DRAFT CONSERVATION ADVICE for the COASTAL SWAMP SCLEROPHYLL FORESTS of SOUTH-EASTERN AUSTRALIA March 2021- for Consultation

DRAFT CONSERVATION ADVICE FOR THE COASTAL SWAMP SCLEROPHYLL FORESTS OF SOUTH-EASTERN AUSTRALIA March 2021- For consultation

Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia © Louise Armstrong

The Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia ecological community is under assessment for potential listing on the threatened ecological communities list under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The proposed national ecological community corresponds in part with the Swamp Sclerophyll Floodplain Forest of NSW listed under NSW legislation, with several Regional Ecosystems (REs) in Queensland and the Swamp Scrub Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) in Victoria. The draft assessment and recommendations are at Section 6. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee seeks input on whether the ecological community merits listing as Endangered.

The draft assessment of the eligibility against each of the listing criteria is: Criterion 1: Vulnerable Criterion 2: Vulnerable to Endangered Criterion 3: Insufficient data Criterion 4: Endangered Criterion 5: Insufficient data Criterion 6: Insufficient data The main factors in the draft assessment that make the ecological community eligible for listing in the Endangered category are its loss of integrity through increased fragmentation and degradation of remnants due to changes in hydrology, land clearing, weed invasion, disease, invasive fauna, and inappropriate grazing and fire management regimes. The proposed Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia ecological community occurs on country (the traditional lands) of the Gureng, Bajtala, Gubbi, Yuggera, Bundjalung, Gumbaynggirr, Dainggatti, Biripi, Worimi, Wonnarua, Awabakal, Darkinjung, Kurin- gai, Eora, Dharug, Tharawal/D’harawal, Yuin, Bidwell and the Kurnai peoples.

This draft document has been prepared in preliminary consultation with experts from NSW, Queensland and Victoria, including a definition and threats workshop in Port Stephens NSW in November 2019. Comments are now sought from the public on the definition and associated distribution, as well as on the threats and proposed conservation category.

CONTENTS 1 CONSERVATION OBJECTIVE ...... 3 2 Description of the ecological community and the area it inhabits ...... 3 2.1 Description ...... 3 2.2 Significance of the ecological community to First Nations peoples ...... 10 3 Threats ...... 11 3.1 Threats table ...... 11 3.2 Key threatening processes ...... 17 4 Existing protection ...... 18 4.1 Existing protection in reserves ...... 18 4.2 Existing protection under state laws ...... 18 4.3 Existing management plans ...... 19 5 Conservation of the ecological community ...... 22 5.1 Identification of the ecological community ...... 22 5.2 Regulated areas of the ecological community ...... 25 5.3 Principles and standards for conservation ...... 30 5.4 Priority conservation and research actions ...... 31 6 Listing assessment and recovery plan recommendation ...... 41 6.1 Eligibility for listing against the EPBC Act criteria ...... 41 6.2 Recovery plan recommendation ...... 51 Appendix A - Species lists ...... 52 A1 Characteristic and Frequently Occurring Vascular Plants ...... 52 A2 Fauna ...... 59 Appendix B - Weeds ...... 63 Appendix C - Relationship to other vegetation classification and mapping systems ...... 64 C1 Queensland vegetation classifications ...... 64 C2 Victorian vegetation classification ...... 64 C3 NSW vegetation classifications ...... 65 Appendix D – Consultation with First Nations Peoples ...... 70 D1. Cultural Heritage Protection ...... 70 D2. First Nations associated with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ...... 71 References ...... 73

1 CONSERVATION OBJECTIVE To mitigate the risk of extinction of the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia and help recover its biodiversity and function through protecting it from significant impacts as a Matter of National Environmental Significance under national environmental law, and by guiding implementation of management and recovery, consistent with the recommended priority conservation and research actions set out in this advice.

This Conservation Advice contains information relevant to the objective by: • describing the ecological community and where it can be found (Section 2); • identifying the key threats to the ecological community (Section 3); • summarising the existing protections for the ecological community (Section 4); • outlining information to guide its identification and conservation, including the key diagnostic features, condition thresholds and classes, and additional information to identify the ecological community, and the priority conservation and research actions to stop its decline, support its recovery and recognise the importance of involving landholders and Indigenous people in its maintenance (Section 5); and • presenting evidence to explain why the ecological community merits listing as nationally threatened (Section 6).

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY AND THE AREA IT INHABITS 2.1 Description The ecological community described in this document includes the plants, animals and other organisms typically associated with palustrine wetlands1, generally swamp forests2, found in the temperate to subtropical regions of Australia’s east-coast and, which typically has a layered canopy, dominated by melaleucas and/or Eucalyptus robusta (Department of Environment and Sustainability 2007; Sheringham et al. 2008; Bell and Driscoll 2016; DELWP 2016; DPI 2016; Miles 2006; Qld Government 2019). The ecological community occurs between the Great Dividing Range and the coast from near Gladstone in Queensland, through New South Wales to the Gippsland Plain east of the Strzelecki Ranges in Victoria. This section describes the natural and largely undisturbed state of the ecological community, with more information to assist in identifying it in Section 5. However, as a result of past and ongoing disturbance, many patches of the ecological community no longer exist in a natural and undisturbed state. Section 5 also provides information to identify which areas retain sufficient conservation values for the ecological community to be considered a matter of national environmental significance as well as information for determining the habitat areas most critical for survival. 2.1.1 Name

The ecological community was originally nominated under the name “Melaleuca dominated Temperate Swamp Sclerophyll Forests on Coastal Floodplains of Eastern Australia”.

1 Palustrine wetlands are vegetated, non-riverine or non-channel systems, which include billabongs, swamps, bogs, springs, soaks etc. and have more than 30% emergent vegetation. wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/ecology/aquatic-ecosystems-natural/palustrine/ 2NSW OEH Profile: Coastal Swamp Forests www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/VegClass.aspx?vegClassName=Coastal+Swamp+Forests

The current name of the ecological community is the “Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia” (hereafter referred to as “Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests” or the “ecological community”). The name refers to the geographic areas, typical wetland ecosystem type, typical vegetation structure and landscape position which characterise the ecological community. 2.1.2 Location and physical environment The Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ecological community is found within the following IBRA3 Bioregions: South East Queensland (SEQ); NSW North Coast (NNC); Sydney Basin (SYB); and South East Corner (SEC), and South East Coastal Plain (SCP). The extent of the ecological community corresponds to country (the traditional lands) of several First Nations peoples. These include the Gureng, Bajtala, Gubbi Gubbi, Yuggera, Bundjalung, Gumbaynggirr, Dainggatti, Biripi, Worimi, Wonnarua, Awabakal, Darkinjung, Kurin-gai, Eora, Dharug, Tharawal/D’harawal, Yuin, Bidwell and the Gunaikurnai.

An alternative option is for the threatened ecological community to be confined to an extent from near the Moruya River and/or southern end of the Sydney Basin Bioregion and northwards to the top of the South East Queensland Bioregion. This would mean that most areas in the South East Corner and South East Coastal Plain Bioregions in NSW and Victoria would be removed from the proposed definition. They may be reconsidered as a separate assessment at a later time. Taking into account the key biological and ecological similarities and differences (including flora and fauna components, vegetation structure, wetland type, ecological function, climate or other biogeographic elements), do you have any comments on this and, most significantly, reasons to support whether or not the southern and northern areas should be separated for national listing?

The ecological community typically occurs in low-lying coastal alluvial areas with minimal relief, such as swamps, floodplain pockets, depressions, alluvial flats, back-barrier flats, fans, terraces, behind fore-dunes. In estuarine depositional systems, the ecological community can be found on fringing coastal bays and lagoons and localised colluvial fans (DELWP 2016; Department of Environment and Sustainability 2007; DPI 2016; Qld Government 2019). The ecological community most commonly occurs below 30m above sea-level (ASL) but can occur occasionally up to 220m ASL on hill slopes, for example in association with perched swamps and lakes, or a naturally highwater table. The frequency and duration of water inundation, salinity and nutrient content of the soil and latitude influences the vegetation composition of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. The ecological community is found on hydric4 soils, which are either waterlogged or intermittently or episodically inundated for typically between one to three months per year, often seasonally (NSW DPI 2016; NSW EPA 2016a, b; Qld Government 2019). The soils on which the ecological community is found, are formed by unconsolidated sediments5 and include

3IBRA refers to the Interim Biogeographical Regionalisation of Australia. IBRA regions are large geographically distinct areas of similar climate, geology and landform with corresponding similarities in their vegetation and animal communities. The version current at the time of this advice is IBRA v7 (DoE, 2013), which divides Australia into 89 bioregions and 419 subregions, including offshore islands. 4Soil that is wet long enough to produce anaerobic conditions (at least periodically), thereby influencing the growth of plants: wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/resources/static/pdf/ecology/soils/soils-report/01047-soil-indicators-qld-wetlands- lowres.pdf 5Unconsolidated sediments include Quaternary deposits of coastal barrier, estuarine, fluvio-deltaic and alluvial origin that have not become lithified. Coastal Quaternary mapping of the southern Hunter to northern Illawarra regions, New South Wales. Quarterly Notes: NSW DPI. www.resourcesandgeoscience.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/584037/QN- 146.pdf 4

alluvial deposits, as well as soils that are primarily marine or aeolian sand in origin, but where silts, clays and organic matter have been incorporated, such as inter-barrier creek deposits, within or along the margins of, coastal barrier systems (Tozer et al. 2021, in prep). They are often stained black or dark grey from humus (NSW Scientific Committee 2011). While Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests occur on the soil types as described above, the primary basis for determining whether an area is the nationally listed ecological community is based on the biological composition of an area. The features that distinguish an area from other ecological communities are identified in Section 5.

Do you have any comments on the information above in particular, where the ecological community occurs? For example, at what elevation do you think this EC is found and hence should be limited to? Do you think that the ecosystem found on a perched swamp and/or at the higher elevations is a different ecosystem type to this EC, and should be excluded from this listing, or included as currently proposed as long as the flora and fauna composition and/or ecological function are similar?

2.1.3 Vegetation structure The structure of the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ecological community typically varies from closed forest to open woodland, with a crown cover6 of 10 to 70%. In some areas, the canopy is low and dense, and the vegetation structure could be described as a scrub (or scrub-forest) or shrubland. In an intact forest, the canopy is layered, with a sub- canopy of melaleuca usually grading into a taller mixed melaleuca and/or eucalypt canopy. Canopy density, light availability, water regime, salinity level and soil fertility influence the development and composition of the understorey flora (Department of Environment and Sustainability 2007; Tozer et al. 2010, NSW Scientific Committee 2011; Qld Government 2019; Tozer et al. 2021 in prep). 2.1.4 Flora

2.1.4.1 CANOPY (AND SUB-CANOPY) SPECIES Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests typically feature a layered canopy and/or sub-canopy dominated by Melaleuca spp. and/or Eucalyptus robusta. Other eucalypts, which are also tolerant of regular inundation and are adapted to sandy soils, may emerge from the canopy with the mix of species present varying depending on the location. Eucalypt trees other than E. robusta that occur scattered through the canopy in some areas but do not dominate the canopy of the patch, include Corymbia intermedia (Pink Bloodwood), E. tereticornis, (Forest Red Gum/Queensland Blue Gum), E. longifolia (Woollybutt), E. botryoides (Southern Mahogany/Bangalay) and E. ovata (Swamp Gum). In the northern extent of the ecological community (northern SYB to the SEQ bioregion) the canopy is typically dominated or co- dominated by Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad-leaved Paperbark) and/or Eucalyptus robusta (Swamp Mahogany). In some more saline areas in the northern (e.g. Central Coast) and the southern SYB (near Jervis Bay) and SEC bioregions, Swamp Mahogany and/or M. ericifolia (Swamp Paperbark) typically dominate or co-dominate. Where Swamp Paperbark occurs, it can form a dense scrub-forest which can out-compete other canopy species. Regional variants of the ecological community with canopies dominated by other melaleuca and other species can occur. For example, M. biconvexa (Biconvex Paperbark) in the southern extent and in northern extent, M. dealbata (Swamp Teatree/Blue-leaved Paperbark), Glochidion ferdinandi (Cheese Tree) and G. sumatranum. In slightly saline areas, Acmena smithii (Lilly Pilly) and M. linariifolia (Narrow-leaved Paperbark/Flax-leaved Paperbark) may also be common. In many areas, Casuarina glauca (Swamp Oak) occurs as a subdominant in patches of the ecological community but where it dominates over a large area this is indicative of a separate nationally listed ecological community, the Coastal

6 The crown cover is measured as the % covered by the total area within the vertical projection of the periphery of the tree crowns, where the tree crowns are considered to be solid (National Committee on Soil and Terrain 2009). 5

Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) Forest of New South Wales and South East Queensland. In some areas adjacent to lowland or littoral rainforest, rainforest species such as Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo), Endiandra sieberi (Hard Corkwood), Homalanthus populifolius (Bleeding Heart/Native Poplar) and Melicope elleryana (Pink-flowered Doughwood) may become abundant (NSW Scientific Committee 2011; Queensland Government 2019a). Sub-canopy species include the shrubs and trees: Acacia melanoxylon (Blackwood), Elaeocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash), Melicope elleryana (Pink-flowered Doughwood),Callistemon salignus (White/Willow Bottlebrush), Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo) and Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum). Other characteristic species include Livistona australis (Cabbage Tree Palm) and Lophostemon suavolens (Swamp Box/Swamp Turpentine) NSW Scientific Committee 2011; Tozer et al. 2021, in prep). In some areas, other melaleuca species such as M. linariifolia (Flax-leaved Paperbark), M. styphelioides (Prickly Paperbark or Prickly-leaved Tea-tree); or other tea-tree species, i.e. (Leptospermum polygalifolium subsp. polygalifolium) are likely to be present and may be locally common in stands, but they do not dominate across a patch (NSW Scientific Committee 2011). In Victoria, Leptospermum lanigerum (Woolly Tea-tree) may dominate or occur as a co-dominant with Melaleuca ericifolia (Department of Environment and Sustainability 2007).

Vines are frequently found on the trunks and climbing into the crown of melaleucas and eucalypts within the ecological community, notably the woody vine Parsonsia straminea (Common silk-pod), Gynochthodes jasminoides (Climbing Scrub-orange) and Stephania japonica var. discolour (Snake-vine) (Griffiths and Wilson 2007, 2008; NSW EPA 2016a, b; OEH 2016; Queensland Government 2019a; Tozer et al. 2021, in prep). Epiphytic plants, such as Cymbidium suave (Snake Orchid), can also be found on the branches of larger trees (Keith et al. 2007).

2.1.4.2 UNDERSTOREY (GROUND-LAYER AND MID-LAYER) SPECIES The understorey can also have a diverse range of hydrophytic plants that tend towards freshwater, although some brackish species may be evident depending upon proximity to estuarine areas. Ground layer composition is variable depending mostly on latitude, canopy cover, inundation regime and disturbance. A mid-dense to dense cover of freshwater sedges, ferns and grasses is common, with some brackish species evident in sites closer to estuarine areas. Typically occurring species include Blechnum spp. (syn. Telmatoblechum spp.), Calochlaena dubia (False Bracken), Gahnia spp., particularly Gahnia clarkei (Tall Saw-sedge), Hypolepsis spp., and Pteridium esculentum (Bracken). Other sedges and reeds can occur, often in saline areas, Carex appressa (Tall sedge), Juncus spp., Lomandra longifolia (Spiny-headed Mat-Rush), Machaerina spp. (syn. Baumea spp.) (Twig-rushes), Baloskion tetraphyllum (Plume Rush), Centella asiatica, Dianella caerulea (Blue Flax Lily), Entolasia marginata (Bordered Panic), Entolasia stricta (Wiry Panic Grass), Imperata cylindrica (Blady Grass), Oplismenus spp., Viola hederacea (Ivy-leaved Violet), Lobelia ssp, and Persecaria spp. (Knotweeds) (Tozer et al. in prep). Scramblers such as Glycine clandestina (Twining Glycine) and G. tabacina (Glycine Pea, Variable Glycine) may also occur. More halophytic species may occur in the ground layer at lower elevations closer to estuarine sites or where groundwater is influenced by brackish inflows, for example, twig- rushes. If the canopy cover is dense, limiting light penetration results in a ground layer that is devoid of herbs and fosters cryptogams such as mosses (including sphagnum), lichens and

liverworts (e.g. Lycopus australis, Australe Gypsywort). Sphagnum moss may also be regularly present in waterlogged patches. At sites or during periods of inundation, the ecological community supports wetland specialist plants, such as Phragmites australis (Common reed) and Triglochin procerum (Water Ribbons). During drier periods, grassy species are more likely to be evident (Griffiths and Wilson 2007, 2008; NSW EPA 2016a, b; OEH 2016; Queensland Government 2019a). There may be a layer of dense leaf- litter and logs from fallen trees. A more comprehensive list of characteristic flora species, including threatened species, is in Appendix A.

Your answer to the following questions will depend on your opinion in relation to the extent of the proposed ecological community. Are there any flora species that you think should be removed, added or described differently from this section (or to Appendix A Species lists) to accurately represent the proposed ecological community? Please provide your reasons. Are you able to identify any flora species that have a significant cultural function? If you feel comfortable, you may indicate what the significance is. However, you could simply note there is a significant cultural function to an area or species and no explanation is necessary. 2.1.5 Fauna Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests provide important habitat and wetland refuge for a wide array of animals, which support healthy ecosystem function through their pollination, seed dispersal, soil turnover, nutrient cycling and predator/prey interactions. The vegetation provides key feeding, breeding and roosting habitat for water-dependant, arboreal and ground-dwelling mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and invertebrates, including several nationally listed animal species.

2.1.5.1 AQUATIC FAUNA Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests also provide habitat for water-dependant animals, such as the threatened Xeromys myoides (Water mouse) and frogs associated with paperbark swamps, such as the nationally listed Litoria olongburensis (Wallum Sedge frog) (Hines et al. 2002; Meyer et al. 2006). Other nationally listed frogs are found within the ecological community, for example, Litoria aurea (Green and Golden Bell Frog) and Mixophyes iteratus (Giant Barred Frog) (TSSC 2017b). Other water-dependent species that often occur in the ecological community include Chelodina longicollis (Eastern Long-necked Turtle) (OEH 2020d), Hydromys chrysogaster (Water Rat), Intellagama lesueurii (Water Dragon) (Cogger 2014) and Australia's only true fishing bat, Myotis macropus (Large-footed or Southern Myotis) (OEH 2020e). During periods of inundation, where there may be connections to rivers, the ecological community may provide habitat for small fish (Churchill, 2008), including galaxiids, and eels (DPI 2019). Aquatic invertebrates that may occur in the ecological community include a range of insects and crustaceans, such as the NSW- listed Petalura gigantea (Giant Dragonfly) (OEH Species profile: Accessed 14 March 2021) and the QLD-listed Tenuibranchiurus glypticus (Swamp Yabby) (Dawkins et al. 2010; Queensland Museum 2020). Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests are also found in, or as part of, nationally7 and internationally8 important wetlands, which provide drought refuge and habitat for waterbirds,

7 The Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia (DIWA) identifies, describes and provides important information on Australia’s Wetlands. www.environment.gov.au/water/wetlands/australian-wetlands-database/directory-important-wetlands 8 Ramsar wetlands: representative, rare or unique wetlands, or are important for conserving biological diversity. www.environment.gov.au/water/wetlands/australian-wetlands-database/australian-ramsar-wetlands

such as Rostratula australis (Australian Painted Snipe) and some migratory waders, (Boone et al. 2016; East Gippsland CMA 2015; Marchant and Higgins 1993; Higgins and Davies 1996), such as the Calidris tenuirostris (Great Knot), which is known to be associated with ecological community in NSW. The melaleucas and reed beds that fringe the waterbodies provide roosting sites and breeding areas for colonially nesting Threskiornis spinicollis (Straw-necked Ibis) and Platalea regia (Royal Spoonbill), ), among other large waterbird species. 2.1.5.2 GROUND-DWELLING FAUNA Ground dwelling species include the nationally listed Isoodon obesulus (Southern Brown Bandicoot) (TSSC 2016b) and Potorous tridactylus (Long-nosed Potoroo), which forage in the leaf litter and soil for invertebrates, fungi, plant root nodules and bulbs. Ground-dwelling birds such as Menura novahollandie (Superb Lyrebird) and Alectura lathami (Australian brush-turkey or gweela), also move soil and distribute nutrients which benefit plants within the ecological community (Eldridge and James 2009). The Superb Lyrebird flushes out insects, which are also retrieved by its companion species Pycnoptilus floccosus (Pilotbird) (Higgins, Peter and Steele 2001). The nationally listed Dasyornis brachypterus (Eastern Bristlebird) is also likely to find refuge in the ecological community (OEH 2012a). The ground-layer within Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest provides animals with nesting materials and, where the understorey is denser, cover (TSSC 2016c) and shelter, for instance for smaller mammals such as the vulnerable Pseudomys novaehollandiae (New Holland Mouse) (Norton et al. 2010 in TSSC 2010b) and the state-listed Planigale maculata (Common Planigale) (Queensland Museum; OEH Species Profile: Accessed 2 August 2019). The forest floor also provides a safe habitat for Koalas to traverse the ground between trees to find mates and new food supplies (McAlpine et al. 2015; in Neldner et al. 2017). It also provides refuge for the nationally listed Dasyurus maculatus (Spot-tailed Quoll, SE mainland population) (TSSC 2004b). More common mammals, such as Wallabia bicolor (Swamp Wallaby) and Tachyglossus aculeatus (Short-beaked Echidna) also feed and forage in the ecological community. Reptiles likely to be present at the ground level include the state-listed Cyclodomorphus michaeli (Mainland She-oak Skink) (DEPI 2014) and other skinks, such as Lissolepis coventryi (Swamp/Eastern Mourning Skink) and snakes, such as Hoplocephalus bitorquatus (Pale-headed Snake) (OEH Species Profile; Queensland Museum Species Profile: Accessed 25 September 2019). The ground layer plants also provide larval food plants for several butterflies, including the nationally listed Argynnis hyperbius inconstans and the state-listed Ocybadistes knightorum (Black Grass-dart), which depends upon the state-listed and restricted patches of Alexfloydia repens (Floyd’s Grass) (Andren and Cameron 2012, 2014; OEH 2020a). More commonly occurring butterfly species include Tisphone abeona (Sword-grass Brown) (Braby 2004).

2.1.5.3 ARBOREAL SPECIES Many animal species that inhabit the canopy are dependent on the large amounts of seasonal pollen, nectar, fruit and seeds produced by the melaleucas, eucalypts and other plants. Many species are nocturnal and will shelter during the day in the canopy, hollows and crevices found in mature trees (Gibbons and Lindenmayer 2002). The nationally listed Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) is strongly associated with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest, particularly where Swamp Mahogany is dominant and/or Forest Red Gum is present

(OEH 2018; Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service 2002; Queensland Government 2019b). Swamp Mahogany is a favoured koala feeding tree in northern NSW (OEH 2018).9 Several other arboreal mammals depend upon a healthy ecological community, notably possums and gliders, such as the nationally listed Petauroides volans (Greater Glider). The nationally listed Grey-Headed Flying Fox (Pteropus poliocephalus), and other flying foxes (Pteropus spp.) feed on the fruit, flowers, pollen and nectar found within Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. While flying foxes are highly mobile and can move up to hundreds of kilometres to follow the flowering and fruiting of food sources, they can set up “camps” within Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests and nearby Coastal Swamp Oak Forest. The ecological community is also a very important habitat for smaller bats, such as Syconycteris australis (Common Blossom-bat) (Booth and Low 2005; Eby and Law 2008; DECCW 2009) and Rhinolophus megaphyllus (Eastern Horseshoe-bat) (Churchill 2008). The canopy also provides shelter for large, predatory birds, such as forest owls, for example, Ninox strenua (Powerful Owl) (DEC 2006), and the nationally listed Erythrotriorchis radiates (Red Goshawk) (TSSC 2015). A large number of bird species depend upon the nectar flows and nesting habitat found within the ecological community. Species recorded foraging in flowering coastal Swamp Mahogany forests include the nationally listed honeyeaters, Anthochaera phrygia (Regent Honeyeater) (Commonwealth of Australia 2016; OEH 2020c; TSSC 2015a) and Grantiella picta (Painted Honeyeater). These critically endangered nectivores also utilise the flowers of canopy species such as the native mistletoe, A. cambagei. Many lorikeets and parrots, including the critically endangered Lathamus discolor (Swift Parrot) (TSSC 2016a) occasionally feed in the canopy of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. The trees and shrubs of the ecological community are also home to insectivorous birds, such as Pachycephala rufiventris (Rufous Whistler), fairy-wrens and robins. Other nectivores and pollinators of canopy trees within the ecological community include native bees such as Amegilla (Notomegilla) chlorocyanea (Blue-banded Bee), sand wasps, butterflies, moths and ants (Braby 2004; Sands 2018). Reptiles and amphibians that may inhabit the canopy include tree-frogs (Litoria spp.) and the threatened, partly tree- dwelling Hoplocephalus stephensii (Stephens' Banded Snake) (OEH 2020b). A more comprehensive list of fauna species that make up the ecological community is in Appendix A.

Your answer to the following questions will depend on your opinion in relation to the extent of the proposed ecological community. Are there any species that you think should be included or excluded, particularly characteristic or functionally significant species that we could highlight their role in this Section (and/or in Appendix A)? Please provide a reason and potential references with your response.

9 Koala habitat and feed trees www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and-plants/native-animals/native-animal- facts/koala/koala-habitat

2.2 Significance of the ecological community to First Nations peoples The coastal landscape and the ecological community provide a direct link with spiritual and material culture to First Nations peoples (OEH 2014; Pascoe 2018). Many Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests hold cultural significance for different nations. The ‘swampy’ landscape associated with the ecological community traditionally helped to trap large game, like kangaroos, and eggs would be gathered from the nests of waterbirds (Australian Museum Consulting 2015; Maynard 2014; Smith 2011). The melaleucas or “ti-trees” that characterise this ecological community are known for their medicinal purposes, particularly as an antiseptic and to treat respiratory disorders. Swamp Mahogany and other eucalypts have been traditionally used for a wide array of purposes, ranging from building shelters, canoes and hunting implements, to harbouring bush honey from native bees. Other important food and medicine species include Swamp Oak, Lilly Pilli, Red Ash (or soap tree), vine tubers and ferns and reeds (Arrawarra Cultural Project 2009, Australian Museum Consulting 2015; Donaldson 2010; GLWAC 2015). Many fauna species of the ecological community have spiritual significance, such as totem and Dreaming relevance, including Koala (Uncle M. Flanders, Gumbayngirr Elder, pers. comm, November 2016). More commonly occurring animals with cultural significance include echidna, goanna, ducks and swans (Arrawarra Sharing Culture Project 2014; English 2002; Mathew 1910; Maynard 2014; Smith 2011; Wesson 2009).

Right: Paperbark, or “ti-tree” swamp on Worimi country, with bilbuuribith (melaleuca), bangwaal (swamp fern), wambuyn (kangaroo), barrin (wallaby), wurran (goanna), gandjiwang (flying fox) and makurr (fish) (Courtesy of Worimi Conservation Lands https://worimiconservationlands.com/

Photo© Department Agriculture, Water and Environment

Some of the local cultural history and land management knowledge, such as burning practices, are now lost, unfortunately. However, First Nations peoples are interested in continuing to use traditional land management practices to help navigate the landscape and protect important resources and areas. For example, the Nyangbul Clan of the Bundjalung Nation own and manage Ngunya Jargoon IPA, the last remaining intact area of native bushland on the lower Richmond floodplain. The Nyangbul Clan actively maintain ecosystem health and cultural values of Country that provide refuge for 38 threatened fauna, five threatened flora and the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests (Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council 2013). Further information on local Traditional Owners and Recognised Aboriginal Parties and the values associated with the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest can be found in Appendix D.

How would you like to see specific cultural values of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest presented in this Conservation Advice? This could range from relevant hyperlinks to existing management plans (see page 21), to developing an Appendix that more specifically identifies the Aboriginal uses/values of the ecological community, in a similar way that was undertaken in the development of the Coastal Swamp Oak Forest Conservation Advice. This is available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communities/pubs/141-conservation- advice.pdf

3 THREATS Prior to European occupation, extensive areas of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests were most likely to have occurred on swamps and alluvial fans. Clearing and drainage for agriculture, forestry and urban development, have detrimentally affected the extent, patch size and condition of the ecological community. Instances of the ecological community remain in estuarine depositional systems below <15 m ASL, which are particularly subject to the impacts of sea-level rise clearing and drainage for agriculture, forestry and urban development, that has occurred since non-Indigenous occupation in 1788, have detrimentally affected the size and condition of the ecological community. Population growth and urban development are expected to continue where the remaining areas of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests occur. Therefore, the areas of the ecological community that remain continue to be affected by the altered hydrological regimes through the construction of drains and water impoundments, fertilisers and discharge of pesticides and pollutants associated with agricultural production at the interface between remnant and vegetation and agricultural land as well as along drainage lines, exposure of sulfidic sediments and the consequent acidification of soils, sea level rises and associated water table salinisation and invasion of exotic plant species. The latter has been facilitated by application of fertilisers, introduction of crop species, movements of domestic stock and other exotic herbivores, increasing fragmentation and ongoing degradation, largely from land clearing. This combined with several other threats associated with urbanisation are significant. All impacts are likely to be exacerbated by climate change. 3.1 Threats table Table 1 outlines the key threats facing the ecological community. The key threats faced by the ecological community are described to help explain why this ecological community merits listing as threatened, supporting the assessment against the criteria. Although presented as a list these threats often interact rather than acting independently.

Do you agree with the information in the table on the following pages? In particular - are any of the listed threats more, or less, severe or of different timing or scope than currently proposed for this ecological community? Are any threats missing, and if so please specify? Please provide additional examples of threat impacts, including potential threats.

Table 1: Summary of threats facing the ecological community Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* Changed Timing: The development of farm dams, flood mitigation and drainage work, hydrological ongoing roads, levee and weir construction, extraction and river regulation and regimes forestry practices are a major factor contributing to the loss of Severity: biological diversity and ecological function in coastal water-dependent extreme ecosystems such as Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. For example, the Tabbiemoble wetlands were drained and fragmented by earthworks Scope: associated with roadworks (DECC 2008). majority This type of development disrupts the balance between estuarine and coastal freshwater ecosystems (including the ecological community). Changes to the natural hydrological regime associated with vegetation clearing is a major factor contributing to the complete loss of wetland features, biological diversity and ecological function in Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. The construction of drains and water impoundments in relation to historical agricultural development (farm dams, flood mitigation and drainage works, levee and weir construction) continues through increased urban development (including canal estates) and due to infrastructure development (roads and related management). For example, the Tabbiemoble wetlands on NSW North Coast have been drained and fragmented by earthworks associated with roadworks (DECC 2008). Changes in water availability and salinity have a direct impact on the health of the ecological community, altering the structure and composition of both vegetation and fauna (Kingsford 2000; in NSW Scientific Committee 2011; NSW DPI 2016; Pressey & Griffith 1992; Queensland Government 2019a). Hydrological changes can also trigger the invasion of aquatic weeds such as Water Hyacinth or drier landscape weeds such as Prickly Pear, oxidisation in acid sulfate soils, alter vulnerability and response to fire, and exacerbate other threats which can have major cumulative impacts on the vegetation and fauna of the ecological community (DECCW 2010a,b; North Coast LLS 2017). The ecological community is also affected by the use of fertilisers and pesticide and pollutant discharge associated with agricultural production, particularly at the at the interface between remnant vegetation and agricultural land, as well as along drainage lines. Changes to the natural hydrological regime can also be caused by river regulation and associated water extraction activities for agriculture and forestry, exposure of sulfidic sediments and the consequent acidification of soils, sea level rise and associated water table salinisation as well as invasion of exotic plant species (facilitated by application of fertilisers, introduction of crop species, movements of domestic stock and other exotic herbivores) (DECCW 2010a,b; Kingsford 2000; in NSW Scientific Committee 2019; North Coast LLS 2017; NSW DPI 2016; Pressey & Griffith 1992; Queensland Government 2019a).

Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* Clearing Timing: As the ecological community occurs in a wet and largely productive ongoing part of the landscape, large areas of it have been, and continue to be cleared and drained. Vegetation clearing on the south-east coast of

Severity: Australia has been occurring since European occupation, commencing extreme as a process to enhance agriculture for the colony (Carron 1985). Over the past 230 years, agricultural areas have become increasingly Scope: urbanised and intensified, coastal townships have evolved into cities, majority and expanding rural centres. This has meant a need for new housing estates, industrial development and recreational facilities. As a result, at least 70% of native vegetation on the coastal floodplains in Queensland’s south-east and New South Wales has been destroyed (Keith 2004; Keith & Scott 2005; Good et al. 2017). Victoria also have also had a high clearing rate of coastal floodplains (Bradshaw 2012). In all states, large areas of coastal floodplain area have also been converted to exotic pastures for grazing, market gardens, turf and other cropping enterprises. There is continued clearing of some coastal wetland areas, including to improve land for grazing, more intensive cropping and irrigation activities (DECC 2008; South-east LLS 2016). Fragmentation Timing: As a result of land clearing and development along the coast of south- legacies ongoing eastern Australia, the remaining areas of coastal native vegetation, including forested wetlands, are being increasingly fragmented (and Severity: hydrologically disconnected). The ecological community now typically major occurs as isolated occurrences adjacent to heavily disturbed and modified land and water bodies, including several other ecological Scope: communities threatened at the national and state levels. The impacts majority of fragmentation often result in decreased biomass and altered nutrient cycles. Isolated smaller patches of the ecological community are likely to have lower species abundance and diversity (Neldner 2017). When species populations are broken up, there is a higher risk of local extinctions. Decreased physical and ecological connectivity contributes to reduced seed dispersal and limits the resources that animals require for a large home range. Small or linear patches, with a large edge to area ratio, contributes to invasion by exotic alien species and/or increased incursions/dominance by aggressive or overabundant natives. Invasive plants species can alter microclimates and make the ecological community more vulnerable to damage during droughts or other extremes. Fragmentation of remaining patches of the ecological community is expected to increase due to rural subdivisions, road construction and logging for forestry. For example, the impacts associated with the Pacific Highway upgrade in the northern extent are considered a threat to several areas in the Clarence and Richmond system (DECC 2008). Areas most at risk include those of comparatively good condition, that provide key habitat corridors such as Halfway Creek in the northern extent (DECC 2008). Disturbance Timing: Most remaining patches also occur in areas where population growth from ongoing and urban development is expected to continue at a rapid rate, urbanisation and particularly in and north of the Sydney Basin (DEWCC 2010a; DPE recreational Severity: 2017). The threat of nearby urban development during and after activity major construction includes impacts from a range of activities where people access areas of the ecological community. Visitor disturbance results Scope: in soil compaction and disturbance, erosion from foot, cycle, trail bike majority and four-wheel drive tracks, fishing and boat ramp access points, the introduction of pests and the creation of new planned and unplanned tracks. Increased visitation to adjacent water bodies results in increased demand for and use of visitor facilities, such as walking tracks, viewing platforms, toilet blocks and picnic areas. Other impacts in such areas include the dumping of cars, rubbish and garden waste, which can affect hydrology and cause weed infestation.

Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* There are also several cumulatively detrimental impacts from urbanisation and recreational activity, such as vehicle strikes on species such as koalas and swamp wallabies, predation or disturbance by domestic animals, rubbish dumping and bush rock removal. Weeds Timing: Exotic alien species of concern within the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll ongoing Forests include Andropogon virginicus (Whiskey Grass), Asparagus asparagoides (Bridal Creeper), Chrysthanemoides monilera spp (Bitou Severity: Bush/Boneseed) and Lantana camara, e.g., Cinnamonum major camphora (Camphor Laurel) and Baccharis halmifolia (Groundsel Bush). Invasion by these species can alter the vegetation structure of Scope: whole the ecological community, which has the potential to make it more vulnerable to further invasion and other threats (e.g. fire). These species also attract vertebrate pests such as foxes and some birds. What remains of the ecological community has been significantly impacted and new invasions and spread are an ongoing major threat (Cousens et al. 2013; Keith & Scott 2005; North Coast LLS 2017; OEH 2015; Tozer et al. 2010). Although they may retain native tree cover, remnants with severe weed infestation exhibit very large reductions in species diversity, structural diversity and habitat value and are likely to have significantly reduced capacity to support ecosystem function. Regrowth is similarly simplified. A list of weeds species that are commonly found in the ecological community is provided in Table 8, Appendix A. Livestock Timing: Grazing and trampling by hard-hoofed stock can rapidly damage or grazing ongoing change the structure, composition and functionality of the ecological community. It can lead to surface drainage and infiltration issues, Severity: impede vegetation regrowth, floristic changes, lead to weed spread, major disturb sediments and increase nutrient levels. These impacts can lead to loss of flora and fauna that depend on, or makeup, important biotic Scope: components. For example, non-sustainable grazing has caused minority damage to key coastal habitat for a high number of nationally threatened species in an important regional fauna corridor containing the ecological community at Evans River/Rocky Mouth Creek (DECC 2008; Good et al. 2017). Invasive fauna Timing: The ecological community is subject to a range of impacts from ongoing invasive animals. Feral goats (Capra hircus) and deer (Cervus spp) increasingly Severity: contribute to the degradation of the ecological community in some extreme areas through overgrazing, browsing, trampling, ringbarking, antler rubbing, dispersal of weeds, creation of trails, the concentration of Scope: nutrients and acceleration of erosion (Clarke et al. 2000; NPWS 2002; whole Keith & Pellow 2004; Moriarty 2004, Dolman & Wäber 2008 in DECCW 2010). Additionally, the feral European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus), alter the structure and composition of the ecological community at some locations by selectively removing the most palatable ground layer vegetation and affecting biomass. They compete with native fauna for grasses, herbs and seeds, affect the regeneration of woody trees and shrubs and spread weed seeds. Feral pigs (Sus scrofa) are considered a major threat to the ecological community, including in areas that are in good condition (DECC 2008; North Coast LLS 2019). Feral pigs cause considerable predation, habitat destruction and disease transmission. Unrestricted grazing, trampling and wallowing from introduced ungulates (hard-hoofed animals) can contribute to erosion, sedimentation, reduced water quality and increased water temperature, with negative consequences for species found within the ecological community, including the Wallum Froglet, Painted Snipe and Southern Swamp Orchid (Northern LLS 2019). Other invasive animals that contribute towards predation, disease transmission and spread of weeds include introduced dogs, foxes, cats, and rats. In the northern extent of the ecological community, Rhinella marina (cane toad) predate on and compete with 14

Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* native amphibians, including the threatened Green and Golden Bell Frog and the Giant Barred Frog (NSW LLS 2019). Cane toads may inhabit parts of the ecological community, and are toxic to native predators, such as Spot-tailed Quoll, Common Planigale, Stephens’ Banded Snake and Varanus varius (lace monitor/tree goanna). Tree hollows provide habitat for important pollinators of the ecological community. These species can be disturbed or displaced by the nests of Apis mellifera (Feral Honeybees), with detrimental consequences, including direct competition with smaller native bees (NSW Scientific Committee 2002; updated 2019). During periods of inundation, invasive fish species e.g., Eastern Gambusia (Gambusia holbrooki) can seriously impact upon on native fish, invertebrates and frogs (NPWS 2003). For example, declines in coastal populations of the NSW-listed Mogurnda adspersa (Purple Spotted Gudgeon), could be partly due to predation by the Plague Minnow (Fisheries Scientific Committee 2008). Climate change Timing: Major impacts of climate change are likely to be played out in the ongoing ecological community through interactions with other threatening processes, including habitat loss and degradation, invasion of exotic Severity: species and changes to hydrological and fire regimes (Auld & Keith major 2009, Dunlop & Brown 2008). For example, a generally warming and drying climate in southern and eastern Australia is likely to significantly Scope: whole reduce run-off to coastal rivers and streams within the range of the ecological community (DCC 2009). One impact is that less water will be available for the ecological community, either through decreased flows and/or evaporative loss. Climate change is also likely to intensify drought events (Dai 2012; Mitchell et al. 2016), which increased the potential for water being diverted away from the ecological community for consumptive use in response to water sharing arrangements. The increased risk of sea level rise is likely to result in freshwater areas below 15 ASL becoming more salinized, which could lead to change in the vegetation structure of affected areas (Keith and Scott 2005; Rogers & Woodroffe 2016). Increasing heat waves will affect functionally important fauna species of the ecological community, such as seed and pollen dispersers like the Little Red Flying-fox and Grey-headed Flying-fox, which can suffer heat stress and lead to multiple deaths within a colony when temperatures exceed 42°C. Climate changes is also likely to increase impacts from invasive weeds and fauna, such cane toads spreading further south. Shifts in the distribution of this ecological community is a plausible response to climate change, but the area to shift into may not be available or suitable, because of coastal development, soil types or competition with other vegetation communities (Paice & Chambers 2016). Fire frequency, intensity and size are expected to increase under climate change as temperatures rise, rainfall variability increases, droughts become more severe and ecosystem dynamics alter, resulting in changed biomass fuel loads and types. The projected hotter, drier, windier conditions associated with climate change would extend the period of fuel drying and increase rates of fire spread (Harrison & Kelley 2017). These changing conditions together with more drought, and/or hydrological changes affecting inundation periods, are likely to increase impacts of fire.

Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* Altered fire Timing: While fire has been integral to the Australia landscape for thousands of regimes ongoing years and is essential for the survival of some plant species, increased frequency, intensity and extent of fire events have been identified as Severity: posing a threat to some parts of the ecological community (G. Moore, extreme pers.comm.; Jali Land Council 2013; NSW 2020a,b,c; NSW OEH, 2014; NSW OEH 2020a, b, c; Pascoe, 2018; Queensland Herbarium Scope: whole 2019b). For example, some wetland remnants may be invaded by introduced species with high flammability loads, i.e. Whiskey Grass. After European occupation resulted in the removal of traditional activities, grass-covered areas inhabited by kangaroos were observed to become “choked” with “underwood” and “young trees” (NSW OEH 2014; Pascoe 2014). This accompanying increase in density of woody mid-layer species or dryland grasses, for example, can increase fire risk and frequency which can simplify ground layer vegetation through loss of flora species (NSW OEH TEC Profile). Fire intensity has also increased significantly within the context of climate change. Studies in relation to the NSW bushfires of 2019-2020 have attributed ongoing drought, surface soil moisture, wind speed, relative humidity, heat waves, dead and live fuel moisture, and certain land cover types to creating favourable conditions for fire ignition and helped to increase fire extent in different regions of the NSW state (Deb et al. 2020). For example, arson or the accidental ignition can be an issue, particularly on urban fringes. High intensity, or too frequent, fires will slow or prevent regeneration of some species in the ecological community, particularly key canopy species, such as melaleucas or other important species and lead to lower species richness High-frequency fire disrupts the life cycle processes in many plants and animals, loss of vegetation structure and composition and enhances the invasion or spread of exotic species (OEH 2020). For example, fire disturbance has been shown to increase the susceptibility of important canopy species, such as Melaleuca quinquinervia to infection by myrtle rust (Austropuccinia psidii, an introduced pathogen that is known to affect the ecological community (Makinson et al. 2020; Pegg et al. 2017; 2018; 2020). Undertaking frequent “hazard reduction burns” and/or weed management can inadvertently affect the canopy of important habitat trees (G. Moore, pers.comm, Oct. 2020) and also decrease available fallen timber and other plant litter. Too low frequency of fire can cause the canopy to close and shade out ground layer flora communities and fauna habitat. The resulting habitat changes and invasion of feral predators following fire are also likely to detrimentally impact on resident fauna such as bandicoots, gliders, potoroos and functionally important birds, such as lyrebirds. Even in areas where vegetation recovers quickly, the loss of animal species impacts on the short-term recovery and long-term health of the ecological communities, especially animals providing essential functions such as soil turnover, pollination and seed dispersal. Certain listed plants, such as orchids, may also be detrimentally affected by high frequency fires (Duncan et al. 2009; Tozer et al. 2010), Diseases and Timing: Several diseases and pathogens can affect the structure and function pathogens ongoing of the ecological community. These include: Severity: • Myrtle rust (Austropuccinia psidii (formerly Puccinia psidii, initially major identified as Uredo rangelii), which is known to cause infection of several canopy species - including paperbarks - particularly if there Scope: has been disturbance from clearing and fire (Makinson et al. 2020; minority Pegg et al 2017; 2018; 2020). • Chytridiomycosis caused by chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) which is a threat to the amphibians that live within the ecological community (DoEE 2016b).

Threat factor Threat Threat Impacts and Evidence Base Status* *Timing – the threat occurs in the past (and unlikely to return), is ongoing (present/continuing), is likely to occur/return in the future, or timing is unknown Severity – the threat causes or has the potential to cause impacts that are extreme (leading to loss or transformation of affected patches/occurrences), major (leading to degradation of affected patches/occurrences), minor (impacting some components of affected patches/occurrences), negligible or unknown Scope – the threat is affecting the whole (>90%), a majority (>50%), a minority (<50%), a negligible amount, or unknown amount of the ecological community

3.2 Key threatening processes The EPBC Act provides for the identification and listing of key threatening processes (KTPs). A threatening process is defined as a key threatening process if it threatens or may threaten the survival, abundance or evolutionary development of a native species or ecological community. The following are EPBC-listed key threatening processes, current at the date of writing, that may be relevant to the ecological community or specific plants and animals that comprise it.

• Land clearance

• Loss of climatic habitat caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases

• Loss and degradation of native plant and animal habitat by invasion of escaped garden plants, including aquatic plants

• Novel biota and their impact on biodiversity - including the effects of Myrtle Rust (Austropuccinia psidii).

• Predation, habitat degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral pigs

• Predation by feral cats

• Predation by European red fox

• Competition and land degradation by rabbits

• Competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats

• The biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by Cane Toads

• Aggressive exclusion of birds from potential woodland and forest habitat by overabundant noisy miners (Manorina melanocephala)

• Infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting in chytridiomycosis

• Dieback caused by the root-rot fungus (Phytophthora cinnamomi) Any approved threat abatement plan or advice associated with these items provides information to help landowners manage these threats and reduce their impacts to biodiversity. These can be found at www.environment.gov.au/cgi- bin/sprat/public/publicgetkeythreats.pl.

4 EXISTING PROTECTION 4.1 Existing protection in reserves The ecological community occurs within reserves to a variable extent. For example, in Queensland there is a moderate to high extent on reserves for most of the Regional Ecosystems (REs) that correspond with the ecological community, and one RE is considered to have a low extent of reservation (Queensland Government, 2020) (See Table 2). In Victoria, 40% of Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) 53 – Swamp Scrub (Endangered) occurs in conservation reserves, of which approximately 30% is protected under the Ramsar convention on wetlands (Gippsland Lakes and Corner Inlet Ramsar sites). The amount in NSW within conservation reserves is not yet known. Many threats to the ecological community operate regardless of land tenure. 4.2 Existing protection under state laws The ecological community has some level of protection by the three states in which it is located. The Queensland the Vegetation Management Act 1992 (NVMA) regulates the clearing of regional ecosystems that are listed as “endangered”, “of concern” or “least concern”. Table 2 shows the regional ecosystems that correspond (at least in part) with the ecological community meet all three of these classifications

Table 2: Proposed Regional Ecosystems to be included in the ecological community and their classification under the NVMA. Regional Short Description Classification Estimated extent Extent in Ecosystem under NVMA Reserves RE 12.2.7 Melaleuca quinquenervia or rarely Least Concern Pre-clearing 31000 ha; High M. dealbata open forest on sand Remnant 2017 19000 ha plains RE 12.3.4 / Melaleuca quinquenervia, Of Concern Pre-clearing 17000 ha; High RE 12.3.4a Eucalyptus robusta woodland on Remnant 2017 8000 ha coastal alluvium/ Eucalyptus bancroftii open woodland often with Melaleuca quinquenervia. RE 12.3.5 Melaleuca quinquenervia open Least Concern Pre-clearing 45000 ha; High forest on coastal alluvium Remnant 2017 20000 ha RE 12.3.6 Melaleuca quinquenervia +/- Least Concern Pre-clearing 32000 ha; High Eucalyptus tereticornis, Remnant 2017 13000 ha Lophostemon suaveolens, Corymbia intermedia open forest on coastal alluvial plains RE 12.3.20 Melaleuca quinquenervia, Casuarina Endangered Pre-clearing 15000 ha; Low Only parts glauca +/- Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. Remnant 2017 3000 ha not siderophloia open forest on low dominated by coastal alluvial plains C. glauca Source: Queensland Government, Regional Ecosystem Descriptions: apps.des.qld.gov.au/regional-ecosystems/ In New South Wales, much of this ecological community corresponds to the NSW-listed ‘Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains of the New South Wales North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions Endangered Ecological Community’ (EEC Profile: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10786) Some patches that are dominated by Melaleuca spp. may also correspond to the NSW-listed ‘Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest of the New South Wales North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions Endangered Ecological Community’ (EEC Profile: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10945) Victoria lists threatened communities of flora and fauna under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988; but protection under the Act only applies to patches that are on public

land tenures. Patches of this ecological community in the East Gippsland Lowlands and Gippsland Plain regions may correspond to the Vic-listed ‘Swamp Scrub (EVC 53)’, which is identified state-wide as Endangered10. 4.3 Existing management plans Several existing plans relate to management and/or recovery of the ecological community, or its component species. These prescriptions were current at the time of publishing. Refer to the relevant agency’s website for any updated versions or new information that has been published. Plans prepared for the management and/or recovery of the ecological community (or its component vegetation units and state-listed equivalent communities). 4.3.1 State management plans Save our Species Strategies for the NSW listed TECs that may align in part with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ecological community have been developed by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). They can be found at:

• ‘Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains of the New South Wales North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions Endangered Ecological Community’ www.environment.nsw.gov.au/savingourspeciesapp/project.aspx?ProfileID=10786

• ‘Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest of the New South Wales North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions Endangered Ecological Community’ www.environment.nsw.gov.au/savingourspeciesapp/project.aspx?ProfileID=10945 More information on the vegetation units, including recently revised NSW PCT classifications (draft) can be seen in Appendix C. Relevant Victorian guides and approaches include:

• Department of Sustainability and Environment (2012). A field guide to Victorian Wetland Ecological Vegetation Classes for the Index of Wetland Condition, 2nd Edition. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg, Victoria //iwc.vic.gov.au/docs/DSE-EVCphotoguideRevised- web.pdf • Biodiversity Response Planning is a new area-based planning approach to biodiversity conservation in Victoria. It is designed to strengthen alignment, collaboration and participation between government agencies, Traditional Owners, non-government agencies (NGOs) and the community. • On-ground biodiversity actions. Threat mitigation for the biodiversity of the far eastern Croajingolong National Park, East Gippsland. www.environment.vic.gov.au/biodiversity/biodiversity-response-planning • Victoria’s Native Vegetation Management - A Framework for Action establishes the strategic direction for the protection, enhancement and revegetation of native vegetation across the State

10 Bioregional Conservation Status for these EVCs in the East Gippsland Lowland and Gippsland Plain Bioregions: Endangered: Contracted to less than 10% of former range; OR less than 10% pre-European extent remains OR Combination of depletion, degradation, current threats and rarity is comparable.

4.3.2 Recovery plans, threat abatement plans, wildlife conservation plans and other plans relevant for components of the ecological community. • DEWHA (2008a). Threat abatement plan for predation by the European red fox. Commonwealth of Australia www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/predation-european- red-fox

• DEWHA (2008b). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats, Commonwealth of Australia. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/competition-and- land-degradation-unmanaged-goats

• DoE (2015a). Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats. Commonwealth of Australia www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/threat- abatement-plan-feral-cats

• DoE (2015b). Arrive Clean, Leave Clean: guidelines to help prevent the spread of invasive plant diseases and weeds threatening our native plants, animals and ecosystems. Commonwealth of Australia. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/invasive-species/publications/arrive-clean- leave-clean

• DoEE (2016a). Threat abatement plan for infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting in chytridiomycosis. Commonwealth of Australia. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/infection- amphibians-chytrid-fungus-resulting-chytridiomycosis-2016

• DoEE (2016b). Threat Abatement Advice for the key threatening process Psittacine Circoviral (beak and feather) Disease affecting endangered psittacine species. Commonwealth of Australia. Last viewed July 2020. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/threat-abatement-advices/beak- feather-disease

• DoEE (2016c). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits. Commonwealth of Australia. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/competition-and- land-degradation-rabbits-2016

• DoEE (2017). Threat abatement plan for predation, habitat degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral pigs (Sus scrofa). Commonwealth of Australia. www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/feral-pig-2017

• Makinson (2018). Myrtle Rust in Australia – a draft Action Plan. Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre. https://www.anpc.asn.au/myrtle- rust/https://www.anpc.asn.au/myrtle-rust/

• NSW DEC (2005). Recovering Bushland on the Cumberland Plain: Best Practice Guidelines for the Management and Restoration of Bushland.

• NSW DECC (2008). Recovery plan for the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/research-and-publications/publications- search/recovery-plan-for-the-koala-phascolarctos-cinereus

• NSW NPWS (2014). Yuin Banggurii (Mountain) Parks: Plan of Management. Incorporating Gulaga National Park and Biamanga National Park

www.environment.nsw.gov.au/research-and-publications/publications-search/yuin- bangguri-mountain-parks-plan-of-management

• Saunders and Tzaros (2011). National Recovery Plan for the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor). http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery- plans/national-recovery-plan-swift-parrot-lathamus-discolor

• Vic DELWP (2016). National recovery plan for the spotted tail Quoll Dasyurus maculatus. https://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery- plans/spotted-tailed-quoll State governments and local governments acknowledge the importance of involving First Nations in the assessment and management cultural heritage. In Queensland, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parties are identified under The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 and Torres Strait Islander Cultural Heritage Act 2003. In NSW some local government areas have Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management plans, such the Tweed Shire - so that the impacts of the region’s rapid growth on natural and heritage resources can be better managed. Documents relating to the use or management of, areas or components of, the ecological community that may occur on either Aboriginal land, such as IPAs, or more generally in the local area include: • Indigenous Cultural Heritage Management Guidelines for South East Queensland Forests: Report for the Queensland South East Queensland Regional Forest Agreement December 1999 www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/sitecollectiondocuments/rfa/regions/qld- south-east/cultural-heriatage/forest-industry-places/qld_se_rfa_indigm.pdf

• Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council (2013). Ngunya Jargoon Indigenous Protected Area Plan of Management. Prepared by Miles Holmes Consulting Anthropologist and Tim Hill Heritage Management and Planning. Available from: jalilands.com.au/assets/ngunya-jargoon-ipa-plan-of-management.pdf

• OEH (2105). Worimi Conservation Lands: Plan of Management worimiconservationlands.com/plan-of-management/

• Office of Environment and Heritage (2014). Plan of Management Yuin Bangguri (Mountain). Parks NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, October 2014 www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks- reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-plans-of-management/yuin-bangguri-mountain- parks-plan-of-management-150003.pdf

• Gunaikurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Corporation (GLWAC) Whole-of-Country Plan. www.gunaikurnai.org/wp-content/uploads/gk_whole-of- country%20plan%20LR%20FINAL%20270815.pdf

• Tweed Shire Council (2018). Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plan www.tweed.nsw.gov.au/AboriginalCulturalHeritage

Do you have more specific information in relation to traditional approaches to managing Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest presented in this Conservation Advice? For example, information on identified threats to culturally important vegetation.

5 CONSERVATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY 5.1 Identification of the ecological community Coastal The key diagnostic characteristics are designed to allow identification of the ecological community irrespective of the season. The nationally listed ecological community does not occur in areas of vegetation that do not meet the key diagnostics. The ecological community is defined as patches of native vegetation meeting the description in Section 2.1 that meet the following key diagnostic characteristics:

• Occurs on the mainland and islands near to the coast (within 20 km) from south-east Queensland to eastern Victoria, specifically within these IBRA Bioregions: South Eastern Queensland (SEQ); NSW North Coast (NNC); Sydney Basin (SYB); South East Corner (SEC) and South East Coastal Plain (SCP).

• Occurs in coastal catchments at or below 30m ASL, sometimes fringing coastal vegetated waterbodies and including but not confined to, floodplains major drainage lines.

• Occur on hydric soils with inundation patterns ranging from intermittent to episodic.

• The vegetation structure varies from tall closed to open forest to woodland, to dense (closed) shrubland or scrub forest. Minimum crown cover (see footnote 3, p. 3) is at least 10%, but it is more typically in the range 50% to 70%.

• From south-east Queensland to central New South Wales, the layered canopy[1] is typically dominated or co-dominated by M. quinquenervia and/or Eucalyptus robusta. In some areas, the canopy may be locally dominated by other melaleuca species including: M. dealbata (SEQ bioregion) (rarely); M. biconvexa (mid-NSW coast to south of Sydney); M. decora (north of Shoalhaven), frequently with Parsonsia straminea climbing on the trunks of canopy species. In the SEC bioregion, Melaleuca ericifolia and/or Leptospermum lanigerum dominant canopy species. o Other tree species may occur in the canopy (or sub-canopy) in some patches, but they are not dominant across a patch, including in particular Casuarina glauca as well as Banksia spp., Callistemon salignus, Corymbia intermedia (Pink Bloodwood), E. tereticornis, (Forest Red Gum/Queensland Blue Gum), E. longifolia (Woollybutt), E. botryoides (Southern Mahogany/Bangalay) and E. ovata (Swamp Gum), Livistona australis and/or Lophostemon spp in some areas.

• The understorey typically includes a poorly developed mid (shrub) layer and a variable ground-layer, depending on canopy cover and inundation rate/period. Tall sedges (typically Gahnia spp). and/or ferns often dominate the ground layer, mixed with graminoids and other herbs. A list of characteristic or commonly occurring species is at Appendix A.

• While they can occur regularly in the ground layer, the ecological community is not present if halophylic species, more typically associated with estuarine/saltmarsh

[1] Canopy - The uppermost layers of a vegetation type, formed by plant crowns. In a woodland or forest, the canopy is formed by the crowns of trees and sometimes large shrubs. The canopy can be further divided into upper, mid and lower canopy layers. The tallest plants of a vegetation type form the upper canopy layer. www.qld.gov.au/environment/plants-animals/habitats/regrowth/regrowth-glossary

areas, dominate the ground layer of a patch, for example, Appium prostratum, Atriplex cineria, Chenopodium glaucum, Rhagodia candolleaus and Samolus repens.

Taking into account the potential options for distribution/definition, do you agree that these statements will clearly identify the EC? If not, why not? Please suggest potential changes. Other characteristics that are not diagnostic but may help identify the ecological community include: Other characteristic or commonly present flora and fauna species are outlined in Appendix A – Species lists.

Are the key diagnostic characteristics sufficient to differentiate the ecological community from other ecological communities on the east coast of Australia? If not, how should it be modified

5.1.1 Additional information to assist in identifying the ecological community The following information should also be taken into consideration when applying the key diagnostic characteristics to assess if a site may include the ecological community. Land use and disturbance history, particularly fire history, will influence the state in which a patch of the ecological community is currently expressed.

Taking into account the potential options for distribution/definition, do you agree with the statements below? If not, why not?

5.1.1.1 IDENTIFYING A PATCH A patch is a discrete and mostly continuous area of the ecological community15, as defined by the key diagnostic characteristics, but can include small-scale (<30 m) variations, gaps and disturbances within this area. The smallest patch size that can be identified is 0.5 ha, because the key diagnostic characteristics cannot reliably be identified for smaller areas than this. Where a larger forest or woodland area has been classified as a different vegetation type (e.g. by state vegetation mapping), localised areas of the ecological community greater than 0.5 ha may be present within this larger area.

5.1.1.2 BREAKS IN A PATCH When it comes to defining a patch of the ecological community, allowances are made for “breaks” up to 30 m between areas that meet the key diagnostics. Such breaks may be the result of watercourses, tracks, paths, roads, gaps made by exposed areas of soil, leaf litter or cryptogams, and areas of localised variation in vegetation that do not meet the key diagnostics. Such breaks do not significantly alter the overall functionality of the ecological community and form a part of the patch. Any small areas of watercourses, gaps made by exposed areas of soil, leaf litter or cryptogams, and areas of localised variation in vegetation, should be included in the calculation of the size of the patch. These should also be taken into account when determining the overall condition of the patch. Wide (up to 3 m) tracks, paths, major highways and roads, or other man-made surfaces should be excluded from the calculation of patch size and condition. Wide (up to 3 m) tracks, paths, major highways and roads, or other man-made surfaces should be excluded from the calculation of patch size and condition. Where there is a break in the ecological community of 30 m or more (e.g. due to permanent artificial structures, wide roads or other barriers, water bodies or other types of vegetation) then the gap indicates that separate patches are present.

5.1.1.3 VARIATION WITHIN A PATCH Patches of the ecological community may contain areas that vary in structural or biological characteristics. For example, one part of a patch may consist of mostly melaleuca species, whereas another part of the same patch may be dominated by eucalypts; or one part of a patch may have been more recently burnt and therefore at a different stage of regeneration. Variation in canopy cover, quality or composition of vegetation across a patch should not be considered to be evidence of multiple patches, so long as it meets the key diagnostics.

5.1.1.4 REVEGETATION AND REGROWTH Revegetated or replanted sites, or areas of vegetation regeneration (regrowth) are included in the nationally listed ecological community, if they meet the key diagnostic characteristics. The inclusion of patches of natural and managed regeneration reflects the ecological community’s ability to regenerate.

5.1.1.5 SURVEY REQUIREMENTS Patches of the ecological community can vary markedly in their shape, size, condition and features. Thorough and representative on-ground surveys are essential to accurately assess the extent and condition of a patch. NSW Native Vegetation Type Standard (Sivertsen 2009) and the Australian Soil and Land Survey Field Handbook (National Committee on Soil and Terrain 2009), or the Methodology for surveying and mapping regional ecosystems and vegetation communities in Queensland (Neldner et al. 2020) may provide guidance. The size, number and spatial distribution of plots or transects must be adequate to represent variation across the patch. Sampling should address likely variation in species composition and significant variation in the vegetation (including areas of different condition), landscape qualities and management history (where known) across the patch. Plots of 0.04 ha (e.g. quadrats of 20 x 20 m) would be suitable (Tozer 2003; Tozer et al. 2010). Recording the search effort (identifying the number of person hours spent per plot/transect and across the entire patch; along with the surveyor’s level of expertise and limitations at the time of survey) is useful for future reference. Whilst identifying the ecological community and its condition is possible at most times of the year, consideration must be given to the role that season, rainfall and disturbance history may play in an assessment. For example, after a fire one or more vegetation layers, or groups of species (e.g. obligate seeders), may not be evident for a time. Timing of surveys should allow for a reasonable interval after a disturbance (natural or human-induced) to allow for regeneration of species to become evident and be timed to enable diagnostic species to be identified. At a minimum, it is important to note climate conditions and what kind of disturbance may have happened within a patch, and when that disturbance occurred, as far as possible. 5.1.1.6 MAPPING AND VEGETATION CLASSIFICATIONS Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria use different mapping and vegetation classification schemes. Although none directly map areas of the ecological community as described in this advice, they provide useful information on the likely occurrence of the ecological community. Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests can intergrade with a range of other vegetation types, some of which are listed as threatened. It can form mosaics with other coastal floodplain vegetation types that share similar environment factors. For example, on lower elevation coastal estuarine plains less than 10 m ASL, the ecological community intergrades with vegetation dominated by Swamp Oak and halophytic forbs and graminoids. The ecological community also intergrades with other coastal swamp or wet sclerophyll forests, including those dominated by a wider range of eucalypts. At higher elevations it may grade into drier sclerophyll forests and woodlands. The key feature distinguishing Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests from other vegetation types includes a layered canopy and/or sub-canopy dominated by melaleuca spp. and/or 24

Eucalyptus robusta. Other eucalypts, which are also tolerant of regular inundation and are adapted to sandy soils, may emerge from the canopy. The understorey can also have a diverse range of hydrophytic plants that tend towards freshwater, although some brackish species may be evident depending upon proximity to estuarine areas. 5.1.1.7 OTHER NEARBY LISTED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES There are several other nationally listed threatened ecological communities that occur adjacent to or near to Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. Table 3 outlines these ecological communities and their status at the time of this document. In most cases an area of vegetation can be defined as one nationally listed threatened ecological community, or as another. Table 3: Other nationally listed threatened ecological communities that can intergrade or overlap with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest TEC Status Other floodplain or coastal communities Coastal Swamp Oak (Casuarina glauca) Forest of New South Wales and South East Endangered Queensland River-flat eucalypt forest on coastal floodplains of southern New South Wales and Critically Endangered eastern Victoria Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine thickets of Eastern Australia Critically Endangered Lowland Rainforest of Subtropical Australia Critically Endangered Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh Vulnerable Other communities adjoining the floodplain Castlereagh Scribbly Gum and Agnes Banks Woodlands of the Sydney Basin Bioregion Endangered Central Hunter Valley eucalypt forest and woodland Critically Endangered Cooks River/Castlereagh Ironbark Forest of the Sydney Basin Bioregion Critically Endangered Cumberland Plain Shale Woodlands and Shale-Gravel Transition Forest Critically Endangered Gippsland Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis subsp. mediana) Grassy Woodland and Critically Endangered Associated Native Grassland Illawarra-Shoalhaven Subtropical Rainforest of the Sydney Basin Bioregion Critically Endangered Illawarra and south coast lowland forest and woodland Critically Endangered Lowland Grassy Woodland in the South East Corner Bioregion Critically Endangered Warkworth Sands Woodland of the Hunter Valley Critically Endangered Western Sydney Dry Rainforest and Moist Woodland on Shale Critically Endangered

5.2 Regulated areas of the ecological community National listing focuses legal protection on patches of the ecological community that are the most functional, relatively natural and in comparatively good condition. These patches are identified through minimum condition thresholds. Condition classes are also used to distinguish between patches of the ecological community of different qualities, to aid environmental management decisions. In order to be protected as a matter of national environmental significance areas of the ecological community must meet both: • the key diagnostic characteristics (Section 5.1.1); AND

• at least the minimum condition thresholds (Section 5.2.1).

Table 4 outlines the different condition classes that apply to the ecological community. The minimum condition thresholds are designed to identify those patches that retain enough conservation values to be considered a matter of national environmental significance, to which the referral, assessment, approval and compliance provisions of the EPBC Act apply. These include all patches in Classes A, B and C. Patches that do not meet the minimum condition thresholds are excluded from protection under the EPBC Act. In many cases, loss and degradation is likely to be irreversible because natural characteristics have been permanently removed. However, although not protected under the EPBC Act, many of these patches may still retain important natural values and may be protected through state and local laws or planning schemes. In addition, patches that can be restored should not be excluded from recovery and other management actions. Suitable recovery and management actions may improve a patch’s condition, such that it subsequently can be included as part of the ecological community fully protected under the EPBC Act. Management actions should be designed to restore patches to high quality condition where practical. When assessing condition of a patch of the ecological community it is important to also consider the key diagnostics (Section Error! Reference source not found.) and patch d efinition information (Section 5.2) 5.2.1 Condition classes and thresholds There may be some patches of the ecological community likely to be in better condition, particularly those which have been subject to no adverse impacts, or low impacts such as light grazing, and those which retain hollow bearing trees. Patches of the ecological community that have a low incidence of weeds, contain mature habitat trees (e.g. those with hollows) and a more diverse understorey, and/or patches that are part of larger native vegetation remnants and/or patches that are known to support arboreal mammals, are a high priority for protection and management. Small, isolated patches that are subject to high disturbance and with a less diverse native understorey, do not contribute greatly to the conservation of the ecological community and may not meet the condition thresholds for national protection. The broadest area that meets the key diagnostic characteristics of the ecological community should be used in determining patch condition. Where it falls below the minimum thresholds, the next largest area or areas that meet key diagnostic characteristics and minimum condition thresholds should be specified and protected. This may result in multiple patches of the ecological community being identified within the overall area first considered. Areas of high, good or moderate quality may then be identified within patches if that is useful to further conservation decision making.

Table 4: Condition classes and thresholds Patch Large patch Medium Small Small patch size The patch is at least 5 ha patch contiguous The patch is at least patch thresholds The patch is 0.5 ha and less than 2 ha at least 2 ha The patch is at but is isolated or part of a

and less least 0.5 ha and small native vegetation than 5 ha less than 2 ha, remnant less than 5 ha and is part of a total. Biotic thresholds larger area of native vegetation of at least 5 ha HIGH CONDITION CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C1 Non-native species A large patch that meets A medium patch that meets A small patch which comprise < 20% of key diagnostics AND key diagnostics AND meets key diagnostics total understory evidence of recruitment evidence of recruitment of and has a predominantly vegetation cover* for most canopy species some of the canopy species native understory. The understory is and has a predominantly comprised of native understory, OR predominantly native A small patch that meets key species. diagnostics and has a predominantly native understory and is contiguous** with another large area of native vegetation. GOOD CLASS B CLASS C1 CLASS C2 CONDITION A large patch that meets A medium patch that meets A small patch that meets Non-native species key diagnostics AND key diagnostics and, the key diagnostics and has comprise 20% to evidence of recent understorey is mostly native a predominantly native 50% of total recruitment of some OR understory and is understory contiguous** with another canopy species A small patch that meets key vegetation cover* large area of native The understory, is mostly diagnostics, the understorey vegetation. native. is mostly native and is contiguous** with another large area of native vegetation. MODERATE CLASS C1 CLASS C2 Not protected CONDITION A large patch which A medium patch that meets Non-native species meets key diagnostics key diagnostics. The comprise 50% - The understory has some understorey is predominantly 80% of total native species. native and is contiguous** with understory another large area of native vegetation cover* vegetation. LOW CONDITION CLASS C2 Not protected Not protected Non-native species A large patch which comprise less than meets key diagnostics, 80% of total the understory has some understory native species AND is vegetation cover* contiguous** with another large area of native vegetation. *Refers to total perennial understory vegetation cover for the patch of the ecological community. Includes vascular plant species with a lifecycle of more than two growing seasons. It includes herbs (graminoids and forbs), grasses, shrubs and juvenile plants of canopy species, but does not include annual plants, cryptogams, leaf litter or exposed soil. **Contiguous means the patch is connected or within 30 m of another area of native vegetation. See Appendix B for further information on non-native/invasive alien plants associated with the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.

Do you think that these criteria thresholds (above) would help guide the protection and management/recovery of the proposed ecological community as a matter of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act? Do you have another comments in relation to these condition thresholds?

Significant impacts11 are likely to affect the sensitivity, value, and quality of the environment where an action is proposed to occur. The intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic extent of the impacts will depend on the impact's significance. Patches that are in the best condition (i.e. Class A in Table 4) and those patches with good native species cover and/or where the patch is contiguous with other native vegetation (Classes B, C1) represent those parts of the ecological community that retain the most intact structure and likely ecological function and hence have the highest chance of persisting in the long-term. Lower condition areas in Class C2 are still important for the survival of the ecological community areas with importance biodiversity or ecosystem function can still be critical to the local survival of the ecological community. 5.2.1 Areas critical to the survival of the ecological community The habitat or areas most critical to the survival of the ecological community are those patches that are in the best condition (i.e. Classes A, B and C1 in Table 4). These represent those parts of the ecological community closest to the benchmark state of the ecological community; they are the patches that that retain the highest diversity and most intact structure and ecological function and have the highest chance of persisting in the long-term. However, this does not mean that areas that otherwise meet the minimum condition thresholds (i.e. class C2 in Table 4) are unimportant for the survival of the ecological community. Many of these patches occur in locations or landscape positions that are particularly important for biodiversity or function and/or may contain suites of species or habitat features that are important in a regional or local context. Hence these areas can still be critical to the survival of the ecological community 5.2.2 Areas of high value - surrounding environment and landscape context Patches of the ecological community do not occur in isolation. Patches of the ecological community do not occur in isolation. The surrounding vegetation, treeless wetlands and other landscape considerations will also influence how important a patch is to the ecological community within a whole-of-landscape context. Patches that are larger and less disturbed are likely to provide greater biodiversity value will also influence how important a patch is to the ecological community within a whole-of-landscape context. For natural resource management activities or actions that may have ‘significant impacts’, i.e. important, notable or of consequence to the condition of the existing patch and require approval under the EPBC Act, it is important to consider the whole environment surrounding patches of the ecological community. For example, in heavily cleared areas, some patches that meet the minimum condition thresholds occur in isolation. Such patches require protection and could benefit from revegetation activities to link them with other patches or the restoration of natural hydrology. In other areas, patches that are interconnected to other native vegetation may not, in their current state, meet the minimum condition thresholds, but have high conservation value. Such patches could benefit from restoration works to improve their condition so that they do

11 For more information on the Significant Impacts Guidelines see: www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/significant-impact-guidelines-12-actions-or-impacting- upon-commonwealth-land-and-actions

meet the minimum condition thresholds. The ecological community often occurs in association with other native vegetation types. Patches of the ecological community that remain connected with other native vegetation have a better chance of future survival and restoration success, because connected patches are buffered from disturbance by the surrounding native vegetation. The following indicators of high value should be considered when assessing the impacts of proposed actions under the EPBC Act, or when determining priorities for protection, recovery, management and funding.

• Patches that meet or are closest to high quality (Class A) and good quality (Class B) for this ecological community or otherwise critical to the survival of the ecological community. These may be based on recent on-site observations or known past management history.

• Patches that include mature trees with important habitat values, for example, hollows and crevices, and/or are part of important wetland areas.

• Patches with a larger area to boundary ratio – such patches are more resilient to edge effect disturbances such as weed invasion and human impacts.

• Patches within or near to a larger native vegetation remnant and that contribute to a mosaic of vegetation types present at a site. Areas of mosaic native vegetation provide a wider range of habitats that benefit flora and fauna diversity. Other patches are important as linkages among remnants, acting as ‘stepping stones’ of native remnants in the landscape or for fauna to travel to and from water sources. Connectivity may include actual or potential connectivity to restoration works (e.g. native plantings).

• Patches that occur in areas where the ecological community has been most heavily cleared and degraded, or that are at the natural edge of its range, particularly where there is genetic distinction, or absence of some threats. These may include unique variants of the ecological community, e.g. with a unique flora and/or fauna composition, or a patch that contains flora or fauna that have largely declined across the broader ecological community or region.

• Patches that show evidence of recruitment of key native plant species or the presence of a range of age cohorts (including through successful assisted regeneration or management of sites). For example, tree canopy species are present on a range of ages and sizes, from saplings to large, potentially hollow-bearing trees.

• Patches with good faunal habitat as indicated by diversity of landscape, diversity of plant species and vegetation structure, diversity of age class, presence of movement corridors, mature trees (particularly those with hollows), logs, watercourses and treeless wetlands, etc.

• Patches containing nationally or state-listed threatened species.

• Patches with high species richness, as shown by the variety of native understorey plant species, or high number of native fauna species (vertebrates and/or invertebrates).

• Patches with low levels of weeds and feral animals.

Do you agree with the statements made above about areas of particularly high value? Please provide additions, comments and reasons for any views on these.

5.3 Principles and standards for conservation To undertake priority actions to meet the conservation objective, the overarching principle is that it is preferable to maintain existing areas of the ecological community that are relatively intact and of high quality, rather than trying to restore or replace areas that have been lost or degraded. There are good, practical reasons to do so. It is typically more cost-effective to retain an intact remnant than to allow degradation and then attempt to restore it or to restore another area. The more disturbed and modified a patch of the ecological community, the greater the recovery effort that is required. Also, intact remnants are likely to retain a fuller suite of native plant and animal species, and ecological functions. Certain species may not be easy to recover in practice, if lost from a site. This principle is highlighted in the National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia (Standards Reference Group SERA 2017): “Ecological restoration is not a substitute for sustainably managing and protecting ecosystems in the first instance. The promise of restoration cannot be invoked as a justification for destroying or damaging existing ecosystems because functional natural ecosystems are not transportable or easily rebuilt once damaged and the success of ecological restoration cannot be assured. Many projects that aspire to restoration fall short of reinstating reference ecosystem attributes for a range of reasons including scale and degree of damage and technical, ecological and resource limitations.” Standards Reference Group SERA (2017) – Appendix 2. The principle discourages ‘offsets’ where intact remnants are removed with an undertaking to set aside and/or restore other, lesser quality, sites. The destruction of intact sites represents a net loss of the functional ecological community because there is no guarantee all the species and ecological functions of the intact site can be replicated elsewhere. Where restoration is to be undertaken, it should be planned and implemented with reference to the National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia. These Standards guide how ecological restoration actions should be undertaken and are available online from the Standards Reference Group [SERA] (2016). They outline the principles that convey the main ecological, biological, technical, social and ethical underpinnings of ecological restoration practice. As restoration ecology is continually developing, it is important to reflect on the experience of others who have worked on restoring the ecological community, or other eucalypt or floodplain ecological communities, as well as adapting restoration projects as site-level experience accumulates. The knowledge and practices of First Nations peoples should also be acknowledged and considered. To achieve cost-effective investments in conservation management it is important to consider the likely interaction of the various management actions being undertaken at any one site, as these may be synergistic or antagonistic. There are also likely to be interactions between sites. Additionally, when allocating management resources, it is important to consider what is the minimum investment required for success and the follow-up required to secure long-term recovery (for example, for how many years should weed management be repeated).

Please provide comments, suggested edits and additions and reasons for your views on the draft priority actions that are below.

5.4 Priority conservation and research actions Priority actions are recommended to abate threats and to support the recovery of the ecological community. They are designed to provide guidance for:

• planning, management and restoration of the ecological community by governments, landholders, NRM and community groups, First Nations peoples and other land managers;

• conditions of approval for relevant controlled actions under the EPBC Act; and

• prioritising activities in applications for Australian Government funding programs. Detailed advice on actions may be available in specific plans, such as management plans for weeds, fire, or for certain parks or regions. The most relevant are listed in Section 4.3. This conservation advice identifies priority conservation actions under the following key approaches.

• PROTECT the ecological community to prevent further losses.

• RESTORE the ecological community by active abatement of threats, appropriate management, restoration and other conservation initiatives.

• COMMUNICATE, ENGAGE WITH AND SUPPORT people to increase understanding of the value and function of the ecological community and encourage their efforts in its protection and recovery.

• RESEARCH AND MONITORING to improve our understanding of the ecological community and the best methods to aid its management and recovery. These approaches overlap in practice; and form part of an iterative approach to management that includes research, planning, management, monitoring and review. The actions below do not necessarily encompass all actions in detail that may benefit the ecological community. They highlight general but key actions required to at least maintain survival of the ecological community at the time of preparing this Conservation Advice. 5.4.1 PROTECT the ecological community This key approach includes priorities intended to protect the ecological community by preventing further losses in extent and integrity.

• Protecting the ecological community should be properly taken into account during the early stages of zoning and development planning decisions, including strategic planning documents at state, regional and local levels.

• Liaise with local councils and State authorities to ensure that detrimental cumulative impacts on the ecological community are reduced as part of broader strategic planning or large projects (e.g. road works, developments). 5.4.1.1 CONSERVE REMAINING PATCHES Further clearance and damage to this ecological community should be avoided because it has been greatly reduced in its extent and integrity.

• Protect and conserve remaining areas of the ecological community.

• Avoid further clearance and destruction of the ecological community.

• Retain other native vegetation near patches of the ecological community, where they are important for connectivity, diversity of habitat, and/or act as buffer zones between the ecological community and threats or development zones.

• Add and protect patches identified as wildlife refuges or of regional importance to formal conservation reserves. Consider other patches for less formal conservation tenures, preferably ones that aim for protection over the long-term. This includes investigating formal conservation arrangements, management agreements and covenants to protect patches on private land. This is particularly important for larger patches, or areas that link to other patches of native vegetation, or that are part of wildlife corridors or migration routes.

• Where regeneration occurs, provide measures that will support the regeneration to maturity (e.g. provide fencing to minimise grazing/trampling damage risk).

• Protect mature and over-mature trees and stags, particularly with hollows. Large and old trees may have numerous fissures that provide shelter and support diverse insects and their predators. 5.4.1.2 MANAGE ACTIONS TO MINIMISE DETRIMENTAL IMPACTS Apply the mitigation hierarchy to avoid, then mitigate, then offset potential negative impacts on the ecological community from development, or other actions. The priority is to avoid further clearance, hydrological impacts and fragmentation of patches, with offsetting as the last resort.

• Plan projects to avoid the need to offset, by avoiding significant impacts to the ecological community.

• In circumstances where detrimental impacts cannot be totally avoided, then they should be minimised by: o retaining and avoiding damage to high quality patches, which should be managed to retain their benchmark state; and o protecting important habitat features, such as large mature trees or stags with hollows as these take many decades to develop and cannot be quickly replaced.

• Avoid activities that could cause significant hydrological change to occurrences of the ecological community. For example, constructing or managing levees, causeways, outlets/drains and other structures that detrimentally alter the hydrology in or near occurrences of the ecological community.

• Where impacts are unavoidable, offsets should be used as a last resort to compensate for the adverse impacts of the action deemed unavoidable. The outcomes of offsetting activities are generally highly uncertain. Any proposals considering offsets for this ecological community should aim to: o minimise the need to offset the ecological community by designing development around the ecological community and applying buffers; o retain moderate, good and high-quality patches (Classes A, B and C) of the ecological community (especially patches including mature trees), rather than offset them (particularly with lower quality offset sites); o manage threats and protect offset areas in perpetuity in areas dedicated for conservation purposes — avoid risks that may reduce their size, condition and ecological function in the future; 32

o select offset sites as close as possible to the impact site, to allow for local and regional variation in the ecological community; o increase the area and improve the ecological function of existing patches, for example by enhancing landscape connectivity, habitat diversity and condition; o focus on restoring lower quality patches of the ecological community, to achieve high quality condition (see Table 4); o extend protection to otherwise unprotected sites (e.g. sites that are currently too small or degraded to meet the minimum condition thresholds, but can reasonably be expanded and/or restored to a better, more intact condition that does meet the thresholds); and o monitor offset areas and the outcomes they deliver over the long-term, to manage them adaptively and improve understanding of the best ways to manage offsets to delivery biodiversity benefits.

• Minimise the risk of indirect detrimental impacts to the ecological community from actions outside but near to patches of the ecological community, including by avoiding disruption to hydrological processes in surrounding and upstream areas.

• Avoid activities that could significantly alter the fire regime of patches of the ecological community. Ensure that fire management activities (including creation of any new fire access tracks) do not have detrimental impacts on fire-sensitive species, or on the integrity of the ecological community. For further information on fire management see Section 5.4.2.3.

5.4.1.3 APPLY BUFFER ZONES

• Protect and apply appropriate buffers, particularly areas of other native vegetation, around patches of the ecological community to minimise adverse off-site impacts. A buffer zone is a contiguous area adjacent to a patch that is important for protecting the integrity of the ecological community. As the risk of indirect damage to an ecological community is usually greater where actions occur close to a patch, the purpose of the buffer zone is to reduce this risk (e.g. by making land managers, or others undertaking activities, aware that the ecological community is nearby and to take extra care of or, avoid the buffer zone). For instance, the buffer zone will help protect the root zone of edge trees, inundated areas and other components of the ecological community from spray drift (fertiliser, pesticide or herbicide sprayed in adjacent land), weed invasion, polluted water runoff and other damage. The best buffer zones are typically areas of other native vegetation. Fire breaks and other asset protection zones do not typically provide a suitable buffer and should not be at the expense of native vegetation, rather be additional to a vegetated buffer.

• A buffer zone of at least 50-60 m (beyond the canopy of the outermost trees in the patch) helps protect the patch from many potential adverse impacts (Smith and Smith 2010). A buffer zone must encompass an area large enough to protect the root zone of the outermost trees and other components of the ecological community from fertiliser, pesticide or herbicide applied or sprayed in adjacent land (e.g. spray drift), weed invasion, water runoff, soil erosion and most other damage and edge effects. A larger buffer zone (e.g. 100 m) should be applied, where practical, to protect patches that are of high conservation value. Judgement should be exercised to determine an appropriate buffer distance, depending on circumstances and how a patch may be detrimentally impacted.

5.4.1.4 PREVENT THE INTRODUCTION AND SPREAD OF EXOTIC SPECIES

• Support strong border biosecurity and avoid importing or accidentally introducing invasive species and pathogens that may have a serious adverse impact on this ecological community.

• Prevent planting of known or potentially invasive flora species in gardens, developments and landscaping near the ecological community, particularly known transformer weeds or bird-dispersed species.

• Avoid the sale of known invasive species in areas where the ecological community occurs.

• When conducting activities in or around the ecological community, practice good biosecurity hygiene to avoid spreading weeds or pathogens (see DoE (2015c)).

• Minimise unnecessary soil disturbance that may facilitate weed establishment.

• Prevent dumping of garden waste into bushland, especially in or near patches of the ecological community.

• Detect and control new weed incursions early, as small infestations are more likely to be eradicated.

• Limit or prevent access by grazing animals to patches of the ecological community (e.g. construct fences) where practicable.

• Prevent further introduction of feral animals and, where possible, contain pets in nearby residential areas. 5.4.2 RESTORE and MANAGE the ecological community This key approach includes priorities to restore and maintain the remaining patches of the ecological community by active abatement of threats, appropriate management, restoration and other conservation initiatives. • Restoration actions should be based on the best available knowledge and scientific research to maximise positive biodiversity outcomes. • Engage and liaise with landholders, NRM and community groups, Traditional custodians and governments to support, undertake and promote programs that ameliorate threats such as grazing and human disturbance.

• Consult with First Nations peoples and take seasonal calendars into account to assist with appropriate restoration and management actions. • Identify and prioritise action to address other specific threats and undertake appropriate on-ground site management strategies where required.

5.4.2.1 MANAGE HYDROLOGY Implement /reinstate appropriate hydrological management regimes for the ecological community and the landscapes surrounding the ecological community, taking into account results from research.

• Use available ecological information, including this Conservation Advice, to understand how water regimes may impact on key species in the ecological community.

• Use available information to appropriately manage groundwater levels in the ecological community.

• Consider appropriate water flows and nutrient loads when establishing new hydrological regimes and water levels in occurrences of the ecological community. 5.4.2.2 MANAGE WEEDS, PESTS AND PATHOGENS Implement effective integrated control and management techniques for weeds, pests and diseases affecting the ecological community and manage sites to prevent the introduction, or the further spread, of invasive species.

• All control programs should be risk-assessed and managed to avoid detrimentally impacting non-target species or having unintended consequences (e.g. do not control pest animals with methods that harm native species or remove weeds in a way that exposes soil to erosion).

• Identify potential new weed incursions early and manage for local eradication, where possible.

• Prioritise weed control in patches in which weed management is most urgent.

• Target control of key weeds that threaten the ecological community using appropriate methods that avoid detrimental impacts to non-target species.

• Encourage appropriate use of local native plant species (including from the ecological community) rather than non-local species in developments in the region through local government and industry initiatives and best practice strategies.

• Ensure that chemicals, or other mechanisms used to manage weeds, pests and pathogens do not have significant adverse off-target impacts on the ecological community.

• Control introduced pest animals through coordinated landscape-scale control programs. For example, work with relevant authorities to suppress feral animal numbers in line with regional pest management strategies.

• Control invasive species using best practice bush regeneration techniques by qualified bush regenerators.

5.4.2.3 MANAGE TRAMPLING, BROWSING AND GRAZING

• Where native vegetation regeneration or replanting is occurring in areas where grazing occurs, provide measures to avoid grazing impacts and support regeneration to maturity, such as fencing and/or tree guards.

• Construct wildlife-sympathetic fences to exclude overgrazing and that incorporate a buffer to protect patches and allow for recruitment and enhanced connectivity.

• Consult with landholders about watering for stock away from the ecological community.

5.4.2.4 MANAGE FIRE

• Implement appropriate fire management regimes for the ecological community and for the landscapes surrounding the ecological community. Take into account Indigenous knowledge about traditional cultural approaches to fire management and scientific research results.

• Where hazard reduction burns or prescribed fires are undertaken in areas near to the ecological community, ensure that the potential for the fire to escape is appropriately

risk assessed and management responses are in place to protect the ecological community.

• If appropriate, use a landscape-scale approach and available local knowledge, including Traditional Owner knowledge, on fire histories to identify sites that would benefit from reinstating appropriate fire frequency to prevent further declines of patches affected by either too low, or too high, fire frequency. It is important to identify suitable fire regimes (interval, intensity, seasonality, prevailing conditions) at each location considering information such as the maturity and seed production rates, as well as the seed germination requirements by key plant species, as well as sensitivities of fauna. o For areas of the ecological community affected by too high fire frequency, identify options for reducing the frequency of fires and protecting important features, such as habitat trees. o For areas of the ecological community affected by too low fire frequency, identify opportunities for applying appropriate ecological burns, including with traditional knowledge and practices. o Fire management strategies at each location should take into account patch size, habitat features (e.g. protect hollow-bearing trees and large logs), vegetation structure and the surrounding landscape (including property protection) to minimise damage, maintain refuges for fauna (during and after fire) and increase habitat variability.

• Fires (including planned burns) must be managed to: maintain the integrity of the ecological community and avoid disruption of the life cycles of the component species; support rather than degrade the habitat; avoid invasion of exotic species; and avoid increased detrimental impacts of other threats such as drought, grazing or predation by feral predators. Isolated faunal populations and threatened plants are particularly vulnerable to local extinction following intense fires combined with other threats. o Ensure that an invasive species risk assessment and management program is planned and budgeted for ahead of proposed burning. o Use available ecological information to avoid detrimental fire impacts on key and susceptible species in the ecological community. For instance, do not burn areas in or adjacent to the ecological community when key, threatened or functionally important flora and fauna (that may be adversely impacted) are flowering, nesting or otherwise reproducing. o Consider weather conditions. Do not burn in, or adjacent to, the ecological community when in drought, or dry conditions are predicted for the coming season because flora and fauna will already be stressed, recovery will be too slow, and erosion may occur; or weeds may become established while vegetation cover is reduced.

• Monitor the outcomes of fire and the consequences of other threats. Manage these within an appropriate timescale (e.g. immediately: put in place erosion control measures; limit access by feral predators and grazers; control weeds as they first appear with follow up treatments as necessary, until native vegetation has regenerated). Ensure monitoring results are made available and taken into account when planning and implementing future fire regimes. For further information on monitoring priorities see Section 5.4.4. 36

5.4.2.5 UNDERTAKE RESTORATION

• Undertake restoration work. This includes revegetating (and encouraging bush regeneration as per next point) and restoring natural hydrology to poorer and moderate and good quality patches, to restore them to high quality (including restoring patches that don’t currently meet the minimum condition thresholds for protection to a condition that does) — see Table 4. Restoration work to reconnect isolated patches to other areas of native vegetation is also valuable.

• Support natural regeneration before planning and implementing replanting programs (e.g. using fenced areas, weed and pest control, and fire). Replant areas where natural regeneration has not been successful.

• Maintain stags/snags12, logs, and mature and old-growth trees with hollows as they provide important habitat for fauna.

• Use local native species in restoration/revegetation projects for the ecological community and restore understorey vegetation to a structure and diversity appropriate to the site.

• In general, use locally collected seeds, where available, to revegetate native plant species. However, choosing sources of seed closer to the margins of the species’ range may increase resilience to climate change.

• Seed collections should follow appropriate national guidelines and protocols with long-term storage of germplasm in an appropriate State facility.

• Ensure commitment to follow up after planting, such as the care of newly planted vegetation by watering, mulching, weeding and use/removal of tree guards.

• Consider the landscape context and other relevant species and ecological communities when planning restoration works. For example, ensure adjacent ecological communities and threatened and migratory species are not adversely impacted by tree planting or other restoration activities for the ecological community.

• Implement effective adaptive management regimes using information from available research and management guidelines, for example, see the National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia (SERA 2016), relevant research or advice from local authorities. 5.4.3 COMMUNICATE, engage with and support This key approach includes priorities to promote the ecological community, and to build awareness and encourage people and groups to contribute to its recovery. This includes communicating, engaging with and supporting the public and key stakeholders to increase their understanding of the value and function of the ecological community and to encourage and assist their efforts in its protection and recovery. Key groups include landholders and land managers; land use planners; NRM and community groups; commonwealth, state and local government agencies; researchers; community members and First Nations peoples.

12 A standing, dead or dying tree, often missing a top, or most of the smaller branches. 37

5.4.3.1 RAISE AWARENESS

• Educate people and groups about the fauna and ecological values of, and threats to, the ecological community (such as altered hydrology, human disturbance and weeds). This may be done through the distribution of relevant publications, erecting interpretive signs at strategic locations, school programs and establishing a demonstration site for the ecological community.

• Encourage land managers to protect patches through long-term private land conservation mechanisms.

• Communicate with landholders/managers, relevant agencies and the public to emphasise: the value of the ecological community; its significance and key threats; appropriate threat management; and the importance of its protection and restoration.

• Encourage landholders to talk with local NRM organisations and other knowledgeable groups, to promote awareness of the ecological community, and to promote cooperation to protect and restore its occurrences.

• Undertake effective community engagement and education to highlight the importance of minimising disturbance (e.g. during recreational activities) and of minimising pollution and littering (e.g. via signage).

• Inform landholders about incentives, such as conservation agreements, stewardship projects, funding and NRM programs, which may be available to help protect and restore patches of the ecological community on private land.

5.4.3.2 GATHER AND PROVIDE INFORMATION

• Develop education programs, information products and signage to help the public recognise the presence and importance of the ecological community, and their responsibilities under local regulations and state and under the EPBC Act.

• Improve understanding of traditional ecological knowledge about the ecological community. Identify and support culturally appropriate mechanisms to share this knowledge to protect and restore the ecological community.

• Install signage to discourage damaging activities such as the removal of dead timber, dumping garden waste and other rubbish, creating informal paths and tracks, and using off-road vehicles in patches of the ecological community.

• Install significant vegetation markers along roads to designate areas of the ecological community, to protect and prevent inappropriate roadside maintenance.

• Promote knowledge about local weeds and what garden plants to avoid planting. Recommend local native species for revegetation and landscaping, or safe alternative garden plants. Encourage nurseries and DIY stores to stop selling species that have the potential to become invasive, in particularly those which are listed as environmental weeds.

5.4.3.3 COORDINATE EFFORTS

• Support opportunities for First Nations peoples to manage the ecological community, including cultural burning, in ways which will benefit areas of the ecological community.

• Encourage local participation in restoration and ‘Landcare’ efforts, e.g., through local conservation groups, creating ‘friends of’ groups, field days and planting projects.

• Liaise with local fire management authorities and agencies and engage their support in sympathetic fire management of the ecological community. Request these agencies to use suitable maps and install field markers to avoid damage to sensitive areas of the ecological community. Ensure land managers are given information about how to manage fire risks to conserve any threatened species and ecological communities.

• Promote awareness and protection of the ecological community with relevant agencies and industries. For example, with: o state and local government planning authorities, to ensure that planning takes the protection of remnants into account, with due regard to principles for long-term conservation; o landowners and developers, to minimise threats associated with land conversion and development; o local councils and state authorities, to ensure infrastructure or development works, involving substrate or vegetation disturbance, do not adversely impact the ecological community. This includes avoiding the introduction or spread of weeds; and o regional authorities, NRM organisations and local councils, to collaborate on threat management and planning with neighbouring authorities. 5.4.4 RESEARCH AND MONITORING This key approach includes priorities for research into the ecological community, and monitoring, to improve understanding of the ecological community and the best methods to aid its recovery through restoration and protection. Relevant and well-targeted research and other information gathering activities are important to inform the protection and management of the ecological community.

5.4.4.1 MAPPING

• Collate existing vegetation mapping information and associated data for this ecological community and identify gaps in knowledge.

• Identify and map the fire interval status of the ecological community and surrounding fire-dependent and/or fire sensitive vegetation.

• Undertake, support and enhance survey programs. o improve mapping of sites where the ecological community is known or likely to be present. o conduct targeted field surveys and ground-truth to fill data gaps and clarify the presence and condition of patches of the ecological community. o identify where the best, high quality remnants of the ecological community occur.

5.4.4.2 OPTIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

• Research into appropriate and integrated methods to manage pests and weeds that affect the ecological community.

• Research into potential impacts of climate change on the distribution of the ecological community. For example, assessment of the vulnerability of the ecological community to climate change and investigate ways to improve resilience through other threat abatement and management actions.

• Research into the impacts of hydrological change (quantity, quality, seasonality and channel movement) on the extent and condition of the ecological community

• Research into the role of fire in this ecological community, including understanding the ecological consequences of fire-exclusion and the role of low intensity fires in maintaining an open vegetation structure and in the ongoing recruitment of open- forest species.

• Research the use of fire in the control of invasive grass weeds and to encourage natural regeneration along remnant edges to increase size and reliance.

• Investigate key ecological interactions, such as the role of fauna in pollination, seed dispersal and nutrient cycling.

• Conduct research leading to the development of effective landscape-scale restoration techniques for the ecological community. Investigate the interaction between disturbance types, such as fire and invasion by weeds and feral animals, to determine how an integrated approach to threat management can be implemented.

• Investigate the most cost-effective options for restoring landscape function, including re-vegetation or assisted regeneration of priority areas, buffering, connecting and protecting existing remnants.

5.4.4.3 MONITORING It is important that any monitoring is planned before management actions commence and that planning considers what data are required to address research questions. Monitoring must also be resourced for management activities, especially for those using a novel approach, and applied during and following the management action.

• Monitor for incursions by new weeds and pest animals.

• Monitor for signs of decline, in terms of known problems e.g. dieback due to pathogens and pests, and new incursions (e.g. myrtle rust).

• Monitor changes in the condition, composition, structure and function of the ecological community, including its responses to all types of management actions and use this information to increase understanding of the ecological community and inform recommendations for future management.

Do you agree with the preliminary listing assessment against EPBC Act listing criteria on the following pages? Please provide advice on any reasons for disagreement and any additional information on how each criterion may be met, including relevant references.

6 LISTING ASSESSMENT AND RECOVERY PLAN RECOMMENDATION 6.1 Eligibility for listing against the EPBC Act criteria On the basis of available information, it is recommended that the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest is eligible for listing as endangered. This was the highest conservation category met at the time of assessment. This assessment uses the criteria set out in the EPBC Regulations and the Guidelines for nominating and assessing ecological communities. Criterion 1 - Decline in geographic distribution Category Critically endangered Endangered Vulnerable Its decline in geographic distribution is either: very severe severe substantial a) Decline relative to the longer- term (beyond 50 years ago e.g. ≥90% ≥70% ≥50% since 1750); or b) Decline relative to the shorter- ≥80% ≥50% ≥30% term (past 50 years). A past decrease sufficient to meet the criterion is considered to be a measurable change whereby: • the ecological community has contracted to less than some threshold proportion of its former range; or • the total area occupied by the community is less than the threshold proportion of its former area; or • less than the threshold proportion of the former area of the community is in patches of a size sufficiently large or well connected with other patches for them to be likely to persist beyond the near future.

May be eligible under Criterion 1 for listing as Vulnerable. Evidence: The Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ecological community coincides with areas that are sought after for agricultural land use, and close to major centres of population growth. Consequently, coastal native vegetation, including the ecological community, has been subject to clearing and degradation associated with agriculture and urban development. The Coastal Floodplain Forests (CFF) of NSW have recently been mapped using vegetation photo patterns (NSW Office of Environment and Heritage 2017). The Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests currently occupy approximately 19% of the CFF complex. Overall, the vegetation photo pattern mapping for the CFF indicate it has declined by 54% (Table 6.1). Assuming a similar level of decline for the ecological community may underestimate the actual loss of this ecological community. Various sources suggest anywhere between 40% and 85% decline in extent in different catchments within NSW (Table 6.1). In Queensland, the regional ecosystem mapping indicates the current extent of this ecological community to be 63 000 ha, an estimated decline of 55% since pre-1750 extent (Table 6.1) (Queensland Government 2021). The decline over the last 20 years has been in the order of 2%, with most loss occurring prior to 1997 (Figure 1). There is between 39% to 80% loss, depending on the Regional Ecosystem component of the ecological community. Primary reasons for clearing and fragmentation in Queensland are for exotic pine plantations, sugar cane and urban or peri-urban residential development (Queensland Herbarium 2020).

Figure 1. Queensland REs likely to be the ecological community: Extent and decline since 1750. Environment and Science (2021) (Subregions—remnant vegetation, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 sourced on 10 February 2021)

160000 60 140000 50 120000 40 100000 80000 30

Area Area (ha) 60000 20 decline % 40000 10 20000 0 0

Year Qld RE Area (ha) % Decline since 1750

The community extends into the Gippsland region of Victoria where it occupies approximately 19300 ha, with an estimated decline of 69% since pre-1750 (Department of Sustainability and the Environment 2007) (Table 6.1). Due to the uncertainty in the 1750 extent in NSW particularly, estimates have been based on: 1. the decline of the Coastal Floodplain Forest complex of 54% as a surrogate for decline in the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest (decline of 57% overall) 2. best case scenario in NSW of 40% decline (decline of 53% overall) 3. worst case scenario in NSW of 85% decline (decline of 76% overall). Therefore, the decline in geographic extent since 1750 of the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests is between 53% and 76% (Table 6.1). This is indicative of a substantial decline and makes the ecological community most likely to be eligible for listing as Vulnerable under Criterion 1a.

Table 6.1. Extent and decline estimates for the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest in the relevant State jurisdictions Location Dataset 1750 current (ha) Declin Reference/source (ha) e (%) State (NSW) Coastal 657994 302903 54 Bob Denholm pers. comm 2020 Floodplain (advance copy of NSW dataset) Forest NSW Office of Environment and Heritage 2017) State (NSW) Various 12469013 57400 54 Various NSW VIS mapping14. VIS 1750 and decline inferred from mapping overall CFF decline.

13 Inferred based on overall decline of CFF. Assumed the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest has the same percent decline as the CFF as a whole. 14 NSW VIS Mapsheets include: Bellingen2013_4188, ByronLGA2007, CoastVeg_3885, CoffsHarbour4189, GreaterTaree_3911, HunterGreater_3855, Kempsey_243, lower_hunter_2225,

SE Qld citation na na 39-80% Queensland Herbarium 2020 Clarence citation na 2500 (1982) 68 DECCW 2008; Northern Rivers Valley CMA Sydney citation na na 85 OEH 2016 Metro area Southern citation na na 40 OEH 2013b NSW Victorian citation na na >50% DSE 2007 extent SE Qld citation 140000 63000 55 Environment and Science 2021 Victorian EVC 61479 19,319 69 Department of Sustainability and extent dataset the Environment 2007 Entire extent 326169 139719 57 estimate based on mapped data and inference of CFF decline in NSW Best case estimate 297146 139719 53 estimated based on best case cited decline (NSW) Worst case estimate 584146 139719 76 estimated based on worse case cited decline (NSW)

This decline in geographic distribution since 1750 also represents a likely Vulnerable status under Criterion A3 of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems (in Bland et al. 2017).

Criterion 2 - Limited geographic distribution coupled with demonstrable threat Its geographic distribution is: Very restricted Restricted Limited 2.1. Extent of occurrence (EOO) < 100 km2 <1,000 km2 <10,000 km2 = <10,000 ha = <100,000 ha = <1,000,000 ha

2.2. Area of occupancy (AOO) < 10 km2 <100 km2 <1,000 km2 = <1,000 ha = <10,000 ha = <100,000 ha

2.3. Patch size < 0.1 km2 < 1 km2 - = <10 ha = <100 ha AND the nature of its distribution makes it likely that the action of a threatening process could cause it to be lost in: the Immediate future Critically Endangered Vulnerable [within10 years, or 3 generations of any long- endangered lived or key species, whichever is the longer, up to a maximum of 60 years.] the Near future Endangered Endangered Vulnerable [within 20 years, or 5 generations of any long-lived or key species, whichever is the longer, up to a maximum of 100 years.] The Medium-term future Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable [within 50 years, or 10 generations of any long-lived or key species, whichever is the longer, up to a maximum of 100 years.]

May be eligible under Criterion 2 for listing as Vulnerable to Endangered.

MidNthCoast_3886, NambuccaL_4473, NthCRAFTI_1082, PortMacquarie_4205, SE_LLS_4211, SydneyMetroArea_4489, TEC_SwampSclerophyllForest, Tweed2012_3912. 43

Criterion 2 aims to identify ecological communities that are geographically restricted to some extent. It is recognised that an ecological community with a distribution that is small and/or fragmented, either naturally or that has become so through landscape modification, has an inherently higher risk of extinction if it continues to be subject to ongoing threats that may cause it to be lost in the future. The indicative measures that apply to this criterion are based on distribution of both former and extant coastal forest habitats. The measures are: • extent of occurrence, an estimate of the total geographic range over which the ecological community occurs or is likely to occur; • area of occupancy, an estimate of the area actually occupied by the ecological community, which generally equates with its present extent; • patch size and distribution, an indicator of the vulnerability of small and/or isolated patches to particular threats; and • an assessment of timeframes over which threats could result in further loss of the ecological community. Evidence: Extent of occurrence Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests occurs within a strip along the east coast of Australia from around Gladstone, Queensland to the Gippsland Plain east of the Strzelecki Ranges bioregion in Victoria, Victoria. As this distribution is very extensive, the extent of occurrence cannot be considered to be limited. Area of occupancy The estimated total area of occupancy is about 140,000 ha (1400 km2) (Table 6.1), which cannot be considered to be limited. Patch sizes Vegetation mapping data from the entire extent indicates that almost 90% of patches are less than 10 ha in size and the median patch size is 0.9 ha. This is indicative of a ‘very restricted’ geographic distribution.

Table 6.2. Extant patch size data for the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest (combined NSW, Qld and Victoria).

Size range No. of % of Cumulative % of Category (ha) patches patches patches

Very 0.1-1 8,823 52% 89% Restricted Restricted >1-10 6,174 37% 99% >10-100 1,660 10% >100 215 1% Total 16,872 100%

Median patch size 0.9 ha (≥0.1 ha)

This combined impacts from threats outlined in Section 3 could be reasonably expected to result in substantial loss of the ecological community within the near to medium-term future (up to 100 years). Figure 2 shows that the number of large, forested areas (greater than 100 hectares) on the NSW coast has significantly decreased (halved) since 1750 and the number of very small patches has significantly increased. 44

Figure 2. Patch size count of Coastal Floodplain Forests (1750 vs 2020)

Conclusion The Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest has a very restricted geographic distribution based on generally very small patch sizes. The risk of ongoing threats to the ecological community suggests it could be lost in the near to medium-term future. The Committee therefore considers the ecological community may be eligible for listing as Vulnerable or Endangered under this criterion.

Criterion 3 - Loss or decline of functionally important species

Category Critically Endangered Endangered Vulnerable

For a population of a native very severe decline severe decline substantial decline species likely to play a major role in the community, there is a: Estimated decline over the at least 80% at least 50% at least 20% last 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer of: to the extent that restoration the immediate future the near future the medium-term of the community is not likely future to be possible in: restoration of the ecological 10 years, or 3 20 years, or 5 50 years, or 10 community as a whole is generations of any long- generations of any generations of any unlikely in lived or key species, long-lived or key long-lived or key whichever is the longer, species, whichever is species, whichever is up to a maximum of 60 the longer, up to a the longer, up to a years. maximum of 100 years. maximum of 100 years.

The Committee currently considers that there is insufficient information to determine the eligibility of the ecological community for listing in any category under Criterion 3.

Criterion 4 - Reduction in Community Integrity Category Critically Endangered Vulnerable Endangered The reduction in its integrity across most of its geographic distribution is: as indicated by degradation of the very severe severe substantial community or its habitat, or disruption of important community processes, that is:

Eligible under Criterion 4 for listing as Endangered Evidence: Human-induced and naturally occurring pressures and disturbances can contribute to both direct and/or indirect impacts to the integrity of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests. Factors contributing to a reduction in the integrity of the ecological community include increased fragmentation and disconnection of remnants due to land-clearing and hydrological changes, inappropriate land management regimes (e.g. grazing and fire), and impacts due to invasive flora and fauna, and introduced pathogens. Other threats, such as potential adverse impacts from climate change are likely to exacerbate these threats and further contribute to loss of integrity over time. For the full list of threats impacting this ecological community see Section 3. Reduction in integrity through changes to altered hydrological regimes and water extraction Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests are recognised as a ground-water dependent ecosystem (GDE) (NSW DPI 2016). In many parts of the extent of the ecological community, bunding, levees, weirs, floodgates and artificial drainage have been constructed to enable urban development and to support agriculture and other industries, such as forestry. This has resulted in impairment of the natural hydrological connectivity for the many parts of the ecological community. For example, in 2009 -13 out of 19 wetland areas (70%), where Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests occur in the Clarence and Richmond River catchments - including the Broadwater - have been affected by changed hydrology. This has resulted in downstream effects such as flooding/increased sedimentation of the waterways, increased nutrients, decreased water quality, invasions of exotic alien species and the development of acid-sulphate soil (ASS) impacts. Additionally, despite being listed on the National Estate for its natural values - including extensive melaleuca stands - Everlasting Swamp now faces a major ASS risk affecting soil and water quality (NSW North Coast LLS, 2019; Queensland Herbarium, 2020; Rogers and Woodroffe, 2016).

Since 2016, the perpetual access to aquifers and rivers for consumptive use, are enabled through water sharing plans15 (WSPs) (NSW DPI 2016) across the extent of the ecological community. These water sharing plans do not guarantee flow to support the ecological community, because flows for the environment depend on rainfall-generated stream flows after consumptive use volumes are extracted. For example, The Water Sharing Plan for the Clarence River Unregulated and Alluvial Water Sources 2016, enables water extraction licences for areas where the ecological community occurs, e.g. on the Orara River, which has 483 extraction licences for that one small area. Despite there being several nationally

15 under the NSW Water Management Act 2000. Available at: /www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2000-092

important wetlands in the region, such as Alumy Creek/Bunyip Swamp, where the ecological community occurs and where threatened species such as the Wallum Froglet and the Green-thighed Frog have been recorded – there is no specific environmental allocation for such wetland assets.

Reduction in integrity through increased fragmentation Prior to European occupation, the ecological community functioned as part of an extensive, mosaic of vegetation types, according to landscape position and exposure to fresh or brackish water. Clearing the land to promote European colonisation has resulted in a highly fragmented and degraded coastal system and its ecosystem function and subsequently, resilience has been altered (Keith 2004; in Keith and Scott 2005; Neldner 2017). Figure 3 shows that large, forested areas (greater than 100 hectares) on the NSW coast have more than halved since 1750.

Figure 3. Coastal Floodplain Forests area showing significant loss of large areas between 1750 and 2020

Population growth continues to exert strong pressure on coastal land for clearing for agriculture; housing, industrial and other coastal developments; transport and infrastructure corridors; recreational access and amenity across the range of the ecological community (Good et al. 2017; Keith 2004; Keith and Scott 2005; Tozer et al. 2010). By the end of 31 March 2020, Australia's population grew by 1.4%. Much of this growth occurred in the Sydney, NSW North Coast and South East Queensland bioregions. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that in 2018-19, the population change in some local government between the Gold Coast and Harvey Bay has at least tripled, such as Moreton Island (4.7) and Caloundra – West (8.3). Greater Brisbane, which includes the Gold Coast, increased by 52,600 people (2.1%). Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests now occur primarily in small patches in close proximity to areas of coastal development, and it is particularly susceptible to the cumulative effect of many small-scale losses. The deterioration of native vegetation continues as forest patches become smaller, more modified and isolated, (Saunders et al. 1991; Wilcox and Murphy 1985; in Neldner et al. 2017). Smaller, isolated patches are demonstrated to have lower species abundance and diversity. For example, clearing of parts of the ecological community in south-east Queensland for sugar cane and urban development has resulted in weed invasion of increasingly fragmented areas (Queensland Herbarium 2020). 47

Reduction in integrity through weed invasion and invasive fauna Many patches of the ecological community have been invaded by a wide range of exotic plants and animals. Some are listed as Weeds of National Significance (WoNS), and as invasive environmental weeds in QLD and NSW. These species disrupt soil nutrient cycling and severely affects native plant species richness (Lindsay and French 2006). Problematic species include climbers and creepers such as Asparagus asparagoides (Bridal Creeper), which can smother native canopies and Chrysthanemoides monilera spp (Bitou Bush) - an understorey plant, which has significant invasions in coastal environments in south-east Qld and NSW, and in some parts of Victoria (Coutts-Smith et al. 2006; Vranjic et al. 2012). It is having a significant impact in several reserves in NSW where the ecological community is located, e.g., Broadwater NP on the North Coast. Bitou Bush is known to impact upon bird suites found within the ecological community, including pollinating species such as honeyeaters. Additionally, there is evidence that these species impact upon coastal leaf litter invertebrates that play an important role in ecosystem function (Gooden et al. 2009; Hughes et al. 2009). Lantana (Lantana camara) has invaded at least four million hectares of native bushland, mainly in NSW and Queensland, transforming the structure and function of ecological communities such as this one (DSEWPaC 2013). Where invasions of Lantana occur, species richness is reduced (Gooden et al. 2009). Lantana has been shown to detrimentally impact on nationally listed species found within the ecological community, including the Lesser/Common Swamp Orchid (Phaius australis) and the Eastern Bristlebird (Dasyornis brachypterus) (DSEWPaC 2013). Baccharis halmifolia (Groundsel Bush), which has a dense canopy that suppresses native sedge growth, destabilises riverbanks and affects water quality, has caused detrimental impacts within Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests, particularly in sub-tropical melaleuca wetlands of the SEQ Bioregion including in several conservation areas (Queensland Government 2019a). Reduction in integrity through altered fire regimes Several species found within the ecological community are also likely to be affected by increased frequency and intensity of fire, particularly melaleucas, as well as threatened flora and fauna. . While the ecological community is fire-adapted to a degree, more frequent fire regimes and high intensity may kill Melaleuca spp., particularly where they are dominant, and lead to whipstick regeneration (Queensland Herbarium 2018a, b). In addition, fires that exceed the optimal frequency rates may result in a net loss of nutrients over time (OEH 2017). High-frequency fire is known to result in the disruption of life cycle processes in plants and animals and loss of vegetation structure and composition (OEH 2020; Queensland Herbarium 2019b). The fire risk is are higher where introduced weeds increase flammability loads (e.g. Whiskey Grass). Conversely frequent, low-intensity fires for hazard reductions or weed management, can decrease available fallen timber and other plant litter. The loss of functional species due to the impacts of fire, is also likely to impact upon other aspects of ecosystem function, such as water quality (due to reduced capacity for water shading and bank stabilisation), biomass (litter) production and seasonal nectar production, which in turn will impact on insects and a range of other fauna. Reduction in integrity through the impact of introduced pathogens The ecological community is defined by the presence of melaleucas, especially Melaleuca quinquenervia. These are subject to Austropuccinia psidii (Myrtle Rust) infections. Myrtle Rust affects the young, actively growing shoots, leaves and flower buds of several plants found within the ecological community, including melaleucas, significant mortality among younger plants is likely to have an impact on population recruitment. This disease has 48

affected a several areas along the extent of the ecological community from south-east Queensland and into Victoria, including areas within the NSW National Park estate, such as Queens Lake, Ti Tree Lake Aboriginal Area and Tyagarah Nature Reserve on the mid-north coast (NSW NPWS 2020a, b, c; Pegg et al. 2017). The impacts of increased wildfire risk coupled with Myrtle Rust has the potential to increase the loss of integrity. Pegg et al. (2020) found that M. quinquenervia was particularly susceptible to infection and, subsequent death as a result of infection by Myrtle Rust, after a fire. Post-fire growth was found to be infected by the pathogen within a few months after the occurrence of the fire. The incidence effect increased quite significantly over several months, with disease severity peaking 6-7 months later. However, severity declined during warmer spring and summer months. Where the infection of epicormic growth was repeated, trees had severe infections with death occurring in some cases. Diminishing population recruitment of key canopy species is the likely outcome within a climate change scenario. However, the extent of this impact is not currently quantifiable (G. Pegg, pers.comm. 3 December 2020). Reduction in integrity due to declining fauna The habitat changes outlined above are also likely to detrimentally impact on fauna that have an important functional role. Birds and many arboreal mammals, such as flying foxes, feed on the nectar and pollen of blossoms, spreading seeds and pollinating native plants within the ecological community. For example, the Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) (Vulnerable); has historically declined due to habitat loss and recently suffered large declines due to heat stress (TSSC 2001; OEH 2019). As a key pollinator of the ecological community, its decline may impact on the regeneration of key vegetation species in the ecological community. Even where Even where vegetation is regenerating, eucalypt regrowth lacks the hollows found in older trees, limiting faunal habitat, ecological complexity and functionality. Fragmentation of the ecological community will also have broken up fauna populations, making them at greater risk of local extinction within each patch of the ecological community. Conclusion Much of the past damage to the ecological community is likely to be irreversible and many of the underlying threats continue. This reduction in integrity, as indicated by the degradation of the community, is considered severe across most of its geographic distribution due to a combination of multiple threats. While active intervention and restoration works may improve the condition of some patches of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests, the complete restoration of the ecological community across its full range is unlikely, especially as many of the areas it formerly inhabited are now unsuitable due to permanent habitat transformation through altered hydrology or construction of buildings and other infrastructure. Therefore, the ecological community is likely to be eligible for listing as endangered under this criterion.

Criterion 5 - Rate of continuing detrimental change Category Critically Endangered Vulnerable Endangered Its rate of continuing detrimental change is: as indicated by a) degradation of the community or its habitat, or disruption of important community processes, that is: very severe severe substantial or b) intensification, across most of its geographic distribution, in degradation, or disruption of important community processes, that is: 5.1 An observed, estimated, inferred or suspected detrimental change over the 80% 50% 30% immediate# past or projected for the immediate future of at least:

Eligibility for listing under Criterion 5: Insufficient information

Evidence: As discussed in the previous sections clearing of native vegetation for agriculture and coastal development and the associated threats, such as weed invasion and the spread of novel biota and pathogens, are a major contributor to continuing detrimental change in the ecological integrity and function of the ecological community. Determining the rate of continuing detrimental change over the immediate past or projected for the immediate future is more difficult. By 1995/1997 vegetation clearing in south-east Queensland had reached approximately 55%, particularly in the Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay areas, where Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests and other vegetated wetlands are known to occur. However, this rate of native vegetation clearing has been shown to have stabilised over the immediate past. Since 2010, vegetation clearing has continued at approximately 400 ha every 2 years, with parts of the ecological community experiencing an annual loss of at least 1% of current (prior) extent per year (Queensland Herbarium 2020). Population growth could be one way of estimating the rate of future detrimental impacts based on the impacts of already high populations. Population increases in northern NSW comprise a 16% increase, with an estimated 46,000 new residential dwellings, particularly in the Tweed, Coffs Harbour and Port Macquarie-Hastings LGAs. Associated with this population growth, the Pacific Highway upgrade, between Newcastle and Queensland, is expected to cater for an 83% increase in freight transport and could substantially affect drainage, hydrological connectivity and tidal inflows (OEH, 2016a). Likewise, the south coast of NSW is also likely to experience a substantial population increase over the immediate future. Overall, whilst vegetation clearance is still occurring and there are various other threats, including impacts from increasing coastal populations and associated development throughout the range of this ecological community, there is no clear rate of detrimental change for the ecological community in the immediate past or future, certainly none that are greater than 30% over the past ten years.

Criterion 6 - Quantitative analysis showing probability of extinction Critically Category Endangered Vulnerable Endangered A quantitative analysis shows that its at least 50% in at least 10% in probability of extinction, or extreme at least 20% in the immediate the medium- the near future degradation over all of its future term future geographic distribution, is: • timeframes 10 years or 20 years or 50 years or 3 generations 5 generations 10 generations Source: DEE & TSSC (2017). Eligibility for listing under Criterion 6: Insufficient information Evidence: Quantitative analysis of the probability of extinction or extreme degradation over all its geographic distribution has not been undertaken. Therefore, there is insufficient information to determine the eligibility of the ecological community for listing in any category under this criterion.

Are you aware of additional data or other clear evidence of these threats and their likely impacts on the ecological community in the immediate, medium or long-term future? The draft conservation advice concludes that the ecological community merits listing as Endangered. What do you propose is the appropriate conservation category for the ecological community, and the reasons supporting this? If you propose an alternative conservation status, please provide supporting evidence for why it applies to this ecological community.

6.2 Recovery plan recommendation A recovery plan is not recommended for this ecological community at this time. The main threats to the ecological community and the priority actions required to address them are largely understood. The draft Conservation Advice sufficiently outlines the priority actions needed for this ecological community and many of the threats affecting the ecological community are best managed at a landscape scale, coordinated with the management of other ecological communities. In addition, a number of existing documents are relevant to the management and/or recovery of this ecological community or the threats to it, outlined in Section 5.

Therefore, listing under national environment law, provision of the information contained within a final Conservation Advice and implementation of the priority conservation actions are expected to be sufficient to guide protection and recovery of this ecological community at this time.

APPENDIX A - SPECIES LISTS This Appendix lists the assemblage of native species that characterises the ecological community throughout its range at the time of listing, particularly characteristic and frequently occurring vascular plants and macroscopic animals at Appendix A (based on the sources cited). The ecological community also includes fungi, cryptogamic plants and other species; however, these are relatively poorly documented. The species listed may be abundant, rare, or not necessarily be present in any given patch of the ecological community, and other native species not listed here may be present. The total list of species that may be found in the ecological community is considerably larger than the species listed here. Species presence and relative abundance varies naturally across the range of the ecological community based on factors such as historical biogeography, soil properties (e.g., moisture, chemical composition, texture, depth and drainage), topography, hydrology and climate. They also change over time, for example, in response to disturbance (by logging, fire, or grazing), or to the climate and weather (e.g. seasons, floods, drought and extreme heat or cold). The species recorded at a particular site can also be affected by sampling scale, season, effort and expertise. In general, the number of species recorded is likely to increase with the size of the site. Scientific names used in this Appendix are nationally accepted names as per the Atlas of Living Australia, as at the time of writing. A1 Characteristic and Frequently Occurring Vascular Plants Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Canopy tree species

Acacia cincinnata Daintree wattle Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood Allocasuarina littoralis Black She-oak Alphitona excelsa Red Ash, Soapbush, Soap Tree Angophora floribunda Rough-barked Apple R Angophora inopina Charmhaven Apple V V Banksia integrifolia Coast Banksia, Honeysuckle Oak, White Honeysuckle, Mountain Banksia Callistemon citrinus Crimson Bottlebrush Callistemon linearifolius Netted Bottlebrush V Callistemon pachyphyllus Wallum Bottlebrush Syn. Melaleuca pachyphylla Callistemon salignus White/Willow Bottlebrush Casuarina glauca Swamp Oak/Swamp She-oak Corymbia intermedia Pink Bloodwood Cupaniopsis anacardioides Tuckeroo Endiandra sieberi Hard Corkwood Elaeocarpus reticulatus Blueberry Ash, Ash Quandong, Blue Olive-berry Eucalyptus bancroftii Orange Gum Eucalyptus botryoides(S)* Southern Mahogany/Bangalay

16 Species listed under the EPBC Act at the time this document was prepared. Note that some species* may have their listing changed due to recent or future listing reassessments. Source: www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl 17 Species listed under the Queensland Act at the time this document was prepared. Source: 18 Species listed under the NSW Act at the time this document was prepared. Source: 19 Species listed under the Victorian Act at the time this document was prepared. Source: 52

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Eucalyptus grandis* Flooded Gum Eucalyptus latisinensis White Mahogany Eucalyptus longifolia(S)* Woollybutt Eucalyptus microcorys Tallowwood Eucalyptus ovata Swamp Gum Eucalyptus resinifera Red Mahogany subsp. hemilampra Eucalyptus robusta* Swamp Mahogany Eucalyptus tereticornis* Forest Red Gum, Queensland Blue Gum Eucalyptus tindaliae Tindale’s Stringybark Ficus racemosa Cluster Fig-tree, Indian Fig- tree, Goolar (Gular) Fig Glochidion ferdinandi* Cheese-tree Glochidion sumatranum* Umbrella Cheese-tree, Buttonwood Livistona australis(N) Cabbage Palm Lophostemon Swamp Turpentine, Swamp suaveolens* Box Melaleuca biconvexa(N) Biconvex Paperbark V V Melaleuca decora no common name SPRAT White-feather Honey-myrtle Melaleuca dealbata Soapy Tea-tree, Swamp Teatree, Blue-leaved Paperbark, Blue Paperbark, Soapy Teatree, Cloudy Teatree Melaleuca ericifolia(S) Swamp Paperbark Melaleuca linariifolia(N) Narrow-leaved Paperbark, Flax-leaved Paperbark Melaleuca Broad-leaved Paperbark quinquenervia* Melaleuca irbyana Bush-house Paperbark, V E E Swamp Teatree, Weeping Paperbark Melaleuca nodosa* Prickly-leaf Paperbark Melaleuca sieberi Paperbark Melaleuca styphelioides Prickly-leaved Paperbark, V Prickly-leaved Tea-tree Melaleuca squarrosa Scented Paperbark Melaleuca thymifolia Thyme Honey-myrtle, Thyme-leaved Bottlebrush Melastoma malabathricum No common name SPRAT (var. Melastoma affine) Blue Tongue/Nunyi-um/ Native Lasiandra Understorey tree and shrub species No common name SPRAT V Acacia attenuata

Acacia irrorata Blueskin, Green Wattle Sydney Golden Wattle, Acacia longifolia* Sallow Wattle Acmena smithii Lilly Pilly, Red Eungella E (syn. Syzygium smithii) Gum, White Eungella Gum, Scrub Mahogany, Midjuburi (Cadigal) Allocasuarina emuina Mountain She-oak E E

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Banksia robur Eastern Swamp Banksia, Swamp Banksia, Broad- leaved Banksia, Large-leaf Banksia, Large-leaved Wallum Breynia oblongifolia Coffee Bush Coprosma quadrifida Prickly Currant-bush Davidsonia jerseyana* Davidson's Plum Dodonaea triquetra Large-leaved Hop-bush, Three-winged Hop-bush Ficus coronata Sandpaper Fig, Creek Fig, Creek Sandpaper Fig Homalanthus populifolius Native Bleeding-heart, Omalanthus, Native Poplar Leptospermum Prickly Tea-tree continentale Leptospermum Prickly Tea-tree, Juniperinum juniperinum Tea-tree Leptospermum Woolly Tea-tree lanigerum Leptospermum no common name SPRAT) polygalifolium subsp. Lemon-scented tea tree polygalifolium Livistona australis Cabbage Palm, Cabbage- tree Palm, Fan Palm, Eungella Fan-palm, Cabbage Fan-palm Lophostemon confertus Brush Box Melaleuca decora no common name SPRAT White-feather Honey-myrtle Melaleuca ericifolia S Swamp Paperbark, Heath- leaved Tea-tree Melaleuca irbyana Bush-house Paperbark, V E E Swamp Teatree, Weeping Paperbark Melaleuca linariifolia Narrow-leaved Paperbark/Flax-leaved Paperbark Melaleuca nodosa Pricklyleaf Paperbark Melaleuca sieberi Paperbark Melaleuca styphelioides Prickly-leaved Paperbark, Prickly-leaved Tea-tree Melaleuca squarrosa Scented Paperbark Melaleuca thymifolia Thyme Honey-myrtle, Thyme-leaved Bottlebrush Melaleuca viridifolia Broad-leaved Paperbark Melastoma malabathricum No common name SPRAT (var. Melastoma affine) Blue Tongue, Nunyi-um, Native Lasiandra Melicope elleryana Pink-flowered Doughwood Persicaria elatior Tall Knotweed/Smart V V Pinkweed

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Pittosporum undulatum Sweet Pittosporum, Snowdrop Tree, Engraver Wood, Mock Orange, Native Laurel, Wave Leaved Pittosporum, White Holly, Native Daphne, Victorian Box, Australian Cheesewood, New Zealand Daphne, Victorian Laurel, Wild Coffee Pultenaea undulatum Myrtle Bush Pea Pultenaea villosa Kerosene Bush, Hairy Bush- pea Symplocos thwaitesii Buff Hazelwood Trema tormentosa Native Peach Fern species Adiantum aethiopicum Common Maidenhair, Maidenhair Fern Blechnum indicum Bungwall, Swamp Water-fern (syn. Telmatoblechum indicum) Blechnum camfieldii no common name in SPRAT Blechnum cartilagineum Gristle Fern Blechnum wattsii Hard Waterfern Calochlaena dubia Common Ground-fern, Rainbow Fern Cheilanthes sieberi Mulga Fern Doodia aspera Prickly Rasp-fern (syn. Blechnum neohollandicum) Drynaria rigidula Basket Fern Hypolepis muelleri Harsh Ground-fern Hypolepis distans Scrambling Ground-fern Lygodium microphyllum Climbing Maidenhair, Snake Fern Polystichum proliferum Mother Shield-fern Herb and orchid and sedge/graminoid species

Agrostis spp. Bent Grasses Agrostis diemenica Flatleaf Southern Bent Alexfloydia repens Floyd’s Grass E Archidendron hendersonii White Lace Flower Arthraxon hispidus Hairy-joint Grass V V Asperula asthenes Trailing Woodruff V Australina pusilla Small Shade Nettle Baloskion pallens Didgery Sticks Baloskion tetraphyllum var Plume Rush tetraphyllum Caladenia tessellata Thick-lipped Spider-orchid, E V V Daddy Long-legs Calystegia sepium Large Bindweed (Swamp E Bindweed) Cassia brewsteri var. Brush Cassia marksiana (syn. Cassia marksiana) Cassytha filiformisN Dodder Laurel Cassytha glabellaN Dodder Laurel, Devil's Twine, Dodder Carex appressa Tall Sedge 55

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Carex longebrachiata Drooping Sedge Centranthera Swamp Foxglove cochinchinensis N Centella asiatica Pennywort Chorizandra cymbaria Bristle Rush Commelina cyanea Scurvey-weed, Wandering Jew Corybas diemenicus Slaty Helmet-orchid Crassula helmsii Swamp Stonecrop, Swamp Crassula Cyperus aquatilis (N) No common name SPRAT (aquatic) Water Nutgrass Dendrobium No common name SPRAT melaleucaphilum Spider orchid Dianella caerulea No common name SPRAT Blue Flax-lily Distichlis distichophylla Australian Salt-grass Diuris praecox Rough Doubletail V V Diuris punctata Purple Diuris V Eleocharis acuta Common Spike-sedge Entolasia marginata Bordered Panic Entolasia stricta Wiry Panic Epilobium pallidiflorum No common name SPRAT Showy Willowherb Isolepis nodosa Knobby Club-rush (syn. Ficinia nodosa) Juncus gregiflorus No common name SPRAT Green Rush Juncus procerus No common name SPRAT Tall Rush Gahnia clarkei Tall Saw-sedge Gahnia grandis No common name SPRAT Cutting Grass Gahnia radula No common name SPRAT Thatch Saw-sedge Gahnia trifidis Coast Saw-sedge No common name SPRAT Gahnia sieberiana Sword Grass, Saw-sedge Gonocarpus tetragynus No common name SPRAT Common Raspwort Geranium solanderi Native Geranium Goodenia heterophylla No common name SPRAT Hemarthria uncinata Mat Grass Hydrocotyle hirta No common name in SPRAT Hairy Pennywort Hydrocotyle pterocarpa No common name SPRAT Wing Pennywort Imperata cylindrica Blady Grass Isachne globosa Swamp Millet Ischaemum austral a grass Leersia hexandra Swamp Rice-grass Lepidosperma elatius No common name SPRAT Tall Swordsedge Lepidosperma limicola Razor Sedge Lepidosperma Pithy Swordsedge longitudinale Lepironia articulata Grey Rush Leptinella longipes No common name SPRAT Coast Buttons

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Lilaeopsis polyantha No common name SPRAT Lobelia anceps Lobelia Lobelia purpurescens White Root (syn. Pratia purpurascens) Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush Lycopus australis Water Horehound, Australian Gipsywort Lythrum salicaria Purple Loosestrife Machaerina articulata Jointed Twig-rush (syn. Baumea articulata) Machaerina juncea Bare Twig-rush (syn. Baumea juncea) Machaerina rubiginosa Soft Twig-rush (syn. Baumea rubiginosa Machaerina tetragona no common name SPRAT (syn. Baumea tetragona) Square Twig-sedge Maundia triglochinoides No common name SPRAT V Oplismenus aemulus No common name SPRAT (var. aemulus) Oplismenus imbecillis (N) No common name SPRAT Persicaria sp. Knotweed Persicaria praetermissa Arrow-leaf Knotweed Phaius australis Common Swamp-orchid E E E Phaius bernaysii Yellow Swamp-orchid E E Phragmites australis Common reed Poa labillardierei Tussock Grass, Snow-grass, River Tussock Polyscias sambucifolia Elderberry Panax, Ferny Panax Pteridium aquilinum subsp. Bracken, Common Bracken, esculentum Austral Bracken (syn. Pteridium esculentum) Pteris comans Netted Brake, Hairy Bracken Pteris tremula Tender Brake, Tender Bracken Pterostylis spp. Greenhood orchids Samolus repens Creeping Brookweed Schoenus brevifolius No common name SPRAT Schoenus scabripes No common name SPRAT Selliera radicans Shiny Swamp-map Senecio spp. Groundsel Senecio minimus No common name SPRAT Stellaria angustifolia Swamp Starwort Tetrarrhena distichophylla Hairy Rice-grass Themeda australis Kangaroo grass (syn. Themeda triandra) Viola betonificolia Arrowhead violet Viola banksii No common name SPRAT Viola hederacea Native Violet, Ivy-leaf Violet, Ivy-leaved Violet Scrambler/climber/epiphyte species

Cymbidium suave Snake/Boat-lipped Orchid Kennedia rubicunda Dusky Coral-pea

Glycine clandestina A glycine Glycine tabacina Glycine Pea, Variable Glycine 57

Scientific name EPBC QLD17 NSW18 VIC19 16 Hardenbergia violacea False Sarsaparilla, Purple Coral-pea, Native Lilac Gynochthodes jasminoides Climbing Scrub-orange (syn. Morinda jasminoides) Parsonsia straminea Monkey Vine, Monkey Rope, Common Silkpod Stephania japonica var. Snake-vine discolor Sources: SPRAT, NSW Plant Net, Victorian and Queensland websites www.swifft.net.au/cb_pages/threatened_flora_east_gippsland_shire.php

A2 Fauna EPBC Qld NSW Vic Scientific name Common name/s Act4 Mammals and Monotremes Acrobates pygmaeus Feathertail Glider Antechinus agilis Agile Antechinus Antechinus flavipes Yellow-footed Antechinus Antechinus stuartii Brown Antechinus V Cercartetus nanus Eastern Pygmy possum V Chalinolobus dwyeri Large-eared Pied Bat V V V Chalinolobus nigrogriseus Hoary Wattled Bat V Dasyurus maculatus maculatus South-east Spot-tail Quoll E/V V V E Hydromys chrysogaster Water Rat Isoodon macrourus Northern Brown Bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus(S) Southern Brown Bandicoot E E NT Falsistrellus tasmaniensis Eastern False Pipistrelle V Macropus giganteus Eastern Grey Kangaroo Macropus rufogriseus Red-necked Wallaby Miniopterus australis Little Bent-wing Bat V Miniopterus schreibersii Eastern Bent-wing Bat V V oceanensis Mormopterus norfolkensis Eastern Free-tail Bat V Myotis macropus = Myotis Large-footed Myotis V NT adversus Perameles nasuta Long-nosed Bandicoot Petauroides volans Greater Glider V E T Petaurus australis Yellow-bellied Glider Petaurus norfolcensis Squirrel Glider V E Petaurus breviceps Sugar Glider Phascogale tapoatafa Brush-tailed Phascogale V V Phascolarctos cinereus Koala V V V Pseudomys gracilicaudatus Eastern Chestnut Mouse V Pseudomys novohollandiae New Holland Mouse V E Planigale maculata Common Planigale V Potorous longipes Long-footed Potoroo E CE E Potorous tridactylus tridactylus Long-nosed Potoroo SE Mainland V V V NT Pseudocheirus peregrinus Common Ringtail Possum Pseudomys novaehollandiae New Holland mouse/Pookila V V V Pteropus alectro Black Flying Fox Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying fox V V C Pteropus scapulatus Little Red Flying Fox Rattus lutreolus Swamp Rat Saccolaimus flaviventris Yellow-bellied Sheath-tail Bat V T Scoteanax rueppellii Greater Broad-nosed Bat V Sminthopsis leucopus (S) White-footed Dunnart V V NT Syconycteris australis (N) Common Blossom-bat V Trichosurus caninus(N) Short-eared Brush-tailed Possum Y Trichosurus vulpecular Common Brush-tailed Possum Wallabia bicolor Swamp Wallaby Xeromys myoides(N) Water Mouse (False Water Rat) V V Birds Accipiter novaehollandiae Grey Goshawk V Acrocephalus australis Australian Reed-warbler Alcedo azurea Azure Kingfisher NT Anseranas semipalmata Magpie Goose V Anthochaera phrygia Regent Honeyeater CE E CE E Ardea modesta Eastern Great Egret Aquila audax Wedge-tailed eagle Botaurus poiciloptilus Australasian bittern E E E Butorides striatus Striated Heron 59

EPBC Qld NSW Vic Scientific name Common name/s Act4 Bubulcus ibis = Ardea ibis Cattle Egret Burhinus grallarius Bush Stone-curlew E Calidris tenuirostris Great Knot CE, M E V E Calyptorhynchus funereus Yellow-tailed Black Cockatoo Calyptorhynchus lathami lathami Glossy Black Cockatoo V V V Ceyx azureus Azure Kingfisher Charadrius leschenaultii Greater Sand Plover V, M V V Cracticus tibicen Australian magpie Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike Coturnix ypsilophora Brown Quail Dacelo novaeguineae Laughing Kookooburra Dasyornis brachypterus Eastern Bristlebird E E E E Dendrocygna arcuata Wandering Whistling Duck Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird Dromaius novaehollandiae (N) Emu Entomyzon cyanotis Blue-faced Honeyeater Eopsaltria australis Eastern Yellow Robin Egretta garzetta Little Egret Egretta novaehollandiae White-faced Heron Ephippiorhynchus asiaticus Black-necked Stork E Epthianura albifrons White-fronted Chat V Erythrotriorchis radiatus Red Goshawk V E CE Grantiella picta Painted Honeyeater V V V V Grus rubicunda Brolga/Australian Crane V V Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-eagle V V Haliastur indus Brahminy Kite Ixobrychus flavicollis Black Bittern V V Ixobrychus minutus dubius Australian Little Bittern E Lathamus discolor Swift Parrot CE E E E Leucosarcia picata = Wonga Pigeon Leucosarcia melanoleuca Limosa limosa Black-tailed Godwit M V V Lophoictinia isura Square-tailed Kite V Malurus cyaneus Superb Fairy Wren Malurus lamberti Variegated Wren Malurus melanocephalus Red-backed Fairy Wren Menura novahollandie Superb Lyrebird Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater Neochmia temporalis Red-browed Firetail Neophema chysogaster Orange-bellied Parrot CE CE T Ninox connivens Barking Owl V E Ninox strenua Powerful Owl V V V Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew CE, M E V Nycticorax caledonicus Nankeen Night Heron Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck V E Oriolus saggitatus Olive-backed Oriole Y Pandion cristatus Eastern Osprey M V Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler Pachycephala pectoralis Golden Whistler Parvipsitta pusilla Little Lorikeet V Pezoporus wallicus wallicus Eastern Ground Parrot V V T Platalea regia Royal Spoonbill Pomatostomus temporalis V Grey-crowned Babbler temporalis Porzana pusilla palustris Baillon’s Crake V Pycnoptilus floccosus Pilotbird Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail Rostratula australis Australian Painted Snipe E V E CE 60

EPBC Qld NSW Vic Scientific name Common name/s Act4 Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck V Stipiturus malachurus Southern Emu Wren V Trichoglossus haematodus Rainbow Lorikeet Trichoglossus chlorolepidotus (N) Scaley-breasted lorikeet Threskiornis spinicollis Straw-necked Ibis M Todiramphus sanctus Sacred Kingfisher Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank M Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper M Tyto longimembris Eastern Grass Owl V Tyto novaehollandiae Masked Owl V Tyto tenebricosa Sooty Owl V V Xenus cinereus Terek Sandpiper M V Reptiles Bellatorias major Land Mullet Boiga irregularis Brown Tree Snake Calyptotis scutirostrum Scute-snouted Calyptotis Eastern Long-necked (Snake- listed Chelodina longicollis necked) Turtle Cyclodomorphus gerrardii Pink-tongued Lizard Cyclodomorphus michaeli Mainland She-oak Skink NT Egernia mcpheei(N) Tree skink, Eastern Crevice-skink Elseya albagula White-throated Snapping Turtle CE E Emydura macquarii Murray River Turtle Heleioporus australiacus Giant Burrowing Frog E E C Hemiaspis signata Black-bellied Swamp Snake Hoplocephalus bitorquatus (N) Pale-headed Snake V Hoplocephalus stephensii (N) Stephens' Banded Snake V Intellagama lesueurii Eastern Water-dragon Lechriodus fletcheri Fletcher’s Frog Lissolepis coventryi (S) V Swamp Skink = Egernia coventryi Morelia spilota spilota Diamond Python E Pseudonaja textilis Eastern Brown Snake Pseudechis porphyriacus Red-bellied Black Snake Pseudophryne semimarmorata Southern Toadlet V Tiliqua nigrolutea Blotched Blue-tongue Lizard Clarence River/Rough-scaled Tropidechis carinatus (N) Snake Uperoleia mahonyi(N) Mahony’s Toadlet E Wollumbinia georgesi Bellinger River Snapping Turtle CE CE Amphibians Crinia tinnula Tinkling Frog V V Limnodynastes dumerilii Eastern Banjo Frog Brown-striped Frog/Striped Marsh Limnodynastes peronii Frog Litoria aurea Green and Golden Bell Frog V E V Litoria brevipalmata Green-thighed Grog V V Litoria caerulea Green Tree Frog Litoria chloris Red-eyed Tree Frog Litoria citropa Blue Mountains Tree Frog Litoria cooloolensis (N) Cooloola Sedge Frog Rare Litoria fallax Dwarf Green Tree Frog Litoria freycineti Wallum Rocket Frog V Litoria latopalmata Broad-palmed Frog Littlejohn’s Tree Frog/Large Brown V V Litoria littlejohni* Tree Frog Litoria olongburensis(N) Wallum Sedge Frog V V V Growling Grass-frog/Green and V E E Litoria raniformis Gold Frog 61

EPBC Qld NSW Vic Scientific name Common name/s Act4 Litoria revelata Revealed Frog/Whirring Tree Frog Litoria wilcoxii Wilcox’s Frog Mixophyes iteratus* E T E Giant Barred-frog =Mixophyes iteratus syn. Mixophyes fleayi* Fleay’s Frog E T E Platyplectrum ornatum Ornate Burrowing Frog Fish Anguilla reinhardtiiN Long-finned Eel Cherax cuspidatusN Coastal Yabby Galaxias aequippinis East Gippsland Galaxia E Galaxias maculatus Common Galaxias Galaxiella pusilla Eastern Dwarf Galaxia V E Gobiomorphus australis Striped Gudgeon NT Nannoperca oxleyana Oxleyan Pygmy Perch E V Ophisternon bengalense(N) One-gill Eel Mogurnda adspersa(N) Southern Purple-spotted Gudgeon E Invertebrates Amegilla (Notomegilla) Blue-banded Bee chlorocyanea Argynnis hyperbius inconstans (N) Laced Fritillary CE E E Australothele nambucca (N) Large Curtain-web Spider Delias aganippe Spotted Jezebel Euastacus bidawalus. East Gippsland Spiny Crayfish V Megadolomedes australianus Giant-water Spider Nephila spp. Golden Orb-weaving Spider Maratus plumosus Peacock Spider Ocybadistes knightorum(N) Black Grass-dart/Knight’s Dart E Petalura gigantea Giant Dragonfly E Petalura litorea (N) Coastal Petaltail E Psychonotis caelius taygetus Small Green-banded Blue Tisiphone abeona Varied Sword-grass Brown Suniana sunias rectivita Wide-brand Grass Dart Spodoptera picta Lily Caterpillar Thersites mitchellae Mitchell’s Rainforest Snail Trigona carbonaria Stingless Native Bee Xylocopa aerate Golden-green Carpenter Bee Tenuibranchiurus glypticusN Swamp Yabby E Sources: Fishes of Australia: Website fishesofaustralia.net.au/home/species/5122; Marchant and Higgins (1990, 1993); Higgins and Davies (1996); Higgins (1999); Higgins, Peter and Steele (2001); Higgins and Peter (2002); Van Dyck and Strahan (2008); Watson (2011); Cogger (2014); Department of the Environment and Energy (2017c); Office of Environment and Heritage (2017e). SWIFFT: Threatened fauna East Gippsland Shire www.swifft.net.au/cb_pages/threatened_fauna_east_gippsland_shire.php#mammals

APPENDIX B - WEEDS Weed Species Common Name State Cinnamomum camphora Camphor Laurel QLD, NSW Baccharis halimifolia Groundsel Bush QLD, NSW Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata Bitou Bush/Boneseed QLD, NSW Ligustrum lucidum Broad-leaved Privet NSW Ligustrum sinense Small-leaved Privet QLD, NSW Pinus elliottii Slash pine QLD Schinus terebinthifolius Broad-leaved pepper tree QLD, NSW Olea europaea subsp. cuspidata African Olive NSW Prunus cerasifera Cherry Plum Vic Rubus fruticosus spp. Agg) Blackberry Vic, NSW Senna pendula var. glabrata Easter Cassia QLD, NSW Solanum mauritianum Bugweed, Wild Tobacco Plant QLD, NSW, Vic Opuntia spp.* Prickly Pears NSW Opuntia aurantiaca Tiger pear NSW Anredera cordifolia* Madeira Vine QLD, NSW Araujia sericifera Moth Plant NSW Asparagus asparagoides Bridal Creeper QLD, NSW Asparagus aethiopicus* Ground asparagus fern/Basket asparagus Vic, NSW Gloriosa superba Glory Lily, Flame/Fire Lily QLD, NSW Ipomoea spp. Morning Glories NSW Lantana camara* Lantana QLD, NSW Lonicera japonica Japanese Honeysuckle NSW Agrostis capillaris Brown-top Bent Vic Ageratina adenophora Cat Weed, Crofton Weed QLD, NSW Andropogon virginicus Whiskey Grass/Broom sedge QLD, NSW Holcus lanatus Yorkshire Fog Vic Paspalum dilatatum Paspalum Vic, NSW Paspalum distichum Water Couch Vic Paspalum mandiocanum Broad-leaf, Paspalum/Warrel Grass QLD, NSW, Vic Bidens pilosa Cobbler's Peg NSW Hypochaeris radicata Cat's Ear Vic, NSW Ruellia tweediana Mexican Bluebell QLD, NSW Cyperus prolifera Bull rush, Paper Plant Ageratum houstonianum Blue Billygoat Weed QLD, NSW Passiflora suberosa Corky passion vine QLD Passiflora subpeltata white passionflower, passionflower QLD * Weeds of National Significance Sources: Keith & Scott (2005); NSW Scientific Committee (2011); Queensland Government, Weeds of Australia Fact Sheets.

APPENDIX C - RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION AND MAPPING SYSTEMS Ecological communities are complex to classify. Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria apply their own systems to classify vegetation communities. Reference to vegetation and mapping units as equivalent to the ecological community, at the time of listing, should be taken as indicative rather than definitive. A unit that is generally equivalent may include elements that do not meet the key diagnostics and minimum condition thresholds. Conversely, some areas mapped or described as other units may meet the key diagnostic characteristics for the ecological community. Judgement of whether the ecological community is present at a particular site should focus on how the site meets the description (section 1), the key diagnostic characteristics (section Error! Reference source not found.) and minimum c ondition thresholds (section 5.2). State vegetation mapping units are not the listed ecological community. However, for many sites (not all) certain vegetation map units will correspond sufficiently to provide indicative mapping for the national ecological community, where the description matches. On-ground assessment is vital to finally determine if any patch is part of the ecological community.

C1 Queensland vegetation classifications In Queensland, vegetation communities in a ‘bioregion’ that are consistently associated with a particular combination of geology, landform and soil are referred to as Regional Ecosystems (RE) are (Sattler and Williams 1999, Vegetation Management Act 1999). The Table below provides information the REs that correspond, at least in part, with the proposed national ecological community. The REs for Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests ecological community is broadly grouped to reflect a common ecological patterns and relationships, independent of bioregions and land zones “Melaleuca spp. open forests and woodlands on seasonally inundated lowland coastal swamps and fringing drainage lines (Palustrine wetlands)” (Neldner et al. 2019).

Table 2: Regional Ecosystems that are identified as palustrine wetlands and corresponding to Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest Regional Ecosystem Short Description RE 12.2.7 Melaleuca quinquenervia or rarely M. dealbata open forest on sand plains RE 12.3.4 / Melaleuca quinquenervia, Eucalyptus robusta woodland on coastal alluvium/ RE 12.3.4a Eucalyptus bancroftii open woodland often with Melaleuca quinquenervia. RE 12.3.5 Melaleuca quinquenervia open forest on coastal alluvium RE 12.3.6 Melaleuca quinquenervia +/- Eucalyptus tereticornis, Lophostemon suaveolens, Corymbia intermedia open forest on coastal alluvial plains RE 12.3.20 Melaleuca quinquenervia, Casuarina glauca +/- Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. Only parts not siderophloia open forest on low coastal alluvial plains dominated by C. glauca Sources: Queensland Government, Neldner et al. (2019).

C2 Victorian vegetation classification Ecological Vegetation Classes (EVCs) are the standard unit for classifying vegetation types in Victoria. EVCs are described through a combination of floristics, lifeforms and ecological characteristics. Patches of the ecological community may be found in Swamp Scrub (EVC 53) in the East Gippsland Lowland and Gippsland Plain (east of the Strzelecki ranges) regions (DSE 2007).

C3 NSW vegetation classifications NSW has a comprehensive state-wide vegetation classification system that identifies Plant Community Types (PCTs). However, as the PCT classification is currently being upgraded for the east coast area and to in order to undertake the Criteria Assessment, data was obtained from several other mapping sources (see Table 4 for details). The PCT classification is designed to be the NSW standard for community-level vegetation mapping. Each PCT community includes a description of its relationship and degree-of-fit to listed threatened ecological communities. The current (draft) PCTs are those indicated as having a relationship with the NSW-listed ‘Swamp Sclerophyll Forest Coastal Floodplains of the New South Wales North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Bioregions’ are outlined in Table 5 and other PCTs that meet the description for the nationally-listed Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests are outlined in Table 6. Table 4a: Mapping units identified as corresponding at least in part to Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forest from the North Coast Region Assessment Map Sheet Map Unit Name NthCRAFTI_102 19 M.quinquenervia(wdlnd)-A.glauca 2 M.quinquenervia-forest 22 M.quinquenervia-forest/woodland 3 M.quinquenervia-woodland 40021 Eucalyptus robusta 40021/40071 Eucalyptus robusta/Melaleuca nodosa 40021/40091 Eucalyptus robusta/Melaleuca sieberi 40022 Eucalyptus robusta 40022/40092 Eucalyptus robusta/Melaleuca sieberi 40022/58021 Eucalyptus robusta/Banksia aemula Eucalyptus robusta/Banksia oblongifolia-Leptospermum 40022/60021 liversidgei-Lepyrodia interrupta-Sprengelia sprengelioides- Xanthorrhoea fulva

40031 Melaleuca quinquenervia 40031/00011 Melaleuca quinquenervia/unidentified (temporary code) 40031/35231 Melaleuca quinquenervia/Banksia integrifolia ssp. integrifolia 40031/40101 Melaleuca quinquenervia/Melaleuca styphelioides-M. biconvexa 40031/40121 Melaleuca quinquenervia/Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca sieberi 40031/92020 Melaleuca quinquenervia/Partially cleared 40032 Melaleuca quinquenervia Melaleuca quinquenervia/Eucalyptus resinifera ssp.? (SG to

40032/40082 check)-E. robusta-Angophora costata Melaleuca quinquenervia/Leptocarpus tenax-Restio pallens-

40032/64031 Schoenus brevifolius

40071 Melaleuca nodosa 40091 Melaleuca sieberi 40091/40021 Melaleuca sieberi/Eucalyptus robusta 40091/40111 Melaleuca sieberi/Melaleuca linariifolia 40091/40981 Melaleuca sieberi/Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca quinquenervia 40092 Melaleuca sieberi 65

Map Sheet Map Unit Name 40101 Melaleuca styphelioides-M. biconvexa 40111 Melaleuca linariifolia 40111/40121 Melaleuca linariifolia/Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca sieberi 40112 Melaleuca linariifolia 40121 Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca sieberi 40981 Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca quinquenervia 40982 Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca quinquenervia 40982/40091 Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca quinquenervia/Melaleuca sieberi 40991 Melaleuca quinquenervia-Casuarina glauca 40992 Melaleuca quinquenervia-Casuarina glauca 6 A,costata-E.robusta-B.oblongifo 7 E.robusta M.quinquenervia-E.robusta lookup_31 Swamp Mahogany lookup_32 Paperbark lookup_472 Swamp Mahogany / (Paperbark) lookup_474 Swamp Mahogany / (Swamp Oak) Paperbark - Swamp Oak (Types 31 & 32 Incl.) (Maritime League lookup_476 only) lookup_478 Paperbark / (Swamp Oak) Tweed2012_3912 305 Coastal Swamp Mahogany Open Forest to Woodland

403 Broad-leaved Paperbark + Eucalyptus spp.+/- Swamp Box Closed Forest to Woodland ByronLGA2007 60 Swamp Sclerophyll Forest

61 Paperbark 62 Swamp Oak +/- Paperbark 63 Swamp Mahogany/Swamp Box 64 Mixed Eucalyptus spp PortMacquarie_4 Broad-leaved Paperbark Swamp Woodland/Forest 205 61

Broad-leaved Paperbark - Mixed Eucalypt Swamp Forest

62 Complex

63 Broad-leaved Paperbark – Swamp Mahogany Swamp Forest 64 Broad-leaved Paperbark - Forest Red Gum Swamp Forest 65 Broad-leaved Paperbark - Bangalow Palm Swamp Rainforest 66 Swamp Mahogany Forest Kempsey_243 Eucalyptus intermedia-E. tereticornis/Melaleuca quinquenervia Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca quinquenervia Melaleuca quinquenervia Melaleuca quinquenervia/Eucalyptus robusta-Melaleuca sieberi 112 Paperbark 66

Map Sheet Map Unit Name 112 Paperbark complex ~ Sedgeland Paperbark complex ~ Wattle / Native Pioneers Sedgeland ~ Paperbark complex 142 Swamp Mahogany CoffsHarbour418 Coastal Paperbark Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest CH_FrW01 9 CH_FrW02 Coastal Swamp Mahogany Forest CH_FrW03 Coastal Paperbark Bottlebrush Channel Forest CH_FrW04 Coastal Paperbark Sedgeland Dominated Forest CH_FrW09 Coastal Wallum Swamp Mahogany Sieber's Paperbark Forest Bellingen2013_41 Broad-leaved paperbark – willow bottlebrush forested wetland of 88 BELL_ForW0 creek channels 3 Draining intermittent coastal lakes and lagoons Swamp oak – broad-leaved paperbark – willow bottlebrush BELL_ForW0 1 floodplain forested wetland BELL_ForW1 Swamp oak forested wetland of estuaries 1 Swamp mahogany – willow bottlebrush – broad-leaved BELL_ForW0 2 paperbark forested wetland NambuccaL_4473 NAM_ForW0 Swamp Oak – Broad-leaved Paperbark – Willow Bottlebrush 2 floodplain forested wetland Broad-leaved Paperbark – Swamp Oak – Tall Sedge swamp NAM_ForW0 4 forest on alluvial soils Broad-leaved Paperbark – Bare Twig Rush swamp sclerophyll NAM_ForW0 5 open forest of coastal swamps Broad-leaved Paperbark – Willow Bottlebrush forested wetland NAM_ForW0 of creek channels draining intermittent coastal lakes and 6 lagoons Swamp Mahogany – Willow Bottlebrush – Broad-leaved NAM_ForW0 8 Paperbark forested wetland Swamp Mahogany – Melaleuca sieberi shrub/sedge swamp NAM_ForW1 2 forest on low lying sandy areas Swamp Mahogany – tea-tree – Tassell Rush forested wetland of NAM_ForW1 3 waterlogged wallum soils Greater Taree 15 Swamp paperbark 14, 14a, Swamp Mahogany 14b Swamp Mahogany/Swamp Oak variant 7c Swamp Mahogany/Swamp Oak variant 7e Swamp Oak variant HunterGreater_3 Broad-leaved Paperbark/ Swamp Mahogany/ Swamp Oak/ Saw MU199 Sedge swamp forest of the Central Coast and Lower North 855 Coast MU200 Swamp Mahogany/ Flax-leaved Paperbark swamp forest on

coastal lowlands of the Central Coast MU201 Paperbarks/ Woollybutt swamp forest on coastal lowlands of the

Central Coast MU203 Swamp Mahogany/ Broad-leaved Paperbark/ Saw Sedge/

Yellow Marsh Flower swamp forest of coastal lowlands 67

Map Sheet Map Unit Name MU204 Swamp Mahogany/ Paperbarks/ Harsh Ground Fern swamp

forest of the Central Coast MU205 Melaleuca biconvexa/ Swamp Mahogany/ Cabbage Palm

swamp forest of the Central Coast Broad-leaved Paperbark/ Swamp Oak/ Saw Sedge swamp MU206 forest on coastal lowlands of the Central Coast and Lower North Coast Swamp Mahogany/ Broad-leaved Paperbark/ Swamp Water MU207 Fern/ Plume Rush swamp forest on coastal lowlands of the

Central Coast and Lower North Coast MU212 Swamp paperbark/ Baumea juncea swamp shrubland on coastal

lowlands of the Central Coast and Lower North Coast lower_hunter_22 Swamp Mahogany – Paperbark Forest 25 37

42 Riparian Melaleuca Swamp Woodland 42a Wyong Paperbark Swamp Forest 43a Melaleuca Scrub SydneyMetroArea Coastal Flats Swamp Mahogany Forest S_FoW02 _4489 S_FoW03 Coastal Freshwater Swamp Forest S_FoW04 Coastal Sand Swamp Mahogany Forest S_FoW012 Coastal Swamp Paperbark-Swamp Oak Scrub BioMetric_Shoalh Coastal freshwater lagoons of the Sydney Basin Bioregion and avenEurobodallaB South East Corner Bioregion ega/ scivi_v14_e_2230 _class_VIS_v10 Swamp Oak - Prickly Tea-tree - Swamp Paperbark swamp forest on coastal floodplains, Sydney Basin Bioregion and South East Corner Bioregion Swamp Mahogany swamp sclerophyll forest on coastal

lowlands, Sydney Basin and South East Corner Swamp Paperbark - Swamp Oak tall shrubland on estuarine

flats, Sydney Basin Bioregion and South East Corner Bioregion Sources: Kingston & Hall (2011); Ecograph & Terrafocus Pty Ltd (2009); Ecological (2005); Nambucca Shire Council (2015); Telfer & Kendall (2006); Phillips, Chang & Kordas (2013); Tozer et al. (2010); Office of Environment & Heritage (2012c), (2013a), (2013b) and (2016a).

Table 5: Proposed (draft) NSW PCTs that align with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests PCT PCT Name 3983 Central Coast Flats Mesic Swamp Forest 3985 Coastal Floodplain Swamp Paperbark Scrub 3986 Coastal Sands Swamp Mahogany Rush Forest 3989 Far North Paperbark Fern Swamp Forest 3990 Far North Paperbark Gahnia Swamp Forest* 3995 Coastal Sand Swamp Mahogany Dry Forest 3997 Hunter Coast Sandplain Sedge Paperbark Wetland 4000 Northern Estuarine Paperbark Sedge Forest 4001 Northern Floodplain Paperbark Fern Swamp Forest 4004 Northern Melaleuca quinquenervia Swamp Forest 4006 Northern Paperbark-Swamp Mahogany Saw-sedge Forest Sources: NSW DPIE (in prep), Tozer et al. 2021 (in prep); M. G. Tozer, pers. comm. (2021)

Table 6: Proposed (draft) PCTs with dominant characteristics of Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests* and that may be aligned, at least in part, to other NSW TECs DRAFT Vegetation Class or NSW TEC PCT PCT Name alignment* Far North Floodplain Paperbark-Swamp Oak Swamp Oak Forest on Coastal Floodplains* 3987 Forest Lowland Rainforest in the NSW North Coast and 3988 Far North Mesophyll Paperbark Swamp Forest Sydney Basin Bioregions 3993 Far North Swamp Oak-Paperbark Tidal Forest Swamp Oak Forest on Coastal Floodplains Closer in concept to Coastal Heath Swamps or 3998 Lower North Creekflat Mahogany Swamp Forest Swamp Sclerophyll on Sandplain (not TECs) Northern Lowland Swamp Turpentine-Mahogany Subtropical coastal floodplain forest (in part) 4003 Forest 4009 Shoalhaven Lowland Flats Wet Swamp Forest Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains Swamp Sclerophyll on Sandplain or 4013 Wyong Paperbark-Woollybutt Swamp Forest Coastal Heath Swamps Coastal Alluvial Bangalay Forest (in part - only Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains 4019 of dominated by E. robusta).* Coastal Creekflat Layered Grass-Sedge Swamp Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains 4020 Forest* 4021 Coastal Creekline Dry Shrubby Swamp Forest* Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains Northern Creekflat Eucalypt-Paperbark Mesic Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains 4044 Swamp Forest* Northern Lowland Swamp Turpentine-Paperbark Subtropical Coastal Floodplain Forest 4045 Forest* Northern Swamp Mahogany-Bottlebrush Swamp Riverflat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains 4047 Forest* 4048 Northern Swamp Oak-Paperbark Forest** Swamp Oak Forest on Coastal Floodplains Southern Estuarine Swamp Paperbark Creekflat Swamp Oak Forest on Coastal Floodplains 4056* Scrub** *can contain some characteristics of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains, such as dominant species can occur. **transitional to Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains Sources: NSW DPIE (in prep), Tozer et al. (in prep.); M. G. Tozer, pers. Comm. (2021)

Do you agree that these mapping units correspond to the ecological community? Should any be added to, or deleted, from the description, or do you have any relevant extra information on these?

Do you have any further comments or information about the ecological community that should be considered for the Conservation Advice?

APPENDIX D – CONSULTATION WITH FIRST NATIONS PEOPLES First Nations peoples should be consulted on protected matters that are likely to be impacted by proposed actions to the ecological community. The Australian Government’s “Guidance for proponents on best practice Indigenous engagement for environmental assessments under the EPBC Act” can be found at: www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/engage- early. D1. Cultural Heritage Protection Each State, where the ecological community is found, provides for the protection of the cultural heritage of First Nations peoples, which is broadly defined across the extent of the ecological community as: ‘objects and/or other evidence of archaeological or historic significance, areas20 and places, features of significance to Aboriginal people (including historic significance), and, Aboriginal ancestral remains.’ However, specific management arrangements vary according to each State and proponents. For example, In Queensland Cultural Heritage Management Plans (CHMP) can be prepared under the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2003 (ACHA). In 2019, New South Wales implemented the NSW State Environmental Planning Policy (Aboriginal Land 2019), which provides for the making of 'development delivery plans' ('DDPs') for land owned by Local Aboriginal Land Councils ('LALCs') which must be considered when determining development applications. Aboriginal Places may also be declared under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1979. While the declaration of an Aboriginal Place does not change the status of or affect ownership rights, Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permits must be sought. Guidance for Aboriginal landholders in relation to natural resource management, business development and environment conservation and be found in Conservation of Aboriginal Heritage in NSW A Guide for Aboriginal Landholders – which can be found here: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/research-and-publications/publications-search/conservation- of-aboriginal-heritage-in-nsw-a-guide-for-aboriginal-landholders. In Victoria, the Victorian Aboriginal Heritage Council has been established to help the broader community respect and understand the cultural heritage and responsibilities of First Nations peoples.

Documents relating to the use or management of, areas or components of, the ecological community that occurs either on Aboriginal lands, such as IPAs, or more generally, can be found in Section 4.3.3. Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Management Plans

Right: Paperbark or “ti-tree” swamps are important sources of food, fibre resources and medicine plants. These trees also provided roofing for shelters, blanket, bandage wounds and to wrap meat for cooking. On Biripi Country ©Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment

20 A significant Aboriginal area is an area that is particularly significant to Aboriginal people because of either or both Aboriginal tradition20 or the history, including contemporary history, of any Aboriginal party for the area. www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2003- 079#sec.9

D2. First Nations associated with Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests The following First Nations communities may hold, or be registered to claim, Native Title and/or co-management agreements over areas where the ecological community occurs.

Queensland Registered Aboriginal Party Fraser Island Butchulla Native Title Aboriginal Corporation Cherbourg Aboriginal Shire Council, Gympie Regional Council, Wakka Wakka People North Burnett Regional Council, South Burnett Regional Council Mulgumpin (Moreton Island), Minjerribah (Stradbroke Island), the Quandamooka Yoolooburrabee Aboriginal Southern Moreton Bay Islands and the mainland coast (Belmont, Corporation Chandler, Tingalpa, Wynnum and Redlands). Brisbane City Council, Bundaberg Regional Council, Fraser Coast Kabi First Nation Traditional Owners Native Regional Council, Gympie Regional Council, Moreton Bay Title Claim Group Regional Council, Noosa Shire Council, North Burnett Regional Council, Somerset Regional Council, Sunshine Coast Regional Council Brisbane City Council, Ipswich City Council, Lockyer Valley Yuggera Ugarapul People Regional Council, Logan City Council, Scenic Rim Regional Council, Somerset Regional Council, Southern Downs Regional Council, Toowoomba Regional Council Brisbane City Council, Ipswich City Council, Lockyer Valley Jinibara People Aboriginal Corporation Regional Council, Logan City Council, Scenic Rim Regional Council, Somerset Regional Council, Brisbane City Council, Gold Coast City Council, Logan City Danggan Balun (Five Rivers) People Council, Redland City Council, Scenic Rim Regional Council Brisbane City Council Jagera Daran Pty Ltd, Turrbal Association Inc Gold Coast City Council, Logan City Council, Scenic Rim Regional Gold Coast Native Title Claim Group Council Southern Downs Githabul Nation Aboriginal Corporation New South Wales Lake Macquarie LGA, New South Wales Awabakal LALC Richmond Valley Council Bandjalang People Lake Macquarie City Council Bahtabah LALC Areas surrounding Lake Macquarie, NSW. Biraban LALC Central Coast Council Darkinjung LALC Mid-Coast Council Forster Local Aboriginal Land Council Clarence Valley Council Gumbaynggirr People Tenterfield and Kyogle Local Government Githabul Nation Aboriginal Corporation Randwick City Council La Perouse Local Aboriginal Land Council

Bega Valley Shire Council, Campbelltown City Council, South Coast People Eurobodalla Shire Council, Goulburn Mulwaree Council, Liverpool City Council, Shellharbour City Council, Shoalhaven City Council, Sutherland Shire Council, The Council of The Municipality of Kiama, Wingecarribee Shire Council, Wollondilly Shire Council, Wollongong City Council, Canterbury-Bankstown Council, Georges River Council, Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council, Snowy Monaro Regional Council Tweed Shire Council Tweed Byron LALC Byron Shire Council, Gold Coast City Council, Tweed Shire Tweed River Bundjalung People Council Victoria Shire of East Gippsland. Gunakurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Coorporation Source: www.nntt.gov.au/searchRegApps/NativeTitleRegisters/Pages/Search-National-Native-Title-Register.aspx

Do you agree with the statements above? Would you have other information in relation to this you would like to share and have included in this Conservation Advice? For example, when is the best time to undertake traditional cultural burning? Can you provide specific information about the traditional cultural approach to management of Coastal Sclerophyll Swamp Forests? For example, where areas on alluvial or black soil likely to be burnt to encourage the growth of specific plants? In your opinion, has fire intensity and/or frequency increased within these swamp areas over the past 200 years? If yes, explain your reasons.

REFERENCES • Andren, M. and Cameron, M.A. (2012). The distribution of the endangered Black Grass-dart Butterfly, Ocybadistes knightorum (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Australian Zoologist 36: 159-168. • Andren, M. and Cameron, M.A. (2014). The conservation status of the Black Grass- dart Butterfly, Ocybadistes knightorum: a species at risk from climate change. Australian Zoologist 37: 76-84 • Aquatic Ecosystems Task Group (2012). Aquatic Ecosystems Toolkit. Module 2. Interim Australian National Aquatic Ecosystem Classification Framework. Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra. Available at: www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/08bfcf1a-0030-45e0-8553- a0d58b36ee03/files/ae-toolkit-module-2-anae-classification.pdf • Arrawarra Culture Project (2009). Project Fact Sheets Booklet. Available from: http://www.arrawarraculture.com.au/fact_sheets/pdfs/00_Fact_Sheets_Booklet.pdf • Atlas of Living Australia. (2019). Circus approximans: Swamp Harrier; Species Profile. Available from: bie.ala.org.au/species/urn:lsid:biodiversity.org.au:afd.taxon:6c14d4ed-b27c-419d- a685-070795ec32e3. Accessed December 2019. • Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) (2020) AIATSIS Map of Indigenous Australia. Available at aiatsis.gov.au/explore/articles/aiatsis-map-indigenous-australia

• Auld TD and Keith DA (2009). Dealing with threats: Integrating science and management. Ecological Management and Restoration, 10: S79–S87.

• Australian Museum Consulting (2015). Clarence Valley Aboriginal Heritage Study. Clarence Valley Council.

• Bell, S and Driscoll, C. (2010). Vegetation of the Worimi Conservation Lands Port Stephens, New South Wales: Worimi NP, Worimi SCA and Worimi RP. Report to Dept. of Environment, Climate Change and Water, Parks and Wildlife Group (NPWS) • Bell, S. and Driscoll, C. (2016). Vegetation Mapping Report, Lake Macquarie Local Government Area. Volume 1: Stages 1 - 6. 10.13140/RG.2.1.1690.4089. • Blay, J. (2005). Bega Valley Region Old Path Ways and Trails Mapping Project. For Bega Valley Regional Aboriginal Heritage Study. Public Version. Available from: http://southeastforests.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Bega-Eden-Merrimans- Path-Ways-Public-Report.pdf • Boone, P., Keith, D. and Raulings, E. (2016). Vegetation of coastal floodplains in south-eastern Australia. In: Vegetation of Australian riverine landscapes: Biology, Ecology and Management. Eds. S. Capon, C. James and M. Read. CSIRO. Canberra. • Booth, C. and Low T. (2005). Flying-fox Conservation Status Review. Prepared for Brisbane City Council. • Braby, M.F. (2004). The Complete Field Guide to Butterflies of Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingword Victoria. • Bradshaw, C. A.J (2012). Little left to lose: deforestation and forest degradation in Australia since European colonization, Journal of Plant Ecology, Volume 5, Issue 1, March 2012, Pages 109–120, https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rtr038

• Brownlie, H (2007). National Recovery Plan for Acacia attenuata: Report to Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane. • Carron, L. T. (1985). A history of forestry in Australia. Australian National University Press. Available from: file://upvvirtclus04fs/Users$/A08459/Profile/Downloads/b16120644.pdf • Churchill, S. (2008). Australian Bats (2nd Edition). Allen and Unwin, Sydney. • Cogger, H. (2014). Reptiles and amphibians of Australia. Seventh Edition, CSIRO Publishing, Collingword Victoria. • Cousens R, Kennedy D, Maguire G and Williams K (2013). Just how bad are coastal weeds? Assessing the geo-ecopsycho-socio-economic impacts, report to the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, University of Melbourne, Melbourne. • Commonwealth of Australia (2015). Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats, Commonwealth of Australia, 2015. Available from www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/tap-approved.html • Commonwealth of Australia (2016). National Recovery Plan for the Regent Honeyeater (Anthochaera phrygia). • Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria (2016). Australian Plant Census. (Accessed May 2016) anbg.gov.au/chah/apc/ • Cowardin, L.M., Carter, V, Golet, F.C and LaRoe, E.T. (1979). Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. 1979, US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: Washington DC.

• Dai A (2012). Increasing drought under global warming in observations and models. Nature Climate Change. 3, 52–58. Available from: www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1633

• Dawkins, K.L., Furse, J. M., Wild, C. H and Hughes J. M. (2010). Distribution and population genetics of the threatened freshwater crayfish genus Tenuibranchiurus (Decapoda: Parastacidae). Marine and Freshwater Research, 61, 1048–1055. Available at: www.publish.csiro.au/MF/pdf/MF09294 • Deb, P., Moradkhani, H., Abbaszadeh, P., Kiem, A. S., Engström, J., Keellings, D., and Sharma, A. (2020). Causes of the widespread 2019–2020 Australian bushfire season. Earth's Future, 8, e2020EF001671. Available from: agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2020EF001671 • Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) (NSW) (2006). NSW Recovery Plan for the Large Forest Owls: Powerful Owl (Ninox strenua), Sooty Owl (Tyto tenebricosa) and Masked Owl (Tyto novaehollandiae) DEC, Sydney. • Department of the Environment (DoE) (2014). Approved Conservation Advice for Phaius australis (Common Swamp-orchid). Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/5872-conservation- advice.pdf. In effect under the EPBC Act from 29-Apr-2014. • Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015a). Conservation Advice for Anthochaera phrygia Regent Honeyeater. Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/82338- conservation-advice.pdf • Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015b). Conservation Advice for Grantiella picta (Painted Honey-eater). Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available

from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/470- conservation-advice.pdf • Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015c). Wildlife Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) (NSW) (2008). Conservation Assessment of Wetlands in the Clarence Lowlands IBRA. NSW Government, Sydney. • Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (NSW) (2009). Draft National Recovery Plan for the Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus. • Prepared by Dr Peggy Eby. Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, Sydney. Available from: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/threatenedspecies/08214dnrpflyingfox.pdf • Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (NSW) (2010a). Far North Coast Regional Conservation Plan. NSW Government, Sydney. • Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) (NSW) (2010b). South Coast Regional Conservation Plan. NSW Government, Sydney. • Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) (2012). Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia, version 7. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) (2016a). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by rabbits. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) (2016b). Threat abatement plan for infection of amphibians with chytrid fungus resulting in chytridiomycosis. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of the Environment and Energy (DoEE) (2017b). Threat abatement plan for predation, habitat degradation, competition and disease transmission by feral pigs (Sus scrofa). Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014) Queensland Coastal Management Plan. State of Queensland, 2013. Available from: www.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/67961/coastal-management-plan.pdf • Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) (Vic). (2016). Index of Wetland Condition – assessment of wetland vegetation. Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, East Melbourne, Victoria. • Department of Environment and Primary Industries (2014) (DEPI) (Vic). Action Statement No: 256: Eastern She-oak Skink Cyclodomorphus michaeli. Victorian Government. Available at: www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/33005/Eastern_She- oak_Skink_Cyclodomorphus_michaeli.pdf • Department of the Environment and Resource Management (DERM) (2010). National recovery plan for the water mouse (false water rat) Xeromys myoides. Queensland Government, Brisbane. • Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008a). Threat abatement plan for predation by the European red fox. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2008b) (DEWHA). Threat abatement plan for competition and land degradation by unmanaged goats. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

• Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2008c). Approved Conservation Advice for Phaius bernaysii. Canberra: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. In effect under the EPBC Act from 16- Dec-2008. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/4918-conservation- advice.pdf. • Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2009) Significant Impact Guidelines for the vulnerable green and golden bell frog Litoria aurea. Nationally Threatened Species and Ecological Communities. EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.19 • Fisheries Scientific Committee (NSW) (2008). Final Determination for Mogurnda adspersa - Purple spotted Gudgeon. www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/636531/FD35-purple-spotted- gudgeon.pdf • Department of Primary Industries (DPI) (NSW) (2016) Methods for the identification of high probability groundwater dependent vegetation ecosystems. NSW Department of Industry, Skills and Regional Development. • Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) (NSW) (2017). North Coast Regional Plan 2036. NSW Government, Sydney. • Department of Primary Industries (DPI) (NSW) (2019) Eels (Short and Long-finned). Available from: www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing/fish-species/species-list/long-finned-eel. Accessed June 2019. • Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (2003) (Vic) Alteration of natural flows of rivers and streams: An action statement under the Flora Guarantee Act, 1988. Available from: www.environment.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/32483/Alteration_to_the_n atural_flow_regimes_of_rivers_and_streams.pdf • Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) (2007) (Vic). EVC/Bioregion Benchmark for Vegetation Quality Assessment East Gippsland Lowlands bioregion; EVC 53: Swamp Scrub. Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment November 2007. Available from: www.environment.vic.gov.au/data/assets/pdf_file/0025/48562/EGL_EVCs_combined. pdf • Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC) (2011). Threat abatement plan for the biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by cane toads. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. • Donaldson S (2010). Understanding Aboriginal Cultural Heritage – A place-based collection of oral histories told by Koori people with traditional and historical connections to the Bega Valley Shire21 begavalley.nsw.gov.au/page.asp?f=RES- FGL-50-44-25 • Duncan, M., Pritchard, A. and Coates, F. (2009). National Recovery Plan for Fifteen Threatened Orchids in South-eastern Australia. Department of Sustain ability and Environment, Victoria. • Dunlop M and Brown PR (2008). Implications of climate change for Australia's National Reserve System: A preliminary assessment, Report to the Department of Climate Change. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

21This report, part of the Bega Valley Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Study, includes information for use in planning and land management of seasonal living and camping places, such as along the Bega River, where traditional cultural use has continued since pre-contact times. These places are usually close to resource collection places and have an important role as teaching and work places.

• East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority (CMA) (2015). Gippsland Lakes Ramsar Site Management Plan, Bairnsdale. • Eby, P. and Law, B. (2008). Ranking the feeding habitats of Grey-headed flying foxes for conservation management: A report for the Department of Environment and Climate Change and the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. October 2008. • Ecograph and Terrafocus Pty Ltd (2009). Updating Vegetation Mapping – Stage 2(production of a digital remnant vegetation layer) for Byron Shire Local Government Area. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. • Ecological (2005). A Vegetation Map for the Northern Rivers Catchment Management Authority to support application of the Biodiversity Forecasting Toolkit. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage • EHP (2016). A Biodiversity Planning Assessment Southeast Queensland Bioregion v4.1. Fauna Expert Panel Report: Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, Queensland Government. • Eldridge D.J., James A.I., (2009) Soil-disturbance by native animals plays a critical role in maintaining healthy Australian landscapes. Ecological Management and Restoration, vol. 10, dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-8903.2009.00452.x • English, A. (2002). The sea and the rock give us a feed: mapping and managing Gumbaingirr wild resource use places. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. • Fensham RJ, Laffineur B, Collingwood TD, Beech E, Bell S, Hopper SD, Phillips G, Rivers MC, Walsh N and White M (2020). Rarity or decline: Key concepts for the Red List of Australian eucalypts. Biological Conservation 243. doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108455

• Gibbons P. and Lindenmayer D. (2002). Tree Hollows and Wildlife Conservation in Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Canberra. • Good, M. Smith, R. and Pettit, N. (2017). Forests and Woodlands of Australia’s Rivers and Floodplains. In Australian Vegetation, 3rd edn. D. A. Keith (Ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.281-313. • Gooden, B., French, K. O. and Turner, P. (2009a). Invasion and management of a woody plant, Lantana camara L., alters vegetation diversity within wet sclerophyll forest in south-eastern Australia. Forest Ecology and Management, 257 (3), 960-967. • Gooden, B., French, K. O., Turner, P. and Downey, P. O. (2009b). Impact threshold for an alien plant invader, Lantana camara L., on native plant communities. Biological Conservation, 142 (11), 2631-2641. • Grant Wardell-Johnson, John Neldner and Jane Balmer. (2017). Wet Sclerophyll Forests. In Australian Vegetation, 3rd edn. D. A. Keith, (Ed), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 281-313. • Griffith S.J and Wilson R. (2007). Wallum on the Nabiac Pleistocene barriers, lower North Coast of New South Wales. Cunninghamia 10(1): 93–111. • Griffith S.J and Wilson R. (2008). Wetland biodiversity in coastal New South Wales: the Wallis Lake catchment as a case study. Cunninghamia 10(4): 569–598. • Gunaikurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Corporation (GLWAC) (2015). Whole-of- Country Plan. Available from: www.gunaikurnai.org/wp-content/uploads/gk_whole-of- country%20plan%20LR%20FINAL%20270815.pdf • Higgins, P.J. (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (Vols 4-5). Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

• Higgins, P.J. and Davies, S.J.J.F. (eds) (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (Vol 3). Oxford University Press, Melbourne. • Higgins, P.J and Peter, J.M. (eds) (2002). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (Vol. 6). Oxford University Press, Melbourne. • Higgins, P.J, Peter, J.M. and W.K. Steele (2001). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (Vol 5). Tyrant-flycatchers to Chats. Oxford University Press, Melbourne • Hines, H. B and the South-east Queensland Threatened Frogs Recovery Team (2002). Recovery plan for stream frogs of south-east Queensland 2001-2005. Report to Environment Australia. Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane. • Hughes, N.K., Burley, A.L., King, S.A and Downey, P.O. (2009). Monitoring manual for bitou bush control and native plant recovery Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, Sydney. • IDEEA Group (2020). Valuation of disaster risk reduction ecosystem services of Australia’s coastal wetlands: review and recommendations. Prepared for the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE). Canberra, Australia. • Jali Local Aboriginal Land Council (2013) Ngunya Jargoon Indigenous Protected Area Plan of Management Prepared by Miles Holmes Consulting Anthropologist and Tim Hill Heritage Management and Planning. Available from: jalilands.com.au/assets/ngunya-jargoon-ipa-plan-of-management.pdf • Keith, D.A and Scott, J. (2005). Native vegetation of coastal floodplains – a diagnosis of the major plant communities in New South Wales. Biodiversity Conservation Science, NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. Pacific Conservation Biology Vol. 11: 81-84. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Sydney. • Keith, D. A., Simpson, C., Tozer, M. G. and Rodoreda, S. (2007). Contemporary and historical descriptions of the vegetation of Brundee and Saltwater Swamps on the lower Shoalhaven River floodplain, south-eastern Australia. Proceedings of the Linnea Society of New South Wales 128, 123-153. • Kingston M and Hall P (2011). Report on update of Tweed Shire Council Vegetation Mapping • Marchant, S. and Higgins P.J. (eds) (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds (Vol 2). Oxford University Press, Melbourne. • Mathew, J. (1910). Two Representative Tribes of Queensland. Unwin, London. • Maynard, J. (2014). True light and true shade. An Aboriginal perspective of John Lycett’s Art. National Library of Australia, Canberra. • Menkhorst, P., Rogers, D., Clarke, R., Davies, J. and Marsack, P. (2017). The Australian Bird Guide, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra. • Meyer, E., J. M. Hero, L. Shoo and B. Lewis (2006). National recovery plan for the wallum sedgefrog and other wallum-dependent frog species. Report to Department of the Environment and Water Resources, Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery-plans/national-recovery- plan-wallum-sedgefrog-and-other-wallum-dependent-frog-species. In effect under the EPBC Act from 09-May-2007. Accessed 14 January 2020. • Miles, M. (2006). Recognition and management of Endangered Ecological Communities in the South-East Corner of NSW. Southern Rivers Catchment Management Authority.

• Nambucca Shire Council (2015). Vegetation Mapping within the Nambucca Local Government Area — Coastal Lowland Vegetation Communities and Potential Threatened Ecological Communities. Volume 1: Project Report. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. • National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (1999). Forest Ecosystem Classification and Mapping for the Upper and Lower North East CRA Regions. CRA Unit, Northern Zone National Parks and Wildlife Service. Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. • National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2001). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes). NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville. • National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2015). Hunter Wetlands National Park: Draft Plan of Management. Office of Environment and Heritage, Sydney. • National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2019). Swamp Wallaby. Website: www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/plants-and-animals/swamp-wallaby. Accessed 1 November 2019. • Neldner, V.J., Laidlaw, M.J., McDonald, K.R., Mathieson, M.T., Melzer, R.I. Seaton, R. McDonald, W.J. F., Hobson, R. and Limpus, C.J. (2017). Scientific review of the impacts of land clearing on threatened species in Queensland. Queensland Government, Brisbane. Available at: environment.des.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/90272/land-clearing- impacts-threatened-species.pdf

• Neldner, V.J., Niehus, R.E., Wilson, B.A., McDonald, W.J.F., Ford, A.J. and Accad, A. (2019). The Vegetation of Queensland. Descriptions of Broad Vegetation Groups. Version 4.0. Queensland Herbarium, Department of Environment and Science. Available at: www.des.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/81929/descriptions-of- broad-vegetation-groups.pdf • Neldner, V.J., Wilson, B.A., Dillewaard, H.A., Ryan, T.S., Butler, D.W., McDonald, W.J.F, Addicott, E.P. and Appelman, C.N. (2020) Methodology for survey and mapping of regional ecosystems and vegetation communities in Queensland. Version 5.1. Updated March 2020. Queensland Herbarium, Queensland Department of Environment and Science, Brisbane. Available at: www.publications.qld.gov.au/dataset/redd/resource/6dee78ab-c12c-4692-9842- b7257c2511e4 • North Coast Local Land Services (2016). North Coast Local Land Services Aboriginal Engagement Plan 2016-2018. Available from: northcoast.lls.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/662532/nclls-aboriginal- engagement-plan.pdf

• North Coast Local Land Services (2017). Regional Strategic Weed Management Plan 2017–2022. Available from: https://northcoast.lls.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/722760/north-coast- regional-weed-management-plan.pdf

• NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (2016a). Assessment of North Coast Floodplain TECs on NSW Crown Forest Estate Survey, Classification and Mapping Completed for the NSW Environment Protection Authority. State of New South Wales and the Environment Protection Authority 2016. • NSW Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (2016b). Assessment of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains TEC on NSW Crown Forest Estate (South Coast Region) Survey, Classification and Mapping Completed for the NSW Environment Protection Authority. State of New South Wales and the Environment Protection Authority 2016. 79

• NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2020a) Queens Lake Nature Reserve Plan of Management, Department of Planning, Industry and Environment • NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2020b) Ti Tree Lake Aboriginal Area Plan of Management. Department of Planning, Industry and Environment • NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) (2020c) Tyagarah Lake Nature Reserve Plan of Management, Department of Planning, Industry and Environment • NSW Scientific Committee (2002). Competition from feral honeybees Apis mellifera: Scientific Determination. NSW Scientific Committee, Hurstville. • NSW Scientific Committee (2004). Introduction of the large earth bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) - key threatening process listing. Available at: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and-plants/threatened-species/nsw- threatened-species-scientific-committee/determinations/final-determinations/2004- 2007/introduction-of-the-large-earth-bumblebee-bombus-terrestris-key-threatening- process-listing • NSW Scientific Committee (2009). Preliminary Determination to support a proposal to list a population of the Koala Phascolarctos cinereus (Goldfuss, 1817) between the Tweed and Brunswick Rivers east of the Pacific Highway as an endangered population. NSW Scientific Committee, Hurstville. • NSW Scientific Committee (2011). Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains of the NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East Corner bioregions - Determination to make a minor amendment to Part 3 of Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals- and-plants/threatened-species/nsw-threatened-species-scientific- committee/determinations/final-determinations/2011-2012/swamp-sclerophyll-forest- on-coastal-floodplains-of-the-nsw-north-coast-minor-amendment-determination. Page last updated 28 May 2019 • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2012a). National Recovery Plan for Eastern Bristlebird Dasyornis brachypterus. Office of Environment and Heritage, Department of Premier and Cabinet (NSW), Sydney. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2012b). Development of a Fine- Scale Vegetation Map for the Coffs Harbour Local Government Area. Volume 1: Project Report. NSW Government, Coffs Harbour. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2012c). Vegetation Classification for the Northern Rivers Catchment Management Area of New South Wales. Appendix 9 – Vegetation Diagnostic Species. June 2012. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2013a). Plant Community Type Mapping (PCT) in the Bellingen Local Government Area. NSW Government, Coffs Harbour. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2013b). Compilation map: Biometric vegetation types and endangered ecological communities of the Shoalhaven, Eurobodalla and Bega Valley local government areas. A living map. Version 2.0. Technical Report. NSW Government, Queanbeyan. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2014). Plan of Management Yuin Bangguri (Mountain). Parks NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, October 2014 • Office of Environment and Heritage (2015). Worimi Conservation Lands: Plan of Management. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, NSW Government. • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2016). The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Area. Volume 1: Technical Report and Volume 2: Vegetation Community Profiles Version 3.0. NSW Government, Sydney.

• Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2017). The NSW State Vegetation Type Map: Methodology for a regional scale map of NSW plant community types, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, Sydney, Australia www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/vegetation/nsw-state-vegetation-type-map- methodology-170134.pdf • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2018). A review of koala tree use across NSW. State of New South Wales and Office of Environment and Heritage 2018. Available at: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate- Site/Documents/Animals-and-plants/Native-animals/review-of-koala-tree-use-across- nsw-180385.pdf • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (2019x) Bandicoots. (Accessed 31 May 2019). www.environment.nsw.gov.au/animals/Bandicoots.htm • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2020a). Floyd’s Grass - Profile. (Accessed 4 February 2020). Available at: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10036 • Office of Environment and Heritage (2020b) Stephen’s Banded-snake – Profile. Available at www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profileData.aspx?id=10414&cm aName=South+Eastern+Queensland • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2020c). Regent Honeyeater Profile. (Accessed September 2020) www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10841 • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (2020d). Freshwater turtles (Accessed February 2020). Available from: www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and- plants/native-animals/native-animal-facts/freshwater-turtles • Office of Environment and Heritage (2020e) Southern Myotis – Profile. Available at www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10549 • Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) (NSW) (2020f). Black grass dart butterfly – Profile. (Accessed February 2020) www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profile.aspx?id=10573 • Office of Environment and Heritage (2020g) High frequency fires resulting in the disruption of life cycle processes in plants and animals and loss of vegetation structure and composition are listed as a key threatening process. (Accessed February 2020) www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/ profile.aspx?id=20014 • Office of Environment and Heritage (2021) Giant Dragonfly: Species profile www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/profileData.aspx?id=10600&cm aName=NSW+North+Coast • Paice R and Chambers J (2016). Climate change impacts on coastal ecosystems. Coast Adapt Impact Sheet 8. National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast. https://coastadapt.com.au/sites/default/files/factsheets/T312_9_Coastal_Ecosystems .pdf

• Pascoe, B (2014). Dark Emu. Magabala Books. • Pegg G., Taylor T., Entwistle P., Guymer G., Giblin F., Carnegie A (2017). Impact of Austropuccinia psidii (myrtle rust) on Myrtaceae-rich wet sclerophyll forests in south east Queensland. PLoS ONE 12(11): e0188058. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188058

• Pegg. G.S., Lee J.D, and Carnegie A.J. (2018). Predicting impact of Austropuccinia psidii on populations of broadleaved Melaleuca species in Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology. • Pegg G., Entwistle P., Giblin F., Carnegie A (2020). Fire and rust – the impact of Austropuccinia psidii (myrtle rust) on regeneration of Myrtaceae in coastal heath following wildfire. Southern Forests: A Journal of Forest Science, 2020: 01–12 • Phillips, S., Chang, M., and Kordas, G. (2013). Vegetation of the Port Macquarie Hastings Local Government Area Version 1.08. Report to Port Macquarie Hastings Council. Biolink Ecological Consultants. Uki, NSW. • Pressey R. L. and Griffth S. J. (1992). Vegetation of the coastal lowlands of Tweed shire, northern New South Wales, species and conservation. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of NSW 113, 203-243. • Queensland Government (2021). Environment and Science, Subregions—remnant vegetation. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 sourced on 10 February 2021 • Queensland Government (2019a). Regional Ecosystem Description Database (REDD). Version 11.1 (April 2019) (DES: Brisbane). apps.des.qld.gov.au/regional- ecosystems/list/?bioregion=12&landzone=3 • Queensland Government (2019b). Draft South East Queensland Koala Conservation Strategy 2019-2024. State of Queensland. • Queensland Museum (2020). Swamp Crayfish (Tenuibranchiurus glytptys): Profile. Available at: www.qm.qld.gov.au/Find+out+about/Animals+of+Queensland/Crustaceans/Rare+or+ threatened+crustaceans/Swamp+Crayfish#.Xk8_v-MzZhE. Accessed 21 February 2020. • Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service (2002). Trees for Koalas: Coastal south-east Queensland. Queensland Government. Available at: www.wildcare.org.au/Documents/Trees_for_koalas.pdf. Accessed February 2020. • Roche, P.K. Campagne, C.S. (2017). From ecosystem integrity to ecosystem condition: a continuity of concepts supporting different aspects of ecosystem sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol 29, pp 63-68. doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.12.009 www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343517302828 • Rogers, K., Woodroffe, C.D. Geomorphology as an indicator of the biophysical vulnerability of estuaries to coastal and flood hazards in a changing climate. J Coast Conserv 20, 127–144 (2016). //doi.org/10.1007/s11852-016-0424-1 • Sands, D.P.A. (2018) Important issues facing insect conservation in Australia: now and into the future. Austral Entomology, 57:150–172. doi:10.1111/aen.12342. • Scott, J.K., Webber, B.L., Murphy, H., Ota, N., Kriticos, D.J. and Loechel, B. (2014). AdaptNRM Weeds and climate change: supporting weed management adaptation. CSIRO, Canberra. • Sheringham, P.R., D. Benwell, A., Gilmour, P., Graham, M.S., Westaway, J., Weber, L., Bailey, D., and Price, R. (2008). Targeted Vegetation Survey of Floodplains and Lower Slopes on the Far North Coast. NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change. • Smith Adam N (2011) Waterbirds and their habitat on the Clarence River floodplain: a history. Zoology, Vol 35(3) pp: 788-809.

• Smith P and Smith J (2010). Urban Edge Effects in the Blue Mountains, New South Wales: Implications for Design of Buffers to Protect Significant Habitats. Pacific Conservation Biology 16, 2, 92–100 • South East LLS (2016). Local Strategic Plan 2016-2021. State of New South Wales through Local Land Services, 2016. • Society for Ecological Restoration Australasia (SERA) (2017) National Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration in Australia. Second Edition. Society for Ecological Restoration Australia. Available on the internet at: www.seraustralasia.com/standards/home.html • Taylor, G., Braby, M., Moir, M., Harvey, M., Sands, D., New, T., Kitching, R. Mcquillan, P., Hogendoorn, K., Glatz, R. Andren, M., Cook, J., Henry, S., Valenzuela, I. and Weinstein, P. (2018). Strategic national approach for improving the conservation management of insects and allied invertebrates in Australia. Austral Entomology. 57. 10.1111/aen.12343

• Telfer D and Kendall P (2006). Native Vegetation and Candidate Endangered Ecological Community Mapping. Kempsey LGA East. Report to Kempsey Shire Council. Office of Environment and Heritage.

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2004b). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Dasyurus maculatus (Spot-tailed Quoll, Spotted-tailed Quoll, Tiger Quoll). Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/tiger- quoll.html. In effect under the EPBC Act from 14-May-2004.

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2010a). Approved Conservation Advice Persicaria elatior Knotweed, Tall knotweed (s266B of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999). Available from www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=5831

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2010b). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Pseudomys novaehollandiae (New Holland Mouse). Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Canberra, ACT: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. In effect under the EPBC Act from 11- Aug-2010. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/96-listing-advice.pdf.

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015). Conservation Advice Erythrotriorchis radiates (red goshawk). Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/942- conservation-advice-31102015.pdf.

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2016a) Conservation Advice Lathamus discolour (Swift parrot). Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/744- conservation-advice-05052016.pdf

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2016b). Approved Conservation Advice for Isoodon obesulus (southern brown bandicoot (eastern). Department of the Environment, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/68050-conservation- advice-05052016.pdf

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2017a). Approved Conservation Advice Argynnis hyperbius inconstans (Australian fritillary). Canberra: Department of the Environment and Energy.

www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/88056-conservation- advice-15082017.pdf

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2017b). Approved Conservation Advice Mixophyes iterates (Giant barred frog, southern barred frog). Canberra: Department of the Environment and Energy. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/1944-conservation- advice-13072017.pdf

• Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2019). Conservation Advice Potorous tridactylus Long-nosed Potoroo (SE Mainland). Canberra: Department of the Environment and Energy. Available from: www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/66645-conservation- advice-31102019.pdf. In effect under the EPBC Act from 31-Oct-2019.

• Tozer, M. (2003). The native vegetation of the Cumberland Plain, western Sydney: systematic classification and field identification of communities. Cunninghamia 8(1): 1-75.

• Tozer, M. G., Turner, K., Keith, D. A., Tindall, D., Pennay, C., Simpson, C., Mackenzie, B., Beukers, P. and Cox, S. (2010). Native Vegetation of Southeast NSW: A revised classification and map for the coast and eastern tablelands. Cunninghamia:11, 359-406.

• Tweed Shire Council. Makinson, R.O., Pegg, G.S., Carnegie, A.J. (2020). Myrtle Rust in Australia: A National Action Plan. Australian Plant Biosecurity Science Foundation, Canberra. Australia. • Van Dyck, S and Strahan, R. (2008). The Mammals of Australia (Third Edition), Reed New Holland.

• VEAC (2019). Assessment of Victoria’s Coastal Reserves Draft Report for Public Comment (2019) Available from: veac.vic.gov.au/documents/VEAC_CoastalRsAssessment_DraftReport2019(LR).pdf • Walker, J. and Hopkins, M.S. (1990). Vegetation, in R.C. McDonald, R.F. Isbell, J.R. Speight, J. Walker and M.S. Hopkins (eds), Australian Soil and Land Survey – Field Handbook, 2nd edition, pp. 58–77. Inkata Press, Melbourne and Sydney.

• Webb, L.B. and Hennessy, K. (2015). Projections for selected Australian cities, CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology, Australia. • Wesson, S. (2009). Murni Dhungang Jirrar: Living in the Illawarra. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.

This document is licensed by the Commonwealth of Australia for use under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence with the exception of the Coat of Arms of the Commonwealth of Australia, the logo of the agency responsible for publishing the report, content supplied by third parties, and any images depicting people. For licence conditions see: creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0

The document should be attributed or cited as:

“Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (2020). Conservation Advice for the Coastal Swamp Sclerophyll Forests of South-eastern Australia. Canberra, ACT.”

The Commonwealth of Australia has made all reasonable efforts to identify content supplied by third parties using the following format ‘© Copyright, [name of third party]’.