DOCSLIB.ORG

Decision Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Clearing Permit Decision Report 1. Application details 1.1. Permit application details Permit application No.: 9200/1 Permit type: Purpose Permit 1.2. Proponent details Proponent’s name: Montague Resources Australia Pty Ltd 1.3. Property details Property: Exploration Licence 77/1582 Local Government Area: Shire of Yilgarn Colloquial name: 1.4. Application Clearing Area (ha) No. Trees Method of Clearing For the purpose of: 1.6 Mechanical Removal Mineral Exploration 1.5. Decision on application Decision on Permit Application: Grant Decision Date: 29 March 2021 2. Site Information 2.1. Existing environment and information 2.1.1. Description of the native vegetation under application Vegetation Description The vegetation of the application area is broadly mapped as the following Beard vegetation association: 1413: Shrublands; acacia, casuarina & melaleuca thicket (GIS Database). A detailed flora and vegetation survey was conducted over the application area by AECOM during November, 2019. The following vegetation associations were recorded within the application area (AECOM, 2019): Mallee Woodland (EeMcDh): Eucalyptus eremophila, Eucalyptus capillosa subsp. polyclada and Eucalyptus incrassata low open woodland over Melaleuca cordata, Olearia sp. eremicola and Acacia assimilis subsp. assimilis mid shrubland over Drummondita hassellii, Gastrolobium floribundum and Hakea meisneriana low open shrubland. Melaleuca Shrubland (GeMhMc): Grevillea excelsior, Santalum acuminatum and Eucalyptus sp. (sterile) low open woodland over Melaleuca hamata, Allocasuarina spinosissima and Exocarpos aphyllus mid shrubland over Melaleuca calyptroides, Hibbertia stowardii and Drummondita hassellii low open shrubland. Mallee Woodland (EpAhAh): Eucalyptus pileata, Eucalyptus eremophila and Eucalyptus prolixa low woodland over Acacia hemiteles, Melaleuca halmaturorum and Exocarpos aphyllus mid sparse shrubland over Acacia hystrix subsp. hystrix, Daviesia argillacea and Microcybe multiflora subsp. multiflora low shrubland. Clearing Description Montague Resources Australia Pty Ltd proposes to clear up to 1.6 hectares of native vegetation within a boundary of approximately 32.139 hectares, for the purpose of mineral exploration. The project is located approximately 75 kilometres south-southeast of Southern Cross, within the Shire of Yilgarn. Vegetation Condition Pristine: No obvious signs of disturbance (Keighery, 1994). To Degraded: Structure severely disturbed; regeneration to good condition requires intensive management (Keighery, 1994). Comment The vegetation condition was derived from a vegetation survey conducted by AECOM (2019). 3. Assessment of application against Clearing Principles (a) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises a high level of biodiversity. Comments Proposal is not likely to be at variance to this Principle The application area is located within the Southern Cross sub-region of the Coolgardie Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) bioregion (GIS Database). The Southern Cross subregion consists of Page 1 diverse Eucalyptus woodlands (Eucalyptus salmonophloia, E. salubris, E. transcontinentalis, E. longicornis) and is rich in endemic eucalypts which occur around salt lakes, on low greenstone hills, valley alluvials and broad plains of calcareous earths (CALM, 2002). The proposal is located wholly within the Jilbadji (‘C’ Class) Nature Reserve which is an area of approximately 200,000 hectares (GIS Database). The environmental values of the Jilbadji Nature Reserve include; large reserve size, importance as a fauna refugia site, high diversity of fauna species and flora species endemism. The Jilbadji Nature Reserve is a significant area in maintaining existing ecological processes at a regional scale. It is substantially larger than the average reserve area in the Wheatbelt of 114 hectares and therefore is a potentially important refugium for many species, including invertebrates and smaller vertebrates (DAWE, 2021). The Nature Reserve also supports a very high diversity of reptiles, with 38 species, and a high diversity of native mammal species, with 15 species (DAWE, 2021). There are no Threatened Ecological Communities, Priority Ecological Communities, or Threatened flora within the application area (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021; GIS Database). Five Priority flora species have been identified during the boarder flora survey (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021): Acacia lachnocarpa – Priority 1; Microcorys elatoides – Priority 1; Microcorys aff. obovata – Priority 1; Verticordia stenopetala – Priority 3; and Calamphoreus inflatus – Priority 4. Acacia lachnocarpa, Microcorys aff. obovata and Calamphoreus inflatus are all outside of the proposed disturbance areas. There are 27 Verticordia stenopetala within five metres of the proposed access track along the northern most part of the application area. AECOM (2019) identified 392 individuals of Verticordia stenopetala so the maximum potential impact to the tenement population is 6%. There are 71 Microcorys elatoides recorded within five metres of the proposed access track, and based on mapping undertaken by Montague Resources Australia Pty Ltd, the maximum potentially to be impacted would be 15 individuals. As 751 individuals have been identified, the maximum local impact would be 9%. Montague Resources Australia Pty Ltd are currently in the final stages of developing a Conservation Management Plan, and have committed to flagging all Priority flora prior to operations commencing and avoiding where possible (Blueprint, 2021). No introduced flora species were recorded within the application area (Blueprint, 2021). Weeds have the potential to out-compete native flora and reduce the biodiversity of an area. Potential impacts to biodiversity as a result of the proposed clearing may be minimised by the implementation of a weed management condition. Two fauna habitats are present within the application area: ‘Shrubland’ and ‘Mallee Woodland.’ Both these fauna habitats are well represented in the local and regional area (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021). Based on the small scale of clearing and the low impact nature of the proposed activities, it is unlikely that the proposed clearing will significantly impact on indigenous fauna species or their faunal habitat. The vegetation associations, fauna habitats and landform types present within the application area, are well represented in surrounding areas (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021; GIS Database). The application area is unlikely to represent an area of higher biodiversity than surrounding areas, in either a local or regional context. Based on the above, the proposed clearing is not likely to be at variance to this Principle. Methodology AECOM (2019) Blueprint (2021) CALM (2002) DAWE (2021) GIS Database: - IBRA Australia - Pre-European Vegetation - Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities Boundaries - Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities Buffers - Threatened and Priority Flora - Threatened Fauna Page 2 (b) Native vegetation should not be cleared if it comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of, a significant habitat for fauna. Comments Proposal may be at variance to this Principle A Vertebrate Fauna Survey was completed over the project tenement comprising a desktop assessment and field survey on 30 and 31 October 2019 (AECOM 2020). The following two fauna habitats have been recorded within the application area (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021): Shrubland – Open shrubland with emergent Eucalypts and Grevillea on white to yellow sandy loam and clay with ferruginous gravel and some fallen timber and leaf litter. Small logs common, no large logs and no hollows because of recent fire. Mallee Woodland – Low open Eucalyptus woodland over open Acacia shrubland. Understorey of emergent shrubs scattered throughout bare sandy loam and clay soils with ferruginous gravel, scattered with fallen timber and small logs. No conservation significant fauna have been identified within the application area, however, three species of conservation significance have been identified as potentially occurring within the broader survey area (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021): Leipoa ocellata (Malleefowl – Vulnerable); Dasyurus geoffroyii (Chuditch – Vulnerable); and Macropus Irma (Western Brush Wallaby – Priority 4). Suitable habitat for Malleefowl was identified in the broader survey area (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021), however, no Malleefowl mounds were recorded during the fauna survey. The fauna survey confirmed a very small amount of breeding and foraging habitat may be impacted if tree and shrubland vegetation is removed (AECOM, 2019). It is unlikely that the small amount of clearing needed for the proposal would have a significant impact on Malleefowl individuals or habitat. A large amount of similar habitat is also located nearby and in surrounding areas (AECOM, 2019). The proposed clearing is not expected to significantly impact this species due to the small size and linear nature of the proposed clearing, short term nature of the exploration activities and rehabilitation being undertaken within six months. A Conservation Management Plan is also being developed to assist in minimising potential impacts (Blueprint, 2021). Chuditch currently only occur in areas dominated by sclerophyll forest or drier woodland, heath and mallee shrubland (AECOM, 2019; Blueprint, 2021). No Chuditch or indirect evidence of this species was observed, however, there are numerous records of Chuditch in the area
Recommended publications
  • Their Botany, Essential Oils and Uses 6.86 MB

    Their Botany, Essential Oils and Uses 6.86 MB

    MELALEUCAS THEIR BOTANY, ESSENTIAL OILS AND USES Joseph J. Brophy, Lyndley A. Craven and John C. Doran MELALEUCAS THEIR BOTANY, ESSENTIAL OILS AND USES Joseph J. Brophy School of Chemistry, University of New South Wales Lyndley A. Craven Australian National Herbarium, CSIRO Plant Industry John C. Doran Australian Tree Seed Centre, CSIRO Plant Industry 2013 The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was established in June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. ACIAR operates as part of Australia's international development cooperation program, with a mission to achieve more productive and sustainable agricultural systems, for the benefit of developing countries and Australia. It commissions collaborative research between Australian and developing-country researchers in areas where Australia has special research competence. It also administers Australia's contribution to the International Agricultural Research Centres. Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrimination against any product by ACIAR. ACIAR MONOGRAPH SERIES This series contains the results of original research supported by ACIAR, or material deemed relevant to ACIAR’s research and development objectives. The series is distributed internationally, with an emphasis on developing countries. © Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) 2013 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from ACIAR, GPO Box 1571, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia, [email protected] Brophy J.J., Craven L.A. and Doran J.C. 2013. Melaleucas: their botany, essential oils and uses. ACIAR Monograph No. 156. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research: Canberra.
  • Heath Community on Chert Hills of The

    Heath Community on Chert Hills of The

    Interim Recovery Plan No. 338 Heath dominated by one or more of Regelia megacephala, Kunzea praestans and Allocasuarina campestris on ridges and slopes of the chert hills of the Coomberdale Floristic Region (update) Interim Recovery Plan 2013 – 2018 Department of Parks and Wildlife, Kensington July 2013 Interim Recovery Plan No. 338 2 Interim Recovery Plan No. 338 Forword Interim Recovery Plans (IRPs) are developed within the framework laid down in Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW) Policy Statements Nos 44 and 50. IRPs outline the recovery actions that are required to urgently address those threatening processes most affecting the ongoing survival of threatened taxa or ecological communities, and begin the recovery process. DPAW is committed to ensuring that threatened ecological communities are conserved through the preparation and implementation of Recovery Plans or Interim Recovery Plans and by ensuring that conservation action commences as soon as possible and always within one year of endorsement of that rank by DPAW‟s Director of Nature Conservation. This Interim Recovery Plan will operate from July 2013 but will remain in force until withdrawn or replaced. It is intended that, if the community is still listed as Endangered after five years, this Interim Recovery Plan will be replaced or updated. This IRP replaces IRP number 65 „Hamilton-Brown, S. (2000). Heath dominated by one or more of Regelia megacephala, Kunzea praestans and Allocasuarina campestris on ridges and slopes of the chert hills of the Coomberdale Floristic Region. 2000-2003. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth, Western Australia‟ The IRP was approved by the Director of Nature Conservation on 9 September 2013.
  • Charles Darwin, Kadji Kadji, Karara, Lochada Reserves WA

    Charles Darwin, Kadji Kadji, Karara, Lochada Reserves WA

    BUSH BLITZ SPECIES DISCOVERY PROGRAM Charles Darwin Reserve WA 3–9 May · 14–25 September · 7–18 December 2009 Kadji Kadji, Karara, Lochada Reserves WA 14–25 September · 7–18 December 2009 What is Contents Bush Blitz? Bush Blitz is a four-year, What is Bush Blitz 2 multi-million dollar Summary 3 partnership between the Abbreviations 3 Australian Government, Introduction 4 BHP Billiton, and Earthwatch Reserves Overview 5 Australia to document plants Methods 8 and animals in selected properties across Australia’s Results 10 National Reserve System. Discussion 12 Appendix A: Species Lists 15 Fauna 16 This innovative partnership Vertebrates 16 harnesses the expertise of many Invertebrates 25 of Australia’s top scientists from Flora 48 museums, herbaria, universities, Appendix B: Rare and Threatened Species 79 and other institutions and Fauna 80 organisations across the country. Flora 81 Appendix C: Exotic and Pest Species 83 Fauna 84 Flora 85 2 Bush Blitz survey report Summary Bush Blitz fieldwork was conducted at four National Reserve System properties in the Western Australian Avon Wheatbelt and Yalgoo Bioregions during 2009. This included a pilot study Abbreviations at Charles Darwin Reserve and a longer study of Charles Darwin, Kadji Kadji, Lochada and Karara reserves. Results include 651 species added to those known across the reserves and the discovery of 35 putative species new to science. The majority of ANHAT these new species occur within the heteroptera (plant bugs) and Australian Natural Heritage Assessment lepidoptera (butterflies and moths) taxonomic groups. Tool Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata), listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act federal Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act 1999 (EPBC Act), were observed on Charles Darwin Reserve.
  • Rangelands, Western Australia

    Rangelands, Western Australia

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
  • Species List

    Species List

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
  • Charles Darwin Reserve Project ABRS Final Report Plants

    Charles Darwin Reserve Project ABRS Final Report Plants

    Biodiversity survey pilot project at Charles Darwin Reserve, Western Australia Vascular Plants Report to Australian Biological Resources Study, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra Terry D. Macfarlane Western Australian Herbarium, Science Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, Western Australia. 31 August 2009 Cover picture: View of York gum ( Eucalyptus loxophleba ) woodland below a greenstone ridge, with extensive Acacia shrubland in the distance, northern Charles Darwin Reserve, May 2009. (Photo T.D. Macfarlane). 2 Biodiversity survey pilot project at Charles Darwin Reserve, Western Australia Terry D. Macfarlane Western Australian Herbarium, Science Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, Western Australia. Address: DEC, Locked Bag 2, Manjimup WA 6258 Project aim This project was conceived to carry out a biological survey of a reserve forming part of the National Reserve System, to provide biodiversity information for reserve management and to contribute to taxonomic knowledge including description of new species as appropriate. Survey structure A team of scientists specialising in different organism groups each with a team of Earthwatch volunteer assistants, driver and vehicle, carried out the survey following individually devised field programs, over the 1 week period 5-9 May 2009. Science teams Five science teams, each led by one of the scientists, specialised on the following organism groups: Plants, Insects (Lepidoptera), Insects (Heteroptera), Vertebrates , Arachnids. Plants were collected by the Plants team and also by some of the animal scientists, particularly Celia Symonds, in order to accurately document the insect host plants. These additional collections were identified along with the other flora vouchers, and contribute to the flora results reported here.

  • Summary of Sites on the South West Australian Transitional Transect

    S ummary of Sites on the South West Australian Transitional Transect 2012-2016 Xanthorrhoea preissii, Mt Roe National Park Acknowledgments TERN AusPlots work would not be possible without significant help from a range of people. TERN Ausplots gratefully acknowledges Dr Stephen van Leeuwen for all of his help and support of the project. Thanks, are also due to the staff from the Department of Parks and wildlife in particular Nick Casson, Nigel Wessels, Jennifer Jackson, Janine Liddelow, John Abbot, Sara Hands-May, Deon Utber. Thanks, are also to volunteers Peter Milnes and Sam Hardy who helped out with the field work and the many others who have assisted with the curation and processing of the data and samples Thanks to the staff at the WA Herbarium, in particular Mike Hislop, for undertaking the plant identification. Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Accessing the Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 3 Point intercept data ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Plant collections ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Leaf tissue samples ...........................................................................................................................................

  • Summary of Sites on Credo Conservation Reserve

    Summary of Sites on Credo Conservation Reserve October 2012 – January 2014 Eucalyptus salmonophloia mid open Woodland, Credo Conservation Reserve Acknowledgments Ausplots Rangelands gratefully acknowledges the staff at Credo Conservation Reserve and at the WA Deprtment of Parks and Wildlife, in particular Nick Casson and Stephen Van Leeuwen for their help and support in the project and for allowing access to the property. Thanks also to the many other volunteers who have helped with data curation and sample processing. Thanks also to Mike Hislop and the staff from the WA Herabrium for undertaking the plant indentications. Contents Introduction......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Accessing the Data ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Point intercept data .................................................................................................................................... 3 Plant collections .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Leaf tissue samples...................................................................................................................................... 3 Site description information .......................................................................................................................

  • Volume 5 Pt 3

    Conservation Science W. Aust. 8 (3) : 277–294 (2013) Flora and vegetation of greenstone formations of the Yilgarn Craton: the northern Forrestania Greenstone Belt (Mount Holland area) WENDY A THOMPSON AND JESSICA ALLEN Science Division, Department of Environment and Conservation, PO Box 51, Wanneroo, Western Australia, 6946. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT A quadrat-based survey recorded the flora and associated environmental parameters in the northern portion of the Forrestania Greenstone Belt. A total of 312 taxa were identified, representing 47 families and 121 genera. Twelve taxa of conservation significance were recorded, including two declared rare flora (Banksia sphaerocarpa subsp. dolichostyla and Eucalyptus steedmanii). Three new taxa were identified, including two shrubs, a Hibbertia sp. and Labichea rossii (Priority 1), and a single grass species, Austrostipa sp. The two undescribed new taxa are proposed for conservation listing. The 50 quadrats were classified into eight community types. Topography and edaphic factors were influential in delineating community groups. Only five weed taxa were identified, despite the history of mining in the area. Only a small portion of the Forrestania Greenstone Belt belongs to the conservation estate. Based on the survey findings, expansion of the secure tenure is recommended to incorporate a more comprehensive representation of the vegetation and landforms of the greenstone belt. Keywords: classification, Coolgardie, florsitic diversity, mallee, vegetation patterns, ultramafics INTRODUCTION 85 km north east of Hyden (Fig. 1). The Forrestania Greenstone Belt trends north to south, and is c. 100 km Historically, the greenstone belts of the Yilgarn Craton in length and c. 15 km west to east.

  • Avon, Western Australia

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Guide to Users Background What is the summary for and where does it come from? This summary has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. It highlights important elements of the biodiversity of the region in two ways: • Listing species which may be significant for management because they are found only in the region, mainly in the region, or they have a conservation status such as endangered or vulnerable. • Comparing the region to other parts of Australia in terms of the composition and distribution of its species, to suggest components of its biodiversity which may be nationally significant. The summary was produced using the Australian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. The list of families covered in ANHAT is shown in Appendix 1. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are are not not included included in the in the summary. • The data used for this summary come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect.
  • SWAFR - IBRA - Native Vascular Plant Taxa

    SWAFR - IBRA - Native Vascular Plant Taxa

    SWAFR - IBRA - Native Vascular Plant Taxa Paul Gioia, Science and Conservation Division, Department of Parks and Wildlife Report generated on 3/11/2015 3:49:33 PM This analysis uses a pro tem definition of the SWAFR that served to define the study area. It was based on the collection of IBRA bioregions most closely approximating the original definition of the Southwest Province by Beard (1980). Data for this report were derived from a snapshot taken from WAHERB on 18/05/2015 for Gioia & Hopper (2015) paper. Criteria for data extraction and analysis were: 1. All vascular plants 2. Species-rank names where the typical subspecies also existed were renamed to the typical subspecies to avoid counting duplicate taxa 3. Native vascular taxa with current names Note: 1. This report contains information generated from intersecting the supplied polygon layer LOCAL_SWFIBR with the point species occurrence layer WAHERB_FILT_NATIVE. 2. Endemism is calculated based on the records available to this analysis and is not necessarily authoritative. Regions reported on: Region Name Hectares SWAFR - IBRA 29,851,921.5 Species List By Region 1 2 3 1 2 3 NameID Species Cons End WA NameID Species Cons End WA 35 12247 Acacia anthochaera SWAFR - IBRA 36 3220 Acacia aphylla T Y 1 4889 Abutilon cryptopetalum 37 15466 Acacia applanata 2 4902 Abutilon oxycarpum 38 14049 Acacia aprica T Y Y 3 43020 Abutilon oxycarpum subsp. Prostrate (A.A. Y 39 37260 Acacia aptaneura Mitchell PRP 1266) 40 14050 Acacia arcuatilis P2 Y Y 4 16106 Acacia acanthaster Y 41 3221 Acacia argutifolia P4 Y 5 16159 Acacia acanthoclada subsp.
  • A.3 Flora and Vegetation Surveys

    A.3 Flora and Vegetation Surveys

    SANDY RIDGE PROJECT, EXPLORATION TENEMENT E16/440 LEVEL 1 FLORA AND VEGETATION SURVEY Prepared for: Tellus Holdings P/L Report Date: 7 November 2016 Version: 4 Report No. 2015-205 CONTENTS Contents ............................................................................................................................................................. i List of Attachments ........................................................................................................................................... ii 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Proposed Mining Operation .............................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Scope of Works .................................................................................................................................. 1 2 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................................... 2 3 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Past and Existing Land Use ...............................................................................................................