DOCSLIB.ORG

3.1.3.2.3.01. Report Template

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Whyalla Solar Farm Baseline Ecological Report Whyalla Flora and Fauna Assessment Baseline Ecological Report Whyalla Solar Farm - Baseline Ecological Report 31 January 2017 FINAL Prepared by EBS Ecology for LBW | ep Document Control Revision No. Date issued Authors Reviewed by Date Reviewed Revision type 1 03/11/2016 EBS EBS 02/11/2016 Draft 2 29/11/2016 EBS EBS 28/11/2016 Draft 3 12/12/2016 EBS EBS 09/12/2016 Final 4 31/01/2017 EBS EBS 31/01/2017 Final Distribution of Copies Revision No. Date issued Media Issued to 1 03/11/2016 Electronic Tegan Stehbens, LBW | ep 2 29/11/2016 Electronic Tegan Stehbens, LBW | ep 3 12/12/2016 Electronic Maria Pedicini, LBW | ep 4 31/01/2017 Electronic Maria Pedicini, LBW | ep EBS Ecology Project Number: E60606 COPYRIGHT: Use or copying of this document in whole or in part (including photographs) without the written permission of EBS Ecology’s client and EBS Ecology constitutes an infringement of copyright. LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of EBS Ecology’s client, and is subject to and issued in connection with the provisions of the agreement between EBS Ecology and its client. EBS Ecology accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this report by any third party. CITATION: EBS Ecology (2017) Whyalla Solar Farm - Baseline Ecological Report. Report to LBW | ep. EBS Ecology, Adelaide. Cover photograph: Whyalla Solar Farm Project Site. EBS Ecology 3/119 Hayward Avenue Torrensville, South Australia 5031 t: 08 7127 5607 http://www.ebsecology.com.au email: [email protected] ii Whyalla Flora and Fauna Assessment Baseline Ecological Report GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATION OF TERMS BDBSA Biological Databases of South Australia DEWNR Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources DOE Department of the Environment, referred to now as DotEE DotEE Department of the Environment and Energy EBS EBS Ecology EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 NPW Act National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 NRM Act Natural Resources Management Act 2004 NV Act Native Vegetation Act 1991 NVC Native Vegetation Council SEB Significant Environmental Benefit ssp. Subspecies spp. species (plural) TEC Threatened ecological community iii Whyalla Flora and Fauna Assessment Baseline Ecological Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EBS Ecology was commissioned by LBW | ep to complete a baseline ecological report on a 396.5 ha parcel of land situated north of Whyalla, for a proposed solar farm. The baseline ecological survey was conducted by EBS Field Ecologist’s on the site from 26 September to 1 October 2016. Two vegetation associations were recorded within the project area and are summarised below. The area contains predominately intact plant communities, with good-high diversity values for the area. No vegetation communities of conservation significance were observed. A total of 86 flora species were recorded across the project area. Seventy of the species recorded were native and 14 species were weed species. No EPBC or state listed species were recorded during the survey. Out of the 14 weed species found on site, the dominant weed was Carrichtera annua (Ward’s Weed); a single Prickly Pear (Opuntia sp.) was recorded on the access road. A total of nine mammal species were recorded across the project area. This included four bat species and one native mouse. Five reptile species were also recorded from the survey. No mammal or reptile species of national or State conservation significance were identified from the survey. A total of 39 bird species and 407 individuals were identified across the project area. One species of national significance, the Western Grasswren (Gawler Ranges) (Amytornis textilis myall) and one of State significance, the Slender- billed Thornbill (western subspecies) (Acanthiza iredalei iredalei) were recorded. The Western Grasswren (Gawler Ranges) was observed opportunistically on the site, in groups of two and six, on 30 September and 1 October 2016, respectively. These observations were within chenopod shrublands on site, not within the access corridor. Both of the habitat associations present on site are representative of the habitat types that Western Grasswren (Gawler Ranges) use most often. At present, given the vegetation communities present on site, their high quality, and that they form the preferred habitat for Western Grasswrens, the entire proposed site holds potential habitat for the species. More information needs to be obtained with regard to the Western Grasswren to determine potential impact within a regional context. A total of nine individuals of the Slender-billed Thornbill were observed at the site during the survey. This species is listed as rare from a State significance perspective; it is estimated that the South Australian population consists of at least 30 000 birds. More information needs to be obtained to provide further insight into the extent of habitat usage by this species on site. iv Whyalla Flora and Fauna Assessment Baseline Ecological Report Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project area ............................................................................................................................... 1 2 COMPLIANCE AND LEGISLATIVE SUMMARY ..................................................... 3 2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwth) ................................. 3 2.2 Native Vegetation Act 1991 (SA) ............................................................................................... 4 2.3 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (SA) ................................................................................ 4 2.4 Natural Resources Management Act 2004 (SA) ....................................................................... 5 3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ............................................................................. 6 3.1 Property description and previous land use .............................................................................. 6 3.2 Environmental setting ................................................................................................................ 6 3.2.1 IBRA Associations ........................................................................................................ 6 3.2.2 Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR) Vegetation Floristics ........................................................................................................................ 7 3.2.3 Climate .......................................................................................................................... 9 3.2.4 Previous surveys conducted ......................................................................................... 9 4 METHODS ............................................................................................................. 11 4.1 Database searches .................................................................................................................. 11 4.2 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 11 4.3 Field survey ............................................................................................................................. 12 4.3.1 Flora ............................................................................................................................ 12 4.3.2 Fauna .......................................................................................................................... 12 4.4 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 13 5 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 18 5.1 Matters of National Environmental significance ...................................................................... 18 5.1.1 Threatened ecological communities ........................................................................... 18 5.1.2 Threatened flora ......................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Field survey ............................................................................................................................. 30 5.3.1 Vegetation associations .............................................................................................. 30 5.3.2 Flora ............................................................................................................................ 35 5.3.3 Weeds ......................................................................................................................... 37 5.3.4 Fauna .......................................................................................................................... 38 6 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 42 7 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 43 v Whyalla Flora and Fauna Assessment Baseline Ecological Report List of Tables
Recommended publications
  • Oochoristica Piankai Sp. N. (Cestoda: Linstowiidae) and Other Helminths of Moloch Horridus (Sauria: Agamidae) from Australia

    Oochoristica Piankai Sp. N. (Cestoda: Linstowiidae) and Other Helminths of Moloch Horridus (Sauria: Agamidae) from Australia

    J. Helminthol. Soc. Wash. 63(2), 1996, pp. 215-221 Oochoristica piankai sp. n. (Cestoda: Linstowiidae) and Other Helminths of Moloch horridus (Sauria: Agamidae) from Australia CHARLES R. BURSEY,' STEPHEN R. GOLDBERG,2 AND DAVID N. WooLERY2 'Department of Biology, Pennsylvania State University, Shenango Campus, Sharon, Pennsylvania 16146 (e- mail: [email protected]), and 2Department of Biology, Whittier College, Whittier, California 90608 (e-mail: [email protected]) ABSTRACT: Oochoristica piankai sp. n., a new linstowiid cestode, discovered in the small intestine of the thorny devil, Moloch horridus, is described and illustrated. Sixteen specimens of Oochoristica piankai sp. n. were found in 8 of 104 (8%) Moloch horridus from Australia. Oochoristica piankai sp. n. differs from 3 other Australian species of Oochoristica from lizards in the number of testes and the shape of the ovary. The presence of the nematode Parapharyngodon kartana and an encysted larva of Abbreviata sp. are also reported. Moloch horridus represents a new host record for P. kartana. KEY WORDS: Oochoristica piankai sp. n., cestode, Parapharyngodon kartana, Abbreviata sp., nematode, Mo- loch horridus, lizard, Agamidae, Australia. Only 3 of 74 species of Oochoristica Luhe, Northern Territory (snout-vent length = 86.1 mm ± 1898, a cosmopolitan genus of cestodes, have 14.5 SD). These specimens had been collected between been reported previously from reptiles of Aus- October 1966 and January 1968 for use in an ecological study (Pianka and Pianka, 1970); collection data will tralia. Taenia trachysauri MacCallum, 1921, was be found in that report. Because the ecological study described from specimens discovered in the in- included stomach analysis, only small and large intes- testine of the Australian lizard Trachydosaurus tines remained with most of the carcasses, but 3 intact rugosus Gray, in the New York Zoological Gar- stomachs and 5 pyloric stomach regions were present.
  • Two New Taxa of Verticordia (Myrtaceae: Chamelaucieae) from South-Western Australia

    Two New Taxa of Verticordia (Myrtaceae: Chamelaucieae) from South-Western Australia

    A.S.Nuytsia George 20: 309–318 & M.D. (2010)Barrett,, Two new taxa of Verticordia 309 Two new taxa of Verticordia (Myrtaceae: Chamelaucieae) from south-western Australia Alex S. George1 and Matthew D. Barrett2,3 1 ‘Four Gables’, 18 Barclay Road, Kardinya, Western Australia 6163 Email: [email protected] 2 Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority, Kings Park and Botanic Garden, Fraser Ave, West Perth, Western Australia 6005 3 School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia 6009 Email: [email protected] Abstract George, A.S. and Barrett, M.D. Two new taxa of Verticordia (Myrtaceae: Chamelaucieae) from south- western Australia. Nuytsia 20: 309–318 (2010). Verticordia mitchelliana subsp. implexior A.S.George & M.D.Barrett and Verticordia setacea A.S.George are described and discussed. Verticordia setacea belongs with V. gracilis A.S.George in section Platandra, previously a monotypic section. Introduction The genus Verticordia DC. (Myrtaceae: tribe Chamelaucieae) is a charismatic group of shrubs found mainly in south-western Australia, with several species in adjacent arid regions and three in tropical Australia (George 1991; George & Pieroni 2002). Verticordia is currently defined solely on the possession of divided calyx lobes, but the limits between Verticordia and the related genera Homoranthus A.Cunn. ex Schauer, Chamelaucium Desf. and Darwinia Rudge are difficult to define conclusively, and other characteristics such as anther morphology suggest conflicting relationships (Bentham 1867; Craven & Jones 1991; George 1991). A recent analysis using a single chloroplast gene, with limited sampling of Verticordia taxa (Ma et al. 2002), suggests that Verticordia may be polyphyletic.
  • Lake Pinaroo Ramsar Site

    Lake Pinaroo Ramsar Site

    Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site Disclaimer The Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW (DECC) has compiled the Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. DECC does not accept responsibility for any inaccurate or incomplete information supplied by third parties. No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for any particular purpose. Readers should seek appropriate advice about the suitability of the information to their needs. © State of New South Wales and Department of Environment and Climate Change DECC is pleased to allow the reproduction of material from this publication on the condition that the source, publisher and authorship are appropriately acknowledged. Published by: Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW 59–61 Goulburn Street, Sydney PO Box A290, Sydney South 1232 Phone: 131555 (NSW only – publications and information requests) (02) 9995 5000 (switchboard) Fax: (02) 9995 5999 TTY: (02) 9211 4723 Email: [email protected] Website: www.environment.nsw.gov.au DECC 2008/275 ISBN 978 1 74122 839 7 June 2008 Printed on environmentally sustainable paper Cover photos Inset upper: Lake Pinaroo in flood, 1976 (DECC) Aerial: Lake Pinaroo in flood, March 1976 (DECC) Inset lower left: Blue-billed duck (R. Kingsford) Inset lower middle: Red-necked avocet (C. Herbert) Inset lower right: Red-capped plover (C. Herbert) Summary An ecological character description has been defined as ‘the combination of the ecosystem components, processes, benefits and services that characterise a wetland at a given point in time’.
  • Conservation Advice: Homoranthus Bebo L.M. Copel (Myrtaceae)

    Conservation Advice: Homoranthus Bebo L.M. Copel (Myrtaceae)

    Homoranthus bebo L.M. Copel (Myrtaceae) Distribution: Endemic to NSW Current EPBC Act Status: Under consideration for listing as Critically Endangered Current NSW TSC Act Status: Not Listed Proposed change for alignment: List as Critically Endangered on EPBC Act Conservation Advice: Homoranthus bebo Summary of Conservation Assessment Homoranthus bebo was found to be eligible for listing as Critically Endangered under Criterion B1ab(iii, v) + 2ab(iii, v). The main reasons for this species being eligible are i) that it has a highly restricted geographic distribution with both an extent of occurrence (EOO), estimated by calculating the area within the smallest possible polygon containing all known records as per IUCN Guidelines (2016), and an area of occupancy (AOO), estimated using 2 x 2 km grids as per IUCN Guidelines (2016), of 4 km2; ii) the species is known from a single location in Dthinna Dthinnawan Nature Reserve in the far North of NSW; iii) there is a projected continuing decline inferred in area, extent and/or quality of habitat and number of mature individuals as the species appears extremely sensitive to fire and observations suggest very slow rates of recruitment and recolonization of burnt patches, hampering the species ability to recover following disturbance events. The size and extent of the population is such that the entire species could be lost during a single fire event of moderate severity if it is assumed that all adult plants are killed by fire and there is no seedling recovery post- fire (as has been observed in response to a recent fire). Description and Taxonomy Homoranthus bebo was first described by L.
  • Management of the Terrestrial Small Mammal and Lizard Communities in the Dune System Of

    Management of the Terrestrial Small Mammal and Lizard Communities in the Dune System Of

    Management of the terrestrial small mammal and lizard communities in the dune system of Sturt National Park, Australia: Historic and contemporary effects of pastoralism and fox predation Ulrike Sabine Klöcker (Dipl. – Biol., Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität Bonn, Germany) Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia 2009 Abstract This thesis addressed three issues related to the management and conservation of small terrestrial vertebrates in the arid zone. The study site was an amalgamation of pastoral properties forming the now protected area of Sturt National Park in far-western New South Wales, Australia. Thus firstly, it assessed recovery from disturbance accrued through more than a century of Sheep grazing. Vegetation parameters, Fox, Cat and Rabbit abundance, and the small vertebrate communities were compared, with distance to watering points used as a surrogate for grazing intensity. Secondly, the impacts of small-scale but intensive combined Fox and Rabbit control on small vertebrates were investigated. Thirdly, the ecology of the rare Dusky Hopping Mouse (Notomys fuscus) was used as an exemplar to illustrate and discuss some of the complexities related to the conservation of small terrestrial vertebrates, with a particular focus on desert rodents. Thirty-five years after the removal of livestock and the closure of watering points, areas that were historically heavily disturbed are now nearly indistinguishable from nearby relatively undisturbed areas, despite uncontrolled native herbivore (kangaroo) abundance. Rainfall patterns, rather than grazing history, were responsible for the observed variation between individual sites and may overlay potential residual grazing effects.
  • Newsletter No

    Newsletter No

    Newsletter No. 167 June 2016 Price: $5.00 AUSTRALASIAN SYSTEMATIC BOTANY SOCIETY INCORPORATED Council President Vice President Darren Crayn Daniel Murphy Australian Tropical Herbarium (ATH) Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria James Cook University, Cairns Campus Birdwood Avenue PO Box 6811, Cairns Qld 4870 Melbourne, Vic. 3004 Australia Australia Tel: (+61)/(0)7 4232 1859 Tel: (+61)/(0) 3 9252 2377 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Secretary Treasurer Leon Perrie John Clarkson Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service PO Box 467, Wellington 6011 PO Box 975, Atherton Qld 4883 New Zealand Australia Tel: (+64)/(0) 4 381 7261 Tel: (+61)/(0) 7 4091 8170 Email: [email protected] Mobile: (+61)/(0) 437 732 487 Councillor Email: [email protected] Jennifer Tate Councillor Institute of Fundamental Sciences Mike Bayly Massey University School of Botany Private Bag 11222, Palmerston North 4442 University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010 New Zealand Australia Tel: (+64)/(0) 6 356- 099 ext. 84718 Tel: (+61)/(0) 3 8344 5055 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Other constitutional bodies Hansjörg Eichler Research Committee Affiliate Society David Glenny Papua New Guinea Botanical Society Sarah Matthews Heidi Meudt Advisory Standing Committees Joanne Birch Financial Katharina Schulte Patrick Brownsey Murray Henwood David Cantrill Chair: Dan Murphy, Vice President Bob Hill Grant application closing dates Ad hoc adviser to Committee: Bruce Evans Hansjörg Eichler Research
  • Fowlers Gap Biodiversity Checklist Reptiles

    Fowlers Gap Biodiversity Checklist Reptiles

    Fowlers Gap Biodiversity Checklist ow if there are so many lizards then they should make tasty N meals for someone. Many of the lizard-eaters come from their Reptiles own kind, especially the snake-like legless lizards and the snakes themselves. The former are completely harmless to people but the latter should be left alone and assumed to be venomous. Even so it odern reptiles are at the most diverse in the tropics and the is quite safe to watch a snake from a distance but some like the Md rylands of the world. The Australian arid zone has some of the Mulga Snake can be curious and this could get a little most diverse reptile communities found anywhere. In and around a disconcerting! single tussock of spinifex in the western deserts you could find 18 species of lizards. Fowlers Gap does not have any spinifex but even he most common lizards that you will encounter are the large so you do not have to go far to see reptiles in the warmer weather. Tand ubiquitous Shingleback and Central Bearded Dragon. The diversity here is as astonishing as anywhere. Imagine finding six They both have a tendency to use roads for passage, warming up or species of geckos ranging from 50-85 mm long, all within the same for display. So please slow your vehicle down and then take evasive genus. Or think about a similar diversity of striped skinks from 45-75 action to spare them from becoming a road casualty. The mm long! How do all these lizards make a living in such a dry and Shingleback is often seen alone but actually is monogamous and seemingly unproductive landscape? pairs for life.
  • Extract from the National Native Title Register

    Extract from the National Native Title Register

    Extract from the National Native Title Register Determination Information: Determination Reference: Federal Court Number(s): SAD6011/1998 NNTT Number: SCD2016/001 Determination Name: Croft on behalf of the Barngarla Native Title Claim Group v State of South Australia Date(s) of Effect: 6/04/2018 Determination Outcome: Native title exists in parts of the determination area Register Extract (pursuant to s. 193 of the Native Title Act 1993) Determination Date: 23/06/2016 Determining Body: Federal Court of Australia ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Note 1: On 6 April 2018 Justice White of the Federal Court of Australia (the Court) ordered that: 1. The Determination of native title made on 23 June 2017 [sic] in Croft on behalf of the Barngarla Native Title Claim Group v State of South Australia (No 2) [2016] FCA 724 be amended in accordance with the Amended Determination attached as Annexure A to this order, noting that because of the size of the Determination Annexure A comprises only: a. pages i to xv inclusive of the Amended Determination; b. the first page of any Schedule which is amended; and c. the particular pages within each Schedule which are amended. 2. Order 2 made on 23 June 2016 be vacated. 3. In its place there be an order that the Determination as amended take effect from the date of this order. Note 2: In the Determination orders of 23 June 2016, Order 22 deals with the nomination of a prescribed body corporate. On 19 December 2016 the applicant nominated to the Court in accordance with sections 56 and 57 of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) that: (a) native title is not to be held in trust; National Native Title Tribunal Page 1 of 20 Extract from the National Native Title Register SCD2016/001 and, accordingly, pursuant to Order 22(b) of 23 June 2016: (b) the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation is nominated as the prescribed body corporate for the purpose of section 57(2) of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
  • Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History Database

    Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History Database

    Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History database Abdala, C. S., A. S. Quinteros, and R. E. Espinoza. 2008. Two new species of Liolaemus (Iguania: Liolaemidae) from the puna of northwestern Argentina. Herpetologica 64:458-471. Abdala, C. S., D. Baldo, R. A. Juárez, and R. E. Espinoza. 2016. The first parthenogenetic pleurodont Iguanian: a new all-female Liolaemus (Squamata: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. Copeia 104:487-497. Abdala, C. S., J. C. Acosta, M. R. Cabrera, H. J. Villaviciencio, and J. Marinero. 2009. A new Andean Liolaemus of the L. montanus series (Squamata: Iguania: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. South American Journal of Herpetology 4:91-102. Abdala, C. S., J. L. Acosta, J. C. Acosta, B. B. Alvarez, F. Arias, L. J. Avila, . S. M. Zalba. 2012. Categorización del estado de conservación de las lagartijas y anfisbenas de la República Argentina. Cuadernos de Herpetologia 26 (Suppl. 1):215-248. Abell, A. J. 1999. Male-female spacing patterns in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Amphibia-Reptilia 20:185-194. Abts, M. L. 1987. Environment and variation in life history traits of the Chuckwalla, Sauromalus obesus. Ecological Monographs 57:215-232. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2003. Anfibios y reptiles del Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay: Facultad de Ciencias. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2007. Anfibio y reptiles del Uruguay, 3rd edn. Montevideo, Uruguay: Serie Fauna 1. Ackermann, T. 2006. Schreibers Glatkopfleguan Leiocephalus schreibersii. Munich, Germany: Natur und Tier. Ackley, J. W., P. J. Muelleman, R. E. Carter, R. W. Henderson, and R. Powell. 2009. A rapid assessment of herpetofaunal diversity in variously altered habitats on Dominica.
  • Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O

    Catalogue of Protozoan Parasites Recorded in Australia Peter J. O

    1 CATALOGUE OF PROTOZOAN PARASITES RECORDED IN AUSTRALIA PETER J. O’DONOGHUE & ROBERT D. ADLARD O’Donoghue, P.J. & Adlard, R.D. 2000 02 29: Catalogue of protozoan parasites recorded in Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 45(1):1-164. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Published reports of protozoan species from Australian animals have been compiled into a host- parasite checklist, a parasite-host checklist and a cross-referenced bibliography. Protozoa listed include parasites, commensals and symbionts but free-living species have been excluded. Over 590 protozoan species are listed including amoebae, flagellates, ciliates and ‘sporozoa’ (the latter comprising apicomplexans, microsporans, myxozoans, haplosporidians and paramyxeans). Organisms are recorded in association with some 520 hosts including mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Information has been abstracted from over 1,270 scientific publications predating 1999 and all records include taxonomic authorities, synonyms, common names, sites of infection within hosts and geographic locations. Protozoa, parasite checklist, host checklist, bibliography, Australia. Peter J. O’Donoghue, Department of Microbiology and Parasitology, The University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia; Robert D. Adlard, Protozoa Section, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane 4101, Australia; 31 January 2000. CONTENTS the literature for reports relevant to contemporary studies. Such problems could be avoided if all previous HOST-PARASITE CHECKLIST 5 records were consolidated into a single database. Most Mammals 5 researchers currently avail themselves of various Reptiles 21 electronic database and abstracting services but none Amphibians 26 include literature published earlier than 1985 and not all Birds 34 journal titles are covered in their databases. Fish 44 Invertebrates 54 Several catalogues of parasites in Australian PARASITE-HOST CHECKLIST 63 hosts have previously been published.
  • Natural Resources Management (General) Regulations 2005 Under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004

    Natural Resources Management (General) Regulations 2005 Under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004

    Version: 1.7.2018 South Australia Natural Resources Management (General) Regulations 2005 under the Natural Resources Management Act 2004 Contents Part 1—Preliminary 1 Short title 3 Interpretation Part 2—Legislative definitions 4 Definition of animal 5 Definition of animal-proof fence 6 Definition of Mount Lofty Ranges Watershed 7 Definition of plant Part 3—NRM authorities 9 Regional NRM boards—Annual reports Part 4—NRM plans 10 Regional NRM plans—prescribed information or material 11 Concept statements and public consultation Part 5—Management and protection of water resources 12 Rate at which drinking water may be taken 14 Activities subject to operation of NRM plans—section 127(5)(k) 14A Water affecting activities—section 127(5a) 15 Expiation fees—section 127(6) 16 Prescribed date—section 134(1) 17 Notice to be given by relevant authority—section 136, 162 or 164D 18 Requirements as to representations under section 136, 162 or 164D 19 Time for response by applicant 20 Well drillers' licences—prescribed conditions 20AAA Cancellation of water resource works approval—prescribed scheme (section 163 of Act) 20AA Cancellation of site use approval—prescribed scheme (section 164E of Act) Part 5AA—Forest water licences 20A Interpretation—harvesting (section 169A of Act) 21 Provision of notice to Minister (section 169C of Act) 21A Variations—allocations—prescribed period (section 169E of Act) 21B Approval for transfer of allocations—prescribed circumstances (section 169F of Act) 21C Variation—conditions—prescribed period (section 169H of Act)
  • A Brief Overview of the Taxonomy and Nomenclature of the Genus

    A Brief Overview of the Taxonomy and Nomenclature of the Genus

    Australasian Journal of Herpetology 57 Australasian Journal of Herpetology 34:57-63. ISSN 1836-5698 (Print) Published 20 July 2017. ISSN 1836-5779 (Online) A brief overview of the taxonomy and nomenclature of the genus Diplodactylus Gray 1832 sensu lato, with the formal naming of a new subgenus for the Diplodactylus byrnei Lucas and Frost, 1896 species group and two new species within this subgenus. RAYMOND T. HOSER 488 Park Road, Park Orchards, Victoria, 3134, Australia. Phone: +61 3 9812 3322 Fax: 9812 3355 E-mail: snakeman (at) snakeman.com.au Received 25 March 2017, Accepted 28 May 2017, Published 20 July 2017. ABSTRACT The taxonomy of the genus Diplodactylus Gray 1832 sensu lato was well resolved at the genus level by Oliver et al. (2007) and to a lesser extent other authors over the past 30 years to 2017. However a group known as the Wüster gang as detailed by Hoser (2015a-f) have unlawfully stopped most herpetologists from using taxonomy and nomenclature proposed by authors outside of their mob. As a result names formally proposed by Wells and Wellington (1989) for obvious species groups have been forcibly suppressed in herpetology since they were first published. This has remained the case even after Oliver et al. (2007) confirmed the validity of their genus-level classification in terms of three names they proposed. Taking an ultra-conservative position, Oliver et al. (2007) split Diplodactylus Gray 1832 sensu lato into three genera, using the first available names of Diplodactylus Gray 1832, Lucasium Wermuth, 1965 and Rhynchoedura Günther, 1867 for three main groups that diverged from one another in excess of 20 MYA.