PSD Point Ceylon NOI Habitat Suit 21 July 2017 Natasha Mcintosh
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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.