Ecological Monitoring Results 1 Nov 2010 - 31 Dec 2011

Attachment D:

Page 1 Ulan Coal Mines Limited Annual Environment Review 1 November 2010 - 31 December 2011

Ulan Coal Mines Limited 2011 Annual Monitoring Report

Prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited

27 March 2012

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2011 Annual Monitoring Report

PREPARED FOR Ulan Coal Mines Limited

PROJECT NO 11MUDECO -0012

DATE March 12

DOCUMENT TRACKING

ITEM DETAIL Project Name Ulan Coal Ecological Monitoring Program for 2011_2012 Project Number 11MUDECO-0012 W:\Projects\Mudgee\11MUDECO\11MUDECO-0012 Ulan Coal Ecological Monitoring File location Program for 2011_2012\Report\Draft Reports Prepared by Daniel Magdi Tammy Paartalu Approved by Bruce Mullins Dr Paul Frazier Status Final Version Number 1 Last saved on 27 March 2012

Flora monitoring sites BOB14, BOBE1 and RPA9 (Tammy Paartalu, ELA) and Harp trap Cover photo along cliff line at BOB1 (Glenn Hoye, Fly By Night Bat Surveys)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd with input from Glenn Hoye (Fly By Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd) and Dr Martin Denny (Biodiversity Monitoring Services) and support from Ulan Coal Mines Limited.

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

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Executive Summary

Eco Logical Australia (ELA) was engaged by Ulan Coal Mines Limited (UCM) to prepare the 2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report for the mining lease (Project Area) in accordance with the Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan (BROMP). The BROMP satisfies the requirements of Condition 44, Schedule 3 of the Project Approval (PA 08_0184) and DSEWPAC Approval (EPBC Ref: 2009/5252) where UCML were required to prepare a Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP). The BROMP was subsequently revised during 2011 to become the BMP. The BMP includes a framework for ecological monitoring and associated reporting consistent with the currently approved BROMP .

The ecological monitoring undertaken in 2011 collected the baseline and monitoring data required in order to assess the performance of biodiversity management measures and to determine whether both biodiversity offset and cliffline management areas are progressing towards meeting the specific condition improvement targets. The ecological monitoring was undertaken within the UCML Project Area, including:

• Open Cut Extension; • Previous Open Cut Mining Areas; • Surface Infrastructure Areas; • Residual Project Area; • Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, including: o Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area; o Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area; o Brokenback Conservation Area; o Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area.

Flora data were collected by ELA, terrestrial and aquatic fauna data were collected by Biodiversity Monitoring Services and microchiropteran bat data were collected by Fly By Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd for the report. Monitoring undertaken during 2011 included surveys for:

• Flora – baseline data for all floristic survey sites, Landscape Function Analysis (LFA) sites and targeted Acacia ausfeldii surveys; • Fauna (excluding microbats); • Microbats; • Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat.

The results obtained during the 2011 survey form the baseline data required to assess the performance of biodiversity management measures and to determine whether both biodiversity offset and cliffline management areas are progressing towards meeting the specific condition improvement targets.

Floristic survey identified a total of 395 species, with 314 native species, 65 introduced species and 16 species that could only be identified to genus level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced. Species diversity varied within each floristic site, with total species identified

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

ranging from 15 species to 59 species. Native and introduced species presence also varied within each floristic site, with native species identified ranging from 5 species to 54 species and introduced species identified ranging from 0 species at multiple sites to 23 species.

LFA results showed that Landscape Organisation differed from the analogue sites and the rehabilitation sites, with litter dominant at the majority of the analogue sites, with an average of 80%, followed by grass/sedges and bare soil. The rehabilitation sites varied, with one site being dominated by litter and the remaining sites being dominated by a mixture of grass/sedges and baresoil. Soil Surface Assessment indicated that stability, infiltration and nutrient percentages were generally higher at the analogue sites than the rehabilitation sites. Vegetation Dynamics indicate that the structural diversity of the rehabilitation sites is mostly dominated by groundcover (grasses and other) and that the analogue site results indicate a structural diversity that should be aimed for in rehabilitation works.

Targeted Acacia ausfeldii surveys identified a total of 75 flora species, with 62 native species, 11 introduced species and 2 species that could only be identified to species level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced. The survey collected data for 9 seedlings, 34 saplings and 57 mature Acacia ausfeldii .

Fauna monitoring identified a total of 22 native and introduced mammal, 129 native and introduced bird, 17 reptile, and 13 amphibian species. Mammal surveys identified 11 native mammal and 11 introduced mammal species. The most common introduced mammal species recorded include the Red Fox and Feral Pig.

Bird survey identified 127 native bird and 2 introduced bird species. A total of 101 sightings of eight threatened species listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) were recorded. In addition, 4 migratory species listed under the EPBC Act were recorded. The targeted species Swift Parrot and Regent Honeyeater were not recorded during the survey.

Fauna habitat characteristic measurements indicate that the habitat is of moderate to high quality in terms of value to woodland birds and ground fauna.

Microbat monitoring at the general fauna sites recorded 14 bat species. The number of species recorded at each site varied from two to nine. Four microbat species listed as vulnerable TSC Act and two listed under the EPBC Act were recorded; with a fifth species tentatively identified from echolocation call recorded from the general fauna sites during the survey period.

Microbat monitoring along cliff line sites recorded twelve bat species. Six of these bat species were recorded from at least half of the sites, the Large-eared Pied Bat, Gould’s Wattled Bat, Chocolate Wattled Bat, Eastern Bent-wing Bat, Long-eared Bat species ( Nyctophilus sp .) and Little Forest Bat. Three microbat species listed as vulnerable TSC Act and two listed under the EPBC Act were recorded.

Aquatic surveys found 2369 individuals from 61 macroinvertebrate taxa across the 18 sites. The number of taxa located was higher than that recorded in previous years at UCML, with 47 recorded in 2010, 60 recorded in 2009 and 47 recorded in 2007. Riparian Habitat evaluation used the modified RCE system and Rapid Appraisal of Riparian Condition (RARC). Overall RARC scores were slightly lower than past surveys at UCML, but the differences are likely within normal variability associated with survey from different people. Bird Diversity indices were calculated, including Evenness, Simpson’s Index of Diversity, Numbers Counted and Species Richness for the birds at each aquatic survey site. These show a wide range of values that as expected when surveying 18 sites within a large area.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Monitoring undertaken during 2011 and previous years (fauna and aquatic fauna) provide the basis to meet the objectives of the management within the domains and the overall aims of the monitoring program outlined within the BROMP. Recommendations for the ongoing monitoring programs and management actions that are required to improve and enhance include:

• Flora o Based on the generally higher numbers of introduced species within the rehabilitation areas, it is recommended that any works to rehabilitate the offset sites aim to increase native species diversity and cover towards the analogue site levels, with similar species diversity and composition with associated vegetation types. It is also recommended that any rehabilitation works target noxious and environmental weeds, which includes St. John’s Wort. o It is important to continue monitoring vegetation in spring and autumn. This will ensure that seasonal species are noted, along with growth rates and impacts from adverse weather conditions. o The floristic monitoring sites established during spring/summer 2011 were based upon current vegetation mapping within the Project Area. This vegetation mapping was inaccurate in some areas, with some sites occurring on ecotones between two vegetation communities or occurring in vegetation that was not aligned with the mapped vegetation. It is recommended that before the autumn 2012 monitoring, vegetation mapping within the general vicinity of the floristic plots be updated and any sites that require a shift to the appropriate vegetation community be undertaken. • LFA o Incorporate revegetation/rehabilitation sites that will undergo works in 2012 within the Biodiversity Offset and Land Management Areas into the spring 2012 monitoring program, establishing sites that will be comparable to analogue sites and to provide actions based on results for improvement in soil disbursement and vegetation structural dynamics;

o Reactive data capture immediately after an event such as significant rainfall or bushfire, to sample any changes in landscape scores.

o Given vegetation dynamics (i.e. densities, height and cover) are not expected to change drastically on an annual basis, particularly for woody strata, sampling should be undertaken every 2 years.

o The exception to the above, would be where active regeneration of a site is undertaken, whereby, it would be valuable to record vegetation dynamics data following revegetation or during the next scheduled LFA/Floristic sampling event.

• Targeted Acacia ausfeldii o Based upon the results obtained, management recommendations should be implemented including any rehabilitation works targetting noxious and environmental weeds, which include Prickly Pear and Rabbit control, should be undertaken.

• Fauna (excluding microbats) o Future monitoring will incorporate two additional sites as the Open Cut expands to the west and the mined area is rehabilitated. Also, the relationship of the survey sites to the domains will change as the emphasis will be on comparing the data from sites on

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

land that is undermined or disturbed by infrastructure (treatment sites) with those relatively undisturbed (control or analogue sites). • Fauna (Microbats) o 10 sites (MB2D1, MB2D2, BD6D1, BD7DI, BD8D1, BD9D2, SGD2, SGD3, SGD5 and SGD7) are retained for future monitoring. o Site MB1 be discontinued from monitoring due to failure to detect activity of the Large- eared Pied Bat or Eastern Bent-wing Bat together with the difficult access to this site. o Some additional survey of unsampled clifflines in the Broken Back Domain and Spring Gully should be undertaken to assess if they provide superior sites for long term monitoring. o Sites were not sampled in cliff lines along Ulan Creek downstream of Old Ulan (due to access difficulties presented by the Ulan West construction project). These should also be sampled in future surveys to assess their suitability for long term monitoring.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Contents

Executive Summary ...... ii

Contents ...... vi

List of Figures ...... viii

List of Tables ...... ix

Abbreviations ...... x

1 Introduction ...... 11 1.1 Project Area ...... 12 1.2 Biodiveristy Management Plan ...... 14 1.2.1 Ecological Management Domains ...... 15 1.2.2 Ecological Management Domain Objectives ...... 16 1.2.3 Ecological Monitoring ...... 17

2 Methodology ...... 20 2.1 Floristic Monitoring...... 20 2.1.2 Residual Vegetation Monitoring (Analogue Sites) ...... 20 2.1.3 Revegetation/Regeneration Area Vegetation Monitoring ...... 24 2.1.4 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring ...... 24 2.2 Landscape Function Analysis ...... 27 2.2.1 Geographic Setting of the Site ...... 29 2.2.2 Landscape Organisation...... 29 2.2.3 Soil Surface Assessment...... 30 2.2.4 Vegetation Dynamics ...... 31 2.3 Targeted Acacia ausfeldii Surveys ...... 32 2.4 Fauna (excluding Microbats) ...... 34 2.5 Fauna (Microbats)...... 40 2.5.1 General Fauna Monitoring Sites ...... 40 2.5.2 Targeted Cliff Line Microbat Monitoring ...... 40 2.6 Aquatic Fauna & Riparian Habitats ...... 43 2.6.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates ...... 44 2.6.2 Birds & Other Vertebrates ...... 45 2.6.3 Riparian Vegetation Condition ...... 45 2.7 Weather Conditions ...... 48

3 Results ...... 50

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.1 Floristic Surveys ...... 50 3.2 Landscape Function Analysis ...... 56 3.3 Acacia ausfeldii Surveys ...... 59 3.4 Fauna (Excluding Microbats) ...... 61 3.4.1 Mammals (excluding Microbats) ...... 61 3.4.2 Birds...... 62 3.4.3 Reptiles ...... 63 3.4.4 Amphibians ...... 63 3.4.5 Fauna Habitat ...... 63 3.5 Fauna (Microbats)...... 66 3.5.1 General Fauna Sites ...... 66 3.5.2 Targeted Microbat Cliff Line Monitoring ...... 66 3.6 Aquatic Fauna & Riparian Habitats ...... 67 3.6.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates ...... 67 3.6.2 Riparian Habitat ...... 72 3.6.3 Bird Diversity ...... 72

4 Discussion & Recommendations ...... 73 4.1 Floristic Monitoring...... 73 4.2 LFA ...... 75 4.3 Acacia ausfeldii ...... 76 4.4 Fauna (excluding microbats) ...... 76 4.5 Fauna Microbats ...... 78 4.5.1 Targeted Cliff Line Microbat Sites ...... 78 4.6 Aquatic Fauna & Riparian Habitats ...... 79

References ...... 81

Appendix A: Floristic Site Descriptions ...... 82

Appendix B: Flora Species List ...... 154

Appendix C: LFA & Vegetation Dynamics Detailed Results ...... 169

Appendix D: Acacia ausfeldii data ...... 197

Appendix E: Fauna Monitoring Report ...... 202

Appendix F: Microbat Monitoring Report ...... 203

Appendix G: Aquatic Fauna & Riparian Habitat Report ...... 204

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: UCML regional location ...... 13

Figure 1.2: UCML Ecological Management Domains ...... 19

Figure 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites ...... 23

Figure 2.2: Revegetation/Regeneration Area vegetation monitoring sites ...... 25

Figure 2.3: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites ...... 26

Figure 2.4: LFA monitoring sites ...... 28

Figure 2.5: Acacia ausfeldii population location and quadrats ...... 33

Figure 2.6: Fauna monitoring sites ...... 36

Figure 2.7: Microbat monitoring sites (General fauna sites & targeted cliff line sites) ...... 42

Figure 2.8: Aquatic fauna monitoring sites ...... 47

Figure 3.1: Individual Acacia ausfeldii locations ...... 60

Figure 4.1: Native and exotic species richness recorded at each EEC/CEEC monitoring site ...... 74

Figure 4.2: Cover of native and exotic species richness recorded at each EEC/CEEC monitoring site . 74

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites ...... 21

Table 2.2: Revegetation/regeneration vegetation monitoring sites ...... 24

Table 2.3: LFA analogue and rehabilitation sites ...... 27

Table 2.4: Fauna monitoring sites ...... 34

Table 2.5: Fauna monitoring technique and effort per site ...... 37

Table 2.6: Targeted Cliff Line Microbat monitoring sites ...... 41

Table 2.7: Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat monitoring sites ...... 44

Table 2.7: Weather conditions preceding the monitoring period ...... 48

Table 2.8: Weather conditions during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring period ...... 48

Table 3.1: Floristic survey summary ...... 51

Table 3.2: Landscape Organisation summary ...... 56

Table 3.3: Soil Surface Assessment summary (bare soil, litter & grass) ...... 57

Table 3.4: Vegetation Dynamics summary ...... 58

Table 3.5: Acacia ausfeldii condition and reproductive ratings summary ...... 59

Table 3.6: Native mammal species captures & observations summary ...... 61

Table 3.7: Threatened bird species recorded during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring ...... 62

Table 3.8: Habitat characteristics identified during the fauna survey (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012) ...... 65

Table 3.9: Aquatic Macroinvertebrates located at each site (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012) ... 68

Table 3.10: Riparian Habitat Value Scores in 2011 ...... 72

Table 4.1: Additional LFA sites required for revegetation/regeneration ...... 76

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Abbreviations

ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION

BMP Biodiversity Management Plan

BROMP Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan

CEEC Critically Endangered Ecological Community

DP&I Department of Planning and Infrastructure

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

EEC Endangered Ecological Community

ELA Eco Logical Australia

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

LFA Landscape Function Analysis

Mtpa Million tonnes per annum

OEH Office of Environment and Heritage

PCQ Point Centered Quarter

SSA Soil Surface Assessment

TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

UCML Ulan Coal Mines Limited

XCN Xstrata Coal NSW

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

1 Introduction

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

Ulan Coal Mines Limited (UCML) developed a Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan (BROMP) (ULN SD EXT 0093) to satisfy the requirements of Condition 44, Schedule 3 of PA 08_0184 where UCML were required to prepare a Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and to satisfy the DSEWPAC Approval (EPBC Ref: 2009/5252). This BROMP was approved by DSEWPAC on 18 th January 2011.

The BROMP was subsequently revised during 2011 to become the Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) (ULN SD PLN 0026), which includes the Offset Management Program (OMP) and submitted to DP&I and DSEWPAC for approval on 22 nd December 2011. The BMP includes a framework for ecological monitoring and associated reporting (refer to Section 1.2.2 ) consistent with the currently approved BROMP .

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

Eco Logical Australia (ELA) was engaged by UCML to prepare the 2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report for the Project Area, in line with the requirements of the BROMP. Flora data were collected by ELA, terrestrial and aquatic fauna data were collected by Biodiversity Monitoring Services and microchiropteran bat data were collected by Fly By Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd for the report.

This Annual Ecological Monitoring Report provides details of the methodology and results obtained during the ecological monitoring conducted during 2011. This report also includes a discussion on comparisons to previous monitoring periods (fauna only), potential management actions that can be implemented during 2012 and potential future changes to the monitoring program.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

1.1 PROJECT AREA UCML is situated in the central west of New South Wales. It is located in the Mid Western Regional Council (MWRC) Local Government Area (LGA) near the village of Ulan, approximately 38 kilometres north-northeast of Mudgee and 19 kilometres northeast of Gulgong (refer to Figure 1.1). UCML is a joint venture between Xstrata Coal Pty Limited (90%) and Mitsubishi Development (10%), Xstrata Coal NSW (XCN) maintains management responsibility for UCML. The mining operations at UCML are one of a number of mining assets owned and/or managed by XCN.

UCML received Project Approval (PA 08_0184) from NSW DP&I on 15 th November 2010 for continued operations. This Project Approval covers current and proposed mining of the Ulan Mine Complex for the next 21 years, and production of up to 20 Mtpa (million tonnes per annum) of product coal. This approval incorporates both underground and open cut mining operations undertaken twenty-four hours a day, 7 days per week.

The Project Area comprises a total of 13,435 ha, made up of:

• Open Cut Extension – approximately 239 ha and is the extent of the recently approved open cut operations; • Previous Open Cut Mining Areas – approximately 475 ha of previous open cut mining areas that have a combination of rehabilitation areas and final voids that remain to support future mining activities (water storage, tailings disposal, underground access etc.); • Surface Infrastructure Areas – the 169 ha disturbance area required for construction of underground service infrastructure; • Residual Project Area – the remainder of the Project Area (approximately 11,000 ha) that is not subject to the current project. This includes large areas that have been previously undermined, agricultural grazing land, irrigation pivots and large areas of remnant native vegetation; • Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, including: o Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area – 991 ha; o Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area – 232 ha; o Brokenback Conservation Area – 58 ha; o Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area – 211 ha.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 1.1: UCML regional location

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

1.2 BIODIVERISTY MANAGEMENT PLAN UCML developed a Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan (BROMP) (ULN SD EXT 0093) to satisfy the requirements of Condition 44, Schedule 3 of the Project Approval (PA 08_0184) (granted under Part 3A of the EP&A Act) where UCML are required to prepare a Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) and to satisfy the DSEWPAC Approval (EPBC Ref: 2009/5252).

Since this BROMP was approved, UCML have made a number of changes to the document to satisfy the conditions of 08_0184. These changes include:

• Changing the document name Biodiversity, Rehabilitation and Offset Management Plan (BROMP) (ULN SD EXT 0093) to Biodiversity Management Plan (ULN SD PLN 0026); • Removing the rehabilitation section and adding it to the Integrated Mining Operation Plan (MOP) (ULN SD PLN 0079), which is effectively UCML’s Rehabilitation Management Plan; • Renaming the Offset Management Plan (referred to as Offset Management Program (OMP) in the BMP); • Incorporate the relevant requirements of the Salinity Offset Area; • Restructuring the document so that the BMP includes the OMP (ULN SD ANN 0048) – Appendix 1 & Bushfire Management Plan (ULN SD ANN 0053) – Appendix 2 ).

This revised plan was submitted for approval on 22 nd December 2011. The BMP includes a framework for ecological monitoring and associated reporting (refer to Section 4 of the BMP) consistent with the currently approved BROMP (ULN SD EXT 0093).

The BROMP provides the framework for the overall UCML Biodiversity Management Structure. As part of this structure, the UCML Integrated Mining Operations Plan (ULN SD PLN 0079), Offset Management Program (ULN SD ANN 0048) and Bushfire Management Plan (ULN SD ANN 0053) were developed to support the implementation of the BROMP. The BROMP and associated plans and programs outline the measures required to implement the biodiversity management commitments in the rehabilitation of mined areas and biodiversity offset areas.

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

The BROMP divides the Project Area into 9 ecological management domains in order to assist in refining targeted ecological management requirements. These ecological management domains include:

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

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

1.2.1 Ecological Management Domains The UCML Ecological Management Domains have been delineated on the basis of habitat and land management objectives established within the BROMP.

The Open Cut Domain (Domain 1) covers an area of 714 ha and has been developed to incorporate both previous and future open cut areas (Figure 1.2 ).

The Surface Infrastructure Domain (Domain 2) covers an area of 169 ha and comprises a mixture of forest, woodland and grassland formations. Infrastructure to support the underground mine, such as access roads, transmission lines, pipelines and dewatering pump sites (Figure 1.2 ) will be developed in this domain.

The Residual Project Area Domain (Domain 3) covers an area of approximately 11,000 ha and includes the remaining Project Area not subject to the mining operations, however, still requires general management actions to ensure no ecological impact from the various components of the mining operations (Figure 1.2).

The Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain (Domain 5) is located along approximately 3.6 kilometres of the river and will be the focus of rehabilitation works to improve the stability of the river diversion and water quality of the Goulburn River.

The Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas (Domains 6 – 9) have been developed in order to provide an immediate ecological outcome to offset the identified impacts of the Ulan Coal Continued Operations Project. The Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas have been located to address specific ecological impacts, primarily vegetation/habitat loss, impacts to White Box Woodland (a part of the White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum endangered ecological community (EEC) (TSC Act)/critically endangered ecological community (CEEC) (EPBC Act)) and impacts to cliffline habitats. The revegetation/regeneration and protection of the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas will provide habitat for a range of threatened fauna species, as well as protect and revegetate/regenerate substantial amounts of White Box Woodland.

The UCML Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas are:

• Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area (991 ha) – This offset area provides an immediate offset for the loss of vegetation from the Open Cut and Surface Infrastructure Disturbance Areas, as well as providing for protection and enhancement of White Box Woodland within the Project Area. This area contains 239 ha of White Box Woodland, comprising six community variants reflecting varying condition, quality and dominant species (Figure 1.2 ). • Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (232 ha) – This offset area contains approximately 169 ha of White Box Woodland to provide for its protection and enhancement. This offset area was established to address the offset requirements from DSEWPAC for the protection of matters of national environmental significance (MNES) (Figure 1.2 ). • Brokenback Conservation Area (58 ha) and Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area (211 ha) – These offset areas provide for the protection of a number of significant rock shelters (in the case of Brokenback Conservation Area) and to compensate for the loss of cliffline and cave habitat from the Open Cut Disturbance Area, together with potential damage to cliffline and cave habitat from subsidence above the longwall areas. These areas contain approximately 12 km of cliffline, including numerous caves or other structures that are likely to provide habitat for micro-bats (Figure 1.2 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

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

• Open Cut Domain: o to create a stable final landform with acceptable post-mining land use capability, being self-sustaining native vegetation communities characteristic of the pre-mining composition; o to rehabilitate and revegetate the post-mining areas progressively over the life of the mine, as soon as practicable after mining disturbance and reforming of the landscape; o to minimise the disturbed area at any point in time; o to use the indicative revegetation strategy developed within the Ulan Coal EA (Umwelt 2009) to return self-sustaining native vegetation communities to the post-mining open cut area; o to rehabilitate the post-mining Open Cut Disturbance Area with the aim of emulating the pre-mining environment, and enhancing local and regional ecological linkages across the Project Area and adjoining areas; o to use local provenance species for revegetation works, unless conditions such as seed availability or climate demand require the use of species from a wider region; o to re-establish a variety of vegetation types to increase the value of this revegetation for fauna species, particularly threatened species; o to undertake revegetation works that aim at reducing the representation of Unimproved Pasture within the post-mining landscape, replacing this with woodland and forest communities, to provide increased fauna habitat within the post-mining Open Cut Disturbance Area; o to undertake post-mining landscaping with species characteristic of Grey Box Woodland and Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone communities; o to include Acacia ausfeldii in revegetation works for the rehabilitation of the post-mining Open Cut Disturbance Area. • Goulburn River Rehabilitation Domain: o to improve the overall aesthetic appearance of the diversion, particularly for sections of the diversion that are highly visible from Ulan Road; o to improve the surface drainage controls and vegetation establishment; o to increase the geomorphic features and ecological integrity of the diversion where feasible; o to implement erosion control measures; o to strive for a positive improvement on water quality exiting the diversion; and o to gain community and government acceptance of the proposed stability works. • Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area: o to provide an immediate, long-term and direct offset for vegetation impacted as a result of the Project; o to protect and improve areas of White Box Woodland EEC/CEEC vegetation; o to protect and improve vegetation and habitat connectivity throughout the Project Area; o to protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly for threatened fauna species; o to ensure all management actions within this area are supplementary to, and do not duplicate, the existing commitments to the Salinity Offset Area; o to provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area: o to provide an immediate, long-term and direct offset for vegetation lost as a result of the clearing activities of the Project; o to protect and improve areas of White Box Woodland EEC/CEEC within the Project Area; o to protect and improve vegetation and habitat connectivity throughout the Project Area; o to protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly for threatened fauna species; o to provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective; • Brokenback Conservation Area and Spring Gully Cliffline Management Area: o to provide for the protection and management of cliffline areas (including associated cave habitat) to compensate for that which will be removed as part of the Open Cut Disturbance Area, as well as that which may be subject to subsidence-related impacts, such as rock fall; o to protect and enhance fauna habitat, particularly cliffline areas for habitat specific threatened fauna species; o to provide monitoring to ensure mitigation strategies are effective.

1.2.3 Ecological Monitoring An integral part of the BROMP is the measurement and evaluation of methodologies and processes. A comprehensive monitoring program was developed to assess the performance of biodiversity management measures and to determine whether both biodiversity offset and cliffline management areas are progressing towards meeting the specific condition improvement targets.

The BROMP outlines a monitoring program that is aimed at:

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

The ecological monitoring program involves monitoring revegetation areas, fauna species and their habitats, key threatened species, landscape function and aquatic features. The monitoring process and

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

results are documented in this Annual Ecological Monitoring Report. This report provides details of the flora and fauna species and ecological communities present within the Project Area monitoring sites and will be used to inform results of and improvements to management actions across the Project Area.

Monitoring undertaken during spring/summer 2011 presented within this report fulfils the first monitoring period under the BROMP and establishes both baseline data collection and continued monitoring for sites in the Project Area. Monitoring undertaken during spring/summer 2011 includes:

• Flora – baseline data for all floristic survey sites, Landscape Function Analysis (LFA) sites and targeted Acacia ausfeldii surveys; • Fauna (excluding microbats) – continuation of existing monitoring and the establishment of new sites; • Microbats – continuation of existing monitoring and the establishment of 7 new sites; • Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat – continuation of existing monitoring and the establishment of 6 new sites.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 1.2: UCML Ecological Management Domains

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2 Methodology

Monitoring during 2011 was undertaken in accordance with the methods and survey techniques prescribed in Section 7 of the BROMP.

2.1 FLORISTIC MONITORING Floristic monitoring was undertaken at 52 sites across the project area (Figures 2.1-2.3) by Tammy Paartalu, Will Introna and Danielle Bennett of ELA from 7 th November to 11 th November 2011 and 14 th November to 18 th November 2011. The monitoring consisted of collecting specific baseline biotic and abiotic data for all 52 sites. Floristic monitoring has been split into three targeted categories:

• Residual vegetation monitoring (Analogue sites); • Revegetation/regeneration area vegetation monitoring; • Floristic-based subsidence monitoring.

At each floristic monitoring site, a 20 m x 20 m plot (quadrat) was established. Individual quadrat descriptions have been compiled within Appendix A . Each quadrat was established using the following technique:

• Each site was located at the pre-determined points identified in the BROMP;

• The corners of the quadrat of each transect were located with a metal star picket (permanent marker to facilitate repeat sampling); • A yellow cap was placed on the top of each star picket;

• A GPS co-ordinate was taken in the north-western corner of each plot.

Within each floristic quadrat, all visible vascular species were recorded, with each species being assigned to one of six foliage cover classes using the Modified Braun-Blanquet Cover-abundance method (Braun-Blanquet 1927, Poore 1955, Austin et al . 2000). Vegetation structure was recorded for each plot, in particular the height and total foliage cover of each stratum. The general health, evidence of natural regeneration, occurrence and abundance of weeds, presence of threatened species, signs of disturbance, evidence of feral animals and any observable impacts for the project were also recorded.

All vascular plant species observed in the plots were identified (where possible), recorded and compiled into the species list ( Appendix B). Most taxa were identified in the field. Those unable to be identified in the field were collected for later identification using a microscope and a combination of field guides, the Flora of New South Wales (Harden 1992; 1993; 2002) and by comparison with herbarium specimens held in the Public Reference Collection of the National Herbarium of NSW in Sydney.

2.1.2 Residual Vegetation Monitoring (Analogue Sites) Residual vegetation monitoring plots were established within the Residual Project Area, Infrastructure Area, Brokenback Conservation Area, Spring Gully Cliff Line Management Area, Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (Figure 2.1 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Vegetation monitoring included the establishment of 33 permanent vegetation plots, with 15 established within the Residual Project Area, 4 established within the Surface Infrastructure Area, 1 established within the Brokenback Conservation Area, 1 established within the Spring Gully Cliff Line Management Area, 8 established within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and 4 established within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (Table 2.1 ).

Table 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites

Site Numbers by Location

Vegetation Type Bobadeen Spring Surface Bobadeen Brokenback Residual East Gully Infrastructure (BOB) (BB) (RPA) (BOBE) (SG) (SI)

Ironbark Open Forest RPA1, BOB3, Complex on Sandstone RPA2, BOB7, BOBE4 SI1 RPA4, BOB8 RPA5 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on BOB5 BOBE3 RPA3 Alluvium/Colluvium

Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand RPA6, SG1 Plateaux RPA9

Grey Box Woodland RPA7

Improved Pasture RPA8

Derived Native Grassland RPA10,

RPA11 Modified White Box Woodland RPA12 SI3

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB6 BOBE2 RPA13 SI2

Unimproved Pasture RPA14

Tumbledown Red Gum - Callitris Open Forest on RPA15 Granite

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone SI4

Stringybark-Ironbark Open BB1 Forest on Sandstone

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site Numbers by Location

Vegetation Type Bobadeen Spring Surface Bobadeen Brokenback Residual East Gully Infrastructure (BOB) (BB) (RPA) (BOBE) (SG) (SI)

Slopes

White Box Woodland BOB1, BOBE1 BOB4 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on BOB2 Alluvium/Colluvium

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.1.3 Revegetation/Regeneration Area Vegetation Monitoring Vegetation monitoring plots were established within areas that will undergo either revegetation or regeneration within the Open Cut Area, Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (Figure 2.2).

Vegetation monitoring included the establishment of 17 permanent vegetation plots, with 5 established within the Open Cut Area, 8 established within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and 4 established within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2: Revegetation/regeneration vegetation monitoring sites

Location & Site Numbers

Vegetation Type Bobadeen Bobadeen Open East (BOB) Cut (OP) (BOBE)

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone BOB16

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium BOBE5

Grey Box Woodland OP2

Derived Native Grassland BOB10, BOBE6 BOB14

Modified White Box Woodland BOB9, BOBE7, BOB12 BOBE8

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB11

Unimproved Pasture BOB13, OP5 BOB15

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium OP1

Rehabilitation Post 1997 OP3

Rehabilitation Pre 1997 OP4

2.1.4 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring Vegetation monitoring plots were established above underground mining areas to monitor the impact of subsidence on vegetation through changes in floristic composition.

One vegetation monitoring plot was established above each longwall panel not already being monitored as part of the residual vegetation monitoring, of which there were two (FBS1 and FBS2) ( Figure 2.3 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.2: Revegetation/Regeneration Area vegetation monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.3: Floristic-based subsidence monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.2 LANDSCAPE FUNCTION ANALYSIS LFA is a monitoring tool that assesses beyond floristic assemblage to look at vegetation orientation and structure, and ecosystem function at the soil level. The tool was originally developed for rangelands but more recently has been applied to mine site rehabilitation projects. LFA data will be used to record the trajectory of change in revegetated and rehabilitated sites towards (or otherwise) comparable analogue sites.

The LFA monitoring focuses on establishing analogue sites that are representative of the vegetation communities that have or will undergo revegetation/regeneration and establishing LFA sites within areas that are currently undergoing or have undergone rehabilitation. LFA monitoring was undertaken at eight analogue sites and three active rehabilitation sites across the Project Area (Table 2.3, Figure 2.4). The rehabilitation sites were located through aerial photography interpretation, focusing on areas that indicate structural variation in the vegetation. The methods completed were consistent with Tongway and Hindley (2005).

Monitoring was undertaken by Tammy Paartalu and Danielle Bennett of ELA from 28 th November to 2 nd December 2011 and on 6 th December 2011.

Table 2.3: LFA analogue and rehabilitation sites

Biodiversity Offset Areas Residual Open Cut Bobadeen Bobadeen East Project Rehabilitation Vegetation Offset Vegetation Offset Vegetation Communities Area Area Area Area

Rehabilitation Analgoue Site Number Site Number

Narrow-leaved Ironbark 2 Woodland

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open 4 Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Rough-barked Apple Open 3 Forest

She-oak Low Forest on 1 Sandstone Crests

Stringybark-Ironbark Open 8 Forest on Sandstone Slopes

Grey Box Woodland 7

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest 5

White Box Woodland 6

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 11

(eastern portion)

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 10

(western portion)

2009 Rehabilitation Areas 9

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.4: LFA monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

At each LFA site, a 20 m x 50 m nested quadrat (20 m x 20 m floristic plot and 50 m transect) was established. Each quadrat was established using the following technique:

• Each site was pre-selected from aerial photography;

• A 50 m tape measure was laid out down slope (according to the requirements of LFA), in some cases bends and kinks were necessary;

• The start and end point of each transect was located with a metal star picket fitted with a yellow cap (permanent marker); • Each start, end and mid-point (where a bend in the transect was necessary) of the transect was recorded using GPS and photographs were taken at the at the start of each transect;

• Each star picket was marked with a length of high visibility flagging tape (or similar). Within each nested quadrat LFA attributes were recorded on field data sheets in accordance with four main components of the method, as follows:

• Geographic setting of the site;

• Landscape organisation; • Soil surface assessment;

• Vegetation dynamics.

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

• Crest; • Upper slope;

• Mid slope;

• Lower slope; • Closed depression, or lake;

• Flat;

• Open depression or stream channel

2.2.2 Landscape Organisation Landscape organisation characterises and maps the spatial patterns of resource loss or accumulation at a site. The procedure is as follows:

• The transect was located directly down slope using a 50 m tape within the 20 m x 50 m quadrat, bends and kinks were needed in some cases to follow the slope. The tape measure was made taut prior to recording measurements.

• A continuous record of patch/inter-patch parameters along the transect was collected.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

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

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

• The distance and interval along the tape; • The patch width;

• The patch/inter-patch identification.

Rill survey was only completed where rills occurred, with the following recorded: • Rill base (eg Rocky, alluvium or gravel);

• Start of rill along the tape;

• Finish of rill along the tape; • Rill width;

• Rill depth.

All data were entered into the LFA spreadsheets and was used to calculate the results of the LFA.

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

• Observations of soil surface features were made using the landscape organisation transect tape to define the query zone. Each SSA feature was estimated on a linear basis. Percentages were calculated according to the length of the particular query zone (ie standard line intercept rules);

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

• The transect data record was used to select ‘query zones’. With query zones distributed along the full length of the transect; • Each query zone was sited symmetrically within the selected zone patch/inter-patch;

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

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

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

Within each query zone the appropriate score for each SSA indicator was recorded, indicators included:

• Rain splash protection;

• Perennial vegetation cover;

• Litter cover, origin and decomposition; • Cryptogram cover;

• Crust brokenness;

• Soil erosion type and severity; • Deposited materials;

• Soil surface roughness;

• Surface nature (resistance to disturbance); • Slake test;

• Soil surface nature.

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

2.2.4 Vegetation Dynamics The Point Centred Quarter (PCQ) method was applied to each 20 m x 50 m quadrat. This involved establishing sampling points at regular 10 m intervals (0 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m and 40 m) along each LFA transect line. At each sampling point, the distance to the four nearest “plants of interest” in each of the 4 quadrants around the tape were measured. The “plants of interest” were ground cover grass and forbs/herbs/sedges/rushes and shrubs and trees. A minimum sampling effort of 80 plants per “plants of interest group” is recommended in the LFA method, but this was not always possible within the 20 m x 50 m quadrat. For each plant the following was recorded:

• The sampling point (ie 0 m, 10 m, 20 m, 30 m or 40 m);

• The point quadrant (ie a, b, c or d moving in a clockwise direction from the top right side quadrant); • Distance to the plant;

• Plant species code;

• Height of the plant; • Width, breadth and height of each plant (for grasses this was butt width, for shrubs and trees crown width was recorded);

• Volume calculated from the width and breadth.

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

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.3 TARGETED ACACIA AUSFELDII SURVEYS Targeted Acacia ausfeldii monitoring was undertaken within a population of Acacia ausfeldii located along Highett Road (within UCML ownership, approximately 1.5 km south-west of the southern extent of Open Cut Disturbance Area) ( Figure 2.5 ). The monitoring was undertaken by Tammy Paartalu, Andrew Whitford and Danielle Bennett of ELA and consisted of collecting specific baseline data for the population of Acacia ausfeldii . Monitoring was undertaken on 19 th and 27 th October.

Acacia ausfeldii monitoring consisted of two techniques:

• Individual surveys; • Quadrat surveys.

Individual surveys collected information for 100 Acacia ausfeldii specimens within the population and recorded the density, height and Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) of Acacia ausfeldii seedlings, saplings and mature shrubs. Additional information was collected for each specimen, including reproductive ratings (1 – Nil, 2 – Sparse/occasional flowers only, 3 – Low/under 25% of potential, 4 – Moderate/25% to 75% of potential and 5 – High/75% to 100% of potential) and condition ratings (1 – severe damage/dieback, 2 – many dead stems, 3 – some dead branches, 4 – minor damage and 5 – healthy).

Two floristic quadrats (described in Section 2.1 ) were also established within the Acacia ausfeldii population ( Figure 2.5 ) to record the following vegetation characteristics:

• Floristic composition (including cover and abundance of species) and structure; • General health of vegetation; • Evidence of natural regeneration of the canopy; • Occurrence and abundance of weed species; • Presence of threatened or other significant species; • Signs of disturbance, either by stock or humans; • Evidence of feral animals; • Any observable impacts of the mining operations, such as the effectiveness of fencing and weed control actions.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.5: Acacia ausfeldii population location and quadrats

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.4 FAUNA (EXCLUDING MICROBATS) Fauna monitoring (excluding microbats) during spring/summer 2011 was undertaken by Dr. Martin Denny of Biodiversity Monitoring Services. Fauna monitoring was undertaken from 26 th September to 8th October 2011 and 7 th December to 20 th December 2011.

Fauna monitoring was undertaken in accordance with the BROMP and involved collecting baseline data to establish the pre-mining diversity and abundance of species at sites within representative areas of the Project Area. Some fauna monitoring sites have been subject to previous monitoring, therefore previous data and the spring/summer 2011 baseline results for new sites have been used to form the dataset for fauna monitoring sites for ongoing monitoring.

Fauna monitoring was undertaken within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, areas adjoining the Open Cut Area, Residual Project Area and sufficiently established post-mining rehabilitated areas. The location of these monitoring sites allows a comparison between the fauna utilisation of un-impacted vegetation (Residual Project Area), vegetation near to impact areas (adjacent to Approved Project Disturbance Areas), rehabilitated vegetation (post-mining Open Cut), revegetation areas (Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area), and areas managed for conservation (Brokenback Conservation Area and Spring Gully Cliff Line Management Area) (Appendix E).

The BROMP required 20 monitoring sites across the Project Area. However, two of the suggested sites were located in the Open Cut Extension Area. These sites are to be surveyed post-mining. Therefore, 18 of the 20 sites were surveyed during the spring/summer 2011 survey period (Table 2.4, Figure 2.6).

Table 2.4: Fauna monitoring sites

Location Site Vegetation Type

FaBOB1 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

FaBOB2 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium and FaBOB3 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

FaBOB4 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest and Ironbark Open Forest FaBOBE1 Bobadeen East Complex on Sandstone Vegetation Offset Area Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium FaBOBE2 (regenerating) and Unimproved Pasture

Residual Project Area FaRPA1 Scribbly Gum Woodland/Heathland on Sand Plateaux

FaRPA2 Scribbly Gum Woodland/Heathland on Sand Plateaux

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest, Scribbly Gum Woodland/Heathland on Sand Plateaux and Rough-barked FaRPA3 Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Location Site Vegetation Type

FaRPA4 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

FaRPA5 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

FaSI1 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone and Rough- FaSI2 barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium Surface Infrastructure Area FaSI3 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium and FaSI4 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Open Cut Area Rehabilitation 2003 Mixed community post 1987

Rehabilitation 1985 Mixed community pre 1987

Spring Gully Cliff Line Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Management Area FaSG1

The fauna monitoring techniques undertaken during the 2011 spring/summer survey are similar to those previously conducted within the UCML site since 1994, however this monitoring period established a standard set of techniques and survey effort for future monitoring (Appendix E).

The monitoring techniques and effort undertaken during the 2011 spring/summer period are identified below in Table 2.5 . Detailed methods are included within the Terrestrial Fauna and Habitats report (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012) in Appendix E.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.6: Fauna monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 2.5: Fauna monitoring technique and effort per site Survey Monitoring Effort Details per Site Technique per Site

Elliott Trapping • 25 small (8x10x33 cm) Elliott traps for 4 consecutive nights. • 100 trap nights • Baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat. Small piece of dacron was placed within each trap (as protection against the cold). • 5 small Elliott traps were mounted on trees at equal distances along • 20 trap nights each transect. • The tree trunk and trap were sprayed with a honey-water mixture to assist in attracting any nectar or sap feeding arboreal mammals. • 2 large Elliott traps. • 8 trap nights • Baited with apple, muesli bar and chicken. Cage Trapping • 3 cage traps were laid on the ground and 3 traps were mounted on • 24 trap nights trees. Spotlighting • Tracks were spotlighted from a moving vehicle. • 2 person hours • Spotlighting on foot was undertaken at each fauna survey site. Hair Funnels • 5 hair funnels (from Faunatech) were set out for 4 nights • 20 trap nights • Baited with a mixture of rolled oats, peanut butter and bacon fat. • Where possible, some of the hair funnels were set onto habitat trees. Glider Traps • 2 vertical plastic tube traps were used as a tree-mounted pit-fall • 24 trap nights trap. Remote • Tree-mounted remote cameras were used to capture images of any • 5 capture Cameras animal using the area, particularly near the traps. nights • At some sites a small container of bait was placed in front of a camera to attract animals. Bird Surveys • Area-search method was used, involving a 30 minute search • 2 person hours through walking around the site and from a single-point. • Up to four periods of observation were undertaken (two in the morning and two in the late afternoon). Call • Calls were broadcast through a megaphone for approximately 5 • 1.5 person Broadcasting minutes, with a 10 minute listening time. hours • Calls broadcast included Ninox strenua (Powerful Owl), Tyto novaehollandiae (Masked Owl), Podargus strigoides (Tawny Frogmouth), Ninox connivens (Barking Owl), Tyto alba (Barn Owl), Ninox boobook (Southern Boobook) and Eurostopodus mystacalis (White-throated Nightjar) as well as Petaurus norfolcensis (Squirrel Glider), Petaurus breviceps (Sugar Glider) , Petaurus australis (Yellow-bellied Glider) and Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala). Amphibian • Water bodies were searched for frogs. • 2 person hours

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Survey Monitoring Effort Details per Site Technique per Site

Searches and • At night, each body of water was searched, using spotlights and Call Recording any frog calls recorded. • Stones beside water were turned over during the day and night. Pit fall traps • Pit fall traps were established at a number of the monitoring sites. • 24 trap nights • A series of 20 litre buckets was used, together with drift fencing made from wire gauze. • At all sites buckets were dug into the ground at 10 metres intervals and a 20cm high wire mesh fence run between each bucket. Herpetological • Systematic searches for reptiles and amphibians were undertaken • 1 person hour Searches within each habitat type. • Litter was raked and rocks and logs turned over. • Loose bark was prised from the trunks of dead trees. • Each search took approximately 30 minutes and was repeated at each site. • Searches for amphibians took place at night using spotlights (particularly after rain) and recognition of characteristic calls. • Spotlighting searches were also attempted for reptiles. Animal Track • Areas of sand on tracks were inspected for evidence of animal Recognition movement. • Paw prints and other animal signs were identified and recorded.

Opportunistic • Any sightings of fauna were recorded whilst moving throughout the Observations Project Area and located using a GPS. • Any scats were collected and their contents analysed.

• Inspection of the cliff-lines was undertaken during the surveys. • Cliff-line ledges were searched for any sign of this species, including Brush-tailed smallish foot prints and characteristically shaped scats. Rock-wallaby • Observations using binoculars were undertaken of inaccessible cliffline ledges, particularly during late afternoon when these animals may be active.

Habitat • Trap Site Description – The first method for describing habitat Characteristics characteristics was to provide a description of the upper, middle and lower storey vegetation, as well as the ground cover, within an area of 1m radius surrounding each trap was undertaken. Where the traps sampled cliff-lines, the unique habitat characteristics of this environment are noted. • Walking Transects - A second method for describing habitat characteristics involved a 50 m walking transect at each survey site. Within each transect, the following habitat characteristics were

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Survey Monitoring Effort Details per Site Technique per Site

measured: a) Upper and Middle Strata Vegetation Density – number of trees and saplings and shrubs. b) Tree and Shrub Height – height of any trees/saplings or shrubs. c) Lower Strata Vegetation Density – visual estimates of the relative proportions of ground cover contributed by grass, forbs, moss, vines, rocks, ferns, litter and logs. d) Diameter Breast Height (DBH) – the diameter of each tree at about breast height. e) Grass and Forb Height – the average height of the grasses and forbs. f) Litter Mass g) Presence of hollows and mistletoe – the presence of tree hollows and mistletoe was documented • Cliff Line Habitat - The cliff-line environment was divided into five features which were considered common to all areas at the UCML site. The features used were: a) Cliff Base – the boundary between the steep cliff-line and the relatively level ground beyond the cliff. b) Overhang – an overhang comprises a large cave-like depression in the cliff-face which may or may not form a narrow dark-zone at the back of the depression. c) Ledge – ledges are found throughout the cliff-line and range in size from large (more than 10 metres long) to small (less than 30cm). d) Cliff crack – this feature is found throughout the cliff-line where cracks have formed. e) Rock fall – this common feature at the base of cliff-lines, comprises pieces of rock broken away from the cliff-line.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.5 FAUNA (MICROBATS) Microchiropteran bat (microbat) monitoring during spring/summer 2011 was undertaken by Glenn Hoye of Fly By Night Bat Surveys Pty Ltd. Monitoring was undertaken in accordance with the BROMP and consisted of two components:

• General Fauna Monitoring Sites; • Targeted Cliff Line Monitoring Sites.

2.5.1 General Fauna Monitoring Sites Microbat monitoring was undertaken at the 18 general fauna sites (identified in Section 2.3). Survey for microbats at the general fauna sites was undertaken from 9th to 14 th October 2011. Microbats were sampled through captures using collapsible harp traps (Tidemann & Woodside, 1978) and recording and analysis of echolocation calls though the use of Anabat detection devices. Each site was sampled for three consecutive nights with harp traps and echolocation call recording undertaken for a minimum of two complete nights.

Microbats captured in harp traps were identified, measured and fitted with an identification band. The locations of the general fauna monitoring sites are indicated in Table 2.5 and in Figure 2.7. Detailed methods are included within the Microbat Monitoring of the Ulan Coal Mine Lease during 2011 report in Appendix F.

2.5.2 Targeted Cliff Line Microbat Monitoring Microbat monitoring within the targeted cliff line monitoring sites consisted of 18 sites. Microbats were sampled through captures using collapsible harp traps (Tidemann & Woodside, 1978), and recording and analysis of echolocation calls through Anabat detection devices. Each site had echolocation call recording undertaken for a minimum of one complete night. Detectors were moved each night to provide information on as many sites along the cliff lines as possible.

At selected sites, microbats were captured in harp traps that were left in place for one to three nights. Microbats captured in harp traps were identified, measured and fitted with an identification band. Survey for microbats at the targeted cliff line sites was undertaken from 7 th to 16 th December 2011 when females of the three target species would be at maternity roosts raising young.

The locations of the targeted cliff line monitoring sites are indicated in Table 2.6 and in Figure 2.7. Detailed methods are included within the Microbat Monitoring of the Ulan Coal Mine Lease during 2011 report in Appendix F.

In addition to the annual Targeted Cliff Line Microbat Monitoring conducted as per above, UCML also had targeted monitoring conducted during 2011 (April and December) on cliff lines over the “North 1” longwall panels in accordance with the BMP and Extraction Plan (Subsidence Monitoring Program) for pre-longwall mining due diligence surveys.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 2.6: Targeted Cliff Line Microbat monitoring sites

GPS Coordinates Location Site Easting Northing

Bobadeen Vegetation BD6D1 753428 6426859 Offset Area BD6D2 753317 6436697

BD7D1 753099 6436650

BD7D2 752825 6436804

BD8D1 752588 6436583

BD8D2 752567 6436561

BD9D1 751863 6436925

BD9D2 751715 6436822

Residual Project Area MB1D1 756927 6426859

MB2D1 758615 6429990

MB2D2 759161 6429879

Spring Gully Cliff Line SGD1 761325 6432796 Management Area SGD2 761309 6432961

SGD3 761227 6433213

SGD4 759548 6433151

SGD5 761591 6432653

SGD6 761271 6432740

SGD7 761240 6433069

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.7: Microbat monitoring sites (General fauna sites & targeted cliff line sites)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.6 AQUATIC FAUNA & RIPARIAN HABITATS Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat monitoring during spring/summer 2011 was undertaken by Dr Martin Denny of Biodiversity Monitoring Services. It was undertaken concurrently with fauna monitoring from 7th December to 20 th December 2011.

Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat monitoring was undertaken in accordance with the BROMP and sites were selected to adequately sample the aquatic environment at Ulan Coal Mines and surrounds. As there is potential for water released from UCML to enter water courses outside the UCML boundary, some sites sample the two rivers that may be affected. The remainder of the sites sample water courses within the UCML boundary that may be affected by mine water releases or are set aside as control (analogue) sites.

The BROMP required 18 monitoring sites at several water courses within the Project Area and the activities of UCML. There are five creeks situated within the Project Area (Spring Gully, Mona, Cockabutta, Bobadeen and Ulan Creeks) and two rivers located nearby (Talbragar and Goulburn Rivers) that underwent ecological monitoring.

The 18 sites selected for ongoing aquatic monitoring were chosen to provide a broad geographic coverage of the Project Area and to ensure adequate representation of upstream and downstream environs (Table 2.7, Figure 2.8 ). Many of the sites have been subject to previous monitoring. They include the following tributaries and creeks:

• Mona Creek – an ephemeral waterway that contains some semi-permanent pools of water, where no fish species have been previously observed or recorded; • Cockabutta Creek – mostly outside the Project Area but one site (an apparently permanent billabong) is near to the edge of the Project Area; • Bobadeen Creek – lies within the north east corner of the Project Area and feeds into Spring Gully. The majority of Bobadeen Creek and its floodplains have been cleared and used for cattle grazing and the main channel of Bobadeen Creek has been incised through erosion. • Ulan Creek – runs south through the centre of the Project Area, before bending towards the east and joining with the Goulburn River at the far east boundary. Ulan Creek has ephemeral flow only, but is subject to mine water releases. • Goulburn River – the headwaters are situated to the south and south-east of the Project Area, where it flows east away from the site through Goulburn River National Park. The reaches are highly modified, having been diverted in 1982 in accordance with a previous approval. • Talbragar River – situated approximately 3 kilometres north of the Project Area, and is the discharge point for future mine water release via a pipeline.

The monitoring techniques and effort undertaken during the 2011 spring/summer period are identified below in Table 2.8.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 2.7: Aquatic fauna and riparian habitat monitoring sites

Site Easting Northing Water Course General Description No.

AQ1 758343 6424939 Goulburn River Top of River at Ulan township

AQ2 760893 6429172 Goulburn River Beside Ulan Coal Mine in a channelised section of River

AQ3 758364 6430126 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek near mine workings

AQ4 759021 6429779 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek near mine workings

AQ5 760167 6429775 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek behind Rowan’s Dam

AQ6 761130 6430399 Goulburn River Relatively undisturbed stretch of River

AQ7 761951 6431228 Goulburn River Relatively undisturbed stretch of River

AQ8 756693 6431676 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek at Old Ulan Hotel site

AQ9 757472 6433978 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek at junction with small tributary

AQ10 757800 6434740 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek at discharge point for treated mine water

AQ11 758297 6435962 Ulan Creek Ulan Creek at series of rock pools in paddock

AQ12 751607 6436594 Cockabutta Ck Series of pools in disturbed land on Wonga Roo Road

AQ13 761776 6436917 Bobadeen Ck Pools in Creek in grazed paddocks

AQ14 758041 6437971 Ulan Creek Headwaters of Ulan Creek at small dam

AQ15 754678 6439620 Mona Creek Large pool in Creek in cleared paddock

AQ16 752878 6443955 Talbragar River Site at River in cleared and grazed paddock

AQ17 753241 6444382 Talbragar River Site at River in cleared and grazed paddock

AQ18 762995 6432624 Goulburn River River near The Drip parking area

The parameters outlined below were monitored during surveys of Ulan Creek, Mona Creek, Bobadeen Creek, Cockabutta Creek, Talbragar River and Goulburn River. Detailed descriptions of these parameters are included within the Aquatic Fauna and Riparian Habitats report (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012) in Appendix G . The parameters were used to produce a set of indices that could monitor changes in the aquatic environment over time.

2.6.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates Aquatic fauna sampling was undertaken using the guidelines described in the Australian River Assessment System (AusRivAS) and the NSW AusRivAS Sampling and Processing Manual (EPA, July 2001). There was a flow along nearly all water courses at the time of sampling and all sites sampled

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

held water. Ulan Creek was flowing, mainly due to water from the local catchment. There was a small release of mine water along this water course.

In the AusRivAS methodology, sampling of 10 m of stream length is recommended. Also, a system of analysis of biological data (Stream Invertebrate Grade Number – Average Level or SIGNAL) eliminated variation in survey effort. The SIGNAL system used to calculate a biotic index has varied slightly over the years. Each invertebrate family has been provided with a pollution sensitivity rating between 10 (most sensitive) and 1 (least sensitive).

Individual animals were identified down to family level, where possible, and down to species level for some. Numbers of individuals of each species were counted and the results from the survey were used to determine a series of scores to be used for monitoring. Parameters used for monitoring are diversity indices (species richness, numbers of individuals, evenness, Simpson’s Index of Diversity), SIGNAL Index (see above) and a salinity index for each site.

The salinity index is derived from salinity sensitivity scores assigned to each taxon (usually families). These scores measure the tolerance of each taxon to increasing salinity and are expressed as three values, namely 1, very tolerant, 5, tolerant and 10, sensitive. Using a similar analysis to that undertaken in deriving the site SIGNAL Index, it is possible to provide a salinity sensitivity index for each site as well i.e. the higher the calculated index the more taxa sensitive to increased salinity occur at the site.

2.6.2 Birds & Other Vertebrates Standardised bird counts (30 minutes observation at each site) were undertaken and diversity indices calculated.

2.6.3 Riparian Vegetation Condition Riparian condition was assessed using:

1) Rapid Appraisal of Riparian Condition (RARC) technical guidelines; 2) RCE inventory.

The Rapid Appraisal of Riparian Condition index has been developed by Charles Sturt University for Land & Water Australia and is made up of five sub-indices, each with a number of indicator variables. These are:

• HABITAT – riparian habitat continuity and extent; • COVER – vegetation cover and structural complexity; • DEBRIS – standing dead trees and fallen logs and leaf litter; • NATIVES – dominance of native species versus exotic species; • FEATURES – extent of vegetation regeneration and damage.

Riparian condition refers to the degree to which man-altered ecosystems diverge from local semi- natural ecosystems in their ability to support a community of organisms and perform ecological functions.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

The RCE method was a modified riparian, channel and environmental (RCE) inventory adapted by Chesman et al. (1997). This method places a ranked value on 13 descriptors to provide a single summed value for each site sampled.

The RARC system is scored out of 50, whilst the RCE system is scored out of 52. Each site score was converted into a percentage of the maximum score possible so comparisons could be made.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 2.8: Aquatic fauna monitoring sites

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

2.7 WEATHER CONDITIONS Weather conditions in three months preceding the monitoring period were cool to mild, with below average rainfall in July and above average rainfall during August and September. Temperatures during this period were close to the averages for the Gulgong area, with mean minimum temperatures generally below average (apart from August) and mean maximum temperatures generally above average, as shown in Table 2.7.

Table 2.8: Weather conditions preceding the monitoring period 2011 Monthly Mean Historical Averages Month Rainfall Rainfall Min Temp ( oC) Max Temp ( oC) Min Temp ( oC) Max Temp ( oC) (mm) (mm)

July 2 15.2 8.7 2.6 14.7 49.2

August 4.4 18.6 58.9 3.4 16.4 46.8

September 5.1 21 114.6 6.1 19.6 46.8

Weather observations were taken from Gulgong (www.bom.gov.au)

Weather conditions during monitoring were considered adequate for the surveys. Temperatures were cool to mild (minimum temperatures relatively low during September and October), with rainfall recorded during the fauna monitoring, as shown in Table 2.8 (temperature records from the nearest weather station, Gulgong Post Office Weather Station).

Table 2.9: Weather conditions during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring period Monitoring 9am 3pm Min Temp Max Temp Rainfall Date Temp Temp Flora Microbats Fauna (oC) (oC) (mm) (oC) (oC) 26 th Sep 2011 6.3 19.1 19.4 14 17.6 27 th Sep 2011 5.8 22 0 14.5 21.6 28 th Sep 2011 9.4 17.1 0 15.5 15.1 29 th Sep 2011 11.9 16.5 51 14 9.4 30 th Sep 2011 4.8 16.3 8.4 11 15.7 1st Oct 2011 3.8 12.8 1 8.4 7.7 2nd Oct 2011 5 15.8 20.3 9.9 15.2 3rd Oct 2011 3.6 19.5 0 10.6 18.1 4th Oct 2011 4.3 20.5 0 11 19.5 5th Oct 2011 6.8 15.5 0 11.5 15.3 6th Oct 2011 9.6 13.8 10.2 10.5 13 7th Oct 2011 10.2 23.5 9.2 13.3 20.4 8th Oct 2011 10.8 22.9 3.6 14.5 22 9th Oct 2011 7.9 19.8 0 11.9 18.5

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Monitoring 9am 3pm Min Temp Max Temp Rainfall Date Temp Temp Flora Microbats Fauna (oC) (oC) (mm) (oC) (oC) 10 th Oct 2011 5.3 20.2 0 10.8 19 11th Oct 2011 5.1 19.2 0 10.6 17.1 12 th Oct 2011 3.2 21 0 9.6 20.6 13 th Oct 2011 9 22.4 0 15.1 22 14 th Oct 2011 11.8 23 0.3 15.1 22.5 19 th Oct 2011 7 24.8 0 12.6 23.6 27 th Oct 2011 10.5 21 0 14.9 20.7 28 th Oct 2011 10.4 27.5 0 16 26.9 7th Nov 2011 14.3 30.6 0 20.5 28.5 8th Nov 2011 16.5 33.5 0 24 31.9 9th Nov 2011 16.1 32.1 7.2 21.3 31.8 10 th Nov 2011 18.5 25 1 19 23.8 11 th Nov 2011 10.2 28.2 0 17.5 27.5 14 th Nov 2011 14.8 34.5 0 24 34 15 th Nov 2011 12.9 34.3 0 22 32.4 16 th Nov 2011 16.9 25 0 19.6 21 17 th Nov 2011 14.3 21 10.8 16.1 18.9 18 th Nov 2011 15.6 29.4 1.2 19 28.6 28 th Nov 2011 12.8 31.5 0 21.5 30.4 29 th Nov 2011 16.4 31.5 0 25.4 30.1 30 th Nov 2011 21.6 25 0 24 20 1st Dec 2011 10.5 23.2 6 17.5 22.2 2nd Dec 2011 7.8 21.2 0 15 20.2 6th Dec 2011 9.7 22.4 0 15.5 21.5 7th Dec 2011 9.4 19 0 14.7 17.7 8th Dec 2011 12.9 20.7 4.2 15.1 19 9th Dec 2011 14.5 24.1 0.2 17.8 24 10 th Dec 2011 14.9 25.8 0 17 24.3 11 th Dec 2011 13.7 25.2 0 20 18.5 12 th Dec 2011 15.2 23.8 20.7 16.8 22.1 13 th Dec 2011 12.9 25.7 0.6 17.9 24.9 14 th Dec 2011 12.5 24.9 0 17 22.8 15 th Dec 2011 11.8 24.3 0 16.2 23.2 16 th Dec 2011 11.9 25.4 0 17 25 17 th Dec 2011 11.1 24.9 0 17 24 18 th Dec 2011 13.2 25.2 0 15.8 24.3 19 th Dec 2011 15.1 23.2 0 21.1 21 20 th Dec 2011 12.2 28.8 14.8 17.8 27

Weather observations were taken from Gulgong Post Office Weather Station.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3 Results

3.1 FLORISTIC SURVEYS A description of each flora survey site is provided in Appendix A . This section provides a summary of the floristic survey undertaken for the purposes of Residual Vegetation Monitoring, Revegetation/Regeneration Vegetation Monitoring and Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring to allow ease of reference when comparing to any future monitoring events. Floristic data collected during monitoring are summarised below in Table 3.1 , with a full species list provided in Appendix B .

Floristic surveys identified a total of 395 species, with 314 native species, 65 introduced species and 16 species that could only be identified to genus level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced.

Species diversity varied within each floristic site, as identified in Table 3.1 , with total species identified ranging from 15 species (RPA14 – Unimproved Pasture) to 59 species (OC5 - Unimproved Pasture). Native and introduced species presence also varied within each floristic site, with native species identified ranging from 5 species (RPA14 – Unimproved Pasture) to 54 species (RPA9 – Scribbly Gum Woodland – Heathland on Sandstone Plateaux) and introduced species identified ranging from 0 species at multiple sites to 23 species (OC4 – Rehabilitation Pre 1997).

No threatened flora species listed under the EPBC Act were recorded during the spring/summer 2011 survey.

Floristic surveys were undertaken within 13 mapped vegetation communities across the Project Area. Two mapped communities surveyed were an EEC/CEEC listed under the TSC Act and EPBC Act, including White Box – Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands and Grey Box ( Eucalyptus microcarpa ) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands. The floristic survey has established 19 sites within these EEC/CEEC’s across the Project Area, with:

• 18 located within White Box – Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands: o 7 being established within Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area, including 3 Residual Vegetation Monitoring Sites (BOB1, BOB4 and BOB6) and 4 Revegetation/regeneration Monitoring Sites (BOB9, BOB10, BOB11 and BOB14); o 5 being established within Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area, including 2 Residual Vegetation Monitoring Sites (BOBE1 and BOBE2) and 3 Revegetation/regeneration Monitoring Sites (BOBE6, BOBE7 and BOBE8); o 4 being established within Residual Project Area, with all sites being Residual Vegetation Monitoring Sites (RPA10, RPA11, RPA12 and RPA13); o 2 being established within Surface Infrastructure Area, with all sites being Residual Vegetation Monitoring Sites (SI2 and SI3). • 1 located within Grey Box ( Eucalyptus microcarpa ) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands: o 1 established within the Residual project Area (RPA7).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 3.1: Floristic survey summary Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Residual Vegetation Monitoring Canopy 20 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Bobadeen Offset BOB6 33 32 1 Shrub 20 0 Ground 10 <5 Canopy 20 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Bobadeen East Offset BOBE2 25 15 10 Shrub 5 5 Ground 65 15 Canopy 50 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Residual Project Area RPA13 53 40 13 Shrub <5 0 Ground 70 5 Canopy 25 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Surface Infrastructure SI2 39 36 3 Shrub 25 0 Ground >5 <5 Shrub <5 0 Derived Native Grassland Residual Project Area RPA10 42 29 13 Ground 80 10 Canopy <5 0 Derived Native Grassland Residual Project Area RPA11 43 23 20 Shrub <5 0 Ground 80 10 Canopy 20 0 Grey Box Woodland Residual Project Area RPA7 36 36 0 Shrub 25 0 Ground 20 0 Shrub <5 0 Improved Pasture Residual Project Area RPA8 19 3 16 Ground 5 90 Canopy 40 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB3 40 40 0 Shrub 5 0 Ground 10 0 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB7 20 20 0 Shrub 30 0 Ground 5 0 Canopy 30 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB8 25 23 2 (regenerating) Shrub 15 0 Ground 35 <5 Canopy 25 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen East Offset BOBE4 37 35 2 Shrub 5 0

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Ground <5 <5 Canopy 30 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Residual Project Area RPA1 20 20 0 Shrub 25 0 Ground 10 0 Canopy 30 0 Shrub 1 5 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Residual Project Area RPA2 22 22 0 Shrub 2 40 0 Ground <5 0 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Residual Project Area RPA4 22 22 0 Shrub 15 0 Ground 5 0 Canopy 15 0 Shrub 1 5 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Residual Project Area RPA5 28 28 0 Shrub 2 25 0 Ground 15 0 Canopy 35 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Surface Infrastructure SI1 37 36 1 Shrub <5 0 Ground 5 <5 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone + Shrub 1 25 0 Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Surface Infrastructure SI4 49 49 0 Shrub 2 20 0 Plateaux Ground 10 0 Canopy 20 0 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Bobadeen Offset BOB2 33 32 1 Shrub 10 0 Alluvium/Colluvium Ground 40 <5 Canopy 25 25 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Bobadeen Offset BOB5 42 42 0 Shrub 30 30 Alluvium/Colluvium Ground 50 <5 Canopy 30 0 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Bobadeen East Offset BOBE3 26 24 2 Shrub 45 0 Alluvium/Colluvium Ground <5 <5 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Canopy 20 0 Residual Project Area RPA3 56 46 10 Alluvium/Colluvium Shrub 10 0

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Ground 75 10 Canopy 20 0 Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Residual Project Area RPA6 52 52 0 Shrub 50 0 Plateaux Ground 10 0 Canopy 15 0 Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Residual Project Area RPA9 55 54 1 Shrub 10 0 Plateaux Ground 10 <5 Canopy 5 0 Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Shrub 1 15 0 Spring Gully SG1 49 49 0 Plateaux Shrub 2 25 0 Ground 20 0 Canopy 20 0 Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Brokenback Offset BB1 31 31 0 Shrub 70 0 Slopes Ground 5 0 Canopy 40 0 Tumbledown Red Gum - Callitris Open Forest on Residual Project Area RPA15 38 34 4 Shrub 5 0 Granite Ground 5 <5 Unimproved Pasture Residual Project Area RPA14 15 5 10 Ground <5 90 Canopy 10 0 White Box Woodland Bobadeen Offset BOB1 53 47 6 Shrub <5 0 Ground 85 5 Canopy 20 0 White Box Woodland Bobadeen Offset BOB4 44 42 0 Shrub 15 0 Ground 50 <5 White Box Woodland Bobadeen East Offset BOBE1 33 19 14 Ground 50 25 Canopy <5 0 White Box Woodland (Modified) Residual Project Area RPA12 52 39 13 Shrub 5 0 Ground 65 5 White Box Woodland (Modified) Surface Infrastructure SI3 42 24 18 Ground 5 90 Revegetation/Regenerating Vegetation Monitoring Canopy 15 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (regenerating) Bobadeen Offset BOB11 35 31 4 Shrub 50 <5 Ground 65 5

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Derived Native Grassland Bobadeen Offset BOB10 25 6 19 Ground <5 90 Canopy 20 0 Derived Native Grassland Bobadeen Offset BOB14 39 23 16 Shrub <5 0 Ground 85 10 Derived Native Grassland Bobadeen East Offset BOBE6 43 22 21 Ground <5 90 Canopy 15 0 Grey Box Woodland Open Cut OC2 48 47 1 Shrub 10 0 Ground 10 <5 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Shrub 1 <5 0 Bobadeen Offset BOB16 40 38 2 (regenerating) Shrub 2 5 0 Ground >5 <5 Canopy 15 0 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Shrub 1 <5 0 Open Cut OC1 58 51 7 Alluvium/Colluvium Shrub 2 5 0 Ground 25 <5 Canopy 10 0 Shrub 1 25 0 Rehabilitation Post 1997 Open Cut OC3 35 19 16 Shrub 2 20 <5 Ground <5 <5 Shrub <5 0 Rehabilitation Pre 1997 Open Cut OC4 37 14 23 Ground 5 65 Canopy 15 0 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Shrub 1 <5 0 Bobadeen East Offset BOBE5 34 27 7 Alluvium/Colluvium (regenerating) Shrub 2 15 <5 Ground 75 <5 Canopy 5 0 Unimproved Pasture Bobadeen Offset BOB13 44 36 8 Shrub 60 0 Ground 65 10 Shrub 30 <5 Unimproved Pasture Bobadeen Offset BOB15 43 28 15 Ground 80 10 Canopy 30 0 Unimproved Pasture Open Cut OC5 59 52 7 Shrub >5 <5 Ground 40 <5

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen Offset BOB12 19 6 13 Ground 70 25 Canopy 15 0 White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen Offset BOB9 46 31 15 Shrub 0 <5 Ground 60 35 White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen East Offset BOBE7 28 17 11 Ground 35 60 White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen East Offset BOBE8 34 16 18 Ground 10 70 Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring Canopy 30 0 Florisitc Based Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone FBS1 35 35 0 Shrub 5 0 Subsidence Plot Ground <5 0 Canopy 25 0 Florisitc Based Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone FBS2 40 39 1 Shrub 20 0 Subsidence Plot Ground >5 <5

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.2 LANDSCAPE FUNCTION ANALYSIS The results for LFA are presented according to individual sites in Appendix C. The following section provides a summary of the LFA and vegetation dynamics for analogue sites and revegetation/regeneration sites in each vegetation community to allow ease of reference when comparing to any future monitoring events. LFA and vegetation dynamics data collected during monitoring are summarised below in Tables 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 .

The Landscape Organisation percentage at the LFA monitoring sites was split between the analogue sites and the rehabilitation sites. Litter dominated the majority of the analogue sites, with an average of 80%, followed by grass/sedges and bare soil (Table 3.2 ). The rehabilitation sites varied, with Site 10 (Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (western portion)) being dominated by litter and remaining sites being dominated by a mixture of grass/sedges and bare soil.

Table 3.2: Landscape Organisation summary

Vegetation Community Site Landscape Organisation (%) No.# Soil Litter Grass Herb Log Cryptogram Rock Other

Analogue Sites

She-oak Low Forest on Sandstone 1 0.75 96.25 0.8 0.05 0 0 0 2.15 Crests

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland 2 2.65 76.4 7.15 7.95 0 0 0 5.85

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest 3 7.68 90.78 0.12 0.68 0.6 0 0 0.14

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open 4 2.07 91.34 5.97 0.1 0 0 0.52 0 Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest 5 0 57 41.2 1.8 0 0 0 0

White Box Woodland 6 4.8 72.1 0 0.6 0 20.1 0 0

Grey Box Woodland 7 5.5 80 11.2 0.6 0 0.8 1.6 0.4

Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest 8 11.4 76.9 0 6.1 1.3 0 3.9 0.4 on Sandstone Slopes

Rehabilitation Sites

2009 Rehabilitation Areas 9 30.79 13.45 49.88 5.29 0 0 1.38 0

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 10 1.65 92.68 3.28 2.02 0 0.31 0 0 (western portion)

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 11 20.24 3.16 72.76 1.48 0 1.96 0.4 0 (eastern portion)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

The Soil Surface Assessment results from the LFA monitoring sites indicate that generally, apart from Site 10 (Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (western portion)) and some features of Site 9 (2009 Rehabilitation Area), the stability, infiltration and nutrient percentages were higher at the analogue sites than the rehabilitation sites (Table 3.3).

This result can be directly related to the the Landscape Organisation results, with the analogue sites recording higher cover (e.g. litter, grass, herbs) than the rehabilitation sites, creating greater protection from rainsplash and potential for decomposition of litter.

Table 3.3: Soil Surface Assessment summary (bare soil, litter & grass)

Vegetation Community Site Soil Surface Assessment (Infiltration Index %) No.# Stability Infiltration Nutrients

Soil Litter Grass/ Soil Litter Grass/ Soil Litter Grass/ Sedge Sedge Sedge

Analogue Sites

She-oak Low Forest on 1 47.5 58.3 59.7 25.1 42.3 44.9 16.3 33.8 35.8 Sandstone Crests

Narrow-leaved Ironbark 2 39.7 60 56.7 24.4 44.9 36.5 9.8 34.8 23.2 Woodland

Rough-barked Apple Open 3 48.1 66.9 56.3 29.32 50.5 56.3 10.7 38.9 17.9 Forest

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open 4 43.8 56.3 53.8 22 33.8 27.6 11.8 30.7 20 Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Blakely’s Red Gum Open 5 - 56.3 57.5 - 33.8 28.7 - 30.7 23 Forest

White Box Woodland 6 49.9 56.2 - 25.6 33.8 - 19.2 30.7 -

Grey Box Woodland 7 54.7 58.8 55.6 33.6 44.2 37.9 16.3 29.7 16.3

Stringybark-Ironbark Open 8 42.1 53.6 - 38.1 53.2 - 15.9 36.3 - Forest on Sandstone Slopes

Rehabilitation Sites

2009 Rehabilitation Areas 9 49.4 58.1 63.1 15.8 28 26.3 10.2 28.1 25.6

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 10 41.7 61.3 54.4 27.4 38.1 36.1 13.9 32.8 23.1 (western portion)

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas 11 9.9 2.1 43.7 4.3 1.1 19.1 2.2 1 13 (eastern portion)

The Vegetation Dynamics results from LFA monitoring sites indicate that generally, apart from Site 10 (Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (western portion)), the structural diversity of the rehabilitation sites is dominated by groundcover (grasses and other) as shown in Table 3.4 . The analogue site results

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

indicate a structural diveristy that should be aimed for in rehabilitation works, depending on vegetation types.

Table 3.4: Vegetation Dynamics summary

Vegetation Community Site No. of Plants (per ha) No.# Grasses Ground Shrubs Trees Total (Other)

Analogue Sites

She-oak Low Forest on Sandstone Crests 1 3,022 12,116 19,237 4,343 38,717

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland 2 97,656 308,642 14,360 301 420,959

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest 3 24,800 108,922 2,877 499 137,098

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on 4 246,292 492,459 2,408 693 741,851 Alluvium/Colluvium

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest 5 2,070,286 826,446 1,367 185 2,898285

White Box Woodland 6 648 37,340 27,824 1,570 67,383

Grey Box Woodland 7 183,411 91,535 5,168 977 281,091

Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on 8 4,275 173,611 8,526 401 186,812 Sandstone Slopes

Rehabilitation Sites

2009 Rehabilitation Areas 9 3,077,870 1,777,778 958 0 4,856,606

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (western 10 174,337 81,633 755 496 257,220 portion)

Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (eastern 11 2,972,652 2,040,816 115 0 5,013,583 portion)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.3 ACACIA AUSFELDII SURVEYS Floristic surveys within the Acacia ausfeldii site identified a total of 75 species, with 62 native species, 11 introduced species and 2 species that could only be identified to species level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced.

The two floristic quadrats established within the Acacia ausfeldii site gave similar results, with both having structural diversity that contained a native groundcover, midstorey and canopy, a relatively low abundance of weeds, the presence of Acacia ausfeldii and good habitat elements including woody debris and leaf litter. However, there were a number of exotic species recorded, although in low abundance, including a noxious weed, Opuntia sp. (Prickly Pear), evidence of feral animals (Oryctolagus cuniculus (Rabbit)) and evidence of previous disturbance from logging activities.

The individual Acacia ausfeldii data collected during the spring/summer 2011 survey establishes a set of baseline data to be used to monitor the health, growth and reproductive rating of the 100 individual specimens tagged as identified in Figure 3.1 . The survey collected data for 9 seedlings, 34 saplings and 57 mature Acacia ausfeldii . Data collected during monitoring are provided in Appendix D .

The height of each mature specimen ranged from 0.7 m to 4 m, whilst the diameter of the main stem ranged from 0.03 m to 0.22 m. The height of each sapling ranged from 0.5 m to 1.5 m, whilst the diameter of the main stem ranged from 0.05 m to 0.07 m. The height of each seedling specimen ranged from 0.06 m to 0.7 m, whilst the diameter of the main stem ranged from 0.006 m to 0.07 m.

Table 3.5 summarises the condition ratings and the reproductive ratings (flower and fruit) given to each mature, sapling and seedling tagged during the survey. The majority of specimens tagged reflected either some minor damage or were healthy, were either flowering or not flowering and contained limited fruits.

Table 3.5: Acacia ausfeldii condition and reproductive ratings summary

Reproductive Ratings Reproductive Ratings Condition Ratings # (Flower)* (Fruit)* Maturity

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

Seedling 3 6 8 1 9

Sapling 2 15 17 18 8 6 2 34

Mature 1 14 24 18 2 3 9 32 11 42 1 1 11 2

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

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure 3.1: Individual Acacia ausfeldii locations

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.4 FAUNA (EXCLUDING MICROBATS)

The following results for the fauna monitoring, excluding microbats, have been presented according to faunal groups. A total of 22 native and introduced mammal, 129 native and introduced bird, 17 reptile, and 13 amphibian species were recorded during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring surveys. A full inventory of fauna species recorded during the 2011 survey period is provided in Appendix E.

3.4.1 Mammals (excluding Microbats) Mammal surveys during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring identified 11 native mammal and 11 introduced mammal species. Table 3.6 summarises the native mammal captures and observations recorded during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring surveys.

Table 3.6: Native mammal species captures & observations summary

Species No. of General & Site specific Notes Records Scientific Name Common Name

Rattus fuscipes Southern Bush Rat Found in pitfall trap at FaBOB 4 3 Several captures at FaSI 1

Antechinus flavipes Yellow-footed Antechinus 1 Captured at FaRPA 1

Trichosurus Common Brushtail Observed during spotlighting vulpecula Possum 43 Captured in traps

Pseudocheirus Common Ringtail Observed during spotlighting peregrinus Possum 13 Scat evidence

Petaurus breviceps Sugar Glider - Chew marks at FaBOBE 1

Macropus giganteus Eastern Grey Kangaroo 813 Recorded within the Project Area

Macropus robustus Common Wallaroo 31

Macropus rufogriseus Red-necked Wallaby 472

Wallabia bicolor Swamp Wallaby 35

Vombatus ursinus Bare-nosed Wombat - Frequently recorded within the Project Area

Tachyglossus Scat and scratches from FaBOB 2, FaBOB 4, FaSI - aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna 1 and FaSI 2

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Introduced mammal species were recorded across the Project Area, with 21 records of Vulpes vulpes (Red Fox) and 78 records of Sus scrofa (Feral Pig). In addition, there were several sightings of Oryctolagus cuniculus (Rabbit) and Lepus capensis (Brown Hare), evidence of Felis catus (Cat) (tracks and sightings) and Canis lupus (Wild Dog). Small groups of Dama dama (Fallow Deer) were observed near Rowan’s Dam.

3.4.2 Birds Bird survey during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring identified 127 native bird and 2 introduced bird species. A complete list of bird species recorded is located in Appendix E. The native birds came from a wide range of groups, including:

• 13 species of honeyeaters including Entomyzon cyanotis (Blue-faced Honeyeater), Grantiella picta (Painted Honeyeater), Lichenostomus virescens (Singing Honeyeater), Melithreptus brevirostris (Brown-headed Honeyeater) and Plectorhyncha lanceolata (Striped Honeyeater); • 10 parrots including Alisterus scapularis (Australian King-Parrot), Glossopsitta concinna (Musk Lorikeet) and Psephotus haematonotus (Red-rumped Parrot); • 9 raptors including Accipiter cirrocephalus (Collared Sparrowhawk), Aquila audax (Wedge-tailed Eagle), Elanus axillaris (Black-shouldered Kite), Haliastur sphenurus (Whistling Kite), Falco berigora (Brown Falcon) and Falco peregrinus (Peregrine Falcon); • 24 birds associated with water including Egretta novaehollandiae (White-faced Heron), Platalea flavipes (Yellow-billed Spoonbill), Tachybaptus novaehollandiae (Australasian Grebe) and Threskiornis spinicollis (Straw-necked Ibis).

During the 2011 spring/summer monitoring, a total of 101 sightings of eight threatened species listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) were recorded. In addition, 4 migratory species listed under the EPBC Act were recorded. The threatened and migratory species recorded are listed below Table 3.7. Threatened species numbers and locations within the Project Area are provided in Appendix D. The targeted species Lathamus discolor (Swift Parrot) and Xanthomyza phrygia (Regent Honeyeater) were not recorded during the survey.

Table 3.7: Threatened bird species recorded during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring

TSC Act EPBC Act Scientific Name Common Name Status Status

Ardea alba Great Egret - M

Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-eagle - M

Hieraaetus morphnoides Little Eagle V -

Calyptorhynchus lathami Glossy Black-Cockatoo V -

Glossopsitta pusilla Little Lorikeet V -

Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater - M

Climacteris picumnus Brown Treecreeper V -

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

TSC Act EPBC Act Scientific Name Common Name Status Status

Pyrrholaemus sagittatus Speckled Warbler V -

Grantiella picta Painted Honeyeater V -

Grey-crowned Babbler (south-eastern sub- - Pomatostomus temporalis temporalis species) V

Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella V -

Rhipidura rufifrons Rufous Fantail - M

3.4.3 Reptiles Reptile survey during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring identified 17 species. The survey periods were not ideal for reptile survey, with overnight and daytime temperatures during the early part of the survey period not sufficiently high to encourage movement of these cold-blooded species, and there was not sufficient movement to catch animals in traps. As such, most records obtained were from active searches under rocks and bark.

Reptile species captured or observed in the study area included Egernia whitii (White's Rock-skink), Lerista bougainvillii (South-eastern Slider), Oedura lesueurii (Lesueur's Velvet Gecko), Physignathus lesueurii (Eastern Water Dragon), Pogona barbata (Eastern Bearded Dragon), Pseudechis porphyriacus (Red-bellied Black Snake), Pseudonaja textilis (Eastern Brown Snake), Ramphotyphlops weidii (Blind Snake), Underwoodisaurus milii (Thick-tailed Gecko), Varanus gouldii (Gould's Goanna) and Varanus varius (Lace Monitor). A complete list of reptile species recorded is located in Appendix E.

3.4.4 Amphibians Amphibian survey during the 2011 spring/summer monitoring identified 13 species. Amphibian species observed included Limnodynastes dumerilii (Eastern Banjo Frog), Limnodynastes ornatus (Ornate Burrowing Frog), Litoria latopalmata (Broad-palmed Frog), Litoria lesueuri (Lesueur's Frog), Litoria peronii (Peron's Tree Frog), Litoria tyleri (Tyler's Tree Frog), Neobatrachus sudelli (Painted Burrowing Frog), Pseudophryne bibronii (Bibron's Toadlet) and Uperoleia laevigata (Smooth Toadlet). A complete list of amphibian species recorded is located in Appendix E.

3.4.5 Fauna Habitat Fauna habitat characteristic measurements undertaken during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring have been used to develop an overall picture of the landscape and its use by fauna within the Project Area. Table 3.8 provides a summary of the habitat characteristics for all sites surveyed.

Furthermore, calculations of the Habitat Complexity Scores for the survey sites sampled were undertaken (Appendix E). The Habitat Complexity Scores were between 15 and 18 for all sites, these indicate that the habitat of the surveyed sites is of moderate to high quality in terms of value to woodland birds and ground fauna. Despite the similarity in habitat characteristics, some sites differed

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

from others, for example, Bobadeen Vegetation Offset East Site 1 had no tall shrub layer, eight of the sites had no low sapling layer, only six sites had cycad cover and two had tall fern (bracken) cover.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 3.8: Habitat characteristics identified during the fauna survey (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012)

Open Cut Surface Bobadeen East Spring Bobadeen (BOB) Residual Project Area (RPA) Habitat Coverage Area Infrastructure (SI) (BOBE) Gully (SG) (%) 1985 2003 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3 4 5

Tree 52 20 32 48 40 48 48 60 40 48 44 56 64 44 36 48 52 60

Tall Shrub 48 64 72 32 16 20 0 24 24 60 52 20 56 48 40 48 28 28

Tall Sapling 28 64 4 20 16 48 48 12 32 12 40 12 12 20 20 16 68 8

Low Shrub 44 56 80 64 44 52 72 76 40 96 60 88 68 68 72 68 36 64

Low Sapling 8 4 0 0 28 4 24 4 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 12 8 0

Cutting Grass 24 40 44 24 20 40 0 0 8 0 32 4 4 12 12 4 8 52

Cycad 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 8 8 4 8 0

Tall Fern 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0

Grass 96 68 24 44 80 76 96 100 52 96 68 88 52 76 32 92 92 52

Forb 68 48 52 96 84 84 100 100 40 100 80 64 72 64 80 100 68 68

Fern 4 0 0 4 8 20 0 4 16 0 0 0 16 12 0 0 4 0

Vine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Litter 100 92 84 92 92 100 96 100 76 100 100 100 96 88 100 100 96 84

Log 28 20 8 24 20 36 56 52 28 36 48 40 36 28 60 60 36 20

Rock 0 28 56 40 48 28 24 4 64 8 32 4 68 60 16 0 0 56

Habitat Complexity Scores 15 15 16 16 15 16 16 15 16 16 17 16 18 17 17 16 16 17

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.5 FAUNA (MICROBATS)

3.5.1 General Fauna Sites Microbat monitoring at the general fauna sites recorded at total of 14 bat species during the spring/summer 2011 surveys. The number of species recorded at each site varied from two to nine, as shown in Appendix F. Seven bat species were recorded from at least half of the sites; Tadarida australis (White–striped Mastiff Bat), Mormopterus sp.4 (Southern Freetail Bat), Rhinolophus megaphyllus (Eastern Horseshoe Bat), Chalinolobus gouldii (Gould’s Wattled Bat), Chalinolobus morio (Chocolate Wattled Bat), Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis (Eastern Bent-wing bat) and Vespadelus vulturnus (Little Forest Bat).

Four microbat species listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act and two listed under the EPBC Act were recorded; with a fifth species tentatively identified from echolocation call recorded from the general fauna sites during the survey period. The threatened species recorded include:

• Saccolaimus flaviventris (Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat) – this is a TSC Act listed species recorded through echolocation call detection at one site (FaSI3). • Chalinolobus dwyeri (Large-eared Pied Bat) – this is a TSC Act and EPBC Act listed species captured at one site (BOB1) and recorded through echolocation call detection at two sites (FaBOB1 & FaOC3). • Eastern Bent-wing Bat - this is a TSC Act listed species recorded from echolocation call at ten sites (FaOB2, FaBOB3, FaBOB4, FaBOBE2, FaSI3, FaRPA1, FaRPA2, FaRPA4, FaOC1 & FaOC3). • Nyctophilus corbeni (South-eastern Long-eared Bat, syn N. timoriensis ) - this is a TSC Act and EPBC Act listed species captured at two sites (FaBOBE1 & FaRPA1). A female banded at FaBOBE1 in October was recaptured with three other breeding females at FaRPA1. • Chalinolobus picatus (Little Pied Bat) – this is a TSC Act listed species was tentatively recorded from echolocation calls at site FaSI4.

3.5.2 Targeted Microbat Cliff Line Monitoring Microbat monitoring along cliff line sites recorded a total of twelve bat species during the spring/summer 2011 surveys. The number of species recorded at each site varied from one to ten, as shown in Appendix F. Six of these bat species were recorded from at least half of the sites, the Large-eared Pied Bat, Gould’s Wattled Bat, Chocolate Wattled Bat, Eastern Bent-wing Bat, Long-eared Bat species (Nyctophilus sp .) and Little Forest Bat.

Three microbat species listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act and two listed under the EPBC Act were recorded. The threatened species recorded include:

• Scoteanax rueppellii (Greater Broad-nosed Bat) – this is a TSC Act listed species recorded through echolocation call detection at one site (MB2D2). • Large-eared Pied Bat – was captured at one site (BD7H1) and recorded through echolocation call detection at ten sites (MB2D1, BD6D1, BD7D1, BD8D1, BD8D2, BD9D2, SGD2, SGD3, SGD5 & SGD7). • Eastern Bent-wing Bat – was recorded from echolocation call at eight sites (MB2D2, BD8D1, BD8D2, BD9D1, BD9D2, SGD3, SGD5 & SGD7).

Additionally, during autumn and summer 2011, targeted cliffline monitoring of micro-bat populations and cliffline habitats was requested prior to longwall mining commencing in the North 1 Panels. The

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

microbat monitoring was undertaken in April and December 2011, targeting seven clifflines identified within the area above the North 1 longwall panels. These clifflines were in four locations, including Sandstone Road (SR1 & SR2); Middle Road (MR1& MR2); Milton Road North (MIRN1) and Milton Road South (MIRS1 & MIRS2).

Every cliffline was traversed on foot to assess potential roosting/breeding habitat for microbats. Where accessible, caves, fissures and overhangs were examined for the presence of microbats as well as signs of previous use including scats or staining. Bat species at each site were surveyed through captures in harp traps and/or through recording and subsequent analysis of echolocation calls.

The April survey (autumn) identified and recorded twelve bat species in total during the cliffline surveys. The number of species recorded at each site varied from two to nine. Six of these bat species were recorded from at least half of the sites; the White-striped Mastiff Bat, Eastern Horseshoe Bat, Gould’s Wattled Bat, Chocolate Wattled Bat, Eastern Bent-wing Bat and Little Forest Bat.

Three microbat species listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act and one listed under the EPBC Act were recorded. The threatened species recorded include:

• Large-eared Pied Bat – was recorded through echolocation call detection at two sites (MR2 and MIRS1). • Eastern Bent-wing Bat – was captured at one site (MIRS2) and recorded through echolocation call detection at five sites (SR1, SR2, MR1, MIRN1 and D8). • Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat – was recorded through echolocation call detection at one site (MIRN1).

The December survey (summer) identified and recorded seven bat species in total during the cliffline surveys. The number of species recorded at each site varied from two to seven. Three of these bat species were recorded from at least half of the sites; Gould’s Wattled Bat, Chocolate Wattled Bat and Little Forest Bat. Both the number of individuals captured and the number of species recorded were lower at all sites than was the case during the survey undertaken in April 2011. This can be attributed to the unseasonably cool conditions at the time of survey in December.

One bat species listed as Vulnerable on Schedule 2 of the TSC Act was recorded during the cliffline surveys. The Eastern Bent-wing Bat was recorded from echolocation call at one site (SR2).

3.6 AQUATIC FAUNA & RIPARIAN HABITATS

The following results for the aquatic fauna and riparian habitats monitoring has been presented according to survey parameters. Detailed results of these parameters are included in Appendix G .

3.6.1 Aquatic Macroinvertebrates A total of 2369 individuals from 61 macroinvertebrate taxa were recorded across the 18 sites sampled during spring/summer 2011. The number of taxa located was higher than that recorded in previous years at UCML, with 47 recorded in 2010, 60 recorded in 2009 and 47 recorded in 2007. Table 3.9 below identifies the macroinvertebrates recorded during the 2011 survey at each site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table 3.9: Aquatic Macroinvertebrates located at each site (Biodiversity Monitoring Services 2012)

AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ Family Group Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Glossiphoniidae Leech 2

Daphniidae Water Fleas 13 3 1 15

Atyidae Freshwater Shrimp 41 3 14 29 21 6 48 54 50 2 10 35

Palaemonidae Freshwater Prawn 1 1 1 1 1

Clam shrimp 1 50 1 27 4 2 1

- Copepods 1 16 9

Notodromadidae Seed Shrimp 4 5 1 12

Hypogastruridae Springtail 1 3 8 12 33 61 50 1 4

Elmidae Riffle Beetle 4 3 1 1 3 4 6 9 1 7 3 27 4

Dystiscidae Diving Beetle larvae 1 1 1 5 1

Dystiscidae Diving Beetle adult 1 33 6 1 1 3

Gyrinidae Whirlygig Beetle 4 1 1

Scirtidae Marsh Beetle larvae 1 1 1

Hydrophilidae Water Scavenger Beetle larvae 1

Hydrophilidae Water Scavenger Beetle adult 2

Haliplidae Crawling Water Beetle larvae 1

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ Family Group Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Haliplidae Crawling Water Beetle adult 1 1

Chironomidae Non-biting Midge 7 14 1 25 15 4 2 1 1 8 3 4 11 2 1 3 2

Simuliidae Black Fly larvae 18 48 1 1 6 5

Sciomyzidae Marsh Fly 2 2

Ceratopogonidae Biting Midge 1 4

Empididae Dance Fly 1

Culicidae Mosquito 6 4 1 10 50 4

Caenidae Mayfly 2 6 2

Leptophlebiidae Mayfly sp.1 50 17 31 35 1 10 26 16 3 16 20

Leptophlebiidae Mayfly sp.2 3

Baetidae Mayfly 3 1 2 21 18 9

Notonectidae Backswimmer 1 8 3 17 11 43 8 15 12 24 2 10

Corixidae Waterboatmen 1 1 1 1 6 3 9 11

Veliidae Small Water Strider 31 9 5 5 87 40 12 50 23 7 39 12 16 49 60 50

Nepidae Needle Bug 1 1

Naucoridae Creeping Water Bug 1 1 1 45

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ Family Group Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Gerridae Water Strider 1 5

Hydrometridae Water Measurer 1

Pleidae Pygmy Backswimmers 12 10

Pyralidae Aquatic Caterpillar 1 1

Corydalidae Dobsonfly 4 1

Osmylidae Lacewing 1

Corduliidae Dragonfly 3 2 2 7 2

Gomphidae Dragonfly 2 3 1

Lindeniidae Dragonfly 1

Austropetaliidae Dragonfly 1

Telephlebiidae Dragonfly 4

Megapodagrionidae Damselfly 15

Lestidae Damselfly 4 8 1 7

Gripopterygidae Stonefly 1 1

Notenemouridae Stonefly 1

Calocidae Caddisfly 3 1 1 1

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ AQ Family Group Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Leptoceridae Stick Caddis 1 3 2 5 3

Hydroptilidae Microcaddis 1 1

Calamoceratidae Sleeping Bag Caddis 2 2 1 1

Hydropsychidae Free-living Caddisfly 1 2

Lycosidae Wolf Spider 3 1 1 2 1 2 2 3

Tetragnathidae Long-jawed Spider 2 2 2 1 1 2 2

- Water Mite 1 7 1 1 6 1 1

Physidae Freshwater Snail 8 21 6 5 1 1 1 29 4

Planorbidae Freshwater Snail 3 2

Lymnaeidae Freshwater Snail 2 1

Ancylidae Freshwater Limpet 8 1

Limacidae Slug 3

Corbiculidae Little Basket Shell 1

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

3.6.2 Riparian Habitat Two systems of riparian habitat evaluation were used (modified RCE system and Rapid Appraisal of Riparian Condition (RARC)) and both provide indices that can be used for monitoring of the riparian condition within the Project Area. Table 3.10 below provides the results from the riparian habitat evaluation.

Overall RARC scores have been slightly higher in the past at UCML, but the differences are likely within normal variability associated with survey from different people.

The modified RCE scoring system has also been used at UCML since 2006. The RCE output is a set of scores representing the value of a creek section as aquatic habitat; ranging from 0 for totally degraded habitat to 52 for pristine and suitable aquatic habitat. The overall mean score for 2011 indicates a moderate habitat value for the study area.

Table 3.10: Riparian Habitat Value Scores in 2011 % % Sites RCE RCE % RARC RARC Sites RCE RCE % RARC RARC

AQ1 28 53.8 13.7 27.4 AQ10 42 80.7 28.5 57

AQ2 23 44.2 16.5 33 AQ11 45 86.5 34.5 69

AQ3 44 84.6 34.1 68.2 AQ12 43 82.7 39.6 79.2

AQ4 39 74.9 38.5 77 AQ13 31 59.6 8.3 16.6

AQ5 29 55.8 24.6 49.2 AQ14 25 48.1 14.3 28.6

AQ6 41 78.8 31.9 63.8 AQ15 25 48.1 14.2 28.4

AQ7 46 88.5 38.1 76.2 AQ16 30 57.7 11.9 23.8

AQ8 38 73.1 29.8 59.6 AQ17 31 59.6 10.2 20.4

AQ9 41 78.8 34.8 69.6 AQ18 43 82.7 37.9 75.8

3.6.3 Bird Diversity Bird diversities were calculated from the results of the 30 minute observation period at each aquatic survey site. Four biodiversity indices were calculated, including Evenness, Simpson’s Index of Diversity, Numbers Counted and Species Richness. The values of the four indices for each site are given in Appendix G.

The biodiversity indices for birds at each aquatic survey site show a wide range of values that is to be expected when surveying 18 sites within a large area. The values of some sites would definitely be related to the extent of riparian vegetation available to birds e.g. AQ5, in cleared land near Rowan’s Dam and AQ1 at Ulan township have low species richness. However, the relationship does not apply to all sites, as sites at the cleared land at Talbragar River have relatively high species richness. There are no correlations between the bird biodiversity indices and the habitat value indices.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

4 Discussion & Recommendations

The monitoring undertaken during 2011 and previous years (fauna and aquatic fauna) provide the basis to meet the objectives of the management within the domains and the overall aims of the monitoring program outlined within the BROMP. The discussion and recommendations below summarises the results obtained during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring, discuss any changes over time from previous monitoring (fauna and aquatic fauna) and provide recommendations for the ongoing monitoring programs and management actions that are required to be improved and enhanced.

4.1 Floristic Monitoring Floristic monitoring undertaken during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring period collected data that will form the basis for future monitoring and act as a reference point against which environmental and ecological change can be measured. The methods undertaken during the monitoring were based upon those stated within the BROMP.

The 2011 floristic monitoring highlights the initial differences between sites that are representative of vegetation communities across the Project Area and sites that will undergo works for restoration. The floristic monitoring has established analogue sites that can be used as a comparison for the revegetation/regeneration sites and floristic-based subsidence monitoring. Baseline surveys have identified that, in general, a higher number of introduced species occur within the revegetation/regeneration sites, and structural diversity is greater within the analogue sites.

Figure 4.1 illustrates native and exotic species richness at the Box Gum Woodland EEC/CEEC analogue sites (BOB1, BOB4, BOB6, BOBE1, RPA10, RPA11, RPA12, RPA13, SI2 and SI3) and revegetation/regeneration sites (BOB9, BOB10, BOB11, BOB12, BOB14, BOBE6, BOBE7 and BOBE8) established within the Offset Areas, Surface Infrastructure and Residual Project Area. Generally, a higher number of introduced species were observed within revegetation/regeneration sites than the analogue sites and a higher number of native species occur within analogue sites. Based on these results, future monitoring will identify change in floristic composition, cover and vegetation structure for revegetation/regeneration sites, and whether there is a trajectory of change towards the characteristics of residual vegetation.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

30 Exotic species 20 Native species

Figure 4.1: Native and exotic species richness recorded at each EEC/CEEC monitoring site

Figure 4.2 illustrates the cover of native and exotic species at the Box Gum Woodland EEC/CEEC analogue sites and revegetation/regeneration sites established within the Offset Areas, Surface Infrastructure and Residual Project Area. Generally, a higher coverage of introduced species was observed within revegetation/regeneration sites than the analogue sites and a higher coverage of native species occur within analogue sites. Based on these results, future monitoring will identify change in floristic cover and vegetation structure for revegetation/regeneration sites, and whether there is a trajectory of change towards the characteristics of residual vegetation.

100 90 80 70 60 Shrub Native 50 Shrub Exotic 40 Ground Native 30 Ground Exotic 20 10 0

Figure 4.2: Cover of native and exotic species richness recorded at each EEC/CEEC monitoring site

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Based on the generally higher numbers of introduced species within the rehabilitation areas, it is recommended that any works to rehabilitate the offset sites aim to increase native species diversity and cover towards the analogue site levels, with similar species diversity and composition with associated vegetation types. It is also recommended that any rehabilitation works target noxious and environmental weeds, which includes St. John’s Wort.

It is important to continue monitoring vegetation in spring and autumn. This will ensure that seasonal species are noted, along with growth rates and impacts from adverse weather conditions. Burrows (1999) noted in the south west slopes that while most floristic diversity was accounted for in spring surveys, there were several species that were only recorded during autumn. Furthermore, the former NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW), now OEH, guidelines for assessing Box Gum Woodlands recommends autumn survey, as one of the key criteria for assessing the presence of the community is the dominance of native perennials in the ground layer. These are most evident in autumn when they are not shrouded with annual exotics which predominantly grow in winter and spring.

The floristic monitoring sites established during spring/summer 2011 were based upon current vegetation mapping within the Project Area. This vegetation mapping was inaccurate in some areas, with some sites occurring on ecotones between two vegetation communities or occurring in vegetation that was not aligned with the mapped vegetation. It is recommended that before the autumn 2012 monitoring, vegetation mapping within the general vicinity of the floristic plots be updated and any sites that require a shifting to the appropriate vegetation community be undertaken.

4.2 LF A The LFA monitoring undertaken during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring period collected data that will form the basis for future monitoring and act as a reference point against which change can be measured and recommendations for improvements in soil disbursement and vegetation structural dynamics can be made. The methods undertaken during the monitoring were based upon those stated within the BROMP.

The spring/summer 2011 LFA monitoring establishes baseline data that will be used for comparison when revegetation/regeneration works start within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas, as well as rehabilitation of the Open Cut extension and other areas of impact.

As such, it is recommended that the LFA should be modified, including:

a) Incorporate revegetation/regeneration sites that will undergo works in 2012 within the Biodiversity Offset and Cliffline Management Areas into the spring 2012 monitoring program, establishing sites that will be comparable to analogue sites and to provide actions based on results for improvement in soil disbursement and vegetation structural dynamics. Table 4.1 below gives the indicative timeline for the establishment of LFA sites in relation to the Offset Area and vegetation communities;

b) Reactive data capture immediately after an event such as significant rainfall or bushfire, to sample any changes in landscape scores.

c) Given vegetation dynamics (i.e. densities, height and cover) are not expected to change drastically on an annual basis, particularly for woody strata, sampling should be undertaken every 2 years.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

d) The exception to c) would be where active regeneration of a site is undertaken, whereby it would be valuable to record vegetation dynamics data following revegetation or during the next scheduled LFA/Floristic sampling event.

Table 4.1: Additional LFA sites required for revegetation/regeneration

Bobadeen Bobadeen East Vegetation Community 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Grey Box Woodland

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest Grassland

White Box Woodland

Yellow Box – Red Gum Woodland

4.3 ACACIA AUSFELDII Floristic plots and individual Acacia ausfeldii surveys undertaken during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring period collected data that will form the basis for future monitoring and act as a reference point against which environmental and ecological change can be measured. The methods undertaken during the monitoring were based upon those stated within the BROMP.

The 2011 monitoring highlights the initial structural diversity of the Acacia ausfeldii site, data that will be used to monitor the health, growth and reproductive rating of the 100 individual specimens tagged and abundance of weeds, habitat elements including woody debris and leaf litter, evidence of previous impacts and evidence of feral animals. Based upon the results obtained, management recommendations should be implemented including any rehabilitation works to target noxious and environmental weeds, which include Prickly Pear and Rabbit control should be undertaken.

4.4 FAUNA (EXCLUDING MICROBATS) The fauna monitoring undertaken in spring/summer 2011 involved surveying both new sites and sites previously established during monitoring undertaken since 1994. Based on this, fauna results can be compared to previous years.

Table 4.2 below shows an analysis undertaken by Biodiversity Monitoring Services (report attached as Appendix E) indicating that the species richness for native mammals and reptiles has stayed relatively constant over time and the results from the 2011 survey are comparable with those obtained in previous

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

surveys. Bird species richness was higher in 2011 than most previous years (comparable with that obtained in 2005), but richness has been erratic over the seasons surveyed (a difference of 54 species from lowest record to highest record) (shown in Figure 3 of Appendix E).

Despite a large number of bird species being observed during the survey period, the target species Swift Parrot and Regent Honeyeater were not observed. The movement of these species is erratic, and their absence from this or previous year’s survey does not suggest habitat on site is unsuitable. Regent Honeyeater were observed in Munghorn Gap National Park in spring 2011, however, few sightings were recorded in the 2011 May and August volunteer counts coordinated by Birds Australia.

Table 4.2: Fauna species richness over time within the Project Area

Year Native (non-bat) Mammal Avifauna Reptile

1997 10 107 15

1998 12 77 14

1999 6 92 15

2001 9 73 11

2003 11 109 16

2004 9 101 16

2005 11 123 23

2006 11 84 11

2007 11 105 14

2009 12 83 10

2010 12 104 15

2011 11 127 17

Data collected during the fauna surveys completed during 2011 and from previous monitoring periods were compared and analysed. The main aim of the analysis was to determine if there are any indications of mine-induced changes in fauna distribution and population numbers.

Detailed analysis of the results has been undertaken using a set of criteria to compare fauna populations within an area over time and between areas i.e. temporally and spatially. To ensure such criteria are used in the long-term monitoring of fauna within the mine areas, a set of quantifiable indices were developed and adopted for the fauna monitoring. 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, as well as to changes in land use and landform. Indices that have been calculated from the results from the monitoring surveys are:

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Species richness of faunal groups • Simpson’s Index of Dominance • Evenness of occurrence of species within an area • Population status of individual species • Capture rates of individual species • Population status of faunal groups • Contribution to the faunal assemblages by threatened species, species dependent upon woodland and by species declining in the Central West • Habitat complexity scores (Further details of indices, methods of analysis and results are included in Appendix E)

Based upon the results of the survey and data analysis using the indices listed above, there are no significant differences between the fauna assemblages located in 2011 and those found in previous years. Also there are no significant differences between the fauna assemblages found at each site. Similarly, the habitat characteristics are comparable with those measured during previous surveys and show no significant differences between the different sites.

Future monitoring will incorporate two additional sites as the Open Cut expands to the west and the mined area is rehabilitated. Also, the relationship of the survey sites to the domains will change as the emphasis will be on comparing the data from sites on land that is undermined or disturbed by infrastructure (treatment sites) with those relatively undisturbed (control or analogue sites).

4.5 FAUNA MICROBATS The general fauna sites microbat monitoring identified that microbat diversity and activity at the two sites sampled in Open Cut Area (FaOC1 and FaOC3) were generally high with eight species recorded from both sites.

Overall microbat activity in 1991 Open Cut regeneration was approaching that seen in forest sites away from the open cut. Activity levels in younger regeneration established in 2003 are substantially lower than that present in the older regeneration. This is consistent with results achieved in previous monitoring at the site since 1995.

For many species the older mine rehabilitation provides additional foraging habitat. Some species such as long-eared bats have been observed utilising roosts under decorticating bark in dead acacias within the older rehabilitated areas (Fly By Night Bat Surveys 2009). Roosts are not yet present for many of the hollow dependent microbat species such as the Little Forest Bat and Gould’s Wattled Bat. These will develop with time but may not be present for at least 50 years

4.5.1 Targeted Cliff Line Microbat Sites The targeted cliff line microbat monitoring sites were surveyed during December 2011 when females of the three target species, the Large-eared Pied Bat, Eastern Bent-wing Bat and Eastern Horseshoe Bat would be expected to be at maternity roosts for the birth and raising of young.

The Large-eared Pied Bat was recorded at 10 of the 18 echolocation call detection sites along cliff lines at the targeted microbat sites. The number of echolocation call passes of this species varied from 1 pass per night at site SGD5 to 43 passes per night at site BD8D1 at the 10 sites. Two males were also

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

captured in a harp trap at site BD7H1. At many of the cliff lines it was recorded at one site but was not detected at another site along the same cliff line (refer to Table 3 and Figure 2 of Appendix F). This supports the methodology used during the current survey. Breeding females were recorded at site A during 2004, indicating the presence of a maternity roost in the vicinity of Spring Gully (Fly By Night Bat Surveys 2005). Activity levels of the Large-eared Pied Bat at the sites sampled at Spring Gully were generally low and not indicative of the activity expected in the vicinity of a maternity roost. Sampling of additional cliff lines in this precinct during future surveys is recommended and should superior sites be found these would replace inferior sites surveyed during 2011.

A second threatened cave-roosting species, the Eastern Bent-wing Bat was recorded from echolocation call at 8 of the 18 sites. Activity levels varied from 1 to 39 echolocation passes per night. This species is likely to roost within deeper caves in sandstone escarpments or disused underground coal mine workings. Females migrate to select maternity roosts in spring to give birth (Dwyer 1995). These are normally located within limestone caves, but in recent years smaller groups of breeding females have been recorded using disused underground coal mines (Dwyer 1995; Hoye 2000).

The non-threatened but locally significant Eastern Horseshoe Bat was recorded from echolocation call at 6 of the 18 sites. Activity levels varied from one to five echolocation passes per night.

The Greater Broad-nosed Bat was recorded from echolocation call at site MB2D2. This represents the first record of this species from the UCML Project Area.

It is recommended that the 10 sites (MB2D1, MB2D2, BD6D1, BD7DI, BD8D1, BD9D2, SGD2, SGD3, SGD5 and SGD7) are retained for future monitoring. These sites generally had the highest activity of the target species, Large-eared Pied Bat. It is recommended that site MB1 be discontinued from monitoring due to failure to detect activity of the Large-eared Pied Bat or Eastern Bent-wing Bat together with the difficult access to this site. Some additional survey of unsampled clifflines in the Brokenback Domain and Spring Gully should be undertaken to assess if they provide superior sites for long term monitoring.

Sites were not sampled in cliff lines along Ulan Creek downstream of Old Ulan due to access issues resulting from the Ulan West Box Cut construction program. These should also be sampled in future surveys to assess their suitability for long term monitoring.

4.6 AQUATIC FAUNA & RIPARIAN HABITATS The aquatic fauna and riparian habitat survey established 18 sites within (and close to) the Project Area, of which 6 are new sites and 12 are existing sites. The sites cover a range of aquatic environments as well as different land types and land uses. All sites were placed at their proposed locations to adequately sample aquatic fauna and riparian habitats typical of the region. The information obtained in 2011 will provide a baseline dataset that can be used to monitor changes over time that may occur as a result either directly or indirectly from mining activities.

The data obtained are of a considerable size and complexity and, to allow for long-term monitoring, these data need to be converted to a readily accessible and understandable format. In both cases a series of indices has been developed from the raw data. The indices used to monitor the aquatic fauna and riparian habitats are:

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Macroinvertebrates – Evenness Score, Simpsons Index of Diversity, Number of individuals captured, Richness in Taxa, SIGNAL Index and Salinity Index; • Riparian Habitat – RARC Score, RCE Score, Bird Evenness, Bird Simpson’s Index of Diversity, Bird Numbers counted and Bird species richness

The indices cover a wide range of values that are, in some cases, related to the site characteristics but more often show no relationship to the present patterns of land use or to the aquatic or riparian environment. However, the dataset adequately covers all the characteristics found in the area and can be used confidently for long-term monitoring.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

References

• Braun-Blanquet, J. (1927) Pflanzensoziologie. Springer, Vienna. • Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) (2012) Daily Weather Observation, Mudgee: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW2088.latest.shtml • Burrow, G.E. (1999) A survey of 25 remnant vegetation sites in the South Western Slopes, New South Wales. Cunninghamia 6(2):283-314. • Chessman, B.C., Growns, J.E., Kotlash, A.R. (1997) Objective derivation of macroinvertebrate family sensitivity grade numbers for the SIGNAL biotic index: application to the Hunter River System, New South Wales, Marine and Freshwater Research, No. 48, pp. 159 – 172 • Dwyer, P.D. (1995) Common Bentwing-bat Miniopterus schreibersii . in Strahan, R. ed. The Mammals of Australia . Reed Books , Chatswood. pp.494-495. Fly by night 2009 • Fly By Night Bat Surveys (2009) Monitoring of the Bat Fauna of Ulan Underground Coal Mine Lease during 2009 . Report to Ulan Underground Coal Mine. July 2009. • Harden G (ed.) (1992) Flora of NSW Volume 2, UNSW Press, Sydney. • Harden G (ed.) (1993) Flora of NSW Volume 4, UNSW Press, Sydney. • Harden G. (ed.) (2002) Flora of New South Wales, Volume 2 revised edition, UNSW Press. • Hoye, G.A. (2000) The Discovery of Two and Distinctive Maternity Roosts of the Large Bent-wing

Bat in the Hunter Valley, NSW . Spoken Presentation. 9th Australasian Bat Conference. Tocal, New South Wales. April 2000. • Poore, M. E. D. (1955) The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations. I. The Braun-Blanquet system. Journal of Ecology 42: 216-224. • Tidemann, C.R. and Woodside, D.P. (1978) A collapsible bat trap and comparison of results obtained with the trap and with mist-nets. Australian Wildlife Research 5:355-362. • Tongway, D.J. and Hindley, N.L. (2005) Landscape Function Analysis: Procedures for monitoring and assessing landscapes with special reference to mine sites and rangelands. CSIRO Sustainable ecosystems, Canberra, ACT. • Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2009) Ulan Coal - Continued Operations Ecological Assessment. Appendix 8 of the Environmental Assessment. Report prepared for Ulan Coal.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix A: Floristic Site Descriptions

Residual Vegetation Monitoring

Site BOB1 – White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759777E, 6434705N

Site BOB1 is located north of Pleuger Road, in the south-east corner of the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain ( Figure AA.1 ). The vegetation has undergone past disturbance and has been mapped as White Box Woodland (Umwelt 2009). Evidence of historical logging and current weed invasion were identified within the site. Although Cassinia arcuata (Sifton Bush) is a native species, this species can act like a weed in disturbed areas forming dense stands. Hypericum perforatum (St John’s Wort) was also common throughout this plot.

Figure AA.1: Site BOB1 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB1 supported open grassy woodland interspersed with regenerating canopy species. The soil comprised a red – brown sandy, clay loam. Eucalyptus blakelyi (Blakely's Red Gum) was the only canopy species recorded within the plot at this site. The shrub layer comprised scattered Cassinia arcuata, Acacia paradoxa (Kangaroo Thorn) and juvenile E. blakelyi . Shrubs contributed less than 5% of the foliage cover within the site (Table 3.1 ). The groundcover was dominated by native grasses including Aristida vagans , Microlaena stipoides (Weeping Grass) and Themeda australis (Kangaroo

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Grass). The overall contribution of groundcover species to cover, both native and exotic grasses and herbs, was 90%.

A total of 53 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ); including 47 native and 6 exotic species. Native species dominated all strata. A small number of exotic species were identified; in the understorey including Hypericum perforatum, Richardia stellaris and Tolpis barbata (Yellow Hawkweed).

Table AA.1 below describes the contribution of living and non-living vegetative matter (litter and cryptogam) and geology (rock and bare ground) identified at the site. Rock, litter and cryptogams represent only a small percentage of the groundcover composition ( Table AA.1 ). Regenerating E. blakelyi was present within the site.

Table AA. 1: Structural ground composition for Site BOB1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB2 – Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759041E, 6434615N

Site BOB2 is located north of Pleuger Road within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain. Vegetation was mapped as Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (Umwelt 2009) (Figure AA.2). Weed invasion and historical logging were recorded within the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.2: Site BOB2 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB2 supported a shrubby understorey and abundant leaf litter. The soil was a dark brown clay loam and Eucalyptus blakelyi dominated the canopy strata. The shrub layer consists primarily of Cassinia sp. with a small number of other shrubs and regenerating eucalypts present at lower densities. The groundcover at this site was dominated by native grasses including; Aristida vagans (Threeawn Speargrass) and Microlaena stipoides var stipoides (Weeping Grass) and the sedge Schoenus apogon . A matrix of bare ground, litter and grasses was present (Table AA.2). Only one exotic species was recorded within the site, Hypochaeris radicata (Catsear).

A total of 33 species were recorded within the site, including 32 native and 1 exotic species (Table 3.1 ).

Fallen litter represented a large proportion of the groundcover at this site as did bare ground ( Table AA.2). Rock and cryptogams were limited at this site and regenerating canopy species were scattered throughout.

Table AA. 2: Structural ground composition for Site BOB2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 35

Bare ground 25

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOB3 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756811E, 6435162N

Site BOB3 is located south east of Bobadeen Loop Road, within the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.3). Evidence of wild pig disturbance was recorded within the site.

Figure AA.3: Site BOB3 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB3 supported a woodland-forest structure with a canopy dominated by Eucalyptus fibrosa (Red Ironbark) and Allocasuarina sp. The soil was a dark brown clay loam and small shrubs (0.1 – 3 m) were scattered throughout the site. Common shrub species included Leucopogon muticus (Blunt Beard- heath) and Astrotricha longifolia . A patchy groundcover of native herbs, forbs and grasses including; Goodenia hederacea (Forest Goodenia), Lomandra filiformis (Wattle Mat-rush), Lomandra multiflora (Many-flowered Mat Rush), and Anisopogon sp. occurred throughout the site.

A total of 40 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ), of which, all were native species. The majority of ground layer (90 %) comprise of litter (Table AA.3). Bare ground, rock and cryptogams contributed a small percentage to the overall groundcover.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 3: Structural ground composition for Site BOB3

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 90

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB4 – White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756509E, 6435648N

Site BOB4 is located south east of Bobadeen Loop Road, within the south-western corner of the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain. Vegetation within the site was mapped as White Box Woodland (Figure AA.4). Evidence of feral animal activity was noted (e.g. rabbit scats and feral pig diggings) and light weed invasion. This plot appeared to be located on the ecotone of two vegetation communities. The soil at this site was comprised of a red brown clay loam.

Figure AA.4: Site BOB4 plot photo, south-east aspect

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site BOB4 was dominated by a canopy of Eucalyptus fibrosa and to a lesser extent, Callitris endlicheri (Black Cypress Pine). A scattered layer of low shrubs (0.2 – 2 m) were present, with common species including Cassinia arcuata, Leucopogon muticus (Blunt Beard-heath) and Acacia verniciflua (Varnish Wattle). Microlaena stipoides dominated the ground layer with smaller patches of other native grass and herb species such as, Austrostipa scabra (Speargrass), Austrodanthonia caespitosa , Calotis cuneata (Mountain Burr-daisy) and Chrysocephalum semipapposum (Clustered Everlasting) also present.

A total of 42 species were recorded within the site, all of which were native species (Table 3.1 ). Despite the low percentage coverage of the shrub layer, shrub species diversity was relatively high within the site. The ground layer was also rich in herb diversity.

Litter abundance was high within this plot and was increased by the presence of a large fallen ironbark within the plot (Table AA.4). Bare ground and canopy species regeneration were identified, however, rock and cryptogams were absent from within the site.

Table AA. 4: Structural ground composition for Site BOB4

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 40

Bare ground 10

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB5 – Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757116E, 6436557N

Site BOB5 is located east of Bobadeen Loop Road to the north of BOB4. The site was mapped as Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium and was located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain ( Figure AA.5). The site supported red brown clay soils.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.5: Site BOB5 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB5 was characterised as open woodland and within the plot supported a single canopy species Eucalyptus crebra (Narrow-leaved Ironbark) over a shrub layer dominated by Lissanthe strigosa (Peach Heath), Cassinia arcuata and Leucopogon muticus . Aristida sp and Microlaena stipoides formed a large proportion of the ground layer together with Astroloma humifusum . A number of low laying herbs were also commonly scattered throughout and included Hydrocotyle laxiflora (Stinking Pennywort) and Goodenia hederacea .

A total of 42 flora species were recorded within this site all of which were native species (Table 3.1 ). A significant number of herbs and grasses were recorded within the ground layer. The shrub layer was also relatively diverse.

Litter represented a large proportion of the ground layer at this site with a cover of approximately 50% (Table AA.5). Cryptogams were occasionally recorded and regeneration was also present.

Table AA. 5: Structural ground composition for Site BOB5

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 50

Bare ground 0

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOB6 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0758269E, 6436473N

Site BOB6 is located west of Fan Road within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain. Vegetation was mapped as Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (Umwelt 2009) (Figure AA.6). There was little evidence of weed invasion. Soils were comprised of brown sandy clay loam.

Figure AA.6: Site BOB6 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic survey The site supported an open woodland structure dominated by Eucalyptus crebra and Eucalyptus blakelyi . The site contained scattered shrub layer of Cassinia arcuata and Lissanthe strigosa . A sparse ground layer of native grasses was represented by Microlaena stipoides , Aristida vagans , Austrodanthonia sp. and the sedge Schoenus apogon . In addition to the native grass species, the exotic grass Lolium perenne was also dominate in the site. Other groundcover species present in low densities include Goodenia hederacea (Forest Goodenia), Astroloma humifusum and Calotis cuneata (Mountain Burr-daisy). Regenerating canopy species including; E. crebra and E. blakelyi were present.

A total of 33 species were recorded within the site, including 32 native species and one exotic species (Table 3.1 ), Hypochaeris radicata (Catsear). Native grasses contributed the highest proportion of foliage cover within the ground layer and several small herbs were recorded. However, vegetation groundcover was relatively sparse with a large proportion of the site comprised of leaf litter, bare ground and cryptogam (Table AA.6).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 6: Structural ground composition for Site BOB6

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 50

Bare ground 15

Rock <5

Cryptogam 25

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB7 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759546E, 6436394N

Site BOB6 is located near the eastern boundary of the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain south of Bobadeen Road. Vegetation has been mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.7). The presence of old stumps indicated historic logging at the site. Soils were a creamy light brown clay loam with quartz present in the matrix.

Figure AA.7: Site BOB7 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB7 supported an open shrubby woodland with a canopy dominated by Eucalyptus fibrosa and scattered Callitris endlicheri. The shrub layer was dominated by low and dense Lissanthe strigosa . A

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

few scattered regenerating E. fibrosa and the occasional small shrub, Bursaria spinosa (Blackthorn) and Astroloma humifusum were also present within this layer. The groundcover was relatively sparse with leaf litter abundant at this site. The most common native species in the ground layer included Joycea pallida (Silvertop Wallaby Grass), Lomandra spp. and Goodenia hederacea .

Overall, species richness was low although exotic species were absent from within the site (Table 3.1 ). A total of 20 species were recorded (Table 3.1 ) including a number of small herbaceous species at low densities.

Table AA.7 describes the ground layer contribution of features other than vegetation. The site contained a high percentage of litter (65%) including a number of fallen logs ( Table AA.7). Rock also contributed a significant proportion towards the ground composition. Cryptogams were limited and a few scattered regenerating canopy trees were present.

Table AA. 7: Structural ground composition for Site BOB7

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 65

Bare ground 5

Rock 25

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB8 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759573E, 6436953N

Site BOB8 is located south of Bobadeen Road within Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (regenerating) (Figure AA.8). Historical logging was evident Soils were a creamy light brown clay loam with quartz present in the matrix.

Figure AA.8: Site BOB8 plot photo, south aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site BOB8 was characterised by a relatively dense canopy of young Eucalyptus macrorhyncha (Red Stringybark) and a few scattered Allocasuarina sp . Both the shrub and ground layers were sparse and species diversity was low. The shrub species most commonly recorded within the site include; Cassinia arcuata and Lissanthe strigosa . Native grasses common in the ground layer included Austrostipa densiflora and Microlaena stipoides (Table 3.1 ). Gahnia aspera (Rough Saw-sedge) and Lomandra multiflora subsp. multiflora (Many-flowered Mat-rush) were also common in the ground layer.

A total of 25 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ) including 2 exotic species, Hypochaeris radicata and Conyza sp. Both species were recorded in low densities.

Litter was widely scattered throughout the site and represented a large proportion of the ground layer (Table AA.8). Bare ground, cryptogams and rock were uncommon. Regeneration of E. macrorhyncha was noted.

Table AA. 8: Structural ground composition for Site BOB8

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 60

Bare ground 5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOBE1 – White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0762711E 6438071N

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOBE1 is located in the southern part Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain off Apple Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as White Box Woodland (Figure AA.9) and supported a predominately grassland with scattered trees. The site has been logged in the past and was currently grazed. Weed invasion was also evident. The soil was red brown clay.

Figure AA.9: Site BOBE1 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey

Site BOBE1 was characterised as a grazed derived grassland. The canopy and shrub layers were absent although scattered trees were present adjacent to the site. The ground layer vegetation was relatively dense and contained a diverse range of native and exotic species. Commonly recorded species included Themeda australis (Kangaroo Grass), Eragrostis curvula , Austrodanthonia sp. and Austrostipa scabra .

A total of 33 flora species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), including 19 native species and 14 exotic species. Exotic grasses and herbs were present and commonly recorded including; Vulpia sp., Bromus molliformis, Petrorhagia nanteuilii and Hypochaeris radicata .

Table AA.9 lists the contribution of other features for site BOBE1. Litter contributed 20% and rocks contributed 5% to the overall groundcover ( Table AA.9). There were no regeneration of canopy species and cryptogam cover was limited.

Table AA. 9: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE1

Description Percent Cover (%)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Litter 20

Bare ground <5

Rock 5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOBE2 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763901E 6438071N

Site BOBE2 is located south west of the junction at Ulan Road and Apple Road within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain. The site was located within the Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (Figure AA.10). Weed invasion and feral animal activity was evident at this site. Soils were comprised of red brown clay.

Figure AA.10: Site BOBE2 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOBE2 supported woodland with a sparse canopy of Eucalyptus albens (White Box). The shrub layer was sparse and included the native species Acacia doratoxylon and Acacia paradoxa . The ground layer was very diverse and dominated by native grasses such as, Aristida ramosa , Microlaena

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

stipoides and Austrodanthonia racemosa var. racemosa . Several small herbs were scattered throughout the grassy layer including, Calotis cuneata, Asperula conferta and Vittadinia cervicularis .

A total of 25 species were recorded within this site; including 15 native species and 10 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Species diversity was very high throughout this community. The species composition included a number of exotic species not commonly recorded at other sites. The most common exotic species included Petrorhagia nanteuilii, Marrubium vulgare (White Horehound) and Vulpia bromoides .

Only a small percentage of litter and bare ground was present in the ground layer ( Table AA.10). Rocks and cryptogams were absent from this site. Some regeneration of canopy species was recorded.

Table AA1. 10: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 10

Bare ground 5

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOBE3 - Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763743E, 6438704N

Site BOBE3 is located north of Apple Road within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain. Vegetation has been mapped as Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium ( Figure AA.11). The understorey in this community is predominately leaf litter and soils are brown grey sandy clay.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.11: Site BOBE3 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOBE3 supported a low closed canopy of Eucalyptus crebra and a sub-canopy of Acacia linearifolia (Narrow-leaved Wattle) and Callitris endlicherii . The shrub layer was relatively dense with Sannantha cunninghamii and Cassinia longifolia the most abundant shrub species recorded within this vegetation community. Other, less abundant shrub species included Cassinia arcuata, Solanum campanulatum and Astroloma humifusum (Native Cranberry). The ground layer was a mix of native and exotic herbs and grasses. Common native species within the ground layer Microlaena stipoides , Poranthera microphylla , Cheilanthes sieberi, Goodenia hederacea and Pomax umbellata . Exotic species present included, Conyza sp. and Hypochaeris radicata .

A total of 26 species were recorded within the site including, 24 native species and 2 exotic species. Species diversity within the vegetation was relatively low.

A large amount of large woody debris litter accumulation (85 %) was present at this site ( Table AA.11). A few small patches of bare ground were present interspersed within the occasional cryptogam. Regeneration of Acacia species was noted, however, canopy species were not regenerating within the plot.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 11: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE3

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 85

Bare ground 10

Rock 0

Cryptogam 5

Regeneration (Y/N) N (some Acacia regen).

Site BOBE4 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763480E, 6438929N

Site BOBE4 is located north-west of BOBE3 and north of Apple Road within an area mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain (Figure AA.12). Historical and current disturbances were identified within this site and included old stumps (historical logging) and feral animal activity.

Figure AA.12: Site BOBE4 plot photo, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site BOBE4 has a very open woodland structure on sandy loam soils with a canopy of Eucalyptus crebra and Callitris endlicheri . Only a small coverage of shrubs was present and included Lissanthe strigosa and Cassinia arcuata . The groundcover was sparse and included common species such as Microlaena stipoides , Cheilanthes sieberi , Pomax umbellata and Lomandra filiformis .

A total of 37 species was recorded within this site including 35 native species and only 2 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Litter in the form of large wood debris and leaves dominated the ground layer ( Table AA.12) . Cryptogams and bare ground also contributed a small proportion of the ground layer. Regeneration of native canopy species, E. crebra, was noted within site BOBE4 ( Table AA.12).

Table AA. 12: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE4

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 75

Bare ground 10

Rock 0

Cryptogam 15

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BB1 – Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Slopes

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0752980E, 64367481N

Site BB1 is located within the Brokenback Conservation Domain north of Broken Back Road ( Figure AA.13). The vegetation has been mapped as Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Slopes and supported grey - light brown sandy loam soils. This site was relatively undisturbed with no exotic species recorded.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.13: Site BB1 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic survey Vegetation within BB1 was typical of Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Slopes vegetation community. The site supported a scattered canopy of Eucalyptus fibrosa (Red Ironbark) and Eucalyptus sparsifolia and a sub-canopy of Allocasuarina gymnanthera. A dense shrub layer of Leucopogon muticus (Blunt Beard-heath), interspersed with Cassinia arcuata (Sifton Bush) and Persoonia linearis was also present. Several smaller native shrubs such as Dodonaea viscose (Sticky Hop-bush) and Platysace linearifolia , Correa reflexa , Brachyloma daphnoides and Hibbertia circumdans were identified within this vegetation community. Groundcover species such as grasses and forbs were sparse with Microlaena stipoides , Lomandra multiflora , Lomandra filiformis and Dichelachne micrantha commonly recorded. A dense layer of litter (95%) was present (Table AA.13).

A total of 31 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ). No exotic species were recorded during the floristic survey. A small percentage of bare ground, rock and cryptogam were present ( Table AA.13). E. fibrosa was recorded regenerating within the plot.

Table AA. 13: Structural ground composition for Site BB1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 95

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site RPA1 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757007E, 6426889N

Site RPA1 is located between Goanna and Quarry Roads at the southern extent of the Residual EA Project Area Domain (RPA). Vegetation within the site represented that of the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.14) and the soils are dark grey brown sandy loams.

Figure AA. 14: Site RPA1 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA1 was characterised as a woodland with a canopy dominated by Eucalyptus sparsifolia , E. fibrosa and E. parramattensis . A mid-storey of Leucopogon muticus was scattered with Lissanthe sp. , Podolobium ilicifolium (Prickly Shaggy Pea) and Hibbertia circumdans recorded at lower densities throughout the site. Groundcover species were sparsely distributed. Species represented within these strata included a number of sedges such as Lomandra longifolia (Spiny-headed Mat-rush), L. multiflora subsp. multiflora (Many-flowered Mat-rush) and L glauca (Pale Mat-rush). Goodenia hederacea , Poranthera corymbosa and Pomax umbellata were also widely distributed but at low densities.

A total of 20 species were recorded within the site, of which all were native species (Table 3.1 ). Species diversity at the site was low. Canopy and shrub species were relatively dense (Table 3.1 ), while only a few scattered groundcover species were recorded.

The site contained a dense cover of litter (80%) including a high proportion of fallen leaf litter and scattered woody debris ( Table AA.14). Rocks and cryptogams were absent and only small patches of

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

bare ground were represented within the site ( Table AA.14). No regeneration of canopy species was recorded, although regeneration was noted adjacent to the site.

Table AA. 14: Structural ground composition for Site RPA1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 80

Bare ground 5

Rock 5

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site RPA2 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756489E, 6429268N

Site RPA2 is located west of the Open Cut Extension within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. Goanna Road is located to the south of the site and the vegetation has been mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone vegetation community ( Figure AA.15). The soils are grey-brown sands and evidence of feral animal activity was recorded at the site.

Figure AA. 15: Site RPA2 photo point, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site RPA2 supported woodland with a thick shrubby mid-storey and limited groundcover. The canopy was dominated by Eucalyptus fibrosa, E. sparsifolia and a few scattered E. parramattensis were also recorded. A small tree layer of Allocasuarina gymnanthera , 2 – 8 m tall was present. A shorter denser shrub layer between 0.5 – 2.5 m in height supported species such as Dodonaea viscosa and Leucopogon muticus species. Groundcover was sparse and common species included Lomandra longifolia and Goodenia hederacea. Other less common species such as Phyllanthus hirtellus (Thyme Spurge) and Hibbertia circumdans were also scattered throughout the site.

A total of 22 species were recorded, all of which were native species (Table 3.1 ). Species diversity was relatively low at this site as the groundlayer supported a dense mat of leaf litter (85 %) ( Table AA.15). Rocks were scattered across the site and bare ground and cryptogams represented a small contribution to the overall groundcover complex. A few regenerating E. fibrosa samplings were present within the site.

Table AA. 15: Structural ground composition for Site RPA2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 85

Bare ground 5

Rock 10

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA3 - Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0758406E, 6430122N

Site RPA3 is located north of the Open Cut Extension area on a drainage line within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. Vegetation was mapped as Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (Figure AA.16). Evidence of wombat activity including a wombat burrow was noted within the site. Clearing of vegetation, weed invasion, erosion and feral animal activities were also identified within the site. Deep alluvial soils were present.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA. 16: Site RPA3 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey The vegetation within site RPA3 was dominated by a scattered canopy of either Eucalyptus tereticornis (Forest Red Gum) or E. blakelyi (the species could not be determined during the Spring 2011 survey as adequate material for identification was not available), the occasional Eucalyptus microcarpa and shrub layer dominated by Acacia linearifolia . A thick carpet of Microlaena stipoides was interspersed with another native groundcover species such as Hydrocotyle laxiflora (Stinking Pennywort), Urtica incisa (Stinging Nettle) and Geranium solanderi and exotic herbs including, Anagallis arvensis (Scarlet Pimpernel) and Modiola caroliniana (Red-flowered Mallow).

A total of 56 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ), including 46 native species and 10 exotic species. The species composition identified within site RPA3 reflects the surrounding disturbed environment and a history of vegetation clearing.

Litter, bare ground, rocks and cryptogams were all recorded within the site, each represented less than 5% of the ground layer ( Table AA.16). Regeneration of the two eucalyptus canopy species was also recorded.

Table AA. 16: Structural ground composition for Site RPA3

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site RPA4 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756180E, 64314037N

Site RPA4 is located south of Box Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site is situated south of a drainage line in Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.17). The soils are brown-grey sandy alluvial with a small amount of loam.

Figure AA. 17: Site RPA4 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA4 consisted of open woodland with a canopy and regenerating layer of Eucalyptus fibrosa . The vegetation within the shrub layer was obtained a maximum height of 0.7m and was represented by Pultenaea microphylla . Vegetation within the ground stratum was sparse with scattered species including Lomandra glauca, Lomandra multiflora , Poranthera corymbosa , Gahnia aspera and Patersonia sericea .

A total of 22 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ). No exotic species were recorded within this vegetation community. The ground layer consisted of a dense coverage of fallen litter, 95% ( Table AA.17). Bare ground, rock and cryptogams accounted for less than 5% cover respectively. Regeneration of E.fibrosa was also present.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 17: Structural ground composition for Site RPA4

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 95

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA5 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757763E, 6432243N

Site RPA5 is located north of South Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. Vegetation was mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone and located within the Residual EA Project Area Domain ( Figure AA.18).

Figure AA. 18: Site RPA5 photo point, east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA5 was described as an open woodland with a dense shrubby layer. Canopy layer consisted of Eucalyptus parramattensis and E. sparsifolia . A small tree layer dominated by juvenile Persoonia

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

linearis was present and a shrub layer was dominated by Boronia ledifolia . A widely scattered ground layer of Platysace linearifolia , Entolasia stricta (Wiry Panic) and Phyllanthus hirtellus was also present.

A total of 28 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), of which all were native species. Rocks contributed the highest portion of the ground layer (35 %) cover ( Table AA.18). Litter represented a small contribution at 20%, while cryptogam and bare ground represented a smaller portion to the overall groundcover complex. One canopy species, E. parramattensis, was regenerating within the site.

Table AA. 18: Structural ground composition for Site RPA5

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 20

Bare ground 5

Rock 35

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA6 – Scribbly Gum Woodland – Heathland on Sandstone Plateaux

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760119E, 6432303N

Site RPA6 is located south of Middle Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The vegetation represented that of the Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Plateaux (Figure AA.19). Feral pigs were observed at this site during the survey. Soils were a yellow-brown sand.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA. 19: Site RPA6 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA6 was characterised by woodland in good condition, rich in species diversity and devoid of weed invasion. The canopy layer consisted of Eucalyptus crebra and a few scattered Allocasuarina gymnanthera were represented in the lower canopy layer. A highly diverse shrub layer including; Sannantha cunninghamii, Leucopogon muticus, Cassinia arcuata and Astroloma humifusum was widely distributed throughout the site. Pomax umbellata, Gahnia aspera, Microlaena stipoides var stipoides Entolasia stricta and Lomandra filiformis were common in the ground layer.

A total of 52 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ). Exotic species were absent from within the site. The ground layer was dominated by a dense cover of litter (80%) and a small amount of cryptogam was present ( Table AA.19). E. crebra was regenerating at the site.

Table AA. 19: Structural ground composition for Site RPA6

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 80

Bare ground <5

Rock 0

Cryptogam 10

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site RPA7 – Grey Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0753574E, 6433068N

Site RPA7 is located north-east of the junction of Grass Tree Lane and Valley Way within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site supported Grey Box Woodland community (Figure AA.20 ) with minor disturbance from historical logging and feral rabbit activities evident. A nearby dwelling was also present, with disturbance from the dwelling evident within a 100 m of the site and including abundant accumulated woody debris. The soils were red-brown clay loams.

Figure AA. 20: Site RPA7 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA7 supported a canopy of Eucalyptus microcarpa (Grey Box) with Eucalyptus fibrosa present outside the immediate survey area. The shrub layer was dense and included Cassinia arcuata and Acacia verniciflua as well as Lissanthe strigosa in low numbers. Groundcover species were sparsely distributed. Species recorded within this strata included; Austrostipa scabra, Austrodanthonia caespitosa (Ringed Wallaby Grass), Aristida vagans and Stackhousia muricata (Western Stackhousia).

Site RPA7 was rich in species diversity had no exotic species. A total of 36 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ). Litter dominated the ground layer and a high percentage of woody debris was noted. Bare ground was limited ( Table AA.20 ) recorded within the site. Regenerating E. microcarpa were present.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 20: Structural ground composition for Site RPA7

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 60

Bare ground 10

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA8 – Improved Pasture

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760888E, 6437655N

Site RPA8 is located north of Bobadeen Road in a pasture within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The vegetation has been mapped as Improved Pasture (Figure AA.21 ). Cattle were seen grazing within the site and weeds were abundant. The soil was deep red-brown clay and feral animal activity was also evident.

Figure AA. 21: Site RPA8 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA8 supported an extensive grassy layer dominated by exotic species. Trees were absent and only a small percentage of shrubs were present. The groundcover was dominated by a thick coverage

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

of Lolium sp. Other exotic species were also widespread including Paronychia brasiliana, Modiola caroliniana , Bromus catharticus, Hordeum sp. and Silybum marianum (Variegated Thistle) an exotic coloniser of disturbed environments. Echium plantagineum (Paterson's Curse) was also recorded and is declared a noxious weed throughout much of NSW. The native grass species, Microlaena stipoides and Austrostipa sp. were also common throughout the site.

Exotic species dominated the species composition within the site. A total of 19 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), including 3 native species and 16 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Only a small percentage of litter, bare ground and cryptogam were recorded at the site (Table AA.21 ).

Table AA. 21: Structural ground composition for Site RPA8

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site RPA9 - Scribbly Gum Woodland – Heathland on Sandstone Plateaux

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757086E, 6433489N

Site RPA9 is located west of Old Ulan Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site is located within Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Plateaux vegetation community (Figure AA.22 ). The soils were light brown sand and weed invasion was limited.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA. 22: Site RPA9 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA9 supported open woodland on sandstone geology. The canopy was dominated by Eucalyptus rossii , E. crebra and E. parramattensis . A diverse shrub layer was present including species such as Calytrix tetragona , Bossiaea obcordata (Spiny Bossiaea), Leucopogon virgatus and Leucopogon attenuatus was widely distributed throughout the site. The ground layer was highly diverse with commonly recorded species including Lomandra filiformis , Pomax umbellata, Goodenia hederacea, Schoenus apogon and Poranthera microphylla .

Site RPA9 had rich floristic diversity in all strata. A total of 55 species were recorded within the site, including only one exotic species within the ground layer (Table 3.1 ).

A number of bare patches were recorded within the site. Litter was abundant and comprised the majority of the groundcover composition (60 %) ( Table AA.22 ). Three canopy eucalyptus species were recorded regenerating within the site.

Table AA. 22: Structural ground composition for Site RPA9

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 60

Bare ground 20

Rock 0

Cryptogam 5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site RPA10 – Derived Native Grassland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0755234E, 6442328N

Site RPA10 is located at the north-western corner of the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The vegetation has been mapped as Derived Native Grassland (Figure AA.23 ). Previous logging, weed invasion and feral animal activity were evident. The soils were compacted red-brown clay.

Figure AA. 23: Site RPA10 photo point, south aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA10 supported grassland on an alluvial flat. Canopy species were absent. An unnamed drainage line adjacent to the site was lined with mature Angophora floribunda and the site had been heavily grazed making identification of groundcover species difficult. The occasional regenerating Eucalyptus sp . (Red Gum) and A .floribunda represented the shrub layer. Grass dominated the floristic composition including native grasses such as, Aristida jerichoensis var. jerichoensis , Sporobolus sp, Dichelachne sp and Chloris truncata . Native herbs were also scattered within the grassy layer including; Plantago sp. (native), Cheilanthes sieberi and Zornia dyctiocarpa . Exotic species were also widely distributed throughout the site. Common exotic species identified within the ground layer included; Hypochaeris radicata , Richardia stellaris and Briza minor .

A total of 42 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ), including 29 native species and 13 exotic species. A large number of exotic species were present within the ground stratum at this site. The cover of litter, rock, cryptogams and bare ground was limited across the site ( Table AA.23 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 23: Structural ground composition for Site RPA10

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 10

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA11 – Derived Native Grassland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0754032E, 6438140N

Site RPA11 is located south of Bobadeen Road within the western boundary of the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site is mapped as Derived Native Grassland (Figure AA.24 ). Minor weed invasion and feral animal disturbance was recorded. The soils are red-brown clays.

Figure AA. 24: Site RPA11 photo point, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site RPA11 supported open woodland with a scattered canopy of Eucalyptus albens (White Box). A sparse shrub layer consisting of Cassinia arcuata was also present although the ground layer was dominated by a dense sward of exotic and native grasses with scattered herbs. Native species present within the ground layer included a number of grasses; Austrodanthonia sp, Austrostipa scabra (Speargrass), Bothriochloa sp., Chloris truncata and herbs such as Calotis cuneata and Geranium solanderi (Native Geranium). Commonly recorded exotic species included Petrorhagia nanteuilii, Briza subaristata , B. minor and Trifolium arvense (Haresfoot Clover).

A total of 43 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ); including 23 native species and 20 exotic species. Litter, bare ground, rock and cryptogam cover were limited ( Table AA.24 ). No regenerating canopy species were present within the site.

Table AA. 24: Structural ground composition for Site RPA11

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground <5

Rock 5

Cryptogam 5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site RPA12 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0761453E, 6438744N

Site RPA12 is located south west of Apple Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site is mapped as Modified White Box Woodland (Figure AA.25 ). Vegetation clearing and trampling of native species was evident. The soils are light brown sandy clay loam.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA. 25: Site RPA12 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA12 supported open grassland with a low scattered canopy of Eucalyptus moluccana . The canopy species were also present as juvenile saplings. Common native species recorded throughout the ground layer included Austrodanthonia caespitosa , Aristida vagans , Microlaena stipoides, Solenogyne bellioides, Chloris truncata and Cymbonotus lawsonianus (Bears-ear). Exotic species Lolium perenne , Vulpia sp., Centaurium tenuiflorum and Conyza sp. were also widely distributed and contributed towards the groundcover foliage coverage.

A total of 52 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ), including 39 native species and 13 exotic species. Bare ground represented approximately 15% of the groundcover structure ( Table AA.25 ). Regeneration of one canopy species was identified.

Table AA. 25: Structural ground composition for Site RPA12

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 10

Bare ground 15

Rock 5

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site RPA13 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757224E, 6439859N

Site RPA13 is located west of Irrigation Road within the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The vegetation is mapped as Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (Umwelt 2009) (Figure AA.26) . Evidence of logging and weed invasion was recorded and rabbit scats were present. The soils are red-brown clay loams.

Figure AA. 26: Site RPA13 photo point, east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA13 supported regenerating woodland, dominated by an exotic/native grassy groundcover. A mature canopy of Eucalyptus blakelyi and the occasional Cassinia arcuata were present. Microlaena stipoides Austrostipa scabra , Sporobolus creber and Austrodanthonia caespitosa were the most commonly recorded species within the ground strata. A number of exotic species were widely distributed within the ground layer including, Modiola caroliniana (Red-flowered Mallow) and Bromus hordeaceus .

Overall the species diversity was rich within the ground layer. A total of 53 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ) including 40 native species and 13 exotic species. The ground layer contained some litter and limited bare earth ( Table AA.26 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 26: Structural ground composition for Site RPA13

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 20

Bare ground 5

Rock <5

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site RPA14 – Unimproved Pasture

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 075094E, 6442103N

Site RPA14 is located in the very north western portion of the study area. The area is mapped as Unimproved Pasture (Figure AA.27) . There was weed invasion and evidence of feral animal activity. The soils are yellow-grey-brown clay loam.

Figure AA. 27: Site RPA14 photo point, east aspect

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site RPA14 was characterised by pasture with the ground layer dominated by exotic pasture grasses such as Briza subaristata, Bromus catharticus and Lolium perenne. Native species were infrequently scattered within the exotic grasses.

A total of 15 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ), including, 5 native species and 10 exotic species. The only native species represented within the site were Microlaena stipoides and Glycine sp. and Rumex sp. No regeneration of native canopy species was present within the site ( Table AA.27 ). A small percentage of litter was present, while rocks, bare ground and cryptogams were absent from the site.

Table AA. 27: Structural ground composition for Site RPA14

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground 0

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site RPA15 – Tumbledown Red Gum – Callitris Open Forest on Granite

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0754836E, 6426088N

Site RPA15 is located in the south of the study area off Highet Road at the southern boundary of the Residual EA Project Area Domain. The site has been mapped as Tumbledown Red Gum - Callitris Open Forest on Granite (Figure AA.28 ). Evidence of weed and feral animal disturbances were noted. The soils are dark brown sandy loam.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA. 28: Site RPA15 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site RPA15 was characterised as a dense woodland with a mixed canopy of Eucalyptus crebra , Angophora floribunda and Callitris endlicheri and E. rossii in small numbers. A very sparse shrub layer was recorded with only a few species; Brachyloma daphnoides (Daphne Heath) and Lissanthe strigosa present . Groundcover species were poorly represented as leaf litter was abundant. Small patches of native herbs such as Cheilanthes sieberi , Geranium solanderi and Podolepis neglecta were present.

A total of 38 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ) including 34 native species and 4 exotic species. The ground layer primarily consisted of fallen leaf litter ( Table AA.28 ). Bare ground, rocks and cryptogam cover was less than 5 % of the groundcover. Juvenile E. crebra and A. floribunda were present at the site.

Table AA. 28: Structural ground composition for Site RPA15

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 95

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site SG1 – Scribbly Gum Woodland – Heathland on Sandstone Plateaux

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760150E, 6433763N

Site SG1 is located north of Cicada Road in Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Plateaux vegetation within the Spring Gully Cliff Line Management Domain ( Figure AA.29 ). Feral activity was noted at this site. Soils are light brown sandy loams.

Figure AA.29: Site SG1 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic survey Site SG1 was described a shrubby woodland with a scattered canopy of Eucalyptus crebra (Narrow- leaved Ironbark) and Angophora floribunda (Rough-barked Apple). A small tree layer of Acacia linearifolia , Acacia doratoxylon and Persoonia linearis (Narrow-leaved Geebung) was present. Sannantha cunninghammii dominated the shrub layer and the dense grassy understorey included Anisopogon avenaceus , Microlaena stipoides, Austrodanthonia sp. and Aristida spp.

The site contained diverse with a total of 49 species recorded, all of which were native species (Table 3.1 ). Litter contributed the highest portion, 40%, to the groundcover (Table AA.29 ) and regeneration of canopy species, E. crebra was present.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 29: Structural ground composition for Site SG1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 40

Bare ground <5

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y – E.crebra

Site SI1 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0754697E, 6432072N

SI1 is located east of Trig Road within the south-western boundary of the Surface Infrastructure (SI) area. The site was situated within an Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.30 ).

Figure AA.30: Site SI1 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site SI1 was characterised by a dense canopy dominated by Eucalyptus fibrosa, E. agglomerata (Blue- leaved Stringybark) and E. blakelyi . A sparse shrub layer of Persoonia linearis and Leucopogon muticus were scattered throughout the site in low densities. Groundcover species also occurred at low

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

densities and commonly recorded species included Austrostipa densiflora , Austrodanthonia sp. and Microlaena stipoides.

A total of 37 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ); including 36 native species and one exotic species. Exotic species were uncommon throughout the site.

Litter formed a dense covering of 85% of the ground layer ( Table AA.30 ). Bare ground contributed a small proportion of the ground layer. Rocks and cryptogam were present within the site; however, their contribution limited.

Table AA. 30: Structural ground composition for Site SI1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 85

Bare ground 10

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site SI2 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0755111E, 6439123N

Site SI2 is situated off Bobadeen Road within a patch of Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (Figure AA.31 ). The site is located within the Surface Infrastructure area. Evidence of weeds and feral animal activity were identified within the site. The soils are cream coloured sands.

Figure AA.31: Site SI2 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site SI2 contained a densely packed canopy of Eucalyptus blakelyi , E. macrorhyncha and Angophora floribunda . A thick shrubby layer consisted of two dominant species including Cassinia arcuata and Brachyloma daphnoides . A sparsely distributed cover of ground species were scattered throughout the site. Native grasses were the most common groundcover species, with small patches of Microlaena stipoides , Dichelachne micrantha and Echinopogon caespitosus . Native herbs were also widely distributed throughout the ground stratum. Species represented within this layer include; Poranthera microphylla , Calotis cuneata and Wahlenbergia sp. Exotic species were identified within the ground layer with typical species recorded within the site including; Hypochaeris radicata , Aira sp. and Centaurium sp.

A total of 39 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ); including 36 native species and 3 exotic species. Groundcover was dominated by litter and interspersed with bare ground ( Table AA.31 ). Rocks were absent from within the site and small patches of cryptogam were also recorded.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 31: Structural ground composition for Site SI2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 60

Bare ground 25

Rock 0

Cryptogam 5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site SI3 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0761205E, 6437802N

Site SI3 is located close to a dam to the north east of Bobadeen Road within the Surface Infrastructure area. The vegetation is mapped as Modified White Box Woodland (Umwelt 2009) ( Figure AA.32 ). Soils are deep black loam.

Figure AA.32: Site SI3 plot photo, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site SI3 was an open pasture dominated by exotic species. The tree and shrub layers were absent and the dominant ground layer species included Bromus molliformis , Lolium perenne, Dichelachne micrantha and Hydrocotyle sp.

Species diversity was high despite only one vegetation stratum. A total of 42 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ); including a significant number of exotic species. 18 exotic species were present within the site, with 24 native species present.

Structural diversity in the ground layer was limited. A small scattering of litter (5%) was record within the site ( Table AA.32 ). Rocks, bare ground, cryptogams and regenerating canopy species were absent.

Table AA. 32: Structural ground composition for Site SI3

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground 0

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site SI4 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0761705E, 6440565N

Site SI4 is situated within the north-eastern corner of the Surface Infrastructure (SI) area. The vegetation is mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone and Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Plateaux (Figure AA.33 ). The soils are light brown-grey sandy clay loam.

Figure AA.33: Site SI4 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site SI4 supported woodland with a diverse canopy layer of Eucalyptus parramattensis (Parramatta Red Gum), E. dwyeri and Angophora floribunda. The shrub layer was relatively dense with the most common shrubs recorded within the site including Leptospermum polygalifolium, Cassinia arcuata, Lissanthe strigosa and Astroloma humifusum . Groundcover was limited with Microlaena stipoides, Arundinella nepalensis , Lomandra spp. and Entolasia stricta the most commonly recorded species.

Vegetation within the site was diverse with a total of 49 species were recorded (Table 3.1 ). Only exotic species was identified within the site.

An abundant litter cover was present throughout the ground layer ( Table AA.33 ). Contributions to percentage ground cover from bare ground and cryptogams were limited. Rocks and regenerating of canopy species were absent from the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 33: Structural ground composition for Site SI4

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 80

Bare ground 5

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Revegetation/Regeneration Vegetation Monitoring

Site BOB9 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760076E 6434964N

Site BOB9 is located within Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area, north of Pleuger Road. Site vegetation has been mapped as Modified White Box Woodland ( Figure AA.34 ). Clearing of native vegetation, weed invasion and rabbit activity was evident at this site. The site has been sown with agricultural species. The soils are brown yellow sandy loam.

Figure AA.34: Site BOB9 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB9 supported a cleared paddock comprising a mixture of native and exotic grass species and scattered trees, Angophora floribunda (Rough-barked Apple). The adjacent woodland community contained a more intact and diverse canopy layer. Shrubs were absent at this site. A diverse grass layer of exotic and native grasses interspersed with herbs was present with Microlaena stipoides dominating the ground layer. Other common grasses included native species such as Aristida vagans and Themeda australis and a number of the exotic Bromus species. A number of native herbs/scramblers were also distributed throughout the ground layer including Desmodium sp., Asperula conferta (Common Woodruff) and Crasspedia sp.

A total of 46 species were recorded within the site including 31 native species and 15 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). A high percentage of exotic herbs and grasses were present at this site. Commonly recorded exotic species included Bromus spp., Conyza sp., Lolium sp. and Paronychia brasiliana (Brazilian Whitlow) and Petrorhagia nanteuilii . Historical disturbance and clearing of native vegetation may have contributed to the successful establishment of weeds within the site. Some exotic grasses have been sown at this site. The site was grazed at the time of the survey and this, together with the

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

absence of canopy species, is likely to have contributed the absence of regeneration at the site. Table AA.34 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 34: Ground Structural Composition for Site BOB9

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOB10 – Derived Native Grassland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759185E 6435444N

Site BOB10 is located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain, east of Fan Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Derived Native Grassland (Figure AA.35 ). The site was highly disturbed by clearing of native vegetation, introduction of exotic pasture grasses, construction/installation of overhead powerlines and underground irrigation pipelines. The soils are brown clay loam.

Figure AA.35: Site BOB10 plot photo, south aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site BOB10 supported an exotic grassland, absent of trees and shrubs. The floristic composition of the ground layer consisted of several exotic pasture grasses including; Bromus molliformis and Lolium perenne. Exotic weeds have invaded the site and were widely distributed throughout the grassland. Medicago sp. and Trifolium arvense (Haresfoot Clover) were among the most abundant herbs recorded. Native species occurred at low densities (<5%) (Table 3.1 ), including Ranunculus sp. and Austrodanthonia sp.

The overall floristic diversity for the site was low. A total of 25 species were recorded including 6 native and 19 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Anthropogenic disturbances have strongly influenced the current floristic composition at the site.

An absence of trees and shrubs limited the accumulation of litter within the site ( Table AA.35 ). The ground layer contained one continuous sward of exotic and native grasses. Table AA.35 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 35: Structural ground composition for Site BOB10

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground 0

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) 0

Site BOB11 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757820E, 6435495N

Site BOB11 is located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain, to the west of Fan Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (regenerating) and is adjacent to a drainage line ( Figure AA.36 ). Historic logging, weed invasion and feral animal activity, such as Rabbit, is evident. Soils are light brown sands.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.36: Site BOB11 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB11 supported open forest with a mixed canopy of Eucalyptus crebra (Narrow-leaved Ironbark) and E. rossii . The shrub layer was dense and dominated by Cassinia arcuata . A number of other native small shrubs were also present such as Brachyloma daphnoides and Astroloma humifusum . Native grasses such as Microlaena stipoides, Echinopogon sp. and Austrodanthonia monticola dominated the ground strata. Exotic species were present in the ground layer although they were not abundant. The most common exotic species included Conyza sp. and Gamochaeta sp.

A total of 35 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1 ). Native flora represented a high proportion of species recorded within the site, 31 natives and 4 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Table AA.36 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 36: Ground Structural Composition for Site BOB11

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 25

Bare ground 5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOB12 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756727E, 6437459N

Site BOB12 is located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain, bounded by Bobadeen Road to the north and Bobadeen Loop Road to the south. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Modified White Box Woodland ( Figure AA.37 ). Previous clearing of vegetation was evident and recent establishment of exotic weeds and grazing were observed within the site. The soils are red brown clay that has been slightly compacted by cattle.

Figure AA.37: Site BOB12 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOB12 supported an open pasture dominated by native grass species although exotic grasses have been sown throughout. Native grasses dominating the ground layer including; Austrodanthonia racemosa var. racemosa , Elymus scaber and Austrostipa sp. Exotic herbs and grasses such as, Lolium perenne (Perennial Ryegrass) and Cirsium vulgare (Spear Thistle) were common at this site.

The overall species richness was low at this site (Table 3.1 ). 19 species were recorded, including 6 native and 13 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Native grasses contributed the greatest proportion of groundcover.

Previous land management practices such as clearing and agriculture, are likely to have contributed the current condition of the site and the absence of leaf litter can be attributed to the absence of tree and shrub layers. Similarly, the absence of regeneration of canopy species would be influenced by the absence of canopy species and current grazing practices. Table AA.37 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 37: Structural ground composition for Site BOB12

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOB13 – Unimproved Pasture

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757610E, 6437421N

Site BOB13 is located near the north-west boundary of the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain and the nearest cross-roads are Bobadeen and Bobadeen Loop Roads. Vegetation within the site was mapped as Unimproved Pasture ( Figure AA.38 ). The soils are red brown clay.

Figure AA.38: Site BOB13 plot photo, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey The vegetation within site BOB13 was dominated by a dense shrub and ground layer. The canopy was dominated by Eucalyptus crebra with sparsely scattered Red Gums (Eucalyptus sp.). In contrast, the shrub layer was low-lying, dense and dominated by Cassinia arcuata. Other common species included Melichrus urceolatus . The ground layer contained a diverse range of herbs and grasses, with Microlaena stipoides dominant. Other native species represented within this layer included Aristida vagans and Gahnia aspera . A small number of exotic species were scattered throughout the native grasses, including; Briza minor (Shivery Grass), Hypochaeris radicata and Petrorhagia nanteuilii .

A total of 44 species were recorded within the site, including 36 native species and 8 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). The site was relatively diverse with limited weed invasion. Table AA.38 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 38: Structural ground composition for Site BOB13

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground 15

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site BOB14 – Derived Native Grassland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0758402E, 6437002N

Site BOB14 is located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain, south of Bobadeen Road, west of the pump station, along a drainage line. The vegetation within the site has been mapped as Derived Native Grassland (Umwelt 2009) (Figure AA.39 ). Feral animal activity and weed invasion were evident at this site. The soils are dark brown clay loams.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.39: Site BOB14 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic Survey Site BOB14 is within a regenerating paddock and supported a low canopy, 6 - 10 m, of regenerating Red Gum (Eucalyptus sp.). Melaleuca thymifolia (Thyme Honey-myrtle) represented the scattered shrub layer and the grassy groundcover was dominated by dense swards of native perennial species such as Arundinella nepalensis, Aristida vagans and Dichelachne micrantha .

A total of 39 species were recorded within the site, including 23 native species and 16 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). The ground layer supported a relatively diverse combination of exotic herbs and grasses. Exotic species were widely distributed throughout the site at low densities. Commonly recorded exotic species included; Briza minor , Vulpia sp. and Paspalum sp. The ground layer lacked structural complexity. Table AA.319 summaries additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 39: Structural ground composition for Site BOB14

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground <5

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOB15 – Unimproved Pasture

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0759362E, 6437357N

Site BOB15 is located within the north-east section of the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain area, adjacent to Bobadeen Road. The vegetation within the site mapped as Unimproved Pasture (Umwelt 2009) (Figure AA.40 ). The soils are red brown clays.

Figure AA.40: Site BOB15 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic Survey Site BOB15 was supported a shrubby pasture with a mixed groundcover of native and exotic species. The canopy was absent and a moderately dense shrubby layer of Acacia linearifolia, Acacia leucolobia and Cassinia arcuata was present. A thick grassy groundcover dominated by native species such as, Microlaena stipoides, Aristida sp., Dichelachne micrantha. Calotis cuneata and Gahnia aspera was recorded.

A total of 43 species were recorded within the site, including; 28 native species and 15 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). A high number of exotic species were recorded within site. Exotic groundcover species recorded within the site included; Bromus sp. commonly recorded, and Hypochaeris radicata and Conyza sp. Table AA.40 Table AA. 40 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 40: Structural ground composition for Site BOB15

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground 5

Rock 5

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOB16 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760008E, 6437426N

Site BOB16 is located within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Domain, between Homestead and Bobadeen Roads. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (regenerating) (Figure AA.41 ). The soils are brown red sandy loam.

Figure AA.41: Site BOB16 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic Survey Site BOB16 supported woodland with a tall canopy, 18 – 20 m, dominated by Eucalyptus fibrosa and E. sparsifolia (Narrow-leaved Stringybark). A sparse shrub layer consisted of C assinia sp, Monotoca elliptica and Lissanthe strigosa . Ground species were present in low frequencies. The most common

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

species in the ground layer included, Joycea pallida (Silvertop Wallaby Grass) Austrodanthonia monticola , Entolasia stricta and Goodenia hederacea.

The species at the site were relatively diverse, despite the abundant leaf litter, with a total of 40 species recorded including 38 native species and 2 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Hypochaeris glabra (Smooth Catsear) was recorded at very low densities. Table AA.41 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 41: Structural ground composition for Site BOB16

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 60

Bare ground 5

Rock 25

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOBE5 - Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763267E, 6438323N

Site BOBE5 is located within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain, north of Apple Road. Vegetation within the site was mapped as Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (regenerating) (Figure AA.42 ). Current disturbance including grazing of livestock and native and feral animals was evident. Soils are red brown clay loams.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.42: Site BOBE5 plot photo, south aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOBE5 is located on a hillslope characterised by a grassy patch amongst an open woodland of Angophora floribunda . A small tree layer of Acacia linearifolia was widely scattered throughout the site. The shrub layer was dominated by Cassinia arcuata . The groundcover was high and comprised of a number of native grasses including Microlaena stipoides and Austrodanthonia sp. Native herbs such as Desmodium sp. and Calotis lappulacea were also present. Mistletoe was recorded within the canopy layer. Mistletoe is an important foraging resource for woodland birds such as the Dicaeum hirundinaceum ( Mistletoebird ).

A total of 34 species were recorded within the site, including 27 native and 7 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Exotic species represented a significant portion of species, particularly in the shrub layer with exotic species less dominant in the ground layer. Table AA.42 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 42: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE5

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 15

Bare ground <5

Rock 5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site BOBE6 – Derived Native Grassland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763512E, 6438078N

Site BOBE6 is located within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain, north of Apple Road in a cleared area. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Derived Native Grassland (Figure AA.43 ) and was comprised of a mixture of native and exotic grass species. The soils are grey clay loam.

Figure AA.43: Site BOBE6 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOBE6 supported grassland with a high exotic species influence. Shrubs and trees were absent from the site. A dense ground layer of Vulpia sp., Bromus molliformis and Lolium sp. was present. A few native species were also present within the ground layer including, Dichelachne micrantha and Austrodanthonia sp.

A total of 43 species were recorded within the site, including 22 native species and 21 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). Table AA.43 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 43: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE6

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground <5%

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOBE7 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763524E 6437768N

Site BOBE7 is located within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain, south of Apple Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Modified White Box Woodland and also supported a derived grassland structure ( Figure AA.44 ). The soils are brown clays.

Figure AA.44: BOBE7 plot photo, south-east aspect.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic survey Site BOBE7 supported groundcover only. Tall grasses of both native and exotic species were present. Exotic species Bromus mollifromis , and Lolium perenne were widely distributed within the ground layer and the native species Dichanthium sp. and Austrodanthonia tenuior were also common. Several small native herbs Asperula conferta (Common Woodruff) and Geranium solanderi were scattered throughout.

A total of 28 species recorded at the site, including 17 native species and 11 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). The absence of canopy species and the dense grass layer meant that the percentage of litter and bare ground was low. Table AA.44 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 44: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE7

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 5

Bare ground <5

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site BOBE8 – Modified White Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0763070E 6437377N

Site BOBE8 is located within the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Domain, south of Apple Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Modified White Box Woodland (Figure AA.45 ), however; the plot location supported a derived grassland structure. The soils are brown clays.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.45: Site BOBE8 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site BOBE8 supported open grassland, with trees and shrubs absent. The species composition was similar to BOBE7 with a mix of native and exotic grasses dominating the ground layer ( Table 3.1 ).

A total of 34 species were recorded within the site, including 16 native species and 18 exotic species (Table 3.1 ). The most abundant species were exotic grasses, including Bromus sp and B. diandrus (Great Brome) and Lolium sp. A few native grass species were also present within the ground layer including Austrodanthonia sp. and Austrostipa scabra. Native herbs were scattered throughout the site. Table AA.45 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 45: Structural ground composition for Site BOBE8

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 20

Bare ground <5

Rock 1

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) N

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site OC1 – Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756413E, 6427552N

Site OC1 is located within the southern section of Open Cut (OC) Extension, east of Goanna Road. The vegetation within the site was mapped as Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium (Figure AA.46) . The soils are grey-brown sandy loams.

Figure AA.46: Site OC1 photo point, south-east aspect

Floristic survey Site OC1 supported woodland with a mixed canopy of Eucalyptus crebra and E. blakelyi . A small tree layer of Acacia linearifolia was also present and the sparse shrub layer supported species such as Dodonaea viscosa and Pomaderris sp. The ground layer supported a number of grass, herb and sedge species with Microlaena stipoides and Schoenus sp. the most abundant native groundcover species. Exotic species were widely distributed throughout the site and included Hypochaeris radicata and Cirsium vulgare .

The site contained high species diversity, especially within the ground layer. A total of 58 species were recorded within this site, the majority of which were native species (Table 3.1 ) including 51 native species and 7 exotic species. Table AA.46 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 46: Structural ground composition for Site OC1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 20

Bare ground 5

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

Site OC2 – Grey Box Woodland

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0756590E, 6428538N

Site OC2 is located within the Open Cut (OC) Extension, directly west of Goanna Road. The vegetation within was mapped as Grey Box Woodland and weed invasion was limited ( Figure AA.47 ). The soils are light brown sandy loam.

Figure AA.47: Site OC2 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site OC2 supported an open woodland with a widely distributed canopy layer of Eucalyptus moluccana, E. crebra and Allocasuarina luehmannii (Bulloak). Shrubs were also scattered throughout the site, although at lower densities. Threatened flora species Acacia ausfeldii (Ausfeld's Wattle) was common in the shrub layer. Other shrub species recorded within the site included Lissanthe strigosa and Astroloma

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

humifusum . The groundcover consisted of a sparse, although diverse, layer of native herbs, grasses and perennial tussocks including Cheilanthes sieberi , Aristida vagans, Arundinella nepalensis and Lomandra multiflora subsp. multiflora. One exotic species, Hypochaeris radicata, was recorded at this site and in low densities. Mistletoe, an important foraging resource for bird species, was identified within the site.

The site had high species richness. A total of 58 species were recorded within the site (Table 3.1), including 47 native species and 1 exotic species. Table AA.47 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table A1. 47: Structural ground composition for Site OC2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 50

Bare ground 15

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

Site OC3 – Rehabilitation Post 1997

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0758053E, 6428804N

Site OC3 is located within a rehabilitation area directly within the Open Cut (OC) Extension area Goanna Road, is situated south-west of the site. The vegetation within the site has been mapped as Rehabilitation Post 1997 (Figure AA.48 ). The site was subject to significant historical disturbance including the removal of native vegetation and changes to the soil profile. Weed invasion and feral animal activity was evident. The soil was a light grey-brown sandy loam.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Figure AA.48: Site OC3 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site OC3 supported a rehabilitation vegetation community with a low scattered canopy of planted Eucalyptus spp. Acacia species created a tall shrub layer, most commonly recorded included A. deanei A.flexifolia and A.linearifolia, and A. decora . A lower shrub layer, at 0.3 - 3m in height contained a small number of other native shrubs including; Cassinia arcuata and Dodonaea viscosa. The groundlayer supported a mixture of native and exotic grasses such as Microlaena stipoides , Vulpia sp., Austrodanthonia racemosa var. racemosa and Austrostipa scabra .

A total of 35 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), including 19 native species and 16 exotic species. Table AA.48 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table A1. 48: Structural ground composition for Site OC3

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 80

Bare ground 10

Rock <5

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site OC4 - Rehabilitation Post 1997

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760783E, 6428253N

Site OC4 is located within Open Cut (OC) Extension area, on the eastern boundary. The vegetation within the site has been mapped as Rehabilitation Post 1997 (Figure AA.49 ). Weed invasion and feral animal activity were evident. Soils were substantially compacted due previous vegetation clearing and mining activities and comprised a light brown clay/rubble.

Figure AA.49: Site OC4 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site OC4 supported pasture with a few scattered Cassinia arcuata . The groundcover consisted of an established layer of primarily exotic grasses and a mixture exotic and native herbs and forbs. Commonly recorded exotic species included Vulpia sp. and Trifolium campestre . A few native grasses such as the colonising grass species Chloris truncata and Bothriochloa macra were present, whilst other species such as Carex appressa (Tall Sedge) were interspersed with the exotic groundcover species.

Site OC4 is highly disturbed and this was reflected by the species composition. A total of 37 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), including 14 native species and 23 exotic species. Exotic weeds dominated foliage groundcover. Bare ground also contributed a significant proportion to the overall structure ( Table AA.49 ). Exposed soils contained a clay/rubble mix following previous disturbance of the soil profile during mining operations and the rehabilitation processes. Table AA.49 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 49: Structural ground composition for Site OC4

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter <5

Bare ground 20

Rock 0

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) Y – E.crebra

Site OC5 – Unimproved Pasture

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0760926E, 6429219N

Site OC5 is located within the Open Cut (OC) Extension area, east of Ulan Road and adjacent to a drainage line. The vegetation of the site was mapped as Angophora floribunda dominated woodland (Figure AA.50 ). Erosion, weed invasion and feral animal activity were evident at the site. Soils are a deep sandy loam.

Figure AA.50: Site OC5 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site OC5 supported diverse woodland with a relatively dense canopy of Angophora floribunda and E. blakelyi . The sparse shrub layer was comprised of several species including Kunzea sp. and Cassinia arcuata . The groundcover was dominated by native species, widely dispersed and in low densities. Typical species included Aristida ramose, Themeda australis and Cheilanthes sieberi .

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Species diversity was high throughout the site. A total of 66 species were recorded (Table 3.1 ). Native species dominated the floristic composition with only 9 exotic species present within the site. Table AA.50 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 50: Structural ground composition for Site OC5

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 40

Bare ground 5

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Floristic-based Subsidence Monitoring

Site FBS1 – Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0758142E; 6431632N

FBS1 is located within Residual project Area, south of South Road. The vegetation in the site was mapped as Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone (Figure AA.51 ). This area had been recently burnt and no exotic species were recorded. The soils are grey sand.

Figure AA.51: Site FBS1 plot photo, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey The floristic structure of site FBS1 was influenced by a recent fire. The vegetation community was described as a woodland formation with a low canopy, 8 – 10m in height. Common canopy species included Eucalyptus crebra, Eucalyptus dwyeri and Acacia doratoxylon (Currawang) with Eucalyptus sparsifolia and Eucalyptus parramattensis occurring less frequently. Young Acacia doratoxylon also formed part of the mid-storey together with the occasional Dodonaea viscosa (Sticky Hop-bush). Groundcover was low (< 5 %) with Entolasia stricta , Microlaena stipoides and Lomandra glauca amongst the most commonly recorded species.

A total of 35 species were recorded (Table 3.1 ). Exotic flora species were absent from the site. Table AA.51 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Table AA. 51: Structural ground composition for Site FBS1

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 50

Bare ground 10

Rock 30

Cryptogam <5

Regeneration (Y/N) N (recent burn)

Site FBS2 - Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone

Geographic setting of the site Zone 55 0757846E, 6432847N

Site FBS2 is located within Residual project Area, south of Middle Road. The vegetation of this was mapped as Scribbly Gum Woodland - Heathland on Sand Plateaux vegetation community ( Figure AA.52 ). The soils are shallow light brown-grey sandy.

Figure AA. 52: Site FBS2 photo point, south-east aspect.

Floristic survey Site FBS2 supported woodland with a canopy dominated by Angophora floribunda , with Eucalyptus crebra (Narrow-leaved Ironbark) and E. rossii (Inland Scribbly Gum) also present at lower densities. A dense mid-storey of Persoonia linearis and Acacia leucolobia (Wattle) dominated the shrub layer.

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Groundcover species were sparsely distributed. Species recorded within this stratum include Microlaena stipoides, Poranthera microphylla, Goodenia hederacea and Lomandra spp.

A total of 40 species were recorded within this site (Table 3.1 ), including 39 native species and 1 exotic species, Hypochaeris radicata . Table AA.52 summarises additional groundcover components of the site.

Table AA. 52: Structural ground composition for Site FBS2

Description Percent Cover (%)

Litter 80

Bare ground 5

Rock 0

Cryptogam 0

Regeneration (Y/N) Y

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix B: Flora Species List

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia ausfeldii Ausfeld's Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia deanei Green Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia decora Western Silver Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia doratoxylon Lancewood Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia flexifolia Bent-leaf Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia gladiiformis Sword Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia implexa Hickory Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia leucolobia Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia linearifolia Narrow-leaved Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia longifolia subsp. longifolia Sydney Golden Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia paradoxa Kangaroo Thorn Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia sp. Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia vernicflua Varnich Wattle Native Rosaceae Acaena echinata var. echinata Native Rosaceae Acaena sp. Native Polygonaceae Acetosella vulgaris Sorrel Exotic Poaceae Aira cupaniana Exotic Poaceae Aira sp. Exotic

Lamiaceae Ajuga australis Austral Bugle Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina gymnanthera Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic

Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina luehmannii Bulloak Native

Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina sp . Native Amaranthaceae Alternanthera denticulata Lesser Joyweed Native Loranthaceae Amyema miquelii Native Myrsinaceae Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel Exotic Myrtaceae Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple Native Poaceae Aristida jerichoensis var. jerichoensis Jericho Wiregrass Native Poaceae Aristida ramosa Purple Wiregrass Native Poaceae Aristida sp. Native Poaceae Aristida ramosa Purple Wiregrass Native Poaceae Aristida vagans Threeawn Speargrass Native Anthericaceae Arthropodium minus Native Poaceae Arundinella napalensis Reedgrass Native Rubiaceae Asperula conferta Common Woodruff Native Rubiaceae Asperula sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Astroloma humifusum Native Cranberry Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Astroloma sp. Native Araliaceae Astrotricha longifolia Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia caespitosa Ringed Wallaby Grass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia duttoniana Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia eriantha Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia fulva Wallaby Grass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia monticola Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia pilosa Smooth-flower Wallaby Grass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia racemosa var. racemosa Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia sp. Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia tenuior Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Poaceae Austrostipa aristiglumis Plains Grass Native Poaceae Austrostipa (?) densiflora Native Poaceae Austrostipa platychaeta Flatawn Speargrass Native Poaceae Austrostipa scabra Speargrass Native Poaceae Austrostipa scabra subsp. falcata Native Poaceae Austrostipa sp. Native Poaceae Avena sp. Exotic Myrtaceae Babingtonia cunninghamii Native Myrtaceae Baeckea sp. Native Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia dominii Tarvine Native Rutaceae Boronia ledifolia Showy Boronia Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea buxifolia Native Fabaceae Bossiaea obcordata Spiny Bossiaea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea prostrata Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea sp. Native Poaceae Bothriochloa macra Red Grass Native Poaceae Bothriochloa sp. Native Sterculiaceae Brachychiton populneus Kurrajong Native Sterculiaceae Brachychiton sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Brachyloma daphnoides Daphne Heath Native Asteraceae Brachyscome sp. Native Poaceae Briza minor Shivery Grass Exotic Poaceae Briza subaristata Exotic Poaceae Bromus catharticus Prairie Grass Exotic Poaceae Bromus diandrus Great Brome Exotic Poaceae Bromus hordeaceus Soft Brome Exotic Poaceae Bromus molliformis Soft Brome Exotic

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Poaceae Bromus sp. Exotic

Asphodelaceae Bulbine sp. Native Pittosporaceae Bursaria spinosa Blackthorn Native

Orchidaceae Caladenia sp. Native Myrtaceae Callistemon pinifolius Pine-leaved Bottlebrush Native Cupressaceae Callitris endlicheri Black Cypress Pine Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneata Mountain Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneifolia Purple Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis lappulacea Yellow Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis sp. Native Myrtaceae Calytrix tetragona Common Fringe-myrtle Native Brassicaceae Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's Purse Exotic Cyperaceae Carex appressa Tall Sedge Native Cyperaceae Carex inversa Native Asteraceae Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Exotic Asteraceae Cassinia arcuata Sifton Bush Native Asteraceae Cassinia aureonitens Yellow Cassinia Native Asteraceae Cassinia longifolia Native Asteraceae Cassinia sp. Native Lauraceae Cassytha glabella Native

Casuarinaceae Casuarina sp. Native Asteraceae Centaurea melitensis Maltese Cockspur Exotic Gentianaceae Centaurium sp. Exotic Gentianaceae Centaurium tenuiflorum Exotic

Caryophyllaceae Cerastium sp. Exotic Euphorbiaceae Chamaesyce drummondi Caustic Weed Native Adiantaceae Cheilanthes austrotenuifolia Rock Fern Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Adiantaceae Cheilanthes sieberi Native Poaceae Chloris truncata Windmill Grass Native Poaceae Chloris sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Chrysocephalum apiculatum Common Everlasting Native Asteraceae Chrysocephalum semipapposum Clustered Everlasting Native Asteraceae Chrysocephalum sp. Native Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle Exotic

Convolvulaceae Convolvulus erubescens Blushing Bindweed Native

Convolvulaceae Convolvulus sp. Native Asteraceae Conyza bonariensis Flaxleaf Fleabane Exotic Asteraceae Conyza sp. Exotic Rutaceae Correa reflexa Common Correa Native Asteraceae Cotula australis Common Cotula Native Asteraceae Cotula sp Native/Exotic Rhamnaceae Cryptandra amara Bitter cryptandra Native Rhamnaceae Cryptandra sp. Native Rhamnaceae Cryptandra spinescens Native Rubiaceae Cyclophyllum longipetalum Coast Canthium Native Asteraceae Cymbonotus lawsonianus Bears-ear Native Poaceae Cymbopogon refractus Barbed Wire Grass Native Poaceae Cynodon dactylon Couch Native Cyperaceae Cyperus sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Dactylis glomerata Cocksfoot Exotic Goodeniaceae Dampiera sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Daviesia genistifolia Broom Bitter Pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium brachypodum Large Tick-trefoil Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium sp. Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium varians Slender Tick-trefoil Native

Phormiaceae Dianella revoluta Blueberry Lily Native

Phormiaceae Dianella sp. Native Poaceae Dichanthium sericeum Queensland Bluegrass Native Poaceae Dichelachne micrantha Shorthair Plumegrass Native Poaceae Dichelachne rara Native Poaceae Dichelachne sp. Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra repens Kidney Weed Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra sp. A sensu Native Anthericaceae Dichopogon sp. Native Anthericaceae Dichopogon strictus Chocolate Lily Native Poaceae Digitaria sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Dillwynia sericea Snowy Parrot-pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Dillwynia sieberi Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea sp. Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea viscosa Sticky Hop-bush Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea viscosa subsp. cuneata Wedge-leaf Hop-bush Native

Droseraceae Drosera sp. Native Poaceae Echinopogon caespitosus Bushy Hedgehog-grass Native Poaceae Echinopogon ovatus Forest Hedgehog Grass Native Poaceae Echinopogon sp. Native Boraginaceae Echium plantagineum Paterson's Curse Exotic Boraginaceae Echium vulgare Vipers Bugloss Exotic Chenopodiaceae Einadia hastata Berry Saltbush Native Chenopodiaceae Einadia sp. Native Poaceae Elymus scaber Native Poaceae Entolasia sp. Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Poaceae Entolasia stricta Wiry Panic Native Poaceae Eragrostis benthamii Native Poaceae Eragrostis curvula African Lovegrass Exotic Poaceae Eragrostis sp. Native Geraniaceae Erodium sp. Native/ Exotic Myrtaceae Eucalyptus (?) crebra juvenile Narrow-leaved Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus (?) parramattensis Parramatta Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus agglomerata Blue-leaved Stringybark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus albens White Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus blakelyi Blakely's Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus crebra Narrow-leaved Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus dwyeri Dwyer's Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus fibrosa Red Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus macroryncha Inland Scribbly Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus melliodora Yellow Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus microcarpa Grey Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus moluccana Grey Box Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus parramattensis Parramatta Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus rossii Red Stringybark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sp. Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sparsifolia Narrow-leaved Stringybark Native Asteraceae Euchiton sp. Native Asteraceae Euchiton sphaericus Native Santalaceae Exocarpos cupressiformis Cherry Ballart Native Santalaceae Exocarpos strictus Pale-fruit Ballart Native Cyperaceae Fimbristylis dichotoma Common Fringe-sedge Native Cyperaceae Fimbristylis sp. Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare Fennel Exotic Cyperaceae Gahnia aspera Rough Saw-sedge Native Cyperaceae Gahnia sieberiana Red-fruit Saw-sedge Native Cyperaceae Gahnia sp. Native Rubiaceae Galium leptogonium Native

Rubiaceae Galium sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta calviceps Cudweed Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta coarctata Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta ? coarctata Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta purpurea Purple Cudweed Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta sp. Exotic Geraniaceae Geranium solanderi Native Geranium Native Geraniaceae Geranium sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine clandestina Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine tabacina Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine tomentella Woolly Glycine Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Gompholobium huegelii Pale Wedge Pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Gompholobium sp. Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus elatus Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus sp. Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus tetragynus Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus teucroides Raspwort Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia hederacea Forest Goodenia Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia pinnatifida Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia sp. Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia sp.1 Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Goodeniaceae Goodenia sp.2 Native Scrophulariaceae Gratiola pedunculata Native Proteaceae Grevillea sericea Pink Spider Flower Native Proteaceae Grevillea sp. Native Proteaceae Hakea sp. Native Haloragaceae Haloragis heterophylla Rough Raspwort Native Haloragaceae Haloragis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Hardenbergia violacea Purple Coral Pea Native Asteraceae Helichrysum sp. Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia circumdans Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia obtusifolia Hoary Guinea Flower Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia sp. Native Brassicaceae Hirschfeldia incana Hairy Brassica Exotic Poaceae Hordeum sp. Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Hovea heterophylla Native Apiaceae Hydrocotyle laxiflora Stinking Pennywort Native Clusiaceae Hypericum gramineum Small St John's Wort Native Clusiaceae Hypericum perforatum St John's Wort Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris glabra Smooth Catsear Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris radicata Catsear Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris sp. Exotic Proteaceae Isopogon sp. Native Poaceae Joycea pallida Silvertop Wallaby Grass Native Juncaceae Juncus homalocaulis Native Juncaceae Juncus sp. Native/Exotic

Juncaceae Juncus usitatus Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Juvenile Acacia Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Myrtaceae juvenile Angophora floribunda Native Myrtaceae juvenile Eucalyptus blakelyi Native Myrtaceae juvenile E. crebra Native Myrtaceae juvenile Eucalyptus moluccana Grey Box Native Myrtaceae juvenile Eucalyptus sp. Native Myrtaceae Kunzea capitata Native Myrtaceae Kunzea parvifolia Violet Kunzea Native Myrtaceae Kunzea sp. Native Poaceae Lachnagrostis sp. Native Asteraceae Lagenophora stipitata Blue Bottle-daisy Native Anthericaceae Laxmannia gracilis Slender Wire Lily Native Anthericaceae Laxmannia sp. Native Brassicaceae Lepidium sp. Native/Exotic Cyperaceae Lepidosperma laterale Native Cyperaceae Lepidosperma sp. Native Asteraceae Leptorhynchos squamatus Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum arachnoides Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum parvifolium Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum polygalifolium Tantoon Native Leptospermum polygalifolium subsp. Myrtaceae transmontanum Tantoon Native Myrtaceae Leptospermum sphaerocarpum Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon attenuatus Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon muticus Blunt Beard-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon virgatus Native Linaceae Linum trigynum French Flax Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Lissanthe strigosa Peach Heath Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Lobeliaceae Lobelia sp. Native Poaceae Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass Exotic Poaceae Lolium sp. Exotic Lomandraceae Lomandra confertifolia Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra filiformis Native Lomandraceae Lomandra filiformis subsp. coriacea Wattle Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra filiformis subsp. filiformis Wattle Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra glauca Pale Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra multiflora subsp. multiflora Many-flowered Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra sp. Native Proteaceae Lomatia sp. Native Zamiaceae Macrozamia spiralis Native Zamiaceae Macrozamia sp. Native

Malvaceae Malva sp. Exotic

Lamiaceae Marrubium vulgare White Horehound Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Medicago sp. Exotic Myrtaceae Melaleuca thymifolia Thyme Honey-myrtle Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus erubescens Ruby Urn Heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus urceolatus Urn-heath Native Poaceae Microlaena stipoides Weeping Grass Native Orchidaceae Microtis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Mirbelia sp. Native Malvaceae Modiola caroliniana Red-flowered Mallow Exotic Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca elliptica Tree Broom-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca scoparia Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca sp. Native Rubiaceae Opercularia diphylla Native Rubiaceae Opercularia sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Ornithopus compressus Yellow Serradella Exotic Oxalidaceae Oxalis perennans Native Oxalidaceae Oxalis sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Panicum effusum Hairy Panic Native Caryophyllaceae Paronychia brasiliana Chilean Whitlow Wort Exotic Poaceae Paspalum sp. Exotic Iridaceae Patersonia sericea Silky Purple-Flag Native Iridaceae Patersonia sp. Native

Polygonaceae Persicaria sp. Native/Exotic Proteaceae Persoonia linearis Narrow-leaved Geebung Native Proteaceae Persoonia myrtilloides subsp. cunninghamii Native Caryophyllaceae Petrorhagia nanteuilii Exotic Caryophyllaceae Petrorhagia velutina Exotic Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus hirtellus Thyme Spurge Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus sp. Native Thymelaeaceae Pimelea linifolia Slender Rice Flower Native Thymelaeaceae Pimelea sp. Native Plantaginaceae Plantago debilis Native Plantaginaceae Plantago gaudichaudii Narrow plantain Native

Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata Lamb's Tongues Exotic

Plantaginaceae Plantago sp. Native Apiaceae Platysace linearifolia Native Poaceae Poa labillardierei Tussock Grass Native Poaceae Poa sp. Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Asteraceae Podolepis neglecta Native Asteraceae Podolepis sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Podolobium aciculiferum Needle Shaggy Pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Podolobium ilicifolium Prickly Shaggy Pea Native Caryophyllaceae Polycarpon tetraphyllum Four-leaved Allseed Exotic Rhamnaceae Pomaderris sp. Native Rubiaceae Pomax umbellata Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera corymbosa Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera microphylla Native Lamiaceae Prostanthera howelliae Native

Dennstaedtiaceae Pteridium esculentum Common Bracken Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea cinerascens Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea microphylla Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea sp. Native Rubiaceae Richardia stellaris Exotic Rosaceae Rubus ulmifolius Blackberry Exotic Polygonaceae Rumex brownii Swamp Dock Native Polygonaceae Rumex dumosus Wiry Dock Native Polygonaceae Rumex sp. Native/Exotic Ranunculaceae Ranunculus Native/Exotic Myrtaceae Sannantha cunninghamii Native Cyperaceae Schoenus apogon Common Bog-rush Native Cyperaceae Schoenus sp. Native Asteraceae Senecio sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Setaria sp. Exotic Malvaceae Sida corrugata Corrugated Sida Native Malvaceae Sida sp. Native/Exotic

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic

Asteraceae Sigesbeckia orientalis Native Asteraceae Silybum marianum Variegated Thistle Exotic Iridaceae Sisyrinchium sp. A Scourweed Exotic Solanaceae Solanum campanulatum Native Solanaceae Solanum sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Solenogyne bellioides Native Asteraceae Solenogyne sp. Native Asteraceae Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle Exotic Asteraceae Sonchus sp. Exotic Poaceae Sporobolus creber Western Rat-tail Grass Native Poaceae Sporobolus sp. Native/Exotic Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia muricata Western Stackhousia Native Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia sp. Native Caryophyllaceae Stellaria flaccida Native Caryophyllaceae Stellaria pungens Pickly Starwort Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia triflora Pink Five-Corners Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia tubiflora Red Five-Corner Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona behriana Behr's Swainson-pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona galegifolia Smooth Darling-pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona sp. Native Asteraceae Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Exotic Poaceae Themeda australis Kangaroo Grass Native Asteraceae Tolpis barbata Exotic Anthericaceae Tricoryne elatior Yellow Rush-lily Native Anthericaceae Tricoryne sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Trifolium arvense Haresfoot Clover Exotic

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Trifolium campestre Hop Clover Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Trifolium sp. Exotic Asteraceae Triptilodiscus pygmaeus Common Sunray Native Urticaceae Urtica incisa Stinging Nettle Native Verbenaceae Verbena bonariensis Purpletop Exotic Scrophulariaceae Veronica plebeia Trailing Speedwell Native Scrophulariaceae Veronica sp. Native Violaceae Viola sp. Native/Exotic Asteraceae Vittadinia cervicularis Native Asteraceae Vittadinia cuneata Fuzzweed Native Asteraceae Vittadinia muelleri Native Asteraceae Vittadinia pterochaeta Native Asteraceae Vittadinia sp. Native Poaceae Vulpia bromoides Squirrel Tail Fescue Exotic Poaceae Vulpia sp. Exotic Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia communis Tufted Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia (?) communis Tufted Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia gracilis Sprawling Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia graniticola Granite Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia luteola Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia (?) multicaulis Tadgell's Bluebell Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia sp. Native Xanthorrhoeaceae Xanthorrhoea johnsonii Johnson's Grass Tree Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Zornia dyctiocarpa var. dyctiocarpa Zornia Native

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix C: LFA & Vegetation Dynamics Detailed Results

Site 1 – She-oak Low Forest on Sandstone Crests

This site is located in the Residual Project Area within the vegetation type She-oak Low Forest on Sandstone Crests.

Landscape organisation Table AC.1 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 24.5

• Total patch area – 192.6 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.96

• Landscape organisation index – 0.99

• Average inter-patch length – 0.15 m

• Range inter-patch length – 0.15 to 0.15 m

Table AC.1: Site 1a patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 0.77 96.25 25 1000.00 Shrub 0.02 1.80 16 2.38 Sedge 0.05 0.25 1 10.00 Tree 0.03 0.35 2 7.00 Grass 0.03 0.55 4 2.75 Baresoil 0.15 0.75 1 Herb 0.01 0.05 1 1.00

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.1), zone stability ( Figure AC.2) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.3).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Shrub Sedge Tree Grass Baresoil Herb

Figure AC.1: Site 1 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Shrub Sedge Tree Grass Baresoil Herb

Figure AC.2: Site 1 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Litter Shrub Sedge Tree Grass Baresoil Herb

Figure AC.3: Site 1 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.2 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.2: Site 1 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 3022 12116 19237 4343 38717.2 Mean distance between plants 1.819 0.9085 0.721 1.5175 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 6 6 27 12044 12082.46 (m³/ha)

Site 2 – Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland

This site is located in the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area within the vegetation type Narrow-leaved Ironbark Woodland.

Landscape organisation Table AC.3 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 25.5

• Total patch area – 154.6 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.77

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Landscape organisation index – 0.97

• Average inter-patch length – 0.27 m

• Range inter-patch length – 0.19 to 0.34 m

Table AC.3: Site 2 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 0.64 76.4 24 1000.00 Herb 0.16 7.95 10 60.20 Sedge 0.19 4.85 5 24.00 Grass 0.06 2.30 8 6.63 Baresoil 0.27 2.65 2 Shrub 0.29 5.85 4 1.5

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.4 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.5 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.6 ).

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

Infiltration IndexInfiltration (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Herb Sedge Grass Baresoil Shrub

Figure AC.4: Site 2 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Herb Sedge Grass Baresoil Shrub

Figure AC.5: Site 2 stability results with standard error

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling Cycling NutrientIndex (%) 0.0 Litter Herb Sedge Grass Baresoil Shrub

Figure AC.6: Site 2 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table A3.4 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.53: Site 2 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 97656 308642 14360 301 420959.1 Mean distance between plants 0.32 0.18 0.8345 5.7625 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 90 11068 467 14785 26409.5 (m³/ha)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site 3 – Rough-barked Apple Open Forest

This site is located in the Bobadeen East Vegetation Offset Area within the vegetation type Rough- barked Apple Open Forest.

Landscape organisation Table AC.5 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 9.4

• Total patch area – 449.0 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.90

• Landscape organisation index – 0.92

• Average inter-patch length – 0.64 m

• Range inter-patch length – 0.1 to 2.0 m

Table AC.5: Site 3 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Baresoil 0.64 7.68 6 Litter 1.75 90.78 26 938.46 Grass 0.01 0.12 4 1.50 Log 0.10 0.60 3 433.33 Fern/Forb 0.03 0.68 11 1.45 Shrub 0.005 0.02 2 1.00 Tree 0.06 0.12 1 6.00

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.7 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.8 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.9 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Litter Grass Log Fern/Forb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.7: Site 3 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Litter Grass Log Fern/Forb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.8: Site 3 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Baresoil Litter Grass Log Fern/Forb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.9: Site 3 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.6 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.6: Site 3 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 24800 108922 2877 499 137097.8 Mean distance between plants 0.635 0.303 1.8645 4.475 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 1 5 858 24023 24887.46 (m³/ha)

Site 4 – Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium

This site is located in the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area within the vegetation type Narrow-leaved Ironbark Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium.

Landscape organisation Table AC.7 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 20.3

• Total patch area – 275.6 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.90

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Landscape organisation index – 0.98

• Average inter-patch length – 0.09 m

• Range inter-patch length – 0.02 to 0.26 m

Table AC.7: Site 4 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 0.84 91.34 33 973.33 Baresoil 0.09 2.07 7 Grass 0.07 5.97 26 6.1 Rock 0.08 0.52 2 11.5 Herb 0.03 0.10 1 10.0

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.10 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.11 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.12 ).

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

Infiltration IndexInfiltration (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Baresoil Grass Rock Herb

Figure AC.10: Site 4 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Baresoil Grass Rock Herb

Figure AC.11: Site 4 stability results with standard error

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling Cycling NutrientIndex (%) 0.0 Litter Baresoil Grass Rock Herb

Figure AC.12: Site 4 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.8 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.8: Site 4 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 246292 492459 2408 693 741851.7 Mean distance between plants 0.2015 0.1425 2.038 3.7985 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 15 4 27 24844 24889.99 (m³/ha)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site 5 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

This site is located in the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area within the vegetation type Blakely’s Red Gum Open forest.

Landscape organisation Table AC.9 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 20.3

• Total patch area – 253.6 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.85

• Landscape organisation index – 1.00

• Average inter-patch length – n/a

• Range inter-patch length – n/a

Table AC.9: Site 5 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 0.61 57.03 28 708.39 Grass 0.46 41.0 27 580.56 Herb 0.14 1.8 4 17.5 Sedge 0.02 0.17 2 4.00

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.13 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.14 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.15 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Grass Herb Sedge

Figure AC.13: Site 5 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Grass Herb Sedge

Figure AC.14: Site 5 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Litter Grass Herb Sedge

Figure AC.15: Site 5 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.10 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.10: Site 5 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 2070286 826446 1367 185 2898285 Mean distance between plants 0.0695 0.11 2.7045 7.353 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 38 10 136 32351 32534.36 (m³/ha)

Site 6 – White Box Woodland

This site is located in the Residual Project Area within the vegetation type White Box Woodland.

Landscape organisation Table AC.11 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 8.8

• Total patch area – 404.3 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.81

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Landscape organisation index – 0.95

• Average inter-patch length – 0.24

• Range inter-patch length – 0.08 to 0.45

Table AC.11: Site 6 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 1.57 72.1 23 730.00 Baresoil 0.24 4.8 10 Tree 0.19 2.3 6 31.8 Cryptogram 0.84 20.1 12 0.0 Herb 0.30 0.6 1 30.0 Shrub 0.02 0.1 2 76.0

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.16 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.17 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.18 ).

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

Infiltration IndexInfiltration (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Baresoil Tree Cryptogram Herb Shrub

Figure AC.16: Site 6 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Baresoil Tree Cryptogram Herb Shrub

Figure AC.17: Site 6 stability results with standard error

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling Cycling NutrientIndex (%) 0.0 Litter Baresoil Tree Cryptogram Herb Shrub

Figure AC.18: Site 6 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.12 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.12: Site 6 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 Grasses cover other Shrubs - Trees Total No plants/hectare 648 37340 27824 1570 67382.86 Mean distance between plants 3.9285 0.5175 0.5995 2.5235 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare (m³/ha) 0 0 4 50259 50263.65

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site 7 – Grey Box Woodland

This site is located in the Residual Project Area within the vegetation type Grey Box Woodland.

Landscape organisation Table AC.14 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 28.8

• Total patch area – 181.5 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.73

• Landscape organisation index – 0.95

• Average inter-patch length – 0.34

• Range inter-patch length – 0.17 to 0.70

Table AC.14: Site 7 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Litter 0.59 80.0 34 684.41 Grass 0.14 11.2 20 102.35 Fern 0.01 0.2 3 1.67 Shrub 0.01 0.4 8 1.00 Cryptogram 0.06 0.8 3 14.00 Baresoil 0.34 5.5 4 Rock 0.41 1.6 1 41.00 Herb 0.03 0.4 3 11.67

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.19 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.20 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.21 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Litter Grass Fern Shrub CryptogramBaresoil Rock Herb

Figure AC.19: Site 7 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Litter Grass Fern Shrub Cryptogram Baresoil Rock Herb

Figure AC.20: Site 7 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Litter Grass Fern Shrub CryptogramBaresoil Rock Herb

Figure AC.21: Site 7 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.14 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.14: Site 7 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 183411 91535 5168 977 281091.4 Mean distance between plants 0.2335 0.330526 1.391 3.2 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 59 29 132 15597 15816.88 (m³/ha)

Site 8 – Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Slopes

This site is located in the Residual Project Area within the vegetation type Stringybark-Ironbark Open Forest on Sandstone Slopes.

Landscape organisation Table AC.15 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 10.9

• Total patch area – 279.2 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.80

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Landscape organisation index – 0.89

• Average inter-patch length – 0.33

• Range inter-patch length – 0.08 to 2.2

Table AC.15: Site 8 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Baresoil 0.33 11.4 12 Rock 0.23 3.9 6 56.83 Litter 1.12 76.9 24 1000.00 Log 0.23 1.3 2 240.00 Herb 0.53 6.1 4 3.50 Shrub 0.06 0.2 1 5.00 Tree 0.06 0.2 1 20.00

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.22 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.23) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.24).

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

Infiltration IndexInfiltration (%) 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Rock Litter Log Herb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.22: Site 8 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Rock Litter Log Herb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.23: Site 8 stability results with standard error

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling Cycling NutrientIndex (%) 0.0 Baresoil Rock Litter Log Herb Shrub Tree

Figure AC.24: Site 8 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.16 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.54: Site 8 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 Grasses cover other Shrubs - Trees Total No plants/hectare 4275 173611 8526 401 186812.9 Mean distance between plants 1.5295 0.24 1.083 4.9925 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare (m³/ha) 0 50 2357 33578 35985.97

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site 9 – 2009 Rehabilitation Areas

This site is located in the LOM Rehabilitation Area within the 2009 Rehabilitation Area.

Landscape organisation Table AC.17 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 43.8

• Total patch area – 44.7 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.45

• Landscape organisation index – 0.74

• Average inter-patch length – 0.10

• Range inter-patch length – 0.02 to 0.18

Table AC.17: Site 9 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Baresoil 0.10 25.97 25 Grass 0.17 43.18 25 762.36 Litter 0.18 25.17 14 108.43 Herb 0.11 4.48 4 17.00 Rock 0.12 1.19 1 12.00

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.25), zone stability ( Figure AC.26 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.27 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Grass Litter Herb Rock

Figure AC.25: Site 9 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Baresoil Grass Litter Herb Rock

Figure AC.26: Site 9 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Baresoil Grass Litter Herb Rock

Figure AC.27: Site 9 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.18 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.18: Site 9 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 3077870 1777778 958 0 4856606 Mean distance between plants 0.057 0.075 3.2315 0 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 31 9 266 0 306.1137 (m³/ha)

Site 10 – Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (western portion)

This site is located in the LOM Rehabilitation Area within the Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Area (western portion).

Landscape organisation Table AC.19 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 15.8

• Total patch area – 363.4 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.91

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

• Landscape organisation index – 0.98

• Average inter-patch length – 0.66

• Range inter-patch length – 0.66 to 0.66

Table AC.559: Site 10 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Cryptogram 0.07 0.37 2 26.50 Grass 0.05 3.28 25 28.80 Litter 1.16 92.68 32 931.41 Herb 0.20 2.02 4 33.75 Baresoil 0.66 1.65 1

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.28), zone stability ( Figure AC.29 ) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.30 ).

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

Infiltration IndexInfiltration (%) 10.0 0.0 Cryptogram Grass Litter Herb Baresoil

Figure A3.28: Site 10 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Cryptogram Grass Litter Herb Baresoil

Figure AC.29: Site 10 stability results with standard error

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling Cycling NutrientIndex (%) 0.0 Cryptogram Grass Litter Herb Baresoil

Figure AC.30: Site 10 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.20 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table A3.560: Site 10 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 174337 81633 755 496 257220.1 Mean distance between plants 0.2395 0.35 3.639474 4.4915 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare (m³/ha) 10 7 7 15243 15267.23

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Site 11 - Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Areas (eastern portion)

This site is located in the LOM Rehabilitation Area within the Pre 2001 Rehabilitation Area (eastern portion).

Landscape organisation Table AC.21 below identifies the different patch and inter-patch types, the average type length, percentage of the transect length, the average patch width and the number of patches sampled. A summary of data from the LFA is as follows:

• Number of patches per 10 m – 22.8

• Total patch area – 199.2 m 2

• Patch area index – 0.80

• Landscape organisation index – 0.80

• Average inter-patch length – 0.19

• Range inter-patch length – 0.01 to 0.65

Table AC.21: Site 11 patch and inter-patch types

Mean Zone % of the No of Mean width Zone Length (m) Transect Patches (cm) Cryptogram 0.10 1.96 5 7.60 Baresoil 0.19 20.24 27 Rock 0.10 0.4 1 10.0 Litter 0.16 3.16 5 209.2 Herb 0.04 1.48 9 5.2 Grass 0.49 72.76 37 733.2

Soil Surface assessment The soil surface assessment charts show the contribution of each of the patch/inter-patch types to zone infiltration ( Figure AC.31 ), zone stability ( Figure AC.32) and zone nutrients ( Figure AC.33 ).

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Infiltration 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0

InfiltrationIndex (%) 10.0 0.0 Cryptogram Baresoil Rock Litter Herb Grass

Figure AC.31: Site 11 infiltration results with standard error (the lower the number of sampled replicates, the higher the standard error)

Zone Stability 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Stability Stability (%) Index 10.0 0.0 Cryptogram Baresoil Rock Litter Herb Grass

Figure AC.32: Site 11 stability results with standard error

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Zone Nutrients 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 Nutrient Cycling NutrientCycling Index (%) 0.0 Cryptogram Baresoil Rock Litter Herb Grass

Figure AC.33: Site 11 nutrient results with standard error

Vegetation dynamics Table AC.22 provides a summary of the vegetation dynamics data for the site. This includes the number of plants per hectare for each of strata layers sampled grasses, other ground covers, shrubs and trees.

Table AC.22: Site 1 vegetation dynamics

Layer1 - Layer2 - Ground Layer 3 - Layer 4 - Grasses cover other Shrubs Trees Total No plants/hectare 2972652 2040816 115 0 5013583 Mean distance between plants 0.058 0.07 9.3269 0 n/a (m) Canopy volume/hectare 181 118 495 0 793.7523 (m³/ha)

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix D: Acacia ausfeldii data

Seedling (se), Rating Rating Height Tag No. Easting Northing Cond. Comments Diam. Main stem (cm) Sapling (sp, (Flowers) (Fruit) (m) Mature (m) A001 754829 6426092 3 3 1 dead leaves / missing leaves / red 2 4 m A002 754839 6426115 4 4 1 minor browning 1.4 2.5 sp A003 754840 6426111 4 1 1 minor browning 0.6 2.5 se A004 754482 6426131 5 5 1 good health 2.2 6 m A005 754837 6426125 2 to 3 5 1 many dead branches 2.4 9 m A006 754837 6426133 4 4 1 minor chewed/dead leaves 0.7 3 se A007 754851 6426140 5 4 1 healthy 1.9 5 m A008 754837 6426149 4 5 1 some missing leaves 1.9 5 (stem close to ground) m A009 754804 6426318 3 3 1 dead leaves and branch chewing 2.3 5 m A010 754812 6426330 5 4 1 2.1 4.5 m A011 754817 6426331 3 2 1 many brown leaves / leaf loss 1.7 4 m A012 754807 6426337 2 3 1 many dead branches 2.2 6 m A013 754798 6426333 5 1 1 healthy 0.6 2.5 sp A014 754793 6426337 4 4 1 leaf loss 2 6 m A015 754792 6426341 5 4 1 some missing leaves 1.7 4 m A016 754794 6426330 5 1 1 healthy 1 2.5 sp A017 754792 6426331 3 4 1 many dead branches 1.9 4 m A018 754790 6426336 4 2 1 minor browning of leaves 1.1 2 sp A019 754788 6426327 5 1 1 healthy 0.8 2 sp A020 754790 6426329 5 1 1 healthy 1 3.5 sp

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Seedling (se), Rating Rating Height Tag No. Easting Northing Cond. Comments Diam. Main stem (cm) Sapling (sp, (Flowers) (Fruit) (m) Mature (m) A021 754785 6426337 5 2 1 minor leaf chewing 0.9 2.5 sp A022 754783 6426338 4 2 1 charred browning 1.1 2.5 sp A023 754779 6426331 5 1 1 healthy 0.2 <1 se A024 754777 6426333 5 1 1 healthy 0.1 <1 se A025 754775 6426324 5 1 1 healthy 0.8 3 sp A026 754766 6426346 4 5 1 some dead branches 2.6 12 m A027 754770 6426350 3 1 1 dead branches 2 4 m A028 754767 6426346 4 4 1 some dead branches/red leaves 2.2 7 m A029 754779 6426345 3 5 1 brown leaves, stems 2.3 8 m A030 754789 6426345 4 1 1 1.2 3 sp A031 754793 6426342 4 1 1 some brown leaves 0.8 <1 sp A032 754800 6426351 5 1 1 very small 0.06 <1 se A033 754804 6426361 4 1 1 some dead charred leaves 1.2 2.5 sp A034 754808 6426357 5 1 1 n/a 0.18 <1 se A035 754814 6426344 5 1 1 n/a 0.1 <1 se A036 754801 6426351 4 4 1 browning leaves 2 4.5 sp A037 754804 6426353 4 2 1 minor leaf damage 0.8 2 sp A038 754815 6426349 4 1 1 minor leaf chewing 0.1 <1 se A039 754827 6426353 5 1 1 n/a 0.7 1 sp A040 754811 6426353 5 1 1 n/a 0.6 <1 sp A041 754831 6426360 4 2 1 some leaf browning 1.1 3 sp A042 754794 6426371 3 1 1 dead branches/browning leaves 1.2 2.5 sp A043 754790 6426363 4 5 1 some browning 1.5 4 sp A044 754842 6426373 4 4 1 some browning 1.4 5 sp A045 754802 6426370 4 4 1 some dead branches 2.2 4.5 m

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Seedling (se), Rating Rating Height Tag No. Easting Northing Cond. Comments Diam. Main stem (cm) Sapling (sp, (Flowers) (Fruit) (m) Mature (m) A046 754790 6426371 5 1 1 0.25 <1 se A047 754786 6426388 4 4 1 missing leaves 2 5 m A048 754789 6426379 4 5 1 one dead branch 1.1 3 sp A049 754794 6426379 5 4 to 5 1 1.9 4 m A050 754788 6426384 4 4 1 some dead branches 3 7 m A051 754784 6426391 5 1 1 0.6 <1 sp A052 754780 6426394 3 3 1 1.9 4 m A053 754794 6426383 4 4 1 some brown leaves 2.1 4 m A054 754785 6426391 5 2 1 1.6 3.5 m A055 754779 6426387 4 2 1 some dead/browning leaves 1 3 sp A056 754771 6426384 3 4 1 dead branches 2.5 7 sp A057 754766 6426387 4 4 1 fallen leaves 1.5 4 m A058 754761 6426387 5 4 1 1 3 sp A059 754774 6426387 3 4 1 many dead branches 2 4 m A060 754766 6426388 5 4 1 1.3 3 sp A061 754766 6426408 4 4 4 browning leaves 1.6 3 m A062 754766 6426410 4 4 1 some dead stems 2.4 11 m A063 754769 6426409 5 5 1 2.2 6 m A064 754777 6426414 5 5 1 2.1 7 m A065 754772 6426430 3 3 1 many dead branches 2 4 m A066 754777 6426424 4 3 1 some dead branches 2 5.5 m A067 754762 6426432 4 3 1 some dead branches 1.9 6 m A068 754762 6426446 5 1 1 1.1 3 sp A069 754773 6426446 4 1 1 some chewed branches 0.6 1 sp A070 754775 6426446 5 4 4 2.3 9 m

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Seedling (se), Rating Rating Height Tag No. Easting Northing Cond. Comments Diam. Main stem (cm) Sapling (sp, (Flowers) (Fruit) (m) Mature (m) A071 754764 6426447 4 4 4 some dead branches 3.2 13 m A072 754761 6426445 5 4 5 2.3 6 m A073 754748 6426443 4 4 4 some missing leaves 2.5 10 m some missing leaves, one dead 3 4 4 2.5 9 m A074 754752 6426437 branch A075 754751 6426450 4 2 4 2.7 13 m A076 754765 6426453 3 4 1 some dead branches 2.1 9 m A077 754770 6426458 4 3 3 some leaf loss 1.8 4 m A078 754784 6426459 4 4 4 some leaf loss 1.9 6 m ph 310 A079 754784 6426455 4 4 1 some dead branches 2.8 9 m A080 754769 6426462 4 4 4 some dead branches 2.1 10 m A081 754730 6426486 4 4 1 some dead branches 2.8 12 m A082 754742 6426499 4 4 1 some chewed leaves 1.9 4 m A083 754742 6426497 5 3 4 1.5 4 m A084 754739 6426506 5 5 1 1.6 4 m A085 754742 6426508 5 1 4 1.5 3.5 m A086 754748 6426511 5 4 2 2.9 8 m A087 754752 6426516 3 4 1 dead branch 4 22 m A088 754770 6426539 5 1 1 0.5 <1 sp A089 754745 6426528 5 2 1 1.2 2.5 sp A090 754750 6426536 4 5 1 some dead branches 3.8 9 m A091 7547757 6426538 4 2 1 some brown leaves 0.9 1 sp A092 7547761 6426536 5 1 1 0.9 2.5 sp A093 7547744 6426532 5 1 1 0.9 2 sp A094 7547750 6426541 5 1 1 0.7 <1 sp A095 7547758 6426541 3 5 1 dead branches 2.6 9 m

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Seedling (se), Rating Rating Height Tag No. Easting Northing Cond. Comments Diam. Main stem (cm) Sapling (sp, (Flowers) (Fruit) (m) Mature (m) A096 754748 6426546 5 4 1 0.7 10 m A097 754751 6426555 5 4 4 2 5 m A098 754749 6426550 5 4 1 2.3 6 m A099 754751 6426547 4 4 1 1.9 10 m A100 754763 6426547 5 5 5 2.6 11 m

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix E: Fauna Monitoring Report

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix F: Microbat Monitoring Report

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

Appendix G: Aquatic Fauna & Riparian Habitat Report

2011 Annual Ecological Monitoring Report

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

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

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

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

DARWIN

Ulan Coal Mines Limited 2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Prepared for Ulan Coal Mines Limited

23 March 2012

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

PREPARED FOR Ulan Coal Mines Limited

PROJECT NO 11MUDECO -0012

DATE March 12

DOCUMENT TRACKING

Approved by Bruce Mullins Dr Paul Frazier Status Final Version Number 1 Last saved on 23 March 2012

Cover photo Flora monitoring sites BOB4, BOB9, BOB13 and RPA13 (Tammy Paartalu, ELA)

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

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

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Contents

Contents ...... ii

List of Figures ...... iii

List of Tables ...... iv

Abbreviations ...... v

1 Introduction ...... 6 1.1 Salinity Offset Area ...... 8 1.2 Salinity Offset Program ...... 8 1.2.1 Salinity Offset Area Objectives ...... 9 1.2.2 Monitoring ...... 9

2 Performance against Mitigation Strategy ...... 12

3 Methodology ...... 13 3.1 Floristic Monitoring...... 13 3.2 Weather Conditions ...... 16

4 Results ...... 17 4.1 Floristic Surveys ...... 17

5 Discussion & Recommendations ...... 27

References ...... 29

Appendix A: Flora Species List ...... 30

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: UCML regional location ...... 7

Figure 1.2: Salinity Offset Area ...... 11

Figure 2.1: Vegetation monitoring sites within the SOA ...... 15

Figure 3.1: Structural ground composition ...... 18

Figure 3.2: Native and exotic species richness recorded at Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest ...... 18

Figure 3.3: Cover abundance recorded at the Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest ...... 19

Figure 3.4: Native and exotic species richness recorded at the Derived Native Grassland ...... 19

Figure 3.5: Cover abundance recorded at the Derived Native Grassland...... 20

Figure 3.6: Native and exotic species richness recorded at the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone...... 21

Figure 3.7: Cover abundance recorded at the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone...... 21

Figure 3.8: Native and exotic species richness recorded within the Unimproved Pasture...... 22

Figure 3.9: Cover abundance recorded at the Unimproved Pasture...... 22

Figure 3.10: Native and exotic species richness recorded within the White Box Woodland...... 23

Figure 3.11: Cover abundance recorded at the White Box Woodland...... 23

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites ...... 9

Table 2.1: Vegetation monitoring sites within SOA ...... 14

Table 2.2: Weather conditions preceding the monitoring period ...... 16

Table 3.1: Floristic survey summary ...... 25

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Abbreviations

ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION

BMP Biodiversity Management Plan

DP&I Department of Planning and Infrastructure

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

ELA Eco Logical Australia

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

EPL Environment Protection Licence

MWRC Mid-Western Regional Council

OEH Office of Environment and Heritage

SOA Salinity Offset Area

SOP Salinity Offset Program

UCML Ulan Coal Mines Limited

XCN Xstrata Coal NSW

2011 Annual Sali nity Offset Scheme Report

1 Introduction

In 2003, as part of the implementation of the Bobadeen Irrigation Scheme, Ulan Coal Mines Limited (UCML) established a Salinity Offset Area (SOA) to offset the salt load within the catchment due to irrigation. This SOA was established in consultation with the former Environment & Protection Authority (EPA) and the Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC).

Modelling undertaken by DLWC (2003) identified that 4460 hectares of land was required to offset the salt load associated with the operation of the Bobadeen Irrigation Scheme (DLWC 2003). This SOA is subject to altered land use and management in order to increase its salt holding potential and thereby compensate for the increased salt loadings within the pivot irrigators.

The Salinity Offset Program (SOP) is a Special Condition under the UCML Environment Protection Licence (EPL) No. 394 issued by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) under Section 55 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 .

UCML’s Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP) considers the biophysical outcomes of the SOA as part of the implementation of the Bobadeen Irrigation Scheme (BIS). As such, to meet the SOP objectives, UCML is required to achieve the following:

• Reduce the percentage of bare ground; • Regeneration of woody vegetation (DLWC 2003).

Eco Logical Australia (ELA) was engaged by UCML to prepare a component of the 2011 annual salinity offset scheme reporting under the BMP, in line with the UCML Project Approval 08_0184 approved by the NSW DP&I, and EPL No. 394 provided by EPA.

This annual report details the monitoring survey undertaken for flora within the SOA as detailed in the BMP. Where improvements to the monitoring program were identified, these have been provided within this report.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 1.1: UCML regional location

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

1.1 SALINITY OFFSET AREA The SOA comprises 4460 ha located at “Bobadeen” approximately 20km north of Gulgong, situated over the Great Dividing Range in the headwaters of the Goulburn River (Hunter River Catchment) and Talbragar River (Macquarie River Catchment). The SOA also incorporates the Bobadeen Irrigation Scheme (BIS) (Figure 1.2 ).

The SOA contains a mix of a remnant, regenerating, modified and disturbed vegetation communities. The SOA incorporates 20 vegetation communities, of which Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone dominates, covering approximately 1,860 ha in remnant and regenerating forms. Other vegetation communities that occupy the SOA include Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (remnant and regenerating forms), Derived Native Grassland, Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium, Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium, Scribbly Gum Woodland in Heathland on Sand Plateaux and White Box Woodland (remnant, modified and regenerating forms). Cleared and disturbed land (including Unimproved, improved pastures and planted areas) occupies an area of approximately 700 ha.

1.2 SALINITY OFFSET PROGRAM A SOP was implemented to satisfy Special Condition E1 of EPL No. 394. The SOA was established in order to offset the increased salt load within the catchment due to the implementation of the BIS. This scheme involves the disposal of surplus mine water through pivot irrigation. UCML pumps surplus mine water to a dam north of the operations, and irrigates land planted with vigorously growing pasture crops. The pasture is managed through rotational grazing of livestock, with a series of fences erected to facilitate grazing management.

The SOP represents a component within the overall UCML Biodiversity monitoring program. In regards to “Measurement and Evaluation” of the BMP, a comprehensive monitoring program has been developed and has already commenced to assess performance of biodiversity management measures.

Within the BMP, the Impact Mitigation Strategy and Completion Criteria for the SOA have been identified (Table 1.1 ). Progress towards meeting these criteria will be discussed within this report. The SOA forms one of nine ecological management domains within the Project Area.

The program of offset works was established within the SOA to progressively offset the modelled amounts of salt that are expected to reach shallow aquifers as a result of using the BIS as a method of using surplus mine water from UCML mining operations. These on ground works involve land use and land management changes to reduce salt exports from other lands that the mine owns and manages. The changes involve:

• Controlled rotational grazing; • 2012 Drill Sites; • 6000 trees planted along pivot fence lines; • Natural regeneration of vegetation cover

These land use changes should result in: • A shift from degraded native forest and poor pasture to an improvement in the condition (and increase in the area) of native forests and pasture lands (improvement in both quality and quantity of native vegetation)

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

• A reduction in salt exported from the offset areas and into the catchment due to an increase in water use by the recovering native vegetation

1.2.1 Salinity Offset Area Objectives The Impact Mitigation Strategies and Completion Criteria for the SOA are shown in Table 1.1 .

Table 1.1: Residual vegetation monitoring sites (BMP 2011) Impact Mitigation Strategy Completion Criteria

Controlled rotational grazing activities have been implemented in a Controlled rotational grazing manner that controls pasture in the pivot area (in pivot areas) Controlled rotational grazing activities are documented

Monitoring has shown that sufficient groundcover has been established such that the percentage of bare ground has reduced. Establishment/maintenance No significant erosion is present. of stable vegetative cover There are no significant weed infestations and weeds do not comprise a significant proportion of the species in any stratum.

The required number of trees has been planted.

More than 75% of trees are healthy and growing as indicated by long 6000 trees planted along term monitoring. pivot fence lines There are no significant weed infestations and weeds do not comprise a significant proportion of the species in any stratum.

Natural regeneration is shown through monitoring to be occurring. Natural regeneration of the vegetation cover There are no significant weed infestations and weeds do not comprise a significant proportion of the species in any stratum.

1.2.2 Monitoring Monitoring within the SOA has previously been undertaken as an isolated program and not integrated effectively in the broader UCML biodiversity monitoring program.

As a result of the revised biodiversity monitoring program developed for PA 08_0184 and detailed in the BMP, UCML has integrated the SOA monitoring program into the broader biodiversity monitoring framework.

An integral part of the BMP is the measurement and evaluation of monitoring methodologies and processes. The condition of vegetation within the SOA will be monitored to identify performance and compliance with the identified Impact Mitigation Strategies during the life of the mine. Initially monitoring will be undertaken annually, however where results are showing negligible change the frequency of monitoring may be reduced (i.e. biennial) in consultation with DP&I and OEH. Permanent

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

monitoring plots will be established within the residual vegetation of the SOA and will incorporate existing analogue sites, where appropriate.

Baseline surveys were conducted during 2011 as part of the ecological monitoring program. Sites were surveyed using the methodology outlined in Section 2 of this report. The data collected from this survey will be used as the baseline for the SOP monitoring locations.

In addition to the sites identified for annual monitoring, the pivot fence lines will be added as an additional monitoring location. This is required due to the completion criteria specifying that 75% of the 6000 trees planted must be healthy and growing. Monitoring to be carried out in this location will assess and systematically record the following characteristics:

• Total tree count along pivot fence lines; • General health of vegetation; • Occurrence and abundance of weed species; • Presence of erosion;

To demonstrate rotational grazing practices utilised by UCML within pivot areas requires that these practices be documented. Due to staffing issues with the company grazing within the SOA, UCML recognises that the grazing records available are inadequate and therefore are working with the grazing company to resolve this issue. This documentation will be compared against monitoring results within the pivot grazing area to ensure that current management practices are appropriate, and to help identify actions or improvements in management techniques moving forward.

Monitoring results will be used to determine what, if any, actions are to be implemented (i.e. weed control).

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 1.2: Salinity Offset Area

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

2 Performance against Mitigation Strategy

Impact Mitigation Completion Criteria Assessment Against Criteria Strategy

Controlled rotational grazing activities UCML and Colinta Holdings Pty Ltd are currently have been implemented in a manner that developing a controlled rotational grazing plan in Controlled rotational controls pasture in the pivot area accordance with the Salinity Offset Program during 2012. grazing (in pivot areas) Controlled rotational grazing activities are See Above documented

Monitoring has shown that sufficient The structural ground composition recorded during the groundcover has been established such 2011 surveys has provided key baseline data for that the percentage of bare ground has comparison in future years to determine if the percentage Establishment/ reduced. of bare ground is reduced due to rehabilitation activities maintenance of stable vegetative No significant erosion is present. No significant erosion present during reporting period cover There are no significant weed infestations No significant weed infestations present during reporting and weeds do not comprise a significant period. Weed control for 2012 in accordance with BMP. proportion of the species in any stratum.

The required number of trees has been 6000 trees planted in 2005 planted.

More than 75% of trees are healthy and No assessment available. 6000 trees planted growing as indicated by long term 2012 monitoring program will include an assessment of: along pivot fence monitoring. lines • Total tree count along pivot fence lines; There are no significant weed infestations • General health of vegetation; and weeds do not comprise a significant • Occurrence and abundance of weed species; proportion of the species in any stratum. • Presence of erosion;

Monitoring has measured high number of native species Natural regeneration is shown through within the SOA. Improved baseline surveys will allow for monitoring to be occurring. further measurable parameters to be established Natural regeneration demonstrating the increase in natural regeneration. of the vegetation cover Weed species are more evident in modified monitored There are no significant weed infestations vegetation communities and less abundant in unmodified and weeds do not comprise a significant communities. Exotic species where evident comprise of proportion of the species in any stratum. less than 15% of the species and ground cover.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

3 Methodology

Monitoring during 2011 was undertaken in accordance with the methods and survey techniques prescribed in Section 4 of the BMP.

3.1 FLORISTIC MONITORING Floristic monitoring was undertaken at 18 sites within the SOA, which incorporates sites within the Bobadeen Offset Area and Residual Project Area (Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1 ). Floristic monitoring was undertaken by Tammy Paartalu, Will Introna and Danielle Bennett of ELA and consisted of collecting specific baseline biotic and abiotic data for all 18 sites. Floristic monitoring was undertaken from 7 th November to 11 th November 2011 and 14 th November to 18 th November 2011.

At each floristic monitoring site, a 20 m x 20 m square plot (quadrat) was established. Each quadrat was established using the following technique:

• Each site was located at the pre-determined points identified in the BMP;

• The corners of the quadrat of each transect were located with a metal star picket (permanent marker to facilitate repeat sampling);

• A yellow cap was placed on the top of each star picket;

• A GPS co-ordinate was taken in the north-western corner of each plot. Within each floristic plot, all visible vascular species were recorded, with each species being assigned to one of six foliage cover classes using the Modified Braun-Blanquet Cover-abundance method (Braun-Blanquet 1927, Poore 1955, Austin et al . 2000). Vegetation structure was recorded for each plot, in particular the height and total foliage cover of each stratum. The general health, evidence of natural regeneration, occurrence and abundance of weeds, signs of disturbance, evidence of feral animals and any observable impacts for the project were also recorded. All vascular plant species observed in the plots were identified (where possible), recorded and compiled into a species list. Most taxa were identified in the field. Those unable to be identified in the field were collected for later identification using a microscope and a combination of field guides, the Flora of New South Wales (1993-2002) and by comparison with herbarium specimens held in the Public Reference Collection of the National Herbarium of NSW in Sydney.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Table 3.1: Vegetation monitoring sites within SOA

Site Numbers by Location Vegetation Type Bobadeen (BOB) Residual (RPA)

Derived Native Grassland BOB10, BOB14

Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone BOB3, BOB7, BOB8, RPA4, BOB16

Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium BOB5

Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest BOB6, BOB11 RPA13

Modified White Box Woodland BOB9, BOB12

White Box Woodland BOB1, BOB4

Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium BOB2

Unimproved Pasture BOB13, BOB15

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 3.1: Vegetation monitoring sites within the SOA

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

3.2 WEATHER CONDITIONS Weather conditions in three months proceeding the monitoring period were cool to mild, with below average rainfall in July and above average rainfall during August and September. Temperatures during this period were close to averages for the Gulgong area, with mean minimum temperatures generally below average (apart from August) and mean maximum temperatures generally above average, as shown in Table 2.2.

Table 3.2: Weather conditions preceding the monitoring period 2011 Monthly Mean Historical Averages Month Rainfall Rainfall Min Temp ( oC) Max Temp ( oC) Min Temp ( oC) Max Temp ( oC) (mm) (mm)

July 2 15.2 8.7 2.6 14.7 49.2

August 4.4 18.6 58.9 3.4 16.4 46.8

September 5.1 21 114.6 6.1 19.6 46.8

Weather observations were taken from Gulgong (www.bom.gov.au)

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

4 Results

4.1 FLORISTIC SURVEYS The following section provides a summary of the floristic monitoring survey undertaken within the SOA as detailed in BMP. The results from the 2011 survey have been compared to the high level survey conducted by Umwelt (2008) to determine any change in vegetation community structure. Floristic data collected during monitoring are summarised in Table 3.1 , with a full species list provided in Appendix A.

Floristic surveys identified a total of 236 species, with 184 native species, 43 introduced species and 9 species that could only be identified to species level and could not be confidently classified as either native or introduced.

Species diversity varied within each floristic site, as identified in Table 3.1 , with total species identified ranging from 19 species (BOB12 – White Box Woodland) to 53 species (RPA13 – Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest & BOB1 – White Box Woodland). Native and introduced species presence also varied within each floristic site, with native species identified ranging from 6 species (BOB10 – Derived Native Grassland & BOB12 – White box Woodland (Modified)) to 47 species (BOB1 – White Box Woodland) and introduced species identified ranging from 0 species at multiple sites to 19 species (BOB10 – Derived Native Grassland).

Floristic surveys were undertaken within 6 mapped vegetation communities across the Project Area, including:

• Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest; • Derived Native Grassland; • Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone; • Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium; • Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium; • Unimproved Pasture; • White Box Woodland.

Figure 3.1 illustrates the structural ground composition for each site surveyed during the spring/summer 2011 period. Litter was dominant across the majority of sites surveyed, ranging from 5% (multiple sites) to 95% (RPA4). Bare ground, rock and cryptograms were also recorded at multiple sites, with bare ground occurring at 14 sites ranging from 5% (multiple sites) to 25% (BOB2), rock occurring at 11 sites ranging from 5% (multiple sites) to 25% (BOB7 and BOB16) and cryptograms occurring at 10 sites ranging from 5% (multiple sites) to 25% (BOB6).

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

120

100

80 Cryptogram 60 Rock 40 Bare Gorund Litter 20

Figure 4.1: Structural ground composition

Figure 3.2 illustrates native and exotic species richness in Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest. The graph clearly shows that native vegetation dominates within this vegetation community.

30 Exotic species Native species

No. of species No.of 20

0 BOB6 RPA13 BOB11

Figure 4.2: Native and exotic species richness recorded at Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Figure 3.3 illustrates the cover abundance of native and exotic vegetation in each strata within Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest. The graph shows that exotic species were most populous within the ground layer of the sites sampled; however, native vegetation remained dominant across all sites. Groundcover percentages were found to be high, which is typical of this vegetation community. This vegetation community also had a higher percentage of shrubs than others surveyed in 2011.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

100 90 80 70 Canopy Native 60 Shrub Native 50 Ground Native 40 Canopy Exotic Percent Cover Percent 30 Shrub Exotic 20 Ground Exotic 10 0 BOB6 RPA13 BOB11

Figure 4.3: Cover abundance recorded at the Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest

Figure 3.4 illustrates native and exotic species richness in Derived Native Grassland. It clearly shows that there is an even spread of exotic species across the two sites, while a considerable difference in the number of native species exists. Site BOB10 is dominated by exotic species.

30 Exotic species Native species No. of species No.of 20

0 BOB10 BOB14

Figure 4.4: Native and exotic species richness recorded at the Derived Native Grassland

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 3.5 illustrates the cover abundance of native and exotic vegetation in each strata of Derived Native Grassland. Site BOB10 recorded 90% cover abundance of ground exotic species when surveyed. This finding also correlates to Figure 3.3 where the results showed that this site had a larger number of exotic species present (19 exotic compared to 6 native). Survey results from site BOB14 found that exotic species were only found within the ground layer.

100 90 80 70 Canopy Native 60 Shrub Native 50 Ground Native 40 Canopy Exotic Percent Cover Percent 30 Shrub Exotic 20 Ground Exotic 10 0 BOB10 BOB14

Figure 4.5: Cover abundance recorded at the Derived Native Grassland.

Figure 3.6 illustrates native and exotic species richness in Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone. It clearly shows that across all sites surveyed within this vegetation community, native vegetation is most dominant. Exotic vegetation was only found in two of the five sites surveyed. In the sites where the presence of exotic species was detected, only two species were found at each site.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

30 Exotic species Native species No.of species 20

0 BOB3 BOB7 BOB8 RPA4 BOB16

Figure 4.6: Native and exotic species richness recorded at the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone.

Figure 3.7 shows the cover abundance of native and exotic vegetation in each strata at Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone. From the sites surveyed the predominant structural layer is the canopy, which consists solely of native species. Site BOB8 shows a high percent cover of ground natives, which is not common within the sites sampled. However, site BOB8 is regenerating which can explain the higher percentage cover of ground natives.

Again, exotic species were not abundant at these survey locations. The two sites surveyed that did have exotic species present (BOB8 and BOB16) are classified as “regenerating”.

100 90 80 70 Canopy Native 60 Shrub Native 50 Ground Native 40 Canopy Exotic Percent Cover Percent 30 Shrub Exotic 20 Ground Exotic 10 0 BOB3 BOB7 BOB8 RPA4 BOB16

Figure 4.7: Cover abundance recorded at the Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 3.8 illustrates native and exotic species richness in Unimproved Pasture. Native species are the most prevalent species found within this community.

30 Exotic species Native species No. of species No. 20

0 BOB13 BOB15

Figure 4.8: Native and exotic species richness recorded within the Unimproved Pasture.

Figure 3.9 illustrates the cover abundance of native and exotic vegetation in each strata in Unimproved Pasture. The results show that while native vegetation is dominant, the majority of that vegetation comes from the ground or shrub layer. This is to be expected given that the vegetation community is Unimproved Pasture. In the sites surveyed, exotic species present are found within the ground layer. Canopy vegetation is not expected to be seen in this vegetation community, and the results support this.

100 90 80 70 Canopy Native 60 Shrub Native 50 Ground Native 40 Canopy Exotic Percent Cover Percent 30 Shrub Exotic 20 Ground Exotic 10 0 BOB13 BOB15

Figure 4.9: Cover abundance recorded at the Unimproved Pasture.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Figure 3.10 illustrates native and exotic species richness in White Box Woodland. The survey results indicate that exotic species are far more prevalent within the two sites classified as White Box Woodland (modified). The un-modified sites show little to no influence by exotic species.

30 Exotic species Native species No. of species No. 20

0 BOB1 BOB4 BOB9 BOB12

Figure 4.10: Native and exotic species richness recorded within the White Box Woodland.

Figure 3.11 illustrates the cover abundance of native and exotic vegetation in each strata in White Box Woodland. The results show that native species dominated the ground layer. The percent cover of exotic species is significantly higher in the modified vegetation communities (BOB9 and BOB12).

100 90 80 70 Canopy Native 60 Shrub Native 50 Ground Native 40 Canopy Exotic Percent Cover Percent 30 Shrub Exotic 20 Ground Exotic 10 0 BOB1 BOB4 BOB9 BOB12

Figure 4.11: Cover abundance recorded at the White Box Woodland.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

The Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium & Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium communities show similar trends in both native and exotic species presence, and percent cover. The survey results showed that both vegetation communities had a high number of native species, with only one exotic species found within the Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium. For each community, the majority of vegetation was found within the ground layer.

There were no exotic species found within the shrub or canopy layers of either community. Rough- barked Apple Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium had a higher percentage of cover within the shrub layer than that of the Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Alluvium/Colluvium vegetation community.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Table 4.1: Floristic survey summary Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Canopy 20 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Bobadeen Offset BOB6 33 32 1 Shrub 20 0 Ground 10 <5 Canopy 50 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest Residual Project Area RPA13 53 40 13 Shrub <5 0 Ground 70 5 Canopy 15 0 Blakely’s Red Gum Open Forest (regenerating) Bobadeen Offset BOB11 35 31 4 Shrub 50 <5 Ground 65 5

Derived Native Grassland Bobadeen Offset BOB10 25 6 19 Ground <5 90

Canopy 20 0 Derived Native Grassland Bobadeen Offset BOB14 39 23 16 Shrub <5 0 Ground 85 10 Canopy 40 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB3 40 40 0 Shrub 5 0 Ground 10 0 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB7 20 20 0 Shrub 30 0 Ground 5 0 Canopy 30 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Bobadeen Offset BOB8 25 23 2 (regenerating) Shrub 15 0 Ground 35 <5 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Residual Project Area RPA4 22 22 0 Shrub 15 0 Ground 5 0 Canopy 20 0 Ironbark Open Forest Complex on Sandstone Shrub 1 <5 0 Bobadeen Offset BOB16 40 38 2 (regenerating) Shrub 2 5 0 Ground >5 <5 Canopy 20 0 Narrow-leaved Ironbark Open Forest on Bobadeen Offset BOB2 33 32 1 Shrub 10 0 Alluvium/Colluvium Ground 40 <5

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Percent Cover Site Total species Native Exotic Vegetation Community Site Type Structural Layer No.# number species species Native Exotic

Canopy 25 25 Rough-barked Apple Open Forest on Bobadeen Offset BOB5 42 42 0 Shrub 30 30 Alluvium/Colluvium Ground 50 <5 Canopy 5 0 Unimproved Pasture Bobadeen Offset BOB13 44 36 8 Shrub 60 0 Ground 65 10 Shrub 30 <5 Unimproved Pasture Bobadeen Offset BOB15 43 28 15 Ground 80 10 Canopy 10 0 White Box Woodland Bobadeen Offset BOB1 53 47 6 Shrub <5 0 Ground 85 5 Canopy 20 0 White Box Woodland Bobadeen Offset BOB4 44 42 0 Shrub 15 0 Ground 50 <5 Canopy 15 0 White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen Offset BOB9 46 31 15 Shrub 0 <5 Ground 60 35

White Box Woodland (Modified) Bobadeen Offset BOB12 19 6 13 Ground 70 25

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

5 Discussion & Recommendations

Ground Cover & Floristic Monitoring

Floristic monitoring undertaken during the spring/summer 2011 monitoring period collected data that will form the basis for future monitoring and act as a reference point against which environmental and ecological change can be measured. The methods undertaken during the monitoring were based upon those stated within the BMP.

Generally, there were a high number of introduced species within some of the monitoring sites, as identified in results above, it is recommended that any works to rehabilitate these sites aim to increase native species diversity and cover, with similar species diversity and composition to be similar to those of associated good condition vegetation sites. Rehabilitation works should target noxious and environmental weeds, which includes St. John’s Wort.

The structural ground composition recorded during the 2011 surveys has provided key baseline data for comparison in future years to determine if the percentage of bare ground is reduced due to rehabilitation activities.

The floristic monitoring sites established during spring/summer 2011 were based upon current vegetation mapping within the Project Area. This vegetation mapping was inaccurate in some areas, with some sites occurring on ecotones between two vegetation communities or in vegetation that was not aligned with the mapped vegetation. It is recommended that before the autumn 2012 monitoring, vegetation mapping within the general vicinity of the floristic plots be updated and any sites found to be in a different vegetation community be shifted to appropriate nearby location to preserve the appropriate sampling rates in each target vegetation community.

Floristic monitoring within the SOA should be expanded to cover sites surveyed previously in 2008 by Umwelt, which will provide a comparison of cover abundance over a longer period of time. A representative number of sites should be established within the previously surveyed sites, which may be up to 14 sites, depending on vegetation communities and their condition within the SOA. This will also expand the area of survey being currently undertaken; given the current floristic survey sites are largely concentrated within the Bobadeen Vegetation Offset Area and two sites immediately to the north within the Residual Project Area.

Tree Planting

6000 trees were planted in 2005, with no significant weed infestations within the planted areas being evident. To monitor the performance of these trees the revised BMP will include monitoring along pivot fence lines to assess and systematically record the following characteristics:

• Total tree count along pivot fence lines; • Health of vegetation (which may include height, evidence of dieback, evidence of flowering and fruiting); • Occurrence and abundance of weed species; • Presence of erosion;

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Grazing Management

To demonstrate rotational grazing practices utilised by UCML within the SOA requires that these practices be documented. Due to staffing issues with the company grazing within the SOA, UCML recognises that the grazing records available are inadequate and therefore are working with the grazing company to resolve this issue. When available this documentation will be compared against monitoring results within the SOA to ensure that current management practices are appropriate, and to help identify actions or improvements in management techniques moving forward.

Rotational grazing must be responsive to vegetative growth and the impact of livestock if the SOA is to sustain a healthy vegetative cover and reduce bare ground in the long term. The rotational grazing records will be compared with results from monitoring within the SOA to ensure that current management practices are appropriate, and to help identify improvements in management techniques.

Ground cover monitoring of bare ground will be improved during future ecological monitoring activities.

Incidental observations of weeds and erosion would also be recorded during these surveys and the necessary management procedures undertaken.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

References

• Austin, M. P., Cawsey, E. M., Baker, B. L., Yialeloglou, M. M., Grice, D. J. and Briggs, S. V. (2000) Predicted Vegetation Cover in the Central Lachlan Region. Final report of the Natural Heritage Trust Project AA 1368.97. CSIRO Wildlife and Ecology, Canberra. • Braun-Blanquet, J. (1927) Pflanzensoziologie. Springer, Vienna. • Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) (2012) Daily Weather Observation, Mudgee: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW2088.latest.shtml • Burrow, G.E. (1999) A survey of 25 remnant vegetation sites in the South Western Slopes, New South Wales. Cunninghamia 6(2):283-314. • Department of Land and Water Conservations (2003) Ulan Mine area – Impacts of proposed land use and Management Changes on Catchment Water and Salt Yields. • Poore, M. E. D. (1955) The use of phytosociological methods in ecological investigations. I. The Braun-Blanquet system. Journal of Ecology 42: 216-224. • Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2008) DRAFT – The Vegetation of Ulan Coal Mine Leases. Report prepared for Ulan Coal. • Umwelt (Australia) Pty Limited (2009) Ulan Coal - Continued Operations Ecological Assessment. Appendix 8 of the Environmental Assessment. Report prepared for Ulan Coal.

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Appendix A: Flora Species List

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Adiantaceae Cheilanthes sieberi Native Anthericaceae Tricoryne elatior Yellow Rush-lily Native Anthericaceae Laxmannia gracilis Slender Wire Lily Native Anthericaceae Dichopogon strictus Chocolate Lily Native Anthericaceae Arthropodium minus Native Anthericaceae Dichopogon sp. Native Apiaceae Foeniculum vulgare Fennel Exotic Apiaceae Hydrocotyle laxiflora Stinking Pennywort Native Apiaceae Platysace linearifolia Native Araliaceae Astrotricha longifolia Native Asteraceae Tolpis barbata Exotic Asteraceae Conyza sp. Exotic Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare Spear Thistle Exotic Asteraceae Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Exotic Asteraceae Carthamus lanatus Saffron Thistle Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta purpurea Purple Cudweed Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris radicata Catsear Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta sp. Exotic Asteraceae Conyza bonariensis Flaxleaf Fleabane Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta coarctata Exotic Asteraceae Hypochaeris glabra Smooth Catsear Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta calviceps Cudweed Exotic Asteraceae Gamochaeta coarctata Exotic Asteraceae Calotis lappulacea Yellow Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneata Mountain Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Cassinia arcuata Sifton Bush Native Asteraceae Euchiton sp. Native Asteraceae Podolepis sp. Native Asteraceae Vittadinia muelleri Native Chrysocephalum Asteraceae semipapposum Clustered Everlasting Native Asteraceae Solenogyne sp. Native Asteraceae Helichrysum sp. Native Asteraceae Vittadinia sp. Native Asteraceae Cotula australis Common Cotula Native Asteraceae Calotis cuneifolia Purple Burr-daisy Native Asteraceae Chrysocephalum apiculatum Common Everlasting Native Asteraceae Brachyscome sp. Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Asteraceae Vittadinia cuneata Fuzzweed Native Asteraceae Cassinia sp. Native Asteraceae Podolepis neglecta Native Asteraceae Calotis sp. Native Asteraceae Euchiton sphaericus Native Asteraceae Solenogyne bellioides Native Asteraceae Triptilodiscus pygmaeus Common Sunray Native Asteraceae Vittadinia pterochaeta Native Asteraceae Cymbonotus lawsonianus Bears-ear Native Asteraceae Leptorhynchos squamatus Native Asteraceae Cotula sp Native/Exotic Boraginaceae Echium plantagineum Paterson's Curse Exotic Boraginaceae Echium vulgare Vipers Bugloss Exotic Brassicaceae Hirschfeldia incana Hairy Brassica Exotic Brassicaceae Lepidium sp. Native/Exotic Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia sp. Native Campanulaceae Wahlenbergia communis Tufted Bluebell Native Caryophyllaceae Petrorhagia nanteuilii Exotic

Caryophyllaceae Cerastium sp. Exotic Caryophyllaceae Paronychia brasiliana Chilean Whitlow Wort Exotic

Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina sp . Native Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina gymnanthera Native

Casuarinaceae Casuarina sp. Native Chenopodiaceae Einadia sp. Native Clusiaceae Hypericum perforatum St John's Wort Exotic Clusiaceae Hypericum gramineum Small St John's Wort Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra repens Kidney Weed Native Convolvulaceae Dichondra sp. A sensu Native Cupressaceae Callitris endlicheri Black Cypress Pine Native Cyperaceae Gahnia sieberiana Red-fruit Saw-sedge Native Cyperaceae Gahnia aspera Rough Saw-sedge Native Cyperaceae Carex appressa Tall Sedge Native Cyperaceae Gahnia sp. Native Cyperaceae Fimbristylis sp. Native Cyperaceae Lepidosperma sp. Native Cyperaceae Carex inversa Native Cyperaceae Schoenus apogon Common Bog-rush Native Cyperaceae Schoenus sp. Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia obtusifolia Hoary Guinea Flower Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia sp. Native Dilleniaceae Hibbertia circumdans Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Brachyloma daphnoides Daphne Heath Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Lissanthe strigosa Peach Heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus urceolatus Urn-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Astroloma humifusum Native Cranberry Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Leucopogon muticus Blunt Beard-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Styphelia triflora Pink Five-Corners Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus sp. Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca elliptica Tree Broom-heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Melichrus erubescens Ruby Urn Heath Native Ericaceae - Styphelioideae Monotoca scoparia Native Euphorbiaceae Chamaesyce drummondii Caustic Weed Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Trifolium arvense Haresfoot Clover Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Trifolium campestre Hop Clover Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Medicago sp. Exotic Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Dillwynia sieberi Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Hardenbergia violacea Purple Coral Pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Glycine tabacina Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Swainsona sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Podolobium ilicifolium Prickly Shaggy Pea Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Juvenile Acacia Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea microphylla Native Zornia dyctiocarpa var. Fabaceae - Faboideae dyctiocarpa Zornia Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea sp. Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Bossiaea prostrata Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Pultenaea cinerascens Native Fabaceae - Faboideae Desmodium varians Slender Tick-trefoil Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia paradoxa Kangaroo Thorn Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia doratoxylon Lancewood Native Fabaceae - Acacia longifolia subsp. Mimosoideae longifolia Sydney Golden Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia sp. Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia linearifolia Narrow-leaved Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia leucolobia Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia verniciflua Varnich Wattle Native Fabaceae - Mimosoideae Acacia decora Western Silver Wattle Native Gentianaceae Centaurium sp. Exotic Geraniaceae Geranium solanderi Native Geranium Native Geraniaceae Erodium sp. Native/ Exotic Goodeniaceae Goodenia hederacea Forest Goodenia Native Goodeniaceae Goodenia sp.1 Native Haloragaceae Haloragis sp. Native Haloragaceae Haloragis heterophylla Rough Raspwort Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus sp. Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus tetragynus Native Haloragaceae Gonocarpus teucrioides Raspwort Native Iridaceae Patersonia sericea Silky Purple-Flag Native Juncaceae Juncus sp. Native/Exotic

Lamiaceae Ajuga australis Austral Bugle Native Lamiaceae Prostanthera howelliae Native Lauraceae Cassytha glabella Native Linaceae Linum trigynum French Flax Native Lomandra multiflora subsp. Many -flowered Mat - Lomandraceae multiflora rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra glauca Pale Mat-rush Native Spiny -headed Mat - Lomandraceae Lomandra longifolia rush Native Lomandra filiformis subsp. Lomandraceae coriacea Wattle Mat-rush Native Lomandra filiformis subsp. Lomandraceae filiformis Wattle Mat-rush Native Lomandraceae Lomandra filiformis Native Malvaceae Modiola caroliniana Red-flowered Mallow Exotic

Malvaceae Malva sp. Exotic Malvaceae Sida corrugata Corrugated Sida Native Malvaceae Sida sp. Native/Exotic Myrsinaceae Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel Exotic Myrtaceae juvenile Eucalyptus blakelyi Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus blakelyi Blakely's Red Gum Native Narrow -leaved Myrtaceae Eucalyptus crebra Ironbark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus rossii Red Stringybark Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus fibrosa Red Ironbark Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Narrow -leaved Myrtaceae Eucalyptus crebra juvenile Ironbark Native Myrtaceae juvenile Eucalyptus sp. Native Myrtaceae Melaleuca thymifolia Thyme Honey-myrtle Native Myrtaceae juvenile E. crebra Native Myrtaceae Baeckea sp. Native Myrtaceae Kunzea parvifolia Violet Kunzea Native Common Fringe - Myrtaceae Calytrix tetragona myrtle Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus dwyeri Dwyer's Red Gum Native Myrtaceae Babingtonia cunninghamii Native Myrtaceae Kunzea capitata Native Myrtaceae Eucalyptus macrorhyncha Inland Scribbly Gum Native Myrtaceae Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple Native Orchidaceae Microtis sp. Native Oxalidaceae Oxalis sp. Native/Exotic

Phormiaceae Dianella sp. Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera microphylla Native Phyllanthaceae Phyllanthus hirtellus Thyme Spurge Native Phyllanthaceae Poranthera corymbosa Native Pittosporaceae Bursaria spinosa Blackthorn Native Plantaginaceae Plantago gaudichaudii Narrow plantain Native Poaceae Briza minor Shivery Grass Exotic Poaceae Vulpia sp. Exotic Poaceae Paspalum sp. Exotic Poaceae Lolium perenne Perennial Ryegrass Exotic Poaceae Bromus molliformis Soft Brome Exotic Poaceae Aira sp. Exotic Poaceae Bromus sp. Exotic Poaceae Lolium sp. Exotic Poaceae Aira cupaniana Exotic Poaceae Bromus diandrus Great Brome Exotic Poaceae Avena sp. Exotic Poaceae Bromus hordeaceus Soft Brome Exotic Poaceae Digitaria sp. Native Poaceae Eragrostis sp. Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia sp. Native Poaceae Dichelachne sp. Native Arundinella napalensis or Poaceae nepalensis Reedgrass Native Poaceae Themeda australis Kangaroo Grass Native Poaceae Aristida vagans Threeawn Speargrass Native Poaceae Microlaena stipoides Weeping Grass Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Poaceae Elymus scaber Native Poaceae Aristida sp. Native Poaceae Echinopogon caespitosus Bushy Hedgehog-grass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia monticola Native Poaceae Chloris truncata Windmill Grass Native Poaceae Panicum effusum Hairy Panic Native Poaceae Cynodon dactylon Couch Native Poaceae Eragrostis benthamii Native Poaceae Aristida ramosa Purple Wiregrass Native Poaceae Bothriochloa macra Red Grass Native Austrodanthonia racemosa Poaceae var. racemosa Native Poaceae Austrostipa sp. Native Poaceae Echinopogon sp. Native Poaceae Dichelachne micrantha Shorthair Plumegrass Native Poaceae Entolasia stricta Wiry Panic Native Poaceae Austrostipa scabra Speargrass Native Poaceae Austrodanthonia caespitosa Ringed Wallaby Grass Native Poaceae Austrostipa (?) densiflora Native Silvertop Wallaby Poaceae Joycea pallida Grass Native Poaceae Sporobolus creber Western Rat-tail Grass Native Poaceae Bothriochloa sp. Native Forest Hedgehog Poaceae Echinopogon ovatus Grass Native Poaceae Entolasia sp. Native Poaceae Chloris sp. Native/Exotic Poaceae Sporobolus sp. Native/Exotic Polygonaceae Acetosella vulgaris Sorrel Exotic Polygonaceae Rumex sp. Native/Exotic Narrow -leaved Proteaceae Persoonia linearis Geebung Native Proteaceae Grevillea sericea Pink Spider Flower Native Rhamnaceae Cryptandra sp. Native Rhamnaceae Cryptandra amara Bitter cryptandra Native Rhamnaceae Cryptandra spinescens Native Rosaceae Acaena sp. Native Rubiaceae Richardia stellaris Exotic Rubiaceae Cyclophyllum longipetalum Coast Canthium Native Rubiaceae Asperula conferta Common Woodruff Native Rubiaceae Pomax umbellata Native Rubiaceae Opercularia diphylla Native Rubiaceae Opercularia sp. Native

2011 Annual Salinity Offset Scheme Report

Family Scientific Name Common Name Native / Exotic Rutaceae Correa reflexa Common Correa Native Dodonaea viscosa subsp. Sapindaceae cuneata Wedge-leaf Hop-bush Native Sapindaceae Dodonaea viscosa Sticky Hop-bush Native Scrophulariaceae Veronica plebeia Trailing Speedwell Native Solanaceae Solanum campanulatum Native Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia sp. Native Stackhousiaceae Stackhousia muricata Western Stackhousia Native Sterculiaceae Brachychiton sp. Native Verbenaceae Verbena bonariensis Purpletop Exotic Zamiaceae Macrozamia sp. Native

2011 Annual Monitoring & Implementation Report

DARWIN