Appendix B Supporting Assessments
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EPBC Technical Report Coppabella Wind Farm APPENDIX B SUPPORTING ASSESSMENTS The following reports were key to the assessment of MNES and are referenced in the referral and Technical Report: 1. Biodiversity Assessment: Coppabella Hills Precinct, NGH Environmental (2009a), including species list from original survey work. 2. NSW Modification Application Ecology chapters 8‐10, NGH Environmental (2017b; project description coincides with this referral). 3. Yass Valley Wind Farm – Golden Sun Moth and Striped Legless Lizard 2014/2015 Summer Survey Results. NGH Environmental (2015b). 4. Golden Sun Moth survey effort and results 2015. Extracted from NGH Environmental (2015c). Superb Parrot surveys (2014, 2016): 5. 2014 Superb Parrot Flight Path Mapping surveys, NGH Environmental (2015a). 6. 2016 Superb Parrot Flight Path Mapping surveys, NGH Environmental (2017a). Operational bird and mat impacts assessment (2009, 2017): 7. Wind Farm Risks to Birds and Microbats (Appendix G of the Environmental Assessment. Proposed Yass Valley Wind Farm: Coppabella Hills and Marilba Hills Precincts. Report prepared by NGH Environmental for Epuron. NGH Environmental (2009b) 8. Coppabella Wind Farm – proposed turbine modification impacts on birds and bats, BL&A (2017). 9. Coppabella Wind Farm – targeted threatened flora surveys October 2017, NGH Environmental (2017c) 17‐375 EPBC Technical Report Final v1 B‐1 EPBC Technical Report Coppabella Wind Farm B.1 BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT: COPPABELLA HILLS PRECINCT NGH Environmental (2009a). 17‐375 EPBC Technical Report Final v1 B‐2 Biodiversity Assessment COPPABELLA HILLS PRECINCT JULY 2009 Coppabella Hills Precinct, Biodiversity Assessment Document Verification Job title: Coppabella Wind farm Document Title Biodiversity Assessment File Name Final_Coppabella_BA.docx Revision Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by Draft Dec 08 name Eleanor Stalenberg name Brooke Marshall name Nick Graham‐Higgs – Director (Certified Environmental Practitioner) Final May 09 name Brooke Marshall, name Brooke Marshall name Steven Sass‐ Senior Ecologist (Certified Environmental Practitioner) Bianca Heinze Eleanor Stalenberg Final July 09 name Brooke Marshall, name nghenvironmental prints all documents on sugar cane paper made from 100% bagasse (a by‐product of sugar production). 1/216 carp street (po box 470) bega nsw 2550 australia t 61 2 6492 8333 f 61 2 6494 7773 web: www.nghenvironmental.com.au email: [email protected] 206/410 elizabeth st surry hills 102/63‐65 johnston st wagga wagga suite 4/4, 234 naturaliste terrace nsw 2010 australia nsw 2650 australia dunsborough wa 6281 australia t 61 2 8202 8333 f 61 2 9211 1374 t 61 2 6971 9696 f 61 2 6971 9693 t 61 8 9759 1985 f 61 2 6494 7773 Coppabella Hills Precinct, Biodiversity Assessment Definition of terms Site The area bounded by the property boundaries of involved landowners. Study area The subject site and any additional areas which are likely to be affected by the proposal, either directly or indirectly. Extended as far as necessary to take all potential impacts into account. Subject site All parts of the site which has potential to carry infrastructure and be directly affected by the proposal. Also referred to as the ‘Development Envelope’. Survey area Where active and passive fauna or flora surveys were undertaken within the study area. Development All parts of the site which has potential to carry infrastructure and be directly Envelope (DE) affected by the proposal. Also referred to as the ‘subject site’. Assessment of the development envelope allows fine‐scale development planning and site decisions to be informed by the findings of the assessment. Direct impacts Impacts that directly affect flora and fauna values. These may include trampling, pollution, vegetation clearing and soil disturbance. Development The area that would be directly displaced by proposed infrastructure, including footprint footings, easements and room to manoeuvre machinery. Blade‐strike Mortality caused by direct collision with turbine blades and by birds being swept down by the wake behind a turbine blade. Barotrauma Rapid or excessive air‐pressure change near moving turbine blades has been linked to bat fatalities as a result of haemorrhaging of the lungs (pulmonary barotrauma) (Baerwald et al. 2008). Final July 2009 iii Coppabella Hills Precinct, Biodiversity Assessment Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 10 2 ASSESSMENT APPROACH ................................................................................... 12 2.1 AIMS OF THIS DOCUMENT ......................................................................................................... 12 2.2 TERMINOLOGY ........................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.1 Subject site and study area ........................................................................................................................ 12 2.2.2 Development envelope .............................................................................................................................. 12 2.3 DESKTOP RESEARCH AND CONSULTATIONS .............................................................................. 13 2.4 FIELD WORK ................................................................................................................................ 14 2.5 ANALYSIS, ASSESSMENT AND REPORT COMPILATION ............................................................... 14 3 THE PROPOSAL ................................................................................................... 15 3.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE .......................................................................................................... 15 3.2 PROPOSED WORKS ..................................................................................................................... 15 3.3 GENERAL IMPACT TYPES ............................................................................................................ 16 3.3.1 Construction ............................................................................................................................................... 16 3.3.2 Operation ................................................................................................................................................... 19 3.3.3 Decommissioning ....................................................................................................................................... 19 4 REGIONAL CONTEXT ........................................................................................... 20 4.1 REGIONAL SCALE ........................................................................................................................ 20 4.1.1 Regionalisations ......................................................................................................................................... 20 4.1.2 Flora ........................................................................................................................................................... 21 4.1.3 Fauna.......................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.1.4 Conservation and environmental management ........................................................................................ 23 4.2 DISTRICT SCALE ........................................................................................................................... 23 4.2.1 District habitat features ............................................................................................................................. 23 4.2.2 Conservation reserves in the district ......................................................................................................... 24 4.2.3 Corridors .................................................................................................................................................... 26 4.3 NATIONAL AND STATE THREATENED SPECIES AND COMMUNITIES .......................................... 26 4.3.1 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 .............................................................................................. 26 4.3.2 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ............................................................. 26 Final July 2009 iv Coppabella Hills Precinct, Biodiversity Assessment 5 FLORA AND ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES ........................................................... 28 5.1 METHODS ................................................................................................................................... 28 5.1.1 Preliminary assessments ............................................................................................................................ 28 5.1.2 Field survey and mapping .......................................................................................................................... 28 5.1.3 Survey methods ......................................................................................................................................... 29 5.1.4 Threatened species and communities ....................................................................................................... 40 5.1.5 Survey limitations......................................................................................................................................