PO Box 5385 Ref: 14024c_Ltr02c Brendale Q 4500

P: 0466 428 625 20 January 2015 F: 07 3264 7131 E: [email protected]

Victoria Musgrove Senior Environmental Planner Cockatoo Coal Limited Level 4, 10 Eagle Street, AMP Bldg, Brisbane QLD 4000

Dear Victoria,

RE: EPBC ACT OFFSET CALCULATIONS FOR BARALABA NORTH CONTINUED OPERATIONS PROJECT Cockatoo Coal Limited engaged Ecological Survey & Management (EcoSM) to prepare the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) offset calculations and supporting documentation for the Baralaba North Continued Operations Project (BNCOP). Specifically, the purpose of this letter report is to provide the habitat quality assessments for Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) that will be impacted by the Haul Route Project. This letter report has been prepared based on our existing knowledge of the Commonwealth threatened fauna and vegetation communities that occur in the BNCOP and information contained within the BNCOP terrestrial ecology assessment, undertaken by RPS Australia East. Background A referral outlining the potential and known impacts to matters of national environmental significance (MNES) has been submitted to the Department of the Environment (DotE) for BNCOP and has received approval to proceed (EPBC 2013/7036). Cockatoo Coal Limited as the approval holder received 18 conditions as part of the approval. Condition 6 states the following: The approval holder must provide environmental offsets for authorised unavoidable impacts to Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co- dominant), Ornamental Snake (Denisonia maculata), Squatter Pigeon (Southern) (Geophaps scripta scripta) and South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni). The approval holder must ensure that environmental offsets comply with the principles of the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy. Scope of Works This letter report provides a brief rationale for calculating the habitat quality for the impacted MNES, EPBC Act offset calculations and supporting documentation for the BNCOP using the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy and calculator (DotE 2012). The offsets calculations have been based on impact area data prepared by RPS Australia East (2014) for the BNCOP. Methodology The EPBC Offsets Calculator requires an assessment for each MNES that must be offset (in this case one community and three fauna species). A key component of this

offset calculation for each MNES is the assessment of habitat quality or condition of both the impact area and proposed offset area with a score from 1 to 10. An assessment of the potential improvement of the offset area is also required assuming that management measures are implemented to manage any potential current threats. For the proposed offset area an assessment of risk of loss with and without the proposed offset area being used as an offset is also required. These calculations will be prepared by others and are not contained in this letter report. The Draft Guide to determining terrestrial habitat quality: A toolkit for assessing land based offsets under the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy – Version 1.0 (EHP 2014) in combination with the results of detailed field surveys undertaken by RPS Australia East in April and October 2013. As the title suggests, the draft guide has been developed to assist proponents measuring the habitat quality of land based offsets under the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy. Habitat quality is based on three key indicators, which include site condition, site context and species habitat index. This approach aligns with the Commonwealth Government’s EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (DotE 2013) measure of ‘habitat quality’ however, the indicators were weighted so that a score out of 10 could be generated for each specific MNES. A habitat quality score was calculated through the addition of numerical scores for site condition, site context and, where relevant, a species habitat index. Habitat quality scores range from 1 to 10. Attachment A provides details of the habitat quality scores calculated for the BNCOP. For site condition, individual scores for 13 bio-condition parameters were determined through comparison of site data against applicable benchmarks or best-on-offer reference sites and summed to produce a measured score that was divided into the maximum score possible (in this case 80). The resulting percentage was then multiplied against the assigned weighting to produce a score for site condition. For site context with reference to threatened communities, individual scores for five site context parameters were determined through spatial analysis and summed to produce a measured score that was divided into the maximum score possible (in this case 26). The resulting percentage was then multiplied against the assigned weighting to produce a score for site context. For site context with reference to threatened species, individual scores for five site context parameters and five species habitat index parameters were determined through spatial analysis and field survey data respectively and then summed to produce a measured score that was divided into the maximum score possible (in this case 66 for Ornamental Snake and South-eastern Long-eared Bat and 76 for Squatter Pigeon). The resulting percentage was then multiplied against the assigned weighting to produce a score for site context. The species stocking rate, with reference to threatened species, was assigned a score of either 0, 1 or 2 and then multiplied against the assigned weighting to produce a score for species stocking rates. These scores represent: 0 = absent; 1 = present in low numbers; and, 2 = present in high numbers based on survey of the site and nearby records. This approach will need to be applied to the assessment of all offset areas that are identified to mitigate the residual offset liability of the project. Summary of Findings Table 1 below identifies the habitat quality score allocated to each MNES impacted by the Project. Refer to Attachment A for a detailed rationale for the assigning of these values.

Table 1: Summary of habitat quality scores for each impact MNES

Matter Habitat Quality Score

Brigalow TEC 4

Ornamental Snake Habitat 2

Squatter Pigeon Habitat 7

South-eastern Long-eared Bat Habitat 5

If you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact me on 0466 428 625 or [email protected].

Kind regards,

Chris Hansen Director – Principal Botanist Ecological Survey & Management

[Attached: • Attachment A: MNES Quality Scores • Attachment B: EPBC Act Environmental Offset Liability Assessment

Attachment A

MNES Quality Scores

[Note: Raw bio-condition data sourced from RPS (2014)]

Table A-1: MNES Quality Scores – Brigalow TEC

MNES Brigalow TEC RPS Mapped Vegetation Unit 1a 3a* 3b Bio-condition Site HB04 A03 BEB03 Site Condition 1. Recruitment of woody perennial species 5 3 5 2. Native plant species richness - Trees 5 5 5 - Shrubs 0 5 2.5 - Grasses 2.5 5 5 - Forbs 5 5 5 3. Tree canopy height 5 5 3 4. Tree canopy cover 5 5 2 5. Shrub canopy cover 0 3 0 6. Native perennial grass cover 3 0 1 7. Organic litter 3 3 3 8. Large trees 5 5 5 9. Coarse woody debris 2 2 0 10. Weed cover 0 0 0 Sum of Score 40.5 46.0 36.5 41.0 Site Condition Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[80]) x Applied Weighting 3.6 Site Context 11. Size of patch 0 2 2 12. Connectivity 0 1 1 13. Context 0 5 1 14. Distance to Watering Point 2 2 2 15. Ecological Corridors 0 0 0 Sum of Score 2 10 6 6.0 Site Context Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[46]) x Applied Weighting 0.4

Applied Weightings: Site Condition 70% Site Context 30%

Table A-2: MNES Quality Scores – Ornamental Snake

MNES Ornamental Snake Habitat RPS Mapped Vegetation 1a 1b 1c 3a 3b Unit Bio-condition Site HB04 BEB01 BEB02 A03 BEB03 Site Condition 1. Recruitment of woody 5 3 3 3 5 perennial species 2. Native plant species 5 5 2.5 5 5 richness - Trees - Shrubs 0 0 0 5 2.5 - Grasses 2.5 2.5 2.5 5 5 - Forbs 5 2.5 2.5 5 5 3. Tree canopy height 5 3 3 5 3 4. Tree canopy cover 5 2 2 5 2 5. Shrub canopy cover 0 0 0 3 0 6. Native perennial grass 3 1 1 0 1 cover 7. Organic litter 3 3 3 3 3 8. Large trees 0 0 0 5 5 9. Coarse woody debris 2 2 2 2 0 10. Weed cover 0 0 0 0 0 Sum of Score 35.5 24.0 21.5 46.0 36.5 32.7 Site Condition Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[80]) x Applied Weighting 1.6 Site Context 11. Size of patch 0 2 0 2 2 12. Connectivity 0 0 1 1 1 13. Context 0 0 0 5 1 14. Distance to Watering 2 2 2 2 2 Point 15. Ecological Corridors 0 0 0 0 0 Sum of Score 2 4 3 10 6 5.0 Site Context Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[46]) x Applied Weighting 0.4

Applied Weightings: Site Condition 40% Site Context 40%

Table A-3: MNES Quality Scores – South-eastern Long-eared Bat & Squatter Pigeon

MNES South-eastern Long-eared Bat & Squatter Pigeon RPS Mapped Vegetation 4a 5* 6a 7 8a Unit Bio-condition Site BEB04 _ LHB1 AB05 HB01 Site Condition 1. Recruitment of woody 0 3 3 5 3 perennial species 2. Native plant species 5 5 5 5 5 richness - Trees - Shrubs 2.5 5 5 5 5 - Grasses 2.5 2.5 5 2.5 5 - Forbs 5 5 5 2.5 5 3. Tree canopy height 5 5 5 5 5 4. Tree canopy cover 5 5 5 5 3 5. Shrub canopy cover 0 5 3 3 5 6. Native perennial grass 5 5 5 3 1 cover 7. Organic litter 3 3 3 3 3 8. Large trees 10 10 10 10 10 9. Coarse woody debris 2 2 2 2 2 10. Weed cover 5 5 0 3 0 Sum of Score 50.0 60.5 56.0 54.0 52.0 54.5 Site Condition Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[80]) x Applied Weighting 2.7 Site Context 11. Size of patch 2 10 0 7 5 12. Connectivity 5 2 0 2 2 13. Context 5 5 0 2 4 14. Distance to Watering 2 2 2 0 2 Point 15. Ecological Corridors 4 6 0 4 4 Sum of Score 18 25 2 15 17 15.4 Site Context Score (Sumof Score/Maximum Score[46]) x Applied Weighting 2.0

Applied Weightings: Site Condition 40% Site Context 40%

Attachment B

EPBC Act Environmental Offset Liability Assessment

EPBC Act Offset Assessments – Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant), Ornamental Snake (Denisonia maculata), Squatter Pigeon (Southern) (Geophaps scripta scripta) and South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni) habitat in the Baralaba North Continued Operations Project (BNCOP) Area.

Brigalow TEC Sources of information used to populate the EPBC Act offset calculator include; field survey that generally complies with Neldner et al. (2012) and completed by RPS Australia East (2014), Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) SPRAT profile (DotE 2014a) and the Conservation Advice for the Brigalow TEC (TSSC 2013).

Weighting of quality components It is considered that site condition is more important habitat characteristics than site context in this instance based on the importance of specific condition thresholds that need to be achieved for a patch of Brigalow to be considered a component of the TEC. The following weightings have been applied: ! Community condition = 70 % according to vegetation type and corresponding bio-condition

! Community context = 30 % according to size of habitat areas, connectivity and proximity of habitat with other vegetated habitats and larger remnant areas

Table 1: Offset Assessment for the Brigalow TEC in the BNCOP Area

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Impact Area 9 ha In accordance with the definitions of the listing advice for the Brigalow TEC, the Brigalow TEC in the BNCOP Area are comprised of one 2.5 ha patch of remnant RE 11.3.1 [Brigalow woodland (Vegetation Community (VC 1a)], 2.5 ha of remnant RE 11.4.8a [Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3a)] and 4 ha of regrowth RE 11.4.8a [disturbed Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3b)].

Quality 4/10 Community Condition = 3.6 The areas of Brigalow woodland (VC 1a) and Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3a) support moderately intact distributions of Brigalow that is approaching remnant state, comprises a diverse mid-stratum and groundcover layer and has micro- habitat features such as fallen woody debris, well- developed gilgai and minimal weed infiltration. The Brigalow TEC that will be impacted by the BNCOP Project was given a ‘Community Condition’ score of ‘3.6’, based on the above factors. This component of

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption the habitat assessment was allocated a weighting of 70%, as outlined above. Community context = 0.4 The Brigalow patches were identified in small patches of less than 10 ha with little to no connectivity to larger patches of remnant habitat. These patches are currently threatened by existing land uses and occurs in a fragmented landscape. There is limited connectivity to large intact remnant areas, except for in the far north of the BNCOP. All of these patches will be completely removed by the Project. The Brigalow TEC that will be impacted by the BNCOP was given a ‘Community Context’ score of ‘0.4’, based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 30%, as outlined above.

Offset Area X ha To be confirmed by others

Time over which 15 years This is likely to be the life of the Baralaba Mine loss averted expansion.

Time until X To be confirmed by others ecological benefit

Start quality X/10 To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others without offset

Future quality X/10 Site condition = To be confirmed by others Site without offset context = To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others with offset

Future quality X/10 To be confirmed by others with offset

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others averted loss

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others change of habitat quality

Outcomes of EPBC Act Offsets Assessment

Using the scores described in Table 1 and the EPBC Environmental Offset Calculator, 40 % (or an adjusted area of 3.6 ha) of the proposed impact to 9.0 ha of Brigalow TEC will need to be offset based on the habitat quality of the impact MNES being ‘4’.

[Note: this value may increase or decrease depending on the various unknowns at this point in time]

Ornamental Snake (Denisonia maculata) Sources of information used to populate the calculator include; field survey generally consistent with DotE survey guidelines RPS Australia East (2014), Draft Referral Guidelines for the Nationally Listed Brigalow Belt Reptiles (SEWPaC 2011a), Ornamental Snake (Denisonia maculata) SPRAT Profile (DotE 2014b), personal observations and previous experience in detection of this species in the local area, i.e. Baralaba Mine TLO Facility site and Theodore-Baralaba Road. Weighting of quality components Specific habitat requirements of Ornamental Snake include presence of gilgai (diet is predominantly frogs) in Brigalow, Gidgee, Blackwood or Coolabah woodland or open forest ideally with course woody debris and ground litter, connectivity of suitable habitat and remnant vegetation is considered important for dispersal. The species is known to travel at least 1 km from remnant/wooded gilgai habitat, in drought conditions for example (DotE 2014b). It is considered that site condition and site context are more important habitat characteristics than species stocking rate in this instance, as stocking rate is not known for the site, it is assumed it is present based on sightings in the local area. Therefore the following weightings have been applied: ! Site condition = 40 % according to vegetation type in combination with microhabitat features (gilgai and course woody debris and ground litter) and condition of vegetation

! Site context = 40 % according to size of habitat areas, connectivity and proximity of habitat with other vegetated habitats and larger remnant areas

! Species stocking rate = 20 % where scores of 0 = absent, 1 = present in low numbers, 2 = present in high numbers based on survey of the site and nearby records.

Table 2: Offset Assessment for Ornamental Snake habitat (important habitat) in the BNCOP Area

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Impact Area 33.5ha The species was not recorded in the BNCOP Project Area during targeted fauna surveys consistent with Commonwealth (SEWPaC 2011a; SEWPaC 2011b) and State (DSITIA 2012) survey guidelines. However the species was identified in the local area and a number of areas of potential habitat comprising 2.5 ha of remnant RE 11.3.1 [Brigalow woodland (Vegetation Community (VC) 1a)], 11.5 ha of regrowth RE 11.3.1 [disturbed Brigalow

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption woodland (VCs 1b and 1c)], 2.5 ha of remnant RE 11.4.8a [Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3a)], 12 ha of regrowth RE 11.4.8a [disturbed Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3b)] and 5 ha of remnant RE 11.3.4 [Riparian woodland (VC 5)], which may provide Ornamental Snake habitat, will be impacted by the BNCOP additional footprint (RPS Australia East 2014).

Quality 2/10 Site Condition = 1.6 The areas of Brigalow woodland (VC 1a) and Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3a) support moderately intact distributions of Brigalow that is approaching remnant state, comprises a diverse mid-stratum and groundcover layer and has micro- habitat features such as fallen woody debris, well- developed gilgai and minimal weed infiltration. The areas of disturbed Brigalow woodland (VCs 1b and 1c) and disturbed Brigalow palustrine wetland (VC 3b) have a simple structure consisting of Brigalow overstorey with no midstory and a heavily grazed understory with no obvious gilgai depressions, an important habitat resource that is required to sustain the Ornamental Snake (i.e. food and refuge habitat). Nevertheless, these currently deficient habitats for this species could provide habitat for the snake in the future under improved management (control of grazing, weeds and pests). The poor condition and relative size of the disturbed patches of Brigalow have lessened the overall community condition score compared with the score that was achieved by the Brigalow TEC (above). The Ornamental Snake habitat that will be impacted by the Haul Route Project was given a ‘Community Condition’ score of ‘1.6’, based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Site context = 0.4 The Ornamental Snake habitat within the Project Area was identified in small patches of less than 10 ha with little to no connectivity to large remnant areas, except for in the far north of the BNCOP. This habitat is currently threatened by existing land uses and occurs in a fragmented landscape. The areas of gilgai in adjacent paddocks generally lacked native regrowth and microhabitat features due to farming practices (e.g. clearing and grazing). All areas of habitat described above fall within the

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption disturbance footprint of the project and therefore will be completely removed by the Project. The Ornamental Snake habitat that will be impacted by the Haul Route Project was given a ‘Site Context’ score of ‘0.4’ based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Species stocking rate = 0 Ornamental Snake was not identified within the Project Area, but within Brigalow communities immediately adjacent to the BNCOP. A score of 0 had a weighting of 20% in the context of an assessment of overall quality.

Offset Area X ha To be confirmed by others

Time over which 15 This is likely to be the life of the Baralaba Mine loss averted years expansion.

Time until X To be confirmed by others ecological benefit

Start quality X/10 To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) X % To be confirmed by others without offset

Future quality X/10 Site condition = To be confirmed by others without offset Site context = To be confirmed by others Species stocking rate = To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others with offset

Future quality X/10 To be confirmed by others with offset

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others averted loss

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others change of habitat quality

Outcomes of EPBC Act Offsets Assessment

Using the scores described in Table 2 and the EPBC Environmental Offset Calculator 20 % (or an adjusted area of 6.7 ha) of the proposed impact to 33.5 ha of Ornamental Snake habitat will need to be offset, based on the habitat quality of the impact MNES being ‘2’. It should also be noted that this offset requirement overlaps with the offset requirement of the impacts to Brigalow TEC.

Squatter Pigeon (Southern) (Geophaps scripta scripta) Sources of information used to populate the calculator include; field survey generally consistent with DotE survey guidelines RPS Australia East (2014), Squatter Pigeon (Geophaps scripta scripta) SPRAT Profile (DotE 2014c), personal observations and previous experience in detection of this species in the local region. Weighting of quality components Natural foraging habitat for the Squatter Pigeon (southern) comprises any remnant or regrowth open-forest to sparse, open-woodland or scrub dominated by Eucalyptus, Corymbia, Acacia or Callitris species, on sandy or gravelly soils, within three kilometres of a suitable, permanent or seasonal waterbody (Squatter Pigeon Workshop, 2011). This species feeds and nests on the ground but roosts in trees. The Squatter Pigeon (southern) withstands habitats with some grazing pressure but is more common in habitat without grazing and no longer occurs in areas with intense grazing (Reis, 2012). Breeding generally occurs on stony rises with sandy or gravelly soils, within one kliometre of a suitable, permanent waterbody (Squatter Pigeon Workshop, 2011). Nests are shallow depressions lined with grass and usually sheltered (Reis, 2012). It is considered that site condition and site context are more important habitat characteristics than species stocking rate in this instance, as stocking rate is not known for the site, it is assumed it is present based on numerous sightings in the local area. Therefore the following weightings have been applied: ! Site condition = 40 % according to vegetation type in combination with microhabitat features (gilgai and course woody debris and ground litter) and condition of vegetation

! Site context = 40 % according to size of habitat areas, connectivity and proximity of habitat with other vegetated habitats and larger remnant areas

! Species stocking rate = 20 % where scores of 0 = absent, 1 = present in low numbers, 2 = present in high numbers based on survey of the site and nearby records.

Table 3: Offset Assessment for Squatter Pigeon (Southern) habitat (important habitat) in the BNCOP Area

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Impact Area 277 ha The Squatter Pigeon (southern), which was recorded at six locations throughout the BNCOP area, shows resilience due to its persistence in the already highly cleared and fragmented landscape. BNCOP would result in the following direct and indirect adverse

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption impacts on the Squatter Pigeon (southern). Known habitat for the Squatter Pigeon (southern) (totaling approximately 277 ha eucalypt woodland to open forest habitat and approximately 1,164 ha of cleared grazing paddocks would be progressively cleared. This would include removal of patches of potential habitat in the BNCOP area and reduction in the area of three patches of potential habitat that extends outside of the BNCOP area. Potential localised indirect impacts on surrounding habitats (dust, noise, edge effects). No adverse water-related impacts are likely to occur on habitats surrounding the BNCOP (e.g. Dawson River, Dawson River Anabranch or wetland to the north of the BNCOP Operational Land). This is because no measurable impacts on surface water quality are likely to occur from changes in surface water and no measurable impacts on surface water quantity or quality are likely to occur regardless of changes in captured catchment areas and groundwater (drawdown). Other minor potential impacts on this species include increased risk of attack from feral animals and bushfire risk.

Quality 7/10 Site Condition = 2.7 (rounded The majority of the BNCOP area has been degraded up from through various rural land uses, particularly grazing, 6.7) clearing and management practices. Extant vegetation is generally limited to the Dawson River and its associated tributaries and a broad overflow floodplain linking the Dawson River floodplain with that of Saline Creek, along fence lines, small wetlands, and road reserves. These areas are impacted by a variety of disturbances include exploration, historical clearing, grazing and weed invasion. The largest patch of vegetation in the BNCOP Additional Footprint is the Eucalypt open forest (VCs 6a, 7, 8a and 8b), but it has been cleared in the past and regrown. The structural complexity of this vegetation is relatively good with multiple vegetation layers, fallen woody debris and leaf litter. This habitat consists of a moderately intact canopy layer (40% cover) of medium to large trees (19 m high and 25-40 cm DBH), a low abundance of hollow bearing trees (1 per ha), a distinct mid-storey and shrub layer (11% cover). However the condition of VC 8a is poor and weed cover is high (average 88% cover). This habitat type has a highly simplified

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption structure with a low but moderately intact canopy layer (9 m high and 39% cover) of small to medium sized trees (15-25 cm DBH), and a sparse shrub layer (5% cover). The external connectivity of the habitats is relatively low, except for habitat along watercourses and the overflow floodplain linking the Dawson River and Saline Creek. Nevertheless the distribution and configuration of such disconnected patches when considered together, provide flyways for some birds and bats. The Squatter Pigeon (Southern) habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP project was given a ‘Site Condition’ score of ‘2.7’ based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Site context = 2.0 Although several small patches of habitat were identified in small patches of less than 10 ha with little to no connectivity to larger patches of remnant habitat, the majority of suitable habitat was identified along the northern boundary of the BNCOP and was either remnant and/or contiguous with vast tracks of remnant vegetation to the north of the BNCOP. This habitat is currently threatened by existing land uses and occurs in a fragmented agricultural landscape. There is limited connectivity to large intact remnant areas, except for in the far north of the BNCOP. All areas of habitat will be completely removed by the Project. The Squatter Pigeon (Southern) habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP project was given a ‘Site Context’ score of ‘2.0’ based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Species stocking rate = 2 The species was recorded at only six locations in the BNCOP area. The Squatter Pigeon (Southern) habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP Project was given a ‘Species stocking rate’ score of ‘2.0’ based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 20%, as outlined above.

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Offset Area X ha To be confirmed by others

Time over which 15 years This is likely to be the life of the Baralaba Mine loss averted expansion.

Time until X % To be confirmed by others ecological benefit

Start quality X/10 To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) X % To be confirmed by others without offset

Future quality X/10 Site condition = To be confirmed by others without offset Site context = To be confirmed by others Species stocking rate = To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others with offset

Future quality X/10 To be confirmed by others with offset

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others averted loss

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others change of habitat quality

Outcomes of EPBC Act Offsets Assessment Using the scores described in Table 3 and the EPBC Environmental Offset Calculator 70 % (or an adjusted area of 193.90 ha) of the proposed impact to 277.0 ha of Squatter Pigeon habitat will need to be offset, based on the habitat quality of the impact MNES being ‘7’.

South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni) Sources of information used to populate the calculator include; field survey generally consistent with DotE survey guidelines RPS Australia East (2014), South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus corbeni) SPRAT Profile (DotE 2014d), personal observations and previous experience in detection of this species in the local region. Weighting of quality components The South-eastern Long-eared Bat occurs in a range of inland woodland vegetation types, including box, ironbark and cypress pine woodlands. The species also occurs in Buloke (Allocasuarina luehmannii) woodland, Brigalow woodland, Belah woodland,

Smooth-barked Apple, (Angophora leiocarpa) woodland; River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) forests lining watercourses and lakes, Black Box (Eucalyptus largiflorens) woodland, and dry sclerophyll forest (DotE, 2014d). Individuals use a number of different roost sites in the same night (DotE, 2014d). The South-eastern Long-eared Bat is an insectivorous and voracious feeder. Food can be taken in-flight by gleaning vegetation or ground foraging (DotE, 2014d). In flight, it commonly feeds on beetles, bugs, and moths (DotE, 2014d) however it has also been recorded feeding on grasshoppers and crickets. The South-eastern Long-eared Bat has a wide home range and forages a few kilometres away from roost sites (DotE, 2014d). It is considered that site condition and site context are more important habitat characteristics than species stocking rate in this instance, as stocking rate is not known for the site, however it is assumed it is present based on numerous sightings in the local area. Therefore the following weightings have been applied: ! Site condition = 40 % according to vegetation type in combination with microhabitat features (gilgai and course woody debris and ground litter) and condition of vegetation

! Site context = 40 % according to size of habitat areas, connectivity and proximity of habitat with other vegetated habitats and larger remnant areas

! Species stocking rate = 20 % where scores of 0 = absent, 1 = present in low numbers, 2 = present in high numbers based on survey of the site and nearby records.

Table 4: Offset Assessment for South-eastern Long-eared Bat habitat (important habitat) in the BNCOP Area

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Impact Area 277 ha The calls of South-eastern Long-eared Bat, which are recorded with an Anabat detector, cannot be distinguished from calls of other Nyctophilus sp. that are also potentially present in the area. Calls of a Nyctophilus sp. were recorded at five locations throughout the BNCOP area by RPS Australia East in April and October 2013. RPS Australia East described that the calls are more likely to be from a common long-eared bat species since the common long-eared bat species were caught in harp traps and the closest record of the South-eastern Long-eared Bat is approximately 130 km to the south-east of the BNCOP area. However, it remains a possibility that the South-eastern Long-eared Bat is present (and some of the calls may be of the South-eastern Long- eared Bat). If the South-eastern Long-eared Bat is present in the area, foraging habitat would be removed through the clearance of woodland and open forest (277 ha) and some breeding habitat where there are hollow-bearing trees.

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption No habitat within the BNCOP locality has been identified as important or critical habitat for the South-eastern Long-eared Bat in any recovery plans or listed on the EPBC Act Register of Critical Habitat maintained by the Minister of the Environment under the EPBC Act (DotE, 2014d). Past disturbance and clearance has resulted in reduced abundance of tree hollows across the BNCOP area and regrowth vegetation is common. Hollow-bearing trees are more abundant outside of the BNCOP area along the Dawson River and Dawson River Anabranch as the vegetation is typically older. The habitat in the BNCOP area may also be suboptimal for the South-eastern Long-eared Bat due to the high levels of fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation is considered a potential threat to the South-eastern Long-eared Bat because the species displays a preference for larger areas of intact habitat (DotE, 2014d).

Quality 5/10 Site Condition = 2.7 (rounded The majority of the BNCOP area has been degraded up from through various rural land uses, particularly grazing, 4.7) clearing and management practices. Extant vegetation is generally limited to the Dawson River and its associated tributaries and a broad overflow floodplain linking the Dawson River floodplain with that of Saline Creek, along fence lines, small wetlands, and road reserves. These areas are impacted by a variety of disturbances include exploration, historical clearing, grazing and weed invasion. The largest patch of vegetation in the BNCOP Additional Footprint is the Eucalypt open forest (VCs 6a, 7, 8a and 8b), but it has been cleared in the past and regrown. The structural complexity of this vegetation is relatively good with multiple vegetation layers, fallen woody debris and leaf litter. This habitat consists of a moderately intact canopy layer (40% cover) of medium to large trees (19 m high and 25-40 cm DBH), a low abundance of hollow bearing trees (1 per ha), a distinct mid-storey and shrub layer (11% cover). However the condition of VC 8a is poor and weed cover is high (average 88% cover). This habitat type has a highly simplified structure with a low but moderately intact canopy layer (9 m high and 39% cover) of small to medium sized trees (15-25 cm DBH), and a sparse shrub layer (5% cover).

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption The external connectivity of the habitats is relatively low, except for habitat along watercourses and the overflow floodplain linking the Dawson River and Saline Creek. Nevertheless the distribution and configuration of such disconnected patches when considered together provide flyways for some birds and bats. The South-eastern Long-eared Bat habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP Project was given a ‘Site Condition’ score of ‘2.7’, based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Site context = 2.0 Although several small patches of habitat were identified in small patches of less than 10 ha with little to no connectivity to larger patches of remnant habitat, the majority of suitable habitat was identified along the northern boundary of the BNCOP and was either remnant and/or contiguous with vast tracks of remnant vegetation to the north of the BNCOP. This habitat is currently threatened by existing landuses and occurs in a fragmented agricultural landscape. There is limited connectivity to large intact remnant areas, except for in the far north of the BNCOP. All areas of habitat will be completely removed by the Project. The South-eastern Long-eared Bat habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP Project was given a ‘Site Context’ score of ‘2.0’, based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 40%, as outlined above. Species stocking rate = 0 The species was not positively identified as occurring within the BNCOP area. The anabat calls are far more likely to be from the more common Nyctophilus species that occur in the area. The South-eastern Long-eared Bat habitat that will be impacted by the BNCOP Project was given a ‘Site Context’ score of ‘0’, based on the above factors. This component of the habitat quality assessment was allocated a weighting of 20%, as outlined above.

Offset Area X ha To be confirmed by others

Time over which 15 years This is likely to be the life of the Baralaba Mine loss averted expansion.

Attribute Value Rationale/assumption

Time until X To be confirmed by others ecological benefit

Start quality X/10 To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others without offset

Future quality X/10 Site condition = To be confirmed by others without offset Site context = To be confirmed by others Species stocking rate = To be confirmed by others

Risk of loss (%) XX % To be confirmed by others with offset

Future quality X/10 To be confirmed by others with offset

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others averted loss

Confidence in XX % To be confirmed by others change of habitat quality

Outcomes of EPBC Act Offsets Assessment Using the scores described in Table 3 and the EPBC Environmental Offset Calculator, 50 % (or an adjusted area of 138.5 ha) of the proposed impact to 277.0 ha of South- eastern Long-eared Bat habitat will need to be offset, based on the habitat quality of the impact MNES being ‘5’. [Note: 1. this value may increase or decrease depending on the various unknowns at this point in time] 2. this habitat would also provide an identical offset for impacts to the habitat of Squatter Pigeon and as such not considered as an additional offset liability to the project.

References

DotE, 2014a. Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) in Community and Species Profile and Threats Database, Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- bin/sprat/public/publicshowcommunity.pl?id=28.

DotE, 2014b. Denisonia maculata in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=1193.

DotE, 2014c. Geophaps scripta scripta in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgibin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=64440

DotE, 2014d. Nyctophilus corbeni in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi- bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=83395

DSITIA, 2012. Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey Guidelines for Queensland (Version 1.0), Biodiversity and Ecosystem Sciences, Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts, Queensland Government, Brisbane. Available at: http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/ecosystems/biodiversity/pdf/fauna_survey_guidelines.pdf.

Neldner, V.J. et al., 2012. Methodology for Survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland, Version 3.2, Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts, Queensland Government, Brisbane. Available at: http://www.qld.gov.au/environment/assets/documents/plants- animals/herbarium/herbarium-mapping-methodology.pdf.

Reis, T. 2012. Squatter Pigeon (Southern) in Curtis, L, Dennis, A, McDonald, KR, Kyne, PM and Debus, SJS. 2012. Queensland’s Threatened Animals. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria.

RPS Australia East, 2014. Baralaba North Continued Operations Project: Terrestrial Ecology Post Summer and Post Winter Baseline Survey Report, RPS Australia East Pty Ltd, prepared for Cockatoo Coal Ltd, Brisbane.

SEWPaC, 2011a. Draft Referral guidelines for the nationally listed Brigalow Belt reptiles, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Australian Government, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/570964ac-15bf-4e07-80da- 848fead7b0cd/files/draft-referral-guidelines-comment-brigalow-reptiles.pdf.

SEWPaC, 2011b. Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened reptiles, Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Australian Government, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/eba674a5-b220-4ef1-9f3a- b9ff3f08a959/files/survey-guidelines-reptiles.pdf.

Squatter Pigeon Workshop, 2011. Proceedings from the workshop for the Squatter Pigeon (southern). 14-15 December 2011 . Toowoomba Office of the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service.

TSSC, 2013. Commonwealth Conservation Advice for Brigalow Ecological Community, Canberra: Department of the Environment. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communities/pubs/028- conservation-advice.pdf.

Directors: A T Veary BSc. (Hons) E L Veary BAppSc

Our Ref: Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification

3 March 2015

Victoria Musgrove Senior Environmental Planner Cockatoo Coal Limited

Via email: [email protected]

Dear Victoria,

RE: Baralaba North – Biodiversity Offset Calculator “Quality” Justification The following brief summary outlines the justifications for the offset habitat quality scores provided in the EPBC Offset calculator for the individual threatened species as required. The underlying principal for providing an offset is to secure suitable habitat for threatened species, such that the species can increase in abundance, the offset providing ecological security for the species in the local area. It is our understanding that offsets are selected on the basis that the ecological value for the target species will improve over time, as should the population, health and abundance, thus not only offsetting the proposed action, but striving to protect and increase the occurrence threatened species and their populations. Cockatoo Coal has instructed FEC/QTree to assess the future value of the brigalow/gilgai habitats of the proposed offset based on the management plans being prepared for the offset. Of particular note is that Cockatoo Coal has provided direction to assess the offset values in relation to specific grazing regimes as follows:  Elimination of grazing from the remnant and regrowth vegetation areas associated with Zamia Creek; and  Pulse grazing during dry periods in other regrowth brigalow areas including areas supporting gilgai formations. We have been advised that these management options/strategies have been accepted by DOTE for other Cockatoo projects as referenced below:  Controlled Action Approval EPBC 2012-6548 approved the implementation of the 'Ornamental Snake Mitigation and Management Plan Baralaba Train Load Out Facility' (August 2014), which includes the following management action: o 'Where feasible within the operational requirements of the TLO Facility, pulse grazing of Ornamental Snake habitat will be undertaken for short durations in the dry season (generally between May-September) to assist in weed management. This will only be undertaken when gilgai are

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 2

completely dry to assist in reducing the cover of exotic pasture grasses. Gilgai areas should not be grazed while gilgai contain water as this can lead to gilgai habitat degradation, e.g. gilgai trampling, water quality impacts.' Consequently, the EPBC offset calculators have taken this directive into consideration, in conjunction with the undertaking by Cockatoo Coal that planned controlled burns will also be implemented, particularly when determining the “time to ecological benefit”, the “percentage confidence” and “Future Value with Offset." Of particular note, with regard to the management of flora, controlled burns are ecologically preferable to pulse grazing for the management of weeds and pasture grass fuel loads within these communities/populations.

1. Squatter pigeon - Zamia  Reviewed the habitat requirements for the bird from DOTE SPRAT.  Reviewed the Proceedings of the Squatter Pigeon Workshop (QNPWS 2011).  Reviewed Squatter Pigeon (Southern), Reis, T. 2012 in Curtis, L, Dennis, A, McDonald, KR, Kyne, PM and Debus, SJS. 2012. Queensland’s Threatened Animals. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria.  Extensive experience surveying for squatter pigeon throughout central Queensland.  Assessed the habitats supported for this species across the site.  Assessed the diversity of resources supported across the site: o Foraging. o Breeding. o Roosting. o Ground cover (protection and foraging). o Prevalence of permanent water on-site or adjacent to site. o Tree canopy cover to provide roosting habitat.  Identified the occurrence and density of threatening processes (e.g. predators such as cats, foxes, pigs). Existing Values (Start Quality) Targeted surveys positively identified the species on-site. The site supports a diverse range of foraging resources supported across the site including both native and introduced (pasture grasses) supported on sandy to heavier clay soils. There is semi-permanent (most likely permanent) water within the deeper pools of Zamia Creek. Large tracts of treed areas associated with the remnant vegetation and advanced regrowth areas provide suitable roosting resources for the squatter pigeon. There are also suitable areas on-site to support breeding for the species. However, due to the presence of predators on site (cats, dogs and pigs) and historic land management practices, a ‘Start Quality’ score of ‘5’ has been given for squatter pigeon (southern) habitat present on site. Future Quality without Offset. Given the historical and current land management practices and the variability of land management in the local area, if an offset is not established, it is expected that the status quo for the squatter pigeon for this site will probably stay the same if not decline thus remaining Vulnerable. However, if there is a significant change/s in land use or practices, e.g. pastoral to cropping and/or clearing of regrowth vegetation, there will be a significant

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 3 reduction in available habitat suitable for the squatter pigeon, which may result in the loss of this species from this property. Consequently, given the tenuous nature of the habitats supported on the property, the ‘Future Quality without Offset’ has been given a score of ‘4’. Future Quality with Offset. The future quality of the offset is predicated on the effective implementation of ecological management plans. For the site to improve in ecological value for this species and for the species to persist and increase on-site, specific management strategies will be required to ensure that the value of the site increases over time for this species. Key management strategies include:  Pest animal management plans particularly for cats.  Elimination of cattle grazing and associated impacts from the remnant and riparian vegetation communities of Zamia Creek and the other two remnant patches of vegetation on-site.  Pulse grazing within the remaining brigalow regrowth communities to control weeds and reduce fire loads.  Fire management to include controlled burning.  Weed management. If these strategies are effectively employed, then there will be a significant increase in the habitat values of the site for the squatter pigeon. Improvements will primarily include increases to:  the diversity, abundance and availability of forage species; and  reduction in predation and nest disruption/destruction which will lead to more successful recruitment of the site and local area. The predicted “Future Quality with Offset” score of ‘8’ been applied within the calculator based upon the effective implementation of a management plan that includes these key strategies as a minimum.

2. Ornamental Snake - Zamia  Reviewed the habitat requirements for the snake from DOTE SPRAT.  Extensive scientific research and experience surveying for ornamental snakes throughout central Queensland.  Assessed the habitats supported for this species across the site.  Assessed the diversity of resources supported across the site: o Foraging. o Breeding. o Refugia. o Ground cover (protection and foraging). o Ability of gilgai formations to support ponded water for prolonged periods. o Proximity to other suitable gilgaied habitats.  Identified the occurrence and density of threatening processes (e.g. cattle and pigs).  Identified and assessed the historic impacts on the site.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 4

Existing Values (Start Quality) Targeted surveys positively identified the species on-site, both adult and sub-adult. There were a diverse range of gilgai habitats supported on-site in terms of depth and sizes of depressions and heights and sizes of mounds. Extensive evidence of long term water holding (presence of dense aquatic growth including bogmarsh and sedges). Positive identification of sub-adult animal on-site indicates that site supports suitable breeding habitat for the species. Identification of 13 species of frogs in abundance of different age classes on-site, which included “preferred” prey species (Andrew Veary pers. obs and Steve Wilson pers. comm.). However, due to historic land management practices and the abundant presence of cane toads on the site, a ‘Start Quality’ score of ‘ 4’ has been given for the ornamental snake habitat present on site. Future Quality without Offset. The site has been subjected to various land management techniques including vegetation clearing and pulling, blade ploughing and inappropriate fire regimes. In addition, active cattle grazing and unfettered access to gilgai areas, particularly during wet environmental conditions, significantly reduces the habitat values of the site. In association with cattle grazing and associated impacts, cane toad populations also have an impact on ornamental snake populations and thus the value of the site. Typically, increased cane toad densities are linked to increasing grazing pressure. Without the offset and the subsequent inability to eliminate these three primary threatening impacts, it is considered highly likely that the habitat values for the ornamental snake will most likely continue to decline which may result in the loss of this species from this property. Therefore, a ‘Future Quality without Offset’ score of ‘1’ has been given. Future Quality with Offset. The future quality of the offset is predicated on the effective implementation of ecological management plans. For the site to improve in ecological value for this species and for the species to persist and increase on-site, specific management strategies will be required to ensure that the value of the site increases over time for this species. Key management strategies include:  Elimination of cattle grazing and associated impacts from the currently un-mapped remnant vegetation community in the central north-west of the site.  Implementation of strictly controlled pulsed cattle grazing during dry season conditions within all other gilgai habitats (as per Cockatoo Coal directive).  Pest animal management in particular cane toads.  Fire management. The ecological values for the offset for the ornamental snake will improve significantly if cattle are excluded from the gilgai areas during wet conditions and cane toad populations are reduced and managed. Improvements will primarily include increases to longevity of the existing population and breeding success which will lead to more successful recruitment of the site and local area. The values of the gilgai (i.e. the depth of the depressions and the height of the mounds through the process of the clay shrinking and swelling) will improve over time, but will be dependent on rainfall events, both in terms of occurrence and severity.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 5

Provided that these key strategies are effectively employed, the habitat values of the offset will improve. The predicted “Future Quality with Offset” score of ‘7’ has been applied within the calculator based upon the effective implementation of a management plan that includes these key strategies as a minimum.

3. South-eastern long-eared bat – Zamia  Reviewed the habitat requirements from DOTE SPRAT.  Extensive experience surveying for south-eastern long-eared bat throughout central Queensland.  Assessed the habitats supported for this species associated with Zamia Creek and adjacent environs including the Zamia Creek Conservation Park.  Assessed the diversity of resources supported within suitable habitats: o Foraging. o Breeding. o Roosting. o Ground cover (foraging). o Prevalence of permanent water on-site or adjacent to site. o Occurrence, density and diversity of tree hollows. o Occurrence of tree fissures and decorticating bark.  Identified the occurrence and density of threatening processes.  Identified and assessed the historic impacts on the site. Existing Values (Start Quality) Trapping surveys were not undertaken for the species, however, Anabat surveys positively identified the presence of Nyctophilus sp. on-site. Diverse range of foraging habitats supported within the well vegetated riparian corridor along Zamia Creek and nearby, including tall treed canopy layer, tall shrub layer and ground cover including native grasses and leaf litter layer. The low shrub layer and leaf litter layers have been significantly impacted upon by cattle which have greatly reduced these resources and subsequently reduced the value of the site. Large tracts of treed areas, with decorticating bark and tree hollows resources considered common, to provide suitable roosting/breeding resources Breeding habitat resources, i.e. tree hollows, supported on-site for the species. For these reasons, a ‘Start Quality’ score of ‘4’ has been given for south-eastern long-eared bat habitat present on the site. Future Quality without Offset. Provided that the remaining areas of remnant vegetation are not cleared from the site, or the habitat resources supported therein are not destroyed by fire, it is considered most likely that the existing habitat values for this species will persist and the status quo remain. However, any change/s to the structure of the remaining vegetation communities (cleared/regrowth areas excluded) will result in a decline in the value of the site to the south-eastern long-eared bat. Consequently, a ‘Future Quality without Offset’ score of ‘3’ has been given. Future Quality with Offset. The future quality of the offset is predicated on the effective implementation of ecological management plans.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 6

For the site to improve in ecological value for this species and for the species to potentially persist and increase on-site, specific management strategies will be required to ensure that the value of the site increases over time for this species. Key management strategies include:  Elimination of cattle grazing and associated impacts from vegetation communities associated with Zamia Creek and the other two remnant patches of vegetation on- site to allow the low shrub layer and ground leaf litter layer to develop and improve.  Fire management Provided that these key strategies are effectively employed, then there will be a significant increase in the habitat values of the site for the south-eastern long-eared bat. Improvements will primarily include an increase in the structural diversity, abundance and availability of foraging habitats supported on-site. The predicted “Future Quality with Offset” score of ‘7’ has been applied within the calculator based upon the effective implementation of a management plan that includes these key strategies as a minimum.

4. South-eastern long-eared bat – Tin Hut Creek  Reviewed the habitat requirements from DOTE SPRAT  Extensive experience surveying for south-eastern long-eared bat throughout central Queensland.  Assessed the habitats supported for this species across the whole property  Assessed the diversity of resources supported within suitable habitats: o Foraging o Breeding o Roosting o Ground cover (foraging) o Prevalence of permanent water on-site or adjacent to site o Occurrence, density and diversity of tree hollows o Occurrence of tree fissures and decorticating bark  Identified the occurrence and density of threatening processes.  Identified and assessed the historic impacts on the site. Existing Values (Start Quality) Not positively identified on-site, but 100 (including one female with two young) microbats from five species were captured. This included 33 Nyctophilus sp.; 9 N. geoffroyi and 24 N. gouldi (inc. 2 young). Diverse range of foraging habitats supported across the whole site, including tall treed canopy layer, tall shrub layer, low shrub layer and ground cover including native grasses and leaf litter layer. The site supported structurally diverse and abundant treed, tall canopy layer with decorticating bark and tree hollows resources considered abundant, to provide suitable roosting/breeding resources. The shrub layers were equally diverse and abundant. The ground and leaf litter layer were diverse, yet patchy, which is common in the local area. Breeding habitat resources, i.e. tree hollows, supported on-site for the species. For these reasons, a ‘Start Quality’ score of ‘8’ has been given for the south-eastern long- eared bat habitat present on the site.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 7

Future Quality without Offset. Historically the site has been selectively logged for timber resources. With the exception of the broadscale clearing of the LNG corridors on-site, there has been little disturbance to the remaining vegetation on-site and consequently, the habitat values supported on-site have improved over time since the cessation of logging activities. In addition, there is limited cattle grazing on-site which has had some impact on the values supported, primarily associated with the decline in the structure, nature and extent of the low shrub, ground and leaf litter layers supported. Without the offset, it is likely that the values of the site will decline over time if cattle grazing pressure continues/increases and/or a wildfire occurs across the site. Both these impacting processes have the potential to significantly impact on the values of the site. The property management practices are currently limited in this regard, and are likely to be maintained as such, therefore a ‘Future Quality without Offset’ score of ‘5’ has been given. Future Quality with Offset. The future quality of the offset is predicated on the effective implementation of ecological management plans. For the site to improve in ecological value for this species and for the species to potentially persist and increase on-site, specific management strategies will be required to ensure that the value of the site increases over time for this species. Key management strategies include:  Elimination of cattle grazing and associated impacts to allow low shrub layer and ground leaf litter layer to develop and improve.  Fire management If these strategies are effectively employed, then there will be continued increase in the habitat values of the site for the south-eastern long-eared bat. The predicted “Future Quality with Offset” score of ‘9’ has been applied within the calculator based upon the effective implementation of a management plan that includes these key strategies as a minimum.

5. Brigalow Threatened Ecological Community – Zamia  Reviewed the ecological characters for this community, and its requirements, from the following DOTE documents: o Listing Advice. o Conservation Advice. o 'Brigalow Regrowth and the EPBC Act' Information Sheet.  Use of the BioCondition assessment methodology by DEHP.  Use of Queensland Herbarium survey methodology by DSITIA.  Extensive experience in surveying and assessing this community in central Queensland.  Identified the quality of habitat for threatened flora species (particularly some Solanum spp.).  Identified the occurrence and density of threatening processes.  Identified and assessed the historic impacts on the site.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 8

Existing Values (Start Quality) The following types of brigalow were found on site (with respective approximate areas):  A large remnant between and joining the anabranches of Zamia Creek (~51 Ha), of which one anabranch connects to Zamia Creek Conservation Park.  Remnant (~3.6 Ha) connected to regrowth area, in turn connected to Zamia Conservation Park.  Remnant (~5.8 Ha) connected to extensive regrowth area.  Riparian remnant component approximately 20% of Zamia Creek vegetation (~7.5 Ha out of ~38 Ha).  Advanced regrowth on denuded channels (~26 Ha).  Various forms of regrowth (but not advanced as above)(~330 Ha), some with gilgai. For these reasons, the following ‘Start Quality’ scores have been given for brigalow on the site:  For the remnant areas a ‘Start Quality’ score of '7' has been given as the mature trees were mostly unaffected by grazing, but the understorey was damaged.  For the regrowth areas a ‘Start Quality’ score of '2' has been applied as grazing practices are impeding the regrowth of native flora species/communities. Future Quality without Offset. Provided that the remaining areas of woody vegetation (remnant and regrowth) are not cleared from the site, or these communities are not destroyed by fire, or grazed more heavily, then it is considered most likely that the existing ecological values for these communities will persist. Therefore the following ‘Future Quality without Offset’ scores have been given:  For remnant vegetation: Score of '1'. Understorey disturbance prevents ability to generate new cohorts for successive generations, particularly following drought- death of mature trees.  For regrowth vegetation: Score of '0'. Complete removal via fire or blade-ploughing. Future Quality with Offset. The future quality of the offset is predicated on the effective implementation of ecological management plans. For the site to improve in ecological value for this community and for the species to potentially persist as an Ecological Community, an increase in on-site, specific management strategies will be required to ensure that the value of the site increases over time for this community. Key management strategies include:  Elimination of cattle grazing and associated impacts from remnant areas to allow low shrub layer and ground layer to develop and improve.  Pulse grazing within the remaining brigalow regrowth communities to control weeds and reduce fire loads.  Fire management. If these strategies are effectively employed, then there will be several improvements in condition:  Existing remnant in good condition has less chance of being degraded, and if under drought stress, will be better able to generate new cohorts for successive generations.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 9

 Existing remnant with understorey and ground layer in poor condition will be allowed to recover.  Existing advanced regrowth on channels with denuded ground layer will be allowed to recover.  Various forms of regrowth will be able to reach maturity, and those with gilgai will be allowed to see a recovery of gilgai structure and floristics. The following predicted “Future Quality with Offset” scores have been applied within the calculator, based upon the effective implementation of a management plan that includes these key strategies as a minimum:  For remnant: Score of '8'. Significant recovery, but Context (location) relatively isolated. Zamia Creek Conservation Park is adjacent, but relatively small compared to most National Parks. Probability of presence of Threatened Solanum spp. on site slightly increases Condition value, based on known presence in the adjacent Park.  For regrowth: Score of '7'. Significant recovery, but ground layer unlikely to reach pristine condition without extensive colonisation from nearest remnant areas.

6. Condition Scoring Look-up Table Note: the "How to use the Offsets Assessment Guide" does not provide pre-defined categories of condition scoring. This is presumably because of the range of complex issues that affect each site. It outlines, in Section 2(c) Quality, the following three quality components:  Site condition  Site context  Species stocking rate It also advises that "the weighting given to each component is dependent on the ecological requirements of the impacted species or ecological community ". And: "In all cases, habitat quality needs to be assessed consistently on both the impact and offset calculators of the guide." (this statement therefore allows the use of a customised set of criteria as long as it applies to both impact and offset areas equally). The following table of scoring is proposed for general terrestrial ecosystems (but it may be different for wetlands, for example) and could be applied to other communities and species in the absence of a specifically customised table. To avoid complexity, the three quality components are to be considered simultaneously, and an ideal match of all three may not be found. It is therefore up to the professional judgement of the user to select the most influential component/s. The following table outlines the scoring selection process for the “values”.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification_unsigned - VM edit 3/03/2015 10

Component Score Description Condition* Context** Population***

0 Destroyed/lost Destroyed/lost Isolated Zero

Imminent Very poor - 1 destruction/ loss Isolated Unviable terminal unavoidable Imminent Very poor - Within 20km of Very low (or overcrowded) 2 destruction/ loss redeemable next remnant - in decline but recoverable reversible Severe damage/ Within approx. Significant competition, 3 Poor disturbance (51- 10km of next constantly limited resources 75%) remnant Significant damage/ Within approx. Sporadically significant 4 Fair disturbance (25- 5km of next competition, seasonally 50%) remnant limited resources Moderate damage/ Within approx. Regular observable 5 Average disturbance (11- 1km of next competition, annually 25%) remnant adequate resources Within approx. Occasional observable Slight damage/ 6 Good 1km of next competition, seasonally disturbance (5-10%) remnant abundant resources Part of Slight localised competition, Very slight damage/ 7 Very good discontinuous annually abundant disturbance (1-5%) corridor resources Near-optimum (occasional Negligible damage/ Part of injury or premature fatality 8 Excellent disturbance but contiguous due to competition or discernible (<1%) corridor stress) Ideal, but 9 possible long- Pristine Adjoining NP etc Optimum term threats Ideal - secure for 10 Pristine Ungrazed NP Optimum long term * Damage can be considered equivalent to impact (e.g. damage to community, impact to species). ** Distances subject to change depending on community, species or district. Genetic exchange a consideration. *** Moderately low population scores (2,3&4) could be due to either low or excessive population numbers (viability vs competition). Optimum numbers for fauna include natural ratios of predation. Competition may be observed in plants as drought stress, among other factors. Victoria, I trust this information is suitable for your discussions with the Federal government. Please do not hesitate to contact me on 0402 882 038 if you would like to discuss the justifications I have provided herein. Yours faithfully, Footprints Environmental Consultants

Andrew Veary Director

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Calculator Justification 27/02/2015

Investigation and Assessment of Potential Biodiversity Offsets

Baralaba North Project and Associated Infrastructure

December 2014 ii

Document Prepared for: Cockatoo Coal Limited

Document Prepared By: Footprints Environmental Consultants PO Box 246 Bribie Island QLD 4507 E: [email protected] T: +61 7 3410 8812

QTree Vegetation Assessment PO Box 7086 Brendale QLD 4500 E: [email protected] T: +61 7 3325 5227

Submitted: December 2014

Disclaimer: Whilst all due care has been taken in the preparation of this report, Footprints Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility whatsoever for the accuracy of any third-party supplied information contained herein. Any person/s using this report, or any data referred to herein, for any purpose not expressly agreed to in writing by Footprints Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd accepts any and all associated risks of such use.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONTENTS iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...... 1 1.1. Offset Requirements (MSES and MNES) ...... 1 1.2. Potential Offset Areas ...... 2 2. TERMINOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE ...... 4 2.1. General...... 4 2.2. Legislation ...... 4 2.2.1. Flora and Fauna ...... 4 2.2.2. Biodiversity Offsets ...... 4 2.3. Flora ...... 5 2.4. Fauna ...... 5 2.5. Conservation Status ...... 5 2.6. Abbreviations ...... 6 3. DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS ...... 7 3.1. Database Searches ...... 7 3.2. General Suitability – Commonwealth EPBC Act Offsets Policy, October 2013...... 7 3.3. General Suitability – Queensland Superseded Biodiversity Offsets Policy, January 2014...... 8 3.4. General Suitability – Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy, July 2014 ...... 12 3.5. Offset Suitability – Flora Perspective ...... 13 3.5.1. Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37, Bushblock ...... 14 3.5.2. Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194, Zamia ...... 14 3.5.3. Lot 5 Plan KM135, Little Sorrel ...... 17 3.6. Offset Suitability – Fauna Perspective ...... 22 3.6.1. Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37, Bushblock ...... 22 3.6.2. Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194, Zamia ...... 23 3.6.3. Lot 5, Plan KM135, Little Sorrel ...... 24 4. FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS AND DETAILED SURVEYS ...... 26 4.1. Field Survey ...... 26 4.2. Existing Information ...... 27 4.2.1. Lot 5 Plan KM135, Little Sorrel ...... 27 4.2.1.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping ...... 27 4.2.1.2. Threatened Plant Species ...... 28 4.2.1.3. Weeds ...... 29 4.2.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 (north), Zamia ...... 30 4.2.2.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping ...... 30 4.2.2.2. Threatened Plant Species ...... 31 4.2.2.3. Weeds ...... 32 4.2.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock ...... 33 4.2.3.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping ...... 33 4.2.4. Threatened Plant Species ...... 34 4.2.4.1. Weeds ...... 35 4.3. Field Observation ...... 36 4.3.1. Lot 5 KM135, Little Sorrel ...... 36 4.3.1.1. Observation Sites ...... 36 4.3.1.2. Regional Ecosystems...... 40 4.3.1.3. Threatened Plant Species ...... 42 4.3.1.4. Weeds ...... 43 4.3.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 north parcel (“Zamia”) ...... 43 4.3.2.1. Observation Sites ...... 43 4.3.2.2. Regional Ecosystems...... 47 4.3.2.3. Threatened Plant Species ...... 50 4.3.2.4. Weeds ...... 50 4.3.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock ...... 50 4.3.3.1. Observation Sites ...... 50

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONTENTS iv

4.3.3.2. Regional Ecosystems...... 53 4.3.3.3. Threatened Plant Species ...... 53 4.3.3.4. Weeds ...... 53 4.4. BioCondition Assessments ...... 53 4.4.1. Calculation Requirements ...... 53 4.4.1.1. State Requirements and Methodology ...... 53 4.4.1.2. Commonwealth Requirements and Methodology ...... 55 4.4.2. Site Selection ...... 56 4.4.2.1. Lot 5 KM135, Little Sorrel ...... 56 4.4.2.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 (north), Zamia ...... 56 4.4.2.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock ...... 57 4.4.3. BioCondition Calculations - Zamia (north) Sites ...... 57 4.4.3.1. Regrowth Brigalow RE 11.4.9 on Gilgai ...... 57 4.4.3.2. Blackbutt-Belah RE 11.4.8 ...... 59 4.4.3.3. Brigalow-Belah RE 11.4.3 ...... 60 5. THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS ...... 63 5.1. Habitat Assessments ...... 63 5.2. Methodology ...... 64 5.2.1. Search Area Location and Selection ...... 64 5.2.2. Fauna Survey Methodologies and Effort ...... 64 5.2.2.1. Diurnal Bird Surveys ...... 64 5.2.2.2. Nocturnal Herpetofauna Ground Searches ...... 65 5.2.2.3. Insectivorous Microbat Surveys ...... 65 5.2.2.4. Targeted Area Searches ...... 65 5.2.2.5. Driving Transects ...... 66 5.3. Threatened Species, Survey Methodology and Effort ...... 66 5.4. Threatened Species Profiles ...... 66 5.4.1. Ornamental Snake ...... 66 5.4.2. Squatter Pigeon ...... 68 5.4.3. South Eastern Long-Eared Bat ...... 69 5.5. Results and Discussion ...... 70 5.5.1. Survey Timing and Personnel ...... 70 5.5.2. Field Survey Conditions ...... 70 5.5.3. Lot 5, Little Sorrel ...... 70 5.5.3.1. Ornamental Snake ...... 71 5.5.3.2. Squatter Pigeon ...... 72 5.5.3.3. South-eastern Long-eared Bat ...... 72 5.5.1. Lot 9 (north), Zamia ...... 73 5.5.1.1. Ornamental Snake ...... 74 5.5.1.2. Squatter Pigeon ...... 75 5.5.1.3. South-eastern Long-eared Bat ...... 75 5.5.2. Lots 21 & 22, Bushblock ...... 77 5.5.2.1. Squatter Pigeon ...... 78 5.5.2.2. South-eastern Long-eared Bat ...... 78 6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 85 6.1. Flora ...... 85 6.2. Fauna ...... 86 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 87

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONTENTS v

List of Figures Figure 1-1 Potential Offset Locations – Overview Map ...... 3 Figure 3-1 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37 ...... 14 Figure 3-2 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 9, Plan BH194 ...... 15 Figure 3-3 Protected Plants Survey Trigger Map for Lot 9, Plan BH194 ...... 16 Figure 3-4 Flora Records for Lot 9 (north) from Atlas of Living Australia ...... 17 Figure 3-5 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 5, Plan KM135 ...... 18 Figure 3-6 Flora Records for Lot 5 from the Atlas of Living Australia ...... 19 Figure 3-7 Fauna Records for Lots 21 & 22 from Atlas of Living Australia ...... 22 Figure 3-8 Fauna Records for Lot 9 (north) from Atlas of Living Australia ...... 23 Figure 3-9 Fauna Records for Lot 5 from Atlas of Living Australia ...... 24 Figure 4-1 Little Sorrel - Current RE Mapping ...... 27 Figure 4-2 Zamia - Current RE Mapping ...... 30 Figure 4-3 Bushblock - Current RE Mapping ...... 33 Figure 4-4 Little Sorrel - Observation Sites ...... 36 Figure 4-5 Revised RE Map for Little Sorrel ...... 42 Figure 4-6 Zamia (northern portion) - Observation Sites ...... 43 Figure 4-7 Revised RE Map for Zamia (northern portion) ...... 49 Figure 4-8 Bushblock - Observation Sites ...... 51 Figure 5-1 Photographs of Ornamental Snakes ...... 67 Figure 5-2 Photograph of Squatter Pigeon ...... 68 Figure 5-3 Squatter Pigeons Resting on Cattle Pad ...... 68 Figure 5-4 South Eastern Long-eared Bat ...... 69 Figure 5-5 Photograph of Cracks and Crevices, Lot 5 ...... 71 Figure 5-6 Photograph of Gilgai Formation, Lot 5 ...... 72 Figure 5-7 Lot 5 - Location of Habitat Features and Observed Target Species ...... 73 Figure 5-8 Photograph of Cracks and Crevices, Lot 9 ...... 74 Figure 5-9 Photograph of Gilgai Formations with Sink Holes, Lot 9 ...... 75 Figure 5-10 Lot 9 (north) – Location of Habitat Features and Target Species ...... 77 Figure 5-11 Lots 21 & 22 - Location of Habitat Features and Trap Sites ...... 84

List of Tables Table 1-1 Details of Potential Offset Locations for Further Investigation ...... 2 Table 2-1 Abbreviations ...... 6 Table 3-1 Proposed Disturbance/Offset Area General Preference Criteria ...... 13 Table 3-2 LGA Preference Matrix ...... 13 Table 3-3 Sub-region Preference Matrix ...... 13

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONTENTS vi

Table 3-4 Summary of Flora Characteristics of Potential Offset Areas ...... 20 Table 3-5 Summary of Target Fauna Species, Potential Habitat and Occurrence Assessment .... 25 Table 4-1 Little Sorrel - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP ...... 28 Table 4-2 Little Sorrel - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 28 Table 4-3 Little Sorrel - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 29 Table 4-4 Little Sorrel - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species ...... 29 Table 4-5 Zamia (north parcel) - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP ...... 31 Table 4-6 Zamia (north parcel) - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 31 Table 4-7 Zamia (north parcel) - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 32 Table 4-8 Zamia (north parcel) - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species ...... 32 Table 4-9 Bushblock - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP ...... 34 Table 4-10 Bushblock - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 35 Table 4-11 Bushblock - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species ...... 35 Table 4-12 Bushblock - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species ...... 36 Table 4-13 Little Sorrel - Site Observations ...... 37 Table 4-14 Little Sorrel - Unmapped Regional Ecosystems Observed ...... 40 Table 4-15 Zamia (northern portion) - Site Observations ...... 44 Table 4-16 Zamia (northern portion) - Unmapped Regional Ecosystems Observed ...... 47 Table 4-17 Bushblock - Site Observations ...... 51 Table 4-18 State Offset Condition Indicators...... 54 Table 4-19 State Offset Special Feature Indicators ...... 55 Table 4-20 BioCondition Scoring - Regrowth Brigalow RE 11.4.9 on Gilgai ...... 57 Table 4-21 BioCondition Scoring - Blackbutt-Belah RE 11.4.8 ...... 59 Table 4-22 BioCondition Scoring - Brigalow-Belah RE 11.4.3 ...... 60 Table 5-1 Summary of Target Fauna Species, Potential Habitat, Occurrence Assessment and Survey Recommendations ...... 63 Table 5-2 Conservation Significant Species, Survey Methods & Efforts Matrix ...... 64 Table 5-3 Harp Trap Brief Habitat Descriptions of Harp Trap Locations ...... 79 Table 5-4 Results of Microbat Trapping Program ...... 83

List of Appendices APPENDIX A BIOCONDITION SITE DATA ...... A-1 APPENDIX B DEHP PROTECTED PLANTS FLORA SURVEY TRIGGER MAP ...... B-1 APPENDIX C FLORA PHOTOGRAPHS – POTENTIAL OFFSET AREAS ...... C-1 APPENDIX D REPRESENTIVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF FAUNA HABITAT SUPPORTED ON EACH LOT ....D-1 APPENDIX E PHOTOGRAPHS OF MICROBAT SURVEY ...... E-1

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND As part of the proposed expansion of Baralaba North Coal Mine, upgrade of the associated coal haulage route and construction of train load out infrastructure, Cockatoo Coal Limited, has given commitments to provide offsets for a range of Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES) and Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) across several different project areas. Four potentially suitable properties, with a range of different biodiversity attributes, have been identified by Cockatoo Coal for investigation (email dated 23 September 2014). Footprints Environmental Consultants and QTree Vegetation Assessment have subsequently been engaged to assess the four nominated properties as to their potential suitability for use as offsets for the specific MSES and MNES species/communities identified. The assessment of the proposed offset areas has been undertaken in three stages: Stage 1 – Desktop Suitability Assessment Stage 2 – Field Validation of Habitat Suitability and Detailed Flora Assessments Stage 3 – Detailed Fauna Assessments including Targeted Species Surveys The findings of these investigations are detailed herein.

1.1. Offset Requirements (MSES and MNES) Cockatoo Coal has identified and/or committed to the following biodiversity offsets: Baralaba North Continued Operations Project (BNCOP) MNES under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act): Brigalow Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) – residual impact of 9 ha Ornamental Snake Potential Habitat – residual impact of 33.5 ha Squatter Pigeon (Southern) Habitat – residual impact of 277 ha South-eastern Long-eared Bat potential habitat – residual impact of 277 ha Train Load Out MSES under the Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) Solanum elachophyllum habitat – residual impact 4 ha, offset requirement of 5:1 Dawson Highway MSES Solanum elachophyllum and Solanum johnsonianum habitat – residual impact 12 ha, offset requirement of a maximum of 4:1 Coal Haulage Route Upgrade MNES Potential Ornamental Snake Habitat – residual impact 19 ha

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 2

1.2. Potential Offset Areas Cockatoo Coal has nominated the following four properties (see Table 1-1) for investigation as to the suitability for use as offset areas. The location of these properties is shown in Figure 1-1. Table 1-1 Details of Potential Offset Locations for Further Investigation

Property Lot & Plan Location Owner Potential Offset Value Name

Potential Habitat: 20 km Lot 21 Cockatoo Squatter Pigeon (Southern Bushblock North of Plan AU37 Coal Habitat) Miles South-eastern Long-eared Bat Potential Habitat: 20 km Lot 22 Cockatoo Squatter Pigeon (Southern Bushblock North of Plan AU37 Coal Habitat) Miles South-eastern Long-eared Bat Brigalow TEC Solanum elachophyllum, Lot 9 (north) 50 km West Woorabinda Zamia Solanum johnsonianum Plan BH194 of Moura Shire Council Potential Habitat: Ornamental Snake Brigalow TEC 30 km Solanum elachophyllum, Little Lot 5 Woorabinda North of Solanum johnsonianum Sorrell Plan KM135 Shire Council Duaringa Potential Habitat: Ornamental Snake

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 3

Figure 1-1 Potential Offset Locations – Overview Map

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 TERMINOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE 4

2. TERMINOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE

2.1. General For this report, the term project area refers generally to the lands and associated habitats surrounding the study area and the study area refers to each of the lots identified as proposed offset areas area as depicted in Figure 1-1. A search area is an area established within the study area where a set of standardised survey methodologies are applied and/or continuously implemented throughout the whole field survey period. Nominally, a search area encompasses an area of approximately four hectares. Search areas were selected within representative habitats that were supported across the study area. The study area is located within the southern Brigalow Belt Bioregion. The Brigalow Belt Bioregion is defined as one of 13 biogeographical areas of Queensland, and extends from the Queensland-New South Wales border to Townsville and encompasses approximately 36 million hectares of sub-humid and semi-arid environments (see Sattler and Williams 1999).

2.2. Legislation Legislation and policy documents relevant to this study are set out in the following sections.

2.2.1. Flora and Fauna Commonwealth Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) – this Act protects Threatened species and Vegetation Communities at the National level. Queensland Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act) – this Act protects vegetation from unauthorised clearing (i.e. it focuses on plant communities, not individual plants). Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) (and Regulations and Conservation Plans) – this Act protects Threatened species at the State level. Protected plants are listed under the Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006. Queensland Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 (LP Act) – this Act protects lands from a number of pest factors including invasion or infestation by Declared Plants (formerly noxious weeds).

2.2.2. Biodiversity Offsets In relation the statutory requirements for the proposed biodiversity offsets proposed for this project, the following are relevant for this study: Commonwealth EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy 2012. Queensland Environmental Offsets Act 2014 (and Regulations). Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy (Version 1.0). Queensland Biodiversity Offsets Policy (superseded by the Environmental Offsets Policy).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 TERMINOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE 5

2.3. Flora In reference to vegetation, the definition of a Regional Ecosystem (RE) follows that provided by Sattler and Williams (1999). For the purpose of this report, the status of RE’s follows that of the Regional Ecosystem Description Database (REDD, Version 6.0b and Version 7.0) published by Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (DEHP) (2014a). Regrowth vegetation means woody vegetation that is not remnant as defined under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act). A declared plant refers to a species declared under the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 (LP Act). In this report, descriptions of vegetation types are based on the structural types described by Specht (1970). Standard references relevant to the study area or region that have been employed for the taxa listed in this report are as follows: Queensland Herbarium (2002); Royal Botanic Gardens (1993); Sharpe (1986); Simon (1993); and Stanley & Ross (1983, 1986, 1989). Additional nomenclatural changes have been incorporated via regular, personal communication with staff at the Queensland Herbarium.

2.4. Fauna Fauna refers to all vertebrate fauna and the nomenclature used in this report follows Strahan (2000) for non-flying mammals, Churchill (1998) for bats, Christidis and Boles (1994, 2008) for birds, and Cogger (2000) for reptiles and amphibians (though common names for frogs follow Ingram et al. 1993).

2.5. Conservation Status Within this report, the conservation status of a species or community may be described as Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, Of Concern or Least Concern. These terms are used in accordance with the provisions of the following: Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) and its regulations and amendments (endangered, vulnerable, near threatened, special least concern and least concern); Queensland Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act) and its regulations and amendments (endangered, of concern and least concern); and/or Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (endangered and vulnerable). Fauna species listed as endangered, vulnerable or near threatened under the NC Act and/or EPBC Act are collectively referred to as “threatened species”.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 TERMINOLOGY AND NOMENCLATURE 6

2.6. Abbreviations Abbreviations commonly used in this report are shown in Table 2-1 below. Table 2-1 Abbreviations

Abbreviation Full name

AVH Australia’s Virtual Herbarium

DEHP Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

DNRM Queensland Department of Resources and Mines

DOTE Commonwealth Department of the Environment

DSITIA Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts

EEM Ecological Equivalence Methodology

EPBC Act Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

GIS Geographical Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

LP Act Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002

MNES Matter of National Environmental Significance

MSES Matter of State Environmental Significance

NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1992

RE Regional Ecosystem

REDD Regional Ecosystem Description Database

SoW Scope of Works

TEC Threatened Ecological Community

VM Act Vegetation Management Act 1999

WoNS Weed of National Significance

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 7

3. DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS

3.1. Database Searches To confirm the status and existing biodiversity value of the proposed offset areas, a review of aerial photography and desktop searches of relevant databases were undertaken using a centroid search with 10km buffer applied as follows: EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool (for MNES); DSITIA Wildlife Online Database Extract (for MSES); DNRM Vegetation Mapping; Australia’s Virtual Herbarium (AVH); and Atlas of Living Australia.

3.2. General Suitability – Commonwealth EPBC Act Offsets Policy, October 2013. This Policy relates to MNES potentially impacted upon that require provision of offset areas. The EPBC Act environmental offsets policy has five key aims, to: 1. Ensure the efficient, effective, timely, transparent, proportionate, scientifically robust and reasonable use of offsets under the EPBC Act. 2. Provide proponents, the community and other stakeholders with greater certainty and guidance on how offsets are determined and when they may be considered under the EPBC Act. 3. Deliver improved environmental outcomes by consistently applying the policy. 4. Outline the appropriate nature and scale of offsets and how they are determined. 5. Provide guidance on acceptable delivery mechanisms for offsets. The overarching offset principles that are applied in determining the suitability of offsets are that suitable offsets must: 1. Deliver an overall conservation outcome that improves or maintains the viability of the aspect of the environment that is protected by national environment law and affected by the proposed action; 2. Be built around direct offsets but may include other compensatory measures; 3. Be in proportion to the level of statutory protection that applies to the protected matte; 4. Be of a size and scale proportionate to the residual impacts on the protected matter; 5. Effectively account for and manage the risks of the offset not succeeding; 6. Be additional to what is already required, determined by law or planning regulations or agreed to under other schemes or programs (this does not preclude the recognition of state or territory offsets that may be suitable as offsets under the EPBC Act for the same action, see section 7.6); 7. Be efficient, effective, timely, transparent, scientifically robust and reasonable; and 8. Have transparent governance arrangements including being able to be readily measured, monitored, audited and enforced.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 8

In assessing the suitability of an offset, government decision-making will be: 1. Informed by scientifically robust information and incorporate the precautionary principle in the absence of scientific certainty; and 2. Be conducted in a consistent and transparent manner. Assessment of the Commonwealth Offsets policy and direction given from DOTE suggests that targeted field surveys should be undertaken to ascertain/confirm the presence of targeted species supported within proposed offsets.

3.3. General Suitability – Queensland Superseded Biodiversity Offsets Policy, January 2014. Under the superseded system, offset decisions for state approvals were guided by five separate Queensland environmental offset policies. The overarching Queensland Government Environmental Offset Policy (QGEOP) provided the principles for offsets in Queensland and was supported by four specific-issue policies: Policy for Vegetation Management Offsets; Queensland Biodiversity Offsets Policy; Marine Fish Habitat Offsets Policy; and Offsets for a Net Gain in Bushland Koala Habitat in South East Queensland Policy. The superseded Queensland Government Environmental Offsets Policy (QGEOP) set principles for environmental offsets in Queensland. These policy principles established a framework to guide applicants to meet the standards established by the Queensland Government to ensure that offsets are implemented and secured in an integrated, consistent and transparent manner. The seven QGEOP principles are: 1. Offsets will not replace or undermine existing environmental standards or regulatory requirements, or be used to allow development in areas otherwise prohibited through legislation or policy. 2. Environmental impacts must first be avoided, then minimised, before considering the use of offsets for any remaining impact. 3. Offsets must achieve an equivalent or better environmental outcome. 4. Offsets must provide environmental values as similar as possible to those being lost. 5. Offset provision must minimise the time-lag between the impact and delivery of the offset. 6. Offsets must provide additional protection to environmental values at risk, or additional management actions to improve environmental values. For example, an offset cannot be an area that is already protected by another State government law, or an area that is required to be retained as part of a development permit. 7. Offsets must be legally secured for the duration of the offset requirement. Under this policy, specific requirements are given for protected plants which detail: a) How the offset will achieve a net gain for the species affected. b) How the offset is consistent with the requirements of an approved recovery plan for the species or in the absence of an approved recovery plan, consistent with written advice provided from a recognised expert for the species with regards to the conditions and requirements for the survival of the species.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 9

Offset proposals must provide: a) details of how the criteria contained in this policy have been met; b) tenure of offset area; c) details of any rights to take forestry products; d) details of any mining encumbrances, including exploration permits; and e) an analysis of the proposed location of the offset area in relation to existing and future land uses, and the implications of the land use on the offset area’s long-term viability. Matters to be considered as part of the analysis include: i. zoning and regional land-use category (if available) of the offset area and surrounding area under the local government planning scheme and regional plan produced either under the repealed Integrated Planning Act 1997 or Sustainable Planning Act 2009; ii. maps spatially identifying the current and potential future land-uses, including proposals for major infrastructure, mining, petroleum and gas activities on or in the general vicinity of the offset area; and iii. threatening processes which may impact on the effectiveness of the management actions on the proposed offset area. The Train Load Out facility impacts upon one MSES listed under the NC Act and therefore requires offsetting under this superseded offsets policy. As such, an offset proposal must meet the mandatory requirements of criteria B2, A2 and A3 of the superseded policy for a biodiversity offset that is required for a clearing permit to take endangered, vulnerable or near threatened protected plants under the NC Act. Offsets cannot be provided for plants prescribed as ‘extinct in the wild’ wildlife under the NC Act Regulations, and if such plants are found to be in the impact area, they must be protected. Criteria A2 Legally Securing Biodiversity Offsets All land-based offsets must be must be legally secured using a legally binding mechanism. A legally binding mechanism includes any of the following: Gazettal as a protected area (e.g. a nature refuge) under the Nature Conservation Act 1992; Declaration of an area of high nature conservation value under the Vegetation Management Act 1999; Use of a covenant under the Land Title Act 1994 or Land Act 1994; and Other mechanism administered and approved by the State. The legally binding mechanism for the offset area must be noted on the title of the relevant parcel of land being used as an offset area. The legally binding mechanism must also be supported by an offset area management plan that identifies the actions required to ensure an offset area is managed to meet the objective/s of the offset area. Direct offsets Direct offsets are provided with the development application or during assessment and must be legally secured within four months of the relevant development permit being issued, unless specifically identified elsewhere in this policy.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 10

That is, where the offset area, legally binding mechanism, and offset area management plan are approved and a development permit is issued, the applicant has four months to ensure the legally binding mechanism is finalised, e.g. a covenant under the Land Act 1994 is registered on title with the Lands Title Registry within four months of the development permit being issued. Offset transfer Where a contractual agreement with an offset broker is provided with the development application or during assessment, an offset area must be legally secured within 12 months of the relevant development permit being issued, unless specifically identified elsewhere in this policy. Criteria A3 Information Requirement Where an offset is proposed, applicants must provide the following information to demonstrate how the legislative and policy requirements relating to the offsets and this policy are to be achieved to the satisfaction of the administering authority. General assessment requirements These requirements must be addressed by all applicants: a) how the development has been designed and located on the lot/s to avoid and minimise the extent of impact; and b) tenure of the impact area. Specific requirements for resource activities a) an offset strategy is provided as part of the application documents or submitted Environmental Management Plan. This strategy is to outline: when (at time of approval or rolling plan) and how (the offset delivery mechanism) offsets will be provided; the expected impacts of the project/s represented spatially; the known values (including extent) which will be impacted relevant to this policy; other known values which are being addressed through other offset policies; the likelihood of an offset being available which meets the policy requirements; and whether the impact area includes an existing offset area. b) a reporting framework, using the existing reporting tools such as the annual return, which; reports progress of offsetting requirements as specified in the agreement; demonstrates whether or not the offset requirements are being met; and identifies any changes to offset delivery during the reporting period is available for auditing by a third party to identify where investigation and/or compliance action is required by the department. Specific requirements for protected plants a) how the offset will achieve a net gain for the species affected; and b) how the offset is consistent with the requirements of an approved recovery plan for the species or in the absence of an approved recovery plan, consistent with written

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 11

advice provided from a recognised expert for the species with regards to the conditions and requirements for the survival of the species. Specific requirements for offset proposals (to be provided for all offset proposals) a) details of how the criteria contained in this policy have been met b) tenure of offset area c) details of any rights to take forestry products d) details of any mining encumbrances, including exploration permits e) an analysis of the proposed location of the offset area in relation to existing and future land uses, and the implications of the land use on the offset area’s long-term viability. Matters to be considered as part of the analysis include: i. zoning and regional land-use category (if available) of the offset area and surrounding area under the local government planning scheme and regional plan produced either under the repealed Integrated Planning Act 1997 or Sustainable Planning Act 2009; ii. maps spatially identifying the current and potential future land-uses, including proposals for major infrastructure, mining, petroleum and gas activities on or in the general vicinity of the offset area; and iii. threatening processes which may impact on the effectiveness of the management actions on the proposed offset area. Furthermore, there are prescribed specific requirements for offset area management plans Criteria B2 Nature Conservation Act 1992 Specific Requirements A biodiversity offset for protected plants: a) may be any of the following: i. a direct offset; and ii. an offset transfer. b) may be used to satisfy multiple offset requirements, where an offset is required under another Act or policy of Commonwealth, State or local government for the one development application, providing the requirements of this policy are met; c) may be located on land owned by the applicant or by a third party; and d) must be in an area where the protected plant species has the conditions and requirements necessary to survive. The offset must: a) be within the known or historical distribution of the species being offset; b) be in an area which contains the conditions necessary for the survival of the species being offset, such as sunlight, water availability, soil type or position in the landscape; c) demonstrate like for like for the species being cleared, by replacing the species being impacted on in the impact area with the same species in the offset area; d) achieve a net conservation gain for the species affected, using the following offset ratios:

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 12

i. at least 1: 5 for endangered species (i.e. 5 plants must be re-planted to replace 1 plant cleared); ii. at least 1: 3.5 for vulnerable species e) be replaced in an area likely to be viable and display the inter-relationships the species needs to survive; and f) have a management plan that clearly identifies how the offset area will be managed to ensure a self-sustaining wild plant population is created. For endangered plants, the offset must be consistent with the requirements of an approved recovery plan (where it exists) for the species or relevant community as well as the Nature Conservation (Protected Plants) Conservation Plan 2000 which is available on the Office of the Queensland Parliamentary Counsel. Where a specific plan for the species does not exist, advice from the Queensland Herbarium (or from a suitably qualified and experienced person) should be sought and provided about the conditions and requirements for the survival of the species. At this stage of the assessment process, it is considered that the proposed offset areas may potentially support habitat for the MSES impacted by the proposed Train Load Out facility. This will be confirmed following the field investigations.

3.4. General Suitability – Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy, July 2014 Environmental offsets delivered under the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy are required to achieve a conservation outcome for the impacted matters by providing an offset in the most strategic location to achieve a conservation outcome for the impacted prescribed environmental matter (DEHP 2014b). Under the new Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy, the five superseded offset policies have been replaced with a policy that offers standardised offset delivery for State and local government. Compared to the superseded offset policies, the new single policy is intended to provide greater flexibility for offset provision, greater consistency with Commonwealth offset principles and to enable earlier start-up of projects. The adoption of a single offsets policy has also removed duplication and inconsistency associated with the previous policies. When considering the potential suitability of a proposed offset location, wherever possible, offsets should be delivered within a Strategic Offset Investment Corridor closest to the impacted site; and in the case of a land-based offset, in the most strategic location to achieve a conservation outcome. In order of preference, offsets are generally located in: 1. the same local government area 2. the same sub-region 3. the same bioregion or adjacent bioregion Strategic Offset Investment Corridor mapping has been undertaken for the Galilee Basin to the west of the general project area, however at this time, mapping does not exist for the proposed offset areas. In terms of general offset suitability for those areas specified, the following is noted. Local Government Area (LGA) – not preferred. Lot 5 KM135 and Lot 9 (north) BH194 are located in Woorabinda Aboriginal Shire Council LGA

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 13

The proposed areas of disturbance for the Train Load Out and Dawson Highway projects are within Banana Shire LGA. Sub-region - partially suitable. Lot 5 KM135 straddles two sub-regions – Woorabinda and Isaac-Comet Downs Lot 9 (north) BH194 is within the Dawson River Downs sub-region The proposed areas of disturbance for the Train Load Out and Dawson Highway projects are within Dawson River Downs sub-region. Bioregion – suitable: All proposed disturbance and offset areas are located within the Brigalow Belt Bioregion (Southern). Table 3-1 provides a summary of general offset suitability, with suitability matrices for LGAs and sub-regions provided in Table 3-2 and Table 3-3 respectively. Relative suitability (or not) of these potential offset areas should be considered by Cockatoo Coal in terms of the likelihood of acceptance of these offset areas by DEHP. Table 3-1 Proposed Disturbance/Offset Area General Preference Criteria

Location LGA Sub-Region Bioregion Woorabinda Aboriginal Woorabinda and Isaac- Brigalow Belt Lot 5 KM135 Shire Council Comet Downs Bioregion (Southern) Lot 9 (north) Woorabinda Aboriginal Brigalow Belt Dawson River Downs BH194 Shire Council Bioregion (Southern) Brigalow Belt Train Load Out Banana Shire Dawson River Downs Bioregion (Southern) Brigalow Belt Dawson Highway Banana Shire Dawson River Downs Bioregion (Southern) Table 3-2 LGA Preference Matrix BNCOP Train Load Out Dawson Hwy Haulage Route Lot 5 KM135 Lot 9 (north) BH194 Not Preferred Table 3-3 Sub-region Preference Matrix Train Load Out Dawson Hwy Lot 5 KM135 Lot 9 (north) BH194 Preferred; Not Preferred.

3.5. Offset Suitability – Flora Perspective The following section discusses the findings of the desktop assessment as related to flora offset requirements for the following prescribed environmental matters: Brigalow TEC (Status: Endangered – EPBC Act); Solanum elachophyllum (Status: Endangered – NC Act); Solanum johnsonianum (Status: Endangered – NC Act); and The following sections discuss each of the proposed offset areas, with a summary of the salient points presented in Table 3-4.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 14

3.5.1. Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37, Bushblock These two adjacent lots are characterised by RE11.7.4/11.7.7/11.7.5/11.7.2 (ironbark, scalds and lancewood), RE11.5.21/11.7.4/11.5.4 (bloodwood, cypress, ironbark and/or others) and RE11.7.4 (ironbark). In terms of meeting requirements for offsets, from a flora perspective, these two lots are not relevant as they are highly unlikely to contain any of the vegetation communities/species that are required to be offset.

Figure 3-1 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37 A search of the Atlas of Living Australia did not provide any records for the offset target species.

3.5.2. Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194, Zamia Lot 9 (north), located on the northern side of the Dawson Highway situated on and to the east of Zamia Creek, is characterised by RE11.3.3/11.3.4 (floodplain coolabah, floodplain eucalypt woodland), regrowth of RE11.4.9a/11.4.8 (brigalow-bauhinia, blackbutt-brigalow) and RE11.9.5 (brigalow). In terms of meeting requirements for offsets, from a flora perspective, the RE11.4.9a/11.4.8 is considered highly likely for the occurrence of Solanum elachophyllum. In addition, Solanum johnsonianum is considered possible within the regrowth brigalow areas of RE11.4.9a/11.4.8 and the remnant area of RE11.9.5. Solanum elachophyllum is typically associated with fertile cracking clays in association with brigalow, belah, bonewood or blackbutt, whilst Solanum johnsonianum has a greater likelihood of occurrence in brigalow communities on heavy clays (Bean 2004). A search of the Lot and Plan number of various databases returned a positive record for an EVNT (Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened) flora species (see Figure 3-3). Whilst there is no confirmed record noted on AVH, this is likely to be Solanum elachophyllum.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 15

Figure 3-2 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 9, Plan BH194

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 16

Figure 3-3 Protected Plants Survey Trigger Map for Lot 9, Plan BH194

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 17

There were no records of the target flora species from the Atlas of Living Australia (Figure 3-4) in or adjacent to Lot 9. However, records of all three species were identified to the south east of the Lot which would suggest that there is potential for them to occur within the proposed offset area as there are similar supported habitat types.

Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194

Figure 3-4 Flora Records for Lot 9 (north) from Atlas of Living Australia

3.5.3. Lot 5 Plan KM135, Little Sorrel This lot is characterised by RE11.7.2 (lancewood jump-up), RE11.4.3/11.4.8 (brigalow- belah, blackbutt-brigalow), RE11.5.9b (ironbark and others (E. crebra, E. tenuipes, Lysicarpus angustifolius) - appears to be at the top of the jump-up). In terms of meeting requirements for offsets, from a flora perspective, the RE11.4.3/11.4.8 (approximately 1 ha of remnant area) is considered possible for the occurrence of Solanum elachophyllum and Solanum johnsonianum.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 18

Figure 3-5 Regional Ecosystem Mapping for Lot 5, Plan KM135 There were no records for the target species located within or immediately adjacent to Lot 5 in the Atlas of Living Australia. Records for S. elachophyllum were observed to the east, south west and west of the site (Figure 3-6).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 19

Lot 5, Plan KM135

Figure 3-6 Flora Records for Lot 5 from the Atlas of Living Australia A summary of the salient points discussed above for each of the proposed offset areas is presented in Table 3-4 below.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 20

Table 3-4 Summary of Flora Characteristics of Potential Offset Areas

Property Nearest Regional Summary of Remnant Threatened Preferred Likelihood of occurrence Locality Ecosystems mapped remnant Area Ha species that habitat vegetation (approx) may occur

Lots 21 & Barakula 11.7.4/11.7.7/ Ironbark, scalds and 1000 No. (REs checked for flora 22 Plan 11.7.5/11.7.2 lancewood. suitability in case of possible AU37 habitat suitability). Highly Bushblock unlikely for target flora species. Too dry.

11.5.21/11.7.4/ Bloodwood, cypress, 220 No. (REs checked for flora 11.5.4 ironbark and/or others. suitability in case of possible habitat suitability). Highly unlikely for target flora species. Too dry.

11.7.4 Ironbark. 170 No. (REs checked for flora suitability in case of possible habitat suitability). Highly unlikely for target flora species. Too dry.

Lot 9 Plan Bauhinia 11.3.3/11.3.4 Floodplain coolabah, 60 Target species are N/A. BH194 floodplain eucalypt found in brigalow (north woodland. but clay soils parcels) might provide Zamia habitat in well wooded shady areas.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 21

Property Nearest Regional Summary of Remnant Threatened Preferred Likelihood of occurrence Locality Ecosystems mapped remnant Area Ha species that habitat vegetation (approx) may occur

11.4.9a/11.4.8 Brigalow-bauhinia, 0* S. elachophyllum, Brigalow. High for Solanum blackbutt-brigalow. S. johnsonianum elachophyllum. Trigger map indicates occurrence here, but no record on AVH. Possible for S. johnsonianum.

11.9.5 Brigalow. 4 S. elachophyllum, Brigalow. Possible. S. johnsonianum

Lot 5 Plan Duaringa 11.7.2 Lancewood jump-up. 150 No. Highly unlikely. Too dry. KM135 Little 11.4.3/11.4.8 Brigalow-belah, 1 S. elachophyllum, Brigalow. Possible. Sorrel blackbutt-brigalow. S. johnsonianum

11.5.9b Ironbark and others 100 No. Highly unlikely. Too dry. (E. crebra, E. tenuipes, Lysicarpus angustifolius). Appears to be at top of jump- up.

* - None mapped, but directly adjacent to approx 40 Ha within Conservation Park. There also appears to be an unmapped patch of approximately 3 Ha within Lot 9 (north) NB - all RE mapping needs to be confirmed - particularly small polygons of unusual RE. Area estimates are approximate and indicative only.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 22

3.6. Offset Suitability – Fauna Perspective The following section discusses the findings of the desktop assessment as related to fauna offset requirements for offsetting the residual environmental impact to the following prescribed environmental matters: Denisonia maculata - Ornamental Snake (Status: Vulnerable – NC Act and EPBC Act); Geophaps scripta scripta - Squatter Pigeon (Southern) (Status: Vulnerable – NC Act and EPBC Act); and Nyctophilus corbeni/timoriensis - South-eastern Long-eared Bat (Status: Vulnerable – NC Act and EPBC Act).

3.6.1. Lot 21 and 22, Plan AU37, Bushblock These two lots have been identified as potential offset habitat for squatter pigeon and south-eastern long-eared bat. Review of the fauna databases and RE mapping for the lots and surrounds suggests that these lots potentially support suitable habitat for these species. Review of the Atlas of Living Australia for this local area has identified that there are records for squatter pigeon in the region as depicted in Figure 3-7. These lots may potentially support habitat for the south-eastern long-eared bat as there are numerous records to the south east (out of view in Figure 3-7) within the same mountain range system, which potentially support similar habitats. Lack of records in this area is most likely due to lack of survey effort.

Lots 21 & 22, Plan AU37

Figure 3-7 Fauna Records for Lots 21 & 22 from Atlas of Living Australia

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 23

3.6.2. Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194, Zamia Identified as supporting suitable habitat for the ornamental snake, this lot potentially supports suitable habitat for the squatter pigeon as well. Review of RE mapping and fauna databases did not reveal specific records, however, given the distribution of significant species records in the local region from the Atlas of Living Australia (Figure 3-8) located in similar habitats, it is considered likely that suitable habitats may potentially be supported within Lot 9 (north). It should be noted that there is a small possibility that the south- eastern long-eared bat may be present within habitats supported within riparian vegetation along Zamia Creek providing suitable roosting resources are supported. As such, consideration of this species in this lot should also be given.

Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194

Figure 3-8 Fauna Records for Lot 9 (north) from Atlas of Living Australia

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 24

3.6.3. Lot 5, Plan KM135, Little Sorrel This lot has been highlighted as supporting potentially suitable habitat for the ornamental snake. Review, as with previous lots, supports this conclusion even though a search of the Atlas of Living Australia did not identify any records for this species in close proximity (as can be seen in Figure 3-9). Database searches did identify records for the other two target species, squatter pigeon and south-eastern long-eared bat, within close proximity to the lot. As such, it is reasonable to conclude that, as the lot may potentially support suitable habitat for these species, that it may also be earmarked as a suitable offset for these two species.

Lot 5, Plan KM135

Lot 9 (north), Plan BH194

Figure 3-9 Fauna Records for Lot 5 from Atlas of Living Australia

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS 25

Details of the database source and the type of records contained therein, the REs mapped that potentially support suitable habitat for each target species per lot and an assessment of the likelihood of occurrence for each target species is presented in Table 3-5 below. Table 3-5 Summary of Target Fauna Species, Potential Habitat and Occurrence Assessment

Species 1 2 3 4 5 Possible/potential habitat 11.4.3/ present. Field validation Ornamental snake 11.4.8, Near required to assess Cleared presence/quality of gilgai habitats Lot 5, Possible/potential habitat Squatter pigeon Near KM135, present 11.5.9, Little Sorrel Possible/potential habitat 11.7.2, present. Field validation 11.4.3/ South-eastern required to assess 11.4.8, long-eared bat presence/quality of woodland Cleared condition, presence of roosting/foraging resources 11.3.3/ 11.3.4, Possible/potential habitat regrowth present. Field validation Ornamental snake 11.4.9/ Near required to assess 11.4.8, presence/quality of gilgai 11.9.5, habitats Lot 9 Cleared (north) Possible/potential habitat BH194, Squatter pigeon As above Near present Zamia Possible/potential habitat present. Field validation 11.3.3/ South-eastern required to assess 11.3.4, long-eared bat presence/quality of woodland Cleared condition, presence of roosting/foraging resources 11.7.4/ 11.7.7/ Possible/potential habitat Squatter pigeon Near 11.7.5/ present 11.7.2 Lot 21&22, Possible/potential habitat Plan AU37, 11.7.4/ present. Field validation Bushblock South-eastern 11.7.7/ required to assess Near long-eared bat 11.7.5/ presence/quality of woodland 11.7.2 condition, presence of roosting/foraging resources Table Key: 1 = Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Protected Matters Search Tool; 2 = REs supported on each lot considered likely to support potentially suitable target species habitat; 3 = Wildlife database search; 4 = Atlas of Living Australia database search; 5 = Assessment of potential likelihood of target species/habitat occurrence. = database potential habitat; = database record; = not recorded; Near = ALA record in local region. NB: Species in grey shading are offset target species considered likely to occur in these proposed offset areas, though not indicated by Cockatoo Coal in the Scope of Works as requiring investigation.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 26

4. FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS AND DETAILED SURVEYS The following section discusses the findings of the flora habitat assessments and detailed surveys, undertaken by QTree Vegetation Assessment, to assess the suitability of the properties potentially useful for Environmental Offsets under Queensland Government policy. These field surveys follow on from the Stage 1 desktop assessment for habitat suitability and likelihood of occurrence of several target flora species, which have now been revised to the following species, all of which are from a group broadly referred to as "nightshades": Solanum elachophyllum. Solanum johnsonianum. Both species are listed as Endangered under the Queensland Nature Conservation Act 1992, but are not listed under the Commonwealth Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The three potential offset areas which were surveyed were: Lot 9 Plan BH194 (northern parcel) - ("Zamia"). Lot 5 Plan KM135 ("Little Sorrel"). Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37 ("Bushblock"). This area was considered unlikely, so was only briefly surveyed.

4.1. Field Survey Field survey was undertaken using Queensland Herbarium mapping methodology (DSITIA 2012). Threatened flora species survey was also undertaken with methods by DSITIA (2012), and incorporated methods required by DEHP (2014c). Sampling sites during reconnaissance are referred to as Brief – only the dominant and indicator plant species present on-site are recorded. This type of site is consistent with a Queensland Herbarium Quaternary site using Queensland Herbarium mapping methodology (DSITIA 2012). Brief sites are surveyed to confirm current vegetation mapping, and get an overview of the study area. Detailed sites were used to assess suitability of habitat for target threatened flora species. Data were collected to satisfy BioCondition sites (DERM 2011a), which are required as the supporting component of Ecological Equivalence Methodology (DERM 2011b). This is used to compare the impacted project areas and the proposed offset areas. If necessary, when vegetation structure and floristics are complex, these site data are supported by further detailed data in the form of Queensland Herbarium Secondary sites (DSITIA 2012). Threatened species and significant weeds are searched for during the entire course of survey work. Photographs are taken at each site to illustrate dominant species and vegetation structure, and the position is recorded with a hand-held GPS. Flora species unable to be identified in the field are collected for later identification, with appropriate permits in place if required. Individual unknown plants are not collected if whole plant removal is required, and instead, close-up photographs and descriptions are taken, along with highly specific location information for return to site if necessary. Survey was undertaken from 8-11 October 2014, with the caveat that there were seasonal limitations for detecting the target flora species, which were expected to have largely died back at this time, due to a preceding dry period of several weeks.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 27

4.2. Existing Information

4.2.1. Lot 5 Plan KM135, Little Sorrel

4.2.1.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping Current Regional Ecosystem mapping (DEHP 2014d) covering the study area is shown in Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-1 Little Sorrel - Current RE Mapping Red = polygons with RE codes, Purple = study area. Distance along southern boundary is approximately 3.3 km. Image from Visual Earth (2014). Regional Ecosystems from RE mapping in Figure 4-1 are summarised in Table 4-1.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 28

Table 4-1 Little Sorrel - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP

Regional VM Act Biodiversity Ecosystem Description (DEHP 2014a) Common Names Status Status Code

Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina 11.4.3 cristata shrubby open-forest on brigalow-belah Endangered Endangered Cainozoic clay plains.

Eucalyptus cambageana woodland to open-forest with Acacia harpophylla or 11.4.8 blackbutt-brigalow Endangered Endangered A. argyrodendron on Cainozoic clay plains.

ironbark, narrow- E. crebra, E. tenuipes, Lysicarpus leafed white Least No Concern at 11.5.9b angustifolius +/- Corymbia spp. mahogany, budgeroo Concern Present woodland. +/- bloodwoods

Acacia spp. woodland on Cainozoic Least No Concern at 11.7.2 wattles on jump-ups lateritic duricrust. Scarp retreat zone. Concern Present

The EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool (DOTE 2014a) lists the following Threatened Ecological Communities as potentially occurring within the study area: Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and codominant). Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions. Natural Grasslands of the Queensland Central Highlands and the northern Fitzroy Basin. Semi-evergreen vine thickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregions. Weeping Myall Woodlands. Of these, Brigalow is mapped within the study area by DEHP (2014c). Semi-evergreen vine thicket may occur, but Natural Grasslands and Weeping Myall are considered less likely to occur.

4.2.1.2. Threatened Plant Species Threatened flora listed under the EPBC Act Protected Matters search, potentially occurring within the Study Area (DOTE 2014a), based on a search radius of 10 km, are shown in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Little Sorrel - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name EPBC Likelihood of Occurrence Act*

Cadellia pentastylis ooline V Unlikely. Outside known distribution.

Cycas ophiolitica a cycad E Unlikely. Outside known distribution.

* CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 29

There were no NC Act or EPBC Act Threatened flora species listed as potentially occurring within 10 km of the study area by DEHP (2014e). A blank Table 4-3 is retained to maintain consistency with other sections in this report. Table 4-3 Little Sorrel - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name EPBC Act* NC Act* Likelihood of Occurrence

none recorded

*underlined and in bold if listed on database CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened Although the presence of Cadellia pentastylis or Cycas ophiolitica is considered unlikely on Lot 5 ("Little Sorrel"), they would add value to the offset area, in case of the need to offset these species due to any future projects.

4.2.1.3. Weeds The presence of significant weed infestations may make land management difficult or uneconomic. EPBC Act Significant weed species listed as potentially occurring within the study area by DOTE (2014a), based on the 10 km search radius, are shown in Table 4-4. These species are from the list of Weeds of National Significance (WoNS), by Thorp and Lynch (2000), and the list of Declared Plants under the LP Act. If a Declared Plant, then this is indicated in the table. Likelihood of occurrence is based on actual species distributions and habitat suitability These are based on Wildlife Online records (DEHP 2014e), known distributions (CHAH 2014) and RE mapping (DEHP 2014d). Table 4-4 Little Sorrel - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name Declared Class Likelihood of under LP Act Occurrence (if applicable)

Acacia nilotica subsp. indica prickly acacia 2 Unlikely. (also listed as Vachellia nilotica)

Cryptostegia grandiflora rubber vine 2 Possible.

Hymenachne amplexicaulis hymenachne 2 Unlikely.

Jatropha gossypifolia bellyache bush 2 Possible.

Lantana camara lantana 3 Possible.

Opuntia spp. prickly pear 2 Highly likely.

Parkinsonia aculeata parkinsonia 2 Unlikely.

Parthenium hysterophorus parthenium 2 Possible.

Salvinia molesta salvinia 2 Unlikely.

The presence of Opuntia spp. (prickly pear or tree pear) on Lot 5 ("Little Sorrel") is considered highly likely due to distribution and topography. The presence of several other

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 30 weed species (Cryptostegia grandiflora, Jatropha gossypifolia, Lantana camara and Parthenium hysterophorus) is also considered possible, and field survey will help determine the extent and severity of these weed species.

4.2.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 (north), Zamia

4.2.2.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping Current Regional Ecosystem mapping (DEHP 2014d) covering the study area is shown in Figure 4-2.

Figure 4-2 Zamia - Current RE Mapping Red = polygons with RE codes, Purple = study area. Distance along southern boundary of northern parcel is approximately 4 km including Zamia Creek. Image from Visual Earth (2014). Regional Ecosystems from RE mapping in Figure 4-2 are summarised in Table 4-5.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 31

Table 4-5 Zamia (north parcel) - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP

Regional VM Act Biodiversity Ecosystem Description (DEHP 2014a) Common names Status Status Code

Eucalyptus coolabah woodland on 11.3.3 floodplain coolabah Of Concern Of Concern alluvial plains.

Eucalyptus tereticornis and/or floodplain eucalypts 11.3.4 Eucalyptus spp. tall woodland on (including blue Of Concern Of Concern alluvial plains. gum, carbeen etc)

Eucalyptus cambageana woodland to open-forest with Acacia 11.4.8 blackbutt-brigalow Endangered Endangered harpophylla or A. argyrodendron on Cainozoic clay plains.

Acacia harpophylla, Lysiphyllum brigalow and 11.4.9a carronii +/- Casuarina cristata open- Endangered Endangered bauhinia forest to woodland.

Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina brigalow and/or 11.9.5 cristata open-forest on fine-grained Endangered Endangered belah sedimentary rocks.

The EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool (DOTE 2014a) lists the following Threatened Ecological Communities as potentially occurring within the study area: Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and codominant). Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions. Semi-evergreen vine thickets of the Brigalow Belt (North and South) and Nandewar Bioregions. Weeping Myall Woodlands. Of these, Brigalow and Coolibah are mapped within the study area by DEHP (2014d). Semi- evergreen vine thicket may occur, but Weeping Myall is considered less likely to occur.

4.2.2.2. Threatened Plant Species Threatened flora listed under the EPBC Act Protected Matters search, potentially occurring within the Study Area (DOTE 2014a), based on a search radius of 10 km, are shown in Table 4-6. Table 4-6 Zamia (north parcel) - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name EPBC Likelihood of Occurrence Act*

Cadellia pentastylis ooline V Possible.

Dichanthium queenslandicum king bluegrass E Possible.

* CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 32

NC Act Threatened flora species listed as potentially occurring within 10 km of the study area by DEHP (2014c), are shown in Table 4-7. The only species listed is Solanum elachophyllum. Notably, the record for this species occurs within Zamia Creek Conservation Park, which is immediately adjacent to the study area. This was spatially confirmed by the Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map (DEHP 2014f). There were no EPBC Act Threatened flora species listed as potentially occurring in the study area (DEHP 2014e). Table 4-7 Zamia (north parcel) - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name EPBC Act* NC Act* Likelihood of Occurrence

Solanum none E Highly likely if remnant vegetation is elachophyllum present.

*underlined and in bold if listed on database CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened The known occurrence of Solanum elachophyllum in close proximity to Lot 9 North ("Zamia") is enough to recommend the use of this land as an offset for the species, provided the condition of the land is sufficiently good enough to support the species. The focus of the field survey in this case needs to be on the following: Ability of the native vegetation habitat to recover once grazing is excluded. Presence of any unmapped habitat of remnant or near-remnant status. An absence of significant weed infestations. The presence of Cadellia pentastylis or Dichanthium queenslandicum would add value to the offset area, in case of the need to offset these species due to any future projects.

4.2.2.3. Weeds The presence of significant weed infestations may make land management difficult or uneconomic. EPBC Act Significant weed species listed as potentially occurring within the study area by DOTE (2014a), based on the 10 km search radius, are shown in Table 4-8. These species are from the list of Weeds of National Significance (WoNS), by Thorp and Lynch (2000), and the list of Declared Plants under the LP Act. If a Declared Plant, then this is indicated in the table. Likelihood of occurrence is based on actual species distributions and habitat suitability. These are based on Wildlife Online records (DEHP 2014e), known distributions (CHAH 2014) and RE mapping (DEHP 2014d). Table 4-8 Zamia (north parcel) - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species

Declared Class Likelihood of Botanical Name Common Name under LP Act Occurrence (if applicable)

Acacia nilotica subsp. indica prickly acacia 2 Unlikely. (also listed as Vachellia nilotica)

Dolichandra unguis-cati cat's-claw creeper 3 Unlikely.

Parkinsonia aculeata parkinsonia 2 Unlikely.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 33

Declared Class Likelihood of Botanical Name Common Name under LP Act Occurrence (if applicable)

Parthenium hysterophorus parthenium 2 Highly likely.

The presence of Parthenium hysterophorus on Lot 9 North ("Zamia") is considered highly likely due to distribution and soil type (clay). Field survey will help determine the extent and severity of this weed species.

4.2.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock

4.2.3.1. Regional Ecosystem Mapping Current Regional Ecosystem mapping (DEHP 2014d) covering the study area is shown in Figure 4-3.

Figure 4-3 Bushblock - Current RE Mapping Red = polygons with RE codes, Purple = study area. Distance along southern boundary of both blocks combined is approximately 3.7 km. Image from Visual Earth (2014).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 34

Regional Ecosystems from RE mapping in Figure 4-3 are summarised in Error! Not a valid bookmark self-reference.. Table 4-9 Bushblock - Remnant RE Mapped by DEHP

Regional VM Act Biodiversity Ecosystem Description (DEHP 2014a) Common names Status Status Code

Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, C. endlicheri, E. ironbark, cypress and Least No Concern 11.5.4 chloroclada, Angophora leiocarpa on gums on deep sand Concern at Present Cainozoic sandplains/remnant surfaces. Deep sands.

Corymbia bloxsomei +/- Callitris yellow bloodwood +/- glaucophylla +/- Eucalyptus crebra others including Least No Concern 11.5.21 +/- Angophora leiocarpa woodland on cypress, ironbark, Concern at Present Cainozoic sandplains/remnant smooth-barked apple surfaces.

Acacia spp. woodland on Cainozoic Least No Concern 11.7.2 wattles on jump-ups lateritic duricrust. Scarp retreat zone. Concern at Present

Eucalyptus decorticans and/or gum-topped ironbark Eucalyptus spp., Corymbia spp., and/or eucalypts, Least No Concern 11.7.4 Acacia spp., Lysicarpus angustifolius with bloodwoods, Concern at Present on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust. wattles, budgeroo

Shrubland on natural scalds on deeply shrubland on natural Least No Concern 11.7.5 weathered coarse-grained scalds Concern at Present sedimentary rocks.

Eucalyptus fibrosa subsp. nubila +/- broad-leafed ironbark Least No Concern 11.7.7 Corymbia spp. +/- Eucalyptus spp. on +/- bloodwoods and Concern at Present Cainozoic lateritic duricrust. eucalypts

The EPBC Protected Matters Search Tool (DOTE 2014a) lists the following Threatened Ecological Communities as potentially occurring within the study area: Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and codominant). Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South Bioregions. Weeping Myall Woodlands. None of these communities (TECs) are mapped within the study area by DEHP (2014e) due to the significant difference between the soil requirements of these TECs (clay soils) and the mapped REs (sandy soils).

4.2.4. Threatened Plant Species Threatened flora listed under the EPBC Act Protected Matters search, potentially occurring within the Study Area (DOTE 2014a), based on a search radius of 10 km, are shown in Table 4-10.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 35

Table 4-10 Bushblock - EPBC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

Botanical Name Common Name EPBC Act* Likelihood of Occurrence

Cadellia pentastylis ooline V Possible.

Calytrix gurulmundensis none V Possible.

Homopholis belsonii Belson's panic V Unlikely. Prefers brigalow.

Homoranthus decumbens none E Possible.

* CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened NC Act Threatened flora species listed as potentially occurring within 10 km of the study area by DEHP (2014e), are shown in Table 4-11. One species from this table, Calytrix gurulmundensis, is also recorded in the EPBC Protected Matters search (previous table). It is listed as Vulnerable under both the EPBC and NC Acts. Table 4-11 Bushblock - NC Act Threatened Flora Potential Species

EPBC NC Botanical Name Common Name Likelihood of Occurrence Act* Act*

Calytrix gurulmundensis none V V Possible.

Cryptandra ciliata none NT Possible.

Aphyllorchis anomala none - an orchid NT Unlikely. Outside main distributions.

Unknown. Level of assessment Eremochloa muricata none - a grass E E needed is high and not warranted for the purposes of this study.

*underlined and in bold if listed on database CE=Critically Endangered, E=Endangered, V=Vulnerable, NT=Near-Threatened The presence of Calytrix gurulmundensis or Cryptandra ciliata on Lots 21 & 22 ("Bushblock") would add value to the offset area, in case of the need to offset these species due to any future projects. The presence of Cadellia pentastylis and Homoranthus decumbens are considered less likely to occur, but are nonetheless of potential value. The other species listed are considered unlikely to occur and do not need to be targeted in field survey.

4.2.4.1. Weeds The presence of significant weed infestations may make land management difficult or uneconomic. EPBC Act Significant weed species listed as potentially occurring within the study area by DOTE (2014a), based on the 10 km search radius, are shown in Table 4-12. These species are from the list of Weeds of National Significance (WoNS), by Thorp and Lynch (2000), and the list of Declared Plants under the LP Act. If a Declared Plant, then this is indicated in the table. Likelihood of occurrence is based on actual species distributions and habitat suitability. These are based on Wildlife Online records (DEHP 2014e), known distributions (CHAH 2014) and RE mapping (DEHP 2014d).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 36

Table 4-12 Bushblock - EPBC Act Significant Weeds Potential Species

Declared Class Likelihood of Botanical Name Common Name under LP Act Occurrence (if applicable)

Eichhornia crassipes water hyacinth 2 Unlikely.

Hymenachne amplexicaulis hymenachne 2 Unlikely.

Opuntia spp. prickly pear 2 Highly likely.

Parkinsonia aculeata parkinsonia 2 Unlikely.

Parthenium hysterophorus parthenium 2 Unlikely.

Salvinia molesta salvinia 2 Unlikely.

Aerial imagery and RE mapping indicate a lack of water bodies, wet areas and clay plains on Lots 21 & 22 ("Bushblock"), and hence the only weed species listed that is of concern is Opuntia spp. (prickly pear or tree pear).

4.3. Field Observation

4.3.1. Lot 5 KM135, Little Sorrel

4.3.1.1. Observation Sites An aerial image of the study area, with sites overlaid, is shown in Figure 4-4. Site observations are shown in Table 4-13.

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014 Figure 4-4 Little Sorrel - Observation Sites

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 37

Blue dots=observation sites in study area, with GPS tracks. Red = mapped remnant Regional Ecosystems. Distance along southern boundary is approximately 3.3 km. Table 4-13 Little Sorrel - Site Observations

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

Colluvial outwash of orange sand. Narrow thin trees forming woodland 10-12m tall, 60% cover. Eucalyptus sp. (probably E.tenuipes), Acacia shirleyi. Sparse shrub layer with Flindersia dissosperma et al. Ground layer of Edge of remnant 001 756977 7395431 buffel grass and Carissa ovata. at foot of slope. RE Edge of remnant has 1 Eucalyptus populnea, 1 11.5.9. E.cambageana, indicating soil change and preferential clearing downslope. Soil changes downslope to cleared paddock of black soil (clay).

As above for site 1, but only about 30% cover, with 002 756932 7395298 taller trees upslope. Other species include Erythroxylum RE 11.5.9. australe, Aristida ramosa.

Downslope. Small patch of brigalow regrowth 1-7m tall, patchy 20- 003 756864 7395337 Regrowth of RE 90% cover. 11.4.9.

Further downslope Small slight terrace of disturbed Acacia rhodoxylon, - RE 11.7.2. Then Acacia shirleyi, 1 Santalum lanceolatum, 1 medium to west is non- 004 756759 7395332 Eucalyptus cambageana at edge. To west is extensive remnant and lower plain of clearing and brigalow regrowth. regrowth 11.4.8, 11.4.9 or 11.9.5.

Regrowth of RE 11.4.8 on lower Large continuous patch of regrowth of various stages, slope. RE 11.7.2 5-14m tall, of Eucalyptus cambageana, brigalow, on upper slope. Alphitonia excelsa, cover highly variable 10-60%. Shrub Contiguousness of 005 756887 7394517 layer mainly Alectryon diversifolius to 2m tall, with 11.4.8 regrowth Carissa ovata, Diospyros humilis. RE 11.4.8. with 11.7.2 Uphill is Acacia shirleyi on laterite slope. RE 11.7.2. remnant increases ecological value of 11.4.8 regrowth.

Laterite slope with Acacia shirleyi 7m tall, with dying Base of laterite 006 756970 7394518 emergents 12m tall. Also Alphitonia excelsa, Aristida scarp. RE 11.7.2. ramosa.

007 757026 7393735 Small spur of Acacia shirleyi. RE 11.7.2.

As for site 5 - extensive area on footslope of variable- aged regrowth of RE 11.4.8, with Eucalyptus Regrowth of RE cambageana, brigalow, occasional scrub species. 11.4.8, with lower 008 757196 7392835 Downhill on flat area to south is extensive area of low regrowth of 11.4.9 brigalow regrowth to 3m tall, about 30-40% cover. No downhill. gilgai in this area.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 38

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

200m west - isolated patch of Eucalyptus cambageana about 0.5 Ha. W - 11.4.8. 100m north - southern edge of extensive brigalow N - regrowth 009 757250 7392473 regrowth. 11.4.9. 50m east - woodland of Eucalyptus crebra 12m tall, 40% cover. E - 11.9.9. On site - cleared, non-remnant.

Woodland 12-14m tall, 50% cover, Eucalyptus crebra, RE 11.5.9. Serves E.cambageana, Acacia shirleyi. Sparse shrub layer of as a more valuable 010 757393 7392495 Erythroxylum australe. Ground layer sparse but diverse, buffer than 11.7.2 including Aristida caput-medusae, Ancistrachne for the RE 11.4.8 uncinulata, Alternanthera sp., Sida sp., Poaceae indet. described site 5.

Southern Lower slope of Acacia shirleyi on laterite, with boundary. RE Eucalyptus crebra, Erythroxylum australe (RE 11.7.2). 11.7.2. Severe 011 757392 7391932 erosion along Lower down slope is Eucalyptus cambageana, E.crebra fenceline on (REs 11.4.8, 11.5.9). neighbouring property.

RE 11.7.2. Near Acacia shirleyi only. Edge of patch of Cerbera dumicola 012 757766 7391938 Threatened (NT under NC Act). Associated small tree species TBI. species present.

Very open woodland of Corymbia clarksoniana, with Top of plateau, 013 757857 7392020 some Eucalyptus crebra, E.tenuipes. Grassy about 30m from understorey with Aristida caput-medusae. edge. RE 11.5.9.

RE 11.4.8. Adjacent to dam and heavily used by cattle for shade and camp. South-east corner of isolated patch of woodland of 014 756823 7392461 Strongly Eucalyptus cambageana with occasional brigalow. undulating, no gilgai. Occurrence of target EVNT Solanum spp. very unlikely.

Near SE corner of patch of woodland of Eucalyptus RE 11.7.1 is only thozetiana 14m tall, 50% cover. Some brigalow 3-5m option to cover tall. Sparse shrub layer of Eremophila sp. (probably dominant species, 015 755587 7394133 E.deserti). Carissa ovata. but there is no laterite and land Surrounding landscape is extensive very open brigalow zone is probably 5 regrowth. (hard sand).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 39

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

Near SW corner of woodland of Eucalyptus cambageana on distinct dome compared to surrounding Shed and new area (different patch of woodland to site 15). Tree cattle yards 100m height variable - a clump of relict trees 12-16m tall, 016 756031 7395884 SE. RE 11.4.9 with the rest to N, E, S as advanced regrowth 8-12m grading upslope to tall including E.crebra, E.populnea, Acacia catenulata, RE 11.5.9. Acacia rhodoxylon, Alectryon oleifolius. Sparse ground layer mostly grazed buffel grass.

South-east part of large domed orange-sand area with some scalded areas north of cattle yards. Mostly very open woodland of Eucalyptus crebra 12-18m tall. Shrub layer of Acacia rhodoxylon, Petalostigma RE 11.5.9, with pubescens, Alstonia constricta, Carissa ovata. Ground small patch of layer with Sida sp., Dianella sp., *Melinis repens, 11.4.8 to south. 017 756255 7395811 Heteropogon contortus. further south is 50m south - small patch of woodland of Eucalyptus advanced regrowth cambageana about 50m x 50m in size. of 11.4.9. 200m south - large patch of advanced brigalow regrowth with dam in centre. Heavily impacted by cattle.

Eastern edge of woodland from site 17, of Eucalyptus crebra. Shrub layer of Petalostigma pubescens, Alectryon oleifolius, Acacia rhodoxylon, Alstonia RE 11.5.9. To east 018 756289 7395995 constricta, Erythroxylum australe. Ground layer mostly Aristida sp. Orange clayey sand as for site 17. is regrowth 114.9. To east - patchy low open brigalow regrowth past edge of dead trees.

Change from Eucalyptus crebra (RE 11.5.9) to RE 11.5.9 with 019 756209 7395978 E.populnea (RE 11.5.3) to north-west. Both on orange 11.5.3 to NW. sand with similar understorey.

Centre of small patch of advanced regrowth of two types: To south - regrowth of Eucalyptus cambageana 10-14m Advanced 020 756683 7395652 tall (RE 11.4.8), with Carissa ovata, Citrus glauca. regrowth of RE 11.4.8 and 11.4.9. To north - regrowth of brigalow 8-10m tall (RE 11.4.9), with bare understorey and ground layer, and slight depression (possibly gilgai).

Western boundary, Non-remnant, completely cleared. Buffel grass. near southern Occasional slight gilgai. boundary. Old broken dam. Non- 021 755002 7392677 To west - neighbouring property has remnant brigalow, remnant. To west Eucalyptus thozetiana, Casuarina cristata, Terminalia in neighbouring oblongata, Eremophila sp. (probably E.deserti). property is RE 11.4.3.

* naturalised (weed or exotic) species indicated by * Brigalow = Acacia harpophylla, buffel = Pennisetum ciliare. TBI = to be identified.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 40

4.3.1.2. Regional Ecosystems Additional, unmapped REs observed from field survey are shown in Table 4-14. Table 4-14 Little Sorrel - Unmapped Regional Ecosystems Observed

Regional VM Act Biodiversity Ecosystem Description (DEHP 2014a) Common names Status Status Code

Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina cristata Brigalow and/or and Eucalyptus thozetiana or E.microcarpa belah and Least 11.7.1 Of Concern woodland on lower scarp slopes on napunyah or grey Concern Cainozoic lateritic duricrust. box.

The RE mapping for the study area was generally correct, but some map revision is necessary to at least remove the sliver of the RE mosaic 11.4.3/11.4.8, as shown in Figure 4-1. These two REs represent brigalow-belah and brigalow-blackbutt respectively, but neither were observed to occur as remnants in that area (sites 1 & 2). Instead, this area was observed as RE 11.5.9, and was locally dominated by small-leafed white mahogany (Eucalyptus tenuipes), which has presumably produced a dark aerial imagery signature similar to that of brigalow. Alternatively, the pre-clearing mapping by DEHP was used to produce the remnant mapping, and the deletion of the RE mosaic 11.4.3/11.4.8 polygon has left a sliver at the edge of the remaining remnant. The low escarpment running down the mid-east part of the study area is mapped as the RE mosaic 11.7.2/11.7.2/11.7.2, which can be amalgamated into a single code of 11.7.2. The multiple codes have originated from more locally detailed floristic codes which are not relevant to this study. This RE has been confirmed on site as dominated by lancewood (Acacia shirleyi) (see sites 6,7,11,12). The plateau was of limited interest in terms of target Threatened flora and fauna species, so was briefly confirmed at site 13. The footslopes of the low escarpment have relatively extensive areas of regrowth blackbutt, brigalow and occasional scrub species (sites 5 & 8). These areas need to be mapped as regrowth RE 11.4.8, as they are considered to be capable of regenerating to remnant structure and condition, and may provide future habitat for the target Threatened flora species. The unmapped, relatively pure stand of napunyah (Eucalyptus thozetiana) in the mid-west of the study area (site 15) is best classified by RE 11.7.1, but there is no laterite visible in this area and topographic relief is minimal. However, this RE will be used for practical purposes to highlight the difference in dominant trees, as the alternative REs describe it very poorly and there is some confusion as to their descriptions. RE 11.4.9b describes it as "Acacia harpophylla, Eucalyptus thozetiana" which is a partly correct description, but then the comments in that section of REDD indicate that it has been reclassified as RE 11.4.8a, which is described as "palustrine wetland". This is completely inapplicable to the Eucalyptus thozetiana community observed on site. There is an unmapped remnant consisting of several REs in the north-west of the study area (sites 16-19) which occurs mostly on a sandy dome which was presumably not cleared due to soil type (it is surrounded by clay soils). This sandier area is mostly RE 11.5.9 (ironbark dominated) with some 11.5.3 (poplar box dominated), but also has smaller areas of REs 11.4.9 (brigalow) and 11.4.8 (blackbutt-brigalow). It is these brigalow (and blackbutt- brigalow) areas that are of interest for potential Threatened flora and fauna target species habitat, and as such need to be mapped in order to calculate areas and assess value.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 41

There is a small unmapped remnant with one half consisting of blackbutt, and the other half of brigalow, at site 20. This remnant is in fair condition, but is considered too small to be viable as habitat for the target Threatened flora species, due to edge effects. It may be of value as a cumulative area if sufficient other areas are also set aside as offsets, but it is not contiguous with these areas. There is an unmapped remnant of blackbutt at site 14, adjacent to a dam. The soil has been compacted severely by cattle at this site and it is considered unlikely that the soil structure would recover sufficiently to provide suitable habitat for the target Threatened flora species. The small size of this remnant, in conjunction with its poor condition, do not make it worthwhile to recognise on revised mapping. There is an unmapped remnant of brigalow about 200m south of site 17. This was seen to be intensively used by cattle and the small size of this remnant, in conjunction with its anticipated poor condition, do not make it worthwhile to recognise on revised mapping. Extensive areas of brigalow regrowth were observed in the study area but almost none had gilgai ("melonholes"). The general domination of the ground layer by buffel grass (Pennisetum ciliare) determined that doing a detailed BioCondition site was of no benefit. Some of the denser areas of brigalow regrowth are considered to be capable of regenerating to remnant structure and condition, and may provide future habitat for the target Threatened flora species. These areas can be added to revised mapping. A revised RE map is shown in Figure 4-5 (figure is split into two parts). Red lines are DEHP RE mapping, green lines are the revised RE polygon mapping.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 42

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014 Figure 4-5 Revised RE Map for Little Sorrel

4.3.1.3. Threatened Plant Species No suitable habitat was found in the study area for the target Threatened flora species (S.elachophyllum, S.johnsonianum). However, the extensive areas of brigalow regrowth, and particularly the blackbutt-brigalow regrowth on the footslopes of the low escarpment, may be suitable as future habitat, provided grazing is excluded.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 43

It is possible that habitat for the Threatened flora species may be provided by the unmapped remnants at sites such as 17, but the lack of nearby records of occurrence of these species suggest that this would be unlikely, particularly when compared with more favourable areas such as Zamia (north). A small patch of native frangipani (Cerbera dumicola) was seen at site 12, towards the top of the slope of the low escarpment near the southern boundary of the study area. This species is Near Threatened under the NC Act, and may be of offset value for future projects.

4.3.1.4. Weeds Much of the study area was extensively dominated by buffel grass (Pennisetum ciliare). In areas not dominated by buffel grass, there were some minor weeds observed, but these were not serious. These weed species include occasional tree pear (Opuntia tomentosa). Tree pear is a Class 2 Declared Plant under the LP Act and efforts to control it are required.

4.3.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 north parcel (“Zamia”)

4.3.2.1. Observation Sites An aerial image of the study area, with sites overlaid, is shown in Figure 4-6. Site observations are shown in Table 4-15. Note that observation site numbers may not start at "1" due to other Lots surveyed as part of this study.

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014

Figure 4-6 Zamia (northern portion) - Observation Sites Blue dots=observation sites in study area, with GPS tracks. Red = mapped remnant Regional Ecosystems. Distance along southern boundary of northern parcel is approximately 4 km including Zamia Creek.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 44

Table 4-15 Zamia (northern portion) - Site Observations

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

Brigalow regrowth 1-3m tall (avg. 2m) on moderate gilgai. Ground layer sparse in dips. Mostly buffel on higher areas (rims) and in small flat cleared areas. Leptochloa digitata in larger depression here on site. Enchylaena tomentosa, Near SE corner occasional small *Parthenium hysterophorus. of Zamia Creek 022 740753 7276065 Small open area has *Oxalis corniculata, Atalaya Conservation hemiglauca, Apophyllum anomalum, Portulaca Park. oleracea, Eriachne sp., Terminalia oblongata, Evolvulus alsinoides, Capparis lasiantha, Glycine sp., Enteropogon sp., Sporobolus caroli, Citrus glauca, Solanum sp.(possibly S.johnsonianum).

BioCondition As above - brigalow regrowth 1-3m tall (avg. 2m) 023 740775 7276052 site1. Site centre on moderate gilgai. Patchy cover to 40%. - 50m mark.

BioCondition 024 740735 7276073 As above. site1. 0m mark.

BioCondition 025 740817 7276019 As above. site1. 100m mark.

Brigalow regrowth to 3m (avg. 2m) 20% cover. Buffel grass 50% cover. Also Leptochloa digitata, Gentle drainage Eriachne sp., Enteropogon acicularis, Sporobolus depression with caroli. Note: loose head of Homopholis belsonii - pale sandy clay. possibly from adjacent conservation park. Ex 11.3.1 or 026 743066 7276526 Enchylaena tomentosa, Atalaya hemiglauca, 11.4.9. Two Apophyllum anomalum, Terminalia oblongata, possible Evolvulus alsinoides, Capparis lasiantha, Glycine Threatened sp., Citrus glauca, Solanum sp. (possibly species. S.johnsonianum) *Pennisetum ciliare, *Oxalis corniculatum, Parthenium hysterophorus.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 45

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

Patch of disturbed mapped remnant brigalow-belah about 16m tall with about 30% canopy cover, and 30% partly-overlapping sub-canopy cover. Large logs. Disturbed by grazing. T1-EDL (upper) 16-18m tall, 10% cover - Eucalyptus cambageana, Casuarina cristata. T2-Sub (mid) 8-12m tall, 50% cover - Acacia harpophylla, Brachychiton rupestris, Geijera salicifolia. S1 (tall shrub) 2-8m tall, 40% cover - Geijera BioCondition 027 743050 7276355 parviflora, Citrus glauca, Alectryon diversifolius, site2. Site centre Everistia vacciniifolia, Alectryon oleifolius, Amyema - 50m mark. sp. S2 (lower shrub) 1-2m tall, 10% cover - Casuarina cristata, Citrus glauca, Acacia harpophylla, Carissa ovata, Lysiphyllum carronii, Terminalia oblongata, Apophyllum anomalum. G (ground) - Enteropogon acicularis, Sporobolus caroli, Capparis lasiantha, Apophyllum anomalum, Cissus opaca, Sida sp., Maireana microphylla, *Pennisetum ciliare, *Opuntia tomentosa.

BioCondition 028 743091 7276360 As above. site2. 0m mark.

BioCondition 029 743001 7276348 As above. site2. 100m mark.

Eastern edge of remnant patch of brigalow-belah with Eucalyptus cambageana.

030 743129 7276354 To east: extensive cleared area with no gilgai. Soil has top sandy layer, dominated by buffel grass. Note: ridge line several hundred metres west defines eastern edge of gilgai to west.

Distinct sudden change from orange sandy-covered soil to east, and typical black soil with cracking and 031 742023 7277263 gilgai to west. Western area supports brigalow regrowth 1.5 - 4m tall.

Typical sample of wedge of dryland vegetation in between anabranches of Zamia Creek. Tall open woodland of brigalow 18-20m tall, 10% cover, with Remnant RE variable height understorey to 10m tall (avg. 5m) 032 740339 7278079 11.9.5. No consisting of brigalow, belah, Lysiphyllum hookeri, gilgai. Eremophila mitchellii, Geijera parviflora, 1 Capparis arborea, Amyema sp. on brigalow, buffel grass, Enchylaena tomentosa.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 46

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

One of several channels comprising western (or Zamia Creek, NW) branch of fork of creeks surrounding wedge of NW anabranch. 033 740219 7278138 dryland vegetation (as per site 32). Tall brigalow, with Melaleuca bracteata and Eucalyptus coolabah. RE 11.3.1, with Ground layer and water impacted by cattle. 11.3.37.

Traverse down western Further downstream - generally mostly E.coolabah boundary of along creek from site 33 to here, but with creek, mostly RE component of brigalow approximately 10%. Also 11.3.37 and 034 740005 7277232 some brigalow on floodplain on western side of 11.3.3. Further creek, but too narrow to be of offset value (cleared survey needed to west), and mostly E.coolabah. to determine amount of brigalow 11.3.1.

Further downstream - E.coolabah, Melaleuca Creek. RE 035 739981 7276481 trichostachya. Terminalia oblongata up on terrace, 11.3.37 and with Brachychiton rupestris and brigalow. 11.3.3.

Remnant brigalow-belah in good condition.

T1 (upper) 12-14m tall, 30% cover - brigalow Inspection of 15%, belah 15%. Most larger trees 15-20cm DBH, site record but all under BioCondition threshold of 32cm. location for T2 (mid) 7-10m tall, 20% cover - brigalow, belah, Solanum Citrus glauca, Flindersia dissosperma. elachophyllum in Zamia Creek 036 740463 7276497 S1 (shrub) 1.5-4m tall, 15% cover - Geijera Conservation parviflora, brigalow, belah. Park. No sign of S2 (shrub) 0.5-1.5m tall, 30% cover - Paspalidium target species sp., Enchylaena tomentosa, Capparis lasiantha, due to dry Chenopodiaceae, Acanthaceae, *Opuntia conditions. RE tomentosa, Cissus opaca, Sida sp. 11.4.3. Litter 30%, bare 30%, logs 10%.

Also in Zamia Creek 037 740528 7276602 Senna sp. collected TBI. Conservation Park, near site 36.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 47

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 55 Vegetation description* Comments site 55 GDA94) GDA94)

Patch of disturbed mapped remnant brigalow-belah about 14m tall with about 10% canopy cover, and 70% partly-overlapping sub-canopy cover. Large logs. Disturbed by grazing. T1-EDL (upper) 12-16m (avg.14m), 10% cover - Casuarina cristata (dominant), Acacia harpophylla. T2-Sub (mid) 2-12m (avg.9m), 60% cover - Casuarina cristata, Acacia harpophylla, Lysiphyllum carronii, Alectryon diversifolius, Terminalia BioCondition 038 741355 7277216 oblongata. site3. Site centre - 50m mark. S1 (shrub) 1-2m, 5% cover - Acacia harpophylla, Casuarina cristata, Geijera parviflora, Terminalia oblongata, Alectryon diversifolius, Carissa ovata. G (ground) Ancistrachne uncinulata, thin-leafed grass grazed (possibly Enteropogon acicularis), Cissus opaca, Jasminum didymum subsp. lineare, Enchylaena tomentosa, Capparis lasiantha, probably Sida sp., *Bryophyllum sp., *Opuntia tomentosa.

BioCondition 039 741347 7277265 As above. site3. 0m mark.

BioCondition 040 741364 7277175 As above. site3. 100m mark.

* naturalised (weed or exotic) species indicated by * Brigalow = Acacia harpophylla, belah = Casuarina cristata, buffel = Pennisetum ciliare.

4.3.2.2. Regional Ecosystems Additional, unmapped REs observed from field survey are shown in Table 4-16. Table 4-16 Zamia (northern portion) - Unmapped Regional Ecosystems Observed

Regional VM Act Biodiversity Ecosystem Description (DEHP 2014a) Common names Status Status Code

Acacia harpophylla and/or Casuarina brigalow and/or belah 11.3.1 cristata open-forest on alluvial Endangered Endangered on alluvium plains.

Eucalyptus coolabah fringing Least No Concern 11.3.37 coolabah on channels woodland on alluvial plains. Concern at Present

The RE mapping for the study area was generally correct, with the western remnant area surrounding and between Zamia Creek and its anabranch as eucalypt floodplain REs 11.3.3 (coolabah) and 11.3.4 (blue gum and/or other floodplain eucalypts). However, there is a large wedge of brigalow and belah, sampled at site 32, between the anabranches, which is mappable as RE 11.4.3 (or possibly 11.9.5 depending on soil type and geology mapping).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 48

The large remnant of Zamia Creek Conservation Park, which is immediately adjacent to the study area, is generally correctly mapped as a mosaic of two brigalow REs (11.4.9a and 11.4.8). It was observed to be RE 11.4.3 in places such as site 36 due to the presence of belah (Casuarina cristata), but it is beyond the scope of this study to revise the mapping in this external area. It is also largely unnecessary since all three afore-mentioned REs are generally brigalow dominated or co-dominated, and are hence similar. The isolated patch of brigalow in the north-east part of the study area is also mapped correctly, as RE 11.9.5, sampled at site 27 (BioCondition site 2). However there is also a similar-sized remnant patch of brigalow-belah which has not been mapped, and is sampled at site 38 (BioCondition site 3). Extensive areas of brigalow regrowth were observed in the study area and a significant proportion of this had gilgai ("melonholes"). This regrowth with gilgai was sampled near the south-east corner of Zamia Creek Conservation Park, at site 23 (BioCondition site 1). The regrowth over gilgai is most likely from RE 11.4.9. Most of the area without gilgai, especially if undulating, is likely to be from RE 11.9.5. More minor additions to the RE mapping entail adding riparian forest communities for Zamia Creek, as there are currently only floodplain communities mapped. RE 11.3.37 (fringing coolabah) needs to be added, and also RE 11.3.1 (brigalow on alluvium). These two REs can only be currently mapped as a mosaic, as further survey would be needed to differentiate them along the watercourses. A revised RE map is shown in Figure 4-7 (figure is split into two parts). Red lines are DEHP RE mapping. Note that "disturbed" vegetation has a mature structure but the understorey is missing, therefore it is classified as regrowth.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 49

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014 Figure 4-7 Revised RE Map for Zamia (northern portion)

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 50

4.3.2.3. Threatened Plant Species A seedling resembling one of the target Threatened species, Solanum johnsonianum, was found at site 22. A photograph was taken in situ. A Quaternary sample site (site 36) was done in remnant vegetation in the adjacent Zamia Creek Conservation Park, at a known location of one of the target Threatened species, Solanum elachophyllum. The dry seasonal conditions made it unlikely to find the species, but it gave a good indication of suitable habitat. On this basis it was decided that an unmapped remnant of similar structure and floristics to the north may also provide suitable habitat, albeit in poorer condition due to grazing disturbance. A BioCondition site (BioCondition site 3) was done at this location (also marked as Quaternary site 38). Similar habitat was also observed to occur within the large wedge-shaped remnant in between the anabranches of Zamia Creek. This was sampled at Quaternary site 32. In general, some potentially suitable habitat was found in the study area for the target Threatened flora species (Solanum elachophyllum, S.johnsonianum). The areas with the greatest potential are the following: The wedge of brigalow and belah, sampled at site 32, in between the anabranches of Zamia Creek. This is the largest remnant in the study area and is improved in value because it is contiguous with the creek. It is currently mapped as a mosaic of REs 11.3.3/11.3.4, but should be mapped as 11.4.3 or 11.9.5 depending on soil type and geology mapping. The isolated patch of brigalow in the north-east part of the study area is mapped correctly, as RE 11.9.5, sampled at site 27 (BioCondition site 2). There is also a similar-sized remnant patch of brigalow-belah which has not been mapped, and is sampled at site 38 (BioCondition site 3). The extensive areas of brigalow regrowth mainly in the western half of the study area, and in particular, those areas with gilgai near the south-east corner of Zamia Creek Conservation Park, sampled at site 23 (BioCondition site 1). These areas are not currently suitable habitat due to lack of shade, but are considered to be capable of regenerating to remnant structure and condition, and may provide future habitat for the target Threatened flora species. These areas can also be added to revised mapping.

4.3.2.4. Weeds Some parts of the study area were extensively dominated by buffel grass (Pennisetum ciliare). In areas not dominated by buffel grass, there were some minor weeds observed, but these were not serious. These weed species include tree pear (Opuntia tomentosa). Tree pear is a Class 2 Declared Plant under the LP Act and efforts to control it are required.

4.3.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock

4.3.3.1. Observation Sites An aerial image of the study area, with sites overlaid, is shown in Figure 4-8. Site observations are shown in Table 4-17. Note that observation site numbers may not start at "1" due to other Lots surveyed as part of this study.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 51

Imagery: Visual Earth 2014 Figure 4-8 Bushblock - Observation Sites Blue dots=observation sites in study area, with GPS tracks. Red = mapped remnant Regional Ecosystems. Distance along southern boundary of both blocks combined is approximately 3.7 km.

Table 4-17 Bushblock - Site Observations

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 56# Vegetation description* Comments site 56# GDA94) GDA94)

Tall open forest of Eucalyptus crebra 20- NE corner of L Tree Rd 41 218764 7069749 25m tall, with dense lower layer of and Warramoo Rd. RE Callitris glaucophylla to 16m tall. 11.5.1.

Minor drainage Drainage depression. As above for site 42 218836 7070534 depression, but no 41, but also with Eucalyptus chloroclada. channel.

Minor drainage As above for site 42, but with channel in 43 218842 7070583 depression with drainage depression. channel.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 52

Easting Northing Observation (Zone (Zone 56# Vegetation description* Comments site 56# GDA94) GDA94)

Another drainage depression. As for site 44 218924 7071265 Drainage depression. 42.

As for site 41, but also with Melaleuca Probably a slightly 45 219169 7073290 decora. wetter area.

Grid on L Tree Rd, and gate to Lot. No east- Eucalyptus crebra, Angophora leiocarpa, 46 219190 7073457 west fence east of grid, Callitris glaucophylla. but there is one to the west.

NW corner of Lot. Good access along both Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, 47 219251 7073852 boundaries and along Corymbia sp. (probably C.watsoniana). pipeline easement running ESE.

Gate. Minor track 48 219036 7072135 As for site 41. access to east.

Gate on Warramoo Rd. Minor track access to Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, 49 220387 7069545 north between Lot 21 & Eucalyptus populnea. Lot 22. RE 11.5.1 with minor 11.5.1a.

Eucalyptus crebra, Callitris glaucophylla, 50 220842 7069489 Allocasuarina luehmannii. Shrub layer of Acacia spp.

Start of fork into two Mainly Eucalyptus crebra, Allocasuarina 51 221269 7069437 gas pipeline easements luehmannii. to NNW.

Eucalyptus crebra, Corymbia sp. Drainage depression, 52 221615 7069396 (probably C.watsoniana), Acacia spp., but no channel. minor Callitris glaucophylla.

Semi-advanced regrowth, or possibly stunted, Eucalyptus sp. (probably 53 221766 7069375 E.tenuipes), Callitris glaucophylla, Acacia spp., Corymbia sp. (probably C.watsoniana), Eucalyptus crebra.

East end of Warramoo Rd, with gate SE to Shrubland of Acacia aprepta for last 100m Warramoo. Also gate to 54 222013 7069346 of road. 1 large Eucalyptus populnea in NE property. No track corner of Lot 21 but no others. to Lot 21 but fenceline is cleared.

* naturalised (weed or exotic) species indicated by * # note that this site (Bushblock) is further east than the other two sites (Little Sorrel and Zamia) and is in MGA Zone 56 (and not 55).

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 53

4.3.3.2. Regional Ecosystems Based on existing RE mapping and general familiarity with the study area, Lots 21 & 22 ("Bushblock") were not considered suitable habitat for the targeted offset species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum). For this reason only a brief roadside survey was undertaken to ensure that the RE mapping was broadly correct, and this was found to be the case.

4.3.3.3. Threatened Plant Species It is possible, but considered unlikely, that there are minor areas of suitable habitat for the targeted offset species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum) within Lots 21 & 22 ("Bushblock"). Detailed survey similar to the other sites (Lot 9 (north) "Zamia " and Lot 5 "Little Sorrel") may be of benefit in order to assess habitat and search for other target flora species that may become relevant offset species due to future projects.

4.3.3.4. Weeds Roadside survey found that weed infestation was relatively minor, but a more thorough survey would be necessary to make a complete assessment, particularly since the woody vegetation is relatively dense and visibility is limited. It is expected that there would be at least occasional localised infestations of Opuntia spp. (prickly pear or tree pear). Significant clearing for high pressure gas pipelines has been done, and these areas may pose a significant future risk for weed invasion.

4.4. BioCondition Assessments

4.4.1. Calculation Requirements

4.4.1.1. State Requirements and Methodology Clearing of vegetation in Queensland often requires the use of offsets once measures to avoid and mitigate impacts have been implemented. Offsets are currently required under the Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy (Version 1.0) (DEHP 2014b). The policy applies to matters of state environmental significance listed in Schedule 2 of the Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014. This framework replaces the Queensland Biodiversity Offset Policy (DERM 2011c). Although the policy framework has changed, the methodology for assessing the ecological condition of vegetation remains the same. BioCondition assessment (DERM 2011a) is a field assessment used to evaluate the ecological condition of vegetation to be cleared, and compare it with the condition of vegetation proposed as offset. With these data, the two areas of vegetation are compared using Ecological Equivalence Methodology (DERM 2011b). Condition indicators are based on Tables 2 & 4 in the EEM, shown in Table 4-18. Scores are calculated for each indicator, so that clearing and offset areas can be compared.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 54

Table 4-18 State Offset Condition Indicators

Condition indicator (from Tables 2 & 4 in the Ecological Equivalence Methodology, DEHP 2011b)

1 Recruitment of woody perennial species.

2 Native plant species richness

Trees

Shrubs

Grasses

Forbs

3 Tree canopy height.

4 Tree canopy cover.

5 Shrub canopy cover.

6 Native perennial grass cover.

7 Organic litter.

8 Large trees.

9 Coarse woody debris.

10 Weed cover.

11 Size of patch (Fragmented).

12 Connectivity (Fragmented).

13 Context (Fragmented).

14 Distance from water (Intact).

Sum of score:

Area (Ha).

Sum of scores x area / 100 = Ecological equivalence score for ecological condition

The calculations in this report will be completed by using a benchmark RE for comparison, in order to assess offset feasibility based on absolute environmental values. The same method of calculation will be necessary to compare the study area with the intended areas of clearing. The clearing area is compared with the offset area, using the following calculation: Sum of scores x area / 100 = Ecological equivalence score for ecological condition.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 55

BioCondition benchmarks were developed by the Queensland Herbarium (2012) based on CORVEG vegetation mapping site data, and are periodically updated. These provide standardised average data (e.g. heights, cover, floristic diversity) on selected REs in good condition. Wherever possible, BioCondition data collected from the EIS is used if deemed to be reliable, but may need to be supplemented with additional BioCondition site data to enable calculations to satisfy DEHP requirements. The main reasons for additional data collection will depend on Condition Indicators 11-14 as seen in the preceding table, which requires knowledge of the following: Size of patch (Fragmented). Connectivity (Fragmented). Context (Fragmented). Distance from water (Intact). Further calculations may be necessary to compare the study area with the intended areas of clearing depending on any special features which may be present in the clearing area, based on Tables 7 & 8 in the Ecological Equivalence Methodology (DERM 2011b). These special features are mapped in an Offsets Special Features GIS layer available from DEHP. Recent changes in DEHP offset policy may affect the need or use of this dataset. The special features are shown in Table 4-19. Scores are calculated for each feature. Table 4-19 State Offset Special Feature Indicators

Special Feature Indicator (from Tables 7 & 8 in the Ecological Equivalence Methodology, DEHP 2011b)

Indicators which require adjacency calculation: 1 Centres of endemism. 2 Wildlife refugia. 3 Areas with concentrations of disjunct populations. 4 Areas with taxa at limits of geographic range. 5 Areas with high species richness. 6 Areas considered to be important for maintaining populations of ancient and primitive taxa. 7 Areas containing regional ecosystems with distinct variation in taxa composition associated with geomorphology and other environmental variables. 8 Artificially created waterbodies of ecological significance. 9 Areas considered to be important because of high relative density of hollow-bearing trees. 10 Breeding or roosting sites used by a significant number of individuals. 12 (sic) Priority species. Indicators where adjacency is not applicable: 11 (sic) Ecological corridors. 13 Significance of patch within a 1 kilometre buffer. 14 Protected area estate buffer.

4.4.1.2. Commonwealth Requirements and Methodology Vegetation clearing offsets are also required under Commonwealth policy. The policy was last updated in October 2012: Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environmental Offsets Policy (DOTE 2014b). The policy applies to Threatened

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 56

Ecological Communities and Threatened species (and their habitat) as defined under the EPBC Act, and therefore has some overlap with the Queensland policy. An offsets calculator is supplied by DOTE in the form of an Excel spreadsheet, which is a different method to the DEHP EEM. The collection of field data is still done primarily using the State-derived BioCondition methodology (DERM 2011a). The Commonwealth policy is not applicable to the two NC Act target Threatened species in this report (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum), as they are not listed as Threatened species under the EPBC Act. It will still be applicable to the clearing of any Threatened Ecological Communities (e.g. brigalow).

4.4.2. Site Selection

4.4.2.1. Lot 5 KM135, Little Sorrel The Little Sorrel site had limited areas of vegetation suitable for BioCondition assessment, on the basis of: Limited areas of the same remnant REs suitable for offset. No records of nearby occurrence of target Threatened species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum). High impact by cattle grazing and trampling, based on brief observations recorded during Quaternary site data survey.

4.4.2.2. Lot 9 Plan BH194 (north), Zamia The Zamia (north) site had several areas of vegetation suitable for BioCondition assessment, on the basis of: Target REs in relatively good condition for the region, based on brief observations recorded during Quaternary site data survey. Known nearby occurrence of target Threatened species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum). Proximity to remnant brigalow in good condition in Zamia Creek Conservation Park, and Zamia Creek. Three different representative sites were selected for BioCondition assessment. These were: Regrowth brigalow on gilgai. This would originally have been RE 11.4.9. This site was BioCondition site 1 (Quaternary site 23), near the south-east corner of the brigalow remnant of Zamia Creek Conservation Park. This remnant is adjacent to the regrowth area, and has a recorded occurrence of Solanum elachophyllum. Blackbutt-belah. This is RE 11.4.8. This site was BioCondition site 2 (Quaternary site 27), an isolated mapped remnant in the east of the study area. Brigalow-belah. This is RE 11.4.3. This site was BioCondition site 3 (Quaternary site 38), an isolated unmapped remnant in the mid-north of the study area. It could potentially be joined to Zamia Creek Conservation Park by brigalow regrowth in between the two areas.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 57

4.4.2.3. Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37, Bushblock The Bushblock site had no areas of vegetation suitable for BioCondition assessment, on the basis of: No mapped areas of the same remnant REs suitable for offset. Only brief survey along two boundaries of the site (on public roads) were necessary to confirm that the site was not a suitable offset. No records of nearby occurrence of target Threatened species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum).

4.4.3. BioCondition Calculations - Zamia (north) Sites

4.4.3.1. Regrowth Brigalow RE 11.4.9 on Gilgai BioCondition assessment of regrowth brigalow on gilgai was done at BioCondition site 1 (Quaternary site 23). This would originally have been RE 11.4.9. Calculations are shown in Table 4-20, which is based on the sample table in Appendix E of the EEM. A relatively low score is expected for this site because it is regrowth, but calculations are done nonetheless for consistency with the other remnant offset sites, and to help assess the overall value of the site. There is currently no BioCondition benchmark (Queensland Herbarium, 2012) available for RE 11.4.9, so a benchmark for a similar RE was selected - RE 11.9.5. Ideally a Best On Offer site of the same RE is assessed and a temporary benchmark established, but this was beyond the scope of this study. It would however be required in subsequent work if comparing clearing and offset areas using EEM. Table 4-20 BioCondition Scoring - Regrowth Brigalow RE 11.4.9 on Gilgai

Benchmark Offset Field-based Condition Comparison Benchmark Offset RE* (11.9.5 study Indicators west as % Score score area surrogate)

1 Recruitment of woody 100 100 100 5 5 perennial species (%). Offset must score >=3.

2 Native plant species richness.

Trees. 4 1 25 5 2.5

Shrubs. 5 1 20 5 0

Grasses. 5 4 80 5 2.5

Forbs. 10 9 90 5 2.5

3 Tree canopy height. 15 2 13 5 0

4 Tree canopy cover. Offset 32 2.5 (30 8 (94 avg) 5 0 (5 avg) must score >=2. avg)

5 Shrub canopy cover. 19 5.5 30 5 3

6 Native perennial grass cover. 30 5 17 5 1

7 Organic litter. 49 40 82 5 5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 58

Benchmark Offset Field-based Condition Comparison Benchmark Offset RE* (11.9.5 study Indicators west as % Score score area surrogate)

8 Large trees (Ha). 10 0 0 10 0

9 Coarse woody debris (m/Ha). 688 0 0 5 0

10 Weed cover. 0 <1 > 10 10

Total of Field Indicators: 75 24 (or 29)

GIS/map-based Indicators

11 Size of patch (Ha - include No data ~430 10 adjoining woody).

12 Connectivity (length adjacent No data ~5% 0 woody boundary %).

13 Context (% woody within No data ~50% 2 (TBC) 1km).

14 Distance from water (intact N/A for n/a n/a bioregions only). B.Belt

Sum of All Indicators:

Area (Ha). applies to clearing areas

Sum of scores x area / 100 = Ecological equivalence score for ecological condition

* Benchmarks from Queensland Herbarium (2012). In this case a surrogate RE 11.9.5 needed to be used as RE 11.4.9 was unavailable. Site is in sub-region 21, Dawson River Downs, therefore western benchmark of 11.9.5 needs to be used. This site has a BioCondition score of between 24 and 29 based solely on field condition indicators. This indicates that that its ecological condition is not as high as the benchmark RE (score 75). However, this is to be expected since this potential offset community is regrowth. The GIS-based indicators would improve its score, due to its patch size, particularly when joined to the adjacent Zamia Creek Conservation Park remnant. Its connectivity is also high, as it joins the Park along the Park's entire eastern boundary of approximately 400m, and another nearby patch of regrowth joins for approximately 800m. Furthermore, the Park is in turn joined to the remnant vegetation of Zamia Creek, which extends considerably further. This would produce a high context score. (Note: a vehicle track runs along the perimeter of the Park but this can be decommissioned, or preferably retained as a firebreak). Tree canopy cover was measured by running the measuring tape through open areas due to difficulty with access through (and over) dense young brigalow regrowth. This tended to under-represent the amount of cover, and a higher estimate of cover is proposed as an alternative in the above table. Also, most of the brigalow was slightly under 2m tall, and hence missed out on being counted as tree cover.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 59

The EEM allows for exclusion of some indicators if they are not naturally present in a particular type of community. In the case of this shrubland, it might be possible to exclude large tree counts, which would improve the relative score of the offset area. Section B.2, Box B.4 of the EEM demonstrates this. The size of this patch of regrowth (with gilgai) is approximately 85 ha. The total area of brigalow regrowth in the study area (with or without gilgai) is approximately 280 Ha, based on revised RE mapping using field survey data. This area is then used in future calculations when comparing with clearing areas (refer to last two rows of above table). Regrowth areas will be worth less than remnant areas. The proximity to Zamia Creek Conservation Park, and a known occurrence of one of the target threatened flora species, adds ecological value to these regrowth areas.

4.4.3.2. Blackbutt-Belah RE 11.4.8 BioCondition assessment of blackbutt-belah was done at BioCondition site 2 (Quaternary site 27). This is RE 11.4.8. Calculations are shown in Table 4-20. There is currently no BioCondition benchmark (Queensland Herbarium, 2012) published for RE 11.4.8, but a draft benchmark was available from the Queensland Herbarium. Table 4-21 BioCondition Scoring - Blackbutt-Belah RE 11.4.8

Benchmar Offset k RE* Comparison Benchmark Offset Field-based Condition Indicators (11.9.5 west study % Score score as area surrogate) 1 Recruitment of woody perennial 50** 50 100 3 3 species (%). Offset must score >=3. 2 Native plant species richness. Trees. 4 9 225 5 5 Shrubs. 7 7 100 5 5 Grasses. 10 2 20 5 0 Forbs. 14 5 36 5 2.5 3 Tree canopy height. 16 15 94 5 5 4 Tree canopy cover. Offset must score 32 34.5 108 5 5 >=2. 5 Shrub canopy cover. 15 5 33 5 3 6 Native perennial grass cover. 10 0.6 6 1 0 7 Organic litter. 75 53.4 71 5 5 8 Large trees (Ha). 115 26 23 10 5 9 Coarse woody debris (m/Ha). 800 291 36 5 2 10 Weed cover. 0 20 > 10 5 Total of Field Indicators: 69 45.5 GIS/map-based Indicators 11 Size of patch (Ha - include adjoining No data 5.8 2 woody). 12 Connectivity (length adjacent woody No data ~50% 0 boundary %). 13 Context (% woody within 1km). No data ~50% 2 (TBC)

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 60

14 Distance from water (intact bioregions N/A for n/a n/a only). B.Belt Sum of All Indicators: Area (Ha). applies to clearing areas Sum of scores x area / 100 = Ecological equivalence score for ecological condition

* Benchmarks from Queensland Herbarium (2012). In this case a draft benchmark from Queensland Herbarium was used as the RE 11.4.8 benchmark has not yet been published. ** Recruitment of woody perennial species - benchmark has no Eucalyptus cambageana recruitment, but has brigalow. Offset study area has no Eucalyptus cambageana recruitment either, but also has no brigalow in the tree layer, instead it is belah. It also has belah recruitment so it is also regarded as 50%. This site has a BioCondition score of 45.5 based solely on field condition indicators. This indicates that that its ecological condition is not as high as the benchmark RE (score 69). The main factors that lower the score are lack of large trees, and lack of native grass cover. This mapped remnant is actually advanced regrowth and therefore has the potential to produce large trees in the future. Grazing has depleted native grass cover, which would return if grazing was excluded. Coarse woody debris rules produced inaccurate results, as, for example, one particularly large hollow log spanned a gully and was not recordable since it was elevated. This patch of remnant is isolated, so therefore the GIS-based indicators of patch size and connectivity will not improve scoring. However, the patch is near other remnants, and could be connected to them in future by brigalow regrowth if grazing was excluded. It would then connect to Zamia Creek Conservation Park, and in turn the more extensive remnant vegetation of Zamia Creek. The presence of the Park and Zamia Creek would currently produce a high context score. The size of this patch of blackbutt-belah remnant is approximately 5.8 Ha, and is the total extent of this community in the study area. This area is then used in future calculations when comparing with clearing areas (refer to last two rows of above table). Although much smaller in total area than the brigalow regrowth, it has greater ecological offset value under State policy.

4.4.3.3. Brigalow-Belah RE 11.4.3 BioCondition assessment of brigalow-belah was done at BioCondition site 3 (Quaternary site 38). This regrowth is RE 11.4.3. Calculations are shown in Table 4-20. Table 4-22 BioCondition Scoring - Brigalow-Belah RE 11.4.3

Offset Field-based Condition Benchmark RE* Comparison Benchmark Offset (11.9.5 west as study Indicators % Score score surrogate) area 1 Recruitment of woody 100 100 100 5 5 perennial species (%). Offset must score >=3. 2 Native plant species richness. Trees. 2 5 250 5 5 Shrubs. 10 6 60 5 5 Grasses. 4 2 50 5 5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 61

Forbs. 13 5 38 5 5 3 Tree canopy height. 24 14 58 5 3 4 Tree canopy cover. Offset 70 7 (+68 0.1 (or 107 5 0 (or 5 must score >=2. sub) with sub) with sub) 5 Shrub canopy cover. 48 5 10.4 (10 5 2 scores 0) 6 Native perennial grass 6 1.4 23 5 1 cover. 7 Organic litter. 75 81.8 109 5 5 8 Large trees (Ha). 80 (DBH>32) 0 (or 200 0 (or 250 for 10 0 (or 15 for DBH smaller DBH) for smaller 10-15) DBH) 9 Coarse woody debris 1752 250 14 5 2 (m/Ha). 10 Weed cover. 0 10 > 10 5 Total of Field 75 43 (or Indicators: 63) GIS/map-based Indicators 11 Size of patch (Ha - include No data ~430 10 adjoining woody). 12 Connectivity (length No data ~50% 0 adjacent woody boundary %). 13 Context (% woody within No data ~50% 2 (TBC) 1km). 14 Distance from water N/A for B.Belt n/a n/a (intact bioregions only). Sum of All Indicators: Area (Ha). applies to clearing areas Sum of scores x area / 100 = Ecological equivalence score for ecological condition

* Benchmarks from Queensland Herbarium (2012). This site has a BioCondition score of 43 (or as high as 63) based solely on field condition indicators. This indicates that that its ecological condition is not as high as the benchmark RE (score 75), but with the higher possible score of 63, this patch of remnant is a potential offset with ecological condition which is almost as high as the benchmark. All trees in this patch were advanced regrowth, and hence the DBH ranged from 10-15 cm, therefore no trees were able to be included in the large tree count, due to the higher threshold DHB of 32 cm. This produced an inaccurate assessment of the patch, and an alternative score is included which takes these smaller trees into account. The assessment of tree cover was inaccurate because most of the trees were in the sub- canopy, and had to be ignored in the scoring process, even though they comprised most of the overstorey, with a relatively small number of taller, narrow-crowned trees forming the Ecologically Dominant Layer. If the trees from the sub-layer are included in the EDL, a much higher and more appropriate cover is calculated.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 FLORA HABITAT ASSESSMENTS & DETAILED SURVEYS 62

This unmapped remnant is actually advanced regrowth and therefore has the potential to produce large trees in the future. Grazing has depleted native grass cover, which would return if grazing was excluded. This patch of remnant is isolated, so therefore the GIS-based indicators of patch size and connectivity will not improve scoring. However, the patch is near other remnants, and could be connected to them in future by brigalow regrowth if grazing was excluded. It would then connect to Zamia Creek Conservation Park, and in turn the more extensive remnant vegetation of Zamia Creek. The presence of the Park and Zamia Creek would currently produce a high context score. The size of this patch of brigalow-belah remnant is approximately 3.6 Ha. The total area of this community in the study area is far greater, but cannot be accurately estimated without further field survey. It is considered to form at least 50%, and possibly as much as 100%, of the wedge of brigalow (with or without belah) in between the two anabranches of Zamia Creek within the study area. This wedge is up to approximately 55 Ha of remnant, and appears to be in good condition. Some of it may be in condition equal to that of Zamia Creek Conservation Park. Some of this area may also be coolabah floodplain (RE 11.3.3), but may also be brigalow on alluvium (RE 11.3.1). Once confirmed, this area of brigalow (with or without belah) is then used in future calculations when comparing with clearing areas (refer to last two rows of above table). Although much smaller in total area than the brigalow regrowth, it has greater ecological offset value under State policy.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 63

5. THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS

5.1. Habitat Assessments Field investigations and assessments of the fauna habitats supported on each property and their potential suitability to support the target threatened species undertaken as part of Stage 2, identified potentially suitable habitats for the target species on each of the proposed lots as detailed in Section 3.6. Consequent of these assessments, a field survey program was designed and implemented to undertake targeted surveys for these threatened species on each property as described in Table 5-1 below. Table 5-1 Summary of Target Fauna Species, Potential Habitat, Occurrence Assessment and Survey Recommendations

Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 11.4.3/ Possible/potential habitat present. Field Ornamental 11.4.8, Near validation required to assess Y snake Cleared presence/quality of gilgai habitats Lot 5, Squatter KM135, 11.5.9, Near Possible/potential habitat present Y pigeon Little 11.7.2, Possible/potential habitat present. Field Sorrel South- 11.4.3/ validation required to assess y eastern long- 11.4.8, presence/quality of woodland condition, m eared bat Cleared presence of roosting/foraging resources 11.3.3/ 11.3.4, regrowth Possible/potential habitat present. Field Ornamental 11.4.9/ Near validation required to assess Y snake 11.4.8, presence/quality of gilgai habitats Lot 9 11.9.5, (north) Cleared BH194, Squatter Zamia As above Near Possible/potential habitat present Y pigeon Possible/potential habitat present. Field South- 11.3.3/ validation required to assess y eastern long- 11.3.4, presence/quality of woodland condition, m eared bat Cleared presence of roosting/foraging resources 11.7.4/ Squatter 11.7.7/ Near Possible/potential habitat present Y pigeon 11.7.5/ Lot 21/22, 11.7.2 Plan AU37, 11.7.4/ Possible/potential habitat present. Field Bushblock South- 11.7.7/ validation required to assess eastern long- Near Y 11.7.5/ presence/quality of woodland condition, eared bat 11.7.2 presence of roosting/foraging resources Table Key: 1 = Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Protected Matters Search Tool; 2 = REs supported on each lot considered likely to support potentially suitable target species habitat; 3 = Wildlife database search; 4 = Atlas of Living Australia database search; 5 = Assessment of potential likelihood of target species/habitat occurrence; 6 = Targeted field surveys. = database potential habitat; = database record; = not recorded; Near = ALA record in local region; Y = undertake targeted surveys; ym = undertake modified targeted surveys . NB: Species in grey shading are offset target species considered likely to occur in these proposed offset areas, though not indicated by Cockatoo Coal in the Scope of Works as requiring investigation.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 64

5.2. Methodology

5.2.1. Search Area Location and Selection Search areas were selected on the basis that they contained suitable habitat values and structural composition likely to support the threatened fauna species targeted for the assessment. Each search area was selected to provide good geographical spread and representation of vegetation communities and landscapes across the study area.

5.2.2. Fauna Survey Methodologies and Effort As a minimum requirement of the SoW, survey methodologies used to undertake this assessment were based on the individual significant species survey guidelines recommended by the Federal Government. These survey guidelines stipulate a variety of methods for targeted surveying of threatened species which can be summarised by the following: diurnal bird census and flushing surveys – squatter pigeon (Geophaps scripta scripta); active diurnal and nocturnal ground searching – ornamental snake (Denisonia maculata); and harp trapping and trip lining – south-eastern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus corbeni/timoriensis). The following table details the threatened species considered for this assessment, the applicable survey methods as dictated by the Commonwealth threatened species survey guidelines and the level of survey effort required. Table 5-2 Conservation Significant Species, Survey Methods & Efforts Matrix Survey Zoological Name Methods Effort* Timing REPTILES Denisonia maculata 1.5 hours/Ha over 3 Nocturnal Area Searches ornamental snake nights BIRDS Geophaps scripta scripta 15 hours/area, 10 hours Diurnal Census/Area Searches squatter pigeon flushing,<50Ha, 3 days BATS Nyctophilus corbeni Min 5 nights, 20 trap Nocturnal Harp/Anabat south eastern long-eared bat nights, areas <50Ha * Effort as indicated in relevant Commonwealth Survey Guidelines. The survey program comprised a range of survey techniques, utilised where applicable, at each search area. The methods applied are discussed in the following sections. The survey methodologies employed for these assessments are based upon, conform to, if not exceed, current recommended methodologies (e.g. McFarland et al. 1999, Commonwealth survey guidelines for threatened species).

5.2.2.1. Diurnal Bird Surveys Diurnal birds were surveyed using area searches that were comprised of early morning censuses, transect and flushing survey methods. In addition, surveys of water bodies supported within each property were conducted pre and post dusk and dawn. Area searches were conducted at search areas and at other selected locations where suitable

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 65 habitat for target species was supported. Census surveys were undertaken within four hours of sunrise and sunset. Birds were identified from either direct observations and/or their call vocalisations.

5.2.2.2. Nocturnal Herpetofauna Ground Searches Dedicated active ground searches were conducted at each of the search areas and at other selected locations where suitable habitat for target species was supported. Surveys were conducted on each of the survey days to locate active/inactive reptiles and inactive frogs. Total search effort for each of the targeted species was dictated by the recommended Commonwealth survey guideline methodology applicable. This method involved: rolling logs and rocks; raking soil at the base of trees and shrubs and examination under debris; and searching under decorticating/exfoliating bark on logs and standing dead or live trees. Spotlighting searches were undertaken on foot using hand-held spotlights and headlamps. These were conducted at selected search areas and at other selected locations where suitable habitat for target species was supported. Searches were conducted for a minimum of 60 minutes per area and replicated as dictated by survey requirements for the threatened species of interest.

5.2.2.3. Insectivorous Microbat Surveys The survey program for insectivorous bat fauna was undertaken using harp traps and trip lining methods. With regards the Nyctophilus genus of microbats, it is impossible to differentiate between the calls of the species within this genus. Consequently, Anabat detection for specific identification of individual species’ of Nyctophilus genus is useless. However, Anabat detection methods, as they can identify the genus, are useful in establishing whether a particular area supports the genus, and therefore, suitable habitat for the genus. This data can then be used to indicate whether N. corbeni, or other Nyctophilus spp., are present in a particular area, for which targeted trapping methods can then be employed. Anabat detection involved both remote and active detection techniques with Anabat II detectors, used to record the ultrasonic signals of active bats. Remote detection (i.e. equipment programmed for unattended, fixed point, overnight detection of microbat calls, was employed during nocturnal spotlighting surveys. Ultrasonic bat calls and locality details were recorded during the survey and subsequently analysed by Greg Ford, Balance Environmental, for species identification.

5.2.2.4. Targeted Area Searches A series of rapid biodiversity assessments and target species surveys were undertaken in a range of representative and/or distinctive habitat types throughout the study site. For diurnal activities, each search area, nominally comprised of up to four hectares, was surveyed for up to one person hour. At each selected search area, a combination of active diurnal ground searches, primarily for reptiles, and bird surveys were undertaken. For nocturnal assessments, an area of approximately two hectares was surveyed for a minimum of one survey person hour where spotlighting searches on foot were undertaken using 30- watt spotlights and headlamps.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 66

Targeted area searches were also undertaken for specific species, such as ornamental snake, in specific habitat types, such as brigalow gilgai associations.

5.2.2.5. Driving Transects Driving diurnal and nocturnal transect searches (driver plus one observer with a 100-watt spotlight) were undertaken from a 4WD along the road/track network within the study site primarily to survey for squatter pigeons.

5.3. Threatened Species, Survey Methodology and Effort

5.4. Threatened Species Profiles The following section provides threatened species profiles for each of the conservation significant species surveyed.

5.4.1. Ornamental Snake The ornamental snake (see photographs in Figure 5-1) is listed as vulnerable under the provisions of both the NC Act and EPBC Act and is one of several key threatened terrestrial fauna species that have been recorded on mining leases throughout the geographic extent of the Bowen Basin (pers. obs. A. Veary 1998 - 2012). It has a small, well-defined distribution range, located only in mid-eastern Queensland, and confined to the Brigalow Belt, primarily within the Fitzroy River drainage system (McDonald et al. 1991; Cogger et al. 1993; Cogger 2000). In the main, the biology and ecology of the ornamental snake is considered to be poorly known (Cogger et al. 1993; pers. comm. R. Shine, Sydney University 2005) however, the recently completed ACARP research project by the author has provided insight into the biology and movement patterns of this cryptic species (Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011). Within the drainage system of the Fitzroy and Dawson Rivers, the ornamental snake is known to primarily inhabit brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) forest growing on grey cracking clays supporting gilgai formations (Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011). This habitat preference is believed to reflect the relative abundance of its food source, which is principally a diet of frogs (Cogger 2000, Wilson and Swan 2003). This cryptic snake is regarded as a specialist predator of native frogs (Shine 1983; Cogger 2000). At a brigalow woodland site near Nebo, snakes were only found in the vicinity of a complex of flooded gilgai, where there was an abundance of frog prey, however snakes were not found in nearby riparian and floodplain woodland vegetation (Melzer 2001 in DEWR 2007). Surveys conducted over the last 11 years have only recorded ornamental snakes within grey cracking clay soils supporting gilgai formations (pers. obs. A. Veary) and ecological modelling has identified that grey cracking clays in REs 11.4.8 and 11.4.9 appear to be the primary habitat type for the ornamental snake (Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011). Activity levels, and hence highest potential for ornamental snake detection, are typically restricted to periods following suitable summer rainfall events which create optimum conditions for its favoured prey to be most active and concentrated around its breeding sites (Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011, pers. obs. A. Veary 1998 - 2012; pers. comm. R. Shine, Sydney University 2005). Thus, the opportunity to detect the ornamental snake is highly constrained. During dry periods when gilgai formations do not support water and the soil has shrunk to form large ground cracks, the snakes seek refuge in these ground cracks. Once the soils are wet and cracks have closed up, the snakes seek refuge in dense tussock grass clumps

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 67 and in log piles where available (Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011). The snake also shelters under litter and fallen timber (Cogger 2000), becoming active only at night (Shine 1983, Footprints Environmental Consultants 2011). This suggests that vegetation groundcover characteristics may also be an important component of good quality ornamental snake habitat. Current ecological knowledge (pers. comm. A. Veary 2011) suggests ornamental snake habitat requires soil landscapes that have the capacity: to pond shallow surface water for extended periods; and to provide a nutrient rich, seasonal wetland environment capable of supporting amphibious prey habitat; and also to dry and crack extensively on a regular basis to provide dry season snake refugia via surface cracks and sub-surface voids.

© A. Veary

© A. Veary Figure 5-1 Photographs of Ornamental Snakes

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 68

5.4.2. Squatter Pigeon The southern subspecies of the squatter pigeon (Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3) is listed as vulnerable under both the NC Act and the EPBC Act. Squatter pigeons are small yet robust, ground dwelling, seed-eating birds with a preference for eucalypt woodland with a sparse native grass cover within close proximity to permanent water in tropical and subtropical eucalypt woodland (Frith 1982, Higgins 1996, Garnett & Crowley 2000). The ecology of Geophaps scripta is poorly known and no populations estimates are given for the species (Higgins 1996). It is known that they nest on the ground; roost in low trees at night; forage on the ground, amongst sparse low grass and in improved pasture; are always near permanent water; and formally hunted and considered excellent eating (Higgins 1996). Very little is known about their breeding biology with only eight records available (Higgins 1996). Key threatening processes detailed in Higgins (1996) note that much of their original habitat has been replaced with improved pasture for cattle grazing. However, this may be not as destructive as grazing by sheep. Improved pastures may supply an important food source.

© A. Veary Figure 5-2 Photograph of Squatter Pigeon

© A. Veary Figure 5-3 Squatter Pigeons Resting on Cattle Pad

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 69

5.4.3. South Eastern Long-Eared Bat The south eastern long-eared bat (Figure 5-4) is listed as vulnerable under both the NC Act and EPBC Act and vulnerable by Duncan, Baker & Montgomery (1999). This microbat inhabits southern central Queensland, central western New South Wales, north-western Victoria and South Australia (Parnaby 1995) and is considered scattered through the remainder of Queensland (Turbill and Ellis 2006) though surveys for this species through much of western Queensland have not been undertaken (C. Clague, unpubl. in SEWPaC Survey Guidelines). The species also occurs in a range of habitat s from Buloke/belah woodlands to brigalow woodlands to a variety of eucalypt and bloodwood forest/woodlands, riparian zones to dry sclerophyll forest. Mixed eucalypt and bloodwood woodlands/forests are dominant within this species habitat throughout inland Queensland, with it being most abundant in vegetation with a distinct canopy and a dense cluttered shrub layer (Dominelli 2000; Ellis et al. 1999; Koehler 2006; Lumsden 1994; McFarland et al. 1999; Parnaby 1995; Turbill & Ellis 2006). This species is generally found in river red gum forest, savannahs and semi-arid woodlands. It also occur in ironbark/box/Callitris open forests and Buloke woodland (Duncan, Baker & Montgomery 1999). It roosts in tree hollows and under loose bark (Parnaby 1995a). Extensive loss of habitat, clearing for agriculture, timber harvesting, grazing and inappropriate fire regimes (Parnaby 1995, Duncan, Baker & Montgomery 1999) are considered threatening process for this species.

© H. Parnaby Figure 5-4 South Eastern Long-eared Bat

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 70

5.5. Results and Discussion The results of the habitat assessments and targeted field surveys for each of the respective lots proposed for potential offsets are detailed in the following sections.

5.5.1. Survey Timing and Personnel Initial site reconnaissance and habitat assessments (Stage 2) were undertaken from the 7th to the 11th October 2013, inclusive. From these site assessments, detailed, targeted field surveys (Stage 3) were undertaken as follows (dates inclusive): Lot 5 – 28th – 31st October. Lot 9 – 1st – 4th November. Lots 21/22 – 8th – 13 November. The principal investigator was Andrew Veary (BSc (Hons)) with assistance in the field from Elle Veary (BAppSc). Greg Ford (BAppSc, Grad Dip Resource Management) of Balance Environmental, was commissioned by Footprints Environmental Consultants to undertake the Anabat microchiropteran bat call recording analysis.

5.5.2. Field Survey Conditions Excellent rainfall in the preceding summer seasons and the good rainfall in the local district over several years had recharged the waterbodies and creeks in the local area and promoted good vegetative growth, particularly in relation to the diversity and biomass of grasses. Very little rain was recorded during the 2014 winter and immediately preceding and during the survey period. Climatic condition leading up to the survey were characterised by hot (high 30’s to low 40’s ºC), partly cloudy to fine days with warm (mid to low 20’s ºC), humid nocturnal conditions. Environmental conditions immediately prior to undertaking the surveys for squatter pigeons and south-eastern long-eared bats were considered to be optimal for a targeted fauna survey for these species. For the ornamental snake however, environmental conditions were considered not to be optimal due to the lack of sufficient rainfall prior to or during the survey period. This meant that the gilgais did not support water and there was no observed frog activity within gilgai habitats. This would have resulted in no ornamental snake activity in potentially suitable habitats, if they are present within suitable habitats supported within the study site.

5.5.3. Lot 5, Little Sorrel Detailed vegetation community descriptions and floristic structure and composition for this site are presented in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.3.1 above. This site consisted of a mosaic of cleared/pastorally improved areas, remnant/regrowth patches of mixed eucalypt woodlands and extensive areas of regrowth brigalow on grey cracking clays. The majority of this site has been cleared as part of pastoral improvement practises, which have been focused on the grey cracking clay soils. The north – south ridge line located in the central portion of the site supported a mosaic of lancewood woodlands on the ridge slopes with a ground cover of mixed native grasses. Dawson gum/brigalow and ironbark

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 71 woodland mosaics were located on mid-slope benches to the west, with dense ground cover dominated by buffel grass and blackcurrant bush. Above the ridge line and to the east on flat plains, ironbark/acacia open woodlands were supported with sparse cover of native grasses and chenopods. At the toe of the ridge line and to the west, a mosaic of brigalow regrowth and buffel grass dominated the landscape. Several drainage lines were observed within the landscape. There were areas of weakly formed gilgais, observed within portions of this habitat type and grey cracking clays were present in these areas. There was some evidence of historically ponded water within a few of the larger gilgai formations. There was an area of remnant vegetation associated with cattle yards and a farm dam in the northern central part of the site, situated on a slight hill. In addition, in the western central area, a small remnant of mountain yapunyah and brigalow persisted. In the central south, a copse of Dawson gum with some brigalow was associated with another farm dam. In the areas associated with the farm dams, there was little to no shrub nor ground layers present, consequent of the apparent use of the areas as cattle camps.

5.5.3.1. Ornamental Snake Review of pre-clearing and remnant RE mapping and historical aerial photography (Google Earth) identified the possible presence of several areas of gilgai formations within Lot 5. Field surveys were undertaken across the site to indentify, validate and map areas of gilgai formations and assess and evaluate the potential suitability of those habitats to support population/s of ornamental snake. As part of the field surveys, gilgai formations were identified within an area in the central part of the site (see Figure 5-7). This area supported regrowth brigalow to 5 m on cracking clays, where significant cracks and crevices were observed (Figure 5-5). The gilgai were considered to be poorly formed, represented by very shallow depressions and low mounds (Figure 5-6). Given the historical land management practises evident on site, the lack of distinct gilgai structure is considered to be most likely attributed to clearing and blade ploughing of the area for pastoral improvement. Consequently, it is considered that this area supports very low to no habitat value for ornamental snakes.

Figure 5-5 Photograph of Cracks and Crevices, Lot 5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 72

Figure 5-6 Photograph of Gilgai Formation, Lot 5

5.5.3.2. Squatter Pigeon Targeted field surveys identified two squatter pigeons in the south east corner of the property (Figure 5-7). These birds were observed as part of transect surveys, resting on the ground in the shade within ironbark open woodland with a native grass ground cover. Assessment of the habitats supported across the property and the confirmation of the species on site indicates that the site supports suitable habitat for squatter pigeon.

5.5.3.3. South-eastern Long-eared Bat Anabat detection surveys were undertaken at specific locations that supported potentially suitable habitat for Nyctophilus species. These locations are presented in Figure 5-7. The dam locations were selected as they provided the opportunity to survey the microbat population of the local area as they congregate and utilise the dam to drink on dusk before embarking on foraging for the night. Results of Anabat data collected from these surveys confirmed the presence of 12 microbat species from Lot 5. These species were: Chalinolobus gouldii Vespadelus baverstocki Chalinolobus morio Chaerephon jobensis Chalinolobus picatus (NT – NC Act) Mormopterus beccarii Nyctophilus sp. Mormopterus ridei Scotorepens balstoni Saccolaimus flaviventris Scotorepens greyii Taphozous troughtoni

Of note, is that the Anabat surveys recorded little pied bat (Chalinolobus picatus) which is listed as Near Threatened under the NC Act.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 73

Figure 5-7 Lot 5 - Location of Habitat Features and Observed Target Species

5.5.1. Lot 9 (north), Zamia Detailed vegetation community descriptions and floristic structure and composition for this site are presented in Sections 4.2.2 and 4.3.2 above. This site consisted of a mosaic of cleared/pastorally improved areas, remnant/regrowth patches of mixed eucalypt woodlands and extensive areas of regrowth brigalow on grey cracking clays.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 74

As with Lot 5, the majority of the site had been cleared for pastoral improvement. A small remnant patch of Dawson gum/brigalow and brigalow/belah woodlands remained which supported a relatively diverse shrub layer and a ground cover that included native and pastoral grasses. Zamia Creek passed through the western portion of the site which consisted of several distinct channels within the high banks of the creek. Riparian vegetation consisted of coolabah woodlands fringing the creek channels, giving rise to mountain yapunyah/brigalow, brigalow/belah and brigalow woodlands on higher ground. This riparian zone supported a complex understorey mosaic of shrubs and ground cover, which included dense thickets of brigalow, mixed Acacia species, native grasses and blackcurrant bush. The eastern margins of the riparian zone were highly impacted by cattle, where, in some areas, there was little to no understorey and no ground cover.

5.5.1.1. Ornamental Snake Review of pre-clearing and remnant RE mapping and historical aerial photography (Google Earth) identified the possible presence of several areas of gilgai formations within Lot 9 (north). Identification, validation and mapping of areas of gilgai formations was undertaken across the site during field surveys to assess and evaluate the potential suitability of those habitats to support population/s of ornamental snake. As part of the field surveys, gilgai formations were identified within an area in the central western portion of the site (see Figure 5-10). These areas supported dense regrowth brigalow to 5 m on deep cracking clays, where significant cracks, crevices and sink holes were observed (Figure 5-8). The gilgai were considered to be well defined and formed, consisting of a mosaic of depressions and mounds and they supported vegetation characteristic of wetland habitats (see Figure 5-9). Given the diverse characteristics of the gilgai identified within the areas identified, it is considered likely that these habitat areas potentially support population/s of ornamental snakes.

Figure 5-8 Photograph of Cracks and Crevices, Lot 9

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 75

Figure 5-9 Photograph of Gilgai Formations with Sink Holes, Lot 9

5.5.1.2. Squatter Pigeon Targeted field surveys identified a squatter pigeon in the north west corner of the property (Figure 5-10). This bird was observed as part of transect surveys, resting on the ground in the shade of dense regrowth brigalow on the fringe of a large remnant area of RE 11.4.3/11.4.9. Assessment of the habitats supported across the property and the confirmation of the species on site indicates that suitable habitat for squatter pigeon is supported across the whole site.

5.5.1.3. South-eastern Long-eared Bat Anabat detection surveys were undertaken at four specific locations in the western half of Lot 9 (north) that supported potentially suitable habitat for Nyctophilus species collecting data for a total of 16 nights. These locations are presented in Figure 5-10. These locations were selected as they supported potentially suitable habitat, a structurally and floristically diverse mosaic complex of a tall canopy of mixed eucalypts and a dense, multi-layered shrubby understorey. Specifically, the riparian zone of Zamia Creek was targeted as this area forms part of an extensive riparian corridor of Zamia Creek that extends further to the north and east, draining into Mimosa Creek, ultimately into the Dawson River. The riparian

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 76 zones of these creeks appeared relatively intact and potentially forms an important movement corridor in a landscape that has been significantly altered for cropping and pastoral activities. Nyctophilus species calls were recorded during most detector-nights across the study site, however, it is not possible to reliably differentiate these calls to species level. Two species are likely to be common at Lot 9 (north): N. geoffroyi and N. gouldi. N. corbeni (Vulnerable; EPBC Act) – also possibly occurs in the Moura study area (pers.comm. G. Ford). The south eastern long-eared bat (N. corbeni) is generally only encountered in relatively large, more-or-less intact tracts of dry sclerophyll forest (e.g. ironbark-cypress-bulloak), but may forage in smaller forest remnants (e.g. roadside or riparian corridors) that are connected to larger tracts. It should, therefore, be considered as probably present where Nyctophilus species calls were recorded in larger forest tracts (pers.comm. G. Ford). The only way of confirming the presence of N. corbeni in any study area is to undertake an extensive, systematic trapping survey using harp traps (Reardon 2010). Results of Anabat data collected from these surveys confirmed the presence of 15 microbat species from Lot 9. These species were: Chalinolobus gouldii Miniopterus orianae oceanensis Chalinolobus morio Austronomus australis Chalinolobus picatus (NT – NC Act) Chaerephon jobensis Nyctophilus sp. Mormopterus beccarii Scotorepens balstoni Mormopterus ridei Scotorepens greyii Saccolaimus flaviventris Vespadelus baverstocki Taphozous troughtoni Vespadelus vulturnus Of note, is that the Anabat surveys recorded little pied bat (Chalinolobus picatus) from all recording locations across the sites. This species is listed as Near Threatened under the NC Act.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 77

Figure 5-10 Lot 9 (north) – Location of Habitat Features and Target Species

5.5.2. Lots 21 & 22, Bushblock Detailed vegetation community descriptions and floristic structure and composition for this site are presented in Sections 4.2.3 and 4.3.3. The sites are located within a very large area of remnant vegetation and are located 3 km to the west of the Barakula State Forest. Historically, these sites have been selectively logged as part of the regional timber harvesting industry. Consequently, whilst there were old growth trees present on site, they were considered rare and sparsely distributed within the landscape. The sites supported a floristically diverse and structurally complex mosaic of communities. Communities included: ironbark open woodlands with low shrub layer; mixed eucalypt woodlands with dense, diverse shrub layers; dense calitris closed woodlands; low, open eucalypt woodlands with low, very dense heath shrubland layers; riparian woodlands; buloke woodlands; stringybark woodlands; and cleared corridors for LNG high pressure gas pipelines. Ground cover in all areas (except cleared pipeline corridors) was dominated by native tussock grasses and low shrubs. The northern boundary of the sites was formed by Tin Hut Creek which supported significant pools of water at the time of the survey. Tin Hut Creek flows to the east, draining into Bottletree Creek, which then flows into Dogwood Creek. Several drainage lines

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 78 traverse the site, with standing pools of water, whilst rare, being observed during the survey. A farm dam was located within a stand of stringybarks in the north western quadrant of the sites. Habitat resource preferences for the south eastern long-eared bat were well represented on site including abundant tree hollows, decorticating bark, water courses with potentially semi-permanent water, a dam and well structured vegetation communities with tall canopy layer and sub-canopy and shrub layers from sparse to very dense.

5.5.2.1. Squatter Pigeon Targeted field surveys completed a total of 289 km of transect surveys (both on ATV and walking) in addition to flushing surveys at 45 locations in approximately four hectare areas and dusk and dawn observations at water bodies at three locations. This survey effort failed to produce any records for squatter pigeon within the various habitats supported on these sites. Review of historical databases, Atlas of Living Australia and Wildlife Online, identified one record for squatter pigeon approximately 8.5 kilometres to the north west of the sites, however this historical record is from 1997. As a consequence of the assessment of the habitats supported across the sites, the survey effort expended and together with the authors extensive experience in surveying for and identifying squatter pigeons and their habitats, it is considered highly unlikely that the sites support squatter pigeons and consequently, should not be considered as suitable offset areas for this species.

5.5.2.2. South-eastern Long-eared Bat Habitat assessments identified that the sites supported potentially suitable habitats to support south eastern long-eared bats. To that end, detailed targeted fauna surveys were implemented across the sites which included harp trapping, trip lining and Anabat remote detection (to collect additional background data on microbat population composition should the trapping program fail to capture Nyctophilus microbats). Anabat detection surveys were undertaken at eight specific locations across the sites that supported potentially suitable habitat for Nyctophilus species. These locations are presented in Figure 5-11. These locations were chosen as they supported potentially suitable habitat, a structurally and diverse mosaic complex of a tall canopy of mixed eucalypts and a dense, multi-layered shrubby understorey. Anabat detection surveys provided 23 recording nights. Nyctophilus species calls were recorded during most detector-nights across the study site, however, it is not possible to reliably differentiate these calls to species level. Two species are considered common (through the trapping program) within Lots 21 & 22: N. geoffroyi and N. gouldi. N. corbeni (Vulnerable; EPBC Act) – also potentially occurs in the Miles study area (pers.comm. G. Ford). The south eastern long-eared bat (N. corbeni) is generally only encountered in relatively large, more-or-less intact tracts of dry sclerophyll forest (e.g. ironbark-cypress-bulloak), but may forage in smaller forest remnants (e.g. roadside or riparian corridors) that are connected to larger tracts. It should, therefore, be considered as probably present where Nyctophilus species calls were recorded in larger forest tracts (pers.comm. G. Ford). The only way of confirming the presence of N. corbeni in any study area is to undertake an extensive, systematic trapping survey using harp traps (Reardon 2010) as was undertaken for this study.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 79

Results of Anabat data collected from these surveys confirmed the presence of 13 microbat species from Lots 21/22. These species were: Chalinolobus gouldii Vespadelus vulturnus Chalinolobus morio Vespadelus troughtoni Chalinolobus picatus (NT – NC Act) Austronomus australis Nyctophilus sp. Mormopterus beccarii Scotorepens balstoni Mormopterus ridei Scotorepens greyii Saccolaimus flaviventris Vespadelus baverstocki Of note, is that the Anabat surveys recorded little pied bat (Chalinolobus picatus) from all recording locations across the sites. This species is listed as Near Threatened under the NC Act. Harp traps were deployed in nine locations within the most suitable habitats supported on site. The locations of these traps are depicted in Figure 5-11 below. A brief habitat description and accompanying photograph of each harp trap location is provided in Table 5-3 below. Further photographs of each trap location are presented in APPENDIX E. Harp traps were “open” for five nights, providing for 45 trap nights for the survey. Table 5-3 Harp Trap Brief Habitat Descriptions of Harp Trap Locations

Trap Site Habitat Description Photograph #

Tin Hut Creek, located on rock outcrop within creek over large water pool. Old growth E. tereticornis common with numerous hollows and decorticating bark. Riparian vegetation tall eucalypt 1 woodland with complex shrubby understorey including dense copse of calitris. Well developed ground cover of native grasses and thick leaf litter layer.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 80

Trap Site Habitat Description Photograph #

Situated within mixed eucalypt closed woodland within deeply incised gully, downstream from large rock overhang, adjacent to 2 Tin Hut Creek. Complex, dense shrubby understorey with dense ground cover of native grasses and thick leaf litter layer.

Buloke open woodland with ironbark emergents, sparse ground cover of native grasses, copses of 3 buloke regrowth formed shrub layer copses and sparse leaf litter layer.

Situated over a drainage channel with fringing melaleucas within a larger area of dense calitris forest. 4 Ground cover patchy, native grasses and thick leaf litter layer.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 81

Trap Site Habitat Description Photograph #

Positioned on a rock bar within stream channel, immediately upstream of ponded water. Fringing vegetation included forest redgum, 5 calitris copses, acacia understorey with dense ground cover of native grasses with a thick leaf litter layer.

Ironbark open woodland with patchy acacia understorey with sparse native grass ground cover 6 and a sparse leaf litter layer with abundant fallen timber.

Mixed open woodland of eucalypts, acacia, calitris and buloke. Thick shrub layer of acacias and buloke 7 with a sparse native grass ground cover.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 82

Trap Site Habitat Description Photograph #

Tall open ironbark woodland with tall open shrub layer of acacias and 8 sparse native grass ground layer and leaf litter layer.

Dense copse of calitris with dense native grass ground cover, 9 abundant fallen timber and leaf litter layer.

Small farm dam, bare earthen banks as a result of dropping water levels and cattle access. Fringing vegetation dominated by Trip stringybarks, calitris and acacia Lining understorey. Sparse leaf litter, except under stringybarks, and ground cover layers.

Trip lining surveys were undertaken on the farm dam over two nights from dusk until approximately 2100 hrs.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 83

A total of 100 microbats, comprised of three genus and five species were captured and identified through the combined methods of harp trapping and trip lining. The five species were: Nyctophilus geoffroyi, lesser long-eared bat; Nyctophilus gouldi, Gould's long-eared bat; Scotorepens balstoni, inland broad-nosed bat; Scotorepens greyii, little broad-nosed bat; and Mormopterus beccarii, Beccari’s freetail bat. The details of the trapping program are presented in Table 5-4. Table 5-4 Results of Microbat Trapping Program

Harp Trap Site # N. geoffroyi N. gouldi S. balstoni S. greyii M. beccarii Totals

1 4 2 6

2 1 1

3 3 2 1 6

4 1 2 3

5 3 14 13 1 31

6 1 1

7

8 2 1 3

9 2 1 1 4

Trip Lining 1 32 10 43

Totals 9 22* 53 2 12 98*

NB: * Total capture = 100 bats as one N. gouldi female was captured carrying two young.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 THREATENED FAUNA SPECIES TARGETED SURVEYS 84

Figure 5-11 Lots 21 & 22 - Location of Habitat Features and Trap Sites

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 85

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In summary, the lots that have been identified to provide offsets for the Baralaba North Continued Operations Project, the Train Load Out facility, the Dawson Highway re-alignment and upgrade and the Coal Haulage Route upgrade are considered to potentially support suitable habitat for the six threatened target species and one target threatened community. Field surveys were undertaken to ascertain that extent, nature, condition and values of those suitable habitats for each of the target species/communities. In addition, targeted threatened species surveys were also completed to provide sufficient data to inform the assessment of the offset/s suitability as per the three offsets policies (Commonwealth and State – both superseded and current).

6.1. Flora Lot 9 BH194 north parcel ("Zamia") is the preferred property of the three surveyed, to be used as a source of ecological offset areas for the target threatened flora species (Solanum elachophyllum & S.johnsonianum). Its key features that make it the preferred option are: Known occurrence of Solanum elachophyllum in the adjacent Zamia Creek Conservation Park. Up to approximately 55 Ha of brigalow (with or without belah) in between the two anabranches of Zamia Creek within the study area, with connectivity to the creek, and with structure and condition probably as good as the adjacent Park in some places. Refinement of mapping will determine the balance of the two REs - brigalow 11.4.9, and brigalow-belah 11.4.3. There may also be some brigalow on alluvium RE 11.3.1. Two additional small patches of suitable remnant belah. One patch is with blackbutt - approximately 5.8 Ha of RE 11.4.8, one patch is with brigalow - approximately 3.6 Ha of RE 11.4.3). Up to approximately 85 Ha of brigalow regrowth on gilgai, which may not be as useful for flora species offsets, but may be of high value for fauna species offsets (e.g. Ornamental Snake). Up to approximately 200 Ha of additional brigalow regrowth without gilgai. Although this may be of limited offset value, it functions as connective vegetation and improves the value of other preferred offset vegetation. Up to 65 Ha of remnant brigalow and up to 285 Ha of regrowth brigalow in various stages of regeneration are available as potential offsets for the brigalow TEC. There are some limited offset values at Lot 5 KM135 ("Little Sorrel"). This property has an area of approximately 20 Ha of blackbutt regrowth (RE 11.4.8) on the footslopes of the low escarpment which runs through the entire property from north to south. The regrowth is characterised by a variety of tree and shrub heights, and a variety of species. Its connection to the scarp vegetation improves its ecological value. However, there are no nearby records of target Threatened flora species as there are for the Zamia north site. No suitable Regional Ecosystems or target flora habitats were observed at Lots 21 & 21 AU37 ("Bushblock").

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 86

6.2. Fauna As with the flora assessment, Lot 9 (north) Zamia Creek supports the best biodiversity habitat values to be used as ecological offsets for the ornamental snake and the squatter pigeon. Key features that make this property the preferred option are: Current surveys have confirmed the presence of squatter pigeon on site and habitat assessments have identified that the entire site supports suitable habitat, approximately 670 ha, for this species. Approximately 100 ha of gilgai habitat, that is considered potentially suitable for the ornamental snake, is supported within the property boundaries. Approximately 105 ha of potential habitat for south-eastern long-eared bat associated with the riparian vegetation and immediate surrounds of Zamia Creek. However, with regard to the occurrence of the ornamental snake on site, which was not sufficiently assessed due to the very dry environmental conditions that prevailed during the assessments, additional targeted surveys under optimal environmental conditions, i.e. flooded gilgai, must be undertaken before this site may be considered suitable as an offset for ornamental snake habitat. Whilst Lot 5 did support approximately 1242 Ha of suitable habitat for squatter pigeon, Lot 5 is unsuitable for other offset purposes. Unless this site is desired as solely a squatter pigeon offset area, greater ecological gains can likely be obtained by grouping and managing consolidated offset areas for multiple species and communities. The surveys and assessments of Lots 21 and 22 have identified that these sites support suitable habitat for the Nyctophilus microbats, recording two species through targeted surveys. Whilst N. corbeni was not captured during the surveys, it is considered highly likely that, given the extent, nature and condition of the suitable habitats supported on the sites, approximately 1431 Ha (1469 Ha – 38 Ha of cleared LNG pipeline corridors), and that searches of databases identified a record of the species 4.5 km to the west in 2002 along Tin Hut Creek, that there is a very high probability that the site does support this threatened microbat. N. corbeni is particularly difficult to trap, by virtue of the fact that it is vulnerable (and hence, represented only in low numbers in a wider population of microbats). Absence of capture results should not be taken as confirmation that N. corbeni is not present when other factors indicate a high likelihood of its presence.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 87

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY Accad, A, Neldner, V. J, Wilson, B., A, Neihus, R. A (2006). Remnant Vegetation in Queensland. Analysis of remnant vegetation-1997-1998-1999-2000-2001-2002- 2005, including regional ecosystem information. Queensland Herbarium, Environmental Protection Agency. Atlas of Living Australia (2014). http://www.ala.org.au AVH (2012). Australia's Virtual Herbarium. Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research, Council of Heads of Australian Herbaria. Barnard, C. A., and Barnard, H. G. (1925). A review of the bird life of Coolooboolaroo Station, Duaringa District, Queensland, during the past fifty years. Emu 24: 252- 65. Barrett, G., Silcocks, A., Barry, S., Cunningham, R. and Poulter, R. (2003). The New Atlas of Australian Birds. Birds Australia, Hawthorn East. Bean, A.R. (2004). The taxonomy and ecology of Solanum subg. Leptostemonum (Dunal) Bitter (Solanaceae) in Queensland and far north-eastern New South Wales, Australia. Austrobaileya 6(4): 676-678, 705-706, 784-785. Bostock, P.D and Holland, A.E (eds.) (2013) Census of the Queensland Flora. Queensland Herbarium, Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts. specifically Updates advised on Braithwaite, R. W. (1987). Effects of fire regimes on lizards in the wet-dry tropics of Australia. Journal Tropical Ecology, vol. 3, pp. 265-275. Brooker, L., Brooker, M. and Cale, P. (1999). Animal Dispersal in Fragmented Habitat: Measuring Habitat Connectivity, Corridor Use, and Dispersal Mortality. Conservation Biology 3(1):4. Burnett, S. (1997). Colonising cane toads cause population declines in native predators: reliable anecdotal information and management implications. Pacific Conservation Biology 3:65-72. Catling, P. C. & Newsome, A. E. (1981). Responses of the Australian vertebrate fauna to fire: an evolutionary approach. In Fire and the Australian Biota Eds. A.M. Gill, R.H. Groves & I.R. Noble, Australian Academy Science, Canberra. Catling, P. C. (1988). Similarities and contrasts in the diets of foxes, Vulpes vulpes, and cats, Felis catus, relative to fluctuating prey populations and drought. Australian Wildlife Research 15: 307-317. Choquenot, D., McIlroy, J. and Korn, T. (1996). Managing Vertebrate Pests: Feral Pigs. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra. Christidis, L. and Boles, W. E. (1994). The Taxonomy of Species of Birds in Australia and Its Territories. Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union, Monograph 2. Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union, Hawthorn East. Christidis, L., and Boles, W. E. (2008). Systematics and taxonomy of Australian birds. CSIRO Publishing Collingwood, Victoria. Churchill, S. (2008). Australian Bats. Jacana Books, Allen & Unwin; Sydney.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 88

Cogger, H. G., Cameron, E. E., Sadlier, R. A. and Eggler, P. (1993). The Action Plan for Australian Reptiles. Endangered Species Program, Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra. 242pp. Cogger, H.G. (2000). Reptiles and Amphibians of Australia. 6th Edition. New Holland Publishers, Sydney. Corben, C. (2013). AnalookW for bat call analysis using ZCA. Version 3.9f, 22 March 2013. Council of Heads of Australasian Herbaria Inc. (2014) Australia’s Virtual Herbarium. Covacevich, J. A., Couper, P. J. and McDonald, K. R (1997). Reptile diversity at risk in the Brigalow Belt, Queensland. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 42(2): 475-486. Covacevich, J.A. and Archer, M. (1975). The distribution of the cane toad Bufo Marinus in Australia and its effects on indigenous vertebrates. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 17(2): 305-310. Crossman, D. G., and Reimer, D. S. (1986). Mammals. Birds, reptiles and amphibians of the Taroom Shire, central Queensland. Queensland Journal of Agriculture Animal Science. 43:55-72. Curtis, L.K., Dennis, A.J., McDonald, K.R., Kyne, P.M., Debus, S.J.S. (2012). Queensland’s Threatened Animals. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Australia. Deer, R. (1996). Reptile diversity in a Callitris forest in central Queensland’s brigalow belt. Memoirs of Queensland Museum, 39:390. DEH (2005a). Principle Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1: Matters of National Environmental Significance. Australian Government, Canberra. DEH (2005b). Key threatening process – ‘The biological effects, including lethal toxic ingestion, caused by Cane Toads (Bufo marinus)’, Department of the Environment and Heritage, www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/ktp/cane- toads.html. DEH (2005b). Threat Abatement Plan - Predation, Habitat Degradation, Competition and Disease Transmission: Feral Pigs. Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2011g). Regrowth Vegetation Map - Version 2.1. Queensland Government digital data. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014a). Regional Ecosystem Description Database. Maintained by Queensland Herbarium, Brisbane. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014b). Queensland Environmental Offsets Policy (Version 1.0), July 2014, Queensland. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014c). Flora Survey Guidelines - Protected Plants. Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014d). Vegetation Management Act Regional Ecosystem and Remnant Map - Versions 6b and 7. Queensland

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 89

Government digital data. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014e). Wildlife Online. Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2014f). Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map. Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Resource Management (2011a) (now Department of Environment and Heritage Protection). BioCondition: A Condition Assessment Framework for Terrestrial Biodiversity in Queensland. Assessment Manual. Version 2.1. Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Resource Management (2011b) (now Department of Environment and Heritage Protection). Ecological Equivalence Methodology Guideline. Policy for Vegetation Management Offsets. Queensland Biodiversity Offset Policy. Version 1. Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Resource Management (2011c) (now Department of Environment and Heritage Protection) . Queensland Biodiversity Offset Policy. Version 1 (superseded by Environmental Offsets Policy). Queensland Government. Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) (2010g). Species management program for tampering with animal breeding places under Section 88 of the NCA and Section 332 of the Nature Conservation (Wildlife Management) Regulation (2006). Unpublished Report provided by DERM. Department of Natural Resources and Mines (2014). Regulated Vegetation Management Map. Queensland Government - most up-to-date map, but coarse PDF non-digital format only. Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts (2012). Methodology for Survey and Mapping of Regional Ecosystems and Vegetation Communities in Queensland. Version 3.2. Updated August 2012. Queensland Government. Queensland Herbarium, Brisbane. Department of the Environment (2014a) EPBC Protected Matters Report. Commonwealth of Australia Department of the Environment (2014a). Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Environmental Offsets Policy. Australian Government. October 2013. Dickman, C. (1993). Raiders of the Last Ark: Cats in Island Australia. Australian Natural History. Winder Edition.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 90

Dickman, C. (1993). Raiders of the Last Ark: Cats in Island Australia. Australian Natural History. Winder Edition. Dickman, C.R. (1996). Overview of the impact of Feral Cats on Australian Native Fauna. Report to Australian Nature Conservation Agency. Dominelli, S. (2000). Distribution, roost requirements and foraging behaviour of the Greater Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus timoriensis) and the Little Pied Bat (Chalinolobus picatus) in the Bookmark Biosphere Reserve. Unpublished report. Unpublished report to the Bookmark Biosphere Trust, South Australia. Duncan, A., Baker, G. B. and Montgomery, N. (eds.) (1999). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia, Commonwealth Government, Canberra. EcoServe (2005b). Ornamental Snake Habitat Suitability & Impact Assessment – Moranbah to Newlands Rail Link. Unpublished report prepared for GHD Pty Ltd. EcoServe (2007). Management of Koalas and Koala Habitat Use on BMA Saraji Mine. Unpublished report prepared for Saraji Coal Mine. Ehmann, H. F. W. (1992). Encyclopaedia of Australian Animals: Reptiles. Australian Museum, Angus and Robertson, Sydney. Ellis, M., L. Lumsden, M. Schulz, T. Reardon, G. Richards & G. Hoye (1999). Eastern Long- eared Bat. Pp. 42-43. In: Duncan, A., G.B. Baker, and N. Montgomery. (Eds.). The Action Plan for Australian Bats. Canberra: Environment Australia. Ellis, W.A.H., Melzer, A., Carrick. F.N., and Hasegawa, M. (2002). Tree use, diet and home range of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) at Blair Athol, Central Queensland. Wildlife-Research, 29(3): 303-311. Environment Australia (1999b). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by Feral Cats. National Feral Animal Control Program. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia). Environment Australia (1999c). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by the European Fox. National Feral Animal Control Program. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia). Eyre, T.J., Kelly, A.L. and Neldner, V.J. (2006). Methodology for the establishment and survey of reference sites for biocondition, Version 1.4. Environmental Protection Agency, Brisbane. Finlayson, H. H. (1931). On mammals from the Dawson Valley, Queensland - Part I. Trans. R. Soc. S.A. 55:67-89. Finlayson, H. H. (1934). On mammals from the Dawson and Fitzroy Valleys, central coastal Queensland - Part II. Trans. R. Soc. S.A. 55:67-89. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2011). Assessment of Seasonal Habitat Characteristics as Predictors of Habitat Suitability for the Threatened Ornamental Snake. Unpublished research project ACARP C15044 for the Australian Coal Association Research Program. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2012a). GLNG Gas Transmission Pipeline Threatened Species Pre Clearing Surveys. Unpublished report prepared for Santos GLNG. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2012b). GLNG Gas Transmission Pipeline Targeted Species Surveys for Water Mouse. Unpublished report prepared for Santos GLNG.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 91

Footprints Environmental Consultants (2012c). GLNG Gas Transmission Pipeline Surveys for Migratory Birds. Unpublished report prepared for Santos GLNG. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2012d). GLNG Gas Transmission Pipeline Marine Megafauna Surveys. Unpublished report prepared for Santos GLNG. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2013a). South Walker Creek Targeted Threatened Species Surveys and Assessments. Unpublished report prepared for BMC South Walker Creek Coal Mine. Footprints Environmental Consultants (2014). Predictive Ecological Modelling and Habitat Mapping of the Moranbah Gas Project and Bowen Gas Project Lease Areas. Unpublished report prepared for Arrow Energy. Ford, G. I., Pennay, M., Young, R. A. and Richards, G. C. (2008). Little Pied Bat Chalinolobus picatus. In The Mammals of Australia (Third Edition), S. Van Dyck & R. Strahan (Eds). New Holland; Sydney. Fox, B. J. (1997). The distribution of fauna in natural and disturbed landscapes in relation to appropriate habitat. In: Asher, C. J. and Bell, L. C. (eds) Fauna Habitat Construction after Mining-Workshop Proceedings. Australian Centre for Mining Environmental Research, Kenmore, Queensland. Friend, G. R. (1993). Impact of fire on small vertebrates in mallee woodlands and heathlands of temperate Australia - a review. Biological Conservation, vol. 65, pp. 99-114. Frith, H. J. (1982). Pigeons and Doves of Australia. Rigby Publishers, Sydney. Garnett, S. Y. and Crowley, G.M. (2000). The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia, Commonwealth Government, Canberra. Garnett, S. Y. and Crowley, G.M. (2000). The Action Plan for Australian Birds. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia, Commonwealth Government, Canberra. Hall, L.S and Richards, G. C. (1979). Bats of Eastern Australia. Queensland Museum Booklet No. 12, Queensland Museum, Brisbane. Hazell, D., Cunningham, R., Lindenmayer, D., Mackay, B., and Osborne, W. (2001). Use of farm dams as frog habitat in an Australian agricultural landscape: factors affecting species richness and distribution. Biological Conservation, 102(2), pp 155-169. Higgins, T.J. (1999). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 4. Parrots to Dollarbird. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. Higgins, T.J. and Davies, S.J.J.F. (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 3. Snipe and Pigeons. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. Higgins, T.J. and Davies, S.J.J.F. (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 3. Snipe and Pigeons. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. Hoser, R.T. 1989. Australian Reptiles & Frogs. Pierson & Co., Mosman. Ingram, G.I., Natrass, A.E.O. and Czechura, G.V. (1993). Common names for Queensland frogs. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 33(1); 221-244. Brisbane. Ingram, G.J. & Raven, R. (1990). An Atlas of Queensland’s Frogs, Reptiles, Birds & Mammals. Queensland Museum, Brisbane.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 92

Koehler, S. (2006). New record of a Greater Long-eared Bat in Victoria. Australasian Bat Society Newsletter. 26:43-44. Lumsden, L.F. (1994). The distribution, habitat and conservation status of the Greater Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis in Victoria. Victorian Naturalist. 111:4-9. Marchant, S. and Higgins, P. J. (eds) (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 2. Raptors to Lapwings. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Marchant, S. and Higgins, P.J. (eds) (1990). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume I Ratites to Ducks Part B Australian Pelican to Duck. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. McDonald, K. R., Covacevich, J. A., Ingram, G. I. and Couper, P. J. (1991). The status of frogs and reptiles. In: Ingram, G. J and Raven, R. J (eds) An Atlas of Queensland’s Frogs, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals. Queensland Museum, Brisbane. McFarland, D., Haseler, M., Venz, M., Reis, T., Ford, G. and Hines, B. (1999). Terrestrial vertebrate fauna of the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion: assessment and analysis of conservation planning. Biodiversity Planning, Environment Protection Agency, Brisbane. McFarland, D., M. Venz & T. Reis (1999). Priority Species Summaries. An attachment to the report: Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna of the Brigalow Belt South Bioregion: Assessment and Analysis for Conservation Planning. Brisbane: Biodiversity Planning, Environmental Protection Agency. Menkhorst, P., and Knight, F. (2001). A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia. Oxford University Press, South Melbourne. Mitchell, J. (1993). Systematic assessment of feral pig damage and recommended pig control methods in the wet tropics World Heritage Area. Final report to the Wet Tropics Management agency, Department of Lands, Charters Towers. Morton, S. R. & Andrew, M. H. (1987). Ecological impact and management of fire in Northern Australia. Search, vol. 18, pp. 77-82. NRM&E (2004). Queensland pest animal strategy: Feral Pigs (Sus scrofa). Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy, Brisbane, Queensland. Olsen, P., M. Weston, R. Cummingham and A. Silcocks. (2003). The state of Australia's birds 2003. Wingspan. 13: i–xxi. Parnaby, H. (1992). An Interim Guide to Identification of Insectivorous bats of South- eastern Australia. Technical Reports of the Australian Museum, No. 8. Australian Museum, Sydney. Parnaby, H. (1995). Greater Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis. Chatswood, NSW: Reed Books. Paton, D.C. (1991). Loss of wildlife to domestic cats. In: Impact of Cats on Native Wildlife, Potter, C. (eds). Pennay, M., Law, B. and Reinhold, L. (2004). Bat Calls of New South Wales. Department of Environment and Conservation, Hurstville. Phillips, B. L., Brown, G. P., and Shine, R. (2003). Assessing the Potential Impact of Cane Toads on Australian Snakes. Conservation Biology 17 (6): 1738-1747.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 93

Pizzey, G. & Knight, F. (2007). Field Guide to the Birds of Australia. Harper Collins Publishers, Sydney. Pringle, J.D. (1987). The Shorebirds of Australia, Australian Museum. Angus & Robertson Publishers, North Ryde. QDNR & QDoE (1997). Draft Systematic Vertebrate Fauna Survey Project. An unpublished report prepared for the Queensland CRA/RFA Steering Committee. Queensland Herbarium (2002). Queensland Plants. Names and Distribution. Ed. R. J. F. Henderson. Qld. Herbarium. Brisbane. Queensland Herbarium (2012). BioCondition benchmarks of Regional Ecosystems. Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts. Reardon, T. (2003). Standards in bat detector based surveys. Australasian Bat Society Newsletter 20, 41-43. Reardon, T. (2010). Survey Guidelines for Australia’s Threatened Bats. Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra. Reardon, T.B and Flavel, S.C. (1991). A Guide to the Bats of South Australia. South Australian Museum, Adelaide. Reinhold, L., Law, B., Ford, G. and Pennay, M. (2001). Key to the bat calls of south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales. Department of Natural Resources and Mines, Brisbane. Richards, G.C. (2000). Little Pied Bat Chalinolobus picatus. In: R. Strahan (ed.), Mammals of Australia. Reed Books Australia, Sydney. Royal Botanic Gardens (1993). Flora of New South Wales. Vols. 1 - 4. Ed. G. J. Harden. Sydney. Sattler, P. S. (1993). Towards a nationwide biodiversity strategy: the Queensland Contribution. In Moritz, C. & Kikkawa, J. (eds) Conservation Biology in Australia and Oceania. Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton. Sattler, P.S. and Williams, R. D. (eds) (1999). The Conservation Status of Queensland’s Bioregional Ecosystems. Queensland Environmental Agency, Brisbane. Saunders, D. A., Arnold, G. W., Burbidge, A. A. and Hopkins, A. J. M. (nd) Role of Remnants of Native Vegetation, Surrey Beatty, Sydney. Serventy, V. (1985). The Waterbirds of Australia. The National Photographic Index of Australia Wildlife. Angus & Robertson Publishers North Ryde, NSW. Sharpe, P. R. (1986). Keys to Cyperaceae, Restionaceae and Juncaceae of Queensland. Qld. Botany Bull. No. 5. Q.D.P.I. Brisbane. Shine, R. (1981). Ecology of Australian Elapid Snakes of the Genera Furina and Glyphodon. Journal of Herpetology 15 (2): 219-224. Shine, R. (1983). Food habitats and reproductive biology of Australian elapid snakes of the genus Denisonia. Journal of Herpetology 17 (2): 171-175. Shine, R. (1998). Australian Snakes – A Natural History. Reed New Holland, Sydney. Simon, B. (1993). A Key to Australian Grasses. 2nd Edition. Qld. D.P.I. Brisbane.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 94

Smyth, A. K. (1997). Mammals, Birds, Reptiles and Frogs of the Brigalow Belt Bioregion of Queensland – The Past, Present and Future. Centre for Conservation Biology & Queensland Wildlife Preservation Society, Brisbane. Soil Mapping and Monitoring P/L (2007). Identification of Soil Characteristics Contributing to the Extent and Distribution of Ornamental Snake Habitat within the Bowen Basin, C. Q. An unpublished report for EcoServe Pty Ltd. Specht, R.L. (1970). Vegetation. In: The Australian Environment. G.W. Leeper. Melbourne, CSIRO and Melbourne University Press: 44-64. Stanley, T.D. and Ross, E.M. (1983). Flora of South-Eastern Queensland - Volume 1. Miscellaneous Publication 81020. Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Stanley, T.D. and Ross, E.M. (1986). Flora of South-Eastern Queensland - Volume 2. Miscellaneous Publication 84007. Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Stanley, T.D. and Ross, E.M. (1989). Flora of South-Eastern Queensland - Volume 3. Miscellaneous Publication 88001. Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Strahan, R. (2000). The Mammals of Australia. Australian Museum and Reed Books, Sydney, Australia. Swanson, S. 1976. Lizards of Australia. Angus & Robertson, Sydney. Taylor, J. E. and Fox, B. J. (2001). Disturbance effects from fire and mining produce different lizard communities in eastern Australian forests. Austral Ecology 26, 193-204. Thorp, J.R. and Lynch, R. (2000). The Determination of Weeds of National Significance. A joint initiative of the Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and forestry ministers. Tisdell, C. A. (1984). Feral pigs threaten native wildlife in Australia. Tigerpaper, vol.11, pp. 13–17. Triggs, B. (2004). Tracks, Scats and Other Traces: a Field Guide to Australian Mammals. Oxford University Press, Sydney. Turbill, C. & M. Ellis (2006). Distribution and abundance of the south eastern form of the Greater Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus timoriensis. Australian Mammalogy. 28:1-7. Tyler, M.J. (1997). The Action Plan for Australian Frogs. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra. 77pp. van Dyck, S., Gynther, I. and Baker, A. (ed.) (2013). Field Companion to the Mammals of Australia. New Holland; Sydney. Veary, A. T, Veary, E. L., Burgess, J and Fell, D. (2011). Assessment of Habitat Characteristics as Predictors of Habitat Suitability for the Threatened Ornamental Snake. Unpublished report and on-going research on behalf of the Australian Coal Association Research Program, Research Project C15044. Wilson, S. (2005). A Field Guide to Reptiles of Queensland. Reed New Holland, French’s Forest. Wilson, S. K. and Knowles, D. G. (1988). Australia's Reptiles: A Photographic Reference to the Terrestrial Reptiles of Australia. Collins Angus & Robertson Publishers Pty Limited, Pymble.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 BIBLIOGRAPHY 95

Woinarski J. C. Z. and C. P. Caterrall (2004). Historical changes in bird fauna at Coomooboolaroo, northeastern Australia, from the early years of pastoral settlements (1873) to 1999. Biological Conservation. 116: 379-401. Young, P. A. R., Wilson, B. A., McCosker, J. C., Fensham, R. J., Morgan, G. and Taylor, P. M. (1999). Chapter 11 Brigalow Belt and Chapter 12 Southeast Queensland. In Sattler, P.S. and Williams, R. D. (eds) (1999). The Conservation Status of Queensland’s Bioregional Ecosystems. Queensland Environmental Agency, Brisbane.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-1

APPENDIX A BIOCONDITION SITE DATA

Methodology is in accordance with Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (formerly Department of Environment and Resource Management) (2011). BioCondition: A Condition Assessment Framework for Terrestrial Biodiversity in Queensland. Assessment Manual. Version 2.1. Default plot size, unless otherwise specified, is a set of nested quadrats. Simplified summary is: Trees 100 m x 50 m, Shrubs and ground layer 50 m x 10 m, Fallen timber 50 m x 20 m, Ground cover percent 5 x 1 m x 1 m quadrats on centre-line. Heights are in metres. Cover is based on projected crown cover (not projected foliage cover, unless specified). * denotes naturalised species (weed). DBH, stands for Diameter at Breast Height (diameter of tree trunk in cm, taken approximately 1.3 metres above ground level). TBI = to be identified, NFI = needs further identification, TBC = to be confirmed.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-2

BioCondition Site 1 Relevant quaternary site no. if 23 no: applicable: RE/landtype: regrowth 11.4.9 Bioregion: BB Property: "Zamia North" (Lot 9 BH194 north) Date: 09/10/14 Photos: N: 3 E: 3 S: 3 W: 3 Landscape photos: 3 Spot photos: 1: 2: 3: 4: 5: Datum: WGS84/GDA94/specify if other: Zone: 55 Transect bearing: W-E (90 deg) 0m mark E 740734 N 7276174 100m mark: E 740818 N 7276019 50m mark E 740774 N 7276052 General description: Brigalow regrowth on gilgai. 100m x 50m area: Eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): n/a Non-eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): n/a Number of large eucalypt trees: 0 Number of large non-eucalypt trees: 0 Total large trees: 0 Tree canopy height (for EDL Ecologically Dominant Layer) (m): 2m 1-3m tall (avg. 2m) on moderate gilgai. Patchy cover to 40%. Subcanopy height (if present) (m): - Emergent height (if present) (m): - Proportion of dominant canopy species with evidence of recruitment (%): 100% Total tree species richness: 1 Includes all tree species in 100m x 50m, not just EDL. Trees are single- stemmed and over 2m tall. Tree species list: Acacia harpophylla. 50m x 10m area: Shrub species richness: 1 Defined as single-stemmed and below 2m tall, or multi-stemmed from base, or from below 20cm. Shrub species Acacia harpophylla. list:

Grass species richness: 4 Grass species Leptochloa digitata, Eriachne sp., Enteropogon acicularis, Sporobolus caroli. Note: loose head of list: Homopholis belsonii - possibly from adjacent conservation park, not counted. Forbs and others (non-grass 9 ground) species richness:

Forbs and other Enchylaena tomentosa, Atalaya hemiglauca, Apophyllum anomalum, Terminalia oblongata, Evolvulus ground species: alsinoides, Capparis lasiantha, Glycine sp., Citrus glauca, Solanum sp. (possibly S.johnsonianum).

Non-native plant cover (%): 30% Species: Pennisetum ciliare, Oxalis corniculatum, (Parthenium hysterophorus <1%). 50m x 20m area: Coarse woody debris (>10cm diameter, >0.5m long, measure to plot boundary). Total length 0m (m): Note: much woody debris but only up to 8cm diameter.

Five 1m x 1m plots (ground cover %): Quadrat: 1 2 3 4 5 Mean Native perennial "decreaser" grass: n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r - see below

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-3

Native other grass cover: 0 0 0 25 0 5 Native forbs and other species: 0 0 0 1 0 0.2 Native shrubs (<1m tall): 0 0 5 0 0 1 Non-native grass: 0 35 20 3 35 22.6 Non-native forbs and shrubs: 0 0 0 <1 0 <1 Litter: 25 10 75 30 60 40 Rock: 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bare ground: 75 55 0 30 5 33 Cryptogams: 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total: =100% =100% =100% =100% =100% =100.8 100m transect: Tree canopy cover: (Tree or Group code: C=canopy, S=subcanopy, E=emergent) Total % canopy: 0 Total % subcanopy: 2.5 Total % emergent: 0

Tree Distance Total Tree Distance Total Tree Distance Total Tree Distance Total or (m) or (m) or (m) or (m) group group group group (C, S (C, S (C, S (C, S or E) or E) or E) or E) S 2.5

Shrub canopy cover: (indicate non-native with *) Total % 5.5 Total % non- 0 native: native:

* Distance Total * Distance Total * Distance Total * Distance Total (m) (m) (m) (m)

1.5 3 0.5 0.5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-4

BioCondition Site 2 Relevant quaternary site no. if 27 no: applicable:

RE/landtype: 11.4.8 Bioregion: BB Property: Lot 5 KM135 ("Little Sorrel")

Date: Photos: N: 3 E: 3 S: 3 W: 3

Landscape photos: 3 Spot photos: 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

Datum: WGS84/GDA94/specify if other: Zone: 55 Transect bearing: E-W (270 deg)

0m mark E 743049 N 7276355 100m mark: E 743001 N 7276347

50m mark E 743092 N 7276361

General description: Woodland (disturbed an open in places) of Acacia harpophylla with Eucalyptus cambageana and Casuarina cristata. Moderate shrub layer and numerous naturally fallen logs.

100m x 50m area:

Eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): 40cm(draft Non-eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): 27cm(draft) )

Number of large eucalypt trees: 6 Number of large non-eucalypt trees: 7

Total large trees: 13

Tree canopy height (for EDL Ecologically Dominant Layer) (m): 15m T1 16-18m, 10% T2 8-12m, 50% Subcanopy height (if present) (m): 6m S1 2-8m, 40%, S2 1-2m, 10% Emergent height (if present) (m): -

Proportion of dominant canopy species with evidence of recruitment (%): 50% Casuarina only, no blackbutt

Total tree species richness: 9 Includes all tree species in 100m x 50m, not just EDL. Trees are single- stemmed and over 2m tall.

Tree species list: [T1-EDL Eucalyptus cambageana, Casuarina cristata], [T2-Sub Acacia harpophylla, Brachychiton rupestris, Geijera salicifolia], [S1 Geijera parviflora, Citrus glauca, Alectryon diversifolius, Everistia vacciniifolia, Alectryon oleifolius]. (mistletoe not counted - Amyema sp.)

50m x 10m area:

Shrub species richness: 7 Defined as single-stemmed and below 2m tall, or multi-stemmed from base, or from below 20cm.

Shrub species [S2 Casuarina cristata, Citrus glauca, Acacia harpophylla, Carissa ovata, Lysiphyllum carronii, list: Terminalia oblongata, Apophyllum anomalum].

Grass species richness: 2

Grass species Enteropogon acicularis (common), Sporobolus caroli (rare). list:

Forbs and others (non-grass 5 ground) species richness:

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-5

Forbs and other Capparis lasiantha, Apophyllum anomalum, Cissus opaca, Sida sp., Maireana microphylla. ground species:

Non-native plant cover (%): 20% Species: Pennisetum ciliare (common), Opuntia tomentosa (rare).

50m x 20m area:

Coarse woody debris (>10cm diameter, >0.5m long, measure to plot boundary). Total length 145.5m (m):

71

74.5

Five 1m x 1m plots (ground cover %):

Quadrat: 1 2 3 4 5 Mean

Native perennial "decreaser" grass: n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r - see below

Native other grass cover: 1 1 1 0 0 0.6

Native forbs and other species: 1 5 0 0 0 1.2

Native shrubs (<1m tall): 0 5 0 0 70 15

Non-native grass: 0 20 2 10 10 8.4

Non-native forbs and shrubs: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Litter: 30 64 78 85 10 53.4

Rock: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bare ground: 68 5 20 5 10 21.6

Cryptogams: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total: =100% =100% =100% =100% =100% =100.2

100m transect:

Tree canopy cover: (Tree or Group code: C=canopy, S=subcanopy, E=emergent)

Total % canopy: 34.5 Total % subcanopy: 31.8 Total % emergent: 0 Total Total Total Total Tree Distance Tree Distance Tree Distance Tree Distance or or or or (m) (m) (m) (m) group group group group (C, S (C, S (C, S (C, S or E) or E) or E) or E)

S 2 S 3

C 7 S 6.3

S 4.5 C 9

C 5.5 S 2

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-6

C 3

S 3

S 4

C 10

S 7

Shrub canopy cover: (indicate non-native with *)

Total % 5 Total % non- 0 native: native: Total Total Total Total Total * Distance * Distance * Distance * Distance (m) (m) (m) (m)

2.5

2.5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-7

BioCondition Site 3 Relevant quaternary site no. if 38 no: applicable:

RE/landtype: 11.4.3 Bioregion: BB Property: Lots 21 & 22 Plan AU37 ("Bushblock")

Date: 10/10/14 Photos: N: 3 E: 3 S: 3 W: 3

Landscape photos: 3 Spot photos: 1: 3 2: 3 3: 3 4: 3 5: 3

Datum: WGS84/GDA94/specify if other: Zone: 55 Transect bearing: W-E (90 deg)

0m mark E 741347 N 7277266 100m mark : E 741364 N 7277175

50m mark E 741355 N 7277217

General description: Woodland of Acacia harpophylla and Casuarina cristata with moderate shrub layer of same, and sparse ground cover over minor gilgai.

100m x 50m area:

Eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): n/a Non-eucalypt large tree DBH benchmark (cm): 32cm

Number of large eucalypt trees: 0 Number of large non-eucalypt trees: 0*

Total large trees: 0* *Note: most large trees were non-eucalypt 10-15cm DBH.

Tree canopy height (for EDL Ecologically Dominant Layer) (m): 14m T1 12-16m, 10% T2 2-12m, 60% Subcanopy height (if present) (m): 9m S1 1-2m, 5% Emergent height (if present) (m): -

Proportion of dominant canopy species with evidence of recruitment (%): 100%

Total tree species richness: 5 Includes all tree species in 100m x 50m, not just EDL. Trees are single- stemmed and over 2m tall.

Tree species list: [T1-EDL Casuarina cristata (dominant), Acacia harpophylla], [T2-Sub Casuarina cristata, Acacia harpophylla, Lysiphyllum carronii, Alectryon diversifolius, Terminalia oblongata]

50m x 10m area:

Shrub species richness: 6 Defined as single-stemmed and below 2m tall, or multi-stemmed from base, or from below 20cm.

Shrub species Acacia harpophylla, Casuarina cristata, Geijera parviflora, Terminalia oblongata, Alectryon list: diversifolius, Carissa ovata.

Grass species richness: 2

Grass species Ancistrachne uncinulata, thin-leafed grass grazed (possibly Enteropogon acicularis). list:

Forbs and others (non-grass 5 ground) species richness:

Forbs and other Cissus opaca, Jasminum didymum subsp. lineare, Enchylaena tomentosa, Capparis lasiantha, probably ground species: Sida sp.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-8

Non-native plant cover (%): 10% Species: Bryophyllum sp. (common), Opuntia tomentosa (rare).

50m x 20m area:

Coarse woody debris (>10cm diameter, >0.5m long, measure to plot boundary). Total length (m):

Five 1m x 1m plots (ground cover %):

Quadrat: 1 2 3 4 5 Mean

Native perennial "decreaser" grass: n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r - see below

Native other grass cover: 0 5 0 2 <1 1.4

Native forbs and other species: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Native shrubs (<1m tall): 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-native grass: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Non-native forbs and shrubs: 0 0 2 2 <1 0.8

Litter: 65 90 75 90 89 81.8

Rock: 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bare ground: 30 5 8 5 10 11.6

Cryptogams: Logs (can add to litter): 5 0 15 1 0 4.2

Total: =100% =100% =100% =100% =100% =99.8

100m transect:

Tree canopy cover: (Tree or Group code: C=canopy, S=subcanopy, E=emergent)

Total % canopy: 7 Total % subcanopy: 68 Total % emergent: 0 Total Total Total Total Tree Distance Tree Distance Tree Distance Tree Distance or or or or (m) (m) (m) (m) group group group group (C, S (C, S (C, S (C, S or E) or E) or E) or E)

S 0-2 2 S 71.5-77 5.5

C 2-5 3 S 81.5-82 0.5

S 4-19 15 S 94-97 3

S 23-25 2 S 98-100 2

S 29-34 5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX A A-9

S 36-41 5

S 45-56 11

C 59-63 4

S 63-80 17

Shrub canopy cover: (indicate non-native with *)

Total % 5 Total % non- 0 native: native: Total Total Total Total * Distance * Distance * Distance * Distance (m) (m) (m) (m)

2.5-3.5 1

9.5-10 0.5

12-14.5 2.5

26-26.5 0.5

34.5-35 0.5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX B B-1

APPENDIX B DEHP PROTECTED PLANTS FLORA SURVEY TRIGGER MAP

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX C C-1

APPENDIX C FLORA PHOTOGRAPHS – POTENTIAL OFFSET AREAS

Zamia site 22 - regrowth brigalow with Zamia site 27 - blackbutt, belah, brigalow gilgai and canegrass advanced regrowth (mapped remnant)

Zamia site 36 - reference site only - Zamia site 32 - wedge of brigalow between previously recorded location of anabranches of Zamia Creek S.elachophyllum in adjacent Zamia Creek Conservation Park

Zamia site 38 - advanced regrowth of Little Sorrel site 5 - variable-aged regrowth brigalow-belah (not mapped by DEHP) of brigalow-belah

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX C C-2

Little Sorrel site 8 - variable-aged regrowth Bushblock site 50 - ironbark-cypress-bulloak of brigalow-belah typical of general area

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-1

APPENDIX D REPRESENTIVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF FAUNA HABITAT SUPPORTED ON EACH LOT

Lot 5, Little Sorrel

Open Ironbark woodland, eastern portion of site, on top of ridge line.

View to the west from the toe of the ridge line

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-2

Poorly formed gilgai mound and depression with regrowth brigalow. Lot 9 (north), Zamia

View from the eastern boundary to the west, dense brigalow regrowth mid-photo, Zamia Creek in background.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-3

Well formed gilgai near Zamia Creek Conservation Park

Extensive cracking holes in grey cracking clays within potential ornamental snake habitat

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-4

Well formed gilgai with distinct mounds and basin shaped depressions

. Remnant brigalow, complex shrub understorey and native grass cover

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-5

Water hole on Zamia Creek Lots 21 and 22, Bushblock

Drainage line and riparian vegetation at Harp Trap Site 5

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-6

Ironbark open woodland with calitris understorey and complex shrub and ground layers

Buloke open woodland with regrowth understorey and sparse ground cover

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-7

Mixed eucalypt open woodland with heath shrub layer

Mixed eucalypt open woodland with calitris understorey, complex shrub and ground layers

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-8

Tin Hut Creek and associated riparian vegetation

Ironbark open woodland, calitris understorey, buloke shrub and grass/leaf litter layers

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX D D-9

Ironbark woodland with acacia understorey, grass, leaf litter, fallen timber ground layers

Ironbark woodland with buloke understorey and sparse grass ground layer

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX E E-1

APPENDIX E PHOTOGRAPHS OF MICROBAT SURVEY

Harp Trap Site 1

Harp Trap Site 2

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX E E-2

Harp Trap Site 3

Harp Trap Site 4

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX E E-3

Harp Trap Site 5

Harp Trap Site 6

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX E E-4

Harp Trap Site 7

Harp Trap Site 8

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014 APPENDIX E E-5

Harp Trap Site 9

Trip Ling at Farm Dam

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Report_FINAL 16/12/2014

Directors: A T Veary BSc. (Hons) E L Veary BAppSc

Our Ref: Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys

16 February 2015

Victoria Musgrove Senior Environmental Planner Cockatoo Coal Limited

Via email: [email protected]

Dear Victoria,

RE: Baralaba North – Biodiversity Offset Investigation, Lot 9 Zamia Targeted Ornamental Snake Surveys To investigate the suitability of the Zamia (Lot 9) property as a potential biodiversity offset for the Baralaba North Continued Operations Project (BNCOP), targeted threatened species surveys were undertaken from the 1st – 4th November 2014. As part of those field surveys, gilgai formations were identified within an area of approximately 100 Ha in the central western portion of the site (see Figure 1). These areas supported dense regrowth brigalow to 5 m on deep cracking clays, where significant cracks, crevices and sink holes were observed (see Figure 2). The gilgai were considered to be well defined and formed, consisting of a mosaic of depressions and mounds and they supported vegetation characteristic of wetland habitats (see Figure 3). At the time of these surveys, environmental conditions were very dry. Rainfall recorded for 2014, prior to the November surveys, was well below the collated average data for the local area (recorded at Bureau of Meteorology, Bauhinia Downs Store, see Figure 4). As such, conditions were considered to be very poor to adequately survey for the ornamental snake and none were positively identified during this survey. However, given the diverse characteristics of the gilgai observed within the areas identified, it was considered likely that these habitat areas potentially supported population/s of ornamental snakes. In order to confirm the suitability of the habitats supported on-site for an offset for the ornamental snake, additional targeted surveys were undertaken from the 20th to 22nd January 2015, following significant rainfall in the local district.

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys 16/02/2015 2

Figure 1 Lot 9 (north) – Location of Habitat Features and Target Species

Figure 2 Photograph of Cracks and Crevices, Lot 9

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys 16/02/2015 3

Figure 3 Photograph of Gilgai Formations with Sink Holes, Lot 9

Figure 4 2014 Rainfall Bauhinia Downs Store

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys 16/02/2015 4

The local area received 177 mm and 79.4 mm of rainfall in December and January (prior to the survey) respectively. During the survey period, an additional 41.4 mm of rainfall was recorded. Consequent of this rainfall and the swelling of the grey clays, all but the very largest ground cracks were closed. Numerous gilgai supported surface water, with some supporting established aquatic vegetation such as sedges and bog marsh (Monochoria cyanea), which are common elements within these gilgai features under suitable environmental conditions. The surveys were conducted over three nights from approximately 6pm – 1am at targeted areas supporting the best habitat characteristics for this species within the 100 ha area of gilgai habitat. Target sites were selected in the late afternoon/early evening, with nocturnal ground searches conducted using hand held spotlights. Three primary areas were surveyed. At all survey areas, a diverse and abundant assemblage of frog fauna species were observed. 13 species in total were observed as follows:  Cyclorana alboguttata greenstripe frog  Litoria caerulea green treefrog  Litoria fallax eastern sedgefrog  Litoria inermis bumpy rocketfrog  Litoria peroni emerald-spotted treefrog  Litoria rothii red-eyed treefrog  Litoria rubella naked treefrog  Platyplectorum ornatus ornate burrowing-frog  Limnodynastes salmini salmon-striped frog  Limnodynastes tasmaniensis spotted marsh frog  Limnodynastes terraereginae scarlet-sided pobblebonk  Uperoleia rugosa chubby gungan  Rhinella marinus cane toad The surveys recorded two ornamental snakes, a sub-adult and an adult near the Zamia Creek Conservation Park. The occurrence of the sub-adult indicates that the ornamental snake has been/is breeding within the gilgai habitats supported on Lot 9 (north). From the results of the surveys, it is considered highly likely that ornamental snakes are supported in all areas where gilgai formations are present. Identified Management Issues The site supports an extensive infestation of parthenium which, whilst the impact of this listed weed is not fully known for the ornamental snake and other target threatened species, e.g. squatter pigeon, it potentially reduces the value of the site for an offset. The control, reduction and elimination of parthenium should be addressed within the management plan for the offset if accepted. Cane toads were observed across the areas surveyed and it is highly likely that they occur across the whole of the site. Cane toads have been listed as a key threatening process under the EPBC Act. In some areas, cane toads dominated the amphibious fauna. Cane toads have been identified as causing mortality in ornamental snakes, both juveniles and adults. Consequently, the control, reduction and elimination of cane toads from gilgai

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys 16/02/2015 5 habitats should be addressed with the highest priority within the management plan for the offset if accepted. In addition to the impacts of cane toads on ornamental snake populations, the effects of cattle accessing flooded gilgai to drink has been linked to mortality of snakes and the degradation of gilgai formations which impacts on the species ability to survive and persist under grazing regimes which do not exclude cattle from gilgai areas. As such, for the offset to maintain and ultimately improve in value for this species, the management plan for the offset must adequately address the impacts of grazing on gilgai formations and the flow on effects to the ornamental snake population of the site. Victoria, I’d like to thank you for the opportunity to undertake the targeted surveys for the ornamental snake on Lot 9 north, Zamia and we look forward to continuing our involvement with this project for Cockatoo Coal. Please do not hesitate to contact me on 0402 882 038 if you would like to discuss the outcomes of the targeted species surveys undertaken to date. Yours faithfully, Footprints Environmental Consultants

Andrew Veary Director

Cockatoo Coal - Biodiversity Offsets Assessments Lot 9 Ornamental Snake Surveys 16/02/2015