge habitat, genetic isolation and loss of leaf litter and logs.
Some of these results are applicable to the situation occurring within the Modification Area, but the degree of loss of vegetation due to clearing and modification must be placed into context.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 42
Analysis by Florasearch (2012) shows that the loss of vegetation communities within the development area is relatively small when compared to that occurring in the surrounding region. Analysis of the data presented in Table 18 of the Florasearch report is given here as Table 10. This shows that the extent of loss of habitats within the Modification Area is very small relative to the surrounding area (~0.03%) and it is unlikely that such a loss could be considered significant. Any loss of habitats will be compensated for by setting aside and managing an area of equivalent habitats to ensure an increase in biodiversity values over time. This will be achieved by the creation of a Biodiversity Offset Area (see Section 10.0).
However, such a loss could affect a population of a species with a restricted distribution. Of the Threatened fauna species located within the deposit area only the Marble-headed Delma could be considered as having a restricted distribution (part of the reason for it’s listing as Endangered). It would appear that this species is distributed throughout the MLA and has been located within the Biodiversity Offset Area. It will be important to determine the population size and distribution of the Marble-headed Delma within the Modification Area and beyond (see Section 9.0).
Table 10: Percentage of Habitat Lost within the Modification Area
Habitat Total Area (ha) Estimated Percent of Extant on Study Area Current Extent Area that would be (ha) Cleared for the Project Black Box 21.5 100,000 0.0002% Woodland
Black Oak 51.5 500,000 0.001% Woodland Shrubland 347 750,000 0.0004% Mallee-Spinifex on 268.5 650,000 0.0005% Dunes Grassland 71.5 100.000 0.0007% TOTAL 760 2,100,000 0.0003%
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 43
8.2 Disturbance by Noise and Dust
Excessive dust generation can impact on the health and viability of surrounding vegetation and indirectly affect fauna populations. Such an impact would be limited and any dust effects would be mitigated by a rigorous suppression regime through regular watering of roads and soil stockpiles, emplacements and other active areas within the Modification.
Studies have shown that excessive and sudden noise can affect the presence and breeding ability of certain fauna species. However, it is also found that many species adapt to human activities and readily habituate to noise. A range of fauna species are known to inhabit land within and surrounding the existing developments (Gingko and Snapper), and it is considered that the impact of noise generated by the Modification on vertebrate fauna adjacent to the area is likely to be minimal.
8.3 Vehicle Movement
Establishing roads within undeveloped land may result in fauna mortality via vehicular strike, as well as creating barriers to some small ground fauna. Provided measures to avoid and mitigate potential impacts described in Section 10.0 (e.g. speed limits, culverts), then the impacts on fauna should be minimal.
8.4 Fauna and Artificial Lighting
Artificial lighting for the Project has the potential to affect the behavioural patterns of some fauna species e.g. attracting birds and bats to feed at lights. Although such situations can result in increased predation there is no evidence of this phenomenon within the existing lighting set-up at Gingko or Snapper Mines and it is unlikely that the impacts from artificial lighting at the Study Area would be different.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 44
8.5 Introduced Fauna
The creation of disturbed land could attract introduced species such as House Mice, Red Fox, Rabbit and Cat to the area. However, it is planned to ensure a clean, rubbish- free environment is maintained, as well as a pest management strategy (see Section 9.0). Consequently the presence of introduced fauna would be low.
8.6 Bushfire Risk Ecological Consequences of High Frequency Fire is listed as a Key Threatening Process under the NSW TSC Act. The risk of fire would be reduced through the management measures described in Section 9.0. Therefore, it is considered unlikely that the Modification would result in a significant change in the frequency of fires.
8.7 Cumulative Impact Assessment
8.7.1 Loss of Native Vegetation
The Modification would result in the loss of 760 ha of native vegetation. This is in addition to native vegetation that has been approved for removal in previous phases of mining by Bemax Resources Limited in the nearby region, including 1,630 ha for the Snapper Mine and 490 ha for the Ginkgo Mine. Even with all past and proposed disturbances, the cumulative proportions of the extant vegetation of all types that would be disturbed are very small.
8.7.2 Loss of Habitats
Concomitant with the loss of native vegetation is the loss of habitats for native fauna. In addition to the removal of a proportion of the vegetation communities in the general area is the loss of the sand dune landscape.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 45
The distinctive characteristics of the sandy soils make this habitat preferred by a variety of burrowing fauna species, such as reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates. The extent of loss of habitats is similar to that calculated for native vegetation (see Section 8.7.1) i.e. about 3,000 ha. This loss is relatively small in comparison with the extent of the native vegetation and associated habitats within the Murray-Darling Basin.
8.7.3 Threatened Fauna
Low population numbers and limited distribution are two reasons why fauna species are listed as Threatened. The Threatened fauna known to occur within or near the Modification that have such characteristics include those species with specific habitat preferences and small home ranges. Reptiles such as the Jewelled Gecko, Marble- headed Delma and Mallee Worm-lizard are such species. The loss of local populations of these species can have a cumulative impact upon their long-term survival. Consequently, it is important that mitigation measures be undertaken to ensure any population of Threatened fauna is retained in the area. The removal of preferred habitats will require investigations of the current distribution and habitat preferences of targeted species and possibly the re-location of such species likely to be affected by the Modification.
9.0 MEASURES TO AVOID AND MITIGATE IMPACTS
Impact avoidance and mitigation measures have been developed to avoid and mitigate potential impacts of the Modification on fauna. These measures would be detailed in a Flora and Fauna Management Plan (FFMP) which would be prepared prior to the Modification construction. The FFMP would include measures which would be undertaken during construction and operation, including a Vegetation Clearance Protocol, Threatened Species Management Protocol, grazing management, control of introduced flora species, control of introduced animal species, fauna habitat monitoring, Marble-headed Delma monitoring and bushfire management.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 46
These management measures are described below. In addition, a Biodiversity Offset Area will be created that aims to replace the biodiversity values lost at the impacted site. This aspect is described and assessed on Section 10.0.
Vegetation Clearance Protocol A Vegetation Clearance Protocol would be implemented to minimise the removal/modification of fauna and their habitats. Key components of the Vegetation Clearance Protocol would include the delineation of areas to be cleared of remnant vegetation, a pre-clearance survey, identification of fauna management strategies and specific procedures for vegetation clearance. Vegetation clearance would be timed to minimise disturbance to potential roosting/breeding activities of fauna.
Vegetation clearance along the Haul Road would be minimised where practical using techniques such as selective clearing (e.g. minimising vegetation clearance to higher midstorey and upperstorey vegetation).
Threatened Species Management Protocol A Threatened Species Management Protocol would be prepared and implemented to facilitate the management and minimisation of potential impacts on threatened fauna species. Key components of the Threatened Species Management Protocol would include site observations/surveys, threatened species management strategies and reporting. In particular, it will be necessary to determine the distribution of the Marble- headed Delma within the Modification and the surrounds as this threatened species has not been located in the area previously. The Threatened Species Management Protocol would be conducted by suitably qualified person(s).
Grazing Management Appropriate fencing would be used to prevent the uncontrolled entry of livestock within the mine work and progressive rehabilitation areas for the life of the mine.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 47
Control of Introduced Flora Species Control measures would be conducted to minimise the occurrence of weeds. These may include the mechanical removal of identified weeds and/or the application of approved herbicides in authorized areas. Herbicides that contain glyphosate as the active ingredient and/or surfactants (detergent additive used as a dispersant/wetting agent) would not be utilised due to potential adverse impacts on amphibians.
Control of Introduced Animal Species A clean, rubbish-free environment would be mandated to discourage scavenging and reduce the potential for further colonisation of the study area by non-endemic fauna (e.g. introduced rodents and foxes). The introduction of animals on to the site would be prohibited. Domestic pets would not be allowed on the mine site.
In addition, control measures would be conducted to minimise the occurrence of declared pests (e.g. Rabbits) and species listed as Invasive under the EPBC Act (Feral Goat, Cat, Red Fox). These may include the removal of rabbit harbour, feral cat trapping, fox baiting and mustering of goats. Animal pest control would be undertaken by a licensed contractor.
Vegetation Monitoring A photographic monitoring programme would be developed to assess the performance of the rehabilitation areas and monitor the health of the vegetation surrounding the mine path and initial overburden emplacement with regard to potential impacts from airborne salts.
Marbled-headed Delma Monitoring The Marble-headed Delma is listed as Endangered under the NSW TSC Act and was located within the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Area. Continued surveys for this species will be undertaken to delineate their distribution and population numbers within the disturbance and surrounding areas and within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 48
Dust Suppression Dust suppression techniques would be undertaken on the Snapper Mine roads within the MLA area.
Vehicular Traffic Management The movement of vehicles associated with the Study Area has the potential to increase the incidence of fauna mortality via vehicular strike. To reduce this potential, the number of roads constructed for the Study Area would be minimised, employees and contractors would be instructed to only use the Study Area roads, speed limits would be imposed on vehicles using the Study Area roads and tracks, and signposting would be installed to remind personnel of the danger of vehicles to wildlife. Vehicle speed would be restricted to 50 km/hour on all roads inside the Study Area.
Where new roads are created (e.g. Haul Road) culverts would be installed where the road passes across drainage lines or depressions to enable the road to be used in wet weather. This may also potentially allow the passage of fauna under the road.
Bushfire Risk Management The potential for a change in the frequency of fires due to the Modification would be reduced through implementation of a Bushfire Management Plan. The Bushfire Management Plan would establish a bushfire management strategy to reduce the risk of bushfire outbreaks in the Study Area and to establish emergency response.
Site Induction An environmental education programme would be included in employee and contractor inductions.
Management of Biodiversity Offset Area To ensure an increased habitat condition within the offset area, it will be necessary to undertake a pest control programme focusing on Feral Goats, Cats and Red Foxes.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 49
In addition, fencing of the offset area will be undertaken to ensure the exclusion of domestic stock. It may be necessary to fence any farm dams in the offset area to reduce access by feral animals. On-going monitoring of the habitat condition and native fauna populations will be undertaken to determine biodiversity values over time.
10.0 PROPOSED BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA
10.1 Background
According to the principles stated by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) for the use of biodiversity offsets in NSW, biodiversity offsets counterbalance specific impacts of development on biodiversity. A biodiversity offset can be considered an action that is taken at a location away from an impacted site that aims to replace the biodiversity values lost at the impacted site. Offsets result in the legal protection of land and the implementation of management actions to remove threats. The proposed offset study area occupies 2,594 ha (Appendix 6). The area aims at preserving similar vegetation to that which will be cleared for the proposed modification, as well as aiming at preserving communities of higher conservation value (i.e. Black Box). An accompanying report by Biodiversity Monitoring Services (Ginkgo Mine Modification- Crayfish Deposit Biodiversity Offset Fauna Assessment) provides detailed descriptions of the location, habitats and fauna located within the offset area.
10.2 Comparison between Modification Area and Biodiversity Offset Area
The aim of this section is to determine if the land set aside for a biodiversity offset area supports similar fauna assemblages and habitats as that within the impact areas i.e. to determine whether the offset area satisfies a ‘like for like’ strategy. Section 6.5 lists and describes a series of indices that can be used to quantify biodiversity values and to compare these values between areas.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 50
Each of these indices have been derived from the results of the fauna surveys for the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Area and are used here to determine whether the offset effectively counterbalances any impacts within the Modification.
To provide a comparison between the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas the data used must be derived from surveys of approximately equal effort. In the case of the Modification Project this was possible as both areas were surveyed in about the same period of time. The efforts for the surveys within the Modification and the Biodiversity Offset Area can be compared to determine whether a relatively similar effort was expended at each Area. If this is the case then the results from the surveys at each Area can also be compared to determine whether the Areas are similar in their overall biodiversity. Survey effort was measured as the number of trap-days (i.e. number of day traps were used), Anabat-days (i.e. number of days Anabats were used), camera-days (i.e. number of days cameras were used) and person-days (i.e. number of days for both surveyors to use a technique).
Figure 10 shows the distribution of trap-days, camera-days and person-days within the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas. It can be seen that the degree of survey effort at each Area is relatively similar. Statistical analyses show that there are no significant differences in the survey efforts between each site for each Area (non- parametric Kruskal-Wallis One Way Analysis of Variance on Ranks). Importantly, there are also no significant differences between the survey efforts used at each Area (non- parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test). This means that it is possible to compare the results from the surveys at each Area to determine the degree of similarity between them, on the basis of biodiversity values.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 51
450 Crayfish 400 Deposit Area 350 Total 300 Biodiversity 250 Offset Area 200 Total 150 100 50 0
s tt s tt ls ls s h s tt p io bat l aps arc a Tra e ount Ellio e e El S C An d g g Funne ree Ellio a Pit Tr ir ile d T C a oun Lar lider FunneH Bir G mote CameraRept Gr e R
Figure 11: Comparison of the Survey Efforts between the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas on the basis of trap-days, Anabat-days, camera-days and person-days
As discussed in Section 6.5 a set of indices provides an important set of criteria that can be used to compare the use by fauna populations of an area over time and between areas i.e. temporally and spatially. Each of these indices is applied to the data from each Area in the following sections.
10.2.1 Species Richness of Faunal Groups
The species richness of bird and reptile assemblages for the deposit and offset areas are given in Table 10 and shown in Figure 11. There is a difference in the reptile species richness between the two areas due to sampling in different seasons (summer versus winter). However, there is little difference between the bird species richness values for each area, with the offset area having a slightly higher value (55 versus 46 species). The difference is mainly the result of the presence of water bodies within the offset area providing habitat for water birds, although there would be some seasonal effect.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 52
There was also little difference in the species richness of bats recorded from each site, with 10 species recorded from the Modification Area and eight species from the Biodiversity Offset Area. In addition, the mean number of passes per site recorded from each area is similar – 123 passes per site from the Modification Area and 165 passes per site from the Biodiversity Offset Area.
10.2.2 Simpson’s Index of Diversity
Simpson’s Index of Diversity for both areas is given in Table 11 and Figure 12 and this shows that there is little difference between the two areas (deposit area 0.911 and offset area 0.866).
10.2.3 Evenness of Occurrence of Species within an Area
Evenness is higher within the Modification when compared to that from the Offset area (0.796 versus 0.687). This due to the high numbers of wood-swallows recorded in the Offset area during the surveys (>500 seen). With the removal of the wood-swallow species from the lists derived from both areas then the evenness is similar for both areas (deposit 0.867 versus offset 0.858). With such values for Evenness then the values for Simpson’s Indices of Diversity are also similar (deposit 0.948 versus offset 0.956).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 53
Table 11: Biodiversity Indices for Modification Area and Biodiversity Offset Area
Biodiversity Modification Biodiversity Index Area Offset Area Birds Evenness 0.796 0.687 Simpson’s Index of 0.911 0.866 Diversity Numbers Recorded 869 2034 Species Richness 46 55 Reptiles Evenness 0.603 0.961 Simpson’s Index of 0.632 0.72 Diversity Numbers Recorded 70 5 Species Richness 15 4
Figure 12: Biodiversity Indices for Birds and Reptiles a. Evenness and Simpson’s Index of Diversity
1.2
1
0.8 Modification Area 0.6 Biodiversity Offset Area 0.4
0.2
0 Evenness Evenness Simpson's Simpson's Birds Reptiles Index of Index of Diversity Birds Diversity Reptiles
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 54 b. Bird Numbers
2500
2000
1500 Numbers Recorded Birds 1000
500
0 Modification Area Biodiversity Offset Area
c. Bird Species Richness
Species Richness Birds
56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 Modification Area Biodiversity Offset Area
d. Reptile Numbers and Species Richness
80
70
60
50 Modification Area 40 Biodiversity Offset Area 30
20
10
0 Numbers Recorded Reptiles Species Richness Reptiles
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 55
10.2.4 Capture Rates of Individual Species
Usually capture rates are expressed as number of captures of native mammals per trap- day. However, this form of index is not applicable to the Modification Project as only introduced House Mice were captured. Also, the difference in the reptile numbers between summer and winter precluded this fauna group. It is possible to compare the number of passes by bat species within each Area and this is discussed in Section 10.2.1. Instead, the number of sightings of each bird species is used. As the survey efforts at the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas are similar (see Section 10.2) it is possible to compare the sighting rates at each area. Appendix 3 shows which bird species were present within the Study Area during the surveys, each over a period of six days. Appendix 4 gives the species and numbers sighted within the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas.
Statistical analysis of the data in Appendix 4 shows that there is no significant difference between the numbers sighted in the Modification and the Biodiversity Offset Area (non- parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test). Application of a Spearman Rank Order Correlation analysis provided a Correlation Coefficient of 0.68 i.e. nearly 70% of the bird species were similar for each area. A Bray Curtis similarity analysis gives a similarity index of 61.5. Such analysis shows that the assemblages of birds at the Modification Area and the Biodiversity Offset Area can be considered similar, considering the different seasons surveyed.
10.2.5 Contribution to the Faunal Assemblages by Threatened Species and Species Dependant upon Woodland
Lists are available of bird species that are considered to be declining and/or woodland dependent. These lists are used to calculate the proportion of birds located within an area that are considered to be under threat. The higher the proportion, then the greater the value that can be placed on the present habitat in the area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 56
The list used here is from the western slopes and plains of NSW (‘sheep-wheat belt’) as compiled by Reid (2000). Table 12 shows the proportion of declining and woodland dependent birds within the populations surveyed in each area.
Table 12: Proportion of Woodland Dependent and Declining Birds in Each Area
Category Modification Area Biodiversity Offset Area Woodland Dependent 70% 75% Declining 17% 19% Threatened 2.2% 4.2%
Although the values for the offset area are slightly higher, there are no significant differences between the proportions from each area.
10.2.6 Habitat Characteristics
Table 13 and Figure 13 shows the mean values of the habitat characteristics for the Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas.
Table 13: Mean Values of Habitat Characteristics for Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas
Habitat Characteristic Mean Offset Area Mean Modification Area Tree Cover 72 46 Tall Shrub Cover 1 33 Tall Sapling Cover 4 13 Low Shrub Cover 53 61 Low Sapling Cover 1 4 Spinifex Cover 25 39 Grass Cover 51 21 Forb Cover 63 74 Litter Cover 87 75 Log Cover 49 22
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 57
Figure 13: Mean Values of Habitat Characteristics for Modification and Biodiversity Offset Areas
100 90 80 70 60 Mean Offset 50 Mean Deposit 40 30 20 10 0 Tree Tall Tall Low Low Spinifex Grass Forb Litter Log Cover Shrub Sapling Shrub Sapling Cover Cover Cover Cover Cover Cover Cover Cover Cover
There are no significant differences between the habitat characteristics for each area (paired t-test), although the Offset area has higher middle storey cover than the Modification area .
10.2.7 Habitat Complexity Scores
The Habitat Complexity Scores (see Section 6.4e) for the survey sites within the Modification, Biodiversity Offset and Haul Road Areas range between 12 and 15 indicating moderate habitat complexity scores. The values are given in Table 14 and Figure 13. The Habitat Complexity Scores are lowest for CD05 (Shrub) Site and highest for CD03 and BO01 (Mulga) Sites and for CD01 (Dune-Spinifex) Site. There are no significant differences between the habitat complexity scores for the Modification Area and the Biodiversity Offset Area (Students t-test).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 58
Table 14: Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites
CD01 CD02 CD05 CD04 CD03 BO01 BO02 BO03 Mean Score 15 13 12 14 15 15 13 13 13.7
Figure 14: Habitat Complexity Scores
Habitat Complexity Score
16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CD01 CD02 CD05 CD04 CD03 BO01 BO02 BO03 Mean
10.2.8 Threatened Fauna
Four Threatened species were located within the Biodiversity Offset Area (Little Pied Bat, Hooded Robin, Varied Sittella and Marbled-headed Delma). Two additional threatened species were located within the Modification Area (Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo and Little Eagle) but these would be expected to occur in the offset area as both are have large home ranges. It is likely that the Biodiversity Offset Area supports a similar diversity of Threatened Species as the Modification Area.
10.2.9 Other Factors
One difference between the two areas assessed is the use by domestic stock and pest animal species. During the period of the surveys no domestic stock were located within the Modification Area whilst the Biodiversity Offset Area was stocked with cattle (24 sightings) and sheep (291 sightings).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 59
In addition, there were higher numbers of pest animal species within the Offset Area when compared with that sighted in the Modification Area. Table 15 gives the number of sightings of the pest species in each Area. These pest species are those listed as Invasive under the EPBC Act.
Table 15: Sightings of Pest Species in Both Areas
Pest Species Modification Area Biodiversity Offset Area Feral Goat 155 237 Red Fox 14 18 Cat 3 8
The presence of these pest species in the numbers recorded, particularly within the Offset Area, would result in a reduction in biodiversity values of these areas. If such numbers can be reduced, through active pest management strategies, then an increase in biodiversity values could be expected.
10.3 Conclusion
Although there are some variations in the extent and composition of the habitats found in the Modification Area and Biodiversity Offset Area, it can be concluded that the Offset area is a suitable replacement for the Modification. Analyses of the various indices show that there are no significant differences in the biodiversity characteristics and values. In addition, there is an opportunity to improve the condition of the Offset area by the removal of pest animal species, particularly Feral Goats, Red Foxes and Cats. This could lead to an increase in biodiversity values and satisfy the basic principle of any offset strategy i.e. to improve or maintain environmental outcomes.
In addition, there are no significant differences between the diversity indices for the Modification Area and the Biodiversity Offset Area (non-parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 60
There is a large difference in the reptile numbers and species richness between the Modification Area and the Biodiversity Offset Area due to the colder conditions during the survey of the Offset area resulting in a low number of records. Also, the evenness value for birds within the Offset area is lower than that from the deposit area. This is due to the high numbers of two bird species observed, the Masked Wood-swallow (510 sightings) and the White-browed Wood-swallow (500 sightings), skewing the Evenness values.
11.0 OFFSET MEASURES
11.1 Offset area proposal management, security, monitoring and auditing
11.1.1 Proposed Management Plan
A Biodiversity Offset Management Plan will be established to ensure the biodiversity values associated with the offset area are improved and conserved in perpetuity. The plan will cover the removal and continued exclusion of domestic stock from the area, as well as the management of pest species, particularly those listed as Invasive under the EPBC Act. Animal pest control would be undertaken by a licensed contractor. Access to the area will be limited to persons undertaking on-going monitoring and auditing and those involved in pest management.
11.1.2 Monitoring
Monitoring of biodiversity values will be undertaken using a number of indices as surrogates for these values. Native and introduced animal populations will be surveyed and assessed, as well as habitat conditions throughout the area. Monitoring of species listed as Threatened under the TSC Act will be targeted e.g. Marble-headed Delma. The use of indices will allow for the tracking of biodiversity values over the long-term (see Section 6.5).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 61
11.1.3 Independent audits
As part of the Biodiversity Offset Management Plan, independent auditing of the offset will occur to ensure that all proposed management actions are carried out, and monitored to determine that the actions are leading to positive biodiversity outcomes.
11.1.4 Completion Criteria
By using a series of indices to measure biodiversity values, it is possible to track changes within the Biodiversity Offset Area. By tracking changes in indices it is possible to determine whether the biodiversity values are approaching those associated with the areas considered to be still in a ‘natural’ state e.g. conservation reserves of similar habitats in the region.
11.1.5 Strategic Benefit of the Offset Area
Biodiversity Offset Area provides a representative sample of the land forms and habitats that are found in this part of the Murray-Darling Depression IBRA Region. Management of these habitats will provide a strategic benefit to the overall nature conservation in the region. The proximity of the offset area to the Darling River and associated flood plain will provide a linkage between the drier inland and the riparian environments.
11.1.6 Ecosystem Resilience
At present the ecosystem resilience is not as strong as that expected to occur after the removal of domestic stock and appropriate pest management. However, the diversity of bird and other fauna within the Biodiversity Offset Area is similar to that found in the Modification Area and the Gingko Mine land prior to development.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 62
11.1.7 Existing infrastructure
The Biodiversity Offset Area contains a number of access tracks and internal fencing, as well as some small tanks for stock watering.
Plate 7: Sand Goanna (Varanus gouldii) at CD01 (Dune South) Site
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 63
11.3 Reconciliation of the Proposed Offset Strategy against OEH Offset Principles
There are 13 OEH Offset Principles that provide a framework for considering environmental impacts and developing offset proposals. A reconciliation of the proposed offset strategy against these principles is given in Table 16.
Table 16: Reconciliation of Offset Strategy against OEH Principles
Principles Reconciliation Impacts must be avoided first by using See Section 10.0 prevention and mitigation measures. All regulatory requirements must be met. Satisfied Offsets must never reward ongoing poor Degradation or mismanagement of offset performance. areas will not occur Offsets will complement other To be achieved government programs. Offsets must be underpinned by sound Satisfied ecological principles. Offsets should aim to result in a net Pest management and stock removal will improvement in biodiversity over time. result in net improvement Offsets must be enduring - they must To be achieved offset the impact of the development for the period that the impact occurs. Offsets should be agreed prior to the Satisfied impact occurring. Offsets must be quantifiable - the impacts To be achieved by use of the tracking of and benefits must be reliably estimated. biodiversity indices Offsets must be targeted. A like-for-like outcome will occur Offsets must be located appropriately. Offset has similar ecological characteristics to deposit area Offsets must be supplementary. Satisfied Offsets and their actions must be The offset area will be audited to ensure enforceable through development consent management actions will be carried out conditions, licence conditions, and monitored to determine that the conservation agreements or a contract. actions are leading to positive biodiversity outcomes
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 64
11.4 Ecological Gains of the Proposed Offset
The main ecological gain of the proposed offset is to provide a representative sample of land forms and habitats found in the general area and to counterbalance specific impacts of development on biodiversity. The relatively size of the offset in comparison to the development area is also a benefit. The Biodiversity Offset Area is more than three times the size of the Modification Area (2,594 ha versus 729 ha). The proposed offset will also ensure that biodiversity values will be improved by undertaking actions that increase the quantity, quality or likely persistence of these values.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 65
12.0 REFERENCES
Biosphere Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd 2007 Gingko Mineral Sands Project Implementation of the Painted Burrowing Frog Monitoring Programme Report to Bemax Resources Ltd
Catling, P. C. and Burt, R.J. 1995 Studies of the ground-dwelling mammals of eucalypt forests in south-Western New South Wales: the effect of habitat variables on distribution and abundance Wildlife Research 22: 271-288
DECC 2006 Threatened Species Survey & Assessment: Guidelines for Developments and Activities Working Draft Report prepared by DECC
DEWHA 2010a Survey Guidelines for Threatened Birds
DEWHA 2010b Survey Guidelines for Threatened Mammals
DEWHA 2010c Survey Guidelines for Threatened Reptiles
DEWHA 2010d Survey Guidelines for Threatened Amphibians
Florasearch 2012 Ginkgo Mineral Sands Project - Crayfish Modification Flora Assessment Report prepared for Bemax Resources Ltd
How, R.A., Dell, J. and Wellington, B.D. 1986 Comparative Biology of Eight Species of Diplodactylus Gecko in Western Australia. Herpetologica 42: 471-482
Marchant, S. and Higgins, P.J. 1993 Handbook of Australian, New Zealand & Antarctic Birds. Oxford University Press, Melbourne
Reid, J. R. W. 2000 Threatened and Declining Birds in the New South Wales Sheep-Wheat Belt: II Landscape Relationships – Modelling Bird Atlas Data against Vegetation Cover Report to NSW NPWS, CSIRO
Sass, S., Swan, G., Marshall, B., Browne, T. and Graham-Higgs, N. 2011 Disjunct populations of spinifex-obligate reptiles revealed in a newly described vegetation community near Broken Hill, far-western new South Wales. Australian Zoologist 35: 781- 787
Swan, M. and Watharow, S. 2005 Snakes, Lizards and Frogs of the Victorian Mallee CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood
Val, J., Oliver, D., Pennay, M., McLaughlin, J., Ewin, P. and Foster, E. 2012 The reptile, bird and small mammal fauna of Dune Mallee Woodlands in south-western new South Wales Aust. Zool. 36: 29-48
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 66 van Dyke, S. and Strahan, R. (editors) 2008 The Mammals of Australia 3rd Edition. Reed New Holland, Sydney
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 67
APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY OF TECHNIQUES TO BE USED DURING THE SURVEY OF STUDY AREA
Used in Current Mammals Birds Reptiles Amphibians Survey Existing Literature and Databases X X X X X Scat and Owl Pellet Identification X X - - X Scat and Owl Pellet Analysis X X X X X Tracks X X X - X Scratches X X X - X Burrows and Nests X X X - X Sand Plots X X X - X Spotlighting X X X X X Stagwatching X X - - X Call Detection and Playback X X - X X Remote Cameras X X X X X Hair Sampling X - - - X Pitfall Traps X - X X X Elliott Traps X - X X X Tree-mounted Traps X X - - X Cage Traps X X X - X Funnel Traps - - X X X Glider Tubes X - - - X Anabat Recording and Analysis X - - - X Harp Traps X - - - X Mist Nets X X - - No Targeted Searches X X X X X Point Surveys - X - - X Visual Encounter Surveys - - - X X Direct Observation X X X X X Nest Boxes X X - - No
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 68
APPENDIX 2: FAUNA LOCATED DURING THE SURVEY OF MLA AND HAUL ROAD AREAS a. Mammals
EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act MLA Road Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna x Macropodidae Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo x x Macropus fuliginosus Western Grey Kangaroo x x Muridae Mus musculus House Mouse x x Molossidae Mormopterus sp 3 Inland Freetail Bat x Mormopterus sp 4 Southern Freetail Bat Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat x Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat Vulnerable x Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat x Tadarida australis White-striped Mastiff Bat x Nyctophilus geoffroyi Unidentified Long-eared Bat x Vespadelus vulturnus Little Forest Bat Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat Vulnerable x Vespadelus sp. Forest Bat Canidae Vulpes vulpes Red Fox Invasive x x Canis familiaris Dog Felidae Felis catus Cat Invasive x Bovidae Bos taurus European cattle x Pest Capra hircus Goat Species Invasive x x Artiodactyla Ovis aries Sheep Suidae Sus scrofa Feral Pig Invasive Leporidae Pest Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit Species x x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 69 b. Birds
EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Road Dromaiidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu xx Anatidae Anas gracilis Grey Teal Aythya australis Hardhead Chenonetta jubata Australian Wood Duck Podicipedidae Tachybaptus novaehollandiae Australasian Grebe Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax melanoleucos Little Pied Cormorant Ardeidae Egretta pacifica White-necked Heron Accipitridae Accipiter cirrocephalus Collared Sparrowhawk x Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle x Elanus axillaris Black-shouldered Kite x Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle Vulnerable x x Falconidae Falco longipennis Australian Hobby Falco berigora Brown Falcon xx Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel x Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon x Rallidae Tribonyx ventralis Black-tailed Native-hen x Charadriidae Elseyornis melanops Black-fronted Dotterel x Columbidae Phaps chalcoptera Common Bronzewing Geopelia cuneata Diamond Dove Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon x Cacatuidae Major Mitchell's Lophochroa leadbeateri Cockatoo Vulnerable x x Eolophus roseicapillus Galah xx Psittacidae Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck xx Northiella haematogaster Bluebonnet xx Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot xx Strigidae Ninox novaeseelandiae Southern Boobook x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 70
EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Road Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl x Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth x Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar x Aegothelidae Australian Owlet- Aegotheles cristatus nightjar x Meropidae Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater Migratory x x Climacteridae Climacteris picumnus Brown Treecreeper xx Pardalotidae Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote xx Acanthizidae Yellow-rumped Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Thornbill x x Chestnut-rumped Acanthiza uropygialis Thornbill x x Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface x Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill xx Meliphagidae Spiny-cheeked Acanthagenys rufogularis Honeyeater x x Yellow-plumed Lichenostomus ornatus Honeyeater x Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater White-plumed Lichenostomus penicillatus Honeyeater Manorina flavigula Yellow-throated Miner xx Brown-headed Melithreptus brevirostris Honeyeater x x Plectorhyncha lanceolata Striped Honeyeater xx White-fronted Purnella albifrons Honeyeater x Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter x Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin x Pomatostomidae Chestnut-crowned Pomatostomus ruficeps Babbler Pomatostomus superciliosus White-browed Babbler xx Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella Vulnerable x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 71
EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Road Pachycephalidae Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird x Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush xx Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler xx Dicruridae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark x Myiagra inquieta Restless Flycatcher x Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail xx Artamidae White-browed Artamus superciliosus Woodswallow x x Artamus personatus Masked Woodswallow x Black-faced Artamus cinereus Woodswallow x Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird xx Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird xx Gymnorhina tibicen Australian Magpie xx Campephagidae Black-faced Cuckoo- Coracina novaehollandiae shrike x x Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian Raven xx Corvus bennetti Little Crow x Corvus mellori Little Raven x Corcoracidae Struthidea cinerea Apostlebird xx Corcorax melanorhamphos White-winged Chough xx Hirundinae Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow x Petrochelidon nigricans Tree Martin x Sylviidae Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark Dicaeidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird Motacillidae Anthus australis Australasian Pipit x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 72 c. Reptiles
EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act MLA Road Agamidae Amphibolurus nobbi Nobbi x Pogona vitticeps Central Bearded Dragon x x Ctenophorus fordi Mallee Dragon x Gekkonidae Diplodactylus damacus Beaded Gecko x Rhynchoedura ornata Beaked Gecko x Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella Heteronotia binoei Prickly Gecko x Pygopodidae Delma australis Marbled-headed Delma Endangered x Varanidae Varanus gouldii Gould's Goanna x x Scincidae Cryptoblepharus carnabyi Carnaby's Wall Skink x Ctenotus atlas x Ctenotus brachyonyx Murray Striped Skink x Barred Wedgesnout Ctenotus schomburgkii Ctenotus x Lerista punctatovittata Eastern Robust Slider x Morethia adelaidensis Saltbush Morethia Skink x Morethia obscura Dull Morethia x Liopholis inornata Desert Skink x Menetia greyii Common Dwarf Skink x Morethia boulengeri South-eastern Morethia Skink x Tiliqua rugosa Shingle-back x Elapidae Pseudonaja textilis Eastern Brown Snake x Pseudechis australis King Brown Snake x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 73 d. Amphibians
TSC EPBC Haul Scientific Name Common Name Act Act MLA Road Hylidae Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog Myobatrachidae Neobatrachus sudelli Sudell's Frog x Limnodynastes fletcheri Long-thumbed Frog Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Spotted Marsh Frog
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 74
APPENDIX 3: FAUNA LOCATED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA a. Mammals
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act MLA Area Road Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna x Macropodidae Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo x x x Macropus fuliginosus Western Grey Kangaroo x x x Muridae Mus musculus House Mouse x x x Molossidae Mormopterus sp 3 Inland Freetail Bat x Mormopterus sp 4 Southern Freetail Bat Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat x Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat Vulnerable x Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat x Tadarida australis White-striped Mastiff Bat x Nyctophilus geoffroyi Unidentified Long-eared Bat x Vespadelus vulturnus Little Forest Bat Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat Vulnerable x Vespadelus sp. Forest Bat Canidae Vulpes vulpes Red Fox Invasive x x x Canis familiaris Dog x Felidae Felis catus Cat Invasive x Bovidae Bos taurus European cattle xx Pest Capra hircus Goat Species Invasive x x x Artiodactyla Ovis aries Sheep x Suidae Sus scrofa Feral Pig Invasive x Leporidae Pest Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit Species x x x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 75 b. Birds
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Area Road Dromaiidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu x x x Anatidae Anas gracilis Grey Teal Aythya australis Hardhead Australian Wood Chenonetta jubata Duck x Podicipedidae Tachybaptus Australasian novaehollandiae Grebe x Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax Little Pied melanoleucos Cormorant Ardeidae White-necked Egretta pacifica Heron x Accipitridae Collared Accipiter cirrocephalus Sparrowhawk x x Wedge-tailed Aquila audax Eagle x x Black-shouldered Elanus axillaris Kite x Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite x Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle Vulnerable x x Falconidae Falco longipennis Australian Hobby x Falco berigora Brown Falcon xx x Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel xx Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon x Rallidae Black-tailed Tribonyx ventralis Native-hen x Charadriidae Black-fronted Elseyornis melanops Dotterel x Columbidae Common Phaps chalcoptera Bronzewing x Geopelia cuneata Diamond Dove x Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon xx
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 76
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Area Road Cacatuidae Lophochroa Major Mitchell's leadbeateri Cockatoo Vulnerable x x Eolophus roseicapillus Galah x x x Psittacidae Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck xx x Northiella haematogaster Bluebonnet x x x Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot xx x Strigidae Ninox novaeseelandiae Southern Boobook x Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl x Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth xx Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar xx Aegothelidae Australian Owlet- Aegotheles cristatus nightjar x x Meropidae Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater Migratory x x Climacteridae Climacteris picumnus Brown Treecreeper x x x Pardalotidae Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote xx x Acanthizidae Acanthiza Yellow-rumped chrysorrhoa Thornbill x x x Acanthiza Chestnut-rumped uropygialis Thornbill x x x Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface x x Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill x x x Meliphagidae Acanthagenys Spiny-cheeked rufogularis Honeyeater x x x Lichenostomus Yellow-plumed ornatus Honeyeater x x Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater x Lichenostomus White-plumed penicillatus Honeyeater x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 77
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Area Road Yellow-throated Manorina flavigula Miner x x x Melithreptus Brown-headed brevirostris Honeyeater x x x Plectorhyncha lanceolata Striped Honeyeater x x x White-fronted Purnella albifrons Honeyeater x Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter xx Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin x Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin xx x Pomatostomida e Pomatostomus Chestnut-crowned ruficeps Babbler x Pomatostomus White-browed superciliosus Babbler x Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella Vulnerable x x Pachycephalidae Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird xx Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush x x x Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler x x x Dicruridae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark xx Myiagra inquieta Restless Flycatcher x Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail x Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail xx x Artamidae Artamus White-browed superciliosus Woodswallow x x x Masked Artamus personatus Woodswallow x x Black-faced Artamus cinereus Woodswallow x Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird x x x Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird xx x Gymnorhina tibicen Australian Magpie xx x Campephagidae Coracina Black-faced novaehollandiae Cuckoo-shrike x x x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 78
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act MLA Area Road Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian Raven xx x Corvus bennetti Little Crow x Corvus mellori Little Raven xx Corcoracidae Struthidea cinerea Apostlebird xx x Corcorax White-winged melanorhamphos Chough x x x Hirundinae Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow x Petrochelidon nigricans Tree Martin x Sylviidae Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark x Dicaeidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird x Motacillidae Anthus australis Australasian Pipit x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 79 c. Reptiles
EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act MLA Area Road Agamidae Amphibolurus nobbi Nobbi x Pogona vitticeps Central Bearded Dragon x x Ctenophorus fordi Mallee Dragon x Gekkonidae Diplodactylus damacus Beaded Gecko x Rhynchoedura ornata Beaked Gecko x Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella x Heteronotia binoei Prickly Gecko x Pygopodidae Delma australis Marbled-headed Delma Endangered x x Varanidae Varanus gouldii Gould's Goanna x x Scincidae Cryptoblepharus carnabyi Carnaby's Wall Skink x Ctenotus atlas x Ctenotus brachyonyx Murray Striped Skink x Barred Wedgesnout Ctenotus schomburgkii Ctenotus x Lerista punctatovittata Eastern Robust Slider x Morethia adelaidensis Saltbush Morethia Skink x Morethia obscura Dull Morethia x Liopholis inornata Desert Skink x Menetia greyii Common Dwarf Skink x Morethia boulengeri South-eastern Morethia Skink x x Tiliqua rugosa Shingle-back x x Elapidae Pseudonaja textilis Eastern Brown Snake x Pseudechis australis King Brown Snake x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 80 d. Amphibians
TSC EPBC Offset Haul Scientific Name Common Name Act Act MLA Area Road Hylidae Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog x Myobatrachidae Neobatrachus sudelli Sudell's Frog x Limnodynastes fletcheri Long-thumbed Frog x Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Spotted Marsh Frog x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 81
APPENDIX 4: SIGHTING NUMBERS OF BIRDS WITHIN EACH AREA DURING A SIX DAY SURVEY PERIOD
Biodiversity Offset Species Area Modification Area Apostlebird 73 78 Australasian Grebe 11 14 Australian Hobby 3 1 Australian Magpie 98 206 Australian Owlet-nightjar 0 3 Australian Raven 93 49 Australian Ringneck 50 50 Australian Wood Duck 28 43 Barn Owl 0 9 Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike 5 12 Black-faced Woodswallow 01 Black-fronted Dotterel 0 1 Black-shouldered Kite 0 1 Black-tailed Native-hen 0 3 Blue Bonnet 69 47 Brown Falcon 2 1 Brown Treecreeper 65 22 Brown-headed Honeyeater 9 9 Chestnut-crowned Babbler 8 0 Chestnut-rumped Thornbill 23 57 Collared Sparrowhawk 1 1 Common Bronzewing 1 13 Crested Bellbird 13 13 Crested Pigeon 40 9 Diamond Dove 1 0 Emu 35 33 Galah 50 102 Grey Butcherbird 18 36 Grey Fantail 8 0 Grey Shrike-thrush 7 29 Grey Teal 20 13 Hardhead 6 6 Hooded Robin 11 0 Jacky Winter 7 17 Little Raven 16 1 Magpie-lark 14 11 Masked Woodswallow 510 242 Mistletoebird 2 0
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 82
Biodiversity Offset Species Area Modification Area Mulga Parrot 58 142 Nankeen Kestrel 4 3 Pied Butcherbird 11 9 Rainbow Bee-eater 0 25 Red-capped Robin 45 18 Restless Flycatcher 0 5 Rufous Songlark 10 Rufous Whistler 3 17 Singing Honeyeater 10 0 Southern Boobook 02 Southern Whiteface 22 3 Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater 13 28 Spotted Nightjar 6 7 Striated Pardalote 71 47 Striped Honeyeater 16 23 Tawny Frogmouth 2 6 Tree Martin 0 23 Varied Sittella 3 2 Wedge-tailed Eagle 12 2 Weebill 42 33 Whistling Kite 1 0 Welcome Swallow 0 2 White-browed Woodswallow 500 40 White-fronted Honeyeater 0 10 White-necked Heron 2 1 White-plumed Honeyeater 2 0 White-winged Chough 69 78 Willie Wagtail 13 13 Yellow-plumed Honeyeater 5 18 Yellow-rumped Thornbill 43 12 Yellow-throated Miner 69 73
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 83
APPENDIX 5: ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS UPON THREATENED SPECIES
Background
According to the Draft Guidelines for Threatened Species Assessment issued by the Department of Environment and Conservation and Department Of Primary Industries (July 2005) any assessment of a development is based on: • whether or not the proposal, including actions to avoid or mitigate impacts or compensate to prevent unavoidable impacts will maintain or improve biodiversity values. • whether or not the proposal is likely to reduce the long-term viability of a local population of the species, population or ecological community. • whether or not the proposal is likely to accelerate the extinction of the species, population or ecological community or place it at risk of extinction. • whether or not the proposal will adversely affect critical habitat.
To undertake such an assessment requires identifying potential effects of the proposal on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats. The list in Table A1 (taken from Appendix 3 in the Guidelines) provides factors for consideration in identifying adverse impacts.
Table A1: Factors for Consideration
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population? a) displaces or disturbs threatened species and/or populations b) disrupts the breeding cycle c) disturbs the dormancy period d) disrupts roosting behaviour e) changes foraging behaviour f) affects migration and dispersal ability g) disrupts pollination cycle; h) disturbs seedbanks; i) disrupts recruitment (ie. germination and establishment of plants); j) affects the interaction between threatened species and other species in the community (eg. pollinators, host species, mychorrizal associations).
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community? a) disturbs any permanent, semi-permanent or ephemeral water bodies; b) degrades soil quality; c) clears or modifies native vegetation; d) introduces weeds, vermin or feral species or provides conditions for them to increase and/or spread; e) removes or disturbs key habitat features such as trees with hollows, caves and rock crevices, foraging habitat; f) affects natural revegetation and recolonisation of existing species following disturbance; and
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 84
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
How is the proposal likely to affect current disturbance regimes? a) modifies the intensity and frequency of fires; b) modifies flooding flows.
How is the proposal likely to affect habitat connectivity? a) creates a barrier to fauna movement; b) removes remnant vegetation or wildlife corridors; c) modifies remnant vegetation or wildlife corridors.
How is the proposal likely to affect critical habitat? a) removes or modifies key habitat features; b) affects natural revegetation or recolonisation of existing species following disturbance; c) introduces weeds, vermin or feral species d) generates or disposes of solid, liquid or gaseous waste; e) uses pesticides, herbicides, other chemicals.
Threatened Species
A search of the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage Wildlife Database in July 2012 provided a list of threatened species known from the area surrounding the Modification. In addition, a general species listing for an area surrounding the proposed development was obtained from the CSIRO and Australian Government’s Atlas of Living Australia web site (www.biocache.ala.org.au). This web site provides distributional data from the NSW DECCW (now OEH), The Australian Museum and Bird Data.
The locations of the records were overlaid on a map of the region using Arc-View GIS. A 20km buffer (the locality) was established around the Study Area and all threatened species located within the buffer area were noted.
Twelve threatened species were obtained from the OEH database and another eleven species were added from the results of the present and past surveys of the Study Area. In addition, another nine threatened species known to occur within the Lower Murray Darling CMA (Val et al, 2012) have been added.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 85
Table A2: Threatened Species Known from the Locality Containing the Study Area
NSW TSC EPBC Scientific Name Common Name Act Act Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat V Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat V Nyctophilus corbeni Corben’s Long-eared Bat V V Saccolaimus flaviventris Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat V Dasyruridae Ningaui yvonneae Southern Ningaui V Anatidae Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck V Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck V Accipitridae Hamirostra melanosternum Black-breasted Buzzard V Circus assimilis Spotted Harrier V Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle V Lophoictinia isura Square-tailed Kite V Falconidae Falco hypoleucos Grey Falcon V Cacatuidae Lophochroa leadbeateri Major Mitchell's Cockatoo V Psittacidae Regent Parrot (eastern sub- Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides species) E V Strigidae Ninox connivens Barking Owl V Climacteridae Brown Treecreeper (eastern Climacteris picumnus victoriae sub-species) V
Pachycephala inornata Gilbert’s Whistler V Sericornis cauta Shy Heathwren V Petroicidae Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin V Pomatostomidae Grey-crowned Babbler (south- Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis eastern sub-species) V Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella V Eupetidae Cinclosoma castaneothorax Chestnut-backed Quail-thrush V Gekkonidae Strophurus elderi Jewelled Gecko V Diplodactylus stenodactylus Crowned Gecko V
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 86
Pygopodidae Delma australis Marbled-headed Delma E Aprasia inaurita Mallee Worm Lizard E Scincidae Tiliqua occipitalis Western Blue-tongue Lizard V Slender Mallee Blue-tongue Cyclodomorphus melanops elongatus Lizard V Lerista xanthura Yellow-tailed Plain Slider V Ctenotus brooksi Wedged-snout Ctenotus V Elapidae Pseudonaja modesta Ringed Brown Snake V Myobatrachidae Neobatrachus pictus Painted Burrowing Frog E
The 32 threatened species known from the locality are given in Table A2. However, three of these species can be eliminated. These are the Eastern subspecies of the Brown Treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus victoriae), Grey-crowned Babbler (Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis) and the Painted Burrowing Frog (Neobatrachus pictus).
The western boundary of the range of the Eastern subspecies of the Brown Treecreeper runs approximately through Wagga Wagga, Temora, Forbes, Dubbo and Inverell and along this line the subspecies intergrades with the arid zone subspecies of Brown Treecreeper Climacteris picumnus picumnus and it is this form of the species that is found at the Modification. The arid zone subspecies is not listed as Threatened. Similarly, only the south-eastern sub-species of the Grey-crowned Babbler is listed as Threatened. In NSW, the eastern sub-species occurs on the western slopes of the Great Dividing Range, and on the western plains reaching as far as Louth and Balranald.
Although the Painted Burrowing Frog (Neobatrachus pictus) has been recorded as occurring within the locality, at the original Gingko Mine area, continued surveys have not located this species. The closely related Neobatrus sudelli has been recorded from the locality on several occasions, including during the present surveys.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 87
A report by Biosphere Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd (2007) concluded “ Given the widespread occurrence of N. sudelli throughout the study area, it appears unlikely that N. pictus is present on either the Gingko Mine mining lease area (ML) or Snapper Mine mining lease application (MLA) area as it was not recorded despite ideal survey conditions. As this is the case, the previous identification of N. pictus on the Gingko Mine ML area in 2000 is doubtful. The locations in which N. pictus was previously identified in 2000 were monitored. At these sites, Neobatrachus individuals were found though they were N. sudelli not N. pictus. If the records of N. pictus in the Ginkgo Mine ML area from 2000 were misidentified, the westernmost part of the distribution of N. pictus is the New South Wales (NSW)/South Australian border, with the Scotia Sanctuary being the only apparent true record of N. pictus in NSW” (p. 7). Further surveys in 2009, 2010 and 2012 did not find any Neobatrachus pictus.
This leaves 29 Threatened species that are known from within the Lower Murray Darling catchment, in the region including the Modification. However, only 12 species are included within the OEH records for an area of 20km surrounding the Modification. The remaining species are derived from the previous surveys at Gingko Mine and from the surveys by Val et al (2012). To ensure a complete assessment of impacts is undertaken all 29 species are addressed in the following section.
Some of the species can be assessed in groups based upon their habitat preferences and behaviour e.g. tree-roosting bat species, ducks, raptors, reptiles and woodland dependant birds. For the purposes of this assessment such groups are included in the following section.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 88
Assessment of Impacts Of the six factors to consider three are of a more general nature. These are:
How is the proposal likely to affect current disturbance regimes? a) modifies the intensity and frequency of fires; b) modifies flooding flows.
Fire and flood control and management will be undertaken and it is unlikely that the development would affect either fire frequency or flooding regimes.
How is the proposal likely to affect habitat connectivity? a) creates a barrier to fauna movement; b) removes remnant vegetation or wildlife corridors; c) modifies remnant vegetation or wildlife corridors.
The proposal could create a barrier to the movement of small ground fauna, but larger more mobile fauna will still be able to move around, across or over the Modification Area and haul road.
The proposal will not remove remnant vegetation, as the vegetation to be removed is part of a larger area of vegetation. It is estimated that about 0.033% of the extant vegetation in the region will be removed by the development.
How is the proposal likely to affect critical habitat?
No critical fauna habitat occurs within the vicinity of the study area as designated by the Register of Critical Habitat held by the Commonwealth Minister of the Environment, Heritage and Arts and the Register of Critical Habitat held by the Director-General of the OEH. Therefore, the Project would not affect any critical habitat.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 89
The remaining three factors are relevant to the Threatened species located or expected within the Study Area.
1. Tree-roosting Bats
The four Threatened bat species (Little Pied Bat, Inland Forest Bat, Corban’s Long-eared Ba and Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat) utilize tree hollows and occasionally buildings for day-time roosting. All bats are usually found near water (dams, creeks) in the arid zone. The Inland Forest Bat is widely distributed throughout Australia but is limited to the south-western part of NSW. In contrast, the Little Pied Bat is known from much of NSW, particularly the western half. All species are associated with woodlands and shrublands and some are known to travel long distances to water or feed (e.g. Little Pied Bats are known to make a nightly return trip of 14-34 kilometres between roost sites and water, van Dyke and Strahan, 2008).
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some trees with potential hollows will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The current mined area is still utilized by at least one of the Threatened bats - the Little Pied Bat was located at the Gingko Mine camp by ultrasonic calls (Fly by Night Bat Surveys, 2012) and it is expected that bats with a nightly range of 14-34 km would continue utilize the Modification for foraging.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting habitat in the surrounding area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? No species are at the limit of their distribution.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 90
2. Southern Ninguai
In NSW, most records for the Southern (=Mallee) Ningaui are from the far south west, including the Scotia mallee (Tarawi Nature Reserve, Scotia Sanctuary and surrounding properties) and east of the Darling River (Mungo and Mallee Cliffs National Parks and many surrounding properties). It’s distribution is closely tied to vegetation with spinifex clumps (in NSW mainly associated with mallee woodlands), though occasionally recorded in other habitats. Most movements are relatively localised, but males will regularly move more than 200 metres, particularly during the breeding season, and movements of up to 2 kilometres have been recorded. Despite targeted surveys no Southern Ninguai were located in the Modification or Biodiversity offset Areas and none were located during the surveys for the Gingko and Snapper mines. Because of the disturbed nature of the Modification Area it is unlikely to be found there.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, two species considered a threat to the Southern Ningaui. Considering the relatively mobile nature of this species in the inland it is unlikely that the proposal will affect any population.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available habitat in the surrounding area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 91
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
This species is not at the limit of its distribution.
3. Ducks
Two duck species are known from the area surrounding the Modification (Blue-billed and Freckled Duck were located during the surveys at Gingko). However, there are no bodies of water within the Modification and it is unlikely that the two species would occur there.
4. Raptors
All five raptors (Black-breasted Buzzard, Little Eagle, Spotted Harrier, Square-tailed Kite, Grey Falcon) have relatively large home ranges, utilize a range of habitats for foraging, roosting and nesting and mainly nest in living or dead trees (Marchant and Higgins, 1993). All are either migratory or undertake dispersal movements in response to seasonal changes. Only the Little Eagle was located within the Modification Area during the surveys.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some trees with nesting potential will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). No nests were observed within the Modification Area during the survey. Because of the relative mobile behaviour of these four raptors it is unlikely that the development would affect their lifecycles.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 92
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
No species is at the limit of its distribution.
5. Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo
The Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo inhabits a wide variety of semi-arid and arid inland habitats, provided there is fresh surface water and large hollow trees for nesting. It has been recorded in forest, woodland and shrubland, including mulga, mallee, Acacia, and Callitris associations. It has also been recorded in cropping areas throughout its range. It is found from central New South Wales and south west Queensland to southern and northern inland Western Australia.
This species is sedentary where there are permanent waters, but nomadic in response to changing conditions and will congregate in large numbers where food and water is abundant. Roosts in trees and nests in tree hollows. This species was located frequently within and near the Modification.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some trees with nesting potential will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). This species appears to be able to utilize the current mine area (several observed at Gingko Mine).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 93
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
This species is not at the limit of its distribution.
6. Regent Parrot
In NSW, the Regent Parrot (eastern sub-species) is confined to the southern Lower Western Region, mainly along the Murray River, from Kyalite, north west to Mallee Cliffs State Forest, and is also recorded near Wentworth and the Rufous River. Away from the Murray River, the subspecies is recorded at isolated localities near Pooncarie. The Regent Parrot (eastern) primarily inhabits riparian or littoral River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) forests or woodlands and adjacent Black Box (E. largiflorens) woodlands. Nearby open mallee woodland or shrubland, usually with a ground cover of spinifex (Triodia) or other grasses, supporting various eucalypts, especially Christmas Mallee (E. socialis) and Yellow Mallee (E. costata) Mallee, as well as Belah (Allocasuarina cristata), Buloke (A. leuhmannii) or Slender Cypress Pine (Callitris preissii) also provide important habitat for this subspecies. They often occur in farmland, especially if the farmland supports remnant patches of woodland along roadsides or in paddocks. The subspecies seldom occurs in more extensively cleared areas. Mainly sedentary but will disperse from riparian to mallee habitats for food. Roost in trees and nest in tree hollows. The Regent Parrot was not found within the Modification during the current surveys but has been located at Gingko Mine.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 94
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some trees with hollows will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). Nesting is restricted to riparian habitats which are not found within the Study Area. Foraging may occur in the mallee habitats, but this is more likely to occur close to the Darling River i.e. within the proposed Biodiversity Offset Area. Overall, it is unlikely that the proposal will affect this species lifecycle.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
This species is not at the limit of its distribution.
7. Barking Owl
The Barking Owl is found throughout continental Australia except for the central arid regions. Although common in parts of northern Australia, the species has declined greatly in southern Australia and now occurs in a wide but sparse distribution in NSW. Inhabits woodland and open forest, including fragmented remnants and partly cleared farmland. It is flexible in its habitat use, and hunting can extend in to closed forest and more open areas. Sometimes able to successfully breed along timbered watercourses in heavily cleared habitats (e.g. western NSW) due to the higher density of prey on these fertile soils. Roost in shaded portions of tree canopies. Not located within the Modification Area but was found during the Gingko Mine surveys.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 95
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control species considered a threat to the Barking Owl.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
The species are not at the limit of their distribution.
8. Woodland Dependant Birds
Both the Hooded Robin and Varied Sittella are considered to be woodland dependant i.e. they are closely associated with woodland habitats. The Hooded Robin and Varied Sittella inhabit dry eucalypt and acacia woodlands and shrublands, with an open understorey, some grassy areas, and a complex ground layer. Both species rely upon habitat complexity that includes the amount of tree canopy cover, shrub cover, ground cover, logs, fallen branches and litter. The Hooded Robin and Varied Sittella build open cup nests of plant fibres and cobweb, sited on low, live or dead forks or branches of trees or stumps, or occasionally on fallen trees or limbs. Both species are found throughout NSW, except for the far north-western corner.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 96
The Varied Sittella was located within the Modification Area and the Hooded Robin in the Biodiversity Offset Area. Both are known from scattered records in the surrounding locality (see Figure A2).
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, two species considered a threat to the Hooded Robin and Varied Sittella.
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species are not at the limit of their distribution.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 97
Figure A2: Hooded Robin and Varied Sittella Records in the Locality How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 98
9. Shrubland Dependant Birds
Three Threatened bird species known from the region are associated with shrublands and/or woodlands with dense shrubby understory. These are the Gilbert’s Whistler, Shy Heathwren and the Chestnut Quail-thrush. None have been found within the Modification Area, but are known from the region. All three species inhabit mallee woodlands with a relatively dense understorey of shrubs and heath plants and forage on or near the ground in shrub thickets and in tops of small trees. Food consists mainly of spiders and insects such as caterpillars, beetles and ants, and occasionally, seeds and fruits are eaten. Populations of the Chestnut Quail-thrush are highly mobile and the movements nomadic, probably in response to changes in availability of food, with birds moving into areas experiencing good rains.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, two species considered a threat to the three ground-living species. Considering the mobile nature of Chestnut Quail-thrush in the inland it is unlikely that the proposal will affect any population of this species. There is evidence that the Gilbert’s Whistler will disperse in response to changing conditions.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Some habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with the available foraging and roosting and nesting habitat in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 99
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution?
The three species are not at the limit of their distribution.
10. Reptiles a. Species known to occur within 20km of the Modification
Four reptile species have distributions covering the Pooncarie region and are found within 20km of the proposal. These are the Jewelled Gecko, Crowned Gecko, Western Blue-tongue Lizard, Wedgesnout Ctenotus and Marble-headed Delma.
Jewelled Gecko (Strophurus elderi)
The Jewelled Gecko is a small gecko that is distributed through the arid regions of north-western Australia, through central Australia to southern Australia. In NSW records of the species are largely confined to the south-west of the state in two broad areas one between Mildura and Menindee and another between Menindee and Robinvale. There is one record for the Jewelled Gecko within 20km of the Modification Area, about 10km to the south-west.
The Jewelled Gecko is restricted to habitats containing spinifex on red sandy plains or dunes and to a lesser extent stony hills. Spinifex may occur as a dominant groundcover with little to no overstorey vegetation or in association with mallee, cypress pine or acacia woodlands. Animals are nocturnal, foraging at night within or on the exterior portion of a clump of spinifex. They are also observed in the matrix between spinifex clumps, especially during stormy conditions, presumably seeking new refuge. Animals seek refuge during the day inside hummock grass and they may also occupy underground burrows beneath spinifex.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 100
Degradation and loss of Jewelled Gecko habitat occurs in association with land use. Grazing by introduced herbivores within mallee-spinifex habitat affects the density and structure of spinifex. Cattle, goats and sheep graze spinifex seed heads, and in the process trample the clumps. Grazing also affects the density of adjacent shrubs and ground cover, which offer shelter for individual geckos moving between spinifex clumps.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, two species that could be considered a threat to the Jewelled Gecko, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is not at the limit of its distribution.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 101
Crowned Gecko
The Crowned Gecko known from four separate locations in the far west NSW. These are Sturt National Park, Mutawintji National Park, Loch Lilly, 125km south of Broken Hill, and Thurloo Downs, 145km east of Tibooburra. This species was reported from Gingko Mine during surveys in 2001. Habitat preferences of the Crowned Gecko are largely unknown. In NSW, the species has been reported from red sand habitats and elsewhere from savannah woodland and stony areas with shrubs. The species is nocturnal foraging on small insects.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, two species that could be considered a threat to the Crowned Gecko, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex and sand dune habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is at the southern limit of its distribution.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 102
Western Blue-tongue Lizard (Tiliqua occipitalis)
A robust pale brown skink with a series of broad brown transverse bands on the body and tail. There are scattered records across central western and western NSW and one record for this species about 10km to the west of the Modification Area. Inhabits plains, swales, ranges and sometimes dunes of loamy or clayey/sandy soils vegetated by woodlands, especially mallee, shrublands (including chenopods), heaths or hummock grasslands. Preferred vegetation type appears to be mixed mallee/Triodia communities. The Western Bluetongue Lizard diurnally forages for insects, snails, native vegetation and carrion and is known to utilise rabbit warrens for shelter
According to the OEH profile, the major threats to this species are clearing and heavy grazing of mallee destroying or fragmenting habitat; ripping of rabbit warrens potentially reducing shelter and predation by foxes and cats.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species considered a threat to the Western Blue-tongue Lizard, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 103
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is at the eastern limit of its distribution, if it occurs in the Modification Area.
Wedgesnout Ctenotus
In NSW, this species is known from few records, all from Sturt and Paroo-Darling National Parks. It occurs in arid and semi-arid habitats and may be highly specialised, as it has only been recorded from large unconsolidated sand dunes and not from the low consolidated red sand ridges. The Wedgesnout Ctenotus prefers areas of loose sand interspersed with vegetation on and near the crests of dunes and in NSW it is probably restricted to habitats containing spinifex or other clumping grassland communities. There is a record of its occurrence within the Gingko Mine area but this may have been a mis-identification, as no unconsolidated sand dunes occur in the area. At present, there is little information available about this species distribution and habitat preferences.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species considered a threat to the Wedgesnout Ctenotus, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 104
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is at the southern limit of its distribution, if it occurs in the Modification Area.
Marble-faced Delma (Delma australis)
The Marble-faced Delma is a brown legless lizard with black variegations and reticulations on the dorsal surface of the head and neck, and vertical black bars on sides of the head and neck and is distributed from southern Western Australia, through South Australia and the south of the Northern Territory, to north-western Victoria and western New South Wales (NSW). In NSW, the species occurs at scattered locations within two disjunct populations: in central-western NSW in the vicinity of Round Hill and Yathong Nature Reserves; and in the south-western corner of the state. Figure 9 shows the distribution of records for the Marble-headed Delma in NSW and there were three captures of this species in pit traps within the Modification Area, two within the Modification Area and one in the Biodiversity Offset Area (see Section 7.2).
In NSW, the Marble-faced Delma is restricted to temperate mallee woodlands or spinifex grasslands but elsewhere is also found in chenopod shrublands, heathlands and buloke associated with mallee habitats or eucalypt lined watercourses. The species occupies areas with a sandy substrate but may also utilise cracking red loam soils, but has also recently been recorded in spinifex on rocky hillsides near Silverton, NSW (Sass et al, 2012). It is found in deep leaf litter, under rocks, logs, fallen timber or in grass clumps such as spinifex. They are considered to be terrestrial although they may climb into hummock grass and even sleep in the branches of small shrubs.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 105
They are generally active during the day but have been observed being active at night or around sunrise and sunset.
Degradation and loss of Marble-faced Delma habitat occurs in association with land use. Grazing by both livestock and feral species within mallee-spinifex habitat affects the density and structure of spinifex. Cattle, goats and sheep graze spinifex seed heads, and in the process trample the clumps. Grazing also affects the density of adjacent shrubs and ground cover (which offer shelter for individuals moving between spinifex clumps). Also considered important threats are inappropriate fire frequency and predation by Red Foxes.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species considered a threat to the Marble-headed Delma, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species. It will be important to determine the distribution of this species within the Modification Area and surrounds and to relocate any captures within the Modification Area prior to any clearing.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is not at the limit of its distribution.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 106 b. Species known from the Lower Murray Darling Catchment and could possibly occur within the Modification
Mallee Worm Lizard
Most records for the Mallee Worm Lizard in NSW are from the south west corner of the state, from the mallee between Balranald and Gol Gol centred on Mallee Cliffs NP, though recent surveys in the Scotia mallee have also recorded this species. This species inhabits semi-arid, mallee woodlands on red sands and often shelters in sand, beneath mallee stumps, in leaf litter or in the nests of ants and other insects. It is thought to be dependent on Spinifex.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species that could be considered a threat to the Mallee Worm Lizard, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol. How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is within its limited distribution, if it occurs in the Modification Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 107
Slender Mallee Blue-tongue Lizard
In NSW, the Slender Mallee Blue-tongue Lizard is restricted to the far south west with records scattered from mallee areas either side of the Darling River (including the Scotia mallee and Mungo and Mallee Cliffs National Parks). Recent surveys have detected this species in spinifex occurring on rocky hillsides to the north west of Broken Hill. This species is known to inhabit mallee/spinifex communities on a sandy or mixed sand/gravel substrate (plains, ridges or hillslopes. It is assumed that the species seeks refuge in vegetation clumps such as spinifex and in fallen timber and leaf litter.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species considered a threat to the Slender Mallee Blue-tongue Lizard, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is within its limited distribution, if it occurs in the Modification Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 108
Yellow-tailed Plain Slider
The Yellow-tailed Plain Slider is known from two disjunct populations. One population occurs between Tarawi Nature Reserve, Ivanhoe and Broken Hill, and the other in the north-west corner of the state. Since the 1970s, it has only been recorded from Kinchega, Sturt and Mutawintji National Parks, Tarawi Nature Reserve, and one record from Broken Hill. This species occurs in a variety of semi-arid and arid habitats, including grassed alluvial sands and sand dunes, including dry open woodlands and spinifex-dominated red sand plains. The Yellow-tailed Plain Slider is fossorial and usually found in loose soil or sand beneath stones, logs and other surface debris.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species that could be considered a threat to the Yellow-tailed Plain Slider, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre- clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol. How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 109
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is at the southern edge of its distribution, if it occurs in the Modification
Area.
Ringed Brown Snake
The Ringed Brown Snake is thought to occupy the north-west portion of NSW having been recorded from Tarawi Nature Reserve, 140km south of Broken Hill, Silverton, Tibooburra, Wanaaring and from Kilberoo, 140km north-west of Bourke. There is limited data on this species distribution. The Ringed Brown Snake is a terrestrial species that inhabits drier areas including rocky outcrops and dry watercourses. Occurs in a variety of vegetation types including woodlands, shrublands, mallee and grasslands. By night it shelters in ground debris or abandoned animal burrows. There is limited preferred habitat within the Modification Area.
How is the proposal likely to affect the lifecycle of a threatened species and/or population?
Although some vegetation will be removed by the development, the overall loss is very low (0.033% loss of vegetation from the region). The loss of habitat will be compensated by the management of a larger area of vegetation within the Biodiversity Offset area. Management of this area will include pest animal control e.g. Red Fox, Cat, species that could be considered a threat to the Ringed Brown Snake, and the removal of cattle, sheep and goats from any offset area. However, considering the limited home range and the dependence upon spinifex habitat the extent of clearing could affect the lifecycle of this species, if it occurs in the Modification Area. Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
How is the proposal likely to affect the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community?
Spinifex habitat will be lost but the quantity is relatively low in comparison with that available in the surrounding area, particularly within the Biodiversity Offset Area.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 110
Does the proposal affect any threatened species or populations that are at the limit of its known distribution? The species is at the southern edge of its distribution, if it occurs in the Modification
Area.
CONCLUSION
The relatively small loss of an amount of the native vegetation communities and landscape features will be compensated for by the setting aside and management of the Biodiversity Offset Area. Consequently, populations of most Threatened species that are found or could occur within the Modification Area are unlikely to be significantly affected. However, some of the small reptiles with restricted habitat preferences and limited home ranges may be affected. These include those that have been located within or close to the Modification (e.g. Jewelled gecko, Crowned Gecko, Wedgesnout Ctenotus, Western Blue-tongue Lizard, Marble-faced Delma). Pre-clearance surveys would be undertake in accordance with the Vegetation Clearance Protocol.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION – FIELD SURVEYS & FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 111
APPENDIX 6: GINKGO MINERAL SANDS MINE CRAYFISH MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINKGO MINERAL SANDS MINE – CRAYFISH MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT
Mallee Dragon (Ctenophorus fordi) - a common inhabitant of Mallee-Spinifex Habitats (photo by Andrew Lothian)
A Report by Biodiversity Monitoring Services, November 2012
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page i
GINKGO MINERAL SANDS MINE CRAYFISH MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Section Section Title Page Number Number 1.0 BACKGROUND 1 2.0 BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA 1 3.0 SURVEY SITES 6 4.0 SURVEY GUIDELINES 8 5.0 APPROACH TO SURVEY 8 6.0 METHODOLOGY 10 6.1 Fauna Sampling 10 6.2 Survey Effort 13 6.3 Habitat Characteristics 15 6.4 Statistical Analysis 15 6.5 Use of Indices 15 7.0 RESULTS 20 7.1 Fauna 20 7.1.1 Fauna Listings 20 7.1.2 Fauna in the Study Area 20 7.1.3 Biodiversity Indices 21 7.1.4 Threatened Species 21 7.3 Habitat 24 8.0 REFERENCES 26 Appendix 1 SUMMARY OF TECHNIQUES TO BE USED DURING 27 THE SURVEY OF BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA Appendix 2 FAUNA SPECIES LOCATED WITHIN BIODIVERSITY 28 OFFSET AREA DURING SURVEY
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page ii
FIGURES
Figure Figure Title Page Number Number 1 Location of Biodiversity Offset Area within Study Area 2 2 Vegetation Communities within Biodiversity Offset Area 4 3 Habitats within Biodiversity Offset Area 5 4 Location of Detailed Fauna Survey Sites within the Offset 7 Area 5 Sampling Score Sheet Used to Calculate Habitat 18 Complexity 6 Threatened Species within Biodiversity Offset Area 23 7 Habitat Characteristics at Each Site 25
TABLES
Table Table Title Page Number Number 1 Areas of each Vegetation Community in the proposed 3 Offset Area 2 Habitats Derived from Vegetation Communities 3 3 Detailed Survey Sites Selected within Biodiversity Offset 6 Area 4 Weather at Pooncarie during Survey period 9 5 Survey Efforts within each Site in Trap-days, Camera-days 14 and person-days 6 Biodiversity Indices for Biodiversity Offset Area 21 7 Threatened Species Located in Biodiversity Offset Area 21 8 Habitat Characteristics of the Detailed Survey Sites within 24 the Biodiversity Offset Area 9 Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites 26
PLATES
Plate Plate Title Page Number Number 1 BO02 (Spinifex) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area 19 2 BO01 (Mulga) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area 19 3 BO03 (Oakland) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area 22
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 1
GINKGO MINERAL SANDS MINE CRAYFISH MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT
1.0 BACKGROUND
According to the principles stated by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) for the use of biodiversity offsets in NSW, biodiversity offsets counterbalance specific impacts of development on biodiversity. A biodiversity offset can be considered an action that is taken at a location away from an impacted site that aims to replace the biodiversity values lost at the impacted site. Offsets result in the legal protection of land and the implementation of management actions to remove threats. Thirteen principles are stated by OEH and these are addressed in Section 11.2 of the Gingko Mine Modification – Crayfish Deposit Fauna Assessment Report by Biodiversity Monitoring Services. However, the basic principle to any offset strategy is to improve or maintain environmental outcomes. Part of such outcomes is the biodiversity values of an area. Biodiversity values include the composition, structure and function of the ecosystems including threatened species, populations and ecological communities, and their habitats. Biodiversity values may be improved by undertaking actions that increase the quantity, quality or likely persistence of these values. Actions may improve biodiversity values by increasing the area, connectivity and/or condition of ecological communities or threatened species habitat; and/or by removing threats to these areas through improved security.
2.0 BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA
At this stage, an area of land to the east of the Gingko Mine Modification (the Modification) has been ear-marked as a Biodiversity Offset Area. This area occupies 2,594 ha and is shown in Figure 1. The land is part of Mallara property and supports a variety of vegetation types and habitats that are similar to that found in the Modification Area. Vegetation communities and modelled habitats within the offset area are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 2
Figure 1: Location of Biodiversity Offset Area within Study Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 3
Table1 lists the vegetation communities described within the Biodiversity Offset Area (from Florasearch 2012) and Table 2 lists the habitats derived from the vegetation communities. Table 1: Areas of each Vegetation Community in the Proposed Offset Area
Vegetation Community Area (ha) Black Box Woodland 57.6 Black Oak - Western Rosewood Woodland 495.9 Chenopod Mallee Woodland / Shrubland 931.3 Dune Mallee Shrubland 368.9 Derived Austrostipa Grassland 481.0 Sida Low Shrubland 228.2 Total 2, 562.9
Table 2: Habitats Derived from Vegetation Communities
Habitat Type Area (ha) Shrubland 1,159.5 Mallee Spinifex on Dunes 368.9 Black Oak Woodland 495.9 Grassland with Black Box 538.6 Total 2,562.9
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 4
Figure 2: Vegetation Communities within Biodiversity Offset Area (from Florasearch, 2012)
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 5
Figure 3: Habitats within Biodiversity Offset Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 6
3.0 Survey Sites
Four sites were established within the proposed offset area. The entire area was surveyed visually with detailed survey techniques used at the four sites. Stratification of the sites was based on habitat classes and all classes were sampled. The sites are listed in Table 3, together with a brief description of the habitat sampled. The locations of the sites are given in Figure 4.
Table 3: Detailed Survey Sites Selected within Biodiversity Offset Area
Site Site Habitats Sampled Number Name Easting2 Northing Shrubland with Mulga BO01 Mulga 638003 6301659 BO02 Spinifex 638519 6302910 Mallee-spinifex on Dunes Black Oak woodland BO03 Oakland 635145 6303200 Grassland with Mature Black Box BO04 Arboreal 634691 6303016
2 As WGS84, MGA
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 7
Figure 4: Location of Detailed Fauna Survey Sites within the Offset Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 8
4.0 SURVEY GUIDELINES
Survey guidelines have been developed and issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and by the Federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC). Although these guidelines are not a legal requirement when undertaking surveys, they do provide a set of techniques that ensure that the full range of terrestrial vertebrate fauna is sampled. A summary of the survey guidelines is given in Appendix 1, together with an indication of those used in the current survey. Some additional techniques have been added to cover species that may occur (e.g. glider tubes for Western Pygmy-possum) and are techniques developed since the guidelines have been released.
It can be seen that the majority of survey techniques were used within the Biodiversity Offset Area. No mist nets were used, as these are usually associated with water bodies and these were limited within the surveyed areas. No nest boxes were used as these require a longer period of time to be successful.
5.0 APPROACH TO SURVEY
Three of the sites listed in Table 3 were used to survey for fauna in considerable detail i.e. all terrestrial vertebrate groups were surveyed using a wide range of equipment and techniques (these are described in Section 6.0). Other sites were used for specific techniques targeting individual fauna groups. Arboreal marsupials were targeted at the BO04 site using tree-mounted cage traps, and micro-bats were targeted using a harp trap at a site between mature trees in the Offset Area. In addition, call broadcasting for nocturnal birds was undertaken at numerous sites as were the use of Anabat recorders for micro-bats.
Much of the land surrounding the Biodiversity Offset Area was inspected and the location, number and habitat association of any fauna species located was recorded.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 9
Any water bodies (e.g. tanks) were inspected and waterbirds and amphibians searched for. Spotlighting transects were undertaken throughout the Offset Area, either from vehicle or on foot.
The surveys were undertaken by Dr Martin Denny and Andrew Lothian between 7th and 14th June 2012 using NPWS Scientific Licence No. S10282 and ACEC Approval No. AW96/033.
The weather during the survey period was relatively clear with cool days and very cold overnight. The weather data from Pooncarie weather station is given in Table 4.
Table 4: Weather at Pooncarie during Survey Period
Minimum Maximum Rainfall Date temperature (°C) temperature (°C) (mm) 6/7/2012 1.4 14.5 0 6/8/2012 2 15.4 0 6/9/2012 2.3 14.9 0 6/10/2012 3 16 0 6/11/2012 1 17.4 0 6/12/2012 1.3 17.4 0 6/13/2012 2.1 20.8 0 6/14/2012 5.2 20.3 0.2
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 10
6.0 METHODOLOGY
The survey methods follow, as closely as possible, the guidelines developed and issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and by the Federal Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPAC).
6.1 Fauna Sampling a. Elliott Trapping
Twenty-five small (8x10x33 cm) Elliott traps were laid in straight lines for five days through the habitats at each site. This is equivalent to 100 trap nights over four consecutive nights at each site. The traps were baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat, and a small piece of dacron was placed within each trap (as protection against the cold). A freezer bag was placed over the end of each trap to prevent the contents becoming wet from rain. At each trap site a description of the physical characteristics of the habitat within a one metre radius was noted. This information is used in the analysis of habitat values.
To sample any small arboreal mammals, five small Elliott traps were mounted on trees at equal distances along each transect (20 trap nights over five consecutive days at each site). Aluminium tree mounts were attached to trees and a baited Elliott trap attached to the mount. The tree trunk and trap were sprayed with a honey-water mixture to assist in attracting any nectar or sap feeding arboreal mammals. Again, dacron and freezer bags were used to combat the cold and wet conditions.
b. Cage Traps
Tomahawk cage traps were laid on the ground and on trees at each site (see Plate 1). The number of Tomahawk traps varied at each site according to the presence of trees sufficiently large to hold a cage trap.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 11
A large Elliott trap was placed at each site (4 trap-nights). The large Elliott traps and the Tomahawk traps were baited with chicken, apple and muesli bar. c. Spotlighting
Two forms of spotlighting transect were undertaken. Tracks within the Modification area were spotlighted from a moving vehicle. In addition, spotlighting on foot was undertaken at the detailed fauna survey sites, particularly through the Spinifex clumps. d. Hair Funnels
Hair funnels (from Faunatech) were used instead of large and small hair tubes. The design of the tapered hair funnels is such that both large and small animals can be detected by a single funnel. Five hair funnels were set out at each site for four nights and baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat. Where possible, some of the hair funnels were set onto ‘habitat trees’ (these are considered to be trees that showed signs of use by arboreal marsupials and have obvious hollows). e. Glider Traps
Tree-mounted plastic tubes were used to capture small arboreal mammals (e.g. Western Pygmy-possum). These act as vertically mounted pit traps and were baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and honey. Two traps were placed at each site. f. Remote Cameras
Digital Scouting Cameras with infrared illumination were set up at each site and run for 3 to 5 days. In addition, a remote camera was set up at a small bait station to record any fauna attracted to the bait.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 12 g. Bird Surveys
In addition to the results obtained from general observations and spotlighting, listening and observing periods were undertaken at all sites. A 30 minute search was used where the observer walked around each site, as well as observing and listening for calls from a single point. At each site up to four periods of observation were undertaken (two in the morning and two in the late afternoon).
h. Call Broadcasting
Calls of several species of nocturnal bird were broadcast during the night in the general area. Calls were broadcast through a megaphone for approximately five minutes, with a ten minute listening time. Calls from the Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua), Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae), Tawny Frogmouth (Podargus strigoides), Barking Owl (Ninox connivens), Eastern Grass Owl (Tyto capensis), Australian Owlet-nightjar (Aegotheles cristatus), Barn Owl (Tyto alba), Southern Boobook (Ninox boobook) and the Spotted Nightjar (Eurostopodus mystacalis) were broadcast.
i. Pitfall Traps
Pit traps were constructed from a 20L bucket and combined with a 20m drift-fence made from fly-screen wire mesh. These were used where the ground could be dug to a depth to accommodate the buckets. Pit traps were established at three sites and used for five days (see Plate 1). j. Herpetological Searches
Systematic searches for reptiles and amphibians were undertaken within each habitat type at each survey site. Litter was raked and rocks and logs turned over. Loose bark was prised from the trunks of dead trees. Each search takes approximately 30 minutes
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 13 and was repeated at each site. Searches for amphibians took place at night using spotlights (particularly after the one day of rain) and recognition of characteristic calls. Spotlighting searches were also attempted for reptiles, particularly in clumps of spinifex.
l. Bat Call Detection
An Anabat II Bat Detector with a Compact Flash Storage ZCAIM was placed at each site for one night and any recorded bat calls analysed by Glenn Hoye, FBN Bat Surveys PL. m. Animal Track Recognition
Areas of sand on tracks were inspected for evidence of animal movement. Paw prints and other animal signs were identified and recorded. n. Opportunistic Observations
Any sightings of fauna were recorded whilst moving throughout the survey area and located using a Global Positioning System (GPS). Any scats were collected and their contents analysed.
6.2. Survey Effort
The survey efforts expended within the Biodiversity Offset Areas are given in Table 5. Survey effort was measured as the number of trap-days (i.e. number of day traps were used), Anabat-days (i.e. number of days Anabats were used), camera-days (i.e. number of days cameras were used) and person-days (i.e. number of days for both surveyors to use a technique).
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 14
Table 5: Survey Efforts within Each Site in Trap-days, Camera-days and Person-days
Survey Technique BO01 BO02 BO03 BO04 Biodiversity Offset Area Total Ground Elliott Traps 100 100 100 0 300 Tree-mounted Elliott Traps 20 20 20 20 85 Tomahawk Traps 0 0 0 24 24 Large Elliott Traps 8 8 8 0 24 Pit Traps 16 16 12 0 44 Glider Funnels 8 8 8 0 24 Hair Funnels 20 20 20 0 60 Remote Cameras 10 camera- 10 camera- 10 camera- 0 30 camera-days days days days Reptile Search 8 person- 8 person- 8 person- 8 person- 32 person-days days days days days Bird Counts 8 person- 8 person- 8 person- 8 person- 32 person-days days days days days Harp Trap 2 days Anabat 1 day 1 day 1 day 0 3 days Spotlighting 65.4 km; 3.5 hrs
6.3 Habitat Characteristics
As each Elliott trap was laid, a description of the trap site was recorded. A description was recorded of the upper, middle and lower storey vegetation, as well as the ground cover, within an area formed by a one metre radius around each trap. For example, if 15 trap sites out of a trap line of 20 Elliott traps contains a shrub, then it is estimated that the shrub cover in that survey site is 75%.
6.4 Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was undertaken using SigmaPlot 11.0 and Primer 6.1.6, with the following tests applied where necessary: 1. To compare between more than two groups of results a One Way ANOVA was used. 2. To compare between two groups of results then either a Student t-test or a Paired t-test was used.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 15
3. If the data to be analysed was not normally distributed, then either a non- parametric Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test or a Kruskal-Wallis One Way Analysis of Variance on Ranks was used.
6.5 Use of Indices
Most fauna monitoring surveys produce a species list that shows what animals are found within a specified area. However, a list alone does not provide the necessary criteria to determine whether an activity is affecting fauna populations over time.
Consequently, it is important to provide a set of criteria that can be used to compare fauna populations within an area over time and between areas i.e. temporally and spatially. The criteria must be relatively simple, easy to interpret and the processes required to develop each criteria must be consistent and repeatable. To ensure such criteria are used in the long-term monitoring of fauna within the mine areas, a set of quantifiable indices have been developed and adopted for this project. The indices are a set of single values, changes in which indicate changes in the fauna populations and their habitats. These changes can then be related to changes in environmental factors, such as climate, land use and landform.
The detailed surveys can provide sufficient information to establish a series of indices that can be used as ‘monitoring trigger points’ i.e. single values that can be used to determine whether any significant changes have occurred in fauna populations over time. Indices that were used in this project were: . Species richness of faunal groups . Simpson’s Index of Dominance . Evenness of occurrence of species within an area . Capture rates of individual species . Contribution to the faunal assemblages by threatened species and species dependant upon woodland . Habitat complexity scores
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 16 a. Species richness of faunal groups This is the number of species located within each fauna group at each site during each survey b. Simpsons Index of Dominance Total numbers and species richness (number of species per site) are the simplest measures used to determine biodiversity of a site. However, these indices miss the information that some species may be rare and others common. The Simpson’s Index of Dominance (D) takes into account both the abundance patterns and the species richness of a community. This index measures the probability that two individuals randomly selected from a sample will belong to the same species (or some category other than species). c. Evenness Score An evenness score is also calculated. Evenness is a measure of the relative abundance of different species making up the richness of an area. A low value for evenness means that the sample is dominated by a large number of one or two species. A high evenness value means that most species in the sample have a similar abundance. A high value is indicative of a well maintained population of fauna as an even distribution of species means there is sufficient resources for a high diversity of species to be supported. A low value indicates that, although there may be high numbers of animals in a population there are few species as the numbers are dominated by one or two species and many others are not represented. This indicates that the resources may not be sufficient to allow some species to survive. d. Capture rates of individual species
Normally this index would be represented by the % trapping rates of small native mammals within an area. However, only the introduced House Mouse was trapped within the Study Area and these have been used to determine the extent of occupancy by this species.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 17
It is also possible to use the number of individuals of each bird species sighted within the Crayfish Deposit Area and Biodiversity Offset Area to compare occupancy rates. As the survey effort within each Area was approximately similar the results from the surveys are comparable. e. Contribution to the faunal assemblages by threatened species, species dependant upon woodland and by declining species
Lists are available of bird species that are considered to be declining and/or woodland dependent. These lists are used to calculate the proportion of birds located within an area that are considered to be under threat. The higher the proportion, then the greater the value that can be placed on the present habitat in the area. f. Habitat complexity scores
Measurements of habitat characteristics derived from trap site descriptions have been used to provide an index of habitat complexity that can be helpful in determining changes over time of the habitats surveyed over an area. One system used to assess habitat values is that developed by Catling and Burt (1995), called the Habitat Complexity Score. This system scores the following parameters: Tree cover, tall and low shrub cover, ground cover, logs/rocks and litter cover. The scores range from 0 to 3, with a maximum score of 18. A sampling scoring sheet is shown in Figure 5. Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 Total 0-10% cover 10-20% cover 20-50% cover >50% cover Tree canopy Tall shrub cover (2 – 4m) Short shrub cover (0.5 – 2m) Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3 1-10% cover 10-40% cover 40-70% cover >70% cover Ground herbage Logs/rocks Litter
SCORE
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 18
Figure 5: Sampling Score Sheet Used to Calculate Habitat Complexity Scores
Plate 1: BO02 (Spinifex) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area
Plate 2: BO01 (Mulga) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 19
7.0 RESULTS
7.1 Fauna
7.1.1 Fauna Listings
A total of 56 bird, native mammal, eight introduced mammal, four reptile and three amphibian species were located within the Biodiversity Offset Area during the survey. A list of fauna species located within the Biodiversity Offset Area is given in Appendix 2.
7.1.2 Fauna in the Biodiversity Offset Area
Although the assemblage of birds was robust, the numbers and diversity of non-bat native mammals and reptiles were low. This was partly due to the disturbed nature of the land (grazed and cleared over the years), the presence of House Mice and the relatively high numbers of introduced predators occupying the area at the time of the survey (18 sightings of the Red Fox and 8 sightings of cat). There were also high numbers of Feral Goats as well as rabbits. Such numbers of introduced competitors and predators could have resulted in a suppression of small native ground mammals. However, the number of bat species was high, with eight species identified from Anabat recordings. Three frog species were located with high numbers of the Spotted Marsh Frog at one dam.
The range of bird species was high with some groups strongly represented. Raptors were commonly encountered and this phenomenon is possibly associated with the numbers of House Mice found in the Offset Area. Other diverse groups were the honeyeaters (feeding upon flowering shrubs and mallee), water birds (at tanks) and upper foliage gleaners (e.g. thornbills). The range of reptile species was low, due to the cold overnight and daytime temperatures. However, some species were still moving and were either captured in pit traps (e.g. Marble-headed Delma) or found under logs and/or bark.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 20
7.1.3 Biodiversity Indices
Biodiversity indices could be calculated for birds and reptiles for within the Biodiversity Offset Area. These are given in Table 6.
Table 6: Biodiversity Indices for Biodiversity Offset Area
Biodiversity Index Biodiversity Offset Area Birds Evenness 0.687 Simpson’s Index of Diversity 0.866 Numbers Recorded 2034 Species Richness 55 Reptiles Evenness 0.961 Simpson’s Index of Diversity 0.72 Numbers Recorded 5 Species Richness 4 7.1.4 Threatened Species
A total of four threatened species were located within the Offset Area. These are listed in Table 7, together with their status under the NSW TSC Act.
Table 7: Threatened Species Located in Biodiversity Offset Area
Offset Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Area Mammals Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat Vulnerable x Birds Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin Vulnerable x Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella Vulnerable x Reptiles Delma australis Marbled-headed Delma Endangered x
The Little Pied Bat was located using ultrasonic call analysis derived from Anabat recorders placed at Mulga, Spinifex and Oakland Offset Sites (BO01, BO02, BO03), as
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 21 well as under lights at Gingko camp. The recordings showed high activity over a wide area by this species. There were five sightings of the Hooded Robin in the Offset Area and these are shown in Figure 6. Only one sighting of the Varied Sittella was obtained from the Offset Area, at the Mulga Offset Site (BO01). A single record of the Marble- headed Delma was obtained from a pit trap in the Spinifex Offset Site (BO02).
There were some differences between the threatened species located within the Offset Area and the Crayfish Modification Area. No Hooded Robins were located within the Modification Area, and conversely, no Major Mitchell Cockatoos were located in the Offset Area. It is anticipated that both species would be found in both areas and any differences are possibly due to the limited survey periods.
Plate 3: BO03 (Oakland) Site in Biodiversity Offset Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 22
Figure 6: Threatened Species Located within Biodiversity Offset Area
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 23
7.3 Habitat
The main habitat type within the offset area is open woodland/shrubland with chenopod and grassy understorey. There are areas of sand-dune and sand plain with spinifex- mallee as well as open areas of grassland. The area has undergone long-term grazing by sheep and cattle (as well as goats) and the understorey and ground cover shows signs of overgrazing. However, the tree cover is relatively high, with a number of mature trees with hollows observed. Recruitment of trees may be limited due to grazing impacts.
The wildlife habitat condition and values were assessed using the structural integrity of the vegetation and ground cover at each detailed survey site (see Section 6.3). Table 8 provides information about the habitat characteristics of all the detailed survey sites within the Biodiversity Offset Area and Figure 7 illustrates these values.
Table 8: Habitat Characteristics of the Detailed Survey Sites within the Biodiversity Offset Area
% Cover BO01 BO02 BO03 Tree Cover 80 52 84 Tall Shrub Cover 0 4 0 Tall Sapling Cover 12 0 0 Low Shrub Cover 80 20 60 Low Sapling Cover 0 4 0 Spinifex Cover 0 76 0 Grass Cover 64 40 48 Forb Cover 80 44 64 Litter Cover 88 84 88 Log Cover 48 32 68
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 24
Figure 7: Habitat Characteristic at Each Site a. Upper Storey
% Cover
90 80 70 60 BO01 50 BO02 40 BO03 30 20 10 0 Tree Cover Tall Shrub Tall Sapling Low Shrub Low Sapling Cover Cover Cover Cover
b. Middle and Lower Storey and Ground Cover
% Cover
100 90 80 70 60 BO01 50 BO02 40 BO03 30 20 10 0 S pinifex Cover Gras s Cover Forb Cover Lit t er Cover Log Cover
The Habitat Complexity Scores (see Section 6.4e) for the three detailed survey sites range between 13 and 15 indicating moderate habitat complexity scores. The values are given in Table 9.
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 25
Table 9: Habitat Complexity Scores for All Sites
BO01 BO02 BO03 Mean Score 15 13 13 13.7
Overall, the habitat condition varied, with some parts of the Offset Area in low condition due to previous clearing and stock grazing. Although there are many mature trees with hollows scattered throughout the Area, there is also a high proportion of young, regrowth vegetation. As an offset area there is considerable benefit in the presence of habitats in moderate to low condition as these can, with appropriate management strategies, increase in biodiversity values over time.
8.0 REFERENCES
Catling, P. C. and Burt, R.J. 1995 Studies of the ground-dwelling mammals of eucalypt forests in south-Western New South Wales: the effect of habitat variables on distribution and abundance Wildlife Research 22: 271-288
DECC 2006 Threatened Species Survey & Assessment: Guidelines for Developments and Activities Working Draft Report prepared by DECC
DEWHA 2010a Survey Guidelines for Threatened Birds
DEWHA 2010b Survey Guidelines for Threatened Mammals
DEWHA 2010c Survey Guidelines for Threatened Reptiles
DEWHA 2010d Survey Guidelines for Threatened Amphibians
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 26
APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY OF TECHNIQUES TO BE USED DURING THE SURVEY OF BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA
Used in Current Mammals Birds Reptiles Amphibians Survey Existing Literature and Databases X X X X X Scat and Owl Pellet Identification X X - - X Scat and Owl Pellet Analysis X X X X X Tracks X X X - X Scratches X X X - X Burrows and Nests X X X - X Sand Plots X X X - X Spotlighting X X X X X Stagwatching X X - - X Call Detection and Playback X X - X X Remote Cameras X X X X X Hair Sampling X - - - X Pitfall Traps X - X X X Elliott Traps X - X X X Tree-mounted Traps X X - - X Cage Traps X X X - X Funnel Traps - - X X No Glider Tubes X - - - X Anabat Recording and Analysis X - - - X Harp Traps X - - - X Mist Nets X X - - No Targeted Searches X X X X X Point Surveys - X - - X Visual Encounter Surveys - - - X X Direct Observation X X X X X Nest Boxes X X - - No
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 27
APPENDIX 2: FAUNA SPECIES LOCATED DURING THE SURVEY OF BIODIVERSITY OFFSET AREA a. Mammals
EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act Area Macropodidae Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo x Western Grey Macropus fuliginosus Kangaroo x Muridae Mus musculus House Mouse x Molossidae Mormopterus sp 3 Inland Freetail Bat x Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat x Chalinolobus picatus Little Pied Bat Vulnerable x White-striped Mastiff Tadarida australis Bat Unidentified Long- Nyctophilus sp. eared Bat x Vespadelus vulturnus Little Forest Bat x Vespadelus regulus Southern Forest Bat x Canidae Vulpes vulpes Red Fox Invasive x Canis familiaris Dog x Felidae Felis catus Cat Invasive x Bovidae Bos taurus European cattle x Pest Capra hircus Goat Species Invasive x Artiodactyla Ovis aries Sheep x Suidae Sus scrofa Feral Pig Invasive x Leporidae Pest Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit Species x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 28 b. Birds
EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act Area Dromaiidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu x Anatidae Australian Wood Chenonetta jubata Duck x Podicipedidae Tachybaptus novaehollandiae Australasian Grebe x Ardeidae White-necked Egretta pacifica Heron x Accipitridae Collared Accipiter cirrocephalus Sparrowhawk x Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle x Haliastur sphenurus Whistling Kite x Falconidae Falco longipennis Australian Hobby x Falco berigora Brown Falcon x Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel x Columbidae Common Phaps chalcoptera Bronzewing x Geopelia cuneata Diamond Dove x Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon x Cacatuidae Eolophus roseicapillus Galah x Psittacidae Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck x Northiella haematogaster Bluebonnet x Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot x Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth x Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar x Aegothelidae Australian Owlet- Aegotheles cristatus nightjar x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 29
EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act Area Climacteridae Climacteris picumnus Brown Treecreeper x Pardalotidae Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote x Acanthizidae Yellow-rumped Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Thornbill x Chestnut-rumped Acanthiza uropygialis Thornbill x Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface x Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill x Meliphagidae Spiny-cheeked Acanthagenys rufogularis Honeyeater x Yellow-plumed Lichenostomus ornatus Honeyeater x Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater x White-plumed Lichenostomus penicillatus Honeyeater x Yellow-throated Manorina flavigula Miner x Brown-headed Melithreptus brevirostris Honeyeater x Plectorhyncha lanceolata Striped Honeyeater x Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter x Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin Vulnerable x Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin x Pomatostomidae Chestnut-crowned Pomatostomus ruficeps Babbler x Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella Vulnerable x Pachycephalidae Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird x Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush x Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler x Dicruridae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark x Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail x Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 30
EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name TCS Act Act Area Artamidae White-browed Artamus superciliosus Woodswallow x Masked Artamus personatus Woodswallow x Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird x Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird x Gymnorhina tibicen Australian Magpie x Campephagidae Black-faced Cuckoo- Coracina novaehollandiae shrike x Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian Raven x Corvus mellori Little Raven x Corcoracidae Struthidea cinerea Apostlebird x White-winged Corcorax melanorhamphos Chough x Sylviidae Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark x Dicaeidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird x
c. Reptiles
EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name TSC Act Act Area Gekkonidae Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella x Pygopodidae Delma australis Marbled-headed Delma Endangered x Scincidae South-eastern Morethia Morethia boulengeri Skink x Tiliqua rugosa Shingle-back x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]
GINGKO MINE MODIFICATION BIODIVERSITY OFFSET FAUNA ASSESSMENT Page 31 d. Amphibians
TSC EPBC Offset Scientific Name Common Name Act Act Area Hylidae Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog x Myobatrachidae Limnodynastes fletcheri Long-thumbed Frog x Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Spotted Marsh Frog x
BIODIVERSITY MONITORING SERVICES [email protected]