20110419 792 weld range trog final report ch md · 2021. 1. 4. · prospectus, loan, or other...

APRIL 2011

SINOSTEEL MIDWEST CORPORATION LTD

WELD RANGE IRON ORE PROJECT

TROGLOFAUNA ASSESSMENT

This page has been left blank intentionally

SINOSTEEL MIDWEST CORPORATION LTD

WELD RANGE IRON ORE PROJECT

TROGLOFAUNA ASSESSMENT

Weld Range Iron Ore Project

Troglofauna Assessment

April 2011

i

Document Status

Approved for Issue Rev Author Reviewer/s Date

Name Distributed To Date

4 C. Hall,

M. Davis

W. Ennor,

L. Quinn,

M. Davis

19/04/11 M. Davis M. Wood Apr 2011

ecologia Environment (2010). Reproduction of this report in whole or in part by electronic, mechanical or chemical means including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, in any language, is strictly prohibited without the express approval of Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Ltd and/or ecologia Environment.

Restrictions on Use

This report has been prepared specifically for Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Ltd. Neither the report nor its contents may be referred to or quoted in any statement, study, report, application, prospectus, loan, or other agreement document, without the express approval of Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Ltd and/or ecologia Environment.

ecologia Environment

1025 Wellington Street

WEST PERTH WA 6005

Phone: 08 9322 1944

Fax: 08 9322 1599

Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



April 2011

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND............................................................................................................1

1.2 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................................1

1.3 SURVEY OBJECTIVES..................................................................................................................5

2 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT............................................................................................ 7

2.1 BIOGEOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................7

2.2 CLIMATE ....................................................................................................................................7

3 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................ 9

3.1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ...........................................................................................................9

3.2 SURVEY DESIGN.........................................................................................................................9

3.3 SITE SELECTION .........................................................................................................................9

3.4 CURATION AND SPECIES IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................9

3.5 HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION........................................................................11

4 RESULTS.......................................................................................................................... 17

4.1 INSECTS (PHYLUM ARTHROPODA, CLASS INSECTA)................................................................17

4.2 ARACHNIDS (PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA, SUB CLASS: ARACHNIDA) ..........................................17

4.3 CRUSTACEANS (PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA, SUB PHYLUM: CRUSTACEA)..................................17

4.4 HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION........................................................................19

5 DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................... 35

5.1 TROGLOFAUNA HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION..............................................35

6 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................. 37

7 SURVEY TEAM................................................................................................................. 39

8 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................... 41



April 2011

iii

TABLES

Table 2‐1 – Summary of Climatic Data for Meekatharra 2008. °C. ..........................................................8

Table 3‐1 – Summary of Traps Deployed at Beebyn (June – August 2008)............................................10

Table 3‐2 – Summary of Traps Deployed at Madoonga (June – August 2008) ......................................12

Table 4‐1 – Specimens Recorded at Madoonga.....................................................................................18

Table 4‐2 – Specimens Recorded at Beebyn ..........................................................................................19

Table 4‐3 ‐ Impacts of the Project Components Within Troglofauna Habitat........................................25

Table 4‐4 – Survey Limitations ...............................................................................................................33

FIGURES

Figure 1.1 – Map of Beebyn and Madoonga Sites....................................................................................3

Figure 2.1 – Western Murchison Subregions and Surrounds (based on IBRA Version 6.1 (Richoux and Reygrobellet 1986; Ueno 1996) ...........................................................................................7

Figure 3.1 – Map of Madoonga Bore Sites .............................................................................................13

Figure 3.2 – Map of Beebyn Bore Sites ..................................................................................................15

Figure 4.1 – Unidentified Scolopendromorph Centipede from Site WRRD0273 ...................................17

Figure 4.2 – Crossection of Beebyn Pit at Bore Hole WRRD0273 ..........................................................21

Figure 4.3 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of Dolerite ............................................................................................23

Figure 4.4 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of the Banded Iron Formation (unmineralised)...................................23

Figure 4.5 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of the Banded Iron Formation (mineralised) .......................................24

Figure 4.6 – Location of the Scolopendromorph Centipede (Red Dot) at Beebyn.................................27

Figure 4.7 – Outlines of the Resource Area (Direct Impact) Superimposed on the Potential Troglobitic Habitat (Dolerite and BIF) at Beebyn .................................................................................29

Figure 4.8 – Outlines of the Mine Infrastructure Area (Indirect Impact) Superimposed on the Potential Troglobitic Habitat (Dolerite) at Beebyn............................................................................31

APPENDICES

Appendix A Risk Management ..............................................................................................................43



April 2011

iv

ACRONYMS

List all acronyms used in the report here. Format alphabetically as follows:

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

EPA Environmental Protection Authority

EPBC Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1950



April 2011

v




April 2011

vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Ltd (SMC) proposes to develop a new iron ore mining operation at Weld Range (the Project) in the Midwest region of Western Australia. The project is located approximately 85 km southwest of Meekatharra and 60 km northwest of Cue and has high grade outcrops with a target reserve of a minimum of 124 million tonnes. Mining will initially occur at two pits, Beebyn and Madoonga. The proposed impact areas are dominated by Banded Ironstone Formations (BIF), which have been assessed as prospective habitat for subterranean fauna. As a result, SMC commissioned ecologia Environment (ecologia) to conduct baseline troglofauna survey in both proposed impact areas.

Troglobitic organisms (Troglofauna) are communities of terrestrial subterranean animals that inhabit subterranean air filled void spaces and networks. A species is considered to be troglobitic by the presence of specific morphological characters that relate to its specialized subterranean habitats. Troglobitic faunal assemblages are dominated by arthropods such as isopods, schizomids, pseudoscorpions, spiders, harvestmen, mites, centipedes, millipedes, diplurans and silverfish. Many species are relict rainforest litter fauna from previously tropical climates that have become dependent on subterranean habitats which are constantly humid.

The survey undertaken comprised two sampling phases between May–July 2007 and June‐August 2008. Traps were deployed in 40 bore holes during the first phase, each bore hole containing three traps deployed at 10, 20 and 30 m depths. Of the 40 bores, 20 were surveyed within the Madoonga and Beebyn proposed impact areas and twenty bores were sampled outside of the impact areas. In the following phase, two traps were deployed in each bore. Forty bores located within each impact area and 20 outside were sampled. Traps were retrieved after approximately eight weeks and transferred to ecologia laboratory. Organisms were extracted from traps using Tullgren funnels and then preserved in 70% ethanol.

A single centipede specimen from the order Scolopendromorpha was collected from a single bore (WRRD0273) within the Beebyn impact area. The specimen exhibits characteristics of troglobitic organisms and the initial identification places the specimen in the family Cryptopidae. Cryptopids have been collected elsewhere in Western Australia; however, no records exist near Weld Range or other ranges in the Midwest region. No specimens have been recovered from outside of the impact areas.

Acarina (mites) were widely collected from sample areas both inside and outside the proposed impact zone. Mites have previously been found to be widespread throughout Western Australia. Their presence in samples does not necessarily confirm their troglobitic status as mites previously found in caves have been shown to be widespread. The abundance of these mites outside the area proposed for development warrants no significant impact to the community.

Collembolans (springtails) were present in many samples and collected from both inside and outside of the proposed development. This species possesses eyes and moderate body pigmentation, thus its status as a troglobite was not confirmed. Collembolans are associated with leaf litter and soil fauna, but troglobitic forms are also known. The level of cave specialization of this species is unclear. The presence of the species inside and outside of the proposed development site suggests that this species would not be threatened by the proposed development.

An assessment of suitable habitat for troglofauna in the Weld Range area was completed in order to determine how much troglofauna habitat may be impacted by the proposed development. In the context of troglofauna, porous rock strata are more likely to harbour troglobitic communities.



Examination of the bore hole with the troglofauna record showed that the hole contained at least two geological strata with voids suitable for troglofauna habitation. The most common stratum was dolerite, and this habitat has been classified as ‘suitable’ due to its common fractures. The other stratum was Banded Iron Formation (BIF). This habitat showed some degree of porosity but was mostly located below the water table and thus its use for troglofauna was assessed as not suitable.

The direct impact of the Project at Beebyn, as a result of excavation in the Beebyn Resource Area, equalled 17.5% of the predicted troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement. Indirect (or secondary) impacts resulting from the clearing of vegetation for mine infrastructure (such as the waste landforms, tailings storage facility, plant site and stockpiles) equalled 70.7% of the remaining troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement. The total impact on the potential troglofauna community within Beebyn tenement was, therefore, estimated at 88.2%. However, the suitable troglobitic habitat (dolerite) is widespread throughout the range. In addition, both dolerite and BIF strata are continuous between Beebyn and Madoonda, occurring also in the Aboriginal Reserve Wilgie Mia located between the two proposed resource areas. As a result, the total impact on the potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is expected to be much lower. As Beebyn and Madoonga present approximately two fifths of the total range area, a conservative estimate of the total impact of the Project on potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is 7% of direct impact and 23% of an indirect (secondary) impact. The combined impact of the Project is, therefore, expected to be approximately 30%.

April 2011

vii



April 2011

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

Sinosteel Midwest Corporation Ltd (SMC) is conducting mineral exploration, engineering, environmental and economic studies for the feasibility to mine iron ore at Weld Range (the Project) in the Midwest Region of Western Australia. The Project is located approximately 85 km southwest of Meekatharra and 60 km northwest of Cue and has high grade outcrops over a 60 km strike length. The current resource represents only 6 km of the strike length with a target reserve minimum of 124 million tonnes. Mining is planned via two open‐cut pits (Figure 1.1) from which the SMC plans to ship 15 million tonnes per annum over 9 years.

SMC commissioned ecologia Environment (ecologia) to perform a single phase survey for troglofauna sampling from May to July 2007. That survey did not yield any troglobitic organisms; however, shortly after the results of this survey the EPA released a new guidance statement (54a) which recommended two sampling seasons in order to survey for troglofauna more confidently. The resultant second phase was conducted by ecologia between June and August 2008.

1.2 LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

Subterranean fauna are protected at a State level under the Wildlife Protection Act 1950 (WP Act) and their environment is protected under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act). The WP Act was developed to provide for the conservation and protection of wildlife in Western Australia. Under Section 14 of this Act, all fauna and flora within Western Australia is protected; however, the Minister may, via a notice published in the Government Gazette, declare a list of fauna taxa identified as likely to become extinct, or is rare, or otherwise in need of special protection. The current listing was gazetted on the 5 August 2008.

A Guidance Statement has been developed specifically to advise the public about the minimum requirements for environmental management with respect to subterranean fauna. EPA Guidance Statement 54: Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia 2003 states that:

“Proposals that, if implemented, could potentially have a significant impact on stygobitic or troglobitic habitat by:

• lowering the water table sufficiently to dry out the zone in which some species live, or otherwise artificially changing water tables; or

• changing water quality (e.g. increasing salinity levels or altering haloclines, increasing nutrient levels or the availability of organic matter, or introducing other pollutants); or

• destroying or damaging caves (including changing their air temperatures and humidity).

will be subject to formal EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) under the EP Act.

The EP Act is “an Act to provide for an Environmental Protection Authority, for the prevention, control and abatement of environmental pollution, for the conservation, preservation, protection, enhancement and management of the environment and for matters incidental to or connected with the foregoing.” Section 4a of this Act outlines five principles that are required to be addressed to ensure that the objectives of the Act are addressed.



April 2011

2

Three of these principles are relevant to native fauna and flora:

• The Precautionary Principle

Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.

• The Principles of Intergenerational Equity

The present generation should ensure that the health, diversity and productivity of the environment is maintained or enhanced for the benefit of future generations.

• The Principle of the Conservation of Biological Diversity and Ecological Integrity

Conservation of biological diversity and ecological integrity should be a fundamental consideration.

Projects undertaken as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process are required to address guidelines produced by the EPA, in this case:

• Guidance Statement 56: Terrestrial Fauna Surveys for Environmental Impact in Western Australia (EPA 2004),

• Guidance Statement 54: Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia (EPA 2003), and

• principles outlined in the EPA’s Position Statement No. 3 Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an element of Biodiversity Protection (EPA 2002).

Additionally, a requirement to protect subterranean fauna, and to prevent or manage activities that may cause a decline in subterranean fauna populations is now written into the License to Operate for most mining and industrial activities.

Subterranean fauna in Western Australia are also protected at a Federal level under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). The EPBC Act was developed to provide for the protection of the environment, especially those aspects of the environment that are matters of national environmental significance, to promote ecologically sustainable development through the conservation and ecologically sustainable use of natural resources; and to promote the conservation of biodiversity. The EPBC Act includes provisions to protect native species (and in particular prevent the extinction, and promote the recovery, of threatened species) and ensures the conservation of migratory species. In addition to the principles outlined in Section 4a of the EP Act, Section 3a of the EPBC Act includes a principle of ecologically sustainable development dictating that decision‐making processes should effectively integrate both long‐term and short‐term economic, environmental, social and equitable considerations.

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!( !(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!( !(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

545000 550000 555000 560000 565000 570000 575000 580000 58500070

1500

070

2000

070

2500

070

3000

070

3500

0

Legend!( Troglofauna Trapping Sites

BFS Base Case Infrastructure

Pits and Dumps

Coordinate SystemName: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 50Projection: Transverse MercatorDatum: GDA 1994 A4

Figure: 101Project ID: 792

Drawn: SGDate: 03/11/09

K0 2.5 5

Kilometres

1:150,000Absolute Scale -

Unique Map ID: S050

Weld Range Troglofauna

Trapping Sites



April 2011

4




April 2011

5

1.3 SURVEY OBJECTIVES

SMC commissioned ecologia to undertake a baseline biological survey of the subterranean invertebrate fauna (troglofauna) of the Weld Range Madoonga and Beebyn tenements as part of the environmental impact assessment for the project.

The EPA’s objectives with regards to fauna management are to:

• maintain the abundance, species diversity and geographical distribution of Subterranean terrestrial invertebrate fauna; and

• protect Specially Protected (Threatened) fauna, consistent with the provisions of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950.

Hence, the primary objective of this study was to provide sufficient information to the EPA to assess the impact of the project on the troglofauna of the area, thereby ensuring that these objectives will be upheld.

Specifically, the objectives of this survey were to undertake a survey that satisfies the requirements documented in EPA’s Guidance Statement 54 and Position Statement No. 3, thus providing:

• A review of background information (including literature and database searches);

• An inventory of troglofauna species occurring in the study area, incorporating recent published and unpublished records;

• An inventory of species of biological and conservation significance recorded or likely to occur within the project area and surrounds;

• A review of regional and biogeographical significance, including the conservation status of species recorded in the project area; and

• A risk assessment to determine likely impacts of threatening processes on troglobitic species within the study area.

1.3.1 Troglofauna Background

Troglobites are communities of terrestrial subterranean animals that inhabit air filled chambers and networks or caves. They are divided into three ecological categories:

a. Troglobites ‐ obligate cavernicolous species, (Howarth 1983);

b. Troglofiles ‐ facultative species that live and reproduce underground but that are also found in similar dark, humid microhabitat on surface (Howarth 1983); and

c. Trogloxenes ‐ species that regularly inhabit underground caves and cavities for refuge but normally return to surface environment to feed (Howarth 1983).

A fourth group, accidentals, wander into cave systems but cannot survive there (Howarth 1983).

Troglobites are recognized by the presence of specialized morphological characters: reduction or loss of eyes, wings body pigmentation; attenuation of appendages; thinning of cuticle, loss of circadian rhythms and well developed mechanosensory systems (Howarth 1983). Troglobitic faunal assemblages are dominated by arthropods such as isopods (Isopoda), schizomids (Schizomida),



April 2011

6

pseudoscorpions (Pseudoscorpiones), spiders (Araneae), harvestmen (Opiliones), mites (Acari), centipedes (Chilopoda), millipedes (Diplopoda), diplurans (Diplura) and silverfish (Thysanura). Troglobitic species are thought to represent relict rainforest fauna from previously tropical climates (Humphreys 1993). Aridification of Australia over the last 60 million years is thought to have trapped these organisms within these void systems (Humphreys 1993) and have become specialized to exploit the unique conditions dependent on subterranean habitats that are characterized by: constantly high humidity; extremely stable temperature; complete absence of light.

Food resources in subterranean ecosystems are largely allochthonous (i.e. not formed in the region where found) and carried into caves and cavities by plant roots, water and animals (Howarth 1983; Howarth 1993). Subterranean ecosystems have low levels of carbon and nitrogen in the form of organic matter, which is the main food resource for most troglobitic species (Howarth 1993).

Troglobites often have spatially restricted distributions, making them good examples of short‐range endemics because they are incapable of dispersing on the surface (Harvey 2002b). Such dispersal limitations often result in troglobites having extremely small distribution ranges and high levels of endemism (Strayer 1994; EPA 2003), which is characteristic of subterranean fauna worldwide. Examples include the millipede Stygiochiropus peculiaris, which is restricted to a single cave system at Cape Range (Strayer 1994). Troglobitic species represent special cases of short‐range endemism (Humphreys and Shear 1993; Harvey 2002b).

Troglophyles are less likely to be as range restricted because they are not obligated to living in caves, and thus have greater freedom to disperse. Genomic studies of cavernicolous mites from the Pilbara region found that they were widely distributed (Harvey 2002b) and these species may represent troglophyles rather than troglobites.

The diversity of troglofauna in Western Australia has become increasing understood over past two decades (Biota 2006); however, despite recent studies subterranean systems and their fauna remain poorly known (Humphreys et al. 2005; Humphreys 2008). In Western Australia, troglofauna have been recorded from karstic limestone systems at Cape Range, Barrow Island and the Kimberley (Humphreys 2008), also in pisolitic mesa formations in the Pilbara (Harvey 1988; Humphreys 2001b; Biota 2005; Humphreys 2008) and in cave systems at Yanchep (Biota 2006), Margaret River (EPA 2005) and across the Nullarbor (Eberhard 2006).



2 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

2.1 BIOGEOGRAPHY

The Weld Range lies in the Murchison Biogeographic Region, Western sub region which lies within the Eremaean botanical province or the Arid zone of Western Australia (Figure 2.1). The System is described as rugged ranges and ridges of mainly Archaean metamorphosed sedimentary rocks supporting Acacia shrub lands (Moore 1995). The area spans 78479.96 km² and includes the Weld Range and Jack Hills systems.

The tenements that form the basis for the Weld Range Iron Ore project cover a series of hills that rise approximately 250 m above the surrounding plains. The range is approximately three kilometres wide and extends for up to 60 km in length from southwest to the northeast. The range consists of a series of parallel ridges with deeply incised valleys.

Figure 2.1 – Western Murchison Subregions and Surrounds (based on IBRA Version 6.1 (Richoux and Reygrobellet 1986; Ueno 1996)

2.2 CLIMATE

The climate of the Murhison Biogeogaphic Region is considered to be semi‐arid with a summer and winter rainfall bimodal pattern (Curry et al. 1994). The average annual rainfall, as recorded from historical data at Meekatharra airport, is 236 mm falling over an average of 46 days; however, there

April 2011

7



April 2011

8

is considerable annual variation (Desmond et al. 2001). The average maximum summer temperature is 39°C and the winter temperature is 19°C. The minimum temperatures on average range from 9°C in winter to 24°C in summer (BOM 2007). Humidity is low with morning relative humidity reaching approximately 60% and afternoon relative humidity quite often dropping below 20%. Pan evaporation is on average 3560 mm/annum at Meekatharra Airport. The pan evaporation drops to 114 mm on average in June and rises to an average of 505 mm in January. Thus pan evaporation always exceeds rainfall and the area is extremely dry (BOM 2007).

During the 2008 sampling period (June‐August) daily maximum and minimum temperatures were similar to historical means, not varying more than 2°C and 1°C respectively. Rainfall during the period June‐July was up to 20 mm less than annual means for the same period (Table 2.1), in comparison to the final month (August) where records were 6 mm greater than the average for the same period (Table 2.1).

Table 2‐1 – Summary of Climatic Data for Meekatharra 2008. Records Obtained from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Meekatharra Airport Weather Station. Rainfall and Evaporation in mm and Temperature in °C.

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

Average Monthly Records 1950‐2008

Rainfall 27.5 36.2 29 21.1 23.9 31 22.1 11.4 4.6 6.4 11.3 12.2

Average Monthly Records 1950‐2008

Temp. Max.

38.2 36.6 34.3 29.1 23.7 19.6 19 21.3 25.6 29.5 33.2 36.4

Temp. Min. 24.3 23.7 21.4 17 12.1 8.7 7.4 8.5 11.5 15 18.7 22

Records for 2008

Total Rainfall 5.4 127.6 57.2 13.8 2.2 10.8 16.8 17.6 0 6.2

Total Evaporation

531 343.2 329 213.8 180.6 129.8 132 176.8 231.4 336.2

Average daily Temp. Max.

42.1

35.6 35.2 29 27.3 21 20.8 20.9 26.3 21

Average daily Temp. Min.

27.3

22.9 22.1 16.9 12.6 9 7.9 7.9 11.6 16.8



April 2011

9

3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

Troglofauna were sampled via portable litter traps lowered into bore holes. Each trap consisted of two PVC pipes screwed together. Each end was capped with a wide aperture grate and holes were drilled in the casing to facilitate colonisation. Prior to deployment, each trap was filled with sterilised leaf litter. Leaf litter was collected from the local surface environment and soaked for an hour in water and microwaved on high for 3 minutes, thus sterilizing the leaf litter. Sterilization aimed to minimize contamination by terrestrial organisms.

3.2 SURVEY DESIGN

The initial phase (May–July 2007) surveyed 40 bore holes, of which 10 were deployed at Beebyn and Madoonga tenements, and the remaining 20 were outside of the proposed development sites. Each bore contained three troglofauna traps spaced apart at 10, 20 and 30 m below surface level, effectively creating a sample size of 120. Traps were left in the bores for approximately eight weeks. Bore holes were closed using bore plugs to retain humidity and minimize colonization from troglophyles.

The second survey phase (June‐August 2008) surveyed 40 and 41 bores from within Beebyn and Madoonga respectively. Outside the proposed development sites, 22 bores were surveyed (20 outside Beebyn and 2 outside Madoonga). Each bore used in the second phase contained two troglofauna traps spaced 10 m apart. Where possible, traps were lowered to ~5 m above the water level where water was present. Alternatively, if no water was located, traps were lowered to ~5 m above the base of the bore. As with the first phase, traps remained in the holes for approximately eight weeks.

Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 summarise the traps deployed at Beebyn and Madoonga respectively.

3.3 SITE SELECTION

Drilling information of all available bores was provided to ecologia. Bores were chosen from inside and outside each impact area (Madoonga and Beebyn) with the purpose of an even distribution across the tenement (Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2). Sites to be utilized in the survey were finalised on site. Where a planned bore was inaccessible, another nearby bore was chosen instead.

3.4 CURATION AND SPECIES IDENTIFICATION

All traps were retrieved at the conclusion of eight weeks below ground level (colonization period) and the contents of each was placed in sealed plastic bags. These samples were kept inside coolers for transport to ecologia Perth laboratory at a stable temperature.

Leaf litter was placed in Tullgren funnels similar to those used by Brady (SRK 2007) in order to extract the live organisms. Organisms migrate away from the gradual desiccation of the litter following a humidity gradient induced by heat globes above each sample (1969), they are collected into a specimen vial containing 70 % ethanol for preservation.

Each vial was sorted in the laboratory using dissection microscopes. Troglobitic organisms were identified and individually labelled. Specimens were sent to relevant specialists for identification. In



April 2011

10

cases where a sample contained many specimens of known terrestrials (typically the case for mites), a general representative sample was taken and any further presence was noted.

Table 3‐1 – Summary of Traps Deployed at Beebyn (June – August 2008)

Beebyn pit Bore ID Trap Depths (m) Bore ID Trap Depths (m)

MRRC0001 20,30 WRRC0002 20,30 WRRC0136 20,30 WRRC0098 20,30 WRRC0283 20,30 WRRC0386 20,30 WRRC0286 20,30 WRRC0387 20,30 WRRC0315 20,30 WRRC0389 20,30 WRRC0374 20,30 WRRC0390 20,30 WRRC0384 20,30 WRRC0391 20,30 WRRC0420 20,30 WRRC0393 20,30 WRRC0443 20,30 WRRC0394 20,30 WRRC0444 20,30 WRRC0398 20,30 WRRC0451 20,30 WRRC0399 20,30 WRRC0573 20,30 WRRC0422 20,30 WRRC0574 20,30 WRRC0423 20,30 WRRC0575 20,30 WRRC0425 20,30 WRRC0579 20,30 WRRC0426 20,30 WRRC0601 20,30 WRRC0435 20,30 WRRC0603 20,30 WRRC0437 20,30 WRRC0605 20,30 WRRC0440 20,30 WRRC0608 20,30 WRRC0441 20,30 WRRC0611 20,30 WRRC0794 20,30 WRRC0617 20,30 Inside project area WRRC0619 20,30 Outside project area WRRC0620 20,30 WRRC0621 20,30 WRRC0628 20,30 WRRC0630 20,30 WRRC0632 20,30 WRRC0635 20,30 WRRC0639 20,30 WRRC0661 15,25 WRRC0666 20,30 WRRC0676 20,30 WRRC0766 20,30 WRRC0769 20,30 WRRD0273 20,30 WRRD0478 20,30 WRRD0678 20,30 WRRD0699 20,30 WWRC0378 20,30 WWRC0680 20,30



April 2011

11

3.5 HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION

The suitability of geological formations as habitat for troglofauna is primarily a function of available habitat space. Porous rock strata are, therefore, more likely to harbour troglobitic communities than fresh, non‐fractured rock. In order to assess the porosity of the habitat, diamond drill cores from the area were inspected.

Assessment of direct and indirect impact on potential troglobitic habitat and an extrapolation of remaining habitat were conducted using super‐imposition of planned impact areas (e.g. pits, waste dumps) onto the area of the most prospective troglobitic habitat.



April 2011

12

Table 3‐2 – Summary of Traps Deployed at Madoonga (June – August 2008)

Madoonga Pit

Bore ID Depth measurement

(m) Trap Depths (m)

WRRC0072 Water at 39.5 30,40 WRRC0162 Blocked at 30 10,20 WRRC0174 Water at 85.5 70,80 WRRC0504 Water at 17.5 6,10 WRRC0510 Water at 24 5,15 WRRC0517 Water at 51.5 45,35 WRRC0518 Water at 46 30,40 WRRC0519 Water at 31.5 15,25 WRRC0548 Water at 26.7 10,20 WRRC0550 Blocked at 70 50,60 WRRC0551 Blocked at 70 50,60 WRRC0552 Water at 76.2 60,70 WRRC0553 Water at 78.5 60,70 WRRC0554 Water at 89.5 70,80 WRRC0563 Water at 27.8 10,20 WRRC0564 Depth > 40 20,30 WRRC0568 Water at 35.5 20,30 WRRC0569 Water at 63.5 45,55 WRRC0658 Water at 26 10,20 WRRC0684 Water at 27 10,20 WRRC0688 Water at 23 10,20 WRRC0689 Blocked at 35 20,30 WRRC0690 Blocked at 35 20,30 WRRC0691 Blocked at 22 10,20 WRRC0711 Blocked at 57 40,50 WRRC0712 Water at 32.8 15,25 WRRC0714 Water at 43.6 25,35 WRRC0715 Water at 42 25,35 WRRC0716 Water at 70 50,60 WRRC0718 Water at 36.2 20,30 WRRC0719 Water at 44.5 30,40 WRRC0740 Water at 40 20,30 WRRC0741 Water at 42.8 25,35 WRRC0742 Water at 35.05 15,25 WRRC0743 Water at 30 15,25 WRRC0744 Water at 53.9 20,30 WRRC0745 Blocked at 47 30,40 WRRC0747 Blocked at 35 20,30 WRRC0749 Blocked at 36 20,30 WRRC0750 Depth > 80 60,70 WRRC0751 Blocked at 42 20,30 WRRC0752 Blocked at 60 40,50 WRRC0753 Depth > 80 60,70

Inside project area, Outside project area

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

548000 550000 552000 554000 556000 558000 560000 562000 56400070

1200

070

1400

070

1600

070

1800

070

2000

0



Pits and Dumps


Figure: 3.1Project ID: 792


K0 1 2

Kilometres


Unique Map ID: S052

Weld Range (Madoonga)Troglofauna

Trapping Sites




April 2011

14

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!( !( !(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(

!(!( !(!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!( !(!(

!(!(!(!(

574000 576000 578000 580000 582000 584000 58600070

2200

070

2400

070

2600

070

2800

070

3000

0



Pits and Dumps




K0 0.8 1.6

Kilometres


Unique Map ID: S051

Weld Range (Beebyn)Troglofauna

Trapping Sites



April 2011

16




4 RESULTS

4.1 INSECTS (PHYLUM ARTHROPODA, CLASS INSECTA)

4.1.1 Chilopoda: Scolopendromorpha (Centipede)

A single specimen of a scolopendromorph centipede (Figure 4.1) was recorded from a bore inside the Beebyn impact area (WRRD0273 – Table 4.2). The specimen was extracted from a trap situated 30 m bgl. The organism exhibits no eyes or pigment and possess appendages more elongated than terrestrial scolopendrids. Preliminary analysis suggests that the specimen belongs to the family Cryptopidae, although further identification is required.

Figure 4.1 – Unidentified Scolopendromorph Centipede from Site WRRD0273

4.1.2 Colembolla (Springtails)

Specimens of Collembolan (Springtails) were recorded from many bores at a range of depths both inside and outside Madoonga and Beebyn impact areas (Table 4.1 and Table 4.2).

4.2 ARACHNIDS (PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA, SUB CLASS: ARACHNIDA)

4.2.1 Acari (Mites)

Numerous mites were collected from many bores at a range of depths inside and outside both Madoonga and Beebyn tenements (Table 4.1 and 4.2).

4.3 CRUSTACEANS (PHYLUM: ARTHROPODA, SUB PHYLUM: CRUSTACEA)

4.3.1 Copepoda

A single copepod specimen was recorded from within the Madoonga area (WRRC0714) at a depth of 35 m (Table 4.1 and 4.2).

April 2011

17



April 2011

18

Table 4‐1 – Specimens Recorded at Madoonga

Madoonga Bore ID Organism Depth (m) Quantity

WRRC0072 Mites 30 12 WRRC0072 Collembolan 30 20‐50 WRRC0072 Collembolan 40 15 WRRC0162 Collembolan 20 100+ WRRC0162 Mites 20 20‐50 WRRC0174 Mites 70 100+ WRRC0174 Mites 80 20‐50 WRRC0504 Collembolan 10 6 WRRC0504 Mites 10 20‐50 WRRC0510 Mites 5 100+ WRRC0518 Mites 40 9 WRRC0519 Collembolan 25 20‐50 WRRC0519 Collembolan 15 7 WRRC0519 Mites 25 100+ WRRC0519 Mites 15 100+ WRRC0550 Collembolan 50 100+ WRRC0550 Collembolan 60 19 WRRC0564 Mites 20 100+ WRRC0689 Collembolan 30 100+ WRRC0690 Mites 30 20‐50 WRRC0690 Collembolan 20 100+ WRRC0714 Copepod 35 1 WRRC0716 Collembolan 60 20‐50 WRRC0716 Collembolan 50 20‐50 WRRC0716 Mites 60 1 WRRC0740 Collembolan 30 100+ WRRC0740 Collembolan 20 100+ WRRC0740 Mites 30 50‐100 WRRC0742 Mites 15 100+ WRRC0747 Collembolan 20 20‐50 WRRC0747 Mites 20 100+




April 2011

19

Table 4‐2 – Specimens Recorded at Beebyn

Beebyn Bore ID Organism Depth (m) Quantity

WRRC0136 Mite 20 1 WRRD0273 Scolopendrid 30 1 WRRC0399 Mite 20 10 WRRC0399 Mite 30 1 WRRC0420 Mite 20 4 WRRC0423 Mite 20 100+ WRRC0425 Collembolan 20 20‐50 WRRC0435 Collembolan 20 20‐50 WRRC0435 Collembolan 30 20‐50 WRRC0444 Collembolan 20 20‐50 WRRC0574 Mite 20 50‐100 WRRC0601 Mite 30 50‐100 WRRC0611 Collembolan 30 100+ WRRC0620 Collembolan 20 20‐50 WRRC0620 Mite 20 100+ WRRC0621 Collembolan 20 100+ WRRC0632 Collembolan 30 50‐100 WRRC0666 Collembolan 20 50‐100 WRRC0680 Mite 20 100+ WRRC0680 Collembolan 20 100+


4.4 HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION

4.4.1 Habitat Assessment

Examination of the bore hole with the troglofauna record (WRRD0273) showed that the hole contained at least two geological strata with voids suitable for troglofauna habitation (Figure 4.2). The most common stratum was dolerite, and this habitat has been classified as ‘suitable’ due to its common fractures (Figure 4.3). The other stratum was Banded Iron Formation (BIF). This habitat showed some degree of porosity but was mostly located below the water table and thus its use for troglofauna was assessed as not suitable (Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5).



April 2011

20


WRRD0273

WR

RD

0273

Dolerite

Water Table

Banded Iron Formation

Iron Mineralisation

Banded Iron Formation

Not Mineralised

Troglofauna located 30m down hole

Dolerite in Planned Open Pit

58

10

00

E

58

10

00

E

70

26

70

0 N

70

26

70

0 N

70

26

80

0 N

70

26

80

0 N

70

26

90

0 N

70

26

90

0 N

70

27

00

0 N

70

27

00

0 N

70

27

10

0 N

70

27

10

0 N

70

27

20

0 N

70

27

20

0 N

200 Elev 200 Elev

250 Elev 250 Elev

300 Elev 300 Elev

350 Elev 350 Elev

400 Elev 400 Elev

450 Elev 450 Elev

500 Elev 500 Elev

550 Elev 550 Elev

600 Elev 600 Elev

Figure 4.2: WRRD0273 Crossection

View Along WRRD0273 Looking East

Scale 1:2500 Date: 26/03/10

Dolerite



April 2011

22




Figure 4.3 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of Dolerite

Figure 4.4 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of the Banded Iron Formation (unmineralised)

April 2011

23



Figure 4.5 ‐ Diamond Drill Core of the Banded Iron Formation (mineralised)

4.4.2 Extrapolation

Based on geological maps, suitable troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement was estimated at 1261.5 ha (Table 4‐3, Figure 4.7and Figure 4.8). The components impacting on the suitable habitat were:

• Beebyn Resource Area (229 ha); and

• Beebyn Mine Infrastructure (763.8 ha).

The direct impact, as a result of excavation in the Beebyn Resource Area, equalled 17.5% of the predicted troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement. Indirect (or secondary) impacts resulting from the clearing of vegetation for mine infrastructure (such as the waste landforms, tailings storage facility, plant site and stockpiles) equalled 70.7% of the remaining troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement. The total impact on the potential troglofauna community within Beebyn tenement was, therefore, estimated at 88.2%.

However, the suitable troglobitic habitat (dolerite) is widespread throughout the range. In addition, both dolerite and BIF strata are continuous between Beebyn and Madoonda, occurring also in the Aboriginal Reserve Wilgie Mia located between the two proposed resource areas. As a result, the total impact on the potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is expected to be much lower. As Beebyn and Madoonga present approximately two fifths of the total range area, a conservative estimate of the total impact of the Project on potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is 7% of direct impact and 23% of an indirect (secondary) impact. The combined impact of the Project is, therefore, expected to be approximately 30% (Table 4‐3).

April 2011

24



April 2011

25

Table 4‐3 ‐ Impacts of the Project Components Within Troglofauna Habitat

ha m2 % Total dolerite at Beebyn 1261.5 12615077 96.4 Total BIF at Beebyn 47.4 473820 3.6 Total at Beebyn 1308.9 13088897 100 Direct impact at Beebyn Beebyn Main Pit 197.4 1974400 15.1 Beebyn Central Pod 8.4 84300 0.6 Beebyn West Pod 23.1 231300 1.8 Total direct impact at Beebyn 229.0 2290000 17.5 Remaining Beebyn dolerite after direct impact 1079.9 10798897 82.5 Indirect impact at Beebyn Beebyn waste rock dumps areas over dolerite 617.5 6175000 57.2 Beebyn infrastructure over dolerite 113.5 1135000 10.5 Beebyn haul roads over dolerite 32.8 328000 3.0 Total indirect impact on remaining Beebyn dolerite 763.8 7638000 70.7 Remaining Beebyn dolerite after direct and indirect impact 316.1 3160897 29.3 Total impact of the Project (Madoonga and Beebyn) Total dolerite and BIF at Weld Range 6544 65444485 100 Total direct impact of the Project 458 4580000 7.0 Total indirect (secondary) impact of the Project 1528 15276000 23.3 Combined direct and indirect impact of the Project 1986 19856000 30.3



April 2011

26


!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!( !( !(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(

!(!( !(!( !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!( !(!(

!(!(!(!(

!

574000 576000 578000 580000 582000 584000 58600070

2200

070

2400

070

2600

070

2800

070

3000

0

Legend! Centipede Specimen

!( Troglofauna Trapping Sites


Pits and Dumps




K0 0.8 1.6

Kilometres


Unique Map ID: S051

Weld Range (Beebyn)Troglofauna

Trapping Sites




April 2011

28

576

500

E

576500 E

577

000

E

577000 E

577

500

E

577500 E

578

000

E

578000 E

578

500

E

578500 E

579

000

E

579000 E

579

500

E

579500 E

580

000

E

580000 E

580

500

E

580500 E

581

000

E

581000 E

581

500

E

581500 E

582

000

E

582000 E

582

500

E

582500 E

583

000

E

583000 E

583

500

E

583500 E

584

000

E

584000 E

7024000 N 7024000 N

7024500 N 7024500 N

7025000 N 7025000 N

7025500 N 7025500 N

7026000 N 7026000 N

7026500 N 7026500 N

7027000 N 7027000 N

7027500 N 7027500 N

7028000 N 7028000 N

7028500 N 7028500 N

7029000 N 7029000 N

WR

RD

0273

Figure 4.7: Beebyn Direct Impact

Plan View With Pit Surface Area

Scale 1:20000 Date: 20/04/10

Doleritein Planned Open Pit

Dolerite

DoleriteBanded Iron FormationIron Mineralisation

Banded Iron FormationNot Mineralised

BeebynWest Pod

Beebyn CentralPod

BeebynMain Pit




April 2011

30

575000

575000

580000

580000

585000

585000

7025

000

7025

000

7030

000

7030

000

Map Reference: MW47_WRP_Beebyn Dolerite Area_19042011Projection Details: MGA 50, GDA 94Date: 19 April 2011

Figure 4.8: WELD RANGE PROJECTBeebyn Indirect (Secondary) Impact ³0 750 1,500 2,250 3,000375 Meters

1:30,000 @ A3

Legend

Dolerite Area

Beebyn_Dumps_Trog_19042011

Beebyn Infrastructure

Haul and Access Roads

TENEMENTS

I ·· .. 1

,...-?

I! Ill 11 Ill !I

~ D D D D

,,



April 2011

32




April 2011

33

Table 4‐4 – Survey Limitations

CONSTRAINT RELEVANT (yes/no)

COMMENT

Competency/ experience of the consultant carrying out the survey.

No

Ecologia employs a team of experienced invertebrate biologists that have undertaken dozens of Short Range Endemic, Stygofauna and Troglofauna surveys in the past 24 months.

Scope (what taxonomic groups were sampled and were some sampling methods not able to be employed because of constraints such as weather conditions).

No Bores were sampled at similar times during the year allowing weather throughout the survey to remain consistent.

Proportion of fauna identified, recorded and/ or collected.

Yes

Troglofauna have only recently been recorded from non‐karst geologies/environment is WA and as such it is difficult to quantify expected population numbers, species richness etc

Sources of information (previously available information as distinct from new data).

Yes

There is very little published and unpublished literature regarding troglofauna presence, distribution and biology from non‐karst environments in WA.

The proportion of the task achieved and further work which might be needed.

Yes

A large number of prospective bores at Hampton Hill (the area designated as outside the Madoonga impact area) had been rehabilitated. Unable to locate bores, teams could not deploy a sufficient number (20) of traps to sample outside.

Timing/ weather/ season/ cycle. No Both surveys were conducted during cooler, wetter period (May‐August), as required by the EPA guideline 54 and 54A.

Disturbances which affected results of the survey (e.g. fire, flood, accidental human intervention).

No

The only potential disturbing activities is the on‐going exploration drilling that is occurring in the area. However experience at Mesa A suggests that drilling within meters of troglofauna habitats does not adversely affect the population and capture rates.

Intensity (in retrospect was the intensity adequate).

No

The survey spread across each tenement, traps were left for 2 months and two traps per hole were installed, as such the survey is considered adequate.

Completeness (e.g. was relevant area fully surveyed).

No

All of the “impact area” of the proposal was covered in this survey. Areas outside the impact were not completed sufficiently (i.e. Hampton Hill).

Resources (e.g. degree of expertise available in animal identification to taxon level).

Yes

All potential troglofauna specimens recovered were given to relevant taxonomic experts at the WAM for identification, however expertise on troglobitic centipedes is limited in WA.

Remoteness and/ or access problems. Yes Bore holes outside the impact (Hampton Hill) had been rehabilitated and could not be



April 2011

34

CONSTRAINT RELEVANT (yes/no)

COMMENT

located.

Availability of contextual information on the region (e.g. biogeography).

No A wealth of information is available concerning the Biogeographic, geological and hydrological nature of the project area.

Efficiency of sampling methods (i.e. any groups not sampled by survey methods).

Yes

As stated above, the presence of Troglofauna outside of karst environments has only recently been documented in WA and as such it is difficult to determine whether or not certain groups were not recorded during this survey.



April 2011

35

5 DISCUSSION

Little is known of the troglobitic invertebrates of Weld Range owing to a lack of study in the area. The paucity of knowledge of troglobites in this area makes estimating the extent of organisms likely to be at risk from the proposed development difficult. The scolopendrid specimen collected from inside the Beebyn impact area lacked eyes or pigment and displayed elongated appendages, characteristics of troglobitic organisms (Brady 1969). The specimen represents a species from the family Cryptopidae, but more specific identification of the specimen is currently unavailable. Troglobitic centipedes including scolopendrids are known in Western Australia from Robe Valley Mesa A (Culver et al. 2000) and a cave on the Nullarbor plain (Biota 2006). This is the first recorded instance of a troglobitic centipede from Weld Range. The specimen was identified from a single bore from within the Beebyn tenement; no evidence of a population was recovered from outside the impact area.

The collection of a Copepod (aquatic crustacean) indicates a situation where a litter traps has been suspended within the water column. The specimen may be a form of a stygofauna, in contrast to troglofauna which reside in air cavities, as stygofauna inhabit ground water. As such, stygofauna fall outside of the scope of this report and will be discussed in more detail in the relevant stygofauna report.

Collembola (Springtails) are commonly found within leaf litter and associated with the upper layer of soil where they consume decaying material (Edgecombe 2005). The colembolla discovered in this survey are not considered to be troglobitic, despite leaf litter being sterilized prior to trap deployment. The presence of pigmentation and well developed eyes suggest that this species is a troglofile, colonizing the subterranean environment from similar microhabitats near the surface. As these collembola were collected from bores inside and outside both Madoonga and Beebyn tenements, these populations are not at risk from the proposed development. Further investigation of the distribution of this species will not be necessary.

Mites are one of the most diverse and unstudied invertebrate groups and there are many Australian species awaiting taxonomic description (Hopkin 1997; Greenslade 2000). They are also abundant in many habitats both terrestrial and aquatic and are particularly common in leaf litter. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that litter and soil dwelling mites often possess very similar characteristics to troglofauna (i.e. lack of body pigment, reduced eyes, and a body plan adapted for life in small spaces). Mites were so abundant in the samples that it was impossible to identify all specimens. The mites could not be identified to species level; however all morphospecies detected were collected both inside and outside of the impact area. These species are not likely to be threatened by the proposed development.

In conclusion, only the centipede specimen was considered a probable troglobite, and thus significant to the results of the survey. Management recommendations are based on the impact of the proposed development on the centipede found inside the Beebyn tenement and aimed at reducing any impact on the population.

5.1 TROGLOFAUNA HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND EXTRAPOLATION

The suitability of geological formations as habitat is primarily a function of available habitat space. In the context of troglofauna, porous rock strata are more likely to harbour troglobitic communities. The two rock types identified (dolerite and BIF) both showed some degree of porosity, but the dolerite was considered more suitable troglobitic habitat due to the amount of fractures present



April 2011

36

above the ground water level. However, as there was only one troglofauna record available, it was difficult to comment on the numbers of troglobitic communities potentially present.

Reconstruction based on geological maps showed that suitable troglofauna habitat within the Beebyn tenement was estimated at 1261.5 ha (see Results, Table 4‐3, Figure 4.7and Figure 4.8). The components impacting on the suitable habitat were:

• Beebyn Resource Area (229 ha); and

• Beebyn Mine Infrastructure (763.8 ha).

The direct impact of excavation in Beebyn area is low (17.5%), while the indirect (or secondary) impacts resulting from the clearing of vegetation for mine infrastructure (such as the waste landforms, tailings storage facility, plant site and stockpiles) is relatively high (70.7%).

However, the suitable troglobitic habitat (dolerite) is widespread throughout the range. In addition, both dolerite and BIF strata are continuous between Beebyn and Madoonda, occurring also in the Aboriginal Reserve Wilgie Mia located between the two proposed resource areas. As a result, the total impact on the potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is expected to be much lower. As Beebyn and Madoonga present approximately two fifths of the total range area, a conservative estimate of the total impact of the Project on potential troglofauna habitat at Weld Range is 7% of direct impact and 23% of an indirect (secondary) impact (see Results, Table 4‐3). The combined impact of the Project is, therefore, expected to be approximately 30%.



April 2011

37

6 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

Subterranean ecosystems and the fauna they support may face significant risks from a number of mining related processes, most significant of which is the ore extraction process itself, which directly removes the habitat and dependent species. Other risks to sub‐surface dwelling species and communities may also occur as a result of surface operations, e.g. surface sealing or clearing and hydrocarbon and other contaminants (Harvey 2002a), which may impact upon the physical and chemical elements of the habitat. The lowering of the water table resulting from pit dewatering, may also impact upon troglofauna habitat by altering the humidity of the habitats in which troglobites exist.

Troglofauna are very sensitive to changes in their environment as they are generally adapted to an environment that sees only minor physical, chemical and biological change (Humphreys 2001a), and even relatively minor impacts to their habitat may have profound effects on their populations.

The mining proposal currently being planned for the Beebyn area could potentially have a significant impact on troglofauna habitat by:

• Directly removing all or part of their habitat.

• Changing the habitat temperature, humidity, chemical composition, availability of organic matter and interrupting the food chain by exposing voids to atmospheric oxygen, water and pollutants.

• Lowering the water table sufficiently to effect temperature and humidity of the void spaces in which troglofauna live.

• Contamination of habitats through hydrocarbon / chemical spills.

The following management recommendations may mitigate potential risks to troglobitic communities:

• Strict adherence to the Project impact areas as defined in this report. It is recommended that further surveying should be conducted prior to any pit extensions or amendments.

• Further sampling is recommended outside current impact areas to determine whether Cryptopid species are present outside.

• Contamination of troglobitic habitats through hydrocarbon / chemical spills should be prevented. In the event a spill does occur, it should be reported to the supervisor on site, and contained and cleaned immediately as per site procedures.

• Monitoring of water uses to ensure consumption does not exceed the rate at which aquifers recharge.

As no troglofauna has been identified at the Madoonga area, any proposed developments are not expected to have an impact and therefore no management controls are necessary.

A risk assessment is normally undertaken to determine potential impacts arising from the development on troglofauna and the residual impacts following the implementation of management strategies identified in this document. The ‘Significance’ of the risks is classified as either “High” (site/issue specific management programmes required, advice/approval from regulators required),



April 2011

38

“Medium” (specific management and procedures must be specified) or “Low” (managed by routine procedures). The impact risk assessment matrix is presented in Appendix A.



7 SURVEY TEAM

The SMC Weld Range Troglofauna Biological Assessment Survey described in this document was planned, coordinated and executed by:

ecologia Environment

1025 Wellington Street

WEST PERTH WA 6005

Name Position Qualifications

Dr Magdalena Davis Manager Invertebrate Sciences PhD (Zoology)

Dr Erich S Volschenk Senior Invertebrate Zoologist PhD (Zoology)

Nicholas Dight Invertebrate Zoologist BSc (Zoology)

Catherine Taylor Invertebrate Zoologist BSc Hons (Biological Sciences)

Sean White Invertebrate Zoologist BSc

Pia Roberts Invertebrate Zoologist BSc

Melissa White Invertebrate Zoologist BSc

April 2011

39



April 2011

40




April 2011

41

8 REFERENCES

Biota. 2005. Barrow Island Gordon Gas Development. Unpublished report for The Gordon Venture.

Biota. 2006. Mesa A and Robe Valley Troglobitic Fauna: Draft Troglobitic Fauna Management Plan. Prepared for Robe River Iron Associates, June 2006

BOM. 2007. Accessed www.bom.gov.au.

Brady, J. 1969. Some Physical Gradients Set Up In Tullgren Funnels During The Extraction of Mites From Poultry Litter. The Journal of Applied Ecology. 6:391 ‐ 402.

Culver, D. C., W. F. Humphreys, and H. Wilkens. 2000. Subterranean Ecosystems. Ecosystems of the World.

Curry, P. J., A. L. Payne, K. A. Leighton, P. Henning, and D. A. Blood. 1994. An inventory and condition survey of the Murchison River catchment, Western Australia. Technical Bulletin No.84, Department of Agriculture Western Australia.

Desmond, A., M. Cowan, and A. Chant. 2001. Murchison 2 (MUR2 ‐ West Murchison subregion). Accessed

Eberhard, S. M. 2006. Jewel Cave Precinct Management Plan in R. p. f. t. A.‐M. R. T. Association, ed.

Edgecombe, G. D. 2005. A troglomorphic species of the centipede Cryptops (Trigonocryptops) (Chilopoda: Scolopendromorpha) from Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum. 22:315‐323.

EPA. 2002. Position Statement No. 3 Terrestrial Biological Surveys as an element of Biodiversity Protection. Environmental Protection Authority,

EPA. 2003. Guidance for the Assessment of Environmental Factors, Statement No. 54: Consideration of Subterranean Fauna in Groundwater and Caves during Environmental Impact Assessment in Western Australia. EPA, December 2003

EPA. 2005. Managed Aquifer Recharge using Treated Wastewater on the Swan Coastal Plain, Perth, Western Australia.

Greenslade, P. J. 2000. Collembola. The insects of Australia: a textbook for students and research workers. .

Harvey, M. S. 1988. A new troglobitic schizomid from Cape Range, Western Australia (Chelicerata:Schizomida). Records of the Western Australian Museum. 14:15‐20.

Harvey, M. S. 2002a. The neglected cousins: what do we know about the smaller Arachnid orders? The Journal of Arachnology. 30:357–372.

Harvey, M. S. 2002b. Short‐range endemism among the Australian fauna: some examples from non‐marine environments. Invertebrate Systematics. 16:555 ‐ 570.

Hopkin, S. P. 1997. The Biology of the Collembola (Springtails): The Most Abundant Insects in the World. Natural History Museum.

Howarth, F. G. 1983. Ecology of cave arthropods. Annual Review of Entomology. 28:365‐389.

http://www.bom.gov.au/



April 2011

42

Howarth, F. G. 1993. High‐Stress Subterranean Habitats and Evolutionary Change in Cave‐Inhabiting Arthropods. The American Naturalist. 142:S65‐S77.

Humphreys, W. F. 1993. The significance of the subterranean fauna in biogeographical reconstruction: examples from Cape Range peninsula, Western Australia. In Humphreys W.F. (Ed) The Biogeography of Cape Range, Western Australia. Records of the Western Australian Museum. 45:165‐192.

Humphreys, W. F. 2001a. Groundwater calcrete aquifers in the Australian arid zone: the context to an unfolding plethora of stygal biodiversity. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement No. 64: Subterranean Biology in Australia 2000:63‐83.

Humphreys, W. F. 2001b. Milyeringa veritas (Eleotridae), a remarkably versatile cave fish from the arid tropics of northwestern Australia. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 62:297‐313.

Humphreys, W. F. 2008. Rising from Down Under: development in subterranean biodiversity in Australia from a groundwater fauna perspective. Invertebrate Systematics. 22.

Humphreys, W. F., and W. A. Shear 1993. Troglobitic millipedes (Diplopoda : Paradoxosomatidae) from semi‐arid Cape Range, Western Australia: Systematics and biology. Invertebrate Taxonomy. 7:173 ‐ 195.

Humphreys, W. F., C. H. S. Watts, and J. H. Bradbury. 2005. Emerging knowledge of diversity, distribution and origins of some Australian stygofauna. Pp. 57‐60 in J. Gilbert, ed. Proceedings of the World Subterranean Biodiversity Conference, Lyon, Universite Cluade Bernard, Villeurbanne, Lyon, France.

Moore, B. P. 1995. Two remarkable new genera and species of troglobitic Carabidae (Coleoptera) from Nullarbor caves. Journal of Australian Entomological Society. 34:159‐161.

Richoux, P., and J. Reygrobellet. 1986. First report on the ecology of the phreatic water beetles (Coleoptera, Dytiscidea). Entemologia Basiliensia. 11:371 ‐ 384.

SRK. 2007. Acid Drainage and Metal Leaching Assessment.

Strayer, D. L. 1994. Bodysize and abundance of benthic animals in Mirror Lake, New Hamphshire. Freshwater Biology. 32:83‐90.

Ueno. 1996. New phreatobionic beetles (Coleoptera, Phreatodytidae and Dytiscidea) from Japan. Journal of the Speleogical Society of Japan. 21:1 ‐ 50.



April 2011

43

APPENDIX A RISK MANAGEMENT



April 2011

44




Biological Environmental Impact Risk Assessment Project: SMC Weld Range Location: Madoonga – Weld Range Date: 04/12/08

Inherent Risk Residual Risk

Risk Issue Aspect (Event) Impact

Likelih

ood

Conseq

uence

Risk Level

Significance

April 2011

45

Controls

Likelih

ood

Conseq

uence

Risk Level

Significance

Mine Site

Mining Operations Development of Madoonga pit.

Removal of troglofauna habitat

1 3 3 Low As no troglofauna has been identified, the risk is already Low and no controls are necessary.

1 3 3 Low

Changes to groundwater recharge regimes

Water use for general mine activities.

Changes to humidity of troglofauna habitat


1 3 6 Low

Contamination of Madoonga aquifers

Nutrients, heavy metals or other contaminants adversely impacting troglofauna habitats

Contamination of troglofauna habitat


1 3 6 Low



Biological Environmental Impact Risk Assessment

Project: SMC Weld Range Location: Beebyn – Weld Range Date: 04/12/08

Inherent Risk Residual Risk

Risk Issue Aspect (Event) Impact

Likelih

ood

Conseq

uence

Risk Level

Significance

April 2011

46

Controls

Likelih

ood

Conseq

uence

Risk Level

Significance

Mine Site

Mining Operations Development of Beebyn pit.

Removal of troglofauna habitat

4 3 12 High Ground disturbance should be restricted to that which is necessary. Boundaries should be clearly defined in the field.

3 3 9 Medium

Changes to groundwater recharge regimes

Water use for general mine activities.

Changes to humidity of troglofauna habitat

3 3 9 Medium Ensure water consumption does not exceed aquifer recharge rates.

2 3 6 Low

Contamination of Madoonga aquifers

Nutrients, heavy metals or other contaminants adversely impacting troglofauna habitats

Contamination of troglofauna habitat

3 3 9 Medium Spills to be cleaned immediately and reported to supervisors.

2 3 6 Low



Risk Matrix:

LIKELIHOOD

5 4 3 2 1

ALMOST CERTAIN LIKELY POSSIBLE UNLIKELY RARE

Risk Assessment Rating

Is expected to occur in most circumstance

Will probably occur in most circumstance

Could occur Could occur but not expected

Occurs in exceptional circumstances

5 – CATASTROPHIC

Significant impact to fauna species of conservation significance or regional biodiversity

25 20 15 10 5

4 – MAJOR

Impact to fauna species of conservation significance in project area. 20 16 12 8 4

3 – MODERATE

Loss of fauna biodiversity in project area. 15 12 9 6 3

2 – MINOR

Short term or localised impact to fauna biodiversity. 10 8 6 4 2

1 – INSIGNIFICANT

CONSEQUEN

CES

No impact to fauna of conservation significance or biodiversity. 4 3 2 1 5

11‐25

High risk, site/issue specific management programmes required, advice/approval from regulators required.

6 – 10

Medium risk, specific management and procedures must be specified.

April 2011

471 – 5 Low risk, managed by routine procedures.



April 2011

48




Value Description Criteria

5 Almost CertainEnvironmental issue will occur, is currently aproblem or is expected to occur in mostcircumstances.

4 Likely

Environmental issue has been a commonproblem in the past and there is a highprobability that it will occur in mostcircumstances.

3 PossibleEnvironmental issue may have arisen in thepast and there is a high probability that itcould occur at some time.

2 Unlikely

Environmental issue may have occurred inthe past and there is a moderate probabilitythat it could occur at some time but notexpected.

1 RareEnvironmental issue has not occurred in thepast and there is a low probability that it mayoccur in exceptional circumstances.

Likelihood:

Value Description Health & Safety Environmental & ExampleSignificant extensive detrimental long-term impact on theenvironment, the community and/or public health. Catastrophicand/or extensive chronic discharge of persistent hazardouspollutant. Major breach of regulation identified and/or seriousincident nMajor hydrocarbon spill to a land area, major tailings wall failurewith extensive surface and water pollution.

Multiple Lost Time Injuries (LTI)

Serious, chronic, long term effects.

Issues of a significant nature (medium term impact). It also includesincidents that could politically, legally or economically affect SDGMregardless of extent of environmental impact. Clean up orremediation external assistance required.

Admission to intensive care unit or

equivalent.

Groundwater pollution with potential serious biological damageand/or contamination of a potentially useable groundwater resource.

Long-term detrimental environmental or social impact. Issues of acontinuous nature but with limited environmental effect. Probableserious breach of regulation identified with serious prosecution orfine. Clean up or remediation some external assistan

Groundwater pollution with limited biological damage and nocontamination of a potentially useable groundwater resource.

Medical Treatment Injury (MTI)

Short term impact on the environment but a non-recurrent issues.Public concern restricted to re-occurring local complaints. Clean upor remediation activities undertaken internally.

Restricted Work Injury (RWI) Isolated incidences of pollution standards that are exceeded.

First Aid Injury (FAI)

Technical breach of environmental requirements with noenvironmental effect or no lasting detrimental effect on theenvironment. Public concern restricted to local complaints. Cleanup or remediation undertaken internally.

Nuisance value Licence requiring a toe drain around TSF to receive any seepage.The drain is yet to be installed but there is no seepage.

5 Catastrophic Fatality(s) or permanent disability.

4 Major

Insignificant

Moderate

Consequence:

1

2 Minor

Single Lost Time Injury (LTI)3

April 2011

49



April 2011

50


20110419 792 weld range trog final report ch md · 2021. 1. 4. · prospectus, loan, or other...

Documents