4.5
Terrestrial fauna
4.5.1
Fauna species
A total of 73 fauna species were recorded during the field surveys, including seven exotic species. This
comprised 56 bird species, five frog species, five reptile species and seven mammal species. Of these,
only 32 species were recorded within the study area: 21 bird species, two mammal species, five reptile
species and four frog species. A full list of fauna species recorded is provided in Appendix A.
Birds
A relatively high diversity of birds was observed throughout the study area, with a total of 53 species
recorded. No threatened bird species were observed. One species listed as migratory under the EPBC
Act was observed: at least two Black-faced Monarchs (Monarcha melanopsis) were observed outside the
study area, within vegetation on the western side of the railway line in vegetation between Narara Creek
and the railway. Further information on threatened species and migratory species with the potential to
occur is provided in Section 4.7.
The majority of species observed were associated with the larger patches of native vegetation within the
study area, particularly the moist forest bordering Narara Creek and Manns Road, and the patch of
Swamp Oak/mangrove/wet sclerophyll forest on the eastern side of the railway between Brooks Avenue
and Renwick Street. Species observed included:
Seven wetland bird species, associated with creeks or observed overflying the study area. Species
observed included the Australian Wood Duck (Chenonetta jubata), White-faced Heron (Egretta
novaehollandiae) and the exotic Northern Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos).
Open country species, observed foraging in open grassland areas,, including the Galah (Eolophus
roseicapillus), Magpie-lark (Grallina cyanoleuca) and exotic Common Myna (Sturnus tristis).
Small birds, including the Superb Fairy-wren (Malurus cyaneus), Red-browed Finch (Neochmia
temporalis) and the exotic Red-whiskered Bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus) which were common in areas
of shrubby vegetation along the railway line, including patches of Lantana and other exotic
vegetation.
Woodland birds, including Lewin’s Honeyeater (Meliphaga lewinii), Horsfield’s Bronze Cuckoo
(Chalcites basalis), Rufous Whistler (Pachycephala rufiventris), Eastern Yellow Robin (Eopsaltria
australis) and Laughing Kookaburra (Dacelo novaeguineae).
Birds of rainforest or moist sclerophyll forest habitats, including the Green Catbird (Ailuroedus
crassirostris), Satin Bowerbird (Ptilonorhynchus violaceus) and Eastern Whipbird (Psophodes
olivaceus), observed in the patch of moist forest bordering Narara Creek and Manns Road.
Seasonally nomadic or migratory species, including the Eastern Koel (Eudynamys orientalis),
Dollarbird and Black-faced Monarch.
Aggressive birds common in disturbed habitats, including the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala)
and Bell Miner (M. melanophrys).
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
55
Frogs
Despite the wet conditions, presence of standing water and timing of the main surveys (within the
breeding season for many frog species), only three species of frogs were detected and very few
individuals were heard calling. Common Eastern Froglets (Crinia signifera) were heard calling from
flooded drains at the base of the railway cutting in the southern end of the study area. A single Striped
Marsh Frog (Limnodynastes peronii) was recorded from the Typha wetland at the side of the cycleway,
near Brooks Avenue. Approximately five Tyler’s Toadlets (Uperoleia tyleri) were also heard calling from
this area and the forest on the western side of this railway bridge.
During the follow-up Green and Golden Bell Frog surveys, an increase in frog activity was observed.
Frogs were calling at more locations, and more individuals were calling. Two additional species were
recorded in the study area: Dwarf Green Tree Frog (Litoria fallax) and Spotted Grass Frog
(Limnodynastes tasmaniensis), as well as Common Eastern Froglets and Striped Marsh Frog. In
addition, Dwarf Green Tree Frog and Bleating Tree Frog (Litoria dentata) were recorded upstream of the
study area on Wingello Creek (site of the 1967 record of the Green and Golden Bell Frog). Green and
Golden Bell Frogs were observed and heard calling at the reference populations on the night of the 30
November 2011 and 18 January 2012. None were recorded in the study area during surveys.
Reptiles
Due to the relatively cool temperatures during surveys, most reptiles would not have been active and few
individuals were observed. Eastern Water Skinks (Eulamprus quoyii) and two Eastern Water Dragons
(Physignathus lesueurii) were observed at the edge of creeks throughout the study area, either on rocks
or on concrete structures associated with the railway bridges. A large Red-bellied Black-snake
(Pseudechis porphyriacus) was observed within dense Typha in a depression beside the railway track,
and an Eastern Snake-necked Turtle (Chelodina longicollis) was observed in short grass directly
adjacent to the railway line, in the vicinity of Wyoming Creek. Unidentified Garden Skinks (Lampropholis
sp.) were also observed in low numbers throughout the study area. An Eastern Brown Snake
(Pseudonaja textilis) was also observed during a previous site visit for the proposal.
Mammals
Five mammal species were directly observed during surveys. A Bush Rat (Rattus fuscipes) was
observed in a tree on the edge of the railway corridor during spotlighting. Over 30 White-striped Freetailbats (Tadarida australis) were recorded during stag watches, flying out of a hollow-bearing tree situated
to the east of the study area, near Brooks Avenue. This represents a large colony of this species, which
is described as roosting either solitarily or in groups of up to 25, although maternity colonies are larger
with up to 300 individuals (Churchill 2008). Grey-headed Flying-foxes (Pteropus poliocephalus) were
observed overflying the site on both nights of spotlighting. Individuals were flying well above the canopy
and none were observed foraging within the study area. This species is listed as Vulnerable under both
the TSC and EPBC Acts. This species is discussed in greater detail in Section 4.7.3. Two introduced
species, the European Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) and European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) were
observed in the rail corridor during spotlighting.
An additional two species of microbats were confidently identified from analysis of Anabat recordings.
Both Gould’s Wattled Bat (Chalinolobus gouldii) and the Eastern Freetail-bat (Mormopterus ridei) were
recorded within forest vegetation opposite Brooks Avenue Cycleway, next to Narara Creek. The Whitestriped Freetail-bat was also recorded from calls recorded within this area and within mangroves along
Wyoming Creek.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
56
4.5.2
Fauna habitats
Habitat features and resources are described in terms of the native fauna they may support with specific
reference to threatened species potentially present in the site. The project site generally has poor fauna
habitat values, due to disturbances associated with the railway and urban surrounds. Much of the
surrounding study area was also disturbed as a result of its urban nature, however there were small
pockets of forested land. Fauna species recorded included a small number of species that require large
tracts of native vegetation to persist, as well as many generalist species able to utilise disturbed areas.
The habitat assessment identified the following main habitat types in the study area:
Forested areas.
Creeks and drainage ditches.
Disturbed land.
Forested areas
Three main patches of forest are present in the study area. These include a patch associated with
Wyoming Creek, another patch associated with the cycleway and footpath between the railway and
Narara Creek near Manns Road, and the Swamp Oak forest associated with Brady’s Gully adjacent to
Narara Creek. Very little forest was present within the railway corridor, and as such, most forest fauna
species that may occur in the project site are likely to be transitory rather than resident.
The structural diversity of the forested areas is high with a complete mature canopy of eucalypts up to 25
metres tall over an often dense shrub and ground layer. A small number of trees are very old and
substantial in girth. A range of myrtaceous tree species are present, including Eucalyptus saligna (Blue
Gum), Eucalyptus robusta (Swamp Mahogany) and Angophora floribunda (Rough-barked Apple).
Myrtaceous trees would provide foraging resources for a range of birds, including cockatoos, parrots and
honeyeaters, and other arboreal mammals. Honeyeaters recorded during the surveys included the
Eastern Spinebill (Acanthorhynchus tenuirostris), Little Wattlebird (Anthochaera chrysoptera), Lewin’s
Honeyeater, Noisy Miner and Bell Miner. Other birds recorded included Whistlers (Pachycephala spp.),
the Grey Fantail (Rhipidura albiscapa) and Grey Shrike-thrush (Colluricincla harmonica). Fruiting
rainforest elements, including Port Jackson Figs are present in low numbers, and together with
myrtaceous trees would provide foraging resources for the threatened Grey-headed Flying-fox. Forested
areas may provide potential habitat for arboreal species such as the threatened Squirrel Glider (Petaurus
norfolcensis), although the general lack of winter-flowering eucalypts and low numbers of hollow-bearing
trees makes the habitat of only a poor quality for this species. Very few trees had scratches present on
the trunks, suggesting a low density of arboreal marsupials is present in the area. Other trees present in
these areas which provide foraging habitat for fauna include Casuarina glauca (Swamp Oak) and the
introduced Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor Laurel).
No Koalas and very few Koala feed trees were recorded during surveys. Swamp Mahogany occurs as
isolated individuals to the west of the railway and within a small patch of forest. These are isolated from
other areas of potential habitat in the locality, and it is considered unlikely that Koalas would occur in the
study area (Appendix B).
In most areas the shrub layer was dense, dominated by Lantana. Native species included acacias and
banksias. A wide range of small birds were recorded in these areas, including Brown Gerygones
(Gerygone mouki), Silvereyes (Zosterops lateralis), Eastern Yellow Robins, and the migratory Blackfaced Monarch. Two bowers of the Satin Bowerbird were observed within Lantana thickets.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
57
Hollow-bearing trees and stags, which could provide potential nesting habitat for arboreal mammals or
birds, are present in patches within the forested areas outside the study area. Nine hollow-bearing
Eucalyptus saligna and one hollow-bearing Melaleuca biconvexa were recorded. A range of hollow sizes
and shapes are present, catering for a variety of species. Around 300 vertebrate species use tree
hollows and shedding bark in Australia, and the shelter provided by these habitat features is essential for
the survival of many of these species (Gibbons and Lindenmayer 2002). A colony of White-striped
Freetail Bats (Austronomus australis) was observed leaving a hollow of a large Eucalyptus saligna east
of the railway corridor, near Brooks Avenue. The hollow-roosting Gould’s Wattled Bat (Chalinolobus
gouldii) and Eastern Freetail Bat (Mormopterus ridei) were recorded using Anabat analysis. Other hollowdependent fauna observed in the study area include Galahs and Rainbow Lorikeets. No arboreal
mammals were observed. Forest owls are unlikely to roost in the study area given the low number of
appropriately-sized hollows, lack of prey species, and limited area of forest present.
Creeks and drainage ditches
Four creeks are present within the study area. These include three small creeks which cross under the
railway line (Wyoming Creek, Wingello Creek and Brady’s Gully), as well as Narara Creek which runs to
the west of the railway line. Wyoming Creek, Wingello Creek and Brady’s Gully are small, ephemeral
creeks which run through residential and industrial areas before running under the railway line and into
Narara Creek. These are fed by a number of stormwater drains. These creeks have areas of riparian
vegetation and emergent vegetation present. These creeks are highly disturbed by the surrounding
environment. Eastern Water Dragons were observed in and adjacent to Wyoming creek. Striped Marsh
Frog and Tyler’s Toadlets were heard calling. Narara Creek is an estuarine creek with a sandy to silty
substrate. Riparian vegetation includes eucalypt forests, Swamp Oak forest, mangroves, residential
gardens and grassy recreation grounds. A range of common ducks and herons were observed. Aquatic
and riparian habitats associated with these creeks are discussed in more detail in Section 4.6.3.
Railway bridges over the various creeks were inspected for roosting bats. None were considered to
provide roosting habitat, as they were too open, and cracks between planks were letting water through.
Also, most bridges were used by pedestrians for access under the railway, which would cause regular
disturbance to roosting bats.
A number of trunk drains are present alongside the railway line. These are partly vegetated with Typha
and other emergent flora. At the time of surveys some had water present. Common Eastern Froglets,
Eastern Dwarf tree Frogs and Striped Marsh Frogs were heard calling from these drains, and Eastern
Water Skinks and a Red-bellied Black Snake were observed. These drains represent marginal potential
habitat for the threatened Green and Golden Bell Frog. Surveys were conducted for this species on five
separate nights, of which three were during ideal survey conditions. No Green and Golden Bell Frogs
were recorded in the study area, although other common species were calling. The species was
recorded during surveys at the nearby reference population on the two nights it was surveyed. The
Green and Golden Bell Frog is therefore considered highly unlikely to be present in the study area.
In some cases ditches drain under the railway via culverts, which may provide roosting habitat for bat
species such as the threatened bentwing bats (Miniopterus spp.) and the Large-footed Myotis (Myotis
macropus), although none were observed or recorded during surveys.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
58
Disturbed land
Land within the project site and much of the study area has been previously cleared for the railway,
roads, residential and industrial areas, and recreation. In some areas low shrubs including Lantana is
present, and was occupied by a suite of small birds, including thornbills and fairy-wrens. Galahs and
Masked Lapwings (Vanellus miles) were observed in recreation areas. Sunskinks and Water Skinks were
observed in patches of long grass along the railway corridor. A fox and a rabbit were observed in cleared
areas of the railway corridor.
Occasional patches of trees are present in the project site, and include the introduced Cinnamomum
camphora and natives such as Angophora floribunda. No hollow-bearing trees are present within the
railway corridor.
Condition
Fauna habitats within the study area are considered to be of low quality, given the lack of structural
diversity, low diversity of myrtaceous species, lack of tree hollows and limited ground habitat. Moderate
quality habitats are found in patches adjacent to the study area. Areas with hollow-bearing trees are
considered to be of high quality.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
59
To Gosford Station
To Narara Station
RACECOURSE ROAD
BEANE STREET
HOLDEN STREET
SHOWGROUND ROAD
Sheet 2
Sheet
1T
WAT
0
STREET
HILLS STREET
Threatened biota
Melaleuca biconvexa
DWYER STREET
Sheet 3
LINDSEY STREET
Sheet 4
BEANE STREET
KEEVERS LANE
ETNA STREET
MANN STREET
Habitat
Hollow-bearing tree
Aquatic vegetation
Blue Gum - Rough-barked Apple Forest Design
Earthworks
Swamp Mahogany Forest (EEC)
Proposed rail track
Retaining wall
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (EEC)
Safeguarded crossover
Existing rail track
Existing rail track to be removed
Proposed bridge
Railcorp project boundary
Impact area
NOTE:
25
50
1:2,000 @ A3
METRES
GOSFORD PASSING LOOPS
FIGURE 4.2
THREATENED BIOTA AND HABITAT FEATURES
Sheet 1 of 4
\\APSYDNAS02\proj\T\transport_construct_auth\2110614A_NSFC_STAGE_1B_PROJECTS_TECHNI\10_GIS\Projects\ESRI\2110614A_F030_GIS_A2.mxd // SuansriR // 11/06/12
100
EN
GL
To Gosford Station
S
NIE
E
TR
WO
LLO
S
NG
TR
EET
To Narara Station
ET
KIR
ER
WE
RA
OA
D
BIRRU ROAD
NA
RA
RA
CR
E
BR
AD
YS
G
EK
UL
LY
SHOWGROUND ROAD
AKORA ROAD
PACIFIC HIGHW
AY
EET
ET
T RE
NS
N
MA
E
TR
ET
ET
EET
Sheet 2
EET
E
TR
TR
HI
R
ST
LLS
YS
S
NIE
S
ER
Sheet 3
R
CA
EN
GL
Y
DW
Sheet 4
0
Sheet 1
25
50
1:2,000 @ A3
Threatened biota
Melaleuca biconvexa
Habitat
Hollow-bearing tree
Aquatic vegetation
Blue Gum - Rough-barked Apple Forest Design
Earthworks
Swamp Mahogany Forest (EEC)
Proposed rail track
Retaining wall
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (EEC)
Safeguarded crossover
Existing rail track
Existing rail track to be removed
Proposed bridge
Railcorp project boundary
Impact area
NOTE:
100
METRES
GOSFORD PASSING LOOPS
FIGURE 4.2
THREATENED BIOTA AND HABITAT FEATURES
Sheet 2 of 4
\\APSYDNAS02\proj\T\transport_construct_auth\2110614A_NSFC_STAGE_1B_PROJECTS_TECHNI\10_GIS\Projects\ESRI\2110614A_F030_GIS_A2.mxd // SuansriR // 11/06/12
BRADYS GULLY
CA
R
ST
LL
BE
P
M
UE
M
AL
IE A
VEN
To Narara Station
IW
A
O
AK
SHOW
G
RA
ROUND
RO
BELL
BOW
R
To Gosford Station
AD
RO
RO A D
AD
D
BRA
LLY
U
YS G
NAR
Y PA
RRY
D RI
CRE
EK
VE
EET
STR
EE
K
PEM
ELL
WA
Y
OA D
Sheet 3
AR
I GH
R
AKO
PAC
IFIC
H
Sheet 4
WYOMIN
G CREEK
HEN
R
ARA
GE
LL
O
CR
Sheet 2
0
W
IN
Sheet 1
H
PACIFIC HIG
Threatened biota
Melaleuca biconvexa
Habitat
Hollow-bearing tree
Aquatic vegetation
Blue Gum - Rough-barked Apple Forest Design
Earthworks
Swamp Mahogany Forest (EEC)
Proposed rail track
Retaining wall
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (EEC)
Safeguarded crossover
Existing rail track
Existing rail track to be removed
Proposed bridge
Railcorp project boundary
Impact area
NOTE:
WAY
25
50
1:2,000 @ A3
METRES
GOSFORD PASSING LOOPS
FIGURE 4.2
THREATENED BIOTA AND HABITAT FEATURES
Sheet 3 of 4
\\APSYDNAS02\proj\T\transport_construct_auth\2110614A_NSFC_STAGE_1B_PROJECTS_TECHNI\10_GIS\Projects\ESRI\2110614A_F030_GIS_A2.mxd // SuansriR // 11/06/12
100
SR
OA D
R
CA
N
TO
NG
I
R
ET
EE
K
MA
NN
RE
ST
FO
U
NT
AIN
L
BE
RI
UE
EN
V
EA
To Narara Station
CR
OW
LB
To Gosford Station
ROAD
SHOWGROUND
RA
RA
A
N
E
CR
EK
NA
R
NC
FRA
S
E
BR
Sheet 2
K
OO
UE
EN
AV
IC
CI F
PA
Sheet 1
Threatened biota
Melaleuca biconvexa
Habitat
Hollow-bearing tree
Aquatic vegetation
Blue Gum - Rough-barked Apple Forest Design
Earthworks
Swamp Mahogany Forest (EEC)
Proposed rail track
Retaining wall
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest (EEC)
Safeguarded crossover
Existing rail track
Existing rail track to be removed
Proposed bridge
Railcorp project boundary
Impact area
NOTE:
G
HI
AY
HW
0
25
RIV
E
AR
A
50
1:2,000 @ A3
CR
ES
CE
NT
100
METRES
GOSFORD PASSING LOOPS
FIGURE 4.2
THREATENED BIOTA AND HABITAT FEATURES
Sheet 4 of 4
\\APSYDNAS02\proj\T\transport_construct_auth\2110614A_NSFC_STAGE_1B_PROJECTS_TECHNI\10_GIS\Projects\ESRI\2110614A_F030_GIS_A2.mxd // SuansriR // 11/06/12
YD
NA
R
S
CLO
Sheet 3
VAL
LE
E
LOS
N
EVA
Sheet 4
PA
ES
SC
R KE
AR
A
4.6
Aquatic habitats
4.6.1
Introduction
The railway crosses three creeks (Bradys Gully, Wingello Creek and Wyoming Creek), with Narara
Creek to the west. A tributary of Wyoming Creek bends around to the east of the study area, arising from
two stormwater drains adjacent to the Brooks Avenue cycleway. The classification of these creeks with
respect to fish habitat (as defined by Fairfull and Witheridge 2003) is provided in Table 4-14. All
waterways in the study area are classified as Key Fish Habitat (DPI 2011a). Further discussions of water
quality and habitat assessment results are provided below.
Table 4-14 Classification of fish habitat
Classification
Characteristics of the waterway type
Creeks in the
study area
Class 1
Major permanently or intermittently flowing waterway (e.g.
river or major creek); habitat of a threatened fish species or
‘critical habitat’.
Narara Creek
Named permanent or intermittent stream, creek or
waterway with clearly defined bed and banks with semipermanent to permanent waters in pools or in connected
wetland areas. Marine or freshwater aquatic vegetation is
present. Known fish habitat and/or fish observed inhabiting
the area.
Bradys Gully
Named or unnamed waterway with intermittent flow and
potential refuge, breeding or feeding areas for some aquatic
fauna (e.g. fish, yabbies). Semi-permanent pools form
within the waterway or adjacent wetlands after a rain event.
Otherwise, any minor waterway that interconnects with
wetlands or recognised aquatic habitats.
N/A
Named or unnamed waterway with intermittent flow
following rain events only, little or no defined drainage
channel, little or no flow or free standing water or pools after
rain events (e.g. dry gullies or shallow floodplain
depressions with no permanent aquatic flora present).
N/A
Major Fish Habitat
Class 2
Moderate Fish
Habitat
Class 3
Minimal Fish
Habitat
Class 4
Unlikely Fish
Habitat
4.6.2
Wingello Creek
Wyoming Creek
Brooks Avenue
Cycleway
Water quality
Results of the water quality surveys are presented in Table 4-15. ANZECC (2000) trigger values are
provided for relevant parameters. Values that exceed guideline ranges are highlighted in grey. Note that
exceedances can include values higher or lower than the guideline range. These results are further
discussed for each site in the following sections.
Guideline trigger values are indicative only and provide environmental managers with a set of values
upon which to assess future potential impacts on a stream. Some values may need local adjustment as
regional influences (geology, nutrients etc) can differ between catchments. A broad set has been derived
(used herein) which provide a measure until such time that more site specific trigger values can be
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
64
developed, given adequate time. Exceedances, in this case, may not necessarily indicate a negative
effect is occurring.
Table 4-15 In situ water quality results
Site
Temperature
(oC)
pH
Dissolved
Oxygen (%)
Electrical
Conductivity2
(µs/cm)
Salinity
(ppt)
No value
6.5-8.0
85-110
125-2,200
No
value
Brady's Gully
19.7
6.83
54.6
200
0.09
Wingello Creek
19.6
6.53
55.4
295
0.14
Wyoming Creek
19.8
6.64
38.3
774
0.38
Brooks Avenue
Cycleway (Wyoming
Creek)
19.0
6.56
28.5
183
Narara Creek
21.1
6.45
44.3
9,077
ANZECC (2000)
Trigger value –
Lowland Rivers
4.6.3
0.08
5.12
Aquatic habitat assessment
Descriptions of aquatic habitats within the rail corridor are provided below. All aquatic habitats surveyed
have some tidal influence, decreasing with distance upstream from Narara Creek. All sites except
Wingello Creek were surveyed around low tide, which was at approximately 09:08 (sites surveyed
between 08:50 and 10:50 on November 17). Wingello Creek was surveyed at 13:10 on the same day,
and high tide was at approximately 15:37 (BOM 2011).
Brady's Gully
This creek flows roughly northwards under the railway bridge approximately 300 metres west of chainage
83.000km, draining into Narara creek approximately 100 metres past the railway line. On the eastern
side of the railway near Akora Road, the site is dominated by industrial and residential areas with a thin
riparian strip of Blue Gum – Rough-barked Apple Forest and dense Camphor Laurel. To the west of the
railway line the creek passes through open grassland in recreational areas, with a narrow strip of riparian
vegetation characterised by Swamp Oak and exotic species. The creek is between two to four metres
wide and between two and 30 centimetres deep.
The majority of the creek was in shade from the dense riparian vegetation and/or the railway bridge.
There was no aquatic vegetation within the area sampled and little structural habitat for native fauna, with
no snags, large woody debris or areas of overhanging banks observed. Approximately 80% of the banks
were covered in fringing vegetation. The substrate was mainly sand with some fine silt present, and
areas of coarse gravel fallen from the railway embankment. Rubbish (mainly discarded food wrappers,
plastic bags, etc) had accumulated throughout the stream and surrounding vegetation.
2
Specific Conductance is reported for this parameter, as this measure adjusts the recorded electrical conductivity according to the
temperature of the water.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
65
The water in the creek was clear with no sediment, oil or odours observed. Water temperature was 19.7
degrees Celsius. Although the water was not tannic the pH levels were slightly acidic (6.83). Dissolved
oxygen levels were low (4.99 mg/L, corresponding to 54.6 % saturation), and electrical conductivity was
200 micro-siemens per centimetre. When compared with ANZECC trigger values for freshwater lowland
rivers in southeast Australia, the water quality variables measured do not exceed the trigger values with
the exception of the low dissolved oxygen level. Low dissolved oxygen levels may be associated with the
high levels of vegetation present within the creek (Australian Water Technologies 2001).
Plate 4a: Railway bridge at Brady’s Gully
Plate 4b: Brady’s Gully downstream of the railway
bridge
Wingello Creek
Wingello Creek crosses the railway line approximately 200 m north of chainage 83.000km, and drains
into Narara Creek approximately 100 m downstream of the railway bridge. Upstream of the site the creek
runs through residential areas and is highly modified by incoming stormwater drains, invasion of exotic
plants and altered soil profiles. Immediately upstream of the bridge the creek runs along one side of a
patch of Swamp Mahogany Forest with Camphor Laurel, as shown in Plate 4c. Downstream of the bridge
the creek widens and passes through Swamp Oak Forest and Blue Gum – Rough-barked Apple Forest.
The creek is between three and eight metres wide, and between 10 and 30 centimetres deep.
The substrate is predominately sand with approximately 10% fine silt and 10% gravel. There are patches
of emergent macrophyte vegetation upstream of the railway bridge, including Typhaand Knotweed,
particularly in areas where sediments have accumulated. There are some snags upstream of the bridge
and small areas of overhanging banks downstream which would provide some habitat complexity for
native aquatic fauna.
The water was fairly clear with no visible suspended sediment, oil or odour. The water was slightly tannic
and had a slightly acidic pH of 6.53. Water temperature was 19.6 and electrical conductivity was 295
microsiemens per centimetre. Dissolved oxygen was the highest of all sites sampled with a concentration
of 5.08 milligrams per litre (55.4%), although this value still exceeds the ANZECC trigger values for
freshwater lowland rivers in southeast Australia. Low dissolved oxygen levels may be associated with the
high levels of vegetation present within the creek (Australian Water Technologies 2001).
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
66
Plate 4c: Wingello Creek upstream from the
railway bridge
Plate 4d: Wingello Creek and railway bridge
Wyoming Creek
Wyoming Creek flows in a roughly south-westerly direction under the railway bridge located
approximately 150 metres south of chainage 83.500km, draining into Narara creek approximately
50 metres to the west of the railway line. Just before the railway bridge the creek is joined by an
unnamed, artificial drainage line running east-west from the Pacific Highway. In the vicinity of the railway
line, Grey Mangroves grow within and on the banks of the creek, with Swamp Oaks and Acacias also
present. The creek is between one and six metres wide, and between 30 and 40 centimetres deep.
The substrate is mostly sand with some large rocks and pebbles. Upstream of the bridge the creek is
relatively shallow and has a moderate cover of aquatic and emergent vegetation, with approximately
40% cover of macrophytes such as Cumbungi, 5% cover of algae and dense patches of Kikuyu along the
banks. Downstream of the bridge the creek widens and deepens with little aquatic or emergent
vegetation, but increased height and density of riparian vegetation. Fallen branches and woody debris
provide some structural habitat complexity for native aquatic fauna.
The water was fairly murky with visible suspended sediment. Water temperature was 19.8 degrees
Celsius with a pH of 6.64. Electrical conductivity was relatively high compared to other sites (774 microsiemens per centimetre), probably due to the increased salinity which has also allowed the area to be
colonised by mangroves. Dissolved oxygen was low, with an average concentration of 3.49 milligrams
per litre (38.3% saturation).
The low dissolved oxygen at this site exceeds the ANZECC trigger values for freshwater lowland rivers in
southeast Australia. Low dissolved oxygen levels may be associated with the high levels of vegetation
present within the creek (Australian Water Technologies 2001).
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
67
Plate 4e: Wyoming Creek upstream from the
railway bridge
Plate 4f: Wyoming Creek downstream of the
railway bridge
Wyoming Creek tributary (Brooks Avenue Cycleway)
This site is adjacent to the cycleway which crosses under a railway bridge near Brooks Avenue,
approximately 200 m south of chainage 84.000km. Stormwater drains into the east of the site and then
flows to the south, joining with Wyoming Creek before flowing into Narara Creek. The majority of the site
comprises a relatively stagnant backwater dominated by Cumbungi, shaded by large melaleucas and
eucalypts. The water is between one and 15 metres wide, and between two and 30 centimetres deep.
The substrate was entirely mud and released methane gas when disturbed, indicating anoxic conditions.
The dissolved oxygen levels were correspondingly low, with an average concentration of 2.63 milligrams
per litre (28.5 % saturation), the lowest recorded across the study area. The water temperature was 19.0
degrees Celsius. The water was slightly tannic but generally clear, except in the vicinity of the drain, and
the water was slightly acidic (pH 6.56). Electrical conductivity was the lowest recorded at the site (183
micro-siemens per centimetre).
The very low dissolved oxygen at this site exceeds the ANZECC trigger values for freshwater lowland
rivers in southeast Australia. Low dissolved oxygen levels may be associated with the high levels of
choking vegetation present within the creek (Australian Water Technologies 2001).
Plate 4g: Dense Typhaat Brooks Avenue cycleway
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
68
Narara Creek
Narara Creek flows along the western side of the railway line, and will not be directly affected by the
construction works. All other creeks surveyed within the railway corridor drain into this waterway, which
in turn flows into Brisbane Water. Within the study area, the creek is tidally influenced and supports
areas of mangroves as well as riparian Swamp Oak forest and native eucalypt woodland. The closest
stretch of the creek to the railway line is bordered on one side by residential properties and on the other
by the cycleway and remnant, though highly modified, native vegetation. The creek is between 10 and 20
metres wide, and up to 50 centimetres deep at the time of survey (low tide).
The substrate is predominately silt with approximately 10% sand and 30% clay. Probably due to the
salinity and tidal flow there is no instream vegetation. There were no visible snags or woody debris within
the creek, nor any areas of overhanging banks which would provide shelter for aquatic fauna.
The water was clear, with a temperature of 21.1 and a pH of 6.45. Dissolved oxygen was relatively low
with a concentration of 3.84 milligrams per litre (44.3%). Conductivity was much higher than the other
creeks (9,077 microsiemens per centimetre), indicative of the more saline conditions.
The pH, dissolved oxygen and electrical conductivity at this site all exceed the ANZECC trigger values
for freshwater lowland rivers in southeast Australia, and dissolved oxygen and pH also exceed the
ANZECC trigger values for estuaries.
Exceedances at Narara Creek are likely to be associated with the many disturbances in the catchment
reducing water quality. Large areas of unconsolidated surfaces are present in the catchment area (e.g.
unsealed roads, driveways and cleared, non-vegetated areas) resulting in sediment deposition and a
shallowing of Narara Creek. There are also large numbers of weeds in the riparian zone, choking the
creek systems running into Narara Creek and restricting flows. Much of the Narara Creek catchment
around the study area consists of residential / light commercial areas with fringing bushland. A major
issue for this part of the catchment is runoff from the developed areas including nutrient runoff from
properties, zinc from old roofs and hydrocarbons / lead from road runoff (Australian Water Technologies
2000).
Plate 4h: Narara Creek looking upstream
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Plate 4i: Narara Creek looking downstream
69
4.7
Conservation significance
4.7.1
Threatened ecological communities
Three threatened ecological communities listed under TSC Act were recorded within the study area
(Table 4-16; Figure 4-2): River-flat Eucalypt Forest, Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and Swamp
Sclerophyll Forest.
The Mangrove Estuarine Complex vegetation is protected aquatic habitat under Part 7 Division 4 of the
FM Act.
No threatened ecological community listed under the EPBC Act or FM Act is present within the study
area.
Table 4-16 Threatened ecological communities recorded within the study area
Threatened ecological community
TSC
Act
River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal
Floodplains of the NSW North Coast, Sydney
Basin and South East Corner Bioregions (as
described in the determination of the Scientific
Committee under Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring within the
study area and confirmed during site
surveys.
Swamp Oak Floodplain forest of the NSW
North Coast, Sydney Basin and South East
Corner Bioregions (as described in the
determination of the Scientific Committee
under Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring within the
study area and confirmed during site
surveys.
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal
Floodplains of the NSW North Coast, Sydney
Basin and South East Corner Bioregions (as
described in the determination of the Scientific
Committee under Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring within the
study area and confirmed during site
surveys.
4.7.2
EPBC
Act
Occurs within the study area?
Endangered populations
Neither plant population listed under the TSC Act identified in the locality from the desktop review was
recorded within the study area. Neither Eucalyptus parramattensis subsp. parramattensis or Eucalyptus
oblonga is a cryptic species and neither were recorded the study area. The distribution of these listed
populations does not include the study area.
The study area is located upstream of the Posidonia australis (Seagrass) population in Brisbane Waters,
listed under the FM Act.
4.7.3
Threatened species
Flora
One species of threatened plant, Melaleuca biconvexa, was recorded within the study area (see
Appendix B; Figure 4-2). This species is discussed below.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
70
Other threatened species known or predicted to occur in the locality are considered unlikely to occur in
the study area (Appendix B) for one or more of the following reasons:
Preferred habitat is not present.
The study area is outside the known range of the species and habitat is marginal.
The species is not cryptic and based on survey effort, would have been recorded if present.
Melaleuca biconvexa, listed as Vulnerable under both the EPBC Act and TSC Act, is a shrub to small
tree usually to 10 m tall (but up to 20 m high) with typical paperbark. The leaves are small, to 18 mm long
and 4 mm wide; each leaf has a centre-vein in a groove and the leaf blade curves upwards on either side
of this centre-vein (NSW Scientific Committee 1998).
Extensive populations of Melaleuca biconvexa are known to occur in many alluvial valleys and creeklines
of the Wyong and Gosford area (Bell 2004). Within Gosford local government area populations are
known to occur from Narara and to the west of Gosford Racecourse.
Five individuals of Melaleuca biconvexa were recorded within the vegetation to the north of Bradys Gully
(Figure 4-2). To estimate population size of Melaleuca biconvexa within the project site, a stem count
was completed. A summary of stem counts is provided below in Table 4-17.
A small stand of approximately 20 individuals of Melaleuca biconvexa was also observed in remnant
Swamp Mahogany – Paperbark Forest in Paddy Clifton Oval. A further stand of mature and immature
stems were observed outside the study at the cycleway underpass near Narara Creek (see Figure 4-2).
Table 4-17 Summary of Melaleuca biconvexa within the project site
Melaleuca biconvexa
Project site
Mature stems
5
Immature stems
0
Total stems
5
Terrestrial Fauna
One species of threatened fauna, the Grey-headed Flying-fox, was observed during field surveys. Based
on the results of the desktop assessment and habitat assessments during field surveys, 11 other species
of threatened fauna were considered to have the potential to occur within the study area (Appendix B).
These species are summarised in Table 4-18 and those with potential habitat in the project site are
noted.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
71
Table 4-18 Threatened fauna recorded in the study area or with the potential to occur within the
study area
Common Name
Scientific Name
TSC
Status
EPBC
Status
Potential Habitat within the study
area
Grey-headed
Flying-fox
Pteropus
poliocephalus
V
V
Yes – Swamp Mahogany Forest
Eastern Bentwing
Bat
Miniopterus
schreibersii
oceanensis
V
Yes – possible roost sites in culverts.
Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
Little Bentwing
Bat
Miniopterus
australis
V
Yes – possible roost sites in culverts.
Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
Large-footed
Myotis
Myotis macropus
V
Yes – possible roost sites in culverts.
Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
East Coast
Freetail Bat
Mormopterus
norfolkensis
V
Yes – Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
Greater Broadnosed Bat
Scoteanax
rueppellii
V
Yes – Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
Yellow-bellied
Sheathtail Bat
Saccolaimus
flaviventris
V
Yes – Small areas of potential foraging
habitat.
Black Bittern
Ixobrychus
flavicollis
V
Yes – mangrove areas.
Masked Owl
Tyto
novaehollandiae
V
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Powerful Owl
Ninox strenua
V
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Superb Fruit-dove
Ptilinopus superbus
V
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Green and
Golden Bell Frog
Litoria aurea
E
V
Yes – potential habitat in drains in
railway corridor
Notes: Bold – recorded in the study area
Threatened Birds
The desktop assessment identified 33 threatened bird species with the potential to occur in the locality.
Of these species, one was identified as having potential habitat within the project site (see Appendix B):
Black Bittern (Ixobrychus flavicollis). This species inhabits terrestrial and estuarine wetlands,
generally in areas of permanent water and dense vegetation and may occur in flooded grassland,
forest, woodland, rainforest and mangroves as long as there is permanent water (Department of
Environment and Conservation 2005). Potentially suitable foraging and breeding habitat for the Black
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
72
Bittern exists within areas of dense mangrove and swamp forest to the east of the railway alignment,
between Brooks Avenue and Renwick Street.
Threatened Mammals
Of the 21 species of threatened mammals identified as potentially occurring within the locality, one
species (the Grey-headed Flying-fox) was recorded flying over the study area. Three microbat species
were also identified as having the potential to occur within the study area based on the habitats present
(see Appendix B). These species are discussed below:
Grey-headed Flying-fox. This species was recorded flying over the canopy, but no foraging activity
was observed. The nearest known roost camps for this species are along Wingello Creek,
approximately 2 km east of the site, and at Matcham, approximately 8.5 km to the east of the site
(DECCW 2008). No roosting individuals or evidence of flying-fox camps was observed during the site
visit, and individuals would be unlikely to roost or breed within the study area. Potential foraging
habitat for this species within the study area is mainly confined to patches of eucalypt woodland
outside the railway corridor, with a few isolated eucalypt trees occurring within the corridor that may
be used on an opportunistic basis. This species is highly mobile, travelling up to 50 km in a night to
forage (Eby and Law 2008) and would be unlikely to be reliant on habitats present within the study
area.
Eastern Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis). This species was not recorded during
surveys but could roost and forage in the study area. This species is a cave bat which may also roost
in culverts, stormwater tunnels and man-made structures in the non-breeding season (Churchill
2008). The culverts inspected during the field surveys may provide occasional roosting habitat for
these species. The study area does not contain any potential maternity roosts for this species: there
are only four known maternity roosts in NSW near Wee Jasper, Bungonia, Kempsey and Texas. This
species forages in a range of habitats, and could forage in the study area.
Large-footed Myotis (Myotis macropus). This species was not recorded during surveys but could
roost and forage in the study area. This species roosts in a range of habitats including hollow-bearing
trees and under bridges, typically within close proximity to water (Campbell 2011). Culverts within the
study area would provide marginal roosting habitat for the Large-footed Myotis. Hollow-bearing trees
or stags recorded within the study area (but outside the rail corridor, see Figure 4-2), would also
represent potential roosting habitat for this species. The Large-footed Myotis forages for insects and
small fish by raking the surface of the water with its feet. The species may forage in patches of open
water along creeks within the study area.
Little Bentwing-bat (Miniopterus australis). This species was not recorded during surveys but could
roost in the study area. This species occurs in mesic or well-timbered habitats including rainforests,
sclerophyll forests, paperbark swamps and vine thickets (Churchill 2008). This species is more likely
to forage outside the study area where the vegetation has a more complex structure. There is no
breeding habitat for this species within the study area: in NSW there is only one known maternity
cave for this species, near Kempsey. Outside the breeding season the species roosts in caves,
tunnels and mines and has been recorded in a tree hollow on one occasion. The study area does not
therefore contain preferred roosting habitat for the species but the culverts may represent marginal
roosting habitat for the species.
East Coast Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis), Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii)
and Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris). These species were not recorded during
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
73
surveys but could forage in forested and cleared areas within the study area. Potential roosting and
breeding habitat is present in the hollow-bearing trees outside the study area.
Threatened Reptiles
There is no suitable habitat within the study area for any of the four species of threatened reptiles
identified as having the potential to occur within the locality (see Appendix B).
Threatened Frogs
Seven threatened frogs were identified as having the potential to occur within the locality. The study area
does not contain potentially suitable habitat for any of these species, with the exception of the Green and
Golden Bell Frog (see Appendix B):
Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea). There is potentially suitable habitat for this species within
areas of Cumbungi-dominated wetlands. A historic record (from 1967) of the species exists within the
Wingello Creek Reserve, approximately 100 m from the study area. There are two known, extant
populations of this species at Davistown and North Avoca (White and Pyke 2008, Office of
Environment and Heritage2011a), between 8-10 km from the site to the south-east and east. These
populations are identified as ‘key populations’ in the draft recovery plan for the species, and
abundances have been estimated at approximately 100 individuals at North Avoca and less than 20
individuals at Davistown (Biosphere Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd 2006). Targeted surveys
were conducted in accordance with the survey guidelines (Department of the Environment, Water,
Heritage and the Arts 2009b; National parks and Wildlife Service 2003b). Surveys were conducted
over a number of non-consecutive nights in appropriate weather conditions. Surveys were conducted
at both the reference populations and the study area on the same nights. Individuals were heard
calling at both reference populations during targeted surveys and one individual was observed on 20
November 2011 and three on 18 January 2012 at Davistown, but none were recorded within the
study area. If present in the study area, the species is likely to have been active and calling in this
area, as they were in the reference populations. This indicates that the species is unlikely to be
present within the project site despite the presence of potentially suitable habitat.
Aquatic Fauna
The desktop review indicated the potential presence of two threatened fish within the locality, the
Macquarie Perch (Macquaria australasica) and the Australian Grayling (Protroctes maireana). Neither of
these fish would be likely to occur in the aquatic habitats present within the study area. There are no
records of these or any other threatened fish species within the Gosford LGA (Department of primary
Industries 2011a). The study area is outside the range of the Australian Grayling, which occurs in rivers
south of the Shoalhaven River. Macquarie Perch prefer upper reaches of rivers and streams, and require
abundant cover (see Appendix B).
4.7.4
Migratory species
As described in Section 4.5.1, one species listed as migratory under the EPBC Act, the Black-faced
Monarch, was observed in the moist forest habitats between Narara Creek and Manns Road outside the
study area. This species is a summer breeding migrant to coastal south-eastern Australia, breeding in
rainforests, eucalypt woodlands, coastal scrub and damp gullies (Boles 1998). There is no habitat for this
species within the rail corridor.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
74
The desktop assessment identified 18 other listed migratory species with the potential to occur within the
study area. Based on the results of the desktop assessment and habitat assessments during field
surveys, four other species of migratory birds were considered to have the potential to occur within the
study area (Appendix B). None of these species is considered likely to occur within the study area or be
affected by the proposal.
Table 4-19 EPBC Act-listed migratory species recorded or with the potential to occur within the
study area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Haliaeetus
leucogaster
White-bellied Seaeagle
M,
Marine
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Hirundapus
caudacutus
White-throated
Needletail
M;
Marine
No – aerial habitat only. Will not be
affected by the proposal
Monarcha
melanopsis
Black-faced
Monarch
M;
Marine
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher
M;
Marine
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Rhipidura rufifrons
M;
Marine
No – potential habitat in adjacent areas
only
Rufous Fantail
TSC
EPBC
Status Status
Potential Habitat within the study area
Bold – recorded outside study area during surveys.
4.7.5
Other ecological values and Matters of National Environmental Significance
World heritage properties
No world heritage properties are within the locality of the study area.
National heritage properties
Two national heritage properties of Brisbane Water and Bouddi National Parks are located to the south
west of the study area (3 kilometres at the closest point). The project is unlikely to impact upon these
national parks.
Ramsar wetlands
No Ramsar wetlands are within the locality of the study area.
Wetlands of national importance
Two wetlands of national importance, Avoca Lagoon and Brisbane Water Estuary are present in the
locality. Avoca Lagoon is nine kilometres to the south-east of the study area and Brisbane Water Estuary
is about one kilometre to the south of the study area at its closest point. These wetlands occur outside of
the study area and are not likely to be impacted due to the linear nature of the project and the relatively
small areas to be affected.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
75
5.
Potential Impacts
The project would have both direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity during both the construction and
operation phases (Table 5-1). These impacts are described in more detail below.
Table 5-1
Potential impacts of the project on biodiversity
Impacts of the project on biodiversity
Construction
Operation
Vegetation/habitat clearing
Weed invasion
Increase in edge effects
Increase in Key Threatening Processes
5.1
Construction impacts
5.1.1
Direct impacts
Vegetation clearing
Clearing of native vegetation is listed as a Key Threatening Process under both the NSW TSC Act and
the Commonwealth EPBC Act. Under the TSC Act, native vegetation is made up of plant communities,
comprising primarily indigenous species. Clearing is defined as the destruction of a sufficient proportion
of one or more strata layers within a stand or stands of native vegetation so as to result in the loss, or
long-term modification, of the structure, composition and ecological function of a stand or stands (NSW
Scientific Committee 2001).
Construction of the project will require the clearing of vegetation as summarised in Table 5-2. The
majority of the clearing required for the project would involve non-native weedy-dominated areas. Native
vegetation makes up only 6.59% of the clearing. The proposal would result in clearing of two endangered
ecological communities listed under the TSC Act.
Table 5-2
Potential loss of vegetation within the project site
Vegetation community
Extent within
study area (ha)
Vegetation
clearing (ha)
Extent within
locality4
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest1
0.44
0.17
283
Swamp Mahogany Forest2
0.21
0.00
663
Blue Gum – Rough-barked Apple Forest3
0.42
0.28
771
Estuarine Mangrove Complex
0.07
0.01
204
Weed dominated areas
13.52
6.46
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
76
Vegetation community
Extent within
study area (ha)
Vegetation
clearing (ha)
Aquatic vegetation
0.07
0.07
Total
14.73
6.98
Total area of EEC clearing
Extent within
locality4
0.44
Notes: Commensurate with Endangered Ecological Community as listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 as
follows:
1)
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest on Coastal Floodplains
2)
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains
3)
River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains
4)
area of these EECs mapped by Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy (2003).
Fauna habitat clearing
Clearing of fauna habitat would be limited, as most of the project site is already cleared land. Loss of
fauna habitat would be restricted to:
The loss of a small number of trees which provide nesting and foraging habitat for common species
of birds, as well as 0.28 hectares of potential foraging habitat for the threatened Grey-headed Flyingfox.
The loss of small shrubby and grassy areas, which provide nesting and foraging habitat for common
small birds, as well as shelter and foraging habitat for reptiles and frogs.
The loss of aquatic habitat associated with trunk drainage channels. This would lead to the loss of
breeding and foraging habitat for reptiles and frogs, and may include the loss of 0.07 hectares of
potential habitat for the threatened Green and Golden Bell Frog (although, as discussed in Section
4.5.2, this species is considered highly unlikely to occur).
No potential or core Koala habitat (as defined under SEPP 44) would be cleared.
Direct fauna mortality
The proposal has the potential to cause fauna injury or mortality as a result of construction activities.
Given the nature of the project site, fauna mortality is likely to be restricted to ground dwelling, relatively
sedentary species such as frogs and reptiles. More mobile fauna such as birds and mammals are likely
to be able to avoid injury by moving away from the construction area.
Aquatic habitats
Rail bridges have been designed to replicate the flow area of the existing rail bridges to minimise the
project’s impact on surface water hydrology and flooding of the study area. It is currently anticipated that
piled abutments and retaining walls would be required at each of the bridge abutments. The proposed
bridging structures at the Wyoming Creek Bridge have piers that may constrict the flow through the
bridge. Hydraulic modelling of the creek crossing would be required to determine the impact, if any, on
upstream flood levels. Where trunk drainage has been relocated in the Up cess, the works have been
designed to convey the 100-year ARI flow (PB & GHD 2011b). On this basis, fish passage within the
creeks would not be affected during or after construction. A small area of riparian and instream habitat
would be removed to make way for the wider bridges. There would be no disturbance of instream woody
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
77
debris. Downstream impacts are expected to be minimal, with appropriate mitigation to prevent
sedimentation and contamination (see Section 6).
The proposed rail track on the eastern side would impact 0.01 hectares of Mangrove Estuarine Complex
associated with Wyoming Creek. This area of impact is very minor, and appropriate mitigation measures
(Section 6) would be put in place to limit indirect impacts on adjacent or downstream areas of Mangrove
Estuarine Complex. A permit is required under the FM Act for any activities that harm marine vegetation.
A summary of the works to be undertaken within each major waterway is presented in Table 5-3, along
with the estimated direct impacts on riparian and aquatic vegetation.
Table 5-3
Potential direct impacts within waterways
Waterway
Brady's Gully
Works to be undertaken
Twin bridges, walkway
Potential Direct Impacts
Riparian vegetation removal, including:
– Less than 0.02 ha Swamp Oak
Floodplain Forest
– Less than 0.01 ha ha Blue Gum –
Rough-barked Apple Forest
No aquatic vegetation to be affected
Wingello
Creek
Twin bridges, walkway
Scour protection
Riparian vegetation removal, including:
– Less than 0.02 ha Swamp Oak
Floodplain Forest
– Less than 0.01 ha Blue Gum –
Rough-barked Apple Forest
Removal of emergent macrophyte
vegetation, including Typha orientalis
and Persicaria sp.
Wyoming
Creek
Twin bridges, walkway
Riparian vegetation removal, including:
– 0.01 ha Mangrove Estuarine
Complex
– Less than 0.02 ha Swamp Oak
Floodplain Forest
Possible removal of aquatic and
emergent vegetation.
Narara Creek
5.1.2
Nil.
Nil.
Indirect impacts
Fragmentation and connectivity
Habitat fragmentation through the clearing of vegetation can increase the isolation of remnant vegetation
and create barriers to the movements of small and sedentary fauna such as ground dwelling mammals,
reptiles and amphibians. Furthermore, habitat fragmentation can create barriers to the movement of
pollinator vectors, such as insects, and consequently affect the life cycle of both common and threatened
flora.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
78
The vegetation within the study area is currently fragmented from the existing rail corridor and urban
development. Remnant vegetation occurs along Narara Creek and its tributaries within the study area.
The removal of a small area of degraded native vegetation is unlikely to further fragment or isolate any
patches of existing native vegetation. Furthermore, the design of the project ensures that clearing of
native vegetation is adjacent to existing clearing and as such there would be no further fragmentation or
isolation between the current remnant patches of vegetation. It is unlikely that the project will create a
barrier to the movement of pollinator and seed dispersal vectors, such as insects and birds. Therefore
the project is unlikely to affect the life cycle of either common or threatened flora species.
The removal of small pockets of shrubby vegetation and trees would have a negligible impact on the
movement of mobile fauna (birds, mammals and reptiles) in the study area and locality. Removal of trunk
drains would impact connectivity for less mobile fauna such as frogs. This could be of concern for the
Green and Golden Bell Frog, which has potential habitat in some of these drains, and could use the rail
corridor for dispersal. Note, however, that the most recent record of the species near the rail corridor is
from 1967, and it is highly likely that the species is extinct in the study area.
Extensions to rail bridges and cross culverts have been designed to replicate the flow area of the existing
rail bridges to minimise the project’s impact on surface water hydrology and flooding of the study area.
Once construction is completed, connectivity of aquatic habitats would be relatively unaffected.
Noise and light impacts on fauna
The majority of the proposed construction works would be undertaken during the standard construction
hours of:
7.00 am to 6.00 pm Monday to Friday
8.00 am to 1.00 pm Saturdays
no work on Sundays or public holidays, with the exception to works undertaken during track
possessions (refer to the REF for more details).
Exemptions and approval for works outside of the above standard construction hours may be required
during certain circumstances (refer to the REF for more details).
Fauna that occupy habitats within the project site and adjacent areas are likely to be habituated to
existing noise originating from passenger and freight trains, road traffic and the urban environment.
Similarly, fauna would be habituated to existing light from trains, cars, street lights and residential and
industrial areas. Construction noise and light would be temporary and confined to daylight hours. There
would be a minor increase above existing background levels and would not significantly impact fauna
that occur in the area.
Weeds
The proposal has the potential to further disperse weeds into areas of native vegetation within the study
area, particularly adjacent to cleared areas. The existing rail corridor has a high level of weed invasion,
particularly exotic grasses.
The study area also includes five weed species listed under the NW Act (see Section 4.3.3): Ageratina
adenophora*, Ambrosia tenuifolia*, Asparagus asparagoides*, Lantana camara* and Rubus fruticosus*.
The latter three weeds are also recognised as a Weeds of National Significance.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
79
The invasion of exotic perennial grasses, such as Chloris gayana*, Ehrharta erecta*, Pennisetum
clandestinum* and Melinis repens* that are abundant within the existing rail corridor, is recognised as a
Key Threatening Process under the TSC Act.
The invasion of exotic vines, such as Asparagus aethiopicus*, Asparagus asparagoides*, Hedera helix*,
Ipomoea indica* and Tradescantia fluminensis* that were recorded within the rail corridor, is also
recognised as a Key Threatening Process under the TSC Act.
The most likely causes of weed dispersal associated with the project would include earthworks,
movement of soil and attachment of seed (and other propagules) to vehicles and machinery.
Existing disturbed vegetation within the study area, however, has considerable weed growth already;
therefore, the overall extent of weed invasion is not likely to increase significantly. Recommendations
have been made in Section 6 to minimise the spread of weeds.
Edge effects
Edge effects are zones of changed environmental conditions (i.e. altered light levels, wind speed and/or
temperature) occurring along the edges of habitat fragments. These new environmental conditions along
the edges can promote the growth of different vegetation types and allow invasion by pest animals
specialising in edge habitats and/or change the behaviour of resident animals. Edge zones can be
subject to higher levels of predation by introduced mammalian predators and native avian predators.
Edge effects have mainly been recorded adjacent to roads and at distances greater than 1,000 m from
the road surface (Forman et al. 2000). However, Bali (2005), in a comparison of edge effects in a variety
of different habitat types, estimated that average edge effects generally occur up to 50 m away from the
road edge.
The study area has been extensively cleared for the existing rail corridor and surrounding urban
development. Forest vegetation occurs as small patches of riparian vegetation fragmented by the
existing railway line and urban development. Due to the small size of native vegetation patches, the
majority are currently subject to edge effects such as weed incursions and urban runoff from surrounding
roads and residential infrastructure. As such the project is unlikely to result in a significant increase in
edge effects.
Acid sulphate soils
Gosford City Council mapping and the Stage 1 Contamination Assessment for the proposal (Gosford City
Council 2011, GHD & PB 2011a) have identified the potential for acid sulphate soils to occur within the
project site, particularly in low-lying areas near the creek lines. Disturbance of these soils during
construction may lead to the production of sulphuric acid leachate, which can have serious ecological
and social impacts including:
Death of vegetation due to soil and groundwater pollution.
Death of aquatic flora and fauna due to pollution of waterways.
Damage to buildings and infrastructure.
Damage to agriculture and aquacultural industries.
Further investigation of acid sulphate soils within the study area has been recommended by the Stage 1
Contamination Assessment for the proposal (PB & GHD 2011a), particularly in areas intersecting with
Narara Creek.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
80
Surface water changes
Trunk drainage will be relocated within the rail corridor as discussed above in Section 5.1.1. Where trunk
drainage would be relocated in the Up cess, the works have been designed to convey the 100-year ARI
flow (PB & GHD 2011b). The proposal is therefore unlikely to significantly alter the amount of water
reaching surrounding areas.
Groundwater changes
The proposal would require removal of areas of Mangrove Estuarine Complex, Swamp Oak Floodplain
Forest and Blue Gum – Rough Barked Apple Forest which are all groundwater dependent. The alluvial
aquifers are shallow (approximately 1 to 2.5 m below the surface) and the proposal would require small
cuts (2-3 m) into the alluvium which would result in minor drawdown of the shallow alluvial aquifers.
Whilst the removal of groundwater would have a small indirect impact on the remaining GDEs within the
vicinity of the study area, it is unlikely that this would be significant as the GDEs are not totally reliant
upon groundwater for the water requirements. The GDEs would also utilise surface water runoff and
recharge to the alluvial aquifers is likely to occur from Narara Creek as well as from rainfall.
The NSW Groundwater Dependent Policy (Department of Land and Water Conservation 2002) has five
management principles to manage groundwater systems to ensure that the ecological process and
biodiversity of their ecosystems are maintained or restored for the future. The proposal would result in
the removal of 0.44 ha of groundwater dependent ecosystems and the minor extraction of groundwater
from the alluvial aquifers within the study area, which is not in keeping with the five management
principles. However these ecosystems are highly disturbed with the entire study area from previous
clearing for the construction of the existing rail corridor. Therefore the removal of a small area and
extraction of a small quantity of groundwater is unlikely to have significant impact upon the GDEs in the
locality or the wider region.
Aquatic disturbance and impacts on fish habitat
The introduction of pollutants from the proposal into the surrounding environment, if uncontrolled, could
potentially impact on water quality. Potential contaminants of concern within the study area include:
Acid-sulphate soils (see above).
Fill material
Contaminants from neighbouring land uses.
The potential for water quality impacts on Brady’s Gully, Wingello Creek and Wyoming Creek are
considered to be low to moderate, and a low to negligible water quality impact is considered likely to the
downstream Narara Creek and associated SEPP 14 wetland areas. Potential water quality impacts
would be managed through the implementation of mitigation measures, including the provision of
sedimentation basins.
No endangered aquatic communities, aquatic fauna or marine vegetation listed under the FM Act or
EPBC Act occur in the study area and no significant impacts on riparian vegetation or habitats are
anticipated as a result of the proposal. Impacts on Key Fish Habitat are anticipated to be minimal.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
81
5.2
Operational impacts
The proposal is unlikely to have many ongoing impacts on biodiversity during operation. Some potential
impacts that would occur as a result of the operation of the passing loops include:
Light and noise: Light and noise levels during operation are expected to be similar to existing noise
levels.
Erosion and sedimentation: Some erosion and sedimentation could occur as a result of operation of
the passing loops (e.g. through runoff). This is unlikely to be of greater quantities or volumes than
currently occurs.
Weeds: Introduction of weeds would continue to occur during operation of the passing loops.
Fauna mortality: Fauna mortality may occur as a result of collision with trains moving in or out of
sidings. Due to the slow speed trains would be moving, this is considered unlikely. Fauna mortality is
not likely to increase with the operation of the project.
The potential for these impacts can be minimised through the implementation of appropriate mitigation
measures as outlined in Section 6.
5.3
Key threatening processes
A key threatening process (KTP) is defined in the TSC Act (OEH 2011c) as an action, activity or proposal
that:
adversely affects two or more threatened species, populations or ecological communities
could cause species, populations or ecological communities that are not currently threatened to
become threatened.
There are currently 36 KTPs listed under the TSC Act, seven listed under the FM Act and 19 under the
EPBC Act. A number of KTPs are listed under more than one Act. Those potentially relevant to this
proposal are discussed in Table 5-4 below. Mitigation measures to limit the impacts of KTPs of relevance
are discussed in Section 6.
Table 5-4
Key threatening processes
Listed Key Threatening Process
TSC Act
EPBC Act
FM Act
Land clearance
-
Would the proposal
increase threat?
Habitat loss or change
Clearing of native
vegetation
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Yes. The majority of the
project site is a cleared
railway corridor, however
0.46 hectares of native
vegetation would be cleared.
82
Listed Key Threatening Process
Would the proposal
increase threat?
TSC Act
EPBC Act
FM Act
Loss of hollow-bearing
trees
-
-
No. While hollow trees were
recorded adjacent to the rail
corridor, none were located in
the study area.
Removal of dead wood
and dead trees
-
-
No. While stags were
recorded adjacent to the rail
corridor, none were located in
the study area. The proposal
is unlikely to result in removal
of dead wood.
Forest eucalypt dieback
associated with overabundant psyllids and Bell
Miners
-
-
No. Project unlikely to
increase this threat any more
than that currently occurring
in the study area.
Pest species
Competition and grazing
by the feral European
Rabbit
Competition and
land degradation by
rabbits
No. Project unlikely to
increase this threat any more
than that currently occurring
in the study area.
Predation by the
European Red Fox
Predation by the
European Red Fox
No. Project unlikely to
increase this threat any more
than that currently occurring
in the study area.
Predation by the Plague
Minnow (Gambusia
holbrooki)
-
-
No. Project unlikely to
increase this threat any more
than that currently occurring
in the study area.
Invasion, establishment
and spread of Lantana
camara*
-
-
Possible. Lantana recorded
within the study area,
however, only rarely and in
low abundance.
Invasion of native plant
communities by exotic
perennial grasses
-
-
Yes, rail corridor is dominated
by exotic perennial grasses
and project has potential to
spread these to other areas
in the absence of appropriate
mitigation measures.
Weeds
Disease
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
83
Listed Key Threatening Process
Would the proposal
increase threat?
TSC Act
EPBC Act
FM Act
Infection of frogs by
amphibian chytrid fungus
causing the disease
chytridiomycosis
Infection of
amphibians with
chytrid fungus
resulting in
chytridiomycosis
-
Possible. Construction
vehicles could spread chytrid
fungus within the study area.
Infection of native plants
by Phytophthora
cinnamomi
Dieback caused by
the root-rot fungus
(Phytophthora
cinnamomi)
-
Unlikely. No evidence of
Phytophthora within the study
area. Construction vehicles
could introduce Phytophthora
to the study area without
proper mitigation.
Unlikely. No evidence of
Myrtle Rust within the study
area. Construction vehicles
could introduce Myrtle Rust to
the study area without proper
mitigation.
Introduction and
establishment of Exotic
Rust Fungi of the order
Pucciniales pathogenic on
plants of the family
Myrtaceae
Impacts on riparian
habitats and species
Alteration to the natural
flow regimes of rivers and
streams and their
floodplains and wetlands
-
The degradation of
native riparian
vegetation along
New South Wales
water courses
Yes. The project will involve
the clearing of small areas of
riparian vegetation at Bradys
Gully, Wingello Creek and
Wyoming Creek.
-
-
The removal of
large woody debris
from NSW rivers
and streams
No. The project will not
remove large woody debris.
-
-
Instream
structures and
other mechanisms
that alter natural
flow
No. There would be no
instream structures that
would alter flow.
Injury and fatality to
vertebrate marine
life caused by
ingestion of, or
entanglement in,
harmful marine
debris
-
Unlikely. Project is unlikely to
add debris to estuarine
environments.
Threats to marine
species and habitats
Entanglement in, or
ingestion
of anthropogenic debris in
marine and estuarine
environments
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
84
5.4
Impacts on State-listed threatened biota
Assessments of Significance (7 part tests) have been prepared for threatened biota recorded or possibly
recorded in the study area, or for threatened biota with potential habitat in the project site. A summary of
assessments of significance prepared for biota listed under the TSC Act is provided in Table 5-5. No
threatened biota listed under the FM Act would be impacted by the proposal, and therefore no
assessments of significance have been provided.
Table 5-5
Assessments of significance prepared for threatened biota listed under the TSC Act
Common Name
Scientific Name
Conservation Status
Likely to be
significantly
impacted?
River-flat Eucalypt Forest
Endangered
No
Swamp Oak Floodplain
Forest
Endangered
No
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
Endangered
No
Threatened Communities
Threatened Flora
Biconvex Paperbark
Melaleuca biconvexa
No
Threatened Fauna
Grey-headed Flying-fox
Pteropus poliocephalus
Vulnerable
No
Eastern Bentwing Bat
Miniopterus schreibersii
oceanensis
Vulnerable
No
Little Bentwing Bat
Miniopterus australis
Vulnerable
No
Large-footed Myotis
Myotis macropus
Vulnerable
No
East Coast Freetail Bat
Mormopterus
norfolkensis
Vulnerable
No
Greater Broad-nosed Bat
Scoteanax rueppellii
Vulnerable
No
Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat
Saccolaimus flaviventris
Vulnerable
No
Black Bittern
Ixobrychus flavicollis
Vulnerable
No
Green and Golden Bell Frog
Litoria aurea
Endangered
No
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
85
5.4.1
Threatened ecological communities
Three threatened ecological communities have been recorded in the study area. The proposal would
result in the removal of 0.17 hectares of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and 0.28 hectares of River-flat
Eucalypt Forest. No Swamp Sclerophyll Forest would be removed. Assessments of Significance have
been undertaken for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and River-flat Eucalypt Forest in Appendix C. These
assessments found that the project is unlikely to have significant impact upon these communities due to
the small and degraded area to be affected.
5.4.2
Endangered populations
No endangered plant populations would be impacted as a result of the proposal.
The study area is located upstream of the Posidonia australis (Seagrass) population in Brisbane Waters,
listed under the FM Act. Narara Creek flows into Brisbane Waters which is part of the Brisbane Water
Estuary. However the removal of a small area of vegetation and construction of new bridges for the
project is unlikely to impact upon the water quality of the Brisbane Water Estuary. This creek is currently
subject to numerous disturbances, including sedimentation, restriction in water flow and runoff from
surrounding areas. Appropriate mitigation measures (Section 6) would be put in place to limit additional
indirect impacts on adjacent or downstream areas. Brisbane Water and the seagrass beds are over 1
kilometre downstream of the proposal.
5.4.3
Threatened species
Flora
One threatened flora species, Melaleuca biconvexa was recorded in the study area. The project would
remove five individuals of this species. More than 24 stems were recorded adjacent to the study area.
Therefore an impact assessment has been undertaken in Appendix C of this report. This assessment
found that the project is unlikely to have a significant impact upon this species due to the small number of
individuals and habitat to be affected.
Fauna
Seven part tests have been prepared for threatened fauna species that were recorded within the study
area during the investigation or have potential habitat within the project site. These are:
Grey-headed Flying-fox:
The Grey-headed Flying-fox was recorded flying over the project site during surveys. This species may
forage on occasion in the project site when the eucalypts are in flower. No breeding habitat for this
species is present. Construction for the proposal would remove 0.28 hectares of foraging habitat. Given
the small area of habitat to be affected and the extensive areas of habitat in the locality, the proposal is
unlikely to significantly affect this species.
Cave-dwelling Microbats:
The Eastern Bentwing Bat, Little Bentwing Bat and Large-footed Myotis could have temporary (nonbreeding) roosts in culverts within the rail corridor. The extension of these culverts may temporarily
disrupt this roosting habitat. The proposal would have a negligible impact on foraging habitats for these
highly mobile and wide ranging species. The proposal is unlikely to significantly impact these species.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
86
Hollow-dependent Microbats:
The East Coast Freetail Bat (Mormopterus norfolkensis), Greater Broad-nosed Bat (Scoteanax rueppellii)
and Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris) could forage in forested and cleared areas
within the study area. Potential roosting and breeding habitat is present in the hollow-bearing trees
outside the study area. The proposal would remove 0.46 hectares of potential foraging habitat. The
proposal is unlikely to significantly impact these species.
Black Bittern:
The Black Bittern has potential habitat within a small area of mangroves within the rail corridor. Extension
of the bridge associated with Wingello Creek would remove 0.01 ha of potential foraging and breeding
habitat for this species. Given very small area of habitat to be removed and the extensive areas of better
quality habitat in the locality, the proposal is unlikely to significantly affect this species.
Green and Golden Bell Frog:
The Green and Golden Bell Frog has potential habitat present in drains within in the project site. This
species was surveyed for on five separate occasions along the railway corridor during surveys for the
project. The species was not detected, despite other nearby populations being active at the same time.
The loss of 0.07 hectares of aquatic habitat associated with trunk drainage channels would lead to the
loss of a minimal area of potential breeding, foraging and dispersal habitat for this species. This species
has not been recorded in the area since 1967 (Wingello Creek, just to the east of the study area), and it
is highly unlikely to be present in the railway corridor. The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect this
species.
5.5
Impacts on Matters of National Environmental Significance
Assessments of Significance have been prepared in accordance with the significant impact guidelines
(DEWHA 2009) for threatened or migratory biota recorded or possibly recorded in the study area, or for
threatened biota with potential habitat in the project site (Table 5-6).
Table 5-6
Assessments of significance prepared for biota listed under the EPBC Act
Common Name
Scientific Name
Conservation Status
Likely to be
significantly
impacted?
Melaleuca biconvexa
Vulnerable
No
Grey-headed Flying-fox
Pteropus poliocephalus
Vulnerable
No
Green and Golden Bell Frog
Litoria aurea
Endangered
No
Monarcha melanopsis
Migratory
No
Threatened Flora
Biconvex Paperbark
Threatened Fauna
Migratory Fauna
Black-faced Monarch
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
87
5.5.1
Threatened ecological communities
No threatened ecological communities listed under the EPBC Act are present in the project site or would
be adversely impacted as a result of the project.
5.5.2
Threatened species
One threatened flora species, Melaleuca biconvexa, listed as vulnerable under the EPBC Act was
recorded within the study area. Five individuals and 0.28 hectares of habitat for this species would be
removed as part of the project. More than 24 stems were recorded adjacent to the study area. Therefore
a significance assessment for this species has been undertaken in Appendix D. This assessment found
that the project will not have a significant impact upon this species due to the small number of individuals
and habitat to be affected.
The Grey-headed Flying-fox was recorded flying over the project site during surveys. This species may
forage on occasion in the project site when the eucalypts are in flower. No breeding habitat for this
species is present. Construction for the proposal would remove 0.28 hectares of foraging habitat. Given
the extensive areas of better quality habitat in the locality, the proposal is unlikely to significantly affect
this species.
An assessment of significance has also been prepared for the Green and Golden Bell Frog which has
potential habitat in the project site. This species was surveyed for on five separate occasions along the
railway corridor during surveys for the project and not recorded. The species was recorded as being
active at the nearby reference populations at the same time as surveys in the study area, suggesting it is
not present in the study area. The loss of 0.07 hectares of aquatic habitat associated with trunk drainage
channels would lead to the loss of a minimal area of potential breeding, foraging and dispersal habitat for
this species. This species has not been recorded in the area since 1967 (Wingello Creek, just to the east
of the study area), and it is highly unlikely to be present in the railway corridor. The proposal is unlikely to
significantly affect this species.
5.5.3
Migratory species
The Black-faced Monarch was recorded in vegetation adjacent to the study area. The proposal would
not directly impact any breeding or foraging habitat for this species. The proposal is unlikely to
significantly affect this species.
5.5.4
Other ecological values and Matters of National Environmental Significance
The proposal would not impact any world heritage properties, national heritage properties or Ramsar
wetlands.
The two wetlands of national importance, Avoca Lagoon and Brisbane Water Estuary are unlikely to be
impacted by the project as Avoca Lagoon is outside the catchment of Narara Creek. Narara Creek flows
into Brisbane Waters which is part of the Brisbane Water Estuary. However the removal of a small area
of vegetation for the project is unlikely to impact upon the water quality of the Brisbane Water Estuary.
Appropriate mitigation measures would be implemented to limit downstream impacts of the proposal (see
Section 6).
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
88
6.
Amelioration Measures
The general principle to minimise impacts to biodiversity, should in order of consideration, endeavour to:
avoid impacts on habitat, through the planning process
minimise impacts on habitat, through the planning process
mitigate impacts on habitat, though the use of a range of mitigation measures.
The avoidance of impacts can be achieved through the planning process. This process involves a
preliminary examination of a number of possible route options and their potential impacts on the
environment and other factors (for example, economic and social considerations). Those potential routes
that best fit the environmental, social and economic criteria are then short-listed.
Minimising impacts involves reducing the loss of habitat or significant species as far as practicable.
Through detailed surveys, it is usually possible to fine-tune the final alignment and the width of the
footprint to minimise loss of important vegetation communities or habitats and avoid significant plant
species or habitat features. The final alignment and footprint are also subject to engineering constraints
and safety standards.
The project has undertaken this process through suitable siting of works compounds and access tracks
in disturbed areas, avoiding native forest vegetation. Opportunities to further reduce the clearing of native
vegetation would be investigated during detailed design. It has been necessary to survey and assess a
larger area of impact in this study to provide flexibility for alterations in the design process although it is
unlikely that the entire area will need to be disturbed.
Residual impacts that cannot be avoided or minimised are mitigated wherever possible. Depending on
vegetation and project type, mitigation measures generally employed during construction can include the
following:
fencing of vegetation to be retained
developing weed management strategies.
In order to address the potential impacts of the project on biodiversity, the mitigation measures outlined
in Table 6-1 are recommended.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
89
Table 6-1
Recommended mitigation measures
Impact
General
Mitigation
Ensure all workers are provided an environmental induction prior to starting
work on site. This would include information on the ecological values of the
site, protection measures to be implemented to protect biodiversity and
penalties for breaches.
Prepare a flora and fauna management plan as part of the Construction
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), incorporating recommendations
below, and expanding where necessary.
Vegetation
clearing
Limit disturbance of vegetation to the minimum necessary to construct works.
Where appropriate mark the limits of clearing and install fencing around the
construction footprint area prior to the commencement of construction
activities to avoid unnecessary vegetation and habitat removal.
Restrict equipment storage and stockpiling of resources to designated areas in
cleared land.
Weeds
Develop weed management actions to manage weeds during the construction
phase of the project. This would include the management and disposal of the
following weeds that were recorded within the rail corridor:
o exotic perennial grasses, such as Chloris gayana*, Melinis repens*,
Pennisetum clandestinum*
o exotic vines such as Asparagus aethiopicus*, Asparagus
asparagoides*, Hedera helix*, Ipomoea indica* and Tradescantia
fluminensis*
o noxious weeds of Ageratina adenophora*, Ambrosia tenuifolia*
Asparagus asparagoides*, Lantana camara* and Rubus fruticosus* in
accordance with the NW Weeds Act.
Vehicles and other equipment to be used on site would be cleaned to minimise
seeds and plant material entering the site to prevent the introduction of further
exotic plant species (including Myrtle Rust).
Fauna habitat
Any culverts that would be extended need to be checked for roosting bats
immediately prior to work. Culverts must remain open on at least one side at
all times to allow any roosting bats to fly in or out.
Protocols to prevent introduction or spread of chytrid fungus should be
implemented following Office of Environment and Heritage Hygiene protocol
for the control of disease in frogs (DECCW, 2008).
A trained ecologist would be present during the undertaking of construction
activities that are in areas where frogs are likely to occur to enable the capture
and relocation of any frogs. Frogs would be moved in a sterile container to the
nearest area of similar habitat. Any handling of frogs would be undertaken with
respect to the Office of Environment and Heritage Hygiene protocol for the
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
90
Impact
Mitigation
control of disease in frogs (DECCW, 2008).
Clearing of mature, native trees should be minimised where possible.
Aquatic habitat
Waterway crossings would be designed and constructed in accordance with
the DPI’s Why Do Fish Need to Cross the Road? Fish Passage Requirements
for Waterway Crossings (Fairfull and Witheridge 2003)..
No woody debris is to be removed from waterways.
Replanting of riparian and fringing aquatic vegetation should be undertaken in
disturbed areas immediately after construction to stabilise creek banks.
Acid sulphate
soils
Further investigations of acid sulphate soils within the rail corridor to be
undertaken in accordance with recommendations from the Stage 1
contamination assessment (GHS & PB 2011a).
Preparation of an Acid Sulphate Soils Management Plan should any such soils
be found. The Management Plan is to be prepared in accordance with the Acid
Sulphate Soil Planning Guidelines (Stone and Hopkins 1998).
Water Quality
Erosion and sediment control plans would be prepared in accordance with
Volume 2D of Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction (DECC
2008). The erosion and sediment control plans would be established prior to
the commencement of construction and be updated and managed throughout
as relevant to the activities during the construction phase.
All water discharge into creeks would be guided by the ANZECC Water Quality
Guidelines (2000).
Design temporary scour protection and energy dissipation measures to protect
receiving environments from erosion.
Erosion and sediment control measures would be established prior to
construction.
Erosion and sediment control measures would be regularly inspected,
particularly following rainfall events, to ensure their ongoing functionality.
Riparian vegetation clearance would be avoided where possible to protect
soils from erosion. If clearance cannot be avoided, the area of vegetation
cleared at any one time should be minimised.
Reinstatement of stabilised surfaces as quickly as practicable after
construction.
All stockpiled material would be stored in bunded areas and kept away from
waterways to avoid sediment entering the waterway.
Apply water to exposed surfaces that are causing dust generation. Surfaces
may include unpaved roads, stockpiles, hardstand areas and other exposed
surfaces (for example recently graded areas).
Vehicles must follow appropriate speeds to limit dust generation.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
91
7.
Conclusion
7.1
Vegetation clearing
The project will include the removal of 0.46 hectares of native vegetation, including of 0.17 hectares of
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest, 0.28 hectares of Blue Gum Rough-barked Apple Forest and 0.01 ha of
Mangrove Estuarine Complex. In addition to these three native vegetation communities the proposal will
remove approximately 0.07 hectares of Aquatic Vegetation and 6.36 ha of weed dominated areas.
7.2
Impacts on threatened biota
Assessments of significance were prepared pursuant to section 5A of the EP&A Act (Appendix C) and
the EPBC Act Significant Impact Guidelines (Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage, and the
Arts 2009; Appendix D) for threatened biota or MNES recorded in the study area or with the potential to
be impacted by the proposal.
Two endangered ecological communities listed under the TSC Act were recorded within the project site:
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains. Swamp Sclerophyll
Forest on Coastal Floodplains was recorded immediately adjacent to the project site. The area of the
communities that would be affected is small and of low quality compared to similar vegetation within the
wider Gosford region. These communities are unlikely to be significantly impacted by the proposal.
One threatened flora species, Melaleuca biconvexa, listed as Vulnerable under both the TSC Act and
EPBC Act was recorded within the study area. Five individuals would be removed as a result of the
proposal. Over 20 other individuals would be unaffected. A large number of individuals and large areas of
similar quality habitat occur within the wider Gosford region. The proposal is unlikely to significantly
impact this species.
One threatened fauna species, the Grey-headed Flying-fox, listed as Vulnerable under both the TSC Act
and the EPBC Act, was recorded flying over the study area. The proposal would result in the removal
0.28 hectares of potential foraging habitat for this wide-ranging species.
Eight threatened species have potential habitat in the study area that would be impacted by the proposal.
The Eastern Bentwing Bat, Little Bentwing Bat and Large-footed Myotis (all listed as Vulnerable under
the TSC Act) could roost in culverts in the study area and may forage in the study area. The proposal
would temporarily disrupt roosting habitat, and would remove up to 0.46 hectares of foraging habitat for
these wide-ranging species. The East Coast Freetail Bat, Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat and Greater
Broad-nosed Bat (all listed as Vulnerable under the TSC Act) could also forage in the study area. There
is no roosting habitat for these species in the study area. The proposal would remove 0.46 hectares of
potential foraging habitat for these wide-ranging species. The Black Bittern (listed as Vulnerable under
the TSC Act) could forage and nest in mangroves within the study area. This species has only been
recorded twice in the locality in the last two decades. The proposal would remove 0.01 hectares of
potential habitat for this species. The Green and Golden Bell Frog (listed as Endangered under the TSC
Act and Vulnerable under the EPBC Act) has potential foraging and breeding habitat in the study area.
The species has not been recorded near the study area since 1967. No individuals were recorded,
despite targeted searches during optimal conditions (during which individuals were recorded at a
reference population within the locality). This species is highly unlikely to be present within the study
area. The proposal would remove 0.07 hectares of potential habitat for the Green and Golden Bell Frog.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
92
Given the lack of records of these species in the study area and very small areas of marginal potential
habitat that would be impacted, the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on these species.
The proposal is not likely to have a significant effect on these threatened fauna species. None were
recorded utilising the habitats within the study area, and the Black Bittern and Green and Golden Bell
Frog are unlikely to be present, given the lack of recent records of these species and minimal area of
habitat present.
7.3
Impacts on aquatic habitats
Narara Creek and the associated creeks within the study area (Brady’s Gully, Wingello Creek and
Wyoming Creek) are classed as major and moderate fish habitat respectively. All waterways in the study
area are classified as Key Fish Habitat. The proposed bridging structures at the Wyoming Creek Bridge
have piers that may constrict the flow through the bridge which could impact upstream flood levels on
occasion. Fish passage within the various creeks would not be affected during or after construction. A
small area of riparian and instream vegetation would be removed to make way for the wider bridges.
There would be no disturbance of instream woody debris. Downstream impacts are expected to be
minimal. The potential for water quality impacts on Brady’s Gully, Wingello Creek and Wyoming Creek
are considered to be low to moderate, and a low to negligible water quality impact is considered likely to
the downstream Narara Creek and associated SEPP 14 wetland areas. Potential water quality impacts
would be managed through the implementation of mitigation measures, including the provision of
sedimentation basins.
Removal of 0.01 hectares of Mangrove Estuarine Complex would require a permit from the Department
of Primary Industries.
7.4
Conclusion
The proposal is not likely to have a significant effect on threatened species, populations or ecological
communities listed under the TSC Act, pursuant to section 5A of the EP&A Act. A Species Impact
Statement for these threatened biota is therefore not required.
On the basis of the assessments undertaken (Appendix D), and with reference to the EPBC Act
guidelines (Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts 2009), the proposal is unlikely
to impose a significant impact on any MNES and is therefore unlikely to be a controlled action.
A range of mitigation measures are proposed to minimise potential impacts on native biodiversity and in
particular threatened biota. This includes mitigation measures relevant to both the pre-construction and
construction phase, which should be incorporated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan
for the Project.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
93
8.
References
Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council (2000). Australian Water Quality
Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters. Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation
Council.
Australian Water Technologies (2000). Gosford Water Quality Survey Stage 1 Report –
CommunityConsultation, Field Investigation and Sampling Design. Report prepared for Gosford City
Council. Australian Water Technologies.
Australian Water Technologies (2001). Gosford Water Quality Survey Stage 2 Report – Major Tributary
Water Quality Assessment. Report prepared for Gosford City Council. Australian Water Technologies.
Bali, R. (2005). Discussion Paper - Compensating for Edge Effects, Ecosense Consulting for the NSW
Roads and Traffic Authority, Sydney.
Bell, S. (2004). The natural vegetation of the Gosford Local Government Area, Central Coast, New South
Wales, Unpublished report to Gosford City Council, East Coast Flora Survey, Gosford.
BirdLife International (2009). Monarcha melanopsis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2010.4. www.iucnredlist.org.
Biosphere Environmental Consultants (2006). Plan of Management: Green and Golden Bell Frogs, North
Avoca and Davistown. Biosphere Environmental Consultants.
Boles, W.E. (1988). The Robins and Flycatchers of Australia. Angus and Robertson and The National
Photographic Index of Australian Wildlife, Sydney.
Botanic Gardens Trust (2008). Melaleuca biconvexa, System of Botanic Gardens Trust viewed August
2008,
Bureau of Meteorology (2012). Gosford, New South Wales, Daily Weather Observations. Australian
Government Bureau of Meteorology. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW2048.latest.shtml
Cropper, S.C. (1993). Management of Endangered Plants, CSIRO Australia, Melbourne.
Churchill, S. (2008). Australian Bats, Allen and Unwin, Australia.
Department of Environment and Conservation (2004), Threatened Biodiversity Survey and Assessment:
Guidelines for Developments and Activities (Working Draft), Department of Environment and
Conservation, Hurstville.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2005a). BioMetric - Version 1.8, NSW Department of
Environment and Conservation, Hurstville.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2005b). Draft Recovery Plan for the Green and Golden
Bell Frog (Litoria aurea). Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW, Sydney.
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/recoveryplanGreenGoldBellFrogDraft.pdf
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007a). Introducing the NSW threatened species
priorities action statement (PAS), Department of Environment and Climate Change, Sydney South NSW.
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007b). Threatened species assessment guidelines.
The assessment of significance, Department of Environment and Climate Change, Hurstville.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
94
Department of Environment and Climate Change (2007c). Field Data Sheets for BioMetric (Version 1.8),
NSW Department of Environment and Conservation, Hurstville.
Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (2008). Hygiene protocol for the control of
disease in frogs. http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/hyprfrog.pdf
Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (2009). Draft National Recovery Plan for the
Grey-headed Flying-fox Pteropus poliocephalus. Prepared by Dr Peggy Eby. Department of
Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, Sydney.
Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts (2008). Melaleuca biconvexa Conservation
Advice, viewed June 2008, <http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/5583conservation-advice.pdf>.
Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts (2009a). Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1:
Matters of National Environmental Significance. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the
Arts. http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/pubs/nes-guidelines.pdf
Department of the Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts (2009b). Significant impact guidelines for
the vulnerable green and golden bell frog (Litoria aurea). EPBC Act policy statement 3.19. Department of
the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.
http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/publications/pubs/litoria-aurea-policy.pdf
Department of Land and Water Conservation (2002). The NSW State Groundwater Dependent
Ecosystem Policy, Department of Land and Water Conservation, Sydney.
Department of Land and Water Conservation (2006) Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems, Assessment,
Registration and Scheduling of High Priority, Manual to Assist Groundwater Macroplanning, Department
of Natural Resources.
Department of Natural Resources (2005). Native Vegetation Regulation 2005 Environmental Outcomes
Assessment Methodology, NSW Department of Natural Resources, Sydney.
Department of Primary Industries (1995) Fish Habitat Protection Plan No 1. Department of Primary
Industries (Fisheries). Available from:
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/202688/FISH-HABITAT-PROTECTION-PLANNO-1.pdf
Department of Primary Industries (2011a).Key Fish Habitat Gosford. Department of Primary Industries.
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/339865/Gosford.pdf
Department of Primary Industries (2011b) Threatened and protected species records viewer. Department
of Primary Industries. Available from: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/species-protection/records
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2011a) EPBC Online
Protected Matters Search Tool. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and
Communities. Online resource http://www.environment.gov.au/erin/ert/epbc/index.html , queried
November 2011.
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2011b) Species Profile
and Threats Database (SPRAT) database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population
and Communities. Online resource http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.p
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
95
Duffy, A.M., Lumsden, L.F., Caddle, C.R., Chick, R.R. & Newell, G.R. (2000). The efficacy of Anabat
ultrasonic detectors and harp traps for surveying microchiropterans in southeastern Australia, Acta
Chiropterologica 2: 127-144.
Duncan, S. (2001), 'The conservation of Melaleuca biconvexa Byrnes (Myrtaceae) within Wyong Shire.
Unpublished , .' University of New England.
Eamus, D., Froend, R., Loomes, R., Hose, G. & Murray, B. (2006). A functional methodology for
determining the groundwater regime needed to maintain the health of groundwater-dependent
vegetation. Australian Journal of Botany, 24: 97–114.
Eby, P. and Law, B. (2008). Ranking the feeding habitats of Grey-headed flying foxes for conservation
management: a report for The Department of Environment and Climate Change (NSW) & The
Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Available from
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/threatenedspecies/GHFFmainreport.pdf (accessed
November 2011).
Forman, R.T.T., Sperling, D., Bissonette, J.A., Clevenger, A.P., Cutshall, C.D., Dale, V.H., Fahrig, L.,
France, R., Goldman, C.R., Heanue, K., Jones, J.A., Swamson, F.J., Turrentine, T. & Winter, T.C.
(2000). Road Ecology. Science and Solutions. Island Press, Washington.
Gibbons, P. and Lindenmayer, D.B. (2002) Tree hollows and wildlife conservation in Australia. CSIRO
Publishing.
Gosford City Council (2010). Melaleuca biconvexa http://www.gosford.nsw.gov.au/environment/plantsanimals/threatened-species/documents/melaleuca-biconvexa.pdf
Gosford City Council (2011). Gosford Environmental Mapping Service: Constraints Mapping. Online
resource, available from http://gems1.gosford.nsw.gov.au/constraints/ (accessed December 2011).
Gosford City Council, NSW.
Harden, G. (1992). Flora of New South Wales Volume 3, University of New South Wales Press Ltd.,
Kensington.
Harden, G. (1993). Flora of New South Wales Volume 4, University of New South Wales Press Ltd.,
Kensington.
Harden, G (2000), Flora of New South Wales Volume 1 (Revised Edition), University of New South
Wales Press Ltd., Kensington.
Harden, G. (2002). Flora of New South Wales Volume 2 (Revised Edition), 2nd edn, vol. 2, University of
New South Wales Press Ltd., Kensington.
Hatton, T. and Evans, R. (1998). Dependence of ecosystems on groundwater and its significance to
Australia, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra.
Keith, D. (2004). Ocean shores to desert dunes: the native vegetation of New South Wales and the ACT
Department of Environment and Conservation, Hurstville.
Law, B., Anderson, J. and Chidel, M. (1998). A bat survey in State Forests on the south-west slopes of
New South Wales with suggestions of improvements for future surveys, Australian Zoologist 30: 467479.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
96
Law, B.S., Anderson, J. and Chidel, M. (1999). Bat communities in a fragmented forest landscape on the
south-west slopes of New South Wales, Australia. Biological Conservation 88: 333-345.
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy (2000). Vegetation
Survey, Classification and Mapping - Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment
Management Strategy. Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environment Management Strategy,
Sydney.
Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy (2003). Lower Hunter
Central Coast Extant Vegetation Community Map, Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional
Environmental Management Strategy, Thornton.
Mills, D.J., Norton, T.W., Parnaby, H.E., Cunningham, R.B. & Nix, H.A. (1996). Designing surveys for
microchiropteran bats in complex forest landscapes – a pilot study from south-east Australia. Forest
Ecology and Management 85:149-161.
National Parks and Wildlife Service (2002). Landscapes (Mitchell) of NSW, NSW National Parks and
Wildlife Service, Hurstville
National Parks and Wildlife Service (2003a). The Bioregions of New South Wales: their biodiversity,
conservation and history, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville.
National Parks and Wildlife Service (2003b). Environmental impact assessment guidelines: Green and
Golden Bell Frog. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service,
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/GAndGbellfrogEia0703.pdf
NSW Scientific Committee (1998). Final determination to list Melaleuca biconvexa as a vulnerable
species, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville.
NSW Scientific Committee (2001). Final determination to list the clearing of native vegetation as a key
threatening process, NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville.
Office of Environment and Heritage(2011a). NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service NSW Wildlife Atlas
Database. Office of Environment and Heritage NSW. Data supplied by OEH, November 2011.
Office of Environment and Heritage(2011b) Threatened Species profiles website. Office of Environment
and Heritage NSW, accessed November 2011.
http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/index.aspx
PB & GHD (2011a). Northern Sydney Freight Corridor Program, Stage1B Gosford to Narara: Stage 1
Contamination Assessment. Report prepared for Transport Construction Authority by Parsons
Brinkerhoff (in association with GHD), Sydney.
PB & GHD (2011b). Northern Sydney Freight Corridor Gosford Passing Loops Concept Design 3.3
Hydrology & Drainage. Report prepared for Transport Construction Authority by Parsons Brinkerhoff (in
association with GHD), Sydney.
Pennay, M., Law, B., Reinhold, L. (2004). Bat calls of New South Wales:Region based guide to the
echolocation calls of Microchiropteran bats, NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change,
Hurstville.
Pyke, G.H. and White, A.W. (1996). Habitat requirements for the Green and Golden Bell Frog Litoria
aurea (Anura: Hylidae). Australian Zoologist 30: 224-232.
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
97
Reinhold, L., Law, B., Ford, G. & Pennay, M. (2001). Key to the bat calls of south-east Queensland and
north-east New South Wales, NRM, NRIM, Indooroopilly.
Royal Botanic Gardens (2010). PlantNet - The Plant Information Network System of Botanic Gardens
Trust (version 2.0), Royal Botanic Gardens, <http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/>.
Royal Botanic Gardens (2011). PlantNet - The Plant Information Network System of Botanic Gardens
Trust (version 2.0), Royal Botanic Gardens, <http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/>.
Seidel, J. & Briggs, S. (2008). Biobanking Operation Manual NSW Department of Environment and
Climate Change, Sydney.
Stone, Y, and Hopkins G (1998). Acid Sulfate Soils Planning Guidelines. Published by the Acid Sulfate
Soil Management Advisory Committee, Wollongbar, NSW, Australia.
Thackway, R & Cresswell, ID (1995). An Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia, Australian
Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra.
Van Dyke, S. and Strahan, R. (2008). The Mammals of Australia (Third Edition).
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
98
Appendix A
Species Lists
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Flora species list
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Apiaceae
Apium leptophyllum
Slender Celery
N
Centella asiatica
Pennywort
Y
Hydrocotyle bonariensis
American Pennywort
N
Apocynaceae
Parsonsia straminea
Common Silkpod
Y
Araliaceae
Hedera helix
English Ivy
N
X
Polyscias sambucifolia
Elderberry Panax
Y
X
Asparagus aethiopicus
Asparagus Fern
N
Asparagus asparagoides
Bridal Creeper
N
Ageratina adenophora
Crofton Weed
N
X
Ambrosia tenuifolia
Lacy Ragweed
N
X
Aster subulatus
Wild Aster
N
Bidens pilosa
Cobblers Pegs
N
X
Cirsium vulgare
Spear Thistle
N
X
Conyza albida
Tall Fleabane
N
Asparagaceae
Asteraceae
Conyza sp.
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
N
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
X
Q7
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Coreopsis lanceolata
Coreopsis
N
Cotula australis
Common Cotula
Y
Cotula coronopifolia
Water Buttons
N
Erechtites valerianifolia
Brazilian Fireweed
N
X
Gamochaeta americana
American Cudweed
N
X
Gamochaeta spicata
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
N
X
X
X
Hypochaeris radicata
Catsear
N
Lactuca serriola
Prickly Lettuce
N
Senecio madagascariensis
Fireweed
N
Sonchus oleraceus
Common Sowthistle
N
Taraxacum officinale
Dandelion
N
Avicenniaceae
Avicennia marina
Grey Mangrove
Y
X
Brassicaceae
Brassica fruticulosa
Twiggy Turnip
N
X
Casuarinaceae
Casuarina glauca
Swamp Oak
Y
Commelinaceae
Tradescantia fluminensis
Wandering Jew
N
Convolvulaceae
Dichondra repens
Kidney Weed
Y
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Ipomoea indica
Blue Morning Glory
N
Cunoniaceae
Callicoma serratifolia
Black Wattle
Y
Cyperaceae
Baumea articulata
Jointed Twig-rush
Y
X
Carex appressa
Tussock Sedge
Y
X
Carex fascicularis
Tassel Sedge
Y
X
Carex inversa
Knob Sedge
Y
Cyperus brevifolius
Mullumbimby Couch
N
Cyperus congestus
Dense Flat-sedge
N
Davalliaceae
Nephrolepis cordifolia
Fishbone Fern
Y
Dennstaedtiaceae
Pteridium esculentum
Bracken
Y
Dicksoniaceae
Calochlaena dubia
Common Ground
Fern
Y
Dilleniaceae
Hibbertia scandens
Climbing Guinea
Flower
Y
Euphorbiaceae
Glochidion ferdinandi
Cheese Tree
Y
Homalanthus populifolius
Bleeding Heart
Y
Ricinus communis
Castor Oil Plant
N
Q7
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Fabaceae
(Caesalpinioideae)
Senna pendula
Fabaceae
(Faboideae)
Daviesia ulicifolia
Common Name
Gorse Bitter Pea
Twining Glycine
Glycine tabacina
Fabaceae
(Mimosoideae)
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
N
Desmodium rhytidophyllum
Glycine clandestina
EPBC
Act
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
X
Y
X
Y
X
Y
X
Y
X
Kennedia rubicunda
Red Kennedy Pea
Y
Medicago polymorpha
Burr Medic
N
X
Trifolium arvense
Haresfoot Clover
N
X
Trifolium repens
White Clover
N
Vicia sativa
Common Vetch
N
Acacia decurrens
Black Wattle
Y
Acacia implexa
Hickory Wattle
Y
Acacia irrorata
Green Wattle
Y
Acacia longifolia subsp.
longifolia
Sydney Golden
Wattle
Y
Acacia parramattensis
Parramatta Wattle
Y
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Acacia prominens
Gosford Wattle
Y
Acacia schinoides
Green Cedar Wattle
Y
Fumariaceae
Fumaria muralis
Wall Fumitory
N
X
Gentianaceae
Centaurium erythraea
Common Centaury
N
X
Goodeniaceae
Dampiera stricta
Blue Dampiera
Y
Haloragaceae
Myriophyllum aquaticum
Parrots Feathers
N
Juncaceae
Juncus australis
Austral Rush
Y
Juncus bufonius
Toad Rush
N
Juncus cognatus
Juncus continuus
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
Pithy Rush
Y
Juncus sp.
Y
X
X
Y
Juncus kraussii
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
Juncus usitatus
Billabong Rush
Y
Lauraceae
Cinnamomum camphora
Camphor Laurel
N
X
Linaceae
Linum marginale
Native Flax
Y
X
Lomandraceae
Lomandra longifolia
Spiny-headed Matrush
Y
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Malvaceae
Modiola caroliniana
Red-flowered Mallow
N
Sida rhombifolia
Paddys Lucerne
N
Angophora costata
Sydney Red/Rusty
Gum
Y
Angophora floribunda
Rough-barked Apple
Y
X
Callistemon citrinus
Crimson Bottlebrush
Y
X
Callistemon salignus
Willow Bottlebrush
Y
Eucalyptus robusta
Swamp Mahogany
Y
Eucalyptus saligna
Sydney Blue Gum
Y
Kunzea ambigua
Tick Bush
Y
Myrtaceae
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Leptospermum polygalifolium
Melaleuca biconvexa
Native
Y
Biconvex Paperbark
Melaleuca linariifolia
V
V
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
X
X
X
Ochna serrulata
Mickey Mouse Plant
N
Oleaceae
Ligustrum lucidum
Large-leaved Privet
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ochnaceae
X
X
Y
Y
Random
meander
X
X
Prickly-leaved Tea
Tree
Q8
X
Y
Melaleuca styphelioides
Q7
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Ligustrum sinense
Small-leaved Privet
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Passifloraceae
Passiflora edulis
Common
Passionfruit
N
Phormiaceae
Dianella caerulea var.
producta
Y
Dianella revoluta var.
revoluta
Y
Random
meander
X
X
X
Phytolaccaceae
Phytolacca octandra
Pinaceae
Pinus sp.
Pittosporaceae
Pittosporum revolutum
Rough Fruit
Pittosporum
Y
X
Pittosporum undulatum
Sweet Pittosporum
Y
X
Plantaginaceae
Plantago lanceolata
Lambs Tongues
N
Poaceae
Andropogon virginicus
Whisky Grass
N
Aristida vagans
Threeawn
Speargrass
Y
Briza maxima
Quaking Grass
N
Briza minor
Shivery Grass
N
Inkweed
X
N
Briza subaristata
Bromus catharticus
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N
X
X
X
N
Prairie Grass
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Chloris gayana
Rhodes Grass
N
Cynodon dactylon
Common Couch
Y
Ehrharta erecta
Panic Veldtgrass
N
Eragrostis curvula
African Lovegrass
N
Holcus lanatus
Yorkshire Fog
N
Imperata cylindrica var.
major
Blady Grass
Y
Lachnagrostis filiformis
Common Blowngrass
Y
Lolium perenne
Perennial Ryegrass
N
Melinis repens
Red Natal Grass
N
Oplismenus aemulus
Y
Oplismenus imbecillis
Y
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
X
X
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Panicum maximum
Guinea Grass
N
Paspalum dilatatum
Paspalum
N
X
Paspalum urvillei
Vasey Grass
N
X
Pennisetum clandestinum
Kikuyu Grass
N
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Family Name
Polygonaceae
Primulaceae
Scientific Name
Common Name
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Phalaris aquatica
Phalaris
N
Phalaris minor
Lesser Canary Grass
N
Phragmites australis
Common Reed
Y
Poa annua
Winter Grass
N
Setaria gracilis
Slender Pigeon
Grass
N
Acetosa sagittata
Rambling Dock
N
Persicaria hydropiper
Water Pepper
Y
Persicaria lapathifolia
Pale Knotweed
Y
Rumex brownii
Swamp Dock
Y
Rumex crispus
Curled Dock
N
X
Anagallis arvensis
Scarlet/Blue
Pimpernel
N
X
Samolus repens
Creeping Brookweed
Y
Proteaceae
Banksia robur
Ranunculaceae
Ranunculus repens
Creeping Buttercup
N
Rhamnaceae
Alphitonia excelsa
Red Ash
Y
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
X
X
Q6
Q7
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Y
X
X
X
Family Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Pomaderris sp.
Rosaceae
EPBC
Act
TSC
Act
Native
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Y
Acaena novae-zelandiae
Bidgee-widgee
N
Rubus fruiticosus
Blackberry complex
N
Q7
Q8
Random
meander
X
X
X
X
X
Rubiaceae
Richardia humistrata
N
X
Salicaceae
Salix sp.
Y
X
Scrophulariaceae
Verbascum virgatum
Twiggy Mullein
N
X
Solanaceae
Solanum mauritianum
Wild Tobacco Bush
N
Solanaceae
Solanum nigrum
Black-berry
Nightshade
N
Typhaceae
Typha orientalis
Broad-leaved
Cumbungi
Y
Verbenaceae
Lantana camara
Lantana
N
Verbena bonariensis
Purpletop
N
Verbena rigida
Veined Verbena
N
Fauna Species List – Study Area
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bird Survey Sites
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
General
Area
Study
Area
Common Name
Scientific Name
1
2
3
8
4
6
5
7
Megapodiidae
Australian Brush-turkey
Alectura lathami
Phasianidae
Brown Quail
Coturnix ypsilophora
O
Australian Wood Duck
Chenonetta jubata
O
Chestnut Teal
Anas castanea
x
Northern Mallard
Anas platyrhynchos*
x
Pacific Black Duck
Anas superciliosa
x
Birds
GALLIFORMES
x
O
ANSERIFORMES
Anatidae
Goose
x
O
COLUMBIFORMES
Columbidae
Rock Dove
Columba livia*
x
W
White-headed Pigeon
Columba leucomela
x
Spotted Dove
Streptopelia chinensis*
x
Peaceful Dove
Geopelia striata
x
Bar-shouldered Dove
Geopelia humeralis
x
W
Australasian Darter
Anhinga novaehollandiae
x
O
Australian Pelican
Pelecanus conspicillatus
x
O
O
O
O
W
O
PHALACROCORACIFORMES
Anhingidae
CICONIIFORMES
Pelecanidae
Bird Survey Sites
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
General
Area
Study
Area
Common Name
Scientific Name
White-faced Heron
Egretta novaehollandiae
x
Masked Lapwing
Vanellus miles
x
Galah
Eolophus roseicapillus
x
Sulphur-crested
Cockatoo
Cacatua galerita
x
Rainbow Lorikeet
Trichoglossus haematodus
x
Eastern Koel
Eudynamys orientalis
x
Horsfield's BronzeCuckoo
Chalcites basalis
x
Halcyonidae
Laughing Kookaburra
Dacelo novaeguineae
x
O
Coraciidae
Dollarbird
Eurystomus orientalis
x
O
Green Catbird
Ailuroedus crassirostris
x
O
O
Satin Bowerbird
Ptilonorhynchus violaceus
x
O
W
Maluridae
Superb Fairy-wren
Malurus cyaneus
x
O
Acanthizidae
White-browed
Scrubwren
Sericornis frontalis
x
O
Ardeidae
1
2
3
8
4
6
5
O
7
O
CHARADRIIFORMES
Charadriidae
O
O
PSITTACIFORMES
Cacatuidae
Psittacidae
O
O
O
O
O
W
W
O
W
O
W
O
O
W
O
O
CUCULIFORMES
Cuculidae
W
W
CORACIIFORMES
O
O
PASSERIFORMES
Ptilonorhynchidae
O
O
W
O
O
W
O
W
O
O
O
O
Bird Survey Sites
General
Area
Study
Area
Gerygone mouki
x
O
Striated Thornbill
Acanthiza lineata
x
O
Yellow Thornbill
Acanthiza nana
x
Pardalotidae
Spotted Pardalote
Pardalotus punctatus
x
Meliphagidae
Eastern Spinebill
Acanthorhynchus
tenuirostris
x
Lewin's Honeyeater
Meliphaga lewinii
x
O
Bell Miner
Manorina melanophrys
x
O
Noisy Miner
Manorina melanocephala
x
O
O
Little Wattlebird
Anthochaera chrysoptera
x
O
O
New Holland
Honeyeater
Phylidonyris
novaehollandiae
x
Noisy Friarbird
Philemon corniculatus
Eupetidae
Eastern Whipbird
Psophodes olivaceus
x
Campephagidae
Black-faced Cuckooshrike
Coracina novaehollandiae
x
Pachycephalidae
Golden Whistler
Pachycephala pectoralis
x
Rufous Whistler
Pachycephala rufiventris
x
Grey Shrike-thrush
Colluricincla harmonica
x
Australian Magpie
Cracticus tibicen
x
Pied Currawong
Strepera graculina
Artamidae
Common Name
Scientific Name
Brown Gerygone
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
1
2
3
8
O
4
6
O
O
5
7
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
W
O
W
W
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
W
O
W
W
W
W
W
O
O
O
W
W
W
W
Bird Survey Sites
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
General
Area
Study
Area
Common Name
Scientific Name
Grey Fantail
Rhipidura albiscapa
x
Willie Wagtail
Rhipidura leucophrys
x
Corvidae
Australian Raven
Corvus coronoides
x
Monarchidae
Black-faced Monarch
Monarcha melanopsis
Magpie-lark
Grallina cyanoleuca
x
O
Petroicidae
Eastern Yellow Robin
Eopsaltria australis
x
O
Timaliidae
Silvereye
Zosterops lateralis
x
Hirundinidae
Welcome Swallow
Hirundo neoxena
x
Fairy Martin
Petrochelidon ariel
X
Pycnonotidae
Red-whiskered Bulbul
Pycnonotus jocosus*
x
O
Sturnidae
Common Myna
Sturnus tristis*
x
O
Estrildidae
Red-browed Finch
Neochmia temporalis
x
Pteropodidae
Grey-headed Flying-fox
Pteropus poliocephalus
Molossidae
Eastern Freetail Bat
Mormopterus sp. 2 (ridei)
x
White-striped Freetailbat
Austronomus australis
x
Gould's Wattled Bat
Chalinolobus gouldii
x
Rhipiduridae
M
1
2
3
O
W
O
O
8
4
6
5
W
O
O
O
O
x
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
W
O
D
D
Vespertilionidae
CARNIVORA
x
O
O
O
CHIROPTERA
V
O
W
MAMMALS
V
7
D
D
Bird Survey Sites
General
Area
Study
Area
Vulpes vulpes*
x
O
European Rabbit
Oryctolagus cuniculus
x
O
Bush Rat
Rattus fuscipes
x
O
Agamidae
Eastern Water Dragon
Physignathus lesueurii
x
O
Chelonidae
Eastern Snake-necked
Turtle
Chelodina longicollis
x
O
Elapidae
Red-bellied Black
Snake
Pseudechis porphyriacus
x
O
Scincidae
Water Skink
Eulamprus quoyii
x
O
Litter Skink
Lampropholis sp.
x
O
Hylidae
Dwarf Green Tree Frog
Litoria fallax
x
W
Myobatrachidae
Tyler’s Toadlet
Uperoliea tyleri
x
Common Eastern
Froglet
Crinia signifera
x
W
Striped Marsh Frog
Limnodynastes peronii
x
O/W
Spotted Grass Frog
Limnodynastes
tasmaniensis
x
W
Canidae
Common Name
Scientific Name
European Red Fox
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
1
2
3
8
4
6
5
7
LAGOMORPHA
Leporidae
RODENTIA
Muridae
REPTILES
O
O
FROGS
Notes: * - introduced; Status: V – Vulnerable; M – Migratory; Observation types: O – Observed; W – Heard
W
W
W
W
W
OW
W
W
Fauna Species List – Davistown Green and Golden Bell Frog Reference Site
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
Observation type
E
V
OW
Family
Common Name
Scientific Name
Hylidae
Green and Golden Bell Frog
Litoria aurea
Dwarf Green Tree Frog
Litoria fallax
Peron’s Tree Frog
Litoria peronii
W
Tyler’s Tree Frog
Litoria tyleri
W
Striped Marsh Frog
Limnodynastes peronii
Myobatrachidae
Notes:
Status:
E – Endangered
V – Vulnerable
Observation types:
O – Observed
W – Heard
OW
OW
Appendix B
Threatened Species and Communities
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Threatened ecological communities known or predicted to occur within the locality
Threatened ecological
community
TSC
Act
EPBC
Act
Coastal Saltmarsh in the NSW
North Coast, Sydney Basin and
South East Corner Bioregions
E
No. Not identified within the
study area either in vegetation
mapping of the region or
during site inspections
Freshwater Wetlands on coastal
floodplains of the NSW North Coast,
Sydney Basin and South East
Corner Bioregions(as described in
the determination of the Scientific
Committee under Division 5 of Part
2)
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections
Hunter Lowland Redgum Forest in
the Sydney Basin and NSW North
Coast Bioregions
E
No. Project area is outside the
range of this community.
Kincumber Scribbly Gum Forest in
the Sydney Basin Bioregion
CE
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections
Littoral rainforest in the NSW North
Coast, Sydney Basin and South
East Corner Bioregions*
E*1
Low woodland with heathland on
Indurate Sand at Norah Head in the
Sydney Basin bioregion
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
Lower Hunter Spotted Gum
Ironbark Forest in the Sydney Basin
Bioregion(as described in the
determination of the Scientific
Committee under Division 5 of Part
2)
E
No. Project area is outside the
range of this community.
Quorrobolong Scribbly gum
woodland in the Sydney Basin
Bioregion(as described in the
determination of the Scientific
Committee under Division 5 of Part
2)
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
CE*1
Occurs within the project
area?
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
Threatened ecological
community
TSC
Act
River-flat Eucalypt Forest on
Coastal Floodplains of the NSW
North Coast, Sydney Basin and
South East Corner Bioregions (as
described in the determination of
the Scientific Committee under
Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring
within the project area and
confirmed during site surveys.
Swamp Oak Floodplain forest of the
NSW North Coast, Sydney Basin
and South East Corner Bioregions
(as described in the determination
of the Scientific Committee under
Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring
within the project area and
confirmed during site surveys.
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on
Coastal Floodplains of the NSW
North Coast, Sydney Basin and
South East Corner Bioregions (as
described in the determination of
the Scientific Committee under
Division 5 of Part 2)
E
Yes, mapped as occurring
within the project area and
confirmed during site surveys.
Sydney Freshwater Wetlands in the
Sydney Basin Bioregions(as
described in the determination of
the Scientific Committee under
Division 5 of Part 2)
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
Themeda Grasslands on seacliffs
and coastal headlands in the
Sydney Basin Bioregion
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
Umina Coastal Sandplain woodland
in the Sydney Basin Bioregion (as
described in the determination of
the Scientific Committee under
Division 5 of Part 2)
E
No. Not identified within the
project area either in
vegetation mapping of the
region or during site
inspections.
Notes:
EPBC
Act
Occurs within the project
area?
*There are significant similarities in these TSC and EPBC Act listed communities, however, not all occurrences will fit
both listings. Under the EPBC Act, these communities are listed as:
1)
Littoral Rainforest and Coastal Vine Thickets of Eastern Australia.
Threatened flora known or predicted to occur within the locality
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Araliaceae
Astrotricha
crassifolia
Thick-leaf
Star-hair
V
V
Hibbertia
procumbens
Spreading
Guinea
Flower
Dilleniaceae
Epacridacea
e
Epacris
purpurascens
var.
purpurascens
Euphorbiace
ae
Chamaesyce
psammogeton
E1
V
Sand
Spurge
E1
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs near Patonga and in the Royal
National Park and inland to Glen Davis
where it grows in dry sclerophyll woodland
on sandstone (Department of
Environment and Climate Change 2007;
Harden 1992, 1993).
Recorded within
10km (Royal
Botanic Gardens
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded only from Mangrove Mtn and
grows in heath on sandy soils (Harden
2000).
Recorded within
10 km NPWS
Flora Atlas,
(Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs in Gosford and Sydney districts
where it grows in sclerophyll forest, scrub
and swamps (Harden 1992). Usually
found in sites with a strong shale
influence (NSW National Parks and
Wildlife Service 2002).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs in coastal regions of NSW where it
grows on sand dunes near the sea
(Harden 2000). Grows on fore-dunes and
exposed headlands, often with Spinifex
(Spinifex sericeus) (Department of
Environment and Conservation 2005).
Recorded within
10 km (Royal
Botanic Gardens
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Fabaceae
(Mimosoidea
e)
Acacia
bynoeana
Bynoes
Wattle
V
E1
Lamiaceae
Prostanthera
askania
Tranquility
Mintbush
E
E1
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs south of Dora Creek-Morisset
area to Berrima and the Illawarra region
and west to the Blue Mountains. It grows
mainly in heath and dry sclerophyll forest
on sandy soils (Harden 2002). Seems to
prefer open, sometimes disturbed sites
such as trail margins and recently burnt
areas. (NSW National Parks and Wildlife
Service 1999a).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Restricted to the Ourimbah--Narara area
where it currently known to exist in five
populations. It grows in sclerophyll forest
on ridges in or adjacent to rainforest
grows in sclerophyll forest on ridges in or
adjacent to rainforest (Harden 1992; NSW
Scientific Committee 1998e).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km NPWS
Flora Atlas,
(Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
3
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Lamiaceae
Prostanthera
junonis
Somersby
Mintbush
E
E1
Grows in sclerophyll forest and woodland,
usually near the coast, in sandy loamy
soils, overlying sandstone. Occurs in
Mangrove Mtn and Sydney districts
(Harden 1992).
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km NPWS
Flora Atlas,
(Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Lindsaeacea
e
Lindsaea
fraseri
Frasers
Screw Fern
E1
Occurs upon poorly drained, infertile soils
in swamp forest or open eucalypt forest,
usually as part of a ferny understorey.
Confined to the far north coastal areas
(Royal Botanic Gardens 2009).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Myrtaceae
Darwinia
glaucophylla
Myrtaceae
Eucalyptus
camfieldii
Common
Name
Heartleaved
Stringybark
EPBC
1
Act
V
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
V
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Restricted to the Gosford LGA where it
occurs between Gosford and the
Hawkesbury River around Calga, Kariong
and Mt Karing. It grows in sandy heath,
scrub and woodlands and is often
associated with sandstone rock platforms
or near hanging swamps and friable
sandstone shallow soils. (Department of
Environment and Climate Change 2009).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Camfield’s Stringybark is known from
Norah Head, on the NSW Central Coast,
to Waterfall and the Royal National Park,
south of Sydney (Fairley 2004).
Camfield’s Stringybark occurs in shallow
sandy soils overlying Hawkesbury
sandstone within coastal heath, generally
on exposed sandy ridges. It occurs mostly
in small scattered stands near the
boundary of tall coastal heaths and low
open woodlands of the slightly more fertile
inland areas (Department of the
Environment Water Heritage and the Arts
2008).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Myrtaceae
Eucalyptus
glaucina
Slaty Red
Gum
V
V
Melaleuca
biconvexa
Biconvex
Paperbark
V
Myrtaceae
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs from Taree to Broke where it is
locally frequent but very sporadic and
grows in grassy woodland on deep,
moderately fertile and well-watered soil
(Harden 2002). Endemic on low coastal
ranges and tablelands of central NSW,
Taree to Broke, also near Casino
(Brooker & Kleinig 1999).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs as disjunct populations in coastal
New South Wales from Jervis Bay to Port
Macquarie, with the main concentration of
records is in the Gosford/Wyong area
(NSW Scientific Committee 1998b).
Grows in damp places, often near
streams, or low-lying areas on alluvial
soils of low slopes or sheltered aspects
(Department of Environment and Climate
Change 2008; Harden 2002).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
Yes.
Recorded.
Suitable habitat
in the form of
Blue Gum
Rough-barked
Apple Forest
within the study
area.
Significance
assessment
required. Five
individuals of
this species will
be required to
be removed as
part of the
project.
Therefore
significance
assessments
have been
undertaken in
Appendix C and
D.
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Myrtaceae
Melaleuca
deanei
Deanes
Paperbark
V
V
Syzygium
paniculatum
Magenta
Lilly Pilly
V
Myrtaceae
E1
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs in coastal districts, including
western Sydney (e.g. Baulkham Hills,
Liverpool shires) from Berowra to Nowra
where it grows in wet heath on sandstone
and shallow/skeletal soils near streams or
perched swamps (Harden 2002; James
1997).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs between Bulahdelah and St
Georges Basin where it grows in
subtropical and littoral rainforest on sandy
soils or stabilized dunes near the sea
(Harden 2002). On the south coast the
Magenta Lilly Pilly occurs on grey soils
over sandstone, restricted mainly to
remnant stands of littoral (coastal)
rainforest. On the central coast Magenta
Lilly Pilly occurs on gravels, sands, silts
and clays in riverside gallery rainforests
and remnant littoral rainforest
communities (Department of Environment
and Climate Change 2008).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Orchidaceae
Caladenia
tessellata
Thick Lip
Spider
Orchid
V
E1
Cryptostylis
hunteriana
Leafless
Tongue
Orchid
V
Orchidaceae
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs south of Swansea where it grows
on clay loam or sandy soils (Harden
1993). Prefers low open forest with a
heathy or sometimes grassy understorey
(Bishop 2000). Within NSW, currently
known from two disjunct areas; one
population near Braidwood on the
Southern Tablelands and three
populations in the Wyong area on the
Central Coast. Previously known also
from Sydney and South Coast areas
(NSW Scientific Committee 2002).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km EPBC
Protected Matters
Search
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs south from the Gibraltar Range,
chiefly in coastal districts but also extends
on to tablelands. Grows in swamp-heath
and drier forest on sandy soils on granite
& sandstone. Occurs in small, localised
colonies most often on the flat plains
close to the coast but also known from
some mountainous areas growing in moist
depressions and swampy habitats
(Harden 1993; NSW National Parks and
Wildlife Service 1999b).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
Orchidaceae
Dendrobium
melaleucaphilu
m
Spider
Orchid
Rhizanthella
slateri
Eastern
Australian
Undergroun
d Orchid
Orchidaceae
Poaceae
Bothriochloa
biloba
EPBC
1
Act
E
V
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
E1
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs in coastal districts, north from the
lower Blue Mountains. It grows frequently
on Melaleuca styphelioides, less
commonly on rainforest trees or on rocks
(Department of Environment and
Conservation 2005; Royal Botanic
Gardens 2005).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Highly cryptic as only the flowers may
occur above ground. It is more frequent in
areas of soil disturbance, but further
habitat characteristics or associated
vegetation types are poorly known,
possibly occurring in sclerophyll forests
(Harden 1993).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Has a widespread distribution and grows
in woodland on poorer soils (Harden
1993). Occurs on basaltic hills and
grassland on drainage slopes on a variety
of soils in association with Eucalypus
punctata, E. albens, E.camaldulensis E.
tereticornis, E. populnea ssp bimbil and
Angophora floribunda (DLWC, 2001).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Proteaceae
Grevillea
parviflora
subsp.
parviflora
Smallflower
Grevillea
V
V
Proteaceae
Grevillea
shiressii
V
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Mainly known from the Prospect area (but
now extinct there) and lower Georges
River to Camden, Appin and Cordeaux
Dam areas, with a disjunct populations
near Putty, Cessnock and Cooranbong.
Grows in heath or shrubby woodland in
sandy or light clay soils usually over thin
shales (Harden 2002; NSW Scientific
Committee 1998a).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Grevillea shiressii is a tall shrub Grows
along creek banks in wet sclerophyll
forest with a moist understorey in alluvial
sandy or loamy soils. The species is a fire
sensitive obligate seeder that is highly
susceptible to local extinction due to
frequent fire. Known only from two
populations near Gosford, on tributaries of
the lower Hawkesbury River north of
Sydney (Mooney Mooney Creek and
Mullet Creek). Both populations occur
within the Gosford Local Government
Area (Department of Environment and
Climate Change 2007).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km (Royal
Botanic Gardens
2011)
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
Proteaceae
Persoonia
hirsuta subsp.
hirsuta
Hairy
Geebung
Thymelaeac
eae
Pimelea
curviflora var.
curviflora
EPBC
1
Act
V
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
E1
V
3
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs from Gosford to the Royal
National Parkand Hill Top to Glen Davis
and Putty inland where it grows in
woodlands and dry sclerophyll forest on
sandstone or very rarely on shale.
Typically occurs as isolated individuals or
very small populations (NSW Scientific
Committee 1998c; Royal Botanic Gardens
2005). Habitat in Castle Hill is considered
to be "critical habitat" (James 1997).
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Confined to coastal areas around Sydney
where it grows on sandstone and laterite
soils. It is found between South Maroota,
Cowan, Narrabeen, Allambie Heights,
Northmead and Kellyville, but its former
range extended south to the Parramatta
River and Port Jackson region including
Five Dock, Bellevue Hill and Manly.
Usually occurs in woodland in the
transition between shale and sandstone,
often on Lucas Heights soil landscape
(Harden 2000; James 1997; James et al.
1999; NSW Scientific Committee 1998d).
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Tremandrace
ae
Tetratheca
glandulosa
Common
Name
3
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
V
V
Occurs from Mangrove Mountain to the
Blue Mountains where it grows in sandy
or rocky heath or scrub (Harden 1992).
Associated with shale-sandstone
transition habitat where shale-cappings
occur over sandstone, with associated soil
landscapes such as Lucas Heights,
Gymea, Lambert and Faulconbridge.
Topographically, the plant occupies
ridgetops, upper-slopes and to a lesser
extent mid-slope sandstone benches.
Soils are generally shallow, consisting of
a yellow, clayey/sandy loam. Stony
lateritic fragments are also common in the
soil profile on many of these ridgetops.
Vegetation structure varies from heaths
and scrub to woodlands/open woodlands,
and open forest. Vegetation communities
correspond broadly to Benson & Howell’s
Sydney Sandstone Ridgetop
Woodland.(Department of Environment
and Climate Change 2008).
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Predicted to
occur within
10 km
(Department of
Sustainability
Environment
Water Population
and Communities
2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011;
Royal Botanic
Gardens 2011)
3
Family
Name
Scientific
Name
Common
Name
EPBC
1
Act
TSC
2
Act
Habitat
Tremandrace
ae
Tetratheca
juncea
Black-eyed
Susan
V
V
Occurs in coastal districts from Buladelah
to Port Macquarie where it grows in dry
sclerophyll forest and occasionally
swampy heath in sandy, (Harden 1992)
low nutrient soils with a dense
understorey of grasses. Specifically it is
known to occur within Coastal Plains
Smooth-barked Apple Woodland and
Coastal Plains Scribbly Gum Woodland
(Payne et al. 2002).
Nature of Record
Suitable
Habitat
present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence
and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded within
10 km (Office of
Environment and
Heritage 2011)
No.
Low
No suitable
habitat was
recorded in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
V = Vulnerable, E = Endangered, M = Migratory, C = Conservation Dependent (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999).
V= Vulnerable, E1 = Endangered, E2 = Endangered Population (Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995).
Based on database searches and field surveys.
Likelihood of occurrence (refer Section 3.4 in main report).
Threatened fauna known or predicted to occur within the locality
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Botaurus
poiciloptilus
Australasian
Bittern
E
Widespread but uncommon over most NSW
except the northwest.
Favours permanent freshwater wetlands with
tall dense reedbeds particularly Typha spp. and
Eleocharis spp., with adjacent shallow, open
water for foraging. Roosts during the day
amongst dense reeds or rushes and feeds
mainly at night on frogs, fish, yabbies, spiders,
insects and snails.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Typha reed beds
in the subject site
small in size.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Ninox connivens
Barking Owl
V
Yes.
Low
Marginal habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Birds
E
-
In NSW occurs from coast to inland slopes and Recorded
plains, though is rare in dense, wet forests east within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
of the Great Dividing Range and sparse in
higher parts of the tablelands and in the arid
zone.
Inhabits eucalypt woodlands, open forest,
swamp woodlands, and, especially in inland
areas, timber along watercourses. Roosts
along creek lines in dense, tall understorey
foliage (e.g. in Acacia and Casuarina), or
dense eucalypt canopy. Nests in hollows of
large, old eucalypts including Eucalyptus
camaldulensis, Eucalyptus albens, Eucalyptus
No habitat present
within subject site.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs from southern NSW to Cape York and Recorded
within 10km
the Kimberley, and southwest WA.
(OEH 2011a)
Inhabits terrestrial and estuarine wetlands,
generally in areas of permanent water and
dense vegetation. May occur in flooded
grassland, forest, woodland, rainforest and
mangroves as long as there is permanent
water. Roosts by day in trees or within reeds on
the ground. Nests in branches overhanging
water and breeds from December to March.
Moderate.
Yes
Potential habitat
present in
mangrove areas.
Significance
assessment
prepared.
Recorded
Sparsely distributed in areas of less than
500mm rainfall, north from north-western NSW. within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Inhabits a range of inland habitats, especially
along timbered watercourses which is the
preferred breeding habitat. Also hunts over
grasslands and sparsely timbered woodlands.
Breeds from August to October near water in a
tall tree.
No.
Low
Study area is
outside usual
range for the
species and does
not contain
suitable habitat.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
In NSW, the species becomes increasingly
uncommon south of the Northern Rivers region, within 10km
and rarely occurs south of Sydney. Breeding
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable
permanent
Significance
assessment not
polyanthemos and Eucalyptus blakelyi. Birds
and mammals important prey during breeding.
Territories range from 30 to 200 hectares.
Ixobrychus
flavicollis
Black Bittern
Hamirostra
melanosternon
Black-breasted
Buzzard
V
Ephippiorhynchus
asiaticus
Black-necked
Stork
E
V
-
-
-
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Recorded as far south as Buladelah, though
most breeding in NSW occurs in the north-east.
Primarily inhabits permanent freshwater
wetlands and surrounding vegetation including
swamps, floodplains, watercourses and
billabongs, freshwater meadows, wet
heathland, farm dams and shallow floodwaters.
Will also forage in inter-tidal shorelines,
mangrove margins and estuaries. Feeds in
shallow, still water. This species breeds during
summer, nesting in or near a freshwater
swamp.
Burhinus grallarius Bush Stonecurlew
E
Sternula nereis
nereis
-
Fairy Tern
(Australian)
-
V,
Marine
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
freshwater wetland
habitats not
present within the
study area.
required.
Scattered distribution across NSW. The
nearest known population to the site is in the
Pittwater – Brisbane Waters area (DEC 2006).
Inhabits lowland grassy woodland and open
forest and, in coastal areas, Casuarina and
Melaleuca woodlands, saltmarsh and
mangroves. Requires a low, sparse
groundcover, some fallen timber and leaf litter,
and a general lack of a shrubby understory
(DEC 2006).
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs along NSW coast.
Inhabit offshore, estuarine or lake islands,
wetlands, beaches and spits. Nests on coral
Predicted to
occur within
10km
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
Significance
assessment not
Scientific Name
Callocephalon
fimbriatum
Calyptorhynchus
lathami
Common Name
Gang-gang
Cockatoo
Glossy BlackCockatoo
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
V
V
-
-
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
shingle on continental islands or coral cays, on
sandy islands and beaches inside estuaries
and on open sandy beaches.
(DSEWPaC
2011)
not present within
the study area.
required.
Recorded
Restricted to SE coast and highlands south
from the Hunter Valley. Spends summer in tall within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
mountain forests and woodlands, usually
heavily timbered and mature wet sclerophyll
forests. Winters at lower altitudes in drier more
open eucalypt forest and woodlands,
particularly in coastal areas. Nests in summer
in large tree hollows, often close to water,
usually in tall mature sclerophyll forests with a
dense understorey, and occasionally in coastal
forests. Feeds on seeds, particularly
Eucalyptus and Acacia, also berries, fruit and
insects (Higgins 1999).
Yes.
Low
Marginal habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
Widespread but uncommon from coast to
southern tablelands and central western plains. within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Feeds almost exclusively on the seeds of
Allocasuarina species. Prefers woodland and
open forests, rarely away from Allocasuarina.
Roost in leafy canopy trees, preferably
eucalypts, usually <1 km from feeding site.
Nests in large (approx. 20 cm) hollows in trees,
stumps or limbs, usually in Eucalypts (Higgins
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No habitat present
within subject site.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
M;
Marine
Recorded
Breeds in Asia, migrates south in winter.
within 10km
Individuals are rarely recorded south of the
Shoalhaven estuary, and there are few inland
(OEH 2011a)
records.
Almost entirely coastal in NSW, favouring
beaches of sheltered bays, harbours and
estuaries with large intertidal sandflats or
mudflats; occasionally on sandy beaches, coral
reefs and rock platforms. Roosts at high tide on
sandy beaches, spits and rocky shores. Forage
on wet ground at low tide.
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
-
Occurs throughout NSW except most densely
forested parts of the Dividing Range
escarpment. Occupies habitats rich in prey
within open eucalypt forest, woodland or open
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
Significance
assessment not
1999).
Pomatostomus
temporalis
temporalis
Grey-crowned
Babbler
Charadrius
mongolus
Lesser Sandplover V
Hieraaetus
morphnoides
Little Eagle
V
V
-
Occurs on western slopes and plains , as well
as in the Hunter Valley and several locations
on the north coast. Inhabits open Box-Gum
Woodlands on the slopes, and Box-Cypresspine and open Box Woodlands on alluvial
plains. Family groups have territories between
1-50 (generally around 10) hectares. Nests
typically built in shrubs or sapling eucalypts.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Glossopsitta pusilla Little Lorikeet
Sterna albifrons
Little Tern
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
V
E
-
Marine
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
woodland. Sheoak or acacia woodlands and
riparian woodlands of interior NSW are also
used. For nest sites it requires a tall living tree
within a remnant patch, where pairs build a
large stick nest in winter and lay in early spring.
the study area.
required.
Recorded
Occurs from coast to western slopes of the
within 10km
Great Dividing Range. Inhabits dry, open
eucalypt forests and woodlands. Feed primarily (OEH 2011a)
on profusely-flowering eucalypts and a variety
of other species including melaleucas and
mistletoes. On the western slopes and
tablelands Eucalyptus albens and E. melliodora
are particularly important food sources for
pollen and nectar respectively. Mostly nests in
small (opening approx. 3cm) hollows in living,
smooth-barked eucalypts, especially
Eucalyptus viminalis, E. blakelyi and E.
dealbata.
Yes.
Low
Marginal habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
In NSW occurs mainly north of Sydney, with
within 10km
smaller numbers south to VIC.
Almost exclusively coastal, preferring sheltered (OEH 2011a)
environments; may occur several kilometres
from the sea in harbours, inlets and rivers .
Nests in low dunes or sandy beaches just
above high tide mark near estuary mouths/
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No habitat present
within subject site.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Yes.
Low
Marginal habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
adjacent to coastal lakes and islands. Forage in
shallow waters of estuaries, coastal lagoons
and lakes, also along open coasts, less often
at sea, and usually within 50 m of shore.
Tyto
novaehollandiae
Pandion haliaetus
Grantiella picta
Masked Owl
Osprey
Painted
Honeyeater
V
V
V
-
M
-
Occurs across NSW except NW corner. Most
common on the coast. Inhabits dry eucalypt
woodlands from sea level to 1100 m. Roosts
and breeds in large (>40cm) hollows and
sometime caves in moist eucalypt forested
gullies. Hunts along the edges of forests and
roadsides. Home range between 500 ha and
1000 ha. Prey mostly terrestrial mammals but
arboreal species may also be taken.
No habitat present
within subject site.
Recorded
Favours coastal areas, especially the mouths
of large rivers, lagoons and lakes. They feed on within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
fish over clear, open water. Breeding takes
place from July to September in NSW, with
nests being built high up in dead trees or in
dead crowns of live trees, usually within one
kilometre of the sea.
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
Significance
assessment not
Nomadic, occurring in low densities across
most of NSW. Highest concentrations and
almost all breeding occur on inland slopes of
the Great Dividing Range. Inhabits Boree,
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Brigalow and Box Gum woodlands and BoxIronbark forests. Specialist forager on the fruits
of mistletoes, preferably of the Amyema genus.
Nests in outer tree canopy.
Rostratula
benghalensis
Painted Snipe
(was Australian
Painted Snipe)
E
Haematomus
longirostris
Pied
Oystercatcher
E
Ninox strenua
Powerful Owl
V
V, M
-
-
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
the study area.
required.
Normally found in permanent or ephemeral
shallow inland wetlands, either freshwater or
brackish. Nests on the ground amongst tall
reed-like vegetation near water. Feeds on
mudflats and the water's edge taking insects,
worm and seeds. Prefers fringes of swamps,
dams and nearby marshy areas with cover of
grasses, lignum, low scrub or open timber.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scattered along NSW coast.
Favours intertidal flats of inlets and bays, open
beaches and sandbanks. Forages on exposed
sand, mud and rock at low tide. Nests mostly
on coastal or estuarine beaches; occasionally
saltmarsh or grassy areas.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs from the coast to the western slopes.
Solitary and sedentary species. Inhabits a
range of habitats from woodland and open
sclerophyll forest to tall open wet forest and
rainforest. Prefers large tracts of vegetation.
Nests in large tree hollows (> 0.5 m deep), in
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Yes.
Low
No breeding
habitat present.
Vegetation within
the study area is
highly fragmented
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Petroica boodang
Regent
Honeyeater
Scarlet Robin
CE
V
E
-
In NSW confined to two known breeding areas:
the Capertee Valley and Bundarra-Barraba
region. Non-breeding flocks occasionally seen
in coastal areas foraging in flowering Spotted
Gum and Swamp Mahogany forests,
presumably in response to drought. Inhabits
dry open forest and woodlands, particularly
Box-Ironbark woodland and riparian forests of
River Sheoak, with an abundance of mature
trees, high canopy cover and abundance of
mistletoes.
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
and would not
support a resident
pair. May forage
opportunistically in
the study area.
large eucalypts (dbh 80-240 cm) that are at
least 150 years old. Pairs have high fidelity to
a small number of hollow-bearing nest trees
and defend a large home range of 400 - 1,450
ha. Forages within open and closed woodlands
as well as open areas.
Anthochaera
phrygia
Suitable Habitat
Present?
No habitat present
within the subject
site.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Recorded
In NSW occurs from coast to inland slopes.
Breeds in drier eucalypt forests and temperate within 10km
woodlands, often on ridges and slopes, within
(OEH 2011a)
open understorey of shrubs and grasses and
sometimes in open areas. In autumn and winter
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
Occurs in the coastal, escarpment and
within 10km
tablelands regions of NSW. More common in
(OEH 2011a)
the north and absent from the western
tablelands and further west. Inhabits tall, moist
eucalypt forests and rainforests, and are
strongly associated with sheltered gullies,
particularly those with tall rainforest
understorey. Roosts in tree hollows, amongst
dense foliage in gullies or in caves, recesses or
ledges of cliffs or banks. Nest in large (>40cm
wide, 100cm deep) tree hollows in
unlogged/unburnt gullies within 100m of
streams or in caves.
No.
Low
No suitable
breeding or
roosting habitat.
Preferred
sheltered gullies
not present in the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
it migrates to more open habitats such as
grassy open woodland or paddocks with
scattered trees. Abundant logs and coarse
woody debris are important habitat
components.
Tyto tenebricosa
Haematopus
fuliginosus
Sooty Owl
Sooty
Oystercatcher
V
V
-
-
Evenly distributed along NSW coast, including
offshore islands.
Favours rocky headlands, rocky shelves,
exposed reefs with rock pools, beaches and
muddy estuaries. Forages on exposed rock or
coral at low tide. Breeds almost exclusively on
offshore islands, and occasionally on isolated
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Within NSW most frequently reported from the
hills and tablelands of the Great Dividing
Range, rarely from the coast. Inhabits a wide
range of Eucalyptus-dominated communities
with a grassy understorey, a sparse shrub
layer, often on rocky ridges or in gullies.
Sedentary and requires large, relatively
undisturbed remnants to persist in an area.
Forages on the ground for seeds and insects,
and nests in a slight hollow in the ground or at
the base of a low dense plant.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs across NSW, resident in North,
northeast and along west-flowing rivers.
Summer breeding migrant to southeast of
state. Inhabits a variety of habitats including
woodlands and open forests, with preference
for timbered watercourses. Favours productive
forests on the coastal plain, box-ironbark-gum
woodlands on the inland slopes, and
Coolibah/River Red Gum on the inland plains.
In Sydney area nests in mature living trees
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
promontories.
Pyrroholaemus
sagittatus
Speckled Warbler V
Lophoictinia isura
Square-tailed Kite V
-
-
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Yes.
Low
Potentially suitable
habitat exists in
patch of woodland
adjacent to
cycleway.
Significance
assessment not
required.
within 100 m of ephemeral/permanent
watercourse. Large home range > 100 km2.
Ptilinopus superbus Superb Fruit-dove V
Lathamus discolor
Swift Parrot
E
Marine
E
Occurs mainly north from NE NSW, much less Recorded
within 10km
common further south and largely confined to
(OEH 2011a)
pockets of habitat south to Moruya. Vagrants
occur south to VIC and TAS.
Inhabits rainforest and closed forests, may also
forage in eucalypt or acacia woodland with
fruit-bearing trees. Nests 5-30 m above ground
in rainforest/rainforest edge tree and shrub
species. Part of the population
migratory/nomadic.
Migratory, travelling to the mainland from
March to October. Breeds in Tasmania from
September to January. On the mainland, it
mostly occurs in the southeast foraging on
winter flowering eucalypts and lerps, with
records of the species between Adelaide and
Brisbane. Principal over-winter habitat is boxironbark communities on the inland slopes and
plains. Eucalyptus robusta, Corymbia maculata
and C. gummifera dominated coastal forests
are also important habitat.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No habitat present
within subject site.
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Xenus cinereus
Terek Sandpiper
V
Neophema
pulchella
Turquoise Parrot
V
M
-
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
The two main sites for this species in NSW are Recorded
within 10km
the Richmond River and Hunter River
(OEH 2011a)
estuaries.
Inhabits coastal mudflats, lagoons, creeks and
estuaries. Favours mudbanks and sandbanks
near mangroves, also observed on rocky pools
and reefs and up to 10 km inland around
brackish pools. Roost communally in
mangroves or dead trees. Forages in open
intertidal mudflats.
No.
Low
Preferred habitats
not present at the
site. May occur
elsewhere in the
locality including
downstream areas
of Narara Creek.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs from coast to inland slopes. In coastal
area, most common between Hunter and
Northern Rivers, and further south in S Coast.
Inhabits open eucalypt woodlands and forests,
typically with a grassy understorey. Favours
edges of woodlands adjoining grasslands or
timbered creek lines and ridges. Feeds on the
seeds of native and introduced grasses and
other herbs. Grasslands and open areas
provide important foraging habitat for this
species while woodlands provide important
roosting and breeding habitat. Nests in tree
hollows, logs or posts from August to
December.
Nature of
Record
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Daphoenositta
chrysoptera
Varied Sittella
V
Epthianura albifrons White-fronted
Chat
V
-
-
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Sedentary, occurs across NSW from the coast Recorded
within 10km
to the far west. Inhabits eucalypt forests and
(OEH 2011a)
woodlands, especially rough-barked species
and mature smooth-barked gums with dead
branches, mallee and Acacia woodland.
Sensitive to habitat isolation and loss of
structural complexity, and adversely affected by
dominance of Noisy Miners. Cleared
agricultural land is potentially a barrier to
movement. Builds a cup-shaped nest of plant
fibres and cobwebs in an upright tree fork high
in the living tree canopy, and often re-uses the
same fork or tree in successive years.
No.
Low
Vegetation at the
site dominated by
aggressive Bell
Miners, with high
degree of
fragmentation.
Significance
assessment not
required.
This species occurs from southern Queensland Recorded
within 10km
to Western Australia and down to Tasmania,
(OEH 2011a)
mostly in temperate to arid climates and very
rarely in sub-tropical areas.
Inhabits damp open habitats, particularly
wetlands containing saltmarsh areas that are
bordered by open grasslands. Along the coast
they are found in estuarine and marshy
habitats with vegetation <1m tall, and in open
grasslands and areas bordering wetlands.
Inland, they are often observed in grassy
plains, saltlakes and saltpans along waterway
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
Occurs from Hunter River to Cape York, but
rare south of Coffs Harbour. No recent records within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
from Illawarra where it once occurred.
Inhabits rainforest, low elevation moist eucalypt
forest and brush box forests, mostly in mature
forest but also remnant and regenerating
rainforest. Feeds on fruit and is locally nomadic
following food availability. Builds nest platform
on thin branch or palm frond, often over water,
usually 3-10 m above ground.
No.
Low
Site is outside
species’ usual
range.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
margins.
Ptilinopus
magnificus
Wompoo Fruitdove
V
-
Mammals
Petrogale pencillata Brush-tailed Rock- E
wallaby
V
Occurs from the Shoalhaven north to the
Queensland border. Now mostly extinct west of
the Great Dividing Range, except in the
Warrumbungles and Mt Kaputar. Occurs on
rocky escarpments, outcrops and cliffs with a
preference for complex structures with fissures,
caves and ledges facing north. Diet consists of
vegetation in adjacent to rocky areas eating
grasses and forbs as well as the foliage and
fruits of shrubs and trees.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Miniopterus
schreibersii
oceanensis
Eastern Bentwing- V
bat
-
Pseudomys
gracilicaudatus
Eastern Chestnut V
Mouse
-
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Generally occurs east of the Great Dividing
Range along NSW coast (Churchill 2008).
Inhabits various habitats from open grasslands
to woodlands, wet and dry sclerophyll forests
and rainforest. Essentially a cave bat but may
also roost in road culverts, stormwater tunnels
and other man-made structures. Only 4 known
maternity caves in NSW, near Wee Jasper,
Bungonia, Kempsey and Texas. Females may
travel hundreds of kilometres to the nearest
maternal colony (Churchill 2008).
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Yes.
Moderate.
Potential foraging
and non-breeding
roosting habitat
present. No
breeding habitat
present.
Assessment of
significance
prepared.
Mainly occurs north from the Hawkesbury from
the coast to the eastern slopes of the Great
Dividing Range. Isolated records from Jervis
Bay.
Typically inhabits heathland in dense wet
heaths and swamps, but in the tropics and
northern NSW occurs in grassy woodlands.
Optimal habitat is young regenerating
heathland (e.g. after fire), with dense
understorey the most important characteristic
(Fox 2008). Forages within an area of <0.5 ha.
May nest above ground or in hollows.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Falsistrellus
tasmaniensis
Eastern False
Pipistrelle
V
Occurs on southeast coast and ranges. Prefers Recorded
within 10km
tall (>20m) and wet forest with dense
(OEH 2011a)
understorey. Absent from small remnants,
preferring continuous forest but can move
through cleared landscapes and may forage in
open areas. Roosts in hollow trunks of
Eucalypts, underneath bark or in buildings.
Forages in gaps and spaces within forest, with
large foraging range (12km foraging
movements Recorded) (Churchill 2008, Law et
al 2008).
Mormopterus
norfolkensis
East Coast
Freetail-bat
V
-
-
Occurs in dry sclerophyll forest and woodland
east of the Great Dividing Range. Forages in
natural and artificial openings in vegetation,
typically within a few kilometres of its roost.
Roosts primarily in tree hollows but also
recorded from man-made structures or under
bark (Churchill 2008).
Nature of
Record
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
No.
Low
Species does not
persist in small
remnants.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Yes.
Moderate
Potential roosts
exist within hollowbearing trees
outside the
construction
footprint. Potential
foraging habitat
present outside
the construction
footprint.
Significance
assessment
prepared.
No suitable
breeding, roosting
or foraging habitat
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
within the subject
site.
Cercartetus nanus
Eastern Pygmypossum
Scoteanax rueppellii Greater Broadnosed Bat
V
V
-
Recorded
Occurs along the east coast of NSW, and
inland to the Pillaga, Dubbo, Parkes and
within 10km
Wagga Wagga. Inhabits range of habitats from (OEH 2011a)
coastal heath and woodland though open and
closed forests, subalpine heath and rainforest
(Tulloch and Dickman 1995). Inhabits
rainforest, sclerophyll forests and heath.
Banksia spp. and myrtaceous shrubs and trees
are favoured food sources and nesting subject
sites in drier habitats. Diet mostly pollen and
nectar from Banksia spp., Eucalyptus spp.,
Callistemon spp. and insects (Ward and Turner
2008). Nests in hollows in trees, under the bark
of Eucalypts, forks of tea-trees, abandoned bird
nests and Xanthorrhoea bases (Ward and
Turner 2008, Tulloch and Dickman 2006).
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
Occurs on the east coast and Great Dividing
within 10km
Range. Inhabits a variety of habitats from
woodland to wet and dry sclerophyll forests and (OEH 2011a)
rainforest, also remnant paddock trees and
timber-lined creeks, typically below 500m asl.
Forages in relatively uncluttered areas, using
natural or man-made openings in denser
Yes.
Moderate
Potential foraging
habitat present in
study area.
Potential roosts
exist within hollow-
Significance
assessment
prepared.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Grey-headed
Flying-fox
V
Kerivoula papuensis Golden-tipped Bat V
V
-
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
bearing trees
outside the
construction
footprint.
habitats. Usually roosts in tree hollows or
fissures but also under exfoliating bark or in the
roofs of old buildings. Females congregate in
maternal roosts in suitable hollow trees (Hoye
and Richards 2008, Churchill 2008).
Pteropus
poliocephalus
Suitable Habitat
Present?
No suitable
breeding, roosting
or foraging habitat
within the subject
site.
Roosts in camps within 20 km of a regular food
source, typically in gullies, close to water and in
vegetation with a dense canopy. Forages in
subtropical and temperate rainforests, tall
sclerophyll forests and woodlands, heaths,
swamps and street trees, particularly in
eucalypts, melaleucas and banksias. Highly
mobile with movements largely determined by
food availability (Eby and Law 2008). Will also
forage in urban gardens and cultivated fruit
crops.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Occurs along the NSW coast, with some
records from escarpment areas.
Inhabits moist, closed forest with high summer
rainfall. Optimal sites are near the ecotone
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Recorded.
Recorded.
Multiple individuals
observed
overflying the site
on both nights.
Potential foraging
habitat present. No
roosting or
breeding habitat
present.
Assessments of
significance
prepared.
No.
Low
Preferred
combination of
habitats not
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Phascolarctos
cinereus
Common Name
Koala
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
V
-
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
between wet and dry forest, in the vicinity of
creeks with a westerly aspect, elevation 50150 m, abundance of vines, high relief and
slope and close spacing between stream
channels (Woodside et al 2008). Wide range of
possible roosts but 95% in the bottom of
Yellow-throated Scrubwren and/or Brown
Gerygone nests within rainforest, usually along
creek lines. However individuals frequently
forage in dry sclerophyll forests on upper
slopes, generally within 2 km of the roost.
Thought to have limited dispersal ability
through cleared landscape (Woodside et al
2008).
present.
Vegetation in the
study area is likely
to be too
fragmented to
support
populations of this
species.
Occurs from coast to inland slopes and plains. Recorded
within 10km
Restricted to areas of preferred feed trees in
(OEH 2011a)
eucalypt woodlands and forests. Home range
varies depending on habitat quality, from < 2 to
several hundred hectares.
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species. Very few
scattered feed
trees present.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Chalinolobus dwyeri Large-eared Pied V
Bat
Myotis macropus
Miniopterus
Large-footed
Myotis
V
Little Bentwing-bat V
V
-
-
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs from the coast to the western slopes of
the divide. Largest numbers of records from
sandstone escarpment country in the Sydney
Basin and Hunter Valley (Hoye and Schulz
2008). Roosts in caves and mines and most
commonly recorded from dry sclerophyll forests
and woodlands. An insectivorous species that
flies over the canopy or along creek beds
(Churchill 2008). In southern Sydney appears
to be largely restricted to the interface between
sandstone escarpments and fertile valleys.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Preferred habitats
not present.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Yes.
Moderate.
Potential foraging
and roosting
habitat present in
the study area.
Assessment of
significance
prepared.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Mainly coastal but may occur inland along large Recorded
within 10km
river systems. Usually associated with
(OEH 2011a)
permanent waterways at low elevations in
flat/undulating country, usually in vegetated
areas. Forages over streams and watercourses
feeding on fish and insects from the water
surface. Roosts in a variety of habitats
including caves, mine shafts, hollow-bearing
trees, stormwater channels, buildings, under
bridges and in dense foliage, typically in close
proximity to water (Campbell 2011). Breeds
November or December (Churchill 2008)
Occurs from Cape York to Sydney.
Inhabits rainforests, wet and dry sclerophyll
Recorded
within 10km
No foraging
habitat within the
subject site.
Yes.
Moderate.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
australis
Nature of
Record
(OEH 2011a)
forests, paperbark swamps and vine thickets.
Only one maternity cave known in NSW,
shared with Eastern Bentwing-bats at Willi Willi,
near Kempsey. Outside breeding season
roosts in caves, tunnels and mines and has
been Recorded in a tree hollow on one
occasion. Forages for insects beneath the
canopy of well-timbered habitats (Churchill
2008, Hoye and Hall 2008).
Potorous tridactylus Long-Nosed
Potoroo
Pseudomys
novaehollandiae
Habitat Association
New Holland
Mouse
V
-
V
V
Restricted to east of the Great Dividing Range,
with annual rainfall >760 mm. Inhabits coastal
heath and dry and wet sclerophyll forests.
Requires relatively thick ground cover and
appears restricted to areas of light and sandy
soil (Johnston 2008). Feeds on fungi, roots,
tubers, insects and their larvae, and other softbodied animals in the soil.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Occurs in disjunct, coastal populations from
Tasmania to Queensland. In NSW inhabits a
variety of coastal habitats including heathland,
woodland, dry sclerophyll forest with a dense
shrub layer and vegetated sand dunes (Wilson
and Bradtke 1999). Populations may
recolonise/ increase in size in regenerating
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
No suitable
breeding habitat.
Assessment of
significance
prepared.
Potential foraging
and non-breeding
roost habitat
present.
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Preferred habitats
not present.
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
Occurs mainly in 2 areas: Ku-ring-gai Chase
within 10km
and Garigal National Parks N of Sydney, and
far SE NSW including Ben Boyd National Park, (OEH 2011a)
East Boyd State Forest, Nadgee Nature
Reserve, Nadgee State Forest, South East
Forest and Yambulla State Forest but also
occurs between these areas.
Inhabits scrubby vegetation, including heath,
shrubland, and heathy forest and woodland.
Often associated with well-drained soils and
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
native vegetation after wildfire, clearing and
sandmining. Presence strongly correlated with
understorey vegetation density, and high
floristic diversity in regenerating heath (Lock
and Wilson 1999).
Macropus parma
Isoodon obesulus
obesulus
Parma Wallaby
Southern Brown
Bandicoot
V
E
-
E
Occurs on the coast and ranges from the
Watagan Mountains north to the Gibraltar
Range.
Optimum habitat wet sclerophyll forest with
thick, shrubby understorey associated with
grassy patches, occurs in wet and dry
sclerophyll forests and occasionally rainforest.
Emerge from shelters at night to forage on
herbs and grasses (Maynes 2008).
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species. Preferred
vegetation
associations not
present.
Significance
assessment not
required.
dry heathland communities, and prefers
periodically burnt areas as this increases insect
abundance.
Dasyurus maculatus Spotted-tailed
Quoll
Petaurus
norfolcensis
Squirrel Glider
V
V
E
-
Inhabits a range of environments including
rainforest, open forest, woodland, coastal heath
and inland riparian forest, from the sub-alpine
zone to the coastline. Den subject sites are in
hollow-bearing trees, fallen logs, small caves,
rock crevices, boulder fields and rocky-cliff
faces. Females occupy home ranges of up to
750 ha and males up to 3,500 ha, which are
usually traversed along densely vegetated
creek lines.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Occurs along the drier inland slopes as well as Recorded
within 10km
coastal habitats. Inhabits woodland and open
(OEH 2011a)
forest with a Eucalyptus, Corymbia or
Angophora overstorey and a shrubby
understorey of Acacia or Banksia. Key habitat
components include reliable winter and earlyspring flowering Eucalypts, Banksia or other
nectar sources, and hollow-bearing trees for
roost and nest sites (van der Ree and Suckling
2008, Quin et al 2004), with social groups
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support
populations of this
species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Yes.
Moderate
Potential foraging
habitat present in
study area.
Potential roosts
exist within hollowbearing trees
outside the
construction
Significance
assessment
prepared.
moving between multiple hollows. Social
groups include one or two adult males and
females with offspring, and have home ranges
of 5-10 ha within NSW (van der Ree and
Suckling 2008, Kavanagh 2004).
Petaurus australis
Saccolaimus
flaviventris
Yellow-Bellied
Glider
V
Yellow-bellied
Sheathtail-bat
V
-
-
Recorded
Occurs along the east coast to the western
slopes of the Great Dividing Range. Inhabits a within 10km
variety of forest types but prefers tall mature
(OEH 2011a)
eucalypt forest with high rainfall and rich soils.
Relies on large hollow-bearing trees for shelter
and nesting, with family groups of 2-6 typically
denning together. In southern NSW its
preferred habitat at low altitudes is moist gullies
and creek flats in mature coastal forests.
Mostly feeds on sap, nectar and honeydew.
Migrates from tropics to SE Aus in summer.
Forages across a range of habitats including
those with and without trees, from wet and dry
sclerophyll forest, open woodland, Acacia
shrubland, mallee, grasslands and desert.
Roosts communally in large tree hollows and
buildings (Churchill 2008).
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
footprint.
No suitable
breeding, roosting
or foraging habitat
within the subject
site.
Reptiles
Hoplocephalus
bungaroides
Broad-Headed
Snake
Varanus rosenbergi Rosenberg's
Goanna
E
V
V
-
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
In NSW mainly occurs on the mid coast from
within 10km
Wollemi NP to Nowra; the ACT and Goulburn
(OEH 2011a)
regions and the South-west Slopes.
Inhabits coastal heathlands, wet and dry
sclerophyll forests, woodlands and mallee.
Termite mounds are important: eggs are laid in
the mounds in summer and incubate till spring,
when the young dig themselves out. Young
may return to the mound as a refuge for some
months, while adults shelter in burrows dug
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Nocturnal, sheltering in rock crevices and
under flat sandstone rocks on exposed cliff
edges during autumn, winter, and spring,
moving to shelters in hollows of large trees
within 200m of escarpments in summer. Feeds
mostly on geckos and small skinks, and
occasionally on frogs and small mammals.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable shelter
sites limited and
vegetation at the
site is highly
fragmented, and
unlikely to support
populations of this
species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Recorded
Occurs north from Gosford on the coast and
adjacent ranges. Inhabits moist eucalypt forest within 10km
and rainforest and is partly arboreal, sheltering (OEH 2011a)
in tree hollows or vines but coming to the
ground to forage. Individuals use between 5-30
hollows and have large home ranges: average
5.4 ha (females) and 20.2 ha (males), and do
not persist in small forest fragments (Fitzgerald
et al 2002a,b).
No.
Low
Vegetation within
the study area is
too fragmented to
support individuals
of this species.
Significance
assessment not
required.
under rocks or logs, or in rock crevices, hollow
logs or even rabbit burrows (Sass 2008).
Hoplocephalus
bitorquatus
Pale-headed
Snake
Hoplocephalus
stephensii
Stephen’s Banded V
Snake
Frogs
V
-
-
Occurs north from Tuggerah along the coast
and to the western side of the Great Divide.
Inhabits dry eucalypt forests and woodlands,
cypress woodland and occasionally in
rainforest or moist eucalypt forest. Favours
streamside areas, particularly in drier habitats.
Shelter during the day between loose bark and
tree-trunks, or in hollow trunks and limbs of
dead trees.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Mixophyes iteratus Giant Barred Frog E
Heleioporus
australiacus
Giant Burrowing
Frog
V
E
V
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Occurs on the coast and ranges from southeastern QLD to the Hawkesbury River in NSW,
particularly in Coffs Harbour - Dorrigo area.
Forage and live amongst deep, damp leaf litter
in rainforest, moist eucalypt forest and nearby
dry eucalypt forest. Breed in shallow, flowing
rocky streams. Within Sydney Basin, confined
to small populations in tall, wet forest in the
Watagan Mountains north of the Hawkesbury
and the lower Blue Mountains (White 2008b).
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs along the coast and eastern slopes of
the Great Dividing Range south from Wollemi
National Park. Appears to exist as 2
populations with a 100 km gap in records
between Jervis Bay and Eden. Northern
population occurs on sandy soils supporting
heath, woodland or open forest. Breeds in
ephemeral to intermittent streams with
persistent pools. Only infrequently moves to
breeding sites, most commonly found on ridges
away from creeks, several hundred metres
from water.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Litoria aurea
Green and Golden E
Bell Frog
Litoria brevipalmata Green-thighed
Frog
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
V
V
-
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Formerly occurred from Brunswick Heads to
Victoria, but >80% populations now extinct.
Inhabits marshes, natural and artificial
freshwater to brackish wetlands, dams and in
stream wetlands. Prefers sites containing
cumbungi (Typha spp.) or spike rushes
(Eleocharis spp.), which are unshaded and
have a grassy area and/or rubble as
shelter/refuge habitat nearby. Gambusia
holbrooki is a key threat as they feed on green
and Golden Bell Frog eggs and tadpoles.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
Yes.
Moderate
Potential habitat
present in trunk
drains within the
subject site.
Not recorded in
the area since
1967.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Recorded
Occurs north from Gosford to Qld.
Breeding occurs in flooded semi-permanent or within 10km
ephemeral pools, usually in grassy areas and
(OEH 2011a)
within 100 m of significant stands of native
vegetation (Ehmann 1997, Lemckert et al
2006). Can tolerate some disturbance but not
found in >50% cleared grazing land or entirely
urban areas (Ehmann 1997, Lemckert et al
2006). Usually associated with moist forest
(swamp forest, wet sclerophyll or rainforest) but
often recorded from dry sclerophyll forests in
the northern part of its range (Lemckert et al
2006).
Removal and
disruption to
water bodies in
the rail corridor.
Assessments of
significance
prepared.
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
Litoria littlejohni
Littlejohns
Treefrog
V
Occurs on plateaus and eastern slopes of the
Great Dividing Range south from Watagan
State Forest. Occurs along permanent rocky
streams with thick fringing vegetation
associated with eucalypt woodlands and
heaths among sandstone outcrops, hunting
either in shrubs or on the ground.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Restricted to Sydney Basin, from Nowra to
Pokolbin and west to Mt Victoria. Inhabits
heathland and open woodland on Hawkesbury
and Narrabeen Sandstones, within 100 m of
ridgelines. Breeds in ephemeral feeder creeks
or flooded depressions, requiring unpolluted
water between 5.5 and 6.5 pH. Shelters under
rocks, amongst masses of dense vegetation or
leaf litter. Populations restricted to immediate
vicinity of breeding areas.
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs along the east coast of Australia. Found
in rainforest and wet, tall, open forest. Shelter
in deep leaf litter and thick understorey
vegetation on the forest floor. Feeds on insects
and smaller frogs, breeding in streams during
summer after heavy rain. Within Sydney Basin
Recorded
within 10km
(OEH 2011a)
No.
Low
No suitable habitat
present within the
study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Pseudophryne
australis
Red-crowned
Toadlet
V
Mixophyes balbus
Stuttering Frog
E
V
-
V
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Predicted to
occur within
10km
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
bioregion the species is now confined to
populations in the Watagan Mountains, the
southern Blue Mountains and Macquarie Pass
(White 2008a). The species does not occur in
areas where the riparian vegetation has been
disturbed or where there have been significant
upstream human impacts (Mahony et al 1997).
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
Occurs in the upper reaches of the Lachlan,
Murrumbidgee and Murray Rivers, and in parts
of the Hawkesbury and Shoalhaven catchment
areas.
Inhabits river and lake habitats, especially the
upper reaches of rivers and their tributaries.
Requires clear water with deep, rocky holes
and abundant cover (e.g. aquatic vegetation,
woody debris, large boulders and overhanging
banks). Spawns spring and summer in shallow
upland streams or flowing sections of river
systems.
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
2011a)
No.
Low
Suitable habitat
not present within
the study area.
Significance
assessment not
required.
Occurs in coastal rivers and streams south
from the Shoalhaven River (Backhouse et al
2008).
Inhabits estuarine waters and coastal seas as
Predicted to
occur within
10km
(DSEWPaC
No.
Low
Site outside
species range.
Significance
assessment not
Fish
Macquaria
australasica
Macquarie Perch V
Prototroctes
mairaena
Australian
Grayling
-
E
V, M
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC/FM EPBC
Act
Act
Habitat Association
Nature of
Record
Suitable Habitat
Present?
2011a)
larvae/juveniles, and freshwater rivers and
streams as adults. Most of their lives are spent
in freshwater rivers and streams in cool, clear
waters with a gravel substrate and alternating
pool and riffle zones, however can also occur in
turbid water. The species can penetrate well
inland, being recorded over 100 km inland from
the sea. (Backhouse et al 2008).
All information in this table is taken from NSW OEH and Commonwealth DSEWPaC Threatened Species profiles (DEC 2005, DSEWPaC 2011b)
unless otherwise stated. The codes used in this table are: CE – Critically Endangered; E – Endangered; V – Vulnerable; EP – Endangered
Population; CEEC – Critically Endangered Ecological Community; EEC – Endangered Ecological Community.
Likelihood of
4
Occurrence and
Significance
Assessment
Required?
required.
EPBC Act-listed migratory fauna predicted to occur within the locality
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of impact
M;
Recorded in all regions of NSW.
Marine Non- breeding, and almost exclusively aerial while in Australia.
Occurs over urban and rural areas as well as areas of native
vegetation.
Moderate.
Nil.
May forage above the
study area
Aerial habitats will not
be affected.
M;
Occurs across NSW. Within NSW there are breeding colonies
Marine within the Darling Riverine Plains and Riverina regions, and
minor colonies across its range including the north and northeast of the state.
Reported from a wide range of wetland habitats (for example
inland and coastal, freshwater and saline, permanent and
ephemeral, open and vegetated, large and small, natural and
artificial).
Unlikely.
Nil.
M;
Occurs across NSW. Principal breeding sites are the central
Marine east coast from Newcastle to Bundaberg. Also breeds in major
inland wetlands in north NSW (notably the Macquarie
Marshes).
Occurs in tropical and temperate grasslands, wooded lands and
terrestrial wetlands. Uses predominately shallow, open and
fresh wetlands with low emergent vegetation and abundant
aquatic flora. Sometimes observed in swamps with tall
emergent vegetation and commonly use areas of tall pasture in
moist, low-lying areas.
Low.
Migratory Birds
Wetland or Marine species
Apus pacificus
Ardea alba
Ardea ibis
Fork-tailed Swift
Great Egret
Cattle Egret
No suitable habitat
present.
Suitable freshwater
wetlands do not occur
within the subject site.
Nil.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Charadrius bicinctus Double-banded
Plover
M;
Occurs along the coast and inland areas of NSW. Non-breeding Low.
Marine visitor. Important sites in NSW include Lake Bathurst and
Preferred habitats not
Botany Bay (Penrhyn Estuary and Sydney Airport).
present.
Inhabits littoral, estuarine and fresh/saline terrestrial wetlands
as well as saltmarsh, grasslands and pasture.
Gallinago hardwickii Latham’s Snipe
M;
Occurs along the coast and west of the great dividing range.
Marine Non breeding visitor to Australia.
Inhabit permanent and ephemeral wetlands up to 2000 m asl.
Typically in open, freshwater wetlands with low, dense
vegetation (incl. swamps, flooded grasslands and heathlands).
Can also occur in saline/brackish habitats and in modified or
artificial habitats close to human activity.
Low.
Likelihood of impact
Nil.
Nil.
Preferred habitats not
present.
Heteroscelus
brevipes
Grey-tailed Tattler
M;
Occurs along NSW coast, more common north of Sydney. Non- Low.
Marine breeding visitor to Australia.
No suitable habitat
Inhabits sheltered coasts with reefs and rock platforms or with
present.
intertidal mudflats. Usually forages in shallow water on hard
intertidal substrates, but also recorded foraging on intertidal
mudflats with mangroves/seagrass and occasionally on
intertidal sandflats.
Nil.
Limosa lapponica
Bar-tailed Godwit
Low.
M;
Occurs along NSW coast, with important sites including the
Marine Hunter River estuary. Non-breeding visitor to Australia.
No suitable habitat
Mainly inhabits coastal habitats including intertidal sandflats,
present.
banks, mudflats, estuaries, inlets, harbours, coastal lagoons
and bays. Often found around seagrass beds and sometimes in
nearby saltmarsh. Also recorded from sewage farms, saltworks,
saltlakes and brackish wetlands near coasts, sandy ocean
beaches, rock platforms, and coral reef-flats.
Nil.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Numenius
madagascariensis
Eastern Curlew
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of impact
Low.
M;
Primarily coastal. Non-breeding visitor to Australia.
Marine Associated with sheltered coasts with large intertidal mudflats
No suitable habitat
or sandflats, often with seagrass and are often recorded among
present.
saltmarsh. Occasionally found on open beaches, coral reefs,
rock platforms or islets. Also recorded from saltworks and
sewage farms.
Nil.
Numenius minutus Little Curlew
M;
Widespread in northern Australia, scattered records from other Low.
Marine areas. Non-breeding migrant to Australia.
No suitable habitat
Occur in large flocks on coastal and inland grasslands and
present.
black soil plains in northern Australia, near swamps and flooded
areas. They also feed on playing fields, paddocks and urban
lawns (Birds Australia 2006).
Nil.
Numenius
phaeopus
Whimbrel
Low.
M;
Occurs along NSW coast. Non-breeding visitor to Australia.
Marine Often found on intertidal mudflats (with/without mangroves) of
No suitable habitat
sheltered coasts, also harbours, lagoons, estuaries and river
present.
deltas. Also uses saltflats with saltmarsh, saline grasslands and
sewage farms/ saltworks.
Nil
Pluvialis fulva
Pacific Golden
Plover
Low.
M;
Widespread along coast, may occur inland along major river
Marine systems. Important sites in NSW comprise the Hunter and
No suitable habitat
Shoalhaven estuaries and Richmond and Clarence Rivers.
present.
Does not breed in Australia.
Usually forages on sandy or muddy shores or margins of
sheltered areas such as estuaries and lagoons, though it also
feeds on rocky shores, islands or reefs. Occasionally forage
among vegetation, such as saltmarsh, mangroves or in pasture
or crops.
Nil
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of impact
Rostratula
benghalensis
Painted Snipe
(was Australian
Painted Snipe)
E
V; M; Normally found in permanent or ephemeral shallow inland
Marine wetlands, either freshwater or brackish. Nests on the ground
amongst tall reed-like vegetation near water. Feeds on
mudflats and the water's edge taking insects, worm and seeds.
Prefers fringes of swamps, dams and nearby marshy areas with
cover of grasses, lignum, low scrub or open timber.
Low.
Nil.
M,
Primarily coastal but may extend inland over major river
Marine systems.
Breeds close to water, mainly in tall open forest/woodland but
also in dense forest, rainforest, closed scrub or remnant trees.
Usually forages over large expanses of open water, but also
over open terrestrial habitats (e.g. grasslands).
Moderate.
Moderate.
Nil.
May forage above the
study area
Aerial habitats will not
be affected.
Suitable habitat not
present within the
study area.
Terrestrial species
Haliaeetus
leucogaster
White-bellied Seaeagle
Nil.
May forage/breed
within study area.
No breeding/foraging
habitat within the
subject site.
Hirundapus
caudacutus
White-throated
Needletail
M;
Recorded along NSW coast to the western slopes and
Marine occasionally from the inland plains. Breeds in northern
hemisphere.
Almost exclusively aerial while in Australia. Occur above most
habitat types, but are more frequently recorded above more
densely vegetated habitats (rainforest, open forest and
heathland) than over woodland or treeless areas.
Merops ornatus
Rainbow Beeeater
Low.
M;
Widespread across mainland Australia.
Marine Mainly inhabits open forests and woodlands and shrublands,
No suitable habitat
often in proximity to permanent water. Also occurs in
present,
cleared/semi-cleared habitats including farmland and residential
areas. Excavates a nest burrow in flat/sloping ground in banks
Nil.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of impact
Recorded.
Low.
of waterways, dams, roadside cuttings, gravel pits or cliff faces.
Southern populations migrate north for winter after breeding.
Monarcha
melanopsis
Black-faced
Monarch
M;
Summer breeding migrant to south-east. Occurs along the
Marine coast of NSW.
Inhabits rainforests, eucalypt woodlands, coastal scrub and
damp gullies. It may be found in more open woodland when
migrating (Birds Australia 2005).
Observed within
dense forest near
Brooks Avenue
cycleway, to the west
of the railway.
No suitable habitat
within the subject site.
Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher
Rhipidura rufifrons
Rufous Fantail
M;
In NSW widespread on and east of the Great Divide, sparsely
Marine scattered on the western slopes, very occasional records on the
western plains.
Inhabit heavily vegetated gullies in eucalypt-dominated forests
and taller woodlands, often near wetlands and watercourses.
On migration, occur in coastal forests, woodlands, mangroves
and drier woodlands and open forests. Generally not in
rainforests.
Moderate.
M;
Found along NSW coast and ranges.
Marine Inhabits rainforest, dense wet forests, swamp woodlands and
mangroves. During migration, it may be found in more open
habitats or urban areas (Birds Australia 2008).
Moderate.
Low.
Potential habitat within
forested areas of the
study area.
No suitable habitat
within the subject site.
Potential habitat within
forested areas of the
study area.
No suitable habitat
Low.
Scientific Name
Common Name
TSC
Status
EPBC Habitat Association
Status
Potential Habitat
Present?
Likelihood of impact
within the subject site.
Anthochaera
phrygia
Regent
Honeyeater
CE
E, M
In NSW confined to two known breeding areas: the Capertee
Valley and Bundarra-Barraba region. Non-breeding flocks
occasionally seen in coastal areas foraging in flowering Spotted
Gum and Swamp Mahogany forests, presumably in response to
drought. Inhabits dry open forest and woodlands, particularly
Box-Ironbark woodland and riparian forests of River Sheoak,
with an abundance of mature trees, high canopy cover and
abundance of mistletoes.
Low.
Suitable habitat not
present within the
study area.
All information in this table is taken from NSW OEH and Commonwealth DSEWPaC Threatened Species profiles (DEC 2005, DSEWPaC 2011b)
unless otherwise stated. The codes used in this table are: CE – Critically Endangered; E – Endangered; V – Vulnerable; EP – Endangered
Population; CEEC – Critically Endangered Ecological Community; EEC – Endangered Ecological Community; M – Migratory
Nil.
Appendix C
TSC Act Assessments of Significance
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Section 5A of the EP&A Act lists seven factors that must be taken into account in the
determination of the significance of potential impacts of an activity on ‘threatened species,
populations or ecological communities (or their habitats)’ listed under the TSC Act and FM
Act. The ‘7 part test’ is used to determine whether an activity is ‘likely’ to impose ‘a significant
effect’ on threatened biota and thus whether a species impact statement (SIS) is required.
Should the 7 part test conclude that a significant effect is likely, an SIS must be prepared. On
this basis, 7 part tests have been prepared for the following threatened biota:
Threatened communities:
o
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
o
River-flat Eucalypt Forest on Coastal Floodplains
o
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on Coastal Floodplains.
Threatened plants:
o
Melaleuca biconvexa.
Threatened fauna:
o
Grey-headed Flying-fox
o
Eastern Bentwing Bat, Little Bentwing Bat and Large-footed Myotis
o
East Coast Freetail Bat, Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat and Greater Broadnosed Bat
o
Black Bittern
o
Green and Golden Bell Frog.
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Within the project site, Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest was restricted to several fragmented
areas generally adjoining Narara Creek and its tributaries (Figure 4.2). Clearing for the
project has been minimised through careful design and location of the passing loops and
associated infrastructure within cleared areas of the rail corridor wherever possible.
However, unavoidable residual impacts include clearing of 0.17 ha of this community.
Approximately, 355 ha of Estuarine Swamp Oak Forest (which is commensurate with this
endangered community) has been mapped in the Gosford LGA (Bell 2004) and 283
hectares in the locality (Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
Seven Part Test
Management Strategy 2003). Clearing of 0.17 ha of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest for the
project would not however, affect a significant proportion of the community such that its
local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The vegetation to be cleared is disturbed and subject to moderate to high levels of weed
invasion. Its removal is unlikely to significantly increase edge effects or weed invasion in
areas to be retained due to its current condition and implementation of mitigation
measures to minimise further spread of weeds.
The removal of this small area of vegetation is unlikely to substantially modify the
community’s composition such that it’s local occurrence at risk of extinction.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Clearing for the project has been minimised through careful design layout and where
possible the restriction of construction compounds to already cleared or disturbed areas
within the rail corridor and adjoining unformed tracks. Residual impacts include clearing of
0.17 ha of this community. Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest habitat occupies 283 ha within
the locality and the area that would be removed within the project site represents a small
percentage (0.06%) of this available habitat.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
This community is currently fragmented as a result of the existing rail corridor and urban
development. Remnant vegetation occurs along Narara Creek and its tributaries within the
study area. The removal of a small area of habitat is unlikely to further fragment or isolate
the community. Furthermore, the design of the project ensures that clearing of this
community is adjacent to existing clearing and as such there would be no further
fragmentation or isolation of the community.
Whilst the rail corridor may inhibit movement of ground dwelling fauna, due to the existing
fencing on both sides of the corridor, mobile species including birds, microbats and insects
would also easily traverse the rail corridor. Pollination and seed dispersal agents, including
birds, insects and wind would also continue to operate across the rail corridor.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
The vegetation to be cleared is small in area, and moderately disturbed from weed
invasions from edge effects of the unformed tracks, existing rail corridor and urban
development. The vegetation forms a disturbed edge adjacent to existing cleared areas.
This small area of habitat to be removed is unlikely to be important for the long term
survival of community in the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
Critical habitat refers to those areas of land listed in the Register of Critical Habitat kept by
the Director General of Office of Environment and Heritage. No critical habitat has been
listed for this ecological community. The project site is not considered critical for this
community’s survival.
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
Seven Part Test
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
A recovery plan has not been prepared for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest.
The Office of Environment and Heritage has however identified 11 priority actions to help
recovery of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest.
The small area of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest to be removed for the project will not
affect the recovery of the community.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
Threatening process means a process that threatens, or may have the capability to
threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological
communities. Key threatening processes are listed under the TSC Act. At present there
are 36 listed key threatening processes under the TSC Act.
The project has the potential to contribute to six Key Threatening Processes (see section
5). With respect to Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest, the project is consistent with five Key
Threatening Processes:
clearing of native vegetation
invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara*
invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses
invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers
removal of dead wood
introduction and establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic
on plants of the family Myrtaceae.
This community is currently affected by weed invasions, including Lantana camara*,
Pennisetum clandestinum* (exotic perennial grass) and Ipomoea indica (exotic vine). ). No
exotic rust fungus was recorded within the study area however the project has the
potential to spread this disease due to the close proximity of the study area to the source
of the outbreak of this disease. If the amelioration measures outlined in Section 6 of the
main report are adhered to it is not expected that the project is likely to exacerbate the
aforementioned Key Threatening Processes such that they are likely to significantly affect
Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest. No other Key Threatening Processes are likely to be
significantly increased by the project.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
The project will remove 0.17 ha of the local extent of Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest. The
area to be cleared is small and disturbed and is unlikely to result in a significant impact on
the community in the locality. Mitigation measures have been recommended for
implementation as part of the CEMP to further reduce the potential for indirect adverse
impacts on this community.
River-flat Eucalypt Forest
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Clearing for the project has been minimised through careful design, with passing loops and
associated infrastructure being located wherever possible in existing cleared areas and
access tracks. Residual impacts include clearing of 0.28 ha of this community. This
community is a mixture of Alluvial Blue Gum-Paperbark Forest and Alluvial Paperbark
Sedge Forest as mapped by Bell (2004) within the Gosford LGA. 20 ha and 68 ha
respectively of these two communities have been mapped within the Gosford LGA (Bell
2004. About 771 ha of Alluvial Tall Moist Forest has been mapped within the locality
(Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy 2003).
The removal of such a small area (0.36% of the community in the locality) for the project is
unlikely to affect a significant proportion of the community such that its local occurrence is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The vegetation to be cleared is disturbed and subject to moderate to high levels of weed
invasion. Its removal is unlikely to significantly increase edge effects or weed invasion due
to its current condition and implementation of mitigation measures to minimise further
spread of weeds.
The removal of this small area of vegetation is unlikely to substantially modify the
community’s composition or put its local occurrence at risk of extinction.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Clearing for the project has been minimised by careful design of the project with the
majority of the construction works restricted where possible to cleared or disturbed areas
within the rail corridor and adjoining unformed tracks. Residual impacts include clearing of
0.28 ha of this community. 771 ha has been mapped within the locality and the area that
would be removed within the project site represents a small percentage (0.36%) of this
available habitat.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
This community is currently fragmented from the existing rail corridor and urban
development. Remnant vegetation occurs along Narara Creek and its tributaries within the
River-flat Eucalypt Forest
Seven Part Test
study area. The removal of a small area of habitat is unlikely to further fragment or isolate
the community. Furthermore, the design of the project ensures that clearing of this
community is adjacent to existing clearing and as such there would be no further
fragmentation or isolation of the community.
Whilst the rail corridor may inhibit movement of ground dwelling fauna, due to the existing
fencing on both sides of the corridor, mobile species including birds, microbats and insects
would also easily traverse the rail corridor. Pollination and seed dispersal agents including
birds, insects and wind would also continue to operate across the rail corridor.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
The vegetation to be cleared is small, and moderately disturbed from weed invasions from
edge effects of the unformed tracks, existing rail corridor and urban development. The
vegetation forms a disturbed edge adjacent to existing cleared areas. This small area of
habitat to be removed is unlikely to be important for the long term survival of community in
the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
Critical habitat refers to those areas of land listed in the Register of Critical Habitat kept by
the Director General of the Office of Environment and Heritage. There is no critical habitat
listed for this community and the areas of impact are not considered to be critical to the
survival of this community.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
A Recovery plan has not been prepared for this community the under the TSC Act. The
Office of Environment and Heritage have identified 10 priority actions to direct recovery for
this community. The small area of River-flat Eucalypt Forest to be removed for the project
will not affect the recovery of the community.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
Threatening process means a process that threatens, or may have the capability to
threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological
communities. Key threatening processes are listed under the TSC Act. At present there
are 36 listed key threatening processes under the TSC Act.
The project has the potential to contribute to seven Key Threatening Processes. With
respect to River-flat Eucalypt Forest, the project is consistent with six Key Threatening
Processes:
clearing of native vegetation
invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara*
invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses
invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers
removal of dead wood.
introduction and establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic
on plants of the family Myrtaceae.
This community is currently affected by weed invasions from Lantana camara*,
Pennisetum clandestinum* (exotic perennial grass) and Ipomoea indica (exotic vine). ). No
exotic rust fungus was recorded within the study area however the project has the
potential to spread this disease due to the close proximity of the study area to the source
River-flat Eucalypt Forest
Seven Part Test
of the outbreak of this disease. If the amelioration measures outlined in Section 6 of the
main report are adhered to it is not expected that the project is likely to exacerbate the
aforementioned Key Threatening Processes such that they are likely to significantly affect
River-flat Eucalypt Forest. No other Key Threatening Processes are likely to be
significantly increased by the project.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for River Flat Eucalypt Forest
The project will remove 0.28 ha of the local extent of River-flat Eucalypt Forest. The area
to be cleared is small and disturbed and is unlikely to result in a significant impact on the
community in the locality. Mitigation measures have been recommended for
implementation as part of the CEMP to further reduce the potential for indirect adverse
impacts on this community.
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
One vegetation community Swamp Mahogany Forest is commensurate with endangered
ecological community of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest on coastal floodplains, which occurs in
as one remnant disturbed patch along Wingello Creek, and two small remnants adjacent to
Patty Clifton Oval.
No Swamp Sclerophyll Forest would be directly impacted by the proposal, however the
remnants adjacent to Paddy Clifton Oval are also adjacent to the proposed access road,
and may be indirectly impacted. Bell (2004) has mapped 274 ha of Swamp Mahogany
Paperbark Forest (which is commensurate with this community) within the Gosford LGA
and 663 ha of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest has been mapped within the locality (Lower
Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy 2003). Indirect
impacts on this community from the construction of an access road adjacent to its
occurrence are not expected to have an adverse effect on the local occurrence such that it
would be placed at risk of extinction.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The vegetation to that may be disturbed by the construction of the access road is currently
subject to moderate to high levels of weed invasion. The access road is unlikely to
significantly increase edge effects or weed invasion in areas to be retained due to its
current condition and implementation of mitigation measures to minimise further spread of
weeds.
The access road is unlikely to substantially modify the community’s composition such that
its local occurrence at risk of extinction.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Clearing for the project has been minimised through careful design layout and where
possible the restriction of construction compounds to already cleared or disturbed areas
within the rail corridor and adjoining unformed tracks. Clearing of Swamp Sclerophyll
Forest has been avoided, however it may be indirectly impacted through edge effects. At
least 274 ha occurs within the Gosford LGA (Bell 2004).
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
Seven Part Test
This community is currently fragmented as a result of the existing rail corridor and urban
development. Remnant vegetation occurs along Narara Creek and its tributaries within the
study area. The disturbance of a small area of habitat is unlikely to further fragment or
isolate the community.
Whilst the rail corridor may inhibit movement of ground dwelling fauna, due to the existing
fencing on both sides of the corridor, mobile species including birds, microbats and insects
would also easily traverse the rail corridor. Pollination and seed dispersal agents, including
birds, insects and wind would also continue to operate across the rail corridor.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
The vegetation that may be disturbed is small in area, and moderately disturbed from
weed invasions from edge effects of the unformed tracks, existing rail corridor and urban
development. The vegetation forms a disturbed edge adjacent to existing cleared areas.
This small area of habitat to be indirectly impacted is unlikely to be important for the long
term survival of community in the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
Critical habitat refers to those areas of land listed in the Register of Critical Habitat kept by
the Director General of Office of Environment and Heritage. No critical habitat has been
listed for this ecological community.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
A recovery plan has not been prepared for Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.
The Office of Environment and Heritage has however identified 12 priority actions to help
recovery of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.
The small area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest that may be indirectly impacted for the project
will not affect the recovery of the community.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
Threatening process means a process that threatens, or may have the capability to
threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological
communities. Key threatening processes are listed under the TSC Act. At present there
are 36 listed key threatening processes under the TSC Act.
The project has the potential to contribute to six Key Threatening Processes (see section
5). With respect to Swamp Sclerophyll Forest, the project is consistent with six Key
Threatening Processes:
clearing of native vegetation
invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara*
invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses
invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers
removal of dead wood
introduction and establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic
on plants of the family Myrtaceae.
This community is currently affected by weed invasions, including Lantana camara*,
Pennisetum clandestinum* (exotic perennial grass) and Ipomoea indica (exotic vine). ). No
exotic rust fungus was recorded within the study area however the project has the
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest
Seven Part Test
potential to spread this disease due to the close proximity of the study area to the source
of the outbreak of this disease. If the amelioration measures outlined in Section 6 of the
main report are adhered to it is not expected that the project is likely to exacerbate the
aforementioned Key Threatening Processes such that they are likely to significantly affect
Swamp Sclerophyll Forest. No other Key Threatening Processes are likely to be
significantly increased by the project.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest
The project would have an indirect impact on a small area of Swamp Sclerophyll Forest.
The area that may be disturbed is unlikely to result in a significant impact on the
community in the locality. Mitigation measures have been recommended for
implementation as part of the CEMP to further reduce the potential for indirect adverse
impacts on this community.
Melaleuca biconvexa
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Melaleuca biconvexa is a clonal species and can form dense suckering groups, particularly
in response to disturbance (Driscoll, 2008). Melaleuca species tend to produce large
amounts of nectar when they flower. They are generally pollinated either by birds,
including honeyeaters and lorikeets, or by insects (ANPSA, 2010). In a study of Melaleuca
biconvexa in the Wyong area, it was found that the main pollinator was the European Bee
(Apis melifera), as well as native bees, ants, moths, flies and butterflies (Duncan, 2001).
Seeds are very small, and dispersal is limited (Harden, 2002). Duncan (2001) observed
that the majority of seed dropped to the ground quickly after maturity, however is quite fine
and could be dispersed by wind or water for some distance. Duncan (2001) also noted that
the dominant mode of reproduction was through vegetative means (suckering).
Five mature stems of Melaleuca biconvexa were recorded within the Blue Gum Roughbarked Apple Forest vegetation community within Bradys Gully (see Figure 4-1 of the main
report). A small stand of approximately 20 individuals of Melaleuca biconvexa was also
observed in remnant Swamp Mahogany – Paperbark Forest in Paddy Clifton Oval. A
further stand of mature and immature stems were observed outside the study area near
the Brooks Avenue underpass.
The project would result in the loss of approximately five specimens of Melaleuca
biconvexa and an area of approximately 0.28 ha of habitat.
Within the locality, this species was commonly associated, often present as a dominant
canopy species, with the following vegetation types (Bell 2004):
Alluvial Paperbark Sedge forest (Unit E37a)
Alluvial Blue Gum-Paperbark forest (Unit E5a)
Swamp Mahogany-Paperbark forest (Unit E37).
These three communities combined have been mapped as occupying 362 ha within the
Gosford region.
The projects impacts are likely to result in a small proportional loss (0.07%) of the total
habitat and population size. The proposal would not impact movement of bees in the study
area, and would not impact vegetative suckering of the remaining individuals. As such, it
is unlikely that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction.
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
Melaleuca biconvexa
Seven Part Test
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Five specimens of Melaleuca biconvexa were recorded in Blue Gum – Rough-barked
Apple Forest habitat, located in the drainage associated with Bradys Gully between the rail
corridor and Akora Road. Approximately 0.4 ha of this habitat have been mapped within
the study area, of which, approximately 0.28 ha is likely to be removed or modified by the
project.
The project is likely to incorporate best practise stormwater and water quality design
principles that will ensure that the direct impacts of the development envelope do not result
in further indirect impacts to this community through significant alterations to the natural
drainage system.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Patches of Melaleuca biconvexa occurring more than 1 km apart are considered separate
populations, and patches occurring within 1 km are considered subpopulations (Duncan,
2001). The project will result in a marginal increase in the fragmentation of Melaleuca
biconvexa habitat, with the removal of linear patches of remnant vegetation within the rail
corridor. However, this area is already fragmented by infrastructure, urban development
and the existing rail corridor. It is unlikely that removal of a small linear fragment of the
vegetation within the study area will present a significant barrier to the propagation and
transport of reproductive material between remnants, given the continued facilitation of the
drainage corridor between these remnants for transport of reproductive material.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
The project impacts are likely to result in a small proportional loss (0.07%) of the habitat
and local population of Melaleuca biconvexa within the locality.
Extensive additional populations of Melaleuca biconvexa are known to occur in many
alluvial valleys and creek lines of the Wyong and Gosford area (Bell 2004). More
particularly, within the locality of the project site, prolific populations are known to occur
from Erina Valley catchment (Bell 2004).
It is therefore unlikely that habitat to be removed, modified and fragmented by the project
will be of significance to the long term survival of Melaleuca biconvexa within the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
Critical habitat refers to those areas of land listed in the Register of Critical Habitat kept by
the Director General of the OEH. There is no critical habitat listed for this species and the
areas of impact are not considered to be critical to the survival of this Melaleuca
biconvexa.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
There is no recovery plan for the Melaleuca biconvexa as produced under the Threatened
Species Conservation Act 1995. The OEH has not developed any recovery strategies for
Melaleuca biconvexa. The project is unlikely to affect the recovery of Melaleuca biconvexa.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
Melaleuca biconvexa
Seven Part Test
Threatening process means a process that threatens, or may have the capability to
threaten, the survival or evolutionary development of species, populations or ecological
communities. Key threatening processes are listed under the TSC Act. At present there
are 36 listed key threatening processes under the TSC Act.
The project has the potential to contribute to seven Key Threatening Processes. With
respect to Melaleuca biconvexa, the project is consistent with five Key Threatening
Processes:
clearing of native vegetation
invasion, establishment and spread of Lantana camara*
invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses
Invasion and establishment of exotic vines and scramblers
Introduction and establishment of Exotic Rust Fungi of the order Pucciniales pathogenic
on plants of the family Myrtaceae
The Melaleuca biconvexa habitat is currently affected by weed invasions from Lantana
camara*, Pennisetum clandestinum* (exotic perennial grass) and Ipomoea indica (exotic
vine). No exotic rust fungus was recorded within the study area however the project has
the potential to spread this disease due to the close proximity of the study area to the
source of the outbreak of this disease. If the amelioration measures outlined in Section 6
of the main report are adhered to it is not expected that the project is likely to exacerbate
the aforementioned Key Threatening Processes such that they are likely to significantly
affect Melaleuca biconvexa. No other Key Threatening Processes are likely to be
significantly increased by the project.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for Melaleuca biconvexa
The project will involve the removal of five specimens and approximately 0.28 ha of
suitable Melaleuca biconvexa habitat, which is 0.07% of the mapped habitat within the
Gosford region. The project impacts are likely to result in a small proportional loss of the
local population of Melaleuca biconvexa.
The habitat to be removed and number of individuals to be affected are small in
comparison to better quality habitat and large populations that occur within the wider
region. As such, it is unlikely that the project will have a significant impact on Melaleuca
biconvexa in the local area.
Threatened Fauna
Black Bittern (Ixobrychus flavicollis)
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Potential foraging and breeding habitat is present along Narara Creek and its tributaries. A
small area of mangroves is present in the project site, on the east side of the railway
associated with Wyoming Creek which could possibly provide foraging or breeding habitat
for this species. The proposal would result in the clearing of 0.01 ha of mangroves as a
result of clearing for widening of the bridge at Wingello Creek. Large areas of potential
habitat for the Black Bittern are present along Narara Creek and other wetland areas
throughout the locality. The loss of this small area of habitat is unlikely to have an adverse
effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction, particularly given the lack of recent records in the
LGA.
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Potential foraging and breeding habitat is present along Narara Creek and its tributaries. A
small area of mangroves is present in the project site, on the east side of the railway
associated with Wyoming Creek which could possibly provide foraging or breeding habitat
for this species. The proposal would result in the clearing of 0.01 ha of mangroves as a
result of clearing for widening of the bridge at Wingello Creek. Large areas of potential
habitat for the Black Bittern are present along Narara Creek and other wetland areas
throughout the locality.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Fragmentation from the existing railway, roads, and urban areas is already present. The
proposal may involve the loss of a small number of mangroves adjacent to the railway
corridor. Connectivity along Wingello Creek would be impacted as a result of widening of
the bridge. The area of habitat to the east of the bridge is already a very small area, and is
already isolated from habitat along Narara Creek as a result of the existing bridge. The
clearing of this small area of vegetation would not fragment habitat for this mobile species.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
Black Bittern (Ixobrychus flavicollis)
Seven Part Test
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
Habitat in the project site is not considered important for the Black Bittern, given the small
area of mangroves present, fragmented nature, location directly adjacent to the railway,
and low incidence of the species in the locality. Large areas of mangrove habitats are
present within the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
There is no critical habitat listed for the Black Bittern.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
There is no recovery plan for the Black Bittern. No priority actions have been published for
this species. This species is threatened by the clearing of riparian vegetation. The
proposal will result in the clearing of a very small area of potential habitat for this species.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
KTPs of relevance to the Black Bittern include:
Loss of native vegetation – the proposal would result in the loss of a small area of
native vegetation that could provide foraging or breeding habitat for this species.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for the Black Bittern
The proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the Black Bittern, pursuant to
section 5A of the EP&A Act.
Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The Grey-headed Flying-fox is a highly mobile species which regularly travels up to 50km
in a night to forage, and has been shown to make migratory movements of almost
1000 km within a year (Churchill 2008, Webb and Tidemann 1996). The subsequent
mixing of populations means that genetically the species can be treated as one population
across its entire range in eastern Australia (Webb and Tidemann 1996), and the numbers
in any one camp are influenced by food availability and the requirements of mating and
raising young (KBCS 2011). This population is therefore considered an important
population.
The Grey-headed flying-fox was observed flying over the study area during surveys. There
are no roost camps in the study area. The nearest roost camp is located at Matcham,
about 7 kilometres to the east. No local roosting and breeding habitat would be affected by
the proposal.
Of the highly productive myrtaceous forage trees (see section d-i), only Swamp Mahogany
is present, and in limited numbers. The proposal would not result in the removal of a
Swamp Mahogany, but would result in the removal of other myrtaceous species.
Large areas of similar (and better quality) native vegetation are present throughout locality,
such as Brisbane Water National Park. Given the mobility of the species and the presence
of these alternative habitats, the removal of 0.28 hectares of foraging habitat is highly
unlikely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local
Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)
population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Seven Part Test
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Seven highly productive species (productivity scores >0.91) occur in the LNE NSW region:
Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata), Red Bloodwood (C. gummifera), Pink Bloodwood (C.
intermedia), Swamp Mahogany (Eucalyptus robusta), Grey Ironbark (E. siderophloia),
Forest Red Gum (E. tereticornis) and Five-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia).
All but the Corymbia (n=5, 71%) flower with an annual frequency >0.7, and produce
substantial resources in >60% of years (Eby and Law 2008). Of these highly productive
species, only Swamp Mahogany is present, and in limited numbers. The proposal would
not result in the removal of a small number of Swamp Mahogany, but would result in the
removal of other myrtaceous species. No breeding or roosting habitat would be impacted.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Fragmentation from the existing railway, roads, and urban areas is already present. The
proposal would involve the loss of a small number of forage trees along or adjacent to the
railway corridor. The clearing of this small area of vegetation would not fragment habitat
for this highly mobile species.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
Habitat in the project site is not considered important for the Grey-headed Flying-fox, given
the general lack of native vegetation and low incidence of highly productive feed trees. The
loss of a small number of Swamp Mahogany would not impact the long-term survival of the
species in the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
There is no critical habitat listed for the Grey-headed Flying-fox.
Grey-headed Flying-fox (Pteropus poliocephalus)
Seven Part Test
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
The draft recovery plan for the Grey-headed Flying-fox identifies the following recovery
objectives of relevance to the removal of foraging habitat for the species:
Objective 1. To identify and protect foraging habitat critical to the survival of Greyheaded Flying-foxes throughout their range
The study area does not support a breeding camp or populations of >30,000
individuals. While trees are present that flower during winter and spring (during food
bottlenecks) and summer and autumn (during the breeding season), these trees are not
considered to be productive enough to support the local population in isolation. As
discussed above, the area of potential foraging habitat to be removed does not qualify
as critical habitat for the species. Therefore the proposed action is not inconsistent with
this objective.
Objective 2. To protect and increase the extent of key winter and spring foraging habitat
of Grey-headed Flying-foxes
Winter flowering eucalypts such as Swamp Mahogany are present in the study
area, although only in small numbers. Foraging resources in the study area are not
considered to be key foraging habitat for the Grey-headed Flying-fox, although the
species may forage in the study area on occasion during these seasons. Some
replacement plantings would be undertaken, including the planting of foraging plants for
this species.
The proposal is not likely, therefore, to interfere with the recovery of this species.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
KTPs of relevance to the Grey-headed Flying-fox include:
Loss of native vegetation – the proposal would result in the loss of a small area of
native vegetation.
Infection of native plants by Phytophthora cinnamomi – the proposal is unlikely to result
in the spread of Phytophthora and dieback of Grey-headed Flying-fox habitat.
Forest eucalypt dieback associated with over-abundant psyllids and Bell Miners – the
proposal is unlikely to increase the incidence of Bell Miners in the study area.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for the Grey-headed Flying-fox
The proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the Grey-headed Flying-fox,
pursuant to section 5A of the EP&A Act, given the small area of potential foraging habitat
that would be impacted as a result of the proposal.
Eastern Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis)
Little Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus australis)
Large-footed Myotis
(Myotis macropus)
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable
local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The Eastern Bentwing Bat is essentially a cave
bat, but also utilises man-made habitats such as
road culverts, storm-water tunnels and other manmade structures outside the breeding season.
Breeding takes place from October to April in a
number of maternity caves that host up 100,000
females (Churchill, 2008). Maternity colonies are
known from Wee Jasper, Bungonia, Willi-Willi,
and Riverton (Office of Environment and Heritage,
2011b).
The Little Bentwing Bat is essentially a cave bat,
but also utilises man-made habitats such as road
culverts, storm-water tunnels and other manmade structures outside the breeding season.
Breeding takes place from October to April in a
number of maternity caves that host up 100,000
females (Churchill, 2008). Maternity colonies are
known from Wee Jasper, Bungonia, Willi-Willi,
and Riverton (Office of Environment and Heritage,
2011b).
The Eastern Bentwing Bat is known from a variety
of habitats along the east coast including
rainforest, wet and dry sclerophyll forest,
monsoon forest, open woodland, paperbark
forests and open grasslands. In forested areas, it
flies above the canopy to hunt, while in open
grassland areas, flight may be within 6 metres of
the ground. Moths form the major component of
their diet (Churchill 2008).
The Little Bentwing Bat prefers well-timbered
areas such as rainforest, vine thicket, wet and dry
sclerophyll forests, melaleuca swamps and
coastal forests. It forages for beetles, moths, flies
and spiders between the shrub and canopy layers
in densely wooded areas (Churchill, 2008).
The Eastern Bentwing Bat has been recorded
throughout in the locality. It was not recorded in
the study area during surveys. The species has
potential roost habitat within culverts under the
railway. Culverts would be extended as part of the
proposal. This may cause a temporary disruption
to roost habitats, if the species is roosting in these
culverts at the time of construction. There would
The Little Bentwing Bat has been recorded in
scattered locations in the locality. It was not
recorded in the study area during surveys. The
species has potential roost habitat within culverts
under the railway. Culverts would be extended as
part of the proposal. This may cause a temporary
disruption to roost habitats, if the species is
roosting in these culverts at the time of
construction. There would be no impact on
breeding habitat. Given the species’ preference
for well-timbered areas for foraging, the proposal
The Large-footed Myotis breeds November or
December, roosting in a variety of habitats
including caves, mine shafts, hollow-bearing
trees, stormwater channels, buildings, under
bridges and in dense foliage (Churchill, 2008).
The Large-footed Myotis is primarily a coastal
species that forages over streams and
watercourses feeding on fish and insects
(Churchill, 2008).
The Large-footed Myotis has been recorded in
scattered locations in the locality. It was not
recorded in the study area during surveys. The
species has potential roost habitat within culverts
under the railway. Culverts would be extended as
part of the proposal. This may cause a temporary
disruption to roost habitats, if the species is
roosting in these culverts at the time of
construction. There would be no impact on hollowbearing trees. The project would have a negligible
impact on foraging habitat.
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Eastern Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis)
be no impact on breeding habitat. There would be
minimal impact on foraging habitat.
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
Little Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus australis)
is unlikely to impact on foraging habitat.
Large-footed Myotis
(Myotis macropus)
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that
constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i)
is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk
of extinction
Not applicable.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community:
(i)
the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed
Culverts under the railway corridor would be extended as a result of the proposal. This may cause a minor disruption to bats if they happen to be roosting
during construction. This would not impact any breeding habitat. Approximately 0.46 ha of native forest and woodland will be removed (including areas of
mangroves, Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and Blue Gum – Rough-barked Apple Forest). This would have a minor impact on foraging habitat for the
Eastern Bentwing Bat. It is unlikely that the Little Bentwing Bat would forage in the project site given its preference for well-timbered areas. The proposal
would not directly impact any waterbodies that the Large-footed Myotis would forage over.
(ii)
whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Eastern Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis)
Little Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus australis)
Large-footed Myotis
(Myotis macropus)
Fragmentation from the existing railway, roads, and urban areas is already present. The proposal would involve the loss of a small area of native vegetation
which would provide some connectivity for these species. The clearing of this small area of vegetation would not fragment habitat for these highly mobile
species.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological
community in the locality
Culverts in the study area represent potential roost sites for these species. There are numerous bridges and culverts throughout the locality that would
provide similar roosting habitat. Vegetation that would be cleared represents minimal foraging habitat for the bentwing bats. Aquatic habitats in the study
area would represent minimal foraging habitat for the Large-footed Myotis. Potential habitats in the study area are therefore not considered important for
these species.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly)
There is no critical habitat listed for these species.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan
There is no recovery plan for this species. The
OEH (2011b) has identified a number of priority
actions for this species which generally relate to
maternity caves and roost habitat. No priority
actions are particularly relevant to the proposal.
The proposal is therefore not inconsistent with the
priority actions for this species.
There is no recovery plan for this species. The
OEH (2011b) has identified a number of priority
actions for this species which generally relate to
maternity caves and roost habitat. No priority
actions are particularly relevant to the proposal.
The proposal is therefore not inconsistent with the
priority actions for this species.
There is no recovery plan for this species. The
OEH (2011b) has identified a number of priority
actions for this species, of which the following is
relevant:
Identify, protect and enhance roost habitat
beneath artificial structures (eg bridges),
especially when due for replacement, and
assess effectiveness of the actions.
The proposal is not inconsistent with any recovery
actions.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a
key threatening process
KTPs of relevance to these species include:
Eastern Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus schreibersii oceanensis)
Little Bentwing Bat
(Miniopterus australis)
Large-footed Myotis
(Myotis macropus)
Loss of native vegetation – the proposal would result in the loss of a small area of native vegetation that represents minimal foraging habitat for the
bentwing bats.
Loss of hollow-bearing trees – the proposal would not result in the loss of any hollow-bearing trees that provide potential roost sites for the Large-footed
Myotis.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for Microbats
The proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the Eastern Bentwing Bat, Little Bentwing Bat or Large-footed Myotis, pursuant to section 5A of
the EP&A Act, given the minimal disturbance to potential roosting habitat for the species, and the very small area of potential foraging habitat that would be
removed.
East Coast Freetail bat
(Mormopterus norfolkensis)
Greater broad-nosed Bat
(Scoteanax rueppellii)
Yellow-bellied Sheathtail bat
(Saccolaimus flaviventris)
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable
local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Female East Coast Freetail Bats give birth in late
November/early December and lactate until late
January. East Coast Freetail Bats roost in tree
hollows (generally spouts of large mature trees).
They have also been recorded roosting in
buildings and under exfoliating bark (Churchill,
2008). Hollow-dependent bats such as the East
Coast Freetail Bat are likely to require multiple
roost trees, generally in close proximity. Roost
sites used on consecutive nights are typically
within a few hundred metres of one another
(Parnaby and Hamilton-Smith, 2004).
East Coast Freetail Bats occur in dry forests and
woodlands. They show a preference for foraging
in open spaces in these habitats, as well as over
waterways (Churchill, 2008).
The Greater Broad-nosed Bat inhabits tall, wet
forests and roosts in hollow trunks of eucalypts,
and occasionally in caves and buildings (Churchill,
2008). Hollow-dependent bats such as the
Greater Broad-nosed Bat are likely to require
multiple roost trees, generally in close proximity.
Roost sites used on consecutive nights are
typically within a few hundred metres of one
another (Parnaby and Hamilton-Smith, 2004).
The Greater Broad-nosed Bat inhabits tall wet
forests with a dense understorey. The species
prefers continuous forest, and is generally absent
from small patches of remnant forest. Diet
consists of moths, beetles and other insects
(Churchill, 2008).
The Eastern Bentwing Bat has been recorded
throughout in the locality. It was not recorded in
the study area during surveys The species has
potential breeding habitat outside the study area.
There would be no impact on breeding habitat.
The proposal would clear 0.46 hectares of
foraging habitat.
The Greater Broad-nosed Bat has been recorded
in scattered locations in the locality. It was not
recorded in the study area during surveys. The
species has potential breeding habitat outside the
study area. There would be no impact on breeding
habitat. Given the species’ preference for
continuous forest for foraging, the proposal would
have a minimal impact on foraging habitat.
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
The Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat forages across
a range of habitats including those with and
without trees, from wet and dry sclerophyll forest,
open woodland, Acacia shrubland, mallee,
grasslands and desert. It roosts communally in
large tree hollows and buildings (Churchill 2008).
There are few records of the Yellow-bellied
Sheathtail Bat in the locality. It was not recorded
in the study area during surveys. The species has
potential breeding habitat outside the study area.
There would be no impact on breeding habitat.
Given the species’ preference for continuous
forest for foraging, the proposal would have a
minimal impact on foraging habitat.
The proposal is therefore unlikely to have an
adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such
that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
East Coast Freetail bat
(Mormopterus norfolkensis)
Greater broad-nosed Bat
(Scoteanax rueppellii)
Yellow-bellied Sheathtail bat
(Saccolaimus flaviventris)
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that
constitutes the endangered population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i)
is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk
of extinction
Not applicable.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological community:
(i)
the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the action proposed
Approximately 0.46 ha of native forest and woodland will be removed (including areas of mangroves, Swamp Oak Floodplain Forest and Blue Gum –
Rough-barked Apple Forest). This would have a minor impact on foraging habitat for the East Coast Freetail Bat, Greater Broad-nosed Bat and Yellowbellied Sheathtail Bat. The proposal would not impact any breeding habitat for these species.
(ii)
whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
Fragmentation from the existing railway, roads, and urban areas is already present. The proposal would involve the loss of a small area of native vegetation
which would provide some connectivity for these species. The clearing of this small area of vegetation would not fragment habitat for these highly mobile
species.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological
community in the locality
The proposal would not impact any breeding habitat for these species. The species would forage over large areas of forested land throughout the locality.
The proposal would clear only 0.46 hectares of potential foraging habitat. Potential habitats in the study area are therefore not considered important for
East Coast Freetail bat
(Mormopterus norfolkensis)
these species.
e)
Greater broad-nosed Bat
(Scoteanax rueppellii)
Yellow-bellied Sheathtail bat
(Saccolaimus flaviventris)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat (either directly or indirectly)
There is no critical habitat listed for these species.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a recovery plan or threat abatement plan
There is no recovery plan for this species. The
OEH (2011b) has identified a number of priority
actions for this species which generally relate to
retention of roosting and foraging habitat. No
roosting habitat would be lost, however a very
small area of foraging habitat would be cleared.
The proposal is therefore inconsistent with this
priority action for this species.
There is no recovery plan for these species. The OEH (2011b) has identified a number of priority
actions for this species which generally relate to protection of roosting habitat. No priority actions are
particularly relevant to the proposal. The proposal is therefore not inconsistent with the priority actions
for this species.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a
key threatening process
KTPs of relevance to these species include:
Loss of native vegetation – the proposal would result in the loss of a small area of native vegetation that represents minimal foraging habitat for the
bentwing bats.
Loss of hollow-bearing trees – the proposal would not result in the loss of any hollow-bearing trees.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for Microbats
The proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the East Coast Freetail Bat, Greater Broad-nosed Bat and Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat,
pursuant to section 5A of the EP&A Act, given the very small area of potential foraging habitat that would be removed.
Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea)
Seven Part Test
a)
in the case of a threatened species, whether the action proposed is likely to have
an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the
species is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
The Green and Golden Bell Frog is known to breed in shallow water bodies with emergent
vegetation during late winter to early autumn). The species can move long distances (of up
to one and a half kilometres) in a single day/night during dispersal (DEWHA 2010).
Potential habitat in the study area consists of a number of small drains within the rail
corridor with emergent vegetation. Targeted searches were conducted on five separate
nights (three of which were during conditions considered ideal for detection). No Green
and Golden Bell Frogs were recorded in the study area during these surveys, although the
species was recorded calling at the Davistown and Avoca reference sites during the same
period. Given the lack of recent records, distance from the nearest extant population, and
that frogs were not detected on site despite targeted searches when the species was
known to be active at local reference sites, it is considered highly unlikely that this species
is present within the study area.
The proposal would result in the loss of two open drains currently vegetated with Typha
and other emergent flora, and the disturbance of two other drains. The species (if present)
could potentially use these drains for breeding and/or dispersal, although given the lack of
recent records, this is unlikely. The proposal would not impact breeding within other known
local subpopulations (Davistown and Avoca). The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse
effect on the life cycle of the species such that a viable local population of the species is
likely to be placed at risk of extinction.
b)
in the case of an endangered population, whether the action proposed is likely to
have an adverse effect on the life cycle of the species that constitutes the endangered
population such that a viable local population of the species is likely to be placed at risk of
extinction
Not applicable.
c)
in the case of an endangered ecological community or critically endangered
ecological community, whether the action proposed:
(i) is likely to have an adverse effect on the extent of the ecological community such
that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
(ii) is likely to substantially and adversely modify the composition of the ecological
community such that its local occurrence is likely to be placed at risk of extinction
Not applicable.
d)
in relation to the habitat of a threatened species, population or ecological
community:
(i) the extent to which habitat is likely to be removed or modified as a result of the
action proposed
Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea)
Seven Part Test
Potential habitat at the project site consists of a number of longitudinal trunk drains,
located in the cess of the railway corridor. These vary in size, from about 10 m long to
about 100 m long. The amount of emergent vegetation varies between the various drains.
The proposal would result in the loss of two drains containing Typha comprising
approximately 0.07 ha of aquatic vegetation. Other drains in the Up cess with emergent
Typha would be retained, as would other habitat areas associated with Wingello and
Wyoming Creeks.
Despite the targeted searches for this species in appropriate conditions none were
recorded in the study area. It is highly unlikely that the species occurs.
(ii) whether an area of habitat is likely to become fragmented or isolated from other
areas of habitat as a result of the proposed action
The existing population is fragmented between Avoca Lagoon, Davistown and Kincumber
South (Biosphere Environmental Consultants 2006). An old record (1967) is present near
the study area on Wingello Creek. The study area is about 7-9 kilometres from the existing
population. The removal and disturbance of trunk drains in the project site would not
fragment an existing important population into two or more populations, and would not
further separate the potential habitat in the study area from the existing populations.
(iii) the importance of the habitat to be removed, modified, fragmented or isolated to
the long-term survival of the species, population or ecological community in the locality
Potential habitat at the project site consists of a number of longitudinal trunk drains,
located in the cess of the railway corridor, with varying levels of emergent vegetation. No
Green and Golden Bell Frogs were recorded in the study area, despite five nights of
survey. Frogs were active at known reference sites in the locality during these surveys.
The most recent nearby record is from 1967. Given the small area of habitat, lack of recent
records, and distance from the nearest existing population, the habitat in the study area is
not considered important for the long-term survival of the species in the locality.
e)
whether the action proposed is likely to have an adverse effect on critical habitat
(either directly or indirectly)
There is no critical habitat listed for the Green and Golden Bell Frog.
f)
whether the action proposed is consistent with the objectives or actions of a
recovery plan or threat abatement plan
The objectives of the draft Green and Golden Bell Frog Recovery Plan (DECC 2005)
generally relate to the protection and management of key populations and captive
populations. Green and Golden Bell Frogs were surveyed for in the study area on five
nights, but none were recorded. Given the lack of recent records near the project site, and
the small area of potential habitat that would be removed or disturbed, the proposal is
unlikely to interfere with the recovery of the species.
g)
whether the action proposed constitutes or is part of a key threatening process or
is likely to result in the operation of, or increase the impact of, a key threatening process
KTPs of relevance to the Green and Golden Bell Frog include:
Infection of frogs by amphibian chytrid fungus causing the disease chytridiomycosis while there is possibility that the presence of construction vehicles and work shoes
could spread this disease in the study area, it is considered unlikely.
Mitigation measures have been recommended to limit the spread of chytrid fungus.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance for the Green and Golden Bell Frog
The proposal is not likely to result in a significant impact on the Green and Golden Bell
Green and Golden Bell Frog (Litoria aurea)
Seven Part Test
Frog, pursuant to section 5A of the EP&A Act. Green and Golden Bell Frogs were
surveyed for in the study area on five nights (three in ideal conditions during periods when
the species was known to be active at local reference sites). None were recorded in the
study area. There are no recent the lack of recent records near the project site, and the
small area of potential habitat is highly disturbed. It is considered highly unlikely that Green
and Golden Bell Frogs are present in the study area.
Appendix D
EPBC Act Assessments of Significance
21/20704/173266
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
For threatened biodiversity listed under the EPBC Act significance assessments have been
completed in accordance with the EPBC Act Significant Impact Guidelines (Department of the
Environment, Heritage, Water and the Arts 2009). Under the EPBC Act an action will require
approval from the minister if the action has, will have, or is likely to have, a significant impact
on a MNES. On this basis, assessments of significance have been prepared for the following
MNES:
Threatened plants:
o
Melaleuca biconvexa
Threatened fauna:
o
Grey-headed Flying-fox
o
Green and Golden Bell Frog.
Migratory species.
Melaleuca biconvexa
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
According to the DEWHA (2009) ‘significant impact criteria’ for vulnerable species, an
action is likely to have a significant impact on an vulnerable species if there is a real
chance or possibility that it will:
i).
Lead to a long term decrease in the size of an important population
It is widely accepted that Melaleuca biconvexa reproduces both from seedlings and rhizomes
growth (Benson & McDougall 1998; Royal Botanic Gardens 2011). Pollination and seed
dispersal agents including birds, insects and wind (Benson & McDougall 1998) would also
continue to operate across the rail corridor. Therefore it is unlikely that the project would
create a barrier to the movement of these pollinators or otherwise affect the breeding of the
local population. It is therefore unlikely that the population to be removed would be a key
source population for breeding or dispersal.
Extensive additional populations of Melaleuca biconvexa are known to occur in many alluvial
valleys and creek lines of the Wyong and Gosford area (Bell 2004). Approximately 4 000 ha
of potential habitat is estimated to occur within lower Hunter Valley and Central Coast area
(NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service 2000), and approximately 362 ha within the
Gosford LGA (Bell 2004). The project site provides 0.4 ha of potential habitat, representing a
small proportion (<0.1%) of the suitable habitat for the species in the Gosford locality. The
project site is therefore unlikely to be a key source population or be necessary for maintaining
genetic diversity.
Melaleuca biconvexa occurs between Jervis Bay and Port Macquarie, with the main
concentration of records in the Gosford/Wyong area (NSW Scientific Committee 1998). The
project site is therefore not at or near the limit of the species range.
It is therefore considered that the individuals of Melaleuca biconvexa present within the study
area are not an important population.
ii).
Reduce the area of occupancy of an important population
Melaleuca biconvexa
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
Melaleuca biconvexa occurs as disjunct populations in coastal New South Wales from Jervis
Bay to Port Macquarie, but the main concentration of records is in the Gosford/Wyong area
(NSW Scientific Committee 1998). The regional population of M. biconvexa consists of many
thousands of individuals across a variety of land tenures. The species is not known in any
great numbers within state conservation areas (Gosford City Council, 2010), but has been
recorded in three conservation reserves: Bouddi National Park, Wallingat National Park and
Wyrrabalong National Park (Duncan, 2001). The Melaleuca biconvexa population observed
within the project site is not considered an important population. The loss of five individuals is
not likely to reduce the area of occupancy of the population.
iii).
Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations
The Melaleuca biconvexa population observed within the project site is not considered an
important population. The Melaleuca biconvexa population is currently fragmented by the
railway line and other gaps in its occurrence. Patches of Melaleuca biconvexa occurring more
than 1 km apart are considered separate populations, and patches occurring within 1 km are
considered subpopulations (Duncan, 2001). The loss of the five individuals would not
fragment the population into two or more, as the remaining individuals are within 1 km of each
other.
iv).
Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species
No critical habitat has been listed for this species, nor is the study area critical for the survival
of the Melaleuca biconvexa.
Habitat critical to the survival of a species may include areas that are not listed on the
Register of Critical Habitat if they are necessary:
for activities such as foraging, breeding, roosting, or dispersal
for the long-term maintenance of the species or ecological community (including the
maintenance of species essential to the survival of the species or ecological
community, such as pollinators)
to maintain genetic diversity and long term evolutionary development, or
for the reintroduction of populations or recovery of the species or ecological
community (Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts 2009).
The project site provides 0.4 ha of potential habitat, representing a small proportion (<0.1%)
of the suitable habitat for the species in the Gosford locality. The project site is therefore
unlikely to represent habitat critical to the survival of the Melaleuca biconvexa.
v).
Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population
Melaleuca biconvexa is a clonal species and can form dense suckering groups, particularly in
response to disturbance (Driscoll, 2008). Melaleuca species tend to produce large amounts of
nectar when they flower. They are generally pollinated either by birds, including honeyeaters
and lorikeets, or by insects (ANPSA, 2010). In a study of Melaleuca biconvexa in the Wyong
area, it was found that the main pollinator was the European Bee (Apis melifera), as well as
native bees, ants, moths, flies and butterflies (Duncan, 2001). Seeds are very small, and
dispersal is limited (Harden, 2002). Duncan (2001) observed that the majority of seed
dropped to the ground quickly after maturity, however is quite fine and could be dispersed by
wind or water for some distance. Duncan (2001) also noted that the dominant mode of
reproduction was through vegetative means (suckering).
The Melaleuca biconvexa population observed within the project site is not considered an
important population. The proposal would not impact movement of bees in the study area,
and would not impact vegetative suckering of the remaining individuals. The proposal is not
likely to disrupt the breeding cycle of the subpopulation.
vi).
Modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat
Melaleuca biconvexa
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
to the extent that the species is likely to decline
The project has been designed by minimise the impact upon native vegetation and habitat for
this species where possible. The alignment has been selected to minimise fragmentation and
the introduction of new edge effects. Melaleuca biconvexa uses a combination of vegetative
(clonal) and sexual reproduction (Benson & McDougall 1998). Pollination is likely to be via
insects and seed dispersal is likely to be bird dispersal and through gravity (Benson &
McDougall 1998). The project will not create any impediment to the dispersal or movement of
this species’ pollinators.
The project will modify and destroy a small area of approximately 0.27 ha of habitat and five
individuals of Melaleuca biconvexa. Extensive additional populations of Melaleuca biconvexa
are known to occur in many alluvial valleys and creek lines of the Wyong and Gosford area
(Bell 2004). More particularly, within the locality of the study area prolific populations are
known to occur from the Erina Valley catchment Bell (2004).
The project will have a small adverse effect on the Melaleuca biconvexa within the project
site; however, this will not significantly reduce the population size or extent of the local
population and will not place the local population at risk of extinction. It is considered that the
project is unlikely to result in the decline of Melaleuca biconvexa.
vii). Result in invasive species that are harmful to the vulnerable species becoming
established in the vulnerable species’ habitat
The habitat for Melaleuca biconvexa within the project site is already significantly impacted by
variety of potentially harmful invasive species, including Cinnamomum camphora*, and
Lantana camara*. The project will incorporate amelioration measures, including weed
management that is likely to prevent a significant spread of invasive species that are harmful
to Melaleuca biconvexa.
viii). Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline
No evidence of an introduced disease within the Melaleuca biconvexa was observed with the
study area. However, two diseases are known to occur on trees of the Myrtaceae family being
Phytophthora and Myrtle Rust. These are discussed in further detail below.
Phytophthora
No evidence of the soil borne pathogen Phytophthora cinnamomi was recorded within the
study area. Melaleuca biconvexa has been identified as being at risk from this pathogen as it
has been recorded to occur near other infected plants (NSW Scientific Committee 2002). This
pathogen is spread by spores in flowing water and can be spread through soil on vehicles.
The project may introduce this pathogen through vehicle traffic, however if the amelioration
measures outlined in Section 6 of the main report are adhered to then the project is unlikely to
result in the introduction of the Phytophthora pathogen that may cause the species to decline
of Melaleuca biconvexa population in the locality.
Eucalypt/Guava Rust and Myrtle Rust
There are two known fungal diseases which are associated with species of the Myrtaceae
family, of which Melaleuca biconvexa is a member. These include Eucalypt/Guava Rust
(Puccinia psidii) and Myrtle Rust (Uredo rangelii). It is unknown if Melaleuca biconvexa is
susceptible to Eucalypt Rust, however Melaleuca sp. are known to be susceptible to this
disease (NSW Scientific Committee 2011). Despite no records this fungus has been identified
as having high establishment potential in Australia (Plant Health Australia 2009).
Eucalypt/Guava Rust is difficult to identify from Myrtle Rust, and therefore has been
considered as part of this assessment. Mitigation measures for Eucalypt/Guava Rust would
be identical to that of Myrtle Rust which is discussed further below.
Myrtle Rust was recently recorded for the first time in Australia on the Central Coast, NSW in
April 2010 and has now been recorded from Shoalhaven NSW to the QLD border, generally
occurring along the NSW coast (Department of Industry and Investment 2010a). This fungus
is easily spread by wind, water insects, machinery, tools, vehicles and movement of infected
Melaleuca biconvexa
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
plant material (Department of Industry and Investment 2010b, 2010c). Whilst Myrtle Rust has
not been recorded in Melaleuca biconvexa, other Melaleuca species are known to have been
affected by this disease within NSW (NSW Scientific Committee 2011).
Due to the close proximity of the study area to the original infection source, this fungus could
be currently occurring within the remnant native bushland within the study area. However, no
Myrtle Rust was observed on any Myrtaceous species within the study area. If this fungus
was detected within study area then mitigation measures to control this disease would include
strict cleaning of all machinery, tools, clothing, footwear, hands, face and vehicles before
leaving and entering the site. Any infected plant material that is removed for the project will
need to be buried on site where practical. The Department of Industry and Investment is to be
informed of the location of the Myrtle Rust and the host plant species (Department of Industry
and Investment 2010b).
In conclusion, if the mitigation measures outlined above and the general weed management
amelioration measures outlined in Section 6 of the main report are adhered to, it is unlikely
that the project will result in introducing Myrtle or Eucalypt/Guava Rust that may cause a
decline of Melaleuca biconvexa within the locality or the wider region.
ix).
Interfere with the recovery of the species
There is currently no recovery plan for Melaleuca biconvexa. The project is unlikely to
substantially interfere with the recovery of Melaleuca biconvexa given the small number of
individuals and habitat to be cleared.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance:
The project will impact the local population of Melaleuca biconvexa as a result of clearing of
native vegetation and associated habitat for the species, however it is unlikely to significantly
impact the species or interfere with its recovery. The removal of five individuals of Melaleuca
biconvexa is not likely to be significant by comparison to the size and extant of the known
local population within the wider Erina Valley and Gosford region.
Grey-headed Flying-fox
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
According to the DEWHA (2009) ‘significant impact criteria’ for vulnerable species, an
action is likely to have a significant impact on an vulnerable species if there is a real
chance or possibility that it will:
i).
Lead to a long term decrease in the size of an important population
The Grey-headed Flying-fox is a highly mobile species which regularly travels up to 50km in a
night to forage, and has been shown to make migratory movements of almost 1000 km within
a year (Churchill 2008, Webb and Tidemann 1996). The subsequent mixing of populations
means that genetically the species can be treated as one population across its entire range in
eastern Australia (Webb and Tidemann 1996), and the numbers in any one camp are
influenced by food availability and the requirements of mating and raising young (KBCS
2011). This population is therefore considered an important population.
The Grey-headed flying-fox was observed flying over the study area during surveys. Greyheaded Flying-foxes would forage on the site in eucalypts and other myrtaceous species as
well as fruiting trees on a regular basis. The Proposal would involve the removal of 0.27
hectares of foraging habitat for the Grey-headed Flying-fox. No breeding habitat would be
impacted. Given the high mobility of this species and the proximity of large areas of protected
native vegetation in the locality (eg Brisbane Water National Park), the removal of this
vegetation is very unlikely to have a significant effect on the species such that a local
population would be placed at risk of extinction.
ii).
Reduce the area of occupancy of the species
The Grey-headed Flying-fox occurs along the east coast of NSW, as well as in inland areas.
The proposal would not reduce the area of occupancy of the species.
iii).
Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations
Fragmentation from the existing railway, roads, and urban areas is already present. The
proposal would involve the loss of a small number of forage trees along or adjacent to the
railway corridor. The clearing of this small area of vegetation would not fragment the
important population into two or more populations.
iv).
Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species
The draft national recovery plan states that foraging habitat that meets at least one of the
following criteria qualifies as critical habitat:
productive during winter and spring, when food bottlenecks have been identified.
known to support populations of > 30 000 individuals within an area of 50 kilometre
radius (the maximum foraging distance of an adult).
productive during the final weeks of gestation, and during the weeks of birth, lactation
and conception (September to May).
productive during the final stages of fruit proposal and ripening in commercial crops
affected by Grey-headed Flying-foxes (months vary between regions).
known to support a continuously occupied camp.
Vegetation at the site does not support a continuously occupied roost camp, and is not in a
region with significant commercial fruit crops. The project site would not support a population
of more than 30,000 individuals, but would provide foraging resources on occasion for some
individuals of the population. While there would be some productivity of foraging resources
during winter and spring, the resources present in the study area are limited in comparison to
available foraging resources in nearby areas, such as Brisbane Water National Park. The
small area of foraging habitat to be removed and the large tracts of other vegetation in the
locality mean that the site is unlikely to represent habitat critical to the survival of a local
Grey-headed Flying-fox
population of the species.
v).
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population
There are no roost camps in the study area. The nearest roost camp is located at Matcham,
about 7 kilometres to the east. No local roosting and breeding habitat would be affected by
the proposal.
Grey-headed Flying-foxes would forage on the site in eucalypts and other myrtaceous
species as well as fruiting trees on an occasional basis. Flowering of eucalypts would take
place intermittently through the year. Trees productive in winter and spring are important
during food bottlenecks for this species, and trees productive in summer and autumn are
important during the weeks of birth, lactation and conception.
Large areas of similar (and better quality) native vegetation are present throughout locality,
such as Brisbane Water National Park. Given the mobility of the species and the presence of
these alternative habitats, the removal of 0.27 hectares of foraging habitat is highly unlikely to
cause any disruption in the breeding cycle of local populations.
vi). Modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat
to the extent that the species is likely to decline
Seven highly productive species (productivity scores >0.91) occur in the LNE NSW region:
Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata), Red Bloodwood (C. gummifera), Pink Bloodwood (C.
intermedia), Swamp Mahogany (Eucalyptus robusta), Grey Ironbark (E. siderophloia), Forest
Red Gum (E. tereticornis) and Five-leaved Paperbark (Melaleuca quinquenervia). All but the
Corymbia (n=5, 71%) flower with an annual frequency >0.7, and produce substantial
resources in >60% of years (Eby and Law 2008). Of these highly productive species, only
Swamp Mahogany is present, and in limited numbers. Given the high mobility of this species
and the proximity of large areas of native vegetation in the locality (eg Brisbane Water
National Park), the removal of a small number of productive feed trees would be very unlikely
to have a significant effect on the long-term survival of a local population of the Grey-headed
Flying-fox.
vii). Result in invasive species that are harmful to the vulnerable species becoming
established in the vulnerable species’ habitat
No invasive species that may cause the Grey-headed Flying-fox to decline are likely to
become established in the study area as a result of the proposal.
viii). Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline
No diseases that may cause the Grey-headed Flying-fox to decline are likely to become
established in the study area as a result of the proposal. Mitigation measures are proposed to
prevent Phytophthora occurring in the study area as a result of construction works.
ix).
Interfere with the recovery of the species
Grey-headed Flying-fox
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
The draft recovery plan for the Grey-headed Flying-fox identifies the following recovery
objectives of relevance to the removal of foraging habitat for the species:
Objective 1. To identify and protect foraging habitat critical to the survival of Grey-headed
Flying-foxes throughout their range
The study area does not support a breeding camp or populations of >30,000
individuals. While trees are present that flower during winter and spring (during food
bottlenecks) and summer and autumn (during the breeding season), these trees are not
considered to be productive enough to support the local population in isolation. As
discussed above, the area of potential foraging habitat to be removed does not qualify as
critical habitat for the species. Therefore the proposed action is not inconsistent with this
objective.
Objective 2. To protect and increase the extent of key winter and spring foraging habitat of
Grey-headed Flying-foxes
Winter flowering eucalypts such as Swamp Mahogany are present in the study area,
although only in small numbers. Foraging resources in the study area are not considered
to be key foraging habitat for the Grey-headed Flying-fox, although the species may forage
in the study area on occasion during these seasons. Some replacement plantings would
be undertaken, including the planting of foraging plants for this species.
The proposal is not likely, therefore, to interfere with the recovery of this species.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance:
The proposal is not ‘likely’ to have a ‘significant impact’ on the Grey-headed Flying-fox.
Green and Golden Bell Frog
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
According to the DEWHA (2009) ‘significant impact criteria’ for vulnerable species, an action
is likely to have a significant impact on an vulnerable species if there is a real chance or
possibility that it will:
i).
Lead to a long term decrease in the size of an important population
There are two known, extant populations of Green and Golden Bell Frog at Davistown and
North Avoca (White and Pyke 2008, OEH 2011a), between 8-10 km to the south-east and
east of the project site. All existing populations are considered ‘important populations’ for the
purpose of the EPBC Act. A new individual within ten kilometres of a known site can be
considered a member of a subpopulation of the known population, except where connectivity
between populations does not exist (DEWHA 2010). While there are urban areas between
these populations and the project site, any individuals that may occur at the project site are
considered part of the existing Davistown/Avoca population for the purpose of this
assessment.
Abundances have been estimated at approximately 100 individuals at North Avoca and less
than 20 individuals at Davistown (Biosphere Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd 2006). The
most recent record near the study area is from 1967. No Green and Golden Bell Frogs were
recorded in the study area, despite five nights of survey. Frogs were active at known
reference sites in the locality during targeted surveys in late November 2011 and January
2012. It is considered unlikely that the trunk drains adjacent to railway line would support a
subpopulation of the species, given the high level of disturbance and lack of recent records.
The removal and disturbance of trunk drains in the project site containing approximately
0.07 ha of aquatic vegetation is unlikely to lead to a long term decrease in the size of the
important population.
ii).
Reduce the area of occupancy of the species
The Green and Golden Bell Frog now mostly occurs in coastal lowland areas in New South
Wales and Victoria. The current species’ range is thought to extend from around Brunswick
Heads in northern New South Wales (about 50 kilometres south of the Queensland border) to
around Lake Wellington, just west of Lakes Entrance in south-eastern Victoria (DEWHA
2010). No Green and Golden Bell Frogs were recorded in the study area, despite five nights
of survey. Frogs were active at known reference sites in the locality during these surveys. The
most recent nearby record is from 1967. Given the small area of habitat, lack of recent
records, and distance from the nearest existing population, the species is considered highly
unlikely to be present in the study area. The removal and disturbance of trunk drains in the
project site would not reduce the area of occupancy of the species.
iii).
Fragment an existing important population into two or more populations
The existing population is fragmented between Avoca Lagoon, Davistown and Kincumber
South (Biosphere Environmental Consultants 2006). An old record (1967) is present near the
study area on Wingello Creek. Potential habitat present in the study area is already
fragmented and is about 7-9 kilometres from the existing population. The removal and
disturbance of trunk drains in the project site would not fragment an existing important
population into two or more populations.
iv).
Adversely affect habitat critical to the survival of the species
Green and Golden Bell Frogs prefer water bodies which are still, shallow, ephemeral,
unpolluted, unshaded habitat, free of Gambusia and other predatory fish, with a grassy area
nearby. The substrate of the ponds should be sand or rock, aquatic plants should be present
and there should be a range of possible diurnal shelter sites (Pyke and White, 1996).
Habitat at the project site consists of a number of trunk drains adjacent to the rail lines. These
vary in quality, with some having large areas of Typha and others with only limited emergent
vegetation. Drains are generally unshaded and have diurnal shelter sites present. These
drains are in a highly disturbed environment in the cess of the railway corridor, receiving
Green and Golden Bell Frog
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
stormwater from the rail corridor. The rail corridor runs through a generally urban area, with
residential and industrial areas immediately adjacent. The habitat in the project site not
considered critical to the survival of the species due to the lack of recent records in the area.
v).
Disrupt the breeding cycle of an important population
The Green and Golden Bell Frog is known to breed in shallow water bodies with emergent
vegetation during late winter to early autumn). The species can move long distances (of up to
one and a half kilometres) in a single day/night during dispersal (DEWHA 2010). The proposal
would result in the loss of two open drains currently vegetated with Typha and other emergent
flora, and the disturbance of two other drains. The species could use these drains for
breeding and/or dispersal, although given the lack of recent records, this is unlikely. Potential
habitat present in the study area is already fragmented and is about 7-9 kilometres from the
existing population and it is unlikely that any frogs (if present in the study area, which is highly
unlikely) would move between the study area and these reference populations. The proposal
would not impact breeding within other subpopulations (Davistown and Avoca).
vi). Modify, destroy, remove, isolate or decrease the availability or quality of habitat to the
extent that the species is likely to decline
Potential habitat at the project site consists of a number of longitudinal trunk drains, located in
the cess of the railway corridor. These vary in size, from about 10 m long to about 100 m
long. The amount of emergent vegetation varies between the various drains. Approximately
0.07 ha of aquatic vegetation would be removed for the proposal.
The proposal would result in the loss of two drains containing Typha, and the disturbance on
two drains. Other drains in the Up cess would be retained, as would other habitat areas
associated with Wingello and Wyoming Creeks. The small area of habitat that would be lost
or modified is not likely to cause the species to decline.
vii). Result in invasive species that are harmful to the vulnerable species becoming
established in the vulnerable species’ habitat
The proposal is unlikely to introduce invasive species (eg Mosquitofish) into the project site.
viii). Introduce disease that may cause the species to decline
The presence of construction vehicles has the potential to introduce chytrid fungus to the area
(if not already present), or spread it within the study area. It is likely that the fungus is already
present, given the highly disturbed nature of water bodies in the area. The possible
introduction of the fungus to the area is not likely to cause the species to decline, given the
lack of recent records in the area.
ix).
Interfere with the recovery of the species
The objectives of the draft Green and Golden Bell Frog recovery plan (DECC 2005) generally
relate to the protection and management of key populations and captive populations. Given
the lack of recent records near the project site, and the small area of potential habitat that
would be removed or disturbed, the proposal is unlikely to interfere with the recovery of the
species.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance:
The proposal is not ‘likely’ to have a ‘significant impact’ on the Green and Golden Bell Frog.
Green and Golden Bell Frogs were surveyed for in the study area on five nights (three in ideal
conditions during periods when the species was known to be active at local reference sites).
None were recorded in the study area. There are no recent the lack of recent records near the
project site, and the small area of potential habitat is highly disturbed. It is considered highly
unlikely that Green and Golden Bell Frogs are present in the study area.
Migratory Species
EPBC Act - Assessment of Significance
According to the DEWHA (2009) ‘significant impact criteria’ for migratory species, an
action is likely to have a significant impact on a migratory species if there is a real
chance or possibility that it will:
i). Substantially modify (including by fragmenting, altering fire regimes, altering
nutrient cycles or altering hydrological cycles), destroy or isolate an area of
important habitat for a migratory species;
According to DEWHA (2009), an area of important habitat for a migratory species is defined
as:
a. habitat utilised by a migratory species occasionally or periodically within a region that
supports an ecologically significant proportion of the population of the species, and/or
b. habitat that is of critical importance to the species at particular life stages, and/or
c. habitat utilised by a migratory species which is at the limit of the species’ range, and/or
d. habitat within an area where the species is declining.
An ‘ecologically significant proportion’ of the population of a migratory species varies, as listed
migratory species cover a broad range of species with different lifecycles and population
cycles. Factors to be considered include the species’ population status, genetic
distinctiveness and species specific behavioural patterns (eg site fidelity and dispersal rates)
A ’Population’, in relation to migratory species, means the entire population or any
geographically separate part of the population of any species or lower taxon of migratory
animals.
The Black-faced Monarch was recorded in the study area in the moist forest habitats between
Narara Creek and Manns Road. The project site is not considered potential habitat for any
migratory species.
This species is a summer breeding migrant to coastal south-eastern Australia, breeding in
rainforests, eucalypt woodlands, coastal scrub and damp gullies (Boles 1998). This species
has a very large range and population trends appear to be stable (Birdlife International
2009b). The habitat in the project site does not constitute habitat for this species and would
not therefore support an ecologically significant proportion of the population of this species,
would not be critical to this species (as a whole, or any individuals that may occur) at
particular life stages, is not at the range limit of the species and is not in an area of population
decline for the species. As such, the project site is not considered to be important habitat for
the Black-faced Monarch.
ii). Result in an invasive species that is harmful to the migratory species becoming
established in an area of important habitat for the migratory species; or
No invasive species that are harmful to the Black-faced Monarch are likely to become
established in the study area as a result of the proposal.
iii). Seriously disrupt the lifecycle (breeding, feeding, migration or resting behaviour) of
an ecologically significant proportion of the population of a migratory species.
No breeding or foraging habitat for the Black-faced Monarch would be impacted. The
proposal is not likely to seriously disrupt the lifecycle of an ecologically significant proportion
the Black-faced Monarch’s population.
Conclusion of Assessment of Significance:
The proposal is not ‘likely’ to ‘significantly impact’ the Black-faced Monarch.
GHD
133 Castlereagh St Sydney NSW 2000
T: 2 9239 7100 F: 2 9239 7199 E: [email protected]
© GHD 2012
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose
for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission.
Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
Document Status
Rev
No.
0
Reviewer
Author
Name
K Crosby
R Hamer
D Landenberger
21/20704/173266
Alex Cockerill
Jayne Tipping
Gosford Passing Loops
Ecological Impact Assessment
Approved for Issue
Signature
Name
Jayne Tipping
Signature
Date
13/06/12