PSD Point Ceylon NOI Habitat Suit 21 July 2017 Natasha Mcintosh

5 Davina Street Tarragindi QLD 4121 07 3892 4402 www.austecology.com.au ABN 75 296 587 893

Our Ref: PSD Point Ceylon NOI_Habitat Suitability Assessments.docx

21 July 2017

Natasha McIntosh Environmental Manager – Project Sea Dragon

Kate McBean Senior Consultant - CO2 Australia

Dear Natasha and Kate,

RE: Fauna Habitat Assessment - PSD Gunn Point Stage 1 Hatchery NOI

As requested, I have undertaken both desktop and site investigations to provide information to support the Notice of Intent (NOI) which is being prepared for the development of the Stage 1 Hatchery and associated infrastructure proposed to be developed at Gunn Point, Northern Territory.

Project Site and Development Proposal

The project site is described as Parcel Number 2626, within the Litchfield Municipality, and comprises approximately 160 ha. The project site is owned by the Northern Territory Government, through the Northern Territory Land Corporation. The project site is approximately 30 km to the north-east of Darwin, but is approximately 70 km by road from Darwin. Access to the project site is via Gunn Point Road.

The development of the Project Sea Dragon Hatchery (the Hatchery) operations is proposed for the project site. The Hatchery will provide post-larval prawns (PL 15) for grow-out at the proposed grow-our centre at Legune Station, approximately 375km to the south-west. Although the full-scale project at the Legune Grow-out Facility will require four Hatchery modules to support operations, this NOI is for the first Hatchery module (Stage 1), which is required to support Stage 1 of the Grow-out Facility at Legune Station.

The major components of the Stage 1 Hatchery include one hatchery module, common facilities, and seawater supply, storage and treatment, and discharge infrastructure. A description of each of these components, as well as associated production processes and operational requirements, is provided in the main Notice of Intent report. The footprint of the Stage 1 Hatchery is described with Attachment A.

Page 1 of 36 Desktop Investigations

Flora assessments have been undertaken by Astrebla (2017a & b). That work found the dominant vegetation community comprised open forest and low woodland dominated by Eucalyptus tetrodonta, with E. miniata becoming co-dominant in the open forest at higher elevations (eastern parts of the site), and with low woodland dominated by Melaleuca viridiflora on a gentle run-on plain along the southern flanks of the site. The M. viridiflora low woodland community forms a buffer with the neighbouring Tree Point Conservation Area. A small area of seasonal wetland is located in the south eastern corner, with small areas of swale paperbark open forest, grassland and dry vine thicket communities behind the beach along the western side of the site.

The Tree Point Conservation Area (TPCA) adjoins the site along its southern boundary. The TPCA protects a coastal strip of Shoal Bay along the Tree Point Peninsula, as well as a large area of mangrove habitat and tidal waterway in the south. The TPCA is fringed by coastal vine thicket and a swampy floodplain.

The Tree Point Conservation Area and the site are both located within the Shoal Bay Site of Conservation Significance (SOCS #8; DNREAS 2015). The Shoal Bay SOCS extends from the near north of the site to Howard Springs Nature Park in the south, and west across the Hope Inlet to Buffalo Creek and Lee Point. The Howard River (a relatively small, spring-fed NT river) flows into Shoal Bay, as well as several other coastal creeks.

In regard to the Shoal Bay SOCS, DNREAS (2015) notes the following:  The Shoal Bay site lacks extensive sandy beaches and as a result, it is likely to be only used infrequently by marine turtles for nesting;  No seabird breeding colonies are known from the Shoal Bay site;  The Shoal Bay site lacks a large area of freshwater wetland and supports relatively low numbers of waterbirds;  Sand and mud flats in Shoal Bay are an important feeding and roosting area for migratory shorebirds during their non-breeding season.  Parts of the Shoal Bay site are degraded due to heavy disturbance by recreational users.  Urbanisation is impacting on the Shoal Bay site, with local swamps being drained for urban development and further developments are proposed as Darwin continues to expand.  Other management concerns include exotic plants and animals, frequent fires, and uncontrolled recreational use of the area.

Shoal Bay is identified as an internationally important site for migratory shorebirds in the East Asian Australasian Flyway (Bamford et al. 2008).

Existing information in regard to the known or potential occurrence of fauna species for the site and the broader surrounding area was collated and reviewed. Information sources considered in the preparation of this report included, but were not limited to the following:  NT Infonet (http://www.infonet.org.au) was searched and various NT Natural Resource Management (NRM) Reports generated on threatened fauna, pest animals, fire history, and wildlife management for the area of approximately 313 square kilometres encompassing the site1 (report created 30/06/2017);  All vertebrate fauna records for the Shoal Bay - Site of Conservation Significance #8;

1 An area of 313.59 sq km extending from 120 11min to 120 deg 21min S and 1300 deg 56 min to 1310 7min E. .

Page 2 of 36  An EPBCA Protected Matters Report was extracted from the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy database. The extract covered the extent of land within 15km of the centre of the site (report created 30/06/2017);  Waterbird and shorebird record data relevant to Shoal Bay and surrounds from the Parks and Wildlife Commission Technical Reports 76 and 73 (Chatto 2006 and 2003);  Interrogation of the Atlas of Living Australia for threatened fauna records for the area within 15 kilometres of the site (accessed 01/07/2017); and  NT Maps (http://nrmaps.nt.gov.au/) was searched for information relating to vegetation community (habitat) mapping.

Field Investigations

An assessment was implemented across the site over a two day period (11 and 12 July 2017) by two experienced biologists (myself and Dr. Ed Meyer). Site coverage by foot traverse was comprehensive with all habitats sampled. Both foot traverses and driving transects were undertaken within habitats adjacent and to the north, east and south of the site. As part of habitat suitability assessments on the site, information on the presence of hollow-bearing trees (live trees and stags) was collected along nine transects (80m wide strip transects).

On 11 July, foot searches were undertaken throughout the clay pan and wetland habitat to the near south of the site (within the Tree Point Conservation Area) within an hour before high tide for evidence of that habitat supporting a high tide roost for shorebirds. A seven kilometre section of beach was also inspected (during a slow driving transect) to assess evidence of shorebird high tide roosts. Searches for shorebirds utilising intertidal flats were implemented along the same seven kilometre section of beach during a slow vehicle transect within one hour of the nominated low tide2.

Attachment A provides a set of plans which describe the location and extent of field activities on the site and within the surrounding local area.

Habitat Overview

The site is dominated sclerophyll woodland and open forest. Eucalyptus tetradonta is a dominant element of the tree canopy throughout the eastern two-third of the site. Both density and height of the tree canopy varies considerably. Generally, a higher abundance of taller and older tress were noted from the eastern third of the site, with woodland throughout other parts of the site characterised by a more open tree canopy and generally a lower height class. Understorey is relatively sparse in regard to shrubs and small trees (e.g. Terminalia carpentariae and Pandanus spiralis), though in parts, it is characterised by notable stands of the cycad Cycas armstrongii.

Eucalyptus tetrodonta woodland and open forest supported a comparatively higher density of hollow-bearing trees (live trees and stags) than other vegetation communities. Within the E. tetrodonta woodland and open forest, a higher density of hollow-bearing trees were observed within the eastern part of the site, i.e. transects 1, 2 and 3 (see Attachment A). Generally, ground timber (including hollow logs) and termitaria were present, whereas these habitat resources were sparse to absent within other parts of the site (wester half and north-western parts). Woodland understorey was also variable, and thought to be linked to changes in topography and the frequency of fire. As a general observation, evidence of lower fire frequency appeared to be limited to the eastern part of the site.

2 Bureau of Meteorology tide predictions for Nightcliff were as follows – 11 July (High at 0735 hrs and Low at 1350 hrs) and 12 July (High at 0808 hrs and Low at 1427 hrs).

Page 3 of 36 Sclerophyll woodland and open forest dominates the erosional plain of the east, with low woodland, shrubland, vine thicket, and grassland present on the slopes and flats to the west of the eroding edge of the plain.

The western parts of the site support distinctly different fauna habitat characteristics in comparison to the woodland / open forest habitats dominating the eastern areas. Here low woodland occurs, either dominated by paperbarks (Melaleuca viridiflora) or bloodwoods (Corymbia polysciada). The tree canopy is comparatively lower than that observed within the eastern parts of the site (median height <10m versus 15-20m). Ground timber (including hollow logs) and termitaria were present, though sparsely distributed and typically absent within low paperbark woodland, vine thicket, and grassland/sedgeland communities on sandier soils within the western-most third of the site.

Along the western edge of the site, a low dune and swale variously supports mangroves and dry vine thicket communities. These elements intertwine and form a relatively narrow timbered band. During field work, the sandy beach exposed at high tide was approximately 60m in width, and flats exposed a low tide were approximately 100-150m in width.

A series of photographs of the abovementioned habitats, and the variation within those habitats, is provided in Attachment B.

Threatening Processes

There is evidence of a variety of impacts to fauna habitat values on the site. These can be summarised as follows:

 Fire – Evidence of the effects of fire was widespread across the site. There are indications that fire is more frequent and hotter within the western parts of the site (e.g. signs of old fire scars high up on trunks of canopy trees, and the paucity of ground timber and tree stags). The impact of a recent fire was evident across the northern part of the site and much of the eastern half of the site. Evidence indicates that the fire was of higher intensity within the north. It is quite possible that fires may more often emanate from unattended / poorly managed fires associated with camping along the beach and foredune areas.  Invasive weeds – small occurrences of Gamba grass (Andropogon gayanus) has been detected on the site and within the Gunn Point area (pers comm. S. Danielsen July 2017). Gamba grass is a serious invasive weed with the capacity to dominate the natural ground cover and significantly increase fire intensity, which in turn can reduce habitat values of woodland/open forest for a wide variety of fauna.  Invasive animals – Evidence of the occurrence of feral pigs was evident across the site. Habitats associated with depressions in the south-west and the parperbark wetland within the south-east exhibited recent evidence of pig damage. There was also evidence of Buffalos (Bubalus bubalis) within the Gunn Point area.  Uncontrolled recreational uses – There is ample evidence that the beach and beach dune habitats are well used for recreational camping and four-wheel driving. Clearings for campsites and access tracks are prevalent throughout the dunes. Discarded rubbish is common. Beach driving appears to be common during both high and low tide conditions.

Attachment B provides a photographs which highlight impacts to fauna habitat values on the site.

Page 4 of 36 Threatened Fauna

Information in regard to threatened species known or likely to occur within the Gunn Point area was collated and reviewed prior to implementation field work. Extensive foot traverses were undertaken across the site, as well as surrounds, in order to assess potential habitat suitability for those threatened fauna identified from the desktop reviews.

Attachment C provides a review of all of the threatened fauna species identified within the databases and predictive models for the Gunn Point area. For each species, an assessment of the likelihood of site occurrence is provided. The conclusion in regard to site occurrence, is based on the known ecological requirements, presence of local records, and the presence and condition of suitable potentially habitat resources on the site.

The assessment of the likelihood of species occurrence within the site was based on the assignment of one of the following categories:  Known – where the species has been recorded within the site.  Likely – where there is a medium to high probability of occurrence on the site. For example, where the species has been recorded as part of surveys within habitats within the local surrounding area and potentially suitable habitat is present within the site OR where the species has been recorded within the extent of desktop searches (as defined in the existing information review) and potentially suitable habitat is present within the site3.  Possible – where that part of the published modelled species' distribution (e.g. categorised as "may occur")4 incorporates the site and potentially suitable habitat may occur within the site, though there are no records within the extent of desktop searches (as defined in the existing information review) OR where insufficient information to categorise the species as likely to occur, or unlikely to occur. This category represents a highly conservative view of potential occurrence.  Other – where there is a negligible probability of occurrence within the site (e.g. outside of known extent of occurrence or modelled distribution) OR there is no suitable habitat present within the site or immediately adjacent to the site5.

Attachment C provides an assessment for 31 threatened fauna species, comprising 12 mammal, four reptile, one frog, and 16 birds (including nine migratory shorebird species). For the majority of the species listed, it was concluded that there is a negligible probability of occurrence within the site or that there is no suitable habitat present within the site or within the local surrounds.

For all nine migratory shorebirds species, it was concluded that there was a medium to high probability of occurrence on the site or within the local surrounds. Observations over the field investigation period indicate that there was a surprising paucity of shorebirds using the intertidal flats along the beach6. Whether this is linked to a lower bio-productivity of the intertidal flats (low abundance of invertebrates associated with coarser sandy substrates) and/or the manifest effects

3 This category may include species for which there are historical but no recent records (due to inadequate survey effort), and for which there is suitable habitat within the site. 4 e.g. as published in DEWHA (2009b), SEWPaC (2011a) or as in Garnett et al. (2010) (minimum convex polygon that depicts extant taxon's extent of occurrence). 5 This category could include species known from the project area historically, which are now considered unlikely to occur due to significant loss/degradation of habitat and/or other threatening processes (e.g., disease, predation by feral species). 6 Field observations were undertaken during a period where shorebirds occur in higher abundance along coastal habitats of the Top End.

Page 5 of 36 of regular human disturbance (people, dogs, and of-road vehicles) or some other factor is unknown. Searches of beach and claypan habitats did not reveal evidence of any high-tide roosts.

The likelihood of occurrence within the site for seven species was considered as possible (Attachment C). This included the Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus, Black-footed Tree-rat Mesembriomys gouldii gouldii, Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed Bat Saccolaimus saccolaimus, Yellow- spotted Monitor Varanus panoptes, Red Goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus, Partridge Pigeon Geophaps smithii smithii, and Masked Owl Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli.

This category represents a highly conservative view of potential occurrence. As described, the site has been subject to degrading processes, particularly as result of the past fire regime. There is widespread evidence of invasive plants and feral animals, and the impacts of uncontrolled recreational uses.

Loss of habitat resources (e.g. tree hollows) and conditions as result of inappropriate fire regimes, habitat degradation due to exotic invasive grasses and/or feral animals, and human interference, are regarded a key threats to those seven threatened fauna species whose likelihood of occurrence within the site and surrounds was assess as “possible”.

Conclusions

None of the abovementioned evidence indicates that the site potentially supports important habitat values for threatened fauna.

Of the threatened species considered herein, it would be prudent to implement field surveys for the Black-footed Tree-rat and Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed Bat in order to further assess potential presence and comparative habitat values of habitat in order to determine the final location of development footprint within woodland / open forest within the eastern parts of the site.

The small extent of the proposed development footprint, the proposed location of the footprint elements, and the nature of the operations do not indicate that the project, subject to reasonable and relevant environment management practices, would result in any significant impact to threatened fauna or fauna habitat values more widely.

Yours faithfully,

Lindsay Agnew Director

Page 6 of 36 References

Armstrong, M. (2004). The yellow chat Epthianura crocea tunney i in Kakadu Nat ional Park. Report to Parks Australia (North). Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure Planning and Environment,Darwin.

Astrebla (2017a). Observations from site inspections of potential hatchery sites in NT. Report prepared for Seafarms.

Aumann, T. and Baker-Gabb, D.J. (1991). The ecology and status of the Red Goshawk in northern Australia. RAOU Report No.75, Melbourne.

Chatto, R. (2003). The Distribution and Status of Shorebirds around the Coast and Coastal Wetlands of the Northern Territory. Technical Report 73. Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory, Palmerston.

Chatto, R. (2003a). The Distribution and Status of Shorebirds around the Coast and Coastal Wetlands of the Northern Territory. Technical Report 73. Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory, Palmerston.

Chatto, R. (2003b). A Tour of Selected Significant Coastal Shorebird Sites in the Top End of the Northern Territory of Australia. In Straw, P. (Ed) Status and Conservation of Shorebirds in the East Asian-Australasian Flyway. Wetlands International Global Series 18, International Wader Studies 17, Sydney.

Chatto, R. (2006). The Distribution and Status of Waterbirds around the Coast and Coastal Wetlands of the Northern Territory. Technical Report 76. Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory, Palmerston.

Cogger, H.G. (2014). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. 7th Edition. New Holland Publishers, Sydney.

Cogger, H.G. (2014). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia.. 7th Edition. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

DE (2017a). Dasyurus hallucatus in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Sat, 1 July 2017.

DE (2017b). Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 1 July 2017.

DE TSSC (2011a). Approved Conservation Advice for Acanthophis hawkei. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2013). Approved Conservation Advice for Rostratula australis. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015a). Approved Conservation Advice for Antechinus bellus. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

Page 7 of 36 DE TSSC (2015b). Approved Conservation Advice for Isoodon auratus auratus. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015c). Approved Conservation Advice for Mesembriomys gouldii gouldii. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015d). Approved Conservation Advice for Petrogale concinna canescens. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015e). Approved Conservation Advice for Petrogale concinna canescens. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015f). Approved Conservation Advice for Phascogale pirata. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015g). Approved Conservation Advice Erythrotriochis radiatus Red Goshawk. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015h). Approved Conservation Advice Geophaps smithii smithii partridge pigeon (eastern). Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015i). Approved Conservation Advice Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2015j). Approved Conservation Advice Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli Masked Owl (northern). Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016a). Approved Conservation Advice Conilurus penicillatus. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016b). Approved Conservation Advice for Macroderma gigas. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016c). Approved Conservation Advice Calidris canutus Red Knot. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016d). Approved Conservation Advice Calidris tenuirostris Great Knot. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016e). Approved Conservation Advice Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016f). Approved Conservation Advice Charadrius leschenaultii Greater sand plover. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

Page 8 of 36 DE TSSC (2016g). Approved Conservation Advice Charadrius mongolus Lesser sand plover. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016h). Approved Conservation Advice Erythrura gouldiae Gouldian Finch. Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016i). Approved Conservation Advice Epthianura crocea tunneyi Yellow Chat (Alligator Rivers). Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016j). Approved Conservation Advice Limosa lapponica baueri Bar-tailed Godwit (Western Alaskan). Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DE TSSC (2016k). Approved Conservation Advice Limosa lapponica baueri Bar-tailed Godwit (Western Alaskan). Threatened Species Scientific Committee, Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Canberra.

DERM (2010). National Recovery plan for the water mouse (false water rat) Xeromys myoides. Brisbane, Queensland: Department of the Environment and Resource Management.

DERM (2012). National recovery plan for the red goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus. Report prepared by the Queensland Department of Environment and Resource Management for the Commonwealth Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra.

DEWHA (2009a). Background Paper to EPBC Act Policy Statement 3.20 - Significant impact guidelines for the vulnerable water mouse Xeromys myoides. Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts. Canberra.

DLRM (2012a). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Pale Field-rat Rattus tunneyi. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012b). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Yellow-spotted Monitor Varanus panoptes. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012c). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Mertens` Water Monitor Varanus mertensi. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012d). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Mitchell’s Water Monitor Varanus mitchelli. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012e). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Howard River Toadlet Uperoleia daviesae. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

Page 9 of 36 DLRM (2012f). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Red Goshawk Erythrotriochis radiatus. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012g). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Grey Falcon Falco hypoleucos. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012h). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Partridge Pigeon (eastern subspecies) Geophaps smithii smithii. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012i). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Asian Dowitcher Limnodromus semipalmatus. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012j). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Australian Painted Snipe Rostrula benghalensis australis. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DLRM (2012k). Threatened species of the Northern Territory: Masked Owl (northern)Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli. Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, Darwin. Profile accessed 1 May 2016.

DNREAS (2015). Sites of Conservation Significance. Legune Coastal Floodplain. Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sports, Darwin, Northern Territory. Available online at: http://www.lrm.nt.gov.au/__data/ assets/ pdf_file/0018/13914/27_legune.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2015.

Doody, J.S., Soanes, R., Castellano, R., Rhind, D., Green, B., Henry, C.R., and Clulow, S. (2015a). Invasive toads shift predator–prey densities in animal communities by removing top predators. Ecology, 96(9):2544-2554.

Dostine, P.L. & D.C. Franklin (2002). A comparison of the diet of three finch species in the Yinberrie Hills area, Northern Territory. Emu. 102:159-164.

Fraser F, Lawson V, Morrison S, Christophersen P, McGregor S and Rawlinson M (2003). Fire management experiment for the declining partridge pigeon, Kakadu National Park. Ecological Management and Restoration 4, 94–102.

Garnett, S., J. Szabo & G. Dutson (2011). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO Publishing.

Geering, A., Agnew, L. and Harding, S. (2007) Shorebirds of Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Griffiths AD. and McKay JL (2007). Cane toads reduce the abundance and site occupancy of freshwater goannas Varanus mertensi, Wildlife Research 34:609–615.

Higgins, P.J. (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic birds. Volume 4. Parrots to Dollarbirds. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Page 10 of 36 Higgins, P.J., and Davies, S.J.J.F, (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 3 – Snipe to Pigeons. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Hill, B. & S. Ward (2010). National Recovery Plan For the Northern Quoll Dasyurus hallucatus. [Online]. Department of Natural Resources, Environment, The Arts and Sport, Northern Territory. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/northern-quoll.html.

Marchant, S., and Higgins, P.J., eds. (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 2 - Raptors to Lapwings. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Milne, D. J., & Pavey, C. R. (2011). The status and conservation of bats in the Northern Territory. In The biology and conservation of Australasian bats (eds B. Law, P. Eby, D. Lunney, & L. Lumsden), pp. 208-225. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Sydney.

Milne, D.J., Jackling, F.C., Sidhu, M., and Appleton, B.R. (2009). Shedding new light on old species identiﬁcations: morphological and genetic evidence suggest a need for conservation status review of the critically endangered bat, Saccolaimus saccolaimus. Wildlife Research, 36, 496–508.

O’Malley, C. (2006). National Recovery Plan for the Gouldian Finch (Erythrura gouldiae). WWF- Australia, Sydney and Parks and Wildlife NT, Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, NT Government, Palmerston.

Oakwood M (2003). The effect of cane toads on a marsupial carnivore, the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus. Unpublished Progress Report February 2003. Darwin: Parks Australia North.

Schoenjahn, J. (2013). A hot environment and one type of prey: investigating why the Grey Falcon (Falco hypoleucos) is Australia’s rarest falcon. Emu, 113:19-25.

Schulz, M. & B. Thomson (2007). Recovery plan for the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus 2007-2011. [Online]. Report to Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Brisbane: Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service. http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/s-nudicluniatus.html.

Tidemann, S. C., Lawson, C., Elvish, R., Boyden, J., and Elvish, J. (1999). Breeding biology of the Gouldian Finch Erythrura gouldiae, an endangered ﬁnch of Northern Australia. Emu 99, 191–199.

Woinarski, J., Pavey, C., Kerrigan, R., Cowie, I., and Ward, S. (2007). Lost from our landscape. Threatened species of the Northern Territory.Department of Natural Resources, Environment, and the Arts, Northern Territory Government, Darwin.

Woinarski, J.C.Z. (2004). National multi-species recovery plan for the Partridge Pigeon [eastern subspecies] Geophaps smithii smithii, Crested Shrike-tit [northern (sub)species] Falcunculus (frontatus) whitei, Masked Owl [north Australian mainland subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli; and Masked Owl [Tiwi Islands subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae melvillensis, 2004–2009. Northern Territory Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment, Darwin.

Woinarski, J.Z., Burbidge, A.A., and Harrison, P.L. (2012). The action plan for AUSTRALAIN MAMMALS 2012. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood.

Page 11 of 36 Attachment A – Site Mapping

This page left intentionally blank

Page 12 of 36 ➤ ImageImage ©© 20172017 DigitalGlobeDigitalGlobe ImageImage ©© 20172017 TerraMetricsTerraMetrics N Image © 2017 DigitalGlobe ImageImage ©© 20172017 CNESCNES // AirbusAirbus 4 km Image © 2017 TerraMetrics Image © 2017 CNES / Airbus ➤

Above and Below - Eucalyptus tetrodonta open forest within eastern part of site (Photo Points 1 and 2).

Page 16 of 36 Above - Open woodland dominated by Corymbia polysciada and Erythrophleum chlorostachys with sparse to absent shrub layer (Photo Point 3).

Below – Mixed species low woodland with sparse to absent shrub layer (Photo Point 4).

Page 17 of 36 Above and Below – Mixed species low woodland with sparse to absent shrub layer (Photo Points 5 and 6).

Page 18 of 36 Above and Below – Mixed species low woodland on rocky substrates (Photo Point 7).

Page 19 of 36 Above - Eucalyptus tetrodonta open forest within eastern part of site (Photo Point 8).

Below - Notable stands of the cycad Cycas armstrongii occur throughout the eastern open forest.

Page 20 of 36 Above - Eucalyptus tetrodonta open forest within central part of site (Photo Point 9).

Below – Mixed species open woodland within central part of site (Photo Point 10).

Page 21 of 36 Low woodland on flats adjacent to (Above) and on (Below) west-facing slopes of erosional plain (Photo Point 11)

Page 22 of 36 Above and Below – Melaleuca viridiflora low woodland habitat characteristic of the south-western parts of the site (Photo Points 12 and 13).

Page 23 of 36 Above – Melaleuca viridiflora low woodland habitat within western-most part of the development footprint (Photo Point 14)

Below - Dry vine thicket dominated by Pongamia pinnata and Hibiscus tiliaceus at back of fore dune (Photo Point 15)

Page 24 of 36 Above and Below – Vehicle tracks and camp sites are widespread across the dunal vine thicket habitat (Photo Point 16)

Page 25 of 36 Above – View east along proposed intake pipe alignment to beach dune (Photo Point 17).

Below – View west along proposed intake pipe alignment across beach and intertidal flat at low tide (Photo Point 17).

Page 26 of 36 Above – View south along beach from proposed intake pipe alignment at low tide (Photo Point 17).

Below – View north along beach from proposed intake pipe alignment at low tide (Photo Point 17).

Page 27 of 36 Above at Photo Point 18. Below at Photo Point 19.

There is ample evidence of widespread recreational use of the beach and dunes for recreation. Regular, uncontrolled recreational use of the littoral environment is likely to have a negative impact to wildlife and habitat values, particularly those species which a sensitive to human activity such as migratory shorebirds (at intertidal feeding habitat and/or roost sites).

Page 28 of 36 Clay pan and estuarine wetland habitat to near south of site. Habitat within the Tree Point Conservation Area

Page 29 of 36 Attachment C Threatened Fauna Assessment s Table Notes: Status: Territory TPWCA / Commonwealth EPBCA. CE = Critically Endangered; E: Endangered; V = Vulnerable; and M = Migratory. Information Sources: 1 = EPBC Act Protected Matters Report (20km search area centred on site; 2 = NT NRM records based on a 15km search area centred on site; 3 = NT NTM records within grid cell(s) in which 15km search area occurs; 4 = Records within 15km of the site listed by other sources (e.g. Atlas of Living Australia, Birdlife Australia, etc.).

EPBC TPWC Species Act Act 1 2 3 4 Potential Site Occurrence and Species Profiles Status Status Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (negligible probability / highly degraded conditions & resources / recognised threats present & on-going / marginal habitat suitability)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Occurs mostly in open forests and woodlands dominated by Darwin woollybutt Eucalyptus miniata and/or Darwin stringybark E. tetrodonta, particularly where these forests have a relatively dense shrubby understorey Fawn Antechinus V V  (cf. habitat subject to frequent &/or fires). Insectivorous, and shelters in tree hollows and Antechinus bellus fallen logs. Current threats: predation by feral cats; inappropriate fire regimes; and habitat loss and fragmentation. Potential threats: exotic invasive grasses; cane toads Bufo marinus; and disease from introduced species such as black rats Rattus rattus and feral cats. Known to occur in Litchfield and Kakadu National Parks to near south and east of site. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Young 2012; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2015a. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (negligible probability / highly degraded conditions & resources / recognised threats present & on-going / marginal habitat suitability)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Occurs mostly in open forests and woodlands Brush-tailed Rabbit-rat dominated by Eucalyptus miniata and/or E. tetrodonta which have not been exposed to Pakooma V E   recent severe fires. Shelters in tree hollows and fallen logs. Current threats: high Conilurus penicillatus frequency of extensive and intensive fires; and habitat loss. Potential threats: competition with introduced rodents; and invasive weeds. Known to occur on Groote Eylandt, Cobourg Peninsula, Kakadu National Park (last recorded in 2008). Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2016a. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire & cane toads)

Northern Quoll, Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Restricted to the Top End where habitat comprises Digal E CE    rocky areas and tall open coastal eucalypt forests, with prime habitat associated with Dasyurus hallucatus sandstone escarpment. Decline in the NT has been linked to several threatening processes, including impacts of feral cats and cane toads, disease, and/or changed fire regimes. Sources: Oakwood 2003; Hill & Ward 2010; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE 2017a. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (negligible probability / highly degraded conditions & resources / recognised threats present & on-going / marginal habitat suitability)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Not known to occur on mainland NT, though known to Golden Bandicoot V E  occur following recent introductions to Guluwuru (2007) and Raragala (2008-09) Islands Isoodon auratus auratus in the Wessel group. Current threats: predation by feral cats; and frequent extensive and hot fires. Potential threats: competition with and/or predation by introduced rodents; and invasive weeds. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2015b. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Formerly restricted to forests and woodlands of the Black-footed Tree-rat north Kimberley and mainland Northern Territory. Recent marked declines reported for (Kimberley & mainland NT) the Kakadu area and more broadly across the Top End. Occurs mostly in open forests Djintamoonga E V    and woodlands dominated by Eucalyptus miniata and/or E. tetrodonta, particularly where Mesembriomys gouldii these forests have a relatively dense shrubby understorey (cf. habitat subject to frequent gouldii &/or fires). Shelters in tree hollows and fallen logs. Current and potential threats: inappropriate fire regimes; predation by feral cats or wild dogs; habitat loss; habitat change due to exotic invasive grasses; and poisoning by cane toads. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2015c.

Page 30 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / beyond known range) Common Brushtail Possum Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Two subspecies occur in the NT, with the subspecies (southern) E  T. v. vulpecula occurring as isolated populations in the southern NT. The subspecies T. Trichosurus vulpecula v. arnhemens occurs in the across the monsoon tropics of the Top End of the NT and in vulpecula the Kimberley, WA. T. v. arnhemens remains locally common. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; & Woinarski et. al. 2012. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Restricted to the monsoonal tropics where it has been recorded from a series of isolated rocky sites from the Daly River in the west to the East Nabarlek (Top End) Alligator River area. Species inhabits rugged rocky areas, typically dominated by Petrogale concinna E V  sandstones but occasionally by granites, seeking shelter in caves in cliffs and rockpiles canescens during the day, and emerging at night to feed. Current and potential threats: predation by feral cats; inappropriate fire regimes; habitat loss & fragmentation; habitat degradation due to exotic invasive grasses and/or by livestock and feral herbivores; and human interference. Known populations within Kakadu and Litchfield National Parks. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2015d. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire & cane toads)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Most records from open forests dominated by Northern Brush-tailed Eucalyptus miniata and/or E. tetrodonta. Shelters in tree hollows during the day. Current Phascogale V E  and potential threats: predation by feral cats; inappropriate fire regimes; habitat loss & Phascogale pirata fragmentation. Restricted to eucalypt forests in the NT top end and from Melville Island (Tiwi group) and West Island, Cobourg Peninsula and Gove Peninsula. Almost all other records are concentrated in a restricted area bounded by Kakadu, Katherine and Litchfield National Parks. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2015e. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: A ground-dwelling, nocturnal predator of invertebrates

Water Mouse  (e.g. grapsid crabs, pulmonates and molluscs) on intertidal flats within mangrove Xeromys myoides wetlands and adjacent supralittoral habitats (e.g. sedge swamps and saline grasslands). Known to shelter and “nest” within either burrows or substantial earthen mounds - supralittoral zone, though also around the base of a hollow mangrove tree trunk. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DEWHA 2009a; DERM 2010; & Woinarski et. al. 2012. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Recorded from a broad range of habitats, though distribution is influenced by the availability of cavernous roosts, including caves, rock crevices and disused mine adits. Roost sites used permanently are generally deep Ghost Bat V V   natural caves or disused mines with a relatively stable temperature and a moderate to Macroderma gigas high relative humidity. One of the largest known colonies occurs in a series of gold mine workings at Pine Creek, NT. Current and potential threats: degradation of largest known colony near Pine Creek; human disturbance at roost/maternity sites; and poisoning by cane toads. Sources: Schulz & Thomson 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE TSSC 2016b. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire impacts on tree hollow production)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Based only a restricted sample of records, it is thought to occur within woodlands and forests extending from coastal and adjacent inland areas Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed throughout the Top End. Records derive from tall open eucalypt forest of Eucalyptus Bat V NT    tetrodonta and E. miniata, Pandanus woodland fringing the South Alligator River, and in Saccolaimus saccolaimus grassy beach dunes with Melaleuca and Acacia adjacent to open eucalypt forest. Roosting ecology poorly known - all confirmed roosting records are from deep tree hollows in, mostly large trees, being Eucalyptus platyphylla (reported as E. alba), E. miniata and E. tetrodonta. Hollows in these tree species have also been used as maternity roosts. Such roosts are susceptible to damage by termites and by fire. Sources: Milne et. al. 2009; Milne et. al. 2011; Woinarski et. al. 2012; & DE 2017b.

Page 31 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Once regarded as a widespread and abundant species which formed loose colonies associated with dense vegetation along creeks, though there are records from hill slopes with stony substrates. Nocturnal, mainly Pale Field-rat V  herbivorous, and has a marked breeding season between January and August. Data for Rattus tunneyi a variety of monitored sites (e.g. Kakadu and Litchfield National Parks) show recent severe declines in populations of these former strongholds. Declines have been recorded since the early 2000s with no clear explanation, though impacts related to feral cats and changed fire regimes are currently being studied. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012a; & Woinarski et. al. 2012. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: The exact distribution of the species is unclear. Suitable habitat consists of flat, treeless, cracking-soil riverine floodplains. Based on the Plains Death Adder V V  presence of suitable habitat, the potential geographic range extends from Western QLD, Acanthophis hawkei across the north of the NT to north-east WA. Native frogs make up a large proportion of the species’ diet. The main identified threat is the introduced cane toad. Habitat modification due to over-grazing by cattle and inappropriate fire regimes are potential threats. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DE TSSC 2011a; & Cogger 2014. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire & cane toads)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: A large ground-dwelling monitor occupying a variety of Yellow-spotted Monitor habitats, including coastal beaches, floodplains, grasslands and woodlands. Feeds V   Varanus panoptes mostly on insects and small, terrestrial vertebrates, though will also take other foods when available, such as eggs of marine and freshwater turtles. In the NT, it has been recorded across most of the Top End and the Gulf regions and south to about Katherine. Principal threat in the NT is the arrival and spread of cane toads. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012b; Cogger 2014; & Doody et. al. 2015. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Semi-aquatic monitor and is seldom far from water of coastal and inland rivers and wetlands. Widespread in the Northern Territory, occupying Mertens` Water Monitor  all of the Top End river systems. Known to feed on a wide variety of prey including fish, Varanus mertensi frogs, freshwater crabs, bird and turtle eggs, and carrion, though also insects and terrestrial vertebrates when available. The principal threat in the NT is the arrival and spread of cane toads (poisoning). Sources: Griffiths & McKay 2007; Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012c; & Doody et. al. 2015. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: An aquatic monitor of wetlands across the northern

Mitchell`s Water Monitor  parts of the NT and northern WA. Inhabits all of the Territory’s northern river systems Varanus mitchelli (except the southern Gulf). A strong swimmer and feeds largely on aquatic insects, fish, small lizards and frogs, though also bird’s eggs when available. Principal threat in the NT is the arrival and spread of cane toads. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012d; Cogger 2014; & Doody et. al. 2015. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Endemic to the NT. Confined to sandsheet heathland associated with alluvial plains, drainage lines and seepage zones within the Howard and Howard Springs Toadlet V  Elizabeth River Catchments (close to Darwin). Within these areas, known from habitats Uperoleia daviesae of sandy soils with short vegetation that is inundated in the Wet season, or to adjacent melaleuca woodland areas. Habitats threatened by impacts associated with the expansion of peri-urban areas of Darwin. Sources: Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012e; & Cogger 2014.

Page 32 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Migratory, arriving in northern Australia between late August and early September, with departures to breeding grounds between late March Red Knot and the end of April. Mainly inhabits intertidal mudflats, sandflats and sandy beaches of E, M V     Calidris canutus sheltered coasts, though also sandy ocean beaches or shallow pools on exposed rock platforms. Occasionally seen on terrestrial saline wetlands near the coast and on sewage ponds and saltworks. Within the NT, potentially the most important areas are the coast between the Daly River and the islands off Bynoe Harbour (particularly the Fog Bay area), the coast from Boucaut Bay to Buckingham Bay (including the Cadell Straits) and the coasts in the vicinity of the Roper River and Port McArthur. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003 a&b; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016c. Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Prefers sheltered coastal habitats with large intertidal mudflats or sandflats, including inlets, bays, harbours, estuaries and lagoons. Great Knot Occasionally occur at swamps near the coast, salt lakes and non-tidal lagoons. CE, M V     Calidris tenuirostris Migratory, arriving in northern Australia between late August and November, with departures to breeding grounds between March to April. A significant proportion of the population apparently remain in northern Australia. Within the NT, the most significant areas are along the coast from the Daly River to Murgenella Creek (particularly the Fog Bay area), the coast from Junction to Buckingham Bays, and the coast from Port McArthur to the Roper River. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003 a&b; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016d. Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Mainly on intertidal mudflats in sheltered coastal areas, including estuaries, bays, inlets and lagoons, and also around non-tidal swamps, Curlew Sandpiper CE, M     lakes, lagoons, and sewage farms near the coast. Also recorded less often on inland Calidris ferruginea ephemeral and permanent lakes, dams. Occurs on both fresh and brackish non-tidal habitats. Within the NT, areas of importance include Fog Bay, Chambers Bay and the Port McArthur areas. Migratory, arriving in northern Australia between late August and early September, with departures to breeding grounds between late March and the end of April. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003 a&b; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016de. Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Migratory, arriving along the Top End coastline in late Greater Sand Plover July with departures to breeding grounds late February and April. Almost entirely coastal, V, M V    Charadrius leschenaultii inhabiting littoral and estuarine habitats where it occurs on sheltered sandy, shelly or muddy beaches, large intertidal mudflats, sandbanks, salt-marshes, estuaries, coral reefs, and tidal lagoons near the coast. The most significant areas within the Top End include Joseph Bonaparte Gulf, the coast from Anson Bay to Murgenella Creek, the northern Arnhem coast, and the Port McArthur area. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016df. Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Migratory, arriving along the Top End coastline in late July with departures to breeding grounds late February and April. Almost strictly coastal, Lesser Sand Plover E, M V     preferring sandy beaches, sand-flats, and mudflats of coastal bays and estuaries, Charadrius mongolus occasionally frequenting mangrove mudflats. Mainly feeds on extensive, freshly-exposed areas of intertidal sandflats and mudflats in estuaries or beaches, or in shallow ponds in saltworks. Recorded from most of the NT coastline, with the most significant areas regarded as the coast from Anson Bay to Murgenella Creek, the northern Arnhem coast, Blue Mud Bay and the Port McArthur area. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016g.

Page 33 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire impacts)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Patchy, widespread distribution across coastal and sub-coastal regions of northern and eastern Australia, with the NT considered to be a Red Goshawk V V    stronghold for the species. Maintains a very large home range (e.g. >120km2) across Erythrotriorchis radiatus open forest and woodland, and favouring such habitats associated with river systems. Considered to be monogamous and the same territories may be occupied year after year. Breeding generally occurs in the dry season with very tall E. tetradonta being a favoured nest site. Sources: Aumann & Baker-Gabb 1991; Marchant & Higgins 1993; Woinarski et. al. 2007; Garnett et al. 2011; DERM 2012; DLRM 2012f; & DE TSSC 2015g. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: More commonly associated with open country and Grey Falcon wooded habitats of the arid and semi-arid zones, though occasionally recorded near the V  Falco hypoleucos coast in open woodland, lightly timbered plains and grasslands. Sporadic records on the periphery of its range are usually during or after inland drought. The majority of records from the NT are from the southern half (mainly south of 20ºS). Sources: Marchant & Higgins 1993; Woinarski et. al. 2007; DLRM 2012g; & Schoenjahn 2013. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Obligate cavity-nesting grassﬁnch. Granivorous, with a rather specialised diet according to wet or dry season. Regular seasonal shifts in habitat, from breeding areas in hill woodland in the dry season to adjacent lowlands throughout much of the wet season, are in response to seasonal changes in food Gouldian Finch availability. Known breeding habitat in the NT and WA is characterised by rocky hills with E V   Erythrura gouldiae hollow-bearing Eucalyptus brevifolia, E. tintinnans or Corymbia dichromophloia, and within two to four kilometres of small waterholes or springs that persist throughout the dry season. Formerly ranged across the Top End, though now only reliably recorded at a small number of sites in the Ord Victoria Plains, Victoria Bonaparte, Pine Creek, Central Kimberley, Northern Kimberley, and Dampierland Bioregions of the NT and WA. Sources: Tidemann et al. 1999; Dostine & Franklin 2002; O’Malley 2006; Garnett et al. 2011; & DE TSSC 2016h. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (remnant habitat conditions and resources available / habitat degraded / fire & invasive grasses)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: A ground-dwelling species whose diet comprises seeds of mostly grasses, though also from Acacia and other woody plants. Considered to be relatively sedentary and within habitats in proximity to water, though known to make local-scale movements (up to 5 to 10km) in response to seasonal variations in water and Partridge Pigeon V V   food availability. As a ground-nesting species (nesting during the dry season and Geophaps smithii smithii preferentially selecting sites within relatively dense grass), it is vulnerable to a variety of threats, including fire, though may be disadvantaged by the absence of fire which leads to development of structurally/floristically unsuitable feeding habitat. Previously recorded across the Top End and far east Kimberley though now recorded only in sub-coastal parts, from Yinberrie Hills in the south, Litchfield National Park in the west, and Arnhem Land to the east. Sources: Fraser et al. 2003; Woinarski 2004; Woinarski et al 2007; DLRM 2012h; & DE TSSC 2015h. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Two subspecies occur within the NT, however, subspecies Epthianura crocea tunneyi is restricted to a small geographic area which comprises floodplains between the Adelaide River to the East Alligator River. Within this Yellow Chat (Alligator area it is known from only a small number of sites. Most records of the subspecies derive Rivers) E V   from tall grasslands and samphire shrublands (on coastal saltpans) associated with Epthianura crocea tunneyi floodplain depressions and channels, and concentrating around wetter areas at the end of the dry season. Current and potential threats: alteration of preferred floodplain habitats by invasive exotic plant species (notably by Mimosa pigra, Brachiaria mutica and Andropogon gayanus); and vegetation change due to grazing by buffalo and cattle, by wallowing and rooting by pigs; and by altered fire regimes. Sources: Armstrong 2004; Woinarski et al 2007; Garnett et al. 2011; & DE TSSC 2016i.

Page 34 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Bar-tailed Godwit Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Mainly coastal, occurring on large intertidal sandflats (western Alaskan) V, M V     and sandbanks, and less often on mudflats of estuaries, harbours, and bays. Within the Limosa lapponica baueri Northern Territory, rarely far from the coast. During the non-breeding period, the distribution of L. l. baueri is predominately New Zealand, northern and eastern Australia. Migratory, arriving generally in northern Australia in August, with departures to breeding grounds between mid-March to mid-April. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016j. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: The two subspecies (baueri and menzbieri) in the East Bar-tailed Godwit Asian – Australasian Flyway (EAAF) both occur in Australia, though L. l. menzbieri (northern Siberian) CE, M V  spends the non-breeding period mostly in the north of Western Australia. L. l. menzbieri Limosa lapponica menzbieri usually forages near the edge of water or in shallow water, mainly in tidal estuaries and harbours. Prefers exposed sandy or soft mud substrates on intertidal flats, banks and beaches. Known to arrive along the North Australian coastline from August onwards, with departures to breeding grounds starting early April. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2016k. Potential Site Occurrence: LIKELY (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat).

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Most commonly associated with coastal habitats with Eastern Curlew soft sheltered intertidal sandflats or mudflats along coasts, especially estuaries, bays, Numenius CE; M V     harbours, inlets, though also coastal lagoons. Rarely occur on near-coastal lakes or in madagascariensis grassy areas. Migratory, arriving in northern Australia as early as July, with maximum arrival recorded during the latter half of August, with departures to breeding grounds between late February and March-April. More important areas within the NT include the coast either side of Darwin, the Millingimbi to Buckingham Bay area, Roper and Limmen Bight River mouths and the Port McArthur area of the Gulf of Carpentaria. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DE TSSC 2015i. Potential Site Occurrence: POSSIBLE (potential occurrence on intertidal feeding habitat adjacent / beach subject to regular human disturbance / no suitable high tide roost habitat). Asian Dowitcher Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Typically solitary or in small groups on intertidal Limnodromus V  mudflats, often in areas of soft mud near sea-edge. Migratory, generally arriving in semipalmatus northern Australia from August onwards, with departures to breeding grounds from late April. In the NT, typically reported in small numbers in the Darwin region, central coastal Arnhem Land, Blue Mud Bay and the Port McArthur region. Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; & DLRM 2012i. Potential Site Occurrence: OTHER (would not occur / no suitable habitat present)

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Regarded as crepuscular, possibly nocturnal, feeding at the water’s edge and on adjacent wet soils for seeds and invertebrates, including insects, worms, and molluscs. Known to occur in shallow, vegetated freshwater (occasionally brackish) wetlands, both ephemeral and permanent, and generally with a Australian Painted Snipe E V  good cover of grasses, rushes and reeds, low scrub, and/or Muehlenbeckia spp. (lignum). Rostratula australis* Primary threat is loss and degradation of wetland habitat, especially shallow ephemeral wetlands, through drainage and the diversion of water for agriculture and reservoirs. Other threats include grazing and associated trampling of wetland vegetation by cattle (particularly where grazing is concentrated around wetlands during the dry season). Sources: Higgins & Davies 1996; Chatto 2003a; Geering et. al. 2007; DE TSSC 2013; & DLRM 2012j.

Page 35 of 36 Potential Site Occurrence:

Ecology, Distribution & Threats: Occurs mainly in tall eucalypt open forest (especially those dominated by E. tetrodonta and E. miniata), though also known to roost in monsoonal forest and forage in more open habitats, including grasslands. Small to Masked Owl medium-sized mammals (up to the size of possums) are thought to comprise the majority Tyto novaehollandiae V V   of the diet. Typically roosts (and nests) in tree hollows. Reasons for decline not known, kimberli though probable causes include fire regimes which reduce the availability of large trees and hollows, and declines in small and medium-sized mammals. The distributional range is poorly understood, though generally accepted as extending across the Kimberley region, across the Top End, and east to the north-east part of QLD. Sources: Higgins 1999; Woinarski 2004; Woinarski et al. 2007; Garnet et al. 2011; DLRM 2012k; & DE TSSC 2015.

Page 36 of 36