Supporting Document

Ocean Hill Pty Ltd Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Acquisition Survey

Environmental Protection Act 1986 Section 38 Referral Supporting Document

23 July 2021 WER-HSE-PLN-008 JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G

Table of Contents

Abbreviations and Terms ...... vii

1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Overview ...... 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope ...... 1 1.2.1 Proponent ...... 1 1.3 Environmental Impact Assessment ...... 3 1.3.1 Commonwealth ...... 3 1.3.2 Environmental Protection Act 1986 ...... 3 1.3.3 Other Approvals ...... 4

2. The Proposal ...... 5 2.1 Location and Tenure ...... 5 2.2 Proposal Description ...... 6 2.2.1 Seismic Acquisition Methodology ...... 6 2.3 Accommodation ...... 13 2.4 Chemical and Hazardous Material Storage ...... 13 2.5 Decommissioning, Rehabilitation and Monitoring ...... 13 2.6 Timing and Proposal Staging ...... 13 2.7 Key Proposal Characteristics ...... 14 2.8 Proposal Justification...... 14

3. Stakeholder Consultation ...... 15 3.1 Stakeholder Engagement Process ...... 15 3.2 Stakeholder Identification and Ongoing Consultation ...... 15 3.3 Proposal Stakeholder Engagement ...... 16

4. Environmental Principles ...... 17

5. Identification of Environmental Factors ...... 19

6. Flora and Vegetation ...... 22 6.1 EPA Objective ...... 22 6.2 Policy and Guidance ...... 22 6.2.1 Other policy and guidance ...... 22 6.3 Receiving Environment ...... 22 6.3.1 Studies and Investigations ...... 22 6.3.2 Climate ...... 27 6.3.3 Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia ...... 28 6.3.4 Geology, Land Systems and Soils ...... 28 6.3.5 Vegetation Associations ...... 31

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 ii

6.3.6 Vegetation Types ...... 31 6.3.7 National Parks and Nature Reserves ...... 34 6.3.8 Vegetation Condition ...... 34 6.3.9 Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities...... 36 6.3.10 Priority Ecological Communities ...... 36 6.3.11 Conservation Significant Flora ...... 38 6.3.12 Weeds ...... 40 6.4 Potential Impacts ...... 40 6.5 Assessment of Impacts ...... 40 6.5.1 Direct Impacts ...... 40 6.5.2 Indirect Impacts ...... 41 6.5.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 43 6.6 Rehabilitation ...... 44 6.7 Mitigation ...... 46 6.8 Predicted Outcome ...... 47

7. Terrestrial Fauna ...... 48 7.1 EPA objective ...... 48 7.2 Policy and guidance ...... 48 7.2.1 EPA policy and guidance ...... 48 7.2.2 Other policy and guidance ...... 48 7.3 Receiving Environment ...... 48 7.3.1 Previous Studies ...... 48 7.4 Fauna Habitat ...... 52 7.4.1 Black Cockatoo Habitat Assessment ...... 52 7.5 Description of Vertebrate Fauna ...... 53 7.5.1 Conservation Significant Fauna ...... 53 7.6 Potential Impacts ...... 57 7.7 Assessment of Impacts ...... 58 7.7.1 Direct Impacts ...... 58 7.7.2 Indirect Impacts ...... 59 7.7.3 Cumulative Impacts ...... 60 7.8 Mitigation ...... 60 7.9 Predicted Outcome ...... 62

8. Terrestrial Environmental Quality ...... 63 8.1 EPA objective ...... 63 8.2 Policy and guidance ...... 63 8.3 Receiving Environment ...... 63 8.4 Potential Impacts ...... 63

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 iii

8.4.1 Assessment of Impacts ...... 63 8.4.2 Indirect impacts ...... 63 8.5 Mitigation ...... 64 8.6 Predicted Outcome ...... 64

9. Other Factors ...... 65

10. Matters of National Environmental Significance ...... 70 10.1 Matters of National Environmental Significance ...... 70 10.2 Proposed Action and Assessment ...... 70 10.3 Controlled Action Provisions ...... 70 10.3.1 Likelihood of Occurrence ...... 71 10.4 Policy and Guidance ...... 72 10.5 Listed Threatened Species and Communities ...... 72 10.6 Calyptorhynchus latirostris ...... 72 10.6.1 Habitat and Distribution ...... 72 10.6.2 Key Threats...... 73 10.6.3 Occurrence in the Project DE ...... 73 10.6.4 Assessment of Impacts ...... 73 10.6.5 Significance of Impacts ...... 74 10.6.6 Predicted Outcome ...... 77

11. Holistic Impact Assessment ...... 78

12. Consideration of Significance ...... 79

13. Environmental Management and Regulation Framework ...... 81

14. Limitations ...... 88

15. References ...... 89

List of Tables Table 1.1: Proponent Details ...... 1 Table 1.2: Other Approvals ...... 4 Table 2.1: Development Envelope Coordinates ...... 5 Table 2.2: Land Tenure within the Development Envelope ...... 5 Table 2.3: Summary of the Proposal ...... 14 Table 3.1: Summary of Stakeholder Consultation ...... 16 Table 4.1: Environmental Protection Principles...... 17 Table 5.1: EPA Environmental Factors ...... 19 Table 6.1: Overview of Studies and Investigations ...... 22 Table 6.2: Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Flora species ...... 23 Table 6.3: Vegetation System Associations within the Project DE ...... 31

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 iv

Table 6.4: Vegetation Types mapped within the Disturbance Footprint (Strategen JBS&G 2021) ...... 31 Table 6.5: Vegetation Condition Scale for the Southwest and Interzone Botanical Provinces ...... 34 Table 6.6: Vegetation Condition ...... 34 Table 6.7: Conservation Significant Flora in the Ecological Survey Area (Strategen-JBS&G 2021) ...... 38 Table 6.8: Land System(s) impacted by the Proposal ...... 40 Table 6.9: Vegetation System Association(s) impacted by the Proposal ...... 41 Table 6.10: Impacts to Vegetation Types ...... 41 Table 6.11: Impacts to Conservation Significant Flora ...... 41 Table 6.12: Hygiene Management and Mitigation Measures ...... 42 Table 6.15: Flora and Vegetation - Mitigation ...... 46 Table 7.1: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys ...... 48 Table 7.2. Databases Searches Undertaken ...... 49 Table 7.3: Literature Review and Database Results for Conservation Significant Fauna within proximity to the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021b) ...... 49 Table 7.4: Consideration of Survey Type ...... 51 Table 7.5: Fauna Habitat within the Project DE ...... 52 Table 7.6: Black-Cockatoo Foraging Habitat Quality ...... 53 Table 7.7: Likelihood of Occurrence of Conservation Significant Fauna ...... 53 Table 7.10: Fauna - Mitigation ...... 60 Table 8.1: Terrestrial Environmental Quality - Mitigation ...... 64 Table 9.1: Overview of Other Factors ...... 65 Table 10.1: MNES with the Potential to Occur within the Project DE ...... 71 Table 10.2: Significant Impact Assessment: Carnaby’s Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) ...... 74 Table 12.1: Assessment of Significance ...... 79 Table 13.1: Proposed Regulatory Framework and Environmental Approvals ...... 81

List of Figures Figure 1.1: Regional Location ...... 2 Figure 2.1: Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Lines...... 10 Figure 6.1: Climate statistics for the survey area, Mean annual rainfall and monthly averages for 2020 (BoM 2020) ...... 27 Figure 6.2: Land Systems...... 30 Figure 6.3: Vegetation System Associations ...... 32 Figure 6.4: Vegetation Types within Ecological Survey Area ...... 33 Figure 6.5: Vegetation Condition within Ecological Survey Area ...... 35 Figure 6.6: Conservation Significant Ecological Communities ...... 37

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 v

Figure 6.7: Conservation Significant Flora Recorded within Ecological Survey Area (Strategen-JBS&G 2021a)...... 39 Figure 7.1: Fauna Habitat ...... 55 Figure 9.1: Nearest Sensitive Receptors ...... 69

Appendices Appendix A Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Flora Survey Appendix B Dieback and Weed Management Plan Appendix C Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Fauna Survey and Black Cockatoo Habitat Assessment

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 vi

Abbreviations and Terms

Term Definition AH Act Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA) APPEA Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association BC Act Biodiversity and Conservation Act 2016 (WA) BoM Bureau of Meteorology CAMBA China Australia Migratory Bird Agreement DAWE Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment (Cth) DBCA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (WA) DEE former Department of Energy and Environment (now DAWE) DMIRS Department of Mines, Industry Safety and Regulation (WA) DoE former Department of Environment (now DAWE) DoW former Department of Water (now DWER) DPIRD Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (WA) DPLH Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (WA) DSEWPaC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (now DAWE) DWER Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (WA) DWMP Dieback and Weed Management Plan EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EP Act Environmental Protection Act WA 1986 (WA) EPA Environmental Protection Authority EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cwth) GWMP Groundwater Management Plan ha hectares IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature JAMBA Japan Australia Migratory Bird Agreement m metres mm millimetres MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance NVCP Native Vegetation Clearing Permit OSCP Oil Spill Contingency Plan P1 Priority 1 P2 Priority 2 P3 Priority 3 P4 Priority 4 PEC Priority Ecological Community PGER Act Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967 (WA) PMST Protected Matters Search Tool

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 vii

Term Definition ROKAMBA Republic of Korea Australia Migratory Bird Agreement SDS Safety Data Sheets Strike Energy Ocean Hill Pty Ltd T Threatened TEC Threatened Ecological Community The Proposal Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Acquisition Survey VSA Vegetation System Association VT Vegetation Type

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 viii

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview Ocean Hill Pty Ltd, a fully owned subsidiary of Strike Energy Limited (Strike Energy) is proposing to undertake a three-dimensional (3D) seismic acquisition survey within petroleum exploration permits EP 495, EP 454, and EP 320 (the Proposal). Ocean Hill Pty Ltd is a 100% holder (and designated operator) of Exploration Permit 495 (EP 495) within the Perth Basin. EP 320 and EP 454 are held by AWE (Beharra Springs) Pty Ltd and Energy Resources Limited, respectively. The Proponent will obtain necessary access authority from the underlying permit holders prior to commencement of the survey. The Proposal is located in the Midwest Region of Western Australia (WA), within the Shires of Carnamah and Coorow covering an area of 28, 203.54 ha (the Project Development Envelope) (Figure 1.1). 1.2 Purpose and Scope This document has been prepared to provide supporting information for referral of the Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Acquisition Survey proposed by Strike Energy. This supporting document should be read in conjunction with the completed ‘Form for the referral of a proposal to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) under Section 38 (s38) of the WA Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act). This supporting document describes and assesses the significance of the existing environmental values within the Project Development Envelope (DE) and the potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposal. In preparing this referral, the Proponent has considered the following guidance: • Instructions on how to prepare an Environmental Review Document (EPA 2020a); and • Environmental Impact Assessment (Part IV Divisions 1 and 2) Procedures Manual (EPA 2020b). In the event that the EPA determines the Proposal warrants assessment under Part IV of the EP Act, this document also satisfies the requirements for an accredited assessment under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and includes assessment of potential significant impacts to Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) (Section 10). 1.2.1 Proponent Ocean Hill Pty Ltd (hereafter referred to as Strike Energy) is the Proponent for the Proposal. Strike Energy is a publicly listed oil and gas company with exploration and production assets in Western Australia and South Australia. Proponent details are provided in Table 1.1. Table 1.1: Proponent Details Proponent Ocean Hill Pty Ltd (Strike Energy)

ABN 70 602 409 656

Level 2, 66 King’s Park Road Address WEST PERTH WA 6005

Kevin Craig Chief Operating Officer Contact [email protected] (+61) 08 7099 7400

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 1 OVERVIEW MAP BEEKEEPERS RD THREE SPRINGS!

D ! R ! CARNAMAH S G EP 320 R5 IN ILLAWONG D R R P S ! T

E ENEABBA A

E L

D R ! F

H R T

‐ Y H

A E

B COOLIMBA T B ! K

R A E R

O N

E LEEMAN U

T N

D !

O GREEN HEAD

E S

JURIEN BAY ! BADGINGARRA CARNAMAH‐ENEABBA RD

! ENEABBA

‐

A R IB A L D I W

I D L L R

I E

D S

R K

R D R

A N

N A

L O

D C O

D D

W L

E I

Y I

E T

C O

S EP 454 R1

S O EP 495 R

COORO W‐G REEN H EAD RD

L E TOOTB S ARDIE RD U E U R SC

N RD

I H

C BAN OVIC D R

Legend 02.55Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:250,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers Cadastral boundary Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 REGIONAL LOCATION Petroleum titles Z Highways Job No: 58224 Main road Minor road Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 1.1 Track Version: A Date: 22-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: \\008PMPMR004V001.jbsg.aust\JBS Perth\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_RegLocn.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

1.3 Environmental Impact Assessment 1.3.1 Commonwealth The Commonwealth EPBC Act provides a legal framework for the protection of MNES. The EPBC Act requires that all actions that will or may have a significant impact on a MNES must be referred to the Minister for the Environment. The EPBC Act is administered by DAWE. Protected matters under the EPBC Act include: • World heritage properties; • National heritage places (including Commonwealth Heritage Places); • Wetlands of international importance; • Listed threatened species and ecological communities; • Migratory species protected under international agreements; • Commonwealth marine areas; • A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas activities and large coal mining activities; • The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park; and • Nuclear Actions including uranium mining. The relevant MNES which apply to this Proposal are ‘nationally threatened species and ecological communities.’ The Proposal has been previously referred to DAWE under the EPBC Act and was determined to be a “Controlled Action” (EPBC2017/7970) based on impacts to Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo. The decision notice also identified possible impacts on the following species: • Johnson's mallee (Eucalyptus johnsoniana, vulnerable); • Scaly-butt mallee (Eucalyptus leprophloia, endangered); • Lesueur hakea (Hakea megalosperma, vulnerable); • Sandplain duck-orchid (Paracaleana dixonii, endangered); and • Star sun-orchid (Thelymitra stellata, endangered). The Proposal area has been modified since the original referral decision, with the previous project area limited to EP495 but extending further to the south. As such, a variation request will be submitted to DAWE providing updated details on the current Proposal and impacts on MNES. The assessment approach for the Project is yet to be determined. The proposed clearing of MNES can be assessed by the State on behalf of the Commonwealth through either a formal assessment under Part IV of the EP Act or a Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) under part V of the EP Act. The assessment of potential impacts to MNES is addressed in Section 10. Based on the assessment undertaken in MNES, specifically impacts to Black Cockatoo and Threatened flora species, it is anticipated that the Proposal will be determined to be a Controlled Action. An accredited assessment will therefore be sought with the State. 1.3.2 Environmental Protection Act 1986 The EP Act is the primary environmental legislation governing environmental protection and impact assessment in Western Australia. Strike Energy is self-referring this Proposal to the EPA under Part IV s38 of the EP Act.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 3

Part IV of the EP Act provides for the consideration and assessment of proposals that may, or will, have a significant impact on the environment. The Part IV process is administered by EPA Services of DWER. Based on the assessment undertaken in this referral and the predicted outcomes with respect to the key environmental factors, Strike Energy is of the view that the potential impacts of the Proposal are not so significant as to warrant formal environmental impact assessment under the EP Act. Strike Energy considers that the environmental impacts associated with the Proposal can be adequately assessed and managed via other existing State and Commonwealth approvals processes. Those outcomes and an overview of the relevant approvals that can effectively management the potential risks and impacts are detailed in Section 13. 1.3.3 Other Approvals Other State legislation relevant to the Proposal are outlined in Table 1.2. Section 13 provides an overview of how the other approvals within this regulatory framework can address key environmental factors. Table 1.2: Other Approvals Proposal Activity Type of Approval Administering Authority Legislation Petroleum activity Environment Plan DMIRS Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967 (PGER Act) Clearing of Native NVCP DMIRS (under delegation). EP Act (1986); and the Vegetation Environmental Protection (Native Vegetation Clearing) Regulations 2004 (Clearing Regulations). Storage and Handling of Dangerous Goods Licence. DMIRS. Dangerous Goods Safety Act Dangerous Goods 2004 and Dangerous Goods Safety (the Storage and Handling of Non-explosives) Regulations 2007. Disturbance to Aboriginal Section 16 authorisation to Department of Planning, Aboriginal Heritage Act 1979 Sites enter, excavate, examine, or Lands and Heritage (DPLH). (AH Act). remove anything on an Aboriginal site; and Section 18 consent for impact on an Aboriginal site.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 4

2. The Proposal

2.1 Location and Tenure Coordinates of the Project DE are provided in Table 2.1. Table 2.1: Development Envelope Coordinates Point Easting Northing 1 340818.6 6703123 2 347303.4 6703192 3 347326.6 6702056 4 348799.9 6702044 5 348811.5 6701441 6 349600.3 6701429 7 349741.8 6671009 8 340788.2 6670988 The Project DE (i.e. the physical area the Proposal is limited to) is located within freehold and Unallocated Crown Land as identified in Table 2.2. Table 2.2: Land Tenure within the Development Envelope Property Identifier Plan Land Parcel Lot Number Volume Folio Allocation P110258 2572 - - Crown P083001 6214 - - Crown P090156 6661 - - Crown P163065 9737 - - Crown P210805 10831 - - Crown P210805 10833 - - Crown 10834 - - Crown 10835 - - Crown P210788 10836 - - Crown 10837 - - Crown P210803 10838 - - Crown P210815 10842 - - Crown 10847 - - Crown P210798 10848 - - Crown 10851 - - Crown P210795 10852 - - Crown 10855 - - Crown P210802 10856 - - Crown 10487 - - Crown P208223 10488 - - Crown P206723 10241 - - Crown 10242 - - Crown 10243 - - Crown P206717 10244 - - Crown 10245 - - Crown 10246 - - Crown P240117 11314 - - Crown

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 5

Property Identifier Plan Land Parcel Lot Number Volume Folio Allocation P240117 11315 106 Crown 11483 304 Crown LR3075 P215624 11484 305 Crown 11485 306 Crown 10804 1672 678 Crown P210800 10805 2074 104 Crown P210821 10806 1907 790 Crown P190204 11887 LR3093 069 Crown P026727 12479 LR3118 564 Road Reserve P215544 12260 LR3103 730 Crown P027407 12620 LR3124 932 Crown R 29801 - - - Reserve R 35499 - - - Reserve R 38965 - - - Reserve R 38966 - - - Reserve R 38967 - - - Reserve R 43781 - - - Reserve P220869 12480 LR3118 565 Road Reserve LPU I180822 - - - Lease LPU I122083 - - - Lease LPU I163655 - - - Lease 30 421 Freehold P065745 2745 31 422 Freehold 501 949 Freehold P400357 2861 502 950 Freehold Strike Energy will ensure that land access and compensation agreements are in place with all owners and occupiers of private property within the Project Area prior to implementation of the Proposal. 2.2 Proposal Description The Proponent is proposing to undertake a 3D seismic acquisition survey within petroleum exploration permit EP 495, EP 454 and EP 320. The seismic lines have been aligned to use previously cleared areas where possible to undertake the Proposal with the minimum amount of clearing and disturbance of native vegetation. The Proposal will require temporary disturbance of no more than 113.52 ha of native vegetation to create access tracks for the vibroseis trucks and light vehicles. The Proposal will comprise a Disturbance Footprint of 801.91 ha within a total Project DE of 28,203.54 ha (refer to Section 2.7). A total of 113.52 ha will require clearing within the Disturbance Footprint. Following the completion of the proposed activities, seismic access tracks will be rehabilitated. 2.2.1 Seismic Acquisition Methodology The Proposal involves laying out receiver geophones and conducting a seismic survey using vibroseis technology. Seismic data acquisition involves applying a vibrating seismic energy source, such as a vibroseis truck at discrete surface locations along north-south seismic lines spaced approximately 250 m apart. The resulting energy is reflected back from interfaces where rock properties (velocity and density) change. By recording this reflected energy with an array of geophones placed on the ground surface, the results can be recorded and processed to produce an image of underground

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 6

geological structures and by using a range of attributes these can be used to infer the physical rock properties. The equipment used during the conduct of a seismic survey is typically as follows: • a series of geophones which are place in a line on the ground (approximately 20 to 40 m apart); • low impact trucks (‘vibe-trucks’) equipped with vibrating pads which travel along the seismic lines and introduce vibrations (which are then picked up by the geophones) into the ground (approximately 20m to 40 m apart); • a central control unit (located in a truck/utility vehicle) which sends the control signal to the ‘vibe-trucks’; and • a fleet of vehicles including 4WDs, UTV’s, trucks, low loaders and earth moving equipment for creating seismic lines and transporting crew, supplies and equipment. 2.2.1.1 Line Planning The Proposal’s seismic acquisition lines have been developed through a detailed process of review to ensure that impacts to the environment are minimised to ALARP. The designated seismic acquisition lines represent the most likely locations at this time; however, they may require some revision due to unforeseen circumstances that arise prior to commencement. Seismic acquisition survey lines can also be deviated from the nominal mapped alignments by up to approximately 50 m without losing definition in survey results. This potential deviation allows survey lines to avoid soaks, creek lines and other environmental values such as populations of conservation significant flora, native vegetation and/or fauna habitat. Mulcher capacity is also limited by the girth of tree trunks and limbs, as the mulcher cannot process trunks or limbs larger than 100 mm. This mulcher limitation results in more mature trees (often also significant trees for listed Black Cockatoo species) remaining undisturbed. The maximum clearing area, avoidance and management measures outlined in this supporting document will be maintained in the event of any future potential modification of the seismic lines. Initial proposed seismic acquisition lines were developed by Strike Energy geophysicists with the aim of ensuing a desired level of data quality and quantity across the Project DE. The proposed seismic acquisition lines were then reviewed and refined through the following processes: • High level review of existing aerial imagery to ensure, where possible: o avoidance of areas of native vegetation; o avoidance of buildings and infrastructure; and o use of visible cleared tracks. • Desktop assessment of existing environmentally sensitive features (e.g. conservation areas, heritage areas, mapped conservation significant flora/fauna species and/or communities, surface water features etc.) to identify lines that can be truncated or removed to minimise impacts on these features to the extent possible. All seismic acquisition lines that would have needed clearing, and traversed conservation areas and surface water bodies or drainage lines were removed through this review stage. • Consultation with the local community and/or private landholders to identify culturally or economically sensitive areas to avoid. • On-ground site survey to identify, delineate and deviate around flora populations or individual listed species and communities, significant trees and/or riparian zones for surface water bodies. All these features have been avoided through line deviation or truncation.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 7

To retain the necessary levels of data acquisition, in some locations, survey continuity will be maintained by hand-carrying equipment through environmentally sensitive areas (with no clearing needed). Avoidance areas have been identified and will be input into GPS guidance tablets with audible alarms to enable on-ground identification and avoidance during implementation of the Proposal. During implementation of the Proposal, surveyors may move positions within 50 m either side of the planned location if they encounter any culturally significant sites or believe there will be safety concerns with the position. As a result of this process, significant environmental features have been avoided and/or minimised. 2.2.1.2 Seismic Survey Line Preparation A total of 83.77% of the Project DE comprises land which has been previously cleared for agricultural and/or pastoral purposes. In areas of native vegetation, access lanes of maximum 3.5 m width are necessitated. Access lanes are created via the cutting and mulching of native vegetation. The Proposal will temporarily disturb up to 113.52 ha of native vegetation, which represents 0.40% of the Project DE (28,203.54 ha) and 1.45% of the remnant native vegetation within the area (7,802.76 ha). Seismic acquisition line preparation machinery will be fitted with a real-time sub-1 m accuracy positioning solution to allow the clearing equipment to accurately follow the path of the line data provided (which incorporates botanical survey work already undertaken). Where native vegetation must be cleared for the creation of seismic acquisition lines, ‘single-pass’ cutting vegetation above ground level using cutting and mulching, as close to the ground surface as possible, leaving topsoil and root-stock undisturbed. Up to two tractor-mounted ‘swing hammer’ mulchers will be used for line preparation. Swing Hammer mulchers (rather than fixed) provide minimal ground disturbance and safe vehicle access. The swinging tooth enables the mulcher to follow the natural ground contours through flexible deflection from the ground rather than digging into the ground surface, which avoids disturbance to soil and roots of vegetation. The ‘single pass’ technique also minimises overall traffic along the seismic lines, reducing additional potential soil compaction and vegetation disturbance. If necessary seismic survey lines can be deviated from the nominal mapped alignments by up to 50 m without losing definition in survey results. Cut vegetation will be mulched and returned to its place of origin along lanes. This will facilitate the return of seed-stock and biomass to the soil and provide cover to minimise the risk of soil erosion. The vibroseis vehicle has a ground clearance of 46 cm, sufficient to leave the mulched vegetation intact along the seismic lines. No stockpiling of mulch will be needed. During recent ecological surveys undertaken by Strategen-JBS&G (2021a; 2021b), historic seismic acquisition lines created using bulldozing or rolling techniques were still evident, primarily because of the absence of overstorey species. This method of clearing also produces lines of damaged and partly shredded vegetation, which may affect the post-survey recovery. Rolling can also result in the uprooting of plants, especially in loose sandy soils typical of the Perth Basin. In comparison, the cutting and mulching method results in a safe, cleaner, and more stable site and ensures optimal conditions for successful rehabilitation within a minimised footprint, as follows: • Disturbance created by cutting and mulching vegetation is of a lower order and scale than conventional clearing (i.e. complete removal of vegetation and rootstock); • There is no topsoil disturbance, reducing the risks of erosion and impacts on water filtration into the thin topsoil layer containing the seed resource. In turn, this minimises the potential to leave the area prone to weed invasion;

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 8

• Return of the mulched material to its source location will ensure a maximum rate of humus production and includes facilitation of recolonisation by microfauna and an increase in nutrient cycling within the topsoil; and • Mulching retains significant overstorey species (i.e. diameter greater than 100 mm).

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 9 Legend Indictor Map 012 Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers Clearing Footprint Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 PROJECT AREA Disturbance Footprint Z Highways Job No: 58224 Main road Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 2.1 Page 1 of 3 Minor road Track Version: A Date: 23-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: \\008PMPMR004V001.jbsg.aust\JBS Perth\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_MB_ProjectArea.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 2.3 Accommodation Personnel will be accommodated in existing facilities outside of the Project DE in nearby towns or accommodation facilities. 2.4 Chemical and Hazardous Material Storage Oil, fuel, chemicals and/or other hazardous substances will be stored in self-bunded tanks meeting the appropriate Australian Standard for the chemical class and in accordance with relevant Safety Data Sheets (SDS). A SDS for each chemical handled and stored will be available to surveyors. A Hazardous Materials Register will be maintained. Hazardous materials likely to be stored include: • Diesel fuel for vehicles and equipment; and • Hydrocarbon-based oils and greases, hydraulic fluids, batteries and tyres for vehicle equipment maintenance. 2.5 Decommissioning, Rehabilitation and Monitoring All equipment will be removed at the completion of the Proposal. During Phase 2 (seismic acquisition) geophones will “leapfrog” from behind the acquisition trucks to be placed ahead. Therefore, not all receiver lines will be laid at once. After the seismic activity for the final lines has been conducted, the geophones and equipment will be retrieved in a similar sequence in which they were laid. All other equipment will be removed from the Project DE within one month of completion of the survey and no equipment, machinery or material will remain in the Project DE. Seismic lines and any infrastructure removed or altered as a result of the Proposal (e.g., fences, gates) will be reinstated in accordance with landowner requirements. Given the mulching method of clearing, which will leave root and seed stock in-situ, and avoidance of trees with a trunk diameter greater than 100 mm, natural regeneration of native vegetation is expected. Disturbed areas will be allowed to naturally regenerate following completion or returned to a condition as outlined in landowner access agreements. Strike Energy will monitor rehabilitation following completion of the Proposal to ensure native vegetation along seismic lines returns to a composition and structure that is comparable to its pre-disturbance state or returned to a condition as outlined in landowner access agreements. Monitoring will commence one month after completion of the Proposal with a focus on unauthorized third-party access issues. The program will then continue annually between September and November (i.e., Spring) for two years or until monitoring demonstrates rehabilitation completion criteria have been met. A paired transect design will be implemented to enable comparison of vegetation recovery with undisturbed vegetation. Rehabilitation progress will be reported to DMIRS in the form of an annual report. 2.6 Timing and Proposal Staging The seismic survey is proposed to be undertaken between January 2022 and May 2022 over a total activity period of 13 weeks (including mobilisation and demobilisation).

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 13

2.7 Key Proposal Characteristics The key characteristics of the Proposal are outlined in Table 2.3. Table 2.3: Summary of the Proposal Subject Detail Proposal title Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Proponent name Ocean Hill Pty Ltd Short description Proposed 3D seismic acquisition survey within EP 495, EP 454 and EP 320 within the Shires of Carnamah and Coorow. The Proposal comprises the following key elements: • Preparation of vehicle access lanes by cutting up to 113.52 ha of vegetation above ground level and mulching green stock with immediate replacement of mulch in-situ; • Laying receiver nodes along access lanes to a maximum depth of 200 mm; • Undertaking seismic acquisition (generation of an acoustic signal) using vibroseis trucks; and • Demobilising, rehabilitation and closing vehicular access to seismic lines, monitoring, and as required, remedial rehabilitation works. The Project DE is the area in which the seismic work will be undertaken and covers a total area of approximately 28,203.54 ha within the Perth Basin. The extent of the Project DE is approximately 32 km in length by 9 km in width and is bound by Carnamah-Eneabba Road (north) and Coorow-Green Hill Road (south). Table 2.4 provides the location and proposed extent of the physical and operational elements of the Proposal. Table 2.4: Location and Proposed Extent of Physical and Operational Elements Element Location Proposed extent Physical elements Project DE Refer to Figure 1.1 28,203.54 ha

Disturbance Footprint Figure 2.1 801.90 ha 113.52 ha Clearing Footprint Figure 2.1

2.8 Proposal Justification The Ocean Hill 3D seismic acquisition survey has been designed to improve the sub-surface imaging of the reservoir sandstones of the Jurassic Cadda and Cattamarra formations. The Proposal is expected to substantially improve the understanding of the geology and structure of the Ocean Hill prospect.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 14

3. Stakeholder Consultation Strike has undertaken a consultation program with key stakeholders in relation to its exploration activities in the Perth Basin. Strike Energy has and will continue to consult with landholders, traditional owners, local government, state and federal government agencies and other stakeholders in accordance with Strike Energy’s Perth Basin Stakeholder Management Plan. The key objectives of Strike Energy’s consultation program are to: • Identify relevant stakeholders; • Initiate and maintain communication; • Develop tools for ongoing communication; • Provide for two-way communication on management/mitigation strategies to minimise impacts of the Project on the environment and potentially affected stakeholders; and • Record consultation activity, key issues and outcomes. 3.1 Stakeholder Engagement Process Relevant person(s) for the purpose of identifying stakeholders that should be consulted were identified based on the following: • Government departments or agencies that administer the required approval(s) to implement the Proposal; • Landowners/managers within the Project Area; • Any person or organisation whose functions, interests or activities may be affected by the Proposal; and • Any other person or organisation with a potential interest in the Proposal. Strike will continue to identify new relevant stakeholders prior to the Proposal commencing and during the activity. New stakeholders may be identified during ongoing consultation with stakeholders identified to date or direct approach by persons that have become aware of the Proposal. If additional stakeholders are identified, they will be contacted, provided with information in relation to the Proposal, and invited to make comment. These actions are considered sufficient for any new relevant stakeholders identified to allow them to make an informed assessment of the potential effects of the Proposal on their functions, interests and/or activities. Strike will maintain and continue to update its stakeholder consultation register. 3.2 Stakeholder Identification and Ongoing Consultation Stakeholders engaged to date regarding the Proposal include: • Traditional Owners; • DWER (EPA Services) • DMIRS • Shire of Carnamah, Shire of Coorow and local community members • Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) and • Landowners.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 15

3.3 Proposal Stakeholder Engagement A summary of consultation undertaken in relation to the Proposal is provided in Table 3.1. Table 3.1: Summary of Stakeholder Consultation Stakeholder Group Nature of Consultation Response/Discussion Point Outcome Landowners June 2020 – ongoing • Regular phone and face to face contact with Strike Energy • Two-way communication channel management and Community Relations Officer with an • Key local stakeholders were kept up to date about Proposal overview of the Ocean Hill 3D seismic survey provided. plans and provided feedback. • Land access negotiations with individual landholders • Development of land access agreements. • Overview of baseline environmental survey requirements Activity overview – • Monthly newsletter including all landholder in the permit ongoing area and surrounding landholders (within about 10km radius). Information included project updates on all Strike Energy Perth Basin activities. Shire of Carnamah, Shire of Community information • Provided an overview of all Strike Energy (and its subsidiaries) • Two-way communication channel Coorow and local session – June 2021 development and exploration seismic activities. The • Key local stakeholders were kept up to date about Proposal community members community session included an overview of the West plans and provided feedback. Erregulla development, Project Haber, and exploration • Provided key stakeholders access to detailed information projects (including Ocean Hill). about exploration, operational and future development activities. • Consideration of feedback provided by local community attendees. • Improved understanding of the various regulatory approvals processes, control measures implemented to reduce impact on the community and environment and an understanding of the local benefits of the proposal. DWER EPA Services Pre-referral Meeting – 3 • Presentation of proposal • Project to be referred to EPA May 2021 DMIRS Activity overview May • Presentation of Strike Energy’s (including subsidiary - Ocean • Key stakeholders kept informed of proposed activities. 2021 Hill Pty Ltd) exploration activities and the required regulatory • Clarified required regulatory approvals and likely timeframes approvals. to meet project schedule. DBCA June 2020 • Consulted regarding the environmental baseline survey • Key stakeholders kept informed of proposed activities. aspects associated with the Ocean Hill 3D seismic survey • Clarification regarding environmental baseline aspects and regulatory approvals. Traditional Owners Activity overview – March • Exploration activities overview including cultural heritage • Input and amendment to Strike Energy’s Cultural Heritage 2020 survey clearance requirements and consultation regarding Management Plan (CHMP) for Perth Basin activities. Strike Energy’s Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) • Key stakeholders kept informed of proposed activities. for Perth Basin activities.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 16

4. Environmental Principles

The Proponent has considered the environmental protection principles of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) listed in Section 4A of the EP Act and in accordance with the EPA’s Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives (EPA 2016c). Strike Energy’s consideration of the EP Act principles of environmental protection in relation to the Proposal is outlined in Table 4.1. Table 4.1: Environmental Protection Principles Principle Consideration

1. The Precautionary Principle The Proposal has been developed through a detailed process of review to ensure that impacts to the environment are Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, minimised to the extent possible. lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental The Proponent has used existing environmental data for the degradation. local area and the region and has supplemented this information with additional site specific studies (ecological In application of this precautionary principle, decisions assessment) to ensure a comprehensive understanding of should be guided by: the environmental values and the potential impacts of the • Careful evaluation to avoid, where practicable, serious or Proposal which are described in this referral document. irreversible damage to the environment; and • An assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.

2. The Principle of Intergenerational Equity The Proposal meets the principle of intergenerational equity by ensuring the health of the environmental values, The present generation should ensure that the health, maintaining ecological functions for future generations, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained whilst minimising any impacts on the environment. The and enhanced for the benefit of future generations. Proposal has been designed to address the EPA's objectives for the key environmental factors, with mitigation measures to reduce residual environmental impacts for any significant residual impacts. All native vegetation disturbed by the Proposal will be allowed to regenerate and return to a state and condition consistent with non-disturbed areas. The Proposal can be implemented without significant impacts on the health, diversity or productivity of the environment.

3. The Principle of the Conservation of Biological Diversity The conservation of biological diversity and ecological and Ecological Integrity integrity was a fundamental consideration in the assessment of this proposal. Comprehensive desktop and field based Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity surveys have been undertaken to understand existing should be a fundamental consideration. biological diversity in the area. The results of these surveys have informed the assessment of the potential impacts to biological diversity and ecological integrity. Wherever possible: • seismic lines have been aligned using existing roads, tracks and disturbed areas to minimise clearing; • where required clearing has been minimised by reducing the access track width to the extent possible (3.5 m) whist achieving data level and quality requirements; • seismic lines have been realigned to avoid sensitive environmental features; and • clearing of trees with a diameter of 100 mm or more has been avoided.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 17

Principle Consideration

4. Principles Relating to Improved Valuation, Pricing and Environmental constraint avoidance and management costs Incentive Mechanisms have been considered in the planning and design of the Proposal. Environmental factors should be included in the valuation of assets and services. The Proponent will be responsible for funding the cost of environmental avoidance and management measures and The polluter pays principles – those who generate pollution ongoing monitoring and rehabilitation activities. and waste should bear the cost of containment, avoidance and abatement. The users of goods and services should pay prices based on the full life-cycle costs of providing goods and services, including the use of natural resources and assets and the ultimate disposal of any waste. Environmental goals, having been established, should be pursued in the most cost-effective way, by establishing incentive structure, including market mechanisms, which enable those best placed to maximise benefits and/or minimise costs to develop their own solution and responses to environmental problems.

5. The Principle of Waste Minimisation All reasonable and The Proponent commits to minimising waste as far as practicable measures should be taken to minimise the practicable during construction, operation, and closure by generation of waste and its discharge into the environment. adopting the hierarchy of waste controls: avoid, reduce, reuse, recycle and safe disposal.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 18

5. Identification of Environmental Factors

This section identifies the environmental factors relevant to the Proposal, outlines the overall assessment methodology presented in this document and the detailed environmental impact assessment undertaken for each preliminary key environmental factor. Environmental factors are those parts of the environment that may be impacted by an aspect of a Proposal. The EPA has 14 environmental factors as shown in Table 5.1. Table 5.1: EPA Environmental Factors Theme Factor Objective Consideration

Benthic To protect benthic communities and Not relevant. Communities and habitats so that biological diversity and The Proposal is located onshore. Habitats ecological integrity are maintained.

To maintain the geophysical processes that shape coastal morphology so that Coastal Processes the environmental values of the coast are protected. Sea Marine To maintain the quality of water, Environmental sediment and biota so that Quality environmental values are protected.

To protect marine fauna so that Marine Fauna biological diversity and ecological integrity are maintained.

To protect flora and vegetation so that Relevant. Refer to Section 6. biological diversity and ecological Flora and The Proposal involves clearing of native integrity are maintained. vegetation vegetation. This is considered to be a key environmental factor.

To maintain the variety and integrity of Not relevant. distinctive physical landforms so that No distinctive landform features are environmental values are protected. Landforms present in the Project DE. The Proposal does not involve significant disturbance to landforms.

To protect subterranean fauna so that Not relevant. biological diversity and ecological The Proposal does not involve Subterranean integrity are maintained. Land Fauna groundwater drawdown of removal of habitat that may support subterranean fauna.

To protect terrestrial fauna so that Relevant. Refer to Section 7. biological diversity and ecological The Proposal involves clearing fauna Terrestrial Fauna integrity are maintained. habitat. This is considered to be a key environmental factor.

To maintain the quality of land and soils Relevant. Refer to Section 8. so that environmental values are Terrestrial There is a risk of soil contamination from protected. Environmental spills during Proposal activities (e.g. Quality vehicles, machinery, equipment, etc.). Whilst impacts are likely to be localised and will not result in long term impacts,

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 19

Theme Factor Objective Consideration detail around management actions and response has been provided.

To maintain the hydrological regimes Relevant, but not a key factor. Refer to and quality of groundwater and surface Section 9. water so that environmental values are Surface water features have been protected. avoided by design and implementation of buffers for clearing and vehicle Water Inland Waters movements (other than existing crossings). Clearing of native vegetation (via mulching) is unlikely to result in increased sedimentation to surface water features. Given this, potential for significant impacts of the Proposal on inland waters are unlikely.

To maintain air quality and minimise Relevant, but not a key factor. Refer to emissions so that environmental values Section 9. are protected. There is a potential for dust to be Air Quality generated during Proposal activities; however, impacts are not expected to be significant and therefore this is not considered to be a key environmental factor. Air To reduce net greenhouse gas emissions Relevant, but not a key factor. Refer to in order to minimise the risk of Section 9. environmental harm associated with Greenhouse gas emissions will be climate change. Greenhouse Gas emitted from vehicles during Emissions implementation of the Proposal; however, impacts are not expected to be significant and therefore this is not considered to be a key environmental factor.

To protect social surroundings from Relevant, but not a key factor. Refer to significant harm. Section 9. There is a potential for impacts to Social Aboriginal heritage and amenity impacts Surroundings during construction as a result of dust, and noise; however, impacts are not expected to be significant and therefore this is not considered to be a key environmental factor. People To protect human health from significant Not relevant. harm. The guideline for this factor provides the specific framework for considering the Human Health possible impacts to human health arising from the emission of radiation. There are no emissions of radiation associated with the Proposal that could present a risk to human health.

Based on an assessment of potential impacts associated with the Proposal, the key environmental factors considered relevant to the Proposal and addressed in detail are:

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 20

• Flora and Vegetation (Section 6); • Terrestrial Fauna (Section 7); and • Terrestrial Environmental Quality (Section 8). The key environmental factors associated with the Proposal are addressed in this referral supporting document in the following format: • Statement of Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) objective; • Relevant policy and guidance, and summary of how this guidance has been addressed; • Description of the receiving environment relevant to the factor; • Definition of potential direct and indirect and on the environmental values for this factor; • Assessment of the extent and significance of impacts to the environmental values of this factor; • Description of mitigation, including application of the mitigation hierarchy (i.e. avoid, minimise, rehabilitate and offset); and • Description of the predicted environmental outcome as assessed against the EPA objective for this factor. Other factors considered relevant, but unlikely to be significantly impacted, include (Section 9): • Social Surroundings; • Inland Waters; • Air Quality; and • Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The Proposal has been determined to be a “Controlled Action” under the EPBC Act. This referral also satisfies the requirements for an accredited assessment pursuant to the EPBC Act in the event that the EPA determines assessment is required. In the case of a ‘not assessed – managed under Part V’ decision, the NVCP process would be pursued as an accredited assessment. An assessment of potential significant impacts of the Proposal on MNES is provided in Section 10.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 21

6. Flora and Vegetation

6.1 EPA Objective The EPA’s objective for flora and vegetation is to ‘protect flora and vegetation so that biological diversity and ecological integrity are maintained’ (EPA 2020a). 6.2 Policy and Guidance The following policies and guidance are relevant to the flora and vegetation factor: • Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives (EPA 2020a). • Instructions on how to prepare an Environmental Review Document (EPA 2020b). • Instructions on how to prepare Environmental Protection Act 1986 Part IV Environmental Management Plans (EPA 2020c). • BC Act (2016). • Environmental Factor Guideline: Flora and Vegetation (EPA 2016a). • Technical Guidance: Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment (EPA 2016b). 6.2.1 Other policy and guidance Other policy and guidance relevant to flora and vegetation includes: • EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (DSEWPAC 2012b). • WA Environmental Offsets Policy (Government of Western Australia 2011). • WA Environmental Offsets Guidelines (Government of Western Australia 2014). 6.3 Receiving Environment 6.3.1 Studies and Investigations The flora and vegetation surveys (Level 1 and Level 2) undertaken within and adjacent to the Project DE (the Survey Area) is provided in Table 6.1. Table 6.1: Overview of Studies and Investigations Survey/Investigation Summary

UIL Energy Ocean Hill Lease Area Flora, Vegetation and A Level 2 conservation significant flora and vegetation survey Fauna Assessment by Ecologia Environment (2017). of approximately 200 km of linear seismic lines to support environmental approvals for 3D seismic surveys within the Ocean Hill Exploration Permit EP 495 area, located 250 km north of Perth along the Brand Highway between Eneabba and Hill River in the Midwest region of WA. This survey was undertaken within a previous project area and impacted different patches of native vegetation.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 22

Survey/Investigation Summary

Ocean Hill Pty Ltd (Strike Energy) Flora and Vegetation A desktop assessment and Level 2 flora and vegetation survey Survey Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey by Strategen-JBS&G of proposed seismic line corridors to support Strike Energy with (2021a). the required environmental approvals for the Project, including informing management and mitigation measures implemented in response to the potential interaction between the proposed works and the flora and vegetation values identified within an area of approximately 4, 600 ha within the Perth Basin, located 8 km east of Eneabba. The area which was the subject of the survey is hereafter referred to as the Ecological Survey Area.

The combined coverage of these surveys has enabled a detailed understanding of the existing flora and native vegetation, including Priority and Threatened conservation significant flora species. 6.3.1.1 Desktop Assessment

A total of 83 flora taxa of conservation significance were identified by database searches as potentially occurring within the Project DE (Appendix A).

Of these, 11 species are listed as Threatened under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act) and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The remaining 72 flora taxa identified are priority listed flora species under the Biodiversity and Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act): • Threatened flora - 11 taxa; • Priority 1 flora (P1) -1 taxa; • Priority 2 flora (P2) - 14 taxa; • Priority 3 flora (P3) - 36 taxa; and • Priority 4 flora (P4) - 21 taxa. Three species of Threatened Flora have previously been identified within the Project DE: • Eucalyptus subarea; • Hakea megalosperma; and • Thelymitra stellata. These taxa are known to occur on lateritic hills and breakaways, which are present within the Project DE. Table 6.2: Likelihood of Occurrence of Threatened Flora species Likelihood Taxon Habitat Flowering period of occurrence Banksia catoglypta Lateritic breakaways. June to July Likely Eucalyptus johnsoniana White/grey sand with lateritic gravel. Sandplains, July to August, Likely lateritic breakaways. October to December or January to May Eucalyptus lateritica White or grey sand with gravel. Lateritic August to Likely breakaways & mesas. October Eucalyptus leprophloia White or grey sand over August to Likely laterite. Valley slopes. October Eucalyptus suberea Grey sand. Near or on lateritic breakaways. November to Recorded December or January

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 23

Likelihood Taxon Habitat Flowering period of occurrence Gastrolobium hamulosum Sandy, often gravelly soils or clay. Flats, slopes, August to Likely ridges. October Hakea megalosperma Grey sand, loam. Lateritic hills & rocks. May to June Recorded Paracaleana dixonii Grey sand over granite. October to Likely December or January Petrophile nivea Dry bare white sand over May to July Likely gravel over laterite. Uplands. Tetratheca nephelioides White-grey sand, yellow-brown clayey sand, September Likely gravel, laterite. Outcrops, undulating hills, ridges. Thelymitra stellata Sand, gravel, lateritic loam. October to Recorded November Of the priority species returned from the database searches, 14 have been previously recorded within the Survey Area: • Priority 2: o Calectasia browneana; and o Petrophile clavate. • Priority 3: o Acacia epacantha; o Allocasuarina ramosissima; o Banksia fraseri var. crebra; o Drosera prophylla; o Hemiandra sp. Eneabba (H. Demarz 3687) (H. Demarz 3687) ; o Jacksonia anthoclada; o Persoonia filiformis; o Phlebocarya pilosissima subsp. pilosissima; and o Stylidium drummondianum. • Priority 4: o Calytrix chrysantha; o Calytrix eneabbensis; and o Grevillea rudis. Six Threatened Ecological Communities are known from the Geraldton Sandplains. All six communities occur on restricted landforms and are known to be locally restricted in their occurrences. These communities are described below. • Thetis-microbialite: Stromatolite community of stratified hypersaline coastal lakes: Lake Thetis contains a distinctive and diverse group of benthic microbial assemblages, each producing a mat that is associated with one specific zone within the lake. Crenulate cyanobacterial mats occur in the low-lying areas adjacent to the lake. Lithified stromatolites, resembling those at Shark Bay, with patches of living cyanobacterial mats and nodular mats characterize the littoral areas. Filamentous mats reside in cavities and coat the surface of the flocculant mat in the basin, a mobile diatomaceous mat occurs in the shallows, and thick

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 24

flocculant mats of phototrophic prokaryotes, other microbes and/or diatoms occur in the central basin. Lake Thetis differs from other coastal saline lakes because it has benthic microbial mats adjacent to the lithified stromatolites and well-developed flocculant mats in the basin. Under current conditions “microbial reef-forming” communities and flocculant mat communities are both scarce, and such strong joint development is unusual. Also, some stromatolites have branching columns which are rare in modern environments. There are only ephemeral lakes within the Survey Area and therefore this TEC does not occur within the Survey Area. • Greenough River Flats - Acacia rostellifera low forest with scattered Eucalyptus camaldulensis on Greenough Alluvial Flats: Front Flats - Acacia rostellifera and Melaleuca sp. thickets with scattered Eucalyptus camaldulensis over an understorey that includes Drosera bulbosa, Hypoxis glabella var. leptantha, Wurmbea densiflora, Wurmbea tubulosa, Marsilea drummondii, and Amphibromus nervosus. Back Flats - Acacia rostellifera thickets with scattered Eucalyptus camaldulensis, Eucalyptus loxophleba and Banksia sp. scrub over an understorey that includes Hypoxis glabella var. leptantha, Panicum decompositum, Rhodanthe chlorocephala, Schoenus verbena, Wurmbea monantha and Amphibromus nervosus. This community is only known from occurrences within the Shire of Greenough. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. • Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type): This tall shrubland is located on irregularly inundated red brown sandy loams over ferricrete dominated by Acacia blakelyi, Allocasuarina campestris, Banksia stricta and Labichea lanceolata subsp. lanceolata. Associated species include Alyogyne hakeifolia, Borya sphaerocephala, Isotoma hypocrateriformis, Petrophile seminuda, Stylidium dichotomum, Thysanotus patersonii and Waitzia paniculata. This community was identified by DBCA database searches as occurring to the east of the Project DE. The Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type) is largely defined by the combined presence of Acacia blakelyi, Banksia strictifolia (previously Dryandra stricta) and Labichea lanceolata subsp. lanceolata. Banksia strictifolia were not identified during field surveys. Based on the survey data and the floristic composition recorded, along with the absence of ferricrete identified in the soil sub-system mapping, it is considered unlikely that the Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type) occurs within the Survey Area . • Assemblages of organic mound springs of the Three Springs area: Description: This community is characterised by continuous discharge of groundwater in raised areas of peat. The community is reliant on the hydrological catchment of the Dandaragan Trough which contributes to the ‘artesian’ aquifer systems that feed the mound springs. Many moisture loving species are common to this community, including an overstorey of Melaleuca preissiana trees. Eucalyptus camaldulensis and E. rudis are also found in a number of the mound springs. The shrub layer often includes Hypocalymma angustifolium and Acacia saligna over Baumea vaginalis and other sedges, with the herbaceous Patersonia occidentalis (swamp variant) occurring at several mound springs. This community was identified by DBCA database searches as occurring to the east of the Project DE. The Dandaragan Trough does not extend westwards into the Survey Area except at the north-eastern corner of the Project DE, and no mound springs are known to occur within the Project DE.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 25

It is unlikely that the Assemblages of organic mound springs of the Three Springs area floristic community (Rocky Springs type) occurs within the Survey Area. • Lesueur-Coomallo Floristic Community D1: Description: This community comprises a species- rich low heath, on moderately to well-drained lateritic gravels on lower slopes and low rises, dominated by Allocasuarina microstachya with A. ramosissima, A. humilis, Baeckea grandiflora, Borya nitida, Calytrix flavescens, Calothamnus sanguineous, Conostylis androstemma, Cryptandra pungens, Dryandra armata, Gastrolobium polystachyum, Hakea auriculata, H. incrassata, H. aff. erinacea, Hibbertia hypericoides, Hypocalymma xanthopetalum, Melaleuca trichophylla, Petrophile chrysantha, Schoenus subflavus and Xanthorrhoea drummondii. This community is restricted to the lower slopes and low rises of the Banovich Uplands which do not occur within or adjacent to the Survey Area. In addition, this community is only known from one 0.1 ha occurrence on private freehold land immediately adjacent (south) to Lesueur National Park in the Shire of Dandaragan. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. • Lesueur-Coomallo Floristic Community A1.2: Description: Species-rich heath with emergent Hakea obliqua on sand with faithful species of Hakea obliqua and Beaufortia aff. elegans and constant species of Dasypogon bromeliifolius and Stirlingia latifolia over well-drained grey sand over pale yellow sand on lateritic uplands. Associated species include Allocasuarina humilis, Calothamnus sanguineous, Hibbertia hypericoides, Hypocalymma xanthopetalum and Schoenus subflavus. This community is restricted to the lower slopes and low rises of the Banovich Uplands which do not occur within or adjacent to the Survey Area. In addition, is known only from one 31 ha occurrence within Lesueur National Park. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the survey area. The Critically Endangered TEC Eucalypt Woodlands of the Western Australian Wheatbelt was identified by the Commonwealth PMST database search, however, the diagnostic criteria for this community specify that it only occurs in other IBRA regions. Several Priority Ecological Communities are known to occur in the Geraldton Sandplains. All seven communities occur on restricted landforms and are known to be locally restricted in their occurrences. These communities are described below. • Lesueur-Coomallo Floristic Community M2 (Melaleuca preissiana woodland): Woodland dominated by Melaleuca preissiana along sandy drainage lines, with faithful species of Anigozanthos pulcherrimus and constant species of Chamaescilla corymbosa, Petrophile brevifolia and Xanthorrhoea reflexa. While ephemeral drainage lines are known to occur within the project area, the above species composition does not occur. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. • Lesueur-Coomallo Floristic Community DFGH: Mixed species-rich heath on lateritic gravel with Hakea erinacea, Melaleuca platycalyx and Petrophile seminuda: a fine scale mixture of four floristically-defined communities occurring on lateritic slopes. This community is restricted to the lower slopes and low rises of the Banovich Uplands which do not occur within or adjacent to the Survey Area. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. • Coastal sands dominated by Acacia rostellifera, Eucalyptus oraria and Eucalyptus obtusiflora: Floristically, this community is similar to other Acacia rostellifera communities

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 26

but is differentiated on structure, being dominated by mallee eucalypts. The community occurs on limestone ridges, in some swales in the coastal dunes between Cape Burney and Dongara, on the Greenough Alluvial Flats on limestone soil and near Tarcoola Beach. Some very small occurrences have also been recorded on the limestone scarp north of the Buller River. Coastal sands are not present within the Survey Area. As such this community is not considered to occur with the Survey Area. • Petrophile chrysantha low heath on Lesueur dissected uplands (Gp200-170): Low heath dominated by Petrophile chrysantha on Lesueur Dissected Uplands. Associated species include Dryandra armata and Hakea undulata. Petrophile chrysantha, Banksia armata and Hakea undulata were not identified as occurring within 20 km of the survey area during the NatureMap database search. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. • Subtropical and Temperate Coastal Saltmarsh: Consists of the assemblage of plants, animals and micro-organisms associated with saltmarsh in coastal regions of sub-tropical and temperate Australia (south of 23°S latitude). The habitat is coastal areas under tidal influence. The Survey Area is not located within a coastal region. Given this, this community is not considered to occur within the Survey Area. 6.3.2 Climate The Lesueur Sandplain has a dry warm Mediterranean climate with warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters, but 7-8 dry months per year. The nearest weather station which records both temperature and rainfall data relevant to the area was the Carnamah (Station 008278) which operated from 1937- present. The average annual rainfall during this period was 367.7 mm, with the highest monthly rainfall occurring from June to August (Figure 6.1). The average monthly maximum temperature ranges from 18.0°C in July to 36.1°C in January. Average monthly minimum temperatures range from 7.3°C in July and August to 19.2°C in February. Total winter rainfall (June to August) in the months preceding the 2020 survey was approximately 70 mm less than the long-term average.

140 40

120 35 30

100 C) 25 ° 80 20 60

15 Rainfall (mm)

40 Temperature ( 10

20 5

0 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Mean rainfall Rainfall 2020 Mean Max Temp Mean Min Temp

Figure 6.1: Climate statistics for the survey area, Mean annual rainfall and monthly averages for 2020 (BoM 2020)

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 27

6.3.3 Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia The Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA) (Thackway & Cresswell 1995) divides WA into 26 biogeographic regions and 53 subregions based on dominant landscape characteristics of climate, lithology, geology, landform and vegetation. The Proposal is situated within the Geraldton Sandplains bioregion, specifically, the Lesueur Sandplain subregion covering a total area of approximately 1,358,915 ha. The Geraldton Sandplains bioregion is composed mainly of proteaceous scrub-heaths, rich in endemics, on the sandy earths of an extensive, undulating, lateritic sandplain (Desmond & Chant 2001). More specifically, the Lesueur Sandplain subregion comprises aeolian limestones, Jurassic siltstones and sandstones of central Perth Basin. Alluvials are associated with drainage systems and there are extensive yellow sandplains in southeastern parts. Shrub-heaths rich in endemics occur on a mosaic of lateritic mesas, sandplains, coastal sands, and limestones and heath on lateritised sandplains along the subregions north-eastern margins (Desmond & Chant 2001). 6.3.4 Geology, Land Systems and Soils 6.3.4.1 Geology The Perth Basin is an onshore and offshore sedimentary basin that extends approximately 1,300 km along the southwestern margin of the Australian continent. The basin formed during the separation of the Australian and Great Indian plates in the Permian to early Cretaceous (Geoscience 2020). The basin is structurally complex because of rifting between the Permian and Cretaceous periods. The basin comprises sandstones, siltstones, shales, and limestones which are sources and reservoirs of the oil and gas reserves being explored by Strike Energy. 6.3.4.2 Land systems and Soils Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development (DPIRD) has mapped and described the land systems of WA rangelands, providing comprehensive description of biophysical resources, including soil and vegetation condition (Figure 6.2). The Project DE is located in the Greenough Province soil‐landscape zone (Tille 2006). This zone occupies approximately 1.2% of WA (30,150 km2) and is primarily an agricultural zone. It comprises a laterised plateau, which is dissected at the fringes, over sedimentary rocks of the Perth Basin and gneiss of the Northampton Complex (Tille 2006). Gently undulating plateau surfaces formed on laterite include extensive sandplain development. The soils of the region are classified as yellow deep sands, pale deep sands and some gravelly pale deep sands, with red‐brown hardpan shallow loams (Tille 2006). The Project DE is located entirely within the soil type, Wd9, as classified by the Atlas of Australian Soils. The soil type Wd9 is described as broad valleys with some discontinuous valleys. The Project DE lies within the Arrowsmith Region. The Arrowsmith Region occurs between the Swan Coastal Plain and Dandaragan Plateau, intersecting the eastern edge of the Development. This region is bounded between the Dandaragan Scarp and Gingin Scarp and is to the east and south of the Eneabba area. The Arrowsmith Region is an undulating sandy region with laterite breakaways occurring at the crest of hills and is much more dissected than the Dandaragan Plateau, with surface drainage generally ephemeral, terminating in lakes and swamps on the Swan Coastal Plain. The Proposal will not result in significant clearing or disturbance to soils. 6.3.4.3 Acid Sulfate Soils Acid Sulfate Soils (ASS) are naturally occurring, iron-sulphide rich soils, sediments, or organic substrates, formed under waterlogged conditions. If and when exposed to air, these sulphides can oxidise and release sulphuric acid. The acid in turn may mobilise heavy metals (which are more soluble

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 28

when the pH is low). This process can occur due to drainage, dewatering or excavation for construction. A review of the Australian Soil Resources Inquiry System database indicated that the mapped risks of ASS within the Project Area is ‘Extremely Low Probability/Very Low’.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 29 MOUNT ADAMS SYSTEM

CORREY SYSTEM

ENEABBA PLAIN SYSTEM

COALARA SYSTEM

YERRAMULLAH SYSTEM

BOOTHENDARRA SYSTEM

MINTAJA HILLS SYSTEM

Legend 01.53Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers Land Systems Boothendarra System Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z LAND SYSTEMS Coalara System Correy System Job No: 58224 Eneabba Plain System Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.2 Mintaja Hills System Mount Adams System Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021 Yerramullah System Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: W:\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_Landsystems.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

6.3.5 Vegetation Associations Beard (1976) described and mapped Vegetation System Associations (VSA) of WA, at a scale of 1 : 300,000. One vegetation system (Tathra) and three vegetation associations occur within the Project DE, which is outlined in Table 6.3 and shown in Figure 6.3. Association 379 occurs predominantly in the southern portion of the Project DE and consists primarily of a Banksia mixed open woodland or Allocasuarina mixed shrubland over Anigozanthos mixed open Forbland. In the northern and central portions of the Project DE, Association 379 occurs as a mosaic with Association 49 which consists primarily as a Hakea heath of Hakea auriculata, Allocasuarina humilis, and Dryandra fraseri. Small areas of Association 391 are present along surface water features at the north eastern section of the Project DE. Table 6.3: Vegetation System Associations within the Project DE Pre-European Current Extent (ha) Extent System Association 1 Extent (ha) (March 2019) Remaining (%) 49: Shrublands; mixed composition. 33,139.33 13,618.88 41.10 379: Shrublands; scrub-heath on lateritic sandplain in the central Geraldton 369585.36 111607.21 30.23 Tathra Sandplain Region. 391: Casuarina sp. and teatree Acacia 3063.14 1622.19 52.96 Allocasuarina Melaleuca alliance. 1 Statewide Vegetation Statistics 2018 Simplified Report (DBCA 2019), Extent within Lesueur Sandplain 6.3.6 Vegetation Types Seven Vegetation Types (VT) were mapped (Strategen-JBS&G 2021) in areas of native vegetation within the Project DE within which some clearing is required (i.e. the Ecological Survey Area) (Table 6.4 and Figure 6.4). Table 6.4: Vegetation Types mapped within the Disturbance Footprint (Strategen JBS&G 2021) Code Description Area (ha) Proportion (%) Mid to low shrubland to open shrubland typically dominated by Banksia attenuata and/or Allocasuarina humilis with mixed Proteaceous and BaAh Myrtaceous low shrubs (typically Banksia carlinoides, Banksia candolleana, 1976.44 43 Beaufortia elegans, and Melaleuca leuropoma) over Ecdeiocolea monostachya and/or Mesomelaena pseudostygia sparse sedgeland. Banksia glaucifolia and Banksia kippistiana var. kippistiana low shrubland BgBk 371.24 8 to open shrubland over Mesomelaena spp. Sparse sedgeland. Cl Calothamnus longissimus low shrubland. 43.97 1 Eucalyptus rudis open woodland over Acacia saligna and Melaleuca Er 1.47 0 rhaphiophylla tall shrubland. Eucalyptus todtiana open mallee woodland to isolated mallee trees over mixed proteaceous and myrtaceous low shrubland to open shrubland (typically dominated by Allocasuarina humilis, Banksia attenuata, Banksia candolleana, Banksia kippistiana var. kippistiana, Eremaea violacea, Et Hibbertia hypericoides, Lambertia multiflora, Beaufortia elegans, 1871.17 41 Melaleuca leuropoma, Melaleuca trichophylla, and Xylomelum angustifolium) over Mesomelaena pseudostygia sparse sedgeland. Patches of Eucalyptus conveniens, E. drummondii, E. gittinsii and E. macrocarpa occur within this unit. Hakea psilorrhyncha and Scholtzia sp. Tall open shrubland with isolated Hp 26.45 1 Eucalyptus todtiana. Melaleuca rhaphiophylla tall shrubland with patches of Acacia blakelyi and Mr 73.48 2 Acacia saligna tall open shrubland. Cleared Cleared or cropped land 242.31 5 Total Native Vegetation 4606.54 100

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 31 Legend 01.53Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers Pre-European vegetation (DPIRD) REGIONAL VEGETATION MAPPING Erindoon 378 Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z (BEARD 1981) Gairdner 1032 Le Sueur 1031 Job No: 58224 Tathra 379 Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.3 Tathra 391 Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021 Tathra 392 Tathra 49 Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: W:\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_RegVeg.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Legend 01.53Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Vegetation type Kilometers Highways BaAh Main road BgBk Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z VEGETATION TYPE Minor road Cl Job No: 58224 Track Er Et Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.4 Hp Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021 Mr Cleared Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: W:\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_VegType.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

6.3.7 National Parks and Nature Reserves There are no DBCA managed reserves within the Project DE. Reserves in proximity to the Project DE include: • South Eneabba Nature Reserve (3.2 km west); • Un-named Nature Reserve R 46713 9 (2 km west); • White Gums Nature Reserve (4.7 km north); and • Tathra National Park (8 km east). The Proposal will not impact on these reserves. 6.3.8 Vegetation Condition Vegetation condition is described using the vegetation condition scale presented in Environmental Protection Authority Technical Guidance: Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment (EPA 2016), as shown in Table 6.5. Table 6.5: Vegetation Condition Scale for the Southwest and Interzone Botanical Provinces Condition Ranking Description Pristine or nearly so, no obvious signs of disturbance or damage caused by human activities Pristine since European settlement. Vegetation structure intact, disturbance affecting individual species and weeds are Excellent nonaggressive species. Damage to trees caused by fire, the presence of non-aggressive weeds and occasional vehicle tracks. Vegetation structure altered, obvious signs of disturbance. Disturbance to vegetation Very Good structure caused by repeated fires, the presence of some more aggressive weeds, Dieback, logging, and grazing. Vegetation structure significantly altered by obvious signs of multiple disturbances. Retains basic vegetation structure or ability to regenerate it. Disturbance to vegetation structure Good caused by very frequent fires, the presence of very aggressive weeds, partial clearing, Dieback, and grazing. Basic vegetation structure severely impacted by disturbance. Scope for regeneration but not to a state approaching good condition without intensive management. Disturbance to Degraded vegetation structure caused by very frequent fires, the presence of very aggressive weeds at high density, partial clearing, Dieback, and grazing. The structure of the vegetation is no longer intact, and the area is completely or almost Completely Degraded completely without native species. These areas are often described as 'parkland cleared' with the flora comprising weed or crop species with isolated native trees and shrubs.

Approximately 90% of native vegetation within the Ecological Survey Area has been mapped as ‘Excellent to Pristine’ (Strategen-JBS&G 2021a) (Table 6.6; Figure 6.5). Table 6.6: Vegetation Condition Condition Area (ha) Proportion (%) Pristine/Excellent 4224.69 92% Very Good/Excellent 107.14 2% Very Good 13.16 0% Completely Degraded 19.23 0% No Vegetation/Unsurveyed 242.31 5% Grand Total 4606.54 100%

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 34 Legend 01.53Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Vegetation condition Kilometers Highways Excellent-pristine Main road Excellent Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z VEGETATION CONDITION Minor road Very good Job No: 58224 Track Degraded-good No vegetation Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.5

Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: W:\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_VegCond.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

6.3.9 Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities The Project DE occurs within the buffer of the following TECs (Figure 6.6): • Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type); and • Assemblages of organic mound springs of the Three Springs area. The likelihood of occurrence for these two (2) communities is discussed below. The remaining communities returned from the desktop assessment were considered unlikely to occur within the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021a). 6.3.9.1 Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type) This tall shrubland is located on irregularly inundated red brown sandy loams over ferricrete dominated by Acacia blakelyi, Allocasuarina campestris, Banksia stricta and Labichea lanceolata subsp. lanceolata. Associated species include Alyogyne hakeifolia, Borya sphaerocephala, Isotoma hypocrateriformis, Petrophile seminuda, Stylidium dichotomum, Thysanotus patersonii and Waitzia paniculata (Strategen-JBS&G 2021) . This community was identified by DBCA database searches as occurring to the east of the Project DE. The Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type) is largely defined by the combined presence of Acacia blakelyi, Banksia strictifolia (previously Dryandra stricta) and Labichea lanceolata subsp. lanceolata. Banksia strictifolia were not identified during field surveys (Strategen-JBS&G 2021). Based on the survey data and the floristic composition recorded, along with the absence of ferricrete identified in the soil sub-system mapping, it is considered unlikely that the Ferricrete floristic community (Rocky Springs type) occurs within the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021). 6.3.9.2 Assemblages of organic mound springs of the Three Springs area mound springs of the Three Springs area floristic community (Rocky Springs type) Description: This community is characterised by continuous discharge of groundwater in raised areas of peat. The community is reliant on the hydrological catchment of the Dandaragan Trough which contributes to the ‘artesian’ aquifer systems that feed the mound springs. Many moisture loving species are common to this community, including an overstorey of Melaleuca preissiana trees. Eucalyptus camaldulensis and E. rudis are also found in a number of the mound springs. The shrub layer often includes Hypocalymma angustifolium and Acacia saligna over Baumea vaginalis and other sedges, with the herbaceous Patersonia occidentalis (swamp variant) occurring at several mound springs (Strategen- JBS&G 2021). This community was identified by DBCA database searches as occurring to the east of the Project DE. The Dandaragan Trough does not extend westwards into the Survey Area except at the north-eastern corner of the Project DE, and no mound springs are known to occur within the Project DE (Strategen- JBS&G 2021). It is unlikely that this assemblage occurs within the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021). 6.3.10 Priority Ecological Communities Several Priority Ecological Communities are also known to occur in the Geraldton Sandplains. As with the TECs, all occur on restricted landforms and are known to be locally restricted. The likelihood of occurrence of these communities was undertaken and none were considered likely to be present within the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021).

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 36 Legend 02.55Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:250,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers Threatened Ecological Communities (DBCA-038) Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z THREATENED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES Priority Threatened Job No: 58224

Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.6

Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: W:\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_DBCATECPEC.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community LANDGATE/SLIP

6.3.11 Conservation Significant Flora No Threatened flora species listed under the EPBC Act were recorded with the Project DE in either the 2016 or 2020 survey.

Fifteen (15) Priority flora species recorded within the 2020 Ecological Survey Area (Table 6.7; Figure 6.7) and two other species that have affinities to Priority listed flora; however, it was not possible to identify with current taxonomic data. Table 6.7: Conservation Significant Flora in the Ecological Survey Area (Strategen-JBS&G 2021) Taxon Conservation Status Number Verticordia luteola var. rosea P1 5 Persoonia filiformis P2 4 Allocasuarina ramosissima P3 360 Banksia fraseri var crebra P3 164 Jacksonia anthoclada P3 126 Persoonia rudis P3 1 Phlebocarya pilosissima subsp. pilosissima P3 28 Stylidium ?hymenocraspedum P3 1 Verticordia fragrans P3 3 Hemiandra sp. Eneabba (H. Demarz 3687) P3 163 Banksia chamaephyton P4 105 Calytrix chrysantha P4 1825 Calytrix eneabbensis P4 84 Eremaea acutifolia P4 6 Verticordia aurea P4 18 Hemiandra aff. sp. Eneabba (H. Demarz 3687) Other 9 Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Bellairs 1505) Other 89

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 38 #

# #

# ! # # ! ! ! !!

! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !#! ! ! #### ! #### ### # ! ! # ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! #

## ## # # # ## # # # # # # ## ## # # #

Legend Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:47,500 at A4 00.51 Development Envelope Kilometers Clearing Footprint Disturbance Footprint Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z KEY PRIORITY FLORA Conservation significant flora # Banksia chamaephyton Job No: 58224 ! Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 6.7 Bellairs 1505) Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: \\008PMPMR004V001.jbsg.aust\JBS Perth\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_PFlora.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

6.3.12 Weeds A total of 7 introduced (exotic) taxa were recorded within the Ecological Survey Area, as follows: • Briza maxima; • Cotula coronopifolia; • Ehrharta calycina; • Lolium sp.; • Polypogon monspeliensis; • Sonchus oleraceus; and • Ursinia anthemoides. 6.4 Potential Impacts The Proposal will result in the direct disturbance (via mulching) to approximately 113.52 ha of native vegetation; and may impact individuals of up to 15 Priority flora taxa. The Proposal may also result in indirect impacts on flora and vegetation, including:

• Damage or loss of surrounding vegetation through accidental bushfires;

• Fragmentation of native vegetation; and • Introduction and/or spread of weeds or Dieback to surrounding vegetation 6.5 Assessment of Impacts 6.5.1 Direct Impacts 6.5.1.1 Vegetation The Proposal requires clearing of up to 113.52 ha of native vegetation within the Project DE. The Disturbance Footprint has been planned around: • Maintaining and using existing cleared areas, access tracks/firebreaks where possible to reduce the extent of native vegetation to be cleared; and • Avoiding where possible, and minimising impacts to recorded locations of conservation significant flora species. No TECs and/or PECs occur within the Project DE. On a regional scale, the Proposal temporarily impacts two (2) land systems (Boothendarra and Yerramullah) (Table 6.8) and two (2) Beard (1976) vegetation associations (Tathra 49 and 379) (Table 6.9). Table 6.8: Land System(s) impacted by the Proposal System Extent Remaining (ha) Impact (ha) Impact (%)

Boothendarra 13,764 0.71 0.01

Yerramullah 129,586 112.81 0.09

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 40

Table 6.9: Vegetation System Association(s) impacted by the Proposal System Extent Remaining (ha) Impact (ha) Impact (%) Tathra 49 3,847.02 19.10 0.50 Tathra 379 24,214.01 94.42 0.39

Seven (7) Vegetation Types (VT) have been mapped within the Disturbance Footprint. The extent of impact on mapped vegetation types is shown in Table 6.10. All these vegetation types are known to extend within and beyond the Project DE. It is unlikely that the Proposal would significantly reduce the local occurrence of these vegetation types. Table 6.10: Impacts to Vegetation Types Code Extent in Disturbance Footprint Extent in Clearing Footprint Impact (%) BaAh 1976.07 54.71 2.77 BgBk 371.17 8.06 2.17 Cl 43.96 0.67 1.52 Er 1.47 0.05 3.52 Et 1870.82 47.90 2.56 Hp 26.45 0.43 1.61 Mr 73.47 1.29 1.75 6.5.1.2 Conservation Significant Flora The impact to conservation significant species has been reduced to As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) via changes the design of the Proposal to avoid these species where possible such that the impact is limited to the taxa as shown in Table 6.11. Table 6.11: Impacts to Conservation Significant Flora Number of Individuals Taxa Impact (%) Disturbance Footprint Clearing Footprint Banksia chamaephyton (P4) 105 31 29.52 Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Bellairs 1505) (Other 4.49 species of interest) 89 4 6.5.2 Indirect Impacts 6.5.2.1 Fragmentation The clearing of native vegetation for the Proposal has the potential to result in the fragmentation of vegetation. It is considered that the temporary, narrow (3.5 m wide) and linear nature of the clearings are not sufficient to cause significant, permanent fragmentation of the remnant native vegetation. No significant trees (with a diameter of more than 100 mm) will be cleared. Vegetation along prepared seismic lines in native vegetation will be allowed to regenerate following the completion of seismic acquisition activities. 6.5.2.2 Spread of Weeds or Phytophthora Dieback The clearing of native vegetation, vehicle and machinery movements have the potential to increase the spread and/or introduce weeds and/or Dieback. • Weeds are often able to rapidly invade locations due to disturbance, land clearing and/or altered hydrological regimes. • Dieback is caused by the pathogenic fungus Phytophthora cinnamomii which kills susceptible plants, such as Banksia spp. and Jarrah, by invading their root systems. The fungus is spread

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 41

through the movement of soil and mud, especially by vehicles and footwear. It also moves in free water and via root-to root contact between plants. The Proponent has an established dieback and weed management plan relating to all of its seismic activities within the Perth Basin (Appendix B) to reduce the risk of Dieback spread, existing weeds being spread and/or new weeds being introduced as a result of petroleum exploration activities. An overview of these measures is provided in Table 6.12. Table 6.12: Hygiene Management and Mitigation Measures Dieback Hygiene Management and Mitigation Measures General Hygiene Requirements Signage consistent with the Western Australian Standard Dieback Signage System will be erected at the entry to the Project DE and access points between each dieback management area. Employee, contractor and sub-contractor inductions will include a component on Dieback. The component will include information on hygiene control points and facilities, restrictions on movement throughout the Project DE and the obligations and expectations that are placed on all employees, contractors and sub- contractors working on the project with regards to Dieback. Toolbox meetings will include information on the location of the hygiene control points in relation to the day’s activities. All machinery, vehicles and equipment and personnel will be clean and free from dirt and plant material upon arrival at the Project DE. Records of hygiene inspections will be maintained within the Hygiene Register. Soil and plant material should not be brought into the project area unless it is certified as Dieback-free. Soil and plant material will not be moved from one Dieback management area to another unless it is verified as Dieback-free or private landowner consent has been granted. Hygiene Facilities Mobile hygiene facilities will be installed at strategic hygiene control points, prior to site activities in that area. Hygiene Kits Vehicle movement will be limited within protectable native vegetation during and immediately after heavy rainfall events. Soil conditions are considered to be dry if less than 5 mm of rain has fallen in the previous 24-hour period. Except where machinery, vehicles and equipment will have to pass through a hygiene station prior to entry to a Protectable area, they will carry a hygiene kit, which includes as a minimum: a stiff brush; sterilising solution (i.e. methylated spirits or sodium hypochlorite solution); a thick-walled plastic bag to dispose of contaminated soil/plant material; a small amount of water (less than 3 L); and Hygiene Inspection Forms. Hygiene kits to be used on encountering wet soils (as determined by a soil moisture test) or when unavoidable movement between the unmappable and protectable areas occurs outside of the designated hygiene control points. All soil and plant material will be collected and disposed of at the hygiene control points. Each time the hygiene kits are used a Hygiene Inspection Form will be filled in, the forms will be retained for reporting purposes and a database will be maintained. Monitoring Dieback monitoring will be undertaken annually (in Spring) for two years following completion of project activities in conjunction with the project rehabilitation monitoring. Weed Hygiene Management and Mitigation Measures Weed Monitoring Monitoring of weeds within remnant native vegetation will be undertaken annually for a minimum of two years following the completion of the Proposal activities and until monitoring demonstrates the weed rehabilitation criteria have been met. A qualified botanist and/or a certified environmental officer will undertake the weed monitoring. Weed records will be maintained. Records will detail the identification and location of weed species, the date of the record and management measures that have been implemented, including follow-up monitoring. Weed Control Weed control will be undertaken on an as needs basis (in accordance with recommendations made in the annual monitoring reports) by an suitably qualified, and experienced contractor, at the discretion of the Strike Energy Asset and HSE Manager.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 42

Dieback Hygiene Management and Mitigation Measures Weed control within remnant vegetation on Unallocated Crown Land (UCL) will continue until completion of the rehabilitation activities. Weed control within adjacent remnant vegetation on UCL will be undertaken in accordance with guidelines available from DPIRD. Any weed control measures and timing within freehold land will be negotiated between property owners, the Strike Energy Asset and HSE Manager and the Stakeholder Liaison Group, taking into account landholder requirements. 6.5.2.3 Dust Excessive dust deposition on vegetation foliage has the potential to affect vegetation health and condition. Dust will be generated during native vegetation clearing and from vehicle movements along seismic lines. Line preparation and seismic acquisition activities will be undertaken over a short term period (i.e. 10 - 12 weeks) and dust impacts are therefore considered temporary and likely to be highly localised. Dust mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce impacts to surrounding native vegetation. Measures will include: • Reducing speed limits. • Vehicle and machinery movements to be restricted within the Project DE. • All personnel instructed on vehicle speeds on access roads and within operational areas and dust control measures, via inductions. The above measures are expected to effectively manage dust generation from Proposal activities and therefore mitigate the risk of impacts to surrounding vegetation from dust. 6.5.2.4 Bushfire Combustion engines of vehicles have the potential to result in a bushfire that could cause widespread damage and loss of native vegetation and flora. Several mitigation measures will be implemented in relation to minimising bushfire risk, including: • Adherence to bushfire regulations and fire ban restrictions. • Ensuring activities are conducted in accordance with relevant restrictions (local and/or state), notifications and permitting procedures, such as: o Local fire authorities to be consulted prior to and during operations all plant and equipment to comply to fire safety standards; o Appropriate, maintained firefighting equipment available; o Designated smoking areas; and o Selected personnel trained in responding to fires. • Personnel to be appropriately trained in how to prevent and respond to fires. These measures are expected to effectively mitigate bushfire risks during Proposal activities. 6.5.3 Cumulative Impacts This project has not been considered in the context of the cumulative assessment of vegetation disturbance in the region, as disturbance for seismic activities occurs via mulching to increase the success of natural regeneration and therefore the impacts from these seismic acquisition surveys are considered temporary. Such activities also include Proponent commitments to monitor vegetation

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 43

recovery against completion criteria and implementation of appropriate management actions in the event completion criteria are not achieved within a reasonable timeframe. The monitoring of rehabilitation is a requirement of the PGER Act Environment Plan, for which compliance is managed by DMIRS. 6.6 Rehabilitation Following the completion of Proposal activities, all areas of native vegetation cleared as a result of the Project DEs will be allowed to naturally regenerate to pre-disturbance conditions. Strike Energy will monitor rehabilitation of areas return to a composition and structure that is comparable to their pre- disturbance state, in accordance with completion criteria approved via the PGER Act Environment Plan as assessed by DMIRS. Monitoring will commence one month after the completion of the Proposal with a particular focus on third party access issues and the introduction/increase of weeds. The program will then continue annually between September and November for two years or until monitoring demonstrates rehabilitation completion criteria have been met (

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 44

Table 6.14). A paired transect design will be implemented to enable comparison of vegetation recovery with undisturbed vegetation. A photo monitoring point will be established along each transect. The attributes that will be assessed in each quadrat are summarised in Table 6.13. Monitoring will be assessed against the rehabilitation completion indicators outlined in Table 6.14. The final completion criteria will be determined in consultation with relevant stakeholders in the areas in which clearing has occurred. Table 6.13: Data Collected at Each Quadrat Parameter Field Type Information Transect No. / Analogue sites - labelled A or Rehabilitation sites – labelled R Quadrat ID (rehabilitation) - Q # (Quadrat number) Date dd/mm/yyyy of monitoring Easting Easting (m) of midpoint set in Zone 50; waypoint recorded on a GPS Northing Northing (m) of midpoint set in Zone 50; waypoint recorded on a GPS Percentage of bare (exposed) ground from the following options: Bare ground 0, 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 Total plant cover Percentage plant cover (all species within quadrat) Notes Any notes not specified in prescribed fields, such as disturbances Plant species Name of each species present in the quadrat Dieback Health of indicator species (where present) Keystone species1 Species name and density Height Height Number (integer) Most commonly observed height of a plant species (cm) Life form Life form Text Indicates whether the taxon is an annual species Percentage cover of single Percentage plant cover species Number of individuals2 Count of individuals. If too abundant, estimate to nearest round tens 1 The keystone species assessment will compare the densities of the three most dominant taxa in the control transect with their densities in the rehabilitation transect. 2 Data collected electronically in field using tablet for later extraction and reporting as sub-table.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 45

Table 6.14: Rehabilitation Completion Indicators Aspect Indicator Completion criteria Weeds Statistical change in species To be determined in consultation with relevant stakeholders Dieback Health of indicator species and approved via PGER Act Environment Plan as assessed by DMRIS. Species composition Species richness Total native vegetation % Cover Erosion Visual erosion If after two years, the completion criteria have not been achieved, the following management actions will be implemented and described in the monitoring report: • Review of data to determine likely reasons for rehabilitation not meeting criteria; • Determine environmental significance of rehabilitation progress not meeting criteria; • Determine if any remedial actions are needed; • Implement remedial actions if needed; and • Continue monitoring until such time as the completion criteria have been met and accepted. Remedial actions in the event that rehabilitation criteria have not been met after 2 years, such as weeds or dieback found to have spread as a result of Proposal activities, will be determined on a case by case basis (e.g. weed spraying or Dieback monitoring and management on advice of DBCA). 6.7 Mitigation The Proponent has applied the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimise, and rehabilitate) to reduce the potential impacts of the Proposal on flora and vegetation. An overview of the mitigation measures applied by the Proponent are provided in Table 6.15. Table 6.15: Flora and Vegetation - Mitigation Potential impact Avoidance Minimisation Rehabilitation

Loss of flora and Clearing of flora and native Previously cleared areas have Disturbed area of native vegetation vegetation cannot be avoided been used to minimise the vegetation will recover in implementing the Proposal. clearing of native vegetation following completion the required. seismic acquisition survey. The Disturbance Footprint has been located to avoid native All ground disturbance, vegetation and mapped construction and operational locations of conservation activities will be completed in significant flora to the extent accordance with a Department possible. A number of of Mines, Industry Regulation threatened flora are associated and Safety (DMIRS) with ridge features, which have environment plan, as required been avoided through design under the Petroleum and of the Proposal. Geothermal Energy Resources Act (PGER) and environmental regulations

Fragmentation Fragmentation of native Existing access tracks and other Disturbed area of native vegetation cannot be avoided cleared areas have been used vegetation will recover in implementing the Proposal. where possible to minimise the following completion the extent of vegetation clearing seismic acquisition survey. required. The maximum width of clearing lines is 3.5 m.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 46

Potential impact Avoidance Minimisation Rehabilitation

Introduction or spread Only certified clean equipment Strict hygiene measures will be Weeds will be monitored of weeds/Dieback and materials will be used for implemented to minimise the during rehabilitation activities construction of the Proposal. risk of introducing or spreading and weed control will be weeds or Dieback (refer to implemented where required. Section 6.5.2.2).

Dust impacts Generation of dust during Clearing will occur via mulching Disturbed area of native construction of the Proposal to retain root stock and vegetation will recover cannot be avoided. minimise topsoil disturbance. following completion the seismic acquisition survey. The Proposal is of short duration (i.e. 10 - 12 weeks).

Bushfire Risk Vehicle and equipment access All machinery and vehicles Not applicable. will be restricted to designated undertaking clearing activities roads/tracks and cleared areas. will have fire extinguishers. The Proponent will also implement DFES alerts regarding fire ban measures to minimise the risk days will be monitored during of fires as outlined in high risk activities. Section 6.5.2.4.

6.8 Predicted Outcome After the application of the mitigation hierarchy, the Proposal is predicted to result in the following outcomes in relation to flora and vegetation: • Clearing 113.52 ha of native vegetation within a 28,203.54 ha Project DE, all of which is temporary (and will be allowed to recover). • Two conservation significant taxa will be impacted: o Banksia chamaephyton (P4); and o Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Bellairs 1505) (Other species of interest)’ at up to 29.52% and 4.49% of the recorded population within the Project DE respectively. These taxa will continue to exist in the surrounding vegetation and more broadly in the region; therefore, no significant residual impacts are predicted either locally or cumulatively in the region. • No Threatened and/or Priority 1, 2 or 3 species will be impacted. • No impact to any listed TECs or PECs. In consideration of the application of the mitigation hierarchy and the residual impacts to conservation significant flora and vegetation, the Proponent considers that impacts from the Proposal can be managed to meet the EPA’s objective. Strike Energy considers that impacts to flora and vegetation resulting from the Proposal can be adequately assessed under the NVCP and DMIRS processes (refer to Section 13).

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 47

7. Terrestrial Fauna

7.1 EPA objective The EPA’s objective for terrestrial fauna is to ‘protect terrestrial fauna so that biological diversity and ecological integrity are maintained’ (EPA 2020c). 7.2 Policy and guidance 7.2.1 EPA policy and guidance The following EPA Technical Guidance documents are relevant to the terrestrial fauna factor: • Instructions on how to prepare an Environmental Review Document (EPA 2020a). • Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives (EPA 2020c). • BC Act. • Environmental Factor Guideline – Terrestrial Fauna (EPA 2016c). • Technical Guidance: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys for environmental impact assessment (EPA 2020e). • Technical Guidance: Sampling Methods for Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna (EPA 2016e). • Technical Guidance: Sampling Methods for Short Range Endemic Invertebrate Fauna (EPA 2016f). 7.2.2 Other policy and guidance Other policy and guidance relevant to terrestrial fauna includes: • EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy (DSEWPAC 2012b). • Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened birds (Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA 2010a). • WA Environmental Offsets Policy (Government of Western Australia 2011). • WA Environmental Offsets Guidelines (Government of Western Australia 2014). 7.3 Receiving Environment 7.3.1 Previous Studies The fauna habitat values in the Project DE are well understood. Relevant terrestrial fauna surveys undertaken in areas that intersect the Project DE are identified in Table 7.1. Table 7.1: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys Contractor Survey Type UIL Energy Ocean Hill Lease Area Flora, Vegetation and A Level 1 survey of approximately 200 km of seismic lines to Fauna Assessment by Ecologia Environment (2017). support environmental approvals for 3D seismic surveys within the Ocean Hill Exploration Permit EP 495 area, located 250 km north of Perth along the Brand Highway between Eneabba and Hill River in the Midwest region of WA. Ocean Hill Pty Ltd (Strike Energy) Terrestrial Fauna and Black A desktop assessment and targeted black cockatoo habitat Cockatoo Habitat Assessment Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey assessment to support Strike Energy with the required by Strategen-JBS&G (2021b). environmental approvals for the Proposal, including informing management and mitigation measures implemented in response to the potential interaction between the proposed works and the fauna values identified within a survey area of approximately 4,600 ha within the Perth Basin, located 8 km east of Eneabba.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 48

7.3.1.1 Desktop Assessments A review of all available literature and database searches in proximity to the Project DE (Table 7.2) was undertaken to compile a list of vertebrate fauna species with the potential to occur with the Project DE. Table 7.2. Databases Searches Undertaken Database Type of records held in database Parameters

DBCA Threatened Fauna Records from the Western Australian Museum Database Search (WAM) and Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) databases, including historical data and Threatened and Priority 20 km radius around the centroid: species in WA. 115° 18' 27'' E,29° 24' 59'' S NatureMap Records from the Western Australian Museum and DBCA databases, including historical data and Threatened and Priority species in WA.

EPBC Protected Matters Records on MNES protected under the EPBC Act. 10 km radius around the centroid: Search Tool (PMST) 115° 18' 27'' E,29° 24' 59'' S

The desktop assessment search area is likely to contain habitats which do not occur within the Project DE and given that species tend to be patchily distributed even where appropriate habitats are present, the results of the desktop review are likely to include species which may not occur within the Project DE. Many species of birds listed occur as regular migrants, occasional visitors, or vagrants. A total of 39 conservation significant vertebrate species (including migratory species) were identified from the database searches and literature review, as having previously been recorded and/or have the potential to occur within the Project DE based on distribution and habitat. This comprised of:

• 27 birds;

• three mammals;

• three reptiles; and

• six invertebrates. Table 7.3: Literature Review and Database Results for Conservation Significant Fauna within proximity to the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021b) Conservation Status Taxon Common Name EPBC Act BC Act Birds Anous tenuirostris melanops Australian Lesser Noddy VU EN Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone MI S5-MI

Critically Endangered, Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper S1- CR MI, MA

Calidris ruficolus Red-necked Stint MI S5-MI Hydroprogne caspia Caspian tern MI S5-MI Calyptorhynchus latirostris Carnaby's Cockatoo Endangered S2- EN Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl Vulnerable S- VU Falco hypoleucos Grey Falcon Vulnerable S3- VU Critically Endangered, Numenius madagascariensis Eastern Curlew, Far Eastern Curlew S1- CR MI, MA Rostratula australis Australian Painted Snipe Endangered, MA S2- EN

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 49

Conservation Status Taxon Common Name EPBC Act BC Act Thalasseus bergii Crested Tern MI S5- MI Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank MI S5- MI Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper MI S5- MI Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed Godwit MI, MA S5- MI Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail MI, MA S5- MI Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper MI, MA S5- MI Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper MI, MA S5- MI Pandion haliaetus Osprey MA S5- MI Ardea alba Great Egret, White Egret MA - Ardea ibis Cattle Egret MA - Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper MI S5- MI Chrysococcyx osculans Black-eared Cuckoo MA - Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle MA - Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater MA - Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon - S7-OS Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift MI S5-MI Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck Priority- P4 Mammals Dasyurus geoffroii Chuditch, Western Quoll Vulnerable S3-VU Notamacropus irma Western Brush Wallaby - Priority- P4

Phascogale tapoatafa South-western Brush-tailed - CD wambenger Phascogale Reptiles Egernia stokesii badia Western Spiny-tailed Skink Endangered S3-VU Aspidites ramsayi Woma Python - Priority- P1 Nelaps calonotos Black-striped Snake - Priority- P3 Invertebrates Shield-backed Trapdoor Spider, Black Idiosoma nigrum Vulnerable S2- Endangered Rugose Trapdoor Spider Geraldton Sandplain Shield-backed Idiosoma arenaceum - Priority- P3 Trapdoor Spider Kwongan heath Shield-backed Idiosoma kwongan - Priority- P1 Trapdoor Spider Springtime corroboree stick katydid Phasmodes jeeba - Priority- P3 (Eneabba), cricket Hemisaga verpreculae Thorny bush katydid (Moora) - Priority- P2 Hylaeusglobuliferus Wollybush Bee - Priority- P3 1 EPBC Act listings: E = Endangered, V = Vulnerable, M = Migratory, MA = Marine CD= Conservation Dependent 2 WA Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 listings: S1 to S7 = Schedules 1 to 7 7.3.1.2 Field Surveys The EPA guidance relating to terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys identifies the following aspects to be considered when determining the type of survey required: • Level of existing regional knowledge; • Type and comprehensiveness of recent local surveys; • Degree of existing disturbance or fragmentation at the regional scale; • Extent, distribution, and significance of habitats;

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 50

• Significance of species likely to be present; • Sensitivity of the environment to the proposed activities; and • Scale and nature of impact. Ecologia (2017) completed a Level 1 fauna assessment and Targeted Black cockatoo habitat assessment of a portion of the current Survey area. This identified the potential presence of the following seven conservation significant fauna species: • Carnaby's Black Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris); • Western Brush Wallaby (Macropus irma); • Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata); • Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus); • Rainbow Bee-Eater (Merops ornatus); • Gilled Slender Blue-tongue (Cyclodomorphus branchialis); and • Black-striped Snake (Neelaps calonotos).

Table 7.4 describes fauna surveys relevant to the Project in consideration of the aspects of the EPA guidance for terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys. Based on this assessment, additional field surveys were not considered necessary. Table 7.4: Consideration of Survey Type Aspect Consideration Level of existing regional knowledge The bioregion is well understood, and comprehensive long-term data is available to inform and predict the significance of impacts. A Level 1 survey was undertaken by Ecologia in 2017. Updated database searches were conducted to update the local known records of conservation significant fauna species. The extent of likely fauna assemblages is well documented, with the updated database searches confirming the existing data. Additional surveys within the Project DE are unlikely to increase the level of existing regional knowledge. Type and comprehensiveness of Numerous fauna studies have been conducted both within and adjacent to the recent local surveys Project DE. These surveys have been conducted a various levels of detail. A Level 1 survey was undertaken by Ecologia in 2017. The results of this study are consistent with that of other local surveys and the desktop study conducted by Strategen- JBS&G (2021b). Degree of existing disturbance or Vegetation extent at both local and regional scales is relatively intact. Within the fragmentation at the regional scale Development Envelope, 7,802.76 ha remains, and regionally (30 km radius) 257,004.51 ha of native vegetation extent remains. Conservation significant fauna identified as having potential to occur within the Project DE are known from records both locally and regionally, with suitable habitat present throughout. Extent, distribution and significance Habitats defined within the Project DE are well represented across the local and of habitats regional area. The distribution of conservation significant fauna they support is also well documented with impacts to these species able to be assessed based on existing data. Significance of species likely to be Fauna species listed under both the EPBC Act and BC Act are likely to be present present within the Project DE; however, the distributions of these species are well known throughout the local and regional area. Additional survey work is unlikely to further define impacts to these species by increasing local knowledge of their occurrence. Sensitivity of the environment to the The proposed impacts will be confined to temporary clearing (via cutting above the proposed activities ground and mulching) 3.5 m wide seismic lines, spaced 250 m apart. It is unlikely that impacts to fauna habitat adjacent to the proposed clearing areas will occur.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 51

Aspect Consideration Scale and nature of impact The Proposal represents a 1.45% temporary impact on the current extent of native vegetation within the Project DE. This will also result in a relatively small impact on fauna habitat that supports listed conservation significant fauna. The nature of the clearing will not fragment or isolate habitats to the extent that conservation significant fauna species with potential to occur within the area would be significantly impacted at either a local or regional scale. 7.4 Fauna Habitat Strategen JBS&G (2021b) identified three fauna habitat types within the Ecological Survey Area comprising: 1. Sparse Open Woodland; 2. Shrublands and Scrub Heath; and 3. Drainage Lines These habitat descriptions have been aligned with the mapped VTs within the Ecological Survey Area to determine broad fauna habitat types that are present. These are also consistent with the fauna habitats described by Ecologia (2017). There are two fauna habitats mapped within the Ecological Survey Area (Table 7.5; Figure 7.1). Approximately 83.77% of the Project DE is cleared with existing infrastructure and therefore is considered to have limited fauna habitat value. These habitats are not restricted to the Project DE and are relatively common in the region and wider subregion. With the exception of existing cleared areas, vegetation condition within the Ecological Survey Area is considered to be in ‘Excellent to Pristine’ condition (Table 6.6). Table 7.5: Fauna Habitat within the Project DE Fauna Habitat Area (ha) Proportion (%) Sparse Open Woodland 1871.17 41% Shrublands and Scrub Heath 2391.65 52% Drainage Lines 101.41 2% Cleared 242.31 5% Total 4606.54 100

7.4.1 Black Cockatoo Habitat Assessment

Ecological values for Black Cockatoo species (specifically the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo) within the Ecological Survey Area were based on the definitions of breeding, foraging and roosting habitat as per the EPBC Act referral guidelines for black cockatoos (DSEWPaC 2012). Vegetation within the Ecological Survey Area was assessed for roosting habitat potential based on the suitability of tree species present and on the occurrence of local confirmed or potential roosting sites (DBCA 2020).

The Black Cockatoo habitat assessment mapped ‘Moderate’ and ‘Low to Moderate’ and value foraging habitat within the Ecological Survey Area (Table 7.6; Figure 7.1). The ‘Moderate’ value foraging habitat was represented by low shrubland with a proteaceous cover. The ‘Low to Moderate’ value foraging habitat has a similar structure. This assessment was based on the Strategen JBS&G (2021a) vegetation mapping.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 52

Table 7.6: Black-Cockatoo Foraging Habitat Quality Foraging Habitat within the Ecological Score Context Score Density Score Foraging Score Survey Area Area (ha) Proportion (%) 4: Moderate 3 1 8 371.24 8 3: Low-Moderate 3 1 7 3,849.09 84 1: Negligible-Low N/A N/A 1 143.90 3 0: Nil N/A N/A 0 242.31 5 Total 4,606.54 100

7.5 Description of Vertebrate Fauna 7.5.1 Conservation Significant Fauna Based on habitats present within the Survey Area and nearby records, it was assessed that three (2) species of conservation significance are ‘Likely to Occur’ and five (5) species of conservation significance ‘May possibly occur’ (Table 7.7). The remaining 27 species of conservation significance returned in the database searches are unlikely to occur within the survey area (or the Project DE) based on a lack of suitable habitat or extremely old records occurring in the vicinity (Table 7.7). Table 7.7: Likelihood of Occurrence of Conservation Significant Fauna Conservation Status Likelihood of Taxon Common Name EPBC Act BC Act Occurrence Birds Anous tenuirostris Australian Lesser Noddy VU EN Unlikely to occur melanops Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Critically Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper S1 - CR Unlikely to occur Endangered, MI, MA Calidris ruficollis Red-necked Stint MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Hydroprogne caspia Caspian Tern MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Calyptorhynchus Carnaby's Black-Cockatoo Endangered S2 - EN Likely to occur latirostris Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl Vulnerable S - VU May possibly occur Falco hypoleucos Grey Falcon Vulnerable S3 - VU Unlikely to occur Numenius Eastern Curlew, Far Eastern Critically S1 - CR Unlikely to occur madagascariensis Curlew Endangered, MI, MA Rostratula australis Australian Painted Snipe Endangered, MA S2 - EN Unlikely to occur Thalasseus bergii Crested Tern MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Limosa lapponica Bar-tailed Godwit MI, MA S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Motacilla cinerea Grey Wagtail MI, MA S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper MI, MA S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Calidris acuminata Sharp-tailed Sandpiper MI, MA S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Pandion haliaetus Osprey MA S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Ardea alba Great Egret, White Egret MA - Unlikely to occur Ardea ibis Cattle Egret MA - Unlikely to occur

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 53

Conservation Status Likelihood of Taxon Common Name EPBC Act BC Act Occurrence Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper MI S5 - MI Unlikely to occur Chrysococcyx osculans Black-eared Cuckoo MA - Unlikely to occur Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle MA - Unlikely to occur Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater MA - Recorded Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon - S7 - OS May possibly occur Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift MI S5 - MI Unlikely to ocurr Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck - Priority - P4 Unlikely to occur Mammals Dasyurus geoffroii Chuditch, Western Quoll Vulnerable S3-VU Unlikely to occur Notamacropus irma Western Brush Wallaby Priority - P4 Likely to occur Phascogale tapoatafa South-western Brush-tailed - CD Unlikely to occur wambenger Phascogale Reptiles Egernia stokesii badia Western Spiny-tailed Skink Endangered S3-VU Unlikely to occur Cyclodomorphus Gilled Slender Blue-tongue - Vulnerable May possibly occur branchialis Aspidites ramsayi Woma Python - Priority - P1 Unlikely to occur Neelaps calonotos Black-striped Snake - Priority - P3 May possibly occur

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 54 Legend 01.53Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:150,000 at A4 Development Envelope Kilometers FAUNA HABITAT Fauna habitat WITHIN DEVELOPMENT ENVELOPE Cleared Coord. Sys. GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50 Z (STRATEGEN-JBS&G 2021) Drainage lines Shrublands and scrub heath Job No: 58224 Sparse open woodland Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 7.1

Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: \\008PMPMR004V001.jbsg.aust\JBS Perth\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_FaunaHabitat.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

7.5.1.1 Listed Threatened Species Carnaby's Black-Cockatoo The Project DE is located within the mapped distribution of Carnaby’s Cockatoo (DSEWPaC, 2012). The nearest known record for this species is 8 km southwest of the Project DE (DBCA 2020a). Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo is listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act and as Schedule 2 under the BC Act. This species mainly occurs in uncleared or remnant native eucalypt woodlands, especially those that contain Salmon Gum (Eucalyptus salmonophloia) and Wandoo (E. wandoo), and in shrubland or kwongan heathland dominated by Hakea, Banksia and Grevillea species (Johnstone et al. 2011). Carnaby’s Cockatoo is considered likely to be a regular migrant that may utilise the habitat within the Project DE to forage. However, given the recent impact from fires (within the past 2 years) it is considered unlikely that Carnaby’s Cockatoo will forage within the Project DE, given the current condition of vegetation and the lack of food sources available. The Project DE is situated at the northern most extent of the mapped breeding range for Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo (DSEWPaC 2011). Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo forages in proteaceous heath, banksia woodlands and eucalypt woodlands, and this foraging habitat occurs in the Project DE. Breeding is considered unlikely within the Project DE given the lack of suitable large trees (Strategen-JBS&G 2021b). Roost sites for Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo are known in the general region, with the nearest known roost locations situated approximately 2 km to the southwest of the Survey Area (Appendix C – Figure 5.3). This species is listed under the EPBC Act and therefore impacts are further discussed in Section 10.

Malleefowl

The Malleefowl is listed as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act and BC Act. Malleefowl are restricted to mainly southern arid and semiarid zones mainly in scrubs and thickets of mallee and other dense litter- forming shrublands. Much of their range has been cleared for agriculture. The Malleefowl has occasionally been recorded in the general area and the WA Museum has reported breeding (mounds) in the general region, but details are not available. The nearest known record of Malleefowl occurs 25.2 km northeast of the Survey Area (DBCA 2020a).

The targeted flora survey conducted by Strategen-JBS&G (2021) traversed all planned survey line within areas of potential habitat. No Malleefowl mounds were detected during this survey. This species is therefore considered unlikely to occur within the Project DE. Gilled Slender Blue-tongue The Gilled Slender Blue-tongue is listed as Vulnerable under the BC Act. It is a large skink with a colour of different shades of brown with black and pale spots. It is predominantly crepuscular and nocturnal, occurring in shrublands on heavy red soils (Wilson and Swan 2013) and shelters during the day in spinifex, leaf litter and under fallen timber (Cogger 2000). It feeds on a variety of arthropods and occasionally snails and small lizards, and gives birth to two or three live young during spring and early summer. The species is considered vulnerable due to its limited distribution (Wells 2007). While known distribution of the Gilled Slender Blue-tongue is to the north of the study area (Wilson and Swan 2013) one record occurs ~12 km to the west of the Survey area. As this species is at its extreme southern distribution, it is assessed as having the potential to occur within the Project DE. 7.5.1.2 Listed Marine Species Rainbow Bee-eater

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 56

The Rainbow Bee-eater is listed as a Marine species under the EPBC Act. Numerous records of the Rainbow Bee-eater occur within the vicinity of the Project DE (Strategen-JBS&G 2021). The species is found over a wide range of habitats especially on sandy soils and is therefore this species is considered likely to occur but is unlikely to be reliant on habitat within the Project DE, given the large expanse of suitable habitat present in the Project DE surrounds. This species was recorded by Strategen-JBS&G (2021b) This species is not expected to be reliant on habitat within the Project DE. In addition, this species is likely to move away from the area during Proposal activities. Given the impacts to this species are unlikely to be significant, further assessment has not been undertaken. 7.5.1.3 Priority Species Western Brush Wallaby This species is listed on the DBCA Priority as Priority 4. The Western Brush Wallaby has suffered a large range reduction and fragmentation of populations across this range due to clearing for agriculture and predation by introduced predators. The preferred habitat for the Western Brush Wallaby is open forest or woodland, in which it favours open, seasonally wet flats with low grasses and open, scrubby thickets, and areas of dense vegetation. It is considered possible that this species may utilise the habitat within the Project DE, given the occurrence of suitable habitat within the Project DE and the nearest known record occurring 17 km to the west of the Project DE (DBCA 2020a); however, the species is not expected to be reliant on habitat within the Project DE and extensive areas of similar habitat occurs locally and regionally. In addition, this species is likely to move away from the area during construction activities. Given the impacts to this species are unlikely to be significant, further assessment has not been undertaken.

Black-striped Snake The Black-striped snake is a small-bodied burrowing snake, with a flat head and protruding snout occurring in Banksia woodlands and sandy areas of the Perth region. The nearest known record of this species is 18.2 km west of the Survey Area (DBCA 2020a) and this species is considered to possibly occur within the Project DE. 7.5.1.4 Other Specially Protected fauna Peregrine Falcon This species is listed as Schedule 7 (Other Specially Protected fauna) under the BC Act. The Peregrine Falcon is known to occur over a wide range of environments throughout most of Australia. Preferred nesting locations include a range of highly elevated locations with steep topography such as rocky hills, breakaways, cliffs and will also nest on high artificial structures. The Peregrine Falcon inhabits areas near cliffs along coastlines or rivers and near ranges or wooded watercourses. This species of Falcon is found throughout the state. The Ecologia (2017) survey did not record this species or identify any suitable nesting habitat; however as the species is nomadic, it is possible that this species occurs within the Project DE at least intermittently. The nearest known record of this species occurs 26.4 km south of the Project DE (DBCA 2020a). Given the impacts to this species are unlikely to be significant, further assessment has not been undertaken. 7.6 Potential Impacts The Proposal has the potential to result in both direct and indirect impacts on terrestrial fauna. The potential direct impacts of the Proposal include:

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 57

• Loss or degradation of habitat, including habitat for conservation significant fauna; • Injury, mortality and/or displacement due to machinery and vehicle movements during implementation of the Proposal. The potential indirect impacts on terrestrial fauna include: • A decline in health and/or change in habitat composition, arising from: o dust deposition; and o introduction and spread of weeds o bushfire; • Noise and vibration. An assessment of the impacts of the Proposal is provided in Section 7.7. Further assessment of impacts to MNES, specifically Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo is provided in Section 10. 7.7 Assessment of Impacts 7.7.1 Direct Impacts 7.7.1.1 Loss or degradation of fauna habitat The Project DE comprises three (3) broad fauna habitat types. The Proposal will have a temporary impact on 113.52 ha of habitat that may support conservation significant species which are likely to occur within the Project DE. The impacts to fauna habitats are shown in Table 7.8. Table 7.8: Impacts to fauna habitats Fauna Habitat Area (ha) Area to be cleared % impacted by clearing Sparse Open Woodland 1871.17 47.9 2.56 Shrublands and Scrub Heath 2391.65 63.44 2.65 Drainage Lines 101.41 1.76 1.74 Cleared 242.31 0.42 0.17 Total 4606.54 113.52

Approximately 4,606.54 ha of foraging habitat for the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo has been recorded in the Project area of which of which up to a total of 113.52 ha will be disturbed as a result of the Proposal, for which the value varies from negligible to low, low to moderate and moderate foraging value as shown in Table 7.9. Table 7.9: Impacts to Black Cockatoo habitat Area with the Project Area % impacted by Habitat quality Area to be cleared (ha) clearing Moderate 371.24 8.06 2.17 Low to Moderate 3849.09 102.66 2.67 Negligible to Low 143.90 2.38 1.65 Nil 242.31 0.42 0.17 TOTAL 4606.54 113.52 -

Through the implementation of an iterative planning development process and on ground mitigation measures to be adopted through the duration of the site works, the impacts on listed species has been avoided, reduced or minimised to the extent possible. The Proposal does not comprise broadscale clearing, with clearing limited to mulching vegetation to create access tracks of no more than 3.5 m

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 58

wide, spaced 250 m apart. Any significant trees (i.e. with a trunk diameter of greater than 100 mm) will be retained. The proposed method of clearing is designed to minimise impacts to native vegetation and facilitate recovery of native vegetation (and fauna habitat) following completion of the Proposal. All native vegetation cleared for the purpose of the Proposal will be allowed to regenerate, returning to a state and condition that will provide habitat for fauna. 7.7.1.2 Injury, Mortality and/or Displacement of Conservation Significant Fauna The Proposal may result in impacts to fauna during Proposal activities as a result of vehicle and machinery movements. Any potential impacts will be limited to individuals and therefore will not result in population-wide impacts. A number of management measures will be implemented to minimise the risk of fauna-strike such as: • Restricting vehicle movements to existing and dedicated tracks and access roads; • Restricting speed limits; and • Restricting activities to daylight hours only. The potential impacts on fauna from interactions with vehicles and machinery are not expected to be significant and will not affect the conservation status of species present. 7.7.2 Indirect Impacts 7.7.2.1 Fragmentation The Proposal is located within an area which is surrounded by remnant vegetation. The greatest potential for fragmentation is the seismic lines, which are 3.5 m wide corridors, spaced 250 m apart, required for access during operation. It is expected that fauna will be able to freely move across the access corridors following their creation until they are rehabilitated and recovered. Based on this, no significant fragmentation of habitat is anticipated as a result of the Proposal. 7.7.2.2 Decline in health of vegetation – Dust, Weeds and Bushfire Dust will be generated during Proposal activities from mulching of vegetation and vehicle movements. Excessive dust deposition on vegetation foliage has the potential to affect vegetation health and condition and in turn, cause a decline in health and/or change in fauna habitat composition. Dust mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce impacts to surrounding native vegetation. These measures are described in Section 6.5.2.3. These measures are expected to effectively manage dust generation from Proposal activities and therefore mitigate the risk of impacts to surrounding fauna habitat from dust. The clearing of native vegetation, vehicle and machinery movements have the potential to increase the spread and/or introduce weeds and/or Dieback which can alter fauna habitat condition and structure. As discussed in Section 6.5.2.2,. the Proponent has an established dieback and weed management plan relating to all of its seismic activities within the Perth Basin (Appendix B) to reduce the risk of Dieback spread, existing weeds being spread and/or new weeds being introduced as a result of petroleum exploration activities. The risk of a fire occurring as a result of the Proposal activities is expected to be low as a result of the Proposal activities. Management measures to minimise the risk of fire as a result of Proposal activities is discussed in Section 6.5.2.4.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 59

7.7.2.3 Noise and Vibration Noise and vibration caused by construction and operational activities has the potential to impact terrestrial fauna in the vicinity of the Proposal. Noise impacts may cause temporary disturbance and avoidance behaviour but are not likely to have long term effects in the vicinity of the Proposal. 7.7.3 Cumulative Impacts As discussed in Section 6.5.3, this project has not been considered in the context of the cumulative assessment of vegetation disturbance in the region, as disturbance for seismic activities occurs via mulching to increase the success of natural regeneration and therefore the impacts from these seismic acquisition surveys are considered temporary. Furthermore, the fauna habitats present are not restricted to the Project DE or at a local, sub-regional or regional scale. A broader extent of native vegetation exists outside the Project Area with representation of various fauna habitats within Conservation Estate. The proposal will result in the temporary loss of up to 113.52 ha fauna habitat which represents 2.46% of intact native vegetation in the Project Area (4,606.54 ha). The vegetation to be cleared represents up to 113.52 ha of Carnaby Cockatoo foraging habitat, which is of Negligible to Low (2.38 ha), Low to Moderate (102.67 ha) and Moderate (8.06 ha) quality. No roosting or breeding trees will be impacted. Following the completion of Proposal activities, cleared areas will allowed to regenerate to ensure native vegetation, therefore fauna habitat, returns to a composition and structure that is comparable to its pre-disturbance state and in accordance with rehabilitation completion criteria. Rehabilitation is discussed is Section 6.5.3. 7.8 Mitigation Strike Energy has adopted and implemented the hierarchy of impact management for the project in relation to all environmental factors. The objective of the mitigation measures is to reduce the impact to fauna within the Project DE resulting from the implementation of the Proposal. Mitigation measures for the Terrestrial Fauna are outlined in Table 7.10. Table 7.10: Fauna - Mitigation Potential Impact Avoidance Minimisation Rehabilitation

Loss and fragmentation of Clearing of fauna habitat The Project DE has been Disturbed area of native Fauna Habitat cannot be avoided in located to within previously vegetation will recover implementing the Proposal. cleared areas where possible following completion the to minimise the clearing of seismic acquisition survey. Clearing of all significant fauna habitat. trees with a trunk diameter of greater than 100 mm will Existing access tracks and be avoided. other cleared areas have been used where possible to minimise the extent of vegetation clearing required. Clearing lines are limited to 3.5 m width and spaced 250 m apart.

Injury, Mortality and/or Not Applicable. Vehicle speed limits will be Not applicable Displacement of Fauna implemented, and vehicle movements will be restricted to dedicated or existing tracks. Proposal activities will be undertaken during daylight hours only.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 60

Potential Impact Avoidance Minimisation Rehabilitation

Decline in health and/or Only certified clean Strict hygiene measures will Disturbed area of native change in habitat equipment and materials will be implemented to minimise vegetation will recover composition be used for construction of the risk of introducing or following completion the the Proposal. spreading weeds or Dieback seismic acquisition survey. (refer to Section 6.5.2.2). Weeds will be monitored Clearing will occur via during rehabilitation mulching to retain root stock activities and weed control and minimise topsoil will be implemented where disturbance. required. The Proposal is of short duration (i.e. 10 - 12 weeks). All machinery and vehicles undertaking clearing activities will have fire extinguishers. The Proponent will also implement measures to minimise the risk of fires.

Noise and vibration The use of vehicles and Vehicle use and personnel Not applicable. vibroseis trucks cannot be have been kept to a avoided. minimum while ensuring that the Project duration is reduced to the extent possible to minimise impacts. The vibroseis trucks are designed to be exceptionally quiet to reduce interference noise with the seismic acquisition. Livestock and fauna are expected to move away from activities if provided an opportunity to do so. Restricted speeds will apply within the Project DE.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 61

7.9 Predicted Outcome The direct and indirect impacts are not expected to result in outcomes which would be inconsistent with the EPA guidance. It is expected that when the mitigation measures have been implemented, that the Proposal will result in the following outcomes in relation to Terrestrial Fauna: • 113.52 ha of fauna habitat, which is predominantly low to moderate quality Carnaby’s Black- Cockatoo foraging habitat, will be directly impacted by the Proposal, all of which is temporary and will be allowed to recover with monitoring against completion criteria. • All habitats within the Project DE are widespread and no niche habitats are present. • The potential for fragmentation is minimised as fauna are likely to be able to move across the temporary 3.5 m width cleared seismic lines. • No measurable reduction in the populations of conservation significant fauna within the Project DE is anticipated as a result of the Proposal. • Potential impacts from disturbance resulting from dust emissions and/or noise overspill are manageable and highly unlikely to cause any long-term significant impacts to resident fauna. Through the implementation of the EPA’s mitigation hierarchy, the residual impacts of the Proposal are unlikely to cause significant local or regional impacts to terrestrial fauna including any of the conservation significant fauna species. As a result, the EPA’s objective for terrestrial fauna will be achieved. Strike Energy considers that impacts to fauna resulting from the Proposal can be adequately assessed under the NVCP and DMIRS processes (refer to Section 13).

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 62

8. Terrestrial Environmental Quality

8.1 EPA objective The EPA’s objective for terrestrial environmental quality is to maintain the quality of land and soils so that environmental values are protected. (EPA 2020c). 8.2 Policy and guidance The following policy and guidance documents have been considered in the assessment of the inland waters factor: • Environmental Factor Guideline: Terrestrial Environmental Quality (EPA 2018); • Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives (EPA 2020c); • Instructions on how to prepare an Environmental Review Document (EPA 2020a); and • Water Quality Guidelines (ANZECC/ARMCANZ 2018). 8.3 Receiving Environment The Proposal is located within the Perth Basin which extends from the Murchison River in the north to the south coast of WA. The eastern boundary of the basin is delineated by the Darling Fault and the associated Darling Escarpment. The western boundary is located offshore on the continental slope. Specifically, the Proposal is located in an area occupied by the Geraldton Sandplains. These are characterised by a series of old dunes which run parallel to the coast. The younger Quindalup dunes occur near the contemporary coastline, with the Spearwood dunes occurring further inland. The soils are typically sandy with some areas of exposed limestone, and a series of wetlands occurs along the plains. In the east lateritic rises occur. 8.4 Potential Impacts Proposal activities which have the potential to impact on terrestrial environmental quality include: • Soil compaction due to vehicle use of tracks and use of seismic equipment, notably the acquisition equipment and when soils are moist and sand; and • Operation and servicing of vehicles required to undertake the Proposal resulting in localised contamination of soils. Potential impacts to land quality and soils are limited to the immediate area of the seismic survey area (disturbance footprint) and are considered temporary and cumulative impacts to land and soil quality are not anticipated. 8.4.1 Assessment of Impacts 8.4.1.1 Direct Impacts There are no planned direct impacts to soils as a result of the Proposal. 8.4.2 Indirect impacts Potential indirect impacts that may occur as a result of the Proposal are: • Compaction of soils by vehicles and seismic acquisition equipment – vibration plates and/or tyres; and • Contamination of soils by vehicle use, spills and leaks from hydrocarbon use and/or storage.

©JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G | WER-HSE-PLN-008 63

8.5 Mitigation The mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimise, rehabilitate, offset) has been applied to reduce the potential impacts of the Proposal to Terrestrial Environmental Quality. A summary of mitigation measures is provided in Table 8.1 Table 8.1: Terrestrial Environmental Quality - Mitigation Potential impact Avoidance Minimisation Rehabilitation Soil Compaction The use of vehicles and Vehicle movements, Rehabilitation of agricultural vibroseis trucks cannot be machinery and equipment land in accordance with avoided. restricted to existing roads, landholder access access tracks or planned agreements. seismic lines. Soil Contamination Vehicle movements, Daily checks to be All spills to be recorded and machinery and equipment undertaken of all vehicles to immediately cleaned up in restricted to existing roads, confirm no oil/fuels leaks. accordance with the Project access tracks or planned Oil Spill Contingency Plan seismic lines. No more than 2,000 L bulk (required as part of DMIRS fuel storage. project approvals).

Spill kits to be available in Project vehicles at all time Use drip trays, spill mats or equivalent while refuelling.

All fuels, hydrocarbons, and chemicals to be stored in a controlled environment in accordance with relevant Australian Standards to minimise the risk of spills and contamination. 8.6 Predicted Outcome Following application of the mitigation measures summarised in Table 8.1, the project may result in temporary impacts to soils and landforms, however no significant residual impacts are anticipated. The Proponent considers that the Proposal can be managed to meet the EPA’s objective for Terrestrial Environmental Quality. Strike Energy considers that impacts to Terrestrial Environmental Quality resulting from the Proposal can be adequately assessed under the DMIRS assessment process (refer to Section 13).

9. Other Factors

Table 9.1 outlines potential impacts and their management, associated with other environmental factors or issues relevant to the Proposal that are not considered key factors. These other factors and issues can be regulated by other government agencies under other statutes. Table 9.1: Overview of Other Factors Environmental Factor EPA Objective Potential Impact Existing Environment Management and Mitigation Predicted Outcome Inland Waters To maintain the Activities that have the Surface drainage in the region is made The following avoidance and No direct impacts to surface water or hydrological regimes and potential to cause up of eight (8) main sub-catchments: management measures form part of the groundwater are expected. quality of groundwater impacts to inland waters Arrowsmith River, Cockleshell, Hill Proposal: and surface water so that include: River, Logue, Minyulo, North Coastal • No direct impacts on inland waters Contamination of surface or environmental values are • Alteration of surface Dunes and the South Coastal Dunes are expected as a result of the groundwater is not anticipated given protected’ (EPA 2020c). water features; catchments. The Project DE occurs Proposal. A 50 m offset distance the controls and management which between the Hill River and Indoon- will be implemented in relation to • Contamination of from surface water features will be Logue River Catchments, with maintained during all seismic storage of chemical and hazardous surface water due to watercourses in these catchments materials, spill response and well increased erosion activities. flowing predominantly in an east-west construction, design and operation. and sedimentation; • Seismic lines are highly unlikely to direction from the upland areas in the and result in a disturbance to surface east into large swamps or lakes in water hydrological regimes; The Proposal will not have any • Contamination of interdunal depressions on the Swan however, if the lines do, the significant indirect impacts to surface surface water and Coastal Plain. disturbance will be temporary. water or groundwater. groundwater quality The Warradarge Creek flows through • Daily checks to be undertaken of all Strike Energy considers that the as a result of spills. the central portion of the Project DE. vehicles to confirm no oil/fuels Proposal can be managed to meet the The Project DE is not within any Surface leaks. EPA’s objective for Inland Waters. Strike Water Proclamation Areas pursuant to • No more than 2,000 L bulk fuel Energy considers that impacts to inland the RIWI Act. storage. waters resulting from the Proposal can The Eneabba region overlies the • Spill kits to be available in Project be adequately assessed under the Dandaragan Trough, which is part of the vehicles at all time and use of drip DMIRS assessment process (refer to Perth Basin, extending east to the Urella trays, spill mats or equivalent while Section 13). and Darling Fault and west to the coast. refuelling. The trough consists of up to 30m of • All fuels, hydrocarbons, and Quaternary sand and clay sediments of chemicals to be stored in a the Perth Superficial Formation controlled environment in overlaying early Jurassic to late accordance with relevant Australian Cretaceous sediments of the Standards to minimise the risk of Yarragadee Formation. spills and contamination. Groundwater of the Yarragadee North • All spills to be recorded and aquifer is confined to the coastal plain immediately cleaned up in by the superficial formations, by the

Environmental Factor EPA Objective Potential Impact Existing Environment Management and Mitigation Predicted Outcome South Perth Shale in the south, and by accordance with the Project Oil Spill the Otorowiri Siltstone in the east Contingency Plan (required as part (Department of Water, 2013) and of DMIRS project approvals). occurs as unconfined to confined. On a regional level, groundwater is recharged into the aquifer via rainfall and surface runoff, infiltrating through the overlying surficial and superficial sediments. The main regional use for ground water in the area is stock water supplies, although this water has a relatively high salinity (Department of Water 2013). The Proposal is located within the Arrowsmith Groundwater Area. The Project DE does not fall within any Priority Drinking Water Source Areas (PDWSAs). The nearest water reserve to the Project DE is Eneabba Water Reserve located approximately 6.5km west. The Eneabba town supplies water from the Yarragadee Formation, which is overlain by up to 30m of sand and clay (unsaturated superficial formation) (DWER, 2008) Vegetation within the Project DE is unlikely to be riparian or classed as Groundwater Dependant Ecosystems (GDEs) Air Quality To maintain air quality There is a potential for The dominant industries within the The following management measures Emissions resulting from the Proposal and minimise emissions dust to be generated as a Shires of Carnamah and Coorow are will be implemented: will be minor, highly localised and so that environmental result of vehicle farming (grain production and livestock • Vehicle and machinery movements temporary. Consultation with values are protected. movements. grazing), mining, and government- to be restricted to the Project DE. landowners is ongoing and will continue No other planned based operations. • Vehicle speeds restrictions. during implementation of the Proposal. emissions to air as a The township of Eneabba is the closest • All personnel instructed on vehicle Strike Energy considers that the result of the Proposal. population centres, being 8 km to the of speeds on access roads and within Proposal can be managed to meet the the Project DE operational areas and dust control EPA’s objective for Air Quality and measures, via inductions. Greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmental Factor EPA Objective Potential Impact Existing Environment Management and Mitigation Predicted Outcome GHG Emissions To reduce net GHG GHG emissions will be Several sensitive receptors are located The following management measures Strike Energy considers that impacts to emissions in order to emitted from machinery within the Project DE (all residences) will be implemented: Air Quality and Greenhouse gas minimise the risk of and vehicles used during (refer to Figure 9.1). Impacts are • All vehicles will have standard emissions resulting from the Proposal environmental harm project activities. expected to be highly localised and emission control devices fitted and can be adequately assessed under the associated with climate attenuated with distance to sensitive be maintained and serviced in DMIRS assessment process (refer to change. receptors. accordance with manufacturers’ Section 13). recommendations. • Vehicles and equipment will be switched off when not in use. Social Surroundings To protect social There is a potential for The following management measures Amenity impacts resulting from the Amenity surroundings from amenity impacts during will be implemented: Proposal will be minor, highly localised, significant harm. construction as a result of • Project activities limited to daylight and temporary. Consultation with noise, and dust. hours. landowners is ongoing and will continue • Vehicle and machinery movements during implementation of the Proposal. to be restricted to the Project DE. Strike Energy considers that the • Vehicle speeds restrictions. Proposal can be managed to meet the • All personnel to be instructed on EPA’s objective for Social Surroundings landowner and stakeholder (Amenity). sensitivities and related Strike Energy considers that impacts to responsibilities (e.g. via inductions) Social Surroundings (Amenity). • Vibroseis safe offset distances will resulting from the Proposal can be be outlined in the Environment Plan adequately assessed under the DMIRS for the Proposal and adhered to. assessment process (refer to • The vibroseis trucks are designed to Section 13). be exceptionally quiet to reduce interference noise with the seismic acquisition. • Ongoing consultation with stakeholders. Social Surroundings To protect social There is a potential for The Project DE is located within land The following management measures Consultation with Traditional Owners is Aboriginal heritage surroundings from impacts to Aboriginal which is subject to the Yamatji Nation will be implemented: ongoing and will continue during significant harm. heritage during clearing Indigenous Land Use Agreement. Strike • No ground disturbance will be implementation of the Proposal. activities. Energy (Ocean Hill Pty Ltd) has executed undertaken as clearing will occur via Strike Energy considers that the Exploration Agreements in place for EP cutting above the ground and Proposal can be managed to meet the 495. Management of Cultural Heritage mulching EPA’s objective for Social Surroundings will be undertaken in accordance with • A 50 m offset distance from surface (Aboriginal heritage). the provisions of the Exploration water features will be maintained Strike Energy considers that impacts to Agreement. Seismic activities are during all seismic activities Social Surroundings (Aboriginal heritage) resulting from the Proposal

Environmental Factor EPA Objective Potential Impact Existing Environment Management and Mitigation Predicted Outcome considered low impact activities under • Engagement with cultural monitors can be adequately assessed under the than agreement. and pre-clearance surveys (if DMIRS assessment process (refer to A search of the Department of required) prior to commencement Section 13). Aboriginal Affairs (DAA) database of clearing. (2016) has shown that there are no • Stop work procedures will apply in known Aboriginal Heritage Sites of the event of a potential discovery. significance recorded within the Development Area.

AMAH‐ENEABBA RD CARN )" )" )" ! ENEABBA

‐ )"

)" )"

D B )" R R S A I N L L D I

H W W I D Y L

RD I

G )" THOMSON

ROSE )" )"

)" COO )" ROW ‐GREEN HEAD RD )"

Legend 012 Ocean Hill 3D Seismic Survey Scale 1:175,000 at A4 Development Envelope Highways Kilometers Cadastral boundary Main road Coord. Sys. GCS GDA 1994 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS Sensitive receptors Minor road Z )" Industrial property Track Job No: 58224 )" Residence Client: Strike Energy Limited FIGURE 9.1

Version: A Date: 21-Jul-2021

Drawn By: cthatcher Checked By: LT

File Name: \\008PMPMR004V001.jbsg.aust\JBS Perth\Projects\1)Open\Strike West\58224 Ocean Hill Seismic Survey\GIS\Maps\R01_Rev_A\58224_0x_SensReceptors.mxd Image Reference: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

10. Matters of National Environmental Significance

10.1 Matters of National Environmental Significance The Commonwealth EPBC Act provides a legal framework for the protection of MNES. The EPBC Act requires that all actions that will or may have a significant impact on a MNES must be referred to the Minister for the Environment via the DAWE. Protected matters under the EPBC Act include: • World heritage properties; • National heritage places (including Commonwealth Heritage Places); • Wetlands of international importance; • Listed threatened species and ecological communities; • Migratory species protected under international agreements; • Commonwealth marine areas; • A water resource, in relation to coal seam gas activities and large coal mining activities; • The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park; and • Nuclear Actions including uranium mining. In addition, protected matters include the environment where actions proposed will affect Commonwealth land or proposed actions are being undertaken by a Commonwealth agency. For consistency with the EPBC Act, the Proposal is referred to as the “Proposal Action” and the Project DE as the “Proposed Action Area” in this section of the referral. 10.2 Proposed Action and Assessment The Proposed Action will involve the temporary clearing of up to 113.52 ha of native vegetation which may be considered to be ‘Moderate,’ ‘Low to Moderate,’ or ‘Negligible to Low’ value black cockatoo foraging habitat. A summary of existing environmental values relating to MNES is provided in the following sections: • Section 6.3: Flora and Vegetation; and • Section 7.3: Fauna. Based on the outcomes of the environmental assessments completed to date, no MNES will be directly impacted by the Proposed Action. The following sections provide an overview of the MNES to be impacted by the proposed action, including specific diagnostic criteria and key threats associated with the species and ecological communities. 10.3 Controlled Action Provisions The proposed action is being referred to DAWE in parallel to this referral to the EPA. The environmental values of the Proposed Action as it relates to the EPBC Act have been determined with reference to: • Search of the Protected Matters Search Tool for MNES listed under the EPBC Act database which returned 15 flora taxa listed under the EPBC Act that occur within or have habitat which may occur within the area; • Previous and project related environmental assessments, including flora and vegetation and fauna surveys and investigations (refer to Section 6.3.1); and

• Known and available scientific information on relevant EPBC Act listed species in relation to their habitat needs and requirements. 10.3.1 Likelihood of Occurrence A likelihood of occurrence assessment was undertaken based on the results of the PMST search to identify conservation listed species that are ‘Likely to Occur’ in the Proposed Action Area (Strategen- JBS&G 2021b). Of the 15 listed flora species, five were determined to have the potential to occur due to the presence of some suitable habitat in the area. The remaining 22 taxa are considered unlikely to occur in the Study Area, primarily because suitable habitat is not considered to be present. The MNES ‘Likely to Occur’ within the Proposed Action area are summarised in Table 10.1. Table 10.1: MNES with the Potential to Occur within the Project DE Species Likelihood of Occurrence within the Proposed Action area

Fauna

Calyptorhynchus latirostris Likely to occur given the presence of foraging habitat. Refer to Section 10.6

Likely to occur given the presence of suitable habitat but unlikely to be Merops ornatus significantly impacted. Refer to Section 7.5.1.2

Flora and Communities

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Banksia catoglypta considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Eucalyptus johnsoniana considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Eucalyptus lateritica considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Eucalyptus leprophloia considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Previously recorded in the Proposed Action Area. This species is generally associated with lateritic ridges, which have been avoided through design of the Eucalyptus suberea seismic line alignment. This species was not recorded during 2020 surveys of the Clearing Footprint and is therefore considered unlikely to be impacted by the Proposed Action.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Gastrolobium hamulosum considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Previously recorded in the Proposed Action Area. This species is generally associated with lateritic ridges, which have been avoided through design of the Hakea megalosperma seismic line alignment. This species was not recorded during 2020 surveys of the Clearing Footprint and is therefore considered unlikely to be impacted by the Proposed Action.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Paracaleana dixonii considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Petrophile nivea considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Not recorded within the Proposed Action Area. Based on this, this species is Tetratheca nephelioides considered unlikely to be present within the Clearing Footprint.

Species Likelihood of Occurrence within the Proposed Action area

Previously recorded in the Proposed Action Area. This species is generally associated with lateritic ridges, which have been avoided through design of the Thelymitra stellata seismic line alignment. This species was not recorded during 2020 surveys of the Clearing Footprint and is therefore considered unlikely to be impacted by the Proposed Action.

10.4 Policy and Guidance The potential impacts of the Proposed Action were considered with reference to the following policy documents: • Matters of National Environmental Significance: Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 (Significant Impact Guidelines) (DoE 2013); and • EPBC Act referral guidelines for three threatened black cockatoo species (DSEWPAC 2012a). The Significant Impact Guidelines inform whether a referral is required under the EPBC Act. For the purpose of assessing the significance of impacts to MNES, the Significant Impact Guidelines specify that the threshold for significance will only be met if there is a “real chance or possibility” that an action will: • lead to a long term decrease in the size of a population; • reduce the area of occupancy of the species; • fragment an existing population into two or more populations; • adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species; • disrupt the breeding cycle of a population; • modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that that species is likely to decline; • result in an invasive species that are harmful to a critically endangered or an endangered species becoming established in the endangered or critically endangered species’ habitat; • introduce a disease that may cause a species to decline; and • interfere with the recovery of the species. 10.5 Listed Threatened Species and Communities The Proposed Action has the potential to have a significant impact on the following MNES: • Listed threatened species and communities (Sections 18 and 18A of the EPBC Act): o Calyptorhynchus latirostris (Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo) (Endangered).

An assessment of significance for this species is provided in Section 10.6. 10.6 Calyptorhynchus latirostris Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) is listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act. A National Recovery Plan is in place (DPaW 2013); however, there is no Approved Conservation Advice or Listing Advice for the species. The National Recovery Plan describes the species’ distribution, habitat and population and identifies known threats to the species (DPaW 2013). 10.6.1 Habitat and Distribution Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo is endemic to the southwest of WA, ranging from the Lower Murchison in the north, Esperance in the south and Forrestania in the east. The species exists as two genetically

distinct subpopulations: a western and an eastern (of which the Proposed Action occurs within the region of the western subpopulation (EPA 2019)). There is no accurate estimate of the population number, and little is known about the species’ occurrence within the region. Smaller, important populations for the long-term survival of the species have not been defined for black cockatoos, due to the mobile and widely dispersed nature of the species, and the variation in flock compositions (DSEWPaC 2012a; DotEE 2017). For this reason, it is more appropriate to consider significance in terms of impacts on habitat and individuals rather than a resident population (DoEE 2017). Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo is predominantly restricted to areas of remnant native woodland with an understory dominated by proteaceous species such as Banksia, Hakea and Grevillea. However, as the species is highly mobile and adaptive, they are able to access resources spread over a relatively large area (DPaW 2013). Mapping of the species has proven difficult due to seasonal migration and movement over long distances. This in combination with the adaptive behaviour of the species indicates that the significance of locations within the species’ range, especially in reference to breeding, is likely to continue to change over time (DPaW 2013). Breeding occurs mainly in the Wheatbelt and extends to Hopetoun and Ravensthorpe (DotEE 2017). During the non-breeding season, the majority of individuals migrate to the Midwest, Swan Coastal Plain and South coastal regions (January to July; DPaW 2013). Identified breeding and nearby feeding habitat, former breeding habitat that has hollows intact and vegetation that provides habitat for feeding, watering and regular night roosting for Carnaby’s Cockatoo is defined as ‘habitat critical to the survival’ of the species (DPaW 2013). This includes all areas of breeding habitat including known nesting trees, and foraging areas that support breeding. The Proposed Action area does not occur within the species breeding range. 10.6.2 Key Threats Known and potential threats for Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo include the loss of habitat from clearing or degradation, competition for nest hollows and loss of individuals due to illegal shooting, collisions with motor vehicles and disease (DPaW 2013). A further significant threat is the clearing, fragmentation and degradation of foraging and night roosting habitat in the non-breeding areas of the species’ range in WA (DPaW 2013). 10.6.3 Occurrence in the Project DE There are currently no records of individuals of Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo within the Project DE. The area does not support breeding or roosting trees. There is no evidence (direct observations or indirect evidence such as chewed cones, scats or feathers) that the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo is utilising the habitats within the Project DE for foraging or roosting despite targeted surveys over multiple years (Ecologia 2017; Strategen JBS&G 2021). Similar habitat does exist outside the Project DE such as South Eneabba Nature Reserve, which is known to support the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo.

A total of 4606.54 ha of potential habitat occurs within the Project DE, which has been assessed as predominantly ‘Low to Moderate’ value Carnaby’s Cockatoo foraging habitat (Figure 7.1). The ‘Low to Moderate’ value foraging habitat was represented by low shrubland with a proteaceous cover representing foraging species of between 10 and 15%. The presence of lower-quality foraging habitat has decreased the likelihood of the species utilising the Project DE in the short-term (Strategen-JBS&G 2021b). 10.6.4 Assessment of Impacts The Proposed Action may result in direct and indirect impacts to Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo through: • Clearing (via mulching) of up to 113.52 ha of foraging habitat, all of which will be allowed to regenerate;

• Fragmentation of habitat; • Injury or mortality of fauna individuals as a result of interaction with vehicles/machinery; • Reduction or loss of Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo habitat due to increased fire frequency or intensity; and/or • Disturbance to Carnaby’s Cockatoo and its habitat from dust, and/or noise and vibration. These impacts are consistent with key threats determined for the species in the approved conservation advice (DoE 2013). Section 7.6 addresses both the direct and indirect impacts on fauna habitat, including Carnaby’s Cockatoo, as a result of the Proposed Action. 10.6.5 Significance of Impacts An assessment of the potential impacts against the Significant Impact Criteria for Carnaby’s Cockatoo, listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act, is provided in Table 10.2 Based on this assessment, the Proposed Action is unlikely to have a significant residual impact on Carnaby’s Cockatoo. Table 10.2: Significant Impact Assessment: Carnaby’s Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus latirostris) Criteria An action is likely to have a significant impact on a critically endangered or endangered species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will:

Assessment Lead to a long-term decrease in the size of Unlikely a population; Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo has not been recorded in the Proposed Action Area; however, the species has potential to occur given the presence of low-quality foraging habitat. As per the scoring process conducted, the ‘Low-Moderate’ quality foraging habitat value indicates a potential low density of the species of < 10% across Fauna Habitat and low to moderate represents foraging species of between 10 and 15%. The Proposed Action will result in the temporary clearing of approximately 113.52 ha of potential ‘Low’, ‘Low to Moderate’ and ‘Moderate’ foraging habitat for the species. The Proposed Action Area is located towards the northern limit of the species breeding range. No breeding trees occur within the Proposed Action Area and foraging habitat is expected to regenerate at the completion of the Proposed Action. Not clearing of trees with a diameter of greater than 100 mm will be undertaken. Based on the above, the Proposed Action is not expected to result in a long- term decrease in the size of a population.

Reduce the area of occupancy of the Unlikely species; The species has not been recorded in the Proposed Action Area; however, it has the potential to occur given the presence of low and low-moderate quality foraging habitat. The Proposed Action will result in the loss of up to 113.52 ha of foraging habitat. The Proposed Action area is located within an area of similar vegetation that provides similar habitat immediately adjacent to the area to be disturbed and in the general vicinity of the Proposed Action Area. The area to be cleared is 113.52 ha which represents a small proportion (0.04%) of the vegetation extent proportion within the local (30 km radius) area, where approximately 257,004.51 ha of vegetation remains.

Fragment an existing population into two Unlikely or more populations; The Proposed Action Area is situated at the northern most extent of the mapped breeding range for the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo (DSEWPaC, 2011). The clearing of vegetation across the Proposed Action Area will not fragment any Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo populations as the species is highly mobile and the vegetation that is being impacted is low to moderate value foraging

Criteria An action is likely to have a significant impact on a critically endangered or endangered species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will: Assessment habitat only. Similar vegetation is also found in the vicinity of the Proposed Action Area. The Proposed Action will not result in significant fragmentation of habitat as defined in the referral guidelines for the Carnaby’s Cockatoo, whereby ‘creating a gap of greater than 4 km between patches of black cockatoo breeding, foraging or roosting habitat’ is deemed to be a significant impact (DSEWPaC 2011). It is unlikely that the Project DE would result in the fragmentation of the existing Carnaby’s Cockatoo population.

Adversely affect habitat critical to the Unlikely survival of a species; Matters of National Environmental Significance Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 defines habitat critical to the survival of a species as areas that are necessary: • for activities such as foraging, breeding, roosting, or dispersal; • for the long-term maintenance of the species; • to maintain genetic diversity and long term evolutionary development; and/or • for the reintroduction of populations or recovery of the species. Breeding habitat is defined in the Carnaby’s Cockatoo referral guidelines as ‘trees of species known to support breeding within the range of the species which either have a suitable nest hollow OR are of a suitable diameter at breast height (DBH) to develop a nest hollow’ (DSEWPaC 2011). The Proposed Action Area does not contain critical breeding or roosting habitat for the Carnaby’s Cockatoo. Not clearing of trees with a diameter of greater than 100 mm will be undertaken. The Proposed Action will not result in a significant impact to foraging habitat for the species as defined in the referral guidelines for the Carnaby’s Cockatoo (whereby, the Proposal will not result in the removal of greater than one hectare of high-quality foraging habitat. The Proposal is located within an area of similar vegetation that provides similar habitat immediately adjacent to the area to be disturbed and in the general vicinity of the Project DE. The area to be cleared is 113.52 ha which represents a small proportion (0.04%) of the vegetation extent proportion within the local (30 km radius) area, where approximately 257,004.51 ha of vegetation remains. Based on the above, it is unlikely that the Project DE would have an impact on the survival of the species.

Modify, destroy, remove, isolate, or Unlikely decrease the availability or quality of The Proposed Action area is located within a larger area of native vegetation habitat to the extent that the species is that comprises foraging and possible roosting/breeding habitat for the likely to decline; Carnaby’s Cockatoo. Suitable vegetation and habitat are therefore represented across the Proposed Action Area and adjacent surrounding areas. The Proposed Action Area does not contain critical breeding or roosting habitat for the Carnaby’s Cockatoo. The foraging habitat within the Proposed Action area represents 0.05% of the total remnant vegetation (257,004.51 ha) within the local area (30 km radius). While The Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo may utilise the Proposed Action Area for foraging, it is unlikely to be dependent on the foraging habitat in the area given its low and low to moderate value.

Criteria An action is likely to have a significant impact on a critically endangered or endangered species if there is a real chance or possibility that it will: Assessment

It is unlikely that the Project DE would have an impact on the survival of the species as the clearing should not impact on the availability of quality habitat.

Result in invasive species that are harmful Unlikely to a critically endangered or endangered It is recognised that there are invasive species of flora and fauna in the area species becoming established in the that may impact on the quality of vegetation and hence its suitability as endangered or critically endangered habitat for species such as the Carnaby’s Cockatoo (Woodman 2013). A total species’ habitat; of 6 introduced taxa were recorded within the Ecological Survey Area. Clearing of native vegetation, vehicle and machinery movements have the potential to increase the spread and/or introduce weeds and dieback. The Proponent has an established Weed and Dieback Management Plan relating to its seismic exploration activities to reduce the risk of dieback spread or existing weeds being spread, or new weeds being introduced into the Proposed Action area. The risk of invasive species is well understood, and a series of management measures, including the use of strict hygiene measures upon entry to the Project DE in accordance with Strike Energy’s DWMP, will be implemented to prevent the incursion of weeds into the Project DE. It is therefore unlikely that activities associated with the Project would impact on the habitat for the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo.

Introduce disease that may cause the Unlikely species to decline; or The implementation of management measures should prevent the incursion of the disease. It is therefore unlikely that activities associated with the Proposed Action would impact on the foraging habitat for the Carnaby’s Black- Cockatoo.

Interfere with the recovery of the species. Unlikely It is considered that the anticipated impact is small, temporary for the majority of the area to be cleared and unlikely to have a significant impact on the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo, its recovery and long-term survival.

In addition, the EPBC Act referral guidelines for three threatened Black Cockatoo species (DSEWPAC 2012a) state that an action is regarded as having a high risk of significant impact on habitat for Black Cockatoos if it involves: • clearing of any known nesting tree; • clearing or degradation of any part of a vegetation community known to contain breeding habitat (namely trees of species known to support breeding within the range of the species which either have a suitable nest hollow or are a suitable diameter to develop a nest hollow); • creation of a new gap of more than 4 km between patches of habitat suitable for breeding, foraging or roosting; and • clearing of more than 1 ha of quality foraging habitat.

Table 10.3 presents the outcomes of the impact significance assessment completed for the Proposed Action.

Table 10.3: Assessment of the Proposed Action against the Black Cockatoo Referral Guidelines Referral trigger Assessment of Project DE against referral trigger

Clearing of any known nesting tree The Proposed Action will not result in the clearing of any known nesting trees. Roost sites for the Carnaby’s cockatoo are known in the general region, with the nearest known roost locations situated approximately 2 km to the southwest of the Project DE.

Clearing or degradation of any part of a No known breeding habitat occurs within the Proposed Action area. vegetation community known to contain breeding habitat

Clearing or degradation of more than 1 ha of The Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo foraging habitat assessment mapped a total quality foraging habitat of 4,220.33 ha of ‘Moderate' and ‘Low to Moderate’ value Carnaby’s Black- Cockatoo foraging habitat within the Proposed Action area. This foraging habitat was represented by low shrubland with a proteaceous cover representing foraging species of between 10% and 15%. The Proposed Action Area is not considered to support high quality foraging habitat for Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo.

Clearing or degradation of a known night The Proposed Action will not result in the clearing of any roosting trees. roosting tree Roost sites for the Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo are known in the general region; however, the two known roost locations are situated approximately 2 km to the southwest of the Proposed Action Area.

Creating a gap of more than 4 km between The clearing will not create a gap greater than 4 km between patches of patches of black cockatoo habitat black cockatoo foraging habitat. Suitable foraging habitat is present in the areas immediately surrounding the Proposed Action Area and beyond.

10.6.6 Predicted Outcome In summary, the Proposed Action is expected to result in the following outcomes: • No disturbance, injury or mortality to Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo as there have been no records within the Proposed Action Area. • Up to 110.72 ha of ‘Moderate’ and ‘Low to Moderate’ and quality foraging habitat will be temporarily impacted by the Proposal, all cleared areas will be allowed to regenerate following completion. • Clearing will result in the temporary loss of 2.46% of the available foraging habitat within the Proposed Action Area (4,606.54 ha). • Extensive areas of suitable habitat for this species will still remain within the native vegetation located within the Proposed Action Area (4,493.02 ha) and surrounding areas of native vegetation. • No impact to roosting or breeding sites within the Proposed Action Area. Overall, the Proposed Action is considered unlikely to have any significant residual impacts to Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo.

11. Holistic Impact Assessment

This referral has provided a detailed assessment of the potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposal and the management strategies for each applicable environmental factor. The key environmental factors relevant to the Proposal are: • Flora and vegetation; • Terrestrial fauna; and • Terrestrial Environmental Quality. Based on the assessment undertaken, Strike Energy considers that the impacts of the proposal against these environmental factors are manageable. In considering the inextricable link between flora and vegetation, terrestrial fauna and terrestrial environmental quality, the connections and interactions between parts of the environment to inform a holistic view of impacts to the whole environment has been undertaken. The key environmental impact associated with the Proposal is the temporary clearing of 113.52 ha of native vegetation, all of which will be allowed to regenerate following completion of the Proposal. While the native vegetation to be cleared is primarily in ‘Excellent to Pristine’ condition, impacts to flora or ecological communities of conservation significance are limited to the removal of two Conservation significant flora species (one Priority 4 and one ‘Other species of interest’). Furthermore, the extent and nature of the Proposal is unlikely to significantly impact on fauna of conservation significance. By minimising the impacts to native vegetation, impacts to the health of other elements of the environment including terrestrial fauna have also been minimised. On the above basis, when the separate key environmental factors relevant to the Proposal are considered together, due to the environmental setting of the Project DE, the scale and nature of the Proposal and application of the mitigation hierarchy, the impacts from the Proposal on environmental values is considered to be manageable. Based on the assessment undertaken in this referral and the predicted outcomes with respect to the key environmental factors, Strike Energy is of the view that the potential impacts of the Proposal are not so significant as to warrant formal environmental impact assessment under the EP Act. Strike Energy considers that the environmental impacts associated with the Proposal can be adequately assessed and managed via other State and Commonwealth approvals processes. Those outcomes and an overview of the relevant approvals that can effectively management the potential risks and impacts are detailed in Section 13.

12. Consideration of Significance

In reaching a decision as to whether a proposal is likely to have a significant effect on the environment, whether it is likely to meet its objectives for environmental factors and consequently, whether a referred proposal should be assessed, the EPA may have regard to the following: a. Values, sensitivity and quality of the environment which is likely to be impacted. b. Extent (intensity, duration, magnitude and geographic footprint) of the likely impacts. c. Consequence of the likely impacts (or change). d. Resilience of the environment to cope with the impacts or change. e. Cumulative impact with other existing or reasonably foreseeable activities, developments and land uses. f. Connections and interactions between parts of the environment to inform a holistic view of impacts to the whole environment. g. Level of confidence in the prediction of impacts and the success of proposed mitigation. h. Public interest about the likely effect of the proposal or scheme, if implemented, on the environment, and public information that informs the EPA’s assessment. A significance test for the Proposal has been undertaken against each of these criteria (Table 12.1). Table 12.1: Assessment of Significance Criteria Assessment

Values, sensitivity and quality of the The Proposal is located in Unallocated Crown Land which comprises generally environment which is likely to be intact and undisturbed native vegetation. The Proposal does not impact any impacted. significant areas or land features. No TECs or PECs will be impacted by the Proposal. No Threatened flora species will be impacted. A total of two (2) Conservation significant species (Banksia chamaephyton P4 and Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Bellairs 1505)) ‘Other’, will be impacted by clearing. Impacts have been minimised to the extent possible through avoidance and design. Local impacts to each species are 4.49% (Banksia chamaephyton) and 29.52% Hemiandra aff. sp. Kalbarri (D. Bellairs 1505)); however, given the known range of the species’ and their extent within conservation areas, the Proposal is not expected to alter the conservation significance of these species. Only one conservation significant fauna species is considered likely to be impacted by the Proposal, Carnaby’ s Black Cockatoo. Impacts are restricted to clearing of low (2.38 ha), low to moderate (102.66 ha) and moderate (8.06 ha) quality foraging habitat. Extensive habitat remains in the local area and region. Fauna habitat and land systems are well represented both locally and regionally. The loss of 113.52 ha of fauna habitat is not expected to have a significant effect on faunal assemblages in a bioregional context.

Extent (intensity, duration, magnitude Up to 113.52 ha will be temporarily disturbed as a result of the Proposal. Existing and geographic footprint) of the likely cleared areas and access tracks have been used where possible. impacts. Impacts to land systems affected by the Proposal are considered low, with an Consequence of the likely impacts (or impact of <1% of remaining extent. change). Three (3) Beard (1976) VSA occur within the Project DE, only two (2) of which are within the Clearing Footprint (Tathra 49 and 379). The Proposal will result in the Resilience of the environment to cope temporary clearance of0.5% or less of each VSA. with the impacts or change. Seven (7) VT have been mapped within the Disturbance Footprint. All of these vegetation types are known to extend beyond the Disturbance Footprint and the

Criteria Assessment Project DE. It is unlikely that the Proposal would significantly reduce the local occurrence of these VT. The overall effects of the Proposal are not expected to be significant at a local or regional level.

Connections and interactions between A holistic assessment has been undertaken in Section 11. parts of the environment to inform a holistic view of impacts to the whole environment.

Level of confidence in the prediction of The level of confidence in the predicted outcomes from the Proposal is high given impacts and the success of proposed that the key impacts are direct impacts which are quantifiable and well mitigation. understood. The environmental impacts of this Proposal will be addressed through the management measures identified within each environmental factor.

Public interest about the likely effect of A comprehensive stakeholder consultation process was undertaken during the the Proposal, if implemented, on the planning and design of the Proposal to identify and address concerns. Stakeholder environment, and public information consultation will continue throughout the life of the Proposal through to closure. that informs the EPA’s assessment. The Proposal is expected to generate public concern given the interest in oil and gas activities generally and the level of oil and gas exploration and development in the region. These concerns are expected to focus on renewable alternatives and hydraulic fracture stimulation.

13. Environmental Management and Regulation Framework

An overview of the proposed regulatory framework for the Proposal and applicable environmental approvals for each of the identified relevant factors is provided in Table 13.1. Table 13.1: Proposed Regulatory Framework and Environmental Approvals Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency Key Factor

Flora and vegetation After the application of the mitigation hierarchy, the Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (NVCP) EP Act (WA) DMIRS has Proposal is predicted to result in the following outcomes delegated authority No clearing permit exemptions exist for the required clearing in relation to flora and vegetation: for the (other than in the case of an assessment under Part IV of the administration of • Clearing 113.52 ha of native vegetation within a EP Act). A NVCP would therefore be required to authorise applications to clear 801.91 ha Disturbance Footprint, all of which is clearing of native vegetation required to implement the native vegetation temporary; Proposal. • No Threatened flora will be impacted for mineral and • No impact to any listed PECs or TECs The proposed clearing would be assessed against the ten petroleum activities. clearing principles: • No impact to Priority 1,2 or 3 species. • Impact to two (2) out of 15 Conservation significant a) it comprises a high level of biological diversity; or flora within the Disturbance Footprint (< 30% impact b) it comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for to known population) the maintenance of, a significant habitat for fauna indigenous to Western Australia; or c) it includes, or is necessary for the continued existence of, rare flora; or d) it comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of a threatened ecological community; or e) it is significant as a remnant of native vegetation in an area that has been extensively cleared; or f) it is growing in, or in association with, an environment associated with a watercourse or wetland; or g) the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause appreciable land degradation; or h) the clearing of the vegetation is likely to have an impact on the environmental values of any adjacent or nearby conservation area; or

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency i) the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause deterioration in the quality of surface or underground water; or j) the clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause, or exacerbate, the incidence or intensity of flooding. Any management, mitigation and residual impacts can be conditioned in any approved permit.

Environment Plan PGER Act (WA) DMIRS Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is also subject to the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967 (PGER Act) and associated regulations, administered by the State Government through the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS). An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including impacts to flora and vegetation. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. The management measures outlined in this referral will be documented in the EP. Compliance with EP’s are assessed via a regular audit and review process.

Terrestrial Fauna After the application of the mitigation hierarchy, the NVCP EP Act (WA) DMIRS has Proposal is predicted to result in the following outcomes delegated authority No clearing permit exemptions exist for the required clearing in relation to Terrestrial Fauna: for the (other than in the case of an assessment under Part IV of the administration of • Up to 113.52 ha of fauna habitat, which is EP Act). A NVCP would therefore be required to authorise applications to clear predominantly low to moderate quality Carnaby’s clearing of native vegetation required to implement the native vegetation Black-Cockatoo foraging habitat, will be directly Proposal. impacted by the Proposal, all of which is temporary for mineral and and will be allowed to recover with monitoring The proposed clearing would be assessed against the ten petroleum activities. clearing principles which includes an assessment of the against completion criteria. proposed clearing against the principle “it comprises the whole

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency • All habitats within the Project DE are widespread or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of, a significant and no niche habitats are present. habitat for fauna indigenous to Western Australia”. • The potential for fragmentation is minimised as the Any management, mitigation and residual impacts can be gathering network is to be buried and fauna are conditioned in any approved permit. likely to be able to move across the temporary 3.5 m width cleared seismic line. Environment Plan PGER Act (WA) DMIRS • No measurable reduction in the populations of conservation significant fauna within the Project DE Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is is anticipated as a result of the Proposal; and also subject to the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy • Potential impacts from disturbance resulting from Resources Act 1967 (PGER Act) and associated regulations, dust, and noise and vibrations are manageable and administered by the State Government through the unlikely to cause significant impacts to resident Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS). fauna. An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and Through the implementation of the EPA’s mitigation geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent hierarchy, the residual impacts of the Proposal are with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, unlikely to cause significant local or regional impacts to and to provide a management tool to identify and manage terrestrial fauna including any of the conservation potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, significant fauna species As a result, the EPA’s objective including impacts to fauna. All activities are to be undertaken for terrestrial fauna will be achieved. in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. The management measures outlined in this referral will be documented in the EP. Compliance with EP’s are assessed via a regular audit and review process.

Controlled Action EPBC Act (Cwth) DAWE (accredited assessment process) Native vegetation clearing processes under Part V Division 2 of the EP Act have also now been accredited under the Commonwealth’s EPBC Act (refer to Section 1.3.1). The proposed clearing of MNES can be assessed by the State on behalf of the Commonwealth. Separate decisions on the proposed clearing by the State under the EP Act and the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act will be required. Given potential impacts to MNES (Carnaby’s Black Cockatoo habitat), Strike Energy has referred the Proposal to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act and DAWE has determined the Proposal to

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency be a Controlled Action (assessment approach to be determined). Strike Energy is of the view that the assessment of impacts of the Proposal on fauna can be adequately addressed via the clearing permit and Commonwealth assessment processes.

Terrestrial Following application of the mitigation measures, the Environment Plan PGER Act (WA) DMIRS Environmental project may result in temporary impacts to soils and Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is Quality landforms, however with no significant residual impacts also subject to the PP Act, PGER Act and associated regulations. are anticipated.

An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and The Proponent considers that the Proposal can be geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent managed to meet the EPA’s objective for Terrestrial with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, Environmental Quality. and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including impacts to terrestrial environmental quality. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. Under the petroleum legislation, exploration activities require the submission and approval of an environment plan and OSCP from DMIRS. OSCP(s) are Proposal-specific plans outlining the response structure, strategy, and associated information necessary to aid effective response in the event of a spill. OSCPs are an essential component of an environment plan which is to be incorporated into all relevant operating procedures and may be incorporated into the implementation strategy of an environment plan or submitted as a standalone document. Compliance with environment plan(s) and OSCP’s are assessed via a regular audit and review process.

Other Factors

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency Social Surroundings - Noise is expected to be comparable to other activities in Noise emissions will be subject to the noise levels assigned in Noise Regulations Shires of Carnamah Noise the region and will be attenuated with distance to the the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997. (WA) and Coorow nearest sensitive receptors. DWER

Social Surroundings - Localised reduction in air quality associated with Environment Plan PGER Act DMIRS dust generation of dust emissions that are not expected to Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is cause impacts to sensitive receptors. also subject to the PP Act, PGER Act and associated regulations. An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including impacts from dust. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. Compliance with environment plans are assessed via a regular audit and review process. Native Title Act National Native Title Social Surroundings – No Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) Heritage Agreement (Cwth) Tribunal Aboriginal heritage registered Aboriginal sites or other heritage places are The Project DE is located within land which is subject to the recorded within the Project DE. Yamatji Nation Indigenous Land Use Agreement under the Native Title Act. Any activities on the land subject to the agreement must be undertaken in consultation with the Traditional Owners.

Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 AH Act DPLH The AH Act is a law in the state of WA governing the protection of Aboriginal cultural sites. The law protects all Aboriginal heritage sites in WA, whether or not they are registered with the Department of Planning, Lands, and Heritage. The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs of WA must provide approval for any activity which will negatively impact Aboriginal heritage sites.

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency Environment Plan PGER Act (WA) DMIRS

Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is also subject to the PP Act, PGER Act and associated regulations. An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including impacts to Aboriginal heritage. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. Compliance with EP’s are assessed via a regular audit and review process.

Greenhouse Gas Impacts are expected to be highly localised and Environment Plan PGER Act DMIRS Emissions attenuated with distance to sensitive receptors. Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is also subject to the PP Act, PGER Act and associated regulations. An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including greenhouse gas emissions. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. Compliance with environment plan(s) are assessed via a regular audit and review process. Air Quality Impacts are expected to be highly localised and Environment Plan PGER Act DMIRS attenuated with distance to sensitive receptors. Onshore petroleum exploration and development activity is also subject to the PP Act, PGER Act and associated regulations.

Factor Predicted Outcome Proposed Management/Approvals Legislation Agency An environment plan is required to ensure that petroleum and geothermal activities are carried out in a manner consistent with the principles of ecologically sustainable development, and to provide a management tool to identify and manage potential risks and impacts associated with the activity, including air quality impacts. All activities are to be undertaken in accordance with an environment plan that has appropriate risk based environmental performance objectives and standards, and that provides criteria for determining whether the objectives and standards are met. Compliance with environment plan(s) are assessed via a regular audit and review process.

14. Limitations

Scope of Services This report (“the report”) has been prepared by Strategen-JBS&G in accordance with the scope of services set out in the contract, or as otherwise agreed, between the Client and Strategen-JBS&G. In some circumstances, a range of factors such as time, budget, access and/or site disturbance constraints may have limited the scope of services. This report is strictly limited to the matters stated in it and is not to be read as extending, by implication, to any other matter in connection with the matters addressed in it.

Reliance on Data In preparing the report, Strategen-JBS&G has relied upon data and other information provided by the Client and other individuals and organisations, most of which are referred to in the report (“the data”). Except as otherwise expressly stated in the report, Strategen-JBS&G has not verified the accuracy or completeness of the data. To the extent that the statements, opinions, facts, information, conclusions and/or recommendations in the report (“conclusions”) are based in whole or part on the data, those conclusions are contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of the data. Strategen-JBS&G has also not attempted to determine whether any material matter has been omitted from the data. Strategen-JBS&G will not be liable in relation to incorrect conclusions should any data, information or condition be incorrect or have been concealed, withheld, misrepresented or otherwise not fully disclosed to Strategen-JBS&G. The making of any assumption does not imply that Strategen-JBS&G has made any enquiry to verify the correctness of that assumption. The report is based on conditions encountered and information received at the time of preparation of this report or the time that site investigations were carried out. Strategen-JBS&G disclaims responsibility for any changes that may have occurred after this time. This report and any legal issues arising from it are governed by and construed in accordance with the law of Western Australia as at the date of this report.

Environmental Conclusions Within the limitations imposed by the scope of services, the preparation of this report has been undertaken and performed in a professional manner, in accordance with generally accepted environmental consulting practices. No other warranty, whether express or implied, is made. The advice herein relates only to this project and all results conclusions and recommendations made should be reviewed by a competent person with experience in environmental investigations, before being used for any other purpose. Strategen-JBS&G accepts no liability for use or interpretation by any person or body other than the client who commissioned the works. This report should not be reproduced without prior approval by the client, or amended in any way without prior approval by Strategen-JBS&G, and should not be relied upon by other parties, who should make their own enquiries.

15. References

Beard, J. S. 1976. Vegetation Survey of Western Australia: Murchison 1:1 000 000. Map and Explanatory Notes to Sheet 6. University of Western Australia Press, Perth. Beard, J. S. 1990. Plant Life of Western Australia. Kangaroo Press, NSW. Department of the Environment (DoE) 2021b. Paracaleana dixonii in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=86882. Eco Logical Australia (ELA), 2018a. EP469 West Erregulla-2 Exploration Well Environment Plan, prepared for Strike West Pty Ltd on behalf of EP469 Joint Venture, 6 June 2019 Eco Logical Australia, 2018b. West Erregulla-2 Exploration Well Groundwater Monitoring Plan. Prepared for EP469 Joint Venture, 30 September 2018 Eco Logical Australia 2021, West Erregulla Environmental Survey and Approvals Hydrology and Hydrogeology Baseline and Preliminary Impact Assessment Report, report prepared for AGIG, February 2021 Desmond, A., and Chant, A. 2002. Geraldton Sandplain 3 (GS3 - Lesueur Sandplain subregion), in A Biodiversity Audit of Western Australia's 53 Biogeographic Subregions in 2002, prepared for Department of Conservation and Land Management, accessed online 5 May 2021 at . Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2016a. Environmental Factor Guideline: Flora and Vegetation. Perth, Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2016b. Technical Guidance: Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2016c. Technical Guidance: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys. EPA, Perth, Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2016d. Technical Guidance: Sampling methods for Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna. EPA, Western Australia. December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2016e. Technical Guidance: Sampling Methods for Short Range Endemic Invertebrate Fauna. EPA, Western Australia. December 2016. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2018. Environmental Factor Guideline: Inland Waters. EPA, Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2019. Technical Report: Carnaby’s Cockatoo in Environmental Impact Assessment in the Perth and Peel Region Advice of the Environmental Protection Authority under Section 16(j) of the Environmental Protection Act 1986. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2020a. Statement of Environmental Principles, Factors and Objectives. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, June 2020 Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2020b. Instructions on how to prepare an Environmental Review Document, Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia, March 2020. Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) 2020c. Technical Guidance: Terrestrial vertebrate fauna surveys for environmental impact assessment. EPA, Western Australia. June 2020.

MDW 2015, Groundwater Investigation Warrego Energy – KD1. MDW Environmental Services. Unpublished report for Warrego Energy. September 2015 RPS Aquaterra, 2011. West Erregulla Groundwater Assessment. Prepared for Warrego Energy Pty Ltd, 22 August 2011 Strategen-JBS&G 2021, EP469 West Erregulla Field Development Program Fauna Desktop Review, Unpublished report for Strike West Pty Ltd, June 2020. Terra Rosa, 2021. An archaeological and ethnographic site avoidance heritage survey of the Strike West Pty Ltd West Erregulla Development Footprint (Phase 1) with Yamatji Nation Traditional Owners. Report prepared for Strike West Pty Ltd by Terra Rosa Consulting, May 2021 Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (Woodman Environmental) 2013. West Erregulla Project DE Flora and Vegetation Assessment, Unpublished report for Warrego Resources, September 2013. Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (Woodman Environmental) 2020a. West Erregulla Exploration Program Wells 4 and 5 Flora and Vegetation Risk Assessment, Unpublished report for Strike Energy Ltd, March 2020. Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (Woodman Environmental) 2020b. West Erregulla Exploration Program Targeted Flora Survey, Unpublished report for Strike Energy Ltd, December 2020.

© JBS&G Australia Pty Ltd T/A Strategen-JBS&G This document is and shall remain the property of Strategen-JBS&G. The document may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited. Document Distribution

Rev No. Copies Recipient Date 0 1.x Electronic P Bouteloup 23/07/2021

Document Status

Reviewer Approved for Issue Rev No. Author Name Name Signature Date 0 R Tomkins A Latto A Latto 23/07/2021