Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Prepared by AMBS Ecology & Heritage Pty Ltd for First Class Building Construction

Final Report

January 2017

AMBS Reference: 15225

AMBS Ecology & Heritage www.ambs.com.au [email protected] 02 9518 4489 Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Document Information

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 2016, Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Citation: Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell. Consultancy report to First Class Building Construction. AMBS Ref: 15225 Version 1: Draft Report issued 7 April 2016 Versions: Version 2: Final Draft issued 19 December 2016 Version 3: Final Report issued 24 January 2017 Garth Hsu, JSA Studio Recipients: Shane Youssef, First Class Building Construction Authors: Belinda Pellow, Chantelle Doyle, Mark Semeniuk, Glenn Muir Approved by: Glenn Muir

AMBS Ecology & Heritage II Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Executive Summary

AMBS Ecology & Heritage Pty Ltd (AMBS) was commissioned by Taleb Property Pty Ltd to undertake an ecological assessment in relation to a proposed development at 186-206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell (the study area). The study area is proposed to be developed as a distribution centre and warehouse for a Tempe Tyre and Wheels centre. The project would involve the construction of warehouses, offices, car parking and truck parking, with driveways off Sir Joseph Banks Drive and Chisholm Road. The area is zoned as IN3 heavy industry under the provisions of the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015.

The overall aim of this Ecological Assessment was to address points 4 and 5 of the Sutherland Shire Council (Council) Pre-Application advice, which indicated that the site is mapped as Environmentally Sensitive Land (Terrestrial Biodiversity), that some of the vegetation on the site has been mapped as comprising an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC), and that an Ecological Assessment (also known as a Flora and Fauna Assessment) should be submitted with the Development Application. Point 5 of Council’s Pre-Application advice indicated that the site is mapped as “Greenweb Support” and therefore landscaping of the site should be with species indigenous to the Sutherland Shire. In addition, the site is located close to the Towra Point Nature Reserve, which is a wetland of international importance.

A report in relation to the above was prepared in April 2016. In December 2016, AMBS was requested to also consider the draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2016 (CM SEPP).

The study involved:  a desktop investigation of existing information regarding flora and fauna within the locality (in particular, threatened species, populations and ecological communities);  field surveys of the study area, including diurnal flora and fauna searches, collection of flora plot data and four nocturnal surveys;  preparation of assessments of significance for relevant flora and fauna.

The study found that the study area and much of the surrounds have been used for heavy industrial purposes for many years. The adjacent Caltex Oil Refinery was built in the 1950’s. Previous aerial imagery indicates that the study area was highly disturbed after 1943 with most vegetation removed in the 1950’s and the treeless plain of 1943 being colonised by what appear to be trees by the 1980’s. In the 1990’s about half of the site was cleared for the construction of the AGL hydrocarbon extraction plant.

In 2015 a tornado passed across the Kurnell Peninsula and as a result the vegetation of the study area has suffered disturbance. At the time of the field surveys, most standing trees were either dislodged at their roots or snapped off from the trunk.

The study found that part of the study area does contain the EEC ‘Kurnell Dune Forest’, but that the area of EEC was smaller than that previously mapped and mostly confined to a small area near Chisolm Road. The study also located the threatened plant species Syzygium paniculatum on the site, as well as (possibly) Callistemon linearifolius (the Callistemon was most likely planted). The Syzygium was located in the area regarded as EEC near Chisolm Road.

Eight noxious weed species were recorded during the field surveys. Overall the ground and shrub layers were dominated by weed species. The recent tornado damage had provided conditions that promoted the proliferation of weeds. In particular, Asparagus aethiopicus,

AMBS Ecology & Heritage III Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Lantana camara, Bidens pilosa and Conyza sp. were prolific with dense growth across the ground and fallen timber.

Fauna habitat within the study area ranged from cleared areas in very poor condition to well- structured timbered areas; however, at the time of the survey, most of the wooded areas had been impacted by the tornado, and the canopy largely destroyed. Small patches remained intact and these areas contained shelter and resources for a variety of reasonably common native and introduced fauna. Potential hollow-bearing trees were not a common feature within the study area and only one would be likely to be impacted by the project. The study area did not contain habitat that would typically be utilised by shorebirds. The study area does contain a disused building that may provide roosting sites for microbats.

There were no creeks or rivers on the site and aquatic habitats were limited to small man- made wetlands in depressions in the southern section of the study area and some broader depressions north of the old AGL site that flooded after heavy rain, some along existing tracks and some in open areas that contained varying densities of Gahnia and Phragmites. Marginal potential habitat for the Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) and Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula) occurs, but neither species was recorded during surveys within the study area.

Two threatened species were recorded during the surveys, the Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) and the Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis). The Grey-headed Flying-fox was recorded flying over the study area and sequence files from an ultrasonic call detector placed in the treed part of the site were identified as the Eastern Bentwing-bat. No microbat calls were recorded on detectors placed near the disused building.

A number of recommendations to avoid or minimise impacts to flora and fauna were made. The key recommendations are, in summary: 1. the project should ensure that the areas containing the EEC and threatened plant species are protected and managed; 2. the project should minimise the construction footprint as much as possible and protect and enhance areas of retained vegetation around the footprint, including two man- made wetlands along Chisolm Road; 3. the project should revegetate existing disturbed and cleared areas outside the project boundary with appropriate native species (a list of candidate species is provided in the Appendices); 4. pre-clearance surveys for microbats in the disused building should be undertaken; and 5. all stormwater and runoff from the project should be appropriately managed and treated on-site to ensure that off-site flows do not exceed pre-development flows, that appropriate pollution reduction targets are achieved or exceeded and that appropriate measures to contain weed propagules are included.

Assessments of significance for relevant threatened species, populations and ecological communities were undertaken as part of this study. The assessments found that, provided the recommendations are implemented appropriately, the project would be unlikely to have significant impacts on threatened biota.

It should be noted that, in relation to the Green and Golden Bell Frog, the project would result in the removal of terrestrial habitat within 200 metres of suitable habitat in which the species has been recorded since 1995. Based on the EPBC Act policy statement 3.19 (DEWHA 2009), a referral under the EPBC Act should be considered by the proponent.

In relation to the draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2016 (CM SEPP), it was noted that part of the area has been mapped as “Proximity Area for Coastal

AMBS Ecology & Heritage IV Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Wetlands”, “Coastal Environment Area” and “Coastal Use Area”. The following information is provided in relation to Clause 12 and Clause 14 (d) of the draft CM SEPP. It is not within the scope of this assessment to consider Clause 14 (a), (b), (c), (e), (f) or (g), nor is it within the scope of this assessment to consider Clause 15 of the draft CM SEPP (which deals with the Coastal Use Area).

The proposed development site is currently separated from the “adjacent coastal wetland” by Captain Cook Drive. Runoff/stormwater from the site can enter the coastal wetland area via a drain under Captain Cook Drive. Thus, it is essential that the proposed development does not significantly impact on the quantity and quality of surface and groundwater flows to the adjacent coastal wetland. In relation to native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, part of the area within the development site that has been mapped as Coastal Environment Area currently contains cleared land, exotic vegetation and planted vegetation. The proposed development will remove some native vegetation, fauna and habitat; however, the vegetation in this part of the site has been damaged by the tornado and is heavily weed-infested. No hollow-bearing trees or other significant habitat features were found within this part of the site. The site does not contain undeveloped headlands or rock platforms.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage V Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Contents Executive Summary ...... III 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Project description ...... 1 1.3 Study area ...... 2 1.4 Legislative context ...... 2 1.5 Objectives and scope ...... 1 1.6 Authorship and acknowledgements ...... 1 2 Methodology ...... 1 2.1 Desktop study ...... 1 2.2 Field survey ...... 2 2.3 Data analysis ...... 3 3 Existing Environment ...... 4 3.1 Landscape context ...... 4 3.2 Land use ...... 4 3.3 Plant species ...... 8 3.4 Plant communities ...... 8 3.5 Terrestrial fauna habitat ...... 16 3.6 Aquatic habitat...... 16 3.7 Connectivity ...... 16 3.8 Fauna ...... 16 3.9 Threatened ecological communities ...... 18 3.10 Critical habitat ...... 21 3.11 Weeds ...... 21 3.12 Greenweb strategy ...... 21 4 Impact Assessment ...... 22 4.1 Injury and mortality ...... 22 4.2 Loss of vegetation/habitat ...... 22 4.3 Wildlife connectivity and habitat fragmentation ...... 23 4.4 Weeds ...... 23 4.5 Changed hydrology ...... 23 4.6 Noise, vibration and light ...... 23 4.7 Impact on relevant key threatening processes ...... 23 4.8 Coastal wetlands ...... 24 4.9 Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) ...... 24 5 Assessments of Significance ...... 25 5.1 Threatened plants and ecological communities ...... 25 5.2 Threatened fauna and endangered populations ...... 26 6 Managing Potential Impacts on Biodiversity ...... 27 6.1 Project design ...... 27 6.2 Environmental controls...... 27 6.3 Clearance procedures ...... 27 6.4 Greenweb Strategy ...... 28 7 Conclusion ...... 28 Bibliography ...... 31 Appendix A: Native plant species list ...... 33 Appendix B: Fauna recorded during field surveys ...... 36 Appendix C: Likelihood of occurrence of threatened flora ...... 37 Appendix D: Likelihood of occurrence of threatened fauna ...... 39

AMBS Ecology & Heritage VI Ecological Assessment of 186 - 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix E: Migratory species listed under EPBC Act known or predicted to occur within the locality ...... 42 Appendix F: Exotic species recorded in the study area ...... 44 Appendix G: List of flora species for landscaping ...... 46 Appendix H: TSC Act Assessments of Significance ...... 48 Appendix I: EPBC Act Assessments of Significance ...... 64 Appendix J: SMCMA map unit descriptions ...... 70

Tables Table 2.1 Climate data during the survey period...... 3 Table 3.1 Proportion of study area covered by treed vegetation, cleared land and hard surfaces ..... 5 Table 3.2 Summary of species counts from four flora survey plots...... 9 Table 3.3 Structural features in four flora survey plots ...... 10 Table 3.4 Noxious weeds located in the study area ...... 21

Figures Figure 1.1 Pre-Da Plan of the project ...... 1 Figure 1.2 Location of the study area ...... 1 Figure 3.1 Study area in 1943 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) ...... 5 Figure 3.2 Study area in 1955 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) ...... 6 Figure 3.3 Study area in 1984 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) ...... 6 Figure 3.4 Study area in 2001 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) ...... 7 Figure 3.5 Revegetation works in the western corner of the study area in 2010...... 7 Figure 3.6 Previous vegetation mapping of the study area ...... 14 Figure 3.7 AMBS vegetation map and location of survey plots ...... 15 Figure 3.8 Location of EEC vegetation, threatened flora species and hollow bearing trees ...... 20

AMBS Ecology & Heritage VII Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

1 Introduction 1.1 Background

AMBS Ecology & Heritage Pty Ltd (AMBS) was commissioned by Taleb Property Pty Ltd to undertake an ecological assessment in relation to a proposed development at 186-206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell (the study area). The proposed development would involve the construction of a distribution centre and warehouse (hereafter referred to as ‘the project’) for the Tempe Tyre and Wheels Centre. A ‘Pre-DA Plan’ was prepared by JS Architects Pty Ltd and a ‘Pre-Application Discussion’ (PAD) involving Sutherland Shire Council (Council) and the proponent was held on 9 November 2015. A letter providing a summary of the issues discussed at the PAD was prepared by Council. Comment 4 of Council’s letter indicated that an Ecological Assessment is required in relation to the project.

1.2 Project description

The project would involve the construction of warehouses, offices, car parking and truck parking, with driveways off Sir Joseph Banks Drive and Chisholm Road. Figure 1.1 shows the proposed footprint of the project.

Figure 1.1 Plan of the project as provided by JSA Studio

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 1 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

1.3 Study area

The study area is located on the Kurnell Peninsula in the Sutherland local government area (LGA) and consists of 2 allotments (DP 402485 and DP652964) located between Captain Cook Drive, Sir Joseph Banks Drive, Chisholm Road and the Caltex Oil Refinery (Figure 1.2). Part of the study area is developed and part is vegetated. It is zoned ‘IN3 Heavy Industrial’ by the Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 (SSLEP) (NSW Government 2016) and as ‘Landscaped areas in certain zones’ under clause 6.14 of the SSLEP (which requires 10% of the area to be landscaped). It is also mapped as ‘Environmentally Sensitive Land (Terrestrial Biodiversity)’ under clause 6.5 of the SSLEP and as ‘Greenweb Support’ under Council’s ‘Greenweb’ strategy 2007. Some of the vegetation on the study area has previously been mapped as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC).

1.4 Legislative context

The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) provides a legal framework to protect and manage nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities and heritage places. The legislation applies to anyone whose activity is likely to have a significant impact on ‘Matters of National Environmental Significance’ (MNES). MNES considered in this report include threatened species, populations and ecological communities, migratory species and wetlands of international importance.

The NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) provides for the conservation of threatened species, populations and ecological communities in NSW. If an environmental impact assessment is required for a proposed development or activity before development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW) can be granted, the assessment will need to consider whether there is likely to be a significant effect on any threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats.

The NSW Fisheries Management Act 1994 (FM Act) aims to conserve, develop and share the fishery resources of the State for the benefit of present and future generations and has provisions to protect fish habitat and conserve threatened species of fish and marine vegetation and their habitat.

The Sutherland Shire Local Environment Plan 2015 (SSLEP) provides local environmental planning provisions for land in Sutherland Shire in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Its aims include to protect and enhance the natural environment and scenic quality of the Sutherland Shire through the retention and rehabilitation of wildlife habitats, wildlife corridors, bushland, foreshores and waterways.

Greenweb is a Sutherland Shire Council policy to ensure the long-term conservation of the biodiversity of the Shire and surrounds. Controls for Greenweb areas are provided in the Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2006.

The Coastal Management Act 2016 provides the architecture for strategic management of coastal areas. The Act will not commence until public consultation on the draft Coastal Management State Environmental Planning Policy (CM SEPP) is completed.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 2 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 1.2 Location of the study area

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 1 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

1.5 Objectives and scope

The objectives of this study are to: a) assess the ecological attributes of the study area; b) assess the potential for impacts on flora and fauna (or their habitats) as a result of the project; c) recommend management and mitigation measures where appropriate; and d) prepare any relevant Assessments of Significance to determine whether the project will have a significant impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities (or their habitats).

Threatened species, populations and ecological communities are defined in this report as those listed on the schedules of the TSC Act, FM Act and/or the EPBC Act, and migratory species listed by the EPBC Act. The significance of likely impacts was determined by application of the “7 Part Test” (Section 5A of the EPA&A Act) in relation to the TSC Act, the EPBC “Significant Impact Guidelines” in relation to the EPBC Act, and also the EPBC significant impact guideline for the green and golden bell frog (Litoria aurea). Potential impacts on the Towra Point Nature Reserve have also been considered, as this area is listed as a ‘Ramsar’ site. Ramsar sites are wetlands of international importance and are listed as MNES by the EPBC Act. The FM Act has also been considered in relation to protected marine vegetation for activities that may indirectly impact the Towra Point Ramsar site.

Point 5 of Council’s letter indicates that, as the site is mapped as Greenweb Support, landscaping of the site should be with species indigenous to the Sutherland Shire. AMBS has therefore included advice regarding the most appropriate species for landscaping of the site in this report.

A report in relation to the above was prepared in April 2016. In December 2016, AMBS was requested to also consider the draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2016 (CM SEPP).

1.6 Authorship and acknowledgements

This report was prepared by Belinda Pellow, Mark Semeniuk and Chantelle Doyle. Fauna surveys were undertaken by Glenn Muir, Mark Semeniuk, Henry Cook and Chris Jackson. Belinda Pellow undertook the flora surveys, plant identification and vegetation mapping. Anabat sequence files were analysed by Narawan Williams. Glenn Muir reviewed the report. Information regarding the CM SEPP was added by Glenn Muir in December and January 2016. 2 Methodology 2.1 Desktop study

A desktop study was undertaken, which included:  a search of the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) Atlas of NSW Wildlife database for records of threatened fauna and flora within the locality (OEH 2016a; sourced 5 March 2016);  a search of the Commonwealth Department of the Environment (DotE) Protected Matters database for matters of national environmental significance within the locality (DotE 2016; sourced 5 March 2016);  consideration of the OEH Threatened Species Profiles Database for threatened fauna predicted to occur within the Pittwater (Part A) CMA sub-region;  an examination of vegetation maps of the area;

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 1 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

 a review of relevant literature regarding threatened flora and fauna in the vicinity, for example, the Sydney Metropolitan CMA’s management plan for the Green and Golden Bell Frog population at Kurnell;  an examination of aerial photographs of the study area and surrounds (current and past).

2.2 Field survey

2.2.1 Flora

Flora surveys were undertaken on 10 March 2016 and 22 March 2016. The study area was traversed to examine the vegetation and to record the native species present. A list of weeds was also compiled, in particular any weeds that are listed as noxious in the Sutherland LGA. In four locations 20 x 20 m plots were surveyed to aid in the interpretation of the vegetation communities present.

N.B. At the time the surveys were undertaken, much of the vegetation at the site had been affected by the tornado that passed through Kurnell in December 2015. Many trees had fallen and as a result it was difficult to traverse parts of the study area, and our ability to examine ground cover species was reduced in parts of the site by a dense cover of fallen trees and branches. Searches for threatened plants were made wherever it was possible to access the vegetation.

2.2.2 Fauna

Fauna surveys involved diurnal and nocturnal searches and included a range of techniques targeting a range of fauna groups, including:  spotlighting for nocturnal birds, mammals, reptiles and frogs (including tadpoles);  call playback for threatened frogs (Litoria aurea and Crinia tinnula);  collection and analysis of ultrasonic calls from microbats;  hand searches for reptiles and frogs;  observations and call identification of birds;  searches for tracks, scats and signs of animals; and  searches for tree hollows and other resources that might be used by threatened species.

Diurnal fauna surveys were undertaken on 10 March 2016 and 22 March 2016. Bird surveys were undertaken throughout the study area on both days within 3 hours of dawn. Reptile searches were undertaken on both days after temperatures had warmed. An assessment of the nature, extent and condition of any frog habitat present and active searches for sheltering or ‘basking’ frogs were undertaken. Potential shelter sites searched included rocks, logs and debris. A survey of potential habitat for other threatened fauna was also performed. Fauna habitat assessments were carried out by traversing the site, identifying habitat and resources that may be utilised by threatened fauna in the locality and examining their extent and condition. Opportunistic records of fauna encountered during the surveys were recorded.

Nocturnal fauna surveys were undertaken on four nights (29 February, 15 March, 16 March and 21 March 2016). Each survey was undertaken by two people and included spotlighting throughout the study area. Particular attention was focussed on locations that contained potential frog habitat. Two ultrasonic call recorders were deployed within the study area on 15 March 2016 and 16 March 2016, and three were deployed on 21 March 2016.

Targeted surveys for the Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) (GGBF) were undertaken on each night and involved a combination of spotlight surveys, call detection, call playback and tadpole searches. Searches were undertaken in man-made wetlands and areas with pooling water in the southern and northern sections of the study area. Much of the study area was

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 2 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell inundated with water during the survey on 21 March and consequently a large proportion of the study area was surveyed for frogs on that evening. Call playback for the GGBF was performed at a minimum of two locations within the study area on each night and call playback for the Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula) was performed on the night of 21 March and during the day on 22 March.

Conditions for frog activity were reasonable to good on most nights and excellent on the night of 21 March. Weather conditions prior to and during the survey period are summarised in Table 2.1. Nocturnal temperatures were generally warm (ranging from about 19.5 to 21oC on most nights), with rainfall recorded in the 24 hrs prior to surveys on 15, 16 and 21 March. Heavy rainfall was recorded during the latter dates, including 28.6 mm on 15 March 2016 and 40.8 mm on 21 March 2016. Table 2.1 Climate data during the survey period. Date Temperature min (oC) Temperature max (oC) Rainfall (mm) 29/02/2016 21.0 24.9 0.0 01/03/2016 21.3 30.2 0.0 02/03/2016 20.9 30.6 0.0 03/03/2016 22.8 31.0 0.0 04/03/2016 23.4 30.4 0.0 05/03/2016 20.0 30.0 0.0 06/03/2016 19.6 29.9 0.0 07/03/2016 20.4 30.4 0.0 08/03/2016 23.0 29.8 0.0 09/03/2016 22.0 31.7 0.0 10/03/2016 21.7 25.3 0.0 11/03/2016 22.6 29.5 0.0 12/03/2016 21.8 30.9 0.0 13/03/2016 23.2 29.6 0.0 14/03/2016 21.6 29.9 0.0 15/03/2016 19.5 23.9 28.6 16/03/2016 19.5 24.0 13.0 17/03/2016 19.5 27.0 9.4 18/03/2016 20.1 29.1 0.0 19/03/2016 15.2 21.6 1.0 20/03/2016 17.5 21.0 0.0 21/03/2016 15.4 20.3 40.8 22/03/2016 14.4 21.3 18.8 Note: Data obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology website (www.bom.gov.au) on 29 March 2016 from Sydney Airport weather station (Station Number 066037). oC = degrees Celsius, mm = millimetres.

2.3 Data analysis

Identification of the plant communities present in the study area was undertaken by examining the lists of native species recorded and comparing them to lists of positive diagnostic species for candidate communities as described in The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Area VIS_ID 3817 (SMCMA) (OEH, 2013). Positive diagnostic species are species that occur more frequently within one map unit than in other potential map units and are defined by using a statistical fidelity measure. Candidate communities are those that are shown in SMCMA maps to occur within or in the vicinity of the study area (OEH 2013). In addition, the final determinations for potential Threatened Ecological Communities (TEC) (OEH 2016b) were examined for features and species that would suggest that the vegetation of the study area was a listed ecological community.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 3 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3 Existing Environment 3.1 Landscape context

The study area is situated between Captain Cook Drive and the Caltex Oil Refinery on the Kurnell Peninsula. Much of the area to the east and south has been heavily developed, including the refinery and the Sydney Desalination Plant. Captain Cook Drive is adjacent to the north-western boundary of the site.

Towra Point Nature Reserve lies to the north-west of Captain Cook Drive. Towra Point is recognised as a Ramsar wetland i.e. it is listed under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, which is an inter-governmental treaty providing framework for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. Kamay Botany Bay National Park is located 1.4 km to the east of the study area, on the other side of the refinery (Figure 1.2).

Part of the study area was previously occupied by an AGL hydrocarbon extraction plant, now dismantled, and the remainder consists of vegetation. An easement for the Sydney Desalination Plant pipeline runs along the north-western boundary of the study area.

In 2015 a tornado passed across the Kurnell Peninsula and as a result the vegetation of the study area has suffered disturbance. At the time of the survey most standing trees had either been dislodged at the roots or snapped off from the trunk (Plate 1).

Soils of the study area are of deep Aeolian sand, with the colour and shell content suggesting that the sands are a geologically recent deposit. Soil mapping for the Kurnell Peninsula has the study area designated as ‘Disturbed Terrain’ that includes areas of imported soil and artificial fill with highly variable topography, material types and limitations (Chapman and Murphy 1989).

Plate 1 View of tornado damage to trees within the study area

3.2 Land use

The study area and surrounds have been used for heavy industrial purposes for many years. The adjacent Caltex Oil Refinery was built in the 1950’s. Aerial imagery (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) indicates that the study area comprised treeless vegetation in 1943 (Figure 3.1) and was

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 4 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell highly disturbed afterwards, with most vegetation removed in the 1950’s (Figure 3.2), and the treeless plain of 1943 being colonised by vegetation (including what appear to be trees) by the 1980’s (Figure 3.3). In the 1990’s a large proportion of the site was cleared for the construction of the AGL hydrocarbon extraction plant (Figure 3.4). The north-western boundary has been disturbed for the construction of a pipeline and an access track. Parts of the cleared areas have been replanted and a revegetation area in the western corner of the site can be seen in Figure 3.5. Table 3.1 shows the proportion of the study area covered by vegetation at the time of this study. Table 3.1 Proportion of study area covered by treed vegetation, cleared land and hard surfaces Classification Area (ha) Hard surface (associated with dismantled AGL plant) 1.73 Cleared land (exotic and some native ground cover 0.61 species present) Treed vegetation (mostly flattened by tornado) 3.46 TOTAL 5.80

Figure 3.1 Study area in 1943 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016)

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 5 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 3.2 Study area in 1955 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016)

Figure 3.3 Study area in 1984 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016)

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 6 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 3.4 Study area in 2001 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016)

Figure 3.5 Revegetation works in the western corner of the study area in 2010 (Sutherland Shire Council 2016)

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 7 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3.3 Plant species

Seven plant species listed as threatened by the TSC Act and/or the EPBC Act have been recorded within a 5-km radius of the study area (Appendix C). An assessment of the likelihood of these species occurring within the study area was made (Appendix C), based on an assessment of the environmental requirements of each species. Two of these threatened plant species were considered to have potential to occur within the study area; Pterostylis sp. ‘Botany Bay’ and Syzygium paniculatum.

Forty-seven native plant species were recorded during the survey either in vegetation assessment plots or during transects across the site. This is a relatively low number for an area of native vegetation of this size, and in this location. A list of the native plant species recorded is provided in Appendix A. Two of the plant species recorded are threatened species; Syzygium paniculatum and Callistemon linearifolius (Figure 3.8).

Syzygium paniculatum is listed as endangered by the TSC Act and vulnerable by the EPBC Act. The Atlas of NSW Wildlife has a number of records of this species on the Kurnell Peninsula (including an original collection in May 1770 by Banks and Solander). One individual of this species was recorded during the current survey, close to Chisholm Road (Figure 3.8). The plant was a mature tree approximately 8 m in height.

Callistemon linearifolius listed as vulnerable by the TSC Act. It has only been recorded once before on the Kurnell Peninsula, in 2014, at a site location reported as Caltex, Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell (OEH 2016a). During the field survey, approximately 10 individuals of this species were recorded in the western corner of the study area and it is highly likely that they were planted as part of landscaping in 2010. None of these individuals were flowering, so the identification was unconfirmed and based on vegetative characteristics only.

Pterostylis sp. ‘Botany Bay’ has been previously recorded in Kamay Botany Bay National Park, approximately 1.4 km to the east of the study area. It was not located during the field survey; however, the best time for surveys of this species is spring and it only appears above ground in spring and summer. It occurs on moist level sites with skeletal sandy soils derived from sandstone and is associated with coastal heath dominated by Melaleuca nodosa and Baeckea imbricata (OEH 2016b). The study area is composed of deep sand rather than skeletal sandy soils. There has been significant restructuring of the topography of the majority of the study area and it is considered unlikely that this species could have survived this type of disturbance. An assessment of significance has therefore not been prepared for this species.

3.4 Plant communities

Vegetation mapping of the Sydney Metropolitan Area (SMCMA) has previously been undertaken on a broad scale and includes the vegetated parts of the study area. The SMCMA mapping indicates two native vegetation communities within the study area; Coastal Sand Littoral Forest in the south-west corner and Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub in the northern corner (Figure 3.1). This is consistent with the vegetation mapping of the study area as provided by Council on the Shire Maps webpage (Sutherland Shire Council 2016). The SMCMA also mapped an area of Weeds and Exotics near Chisolm Road, but did not map the vegetation bordering the north- western edge of the study area, adjacent to Captain Cook Drive (Figure 3.1).

The vegetation mapping undertaken by AMBS for this study is based on our field survey results and aerial photograph interpretation and contains some differences to the vegetation mapping of the SMCMA. The key differences are the extent of the vegetation that is described as Coastal Sand Littoral Forest, the absence of Coastal Tea-tree Banksia Scrub and the extent of vegetation

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 8 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell that is considered to be part of the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC. The AMBS vegetation mapping is presented in Figure 3.2.

The field survey found two main patches of treed vegetation on the site, with both patches containing a canopy of mostly native trees dominated by Banksia integrifolia, two smaller patches of treed vegetation adjacent to Chisholm Road along the southern boundary, and an area of planted vegetation. Most of the site had a variable mid and ground layer of both native and exotic shrubs, herbs, sedges and grasses. All of the mid and ground layer vegetation was heavily weed infested. Most of the native vegetation present contained features and species that could be ascribed to more than one vegetation community. Confirmation of the treed vegetation was difficult to interpret due to both the history of the site and the recent tornado damage, the latter making inspection of the site, in particular the ground layer species, difficult.

Interpretation of aerial imagery suggests that in 1943 the study area was virtually treeless, except for a narrow strip adjacent to Chisholm Road that appears to have been a low sand dune extending along Chisholm Road (Figure 3.1). The study area appears to have been more directly linked to the tidal influences from Quibray Bay at this time. In the 1950’s the area was significantly altered by the construction of the Caltex Oil Refinery and the extension of Captain Cook Drive, the latter cutting the study area off from the influences of Quibray Bay (Figure 3.2). By 1984 (Figure 3.3) trees can be observed growing more extensively within the study area and by 2010 (Figure 3.6) have formed a dense canopy layer in the south western and northern sections.

The number of exotic and native species in each of the four 0.04 ha plots are shown in Table 3.2, together with the number of species described in the final determinations for two EECs and the number of positive species for two vegetation communities. The locations of the survey plots are shown on Figure 3.7. Table 3.2 Summary of species counts from four flora survey plots

Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4

Total number of exotic species 8 7 8 9 Total number of native species 14 7 11 15 #Number of species from Kurnell Dune Forest final determination 4 5 2 7 #Number of species Bangalay Sand Dune Forest final determination 2 2 2 3 &Number of positive species for Coastal Sand Littoral Forest 6 7 3 6 &Number of positive species for Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub 7 2 5 3 # total number of species that are listed as indicative for candidate Endangered Ecological Community in the NSW final determinations for each. & total number of species that are listed in the community description as positive for candidate communities (SMCMA, OEH 2013)

Plot 1 was located in the area previously mapped as Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub and contained the highest number of positive species for this community (7). It also contained the second-highest number of positive species (6) for the other community mapped in the study area, Coastal Sand Littoral Forest. N.B. Coastal Sand Littoral Forest and Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub share a number of species in common. Plots 2, 3 and 4 were located in the area previously mapped as Coastal Sand Littoral Forest and plots 2 and 4 contained the highest number of positive species for this community, but plot 3 did not. Plots 2 and 4 contained the highest number of species from the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC determination, but plot 3 did not.

The total native species count was low for every plot, although it exceeded the number of exotic species (however, exotic species dominated the shrub and ground layer cover at all plots). For

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 9 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell example, SMCMA (OEH 2013) plots within Coastal Sand Littoral Forest had an average number of native species of 23.1 ±4.4 per 0.04 ha plot.

A number of native climbers contributed to the native species counts (six species across all plots), but very few herbs and grasses were observed.

The structural features of the vegetation were generally similar between plots, with little or no canopy due to the tornado and a dense layer of weed species in the ground layer (Table 3.3). The overall % cover of weeds ranged from 45 – 80 and this was consistent across the whole study area. Prior to the tornado, dense stands of Banksia integrifolia appear to have made up most of the tree canopy present. Table 3.3 Structural features in four flora survey plots (* denotes introduced species) Plot % cover Dominant Species No: Small Weeds Small Canopy Mid Ground Canopy Mid Ground tree overall tree Leptospermum Lantana camara*, Banksia Plot laevigatum, Ehrharta erecta*, 0 0 25 35 70 integrifolia - 1 Lantana Chrysanthemoides (fallen)- camara* monilifera* Bidens pilosa*, Ehrharta erect*a, Banksia Olea europa*, Asparagus Plot 0 5 15 45 75 integrifolia - Lantana aethiopicus*, 2 (fallen) camara* Conyza sp.* Acetosa sagittata* Hydrocotyle Casuarina bonariensis*, Plot glauca, Acacia Acacia Asparagus 25 10 35 45 45 3 Banksia saligna* saligna* aethiopicus*, integrifolia Chloris gayana*, Ehrharta erecta* Cupaniopsis Eucalyptus anacardioides, Asparagus botryoides, Acacia Plot aethiopicus*, 20 0 35 80 80 Banksia - longifolia 4 Acetosella integrifolia sophorae, sagittata* (fallen) Maclura chinch

The treed vegetation in the study area was divided into the following four types based on aerial imagery interpretation and field survey results (Figure 3.2).

1. Vegetation consistent with the description of Coastal Sand Littoral Forest and loosely meeting the criteria in the final determination for Kurnell Dune Forest EEC (Plate 2). The vegetation has a layer of mesic species such as Glochidion ferdinandii, Cupaniopsis anacardioides under a canopy of Banksia integrifolia (most now flattened) and a few Eucalyptus botryoides. A number of vines also occur such as Maclura cochinchinensis, Geitonoplesium cymosum, Clematis aristata and Hibbertia scandens. The ground and shrub layers are dominated by weed species. The vegetation of this type is located close to what appears to have been an original sand deposit on which trees can be observed in the 1943 imagery.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 10 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Plate 2 Vegetation at survey plot 4 in remnant Kurnell Dune Forest EEC 2. Vegetation that is dominated by Banksia integrifolia and has a very low number of species that are listed in descriptions for either Coastal Sand Littoral Forest or Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub (Plate 3). It does not meet the criteria in the final determination for the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC. The majority of the native species occur in the canopy layer or as vines and the ground layer is dominated by weeds such as Lantana camara, Acetosella sagittata, Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata, and Asparagus asparagoides. The location of this vegetation type is on the highly disturbed flat to the north of vegetation Type 1. Changes to the landscape in and around this area, particularly with the extension of Captain Cook Drive and the construction of the Caltex Oil Refinery, have altered the topography and drainage patterns. In addition, a long sand bank constructed adjacent to Captain Cook Drive, possibly in 2010, retains water on the study area resulting in periodic waterlogging. The canopy layer reflects the varying drainage patterns with Banksia integrifolia domination in drier areas and Casuarina glauca in the wetter areas.

Plate 3 Vegetation at survey plot 2, not considered to be EEC

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 11 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3. Vegetation associated with a made-made wetland (Plate 4). The vegetation in this location is a composite of some Coastal Sand Littoral Forest species and other native species that prefer wet soils such as Melaleuca ericifolia, Gahnia clarkei, Baumea juncea, Phragmites australis and Blechnum indicum. Many weeds also occur such as Rubus fruticosus, Erythrina sykesii, Lantana camara and Gomphocarpus fruiticosus.

Plate 4 Vegetation in and around the man-made wetland 4. Planted vegetation (Plate 5). Vegetation in the western corner of the site that is primarily the result of revegetation undertaken in 2010. Figure 3.5 shows the cleared and newly planted corner. The vegetation is dominated by Casuarina glauca with a ground layer of Cynodon dactylon, Lomandra longifolia, and weed species such as Pennisetum clandestinum, Ehrharta erecta, Lantana camara and Bidens pilosa. Also included in this vegetation type is the landscaped sand bank that runs parallel to Captain Cook Drive. Historic aerial imagery (Sutherland Shire Council 2016) suggests that the bank was constructed and planted out at a similar time to the revegetation of the western corner.

Plate 5 Vegetation in the re-vegetated western corner

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 12 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

The remainder of the site is vegetation that has grown on some of the areas associated with the decommissioned AGL plant (plate 6) and some areas disturbed by the installation of a pipeline adjacent to Captain Cook Drive. Unpaved surfaces have been colonised primarily by exotic species.

Plate 6 Unpaved surfaces colonised primarily by exotic species.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 13 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 3.6 Previous vegetation mapping of the study area

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 14 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 3.7 AMBS vegetation map and location of survey plots

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 15 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3.5 Terrestrial fauna habitat

Fauna habitat within the study area ranged from cleared areas in very poor condition to well- structured timbered areas; however, at the time of the survey, most of the wooded areas had been impacted by the tornado, and the canopy largely destroyed. Small patches remained intact and these areas contained shelter and resources for a variety of native and introduced fauna, including Banksias that provide nectar for honeyeaters and lorikeets, and Acacias and Casuarinas were reasonably common throughout the site and provide shelter and foraging substrate for fauna such as small insectivorous birds (e.g. fairy-wrens, finches).

Potential hollow-bearing trees were not a common feature within the study area, but were recorded in the south-west of the site (Figure 3.8). Potential hollows appeared most likely in trees where branches had been broken, probably by the tornado, and exposed the trunk or limb.

Ground cover within the study area was highly variable, ranging from dense patches of planted Lomandra in the north-west of the study area to open sections in the central parts of the study area. Other areas were a mixture of native and exotic grasses. Ground debris was common throughout, some of which is likely to have been deposited or spread during the tornado, such as fibrous sheets and plastic, however natural fallen wood was also observed.

The study area did not contain habitat that would typically be utilised by shorebirds. There were no sandy beaches, sandbars, estuaries, tidal mudflats, saltmarsh etc. Ephemeral flooded areas after heavy rain may offer temporary foraging habitat for waterbirds capable of utilising non-tidal swamps, lakes, lagoons or ponds.

A dis-used building occurred in the centre of the study area. At the time of the survey the south- eastern corner of the roof was broken. The building provides a potential artificial roosting location for microbats.

3.6 Aquatic habitat

There were no creeks or rivers on the site and aquatic habitats were limited to small man-made wetlands in depressions in the southern section of the study area and some broader depressions north of the old AGL site that flooded after heavy rain, some along existing tracks and some in open areas that contained varying densities of Gahnia and Phragmites. During the first diurnal visit these areas were almost completely dry, with the exception of a small (20 x 20 cm) pool of water in one location in the hole created by an uprooted Melaleuca. During the second diurnal visit, much of the study area had flooded after heavy rain and some areas contained water up to 50 cm deep. Much of this water was exiting the study area via a drain in the north and the extensive flooding would be unlikely to persist for more than a few days. 3.7 Connectivity

Given that the study area is surrounded on three sides, and part of the fourth, by development, it’s value as a habitat corridor is limited.

3.8 Fauna

A list of fauna recorded during the field surveys is presented in Appendix B. In general, the species recorded are relatively common and widespread. A number of frog species were active during the surveys, particularly on the night of 21 March, with the Striped Marsh Frog (Limnodynastes peronii) and Emerald-spotted Tree Frog (Litoria peronii) being particularly common. No GGBFs were observed or heard calling during the surveys. Other than frogs, the most commonly observed nocturnal fauna were Brushtailed Possums and Black Rats. Five

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 16 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell microbat species were recorded by the ultrasonic detectors, mainly along a track through the treed part of the study area. Detectors placed near the disused building did not record any microbats.

Threatened fauna that have previous records or potential to occur within the locality are listed in Appendix D. The list includes one endangered population, the White-fronted Chat population in the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Area. An assessment of the potential for each species to occur within the study area was undertaken, and subsequently an assessment on the potential for the project to impact the threatened species.

Two threatened species were recorded during the surveys, the Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus) and the Eastern Benting-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis). The Grey- headed Flying-fox was recorded flying over the study area, and is listed as vulnerable under the TSC act and EPBC Act. Sequence files from Anabat units were identified as the Eastern Bentwing- bat, which is listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act.

The Grey-headed Flying-fox is a highly mobile species whose migration patterns are determined by the availability of flowering food resources (Eby 1991). The species is a canopy-feeding frugivore, blossom-eater and nectarivore, and occurs in rainforest, woodlands, paperbark swamps and Banksia woodlands (OEH 2016b). This species feeds in particular on the nectar and pollen of native trees, especially Eucalyptus, Melaleuca and Banksia, and fruits of rainforest trees and vines. Grey-headed Flying Foxes congregate in large colonies of up to 200,000 individuals in the summer season forming campsites (Churchill 1998). Campsites are critical for mating, birthing, rearing of young and as diurnal refuge from predators (Tidemann et al. 1999). Camp sites are generally located next to rivers or creeks, and occur in a range of vegetation communities including rainforest, wet sclerophyll forest, Melaleuca woodland, Casuarina forest or mangroves (Eby 2000). These sites have a dense canopy, providing them with the moist, humid microclimate they require.

Impacts to the Grey-headed Flying-fox as a result of the project are expected to be extremely limited. There was no evidence of the species using the vegetation as a campsite. There is potential for individuals to occasionally move through the study area and forage on flowering resources, but the areas likely to be utilised are relatively small, particularly since the majority of the Banksia trees were flattened by the tornado. Some of the vegetation that would be removed by the project consists of planted stands of wattles and casuarinas, which provide virtually no foraging resources for the species. The vegetation that would be removed is not considered a major resource for the Grey-headed Flying-fox in the locality and the species is not considered any further.

Several other threatened species have potential to utilise the study area on rare occasions, but impacts are unlikely to be more than negligible. Wide-ranging nectarivorous birds such as the Swift Parrot and Regent Honeyeater have potential to occur within the study area, but there is very limited foraging habitat available. Neither species would breed within the study area, and are only likely to occur on occasion. Eucalypt trees were uncommon, and while some Banksias occurred, most were impacted by the tornado. Nearby areas contain habitat that is likely to be more suitable and preferred by these species.

Wide-ranging water birds (e.g. Australasian Bittern, Blue-billed Duck, Australian Painted Snipe) have potential to utilise the study area on occasion, particularly after heavy rainfall when the study area is inundated. The area would not be suitable for breeding. Limited foraging habitat would be available for a short period of time until water drains away. More suitable habitat occurs nearby (e.g. Towra Point Nature Reserve).

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 17 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Similarly, raptors and owls have potential to occur on occasion for foraging, but would not use the study area for breeding. There are no tree hollows or mature trees large enough to accommodate breeding. Species with nearby records, including the Masked Owl and Eastern Grass Owl, are far more likely to occur within nearby reserves (i.e. Towra Point Nature Reserve, Kamay National Park) where more extensive habitat occurs.

A total of 66 migratory bird species listed under the EPBC Act are known or predicted to occur in the locality (Appendix E). These species include waterbirds, waders, raptors and other terrestrial species in broad family classifications. The habitats that would be lost within the project footprint provide potential foraging habitat for the listed raptor species, but is not considered to be an important area of habitat within the locality. Similarly, potential foraging habitat is minimal for the listed terrestrial migratory species and it is not considered important habitat within the locality. The habitats within the project footprint are not considered suitable breeding or over- wintering habitat for any of the listed wetland or wading bird species. These migratory species may forage within in these areas from time to time, but the resources that would be impacted by the project are not considered critical for these species, particularly given the other areas of habitat nearby (e.g. Towra Point Nature Reserve).

3.9 Threatened ecological communities

3.9.1 Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and the City of Rockdale

Kurnell Dune Forest is classified as an EEC by the TSC Act. It is not listed as an EEC by the EPBC Act. It is described in the final determination (NSW Scientific Committee 1999) as “a low open sclerophyll forest community with a distinct mesophyll element found on sand, often in association with areas of sclerophyll heath and scrub”.

The study area contains elements of the EEC Kurnell Dune Forest, such as a sand substrate, and some species listed as indicative in the determination. This is particularly so in the vegetation adjacent to Chisholm Road where historic aerial imagery shows a low sand dune with shrubs/trees occurring in 1943. In this location, 13 of the 32 native species listed in the determination as indicative of the community were recorded. In particular, a number of mesic species included in the indicative species list for the EEC occur in this location, such as Glochidion ferdinandii and Cupaniopsis anacardioides.

However, the indicative species list does not include Banksia integrifolia or Casuarina glauca, which are the dominant tree species across the whole study area. The tree species Eucalyptus botryoides, a dominant tree in this EEC, occurs only in a few locations in the south of the study area and where the sands appear to be less prone to inundation.

High levels of disturbance to topography and drainage across the study area have removed pre- European settlement vegetation. Although historic aerial imagery shows the study area as being treeless in 1943, currently this highly disturbed area contains a forest with some elements of Coastal Sand Littoral Forest as described by the SMCMA mapping (OEH 2013). The SMCMA mapping assigns Coastal Sand Littoral Forest to the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC, stating that “Coastal Sand Littoral Forest is a component of Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and the City of Rockdale, an Endangered Ecological Community under the NSW TSC Act.” (OEH 2013).

SMCMA (OEH 2013) mapping has assigned only vegetation in the southern portion of the study area to Coastal Sand Littoral Forest. In the north of the study area SMCMA (OEH 2013) mapping has assigned Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub as the vegetation community, but does not recognise this as a component of the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC. AMBS could not find any major difference between this area of vegetation, in terms of species composition or structural

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 18 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell features, and the majority of the vegetation to the south classified as the EEC, with the exception of that part of the study area vegetation adjacent to Chisholm Road.

The area mapped by AMBS as conforming to the EEC as a result of this assessment displayed the following features consistent with the final determination criteria:  is located on the Kurnell Peninsula  is located on the edge of a low, but highly disturbed sand dune  contains 13 species listed as indicative for the EEC including Eucalyptus botryoides, Glochidion ferdinandii, Cupaniopsis anacardioides, Elaeocarpus reticulatus, Maclura cochinchinensis and Breynia oblongifolia  Is a low open sclerophyll forest community with a mesophyll element.

The area excluded from the EEC displays the following features:  is growing on a highly disturbed, previously cleared sand flat;  does not currently display the structural features described in the final determination for the EEC, as it is a woodland dominated by Banksia integrifolia and Casuarina glauca without a canopy of Eucalyptus botryoides evident, and with an understorey dominated by weeds. Contains few of the species listed as indicative for the EEC.  includes a section of vegetation to the north mapped as a non-EEC conforming community (SMCMA OEH 2013).

A map showing the location of the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC is provided in Figure 3.8. An assessment of significance has been prepared for the TEC Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and the City of Rockdale.

3.9.2 Shorebird community occurring on the relict tidal delta sands at Taren Point

The TEC listed under the TSC Act, “Shorebird Community occurring on the relict tidal delta sands at Taren Point”, occurs close to the locality of the study area. The group of shorebirds that are associated with the ecological community include: Bar-tailed Godwit (Limosa lapponica), Red Knot (Calidris canutus), Great Knot (Calidris tenuirostris), Sharp-tailed Sandpiper (Calidris acuminata), Curlew Sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea), Red-necked Stint (Calidris ruficollis), Common Sandpiper (Actitis hypoleucos), Terek Sandpiper (Xenus cinereus), Latham’s Snipe (Gallinago hardwickii), Grey-tailed Tattler (Heteroscelus brevipes), Grey Plover (Pluvialis squatarola), Pacific Golden Plover (Pluvialis fulva), Common Greenshank (Tringa nebularia), Masked Lapwing (Vanellus miles), Marsh Sandpiper (Tringa stagnatilis), Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres), Pied Oystercatcher (Haematopus longirostris), Sooty Oystercatcher (Haematopus fulinginosus), Whimbrel (Numenius phaeopus), and Eastern Curlew (Numenius madagascariensis).

The TEC occurs on the relict marginal shoal of the Georges River between Taren Point and Shell Point in Botany Bay, although some species identified within this community can be found foraging and roosting at other locations within Botany Bay. The important habitat which is utilised by the TEC are intertidal mudflats and sand flats, as well as proximity of mangroves for roosting for a few species. The known extent of the habitat used by this TEC is approximately 6 km from the study area. Habitats for shorebirds within the study area are limited and do not include mudflats, sandflats or mangroves. The project is unlikely to impact on this threatened ecological community.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 19 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Figure 3.8 Location of EEC vegetation, threatened flora species and hollow bearing trees

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 20 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3.10 Critical habitat

No critical habitat has been listed for any species within the study area.

3.11 Weeds

During the field survey a total of 48 weed/exotic species were recorded, including eight noxious weeds (Table 3.2). A full list of weed/exotic species is provided in Appendix F. More weed/exotic species are likely to be present within the study area, above ground or as seed. The list in Appendix F is of the more common species and noxious weeds.

Overall the ground and shrub layers were dominated by weed species. The recent tornado damage had provided conditions that promoted the proliferation of weeds. In particular, Asparagus aethiopicus, Lantana camara, Bidens pilosa and Conyza sp. were prolific with dense growth across the ground and fallen timber. Table 3.4 Noxious weeds located in the study area

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name Class Poaceae Cortaderia selloana Pampas Grass 3 Asparagaceae Asparagus aethiopicus Asparagus Fern 4 Asparagaceae Asparagus asparagoides Bridal Creeper 4 Asparagaceae Asparagus plumosus Climbing Asparagus Fern 4 Asteraceae Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata Bitou Bush 4 Verbenaceae Lantana camara Lantana 4 Oleaceae Olea europaea subsp. cuspidata African Olive 4 Rosaceae Rubus fruticosus sp. agg. Blackberry complex 4

3.12 Greenweb strategy

The Greenweb Strategy aims to identify and manage significant vegetation and vegetated links throughout the Sutherland Shire, so as to ensure the long-term conservation of the biodiversity of the Shire and surrounds, while providing for recreational opportunities and improvements in water and air quality (Sutherland Shire Council 2007). The Greenweb network will enable animals and plants to move between habitat areas within the Shire, to find food, shelter and mates.

The study area is located within lands addressed by Council’s Greenweb Strategy and has been designated as a Greenweb Support area. Greenweb Support is assigned to areas containing ancillary habitat areas, secondary linkages between habitat, or lands that form a buffer between developments adjacent to key habitats and corridors.

Towra Point Nature Reserve to the west of the study area is designated Greenweb Core. Greenweb Core areas contain key habitat areas, key linkages and threatened species, or endangered ecological communities (usually greater than 3.5ha).

The Sutherland Shire Development Control Plan 2006 (SSDCP 2006) lists a number of controls relevant to Greenweb areas.

Controls for all Greenweb areas (Sutherland Shire Council 2015b) are:

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 21 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

1. Greenweb areas are to be landscaped with species indigenous to the Sutherland Shire. Trees and landscaping should provide in a form and configuration that maintains and enhances the core habitat and vegetated linkages. 2. Development should contribute to the maintenance of local habitat and connectivity between bushland remnants. 3. Bushfire asset protection zones must not be in identified areas of key habitat and corridors except in the case of development or redevelopment of single dwellings and secondary dwellings on existing lots or alterations and additions to existing dwellings. 4. Development should ensure that offsite impacts into adjoining bushland are minimised, such as weed invasion, increased runoff and stormwater pollutants.

Controls for Greenweb Support Areas (Sutherland Shire Council 2015b) are: 1. Development should through its siting design and landscape treatment maximise habitat values and minimise disruption to connectivity through: a. continuous canopy and understorey planting along one boundary, or b. retention and revegetation of remnant bushland elements 2. The required treatment will depend upon the scale of the bushland remnants linked by the land or the quality of the remnants to be retained on site. 4 Impact Assessment

4.1 Injury and mortality

The project has some potential to cause injury or mortality to fauna during construction, as a result of direct encounters with construction works or during clearing of vegetation/habitat for the project. Species that would be particularly at risk include:  Nocturnal species (e.g. frogs, microbats);  Species with low mobility;  Ground dwelling species (e.g. reptiles and frogs).

It is considered unlikely that wildlife mortality on Captain Cook Drive (i.e. road kill) would substantially increase as a result of the project, given the existing road has been in operation for a number of years.

Recommendations to avoid or minimise injury or mortality are to: 1. Undertake pre-clearance searches for roosting microbats inside the disused building prior to demolition, and place roosting animals (if any) into a suitably designed bat box installed in vegetation to be retained; 2. Undertake searches for other fauna during vegetation clearing activities; 3. Avoid clearing vegetation during colder months, if possible, when fauna such as bats, frogs and lizards are likely to be dormant or slow-moving.

4.2 Loss of vegetation/habitat

Direct impacts of the project would include the removal of vegetation and fauna habitat within the project footprint (although much of this has been damaged by the tornado).

Recommendations to minimise this impact are: 1. Minimise the extent of vegetation clearing during construction – if possible only vegetation within the project footprint should be cleared; 2. Prevent access and inadvertent impacts to the EEC and other vegetation along Chisolm Road - a physical barrier should be provided during construction;

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 22 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3. If genuine tree hollows are found during vegetation clearing, (i.e. hollows of a size and type likely to be utilised by fauna), replace these with nest boxes suitable for the relevant fauna in the vegetation to be retained; 4. Other retained areas should be vegetated with suitable native species and managed; 5. The placement of stormwater/runoff control features should be along the north-western side of the project if possible, and designed to include frog habitat features.

4.3 Wildlife connectivity and habitat fragmentation

Apart from the Towra Point Nature Reserve, located on the other side of Captain Cook Drive, the study area occurs in a relatively heavily developed landscape. Existing habitat connectivity to the east and south is poor, with the landscape dominated by industrial development. Captain Cook Drive is located along the north-western side of the study area, causing some fragmentation between the study area and habitats on the northern side of the road.

The main area of connectivity between Towra Point Nature Reserve and Kamay Bay National Park is located to the west of the study area. This would not be affected by the project.

4.4 Weeds

The study area is heavily infested with weeds and the evidence suggests that this was also the case prior to the tornado damage that has prompted weed proliferation. The project will remove areas of vegetation that are currently weed dominated and vegetation clearing should be managed to avoid facilitating the movement of weed propagules into the adjacent Ramsar wetland, including managing the disturbance during clearing and the disposal of the cleared vegetation.

Vegetation to be preserved within the study area should be protected from indirect impacts from the construction and operation of the project. This should include the provision of a buffer area between the EEC and the project area and ensuring that stringent erosion and runoff controls etc. are provided between the construction area and the retained vegetation.

The condition of the retained vegetation could be improved by implementing appropriate weed management.

4.5 Changed hydrology

Two man-made wetlands are located at the southern end of the study area. These wetlands and the associated hydrology should be maintained because a population of the threatened flora species Syzygium paniculatum is located adjacent to one of these wetlands, and they provide habitat for frogs.

4.6 Noise, vibration and light

The habitats within the study area are already subject to noise, vibration and light associated with the existing road and, to some extent, the adjacent refinery. We recommend that lighting at night is designed to avoid or minimise light spill into areas of retained vegetation and directed away from the Towra Point Nature Reserve.

4.7 Impact on relevant key threatening processes

The project may result in the following key threatening processes.

“Clearing of native vegetation. A portion of the study area will be cleared for the project and this could be considered to be a key threatening process. The vegetation to be cleared is subject to a

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 23 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell high level of weed infestations, changes to hydrology and was damaged by the 2015 tornado. The vegetation to be cleared does not in our opinion include the EEC.

“Infection by plant pathogens”. Disturbance as a result of land clearing and other development activities may facilitate the movement of plant pathogens into the remaining vegetation. The project is already located adjacent to a potential vector for plant pathogens, i.e. Captain Cook Drive. Nonetheless there is some potential for the project to facilitate the KTP’s “infection of native plants by Phytophthora cinnamomi“ and “introduction and establishment of exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic on plants of the family Myrtaceae”. Therefore, we recommend that retained vegetation within the study area, particularly in the vicinity of the EEC, should be fenced and signed during construction to prevent people or vehicles moving into these areas and anyone entering these areas should apply appropriate disease hygiene measures.

“Invasion by exotic species”. Removal of vegetation and disturbances such as water runoff/sedimentation from the development site may facilitate the following KTP’s:  Invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers;  Invasion of native plant communities by African Olive Olea europaea L. subsp. cuspidate;  Invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara;  Invasion of native plant communities by Chrysanthemoides monilifera (bitou bush and boneseed); and  Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses

Measures should be implemented to prevent the spread of weed into remnant vegetation by controlling runoff, maintain vehicle weed hygiene measures and restricting accidental incursions into the remnants during construction.

“Loss of hollow-bearing trees”. The potential tree hollows are likely to be small, caused by the breaking of branches and trunks from trees impacted by the tornado. It is likely these trees are outside the project footprint and will not be impacted. Regardless, their potential loss is unlikely to represent a significant impact on items of conservation significance. The installation of nest boxes to replace actual hollows removed could assist in mitigating these impacts.

4.8 Coastal wetlands

No coastal wetlands are located in the study area. Man-made wetlands used for road runoff are present at the southern end of the study area. It is recommended that these wetlands are retained and managed.

The Towra Point Nature Reserve, a Ramsar site, is located immediately adjacent to the study site on the opposite side of Captain Cook Drive. It is important that the project avoid indirect impacts to the Ramsar area, through ensuring that drainage and runoff from the project is dealt with appropriately to prevent pollutants and water-borne weed propagules escaping into the Ramsar area. AMBS has been advised that a stormwater management plan has been prepared that incorporates bioretention and on-site detention to ensure that off-site flows of water do not exceed pre-development flows and that pollution reduction targets are included.

4.9 Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management)

Under the draft CM SEPP, part of the area has been mapped as “Proximity Area for Coastal Wetlands”, “Coastal Environment Area” and “Coastal Use Area”. Clause 12 of the draft CM SEPP deals with the Proximity Area, Clause 14 with the Coastal Environment Area and Clause 15 with the Coastal Use Area. Information is provided below in regards to Clause 12 and Clause 14 part

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 24 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(d). It is not within the scope of this assessment to consider Clause 14 parts (a), (b), (c), (e), (f) or (g), nor is it within the scope of this assessment to consider Clause 15 of the draft CM SEPP.

In relation to the Proximity Area (Clause 12), the consent authority must be satisfied that the proposed development will not significantly impact on: (a) the biophysical, hydrological or ecological integrity of the adjacent coastal wetland or littoral rainforest, or (b) the quantity and quality of surface and ground water flows to the adjacent coastal wetland or littoral rainforest if the development is on land within the catchment of the coastal wetland or littoral rainforest.”

Under the draft CM SEPP the proposed development site has been mapped as within the “Proximity Area for Coastal Wetlands”; however, the site is currently separated from the “adjacent coastal wetland” by Captain Cook Drive. Runoff from the site can currently enter the coastal wetland area via a drain under Captain Cook Drive. Thus, it is essential that the proposed development does not significantly impact on the quantity and quality of surface and groundwater flows to the adjacent coastal wetland.

AMBS has been advised that the proposed development does not involve significant excavation, will not require the extraction of groundwater, and includes significant bioretention which will enable the site to continue recharging the local groundwater system. AMBS has been further advised that a stormwater management plan that incorporates bioretention and on-site detention to ensure that off-site flows of water do not exceed pre-development flows and that pollution reduction targets are included.

In relation to the Coastal Environment Area (Clause 14), the consent authority must be satisfied that the proposed development: (d) is not likely to have an adverse impact on native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms”.

A proportion of the development site on the north-western side falls within the area mapped under the draft CM SEPP as being within the Coastal Environment Area. Part of this area currently contains cleared land, exotic vegetation and planted vegetation. The proposed development would remove native vegetation, fauna and habitat from parts of the area; however, the vegetation that will be removed has been damaged by the tornado and is heavily weed-infested. No hollow-bearing trees or other significant habitat features were found within this part of the area. As with the Proximity Area, the area within the site that has been mapped as part of the Coastal Environment Area is located on the other side of Captain Cook Drive from the “adjacent coastal wetland area”.

The site does not contain undeveloped headlands or rock platforms. 5 Assessments of Significance

Assessments of significance for flora and fauna listed under the NSW TSC Act or the Commonwealth EPBC Act are provided in Appendices H and I. A summary of the outcomes of these assessments is provided below.

5.1 Threatened plants and ecological communities

Two threatened plant species (Callistemon linearifolius and Syzygium paniculatum) and one threatened ecological community (Kurnell Dune Forest EEC) were identified within the study area. Each was assessed for potential impacts from the project via assessments of significance

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 25 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell under the TSC Act and one, Syzygium paniculatum was also assessed under the EPBC Act. No significant impact by the project on these listed entities is expected provided the following measures are implemented.

During construction:  A minimum 15 m buffer zone of non-EEC vegetation is preserved to the immediate north of the mapped area of Kurnell Dune Forest and habitat for Syzygium paniculatum;  Measures to control the movement of weed propagules and sediments into the remnant vegetation during construction are implemented;  Measures to prevent the introduction of the disease Myrtle Rust into the EEC are implemented;  Building debris from the tornado is removed from the EEC and buffer vegetation.

After construction  All remnant vegetation is managed to control weeds and reduce impact of weeds on the EEC and threatened species, and to control subsequent weed invasion as a result of the reduction in overall vegetation from clearing require for the project – edge effect.  Planted native vegetation is maintained and enhanced along the north-western boundary of the study area.

5.2 Threatened fauna and endangered populations

Two threatened species of frog, five microbats and one endangered population were included for assessment under the TSC Act and/or EPBC Act significance assessments.

One microbat, the Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis), was recorded during the surveys from Anabat detector units. Four other species of microbat, Little Bentwing- bat (Miniopterus australis), Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), Southern Myotis (Myotis macropus) and the Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii), are known or predicted to occur within the locality. All of these species are listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act. The assessments of significance concluded the project is unlikely to significantly impact these species given:  no maternity caves occur within the study area and none would be impacted;  only one potential hollow-bearing tree was observed within the project footprint;  a relatively small area (approximately 5.8 ha) of potential foraging habitat would be removed, some of which is open space; and  the habitat that would be removed is disturbed and fragmented.

The Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula) was not recorded during the surveys, but are conservatively included for an assessment of significance given marginal potential habitat was observed. The species is listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act. The assessment of significance concluded the project is unlikely to significantly impact the Wallum Froglet given:  only marginal potential habitat occurs within the man-made wetlands;  the marginal potential habitat south of the Chisolm Road driveway is highly disturbed, and fragmented;  two man-made wetlands will be retained.

The Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) (GGBF) was not recorded during the surveys. The species is listed as endangered under the TSC Act and vulnerable under the EPBC Act. Assessments of significance under both acts concluded the project is unlikely to significantly impact the GGBF given:  the species was not recorded despite considerable survey effort in good conditions;  it is unlikely the species regularly occurs within the study area;

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 26 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

 the main impact would be the loss of approximately 0.6 ha of grassland that may be occasionally used by individuals;  it is unlikely that a breeding population occurs; and  during dry conditions the two man-made wetlands are likely to be more useful for the species, and these areas would not be directly impacted by the project.

It should be noted, however, that the project would result in the removal of terrestrial habitat within 200 metres of suitable habitat in which the GGBF has been recorded since 1995. Based on the EPBC Act policy statement 3.19 (DEWHA 2009), a referral under the EPBC Act should be considered.

One endangered population occurs within the locality, White-fronted Chat population in the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Area. This population is known to occur in Towra Point Nature Reserve, to the north-west and outside of the study area. Known habitat for this population is predominantly saltmarsh, which does not occur within the study area. The only potential impact to the populations would be the loss of less than 1 ha of occasional foraging habitat. The project is not likely to result in a significant impact on the endangered population. 6 Managing Potential Impacts on Biodiversity

6.1 Project design

Impacts to biodiversity can be avoided or minimised to some extent by designing the project around important areas for flora and fauna. In this case the most important areas include:  Areas identified as the Kurnell Dune Forest EEC;  Locations with the threatened plants, Syzygium paniculatum and Callistemon linearifolius;  Locations with potential hollow-bearing trees; and  Two areas identified as man-made wetlands.

The project footprint should therefore be designed to avoid minimise vegetation clearing and construction work, including avoiding stockpiling, near these areas.

To ensure that trees to be retained remain stable in the long term, the development plan needs to incorporate the provision of adequate space around the root zone of trees. Excavation in the root zone of trees could threaten their survival and pose hazards to the persons accessing the area in their vicinity.

6.2 Environmental controls

The project should be designed such that indirect impacts to Towra Point Nature Reserve are avoided during and after project construction. Construction controls should include best practice pollution, sediment and erosion controls and the project should be designed such that surface water runoff is appropriately treated prior to entry to any waterways. If detention basins are required in the design, they should be created to provide suitable habitat for the GGBF, considering factors such as waterbody depth and aquatic vegetation plantings in appropriate densities.

6.3 Clearance procedures

Pre-clearance surveys for microbats should be undertaken inside the old building, prior to demolition.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 27 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

An ecologist should be present during vegetation clearance to rescue fauna disturbed by the clearance activities.

6.4 Greenweb Strategy

The study area is identified as Greenweb Support in Councils Greenweb strategy. As well, on land zoned IN3, landscaped areas of 10% of the site are required under the SSLEPP 2015 Landscape Area Map - Sheet LSA_010 (NSW Government 2016). Thus, the vegetation to be retained and managed along Chisholm Road (including the EEC and buffer) plus the vegetation between the footprint and Captain Cook Drive should represent, as a minimum, at least 10% of the study area.

We recommend that the project utilise the land around the project footprint for the protection and enhancement of native vegetation. This could be achieved by ensuring that impacts on retained native vegetation (particularly the EEC and man-made wetlands) are avoided, by managing weeds and other existing and potential impacts in these areas, and by revegetating currently cleared areas with appropriate native species.

In line with Councils Greenweb strategy landscaping, as required, should be undertaken using locally indigenous species. Appendix G provides a list of species suitable for use in landscaping that are available from the Council Nursery and that are known to occur in the vegetation community identified as occurring in the study area (OEH 2013, NSW Scientific Committee 1999). N.B. Council’s native plant selector does not cover this address.

Timber retained from the vegetation clearing could be distributed at suitable densities to provide shelter habitat for reptiles and frogs. 7 Conclusion

The study area contains an area of the Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) “Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and City of Rockdale”. However, the area covered by this EEC is in our opinion smaller than that previously mapped and is located near Chisolm Road, outside of the project footprint that was provided to AMBS.

The study area contains the threatened plant species Syzygium paniculatum, which was located in the area of the EEC, and several individuals that may be Callistemon linearifolius, which were mostly likely planted and were located in the western corner of the study area. The plants are located outside of the project footprint that was provided to AMBS.

The remainder of the study area has largely either been cleared for the AGL facility or contains vegetation that has grown on areas that appear to have been cleared many years ago. This vegetation is heavily weed infested and has been damaged by the tornado.

Assessments of significance were undertaken for the threatened plant species and the EEC. The conclusion of the assessments was that the project would be unlikely to have a significant impact on the threatened flora provided that the project can ensure there will be no direct impacts and that potential indirect impacts are avoided or minimised. The following measures are recommended in this regard: 1. The project will need to incorporate a buffer zone of native vegetation between the construction footprint and the EEC. A minimum of 15 m is recommended. 2. The project will need to ensure that inadvertent direct impacts to the EEC and threatened species’ habitat do not occur, by providing a physical barrier between the construction area and the retained vegetation.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 28 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3. The project will need to incorporate stringent erosion, pollution and sediment control measures to avoid indirect impacts on retained vegetation. 4. The project will need to include weed control in retained vegetation to control the impacts of the movement of weed propagules into the remnant vegetation during and post construction. 5. The project should minimise the potential for pathogens, especially Myrtle Rust, to be introduced to the EEC and other retained vegetation by preventing access to these areas. When access is required (for example, for cleaning up tornado debris, or weed control), hygiene measures should be implemented.

The study area contains a range of potential habitats for frogs; however, no threatened frog species were detected despite four nights of surveys in relatively good conditions. The study area also contains a disused building that may contain potential roost habitat for microbats, but could not be accessed for WH&S reasons. No microbat calls were recorded on detectors placed near the building. Some potential tree hollows were observed in the vegetation near Chisolm Road.

Seven threatened species and one endangered population were assessed for significant impact in accordance with the TSC Act and/or EPBC Act. These were the Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea), Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula), Eastern Benting-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis), Little Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis), Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), Southern Myotis (Myotis macropus), Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii) and the White-fronted Chat population in the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Area. The assessments concluded the project is unlikely to significantly impact these species and endangered population given that:  for most of these fauna, the vegetation to be removed within the study area represents a relatively small area of disturbed and fragmented habitat in comparison with the nearby Towra Point Nature Reserve and Kamay Botany Bay National Park;  no maternity caves occur and only one hollow-bearing tree was observed in the area to be impacted;  only marginal potential habitat for the threatened frogs occurs, including within two man-made wetlands that will be retained;  no threatened frogs were recorded despite repeated surveys; and  the White-fronted Chat population is only likely to utilise the study area for occasional foraging (primary saltmarsh habitat does not occur within the study area).

N.B. In relation to the Green and Golden Bell Frog, the project would result in the removal of terrestrial habitat within 200 metres of suitable habitat in which the species has been recorded since 1995. Based on the EPBC Act policy statement 3.19 (DEWHA 2009), a referral under the EPBC Act should be considered by the development proponent.

The following measures are recommended to minimise impacts on fauna: 1. a survey of the disused building for microbats prior to demolition (with any individuals placed in a bat box, if present); 2. ecologist present during vegetation clearance; 3. installation of nest boxes to replace tree hollows if any are removed during vegetation clearance; 4. protection and enhancement of two man-made wetlands near Chisolm Road; 5. re-use of logs from the vegetation clearance in landscaping; 6. incorporate frog habitat features into stormwater detention basins.

The Towra Point Nature Reserve is located near the project, on the other side of Captain Cook Drive. In order to avoid indirect impacts on the reserve, the following should be implemented:

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 29 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

1. all stormwater and runoff from the project should be appropriately managed and treated on-site to ensure that off-site flows do not exceed pre-development flows, that appropriate pollution reduction targets are achieved or exceeded and that appropriate measures to contain weed propagules are included; 2. vegetation clearing should minimise the potential for weed propagules to disperse to the reserve.

The study area is zoned IN3 heavy industry. Under clause 6.14 of SSLEP 2015 the study area is required to be 10% landscaped. The study area is also classified as Greenweb Support by Council’s Greenweb Strategy. In line with this policy any landscaping required should use native species indigenous to the Sutherland Shire. Our recommendation in this regard are: 1. the project should retain and manage as much native vegetation as possible around the project footprint, and in particular the EEC, the buffer zone to the EEC, and two man- made wetlands along Chisolm Road; 2. the project should revegetate any existing cleared or disturbed areas with native vegetation, using the species provided in Appendix G.

The study area is mapped as Environmentally Sensitive Land – Terrestrial Biodiversity under clause 6.5 of SSLEP 2015, which states that development consent must not be granted for development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact to native flora and fauna. Assessments of significance have been undertaken in relation to threatened entities listed under the TSC Act or EPBC Act that may be affected by the project. These assessments found that the project would be unlikely to result in a significant impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities, provided that the recommendations described herein are implemented.

The study area is mapped as part of the “Proximity Area for Coastal Wetlands” and “Coastal Environment Area” under the draft CM SEPP. However, the proposed development site is currently separated from the “adjacent coastal wetland” by Captain Cook Drive. Runoff from the site can enter the coastal wetland area via a drain under Captain Cook Drive and it is essential that the proposed development does not significantly impact on the quantity and quality of surface and groundwater flows to the adjacent coastal wetland. In relation to Clause 14 (d) of the draft CM SEPP, part of the area within the development site that has been mapped as Coastal Environment Area currently contains cleared land, exotic vegetation and planted vegetation. The native vegetation that will be removed from this part of the site has been damaged by the tornado and is heavily weed-infested. No hollow-bearing trees or other significant habitat features were found within this part of the area. The site does not contain undeveloped headlands or rock platforms.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 30 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Bibliography

Benson, D & McDougall, L (1998). ‘Ecology of Sydney plant species part 6: Dicotyledon family Myrtaceae’, Cunninghamia, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 808-987. Chapman G.A., Murphy C.L (1989). Soil Landscapes of the Sydney 1:100,000 Sheet. Soil Conservation Service of NSW, Sydney. Churchill, S. (1998). Australian Bats. New Holland Publishers, Sydney. DEC (2004). Threatened Biodiversity Survey and Assessment: Guidelines for Developments and Activities (working draft). New South Wales Department of Environment and Conservation, Hurstville, NSW. DECC (2007). Management Plan for the Green and Golden Bell Frog Key Population at Kurnell. DEWHA (2009). Significant impact guidelines for the vulnerable green and golden bell frog (Litoria aurea). EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.19, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. DEWHA (2010). Survey Guidelines for Australia’s Threatened Frogs. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. DotE (2016) EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool. Commonwealth Department of the, Environment, website: http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/pmst/index.html. [Accessed March 2016]. Agriculture. http://weeds.dpi.nsw.gov.au/ . [Accessed March 2016]. DPI (2016a) NSW Weedwise. Noxious weeds website, NSW Department of Primary Industry, Agriculture. http://weeds.dpi.nsw.gov.au/ . [Accessed March 2016]. DPI (2016b) Biosecurity Myrtle Rust. Department of Primary Industries [Online] Available from http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/biosecurity/plant/myrtle-rust Eby, P. (1991). Seasonal movements of Grey-headed Flying Foxes, Pteropus poliocephalus, from two maternity camps in northern NSW. Wildlife Research 18: 547-559. Eby, P. (2000). Background biology, ecology and public health issues. Pp 9-11 in Richards, G. (Ed.), Proceedings of a workshop to assess the status of the Grey-headed Flying Fox in New South Wales. University of Sydney Press, Sydney. Giblin F & Carnegie AJ (2014). Puccinia psidii (Myrtle Rust) – Australian host list. Version current at 24 Sept. 2014. http://www.anpc.asn.au/resources/Myrtle_Rust.html Lindsay, K.J., Allen, A.P. and Major, R.E. (2015). Can spatial and temporal food variability explain the winter foraging movements of a threatened saltmarsh insectivore? Austral Ecology, 40: 160–169. NPWS (2002). Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines Epacris purpurascens var. purpurascens NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville NSW NSW Government (2016). Sutherland Shire Local Environmental Plan 2015 Website: http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/. [Accessed March 2016]. NSW Scientific Committee (1999). Final determination – Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and the City of Rockdale. NSW Scientific Committee (2011). Syzygium paniculatum - endangered species listing. Final determination. Office of Environment and Heritage. [Online].http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/syzygiumpaniculatumFD.ht m: [Accessed: 29-March-2016].

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 31 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

OEH (2012). National Recovery Plan for the Magenta Lilly Pilly, Office of Environment and Heritage OEH (2013). The Native Vegetation of the Sydney Metropolitan Area. Volume 2: Technical Report. Version 2.0. Office of Environment and Heritage, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Sydney. OEH (2016a). NSW Wildlife Atlas Search. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage BioNet Website: http://www.bionet.nsw.gov.au/ [Accessed March 2016]. OEH (2016b). NSW Threatened Species Profiles Database. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. Website: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/ [Accessed March 2016]. OEH (2016c). NSW Threatened Species Conservation Projects NSW Office of Environment and Heritage. Website: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/savingourspeciesapp [Accessed March 2016]. PlantNET (2016). The Plant Information Network System of The Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust Version 2.0. Website: http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/ Sutherland Shire Council (2007). Greenweb Sutherland Shire Environmental Specification. Sutherland Shire Council (2015a). Pre-Application Discussion (letter to Lomford Projects reference PAD 15/0125). Sutherland Shire Council (2015b). Chapter 38 - Natural Resource Management. Draft Development Control Plan 2015. Sutherland Shire Council (2016). Shire Maps. Website: http://www.sutherlandshire.nsw.gov.au/Development/Shire-Maps [Accessed March 2016]. Tidemann, C.R., Eby, P., Parry-Jones, K.A & Vardon, M. (1999). Grey Headed Flying Fox. In: Duncan, A., Baker, G.B and Montgomery, N. (eds), The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Environment Australia, Canberra. Thurlby K, Sherwin W, Rossetto M, and Wilson P (2000). Final Report on the Australian Flora Foundation funded project Reproductive biology of the Magenta Lilly Pilly (Syzygium paniculatum) and its implications for conservation. Australian Flora Foundation Website http://www.aff.org.au/AFF3_Wilson_Syzgium_final_summary.htm [Accessed March 2016] Veolia 2015. Conservation Area Management Plan for Sydney’s Desalination Plant.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 32 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix A: Native plant species list

Survey Plots Legal Status Legal Status Anecdotal (Braun-Blanquette cover score) Family Scientific Name Common Name NSW TSC Act EPBC Act Sighting Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4

Apocynaceae Parsonsia straminea Common Silkpod x 2

Blechnaceae Blechnum indicum Swamp Water Fern x

Casuarinaceae Allocasuarina littoralis Black She-Oak x 2

Casuarinaceae Casuarina glauca Swamp Oak x 4b

Cyperaceae Baumea juncea x

Cyperaceae Cladium procerum x

Cyperaceae Ficinia nodosa Knobby Club-rush x 1 3

Cyperaceae Gahnia clarkei Tall Saw-sedge x 1

Dennstaedtiaceae Pteridium esculentum Bracken x

Dilleniaceae Hibbertia scandens Climbing Guinea Flower x 1

Elaeocarpaceae Elaeocarpus reticulatus Blueberry Ash x

Ericaceae Leucopogon parviflorus Coastal Beard-heath x 2

Euphorbiaceae Homalanthus populifolius x 2 2 3

Bleeding Heart, Native Euphorbiaceae Omalanthus populifolius x 4a Poplar

Fabaceae Acacia longifolia subsp. longifolia Sydney Golden Wattle x

Fabaceae Acacia longifolia subsp. sophorae Coastal Wattle x 1 4b

Geraniaceae Pelargonium australe Native Storksbill x 1

Lomandraceae Lomandra longifolia Spiny-headed Mat-rush x

Luzuriagaceae Geitonoplesium cymosum Scrambling Lily x 2 2 4a

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 33 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Survey Plots Legal Status Legal Status Anecdotal (Braun-Blanquette cover score) Family Scientific Name Common Name NSW TSC Act EPBC Act Sighting Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4

Malvaceae Lagunaria patersonia Norfolk Island Hibiscus x

Menispermaceae Stephania japonica Snake vine x 2

Moraceae Maclura cochinchinensis Cockspur Thorn x 5

Myrtaceae Angophora costata Sydney Red Gum x

Myrtaceae Callistemon linearifolius Netted Bottle Brush Vulnerable n/a x

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus botryoides Bangalay x 5

Myrtaceae Leptospermum laevigatum Coast Teatree x 2

Myrtaceae Melaleuca ericifolia Swamp Paperbark x

Myrtaceae Melaleuca nodosa x 1

Myrtaceae Melaleuca quinquenervia Broad-leaved Paperbark x

Myrtaceae Syzygium paniculatum Magenta Lilly Pilly Endangered Vulnerable x

Phormiaceae Dianella caerulea var. producta x 1 1 1 2

Phyllanthaceae Breynia oblongifolia Coffee Bush x 1

Glochidion ferdinandi var. Phyllanthaceae Cheese Tree x 1 3 ferdinandi Pittosporaceae Citriobatus pauciflorus Orange Thorn x 1

Pittosporaceae Pittosporum undulatum Sweet Pittosporum x 2

Poaceae Cynodon dactylon Common Couch x 3 3 2 3

Poaceae Dichelachne crinita Longhair Plumegrass x

Poaceae Imperata cylindrica Blady Grass x 2 4b 3

Poaceae Oplismenus aemulus x 1 2

Poaceae Phragmites australis Common Reed x 2 2

Poaceae Themeda triandra x

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 34 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Survey Plots Legal Status Legal Status Anecdotal (Braun-Blanquette cover score) Family Scientific Name Common Name NSW TSC Act EPBC Act Sighting Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4

Proteaceae Banksia integrifolia Coast Banksia x 6 3 5 4b

Ranunculaceae Clematis aristata Old Man's Beard x 1 1

Sapindaceae Cupaniopsis anacardioides Tuckeroo x 1 2 1 4a

Smilacaceae Smilax glyciphylla Sweet Sarsaparilla x

Solanaceae Solanum chenopodinum x 2

Vitaceae Cayratia clematidea Native Grape x

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 35 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix B: Fauna recorded during field surveys

Class Common Name Scientific Name Amphibia Brown-striped Frog Limnodynastes peronii Common Eastern Froglet Crinia signifera Spotted Grass Frog * Limnodynastes tasmaniensis Peron's Tree Frog Litoria peronii Bleating Tree Frog Litoria dentata Reptilia Dark-flecked Garden Sunskink Lampropholis delicata Eastern Water-skink Eulamprus quoyii Eastern Blue-tongue Tiliqua scincoides Three-toed Skink Saiphos equalis Pale-flecked Garden Sunskink Lampropholis guichenoti Aves Australian White Ibis Threskiornis molucca White-faced Heron Egretta novaehollandiae Masked Lapwing Vanellus miles Spotted Turtle-Dove # Streptopelia chinensis Rainbow Lorikeet Trichoglossus haematodus Laughing Kookaburra Dacelo novaeguineae Superb Fairy-wren Malurus cyaneus Spotted Pardalote Pardalotus punctatus Yellow-rumped Thornbill Acanthiza chrysorrhoa White-browed Scrubwren Sericornis frontalis Red Wattlebird Anthochaera carunculata New Holland Honeyeater Phylidonyris novaehollandiae Willie Wagtail Rhipidura leucophrys Pied Currawong Strepera graculina Australian Magpie Cracticus tibicen Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike Coracina novaehollandiae Australasian Figbird Sphecotheres vieilloti Australian Raven Corvus coronoides Welcome Swallow Hirundo neoxena Red-whiskered Bulbul # Pycnonotus jocosus Silvereye Zosterops lateralis Mistletoebird Dicaeum hirundinaceum Red-browed Finch Neochmia temporalis Mammalia Common Brushtail Possum Trichosurus vulpecula Grey-headed Flying-fox (V) Pteropus poliocephalus Black Rat # Rattus rattus House Mouse # Mus musculus Cat # Felis catus Gould’s Wattled Bat Chalinolobus gouldii Chocolate Wattled Bat Chalinolobus morio Eastern Bentwing-bat (V) Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis Gould’s or Lesser Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus gouldi or geoffroyi Little Forest Bat Vespadelus vulturnus Note: # indicates introduced species; * indicates species only recorded outside study area. (V) indicates species is listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act and EPBC Act.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 36 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix C: Likelihood of occurrence of threatened flora

Potential Recommended Common TSC EPBC Records from occurrence Scientific Name Habitat Distribution survey period Name Act Act locality (5km) within study (OEH 2016) area Unlikely - Very limited; mainly in near-coastal Scrub and open eucalypt woodland or vegetation areas from the northern shores of forest, usually in sandy soil on creek community Acacia terminalis subsp. Sunshine Sydney Harbour south to Botany E E banks, hill slopes or in shallow soil in All year Y and soils are terminalis Wattle Bay. Most records from the Port rock crevices and sandstone not those Jackson area and the eastern platforms on cliffs (PlantNET 2016). preferred by suburbs of Sydney (OEH 2016). this species. For the Sydney area, recent records Unlikely – the are limited to the Hornsby Plateau Grows in dry sclerophyll forest on vegetation, area near the Hawkesbury River. the coast and adjacent ranges, chiefly topography The species was more widespread Netted Bottle from Georges R. to the Hawkesbury and soils of Callistemon linearifolius V - in the past, and there are currently All year Y Brush R. the study only 5-6 populations remaining NSW subdivisions: NC, CC (PlantNET area are not from the 22 populations historically 2016) suitable to recorded in the Sydney area (OEH this species. 2016) Unlikely – the vegetation, Found in a range of habitat types, Recorded from Gosford in the topography including sclerophyll forest, scrubs north, to Narrabeen in the east, Epacris purpurascens and soils of V - and swamps on sandstone, most of Silverdale in the west and Avon All year Y var. purpurascens the study which have a strong shale soil Dam vicinity in the South (OEH area are not influence (OEH 2016, PlantNET 2016) 2016). suitable to this species. Occurs on moist level sites with Pterostylis sp. Botany Bay is Possible – skeletal sandy soils derived from restricted to the Sydney region previous Botany Bay sandstone. It is where it is known from a small records are in Pterostylis sp. Botany August- Bearded E E Associated with coastal heath number of sites within Botany Bay Y similar Bay September Orchid dominated by Melaleuca nodosa and National Park on the Kurnell topography Baeckea imbricata. Peninsula. The species was first and soils Occurs in small localised populations, collected at Maroubra in 1908, although

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 37 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Potential Recommended Common TSC EPBC Records from occurrence Scientific Name Habitat Distribution survey period Name Act Act locality (5km) within study (OEH 2016) area usually in areas within the heath although it has not been recorded vegetation where the canopy allows filtered light at Maroubra since that time type is not to reach the ground (OEH 2016) suitable. This is specialised coastal species occurring from the between Kurnell Unlikely – in Sydney and Myall Lakes National prefers Senecio spathulatus occurs mostly on Park (with a possible occurrence at Coast exposed Senecio spathulatus E - frontal dunes and forming low, broad Cudmirrah). The species is also All year Y Groundsel locations clumps (PlantNET 2016) known to occur in Nadgee Nature associated Reserve (Cape Howe, NSW border) with the coast and in Wilsons Promontory (Victoria). On the south coast the Magenta Lilly Possible as Pilly occurs on grey soils over introduction sandstone, restricted mainly to by birds. remnant stands of littoral (coastal) The Magenta Lilly Pilly is found only However, Magenta Lilly rainforest. On the central coast in NSW, in a narrow, linear coastal topography Syzygium paniculatum E V All year Y Pilly Magenta Lilly Pilly occurs on gravels, strip from Upper Lansdowne to and soils of sands, silts and clays in riverside Conjola State Forest (OEH 2016). the study gallery rainforests and remnant area are not littoral rainforest communities (OEH suitable to 2016). this species. In New South Wales, The Black- Unlikely – hooded Sun Orchid is known from soils of the two localities, Cape Solander in study area do At Cape Solander this species is Botany Bay National Park in not match Black-hooded recorded from shallow black peaty southern Sydney, and Bago State August- Thelymitra atronitida CE - Y those in its Sun Orchid soil in coastal heath on sandstone Forest south of Tumut (OEH 2016) September known (OEH 2016) however these two populations location on may be ecologically different. This Cape species is also recorded in NE Solander. Victoria Key: V = vulnerable, E = endangered, CE = Critically Endangered

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 38 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix D: Likelihood of occurrence of threatened fauna

Records from Potential occurrence within study Potential impacts from Class Common Name Scientific Name TSC Act EPBC Act locality (5km) area the project? Amphibia Wallum Froglet Crinia tinnula V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Heleioporus Amphibia Giant Burrowing Frog V V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely australiacus Green and Golden Bell Possible on occasion, potential Loss of potential foraging Amphibia Litoria aurea E V Y Frog foraging and shelter habitat. and shelter habitat Aves Regent Honeyeater Anthochaera phrygia CE CE Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Possible on occasion, potential Aves Australasian Bittern Botaurus poiciloptilus E E Y Unlikely foraging habitat limited. Calamanthus Aves Striated Fieldwren E - N Unlikely, outside known range. Unlikely fuliginosus Aves Sanderling Calidris alba V M Y Unlikely, no potential habitat. Unlikely Aves Red Knot, Knot Calidris canutus V M Y Unlikely, no potential habitat. Unlikely Aves Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea E CE, M Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris V M Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Greater Sand Plover, Aves Charadrius leschenaultii V M N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Large Sand Plover Lesser Sand Plover, Aves Charadrius mongolus V M N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Mongolian Plover Aves Spotted Harrier Circus assimilis V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Daphoenositta Aves Varied Sittella V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely chrysoptera Outside known range, potential Aves Eastern Bristlebird Dasyornis brachypterus E E N Unlikely habitat limited. Aves White-fronted Chat Epthianura albifrons V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely White-fronted Chat population in the Possible on occasion, potential Possible loss of foraging Sydney Metropolitan E - Y habitat limited. habitat Catchment Management Area Aves Beach Stone-curlew Esacus magnirostris E - N Unlikely, no potential habitat. Unlikely

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 39 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Records from Potential occurrence within study Potential impacts from Class Common Name Scientific Name TSC Act EPBC Act locality (5km) area the project? Aves Painted Honeyeater Grantiella picta V V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Sooty Oystercatcher Haematopus fuliginosus V - N Unlikely, no potential habitat. Nil Haematopus Pied Oystercatcher E - N Unlikely, no potential habitat. Nil longirostris Hieraaetus Little Eagle V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely morphnoides Aves Swift Parrot Lathamus discolor E E Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Broad-billed Sandpiper Limicola falcinellus V M Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Square-tailed Kite Lophoictinia isura V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Presumed Aves Star Finch Neochmia ruficauda E Y Well outside current known range. Nil. extinct Neophema Aves Orange-bellied Parrot CE CE N Well outside current known range. Nil. chrysogaster Aves Powerful Owl Ninox strenua V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Numenius Aves Eastern Curlew - CE, M N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely madagascariensis Blue-billed Duck Oxyura australis V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Eastern Osprey Pandion cristatus V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Scarlet Robin Petroica boodang V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Flame Robin Petroica phoenicea V - N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Superb Parrot Polytelis swainsonii V V Y Well outside current known range. Nil Australian Painted Aves Rostratula australis E E N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Snipe Sterna / Sternula Aves Little Tern E M N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely albifrons Aves Australian Fairy Tern Sternula nereis - V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Unlikely, outside current known Hooded Plover Thinornis rubricollis CE C N Nil range. Limited potential habitat. Aves Eastern Grass Owl Tyto longimembris V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Masked Owl Tyto novaehollandiae V - Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Aves Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus V M Y Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Mammalia Large-eared Pied Bat, Chalinolobus dwyeri V V N Possible, potential habitat limited. Loss of potential foraging

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 40 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Records from Potential occurrence within study Potential impacts from Class Common Name Scientific Name TSC Act EPBC Act locality (5km) area the project? Large Pied Bat habitat. Spot-tailed Quoll, Dasyurus maculatus Spotted-tail Quoll, Tiger Mammalia maculatus (SE mainland V V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Quoll (south-eastern population) mainland population) Southern Brown Isoodon obesulus Mammalia E E N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely Bandicoot (Eastern) obesulus Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Little Bentwing-bat Miniopterus australis V - Y Possible, potential habitat limited. habitat. Miniopterus schreibersii Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Eastern Bentwing-bat V - Y Possible, potential habitat limited. oceanensis habitat. Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Southern Myotis Myotis macropus V - Y Possible, potential habitat limited. habitat. Phascolarctos cinereus (combined populations Mammalia Koala V V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely of Qld, NSW and the ACT) Pseudomys novae- Mammalia New Holland Mouse - V N Unlikely, potential habitat limited. Unlikely hollandiae Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus V V Y Possible, potential habitat limited. habitat. Yellow-bellied Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Saccolaimus flaviventris V - Y Possible, potential habitat limited. Sheathtail-bat habitat. Greater Broad-nosed Loss of potential foraging Mammalia Scoteanax rueppellii V - Y Possible, potential habitat limited. Bat habitat. Note: Marine species excluded. V = vulnerable, E = endangered, CE = Critically Endangered, M = Migratory, Ma=Marine

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 41 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix E: Migratory species listed under EPBC Act known or predicted to occur within the locality

Common Name Scientific Name TSC Act EPBC Act Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus - M Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos - M Great Egret Ardea alba - M Cattle Egret Ardea ibis - M Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres - M Sharp-tailed Sandpiper Calidris acuminata - M Sanderling Calidris alba V M Red Knot Calidris canutus - M Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea E M Red-necked Stint Calidris ruficollis - M Great Knot Calidris tenuirostris V M Long-toed Stint Calidris subminuta - M Streaked Shearwater Calonectris leucomelas - M Great Skua Catharacta skua - M Double-banded Plover Charadrius bicinctus - M Greater Sand-plover Charadrius leschenaultii V M Lesser Sand-plover Charadrius mongolus V M Red-caped Plover Charadrius ruficapillus - M Oriental Plover Charadrius veredus - M Oriental Cuckoo Cuculus optatus / saturatus - M Southern Royal Albatross Diomedea epomophora epomophora - V, M Northern Royal Albatross Diomedea epomophora sanfordi - E, M Wandering Albatross Diomedea exulans (sensu lato) E V, M Antipodean Albatross Diomedea exulans antipodensis V V, M Tristan Albatross Diomedea exulans exulans - E, M Gibson's Albatross Diomedea exulans gibsoni V V, M Latham's Snipe Gallinago hardwickii - M Swinhoe's Snipe Gallinago megala - M Pin-tailed Snipe Gallinago stenura - M White-bellied Sea-Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster - M Grey-tailed Tattler Heteroscelus brevipes - M Wandering Tattler Heteroscelus incanus - M Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus - M White-throated Needletail Hirundapus caudacutus - M Broad-billed Sandpiper Limicola falcinellus V M Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica - M Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa V M Southern Storm Petrel Macronectes giganteus E E, M Northern Giant Petrel Macronectes halli V V, M Rainbow Bee-eater Merops ornatus - M Black-faced Monarch Monarcha melanopsis - M Spectacled Monarch Monarcha trivirgatus - M

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 42 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Common Name Scientific Name TSC Act EPBC Act Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava Satin Flycatcher Myiagra cyanoleuca - M Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis - CE, M Little Curlew Numenius minutus - M Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus - M Fairy Prion (southern) Pachyptila turtur subantarctica - V, M Osprey Pandion haligetus - M Sooty Albatross Phoebetria fusca V V, M Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis fulva - M Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarola - M Flesh-footed Shearwater Puffinus carneipes - M Red-necked Avocet Recurvirostra novaehollandiae - M Rufous Fantail Rhipidura rufifrons - M Painted Snipe Rostratula benghalensis (sensu lato) - M Little Tern Sterna / Sternula albifrons E M Buller's Albatross, Pacific Albatross Thalassarche bulleri - V, M Shy Albatross, Tasmanian Shy Albatross Thalassarche cauta cauta V V, M Salvin's Albatross Thalassarche cauta salvini - V, M White-capped Albatross Thalassarche cauta steadi - V, M Chatham Albatross Thalassarche eremita - E, M Campbell Albatross, Campbell Black-browed Thalassarche impavida - V, M Albatross Black-browed Albatross Thalassarche melanophris V V, M Common Greenshank, Greenshank Tringa nebularia - M Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus V M Note: V = vulnerable, E = endangered, CE = Critically Endangered, M = Migratory.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 43 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix F: Exotic species recorded in the study area

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name *Noxious Weed Class Fabaceae Acacia saligna Golden Wreath Wattle

Polygonaceae Acetosa sagittata Rambling Dock

Myrsinaceae Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel

Apocynaceae Araujia sericifera Moth Vine

Asparagaceae Asparagus aethiopicus Asparagus Fern 4 Asparagaceae Asparagus asparagoides Bridal Creeper 4 Asparagaceae Asparagus plumosus Climbing Asparagus Fern 4 Asteraceae Aster subulatus Wild Aster

Asteraceae Bidens pilosa Cobbler's Pegs

Brassicaceae Brassica rapa

Poaceae Briza maxima Quaking Grass

Poaceae Cenchrus echinatus Mossman River Grass

Euphorbiaceae Chamaesyce hyssopifolia

Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium album Fat Hen

Poaceae Chloris gayana Rhodes Grass

Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. Asteraceae Bitou Bush 4 rotundata Asteraceae Conyza spp. A Fleabane

Poaceae Cortaderia selloana Pampas Grass 3 Cyperaceae Cyperus eragrostis Umbrella Sedge

Poaceae Digitaria ciliaris Summer Grass

Poaceae Ehrharta erecta Panic Veldtgrass

Poaceae Eragrostis curvula African Lovegrass

Fabaceae Erythrina sykesii Coral Tree

Fabaceae Erythrina x sykesii Coral tree

Fabaceae Genista monspessulana Montpellier Broom

Apocynaceae Gomphocarpus fruticosus Narrow-leaved Cotton Bush

Apiaceae Hydrocotyle bonariensis

Asteraceae Hypochaeris radicata Catsear

Juncaceae Juncus acutus subsp. acutus Sharp Rush

Verbenaceae Lantana camara Lantana 4 Fabaceae Melilotus alba

Moraceae Morus nigra Black Mulberry

Oleaceae Olea europaea subsp. cuspidata African Olive 4

Poaceae Paspalum dilatatum Paspalum

Geraniaceae Pelargonium domesticum Pelargonium

Poaceae Pennisetum clandestinum Kikuyu Grass

Arecaceae Phoenix canariensis Canary Island Date Palm

Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata Lamb's Tongues

Asparagaceae Protasparagus aethiopicus Sprengeri Fern

Asparagaceae Protasparagus plumosus Climbing Asparagus Fern

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 44 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Family Name Scientific Name Common Name *Noxious Weed Class Rosaceae Rubus fruticosus sp. agg. Blackberry complex 4 Fabaceae Senna pendula

Poaceae Setaria parviflora

Solanaceae Solanum nigrum Black-berry Nightshade

Asteraceae Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle

Poaceae Stenotaphrum secundatum Buffalo Grass

Commelinaceae Tradescantia fluminensis Wandering Jew

*Weed control classes and control measures (DPI 2016a) Control Weed type Example control requirements Class Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to The plant must be eradicated from the land and the primary production or the environment and are not land must be kept free of the plant. Class 1 present in the State or are present only to a limited The weeds are also "notifiable" and a range of extent. restrictions on their sale and movement exist. Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to The plant must be eradicated from the land and the primary production or the environment of a region land must be kept free of the plant. Class 2 to which the order applies and are not present in the The weeds are also "notifiable" and a range of region or are present only to a limited extent. restrictions on their sale and movement exist. Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to primary production or the environment of a region The plant must be fully and continuously suppressed Class 3 to which the order applies, are not widely distributed and destroyed.* in the area and are likely to spread in the area or to another area. Plants that pose a potentially serious threat to primary production, the environment or human The growth of the plant must be managed in a Class 4 health, are widely distributed in an area to which the manner that continuously inhibits the ability of the order applies and are likely to spread in the area or plant to spread* to another area. There are no requirements to control existing plants Plants that are likely, by their sale or the sale of their of Class 5 weeds. Class 5 seeds or movement within the State or an area of However, the weeds are "notifiable" and a range of the State, to spread in the State or outside the State. restrictions on their sale and movement exists.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 45 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix G: List of flora species for landscaping

(all species available from Sutherland Shire Council Nursery)

Species Growth form Angophora costata tree Banksia integrifolia subsp. integrifolia tree Casuarina glauca tree Cupaniopsis anacardioides tree Eucalyptus botryoides tree Eucalyptus robusta tree Ficus rubiginosa tree Glochidion ferdinandi tree Acacia maidenii small tree Acmena smithii small tree Allocasuarina littoralis small tree Homalanthus populifolius small tree Myrsine variabilis small tree Acacia longifolia subsp. longifolia shrub Acacia longifolia subsp. sophorae shrub Banksia ericifolia shrub Banksia serrata shrub Breynia oblongifolia shrub Clerodendrum tomentosum shrub Leptospermum laevigatum shrub Leucopogon parviflorus shrub Maclura cochinchinensis shrub Melaleuca nodosa shrub Myoporum acuminatum shrub Notelaea longifolia shrub Pittosporum revolutum shrub Actinotus helianthi ground cover Commelina cyanea ground cover Desmodium varians ground cover Dianella revoluta subsp. revoluta ground cover Dichondra repens ground cover Entolasia marginata ground cover Imperata cylindrica ground cover Lomandra longifolia ground cover Oplismenus imbecillis ground cover Cayratia clematidea climber Clematis aristata climber

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 46 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Clematis glycinoides subsp. glycinoides climber Eustrephus latifolius climber Geitonoplesium cymosum climber Hibbertia scandens climber Marsdenia rostrata climber Parsonsia straminea climber Sarcopetalum harveyanum climber Smilax glyciphylla climber

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 47 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix H: TSC Act Assessments of Significance

Following are assessments of significance pertaining to the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act).

Kurnell Dune Forest in the Sutherland Shire and the City of Rockdale

Community Description

The final determination for Kurnell Dune Forest was prepared in 1999, two years after the establishment of the NSW Scientific Committee. The determination is brief compared with the final determinations of recent years and provides limited information on this community. The following description is a summary of the community taken from the NSW threatened species webpage (OEH 2016b).

“A low open sclerophyll forest community with a distinctive moist forest component in its flora. The community occupies coastal dune sand and is often found in association with areas of sclerophyll heath and scrub. Characteristic sclerophyll tree and shrub species include Angophora costata, Banksia ericifolia, Banksia serrata, Eucalyptus botryoides, Eucalyptus robusta, Leptospermum laevigatum and Monotoca elliptica. The moist component of the flora is characterised by species including Breynia oblongifolia, Cissus antarctica, Cissus hypoglauca, Clerodendrum tomentosum, Cupaniopsis anacardioides, Elaeocarpus reticulatus, Endiandra sieberi, Glochidion ferdinandi, Maclura cochinchinensis, Notelaea longifolia, Rapanea variabilis and Stephania japonica var. discolor”.

Although degraded, a portion of the study area, 0.18 ha, was determined as representing this EEC. None of the area designated as the EEC will be removed by the Project; however, indirect impacts may occur and suitable buffering of the vegetation should be provided by retention of a 15 m stripe of the adjacent vegetation to the north. Following is an assessment of the significance of the impact of the project on Kurnell Dune Forest.

(a) in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the lifecycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable to an EEC.

(b) in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the lifecycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable to an EEC.

(c) in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed:

(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction, or The Kurnell Dune Forest of the study area is represented by an area of 0.18 ha, is low in native species diversity and high in weed cover. A number of mature indicative native species for this EEC occur within the area. The whole of the area determined to be Kurnell Dune Forest within the study area will not be impacted directly by the

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 48 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

project and therefore its local occurrence is unlikely to be placed at risk provided a 15 m strip of buffering vegetation is maintained to protect the community from edge effects. (ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction The Kurnell Dune Forest of the study is low in native species diversity and high in weed cover. A number of mature, indicative native species occur within the area. The whole of the area determined to be Kurnell Dune Forest within the study area will not be impacted directly by the project and it is unlikely that the composition of the remnant would be substantially modified. A 15 m strip of buffering vegetation will ensure that the potential for further weed invasion as a result of the Project is reduced.

(d) in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community:

(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed, and Kurnell Dune Forest will not be removed as a result of this Project. A 15 m strip of buffering vegetation will ensure that the potential for further modification as a result of weed invasion and other edge effects is reduced.

(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action, and The vegetation of the study area as a whole is already isolated from vegetation to the east and north by industrial developments, in particular the Caltex Oil Refinery. The removal of vegetation to the north of the remnant EEC will reduce the connectivity of the EEC with surrounding vegetation by reducing the length of the western edge of this vegetation that has limited connectivity to the RAMSAR Wetland on the opposite side of Captain Cook Drive.

The closest remnants of Kurnell Dune Forest occur to the south of the study area. Connectivity to these stands is limited by the Desalination Plant and Sir Joseph Banks Drive. The connectivity of the remnant EEC in the study area, to the EEC in the south the will not be altered as a result of the project.

Loss of connectivity to the west may be reduced by the protection and enhancement of native vegetation located to the west of the development footprint, associated with the sand bank and the regeneration occurring between the sand bank and Captain Cook Drive.

(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality Kurnell Dune Forest will not be removed as a result of this project. A 15 m strip of buffering vegetation will ensure that the potential for further modification as a result of weed invasion is reduced.

(e) whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly).

No critical habitat for Kurnell Dune forest occurs within the study area

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 49 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(f) whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

No recovery or threat abatement plans are provided for Kurnell Dune Forest

(g) whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

The following threats identified for Kurnell Dune forest are relevant to this assessment (OEH 2016b):  Further loss and fragmentation of habitat, particularly as a consequence of residential development and sand mining – EEC habitat will not be lost however some fragmentation may result due to the removal of vegetation to the north of the EEC.  Habitat degradation by weed invasion (particularly Bitou Bush) and rubbish dumping – A retained 15 m strip of buffering vegetation will ensure that the potential for further modification as a result of weed invasion and other edge effects is reduced. Debris from the rooves of surrounding buildings dislodged by the 2015 cyclone still litter the remnant EEC. This debris should be removed from the remnant.  Inappropriate plantings in and around remnants – All planting associated with landscaping of surrounding areas will be indigenous native species as per the requirements of Councils Greenweb plan.

Conclusion The Project will not have a significant impact on the EEC remnant as long as: 1. A 15 m buffer strip of vegetation is retained to the north of the boundary of the EEC; 2. Measures are implemented to control weed spread and sedimentation into the EEC as a result of project development activities; 3. Revegetation and landscaping use only indigenous native species; and 4. The project incorporates protection and enhancement of native vegetation located to the west of the development footprint.

Callistemon linearifolius (Link) DC.

Callistemon linearifolius has been recorded only once before on the Kurnell Peninsula in 2014, at a site location recorded as Caltex, Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell (OEH 2016a). During the field survey this species was recorded in the western corner of the study area and it is highly likely that it was planted as part of landscaping in 2010. Approximately 10 individuals were recorded, none we flowering so identification is unconfirmed and based on vegetative characteristic only. Confirmation of the identity will require examination of the specimens when they flower in spring/summer.

(a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The population of Callistemon linearifolius in the study area consists of approximately 10 specimens, possibly planted, which will not be removed as part of the project. The specimens occur in a revegetated area on the corner of Captain Cook Drive and Sir Joseph Banks Drive. Aerial imagery (Sutherland Council 2016) indicates that this location was cleared and re-planted as part of landscaping works in 2010. Some individuals have flowered and retained capsule are evident on a number of plants. The viability of the seed is not known. The reproductive ability of the population is not known however all individuals observed appeared to be of a similar age.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 50 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Callistemon species generally store seed in a canopy seedbank and release seed after fire or when a branch dies.

Neither the specimens nor the vegetation in which they occur will be removed or directly impacted by the proposed project. It is not expected pollination or seed dispersal will be adversely impacted by activities associated with the project, nor will the works impact the genetic diversity of the population. Short term indirect impacts to the individual and pollinators may occur through generation of dust and noise/light disruption. It is unlikely any of these impacts will place the local population at risk of extinction through disrupting it’s life cycle.

(b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable

(c) In the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is the proposal likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction; or (ii) is the proposal likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable

(d) In relation to the habitat of threatened species, population or ecological community:

(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed; The proposed activities will not remove and modify habitat in which the Callistemon currently grows. An area of vegetation to adjacent to the population will be cleared. (ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat; The individuals recorded represent a population of approximately 10 individuals. As a result of historic industrial and road development (Sir Joseph Banks Drive to the west, Chisolm Road to the south and Captain Cook Drive to the north) the population and associated surrounding vegetation is already isolated from other nearby vegetation, thus clearing associated with the project will not fragment or isolate the population from existing habitat. (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality. The known population of Callistemon linearifolius in the study area is represented by 10 individuals. It is probable that their occurrence in this location is the result of landscaping works in 2010. It is unlikely that they have recruited into the area as a result of natural dispersal as the fine seed is unlikely to disperse great distances for the parent population and only one other record of this species has been made approximately 1 km to the north, in 2014. The importance of the habitat to be modified/removed to the long-term survival of this species is low as it is currently heavily weed infested and unlikely to provide suitable recruitment locations without weed control.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 51 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(e) Whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat.

Critical habitat has not been declared for Callistemon linearifolius.

(f) Whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

A recovery plan or threat abatement plan has not been prepared for Callistemon linearifolius.

(g) The action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

A key threatening process (KTP) is defined under the TSC Act as “a process that threatens, or may have the capability to threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological communities”. Following is a list of KTP’s relevant to the project.

1. Clearing of native vegetation 2. Infection of native plants by Phytophthora cinnamomi 3. Introduction and Establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic on plants of the family Myrtaceae 4. Invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers 5. Invasion of native plant communities by African Olive Olea europaea L. subsp. cuspidata 6. Invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara 7. Invasion of native plant communities by Chrysanthemoides monilifera (bitou bush and boneseed) 8. Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses

The project will result in the clearing of native vegetation and may lead to habitat alteration as a result of invasion by weed species. The clearing impact will be outside the immediate vicinity of the recorded individuals and unlikely to result in an edge affect. Given the presence of weed species, in particular Lantana camara, Olea europaea L. subsp. cuspidata and Chrysanthemoides monilifera, disturbance associated with the project may lead to further invasion by these species into the habitat of the Callistemon.

Conclusion Actions associated with the proposed project are not expected to have a direct impact on the Callistemon linearifolius individuals or the vegetation in its’ immediate vicinity. However, proposed activities may in the short-term interfere with pollination and seed dispersal. A long- term impact on the viability of this population or habitat is unlikely as long as measures are implemented to control weed spread and sedimentation as a result of project development activities. Indirect impacts relating to the project such as dust and runoff/sedimentation should be controlled during construction.

Syzygium paniculatum Gaertn (Magenta Lilly Pilly, Daguba (Cadigal))

(a) In the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The known population of Syzygium paniculatum in the study area consists of a single specimen, which will not be removed as part of the project. This specimen occurs between known subpopulations at Kurnell Peninsula (approximately 2.15km to the east), Captain Cook Drive (approximately 3.8km to the west) and Towra Point (approximately 2.8 km to the south west). It

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 52 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell is thought this species has a generalised pollination strategy, with the ability to self-pollinate and outcross (Payne 1997 in OEH 2012). Local and subpopulation scale pollination is attributed to nectar and pollen feeding vertebrates and invertebrates (e.g. flying foxes, possums, honeyeaters, bees, moths and butterflies) (OEH 2012). In addition, Syzygium paniculatum is believed to be apomictic; it can produce fertile seed sexually and asexually. In the case of asexual reproduction (apomixis) seedlings are clones of the parent plant (OEH 2012). Further, Syzgium paniculatum is known as polyembryonic, that is it produces multiple seedlings from the one seed (Thurlby et al 2000). Apomixis paired with polyembryony may contribute to reducing the genetic diversity of this species (Thurlby et al 2000).

The germination cues, seedling survival and longevity of this species have not been rigorously researched. It is thought Syzygium paniculatum lives between 75-100 years (A. Bofeldt in Benson and McDougall 1998), producing fruit sporadically (OEH 2012). The age of the individual is not known but it appears in good health and is not a large tree, indicative of advanced age. Syzygium paniculatum seeds germinate rapidly but, as with many mesic species, have poor longevity in the soil seed bank. Seedling survival is suggested to rely on disturbance to reduce competition from canopy species (Benson and McDougall 1998, OEH 2012). The disturbance associated with the Kurnell tornado and/or the proposed project may trigger seedling germination, however no seedlings were observed in this survey.

Neither the specimen nor the vegetation in which it occurs will be removed or directly impacted by the proposed project. It is not expected pollination or seed dispersal will be adversely impacted by activities associated with the project, nor will the works impact the genetic diversity of the population. Short term indirect impacts to the individual and pollinators/seed dispersal may occur through generation of dust and noise/light disruption. It is unlikely any of these impacts will place the local population at risk of extinction through disrupting it’s life cycle.

(b) In the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable

(c) In the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is the proposal likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction; or (ii) is the proposal likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable

(d) In relation to the habitat of threatened species, population or ecological community:

(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed; The proposed activities may remove and modify an area of vegetation to the north of the identified individual. This vegetation is mapped as Coastal Sand Littoral Forest. Whilst this area maybe potential habitat Syzygium paniculatum it is currently heavily weed infested and unlikely to provide suitable recruitment locations without weed control. Additional suitable habitat, with known populations, exists at Towra Point, Kurnell Peninsula and further south along Captain Cook Drive.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 53 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat; The specimen recorded represents a population of one individual, occurring between three known subpopulations at Towra Point, Kurnell Peninsula and further south along Captain Cook Drive. As a result of historic industrial and road development (Sir Joseph Banks Drive to the west, Chisolm Road to the south and Captain Cook Drive to the north) this specimen and the associated surrounding vegetation is already partially isolated from other nearby vegetation, thus clearing associated with the project will not fragment or isolate the population from existing habitat. (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality The known population of Syzygium paniculatum in the study area is restricted to one individual. The importance of the habitat to be modified/removed to the long-term survival of this species is suggested to be low. This is based on the known pollination and seed dispersal methods of this species, the weed infested state of the vegetation to be cleared and the occurrence of other potentially suitable habitat/known subpopulations within Botany Bay. Clearing of vegetation to the north of this individual may reduce the movement of seed into the area from the north. The retention of a vegetation corridor adjacent to Captain Cook Drive will help to maintain connectivity to the north.

(e) Whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat.

Critical habitat has not been declared for Syzygium paniculatum. It is however a ‘Site Managed Species’, but none of the nominated sites will be impacted by the proposed project (OEH 2016c).

(f) Whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

Objectives of the Syzygium paniculatum National Recovery Plan (OEH 2012) aim to:

• Co-ordinate recovery efforts; • Conduct targeted surveys to establish the full extent of the distribution of Syzygium paniculatum; • Conduct research into the biology and ecology and genetics of Syzygium paniculatum • Minimise the decline of Syzygium paniculatum through in situ habitat protection and management;  Reduce impacts of Myrtle Rust on Syzygium paniculatum and its habitat;  Maintain a representative ex situ collection of Syzygium paniculatum; and  Conduct community liaison, education, awareness and involvement projects to raise awareness of the conservation significance of Syzygium paniculatum and involve the broader community in the recovery program

In addition, the Office of Environment and Heritage has nominated four activities to assist this species (OEH 2013b). Those additional to the Recovery Plan include:

• Protect known sites from fire; ensure that personnel planning and undertaking hazard reduction burns are able to identify the species and are aware of its habitat. • Reduce or remove heavy grazing by domestic stock in areas of known or potential habitat. • Undertake weed control, but avoid spraying weeds close to Magenta Lilly Pilly plants to ensure they are not affected by poison.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 54 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

• Protect known habitat areas from clearing and disturbance.

The proposed project should contribute to controlling weeds in the retained vegetation. Lantana, Asparagus fern and Bitou bush should be particularly controlled.

(g) The action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

A key threatening process (KTP) is defined under the TSC Act as “a process that threatens, or may have the capability to threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological communities”. Following is a list of KTP’s relevant to the project.

 Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands  Clearing of native vegetation  Infection of native plants by Phytophthora cinnamomi  Introduction and Establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic on plants of the family Myrtaceae  Invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers  Invasion of native plant communities by African Olive Olea europaea L. subsp. cuspidata  Invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara  Invasion of native plant communities by Chrysanthemoides monilifera (bitou bush and boneseed)  Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses.

In this instance the proposed activities will contribute to the clearing of native vegetation and habitat alteration however, the impact will be outside the immediate vicinity of the recorded individual and unlikely to result in an edge affect due to the retained vegetation buffer. In addition, the vegetation to be removed is heavily weed infested. The high presence of weed species, in particular Lantana camara and Chrysanthemoides monilifera, may be worsened by the disturbance associated with the project and control of runoff/sedimentation should be undertaken. The recorded Syzygium paniculatum occurs next to a drainage line and the species is known to grow in lowland and coastal rainforest (OEH 2012), favouring moist conditions. Changes to the hydrology of the site resulting from the proposed development will not constitute a threat to this individual provided water flows in the adjacent drainage line are not altered.

Conclusion No significant impact to this individual is expected as a result of the proposal as long as indirect impacts from adjacent disturbances relating to the project are minimised. Measures to minimise disturbances include weed control, disease hygiene measures to protect against Myrtle Rust, reduction of runoff/dust and ensuring the water flows in the adjacent drainage channel are not affected. Clearing of vegetation/habitat clearing for development in the vicinity of this individual does constitute a key threatening process, however the affected vegetation is heavily weed infested and unlikely to represent good habitat in its’ current state.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 55 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

THREATENED MICROBATS

The Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis) was recorded during the surveys from Anabat detector units. Four other species of microbat are known or predicted to occur within the locality, all of which are listed as vulnerable under the TSC Act:  Little Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis)  Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris)  Southern Myotis (Myotis macropus)  Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii).

All five species are included in this assessment of significance.

(a) in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The Eastern Bentwing-bat and Little Bentwing-bat primarily roost in caves, while the Yellow- bellied Sheathtail-bat, Southern Myotis and Greater Broad-nosed Bat roost in tree hollows. However, the Eastern Bentwing-bat, Southern Myotis and Greater Broad-nosed Bat are also capable of roosting in other structures such as buildings, under bridges, storm water channels etc.

No caves occur in the study area and tree hollows mainly occur in the area of vegetation to be retained. There is some potential for the Eastern Bentwing-bat to utilise the old disused building for roosting, but it is not likely to be a significant resource for populations of this species in the locality or region. The loss of this building is unlikely to adversely affect the life cycle of these species such that viable populations would be placed at risk of extinction.

(b) in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable.

(c) in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction, or (ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction

Not applicable.

(d) in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community: (i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed, and (ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action, and (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 56 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(i) Approximately 6 ha of potential foraging habitat would be removed, some of which is open space. This is considered a relatively small area given other areas of nearby habitat. (ii) The vegetation that would be removed is bounded by roads, and to the east by industrial development. No fragmentation or isolation would occur. (iii) The habitats in the study area are relatively disturbed and impacted by the recent tornado. The area represents potential foraging habitat, and is considered unlikely to have more than a negligible impact on these species’ occurrence in the locality or region. More suitable habitat is likely to occur in the Towra Point Nature Reserve and/or Kamay National Park.

(e) whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly).

No “critical habitat” of relevance to these species has been declared.

(f) whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

Management objectives proposed by the OEH (2016b) for these species generally involve preserving tree hollows, protecting known maternity roost sites (e.g. caves), protecting riparian zones, undertaking weed control, raising awareness, and protecting and maintaining high quality foraging habitat.

The project would result in the loss of a small area of disturbed, potential foraging habitat. There is potential for the Eastern Bentwing-bat to utilise the old disused building, but this is unlikely to be a significant resource for the species within the locality. No maternity caves would be impacted, and most of the tree hollows that were observed were in the area of vegetation to be retained. The foraging habitat is not considered high quality.

(g) whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

The project would result in a short-term increase in the key threatening process, clearing of native vegetation. These species are not expected to be reliant on the small area of habitat, much of which is currently open space. More suitable areas are likely to occur in the nearby reserves (Towra Point Nature Reserve and Kamay National Park). Landscaping would be undertaken in retained vegetation, which would provide potential foraging habitat.

Conclusion The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on the Eastern Bentwing-bat, Little Bentwing-bat, Yellow-bellied Sheathtail-bat, Southern Myotis or the Greater Broad-nosed Bat.

WHITE-FRONT CHAT – ENDANGERED POPULATION

The White-fronted Chat population in the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Area is listed as an Endangered Population under the TSC Act. Two isolated sub-populations of White- fronted Chats are currently known from the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Authority area; one at Newington Nature Reserve on the Parramatta River and one at Towra Point Nature Reserve in Botany Bay.

No White-fronted Chats (Epthianura albifrons) were recorded during the surveys, but are conservatively included in this assessment of significance.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 57 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(a) in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable.

(b) in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Coastal populations of the White-fronted Chat are found predominantly in saltmarsh vegetation, but also open grasslands and low shrubs bordering wetland areas. They are heavily reliant on saltmarsh for nesting and feeding, however, they are known to utilise open grasslands for foraging depending on food availability (Lindsay et al. 2015).

One sub-population of the Endangered Population occurs at Towra Point Nature Reserve, approximately 4 km west of the study area. The project would not impact on nesting habitat, but would remove less than 1 ha of potential foraging habitat. Given the proximity of the Endangered Population to the study area, it is considered unlikely the loss of this area would adversely affect the life cycle of these species such that viable populations would be placed at risk of extinction.

(c) in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction, or (ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction

Not applicable.

(d) in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community: (i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed, and (ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action, and (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality

(i) Less than 1 ha of potential foraging habitat would be removed. This is considered a relatively small area given other areas of nearby habitat in Towra Point Nature Reserve. (ii) The vegetation that would be removed is bounded by roads, and to the east by industrial development. No fragmentation or isolation would occur. (iii) The habitats in the study area are relatively disturbed and impacted by the recent tornado. The area represents potential foraging habitat, and is considered unlikely to have more than a negligible impact to the Endangered Population. More suitable core habitat (i.e. saltmarsh) occurs in the Towra Point Nature Reserve.

(e) whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly).

No “critical habitat” of relevance to these species has been declared.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 58 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(f) whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

Management objectives proposed by the OEH (2016b) for the Endangered Population include monitoring, predator control, protecting mangroves and minimising disturbance.

The project would result in the loss of a small area of disturbed, potential foraging habitat. The area is very small (less than 1 ha) and very isolated from the known occurrence of individuals of the Endangered Population.

(g) whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

The project would result in a short-term increase in the key threatening process, clearing of native vegetation. These species are not expected to be reliant on the small area of habitat. Core saltmarsh habitat will not be impacted. More suitable areas occur in the Towra Point Nature Reserve. Landscaping would be undertaken in retained vegetation, which would provide potential foraging habitat.

Conclusion The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact on the White-fronted Chat population in the Sydney Metropolitan Catchment Management Area.

WALLAM FROGLET (Crinia tinnula)

The Wallum Froglet (Crinia tinnula) is listed as a vulnerable species under the TSC Act. They occur from Kurnell in Sydney, to south-east Queensland. Wallum Froglets are found in a range of habitats which are usually associated with acidic swamps on coastal sand plains (OEH 2016b). This includes sedgelands and wet heathlands, but they can also be found along drainage lines within other vegetation communities and disturbed areas (OEH 2016b). Breeding can occur all year but is thought to peak in the cooler months (OEH 2016b).

No Wallum Froglets were recorded during the surveys, but are conservatively included in this assessment of significance.

(a) in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Marginal potential habitat for the Wallum Froglet potentially occurs within two man-made wetlands in the south of the study area. These areas are small and occur outside the footprint of the project. Provided indirect impacts to these wetland areas are minimised the project is unlikely to adversely affect the life cycle of these species such that viable populations would be placed at risk of extinction.

(b) in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 59 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(c) in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction, or (ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction

Not applicable.

(d) in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community: (i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed, and (ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action, and (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality

(i) Two small man-made wetlands have potential to be indirectly impacted by the project. (ii) The wetlands are bounded by roads, and to the east by industrial development. No fragmentation or isolation would occur. (iii) The area is small and represents marginal habitat. Indirect impacts to this area are considered unlikely to have more than a negligible impact to the species. More extensive habitat is likely to occur in Kamay National Park where there are a number of records for the species (OEH 2016a).

(e) whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly).

No “critical habitat” of relevance to these species has been declared.

(f) whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

Management objectives proposed by the OEH (2016b) for the Wallum Froglet include retaining protecting wetlands, controlling pest species, applying appropriate fire regimes, controlling weeds and rehabilitating former or degraded habitats.

The project would avoid directly impacting potential habitat for the species, and landscaping in retained vegetation has potential to improving remaining areas.

(g) whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

The project has potential to result in the operation of the key threatening process, “Alteration to the natural flow regimes of rivers and streams and their floodplains and wetlands”. The man- made wetlands which provide potential habitat for this species would be retained, however it is important for the existing hydrological regime to be retained to this area. Provided this can be achieved this key threatening process is unlikely to be significant.

Conclusion The project is unlikely to result in a significant impact to the Wallum Froglet.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 60 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

GREEN AND GOLDEN BELL FROG (Litoria aurea)

The Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) (GGBF) is listed as an endangered species under the TSC Act, and a vulnerable species under the EPBC Act. The species is currently known from approximately 50 locations throughout NSW, with one population occurring at Kurnell (OEH 2016b). At Kurnell, the population is spread across several private and public land tenures, and is considered to occur as a ‘west’ and ‘east’ sub-populations (DECC 2007). The main breeding habitat is historically known from the Australand property, at Keegan’s Basin and in purpose built ponds on Cronulla STP Sydney Water land (DECC 2007), all of which occur approximately 3.3 km west of the study area. Elsewhere on the Kurnell Peninsula scattered records exist, with habitat areas most likely to be used for foraging, shelter, movement and over wintering (DECC 2007).

The nearest records of the GGBF occur on the western side of Sir Joseph Banks Road, on land at Sydney’s Desalination Plant (Veolia 2015), although the most recent record of the species is from 1996. Recent targeted surveys in this area between 2006 and 2012 have not found any frogs or tadpoles (Veolia 2015).

No Green and Golden Bell Frogs were recorded during the surveys conducted for this study.

(a) in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

The GGBF is not known from the study area and was not recorded during recent surveys in good conditions. It is considered unlikely that the species regularly inhabits the study area. It is possible however, that individuals could utilise the study area on occasion. The habitat within the study area would be classed as marginal, and breeding is considered unlikely.

The main impact of the project would be the removal of approximately 0.6 ha of grassland that could be used for foraging, shelter, movement or over wintering. This area of habitat would become inundated following heavy rainfall, but is unlikely to be used successfully used for breeding given the short time water is likely to persist post-rain. During dry periods, the two man-made wetlands are likely to retain more moisture, and would provide more reliable non- breeding habitat for individuals of the GGBF. This area is outside the project footprint and is unlikely to be impacted. The project is therefore unlikely to adversely affect the life cycle of these species such that viable populations would be placed at risk of extinction.

(b) in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.

Not applicable.

(c) in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed: (i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction, or (ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction

Not applicable.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 61 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

(d) in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community: (i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed, and (ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action, and (iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality

(i) Approximately 0.6 ha of non-breeding habitat would be removed. (ii) The vegetation that would be removed is bounded by roads, and to the east by industrial development. No fragmentation or isolation would occur. (iii) The vegetation that would be impacted provides potential foraging, shelter, movement or over wintering habitat. Successful breeding is considered unlikely. During dry periods two man-made wetlands are likely to retain moisture and be more useful for the species than the grassland area. This area would not be directly impacted by the project. The habitat that would be removed is therefore not considered important to the long-term survival of the species in the locality.

(e) whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly).

No “critical habitat” of relevance to these species has been declared.

(f) whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan.

The draft Recovery Plan for the species outlines five objectives: 1. increase the security of key GGBF populations by way of preventing the further loss of GGBF habitat at key populations across the species range and where possible secure opportunities for increasing protection of habitat areas; 2. ensure extant GGBF populations are managed to eliminate or attenuate the operation of factors that are known or discovered to be detrimentally affecting the species; 3. implement habitat management initiatives that are informed by data obtained through investigations into the general biology and ecology of the GGBF through a systematic and coordinated monitoring program; 4. establish, within more than one institution, self-sustaining and representative captive populations (particularly ‘at risk’ populations) of the Green and Golden Bell Frog for the primary purpose of maintaining ‘insurance’ colonies for re-establishment and supplementation of populations of the species; and 5. increase the level of regional and local awareness of the conservation status of the Green and Golden Bell Frog and provide greater opportunity for community involvement in the implementation of this recovery plan.

The Kurnell Management Plan for the GGBF outlines three primary objectives: 1. To maintain the two existing GGBF sub-populations; 2. Where possible enhance existing GGBF habitat and thus measures of population viability; and 3. To increase connectivity within and between sub-populations.

Six strategies have also been developed to achieve the objectives above: 1. Further development of GGBF breeding and other habitat components, where appropriate, on public and private lands; 2. Improvement of habitat within the GGBF key populations;

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 62 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

3. Education and communications to build awareness of the GGBFs and encourage further on-ground actions by community and other stakeholders; 4. Reduction of external threats to GGBFs; 5. Monitoring and research to better understand the extent and dynamics of the Kurnell GGBF population; and 6. Coordination, communication and strategic funding opportunities sought between and by the various stakeholders, land managers and the community.

In general, the action proposed is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the above objectives or actions. The survival of the Kurnell GGBF population and maintenance of its habitat is dependent on factors that are unlikely to be relevant to the project, in particular, the capability of the species to persist in the Australand and STP sites. The project would not significantly affect the security of a key GGBF population, factors affecting the species, connectivity between populations, and would have only minor impacts on an area of non-breeding habitat of the GGBF. The project does not involve captive breeding, monitoring or research of the GGBF.

If the project would not impact on two man-made wetlands that likely provide better habitat in the study area, and may include the incorporation of additional areas of potential habitat for the GGBF in areas of retained vegetation. These aspects could be regarded as being consistent with some of the above objectives and actions.

(g) whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process.

Two Key Threatening Processes of relevance to the GGBF include “Predation by Gambusia holbrooki Girard, 1859 (plague minnow or mosquito fish)” and “Infection of frogs by amphibian chytrid causing the disease chytridiomycosis”. No Gambusia were observed during the surveys. The project is unlikely to contribute further towards the negative impacts of these key threatening processes. Predation by introduced predators, including the Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes), Cat (Felis catus) and Dog (Canis familiaris) is also listed as a threat to the species (OEH, 2014b). It is unlikely that there would be an increase in cats, foxes or dogs as a result of the project.

Conclusion The project is not considered likely to result in a significant impact on the GGBF given that:  the species was not recorded during recent surveys and is considered unlikely to regularly inhabit the study area;  a small area (0.61 ha) of marginal non-breeding habitat would be removed;  no known breeding ponds are likely to be directly or indirectly impacted;  higher quality habitat occurs outside the project footprint;  no known populations or areas of potential habitat will become isolated.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 63 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix I: EPBC Act Assessments of Significance

Following are significant impact assessments pertaining to the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

Syzygium paniculatum Gaertner (Magenta Lilly Pilly, Daguba (Cadigal))

Syzygium paniculatum (Magenta Lilly Pilly) is listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act. Syzygium paniculatum is a small to medium-sized rainforest tree endemic to New South Wales. It is described as having flaky bark and leaves 45-10cm long that are shiny dark green and glabrous above and paler underneath. Flowers are produced in November to February and are creamy white clusters at the end of branches. Fruit is spherical to egg shaped, deep magenta in colour (occasionally white, pink or purple), contains a single seed that is usually polyembryonic. Fruit mature in May (OEH 2012, NSW TSSC 2011).

Syzygium paniculatum has a coastal distribution between Upper Lansdowne near Taree in the north and Conjola National Park in the south (0EH 2012). The species has been documented as occurring in five broad metapopulations; Jervis Bay, Coalcliff, Botany Bay, Central Coast and Seal Rocks which comprise 44 known subpopulations (OEH 2012). The total number of individuals is estimated to be around 1200 plants, with up to two thirds occurring within the Central Coast metapopulation (OEH 2012).

Syzygium paniculatum was recorded in the study area as one individual, a mature tree close to 8 m in height. It occurred on the southern edge of the study area close to Chisholm Road in the area of vegetation mapped as Kurnell Dune Forest EEC. A Botany Bay metapopulation and subpopulations Captain Cook Drive, Towra Point and Kurnell Peninsula are known in the vicinity of this record. The recorded individual does not fall within the immediate vicinity of known populations records, occurring between known records on Captain Cook Drive and Kurnell Peninsula (OEH 2016a)

Criterion 1: lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species The Syzygium paniculatum specimen was recorded at a single location within the study area on the southern edge of survey site, close the Chisolm Road. Neither the specimen, nor the vegetation immediately surrounding it (mapped as Kurnell Dune Forest EEC), will be removed as part of the proposed development. The project will remove vegetation to the north of the recorded specimen, however no additional individuals were recorded in this area.

Therefore, the project will not lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population.

Criterion 2: reduce the area of occupancy of an important population The area of occupancy within the study area is a single specimen that was recorded to the south of the project footprint. As the recording of this specimen may represent a new record within the Captain Cook Drive subpopulation, this may be considered an expansion in the known occupancy of an important population. However, neither the specimen nor the vegetation immediately surrounding the specimen will be removed as part of the project. Therefore, the project will not lead to a reduction in the area of occupancy of an important population.

Criterion 3: fragment an existing important population into two or more populations The known population of Syzygium paniculatum within the study area consists of a single individual which was recorded on the southern edge of the project, close to Chisolm Road in the area of vegetation mapped as Kurnell Dune Forest EEC. Vegetation clearing for the project will not remove this species or the vegetation immediately surrounding it. As a result of historic

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 64 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell industrial and road development (Sir Joseph Banks Drive to the west, Chisolm Drive to the south and Captain Cook Drive to the north) this specimen and the associated surrounding vegetation is partially isolated from other nearby vegetation. Clearing of vegetation to the north of this individual may impair the movement of propagules into the area from the north. The retention of a vegetation corridor adjacent to Captain Cook Drive will help to maintain connectivity to the north.

Criterion 4: adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species The vegetation immediately surrounding the recorded Syzygium paniculatum individual is mapped as Kurnell Dune Forest EEC and will not be directly affected by the project. Although vegetation to the north that may provide future recruitment opportunity will be removed as part of the project this vegetation is heavily weed infested and not deemed critical to species survival. Vegetation associated with the three known subpopulations will not be affected by the project. Therefore, the vegetation affected is not considered habitat critical to the survival of the species.

Criterion 5: disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population The known population of Syzygium paniculatum in the study area consists of a single specimen, which will not be removed as part of the project. This specimen occurs between known subpopulations at Kurnell Peninsula (approximately 2.15km to the east), Captain Cook Drive (approximately 3.8km to the west) and Towra Point (approximately 2.8 km to the south west). It is thought this species has a generalised pollination strategy, with the ability to self-pollinate and outcross (Payne 1997 in OEH 2012). Local and subpopulation scale pollination is attributed to nectar and pollen feeding vertebrates and invertebrates (e.g. flying foxes, possums, honeyeaters, bees, moths and butterflies) (OEH 2012). In addition, Syzygium paniculatum is believed to be apomictic; it can produce fertile seed sexually and asexually. In the case of asexual reproduction (apomixis) seedlings are clones of the parent plant (OEH 2012).

It is not expected pollination or seed dispersal will be adversely impacted by activities associated with the project and thus it is considered to be unlikely that any disruption to the breeding cycle of any important population will occur.

Criterion 6: modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline Neither the single specimen nor the vegetation in which it occurs will not be removed as a result of the project. While potential habitat to the north of this specimen will be cleared, this vegetation is heavily weed infested and additional individuals were not recorded elsewhere within the study area. In addition, areas of known suitable habitat, identified by the existence of documented populations occur within Botany Bay (OEH 2012, OEH 2016a).

Therefore, it is not expected that the project will modify, destroy, remove or isolate the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline. The project may however, decrease the availability of suitable habitat, but given the condition of the habitat (i.e. heavily weed infested) removal of this potential habitat is not expected to contribute to species decline.

Criterion 7: result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat The project has the potential to increase vehicular traffic in the area and create an edge effect through clearing of nearby vegetation. However, the Syzygium paniculatum specimen occurs within vegetation that already has high weed presence, in particular the key threatening weeds Lantana camara (Lantana), Asparagus asparagoides (Asparagus fern) and Chrysanthemoides monilifera subsp. rotundata (Bitou Bush). In the absence of weed hygiene measures the project

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 65 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell may introduce new weed species, however these are unlikely to affect species recruitment in anyway additional to that of weed species currently occurring.

Due to the presence of existing weed species the project is not expected to result in the introduction of additional invasive species harmful to species establishment.

Criterion 8: introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, Myrtle Rust (Puccinia psidii) is a fungal disease that affects species from the family Myrtaceae and is widespread along the east coast (DPI 2016b). It can result in population decline or changes to genetic diversity through death of juvenile plants of seedlings, but does not cause death of adult plants (DPI 2016b). Myrtle Rust spores can be spread by wind, water, insects and animals and through contaminated clothing, equipment and machinery. In addition, Syzygium paniculatum is a known host of this disease (Giblin and Carnegie 2014). Disturbance associated with the project, particularly in the form of increased vehicular and foot traffic and in the absence of thorough wash-down/quarantine measures may introduce disease that will cause species decline. Removal of vegetation may also result in an edge effect and expose the Syzygium paniculatum individual and surrounding habitat to greater air flow, increasing the chances of wind born disease.

The project may contribute to the introduction disease that could limit species recruitment and in the long term, contribute to species decline however the retention of a buffer of vegetation to the north of the population will reduce the potential for this to occur.

Criterion 9: interfere substantially with the recovery of the species Relevant actions from the National Recovery Plan for the species (OEH 2012) include protecting the viability of known the populations of Syzygium paniculatum and protecting these populations from decline. The recovery plan states that habitat and threat management in relation to Syzygium paniculatum should aim to reduce impacts of Myrtle Rust, ameliorate threats on public lands, support restorative and management activities in known and potential Syzygium paniculatum habitats on private land, control weeds (specifically Bitou Bush, Lantana and Asparagus fern) at priority sites and incorporate specific subpopulations into adjoining conservation reserves. Also included as recovery actions is the maintenance of ex-situ populations and community engagement to raise awareness of the conservation significance of Syzygium paniculatum/ increasing involvement in the recovery program.

The project is not expected to interfere substantially with any of these management actions, provided weed and disease hygiene measures are applied. Further the project does have an opportunity to support these actions, primarily through the control of weed in surrounding vegetation.

Conclusion Neither the Syzygium paniculatum specimen nor the immediate habitat in which it occurs, mapped as Kurnell Dune Forest EEC, will be removed as part of the proposed development. Vegetation to the north of the specimen, will however be removed. Whilst this vegetation is heavily weed infested and additional records of Syzygium paniculatum were not located during the surveys, it may have potential for species recruitment. The project is not expected to interfere with species reproduction or pollination as this individual occurs within a 5km radius of three known populations and the species can be pollinated at a local and subpopulation scale. This species is also known to be capable of asexual reproduction.

The site in question is heavily weed infested, therefore any facilitation of weed invasion through site disturbance or machinery is unlikely to affect the species or its’ habitat, additional to that which is currently occurring. However good weed hygiene measures should be employed and

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 66 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell where possible weed invasion managed as part of the retention of vegetation around the development.

Disease introduction, particularly Myrtle Rust, is a potential threat of the project This disease is unlikely to affect the recorded individual but may limit species recruitment through causing seedling death. Given the known distribution of Myrtle Rust and its ability to spread large distances by wind, it is possible it already has occurred in the area however it is worthwhile noting introduction of this disease to the local area also has the potential to impact known communities nearby. Disease hygiene measures should be employed.

The project is not expected to have a significant impact on the Syzygium paniculatum located within the study area as long as 15 m vegetation buffer is retained and weed control and disease hygiene measures are implemented.

GREEN AND GOLDEN BELL FROG (Litoria aurea)

The Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea) (GGBF) is listed as an endangered species under the TSC Act, and a vulnerable species under the EPBC Act. The species is currently known from approximately 50 locations throughout NSW, with one population occurring at Kurnell (OEH 2016b). At Kurnell, the population is spread across several private and public land tenures, and is considered to occur as a ‘west’ and ‘east’ sub-populations (DECC 2007). The main breeding habitat is historically known from the Australand property, at Keegan’s Basin and in purpose built ponds on Cronulla STP Sydney Water land (DECC 2007), all of which occur approximately 3.3 km west of the study area. Elsewhere on the Kurnell Peninsula scattered records exist, with habitat areas most likely to be used for foraging, shelter, movement and over wintering (DECC 2007).

The nearest records of the GGBF occur on the western side of Sir Joseph Banks Road, on land at Sydney’s Desalination Plant (Veolia 2015), although the most recent record of the species is from 1996. Recent targeted surveys in this area between 2006 and 2012 have not found any frogs or tadpoles (Veolia 2015).

No Green and Golden Bell Frogs were recorded during the surveys conducted for this study.

An action is likely to have a significant impact on a vulnerable species under the EPBC Act, if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:

Criterion 1: lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population The GGBF is not known from the study area and was not recorded during recent surveys in good conditions. It is considered unlikely that the species regularly inhabits the study area. It is possible however, that individuals could utilise the study area on occasion. The habitat within the study area would be classed as marginal, and breeding is considered unlikely.

The main impact of the project would be the removal of a maximum of approximately 0.6 ha hectares of grassland. Most of this area is unlikely to be regularly used except occasionally or after heavy rain, and none of the area that would be affected appears likely to be used successfully for breeding. During dry periods, the two man-made wetlands are likely to retain more moisture, and would provide more reliable non-breeding habitat for individuals of the GGBF. This area is outside the project footprint and is unlikely to be impacted.

The main known breeding habitat for the Kurnell GGBF population is approximately 3 km west. It is highly unlikely that the project would lead to a long-term decrease in population size.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 67 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Criterion 2: reduce the area of occupancy of an important population The Project would result in the loss of a small area of non-breeding habitat, which is likely to be used only occasionally by the species. During dry periods two man-made wetlands are likely to retain moisture and be more useful for the species than the rest of the area. This area would not be directly impacted by the project. Further, the majority of records for the Kurnell GGBF population are known from approximately 3 km west.

The project will include post-construction landscaping; it is recommended that the landscaping include features that provide suitable habitat for the GGBF.

Criterion 3: fragment an existing important population into two or more populations; The area of habitat that would be removed is bounded by roads, and to the east by industrial development. Two man-made wetlands would not be impacted by the project and would continue to provide dispersal habitat. No important populations would be fragmented

Criterion 4: adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species No critical habitat has been identified for this species and no breeding habitat would be impacted. The small area of habitat that would be cleared, and the area that would be disturbed is unlikely to be critical to the survival of the species given the small area (0.61 ha) and low quality of the habitat that would be impacted. Adjacent areas of better habitat remain unaffected.

Criterion 5: disrupt the breeding cycle of a population; The habitat that would be impacted is unlikely to constitute breeding habitat. While the grassland area becomes inundated after heavy rainfall, it is likely this drains away quickly and would not support successful breeding. Known breeding habitat for the Kurnell GGBF Population occurs approximately 3 km west and would not be impacted by the project.

Criterion 6: modify, destroy, remove, or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline; The main impact of the project would be the removal of a maximum of approximately 0.61 hectares of grassland vegetation. The vegetation that would be impacted provides potential foraging, shelter, movement or over wintering habitat. Successful breeding is considered unlikely. During dry periods two man-made wetlands are likely to retain moisture and be more useful for the species than the rest of the area. This area would not be directly impacted by the project. The project is therefore not considered likely to cause the species to decline.

Criterion 7: result in invasive species that that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat The study area is bounded by roads and industrial development. The project is unlikely to contribute further towards invasive species becoming established within study area.

Criterion 8: introduce disease that may cause species to decline; or The study area is bounded by roads and industrial development. The project is unlikely to introduce disease within study area.

Criterion 9: interfere substantially with the recovery of the species No recovery plan has been prepared under the EPBC Act for the GGBF. It is unlikely that the removal of the small area (0.61 ha) of grassland habitat would substantially interfere with the recovery of this species.

Conclusions The project is not considered likely to result in a significant impact on the GGBF given that:

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 68 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

 the species was not recorded during recent surveys and is considered unlikely to regularly inhabit the study area;  a small area (0.61 ha) of marginal non-breeding habitat would be removed;  no known breeding ponds are likely to be directly or indirectly impacted;  higher quality habitat occurs outside the project footprint;  no known populations or areas of potential habitat will become isolated.

It should be noted however, the project would result in the removal of terrestrial habitat within 200 metres of suitable habitat in which the GGBF has been recorded since 1995. Based on the EPBC Act policy statement 3.19 (DEWHA 2009), a referral under the EPBC Act should be considered.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 69 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

Appendix J: SMCMA map unit descriptions

The SMCMA mapping concurs with vegetation mapping of the study area provided by Sutherland Shire Council on their Shire Maps webpage (Sutherland Shire Council 2016).

Coastal Sand Littoral Forest (OEH 2013)

Coastal Sand Littoral Forest is a forest or woodland community that incorporates a prominent component of littoral rainforest species amongst the sclerophyllous shrub and small tree layer. The forest floor is well shaded by Cupaniopsis anacardioides (Tuckeroo) and other waxy-leaved species often occurring at or below a canopy of Banksia, Casuarina and/or Eucalypt trees. A high diversity of vines can be found across multiple layers of the vegetation. The woody vine Maclura cochinchinensis (Cockspur Thorn), identifiable by its long spikes, is a useful diagnostic species for the community. Habitat and disturbance are both very influential in the structure and composition of the community at any location. It is restricted to coastal sand deposits receiving greater than 1050 mm of mean annual rainfall.

Coastal Sand Littoral Forest typically has a four layered structure with a tree height of 9 – 20m and 3 - 60% cover; small tree layer 3 – 10m and 5 – 60% cover; mid layer 1.5 – 5 m and 5 – 60% cover; and ground layer 0.2 – 2m and 15 – 80% cover.

The following species characterise this community and are considered to be diagnostic for determining the vegetation assemblage. Typical tree species include Banksia integrifolia subsp. integrifolia, Eucalyptus robusta, Eucalyptus botryoides, Casuarina glauca, Cupaniopsis anacardioides. Small trees Cupaniopsis anacardioides, Banksia integrifolia subsp. integrifolia, Pittosporum undulatum, Glochidion ferdinandi, Casuarina glauca, Leptospermum laevigatum. Shrubs Breynia oblongifolia, Monotoca elliptica, Notelaea longifolia, Imperata cylindrica, Clerodendrum tomentosum. Ground layer species include Lomandra longifolia, Pteridium esculentum, Commelina cyanea Oplismenus imbecillis. Vines & Climbers Geitonoplesium cymosum, Stephania japonica var. discolor, Maclura cochinchinensis, Hibbertia scandens Eustrephus latifolius.

This community shares many species with Coastal Dune Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Sand Tea- tree Banksia Scrub.

Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub (OEH 2013)

Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub is a littoral heath and scrub that occupies coastal foredunes and beach ridges near the open ocean. Typically, it comprises a dense cover of Leptospermum laevigatum (Coast Tea-tree) and Banksia integrifolia (Coast Banksia). The height of the scrub varies considerably in response to exposure to prevailing winds. This can result in a dramatically different visual appearance between patches. Despite the exposed locations there is usually some development of a soil profile as a result of clay influence in a sandstone headland or of sheltering and protection from leeward scrubs on dune systems. This is sufficient to support some mesic shrubs and eucalypt species that otherwise prefer more sheltered environments in the littoral zone. These species may share or penetrate the canopy, but in the case of the former are more likely to be found amongst a shrub layer of hardy coast-loving plants.

Coastal Sand Tea-tree Banksia Scrub typically has a three layered structure with a tree height of 5-25m and 5 – 75% cover; mid layer 1 – 8 m and 5 – 70% cover; and ground layer 0.1 – 2m and 2 – 90% cover.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 70 Ecological Assessment of 186 – 206 Captain Cook Drive, Kurnell

The following species characterise this community and are considered to be diagnostic for determining the vegetation assemblage. Typical tree species include Leptospermum laevigatum, Banksia integrifolia, Cupaniopsis anacardioides. Shrubs include Monotoca elliptica, Breynia oblongifolia, Acacia longifolia, Pittosporum undulatum, Notelaea longifolia, Westringia fruticosa. Ground cover species include Lomandra longifolia, Commelina cyanea, Ficinia nodosa, Pelargonium australe, Pteridium esculentum, Dichondra repens, Viola hederacea, Imperata cylindrica var. major. Vines and Climbers include Hibbertia scandens, Glycine clandestina, Kennedia rubicunda.

AMBS Ecology & Heritage 71