DOCSLIB.ORG

Biodiversity Addendum

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biodiversity Addendum 2. BIODIVERSITY ADDENDUM BIODIVERSITY 2 ADDENDUM Proposed development of Stage 1, Silverton Wind Farm, far western New South Wales Biodiversity Addendum Final November 2008 Acknowledgements nghenvironmental acknowledges the assistance and contribution of the following people in the preparation of this addendum: • Jim Reside and Nina Trikojus (Wildlife Unlimited) for fauna surveys and specialist Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby advice • Dr Ian Sluiter (Ogyris) for flora surveys • Barbara Triggs for scat identification • Dr Graham Medlin, Honorary Research Associate, Subfossils, Mammal section, South Australian Museum for identification of subfossils • Gerry Swan (Research Associate, Australian Museum and Director, Cygnet Consulting) for specialist advice relating to herpetofauna • Peter Ewin, Regional Biodiversity Conservation Officer (DECC) for advice on threatened species • Barrier Range Field Naturalists for information on local sightings and the flora species DVD provided in the original assessment • Lessees for site access, orientation and local information nghenvironmental Suite1 216 Carp Street (PO Box 470) Bega NSW 2550 phone (02) 6492 8333 fax (02) 6492 8399 email [email protected] a division of Nicholas Graham Higgs Pty Ltd abn 38 711 349 561 Document Verification Job title: Biodiversity Addendum, Silverton Wind Farm, Stage 1 File Name DRAFT_Silverton_Biodiversity_Addendum_Stage_1 Revision Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by Draft Sep name Steven Sass (Senior name Brooke Marshall name Nick Graham-Higgs 2008 Ecologist) (Manager, Projects) (Director) Kelly Simpson (Botanist) Final Nov name Steven Sass (Senior name Brooke Marshall name Nick Graham-Higgs 2008 Ecologist) CEnvP (Manager, Projects) (Director) Cover photos: Bynoes Prickly Gecko, feral goats and general view of study area Proposed development of Stage 1, Silverton Wind Farm, western NSW Biodiversity Addendum CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1 1.1 Description of the site ................................................................................... 1 1.2 Proposed works ............................................................................................. 2 2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 4 2.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Analysis, assessment and report compilation ............................................ 4 2.1.2 Fieldwork ......................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Flora and vegetation communities .............................................................. 6 2.2.1 Preliminary assessments .............................................................................. 6 2.2.2 Field survey and mapping ............................................................................. 6 2.2.3 Survey limitations ........................................................................................... 7 2.3 Fauna and fauna habitat ............................................................................... 7 2.3.1 Preliminary assessments .............................................................................. 7 2.3.2 Field surveys and mapping ........................................................................... 7 2.3.3 Threatened and other significant species .................................................... 8 2.3.4 Survey limitations ........................................................................................... 9 3 RESULTS ............................................................................................ 13 3.1 Flora and vegetation communities ............................................................ 14 3.1.1 Vegetation communities .............................................................................. 14 3.1.2 Conservation status of vegetation communities ...................................... 20 3.1.3 Species recorded at the subject site .......................................................... 20 3.1.4 Species of conservation significance ........................................................ 21 3.1.5 Disturbance and weeds ............................................................................... 22 3.2 Fauna and fauna habitat ............................................................................. 22 3.2.1 Fauna survey results .................................................................................... 22 3.2.2 Fauna habitats in the study area ................................................................. 24 3.2.3 Effects of grazing on fauna habitat by feral goats .................................... 28 3.2.4 Profile of potential bird usage ..................................................................... 29 3.2.5 Threatened and significant species ............................................................ 30 4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................................... 38 4.1 Flora and vegetation communities ............................................................ 38 4.1.1 Construction impacts ................................................................................... 38 4.1.2 Operational impacts ..................................................................................... 46 4.1.3 Decommissioning impacts .......................................................................... 46 4.2 Fauna and fauna habitat ............................................................................. 47 4.2.1 Construction impacts ................................................................................... 47 4.2.2 Operational impacts ..................................................................................... 48 4.2.3 Decommissioning impacts .......................................................................... 51 5 Conclusions ....................................................................................... 52 Final November 2008 i nghenvironmental Proposed development of Stage 1, Silverton Wind Farm, western NSW Biodiversity Addendum 6 Assessment personnel ..................................................................... 53 7 References ......................................................................................... 57 Appendix A: Flora survey results ............................................................. I Appendix B: Fauna survey results .......................................................... V Appendix C: Threatened species evaluation ......................................... IX C.1 Flora .................................................................................................................. X C.2 Fauna ............................................................................................................. XIII Appendix D: Assessment of Significance ...................................... XXVIII D.1 NSW listed species .................................................................................. XXVIII D.2 Commonwealth listed species ............................................................... XXXIX D2.1 Vulnerable species ................................................................................... XXXIX D2.2 Migratory species .......................................................................................... XLI D.3 Conclusion of assessments of significance ............................................. XLII Appendix E: Bird and bat risk assessment ...................................... XLIV Appendix F: Photographs of the site ................................................... LIV Final November 2008 ii nghenvironmental Proposed development of Stage 1, Silverton Wind Farm, western NSW Biodiversity Addendum Figures Figure 1: Examples of vegetation communities found across the study area. ........................... 16 Figure 2: Examples of fauna habitat types present in the study area. ........................................ 28 Tables Table 1: Relative abundance ranking employed during the survey .............................................. 6 Table 2: Summary of fauna survey effort during this survey ...................................................... 10 Table 3: Conservation status of natural vegetation types in the study area ............................... 20 Table 4: Estimated extent of vegetation loss .............................................................................. 40 Table 5: Overall impact risk for bird and bats (bladestrike and avoidance impacts) .................. 49 Table C-6: Threatened flora evaluation. ...................................................................................... X Table C-7: Threatened fauna evaluation. ................................................................................. XIII Maps Map 1: Proposed additional areas of the Stage 1 development. .................................................. 3 Map 2: The spatial distribution of 2007 and 2008 survey locations across the study area .......... 5 Map 3.2: Locations of fauna and flora survey sites during this study. ........................................ 12 Map 3.3: Locations of fauna and flora survey sites during this study. ........................................ 13 Map 4.1: Extent of vegetation communities of the additional Stage 1b and 1c study areas ...... 17 Map 5.1: Threatened and significant biodiversity of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lake Pinaroo Ramsar Site
    Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site Disclaimer The Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW (DECC) has compiled the Ecological character description: Lake Pinaroo Ramsar site in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. DECC does not accept responsibility for any inaccurate or incomplete information supplied by third parties. No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for any particular purpose. Readers should seek appropriate advice about the suitability of the information to their needs. © State of New South Wales and Department of Environment and Climate Change DECC is pleased to allow the reproduction of material from this publication on the condition that the source, publisher and authorship are appropriately acknowledged. Published by: Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW 59–61 Goulburn Street, Sydney PO Box A290, Sydney South 1232 Phone: 131555 (NSW only – publications and information requests) (02) 9995 5000 (switchboard) Fax: (02) 9995 5999 TTY: (02) 9211 4723 Email: [email protected] Website: www.environment.nsw.gov.au DECC 2008/275 ISBN 978 1 74122 839 7 June 2008 Printed on environmentally sustainable paper Cover photos Inset upper: Lake Pinaroo in flood, 1976 (DECC) Aerial: Lake Pinaroo in flood, March 1976 (DECC) Inset lower left: Blue-billed duck (R. Kingsford) Inset lower middle: Red-necked avocet (C. Herbert) Inset lower right: Red-capped plover (C. Herbert) Summary An ecological character description has been defined as ‘the combination of the ecosystem components, processes, benefits and services that characterise a wetland at a given point in time’.
    [Show full text]
  • <I>Morethia</I> (Lacertilia: Scincidae)
    A NEW SPECIES OF MORETHIA (LACERTILlA: SCINCIDAE) FROM NORTHERN AUSTRALIA, WITH COMMENTS ON THE BIOLOGY AND RELATIONSHIPS OF THE GENUS ALLEN E. GREER The Australian Museum, Sydney ABSTRACT Morethia is a genus of Iygosomine skinks endemic to Australia. This paper provides a description of a new species of Morethia from northern Australia, a diagonsis of the genus, and a discussion of its intra and intergeneric relationships. It also includes a key to the eight currently recognized species of Morethia and notes on their colour pattern, reproduction, behaviour, habitat and distribution. A NEW SPECIES OF MORETHIA In his revision of the Western Australian species of the endemic Australian genus Morethia, Storr (1972) noted that the form ruficauda was "replaced by an undescribed race" in the far north of the Northern Territory. A few years later while reviewing the genus, I "rediscovered" this undescribed form and interpreted it as a distinct species. Dr Storr has graciously allowed me to describe this species, and in appreciation of his original contribution to the taxonomy of the genus (Storr 1972), I take pleasure in naming it Marethia starri New Species Figs 1, 2 (top), and 9 HOLOTYPE: Northern Territory Museum R 1815 - 4.5 km. S. of Noonamah, Northern Territory (12°40' 5., 131°04' E.). Collected by Messrs G. F. Gow and R. W. Wells on 10 November 1975. PARATYPES: Unless speCifically mentioned otherwise, all localities are in the extreme northern part of the Northern Territory. Australian Museum: R 12384 - Yirrkala; R 17411 - Port Keats Mission; R 37225- Koongarra, Mt. Brockman Range; R 41960 - Maningrida Settlement; R 71991- Yirrkala; R 72862 - appox.
    [Show full text]
  • Sturt National Park
    Plan of Management Sturt National Park © 2018 State of NSW and the Office of Environment and Heritage With the exception of photographs, the State of NSW and the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) are pleased to allow this material to be reproduced in whole or in part for educational and non-commercial use, provided the meaning is unchanged and its source, publisher and authorship are acknowledged. Specific permission is required for the reproduction of photographs. OEH has compiled this publication in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. No representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information in this publication for any particular purpose. OEH shall not be liable for any damage that may occur to any person or organisation taking action or not on the basis of this publication. All content in this publication is owned by OEH and is protected by Crown Copyright. It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) , subject to the exemptions contained in the licence. The legal code for the licence is available at Creative Commons . OEH asserts the right to be attributed as author of the original material in the following manner: © State of New South Wales and Office of Environment and Heritage 2018. This plan of management was adopted by the Minister for the Environment on 23 January 2018. Acknowledgments OEH acknowledges that Sturt is in the traditional Country of the Wangkumara and Malyangapa people. This plan of management was prepared by staff of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS), part of OEH.
    [Show full text]
  • Level 1 Fauna Survey of the Gruyere Gold Project Borefields (Harewood 2016)
    GOLD ROAD RESOURCES LIMITED GRUYERE PROJECT EPA REFERRAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENT APPENDIX 5: LEVEL 1 FAUNA SURVEY OF THE GRUYERE GOLD PROJECT BOREFIELDS (HAREWOOD 2016) Gruyere EPA Ref Support Doc Final Rev 1.docx Fauna Assessment (Level 1) Gruyere Borefield Project Gold Road Resources Limited January 2016 Version 3 On behalf of: Gold Road Resources Limited C/- Botanica Consulting PO Box 2027 BOULDER WA 6432 T: 08 9093 0024 F: 08 9093 1381 Prepared by: Greg Harewood Zoologist PO Box 755 BUNBURY WA 6231 M: 0402 141 197 T/F: (08) 9725 0982 E: [email protected] GRUYERE BOREFIELD PROJECT –– GOLD ROAD RESOURCES LTD – FAUNA ASSESSMENT (L1) – JAN 2016 – V3 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1 2. SCOPE OF WORKS ...............................................................................................1 3. RELEVANT LEGISTALATION ................................................................................2 4. METHODS...............................................................................................................3 4.1 POTENTIAL VETEBRATE FAUNA INVENTORY - DESKTOP SURVEY ............. 3 4.1.1 Database Searches.......................................................................................3 4.1.2 Previous Fauna Surveys in the Area ............................................................3 4.1.3 Existing Publications .....................................................................................5 4.1.4 Fauna
    [Show full text]
  • Fowlers Gap Biodiversity Checklist Reptiles
    Fowlers Gap Biodiversity Checklist ow if there are so many lizards then they should make tasty N meals for someone. Many of the lizard-eaters come from their Reptiles own kind, especially the snake-like legless lizards and the snakes themselves. The former are completely harmless to people but the latter should be left alone and assumed to be venomous. Even so it odern reptiles are at the most diverse in the tropics and the is quite safe to watch a snake from a distance but some like the Md rylands of the world. The Australian arid zone has some of the Mulga Snake can be curious and this could get a little most diverse reptile communities found anywhere. In and around a disconcerting! single tussock of spinifex in the western deserts you could find 18 species of lizards. Fowlers Gap does not have any spinifex but even he most common lizards that you will encounter are the large so you do not have to go far to see reptiles in the warmer weather. Tand ubiquitous Shingleback and Central Bearded Dragon. The diversity here is as astonishing as anywhere. Imagine finding six They both have a tendency to use roads for passage, warming up or species of geckos ranging from 50-85 mm long, all within the same for display. So please slow your vehicle down and then take evasive genus. Or think about a similar diversity of striped skinks from 45-75 action to spare them from becoming a road casualty. The mm long! How do all these lizards make a living in such a dry and Shingleback is often seen alone but actually is monogamous and seemingly unproductive landscape? pairs for life.
    [Show full text]
  • Level 2 Fauna Survey.Pdf
    Fauna Survey (Level 2) Phase 1 (September 2016) and Phase 2 (April 2017) Lake Wells Potash Project Australian Potash Ltd September 2017 Report Number: 01-000017-1/2 VERSION 4 On behalf of: Australian Potash Limited PO Box 1941 WEST PERTH, WA 6872 Prepared by: Greg Harewood Zoologist PO Box 755 BUNBURY WA 6231 M: 0402 141 197 E: [email protected] LAKE WELLS POTASH PROJECT – AUSTRALIAN POTASH LTD – L2 FAUNA SURVEY - PHASE 1 & 2 – SEPTEMBER 2017 – V4 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. III 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................ 1 1.2 SURVEY AREA ................................................................................................. 1 1.3 SURVEY SCOPE .............................................................................................. 1 2. METHODS ........................................................................................................ 3 2.1 FAUNA INVENTORY - LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................... 3 2.1.1 Database Searches .................................................................................................................. 3 2.1.2 Previous Fauna Surveys in the Area ........................................................................................ 3 2.2 FAUNA INVENTORY – DETAILED
    [Show full text]
  • Mitochondrial Introgression Via Ancient Hybridization, and Systematics of the Australian Endemic Pygopodid Gecko Genus Delma Q ⇑ Ian G
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 94 (2016) 577–590 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Mitochondrial introgression via ancient hybridization, and systematics of the Australian endemic pygopodid gecko genus Delma q ⇑ Ian G. Brennan , Aaron M. Bauer, Todd R. Jackman Department of Biology, Villanova University, 800 Lancaster Avenue, Villanova, PA 19085, USA article info abstract Article history: Of the more than 1500 species of geckos found across six continents, few remain as unfamiliar as the Received 11 May 2015 pygopodids – Family Pygopodidae (Gray, 1845). These gekkotans are limited to Australia (44 species) Revised 21 September 2015 and New Guinea (2 species), but have diverged extensively into the most ecologically diverse limbless Accepted 6 October 2015 radiation save Serpentes. Current phylogenetic understanding of the family has relied almost exclusively Available online 23 October 2015 on two works, which have produced and synthesized an immense amount of morphological, geograph- ical, and molecular data. However, current interspecific relationships within the largest genus Delma Gray Keywords: 1831 are based chiefly upon data from two mitochondrial loci (16s, ND2). Here, we reevaluate the inter- Mitochondrial capture specific relationships within the genus Delma using two mitochondrial and four nuclear loci (RAG1, Introgression Biogeography MXRA5, MOS, DYNLL1), and identify points of strong conflict between nuclear and mitochondrial geno- Pygopodidae mic data. We address mito-nuclear discordance, and remedy this conflict by recognizing several points of Gekkota mitochondrial introgression as the result of ancient hybridization events. Owing to the legacy value and intraspecific informativeness, we suggest the continued use of ND2 as a phylogenetic marker.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing the Relevance of Binary, Mosaic and Continuous Landscape Conceptualisations to Reptiles in Regenerating Dryland Landscapes
    Testing the relevance of binary, mosaic and continuous landscape conceptualisations to reptiles in regenerating dryland landscapes Melissa J. Bruton1, Martine Maron1,2, Noam Levin1,3, Clive A. McAlpine1,2 1The University of Queensland, Landscape Ecology and Conservation Group, School of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management, St Lucia, Australia 4067 2The University of Queensland, ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, St. Lucia, Australia 4067 3Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Department of Geography, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel, 91905 Corresponding author: [email protected] Ph: (+61) 409 875 780 The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10980-015-0157-9 Abstract: Context: Fauna distributions are assessed using discrete (binary and mosaic) or continuous conceptualisations of the landscape. The value of the information derived from these analyses depends on the relevance of the landscape representation (or model) used to the landscape and fauna of interest. Discrete representations dominate analyses of landscape context in disturbed and regenerating landscapes; however within-patch variation suggests that continuous representations may help explain the distribution of fauna in such landscapes. Objectives: We tested the relevance of binary, mosaic, and continuous conceptualisations of landscape context to reptiles in regenerating dryland landscapes. Methods: For each of thirteen reptile groups, we compared the fit of models consisting of one landscape composition and one landscape heterogeneity variable for each of six landscape representations (2 x binary, 2 x mosaic, and 2 x continuous), at three buffer distances. We used Akaike weights to assess the relative support for each model. Maps were created from Landsat satellite images.
    [Show full text]
  • Witchelina Expedition II – Biological Survey 2016 Data Report for The
    Witchelina Expedition II – Biological Survey 2016 Data Report for the Nature Foundation Darren Niejalke Expedition Science Coordinator Scientific Expedition Group on behalf of the Nature Foundation of South Australia Mon 12th– Friday 23rd September 2016 Biological Survey of SA Survey No. – 1028 Site Survey Code prefix – WIT Report Date JULY 2018 1 Table of Contents Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Objectives................................................................................................................................ 3 1.3 Scope of this report ................................................................................................................. 3 2 Method ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 BSSA Survey Sites ................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Fauna Survey ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Flora Condition (Jessup) survey .............................................................................................. 5 3 Results and Discussion ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reintroducing the Dingo: the Risk of Dingo Predation to Threatened Vertebrates of Western New South Wales
    CSIRO PUBLISHING Wildlife Research http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/WR11128 Reintroducing the dingo: the risk of dingo predation to threatened vertebrates of western New South Wales B. L. Allen A,C and P. J. S. Fleming B AThe University of Queensland, School of Animal Studies, Gatton, Qld 4343, Australia. BVertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia. CCorresponding author. Present address: Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Sulfide Street, Broken Hill, NSW 2880, Australia. Email: [email protected] Abstract Context. The reintroduction of dingoes into sheep-grazing areas south-east of the dingo barrier fence has been suggested as a mechanism to suppress fox and feral-cat impacts. Using the Western Division of New South Wales as a case study, Dickman et al. (2009) recently assessed the risk of fox and cat predation to extant threatened species and concluded that reintroducing dingoes into the area would have positive effects for most of the threatened vertebrates there, aiding their recovery through trophic cascade effects. However, they did not formally assess the risk of dingo predation to the same threatened species. Aims. To assess the risk of dingo predation to the extant and locally extinct threatened vertebrates of western New South Wales using methods amenable to comparison with Dickman et al. (2009). Methods. The predation-risk assessment method used in Dickman et al. (2009) for foxes and cats was applied here to dingoes, with minor modification to accommodate the dietary differences of dingoes. This method is based on six independent biological attributes, primarily reflective of potential vulnerability characteristics of the prey.
    [Show full text]
  • Frogs & Reptiles NE Vic 2018 Online
    Reptiles and Frogs of North East Victoria An Identication and Conservation Guide Victorian Conservation Status (DELWP Advisory List) cr critically endangered en endangered Reptiles & Frogs vu vulnerable nt near threatened dd data deficient L Listed under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act (FFG, 1988) Size: of North East Victoria Lizards, Dragons & Skinks: Snout-vent length (cm) Snakes, Goannas: Total length (cm) An Identification and Conservation Guide Lowland Copperhead Highland Copperhead Carpet Python Gray's Blind Snake Nobbi Dragon Bearded Dragon Ragged Snake-eyed Skink Large Striped Skink Frogs: Snout-vent length male - M (mm) Snout-vent length female - F (mm) Austrelaps superbus 170 (NC) Austrelaps ramsayi 115 (PR) Morelia spilota metcalfei – en L 240 (DM) Ramphotyphlops nigrescens 38 (PR) Diporiphora nobbi 8.4 (PR) Pogona barbata – vu 25 (DM) Cryptoblepharus pannosus Snout-Vent 3.5 (DM) Ctenotus robustus Snout-Vent 12 (DM) Guide to symbols Venomous Lifeform F Fossorial (burrows underground) T Terrestrial Reptiles & Frogs SA Semi Arboreal R Rock-dwelling Habitat Type Alpine Bog Montane Forests Alpine Grassland/Woodland Lowland Grassland/Woodland White-lipped Snake Tiger Snake Woodland Blind Snake Olive Legless Lizard Mountain Dragon Marbled Gecko Copper-tailed Skink Alpine She-oak Skink Drysdalia coronoides 40 (PR) Notechis scutatus 200 (NC) Ramphotyphlops proximus – nt 50 (DM) Delma inornata 13 (DM) Rankinia diemensis Snout-Vent 7.5 (NC) Christinus marmoratus Snout-Vent 7 (PR) Ctenotus taeniolatus Snout-Vent 8 (DM) Cyclodomorphus praealtus
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation and Soil Assessment of Selected Waterholes of the Diamantina and Warburton Rivers, South Australia, 2014-2016
    Vegetation and Soil Assessment of Selected Waterholes of the Diamantina and Warburton Rivers, South Australia, 2014-2016 J.S. Gillen June 2017 Report to the South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University, Canberra Disclaimer The South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board, and its employees do not warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of use of the information contained herein as to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency or otherwise. The South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board and its employees expressly disclaim all liability or responsibility to any person using the information or advice. © South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board 2017 This report may be cited as: Gillen, J.S. Vegetation and soil assessment of selected waterholes of the Diamantina and Warburton Rivers, South Australia, 2014-16. Report by Australian National University to the South Australian Arid Lands Natural Resources Management Board, Pt Augusta. Cover images: Warburton River April 2015; Cowarie Crossing Warburton River May 2016 Copies of the report can be obtained from: Natural Resources Centre, Port Augusta T: +61 (8) 8648 5300 E: [email protected] Vegetation and Soil Assessment 2 Contents 1 Study Aims and Funding Context 6 2 Study Region Characteristics 7 2.1 Location 7 2.2 Climate 7 3 The Diamantina: dryland river in an arid environment 10 3.1 Methodology 11 3.2 Stages 12
    [Show full text]