apa group reedy creek wallumbilla pipeline project

APA Group

Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline Project Ecological Constraints Report

APA Group Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline Project

Ecological Constraints Report

16 November 2016

CDM Smith Australia Pty Ltd ABN 88 152 082 936 21 McLachlan Street Fortitude Valley QLD 4006 Tel: +61 7 3828 6900 Fax: +61 7 3828 6999

Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline Project Ecological Constraints Report APA Group

Document History and Status

Revision Date Issued Reviewed By Approved By Date Approved Revision Type

Draft 23/11/2016 M. Imber Draft

Draft A 2/12/2016 M. Imber Draft A

Draft A 20/12/2016 K. Davie, W. Twist

Draft A

Distribution of Copies

Version Date Issued Quantity Electronic Issued To

Draft 23/11/2016 2 2 K. Davie, W. Twist (APA Group)

Draft A 2/12/2016 2 2 K. Davie, W. Twist (APA Group)

Final 22/12/2016 2 2 K. Davie, W. Twist (APA Group)

Printed: 14 February 2017

Last Saved: 14 February 2017 05:15 PM

File Name: BES160302 Wallumbilla pipeline ecology report final_Updated Version.docx

Author: Brett Taylor

Project Manager: Mark Imber

Client: APA Group

Document Title: Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline Project Ecological Constraints Report

Document Version: Final

Project Number: BES160302.01

Table of Contents

Section 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Relevant Legislation and Policies ................................................................................................... 1-2

1.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 .......................... 1-2 1.2.2 Nature Conservation Act 1992 .................................................................................................. 1-2 1.2.3 Environmental Protection Act 1994 ....................................................................................... 1-4 1.2.4 Environmental Offsets Act 2014 ............................................................................................... 1-4 1.2.5 Vegetation Management Act 1999 ........................................................................................... 1-4 1.2.6 Biosecurity Act 2014 ...................................................................................................................... 1-5

1.3 Nomenclature .......................................................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4 Study Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 1-5

1.4.1 Desktop Review................................................................................................................................ 1-5 1.4.2 Field Surveys ..................................................................................................................................... 1-6

Section 2 Desktop Results .................................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Matters of State Environmental Significance ............................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas ................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Terrestrial Flora ..................................................................................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Threatened Ecological Communities ............................................................................................ 2-3 2.5 Regional Ecosystems ............................................................................................................................ 2-4 2.6 Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map ............................................................................... 2-5 2.7 Threatened Flora ................................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.8 Declared Weed Species ....................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.9 Terrestrial Fauna ................................................................................................................................... 2-6 2.10 Essential Habitat .................................................................................................................................... 2-6 2.11 Declared Pest Fauna Species ............................................................................................................ 2-6

Section 3 Field Survey Results ........................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Terrestrial Flora ..................................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Discrepancy in Regional Ecosystem Mapping .................................................................... 3-7 3.1.2 Threatened Ecological Communities ...................................................................................... 3-7 3.1.3 Threatened Flora Species ......................................................................................................... 3-12 3.1.4 Declared Weed Species .............................................................................................................. 3-14

3.2 Terrestrial Fauna ................................................................................................................................ 3-17 3.2.1 Conservation Significant Fauna Species Observed or Likely to Occur ................. 3-18 3.2.2 Exotic Fauna Species Observed .............................................................................................. 3-19 3.2.3 Habitat Values for Terrestrial Fauna ................................................................................... 3-19 3.2.4 Conservation Significant Species Profiles.......................................................................... 3-26

Section 4 Potential Project Impacts ................................................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Project Construction – Brief Description .................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Project Impacts ....................................................................................................................................... 4-2

4.2.1 Vegetation Clearing Impacts ...................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2.2 Habitat Connectivity ...................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.3 Direct Fauna Mortality .................................................................................................................. 4-7 4.2.4 Introduced Pests and Weeds ...................................................................................................... 4-7 4.2.5 Sedimentation of Waterways and Sediment Runoff ........................................................ 4-8 4.2.6 Dust ........................................................................................................................................................ 4-8 4.2.7 Noise...................................................................................................................................................... 4-9

4.3 Significant Impact Assessment for MNES and MSES........................................................... 4-10


4.3.1 EPBC Act Significant Impact Assessment – MNES ......................................................... 4-10 4.3.2 MSES Impact Assessment ......................................................................................................... 4-13

Section 5 Offsets ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Legislation ................................................................................................................................................. 5-1

5.2.1 Commonwealth Legislation ........................................................................................................ 5-1 5.2.2 State Legislation ............................................................................................................................... 5-2 5.2.3 Potential Residual Impacts.......................................................................................................... 5-2

Section 6 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 6-1

List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Project location ............................................................................................................................... 1-3 Figure 1-2 Flora survey location and current DNRM vegetation mapping -survey area (north) ................... 1-10 Figure 1-3 Flora survey location and current DNRM vegetation mapping -survey area (south) ................... 1-11 Figure 3-1 Ground-truthed vegetation mapping for the RCWP Survey area (north) ....................................... 3-9 Figure 3-2 Ground-truthed vegetation mapping for the RCWP Survey area (central) .................................. 3-10 Figure 3-3 Ground-truthed vegetation mapping for the RCWP Survey area (south) .................................... 3-11 Figure 3-4 Recorded weed presence in Survey area (north) ......................................................................... 3-15 Figure 3-5 Recorded weed presence in Survey area (south) ......................................................................... 3-16 Figure 4-1 Connectivity tool pre-impact output .............................................................................................. 4-5 Figure 4-2 Connectivity tool post-impact output ............................................................................................. 4-6 Figure 5-1 Proposed environmental offset areas for RCWP Project ................................................................ 5-4

List of Tables

Table 1-1 Weather conditions during surveys - Roma weather station (BoM 2016) ...................................... 1-6 Table 2-1 RCWP Survey area - Regional Ecosystem descriptions .................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-2 Extent of currently mapped (DNRM) Regional Ecosystems within the Survey area ........................ 2-4 Table 2-3 Introduced fauna species known from the Survey area and surrounds .......................................... 2-7 Table 3-1 RCWP Survey area vegetation community descriptions .................................................................. 3-1 Table 3-2 Potential for listed flora species to occur within the Project area ................................................. 3-12 Table 3-3 Declared weed species identified within Survey area ................................................................... 3-14 Table 3-4 Likelihood of occurrence of conservation significant and migratory fauna ................................... 3-22 Table 4-1 Proposed vegetation clearing on ground truthed remnant and non-remnant vegetation including

identification of potential threatened species habitat .................................................................................... 4-3 Table 4-2 Assessment against significant impact criteria: Yakka Skink .......................................................... 4-11 Table 4-3 Assessment against significant impact criteria: Dunmall’s Snake .................................................. 4-12 Table 4-4 MSES as they apply to the Project ................................................................................................. 4-13 Table 4-5 Assessment against MSES and significant impact criteria: Glossy Black-cockatoo ........................ 4-15 Table 4-6 Assessment against MSES significant impact criteria: Echidna (special least concern) ................. 4-16 Table 5-1 Identified residual impacts to MSES within RCWP Project area ...................................................... 5-3


List of Plates

Plate 2-1: Brigalow regrowth site northerly aspect (N-42) .............................................................................. 2-2 Plate 2-2: Brigalow regrowth site southerly aspect (S-43)............................................................................... 2-2 Plate 2-3: Brigalow regrowth site easterly aspect (E-44) ................................................................................. 2-2 Plate 2-4: Brigalow regrowth site westerly aspect (W-45) .............................................................................. 2-2 Plate 2-5: Quaternary Site 406 (735816.83, 7077214.331) showing area incorrectly mapped as Category B

ESA ................................................................................................................................................................... 2-2 Plate 2-6: Quaternary Site 406 (735698.059, 7076524.287) showing recent blade plough activity and the

area mapped incorrectly as Category B ESA in the background ...................................................................... 2-2 Plate 2-7: Category B ESA area within north of Survey area – browning leaf tips ........................................... 2-3 Plate 2-8: Close up of same area showing dying leaf tips on Brigalow ............................................................ 2-3 Plate 3-1: Shingleback (Tiliqua rugosa) (October 2016) ................................................................................. 3-17 Plate 3-2: Bearded Dragon (Pogona barbata) (November 2015) ................................................................... 3-17 Plate 3-3: Red-rumped Parrot (Psephotus haematonotus) (November 2016) .............................................. 3-18 Plate 3-4: Eastern Grey Kangaroo in modified grassland (November 2016) ................................................. 3-18 Plate 3-5: Poplar Box and Callitris woodland near Reedy Creek Facility ....................................................... 3-20 Plate 3-6: Example of large woody debris common in Survey area ............................................................... 3-20 Plate 3-7: Regrowth Brigalow/Belah community north of Warrego Highway ............................................... 3-21 Plate 3-8: Modified grazed grassland dominant in north of Survey area ...................................................... 3-21

Appendices

Appendix A - Database Search Results Appendix B – Vegetation Assessment Field Results Appendix C – Project Fauna and Flora Species Survey Results Appendix D – Landscape Fragmentation and Connectivity Tool Logfile Output Appendix E – Disclaimer and Limitations

1-1

Section 1 Introduction

This report describes the existing terrestrial flora and fauna values associated with the proposed

Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline (RCWP) extending from the Reedy Creek Gas Processing Facility

south to the Wallumbilla Gas Hub located 11 km south of Wallumbilla. The assessment is based on

desktop literature reviews of existing background information and site-specific field assessments

defined by an 80 metre (m) survey corridor (herein referred to as ‘the Survey area’).

The site investigations focused on habitats within and surrounding the Survey area, and targeted

threatened species. Field surveys were designed to encapsulate seasonal variation in species’

detectability, and survey sites were selected in representative locations of the key vegetation

communities and habitat types present. The Survey area together with additional observations

surrounding the survey area (within 10 km) represent the ecological study area (Figure 1-1), as

referred to in this report (Sections 2 and 3). This information informs the assessment of Project

impacts (Section 4). The RCWP footprint, and therefore impact area (herein referred to as ‘the

Project area’), is less than the overall Survey area, comprising a 30 m wide pipeline Right of Way

(RoW), access track, and extra work spaces (EWS).

Specific objectives of the terrestrial ecology assessment were to:

Review the relevant background information including databases, mapping and literature;

Describe the main vegetation communities within the Study area, confirm Regional Ecosystem(RE) mapping, known Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) (as listed under theEnvironmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act)) and vegetation mapped as Essential Habitat forconservation significant species under the Vegetation Management Act 1999 (VM Act);

Confirm the likely presence/absence of critical habitats and threatened flora and fauna listedunder Queensland’s Nature Conservation Act 1992 (NC Act) and the Commonwealth’sEnvironment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act);

Record the presence of introduced pest flora and fauna;

Discuss the potential direct and indirect impacts to ecological values as a result of the Project;

Propose mitigation measures to protect or enhance ecological values within the Project area;and

Provide a summary of the Project’s likely obligations regarding environmental offsets.

It is understood this document will be used to support APA Group’s application for an

Environmental Authority from the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP).

1.1 Project Description

APA Group is proposing to develop a high pressure underground gas pipeline linking Australia

Pacific LNG Reedy Creek gas processing plant to APA group’s existing LNG hub facility south of

Wallumbilla. The Project involves the planning, construction, commissioning and operation of a

buried high-pressure bi-directional steel gas transmission pipeline which will transport gas

between the two facilities. The pipeline will commence at the RCWP Reedy Creek Facility located

adjacent to the Reedy Creek Gas Processing Facility, approximately 65 km south west of Wandoan.

The pipeline travels in an approximate southerly direction for approximately 49 km through largely

rural lands, crossing the Warrego Highway, Western rail line and Wallumbilla creek before


1-2

terminating at APA’s Wallumbilla Gas Hub located approximately 11 km south of the township of

Wallumbilla (Figure 1-1). The Project is located in the Surat Basin and within the Southern Brigalow

Belt Bioregion.

1.2 Relevant Legislation and Policies

Environmental protection of existing terrestrial wildlife and habitats is governed by several

legislative Acts, policies and guidelines. Those with relevance to ecological values associated with

the Project are outlined below:

1.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

The EPBC Act provides a legal framework to protect and manage Matters of National Environmental

Significance (MNES) including nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological

communities, heritage places and water resources. The EPBC Act implements obligations under

international conventions and treaties, such as protection of migratory species (Migratory Bird

Agreements and Bonn Convention 1979) and World Heritage Area values (World Heritage

Convention 1972). The EPBC Act is administered by the Commonwealth Department of

Environment and Energy (DotEE).

The EPBC Act establishes a process for assessment and approval of proposed actions that have, or

are likely to have, a significant impact on MNES. Proponents refer projects to DotEE initially for

determination on whether a project is a controlled action or not a controlled action. If the referral

is deemed to be a controlled action, then it is likely to have a significant impact on MNES and must

be undertaken in accordance with prior approval from the Minister.

1.2.2 Nature Conservation Act 1992

The NC Act provides for the protection and management of native wildlife and habitat that supports

native species with particular regard to:

The clearing of plants protected under the NC Act;

A clearing permit or an exemption under the NC Act;

Activities that may cause disturbance (that is tamper, damage, destroy, mark, move or dig up)

to animal breeding places; and

The taking of fauna.

Subordinate legislation lists protected species and areas to which the regulatory provisions of the

NC Act apply including:

Nature Conservation (Wildlife) Regulation 2006: this Regulation lists terrestrial and aquatic

plant and animal species presumed extinct, endangered, vulnerable, rare, common,

international or prohibited. It recommends management objectives for the protection and

maintenance of these species in Queensland, as appropriate; and

Nature Conservation (Protected Plants) Conservation Plan 2000: this Plan provides protection

and management of native flora.

WARREGO HIGHWAY

Yuleba State Forest

Yuleba State Forest

Combabula State Forest

Woodduck State Forest

Wallabella State Forest 2

Emu State Forest

Yuleba State Forest

Inglebogie State Forest

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\001-R1-Location.mxd 11/21/2016

Figure 1-1Project Area Location

N

0 52.5

Kilometers

LegendProtected Areas RCWP Project Area

DATA SOURCEQLD Open Source Data, 2015;Geofabric Product Suite V2.1.1 Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) 2011;1 Second SRTM v1.0 © Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) 2011.

Date:1:250,000Scale @ A421/11/16

Drawn: APS

Walumbilla Gas Hub

Reedy CreekProcessing Plant

Walumbilla

Yuleba

QLD

NSW

BRISBANE

GLADSTONE

CHINCHILLA

LOCATION PLAN


1-4

1.2.3 Environmental Protection Act 1994

The EP Act and subordinate legislation provide regulatory provisions for the protection and

management of Environmental Values in relation to resource extraction and development activities.

The act defines Category A, B and C ESAs and specifies limitations of activities on those areas:

Category A areas includes National Parks, Forest Reserves and selected Marine Park areas;

Category B includes World Heritage Areas, Queensland sites on the heritage register,

coordinated conservation areas, designated fish habitat areas, marine plants and Endangered

REs (as listed under ‘Biodiversity Status); and

Category C includes Nature Refuges (under the NC Act), State Forests and Timber Reserves (under the Forestry Act 1992), Of Concern regional ecosystems, designated Koala habitat areas, Regional Parks (under the NC Act), habitat declared as ‘Essential Habitat’ (under the VM Act).

1.2.4 Environmental Offsets Act 2014

The Environmental Offsets Act 2014 (EO Act), Environmental Offsets Regulation 2014 and the

Queensland Government Environmental Offsets Policy provides a streamlined framework for

environmental offset requirements. Offsets are required where there is an unavoidable impact on

significant EVs. In addition, an environmental offset can only be required if impacts from a

prescribed activity constitute a significant residual impact as identified through the following

guidelines:

The State guideline that provides guidance on what constitutes a significant residual impact for

Matters of State Environmental Significance (MSES);

The Commonwealth Significant Impact Guidelines for what constitutes a significant residual

impact on MNES; and

Any relevant local government significant impact guideline for Matters of Local Environmental

Significance (MLES).

To avoid duplication with offsets required under the EPBC Act, the policy provides that the

administering agency must consider other relevant offset conditions which for the same or

substantially the same prescribed impact. If duplicating conditions are imposed it allows APA Group

to remove the duplication.

The Project is located within the Maranoa Regional Council area. The Maranoa-Balonne Regional

Plan (QG, 2009) identifies ecological areas of ‘particular interest’ as identified by the State i.e.

wetlands, protected areas, threatened vegetation communities, essential habitat and natural

grasslands. As these areas are already identified under the MSES provisions, matters of MLES are

not referred to further.

1.2.5 Vegetation Management Act 1999

The VM Act regulates the conservation and management of vegetation communities and provides

protection for REs classified as ‘endangered’, ‘of concern’ or ‘least concern’ under the VM Act. The

clearing of native vegetation for the Project will be exempt from the provisions of the VM Act under

Schedule 24 Part 1, Item 1 (6) of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 (SP Regulation) where

clearing occurs within the Project area for a resource extraction activity.


1-5

1.2.6 Biosecurity Act 2014

The Biosecurity Act 2014 (Biosecurity Act) provides legislative measures to manage pests and

weeds, diseases and environmental contaminants, to address the impacts they have on the economy,

environment, agriculture, tourism and society. The Act commenced on 1 July 2016 and supercedes

a range of separate legislative implements previously used to manage biosecurity. This includes the

Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002 which previously provided legislative

measures to manage damaging pests and weed species.

The Act provides statutory powers to prohibit or restrict the introduction and spread of declared

plant and animal pests within Queensland. Weeds and pests pose one of the most significant threats

to flora and fauna and agriculture within the study area. Accordingly, a range of management

measures will be implemented to restrict the introduction and/or spread of pest species as a means

of protecting the viability of local cattle grazing and cropping activity.

1.3 Nomenclature

Flora nomenclature within this report follows taxonomy accepted by the Queensland Herbarium

and Queensland Museum. Fauna nomenclature follows the Birdlife Australia Rarities Committee

checklist (for birds) and DEHP’s WildNet database taxonomy (for all other fauna), unless otherwise

noted. All flora and fauna in this report will be referred to initially by both their common and

scientific names and then only by the common name.

1.4 Study Methodology

The methodology for the ecology assessment involved a combination of desktop and field based

assessment methods, including:

A desktop review of relevant Commonwealth and State databases, vegetation mapping,

published ecological studies and any other relevant literature. The desktop review was used to

specifically identified vegetation communities predicted to occur within the survey area, and

flora and fauna species known, or which have the potential to occur within the survey area;

Review of field data and recent aerial imagery to refine existing mapping at the property scale;

Field surveys to assess and confirm the presence of listed species (including suitable habitat)

and vegetation communities identified during the desktop review; and

In conjunction with APA Group design personnel the results were used to inform the design of

the finalised pipeline alignment in order to reduce potential impacts to ecologically significant

areas.

1.4.1 Desktop Review

Desktop studies were undertaken prior to the field assessments. The desktop review was used to

obtain background information relating to the potential presence and distribution of species and

ecological communities (including connectivity across the regional landscape), particularly those

listed under the VM Act and NC Act. Desktop studies involved database searches and review of:

MSES reporting and mapping (EHP 2015);

Current RE mapping (Version 8.0), Essential Habitat mapping (DNRM);


1-6

Commonwealth EPBC Act Protected Matters Search Tool (Department of the Environment and Energy (DotEE)) (to confirm potential presence of listed species and communities) (25 km radius surrounding Survey area) accessed 5 October 2016;

EHP’s WildNet (Wildlife Online) database and Species Profile Search results (25 km radius surrounding Survey area) accessed 5 October 2016;

Atlas of Living Australia database (threatened species only);

Protected Plants Trigger Survey Map and Environmentally Sensitive Areas mapping (EHP); and

Reedy Creek Wallumbilla Pipeline. Preliminary Environmental Constraints Memo (Part 2) (Origin August 2016).

1.4.2 Field Surveys

Two field surveys were undertaken for the Project to ground-truth desktop information and identify

any additional flora and fauna values not identified through the desktop study. The results of the

field surveys were intended to inform the final pipeline alignment design in order to reduce the

potential ecological impacts of the Project’s construction. As such, several pipeline configurations

and an overall corridor width of 80 m were surveyed to allow flexibility in finalising the pipeline

alignment. Field surveys were carried led by Dr Andrew Daniel and Brett Taylor. Surveys covered

the entire extent of remaining remnant and regrowth vegetation within the Survey area. Field

surveys comprised:

A rapid flora assessment of the entire alignment as part of a multi-strand team to identify and avoid (where possible) ecological constraints and identify areas for the following detailed assessment (24 -28 October 2016); and

Detailed fauna and flora assessment of most vegetated areas within the designated 80 m survey corridor (7 – 12 November 2016).

Table 1-1 describes weather conditions for each survey period as recorded at Roma (located

approximately 50 km west of the Survey area).

Table 1-1 Weather conditions during surveys - Roma weather station (BoM 2016)

October 2016 November 2016

Temperatures during study

Minimum: 4.9°C Maximum: 32.5°C

Minimum: 17°C Maximum: 37.8°C

Rainfall and comments

No rain during survey. Relatively dry conditions. 8 mm of rain recorded day before site visit, 126 mm recorded in September 2016.

Sporadic rain storms in area during survey although only 11.6 mm recorded in Roma. Very hot conditions on the ground.

1.4.2.1 Vegetation Assessment

Remnant vegetation in Queensland is mapped by Department of Science, Information Technology

and Innovation (DSITI) (2013) using REs. These are defined by Sattler and Williams (1999) as

vegetation communities in a bioregion that are consistently associated with a particular

combination of geology, landform and soil. The conservation status under the VM Act of REs is

derived through estimating the proportion remaining since clearing commenced upon European

settlement. The Biodiversity Status is assigned using expert driven models that assess pervading

factors impacting community condition. For a more in depth discussion on the application and

definitions within the regional ecosystem framework see Sattler and Williams (1999). The

Biodiversity Status of REs is most relevant to the current study being regulated through the EP Act

which defines ESAs.


1-7

Terrestrial vegetation surveys assessed the vegetation communities present within the Survey area,

the quality or condition of the vegetation communities present, and to assess whether vegetation

communities mapped in the latest RE mapping (carried out in 2013) were represented by

communities which were actually present. Further information was required where RE mapping

was found to be inconsistent with the on-site vegetation. These sites were marked by waypoints on

a hand held Global Positioning System (GPS) and accompanied by photographic evidence and site

proformas/observations. Quaternary sites were used to confirm vegetation community types,

vegetation community boundaries, land zones, and occurrence of creek lines.

The November 2016 detailed flora assessment also focussed toward confirming the

presence/absence of threatened flora species (as listed under NC Act and the EPBC Act) species

through observational assessments and targeted searches within key habitat types identified

through desktop searches and the October 2016 rapid assessment.

All field assessments were conducted in accordance with the Queensland Herbariums’ Methodology

for Survey and Mapping of REs and Vegetation Communities in Queensland, Version 3.2 (Neldner,

V.J, Wilson, B.A., Thompson, E.J. and Dillewaard, H.A. (2012)). Where discrepancies were identified

in the field between existing RE mapping and field observations, areas were traversed by foot to

confirm the extent of the change. All field data and ground-truthed vegetation mapping was

reviewed by the Queensland Herbarium. Field surveys used standard floristic survey methods to

describe vegetation type, structure and composition are outlined below. The locations of flora

assessment survey sites are shown in Figure 1-2 and Figure 1-3.

Biocondition Sites

The State’s published methodology for assessing a vegetation community’s condition is the

BioCondition methodology (Eyre et al., 2011). The BioCondition methodology states;

“BioCondition is a condition assessment framework for Queensland that provides a measure of how

well a terrestrial ecosystem is functioning for biodiversity values. It is a site-based, quantitative and

therefore repeatable assessment procedure that can be used in any vegetative state, and provides a

numeric score that can be summarised as a condition rating of 1, 2, 3 or 4, or functional through to

dysfunctional condition for biodiversity. In BioCondition, ‘condition’ refers to the degree to which the

attributes of a patch of vegetation differ from the attributes of the same vegetation in its reference

state” (Eyre et al., 2011).

The BioCondition methodology assesses vegetation community condition through the

measurement of a range of attributes that are subsequently compared to benchmark sites. The

results for each attribute are combined to give a total score. These total scores place a site’s

condition into four categories ranging from dysfunctional to functional. BioCondition is a detailed

methodology that describes vegetation community condition for the purposes of assessing and

monitoring ecological offsets and rehabilitation condition. A total of 18 Biocondition sites were

carried out across the Survey area. Site BioCondition proforma sheets are provided in Appendix C.

Regional Ecosystem Code Sites

Regional Ecosystem Code Sites are used to aid in classification and detailed descriptions of regional

ecosystems and vegetation communities. Data collected include location, and environmental

information such land zone. Structural information such as height and covers are estimated for all

structural layers. Generally, only the dominant or conspicuous species that characterise each layer

are recorded. Plots are not laid out using a tape, site dimensions are restricted to a commonly

occurring vegetation type and condition. A total of 21 RE code sites were carried out across the

Survey area.


1-8

Quaternary Assessments

Quaternary site assessments were used to rapidly assess REs and vegetation communities, using

linear transects. Data were collected at regular intervals along each transect and where REs and

vegetation communities change in structure and composition. A total of 121 quaternary sites were

carried out across the Survey area.

Opportunistic Observations

In addition to the detailed survey plots, opportunistic flora data were collected while traversing

roads and tracks and whilst travelling between the more detailed survey sites. These data were used

to assist in confirmation of RE mapping and to check relationships between classificatory units

(such as vegetation associations, REs, photo-patterns) and landscape features.

Field Data Analysis

Ground-truthed data along with contemporary aerial imagery were used to determine:

Potential presence/absence of Threatened Ecological Communities (TECs);

Known or potential habitat for listed species (NC Act and EPBC Act);

Accuracy of RE mapping (VM Act); and

Potential presence of pest flora species (Biosecurity Act).

Herbarium Identification of Specimens

Plant specimens that could not be identified in the field were collected according to Queensland

Herbarium processes. Specimens of plants thought to be listed as conservation significant but could

not be positively identified using keys and binocular microscope were sent to the Queensland

Herbarium for identification.

1.4.2.2 Fauna Assessment

Surveys focussed on conservation significant fauna species (listed under NC Act and the EPBC Act),

and identifying habitats of high ecological value. General fauna assessments were carried out across

much of the Project and included passive recording techniques such as sightings, recognition of

characteristic vocalisations, and/or identification of animal signs including the following:

Diurnal bird census - timed 20 minute bird surveys across a 2 ha area (early morning and late

afternoon surveys) at selected sites during the detailed assessment. Birds were identified by

direct observation and/or by call;

Diurnal searches for herpetofauna - searches for frogs and reptiles under leaf litter, debris, logs

and rocks. Carried out throughout Survey area where appropriate habitat factors occurred;

Anabat microbat call recording - passive recording of microbat calls overnight (6:30 pm to 5:30

am) using the Anabat recording system. Recording was carried out at three sites during the

November survey;

Spotlighting surveys - minimum 30 minutes of spotlighting in early evening by two people at

selected sites for nocturnal mammals and herpetofauna including surveying tracks at night;


1-9

Terrestrial habitat assessment – vegetated habitat was assessed for the suitability to provide resources for terrestrial fauna. Habitat characters assessed included tree hollow size and abundance, evidence of nesting, leaf litter coverage and depth, presence of large woody debris and weed invasion;

Where appropriate habitat was detected (i.e. where Eucalyptus camaldulensis or E . tereticornis were present on drainage lines) targeted Koala searches were carried out including searches for individuals and signs of habitat use (tree scratches and scats); and

Incidental recording of fauna observations were ongoing throughout the detailed survey period.

Much of the vegetated habitat within the Survey area was surveyed on foot and the fauna

assessment program is considered robust. Nevertheless, CDM Smith have adopted a conservative

approach when considering conservation significant fauna species within the impact assessment for

this Project. As such, all species with the potential to occur in the Survey area have been assumed to

be present unless evidence exists to suggest absence.

1.4.2.3 Threatened Species Presence

Four categories were used to classify the likelihood of a threatened flora and fauna species being

present within the Survey area based on the desktop research and on-site observations. Categories

were defined as:

Known (confirmed during field assessments);

Likely (suitable habitat observed during field assessments, within known distribution and records of the species occurring within or around the Survey area);

Potential (possibility of suitable habitat, or limited records of the species within the local region); and

Unlikely (no suitable habitat or not known to occur within the local region).

The presence or potential presence of a species, and species habitat was used to inform assessment

of the potential risk of impacts from the Project on identified ecological values.

#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*#*

#*

O

O

N

N

M

M

L

L

KK

J

J

I

I

H

H

G G

F

F

EE

D

D

C

B

B

A

9

87

54

14

1312

11

10

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\010-R1-RE_Site_Mapping_North_.mxd 2/10/2017

Figure 1-2Flora survey location and current DNRM

vegetation mapping - survey area (north)

N

0 21

Kilometers

LegendRCWP Project Area

Major Watercourse

Minor Watercourse

ESA Category B

Regional Ecosystems v8Endangered

Of Concern

Of Least Concern

DATA SOURCEQLD Open Source Data, 2015;

Geofabric Product Suite V2.1.1 Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) 2011;1 Second SRTM v1.0 © Commonwealth of

Australia (Geoscience Australia) 2011.

Date:1:100,000Scale @ A410/02/17

Drawn: APS


#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

I

I

H

H

G

G

5

4

21

#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

F

F

E

E D

D

C

INSERT 2

INSERT 2

INSERT 3

INSERT 3

Site Locations Trip 2

Quaternary Points Trip 1#*

RE Code Site Sheets#*

Biocondition Site Sheet

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*#*#*#*

#*#*#*#*#*

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*#*#*

#*TT

S

SR

R

Q

Q

P

P

O

O

N

N

21

2019

18

17

16

15

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\011-R1-RE_Site_Mapping.mxd 2/10/2017

Figure 1-3Flora survey location and current DNRM

vegetation mapping - survey area (south)

N

0 21

Kilometers

LegendRCWP Project Area

Major Watercourse

Minor Watercourse

ESA Category B

Regional Ecosystems v8Endangered

Of Concern

Of Least Concern




Date:1:100,000Scale @ A410/02/17

Drawn: APS

Walumbilla Gas Hub

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

#* #*

#*

#*T

T

21

INSERT 1

INSERT 1

Quaternary Points Trip 1

Site Locations Trip 2#*

RE Code Site Sheets#*

Biocondition Site Sheet

2-1

Section 2 Desktop Results

2.1 Matters of State Environmental Significance

Current mapping of the Survey area (EHP 2016) indicates the presence of 4.5 ha of lands considered

to be MSES under ‘Criteria 4.1: remnant vegetation considered to be Endangered or Of Concern

under the VM Act.’ There are also 735 m of watercourse vegetation intersecting the Survey area

considered to be a MSES under ‘Criteria 4.3: watercourses shown on the Vegetation Management

Watercourse and Drainage Feature Map.’ There are no other features considered to be MSES within

the Survey area (refer Appendix A).

2.2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas

ESA mapping identified a single Category B ESA intersected by the Survey area (refer Figure 1-2).

This Category B ESA is associated with remnant vegetation listed as Endangered under the EP Act.

It is noted this ESA is not listed as remnant or regrowth vegetation under the VM Act. Ground-

truthing identified this area as dense regrowth Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) generally between

2 m - 3 m in height which would not be considered as ‘remnant’ vegetation.

The relevant field sheet for the subject area is Ecological Condition Field Assessment Sheet – Site B

contained in Appendix C. The plates shown at Plate 2-1 to Plate 2-4 are taken at Ecological Condition

Field Assessment Site B. Plate 2-5 is taken at the Quaternary site 406 (coordinates 735816.83,

7077214.331) and clearly demonstrates the mapped Category B Environmentally Sensitive Area

(ESA) area as regrowth and not remnant. Plate 2-6 is taken at Quaternary site 405 (coordinates

735698.059, 7076524.287) and adjacent to the regrowth area mapped as the Category B ESA and

clearly shows recent blade plough clearance activity. The regrowth area is evident in the

background. These plates support the physical data provided in the BioCondition site (refer

Appendix C).

The combination of the quaternary and Biocondition site contains sufficient data to demonstrate

that the mapped Category B ESA is not remnant when these data are compared to the Biocondition

benchmark for RE11.9.5 (e.g. median tree canopy height of 25 m) as published by DSITIA (2012).

There is no published data for local reference benchmarks for this regional ecosystem in the

Southern Downs subregion so the Biocondition benchmark should be used in the lieu of these data

being available.


2-2

Plate 2-1: Brigalow regrowth site northerly aspect (N-42)

Plate 2-2: Brigalow regrowth site southerly aspect (S-43)

Plate 2-3: Brigalow regrowth site easterly aspect (E-44)

Plate 2-4: Brigalow regrowth site westerly aspect (W-45)

Plate 2-5: Quaternary Site 406 (735816.83, 7077214.331) showing area incorrectly mapped as Category B ESA

Plate 2-6: Quaternary Site 406 (735698.059, 7076524.287) showing recent blade plough activity and the area mapped incorrectly as Category B ESA in the background


2-3

As a separate but related matter, discussions with the associated landowner during the October

2016 survey revealed this area had been recently treated with the herbicide Tebuthiuron

(GraslanTM). Evidence of the effects of which were noted during the subsequent November survey

i.e. browning leaf tips (refer Plate 2-7 and Plate 2-8). When the herbicide treatment has taken full

effect on this area it is considered unlikely to qualify as a Category B ESA.

Plate 2-7: Category B ESA area within north of Survey area – browning leaf tips

Plate 2-8: Close up of same area showing dying leaf tips on Brigalow

A number of Category B ESAs surround the survey area which are also associated with remnant

vegetation listed as Endangered under the EP Act. There are also several Category C ESAs within the

wider locality (within 20 km of the survey area), comprising a number of State Forest areas:

Woodduck, Emu, Combabula, Yuleba, and Wallabella State Forests (Figure 1-1).

2.3 Terrestrial Flora

2.4 Threatened Ecological Communities

The Protected Matters Search Tool identified three listed TECs as having potential to occur in the

Survey area:

Brigalow (Acacica harpophylla dominant and co-dominant) – Endangered;

Coolibah - Black Box Woodlands of the Darling Riverine Plains and the Brigalow Belt South

Bioregions - Endangered; and

Semi-evergreen vine thickets (SEVT) of the Brigalow Belt (north and south) and Nandewar

Bioregions – Endangered.

Current RE mapping indicates there are no REs present within the Survey area that may be

considered a TEC. An initial environmental constraints survey of an earlier alignment option (Origin,

2016) (encompassing portions of the alignment within the current Survey area) identified several

regrowth and remnant patches of vegetation communities as potential Brigalow TECs (RE 11.9.5

and RE 11.3.1).


2-4

2.5 Regional Ecosystems

Assessment of current RE mapping identified seven REs occurring on four land zones within the

Survey area: alluvial river and creek flats (land zone 3); Cainozoic sand plains (land zone 5);

Cainozoic lateritic duricrust (land zone 7); and coarse-grained sedimentary rocks (land zone 10)

(Neldner et al. 2014). The Survey area incorporates land holdings currently used for cattle grazing

and cropping. Due to historical and current farming practice, native vegetation has been

substantially cleared with the majority of the Survey area and is mapped as non-remnant. Table 2-

1 provides a brief description of all REs considered to occur within the Survey area and Table 2-2

identifies REs identified within the Survey area, and their extent within a 20 km radius of the Survey

area.

Table 2-1 RCWP Survey area - Regional Ecosystem descriptions

RE VM Act

status

EP Act

status

Description*

11.3.2 Of Concern Of Concern Eucalyptus populnea woodland to open woodland with grassy ground layer. Occurs on Cainozoic alluvial plains with variable soil types.

11.3.25 Least Concern

Of Concern E. camaldulensis or E. tereticornis open forest to woodland. Occurs on fringing levees and banks of major rivers and drainage lines of alluvial plains throughout the region. Soils are very deep, alluvial, grey and brown cracking clays.


No Concern E. crebra and/or E. populnea, Callitris glaucophylla, Angophora leiocarpa, Allocasuarina luehmannii woodland on Cainozoic sand plains/remnant surfaces.


No Concern Acacia species woodland on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust.


No Concern Corymbia citriodora or E. crebra woodland on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust.


No Concern C. glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks.


No Concern E. populnea, E. melanophloia and/or C. glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks.

*(Source – Queensland Herbarium 2015)

Table 2-2 Extent of currently mapped (DNRM) Regional Ecosystems within the Survey area

RE code VM Act status EP Act (biodiversity) status

Total within Survey area (ha)

Total within a 20 km radius of Project (ha)

Non-remnant - - 664.2 -

11.3.25/11.3.2 Of Concern Of Concern 4.63 5,996.6

11.5.1 Least Concern No Concern 10.88 4,855.1

11.7.2 Least Concern No Concern 8.7 161.2

11.7.2/11.5.1 Least Concern No Concern 2.23 1,613.8

11.7.6 Least Concern No Concern 3.46 1,429.9

11.10.11/11.10.9/ 11.7.2

Least Concern No Concern 14.14 69.3


2-5

2.6 Protected Plants Flora Survey Trigger Map

The Survey area does not intersect any area considered to be ‘high risk’ under the flora survey

trigger mapping.

2.7 Threatened Flora

Database searches identified a total of nine conservation significant flora species listed as

Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened (EVNT) under the NC Act as potentially occurring in

the Survey area. Three of these species are also listed as Vulnerable under the EPBC Act and one

species is also listed as Endangered under the EPBC Act. The WildNet database search identified six

EVNT flora species recorded previously within a 25 km radius of the Survey area. The Protected

Matters Online Search Tool predicted the occurrence in the wider area of a further three

conservation significant flora species listed under the EPBC Act. These species and their potential to

occur within the Survey area are discussed in detail in Section 3.1.3. The database search results are

provided in Appendix A.

2.8 Declared Weed Species

The EPBC protected matters search tool identified 12 Weeds of National Significance have the

potential to occur in the Survey area:

Climbing Asparagus (Asparagus africanus);

Climbing Asparagus Fern (Asparagus plumosus);

Prickly Pear (Cylindropuntia spp.);

Cat’s Claw Creeper (Dolichandra unguis-cati);

Lantana (Lantana camara);

African Boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum);

Prickly Pear (Opuntia spp.);

Parkinsonia (Parkinsonia aculeata);

Parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus);

Mesquite (Prosopis spp.);

Fireweed (Senecio madagascariensis); and

Prickly Acacia (Vachellia nilotica, form. Acacia nilotica).

All of these species are also listed as Restricted Matters under the Biosecurity Act. Database searches

of the wider area encountered records of 72 introduced species, including four Prickly Pear species

(Opuntia spp.), as well as two other species listed as Restricted Matters under the Biosecurity Act:

Mother-of-millions (Bryophyllum delagoense); and

Yellow Bells (Tecoma stans).


2-6

2.9 Terrestrial Fauna

A total of 297 species of terrestrial vertebrate are known or predicted to occur within a 25 km radius

of the Survey area, comprising 22 frogs, 82 reptiles, 198 birds and 46 mammal species (see Appendix

A for the database search results).

Twenty-six conservation significant terrestrial vertebrate species are known or predicted to occur

within a 25 km radius of the Survey area based on the database searches (refer Appendix A). This

includes 16 species listed as Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened under the NC Act. Thirteen

species are also listed as Endangered or Vulnerable under the EPBC Act. A further three species not

listed under the NC Act are listed as either Critically Endangered or Vulnerable under the EPBC Act.

The remaining six species are listed as Migratory bird species under the EPBC Act. The full list of

conservation significant species is provided in Table 3-4.

One further significant species (but not listed as EVNT) predicted to occur is Short-beaked Echidna

(Tachyglossus aculeatus) which is listed as Special Least Concern (culturally significant) under the

NC Act.

Ten species listed as EVNT were recorded on the Wildnet database within the 25 km buffered radius

of the Survey area. The nearest records to the survey area are:

A record of a Golden-tailed Gecko (Strophurus taenicauda) located approximately 5 km west the

northern end of the proposed alignment. There are also several records associated with Yuleba

State Forest and surrounds located between 7 to 20 km from the alignment;

A record of Glossy Black-cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus lathami lathami) located approximately 10

km north-east of the alignment near the Warrego Highway; and

A record of Common Death Adder (Acanthophis antarcticus) located 7 km west of the alignment

north of the Warrego Highway.

A further three EVNT fauna species have been recorded within 25 km of the Survey area, these being

Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus), Dunmall’s Snake (Furina dunmalli) and Yakka Skink (Egernia

rugosa).

2.10 Essential Habitat

Within the Survey area a section of habitat mapped as Essential Habitat for an EVNT species occurs

along Wallumbilla Creek. This area is mapped as RE 11.3.25/11.3.2 and is based on a localised

record of Brigalow Scaly-foot (Paradelma orientalis) in the area (refer Vegetation Management

Report – Appendix A). This species is no longer listed as an EVNT fauna species being Least Concern

under the NC Act.

2.11 Declared Pest Fauna Species

Database searches of the wider area encountered records of 12 introduced fauna species. Six of

these species are also listed as Restricted Matters under the Biosecurity Act (Table 2-3). Under the

Act a person who has control over a ‘Restricted Matter’ must not do the following:

Category 3 – A person who has, or has a thing infested with, the ‘Restricted Matter’ in the person’s possession or under the person’s control must not distribute or dispose of the restricted matter unless the distribution or disposal is carried out via the methods set out in the Biosecurity Act;


2-7

Category 4 – move the ‘Restricted Matter’, or cause or allow to be moved;

Category 5 – keep in the person’s possession or under the person’ control; and

Category 6 – give food to the ‘Restricted Matter.’

Table 2-3 Introduced fauna species known from the Survey area and surrounds

Species name Common name Biosecurity Act category

Rhinella marina Cane Toad

Columba livia Rock Dove

Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling

Bos taurus Cattle

Canis lupus dingo Dingo Category 3, 4, 5, 6

Canis lupus familiaris Dog Category 3, 4, 6

Vulpes vulpes Red Fox Category 3, 4, 5, 6

Felis catus Cat Category 3, 4, 6

Lepus europaeus European Brown Hare

Oryctolagus cuniculus Rabbit Category 3, 4, 5, 6

Mus musculus House Mouse

Sus scrofa Pig Category 3, 4, 6

3-1

Section 3 Field Survey Results

3.1 Terrestrial Flora

Twelve vegetation communities or REs were ground-truthed within the Survey area boundary

during field surveys. Detailed descriptions of these communities are provided below in the following

Table including indicative Kilometre Points (KPs) along the alignment.

Table 3-1 RCWP Survey area vegetation community descriptions

RE 11.3.2

Poplar Box (Eucalyptus populnea) grassy woodland on Cainozoic alluvial plains

VM Act status: Of Concern EP Act status: Of Concern (Category C ESA)

Description of community on-site Within survey area: 1.86 ha Within RoW impact area: 0.43 ha

This community occurs in two patches south of the Warrego Highway – un unmapped area near Wallumbilla Creek and an isolated patch mapped as 11.3.25/11.3.2 north of this area associated with a minor drainage area. It is also present in the northern extent of the transport corridor on the edge of the plateau. This second area has been impacted by past tree clearing and is very degraded.

The sparse canopy of this community is characterised by the dominance of Poplar Box (Eucalyptus populnea) in the canopy. The community characteristically has a grassy understorey and sparse lower tree and shrub layers comprising False Sandalwood (Eremophila mitchellii) and Desert Lime (Citrus glauca). The grassy ground layer is dominated by the introduced Buffel Grass (Cenchrus ciliaris). Native grass species are also present including Chloris divaricata and Enteropogon acicularis.

Impacts due to cattle grazing have diminished the condition of this community somewhat within the Survey area. Weeds species including Fireweed (Senecio madagascariensis) and Prickly Acacia (Vachellia nilotica) are present. No EVNT flora species observed or expected.

KP41.2, KP46

RE 11.3.25

Forest Red Gum (Eucalyptus tereticornis) woodland fringing drainage lines

VM Act status: Least Concern EP Act status: Of Concern (Category C ESA)


Occurs along four drainage lines in the Survey area. The mid-dense canopy is dominated by River Red Gum (E. camaldulensis) with a lower tree layer including Sally Wattle (Acacia salicina), Rosewood (A. excelsa) and Boonaree (Alectryon oleifolius). The shrub layer is absent and the ground layer is dominated by the introduced Guinea Grass (Megathyrsus maximus).

This community is generally in poor condition due to impacts from clearing (within and in adjacent communities) and cattle grazing. However, the community on Wallumbilla Creek appears in relatively good condition. Weeds species including Fireweed and Prickly Acacia are present. African Boxthorn (Lycium ferocissimum) was also found along Wallumbilla Creek. No EVNT flora species observed or expected. KP9.1, KP15.3, KP26.4, KP46.2


3-2

RE 11.5.1

Narrow-leaf Ironbark (Eucalyptus crebra) woodland on Cainozoic sand plains/remnant surfaces.

VM Act status: Least Concern EP Act status: No Concern


Within the Survey area predominantly occurs along the lower slopes of a large vegetated hill area 11 km south of the Reedy Creek Facility.

Dominated by Narrow-leaf Ironbark (E. crebra) with some Poplar Box. The canopy is sparse and relatively tall (up to 16 m). There is a very sparse lower canopy comprising White Cypress (Callitris glaucophylla) and Black Wattle (A. leiocalyx). The shrub layers is very sparse and the ground layer is a mix of predominately native grass species dominated by Hooky Grass (Ancistrachne uncinulata) with Aristida caput-medusae and Rough Sawsedge (Gahnia aspera).

This habitat is in fair condition with some impact from current cattle grazing activities and limited evidence of tree thinning.

No EVNT flora species observed. Low potential habitat for Wooly Wrinklewort (Rutidosis lanata).

KP11.2-11.9, KP30.2, KP30.5

RE 11.7.2

Acacia species woodland on Cainozoic lateritic duricrust. VM Act status: Least Concern EP Act status: No Concern


Several patches throughout the Survey area north of the Warrego Highway where it occurs on the top of rises on nutrient poor-rocky duricrust soils.

Lancewood (A. shirleyi) dominates the sparse to mid-dense canopy. An area of this habitat just north of the Warrego Highway is dominated by a low-growing canopy of A. aprepta. The sub-canopy largely comprises immature canopy species. The shrub layer is absent in this community and the very sparse ground layer features Aristida caput-medusae.

This habitat is generally in fair condition due to the lack of potential forage for cattle. There is minor impact from current cattle grazing activities and evidence of tree thinning in some areas. No weeds recorded.

No EVNT flora species observed or expected.

KP4.2, KP12, KP30.5-31


3-3

RE 11.9.5

Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) and/or Belah (Casuarina cristata) open forest on fine-grained sedimentary rocks

VM Act status: Endangered EP Act status: Endangered (Category B ESA – remnant and regrowth)

Description of community on-site Within survey area: 4.22 ha (rem), 2.64 ha (regrowth) Within RoW impact area: 0.15 ha (rem), 0.75 ha (regrowth)

Occurs throughout Survey area often as shade lines in both remnant and regrowth patches. This RE may be considered as a Brigalow TEC under the EPBC Act. A large occurrence of low-growing dense regrowth Brigalow is located in the north of the Survey area and is listed as a Category B ESA. Discussions with the landowner during the October 2016 survey revealed this area has been recently poisoned.

This community is characterised by an open forest canopy and sub-canopy of Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) and often Belah (Casuarina cristata). The shrub layer is generally sparse including Desert Lime, False-sandalwood and Wilga (geihera parviflora). The ground layer is diverse comprising a mid-dense mixture of native grasses and herbs. Characteristic species include: Zygophyllum apiculatum, Rhagodia spinescens, Tetragonia tetragonioides, Chloris divaricata, Enteropogon acicularis, Paspalidium caespitosum and Einadia hastata.

Where remnant this community appears in good condition with good canopy cover even where it occurs as shade lines. Impacts due to grazing are limited although some three thinning has occurred in some patches. Few occurrences of this community satisfy the threshold conditions for a Brigalow TEC. Weeds present include Fireweed, occasional Prickly Acacia and regular occurrences of Prickly Pear (Opuntia tomentosa). No EVNT species were observed. Low potential habitat for Belson’s Panic (Homopholis belsonii).

Remnant – KP3.2, KP11.1, KP18.3, KP19.4-20, KP40.2-40.6

Regrowth – KP0.5, KP6.6.3, KP15.7, KP16.1, KP21.4

RE 11.9.7

Poplar Box and Eremophila mitchellii shrubby woodland on fine-grained sedimentary rocks

VM Act status: Of Concern EP Act status: Of Concern (Category C ESA - remnant only)

Description of community on-site Within survey area: 2.17 ha (remnant), 3.62 ha (regrowth) Within RoW impact area: 0.2 ha (remnant)

Occurs as several discrete patches on a flat plain of black self-mulching clay soils to the north of the Warrego Highway. Characterised by emergent Poplar Box with a sub-canopy of immature individuals and False Sandalwood. The sparse to mid-dense shrub layer is dominated by Desert Lime, False-sandalwood and Wilga. The ground layer is dominated by the introduced Buffel Grass but also includes native grass species are also present including Chloris divaricata, Panicum effusum, Digitaria divericatissima and Enteropogon acicularis.

This habitat remains quite disturbed with evidence of past tree clearing and thinning as well as cattle grazing. Weeds present include Fireweed, occasional Prickly Acacia and regular occurrences of Prickly Pear. No EVNT species were observed. Low potential habitat for Wooly Wrinklewort (Rutidosis lanata). Remnant – KP11.5-21.8, KP27.7

Regrowth – 21.8-22.2


3-4

RE 11.9.10

Eucalyptus populnea, Acacia harpophylla open forest on fine-grained sedimentary rocks

VM Act status: Of Concern EP Act status: Endangered (Category B ESA)


A single occurrence of this community north of the Warrego Highway as a shade line. The canopy comprises a mixture of Poplar Box, Brigalow and Belah with a sub-canopy of immature individuals of the same species. The sparse shrub layer is dominated by Desert Lime, False-sandalwood, Boonaree and Currant Bush. The ground layer is composed of a mid-dense cover of native grass species are also present including Aristida species, Paspalidium jubiflorum and Enteropogon acicularis.

This habitat occurs as a single shade line on the edge of grazing land. Weeds present are similar to those above occurring on the same land zone (9) including sparse instances of Fireweed, Prickly Acacia and Prickly Pear.

No EVNT species were observed. Low potential habitat for Belson’s Panic and Wooly Wrinklewort. KP17.6-17.9, KP31.1

RE 11.9.13

Eucalyptus moluccana open forest on fine grained sedimentary rocks

VM Act status: Of Concern EP Act status: No Concern

Description of community on-site Within survey area: 1.18 ha (regrowth only) Within RoW impact area: 0.06 ha

This community is restricted to a single patch of relatively tall regrowth vegetation north of the Warrego Highway.

Sparse Gum-topped Box (E. moluccana) occurs as an emergent canopy over a mid-dense lower storey, largely of Belah and Brigalow. The shrub layer of the disturbed habitat also comprises immature Brigalow and Belah as well as Wilga, Boonaree and Currant Bush. The ground layer is sparse with patchy occurrence of Hooky Grass.

As already noted this habitat occurs as a regrowth community but remains in relatively good condition will limited evidence of cattle use and abundant macropod scats evident. Weeds present are similar to those above occurring on the same land zone (9) including sparse instances of Fireweed, Prickly Acacia and Prickly Pear. No EVNT species were observed and none are expected. KP15.5


3-5

RE 11.10.1

Corymbia citriodora woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks


Description of community on-site Within survey area: 1.87 ha Within RoW impact area: 0 ha

Within the Survey area occurs along the mid-upper slopes of a large vegetated hill area 11 km south of the Reedy Creek Facility.

The canopy is dominated by Spotted Gum (Corymbia citriodora) and White Bloodwood (C. trachyphloia) with sparse Narrow-leaf Ironbark and Messmate (E. exserta). The lower storey comprises immature canopy species and the shrub layer includes Acacia buxifolia. The ground layer is very sparse as a result of the poor nutrient soils.

This habitat has had only limited impacts from cattle grazing. No significant weeds were recorded and no EVNT species were observed with none expected.

KP11.5

RE 11.10.3

Lancewood (Acacia shirleyi) open forest on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks.



This community occurs as a two occurrences on rocky hill areas north of the Warrego Highway.

Within the Survey area the canopy is dominated by Narrow-leaf Ironbark and Currawang (A. sparsiflora) (Lancewood not being present) with lower storey including Black Cypress (Callitris endlicher). There is a tall but sparse shrub layer including Wilga, Acacia buxifolia, Brush Hovea (Hovea longipes) and Pittosporum spinescens. A patchy ground layer comprised Hooky Grass and Aristida caput-medusae.

This habitat has been impacted by cattle grazing and some evidence of tree thinning was observed. No significant weeds were recorded and no EVNT species were observed. May provide habitat for Wooly Wrinklewort.

KP16.2-16.6, KP28.3


3-6

RE 11.10.7

Narrow-leaf Ironbark woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks

VM Act status: Least Concern EP Act Biodiversity status: No Concern


This community dominates the extensive tract of vegetation located to the south of the Reedy Creek Processing Facility occurring on sandy soils.

The canopy is dominated by Narrow-leaf Ironbark occasionally mixing with Poplar Box. The community has a mid-dense lower storey of White Cypress and includes scattered Beefwood (Grevillea striata) and Black Wattle. The shrub layer is largely restricted to immature White Cypress and scattered areas of Philotheca difformis. There is a sparse to mid-dense ground layer occurs with Hooky Grass, Aristida caput-medusae and Rough Sawsedge.

This habitat is in fair condition with some evidence of cattle grazing impact and areas of tree thinning activity evident. No EVNT species were observed. May provide habitat for Wooly Wrinklewort.

KP1-1.3, KP3.2-4.3

RE 11.10.11

Poplar Box and Callitris glaucophylla woodland on coarse-grained sedimentary rocks



Occurs in the same area as the previous community.

The canopy and sub-canopy is dominated by Gum-topped Box with some Narrow-leaved Ironbark. A tall but sparse shrub layer features Red Wattle, Deane’s Wattle (A. deanei) and Crowded-leaf Wattle (A. conferta). A sparse lower shrub layer is dominated by Currant Bush. There is a very sparse ground layer dominated by Hooky Grass and Aristida caput-medusae.

This habitat is in fair condition with some evidence of cattle grazing impact. No EVNT species were observed. May provide habitat for Wooly Wrinklewort (Rutidosis lanata).

KP0.4-1.1, KP3.1, KP4.3, KP5.7


3-7

3.1.1 Discrepancy in Regional Ecosystem Mapping

The site assessment revealed inconsistencies in RE attribution within the Survey area to the current

DNRM mapping (refer to Section 1.4.2 regarding field assessment methodology). The revised

mapping for the Survey area following the ground-truthing surveys is presented in Figure 3-1 to

Figure 3-3. The amount of remnant vegetation within the Survey area has increased slightly from

44 ha to 49 ha, based on the field survey. Of this, there is 5 ha of Endangered and 5.88 ha of Of

Concern vegetation communities (as listed under the EP Act). An additional 2.64 ha of Endangered

regrowth vegetation was also identified in the Survey area. Ground-truthing identified the

vegetation extant within the corridor is dominated by Poplar Box communities (RE 11.10.11,

11.9.10, 11.9.7 and 11.3.2) and Narrow-leaved Ironbark woodlands (RE 11.10.7 and 11.5.1). The

overall Survey area encompasses 708.3 ha. Of this a total of 56.3 ha remains as remnant or regrowth

vegetation representing 7.95% of the overall Survey area. The remaining area has been cleared and

comprises non-remnant vegetation.

3.1.2 Threatened Ecological Communities

The field assessment confirmed that one EPBC listed TEC occurs within the Survey area associated

with patches of RE11.9.5: Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla dominant and codominant). Brigalow

(Acacia harpophylla) communities are listed as endangered under the EPBC Act. In the past, this

community has been subject to extensive vegetation clearing for agriculture and grazing activities.

This has reduced much of the former extent of this community to isolated, small fragments. Current

threats include continued vegetation clearing, inappropriate fire regimes and introduced weeds and

feral animals.

The revised vegetation mapping indicates 4.2 ha of this community occurs as remnant vegetation in

eight discrete patches throughout the Survey area. An additional 3.8 ha of this community occurs as

regrowth vegetation in another five discrete patches. An assessment of the community was also

carried out using the criteria outlined in Butler (2007). The criteria specify that a Brigalow

ecological community can be excluded from the list of Brigalow communities if it meets any one of

the following three criteria:

Vegetation has been comprehensively cleared (not thinned) within the past 15 years;

Exotic perennial plants have more than 50% cover; assessed in a minimum area of 0.5 ha (100

m by 50 m); and

Individual patches of Brigalow are smaller than 0.5 ha.

Most patches of Brigalow in the Survey area are smaller than 0.5 ha or have been cleared within the

past 15 years and can be excluded as a TEC. This reduces the amount of this community eligible to

be considered a TEC to 2.06 ha over two discrete patches within the Survey area (refer Figure 3-1

and Figure 3-2). These patches have been avoided by the realignment of the pipeline RoW following

completion of the ecological field survey and are not impacted by the Project area.

Two patches of Brigalow RE (11.9.5) are intersected by the alignment but found not to meet the

criteria as a TEC at KP’s 6-6.4 and KP 11.1, but were discounted as TEC:

KP 6-6.4 - This area is dominated solely by regrowth Brigalow ranging between 1.5 m to 3 m in

height with the occasional Bottle Tree left as an emergent. There is a dense coverage in the

central portion of this area (approximately 200 m of the RoW). Outside of this area there is a

more sparse distribution of individuals with Buffel Grass dominant on the ground layer. Given

the even canopy coverage of regrowth across the surveyed area it is evident this area had been


3-8

cleared (as opposed to tree thinning) within the past 15 years and is not considered as eligible

as a TEC under the criteria of Butler (2007); and

KP 11.1 - Although mapped as a Brigalow equivalent community (RE11.9.5) this patch is

composed entirely of Belah (Casuarina cristata). No Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) was

recorded as present and the entire patch is also less than 0.5 ha in area.

There are no other confirmed TECs associated with the vegetation communities extant within the

Survey area.

KP 9

KP 8

KP 7

KP 6

KP 5

KP 4

KP 3

KP 2

KP 1

KP 0

KP 10

KP 9.5

KP 8.5

KP 7.5

KP 6.5

KP 5.5

KP 4.5

KP 3.5

KP 2.5

KP 1.5

KP 0.5

KP 10.5

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\006-R1-Endangered Regrowth-3.mxd 12/2/2016

Figure 3-1Ground-truthed vegetation mapping

for the RCWP Project area (north)

N

0 0.80.4

Kilometers

LegendRCWP Pipeline Easement

RWP KP

RCWP Project Area

Major Watercourse

Minor Watercourse

Vegetation – EP Act statusEndangered

Of Concern

No Concern at Present


Date:1:40,000Scale @ A402/12/16

Drawn: APS


INSERT 9

INSERT 10

INSERT 11

INSERT 10

INSERT 9

INSERT 11

11.3.25

11.9.5

11.9.5

11.10.7

KP 29

KP 28

KP 27

KP 26

KP 25

KP 24

KP 23

KP 22

KP 21

KP 20

KP 19

KP 18

KP 17

KP 16

KP 15

KP 14

KP 13

KP 12

KP 11

KP 28.5

KP 27.5

KP 26.5

KP 25.5

KP 24.5

KP 23.5

KP 22.5

KP 21.5

KP 20.5

KP 19.5

KP 18.5

KP 17.5

KP 16.5

KP 15.5

KP 14.5

KP 13.5

KP 12.5

KP 11.5

KP 10.5

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\005-R2-Endangered Regrowth-2.mxd 2/14/2017

Figure 3-5Ground Truthed vegetation mapping

for the RCWP Project area (central)

N

0 10.5

Kilometers


RWP KP

RCWP Project Area

Major Watercourse

Minor Watercourse


Of Concern





Date:1:60,000Scale @ A414/02/17

Drawn: APS

INSERT 4

INSERT 5

INSERT 6

INSERT 7

INSERT 8

INSERT 4 INSERT 5

INSERT 6

INSERT 7

INSERT 8

Brigalow TEC

11.9.7

11.9.5

11.9.7

11.9.511.3.25

11.9.10

11.10.3

11.9.13

11.3.25

11.9.5

11.5.1

11.9.13

11.9.5

KP 4

8

KP 4

7

KP 4

6

KP 4

5

KP 4

4

KP 4

3

KP 42

KP 41

KP 40

KP 39

KP 38

KP 37

KP 36

KP 35

KP 34

KP

33

KP

32

KP 31

KP 30

KP 29

KP 28

KP 4

8.5

KP 4

7.5

KP 4

6.5

KP 4

5.5

KP 4

4.5

KP 4

3.5

KP 42.5

KP 41.5

KP 40.5

KP 39.5

KP 38.5

KP 37.5

KP 36.5

KP 35.5

KP 34.5

KP

33.5

KP

32.5

KP 30.5

KP 29.5

KP 28.5

KP

27.5

KP 4

8.6

85

SINCLAIRA \\brbsvr1\PRO\Project\BES160302.01-APA Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline Ecological Assessment\7Work\3GIS\DATA\MXD\FINAL\004-R1-Endangered Regrowth-1 .mxd 12/2/2016

Figure 3-3Ground-truthed vegetation mapping

for the RCWP Project area (south)

N

0 10.5

Kilometers


RWP KP

RCWP Project Area

Major Watercourse

Minor Watercourse


Of Concern



Date:1:60,000Scale @ A402/12/16

Drawn: APS

Walumbilla Gas Hub

INSERT 1

INSERT 1

INSERT 2

INSERT 2

INSERT 3

INSERT 3

11.9.10

11.3.2

11.9.5

11.3.25

11.7.211.5.1

11.3.2


3-12

3.1.3 Threatened Flora Species

A total of 242 native plant species were identified within the Survey area (refer Appendix B for a full

species list). Habitat requirements for flora species listed under the NC Act and/or EPBC Act were

considered during the flora assessments. The majority of the vegetated portions of the Survey area

were searched for threatened species over the two site surveys. No flora species listed as Vulnerable

under the NC Act and/or EPBC Act was observed within the Survey area. Samples were collected of

a species of small shrub with potential to be Kogan Waxflower (Philotheca sporadica) – listed as

Vulnerable under the NC Act and EPBC Act. The species was found in several patches in dry remnant

woodlands north of the Warrego Highway, particularly near Reedy Creek. The samples were taken

to the Queensland Herbarium for identification and were confirmed to be a very similar species:

Small-leaf Wax-flower (Philotheca difformis).

When surveying for floristic diversity, “It is not favourable to sample during the peak of summer or

following a period of drought due to a reduction in plant diversity. The best time for assessment is

at the end of the summer rainfall growing season, when plant diversity is greatest. For the majority

of Queensland, this is often from late March to late May, but is dependent on local seasonal

conditions. South of the Tropic of Capricorn, site assessment should be generally conducted in May

or June following the wetter summer months. An exception would be sampling in spring following

an unseasonably wet winter, when many plant species are flowering (Eyre et al. 2015)”. The surveys

for the Project were conducted in spring (late October and early November 2016). Little rain was

recorded in October 2016, however, 127 mm of rain was received at Roma Airport during

September 2016 (BoM 2016). This is well above the monthly average for September of 27 mm. This

rainfall is considered high for this time of year and flora ground layers were observed to be well

developed during the field survey.

Table 3-2 lists species that were identified through desktop searches and their potential to occur

within the Project area based on mapped vegetation types and the field surveys. Six of the ten

species were identified as having a low potential to occur. Suitable habitat for these exists to a

limited extent, however given these areas within the Survey area have been searched it is unlikely

they occur.

Table 3-2 Potential for listed flora species to occur within the Project area

Scientific/ Common

name

Status

Description and habitat Potential to occur in survey area NC ACT

EPBC Act

Acacia wardellii

NT

Slender shrub or small tree. Bark is smooth and silvery grey or white. Found in eucalypt woodland in gravely soils on shallow weathered sandstone.

Low potential. Habitat for this species occurs within Project area in the form of eucalypt woodland on shallow soils of land zone 7 and 10. Single Wildlife online database record from the wider area. This species is a conspicuous perennial and has a low potential to have remained undiscovered within the RoW and broader Survey area.

Cadellia pentastylis Ooline

V V Tall tree with dark, scaly bark and small leaves that are glossy above and dull and paler below. Found in semi-evergreen vine thickets on sandstone and basalt slopes and in Brigalow and Belah communities on undulating clay plains and low hills.

Low potential. Not recorded. Habitat for this species occurs within Project area in the form of acacia woodlands and open forest on Land zone 9. No Wildlife online database records from the wider area. This species is conspicuous tree and has a low potential to have remained undiscovered within the RoW and broader Survey area.


3-13

Scientific/ Common

name

Status

Description and habitat Potential to occur in survey area NC ACT

EPBC Act

Dichanthium setosum

LC V Perennial grass species associated with heavy dark soils derived from basalt and red-brown loams. Often found in moderately disturbed areas.

Unlikely. Not known from region. Nearest records are from the Canarvon Ranges well to the north of the Project area.

Fimbristylis vagans

E Stoloniferous sedge to 60 cm tall. Found in wetlands in wet sandy soils.

Unlikely. No suitable habitat present. Single Wildlife online database record from the wider area.

Homopholis belsonii Belson’s Panic

E V Tufted grass with stolons present. Found in woodlands on rocky hills; forests in alluvial soils on flat to undulating lands; and dry woodlands on poor soils derived from basalt. Also, recorded in Brigalow, and Weeping Myall (A. pendula); Mountain Coolibah (E. orgadophila) communities; and on roadsides.

Potential. Habitat for this species occurs within Project area in the form of Eucalypt and acacia woodlands and open forest on Land zone 9 and 3. Single Wildlife online database record from the wider area located 23 km west of the Survey area. This is a herbaceous species that may have remained undiscovered and has potential to occur within the Project area.

Picris barbarorum

V Erect annual herb 5 cm –60 cm high Restricted to floodplains in association with Black Box (Eucalyptus largiflorens) and Poplar Box, low chenopod shrublands, tall mixed shrublands, low to medium high acacia and eucalypt woodlands with grassy understorey, Mitchell Grass (Astrebla spp.) grasslands, she-oak woodlands and mixed rainforests.

Low potential. Habitat for this species occurs within Project area in the form of Eucalypt woodland communities with a grassy understory on Land zone 9 and 3. Single Wildlife online database record from the wider area. This is an annual herbaceous species that may have remained undiscovered and has potential to occur within the Project area.

Rutidosis lanata

V Erect herb to 30 cm tall. Found in Poplar Box - Belah dominated forests, ironbarks and Currawong forests, box-ironwood forests and eucalypt forests in red-brown gravelly sands, grey clays, red-brown clay and sandy loams, on flat land and stony red ridges and at 280 - 320 m altitude.

Potential. Habitat for this species occurs throughout the Project area. Two Wildlife online database records from the wider area associated with Yuleba State Forest 20 km south-east of the Survey area. This is a herbaceous species that may have remained undiscovered and has potential to occur within the Project area.

Solanum stenopterum

V Sprawling to erect herb to 0.4 m tall. Found in semi-evergreen vine thickets and Brigalow (Acacia harpophylla) - Belah (Casuarina cristata) woodlands and sometimes grasslands on cracking clays.

Low potential. Small isolated patches of habitat for this species occurs within Project area. Single Wildlife online database record from the wider area. This is a herbaceous species that may have remained undiscovered and has a low potential to occur within the Project area.

Swainsona murrayana

V V Prostrate, ascending to erect perennial forb to 25 cm tall. Found in a variety of vegetation communities from saltbush to eucalypt communities in depressions on heavy soils.

Low potential. Small amounts of marginal habitat occur. No database records. EPBC online search only.

This species is a conspicuous perennial and has a low potential to have remained undiscovered within the RoW and Survey area.

Tylophoris linearis

E E Slender dark green twining plant with milky to clear sap. Found in dry scrublands, open forests and woodlands at low altitudes and on sedimentary flats. Eight populations recorded from the Dubbo region in New South Wales

Low potential. Small amounts of marginal habitat occur. No database records. EPBC online search only.

The Project area is not within the current known distribution. This is a herbaceous species that may have remained

apa group reedy creek wallumbilla pipeline project

Documents