Great Western Woodlands Map Project

Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps using the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS)

August 2013 Project ID 11SC-C124

COVER PHOTO Granite outcrop at the proposed Jaurdi conservation reserve. Photo – DEC

Report compiled by: Carly Bishop, Ben Bayliss, Stephen van Leeuwen, Aminya Ennis, Shane French, Paul Gioia, Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, AU.

Citation: Bishop, C.L., Bayliss, B., van Leeuwen, S., Ennis, A., French. S. & Gioia, P. 2013 Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps using the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) , Department of Environment and Conservation (Science Division), Perth, AU.

This report was prepared for South Coast Natural Resource Management - Project ID 11SC-C124 “Great Western Woodlands reconciled vegetation mapping - Wildlife Corridors”

This report and associated information will be available on the Department of Parks and Wildlife DPaW website www.dpaw.wa.gov.au .

* The Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) ceased operations on 30 June 2013 and was divided into 2 agencies: the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPaW) under which this project resides, and the Department of Environment and Regulation (DER).

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 1 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND ...... 3 2. PROJECT APPROACH...... 5

2.1. DATA MINING ...... 7 2.2. SCOPING AND PRIORITISATION ...... 7 2.3. PROCESSING SPATIAL DATA : CREATION OF THE SPATIAL EXTENT OVERVIEW LAYER (MAP “FOOTPRINTS ”): ...... 9 2.4. PROCESSING VEGETATION ATTRIBUTE DATA (DESCRIPTIONS ) – THE NATIONAL VEGETATION INFORMATION SYSTEM (NVIS) 10 2.5. LINKING SPATIAL AND VEGETATION ATTRIBUTE DATA ...... 12 2.6. DEVELOPMENT OF GIS PACKAGES , NATURE MAP PRODUCT AND GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE DATA CAPTURE ...... 13 3. FINDINGS...... 14

3.1. SUMMARY OF MAP COVERAGE ...... 14 3.2. SPATIAL (MAP ) COVERAGE GAPS ...... 15 3.3. MAPS OF VARYING QUALITY /SUITABILITY ...... 15 3.4. MAP SHAPE CONSIDERATIONS : LINEAR CONFIGURATIONS ...... 16 4. PROJECT LEARNINGS ...... 16

4.1. ACCESS TO SOURCE INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS FOR A CENTRAL DATA REPOSITORY ...... 16 4.2. OBTAINING PERMISSION TO USE PROPONENT OWNED DATA IN NATURE MAP ...... 17 4.3. THE COMPLEXITY AND INTERRELATED NATURE OF PROPONENT VEGETATION REPORTS AND MAPS ...... 18 5. SOUTH COAST NRM EVALUATION QUESTIONS...... 19 6. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 21 7. NATUREMAP PRODUCT AND GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE DATA CAPTURE ...... 21

7.1. NATURE MAP ...... 21 7.2. GUIDELINES FOR FUTURE DATA CAPTURE ...... 22 8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... 22 REFERENCES...... 23 GLOSSARY...... 24 APPENDICES...... 26

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

FIGURES

Figure 1: Location of vegetation types of the Great Western Woodlands (Hopkins et al. 2000)...... 4

Figure 2: Approach used to consolidate existing vegetation maps of the Great Western Woodlands (modified from Bayliss et al 2011)...... 6

Figure 3: Proportion of time required for project components...... 7

Figure 4: Decision tree to determine if existing vegetation map attributes were suitable for translation into NVIS descriptions ...... 9

Figure 5: Database form view of vegetation attributes linked to the GIS spatial layers. The field “vegref” is the linking code to the vegetation units displayed in the GIS spatial layer...... 12

Figure 6: Example of a many to many relationship between map unit polygons and associated vegetation descriptions (indicated by the “vegref” code)...... 13

Figure 7: Area range (ha) of mapped extents (footprints) for attributed spatial layers ( refid is the source reference identification code)...... 15

TABLES

Table 1: The NVIS Information Hierarchy with levels recommended for data compilation (ESCAVI 2003)...... 11

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Locations and extents of existing vegetation maps of the Great Western Woodlands

APPENDIX B: A summary of NVIS general concepts and description coding

APPENDIX C: Relationships between the National Vegetation Information System (ESCAVI 2003) and Muir (1977) Vegetation Structural Classification Systems

APPENDIX D: List of collated source documents

APPENDIX E: List of attributed map sources

APPENDIX F: Great Western Woodlands Vegetation Map Project and Guidelines for Spatial Data Capture.

ACRONYMS

ANVMP Avon Native Vegetation Map Project

DEC Department of Environment & Conservation

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

GIS Geographic Information System

GWW Great Western Woodlands

NVIS National Vegetation Information System

PER Public Environmental Review

South Coast NRM South Coast Natural Resource Management Inc.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Summary

The project set out to identify existing sources of mapped native vegetation from across the Great Western Woodlands (GWW) with the aim of producing a consolidated data set and reconciled vegetation map of finer scale than currently exists for the region. Much of the map information was of a variable nature and required a level of standardisation to enable consolidation of the spatial data (maps) and their attributes (vegetation descriptions) into one integrated source.

Following an approach adapted from the Avon Native Vegetation Map Project (ANVMP), existing vegetation maps and their associated descriptions were evaluated and consolidated by the project team for the GWW region. As for the ANVMP the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) was used to help interpret these vegetation descriptions according to a standard terminology.

Key tasks completed for the project were:

• Extensive data mining from public and private sector sources to identify and compile existing fine-scale native vegetation map information for the GWW. This information was predominantly found amongst the “grey” literature such as reports generated through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process; • Scoping and evaluation of over 290 information sources for potentially useful fine scale native vegetation map images and related data. This review process gave a fundamental understanding of the various sources of map information and enabled their prioritisation for integration into the project dataset. • Development of a digital (GIS) overview spatial extent layer or “map of the maps” summarising the georeferenced spatial ‘”footprints” of 75 existing map sources. This layer is an important product of the scoping and evaluation process revealing the location, relative size, configuration, and spatial overlap of mapped areas for the different sources. The extent layer also provides a “spatial catalogue” of the information sources. Contrary to expectations, a significant finding revealed through this spatial overview is the low proportion (3%) of the GWW covered by fine- scaled vegetation maps. • Digitisation of vegetation map units for incorporation into a GIS linked to a database of vegetation attributes with over 500 records. • Standardisation of over 500 source vegetation descriptions according to a consistent, comparable descriptive terminology using the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS). This demonstrated how vegetation attributes associated with existing maps from disparate sources can be successfully consolidated into a single point of inquiry reference resource • Adaptation of the ANVMP concept to the consolidation of fine-scale vegetation map data and standardised attributes for the GWW. Experience from this process will help inform future similar regional spatial data consolidation projects within and outside the GWW; • Development of guidelines to inform future vegetation map data capture and vegetation mapping strategies which, through a standardised approach, ensure the consistency and regional comparability of vegetation data generated by different sources

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

• Creation of a standardised consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps for the GWW publicly accessible through a web based spatial viewer (NatureMap).

The low coverage and variable nature of existing fine scale map data was made apparent through the scoping and evaluation process. These findings determined the kind of final product delivered to the South Coast NRM and the level of reconciliation that could be achieved. Where sufficient basic structural and floristic information was available, NVIS enabled vegetation descriptions to be standardised to a consistent level of terminology. For the final product, this standardisation enables disparate source descriptions to be compared in equivalent terms across the project area. In many cases, such terms could be expressed and compared at the most detailed level of the NVIS descriptive hierarchy (Level 6, sub association). However reconciliation also involves interpreting these equivalent vegetation descriptions as a regionally defined set of mapped units. Variation between the data sources in defining and mapping vegetation units was considerable with incongruent or mismatched line work apparent for adjacent or overlapping maps. Because of this, reclassifying and spatially reinterpreting these units at a regional level required a much greater coverage of the GWW than 3% as well as additional field data collection and ground truthing or verification to meaningfully support this reinterpretation . Given the disparate nature and location of the source information, lack of an existing consolidated spatial summary or “spatial catalogue” of native vegetation data from across the source agencies was also found to be a major limitation to efficiency in data integration as a regional dataset.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

1. Project background

The Great Western Woodlands (GWW) is the largest remaining Mediterranean-climate woodland covering approximately 16 million hectares. The woodlands are floristically diverse containing more than 3000 plant species which is close to 20% of Australia’s known flora (Department of Environment and Conservation, 2012).

In recognition of the significance of the area, the Western Australian state government release d A Biodiversity and Cultural Conservation Strategy for the Great Western Woodlands (Department of Environment and Conservation, 2010). As part of an implementation of key strategies under the conservation strategy, the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) † and South Coast NRM identified the need for a regional vegetation map to help support planning and management of the GWW. This need led to initiation of the current project which aims to:

Collate vegetation and floristic data for the GWW; Standardise and analyse vegetation and floristic data for the GWW; Reconcile vegetation maps and associated spatial data products informing on the reliability, accuracy and comprehensiveness of the botanical/vegetation data used to generate the reconciled map; and Publish guidelines for future botanical survey programs and vegetation mapping campaigns to ensure that new data captured contributes to the development of a region-wide compositionally-based vegetation map.

Previous regional vegetation surveys covering the GWW were undertaken by Beard (1975, 1981) at a scale of 1:1,000,000. From this original work by Beard, Hopkins et al. (2000) further developed the 1:250,000 state vegetation maps that cover the GWW (Figure 1). Although these maps and their associated vegetation data are valuable sources of baseline information, their coarse scale limits their usefulness where finer scaled information is required for decision making. Producing a regional vegetation map at a finer scale than Hopkins et al. (2000), presents an extensive undertaking for an area the size of the GWW study area. However many finer scaled vegetation maps associated with industry and government sector sources provide the opportunity to consolidate existing data into a regional vegetation map. Variation in the way vegetation is described for these maps requires a way of standardising these descriptions so that they can be compared as equivalent attributes across all maps. The National Vegetation System (NVIS) provides a set of useful guidelines that help achieve this.

The project began with a comprehensive data mining exercise. Existing vegetation maps and descriptions were primarily found within the grey literature such as unpublished hard copy reports,

† Known as the Department of Parks and Wildlife from 1 July 2013

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps and documents associated with the environmental review process. Such sources contain valuable information that has the potential to be consolidated and, with reference to the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS), standardised to form the foundation of a vegetation map for the GWW at a finer scale than currently exists.

Figure 1: Location of vegetation types of the Great Western Woodlands (Hopkins et al. 2000)

An important initial stage in the project process was scoping of information sources. Scoping is essential to understand what the information contains, how relevant it is to the project, as well as determine which sources represent the greatest “value for effort” in contributing to the project outcomes. Those sources identified as having the greatest value were prioritised for further examination and processing. A key outcome of this scoping stage was the development of a spatial extent overview layer or “map of the maps” summarising the georeferenced spatial ‘”footprints” of existing information sources. This spatial extent layer was critical to: Understanding the spatial relationships of all potential map information sources and their prioritisation for further analysis. Creating “spatially aware” (georeferenced) map boundaries for more efficient digitising of vegetation units into the project GIS. Prioritisation of vegetation attributes for interpretation and standardisation. The extent layer also provided a “spatial catalogue” indicating the sources from which the information was derived. 4

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Once the initial scoping was complete, the approach used by Bayliss (2011) was adapted and effectively applied to the GWW project.

This project was initiated in 2012 as a collaboration between DEC and South Coast NRM to source, collate, assess and standardise existing fine-scaled vegetation maps. This work aims to produce a consolidated spatial dataset with an interactive layer viewable through NatureMap. The project also provides information about data inconsistencies and deficiencies that hinder standardisation. As a result of these findings, guidelines for data collection have been developed to inform the development of a regional vegetation map for the GWW.

This report documents the approach taken, findings, project challenges and recommended guidelines for future data capture.

2. Project Approach

The approach used to consolidate existing vegetation maps of the GWW was based upon that developed for the ANVMP (Bayliss et al, 2011) to address an information gap identified for the Avon Natural Resource Management Region (Richardson et al. 2007). The application of this approach to the GWW is outlined below and represented in figure 2. Figure 3 depicts the time investment required for each component of the project.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Data mining Locate and obtain fine-scale vegetation maps (generally hard copy but digital if available)

Data scoping

Review collated vegetation reports and maps Review reports and original vegetation maps for suitability for inclusion in the consolidated map product Prioritise original maps based on suitability of spatial and attribute data (vegetation descriptions) for processing

Process spatial data (vegetation maps) Process vegetation attribute data (descriptions) Convert original hardcopy maps into a digital GIS vector layer format Interpret and translate original vegetation descriptions Scan, georeference and rectify map image into standard terminology using NVIS . Digitise map boundaries to create spatial extent Correlate original vegetation descriptions with layer (footprints of existing vegetation maps) mapped polygons/units Digitise vegetation map units as polygon features Interpret and translate vegetation descriptions into Relate digitised polygons with original vegetation NVIS terminology descriptions Enter both the original vegetation descriptions and Generate unique polygon identifiers standardised NVIS descriptions into database. Generate linking reference code (“vegref”)

Link spatial data with vegetation descriptions

Link data types : Attribute (i.e. label) polygons in GIS layers with vegetation database reference code (“vegref”)

Development of products Reporting

Compile metadata for spatial layers and vegetation SCNRM progress & contract closure reports attributes. Final Report GIS package 1 (RESTRICTED – not for public release) GIS package 2 (UNRESTRICTED – for public release) Integrated NatureMap product Guidelines for future data capture

Figure 2: Approach used to consolidate existing vegetation maps of the Great Western Woodlands (modified from Bayliss et al 2011)

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Figure 3: Proportion of time required for project components

2.1. Data Mining

An extensive data mining exercise was carried out to locate existing fine-scale vegetation maps and vegetation attribute data. Maps were generally sourced as hard copy images from the “grey” literature mostly generated through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Source information was obtained from DEC libraries and offices including the Native Vegetation Conservation Branch, Environmental Management Branch, Conservation Science Library, Atrium Library and the Kalgoorlie regional DEC office. Contact was also made with the Office of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) and relevant DEC staff. Reports were scanned into PDF format and maps extracted as digital images to be georeferenced and rectified in a Geographic Information System (GIS) 2.2. Scoping and prioritisation

Scoping was undertaken to understand the content, quality and complexity of relationships between the collated reports. An assessment was made to determine which information sources were relevant and suitable for contribution to the final product. Scoping is an essential prerequisite for efficient, enhanced outcomes and products from a project of this kind. Due to the number and variable quality of information sources collected, it was apparent early in the project scoping that prioritisation was required. Information sources were prioritised according to “value for effort” and relevance to the project aims Factors that were considered in prioritisation were:

Presence of a map. Some information sources documented or described vegetation for the GWW but did not display a map and so could not be used for the project other than as supplementary reference.

Map properties and quality:

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

• Vegetation units should be displayed or interpretable as unbroken closed boundaries (polygons) rather than as points or lines.

• Clarity of map unit delineation. Line work should preferably be clear and unambiguous

• Explicitness of map unit annotation or attribution. Each mapped polygon comprising a map vegetation unit should be clearly labeled according to the vegetation type described. Some maps used rendering such as colour or shading that did not clearly link map units with a described vegetation type.

• Adequacy of geographic referencing. That is, presence of important information needed to define the maps geographic properties and location, such as a datum, projection and coordinate reference grid. Other useful displayed reference information includes documented reference cadastral boundaries, such as mining tenements or property boundaries.

Quality and consistency of the original vegetation descriptions;

• Consistency and comprehensiveness of information relating to structural and floristic parameters such as height, cover, and species dominance. In particular whether vegetation is described according to the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) or to a known structural classification system (e.g.: Muir, 1977) that can be related to NVIS.

• Whether the vegetation descriptions can be unambiguously identified with the mapped vegetation unit polygons. In some cases a potential source map depicted vegetation as broad structural units (e.g.: “woodlands”, “shrublands”). Although vegetation types occurring within the area of the map were described elsewhere in finer floristic and structural detail, these descriptions could not be related (i.e. attributed) to the displayed map units without a high level of interpretation or “educated guesswork”.

Relative extent and configuration of the mapped area i.e. small vs. large area, compact vs. long and narrow such as a transport corridor. Large non linear areas are preferable in that, as well as potentially providing greater coverage; such areas are more likely to appropriately represent regional vegetation patterns.

Copyright restrictions on source material (whether the information owner, such as a mining proponent requires permission to communicate or distribute the information).

The ease of translation of the original vegetation descriptions according to NVIS terminology was of key importance. Vegetation descriptions varied from being closely compliant in that they consistently used an recognised classification scheme – generally Muir (1977) or NVIS (ESCAVI 2003); to descriptions that were generalised, deficient in essential floristic and structural information or used informal non standard descriptive terms. Where vegetation descriptions linked to a vegetation map did not adhere to a defined vegetation classification system, but: i) contained 8

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps sufficient structural and floristic information or ii) where other contextual source information was available (e.g., site data), descriptions could sometimes be usefully interpreted according to NVIS terminology.

Figure 4 outlines the decision process used to determine which source vegetation descriptions were suitable for translation according to NVIS terminology. Vegetation descriptions associated with source maps were considered to be:

A. Directly translatable as NVIS descriptions or,

B. Indirectly translatable ,requiring further interpretation of other supporting information (e.g. site data) or expertise (e.g. from a botanist/ecologist with specialist knowledge of the regional vegetation/flora) or

C. Uninterpretable due to an unstructured, incomplete, informal or vague vegetation description, particularly where the description did not relate to any known structural vegetation classification system. In these cases an NVIS translation was unable to be performed and the map information not eligible to be included in the final consolidated spatial product.

Can the vegetation descriptions be linked to mapped units or polygons? NO YES

Do the existing vegetation descriptions adhere to a standard classification scheme?

Is there adequate supporting information /specialist knowledge for YES a partial or complete interpretation as an NVIS description?

YES

Vegetation descriptions can be translated Information source not eligible to be according to NVIS level terms as spatial included in the final project dataset. (map) attributes. Included in final project dataset

Figure 4: Decision tree to determine if existing vegetation map attributes were suitable for translation into NVIS descriptions

2.3. Processing spatial data: creation of the spatial extent overview layer (map “footprints”):

The majority of source maps were only accessible in hard copy format with few available directly in a GIS compatible digital format. This meant that hardcopy maps had to be manually scanned, and the 9

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps map images made “spatially aware”(georeferenced and rectified) so they could be viewed in a GIS. The boundaries of these georeferenced map images were then digitised as polygon features representing the “foot print” of the map. These footprints were combined into one GIS layer giving a spatial extent overview of all source maps or “map of maps”. (Appendix A). ‡

Much of the source information reflected the pattern of resource extraction activities in the GWW. These activities are subject to EIA assessment for which the reporting required of proponents usually involves collection and presentation of vegetation data. Inevitably such sources of information vary in the quality, scale, methods of capture, interpretation and description of mapped vegetation. Additionally, mapped areas can overlap in time and space and have differing boundaries.

To understand these map information characteristics, creating a spatial extent layer to identify the distribution and extent or “footprints” of existing vegetation maps was as essential component of the project. The spatial extent layer represented a “map of the maps” combining the disparate map images to reveal their location, relative size, configuration, and spatial overlap. This layer was a powerful overview tool for evaluating:

How the various maps related to each other ; Which maps would potentially represent the greatest contribution to the GWW regional cover for the work and time involved (i.e. “value for effort”); Potential overlap and clashes of incongruent information. The area represented by the source from which information was derived.

2.4. Processing vegetation attribute data (descriptions) – the National Vegetation Information System (NVIS)

The NVIS framework (ESCAVI 2003) facilitates the compilation of a nationally standardised vegetation dataset. It provides a comprehensive means of describing and representing vegetation information based on establishing relationships between structural and floristic data. The NVIS framework consists of 6 hierarchical levels based on increasing complexity of structural and floristic components. The NVIS Information Hierarchy is a system for describing the structural and floristic patterns of groups of plants in the landscape. Collectively, the different levels in the classification

‡ All “hard copy” map images, as well as electronic formats such as PDF, have no inherent geographic reference or “spatial awareness” enabling representation in a Geographic Information System (GIS). A GIS enables integration and analysis of such images not possible otherwise. Spatially unaware images, such as scanned maps from a report therefore need to be made “spatially aware” or georeferenced. To create the spatial extent layer, boundaries of georeferenced hardcopy maps images displayed in a GIS viewer were digitised with a standard geographic frame of reference allowing display and query in a GIS as well as a web based spatial viewer such as NatureMap. The spatial extent layer shows the configuration, relative size, distribution, overlap of mapped areas and identifies the map source. The GWW Spatial Extent Layer can be viewed through NatureMap.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps provide a description of vegetation that can be directly related to precise spatial areas on a vegetation map. For more detailed information relating to NVIS data products, publications and resources (including a comprehensive manual) please visit the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities NVIS website. http://www.environment.gov.au/erin/nvis/

Hierarchical Description NVIS structural/floristic components required Level Dominant growth form for the ecologically or structurally I Class* dominant stratum Dominant growth form, cover and height for the ecologically or II Structural Formation* structurally dominant stratum. Dominant growth form, cover, height and dominant land cover III Broad Floristic Formation** genus for the upper most or the ecologically or structurally dominant stratum. Dominant growth form, cover, height and dominant genus for IV Sub-Formation** each of the three traditional strata. (i.e. Upper, Mid and Ground) Dominant growth form, height, cover and species (3 species) for V Association** the three traditional strata. (i.e. Upper, Mid and Ground) Dominant growth form, height, cover and species (5 species §) for ← COMPLEXITY ← ← INCREASING ← ← ← VI Sub-Association** all layers/sub-strata. * (Walker and Hopkins 1990) ** NVIS (defined for the NVIS Information Hierarchy)

Table 1: The NVIS Information Hierarchy with levels recommended for data compilation (ESCAVI 2003).

Although integration of vegetation data for the GWW project does not involve submitting vegetation data to a national dataset, NVIS provides a guide to standardising terminology across sources that do not always uniformly describe or define vegetation. Appendix B contains a summary of general NVIS concepts and a West Australian example of a Muir to NVIS translation for a Salmon Gum Woodland description prepared by Bayliss (2011). NVIS represents a nationally recognised vegetation classification framework that can be related to frequently used structural vegetation classification schemes (e.g. Muir, 1977; Keighery, 1994), For this reason NVIS was used to standardise existing vegetation descriptions associated with maps captured for the GWW. Appendix C provides a comparative table showing the way NVIS and Muir (1977) classifications can be related. This table is a useful tool for other similar projects and applications seeking to interpret vegetation descriptions according to a common NVIS terminology.

A database was developed in Microsoft Access to store the source vegetation descriptions and related NVIS translations as attributes for the spatial layer. An example of the database form view for the vegetation descriptions is shown in figure 5. This database is linked to the GIS spatial layers

§ Although NVIS specifies only 5 species for a Level 6 description, all listed species have been retained for this project to maintain data comprehensiveness

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

(shapefiles) by a reference code (“ vegref ”). This code is carried by each vegetation map unit polygon in the spatial layer and can be used to look up the relevant vegetation descriptions in the database.

When processing source vegetation descriptions, any current name changes were noted as comments in the database but the original species names were maintained in the databased descriptions as they appeared in the original report. This was done so that any old names could be clearly traced back to the source document if required. For example where a species name given in a description appears to have been superseded, the accuracy of the original identification associated with the old name may need to be confirmed in order for the name change to be validated. Current species names can be found on the Department of Parks and Wildlife ** websites: Florabase at http://florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au or through the Species Database MAX at http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/our-environment/science-and-research/information-systems- research/max.html

Figure 5: Database form view of vegetation attributes linked to the GIS spatial layers. The field “vegref” is the linking code to the vegetation units displayed in the GIS spatial layer.

2.5. Linking spatial and vegetation attribute data

There is a many to many relationship between polygons that comprise a map unit and the vegetation descriptions that are attributed to the map polygons in the GIS layer (figure 6). Sometimes a map polygon will be a mosaic of more than one described vegetation type and

** Known as the Department of Environment and Conservation before 1 July 2013

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps sometimes a vegetation type may occur in more than one polygon. Both relationships can occur in the same map layer. Each polygon in the Project GIS map layer carries one or more codes. These codes link to the following information in the database of vegetation descriptions comprising the spatial layer vegetation attributes: The original source description for the vegetation type attributed to the map polygon. The standardised NVIS level 1, 4 and 6 descriptions. Citations for the map and vegetation attribute sources

Many descriptions One description to one polygon to many (Mosaic ) polygons

Description code Description code (“vegref”): (“vegref”):

053L01_1 053L01_7 053L01_2

053L01_5

Figure 6: Example of a many to many relationship between map unit polygons and associated vegetation descriptions (indicated by the “vegref” code)

2.6. Development of GIS packages, NatureMap product and Guidelines for future data capture

Due to copyright restrictions associated with some original vegetation map information sources, two product versions were provided to South Coast NRM:

Product version 1 (RESTRICTED – NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION). This version contains:

The GIS spatial layers for all vegetation maps prioritised for vegetation unit digitisation and attribution. This includes spatial and attribute data for which permission to reproduce or distribute has not been given as well as data already publicly available or supplied with permission to publish in the public domain. The database containing all vegetation attribute records relating to the spatial layers.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

This package is not to be distributed beyond South Coast NRM without obtaining prior permission from the relevant proponents. Four of the 25 source maps (and their associated attribute records), are not publicly available and for which permission could not be obtained.

Product version 2 (UNRESTRICTED – FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION ). This version contains: The GIS spatial layers for vegetation maps representing data for which permission to reproduce or distribute has been obtained or is already in the public domain. The database containing only those vegetation attribute records relating to the above mentioned spatial layers. This package can be distributed at the discretion of South Coast NRM and from which information will be made available for viewing on NatureMap.

Each package contains a set of digital spatial layers (representing the source maps) and reference layers presented in a GIS project format. The spatial layers are linked to a database of source attributes including standardised vegetation descriptions for manual lookup using a reference code (vegref ). The standardised vegetation descriptions follow NVIS nomenclature. The GIS component includes: i) reference layers providing geographic and thematic context to the vegetation maps and ii) the spatial extent layer (showing location, extent, configuration and sources of maps) that was used to help determine the core attributed spatial data set. iii) The core spatial layers representing the prioritised attributed source maps.

The overall approach used here can be further adapted to future map consolidation projects across the state. Having the benefit of experience provided by the ANVMP meant that the time saved and knowledge gained could be spent on advancing the project. For example, the project team was in a better position to appreciate the nature of the source data, its implications for scoping, interpretation, standardisation, and consolidation, of an integrated spatial product.

3. Findings

3.1. Summary of Map Coverage

From the map spatial extent overview layer the following information was highlighted:

The potential mapped area covered by the 98 map “footprints” captured from 75 information sources represents ~ 3% of the GWW area extent. Over half the total spatial footprint area is associated with the 25 prioritised attributed sources. Over 60% of the source map “footprints” represent areas of less than 1000ha, the smallest being under 1ha. Figure 7 shows the area distribution for the attributed set of vegetation maps. About 10% of the sum spatial footprint represents overlapping data from different sources.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

50000

40000

30000

Hectares 20000

10000

0 120 264 206 071 115 099 063 118 112 218 209 053 131 062 244 103 057 052 054 268 068 267 266 252 058 refid

Figure 7: Area range (ha) of mapped extents (footprints) for attributed spatial layers ( refid is the source reference identification code)

The map areas shown in figure 7 represent a displayed original source map scale range of 1:15,000 to 1:80,000 and data currency (i.e. date when map information was captured) range of 32 years from 1979 for the oldest map data to 2011 for the most recent.

3.2. Spatial (map) coverage gaps.

An unexpected finding from the spatial extent layer was the sparse coverage of existing fine-scale vegetation maps. The low coverage of 474,718ha (3% of the GWW) is an important finding and demonstrates that substantially more data would be required to provide a fine scale alternative to Beards mapping at a regional level. Despite such low coverage, the project has been able to:

• Demonstrate how data from different map sources can be consolidated and standardised to a consistent structural classification and nomenclature.

• Inform how future mapping work can deliver information that is more effectively incorporated into a coherent regional vegetation dataset and map coverage.

3.3. Maps of varying quality/suitability

It was apparent from early project scoping that the source material was extremely variable in nature and quality of the spatial data (vegetation maps) and associated vegetation descriptions. Maps were therefore prioritised with reference to the following factors:

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

• Whether there were any restrictions placed on public distribution of source material , (for example, whether a mining proponents permission was required for distribution of information from a commissioned consultant report or where permission was implied through the information being appended or linked to a publicly available document such as a Public Environmental Review (PER );

• The relative extent and configuration of area covered by the mapped area (i.e. small vs. large area, compact vs. a narrow linear configuration);

• Quality and consistency in source documentation of the vegetation descriptions, ease of standardisation and translation of the original vegetation descriptions according to NVIS criteria;

• Unambiguous correlation between map polygon/unit and vegetation descriptions;

• Quality of map annotation: such as clarity of map unit delineation, explicitness of map unit annotation or attribution, and adequacy of geographic referencing such as statement of datum, projection, presence of a reference grid and documented cadastral reference boundaries.

The list of all collated source reports and those suitable for inclusion and processing into the final map product are found in Appendix E and F respectively.

3.4. Map Shape Considerations: linear configurations.

Due to the type of impact or the features being surveyed, many vegetation maps examined represented narrow polygons or a set of survey lines. For example, pipeline, transport or power line corridors may be mapped as narrow features reflecting the area of impact being assessed. The strength and integrity of vegetation mapping in such configurations can be compromised if the broader context of mapped vegetation units in the landscape is not taken into account. The decision to incorporate linearly configured vegetation maps into a spatial data set depends on whether the map units and attributes have been adequately defined with reference to the vegetation patterns characteristic of the region. Other considerations include the width and scale of the mapped area, as well as scarcity of other map data for the area. Valuable information may be gained from using these kinds of maps, but they usually involve significantly more work to evaluate and understand. This is where scoping was important; however, for this project the value for effort represented by the majority of maps examined displaying a narrow configuration meant that they were given a lower priority.

4. Project learnings

4.1. Access to source information and requirements for a central data repository

This and future projects would benefit substantially from access to a central data repository of spatial vegetation data. Currently, environmental survey data and reports generated through the EIA

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps process are often concerned with local and project specific impact assessments as part of a “fit for purpose” product such as is commissioned by a mining proponent. Such products are generally not readily accessible beyond the agencies involved in these specific purpose assessments. Without coordinated spatial referencing of mapped vegetation data, substantial amounts of data are not being utilized to their full potential, through limited access or a lack of awareness of their existence.

Accessing proponent environmental data and reports was essential for this project, but proved frustratingly inefficient. The two main challenges when accessing proponent grey literature were:

1. The disparate nature of where information was held or sourced from meant that it was difficult to assess whether the majority of important/relevant reports and maps had been obtained. Also, given the complex spatial nature of mining tenement jurisdictions and administration as well as turnover in the activities of proponents, much time was needed to cross reference information sources to identify data overlap and duplication. This process would have been helped considerably by having a central coordinated spatial referencing resource.

2. Reports and their associated vegetation maps were generally available only in non digital hard copy format. This required conversion of text and images into appropriate digital formats for databasing of vegetation descriptions and processing of map images into a GIS. Despite requests made to mining proponents few digital spatial datasets (i.e. GIS compatible spatial data formats) could be obtained (the exceptions being Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. and Polaris Metals Pty Ltd). This added considerably to the time required for processing and capturing information: hardcopy map images had to be georeferenced, rectified and then manually digitised to obtain a GIS layer and vegetation description text converted using methods such as optical character recognition or for poorly reproduced copy, re-typed. Given this additional work, prioritising was essential to maximise efficient use of processing time and resources by concentrating on those maps making the greatest contribution to the final map product

Such inefficiencies in accessing and using data could be greatly reduced by having information referenced through a coordinated central interagency repository for vegetation data. For some years, this concept has been raised and discussed at various times amongst government and non government stakeholders. For example, the recently initiated WA Biodiversity Research Institute has Informatics as one of its four key themes. Recent policy decisions by government will help facilitate the expeditious development of such a spatial data repository. Centralised/coordinated spatial referencing of vegetation information would provide a framework for enhanced data access and standards for data collection, interpretation, documentation and quality. This would potentially benefit Government, Industry and Community stakeholders, facilitating ongoing strategic planning and policy decisions.

4.2. Obtaining permission to use proponent owned data in NatureMap

Reproducing vegetation maps and descriptions derived from proponent commissioned documents, albeit in a derived form, in NatureMap presented challenges due to data ownership and copyright issues. The majority of existing reports and related vegetation maps were generated through the EIA 17

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps process by the resources sector. Advice was sought for this project regarding copyright issues and reproduction of derived data in Naturemap. Despite many vegetation maps/reports being generated to inform a proponents EIA review documents or proposals to the Environment Protection Agency (EPA), those information sources that had not been explicitly referenced or appended in a public EIA document or assessment by the (EPA) required permission from the proponent to be reproduced or communicated. †† This included copies of all such information including reports and maps sourced internally from DEC agency reference collections. This issue was somewhat unexpected as the majority of existing vegetation maps for the GWW had been undertaken by mining proponents through their consultants either directly or as background to inform EIA assessments. Initially, direct requests were made to proponents requesting permission to reproduce derived map products (i.e. source description extracts, NVIS interpretations, spatial layers digitised from source map images) in NatureMap and also to access digital GIS layer data, however responses were limited. Fortunately, after examining PER (Public Environmental Review) and related EIA documents, it became apparent that many proponent maps had already been directly referenced or reproduced (partially or wholly) in documents required by the EPA for review in the public domain. Out of twenty-five NVIS attributed vegetation maps, four for which proponent permission was unable to be obtained will not be reproduced in NatureMap. These maps represented information that had yet to be assessed or incorporated into an assessment by the EPA or were part of back ground information not directly referenced in a public review document. Vegetation maps and reports prepared by government agencies or undertaken on conservation estate are interpreted as not requiring permission to be reproduced in NatureMap.

4.3. The complexity and interrelated nature of proponent vegetation reports and maps

Initial scoping revealed fragmentation of information across reporting stages in the environmental review process with frequent cross references between the collated reports and EIA documents. The interrelated nature of spatial data generated by the resources sector and its documentation through the approvals process presented challenges in determining the extent of spatial and attribute data overlap and duplication. Part of the prioritisation process required digitising map extents (i.e. “foot print” boundaries) of nearly 100 collated vegetation maps to provide an overview of the spatial data (the spatial extent layer). This overview was an essential scoping tool in comprehending the spatial relationship of data sources and to determine which maps warranted further work to digitise the vegetation map units. Often vegetation maps and associated vegetation information were presented in proponents EIA submissions as summaries or extracts derived from the original consultants report. Various interpretations and iterations of the consultant’s data sometimes appeared in multiple review documents reflecting the turnover of proponent activities in an area. Understanding this layer of

†† All proposals referred to the EPA are subject to a seven-day public comment period before any decision is made on whether or not to assess the proposal and, if so, the level of assessment: 1) Assessment on Proponent Information (API) category A or B. or 2) Public Environmental Review (PER)

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps complexity and disentangling the relationships between source documents, vegetation maps and proponent review documents was required to identify duplication and overlap to ensure the most relevant data was processed for the final GWW project products. The spatial extent layer revealed a 10% overlap amongst the vegetation maps captured. This overlap often represented incongruities in mapping methods and vegetation interpretation used by different sources. Resolution of these incongruities was often complex, requiring supplementary survey data or additional information about the original mapping process that was not always available. Therefore reconciliation of these spatial incongruities did not necessarily represent “value for effort“ to pursue in the time available. For these reasons map selection aimed to minimise overlap to only those datasets providing the most useful information. By presenting these map data as independent spatial layers in the GIS data frame, areas of significant overlap can be examined by drilling down through the layers to compare the different ways vegetation is defined for a given area by different sources. It may be possible for further interpretation and reconciliation to be done on these areas in the future as more information or opportunities for additional corroborative survey data collection become available.

5. South Coast NRM Evaluation Questions

The South Coast NRM evaluation questions address the impact, effectiveness, appropriateness and efficiency of project delivery. The information is also used to prepare the South Coast NRM Annual Status Report towards progress against the Southern Prospects Strategy for NRM 2011-2016.

Impact To what extent has this project impacted upon the management of native habitat to reduce critical threats to biodiversity and enhance the condition, connectivity and resilience of habitats and landscapes?

The project has identified substantial gaps in fine-scale vegetation map coverage for the GWW. With around 97% of the GWW area not covered by such sources, these gaps are largely due to the size of the GWW and pattern of land use. Most of the fine scale spatial data capture is in relation to activities carried out by the mining sector and EIA reporting requirements. For this reason much of the information exists to support “fit for purpose” products addressing specific terms of reference and not necessarily interpreted within the bioregional context. A bioregional focus is important to address issues relating to native habitat management, biodiversity threat reduction and evaluation of habitat condition, connectivity and resilience in a landscape wide context.

By identifying the locations, coverage and nature of existing map products; the project has provided a foundational reference resource of fine-scale spatial information to guide planning of future appropriate scale mapping projects. At a broader level, the consolidated overview of map footprints generated by this project reflects the distribution and intensity of biological survey activity and data collection. This clearly highlights spatially where there are likely to be gaps in knowledge that need to be addressed in order to better understand native habitats, and their management.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Effectiveness To what extent has the planned activities for the management of native habitat been achieved? The project results and recommendations can be used as a base for future work to improve and further consolidate vegetation mapping of the GWW. The project has identified the extent of existing vegetation mapping, shown how vegetation maps from various sources can be standardised using NVIS and provides guidelines for standardised data collection to streamline and enhance the development of a regional vegetation map for the GWW through incorporating future fine-scaled vegetation mapping in the GWW.

Appropriateness To what extent were the project approach and strategies appropriate in influencing the targeted stakeholders and achieving intended outcomes? Stakeholders from government, non government and resource sectors will benefit from having access to the spatial layers and attribute information accessible through a web based single point of inquiry such as NatureMap. The NatureMap product provides a spatial catalogue of existing fine-scaled vegetation maps of the GWW. This helps stakeholders to evaluate the status of spatial knowledge for native vegetation in their area of interest as well as regionally. The spatial vegetation layers generated by this project can also be related to other biodiversity data through user defined queries in Naturemap. Users can view a vegetation map of interest and its source citation to pursue the original report for further information.

Are there approaches and strategies that might be more appropriate? (Refer to “6: Recommendations” below)

Efficiency To what extent has this project attained the best value out of available resources? The project has utilized the economy of value adding through integration and reinterpretation of existing data . The approach used to standardise original vegetation descriptions according to a common terminology using the NVIS hierarchy and to link this information to a spatial data layer, can be used to inform further map consolidation initiatives for the GWW as well as other regions in the state. Methods used for the GWW have been adapted from an approach developed for a previous DEC collaborative project initiative with the Wheatbelt NRM, “The Avon Native Vegetation Map Project” (ANVMP) (Bayliss 2011). The AVNVMP approach was modified for the particular characteristics of the GWW data sources. The experience that this contributed to the project process advanced the groundwork for the project team to invest more efficiently in the time and resources available to scope information, complete NVIS translations and develop the GIS products.

What other way could we invest for greater return? (Refer to “6: Recommendations” below)

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

6. Recommendations

The efficiency and comprehensiveness of information capture for initiatives such as the GWW Map Project could be greatly improved through a spatially referenced interagency registry of vegetation information. This would provide a single point of inquiry enabling a search by geographic criteria for any vegetation mapping, quadrat based surveys or reporting that exists for an area of interest. Given the variable nature of information sources, standard protocols for spatial and attribute data collection, interpretation, documentation and quality would enhance future regional data reconciliation. This includes consistent and comprehensive capture of floristic site data to enable their interpretation for developing vegetation maps and associated models depicting vegetation patterns at bioregional scales. Reconciliation would also be helped by having a consistent regional geographic spatial base reference for congruent delineation of vegetation units across data sources; for example defining vegetation units with reference to soil landforms. It is recommended that the consolidation of vegetation information from fine scale sources continues to build upon and value add to the current GWW data set. However the low coverage of these sources indicates that further consideration needs to be given to the contribution of existing regional vegetation datasets. For example Beard’s vegetation coverage, although mapped at a coarse scale, has been assigned finer scale information (NVIS level 6) for the system associations. This system association information has not been fully attributed to currently available spatial data layers for Beard’s Pre-European coverage, but would be valuable for interpretation of other spatial vegetation datasets in a regional context. Also, regional vegetation site data such as those captured by the biological surveys of the eastern goldfields (Biological Surveys Committee, Western Australia, 1984), while not necessarily spatially interpreted as mapped units, and thus not relevant to the current project’s scope, represent a valuable dataset that could potentially contribute to a regional base data reference for attribute reconciliation amongst finer scaled sources. NVIS is a valuable framework for defining vegetation data standards in relation to information from different sources. However for vegetation types in South Western Australia and the GWW, NVIS does not accommodate Scrub-heath or Mallee-heath vegetation types as each of these types encompasses a range of strata and has no obvious dominant species. On simplifying levels 5 and 6 to level 4 in the NVIS hierarchy and reducing the representative dominant taxon from species to the rank of genus, there is a significant loss of information which could be overcome if a dominant species component was incorporated into the NVIS level 4 sub-formation descriptions. This may assist further reclassification to define a more regional set of reconciled vegetation units for the GWW. This approach could be tested on the current GWW map project description attributes. Further recommendations are summarised as part of the Guidelines submitted to the South Coast NRM (Appendix F)

7. NatureMap product and Guidelines for future data capture

7.1. NatureMap

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

NatureMap is a Web based portal to a growing selection of Western Australian Biodiversity data. It provides a widely accessible spatial viewer for a variety of data layers and warehouses many other datasets that may be viewed and accessed depending on the level of user access permission.

NatureMap provides the most widely accessible means of viewing the GWW native vegetation map layers as well as custodial security for the underlying attribute dataset. Also there is the capability to use the GWW Map features as predefined criteria to spatially “lasso” or identify and view point based species occurrence record information from other spatially overlapping biodiversity data sets.

GWW Stakeholders involved with government, non government and resource sectors will benefit from having access to spatial vegetation layers available through NatureMap. The NatureMap product currently provides a spatial catalogue (the extent overview layer) of existing fine-scaled vegetation maps for the GWW in addition to the reference source for the original supporting report. This layer provides a single point of inquiry for users to easily find out whether native vegetation for an area of interest within the GWW has been mapped and by whom.

Maps displayed in the GWW vegetation map spatial extent layer have been digitised as a set of polygon features representing the boundary or extent or “footprint” of each georeferenced vegetation map. By selecting “Vegetation map extent” in the interactive map links under the NatureMap Great Western Woodlands Project Theme, a live map will be produced which can be explored. Using the “info” tool a map feature can be selected to return a source reference identifier code number as well as the source reference citation. As some of these maps overlap, a selection may return several source references.

7.2. Guidelines for future data capture

Refer to Appendix F

8. Acknowledgements

We thank the following for their valuable contribution and assistance with this project:

Rebecca Coppen (Department of Environment and Conservation, Science Division) Monica Russell (Polaris Metals Pty Ltd), Sandra Thomas (Department of Environment and Conservation Environmental Management Branch), Caron Macneall (Department of Environment and Conservation Native Vegetation Conservation Branch), Rob Howard (Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd), Phil Ladd (Murdoch University), Emily Ager (Western Botanical) Western Power, Shire of Kondinin and Stephen Connell, Kate Tauss (Dingle Bird Environmental).

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

References

Bayliss, B., 2011. The Avon Native Vegetation Map Project. Department of Environment and Conservation unpublished report .

Beard, J.S., 1975. Vegetation Survey of Western Australia. Nullabor 1:1 000 000 Vegetation Series. University of Western Australia Press, Perth, AU.

Beard, J.S., 1981. Vegetation Survey of Western Australia. Swan 1:1 000 000 Vegetation Series. University of Western Australia Press, Perth, AU.

Department of Environment and Conservation, 2010. A Biodiversity and Cultural Conservation Strategy for the Great Western Woodlands. Perth, AU.

Department of Environment and Conservation, 2012. Great Western Woodlands Graphic branding style guide. Kensington, AU.

ESCAVI, 2003. Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual: National Vegetation Information System Version 6. Canberra, AU.

Hopkins, A.J.M., Beeston, G.R. & Harvey, J.M., 2000. Pre-European Vegetation spatial dataset based upon A database on the vegetation of Western Australia. Stage 1 unpublished . Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth, AU.

Keighery, B.J., 1994. Bushland Plant Survey, A Guide to Plant Community Survey for the Community. Wildflower Society of WA (Inc), Nedlands, Western Australia

Muir, B., 1977. Survey of the Western Australian wheatbelt. Part 2: Vegetation and habitat of Bendering Reserve. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 3. Museum, W.A., Perth, AU.

Richardson, J., Gamblin, T., Glossop, B. & Hogben, J., 2007. The Biodiversity of the Avon NRM Region: Towards Prioritisation for Conservation DRAFT. Department of Environment and Conservation unpublished report .

Walker, J. & Hopkins, M.S., 1990. Vegetation. In: McDonald, R.C., Isbell, R.F., Speight, J.G., Walker, J., Hopkins, M.S. (Eds.), Australian Soil and Land Survey. Field Handbook 2nd edition. Inkata Press, Melbourne, AU.

Biological Surveys Committee, Western Australia, (1984). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 1, Introduction and methods. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 18, Perth,

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Glossary attribute data: “what things are” as distinct from “where things are” ( spatial data ). (GIS: information about what a spatial feature represents) bioregion: Bioregions are relatively large land areas characterised by broad, landscape-scale natural features and environmental processes that influence the functions of entire ecosystems. They capture the broad-scale geophysical patterns across Australia. These patterns in the landscape are linked to fauna and flora assemblages and processes at the ecosystem scale, thus providing a useful means for simplifying and reporting on more complex patterns of biodiversity. Bioregions have been defined for Australia according to The Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (Thackway & Cresswell 1995, Environment Australia 2000, Commonwealth of Australia 2004) IBRA categorises the Australian continent into regions of like geology, landform, vegetation, fauna and climate. There are 80 such regions throughout Australia, and 26 occur in Western Australia. http://florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au/help/ibra/ cadastral boundaries: geographically defined jurisdictional boundary of tenure, ownership or management e.g.: property boundary fine scale: Equivalent to "large scale" (i.e.: for the same size map, features on a small-scale map (1:1,000,000) will be smaller than those on a large-scale map (1:1,200). A fine scale map is more likely to represent a higher spatial resolution of vegetation information. (However simply “zooming in” on a small scale map will not increase the resolution of vegetation information it represents.) floristic data: information about the occurrence of plant species in a location, species composition. geographic coordinate system: a set of values that define a location on the earth surface (e.g. latitude and longitude). A geographic coordinate system is defined by its datum and projection which mathematically interpret the earth’s curved surface as a flat grid for a particular region. geographic datum: (see Geographic coordinate system) geographic projection: (see Geographic coordinate system) georeference: defines where something is on earth according to "real world coordinates" such as Latitude and longitude

GIS (Geographic Information System): A computer based tool for representing and analysing things that can be defined by their position on earth. A GIS links geographic (spatial) information (where things are) with attribute information (what things are). This Information is organised into, and viewed as "layers". GIS layers are made up of the same feature types such as polygons representing a theme (for example vegetation associations). Each layer carries a table (the attribute table) listing attributes for all features. One or more layers can be combined and displayed graphically or printed out as a "map"

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps grey literature: literature that is unpublished , informally published or published in non commercial form, e.g.: technical reports, reviews or briefing documents from government agencies, scientific research groups or industry, commissioned consultants reports, maps, policy statements, issue papers, fact sheets, newsletters and bulletins. map units: A map unit is a spatial category which contains a vegetation type or group of co-occurring vegetation types. The map unit is commonly an item in a map legend and is delineated on the map by means of one to many polygons . map : a graphical representation of geographically defined spatial and attribute information or data (see map units ). Attribute information is often displayed via a map legend. To be useful a map needs to have some kind of geographic reference to place it in the “real world”. A geographic reference is usually expressed according to a defined geographic coordinate system polygon: a flat shape with more than 3 sides. A polygon is a feature type used in a GIS to represent something that has area as well as a position on earth - eg: an area of a particular vegetation type. A polygon also has topological properties of an "inside”, “outside" and adjacency (to other polygons). reconciled: (vegetation map) : reinterpreting spatial units from different sources so that they are congruent (represent the same thing or attribute) and "match up" across adjoining mapped areas. Ideally map data from different sources are not only reconciled with each other but also with the broader bioregional context. rectify: transforming a digital map image to fit a defined geographic coordinated system . This is often done by identifying features in the map image which can be matched with known coordinates and then “warping” the source map image to fit these coordinates. (see also georeferencing) spatial data: information that has a defined location or position on earth. Information about “where thing are” as distinct from “what things are” (attribute data ) spatial layer: A collection of features of the same feature type (e.g. polygon), sharing the same attribute table and theme in a GIS. spatial Viewer: a means by which digital spatial data can be viewed and queried such as through a GIS or web based facility such as NatureMap.

Structural classification (vegetation): a classification of vegetation according to growth form, height and cover. Height and cover value ranges are usually grouped into class intervals for given types of growth forms. (e.g. Muir 1977). structural data (vegetation): Information about the spatial arrangement (vertically and horizontally) of plants within a community.

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

Appendices

APPENDIX A: Locations and extents of existing vegetation maps of the Great Western Woodlands (map footprints)

! MOUNT MAGNET 117° 118° 119° 120° 121° 122° 123° 124° 125° 126° 127° 4700000 4800000 4900000 5000000 5100000 5200000 5300000 5400000 5500000 5600000 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 Locations of existing 0 0 9 9 6 6 Vegetation maps of the Great Western Woodlands

Legend ° 9 2 °

- G

9 Vegetation Map Locations 2 -

0 0 WA Towns

0 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 8 Major_Roads 6 6 WA Coast Great Western Woodlands Boundary G GG G Total Footprint all Veg Maps (some not attr.) G G °

0 GGG G 3 ° - 0

G G 3 - 0 G G 0 0 0

0 G 0

0 G G 0

0 G 0

7 G 7 6 G 6 G G G KALGOORLIE G G G G! G G G ° G G 1

0 G 0 3 G ° - G G

0 G 0 1 0 0 3 - 0 0 0 0

6 G 6 6 G G 6 G GG G GG G GG G GGG G G G G G G G GG G G G

0 0 º G 0 0 ° G 0 0 2 0 0 3 ° 1:3,000,000 (A3) - 0 0 2 5 5 3 - 6 G 6 0 15 30 60 90 120 G G ! NORSEMAN G GG GGG G Kilometres GGGGG GG Projection: Albers Equal Conic G Datum: GDA94 G Produced by GIS Branch

0 G 0

0 0 Dept. Parks & Wildlife 0 0 0 0 ° 4 4 3 Perth, WA. 6 6 3 ° - 3 3 -

0 ESPERANCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ! 0 3 3 6 6 ° 4 3 ° - 4 3 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 6 6 ALBANY ! ° ! 5 3 ° - ! 5 ! 3 - ! ! ! ! !

4700000 4800000 4900000 5000000 5100000 5200000 5300000 5400000 5500000 5600000 117° 118° 119° 120° 121° 122° 123° 124° 125° 126° 127°

Graticule shown at 1 degree intervals Grid shown at 100000 metre intervals The Dept. of Parks and Wildlife does not guarantee that this map is without flaw of any kind and Job Ref: GWW project, Produced at 11:41am, on July 10, 2013 disclaims all liability for any errors, loss or other consequence which may arise from relying on any information depicted. Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

APPENDIX B: A summary of NVIS: general concepts and description coding

NVIS: A Summary of General Concepts and Description Coding

The NVIS Hierarchy: The following is an example illustrating the basic concept behind the NVIS heirachy. For a more comprehensive treatment of the information given in the topics outlined here, go to the Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual Version 6.0 which can be viewed and downloaded from the NVIS website: [ http://www.environment.gov.au/erin/nvis/index.html ] Source Vegetation Map Unit: Woodland Formation (Location 1.1)

Source Vegetation Description: (note NVIS stratum codes to which the source strata have been correlated are shown in red) [Muir Description: Woodland over Low Woodland A over Open Scrub over Open Low Scrub B over Open Dwarf Scrub C over Dwarf Scrub D over Very Open Low Grass on Clay – loam.] [Muir Code: e1Mi.e1+e2Lai.a1Sr.xSBr.xSCr.xSXi.GLr/CL]

Stratum 1 +(U1 ): Eucalyptus salmonophloia (e1), stratum height 16m tall, 15% canopy cover. Stratum 2 (U2 ): Eucalyptus salmonophloia (e1) and Eucalyptus loxophleba (e2), stratum height 6- 10m tall, 18% canopy cover. Stratum 3 (M1 ): Acacia acuminata (a1), Acacia microbotrya , Eremophila drummondii and Daviesia hakeoides , stratum height 2-6m tall, 9% canopy cover. Stratum 4 (M2): Acacia erinacea , Olearia muelleri , Eremophila drummondii , Acacia merrallii and Rhagodia preissii ssp . Preissii , stratum height 1-1.5m tall, 9% canopy cover. Stratum 5 (G1 ): Eremophila drummondii, Daviesia hakeoides and Maireana brevifolia , stratum height 0.5-1.0m tall, 7% canopy cover. Stratum 6 (G2 ): Maireana brevifolia and Rhagodia preissii ssp. Preissii , stratum height 0.1- 0.5m tall, 13% canopy cover. Stratum 7 (G3 ): Stipa elegantissima , stratum height <0.5m tall, 3% canopy cover.

Comments: Lichen and moss species in the understorey, 5% canopy cover on soil surface. Litter: 0-2cm deep, 15% ground cover composed mainly of leaves, some small twigs and some large logs.

Source: EM Mattiske & Associates;(1992);'Botanical survey of 43 reserves vested in the Water Authority of Western Australia. Parts A, B and C' : prepared for Department of Conservation and Land Management' ;Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth.) Diagram of typical Wheatbelt Woodland Association: eg Salmon Gum Woodland NVIS Strata NVIS Level NVIS Level V VI Level V1 Sub Association: Floristic and (Association (Sub-Association) Structural parameters for all substrata ) Stratum Sub stratum U1 eg Eucalyptus salmonophloia . U2 eg Eucalyptus loxophleba M1 eg Acacia acuminata , M2 Acacia erinacea, Acacia merrallii U1+ G1 eg Eremophila drummondii, Daviesia hakeoides, U G2 Maireana brevifolia (note NVIS defines dominance in terms of “biomass” or U2 Ecological significance. The dominant substratum is therefore not always the tallest eg if M2 presents the greatest biomass in the strata M then it is carried through as the representative strata for M. Similarly if M2 had the greatest biomass of All substrata from U, M1 M M, G, then it would be designated “+”

M2 G1 G G2 G3

Level 6 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Sub-Association • Substratum (All Dominant & Nondominant U1+^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia \Eucalyptus \^tree\7\i; Substrata.) U2 ^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia,Eucalyptus loxophleba \Eucalyptus \^tree\6\i; • Species (all) M1 ^^ Acacia acuminata,Acacia microbotrya,Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia • Genus (Dominant for each substratum) hakeoides\Acacia \^shrub\4\r; • Structural parameters (for ea. substratum: M2 Acacia erinacea,Olearia muelleri, Eremophila drummondii, Acacia merrallii, Rhagodia preissii dominant growth form\Substratum cover ssp. Preissii \Acacia \shrub\3\r; class\Substratum height class,) G1 ^^ Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides,Maireana brevifolia\Eremophila \^shrub,chenopod shrub\2\r; G2 Maireana brevifolia^Rhagodia preissii ssp. preissii\Maireana \chenopod shrub\1\i; G3 Stipa elegantissima\Stipa \other grass\1\r NVIS Level Level V Association: Floristic and Structural for V dominant substrata only. (Association ) Dominant substrata representing each of U, M and G carried through to NVIS Level V from Level VI Strata dominant substrata elements. Coded terminology and species indicated

U+

Level 5 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Association • Stratum (All Dominant Substrata only) U+^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia \Eucalyptus\^tree\7\i; • Species (all) M^^ Acacia acuminata,Acacia microbotrya,Eremophila drummondii \Acacia \^shrub\4\r; • Genus (Dominant for each substratum) G^^ Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides,Maireana • Structural parameters (for ea. stratum: brevifolia \Eremophila \^shrub,chenopod shrub\2\r; dominant growth form\Substratum cover class\Substratum height class)

Level IV: Sub-Formation – structural and Floristic (Genus) NVIS level IV Dominant Genus for each of the dominant substrata description Strata only - no species given. Essentially descriptive terminology with dominant genus only indicated

+Eucalyptus Woodlan d

Acacia Mixed tall Sparse Shrubland

Eremophila Mixed Low Sparse Shrubland

Level 4 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Sub-Formation • Stratum (all strata) +Eucalyptus Woodlan d\Acacia Mixed tall Sparse Shrubland \Eremophila Mixed Low Sparse • Dominant (& co-dominant) Genus only Shrubland • Structure (as structural class term for all strata)

Level III - Broad Floristic Formation NVIS level III description Stratum

+Eucalyptus U+ Woodlan d

Level 3 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Broad Floristic Formation • Dominant Stratum only +Eucalyptus Woodlan d • Genus (dominant only) • Structure (as structural class term for dominant Stratum only)

Level II - Structural Formation NVIS level II description Stratum

Woodland U+

Level 2 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Structural Formation • Structure (dominant Stratum only) +Woodland

NVIS level I Level 1 Class Stratum description

Tree U+

Level 1 NVIS Translation (dominant elements in bold) Class • Growth form (dominant Stratum only) +Tree

NVIS Description Codes The following is a condensed guide to the coding used in NVIS Level 6 descriptions using the example source description illustrated in The NVIS Heirachy

NVIS L6 description (VegID 707): U1+^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia \Eucalyptus \^tree\7\i; U2 ^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia,Eucalyptus loxophleba \Eucalyptus \^tree\6\i; M1 ^^ Acacia acuminata,Acacia microbotrya,Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides\Acacia \^shrub\4\r; M2 Acacia erinacea,Olearia muelleri, Eremophila drummondii, Acacia merrallii, Rhagodia preissii ssp. Preissii \Acacia \shrub\3\r; G1 ^^ Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides,Maireana brevifolia\Eremophila \^shrub,chenopod shrub\2\r; G2 Maireana brevifolia^Rhagodia preissii subsp. preissii \Maireana \chenopod shrub\1\i; G3 Stipa elegantissima \Stipa \other grass\1\r

The description components and coding are briefly outlined below. The Level 6 description has the general format: [substratum indicator ] [ stratum dominance indicator ] [ species dominance indicator ] [ dominant species name ]\[dominant or characterising genus name ]\[ growth form dominance indicator ][ dominant growth form ]\[substratum height class code ]\[substratum cover class code ]; Where: “+” substratum dominance indicator “^” dominant or co dominant species indicator “^^ ” mixed (i.e. more than 2 co-dominant species from representing different genera) “\” separator “;” substratum separator

These codes and the description format are illustrated and discussed further below:

The Upper substratum component (U) ^ For each dominant species from different Level VI: Up to 3 genera only (up to 2 sp) substrata within each of ^^ for more than two U, M & G strata. dominant species from (Level V: Only dominant different genera (means substrata representing “Mixed” as in “mixed Refer to look up each strata) Shrubland”) tables

Species Growth form dominance dominance Height Cover class Substratum indicator indicator class code code

U1+^ Eucalyptus salmonophloia \Eucalyptus \^tree \7\i;

Substratum Species Dominant Growth Substratum dominance Genus Form separator indicator

Dominant over all Level V1: Up to Only one For each of substrata in 5 species in (from growth forms Association – (Only order of Dominant represented one substratum can dominance species) by 5 taxa be indicated as “ +”) (Level V: Up to 3 listed species.)

The midstratum component ^ for each dominant species , (comma) between each (up to 2 sp)from different genera species (unless represents Level VI: Up to 3 only a dominant or co dominant substrata within genus when ^ is used. each of U, M & G ^^ for more than two dominant strata. species from different genera +/- in front of species (Level V: Only (means “Mixed” as in “mixed (including dominant or co dominant substrata Shrubland”) only used at front of dominants) which “come representing each species list, with comma and go” or are “not always Refer to look up strata) separating subsequent taxa together at the same time” tables

Species Growth form dominance Species name dominance Height Cover Substratum indicator separator indicator class class code

M1^^ Acacia acuminata,Acacia microbotrya,Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides\Acacia \^shrub\4\r;

Substratum Species Dominant Growth Substratum dominance Genus Form separator indicator

[“ +” absent as Level V1: Up to Only one For each of Substratum is not 5 species in (from growth dominant over all order of Dominant forms others in dominance species) represented association ] (Level V: Up to 3 by 5 taxa species.) listed

The ground stratum component ^ for each dominant species from different Level V1: Up to Level VI: Up to 3 genera only (up to 2 sp) 5 species in substrata within each of ^^ for more than two U, M & G strata. order of dominant species from dominance (Level V: Only dominant different genera (means substrata represents (Level V: Up to 3 “Mixed” as in “mixed species.) Refer to look up each strata) Shrubland”) tables Growth form Species Species Dominant dominance dominance indicator Substratum Genus Height Cover indicator class code class code

G1 ^^ Eremophila drummondii,Daviesia hakeoides,Maireana brevifolia\Eremophila \^shrub,chenopod shrub \2\r; G2 Maireana brevifolia,Rhagodia preissii ssp. preissii\Maireana \chenopod shrub\1\i; G3 Stipa elegantissima \Stipa \other grass\1\r

Substratum Growth Substratum dominance Form separator indicator

[“ +” absent as [2 growth forms Substratum is not represented by dominant over all 3 species in others in association ] substratum ]

Tables:

NVIS Structural Formation Terminology

NVIS Cover codes

NVIS Structural terminology shown in relation to cover and height classes for respective growth forms Cover Characteristics Foliage 70-100 30-70 10-30 <10 ≈0 0-5 unknown cover * Crown >80 50-80 20-50 0.25-20 <0.25 0-5 unknown cover ** % Cover >80 50-80 20-50 0.25-20 <0.25 0-5 unknown *** Cover d c i r bi bc unknown code

Growth Form Height Structural Formation Classes Ranges (m) tree, palm <10,10-30, closed forest open forest woodland open woodland isolated trees isolated clumps trees >30 of trees tree mallee <3, <10, closed mallee open mallee mallee woodland open mallee isolated mallee isolated clumps mallee trees 10-30 forest forest woodland trees of mallee trees shrub, cycad, <1,1-2,>2 closed shrubland shrubland open shrubland sparse shrubland isolated shrubs isolated clumps shrubs grass-tree, tree- of shrubs fern mallee shrub <3, <10, closed mallee mallee shrubland open mallee sparse mallee isolated mallee isolated clumps mallee shrubs 10-30 shrubland shrubland shrubland shrubs of mallee shrubs heath shrub <1,1-2,>2 closed heathland heathland open heathland sparse heathland isolated heath isolated clumps heath shrubs shrubs of heath shrubs chenopod shrub <1,1-2,>2 closed chenopod chenopod open chenopod sparse chenopod isolated isolated clumps chenopod shrubs shrubland shrubland shrubland shrubland chenopod shrubs of chenopod shrubs samphire shrub <0.5,>0.5 closed samphire samphire open samphire sparse samphire isolated samphire isolated clumps samphire shrubs shrubland shrubland shrubland shrubland shrubs of samphire shrubs hummock grass <2,>2 closed hummock hummock open hummock sparse hummock isolated isolated clumps hummock grassland grassland grassland grassland hummock of hummock grasses grasses grasses tussock grass <0.5,>0.5 closed tussock tussock open tussock sparse tussock isolated tussock isolated clumps tussock grasses grassland grassland grassland grassland grasses of tussock grasses other grass <0.5,>0.5 closed grassland grassland open grassland sparse grassland isolated grasses isolated clumps other grasses of grasses sedge <0.5,>0.5 closed sedgeland sedgeland open sedgeland sparse isolated sedges isolated clumps sedges sedgeland of sedges rush <0.5,>0.5 closed rushland rushland open rushland sparse rushland isolated rushes isolated clumps rushes of rushes forb <0.5,>0.5 closed forbland forbland open forbland sparse forbland isolated forbs isolated clumps forbs of forbs fern <1,1-2,>2 closed fernland fernland open fernland sparse fernland isolated ferns isolated clumps ferns of ferns bryophyte <0.5 closed bryophyteland open sparse isolated isolated clumps bryophytes bryophyteland bryophyteland bryophyteland bryophytes of bryophytes lichen <0.5 closed lichenland lichenland open lichenland sparse lichenland isolated lichens isolated clumps lichens of lichens vine <10,10-30, closed vineland vineland open vineland sparse vineland isolated vines isolated clumps vines >30 of vines aquatic 0-0.5,<1 closed aquatic bed aquatic bed open aquatic bed sparse aquatics isolated aquatics isolated clumps aquatics of aquatics seagrass 0-0.5,<1 closed seagrass seagrassbed open sparse isolated isolated clumps seagrasses bed seagrassbed seagrassbed seagrasses of seagrasses

Cover codes in the NVIS description relate to foliage cover, and are defined as: The percentage of the sample site occupied by the vertical projection of foliage and branches (if woody) Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual Ver 6 (2003) Cover type definitions are given in the Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual Ver 6, List of NVIS Attributes, Attribute ST05 – Cover

Height Class codes (and height range according to Growth form)

Height Growth Form Height Height tree, vine shrub, heath shrub, tree tussock grass, bryophyte, Class Range (M & U), chenopod shrub, mallee, hummock lichen, (m) ferns,samphire mallee grass, other aquatic shrub, cycad, grass- shrub grass, sedge, tree, rush, forbs, vine (G) 8 >30 tall NA NA NA NA 7 10-30 mid NA tall NA NA 6 <10 low NA mid NA NA 5 <3 NA NA low NA NA 4 >2 NA tall NA tall NA 3 1-2 NA mid NA tall NA 2 0.5-1 NA low NA mid tall 1 <0.5 NA low NA low low

NVIS stratum codes NVIS NVIS Description Traditional Growth Forms* Height Not Stratum Sub- Stratum Classes* allowed* Code stratum Name Code U U1 Tallest tree sub-stratum. Upper, tree Trees, tree 8,7,6 (5) Grasses & For forests and woodlands this will Overstorey/Canopy mallees, palms, shrubs, low generally be the dominant stratum. vines (mallee mallee (If only one tree shrubs) shrubs For a continuum (eg. no distinct or layer occurs it is discernible layering in the vegetation) coded U1) Also: epiphytes, lichens the tallest stratum becomes the defining sub-stratum.

U2 Sub-canopy layer, second tree layer U3 Sub-canopy layer, third tree layer M M1 Tallest shrub layer. Mid, shrub (if only Shrubs, low (6) 5,4,3 Mid and low one mid layer trees, mallee grasses, M2 Next shrub layer. occurs it is coded shrubs, vines, sedges, M3 Third shrub layer M1) (low shrubs, tall rushes & grasses, tall forbs. forbs, tall Mid & tall sedges) grass- trees/ palms. trees, tree- ferns, cycads, palms. Also: epiphytes, lichens G G1 Tallest ground species Lower, ground (if Grasses, forbs, (4,3) 2,1 Trees, tree- only one ground sedges, rushes, mallees, G2 Ground layer occurs it is vines, lichens, palms. coded G1) epiphytes, low shrubs, ferns, bryophytes, cycads, grass- trees, aquatics, seagrasses.

Stratum Dominance Flag “+” Indicates whether the stratum is dominant, relative to all other strata, within the vegetation community being described.

Level 6 Description Separators Subsequent Taxa names in the description are separated by a comma: – where the leading species in the list is the dominant species (prefixed by ^) – Where the two leading species are of a different genus are co dominant (and each is prefixed by ^) – Where all species listed are co dominant and so the leading taxa name is prefixed by ^^ (indicating “mixed”) Each substratum is separated by a semicolon

The “+/-“ Qualifier This indicates a species that, although dominant/co dominant/mixed or indicative, is not always present in the vegetation association; or that the species so denoted are all part of an identifiable association but do not always occur together concurrently. It may appear in front of ^ or ^^ indicators or as a separator itself, replacing the comma in front of species names in a description.

For example: Source Description [Original Map Veg Unit: Acacia shrubland ] Acacia resinomarginea and /or Casuarina acutivalvis shrubs, 2.5-4m tall, 30-70% canopy cover. Also present were Amphipogon debilis , Astroloma serratifolium , Baeckea muricata , Dianella revoluta , Ecdeicocolea monostachya , Grevillea paradoxa , Hakea subsulcata , Melaleuca oldfieldii . Some areas with dense understorey of Eriostemon deserti .

NVIS translation Level 6: M1++/-^Acacia resinomarginea +/-^Allocasuarina acutivalvis \Acacia\^shrub\4\c Level 4: +Acacia /Allocasuarina Tall Shrubland

The reference to "and/or" in the source description in relation to the dominant species: Acacia resinomarginea and Casuarina acutivalvis shrubs is interpreted as their "coming and going" within the vegetation unit. This is interpreted as a +/- qualifier "Taxon data not always there" Note the qualifier can appear with the dominance indicator “+”

Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

APPENDIX C: Relationships between the National Vegetation Information System (ESCAVI 2003) and Muir (1977) Vegetation Structural Classification Systems

COVER (NVIS Percentage class intervals ~ those of muirs - see Cover Notes below ) Muir/NVIS Cover Class d c i r bi (NVIS) bc(NVIS) Specht (1974) cover term Dense Mid - Dense Sparse Very Sparse (~ Muir Scattered) (~ Muir Scattered) GROWTH FORM HEIGHT 70-100% 30-70% 10-30% 2-10% < 2% < 2% Ht (m) Ht (m) Class Strat Canopy Cover Foliage Cover Canopy Cover Foliage Cover Canopy Cover Foliage Cover Canopy Cover Foliage Cover Foliage Cover Foliage Cover Muir NVIS Muir NVIS NVIS Muir NVIS Muir NVIS Muir NVIS Muir NVIS NVIS only NVIS only >30 >30 8 U Dense Tall Forest Tall Closed Forest Tall Forest Tall Open Forest Tall Woodland Tall Woodland Open Tall Woodland Tall Open Woodland Tall Isolated Trees Tall Isolated Clumps of Trees 15-30 Dense Forest Forest Woodland Open Woodland 10-30 7 U Closed Forest Open Forest Woodland Open Woodland Isolated Trees Isolated Clumps of Trees Trees tree 5-15 Dense Low Forest A Low Forest A Low Woodland A Open Low Woodland A <10 6 U(M) Low Closed Forest Low Open Forest Low Woodland Low Open Woodland Low Isolated trees Low Isolated Clumps of trees <5 Dense Low Forest B Low Forest B Low Woodland B Open Low Woodland B 10-30 7 U Mallee Tree >8 Dense Tree Mallee Tall Closed Mallee Forest Tree Mallee Tall Open Mallee Forest Open Tree Malle Tall Mallee Woodland Very Open Tree Mallee Tall Open Mallee Woodland Tall Isolated Mallee Trees Tall Isolated Clumps of Mallee Trees tree mallee Form 3-10 6 U Closed Mallee Forest Open Mallee Forest Mallee Woodland Open Mallee Woodland Isolated Mallee Trees Isolated Clumps of Mallee Trees <3 5 (U)M Low Closed Mallee Forest Low Open Mallee Forest Low Mallee Woodland Low Open Mallee Woodland Low Isolated Mallee Trees Low Isolated Clumps of Mallee Trees 10-30 7 U Mallee Shrub Tall Closed Mallee Shrubland Tall Mallee Shrubland Tall Open Mallee Shrubland Tall Sparse Mallee Shrubland Tall Isolated Mallee Shrubs Tall Isolated Clumps of Mallee Shrubs mallee shrub Form 3-10 6 U Closed Mallee Shrubland Mallee Shrubland Open Mallee Shrubland Sparse Mallee Shrubland Isolated Mallee Shrubs Isolated Clumps of Mallee Shrubs <8m <3 5 M Dense Shrub Mallee Low Closed Mallee Shrubland Shrub Mallee Low Mallee Shrubland Open Shrub Mallee Low Open Mallee Shrubland Very Open Shrub Mallee Low Sparse Mallee Shrubland Low Isolated Mallee Shrubs Low Isolated Clumps of Mallee Shrubs >2 >2 4 M Dense Thicket Tall Closed Shrubland Thicket Tall Heathland/Tall Shrubland Scrub Tall Open Shrubland Open Scrub Tall Sparse Shrubland Tall Isolated Shrubs Tall Isolated Clumps of Shrubs 1.5-2.0 Dense Heath A Heath A Low Scrub A Open Low Scrub A 1.0-2.0 3 M Closed Heathland/Closed Shrubland Heathland/Shrubland Open Shrubland Sparse Shrubland Isolated Shrubs Isolated Clumps of Shrubs shrub, heath shrub 1.0-1.5 Dense Heath B Heath b Low Scrub B Open Low Scrub B 0.5-1.0 0.5-1.0 2 G Dense Low Heath C Low Closed Heathland/Low Closed Low Heath C Dwarf Scrub C Open Dwarf Scrub C Low Heathland/Low Shrubland Low Open Shrubland Low Sparse Shrubland Low Isolated Shrubs Low Isolated Clumps of Shrubs <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Heath D Shrubland Low Heath D Dwarf Scrub D Open Dwarf Scrub D Tall Sparse Chenopod >2 >2 4 M Dense Thicket Tall Closed Chenopod Shrubland Thicket Tall Chenopod Shrubland Scrub Tall Open Chenopod Shrubland Open Scrub Shrubland Tall Isolated Chenopod Shrubs Tall Isolated Clumps of Chenopod Shrubs 1.5-2.0 Dense Heath A Heath A Low Scrub A Open Low Scrub A 1.0-2.0 3 M Closed Chenopod Shrubland Chenopod Shrubland Open Chenopod Shrubland Sparse Chenopod Shrubland Isolated Chenopod Shrubs Isolated Clumps of Chenopod Shrubs Shrubs1 chenopod shrub 1.0-1.5 Dense Heath B Heath b Low Scrub B Open Low Scrub B 0.5-1.0 0.5-1.0 2 G Dense Low Heath C Low Heath C Dwarf Scrub C Low Open Chenopod Open Dwarf Scrub C Low Sparse Chenopod Low Isolated Chenopod Low Closed Chenopod Shrubland Low Chenopod Shrubland Low Isolated Clumps of Chenopod Shrubs <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Heath D Low Heath D Dwarf Scrub D Shrubland Open Dwarf Scrub D Tall SparseShrubland Samphire Shrubs >2 >2 4 M Dense Thicket Tall Closed Samphire Shrubland Thicket Tall Samphire Shrubland Scrub Tall Open Samphire Shrubland Open Scrub Shrubland Tall Isolated Samphire Shrubs Tall Isolated Clumps of Samphire Shrubs 1.5-2.0 Dense Heath A Heath A Low Scrub A Open Low Scrub A 1.0-2.0 3 M Closed Samphire Shrubland Samphire Shrubland Open Samphire Shrubland Sparse Samphire Shrubland Isolated Samphire Shrubs Isolated Clumps of Samphire Shrubs samphire shrub 1.0-1.5 Dense Heath B Heath b Low Scrub B Open Low Scrub B 0.5-1.0 0.5-1.0 2 G Dense Low Heath C Low Heath C Dwarf Scrub C Low Open Samphire Open Dwarf Scrub C Low Sparse Samphire Low Closed Samphire Shrubland Low Samphire Shrubland Low Isolated Samphire Shrubs Low Isolated Clumps of Samphire Shrubs <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Heath D Low Heath D Dwarf Scrub D Shrubland Open Dwarf Scrub D Shrubland 2 Mat Plants 1 Dense Mat Plants Mat Plants Open Mat Plants Very Open Mat Plants >2 4 M Tall Sparse Hummock Tall Isolated Hummock Tall Closed Hummock Grassland Tall Hummock Grassland Tall Open Hummock Grassland Tall Isolated Clumps of Hummock Grasses 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Grassland Grasses Hummock no height Mid Dense hummock Grass Dense Hummock Grass Hummock Grass Open Hummock Grass Grass category 2 G Closed Hummock Grassland Hummock Grass 0.5-1.0 Hummock Grassland OpenLow Hummock Open Hummock Grassland SparseLow SparseHummock Hummock Grassland IsolatedLow Isolated Hummock Hummock Grasses Isolated Clumps of Hummock Grasses <0.5 1 G Low Closed Hummock Grassland Low Hummock Grassland Grassland Grassland Grasses Low Isolated Clumps of Hummock Grasses >2 4 M Tall Sparse Tussock Tall Closed Tussock Grassland Tall Tussock Grassland Tall Open Tussock grassland Tall Isolated Tussock grasses Tall Isolated Clumps of Tussock grasses grassland >0.5 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Dense Tall Grass Tall Grass Open Tall Grass Very Open Tall Grass tussock grass 2 G Closed Tussock Grassland Tussock Grassland Open Tussock grassland Sparse Tussock grassland Isolated Tussock grasses Isolated Clumps of Tussock grasses 0.5-1.0 Low Sparse Tussock Bunch Grass 1 G Dense Low Grass Low Grass Low Tussock Grassland Open Low Grass Low Open Tussock grassland Very Open Low Grass Low Isolated Tussock grasses Low Isolated Clumps of Tussock grasses <0.5 <0.5 Low Closed Tussock Grassland grassland >2 4 M Tall Closed Grassland Tall Grassland Tall Open grassland Tall Sparse grassland Tall Isolated grasses Tall Isolated Clumps of grasses >0.5 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Dense Tall Grass Tall Grass Open Tall Grass Very Open Tall Grass other grass 0.5-1.0 2 G Closed Grassland Grassland Open grassland Sparse grassland Isolated grasses Isolated Clumps of grasses <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Grass Low Closed Grassland Low Grass Low Grassland Open Low Grass Low Open grassland Very Open Low Grass Low Sparse grassland Low Isolated grasses Low Isolated Clumps of grasses >2 4 M Tall Closed Forbland Tall Forbland Tall Open Forbland Tall Sparse Forbland Tall Isolated forbs Tall Isolated Clumps of forbs Herbaceous no height 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) forb Dense Herbs Herbs Open Herbs Very Open Herbs spp.3 category 0.5-1.0 2 G Closed Forbland Forbland Open Forbland Sparse Forbland Isolated forbs Isolated Clumps of forbs <0.5 1 G Low Closed Forbland Low Forbland Low Open Forbland Low Sparse Forbland Low isolated forbs Low isolated Clumps of forbs >2 4 M sedge (includes Tall Closed Sedgeland Tall Sedgeland Tall Open Sedgeland Tall Sparse Sedgeland Tall Isolated sedges Tall Isolated Clumps of sedges >0.5 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Dense Tall Sedges Tall Sedges Open Tall Sedges Very Open Tall Sedges Cyperaceae, 0.5-1.0 2 G Closed Sedgeland Sedgeland Open Sedgeland Sparse Sedgeland Isolated sedges Isolated Clumps of sedges Restionaceae) <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Sedges Low Closed Sedgeland Low Sedges Low Sedgeland Open Low Sedges Low Open Sedgeland Very Open Low Sedges Low Sparse Sedgeland Low Isolated sedges Low Isolated Clumps of sedges Sedges4 >2 4 M Rush (includes grass Tall Closed Rushland Tall Rushland Tall Open Rushland Tall Sparse Rushland Tall Isolated rushes Tall Isolated Clumps of rushes like non grasses other >0.5 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Dense Tall Sedges Tall Sedges Open Tall Sedges Very Open Tall Sedges than sedges and 0.5-1.0 2 G Closed Rushland Rushland Open Rushland Sparse Rushland Isolated rushes Isolated Clumps of rushes restios) <0.5 <0.5 1 G Dense Low Sedges Low Closed Rushland Low Sedges Low Rushland Open Low Sedges Low Open Rushland Very Open Low Sedges Low Sparse Rushland Low Isolated rushes Low Isolated Clumps of rushes >2 4 M Tall Closed Fernland Tall Fernland Tall Open Fernland Tall Sparse Fernland Tall Isolated Ferns Tall Isolated Clumps of Ferns no height 1.0-2.0 3 M(G) Closed Fernland Fernland Open Fernland Sparse Fernland Isolated Ferns Isolated Clumps of Ferns Ferns ferns and fern allies Dense Ferns Ferns Open Ferns Very Open Ferns category 0.5-1.0 2 G Low Closed Fernland Low Fernland Low Open Fernland Low Sparse Fernland Low Isolated Ferns Low Isolated Clumps of Ferns <0.5 1 G 0.5-1.0 2 G Tall Closed Bryophyteland Tall Bryophyteland Tall Open Bryophyteland Tall Sparse Bryophyteland Tall Isolated Bryophytes Tall Isolated Clumps of Bryophytes Mosses, no height Bryophyte Dense Mosses Mosses Open Mosses Low Closed Open Very Open Mosses Low Closed Sparse Liverwort category Low Closed Bryophyteland Low Isolated Bryophytes Low Isolated Clumps of Bryophytes <0.5 1 G Low Closed Bryophyteland Bryophyteland Bryophyteland Growth Form notes: 1 Shrubs include: Woody perennials Includes non lignotuberous shrubby Eucalypts, woody Chenopods, Woody Samphires. Muir seems to define heath as shrubs above a certain % cover (30%) and below a certain height (2m) NVIS "Heath Shrub" is defined as a Shrub usually less than 2m, with sclerophyllous leaves having high fibre:protein ratios and with an area of nanophyll or smaller (less than 225 sq. m.). Often a member of one the following families: Epacridaceae, Myrtaceae, Fabaceae and Proteaceae. Commonly occur on nutrient-poor substrates. (Note: NVIS does not seem to specify any Cover % criteria to defining "heath" - however for this reference table any shrub meeting the NVIS heath shrub criteria but with cover of < 30% is considered a "shrub" not a "heath shrub. In the context of South West Australian heath vegetation - the notion of a "Sparse Heathland" would appear to be a contradiction in terms for most people working with WA vegetation .

2 Mat Plants: not an NVIS growth form category in itself - Muir defined mat plants are presumably included within the the relevant NVIS growth form with a height class < 0.5m. 3Herbaceous spp: include non woody Chenopods, non woody Samphires NVIS equivalent of Muirs "Herbaceous spp" is "Forb" ie " an Herbacious or slightly woody annual or sometimes perennial plant - usually a dicot. 4 Includes Cyperaceae, Juncaceae, Restionaceae, Typhaceae, Xyridaceae and other plants of sedge like form ie herbaceous usually perennial erect plants generally tufted habit. Arise from stolons, tubers, bulbs, rhizomes or seeds. NVIS "rush" = - Herbaceous, usually perennial erect monocot that is neither a grass nor a sedge. For the purposes of NVIS, rushes include the monocotyledon families Juncaceae, Typhaceae, Liliaceae, Iridaceae, Xyridaceae,Ecdeicolaceae, Anarthriaceae (includes Lyginea), the genus Lomandra; i.e. "graminoid" or grass-like genera. (note: for the Avon Veg Map project, Borya is included in "rush" - although not specified in NVIS manual - as it is a perennial narrow leaved clumping monocot that is not a grass but does not fit the NVIS forb critera: herbaceous annual, dicotyledon. Historically, most vegetation descriptions using the Muir classification refer to Borya as a "herb".

Cover Notes: Muir Classification does not have cover class equivalent to NVIS bi or bc. Where a muir descripton indicates "scattered" this is could be treated as equivalent to NVIS "bi" Muir defines cover in terms of "Canopy Cover" ie: The total area encompassed within the circumference of individual foliage clumps, and expressed as a percentage of a given area, e.g. quadrat or formation area. [Muir BG; (1977); Biological survey of the Western Australian wheatbelt. Part 2: Vegetation and habitat of Bendering Reserve.; Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 3.] eg:

The equivalent percentage measurement used by NVIS is defined by " Foliage Cover": i.e. The percentage of the sample site occupied by the vertical projection of foliage and branches NVIS foliage cover is slightly different to Muir's Canopy cover in that it includes branches - however given the subjectivity of estimation in the application of Muirs Canopy Cover classes, the NVIS and Muir classes can be viewed to all intents and purposes as equivalent (A. Hopkins pers. com) Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

APPENDIX D: Source documents

refid source citation 001 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd and Polaris Metals NL (2008). Flora and vegetation survey of the Carina exploration lease area. Western Australia, for Polaris Metals NL. 002 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2009). Flora and vegetation survey of the proposed Carina transport route Carina Mine to Mount Walton Rd Siding. Western Australia. 047 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2002). Flora and vegetation survey : proposed mining area Cobbler Norseman. Western Australia, for 048 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2002). Flora and vegetation survey : proposed mining areas, Tuatara, Chameleon, Two Gums and Salmon Gums, Davyhurst. Western Australia, for Croesus Mining NL. 049 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2009). Flora and vegetation survey Pinjin infrastructure corridor, L31/56, L31/57, L39/185 : Tropicana Gold project operational area, Pinjin Station. Report prepared for Tropicana Joint Venture / Anglogold Ashanti Australia. Western Australia. 051 Read, T. (1999). Vegetation survey for the West Oliver/Darlek/Bass area near the Widgiemooltha township. Report prepared for Resolute Limited Chalice Gold Project Western Australia. 052 Goble-Garratt and Associates (1999). Survey of the flora and vegetation of Randells (i.e. Randell) Timber Reserve : conducted for Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd. Western Australia, for Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd. 053 W.G. Martinick & Associates (1988). Landform, soils and vegetation : Jilbadji Reserve prospect. Western Australia, for Audax 054 Newbey, B. J. and K. Newbey (1992). Walyahmoning Rock Nature Reserve : flora and vegetation based on 12 sites recorded by Ken Newbey, September 1982. Prepared for the Department of Conservation and Land Management. Western Australia, DEC report. 055 St. Ives Gold Mining Company Pty Ltd (2010). PER Gold Mining Developments on Lake Lefroy Beyond 2010, EPA Assessment number 1809. Western Australia. 056 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2001). Review of vegetation on Portman Iron Ore proposed expansion areas - Koolyanobbing. Report prepared for Portman Iron Ore. Western Australia. 057 Bamford, M. J., S. J. J. F. Davies, et al. (1991). Biological survey of Kangaroo Hills and Calooli timber reserves, Coolgardie, Western Australia. Unpublished report prepared for Kalgoorlie Resources. Western Australia. 058 Monk, D., R. J. Hnatiuk, et al. (1979). Vegetation survey of Frank Hann National Park. West Australian Herbarium Research Notes 2, pp 23 - 49. Western Australia, Western Australian Herbarium. 059 Chapman, A., I. Kealley, et al. (1991). Biological surveys of four goldfields reserves, Landnote 1/91. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Western Australia. 060 Barrett, G. (1991). A biological survey of Victoria Rock Nature Reserve. Western Australia, Goldfields Naturalists Club, Western 062 Ecologia Environment (2002). Koolyanobbing iron ore expansion project : public environmental review, March 2002. Western Australia, for Portman Iron Ore Ltd. 063 Globe Environments Australia Pty Ltd (2009). Koolyanobbing iron ore project : Mt Jackson J1 deposit : Environmental Protection Act 1986, environmental impact assessment, public environmental review. Western Australia. Report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron 064 Environmental Protection Authority (2010). Carina Iron Ore Project, Polaris Metals Pty Ltd: report and recommendations of the Environmental Protection Authority (Report 1368). Western Australia. 065 Environ Australia (2006). Public environmental review : Fimiston gold mine operations extension (stage 3) and mine closure planning. Report prepared for for Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd. Western Australia. 066 360 Environmental Pty Ltd (2009). Tropicana gold project : public environmental review. Western Australia, for Tropicana Joint Venture (AngloGold Ashanti Australia). 067 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2010). Cazaly Resources Limited, Parker Range iron ore project, Mount Caudan deposit : public environmental review. Western Australia. 068 Dames and Moore Group (1999). Public environmental review : gold mining developments on Lake Lefroy Western Australia, for WMC Resources Ltd, St Ives Gold. 070 Botanica Consulting (2010). Flora and vegetation of the Parker Range region, Western Australia, for Cazaly Resources Ltd. 071 Eckermann, B. and G. Cockerton (2010). Flora and vegetation survey of the W4 Deposit in Yilgarn Operations Windarling Range W4 East Deposit. Western Australia, Report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 072 Ecologia Environment (2009). Tropicana Gold Project. Tropicana- transline infrastructure corridor : Vegetation and flora survey. Report prepared for Anglo Gold Ashanti Australia. Western Australia. 073 Biota Environmental Sciences (2011). Deception Deposit Vegetation and Flora Survey (Unpubl). Western Australia, Report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 076 Macpherson, C. (2009). Tropicana Gold project flora and vegetation assessment of the proposed operational area and its surroundings in Tropicana gold project : public environmental review , 2009, Appendix 2 - B6 , Tropicana Joint Venture/ Anglo Gold Ashanti. 077 McNee, S. A., G. T. B. Cockerton, et al. (2009). Flora and vegetation of the Western Jackson Range (Mount Jackson Range), Western Australia. Report prepared for Portman Iron Ore. Western Australia. 079 Polaris Metals N.L.(2010). Public environmental review, Carina Iron Ore Mine : Yilgarn Region WA. Western Australia. 080 Survey & Mapping Group Pty Ltd (1989). Proposed toxic waste disposal site: flora and vegetation survey Western Australia. 081 Jim’s Seeds, Weeds & Trees Pty Ltd (2006). Flora and vegetation: vegetation survey of three rehabilitated sites (Jim's seeds, weeds and trees) in PER Fimiston gold mine operation extensions and mine closure planning. Report prepared for Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd, (Appendix C, C1). Western Australia.

083 Botanica Consulting (2008). Vegetation Survey of New Morning to Spotted Quoll Area within the Tenements M77/583 and M77/545. Western Australia, Report prepared for Western Areas NL. 085 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2009). Carina mine tenement M77/1244A declared rare and priority flora survey. Report prepared for Polaris Metals NL Western Australia. 086 Read, T. and Recon Environmental (2010). Carina Iron Ore Project: Mt Walton siding vegetation. Report Prepared for Polaris Metals Pty Ltd. Western Australia. 087 Burgman, M. A. (1985). Report 5: The flora, ecology and biogeography of the eastern Roe botanical district (unpublished report). 088 Watson, A. (2008). The extraordinary nature of the great western woodlands. Western Australia. 089 School of Environmental Biology Curtin University of Technology (1999). Baseline ecological study of Lake Lefroy. Western Australia. 090 Stratford, K. S. and G. T. B. Cockerton (1998). Baseline vegetation survey and initial habitat mapping project, Jimberlana tenement. Report prepared for Anaconda Nickel Ltd. Western Australia, Anaconda Nickel Ltd,. 091 Henry-Hall, N. J. (1990). Nature conservation reserves in the eastern goldfields, Western Australia : southern two thirds of CTRC system 11 : report submitted to EPA Red Book Task Force, March 1990. Western Australia. 092 Minesite Environmental and E. van Etten (2009). Flora & Vegetation of Gold Fields Ltd St Ives Gold Mine, Proposed Pistol Club Pit Survey Area, Kambalda, Western Australia. Report prepared for St Ives Gold. 093 Botanica Consulting (2010). Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey Brockway Timber Reserve. Tenement: M63/515, P63/1571, P63/1575, P63/1576, P63/1577, P63/1578, P63/1579, P63/1580, P63/1583 and P63/1577. Prepared for Matsa Resources November 2010, Final Report. Western Australia, for Matsa Resources. Page 1 094 Matsa Resources (2010). DRAFT Brockway Iron Project: Conservation Management Plan for DEC Managed Gazetted and Proposed Reserves. Western Australia. 095 GHD and Matsa Resources Pty Ltd (2010). Report for Brockway Exploration Area: Flora and Fauna Assessment. Western Australia, for Matsa Resources. 096 GHD & Matsa Resources Pty Ltd (2009). Report for small scale mining operation: targeted flora survey. Western Australia. 097 Paul Armstrong and Associates (2004). Rare flora search and vegetation survey of North Scotia prospect, For Kinross Gold. Western 098 Botanica Consulting (2011). Mt Gibbs Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey (Tenements E74/305, E74/428, M74/65 & P74/251). Western Australia, for Western Areas NL. 099 AngloGold Ashanti Australia-Greenfields Exploration (2012). Vegetation Mapping of the Beaker Prospect. Western Australia, for AngloGold Ashanti Australia. Briefing document to DEC, 8th February 2012. 100 Paul Armstrong and Associates (2003). Rare flora search and vegetation Survey of Hard Core prospect, Conducted May 2003. For Lion Ore Australia (Nickel) Limited. Western Australia. 101 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2011). Dundas Project Conservation Management Plan: Phase 2 Drilling Program ( E63/872, E63/1101 & E63/1102). Prepared for Thor Mining PLC. Western Australia. 102 Native Vegetation Solutions (2011). L1 Flora and Vegetation Survey Programme of Work Thor Mining - (E63/872) Dundas Nature Reserve. Prepared Keith Lindbeck and Associates. Western Australia. 103 Woodward-Clyde (1996). Cawse Nickel Project: Consultative Environmental Review. Western Australia, for Centaur Mining and 104 AngloGold Ashanti Australia (2012). Viking project: Exploration Conservation Management Plan for Gazetted and Proposed Reserves. Western Australia. 105 AngloGold Ashanti (2010). Annual Environmental and Rehabilitation Report: Viking Project Exploration Activities in Gazetted and Proposed Reserves. Western Australia. 106 Astron Environmental Services (2010). Lindsays Prospect Level 1 Vegetation and Flora Survey. Western Australia, for Gondwana 107 St. Barbara Limited (2007). Burbidge Area Significant Flora and Vegetation Management Plan: Southern Cross Operations. Western Australia, St Barbara Ltd. 108 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1996). Flora and vegetation survey tenements P15/3380 and P 15/3327. Western Australia, for Ms Y.D. 109 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2003). Flora and vegetation values on the proposed pipeline route from Kambalda to Esperance. Western Australia, for Burns and Roe Worley. 110 W.G. Martinick and Asscociates Pty Ltd (1990). Jilbadji Nature Reserve vegetation and flora study. Western Australia, for Aztec Mining 111 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2003). Flora and vegetation survey Mt. Deans project area. Western Australia, for Tantalum Australia. 112 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1998). Vegetation survey of the Galaxy lease, Forrestania. Western Australia, for Bounty Gold Mine Pty 113 St. Barbara Limited (2008). Nevoria Gold Mine Bottledump Open Pit: Mining proposal amendment tenement M77/31. Western 114 Recon Environmental and St. Barbara Limited (2008). Burbidge rare flora distribution and impact. Western Australia. 115 Recon Environmental and St. Barbara Limited (2008). Burbidge spring vegetation survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX12 116 St. Barbara Limited (2008). Southern Cross Operations 2007/08 Annual Environmental Report. Western Australia. 117 Recon Environmental (2008). Axehandle Achilles vegetation survey. Western Australia, for St Barbara Ltd. 118 Recon Environmental (2008). Draft: Ruapehu Transvaal Vegetation Survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX18 119 St. Barbara Limited (2008). Transvaal gold mine mercury pit: mining proposal amendment tenement M77/225, M77/631, L77/51, L77/89. Western Australia. 120 Recon Environmental (2008). Kurrajong vegetation survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX20 121 St. Barbara Limited (2007). Pakistani laterite deposits: mining proposal amendment M77/1052. Western Australia. 122 St. Barbara Limited (2007). Bronco South mining proposal amendment M77/138 & M77/72. Western Australia. 123 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1996). Additional flora for tenements P15/3380 and P15/3327 and the distribution of the vegetation community found at the proposed sand mine. Western Australia. 124 St. Barbara Limited (2007). South Burbidge Mining Operation Mining Proposal Amendment M77/768, M77/72 and M77/138. Western 125 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2004). Rare flora search and vegetation survey of prospects at British Hill mine. For Environ and Polaris Metal NL, March 2004. Western Australia. 126 Botanica Consulting (2011). Level 2 Flora & Vegetation Survey of British Hill. Western Australia, for Southern Cross Goldfields Ltd. 127 Botanica Consulting (2011). Exploration Environmental Management Plan Prepared for Hannans Reward. Western Australia. 128 Botanica Consulting (2011). Hannans Reward Flora and Vegetation Survey: Stormbreaker & Beautiful Sunday West exploration area. Western Australia, for Hannans Reward. 129 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Proposed Drill Lines - M77/544, M77/99, M77/545 and M77/467. Western Australia, for Newexco, Kagara Nickel. 131 St. Barbara Limited (2008). Southern Cross Operations 2007/08 Annual Environmental Report. Western Australia, for St. Barbara Ltd. 132 Botanica Consulting (2010). Monitoring of Riparian Vegetation Fringing Lake Lefroy for St Ives Gold Mine. 133 Botanica Consulting (2006). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Digger Rocks and the RT Pipeline Corridor (M74/58, M74/90, M74/57 and L77/44). For Western Areas NL. . 134 Western Areas NL (2008). Supporting Document for the Proposed Digger Rocks - Mosscos's Farm Dewatering Pipeline Purpose Clearing Permit Application: Appendices 1 to 7. 136 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2006). Vegetation survey and rare flora search at Stormbreaker South prospect July 2006. For Hannans 137 Botanica Consulting (2006). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Exploration Drill Lines within E77/1354 For Hannans Reward Ltd. 138 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2006). "Vegetation survey and rare flora search at Stormbreaker south prospect July and October. For Hannans Reward." 139 Botanica Consulting (2007). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Exploration Drill Lines within E77/514. For Hannans Reward 140 Botanica Consulting (2007). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Exploration Drill Lines withinE77/514, E77/1406, M77/1029 and M77/1030 For Hannans Reward Ltd. 141 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Proposed Drill Lines - P77/3613 Prepared for Hannans Reward. 142 Australia, E. (2008). "Clearing advice for the tenements E77/514, E77/1354 and P77/3613. For Hannans Reward." 143 Botanica Consulting (2010). Hannans Reward Flora and Vegetation SurveyPrepared For Hannans Reward January 2010 Draft 1. 145 Read, T. (2008). Nevoria vegetation survey, Unpublished report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental, Report No. 146 St. Barbara Limited (2009). Southern Cross Operations 2008/09 Annual Environmental Report. Western Australia. 147 Western Australia. Dept. of Conservation and Land Management and W. A. N. P. a. N. C. Authority (2000). Rowles Lagoon Conservation Park and Clear and Muddy Lakes Nature Reserve management plan 2000- 2010, Dept. of Conservation & Land 148 Western Areas NL (2007). Mining Proposal Flying Fox T5 Addendum - Additional Mine Infrastructure. 149 Frost O'Connor & Associates (2004). Flora and vegetation studies Flying Fox Forrestania nickel project prepared for Western Areas NL

Page 2 150 Botanica Consulting (2007). Vegetation Survey of a Proposed Extension to the current clearing permit number 691/1 within the tenements M77/582 and M77/911 Prepared for Western Areas NL. 151 CoSKM (2003). Optus - Lambda Project. Frank Hann NP CEV - Proposal Document to the Conservation Commission of WA. 152 Biota Environmental Sciences (2003). Frank Hann NP (West) (Site 15) Controlled Environmental Vault Flora and Fauna Assessmen. In Sinclair Knight Mertz (2003). Optus - Lambda Project. Frank Hann NP CEV - Proposal Document to the Conservation Commission of 153 Sinclair Knight Mertz (2003). Optus - Lambda Project. Dundas East NR CEV - Proposal Document to the Conservation Commission of 154 Western Botanical (2003). DRF and Priority Flora Survey for Optus CEV Sites 13A and 14A Construction access routes Norseman, May 2003. For Biota Environmental Sciences. In Sinclair Knight Mertz (2003). Optus - Lambda Project. Dundas East NR CEV - Proposal Document to the Conservation Commission of WA. 155 Biota Environmental Sciences (2003). Dundas Nature Reserve (East) (Site 13A) Controlled Environmental Vault - Flora and Fauna Assessment. In Sinclair Knight Mertz (2003). Optus - Lambda Project. Dundas East NR CEV - Proposal Document to the Conservation 156 Sons of Gwalia Ltd (1999). Exploration and Environmental Management Program: Proposed Drilling Program October- November 1999 157 LionOre Australia (Nickel) Limited (2002). Lake Johnston Operations: Notice of Intent Maggie Hays Mine. 158 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2002). Vegetation Survey and Rare Flora Search of Maggie Hays Nickel Mine And Adjacent Areas Conducted June to August 2002, for LionOre Australia. 159 St. Ives Gold Mining Company Pty Ltd (2006). Mining Proposal: Cave Rocks Project. Underground and Open Pit Operations. 160 Botanica Consulting (2006). Vegetation Survey of the Cave Rocks Proposed Satellite pit, Waste dump (Ml 5/300) & Haul Road (L15/214, L15/6l) Prepared for St Ives Gold Mine (SIGM) Gold Fields Limited. 161 Esperance Pipeline Company Pty Ltd & Delco Australia Pty Ltd (2003). Kambalda to Esperance Gas Pipeline Project: Construction Environmental Management Plan. 162 Thevissen, J. (2012). Rare Flora Assessment Report E15/883, Woolgangie Magnetic Anomaly Proposed drill hole WRC017 January . 2012. For Mincor Resources NL. 163 Botanica Consulting (2011). Proposed Development within the Dulcie, King Brown, Marda & Battler region, for Southern Cross 165 Western Botanical (2001). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Polygons at Deception North 1 & 3 Prospects for Future Exploration Drilling Programs September 2011, for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore. 166 GHD (2012). Department of Agriculture and Food Report for State Barrier Fence Esperance Extension: Scoping Study Preliminary Flora and Fauna Assessment July 2012. 167 Authority, E. P. (2009). Advice on Conservation Values and Review of Nature Reserve Proposals in the Lake Cronin Region. June 2009. Environmental Protection Authority, Report 1329. Perth, Western Australia. 168 ENV Australia (2008). Clearing advice for the tenements E77/514, E77/1354 and P77/3613 prepared for:Hannans reward. 169 Botanica Consulting (2011). Hannans Reward Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey Stormbreaker Region Tenements: E77/1354, E77/1406, E77/1762, E77/1764, P77/3607, P77/3763, P77/3848, P77/3849 & P77/3854 Prepared For Hannans Reward Ltd Final 170 Botanica Consulting (2011). Hannans Reward Flora and Vegetation Survey Forrestania. Western Australia, for Hannans Reward Ltd. 171 Botanica Consulting (2011). Level 1 Flora & Vegetation Survey of Gravel Pit Survey Area Tenements: M77/0589, for Western Areas 172 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2007). Vegetation survey and rare flora search at the Parker Range prospect conducted June 2007. For LionOre Australia (Nickel) Limited August 2007. 173 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Spring survey Pinjin infrastructure corridor & opportunistic threatened flora collections l31/56, l31/57, l39/185 Tropicana gold project operational area – pinjin station Prepared for: Tropicana Joint Venture. 175 Read, T. (2008). Rutherford Exploration Project Rare Flora Survey. Unpublished Report prepared for Westonia Mines Limited by Recon Environmental. Report No. WEZ01., for Westonia Mines Limited. 178 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2002). Rare flora search for Eremophila resinosa (f. Muell.) at Westonia Mine conducted in November 2002 for Westonia Mine Limited November 2002. 179 Ecologia Environment (2003). Koolyanobbing expansion project transport corridor flora assessment survey. For Portman Iron Ore Ltd. 180 Western Botanical (2004). Survey for Significant Species of the Proposed Borrow Pit Site adjacent to the 32km SLK, Koolyanobbing - Windarling Haul Rd November/December 2004. For Portman Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 181 Western Botanical (2011). Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd Windarling Range Numerical Analysis of Floristic Data October 2011. 182 Western Botanical (2011). Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd Ricinocarpos brevis 2009 census at Windarling May and July 2009. 183 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Proposed Drill Lines- E77/1294 Prepared for Polaris Metals July 2008 184 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2008). Flora and vegetation survey of infill drill hole sites in exploration tenement e77/1097-I Jackson-4 prospect Prepared for: Polaris Metals NL. 185 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2007). Flora and vegetation survey of drill hole sites in exploration tenement e77/842-I Bungalbin eastern prospect Prepared for: Polaris Metals NL. 186 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Flora and vegetation survey for a proposed power line corridor tenemenT L15/318, for Polaris 187 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2010). Flora and vegetation survey for the proposed carina mine rail siding, for Polaris Metals Pty Ltd. 188 Australia, E. (2011). Iron kool targeted rare flora and fauna assessment. Prepared for Fortescue Metals Group Pty Ltd. 189 Western Botanical (2011). Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Koolyanobbing South Diamond Drilling Program Flora and Vegetation Survey of Koolyanobbing South Range proposed Diamond Drilling Program December 2011. For Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore. 190 Western Botanical (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey of proposed Koolyanobbing South RC Drilling Program, April 2008. For Portman Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 191 Western Botanical (2010). Flora and Vegetation Survey of Koolyanobbing South Range proposed RC Drilling Program, at Flycatcher, Pheasant, and Fowl Prospects March 2010. For Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore. 192 Western Botanical (2009). Regional Surveys for Significant Flora within Pizza and Picnic Polygons, Jackson East March/April 2009. For Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore. . 193 Botanica Consulting (2008). Parker Range-Mt Cauden Flora and Vegetation Survey Tenements E77/1101 E77/1235 E77/1396 E77/1403 M77/680 M77/742 M77/786 P77/2615 P77/2616 P77/2737 P77/2738 P77/2739 P77/2875 P77/2876 P77/2877 P77/3685 P77/3686 P77/3688 P77/3689 P77/3690 P77/3691 P77/3700 P77/3702 P77/3707. Western Australia, for Cazaly Resources Ltd. 194 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey within the Parker Range System (M77/764, M77/741, M77/742, E77/1244, E77/1396) for Cazaly Resources Ltd. 195 Botanica Consulting (2011). Dulcie Project Area Flora & Vegetation Survey for Southern Cross Goldfields (Within Tenements P77/3953, P77/3567, P77/3479, P77/3654, P77/3548, P77/3146, M77/581 and M77/599) Final July 2009, for Southern Cross 196 Botanica Consulting (2010). Parker Range Mt Caudan Mining Proposal Flora and Vegetation Impact Assessment Tenements: M77/741, M77/742, M77/764, E77/1396, P77/2739 & P77/3686 Prepared For Cazaly Resources Ltd April 2010 Draft 197 Globe Environments Australia Pty Ltd (2012). Yilgarn Operations Windarling Range W4 East Deposit EIA Assessment on Proponent Information. Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. Western Australia. 198 Western Areas NL (2011). Conservation management plan Hatter’s Hill & Mt Gibbs project area Rev3_June 2011 (APPENDICES: Appendix 1 – Tenement Conditions, Appendix 2 – Flora Survey Reports, Appendix 3 – GDR Procedure, Appendix 4 – Typical Drill Pad

Page 3 199 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2008). Mining Proposal Diggers South Project (M74/57, M74/58, M74/90, G70/226, G70/231, L70/109, L70/111 & L74/44). 1. 200 Jim’s Seeds Weeds & Trees Pty Ltd (2004). Flora survey for western areas NL Digger Rocks (M74/058) October 2004 Final. 201 Botanica Consulting (2006). Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Digger Rocks Rehabilitated Evaporation Pond and adjacent area (M74/57, M74/58 and M74/90) For Western Areas NL November 2006. 202 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2008). Western Areas NL Mining Proposal: Spotted Quoll Nickel Mining Project. Mining Leases 77/583 and 77/545 (and General Purpose Lease 70/231 at Mossco). 203 Coffey Environments (2009). Draft: Environmental Protection Statement for the proposed Spotted Quoll mine, Western Areas NL. 204 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2010). Parker Range Iron Ore Project: Environmental Scoping Document, for Cazaly Resources Ltd. 205 Cliffs Asia Pacific (2009). Koolyanobbing B Pit Expansion Project - Addendum to mining Proposal 2805 (Tenement M77/607).

206 Western Botanical (2009). Flora and Vegetation of the proposed C Pit and B/C overburden landform, Koolyanobbing, March 2009, for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 207 Western Botanical (2008). Flora and Vegetation of the Proposed B Pit Development, Koolyanobbing March 2008, For Portman Iron Ore 208 Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd (2009). Koolyanobbing C pit expansion project – addendum to mining proposal 2805 (tenement 209 Resolute Resources Limited, 1996, The Bulong Nickel Cobalt Laterite Project Consultative Environmental Review Volume 1 and 2. Prepared by Kinhill Engineers Pty Ltd for Resolute Resources Ltd 210 Resolute Resources Limited (1996). The Bulong Nickel Cobalt Laterite Project Consultative Environmental Review. 2 - Appendices. 212 AngloGold Ashanti (2008). Viking Project General Briefing 213 Coffey Natural Systems Pty Ltd (2008). Draft: Exploration Environmental Management Plan: Carina Exploration Drilling Project. 214 Keith Lindbeck and Associates (2006). Mining Proposal: Cosmic Boy to Digger Rocks Pipeline Extension Western Areas NL. 215 Jim’s Seeds Weeds & Trees Pty Ltd (2006). Vegetation Survey of a Proposed Pipeline from Cosmic Boy to Diggers Rocks (M77/399, M77/335, M77/574, M77/568, M74/91 , M74/90 & M74/58) For Western Areas NL May 2006. 216 St. Barbara Limited (2007). Nevoria Mining Operation Mining Proposal Amendment. 217 Dames and Moore Group (1992). Power Supply to the Bounty & Forrestania Mining Developments. Referral Document. SECWA. 218 Sandiford, E. (1989). Distribution and Conservation Status of Eucalyptus brockwayi with Particular Reference to Brockway Timber Reserve. Unpublished report to the Department of Conservation and Land Management, Albany, Perth, Western Australia. February 219 Robinson, P. (1997). Pan Australian Exploration Pty Ltd Yilgarn Extension Project Six Monthly Progress Report to the Department of Conservation and Land Management Operations Within Dundas Nature Reserve. . 220 McKenzie, K. and N. G. M. J. Venture (1993). Notice of Intent to Mine West Cheritons Gold Deposit ML 77/423 for Nevoria Joint 221 Whelans (1995). Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd Maxwell's Prospect Flora and Fauna Study. 222 Muir Environmental (1999). October 1999 Notice of Intent: Emily Ann Nickel Project for LionOre Australia (Nickel) Limited. 223 Western Areas NL (2007). Annual Environmental Report. 224 Hart Simpson and Associates Pty Ltd (1993). Gold mine in 'C' Class Nature Reserve 18584 , Westonia (Rutherford's Reward) Consultative Environmental Review. 225 Ecologia Environment and Landcorp (1997). Mungari Industrial Estate Vegetation Monitoring. 226 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1998). Vegetation survey of the Turkish Delight lease, Forrestania. Report prepared for Bounty Gold Mine Pty. Ltd. Western Australia. 227 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1998). Vegetation survey of the Leeuwin lease, Forrestania. Report prepared for Bounty Gold Mine Pty. Ltd. Western Australia. Western Australia. 228 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1999) Declared Rare and Priority Flora Search. Sons of Gwalia Ltd Hatters Hill Exploration Area 229 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1997). Review of Priority Flora Species on Golden Grove Operational Areas. Unpublised report prepared for Normandy Golden Grove Operations Pty. Ltd. Report No. CJ004/39/97. 230 Paul Armstrong & Associates (2004). Rare flora search of prospects at Cross Roads North Ironcap South Quest and Northern Estates. Conducted Novemeber 2003 for LionOre Australia Pty Ltd. Western Australia. 231 Read, T. (2008). Vegetation Map: Marvel Loch TSF Expansion. Figure 3, p 66 in Southern Cross Operations 2007/08 Annual Environmental Report (St Barbara Ltd). 232 Read, T. (2008). Vegetation Map: Cornishman to Marvel Loch. Figure 3, p 67 in Southern Cross Operations 2007/08 Annual Environmental Report (St Barbara Ltd). 233 Botanica Consulting (2011?). Vegetation Groups King Brown Flora Survey Southern Cross Goldfields. (maps within power point presentation, Southern Cross Goldfields Ltd.). 234 Botanica Consulting (2011). 2008 Annual Environmental Report, Southern Cross Operations, p4: Vegetation Groups Marda Project Flora Survey, Southern Cross Goldfields. . 235 Botanica Consulting (2011). Vegetation Groups Battler Project Flora Survey Southern Cross Goldfields. (maps within power point presentation, Southern Cross Goldfields Ltd.). 236 Portman Iron Ore Limited (2005). Proposed Windarling Airstrip Application for a Clearing Permit (Area Permit) Additional Information. Application to Department of Environment for Clearing Permit, 27th May 2005. 237 Nelson, J. (2008). Koolyanobbing Project: A Pit Waste Rock Dump Priority Ecological Community, for Portman Iron Ore Ltd. 238 GHD (2006). Water Corporation Report for Bullabulling Tank and Pipeline Environmental Field Survey Results October 2006, for Water 239 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2008). BHP Billiton - Kalgoorlie Nickel Smelter - Application to clear for car park expansion and Lay down area. Clearing Permit Application . 240 Western Botanical (2005) Application for a Clearing Permit: Whitfield Minerals Pty Ltd 241 Western Botanical (2004). Flora, Vegetation and Habitats of the South Kal Mines Pty Ltd Holdings and Surrounding Area, W.A.August 2003 - February 2004. 242 Woodman Environmental Consulting (2007). Western Power Southern Cross Pumping Station Distribution Line Route Flora and Vegeation Survey, for Western Power. 243 Harmony Gold Australia (2007). South Kal Mines Pty Ltd Purpose Permit Application Location 59 South. Assessment of Clearing Principles, for South Kal Mines Pty Ltd. 244 Harmony Gold Australia (2007). South Kal Mines Pty Ltd Purpose Permit Application Location 59 North. Assessment of Clearing Principles, for South Kal Mines Pty Ltd. 245 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2008). Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Furnace Rebuild Project Area, for BHP Billiton. 246 Connell, S. and Enviroworks (2008). Flora, Vegetation and Fauna Habitat of Hyden-Norseman road, Shire of Kondinin.

247 Alexander Holm and Associates (2009). Environmental Assessment: Hampton Location 59 - extension Coolgardie. Report for Dioro 248 Alexander Holm and Associates (2009). Environmental Assessment: Samphire Mine Location North of Kambalda, for Dioro Exploration. 249 Connell, S. and Enviroworks (2009). Flora and Vegetation Survey, Proposed Gravel Pit Number One, Hyden-Norseman Road, Shire of Kondinin, for the Shire of Kondinin.

Page 4 250 Connell, S. and Enviroworks (2009). Flora and Vegetation Survey, Proposed Gravel Pit Number two, Hyden-Norseman Road, Shire of Kondinin, for the Shire of Kondinin. 251 Plant Ecology Consulting (2011). State Barrier Fence Flora and Vegetation Survey - Southern Cross to Hyden. 252 Polaris Metals Pty Ltd (2012 ). Flora and vegetation of Carina and Chameleon prospects, Digital spatial data set with vegetation 255 Partners, M. (1997). Annual Environmental Report Randalls Area, for Mount Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd. 256 W.G. Martinick & Associates (1989). Cheritons Gold Deposit Notice of Intent. 257 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Level 2 flora and vegetation survey of the Snark deposit, new campsite and explosives storage facility, Ularring hematite project area December2011 MMM1102/53/. Western Australia, for Macarthur Minerals Ltd 258 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Level 2 flora and vegetation survey of the central deposit and proposed haul road, Ularring hematite project area. Western Australia, for Macarthur Minerals Ltd. 259 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Level 2 flora and vegetation survey of the Banjo deposit Ularring hematite project area MMM1102/68/11. Western Australia, for Macarthur Minerals Ltd. 260 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2011). Level 2 flora and vegetation survey of the proposed rail siding, Menzies survey area MMM1103/88/11. Western Australia, for Macarthur Minerals Ltd. 261 Botanica Consulting (2011). Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey of Beautiful Sunday Tenement: M77/219. Western Australia, for 262 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and vegetation survey of remnant vegetation south west of m74/57 for western areas NL Digger Rocks (M74/058) October 2004 Final. 263 Botanica Consulting (2007).Flora and vegetation survey of native vegetation fringing farmland western areas NL Digger Rocks (M74/058) October 2004 Final. For Western Areas NL. 264 Western botanical (2012). Deception Deposit Options Assessment Flora and Vegetation Survey . For Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty 265 Botanica Consulting (2011). Spotted Quoll/Cosmic Boy Haul Road Flora and Vegetation Survey Prepared For: Western Areas NL January 2011 Final Report. Western Areas NL. 266 Newby, K. R., (1984). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 1, Introduction and methods. Part 2, Widgiemooltha-Zanthus study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 18 , Western Australian Museum 267 Dell, J., (1985). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 3, Jackson- Kalgoorlie study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 23, Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee.Perth. 268 How, R. A., (1988). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 4, Lake Johnston- Hyden study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 30. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. 269 Menzies study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 31. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth.

270 Dell, J.How, R.A.Milewski, A.V.Keighery, G.J. (1992). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 6, Youanmi-Leonora study area. Part 7, Duketon-Sir Samuel study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 40. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. 271 McKenzie, N. L.,Hall, N.J.,Milewski, A.V.,Keighery, G.J.,Rolfe, J.K. (1992). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 8, Kurnalpi- Kalgoorlie study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 41. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. 272 Hall, N. J.,McKenzie, N.L.,Keighery, G.J.,Rolfe, J.K, (1993). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 9, Norseman- Balladonia study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 42. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. 273 Hall, N. J.,McKenzie, N.L.,Keighery, G.J.,Rolfe, J.K, (1994). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 10, Sandstone-Sir Samuel and Laverton-Leonora study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 47. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. 274 Keighery, G. J.,McKenzie, N. L.,Hall, N. J.,Burbidge, A.A.,Rolfe, J. K.,Fuller, P. J. (1995). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 11, Boorabbin- Southern Cross study area. Part 12, Barlee-Menzies study area, Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 49.Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. 276 Botanica Consulting (2008). Flora and vegetation of the Beachcomber Project Prepared for Tropicana Joint Venture, AngoGold Ashanti 277 Botanica Consulting (2007). Vegetation Survey of New Morning to Willy Willy Area within the tenements M77/583 and M77/545. Prepared for Western Areas NL. 278 Outback Ecology (2010). "Internickel Australia Limited: Lake Giles Project. Revised Level 1 Flora and Vegetation Survey: Lake Giles New Exploration Areas DRAFT." 279 Recon Environmental (2010). Mt Marion Lithium Project Haul Road Vegetation Survey. For Mineral Resources Ltd. Western Australia. 280 Whelans (1993). Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd Randalls Project Flora and Fauna Study for Notice of Intent. 281 Mincor Resources (2008). "Environmental Management Plan: Exploration Leases E15/883 and E15/885 West Kambalda Joint 282 Whelans (1996). Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd Randalls Area. Flora and Fauna Study: Expansion and Consolidation. 283 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2007). Flora, Vegetation and Vertebrate Fauna Survey 132 North Deposit. Prepared for MBS Environmental and Consolidated Nickel Pty Ltd. In:MBS Environmental, 132 North Open Pit Project: Purpose Permit Application, Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2003) Assessment of Clearing Principles prepared for Australian Nickel Mines by Martinick Bosch Sell Pty 284 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2003). "Widgiemooltha North Project Flora and Vegetation Survey. For Titan Resources NL." 285 Botanica Consulting (2012). Level 2 Flora and Vegetation Survey of Cave Rocks. Tenements M15/300, M15/1065 & M15/1379. Prepared for Goldfields. Draft 1. 286 Ecologia Environment (2005). Victoria Rock Exploration Program. Spring Flora and Vegetation Assessment. Western Australia. For Hannans Reward NL. 287 Sipa Exploration NL (2010). "Woodline Project Environmental Management Plan."

288 GHD (2010). Main Roads Western Australia. Report for Kundana Road Intersection. Environmental Impact Assessment. 289 Goldfields Australia (2011). "Cave Rocks Conservation Management Plan, Appendix 11: Botanica consulting, 2011. Level 2 Flora and Vegetetation Survey of Cave Rocks, Tenements M15/1065 & M15/1379. Prepared for Goldfields. 290 Ecoscape (2012). "Merredin to Kalgoorlie Microwave Bearer Flora, Vegetation and Fauna Survey. Western Power." 291 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (2007). "West Kalgoorlie Terminal to Black Flag Substation Transmission Line. Flora, Vegetation and Fauna Survey. Western Power."

Page 5 Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

APPENDIX E: Attributed map sources

refid Source References (Attributed Spatial Data) 052 Goble-Garratt and Associates (1999). Survey of the flora and vegetation of Randells (i.e. Randell) Timber Reserve : conducted for Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd. Western Australia, for Mt Monger Gold Project Pty Ltd. 053 W.G. Martinick & Associates (1988). Landform, soils and vegetation : Jilbadji Reserve prospect. Western Australia, for Audax Resources Ltd. 054 Newbey, B. J. and K. Newbey (1992). Walyahmoning Rock Nature Reserve : flora and vegetation based on 12 sites recorded by Ken Newbey, September 1982. Prepared for the Department of Conservation and Land Management. Western Australia, 057 Bamford, M. J., S. J. J. F. Davies, et al. (1991). Biological survey of Kangaroo Hills and Calooli timber reserves, Coolgardie, Western Australia. Unpublished report prepared for Kalgoorlie Resources. Western Australia. 058 Monk, D., R. J. Hnatiuk, et al. (1979). Vegetation survey of Frank Hann National Park. West Australian Herbarium Research Notes 2, pp 23 - 49. Western Australia, Western Australian Herbarium. 062 Ecologia Environment (2002). Koolyanobbing iron ore expansion project : public environmental review, March 2002. Western Australia, for Portman Iron Ore Ltd. 063 Globe Environments Australia Pty Ltd (2009). Koolyanobbing iron ore project : Mt Jackson J1 deposit : Environmental Protection Act 1986, environmental impact assessment, public environmental review. Western Australia. Report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 068 Dames and Moore Group (1999). Public environmental review : gold mining developments on Lake Lefroy Western Australia, for WMC Resources Ltd, St Ives Gold. 071 Eckermann, B. and G. Cockerton (2010). Flora and vegetation survey of the W4 Deposit in Yilgarn Operations Windarling Range W4 East Deposit. Western Australia, Report prepared for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 099 AngloGold Ashanti Australia-Greenfields Exploration (2012). Vegetation Mapping of the Beaker Prospect. Western Australia, for AngloGold Ashanti Australia. Briefing document to DEC, 8th February 2012. 103 Woodward-Clyde (1996). Cawse Nickel Project: Consultative Environmental Review. Western Australia, for Centaur Mining and Exploration Limited. 112 Mattiske Consulting Pty Ltd (1998). Vegetation survey of the Galaxy lease, Forrestania. Western Australia, for Bounty Gold 115 Recon Environmental and St. Barbara Limited (2008). Burbidge spring vegetation survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX12 118 Recon Environmental (2008). Draft: Ruapehu Transvaal Vegetation Survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX18 120 Recon Environmental (2008). Kurrajong vegetation survey. Western Australia, Unpublished Report prepared for St Barbara Ltd by Recon Environmental. Report No. SBSX20 131 St. Barbara Limited (2008). Southern Cross Operations 2007/08 Annual Environmental Report. Western Australia, for St. 206 Western Botanical (2009). Flora and Vegetation of the proposed C Pit and B/C overburden landform, Koolyanobbing, March 2009, for Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 209 Resolute Resources Limited, 1996, The Bulong Nickel Cobalt Laterite Project Consultative Environmental Review Volume 1 and 2. Prepared by Kinhill Engineers Pty Ltd for Resolute Resources Ltd 218 Sandiford, E. (1989). Distribution and Conservation Status of Eucalyptus brockwayi with Particular Reference to Brockway Timber Reserve. Unpublished report to the Department of Conservation and Land Management, Albany, Perth, Western Australia. February 1989. 244 Harmony Gold Australia (2007). South Kal Mines Pty Ltd Purpose Permit Application Location 59 North. Assessment of Clearing Principles, for South Kal Mines Pty Ltd. 252 Polaris Metals Pty Ltd (2012 ). Flora and vegetation of Carina and Chameleon prospects, Digital spatial data set with vegetation attributes. 264 Western botanical (2012). Deception Deposit Options Assessment Flora and Vegetation Survey . For Cliffs Asia Pacific Iron Ore Pty Ltd. 266 Newby, K. R., (1984). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 1, Introduction and methods. Part 2, Widgiemooltha-Zanthus study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 18 , Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee.Perth, 267 Dell, J., (1985). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 3, Jackson- Kalgoorlie study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 23, Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys 268 How, R. A., (1988). The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 4, Lake Johnston- Hyden study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement Number 30. Western Australian Museum Biological Surveys Committee. Perth. Great Western Woodlands Map Project: Consolidation of existing fine-scale vegetation maps

APPENDIX F: Great Western Woodlands Vegetation Map Project and Guidelines for Spatial Data Capture.

Great Western Woodlands Native Vegetation Map Project and Guidelines for Spatial Data Capture.

by, Ben Bayliss, Carly Bishop, Aminya Ennis and Stephen van Leeuwen , DPaW Science Division [email protected] Background A lack of “fine” scaled (< 1:100,000) spatial data coverage is a major limitation to regional native vegetation assessment and management in Western Australia. The capture of primary vegetation data necessary to address this limitation is inherently expensive and time consuming. These concerns have prompted examination of existing sources of fine scale spatial data for building regional vegetation map coverage. Examples of this are to be found with the Avon Native Vegetation Map Project and most recently, the Great Western Woodlands (GWW) Native Vegetation Map Project . It is clear from these initiatives that the feasibility and effectiveness of addressing concerns associated with vegetation map products is dependent on the completeness and spatial coverage of appropriately scaled source data and the standardization of that data.

The National Vegetation Information System (NVIS) provides an established framework for standardising vegetation attributes and was developed to enable the compilation of a nationally consistent vegetation dataset from data collected by states and territories. NVIS provides a means of describing and representing vegetation information based on establishing relationships between structural and floristic data. In particular NVIS, by way of the Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual (ESCAVI 2003), helps define a standard descriptive terminology for comparing vegetation attributes derived from different data sources. For the GWW project many fine scale vegetation spatial data sources have been generated through the environmental impact assessment process. These sources are often concerned with local and project specific impact assessments as part of a “fit for purpose” product. Adhering to protocols (e.g. NVIS) which enable standardisation with regional datasets, is not the primary focus for such products,.

Over 290 information sources were examined, 75 of which displayed vegetation maps. The spatial extent or “footprints” of these maps were georeferenced to a standard coordinate system in a GIS as an overview extent layer. This layer enabled the relative size, configuration, and spatial overlap of mapped areas from different sources to be scoped and evaluated. Twenty six sources were then selected and prioritised for capture of mapped vegetation as vector data layers in a GIS. Vegetation units were digitised as polygon features with reference to georeferenced, source map images and their “footprints”. Vegetation descriptions from the selected sources were then correlated with the relevant polygon features in the GIS layer, nominally standardised with reference to the NVIS framework and entered into a database linked to the spatial layers. Findings The potential mapped area covered by the 98 spatial “footprints” represents ~ 3% of the “Footprint” attributes ha GWW area extent. Minimum area of footprint 1 Over half the total spatial footprint area is Maximum area of footprint 55,785 associated with the 25 prioritised sources. Total footprint 474,718 Over 60% of the source map “footprints” Average footprint 4,844 represent areas of less than 1000ha, the Table 1: Summary of area statistics for the 98 spatial smallest being under 1ha. (map) “footprints” comprising the GWW project area. Data currency range: 1979 to 2011. Displayed map scale range : 1:15,000 to 1:80,000. About 10% of the sum spatial footprint represents overlapping data. Fragmentation of spatial and attribute data across reporting stages in the environmental review process meant that detailed vegetation attributes were not always clearly referenced to the spatial display (map) of vegetation units. In some cases vegetation attributes could only be interpreted from source map legends. There was considerable variation between sources in spatial resolution, methods of spatial and attribute data capture, interpretation and documentation. The temporal and spatial overlay of mining tenement jurisdictions as well as turnover in the activities of proponents was reflected through data overlap and in some cases, duplication. Management Implications and Guidelines Although the area represented by existing mapped vegetation is a relatively small proportion of the GWW there is the potential to develop a cumulative regional spatial vegetation data set as further data becomes available, either through new survey programs or through the provision of already captured data. However for this to take place efficiently and to be useful there must be: Consistent interagency protocols for centralized/coordinated spatial referencing of vegetation data. Standard protocols for spatial and attribute data collection, interpretation, documentation and quality. This includes consistent and comprehensive capture of floristic site data to enable their interpretation for developing vegetation maps and associated models depicting vegetation patterns at bioregional scales. A consistent spatial base reference for congruent delineation of vegetation units across data sources to enable spatial as well as attribute reconciliation. A consistent reference to a standard structural vegetation classification system, such as NVIS. The following guidelines are fundamental requirements for source data: A vegetation map image showing vegetation units delineated as polygons, or, digital vector data representing vegetation units as a polygon feature class. Clear and explicit vegetation unit annotation, rendering and delineation with respect to attributes. A defined geographic coordinate system for all spatial data as well as a displayed coordinate grid, and/or clear set of explicit rectification control point features for georeferencing map images to a target GIS data layer (i.e. to give a map image “real world” coordinates in a GIS). Vegetation attribute data that can be interpreted according to delineated polygonal map units. Vegetation attributes defined and described with reference to the NVIS, or, to a known structural classification system such as that of Muir (1977) congruent with NVIS. [NVIS – Muir comparison table] Protocols for floristic attributes that include standardising species names to current WA Herbarium (WACensus) nomenclature conventions. Documented methods by which vegetation map units are defined, mapped and attributed. A defined scale range within which mapped vegetation units can be meaningfully interpreted. A statement of reliability for spatial data to indicate: – How accurately polygonal map units are delineated, especially how accurately boundaries are captured; – How representative delineated map units are of the on-ground situation. Defined core metadata attributes such as scale, currency, custodian and access constraints. The data capture procedures, data management framework and work flow protocols developed and refined during the GWW project, coupled with the ability to deliver “fit for purpose” outputs through NatureMap, have application to other regions of the State (e.g. Pilbara). This application will facilitate the development of the State’s Vegetation Information System when opportunities arise.

References: Executive Steering Committee for Australian Vegetation Information (ESCAVI) (2003) Australian Vegetation Attribute Manual: National Vegetation Information System, Version 6 . Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra [http://www.environment.gov.au/erin/nvis/about.html ] Muir BG; (1977); Biological survey of the Western Australian wheatbelt. Part 2: Vegetation and habitat of Bendering Reserve .; Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 3. (The associated project report can be found on the South Coast NRM and DPaW websites.) The project was partially funded through the South Coast NRM and was supported by the Australian Government and the Government of Western Australia )