environmental consulting options tasmania...stornoway quarrying 18 may 2009 ecotas…providing...

Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania

Mark Wapstra ABN 83 464 107 291 business ph.:(03) 62 513 212 28 Suncrest Avenue email: [email protected] personal ph.: (03) 62 283 220 Lenah Valley, TAS 7008 web: www.ecotas.com.au mobile ph.: 0407 008 685

ECOtas…providing options in environmental consulting

ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED LEVEL 1 QUARRY (JUNCTION LYELL AND MURCHISON HIGHWAYS,

QUEENSTOWN) TO SUPPORT MINING LEASE APPLICATION

Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania (ECOtas) for Stornoway Quarrying

18 May 2009


Ecological Assessment of Proposed Mining Lease, Queenstown (Stornoway Quarrying) i

CITATION

This report can be cited as: ECOtas (2009). Ecological Assessment of Proposed Level 1 Quarry (Junction Lyell and Murchison Highways, Queenstown) to Support Mining Lease Application. Report by Environmental Consulting Options Tasmania (ECOtas) for Stornoway Quarrying 18 May 2009.

AUTHORSHIP

Field assessment: Brian French

Report production: Mark Wapstra & Brian French

Habitat and vegetation mapping: Brian French

Base data for mapping: TasMap, Stornoway Quarrying

Digital and aerial photography: Brian French, GoogleEarth

Cover illustration: View of the existing quarry in the east of the proposed lease area.


Ecological Assessment of Proposed Mining Lease, Queenstown (Stornoway Quarrying) ii

CONTENTS

SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 3

PURPOSE, SCOPE, LIMITATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF THE SURVEY ..................................... 4

Purpose ....................................................................................................................... 4

Scope.......................................................................................................................... 4

Limitations ................................................................................................................... 4

Qualifications................................................................................................................ 4

Permit ......................................................................................................................... 5

THE STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................. 5

THE PROPOSAL .................................................................................................................... 6

METHODS ........................................................................................................................... 6

Nomenclature............................................................................................................... 6

Preliminary investigation ................................................................................................ 6

Field assessment........................................................................................................... 6

RESULTS............................................................................................................................. 7

Sites of potential significance for flora .............................................................................. 7

Vegetation types........................................................................................................... 7

Comments on TASVEG mapping ................................................................................. 7

Vegetation types recorded as part of the present study ................................................. 7

Plant species .............................................................................................................. 10

Priority flora species recorded from the study area...................................................... 10

Priority flora species recorded from databases............................................................ 10

Weed species ............................................................................................................. 12

Disease management .................................................................................................. 13

Priority fauna – sightings.............................................................................................. 14

Priority fauna – database information............................................................................. 15

DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................... 16

Legislative and policy implications ................................................................................. 16

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 17


Ecological Assessment of Proposed Mining Lease, Queenstown (Stornoway Quarrying) 3

SUMMARY

General

Stornoway Quarrying engaged ECOtas to undertake an ecological assessment of a proposed mining lease area at the junction of the Lyell and Murchison Highways near Queenstown, primarily to facilitate planning approval processes.

Vegetation Types

The study area supports four TASVEG mapping units, namely:

Queenstown regrowth mosaic (SQR);

Restionaceae rushland (MRR);

Extra urban miscellaneous (FUM).

None of the mapping units recorded are classified as threatened under Tasmanian legislation and vegetation management policy.

Flora Species

No flora species, listed on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, were recorded from the study area.

Fauna Species

No fauna species, listed as threatened on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, were recorded from the study area. Similarly, species listed as “protected wildlife” on the schedules of the Wildlife Regulations 1999 were not detected and no products of such species (e.g. nests, den sites, etc.) were recorded such that additional permits under these regulations will not be required.

The study area supports potential habitat for threatened fauna., most notably opportunistic foraging habitat for the spotted-tailed quoll, Tasmanian devil, wedge-tailed eagle and masked owl exists in the lease area. The proposed quarry operations will have a negligible impact on these habitat components.

Weed Species

Three species classified as “declared weeds” within the meaning of the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999 were recorded from the study area. A map is provided indicating the location of the “declared weeds” within the lease area. Two species, Cytisus scoparius (english broom) and Ulex europaeus (gorse), only occurred as localised individuals within the lease area. Rubus fruticosus (blackberry) were widespread and actively regenerating in the lease area.

There is potential for all of the above species to be spread by seed contained within the quarry material. Given the proposed land use (which includes re-distribution of material to off-lease sites), special management prescriptions to prevent the introduction of the declared weeds to other areas (such as road work sites) are recommended.

Rudman (2005) indicate that the vegetation types present within the study area are susceptible to the root-rot pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi. No evidence of the pathogen was observed during field assessment (susceptible indicator species were largely absent from the site). Given the proposed land use (which includes re-distribution of material to off-lease sites), special management prescriptions to prevent the introduction of the pathogen to other areas (such as road work sites) are recommended.



PURPOSE, SCOPE, LIMITATIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS OF THE SURVEY

Purpose

Stornoway Quarrying engaged ECOtas to undertake an ecological assessment of a proposed mining lease area at the junction of the Lyell and Murchison Highways near Queenstown, primarily to facilitate planning approval processes.

Scope

This report relates to:

flora and fauna species of conservation significance, including a discussion of listed threatened species potentially present, and other species of conservation significance/interest;

vegetation types (forest and non-forest, native and exotic) present, including a discussion of the distribution, condition, extent, composition and conservation significance of each community;

plant disease and weed management issues; and

a discussion of some of the policy and legislative implications of the identified ecological values.

This report follows, in a general sense, the government-produced Brief for Consultants (DPIWE 2004) in anticipation that the report (or extracts of it) may be used as part of various approval processes that may be required for the development proposal on the site.

Limitations

The ecological assessment was undertaken in mid May 2009. Many plant species have ephemeral or seasonal growth or flowering habits, or patchy distributions (at varying scales), and it is possible that some species were not recorded for this reason. However, every effort was made to sample the range of habitats present in the survey area to maximise the opportunity of recording the majority of species present (particular those of conservation significance).

Late spring and into summer is usually regarded as the most suitable period to undertake the majority of botanical assessments. While some species have more restricted flowering periods, a discussion of the potential for the site to support these is presented. In the present case, the timing of survey is not regarded as critical to detecting threatened flora potentially present.

The survey was also limited to vascular species: species of mosses, lichens and liverworts were not recorded. However, a consideration is made of species (vascular and non-vascular) likely to be present (based on habitat information and database records) and reasons presented for their apparent absence.

Surveys for threatened fauna were practically limited to an examination of “potential habitat” (i.e. comparison of on-site habitat features to habitat descriptions for threatened fauna), and detection of tracks, scats and other signs.

Qualifications

Except where otherwise stated, the opinions and interpretations of legislation and policy expressed in this report are made by the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the relevant agency. The client should confirm management prescriptions with the relevant agency before acting on the content of this report.



Permit

Any plant material was collected under DPIW permit TFL08070. Relevant data will be entered into DPIW’s Natural Values Atlas database by the authors. Some plant material will be lodged at the Tasmanian Herbarium by the authors.

THE STUDY AREA

The study area (Figure 1) comprises 12.32 ha of land situated near the junction of the Lyell and Murchison Highways, west of Queenstown, centred on 379550mE 5342200mN (GDA94; Professor 3634 1:25000 TASMAP).

Figure 1. Map showing general location of the study area.

The proposed mining lease area comprises mainly gentle to moderately sloped land. The proposed lease area is typical of the Queenstown area with little topsoil or subsoil and various amounts of low “west coast scrub”. Much of the proposed lease area is already stripped of vegetation and heavily disturbed through illegal gravel extraction over many years by unknown users. The natural drainage of the site is through an undulation located between the two knolls within the proposed lease area. No water enters the area except for rain water from surrounding land. Elevation varies from c. 270 to c. 300 m a.s.l. Geology is mapped as shallow marine quartz sandstone (Florence Quartzite, Currawong Quartzite and correlates) of the Siluro-Devonian Wurawina Supergroup.

Land tenure and other categorisations of the study area are as follows:

Crown land (Department of Primary Industries & Water);

West Coast municipality;



Cradle Coast Natural Resource Management region;

West and Southwest Bioregion (according to the description of IBRA 4 boundaries in the Forest Botany Manual);

West Bioregion (according to the IBRA 5 boundaries used by several government agencies).

THE PROPOSAL

The proposed lease boundary is shown in Figure 1. Further details of the proposal have been documented by Stornoway Quarrying in the mining lease application and are not repeated herein. For the purpose of the present ecological assessment, it was assumed that any part of the proposed lease area might be disturbed and thus the whole area was assessed, irrespective of the detailed proposal.

METHODS

Nomenclature

All grid references in this report are in GDA94, except where otherwise stated. Vascular species nomenclature follows Buchanan (2009) for scientific names and Wapstra et al. (2005) for common names. Fauna names are as per DPIW’s Natural Values Atlas (DPIW 2009).

Preliminary investigation

Available sources of threatened flora and fauna records, vegetation mapping and other potential environmental values were interrogated. These sources include:

DPIW’s Natural Values Atlas (Report No. 36029 ECOtas_StornowayQueenstownQuarry_ 22April2009 (DPIW 2009) – appended to the present report;

the Forest Practices Authority’s online Fauna Values Database, specifically the species’ information for the Professor 3634 and Gormanston 38341:25000 mapsheets, hyperlinked species’ profiles and predicted range boundary maps (FPA 2009) – appended to the present report;

the TASVEG vegetation coverage (as available through the cited Natural Values Atlas report).

Field assessment

The ecological assessment took place on 14th May 2009, and was undertaken by Brian French (ECOtas). The survey aimed to assess the range of habitat types present in the study area (at the broad scale e.g. vegetation type, altitude variation, and at the finer scale e.g. microhabitats such as slopes, poorly drained areas, etc.). In this case, survey coverage was not limited by access restrictions because of the small area requiring assessment, the well-defined boundaries and existing tracks.

Reference to topographic maps (Professor 3480 TASMAP 1: 25000 scale), aerial photography (GoogleEarth as at 22 April 2009) and vegetation maps (TASVEG as per the cited Natural Values Atlas report) established the approximate range and distribution of topographic and habitat variation present in the study area.

Detailed plots recording all vascular species, vegetation structure and site characteristics were undertaken in representative vegetation types (i.e. existing quarry areas, less disturbed sites, etc.).



Less formal species lists were created for other areas (e.g. tracks and drains) Plot data and species lists can be supplied on request.

Potential habitat for threatened fauna (as listed on databases referred to above) was assessed by reference to the vegetation types and site characteristics present.

RESULTS

Sites of potential significance for flora

Section 4 of the Forest Botany Manual Module 8 West and Southwest Region provides a means to identify particular physical environments or vegetation types of potential significance for flora. This manual is referred to herein because it provides one of the only documents to identify sites that may support threatened or other significant flora values. Note that a Forest Practices Plan under the Forest Practices Act 1985 will not be required because no woody vegetation is to be cleared.

In this case, the study area does not support any sites of potential significance for flora as identified in Table 4a or Table 4b of the Forest Botany Manual (FPA 2005), which provides some indication that the study area is unlikely to be associated with threatened flora species or threatened vegetation types.

Vegetation types

Comments on TASVEG mapping

TASVEG mapping (as shown in the cited Natural Values Atlas report) maps virtually the whole of the proposed lease area as “Queenstown regrowth mosaic” (TASVEG code: SQR), with small patches of “extra-urban miscellaneous” (TASVEG code: FUM). Ground-truthing (as indicated in the section below) indicated that the vegetation types are marginally more complex, although this is essentially a reflection of the scale of mapping (i.e. field assessment detects minor variations not evident from aerial photography, which was used to map the majority of the TASVEG coverage).

Vegetation types recorded as part of the present study

Vegetation types have been classified according to Harris & Kitchener (2005) From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s Vegetation. Conservation priorities alluded to in the text below are taken from Schedule 3 of the Nature Conservation Act 2002 (DPIW 2009).

Three vegetation types have been identified from the proposed lease area (Figure 3).

Extra-urban miscellaneous (TASVEG code: FUM) [Plate 1]

This TASVEG mapping unit is used to represent disturbed sites such as quarries or other areas that have originated from human activities.

Extra-urban miscellaneous represents the areas within the lease area that have been created due to past quarrying activities, roads and cleared sites. This mapping unit has little or no vegetation and is characterised by the dominance of gravel soils.

This mapping unit is not classified as threatened.



Figure 2. Existing TASVEG mapping for the study area (red area: shown as very approximate only), Source: DPIW (2009) Natural Values Atlas report.

Figure 3. Revised vegetation mapping for the study area.



Plate 1. Eastern quarry area indicating the area mapped as Extra-urban miscellaneous. This mapping unit

describes all of the extensively disturbed ground within the lease area.

Queenstown regrowth mosaic (TASVEG code: SQR) [Plate 2]

This TASVEG mapping unit is used to represent regenerating native vegetation on disturbed sites in the Queenstown area (e.g. previously denuded slopes associated with the Mount Lyell mine).

The native vegetation within the lease area is characterised by a mosaic of species that are regenerating on the otherwise bare ground. The high percentage of bare ground (50-75%) is a factor of the frequent burning of the area therefore there is little or no soil accumulation. This vegetation mapping unit is dominated by a sparse small tree layer of Acacia mucronata subsp. mucronata (erect caterpillar wattle) with scattered Pinus radiata (radiata pine) and Leptospermum nitidum (shiny teatree) over a sedgey layer dominated by Baloskion tetraphyllum (tassel cordrush).


Restionaceae rushland (MRR)

This TASVEG mapping unit is used to represent native vegetation dominated by rushes from the family Restionaceae.

This mapping unit dominates the poorly drained areas and low valleys associated with drainage lines. This mapping unit is entirely dominated by the rushes Baloskion tetraphyllum (tassel cordrush) and Baloskion australe (southern cordrush). There are scattered Pinus radiata (radiata pine) wildlings throughout this mapping unit. The rainforest species Atherosperma moschatum (sassafras), Gaultheria hispida (snowberry) and the ubiquitous Acacia melanoxylon (blackwood) were recorded from this community indicating that there has been a reasonably long period since the last fire event since the first two species are fire sensitive.




Plate 2. Example of Queenstown regrowth mosaic (SQR) within the lease area. Note the high percentage of bare ground due to the frequent burning and scattered Pinus radiata (radiata pine) in the middle ground. The poor clarity of the image is due to the heavy rain encountered during the assessment. Note the Restionaceae

rushland (MRR) in the background.

Plant species

Priority flora species recorded from the study area

No flora species, listed as threatened on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, were recorded from the study area. The potential for the study area to support threatened flora, and reasons for their absence, is discussed in Table 1.

There is no potential habitat present for Commonwealth-listed flora species such that referral, on the grounds of threatened flora, to the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts will not be necessary.

Priority flora species recorded from databases

Table 1 provides a listing of priority flora from within 500 m and 5000 m of the study area, with comments on whether potential habitat is present for the species, and possible reasons why a species was not recorded. Some other species considered to have potential to occur in the habitat types present within the study area but without any database records within 5 km are also included in the table below.



Table 1. Priority flora records from within 500 m and 5000 m of boundary of study area.

Species listed below are listed as rare (r), vulnerable (v), endangered (e), or extinct (x) on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSPA); vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN), critically endangered (CR) or extinct (EX) on the

Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBCA). Information below is sourced from the DPIW’s Natural Values Atlas (DPIW 2009) and other sources where indicated. Habitat descriptions are taken from TSU

(2003), except where otherwise indicated.

Species Status TSPA

EPBCA

Observations (collection details)

Comments

Records within the study area

No records shown on databases from within defined study area.

Records within 500 m of study area

No records shown on databases from within 500 m of defined study area.


Caladenia pusilla (tiny fingers)

r -

P.Collier 23-Nov-1991 379412,5338283 +/-

100m

Species not detected although the survey is well outside the peak flowering period (Wapstra et al. 2008) but potential habitat absent (prefers near-coastal sites on sandy sites, usually flatter and less rocky terrain).

Isolepis habra (wispy clubsedge)

r -

W.Curtis 04-Jan-1968 382872,5340533 +/-

1500m

Historical record of low precision only. Potential habitat (poorly known but likely to be poorly-drained sites) marginally present. This highly distinctive perennial sedge was not detected.

Muehlenbeckia axillaris (matted lignum)

r -

A.Buchanan 01-Apr-1985 380712,5340983

+/- 100m

Potential habitat (moist, gravelly sites, usually in subalpine areas such as the Central Plateau but close to sea level on the west coast) marginally present. This distinctive perennial matted shrub was not detected.

Persoonia muelleri subsp. angustifolia

(narrowleaf geebung)

r -

J.Davies 26-Sep-2006 383584,5345472 +/-

15m. A.Moscal 17-Nov-1990 381912,5346483 +/-

100m J.Davies 27-Sep-2006 383408,5345391 +/-

15m J.Davies 11-Jun-2008 381119,5342794 +/-

10m J.Davies 11-Jun-2008 381185,5342736 +/-

10m J.Davies 11-Jun-2008 382885,5346066 +/-

10m J.Davies 11-Jun-2008

Potential habitat effectively absent (rainforest to dense scrub on a variety of sedimentary and metamorphic substrata). There are recent records from areas close to Queenstown. This distinctive perennial shrub was not detected.



Species Status TSPA

EPBCA


Comments

382834,5346039 +/- 10m

Spyridium vexilliferum var. vexilliferum

(helicopter bush)

r -

W.Hart Nov-1932 380612,5340683 +/-

2000m

Potential habitat absent (on the west coast this is a species of windswept coastal heathlands and shrublands, although the herbarium record from 1932 is apparently from “Queenstown”). This distinctive perennial shrub was not detected.

Other species (considered by the authors) to have potential to be present

Deyeuxia densa (heath bentgrass) Deyeuxia minor

(small bentgrass)

r -

No database records but these are widespread species of various habitats, including disturbed sites. Species not recorded.

Senecio squarrosus (leafy fireweed)

r -

No database records but this is a widespread species of various habitats including disturbed sites. Species not recorded.

Senecio velleioides (forest groundsel)

r -

No database records but this is a widespread species of various habitats including disturbed sites, especially intensively disturbed areas such as cleared forests and bare roadsides. Species not recorded.

Weed species

Three species classified as “declared weeds” within the meaning of the Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999 were recorded from the study area. Figure 4 indicates the location of the “declared weeds” within the lease area (also indicated is the location of individuals of the non-declared but potentially invasive Pinus radiata).

The potentially invasive species Cytisus scoparius (english broom) and Ulex europaeus (gorse) were recorded from highly disturbed sites such as old tracks and the main existing quarry area. Both of these species are easily managed by “hand pulling” as they only occur as individuals and disposing of them appropriately (such as placing in plastic bags and disposing of in a waste refuse area). However early management of both of these species is recommended so that they do not become a management problem within and adjacent to the lease area.

Pinus radiata (radiata pine) and Rubus fruticosus (blackberry) were scattered and abundant within the lease area. Both of these species are easily dispersed by wind (radiata pine) and by bird droppings (blackberry). These species are widespread and abundant in the Queenstown area and long term management is compromised by their abundance on the adjacent land. The proposed quarrying activities will largely eliminate these species from within the lease area itself (although they will probably re-establish in disused parts of the lease area within a relatively short period).

The area supports various other exotic species (mainly ubiquitous pasture grasses and herbaceous weeds). These species were noted from the disturbed areas associated with the existing roads and quarry areas. These species do not pose a management threat and are not considered further.

Gorse, english broom and blackberry are all subject to a Statutory Weed Management Plans under the Weed Management Act 1999 (see information on weed section of DPIW’s web site; http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/). The study area falls within the West Coast municipality, which is classified as a “Zone B” municipality for all three species with “widespread infestations” noted. “Containment”, within the meaning of the Weed Management Act 1999, is the most appropriate management objective for municipalities who have problematic infestations but no plan and/or resources to undertake control actions at a level required for eradication. The management outcome for these municipalities is ongoing prevention of the spread of declared weeds from existing



infestations to areas free or in the process of becoming free of these weeds. In this case, while the infestations within the lease area are relatively minor, the proposed removal, transport and re-use of quarried material to other sites within the municipality that are presently free of these species, or to adjacent municipalities where the species are classified at a higher level means that some level of management is suggested.

In the first instance, localised treatment and/or removal of isolated individuals of gorse and broom is suggested (or at least ensuring that plants or plant parts are not carted off site unless to a disposal area). Treatment of blackberry may be impractical, even at a local scale, and may not be warranted given its widespread occurrence along many roads in the area. The risk of spreading weeds from the lease area to off-lease areas may be reduced significantly by extracting the gravel resource from below the immediate soil surface (where most soil-stored seed would be present) or from existing piles/banks presently free from the identified species.

Figure 4. Locations of weed species within the lease area.

Disease management

Rudman (2005) indicate that the vegetation types present within the study area is susceptible to the root-rot pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi. No evidence of the pathogen was observed during field assessment (susceptible indicator species were largely absent from the site). Given the proposed land use, special management prescriptions to prevent the introduction of the pathogen to other areas (such as road work sites) are necessary (see also comments under Weed species).



Rudman (2005) provides guidelines for the use and management of quarries and borrow pits with respect to minimising the risk of spreading Phytophthora cinnamomi. These are presented verbatim below. The Department of Primary Industries and Water should be contacted if the intent of these guidelines cannot be met.

Quarry and borrow pit management

Movement of infected gravel, sand and soil has been implicated in the spread of P. cinnamomi throughout Australia. Maintenance of P. cinnamomi free quarries and pits is essential to avoid spreading the fungus. Follow the Quarry Code of Practice (1999) to reduce the likelihood of P. cinnamomi infected material being produced. Relevant points are provided below.

Crushed rock products are considered free of P. cinnamomi provided they are not contaminated with topsoil or gravel.

Quarries will require reassessment (if the last assessment was done more than 12 months ago) for presence of P. cinnamomi before supplying material to P. cinnamomi sensitive areas (see P. cinnamomi survey guidelines).

Siting quarries and pits

Use gravel “in situ” wherever appropriate (e.g. walking tracks).

Preferably site quarries and borrow pits in non-P. cinnamomi susceptible areas. Alternatively if siting in a P. cinnamomi free area consider the potential implications if hygiene fails.

Ensure machinery used in locating quarries is clean.

Select gravel pits in P. cinnamomi free areas i.e. 500 m laterally from nearest infection and free from drainage flowing from infected areas.

Maintaining quarries and pits

Maintain good drainage to prevent mud building up in working areas.

Construction of cut-off drains to prevent spores of Phytophthora cinnamomi washing into the pit from surrounding areas.

Wash machinery that is brought onto the site.

Ensure topsoil stockpiles are located so that drainage does enter working areas.

Be aware of the P. cinnamomi status of the pit.

Managing P. cinnamomi infected quarries and pits

Consider risk of Phytophthora infection in sequential rehabilitation of quarries. For pits open for the short to medium term it is preferable to rehabilitate following completion of quarrying if the risk of contaminating the product stockpiles is high.

Advise customers if aware that P. cinnamomi contamination could be a hazard in the end use.

Do not distribute non-crushed rock products for use in the nursery industry without advising the potential for P. cinnamomi contamination. Sterilisation by steam or other methods is possible.

Priority fauna – sightings

No fauna species, listed as threatened on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 or the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, were recorded from the study area. The potential for the study area to support threatened fauna, and reasons for their absence, is discussed in Table 1.



Priority fauna – database information

Table 2 provides a listing of priority fauna recorded from within 500 m and 5000 m of the study area, with comments on whether potential habitat is present for the species, and possible reasons why a species was not recorded.

Table 2. Priority fauna records from within 500 m and 5000 m of boundary of study area.

Species listed below are listed as rare (r), vulnerable (v), endangered (e), or extinct (x) on the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSPA); vulnerable (VU), endangered (EN), critically endangered (CR) or extinct (EX) on the

Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBCA). Information below is sourced from the DPIW’s Natural Values Atlas (DPIW 2009), Bryant & Jackson (1999) and FPA (2009).

Species Status TSPA

EPBCA


Comments

Records within the study area

No records within defined study area.


No records shown on databases from within 500 m of defined study area.

Records and potential habitat within 5000 m of study area

Accipiter novaehollandiae (grey goshawk)

e -

RAOU 05-Dec-1978? 382938,5340167 +/-

18500m RAOU 31-Aug-1979? 382938,5340167 +/-

18500m

FPA (2009) and DPIW (2009) indicate the potential for this species to occur on some of the 1:25000 mapsheets that cover the study area and surrounds but no nest sites are recorded in either database, indicating that the records cited represent sightings only. FPA (2009) describes potential habitat as “wet eucalypt forest with blackwood/myrtle understorey, blackwood swamp, E. brookeriana wet forest, melaleuca and leptospermum forest”. These habitat elements are entirely absent from the study area. No grey goshawks were sighted during the surveys. No grey goshawk nests were detected.

Aquila audax subsp. fleayi (wedge-tailed eagle)

e EN

W.McCann 10-Feb-1996? 378612,5343983

+/- 1000m (sighting only, not nest

site)

There are no known nests within 1000 m of the study area. Potential habitat is described as large tracts (more than 10 ha) of eucalypt or mixed forest” (FPA 2009). No nests are present within the proposed lease area and there are no patches of forest mapped within 1000 m of the lease area so there are no potential nest sites requiring further survey and/or management.

Ceyx azurea (azure kingfisher)

e -

No database records

Database records for this species are scant and do not truly represent the potential extent of occurrence of the species in Tasmania. However, the study area lacks any elements of potential habitat (tree-lined waterways).

Dasyurus maculatus subsp. maculatus

(spotted-tailed quoll)

v VU

N.Mooney 01-Jan-1989? 380812,5341183

+/- 100m

This species potentially has a Statewide distribution in a range of vegetation types. However, no evidence of the species (in the form of



Species Status TSPA

EPBCA


Comments

S.Barwick 01-Aug-1996? 376712,5340783

+/- 100m S.Barwick 01-Jan-

1995? 381012,5341983 +/- 100m

distinctive scats or den sites) was observed from the study area. Further disturbance of the proposed lease area, which is already significantly disturbed, would not result in a “significant impact” on the habitat of the species, as defined by the guidelines (CofA 2006) related to the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Haliaeetus leucogaster (white-bellied sea-eagle)

v -

RAOU 01-Dec-1978? 382938,5340167 +/-

18500m (sighting only, not nest

site)

There are no known nests within 1000 m of the study area. Potential habitat is described as “forest with significant old-growth eucalypt component within 5 km of the coast (nearest coast including shores, bays, inlets and peninsulas), rivers, lakes or complex of farm dams” (FPA 2009). No nests are present within the proposed lease area and there are no patches of forest mapped within 1000 m of the lease area so there are no potential nest sites requiring further survey and/or management.

Sarcophilus harrisii (Tasmanian devil)

e VU

D.Sinn 03-Nov-2007 379605,5344812 +/-

7m Unknown 04-Dec-2007 380446,5337311 +/-

7m Unknown 04-Nov-2007 379932,5345271 +/-

7m

This species potentially has a Statewide distribution in a range of vegetation types. However, no evidence of the species (in the form of distinctive scats or den sites) was observed from the study area. Further disturbance of the proposed lease area, which is already significantly disturbed, would not result in a “significant impact” on the habitat of the species, as defined by the guidelines (CofA 2006) related to the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Tyto novaehollandiae (masked owl)

e -

No database records

Potential habitat is described as “lowland dry sclerophyll forest with old growth components” (FPA 2009), a habitat type entirely absent from both the leased area and surrounding areas.

DISCUSSION

Legislative and policy implications

Some commentary is provided below with respect to the key threatened species, vegetation management and forest practices legislation. Note that there may be other relevant policy instruments in addition to those discussed.

Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995

There are no implications under this Act because no threatened flora or fauna were recorded from the study area, and no known sites for such species will be affected.

Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

There is marginal potential habitat for two species listed on this Act, namely Sarcophilus harrisii (Tasmanian devil) and Dasyurus maculatus subsp. maculatus (spotted-tailed quoll). The Commonwealth Department of Environment, Water, Heritage & the Arts provides a Significant



Impact Guidelines policy statement (CofA 2006) to determine if referral to the department is required. The proposed development will not constitute a “significant impact” with respect to these species because while there will be a minor temporary loss of marginal potential habitat as a result of quarrying operations, the loss is not such that it is likely to lead to a long-term decrease in the size of an important population of a species, reduce the area of occupancy of an important population, fragment an existing important population into two or more populations, adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of a species, disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population, modify, destroy, remove or isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the extent that the species is likely to decline, result in invasive species that are harmful to a vulnerable species becoming established in the vulnerable species’ habitat, introduce disease that may cause the species to decline, or interfere substantially with the recovery of the species.

Tasmanian Weed Management Act 1999

It is recommended that a simple site-plan is developed that ensure that quarried material removed from the site dos not contain plants or plant parts of declared weed species (most notably gorse, broom and blackberry). This may be achieved by careful selection of quarrying sites or pre-treatment of some sites prior to quarrying being undertaken. Utilising existing exposed gravel piles and banks presently free of obvious weed individuals may reduce the potential for inclusion of the species in quarried material. Extracting quarried material from below the first 10 cm of “soil” (where most seed of declared weeds would be present) will also reduced the potential to spread weeds from the lease area to off-lease sites.

Tasmanian Nature Conservation Act 2002

The proposed lease area does not support vegetation types classified as threatened on Schedule 3 of this Act. As such, any “clearing” will not result in the need for a Forest Practices Plan under the provisions of the Forest Practices Act 1985 through the “vulnerable land” classification that applies to threatened vegetation types.

Tasmanian Wildlife Regulations 1999

No species, or products (e.g. nests, dens, etc.) of species, listed on schedules of the Regulations (i.e. “specially protected wildlife”, “protected wildlife”, “partly protected wildlife”) will be knowingly disturbed by the proposed quarrying activities. No special actions are required in relation to these Regulations.

Tasmanian Forest Practices Act 1985 and associated regulations

A Forest Practices Plan (FPP) is required for most “clearing” activities in areas of forest and woodland (and for some activities within threatened non-forest native vegetation). No clearing of “forest” or “trees” within the meaning of the Act is proposed and as such an FPP will not be required.

REFERENCES

Bryant, S.L. & Jackson, J. (1999). Tasmania’s Threatened Fauna Handbook: What, Where and How to Protect Tasmania’s Threatened Animals. Threatened Species Unit, Parks & Wildlife Service, Hobart.

Buchanan, A.M. (2009). A Census of the Vascular Plants of Tasmania and Index to The Student’s Flora of Tasmania. Tasmanian Herbarium Occasional Publication No. 7, Tasmanian Herbarium,



Hobart. (2009 web edition as downloaded from http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/Herbarium/ TasVascPlants.pdf).

Commonwealth of Australia (CofA) (2006). EPBC Act Policy Statement 1.1: Significant Impact Guidelines – Matters of National Environmental Significance. Department of the Environment & Heritage.

Department of Primary Industries & Water (DPIW) (2009). Report No. 36029 ECOtas_ StornowayQueenstownQuarry_22April2009.

Department of Primary Industries & Water (DPIW) (2009). Threatened Native Vegetation Communities List July 2007 as per Schedule 3A of the Nature Conservation Act 2002. http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/WebPages/AWAH-6547ZL?open

Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment (DPIWE) (2004). A Brief for Consultants, Reporting on the Impact of Proposed Activities on the Natural Values and Providing Recommendations for Mitigating Impacts on these Values. Nature Conservation Branch, Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment.

Forest Practices Authority (FPA) (2005). Forest Botany Manual: Module 8 – West and Southwest Region. Forest Practices Authority, Tasmania.

Forest Practices Authority (FPA) (2009). Threatened Fauna Manual Mapsheet Display Professor 3634 current as at 30 April 2009, and hyperlinked species profiles and range boundary maps. http://www.fpa.tas.gov.au/index.php?id=20.

Harris, S. & Kitchener, A. (editors) (2005). From Forest to Fjaeldmark: Descriptions of Tasmania’s Vegetation. Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Hobart.

Rudman T. (2005). Interim Phytophthora cinnamomi Management Guidelines. Nature Conservation Report 05/7, Biodiversity Conservation Branch, Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Hobart.

Threatened Species Unit (TSU) (2003). Notesheets for various threatened species listed in Table 1. DPIWE, Hobart.

Wapstra, M., Roberts, N., Wapstra, H. & Wapstra, A. (2008). Flowering Times of Tasmanian Orchids: A Practical Guide for Field Botanists. Self-published by the authors (April 2008 version).

Wapstra, H., Wapstra, A., Wapstra, M. & Gilfedder, L. (2005). The Little Book of Common Names for Tasmanian Plants. Department of Primary Industries, Water & Environment, Hobart.

Natural Values Atlas ReportAuthoritative, comprehensive information on Tasmania's natural values.

Report number: 36029

Reference: ECOtas_StornowayQueenstownQuarry_22April2009

Requested For: MWapstra

Timestamp: 09:33:53 AM Wednesday 22 April 2009

Threatened Flora: buffers 500m and 5000m

Threatened Fauna: buffers 500m and 5000m

Conservation Significance Flora: Not requested

Conservation Significance Fauna: Not requested

TasVeg: buffer 1000m

Threatened Non-Forest: buffer 1000m

Geoconservation: buffer 1000m

Private Reserves: buffer 1000m

The centroid for this query GDA94 379556,5342203 falls within:

1:25000 Map: 3634 PROFESSOR

Property: 7768960 MOUNT JUKES ROAD,QUEENSTOWN TAS 7467

Page 1 of 16

DEPARTMENT of PRIMARY INDUSTRIES and WATER

*** No threatened flora found within 500 metres. ***

Threatened flora within 500 metres

Page 2 of 16


E: 374076 E: 385019N: 5347685 N: 5347685

E: 374076 E: 385019N: 5336927 N: 5336927


Page 3 of 16



Page 4 of 16


For more information about threatened species, please contact the Manager, Threatened Species Section.

Telephone: (03) 6233 8759

Email: [email protected]

ID Species Common Name SS NS Observers Date Location (GDA94)

230063 Caladenia pusilla tiny fingers r P.Collier 23-Nov-1991 379412,5338283 +/- 100m.

928742 Isolepis habra wispy clubsedge r W.Curtis 04-Jan-1968 382872,5340533 +/- 1500m.

230815 Muehlenbeckia axillaris matted lignum r A.Buchanan 01-Apr-1985 380712,5340983 +/- 100m.

952042 Persoonia muelleri subsp.angustifolia

narrowleaf geebung r J.Davies 26-Sep-2006 383584,5345472 +/- 15m.


narrowleaf geebung r A.Moscal 17-Nov-1990 381912,5346483 +/- 100m.


narrowleaf geebung r J.Davies 27-Sep-2006 383408,5345391 +/- 15m.


narrowleaf geebung r J.Davies 11-Jun-2008 381119,5342794 +/- 10m.







230134 Spyridium vexilliferumvar. vexilliferum

helicopter bush r W.Hart Nov-1932 380612,5340683 +/- 2000m.


Page 5 of 16


E: 378566 E: 380519N: 5343185 N: 5343185

E: 378566 E: 380519N: 5341423 N: 5341423

Threatened fauna within 500 metres

Page 6 of 16



(based on Habitat Mapping)


Telephone: (03) 6233 8759


Species Common Name SS NS Potential Known Core

Aquila audax wedge-tailed eagle pe pen 1 0 0

Tyto novaehollandiae masked owl e 1 0 0

Aquila audax subsp. fleayi wedge-tailed eagle e en 1 0 0

Accipiter novaehollandiae grey goshawk e 1 0 0

Tyto novaehollandiae subsp.castanops

masked owl (tasmanian) e 1 0 0

Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle v 1 0 0


Page 7 of 16


E: 374076 E: 385019N: 5347685 N: 5347685

E: 374076 E: 385019N: 5336927 N: 5336927


Page 8 of 16



Page 9 of 16



(based on Habitat Mapping)


Telephone: (03) 6233 8759


ID Species Common Name SS NS Observers Date Location (GDA94)

666213 Accipiter novaehollandiae grey goshawk e RAOU 05-Dec-1978? 382938,5340167 +/- 18500m.

712434 Accipiter novaehollandiae grey goshawk e RAOU 31-Aug-1979? 382938,5340167 +/- 18500m.

862501 Aquila audax subsp. fleayi wedge-tailed eagle e en W.McCann 10-Feb-1996? 378612,5343983 +/- 1000m.

884727 Dasyurus maculatussubsp. maculatus

spotted-tailed quoll r vu N.Mooney 01-Jan-1989? 380812,5341183 +/- 100m.


spotted-tailed quoll r vu S.Barwick 01-Aug-1996? 376712,5340783 +/- 100m.


spotted-tailed quoll r vu S.Barwick 01-Jan-1995? 381012,5341983 +/- 100m.

657736 Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle v RAOU 01-Dec-1978? 382938,5340167 +/- 18500m.

1042117 Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil e vu D.Sinn 03-Nov-2007 379605,5344812 +/- 7m.

1038970 Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil e vu 04-Dec-2007 380446,5337311 +/- 7m.

1041509 Sarcophilus harrisii tasmanian devil e vu 04-Nov-2007 379932,5345271 +/- 7m.

Species Common Name SS NS Potential Known Core

Aquila audax wedge-tailed eagle pe pen 1 0 0

Tyto novaehollandiae masked owl e 1 0 0

Ceyx azurea azure kingfisher e 1 0 0

Aquila audax subsp. fleayi wedge-tailed eagle e en 1 0 0

Accipiter novaehollandiae grey goshawk e 1 0 1

Tyto novaehollandiae subsp.castanops

masked owl (tasmanian) e 1 0 0

Haliaeetus leucogaster white-bellied sea-eagle v 1 0 0


Page 10 of 16


E: 378065 E: 381019N: 5343684 N: 5343684

E: 378065 E: 381019N: 5340923 N: 5340923

TasVeg communities within 1000 metres

Page 11 of 16



Page 12 of 16


For more information about TASVEG maps, please contact the Coordinator, Tasmanian Vegetation Mapping Program.

Telephone: (03) 6233 4501


ID Code Community Emergent Species

101223840 RMT Nothofagus - Atherosperma rainforest

101223757 SQR Queenstown regrowth mosaic

101223837 MRR Restionaceae rushland


101223833 NLA Leptospermum scoparium - Acacia mucronata forest

101221148 FUM Extra-urban miscellaneous


101220556 WNU Eucalyptus nitida wet forest (undifferentiated)



101223753 FUR Urban areas


101223834 ORO Rock (cryptogamic lithosere )



101223504 OAQ Water, sea


101224015 ORO Rock (cryptogamic lithosere )


101223832 SLW Leptospermum scrub


101221139 SLW Leptospermum scrub

101223503 FUR Urban areas



Page 13 of 16


*** No threatened non-forest communities found within 1000 metres. ***

Threatened non-forest communities within 1000 metres

Page 14 of 16


*** No Geoconservation sites found within 1000 metres. ***

Geoconservation sites within 1000 metres

Page 15 of 16


*** No private reserves found within 1000 metres. ***

Private reserves within 1000 metres

Page 16 of 16


THREATENED FAUNA MAPSHEET DISPLAY

PROFESSOR 3634

Current as at 30/Apr/2009

Please note, coordinates use map datum GDA94

Known localities

Species Tenure Locality Noteswedge-tailed eagle SF 361195 5344702 Henty River 5 km E of

Henty Bridgenest (#178)

Habitat which may contain threatened species

Species Habitatgrey goshawk Wet eucalypt forest with blackwood/myrtle understorey,

blackwood swamp, E. brookeriana wet forest, melaleuca and leptospermum forest.

quoll (spotted-tailed, eastern)

All wetter forest types, coastal heath and bush-pasture interfaces

wedge-tailed eagle Large tracts (more than 10 ha) of eucalypt or mixed forest

white-bellied sea eagle Forest with significant old-growth eucalypt component within 5 km of the coast (nearest coast including shores, bays, inlets and peninsulas), rivers, lakes or complex of farm dams

Back

Page 1 of 1

30/04/2009http://fpop.fpa.tas.gov.au/thpweb/TFM/PartIDisplay.asp?lMap25ID=295

environmental consulting options tasmania...stornoway quarrying 18 may 2009 ecotas…providing...

Documents