Bauxite Hills Mine Offset Strategy

Date of Preparation 27 April 2020

Bauxite Hills Mine

Offset Strategy

Bauxite Hills Mining and Barging Project (EPBC 2015/7538) Skardon River Bauxite Mining Project (EPBC 2014/7305)

Offset Strategy - Bauxite Hills Mine Report

Item Page Section Comments

Insert

paragraph

21 of 31 4.3 Paragraph inserted at request of DoEE

Insert new

section

21 and 22 of 32 4.3 Existing section 4.3 removed and replaced with new

section 4.3 at request of DoEE

Change

section

22 4.3 Change to date for Metro offset strategy

commitment in consultation with DoEE

Change

section

22 4.3 Change dates to align with the DoEE notice being

received.

Insert

paragraph

22 4.4 Include a note on Table 4.1 to identify removal of

Red Goshawk and Protected Area Establishment

from the Concept Strategy.

Delete section 25 Table 4-1 Remove section on Protected Area Establishment

Delete section 27 Table 4-1 Remove section on Red Goshawk.

Change

section

22 4.3 Change dates in accordance with email from Casa

Dalton on 12/09/2019.

Change

section

22 4.4 Modify wording on Red Goshawk in accordance

with email from Casa Dalton on 12/09/2019.

Change

section

27 Table 6-1 Update position names for roles and responsibilities

Change

section

22 4.3 Change dates to extend timeframes in response to

COVID-19 restrictions

Word update Document All Change Department of Environment and Energy, to

Department of Agriculture, Water and the

Environment, and replace DoEE with DAWE.

* Use after Rev. 0

Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed

Approved

Study

Manager Sign-off Client

A 06-09-2017Draft for Client

Review

B. Ezzy

D. Hodgson

B. Thomson

J. Brown B. Ezzy J. BrownMetro

Mining Ltd

0 07-09-2017 Final for issue B. EzzyJ. Brown

C. FishB. Ezzy J. Brown

Metro

Mining Ltd

1 12-09-2017 Revised for use B. EzzyJ. Brown

C. FishB. Ezzy J. Brown

Metro

Mining Ltd

2 05/09/2018 Revised for use C. Fish C.Fish NA NA NA

3 22/07/2019 Revised for use C.Fish C.Fish NA NA NA

4 26/09/2019 Revised for use C.Fish C.Fish NA NA NA

5 09/04/2020 Revised for use C. Fish C. Fish NA NA NA

6 27/04/2020 Revised from

DAWE comment C.Fish Tony Dowd NA NA NA


Disclaimer

This Offset Strategy (Report) has been prepared for Metro Mining Limited (Metro Mining) by Amec Foster Wheeler Australia Pty Ltd (Amec Foster Wheeler), based on assumptions as identified throughout the text and upon information and data supplied by others.

The Report is to be read in the context of the methodology, procedures and techniques used, Amec Foster Wheeler’s assumptions, and the circumstances and constraints under which the Report was written. The Report is to be read as a whole, and sections or parts thereof should therefore not be read or relied upon out of context.

Amec Foster Wheeler has, in preparing the Report, followed methodology and procedures, and exercised due care consistent with the intended level of accuracy, using its professional judgment and reasonable care. However, no warranty should be implied as to the accuracy of estimates or other values and all estimates and other values are only valid as at the date of the Report and will vary thereafter.

Parts of the Report have been prepared or arranged by the client or third party contributors, as detailed in the document. While the contents of those parts have been generally reviewed by Amec Foster Wheeler for inclusion into the Report, they have not been fully audited or sought to be verified by Amec Foster Wheeler. Amec Foster Wheeler is not in a position to, and does not, verify the accuracy or completeness of, or adopt as its own, the information and data supplied by others and disclaims all liability, damages or loss with respect to such information and data.

In respect of all parts of the Report, whether or not prepared by Amec Foster Wheeler no express or implied representation or warranty is made by Amec Foster Wheeler or by any person acting for and/or on behalf of Amec Foster Wheeler to any third party that the contents of the Report are verified, accurate, suitably qualified, reasonable or free from errors, omissions or other defects of any kind or nature. Third parties who rely upon the Report do so at their own risk and Amec Foster Wheeler disclaims all liability, damages or loss with respect to such reliance.

Amec Foster Wheeler disclaims any liability, damage and loss to the client and to third parties in respect of the publication, reference, quoting or distribution of the Report or any of its contents to and reliance thereon by any third party.

This disclaimer must accompany every copy of this Report, which is an integral document and must be read in its entirety.


Declaration of accuracy

I declare that:

1. To the best of my knowledge, all the information contained in, or accompanying this Offset Strategy, to satisfy requirements of Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) approvals ref. EPBC2014/7305 and EPBC2015/7538 is complete, current and correct.

2. I am duly authorised to sign this declaration on behalf of the approval holder.

3. I am aware that:

a) Section 490 of the EPBC Act makes it an offence for an approval holder to provide

information in response to an approval condition where the person is reckless as to whether the information is false or misleading.

b) Section 491 of the EPBC Act makes it an offence for a person to provide information or documents to specified persons who are known by the person to be performing a duty or carrying out a function under the EPBC Act or the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2000 (Cth) where the person knows the information or document is false or misleading.

c) The above offences are punishable on conviction by imprisonment, a fine or both.

Signed

Full name (please print) Colleen Fish

Organisation (please print) Metro Mining Ltd

Date 24th April 2020


T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

Terms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................................... 6

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 7

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................ 7

1.2 Purpose of Offset Strategy ................................................................................................................ 7

1.3 Statutory Requirements and where addressed in this Offset Strategy ............................................. 9

Habitat Mapping & Residual Impacts ....................................................................................................... 12

2.1 Habitat Requirements for Target Species ....................................................................................... 12

2.2.1 Red Goshawk .............................................................................................................................. 12

2.2.2 Masked Owl (Northern) ................................................................................................................ 12

2.2.3 Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat ........................................................................................................ 12

2.2.4 Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld) ................................................................................................ 13

2.2 Residual Impacts to Habitat ............................................................................................................. 13

Species Conservation Advice ................................................................................................................... 15

Offset Strategy Framework ...................................................................................................................... 20

4.1 Environmental Offset Principles ...................................................................................................... 20

4.2 Financial Commitment ..................................................................................................................... 20

4.3 Offset Projects ................................................................................................................................. 21

4.4 Offset Project Delivery Themes ....................................................................................................... 22

Monitoring & Reporting ............................................................................................................................. 27

Roles & Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................... 27

References ............................................................................................................................................... 28

APPENDIX A: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR AN OFFSET PROJECT PROPOSAL .............................. 31

F I G U R E S

Figure 1-1: Project Location.............................................................................................................................. 11

Figure 2-1: Vegetation Mapping and Potential Impacts to Habitat ................................................................... 14

T A B L E S

Table 1-1: Conditions of approval specifying this Offset Strategy ...................................................................... 9

Table 3-1 Information on MNES Species ......................................................................................................... 15

Table 4-1: Offset Project Themes ..................................................................................................................... 23

Table 6-1: Roles and Responsibilities .............................................................................................................. 27


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 6 of 31

Terms and Abbreviations The following terms and abbreviations are used within this report.

Abbreviation Description

ABLV Australian Bat Lyssavirus

BHM Bauxite Hills Mine (encompasses both BHM-BH & BHM-SR)

BHM-BH Bauxite Hills Mining and Barging Project

BHM-SR Skardon River Bauxite Project

BLA Barge Loading Area

DATSIP Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships

DAWE Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

DEHP Department of Environment and Heritage Protection

DOGIT Deed of Grant in Trust

DNRM Department of Natural Resources and Mines

DSO Direct Shipping Ore

EA Environmental Authority

e.g. For example

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1994

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

ESAs Environmentally Sensitive Areas

EVNT Endangered, Vulnerable or Near Threatened

GDE Groundwater dependent ecosystems

GIS Geographical Information System

GTRE Ground-truthed Regional Ecosystem

ha Hectare

i.e. That is

km Kilometre

MDL Mineral Development Licence

Metro Mining Metro Mining Limited

MIA Mine Infrastructure Area

MNES Matters of National Environmental Significance

Mtpa Million tonnes per annum

NC Act Nature Conservation Act 1992

OMAC Old Mapoon Aboriginal Corporation

OS Offset Strategy

RE Regional Ecosystem

SEIS Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement

SPRAT Species Profile and Threats Database

TEC Threatened Ecological Community

https://www.datsip.qld.gov.au/people-communities/aboriginal-torres-strait-islander-cultural-heritage/what-cultural-heritage

https://www.datsip.qld.gov.au/people-communities/aboriginal-torres-strait-islander-cultural-heritage/what-cultural-heritage


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 7 of 31

Introduction 1.1 Background

Metro Mining Limited (Metro Mining) is constructing the Bauxite Hills Mine (BHM), comprising the Skardon

River Bauxite Project (BHM-SR) and Bauxite Hills Mining and Barging Project (BHM-BH). Metro Mining is the

parent company for Gulf Alumina Pty Ltd, Aldoga Minerals Pty Ltd and Cape Alumina Pty Ltd, the respective

approval holders for BHM which is situated on the western coastline of Cape York, approximately 35

kilometres (km) northeast of Mapoon, Queensland (Figure 1-1).

The projects consist of mining bauxite from open cut pits which is then trucked via haul road to a Barge

Loading Area (BLA) and Mine Infrastructure Area (MIA) adjacent to the Skardon River. Bauxite is loaded

onto barges where tugs will then tow the barges down the river and out to an anchorage point beyond the

Skardon River mouth to awaiting freight vessels. The bauxite is suitable as a Direct Shipping Ore (DSO)

product (i.e. ore is extracted and loaded directly to ships with no washing or processing required). The

operations will initially produce 2 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) reaching up to 6Mtpa combined, subject to

market conditions. Mining operations are planned to be undertaken in the dry season only, with shut down

during heavy rain periods of the wet season (estimated from January to March).

The combined mining operations propose to clear between 2,746ha and 3,000 ha of remnant vegetation

over the life of the mine. Progressive vegetation clearing will generally occur on an annual basis over the life

of the project, which is planned for up to 18 years. This approach minimises the extent of cleared land

required at each stage, and reduces impacts to fauna species by increasing habitat availability and

connectivity between habitat patches, as progressive rehabilitation of cleared areas will also be undertaken

as soon as practicable after mining of an area is completed.

Metro has an Ancillary Agreement with The Ankamuthi People, the Native Title holders, and the Old Mapoon

Aboriginal Corporation (OMAC) who are the trustees of the land. The agreement provides for the

management of cultural heritage, the provision of jobs and business opportunities for the Ankamuthi and

royalty payments over the life of the mine. The agreement also provides for the input of OMAC and the

Ankamuthi into matters including rehabilitation and final landform. Development of the mine is expected to

provide a substantial economic contribution to the area.

The BHM-SR (EPBC 2014/7305) was declared a ‘controlled action’ under the Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) on 11 September 2014, and BHM-BH (EPBC 2015/7538) on

18 September 2015 for; sections 18 and 18A (listed threatened species and communities), 20 and 20A

(listed migratory species) and 23 and 24A (Commonwealth marine areas). Both projects were assessed

under the bilateral agreement between the Commonwealth and the State of Queensland using the

Environmental Impact Statement’s (EIS) prepared under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act).

Both projects have now received approvals under the EPBC Act and Environmental Authorities (EAs) under

the EP Act.

1.2 Purpose of Offset Strategy

The EPBC Act conditions of approval for both projects require that clearance of habitat for the Red Goshawk

(Erythrotriorchis radiatus), Masked Owl (Northern) (Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli), Bare-rumped Sheathtail

Bat (Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus) or Black-footed Tree-rat (North Queensland) (BHM-BH only) is

to be offset by preparing and implementing an Offset Strategy approved by the Minister. The Offset Strategy

is to be implemented through Offset Projects approved by the Department.

This Offset Strategy (OS) has been prepared to meet the EPBC Act conditions of approval for the BHM-SR

(EPBC 2014/7305) and BHM-BH (EPBC 2015/7538) pertaining to the requirement for preparation of an

Offset Strategy and delivery of environmental offsets for the Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern), Bare-

rumped Sheathtail Bat and Black-footed Tree-rat (North Queensland).

This OS provides a framework for identifying, developing and seeking approval for offset projects to meet the

offset requirements for EPBC 2014/7305 and EPBC 2015/7538. The framework includes:

• Financial commitments for delivery of environmental offset projects

• Key recovery and research themes that will guide the environmental offset projects to be developed

and submitted to the DAWE for approval

• Consultation processes and timeframes for developing environmental offset projects


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 8 of 31

• Reporting requirements.

As BHM will be operated as a single operation it is proposed that the offset requirements for EPBC

2014/7305 and EPBC 2015/7538 be delivered in a coordinated manner through this OS.

This OS includes the following information:

• Based on current information a conservative estimate of the total extent of habitat impacts required

to be offset.

• Summary of information from relevant species recovery plans, conservation advice and threat

abatement plans, from which threats and priority actions (including recovery and research projects)

are identified for the protected matters.

• Offset project themes and/or objectives that will address the threats and priority actions identified in

the above plans.

• Outline of a process for consulting with DAWE, State Government Agencies, relevant species

recovery team/s, and traditional owners/land managers for the purpose of developing offset projects

for approval by DAWE.

• Commitments around budget expenditure, timing and reporting for the delivery of offset projects.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 9 of 31

1.3 Statutory Requirements and where addressed in this Offset Strategy

The specific conditions of approval for each project, and where they are addressed in this OS, are outlined in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1: Conditions of approval specifying this Offset Strategy

Approval

Condition

Condition Requirement Plan Reference How the plan addresses requirements

Bauxite Hills Mine - Skardon River tenements (EPBC2014/7305)

Condition 5

Prior to the commencement of the action, the approval holder must

submit an Offset Strategy for the written approval of the Minister.

The Offset Strategy must be a framework for how the clearance of

habitat for the Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern) and Bare-

rumped Sheathtail Bat will be offset, and must:

a) review relevant approved conservation advices, recovery plans

and threat abatement plans;

b) identify threats to Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern) and Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat, and potential recovery actions and research opportunities; c) outline a process for developing Offset Projects, and a staged process for submitting Offset Projects to the Department for the written approval of the Department.

This whole OS addresses this condition.

In particular:

Chapter 3 addresses 5a and 5b

Chapter 4 addresses 5c

A conservative approach has been taken assuming all woodlands, including Eucalyptus tetradonta woodlands will provide habitat for these species and their prey. These vegetation communities are mapped in Figure 2-1.

Chapter 3 outlines the relevant approved conservation advices, recovery plans and threat abatement plans for the target species and summarises key threats, recovery actions and research opportunities.

Chapter 4 outlines a process for developing offset projects, budgets to be allocated and associated timeframes for the delivery and reporting on those projects. Chapter 4 also identifies key recovery and research themes that will inform the offset projects to be developed.

Bauxite Hills Mine – Bauxite Hills tenements (EPBC2015/7538)

Condition 5

Prior to the commencement of the action, the approval holder must

submit an Offset Strategy for the written approval of the Minister.

The Offset Strategy must be a framework for how the clearance of

habitat for the Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern), Bare-rumped

Sheathtail Bat and Black-footed Tree-rat (North Queensland) will be

offset, and must:

a. review relevant approved conservation advices, recovery

plans and threat abatement plans;

This whole OS addresses this condition.

In particular:

Chapter 3 addresses 5a and 5b

Chapter 4 addresses 5c

A conservative approach has been taken at this time, and it is assumed all woodlands, including Eucalyptus tetradonta woodlands will provide habitat for these species and their prey. Mapping of these communities is provided in Figure 2-1.

Chapter 3 outlines the relevant approved conservation advices, recovery plans and threat abatement plans for the target species and summarises key threats, recovery actions and research opportunities.

Chapter 4 outlines a process for developing offset projects, budgets to be allocated and associated timeframes for the


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 10 of 31

Approval

Condition

Condition Requirement Plan Reference How the plan addresses requirements

b. identify threats to Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern), Bare-

rumped Sheathtail Bat and Black-footed Tree-rat (North

Queensland), and potential recovery actions and research

opportunities;

c. outline a process for developing Offset Projects, and a staged process for submitting Offset Projects to the Department for the written approval of the Department.

delivery and reporting on those projects. Chapter 4 also identifies key recovery and research themes that will inform the offset projects to be developed.

Metro Mining - 652740 - Title: Bauxite Hills - Skardon River Offset LOCATION DIAGRAM

AMEC does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the map and does not make any warranty about the data.AMEC is not under any liability to the user for any loss or damage (including consequential loss or damage) which the user may suffer resulting from the use of this map.

Path:

W:\P

ROJE

CTS\

EI\M

etro M

ining

Ltd\6

5274

0\2.0_

Proje

ct_De

livery

\GIS

\Map

ping\F

igure1

_1_P

rojec

t_Loc

ation

s.mxd

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

ML 100130BH1 HaulRoad

ML 20689BAUXITE HIL LS6 WE ST ( BH6 WE ST)

ML 40069SKARDO N

ML 40082SKARDO N

ML 20687BAUXITE

HILLS 2 ( BH2)

ML 20676BAUXITEHILLS 1

ML 6025SKARDO N

RIV ER NO. 1

EMBLEY RIVER

SKARDON RIVER

JACKSON RIVER

WENLOCK RIVER

DUCIE RIVER

DULHUNTY RIVER

MISSION RIVER

NAPRANUM

WEIPA

DUYFKENPOINT

ANDOOM

BERTIEHAUGH

MAPOON

ALBATROSSBAY

PORTMUSGRAVE

(A3) GCS GDA 1994

1:400,000

LEGENDFigure 1-1

Project Locations

WORK REQUEST NUMBER: 652740ISSUE DATE

14/08/2017

AUTHOR

JLG

QA CHECK APPROVED

JB

0 5 10Kilometers

!

!

WEIPA

THURSDAYISLAND

MAP REV.

A

REVISION NOTE

Issued for Information

! LocalitiesMajor RiverBauxite Hills and Skardon River Project Mining Lease Areas

DATA SOURCES:World Base Map Copyright © 2015 DeLormeMining leases, Roads, Rivers - QLD Government ¹


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 12 of 31

Habitat Mapping & Residual Impacts 2.1 Habitat Requirements for Target Species

Habitat information for each target species is outlined below.

2.2.1 Red Goshawk

Red Goshawks generally avoid very densely vegetated or very open habitats, but will hunt along ecotones

between such habitats and woodlands or forests. In northern Queensland, Red Goshawks are mainly

associated with extensive, uncleared, mosaics of native vegetation, especially riparian vegetation, open

forest and woodland that contain a mix of eucalypt, ironbark and bloodwood species (Pandanus Solutions,

2017). All identified nests have been within 1km of permanent water, often adjacent to rivers or clearings,

and are usually in the tallest (mean height = 31m) and most massive trees. In Cape York, Red Goshawks

are mainly found in vegetation types dominated by Eucalyptus tetrodonta, bloodwoods Corymbia spp. or

paperbarks Melaleuca spp. (Pandanus Solutions, 2017).

The BHM-SR and BHM-BH mine lease areas contain large tracts of remnant vegetation dominated by

woodlands including E. tetrodonta, Corymbia novoguinens and melaleuca forests. The area also contains

areas of riparian vegetation and permanent and ephemeral water sources including Skardon River,

Namaleta Creek and wetlands.

As a conservative approach all areas of eucalypt, corymbia and melaleuca woodlands which have the

potential to contain hollows are considered potential foraging habitat for the Red Goshawk, and remnant

vegetation within 1km of permanent water is likely to provide potential nesting habitat (Figure 2-1).

2.2.2 Masked Owl (Northern)

Masked Owls are restricted to open forests and savanna woodlands of northern Australia with very few

records across its very broad range. There are too few records of the northern Australian mainland

subspecies of Masked Owl to characterise habitat, but it is dependent on relatively large tree hollows in

sclerophyll forest and woodlands with a grassy understorey or a mosaic of sparse and dense ground cover

(Pandanus Solutions, 2017). The Masked Owl (Northern) nests in large hollows in live or dead trees, usually

in eucalypts in open forest (Higgins, 1999). Nests are most commonly in the main trunk with a side entrance

but may be in vertical spouts or limbs.

It is a specialised predator of small mammals and thought to hunt preferentially within riverine gallery forests

where prey is more abundant. Preferring ecotones around preferred habitats such as riparian forests (Gulf

Alumina, 2016).

The BHM-SR and BHM-BH mine lease areas contain large tracts of remnant vegetation dominated by E.

tetrodonta woodlands and forests with a grassy understorey that contain tree hollows of varying sizes. Based

on the pre-disturbance survey methodology trees with larger hollows (> 20cm diameter) are considered as

suitable nesting sites for Masked Owl (Northern). As a conservative approach all areas of eucalypt, corymbia

and melaleuca woodlands are considered potential foraging habitat for the Masked Owl (Northern) (Figure

2-1).

2.2.3 Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat

Within Australia, the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat is a poorly known species of insectivorous bat that inhabits

tropical eucalypts woodland and possibly rainforest in coastal lowlands of north-eastern Queensland and top

end of Northern Territory. It prefers open woodlands, particularly Poplar Gum (E. platyphylla) woodlands and

tall open forests (Pandanus Solutions, 2017). Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bats roost in small colonies (3 to 40

individuals) in hollows of old trees, buildings and shallow caves, whereas maternity roost sites can contain

100 individuals. All confirmed roost sites in Australia have been in large eucalypts, including E. tetrodonta

where diameters of hollow trunks were large (18-40cm diameter) (Pandanus Solutions, 2017).

The BHM-SR and BHM-BH mine lease areas contain large tracts of remnant vegetation dominated by E.

tetrodonta woodlands with potential to contain tree hollows. As a conservative approach all areas of

eucalypt, corymbia and melaleuca woodlands are considered potential roosting and foraging habitat for the

Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat (Figure 2-1).


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 13 of 31

2.2.4 Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld)

Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld) is a nocturnal medium-sized native mammal that dens mostly in tree

hollows, but occasionally in dense foliage (notably of Pandanus) and occasionally in buildings. Most

knowledge for this species is derived from another subspecies which occurs in the Kimberley and mainland

Northern Territory (Pandanus Solutions, 2017).

In Cape York it has been recorded mostly from eucalypt forests and woodlands around Mareeba but there

are records sparsely across Cape York Peninsula. It forages on the ground and in trees, and individuals may

move up to 500m from a roost site to foraging areas. Its diet comprises mostly fruits and seeds, but also

includes some invertebrates, flowers and grass (Pandanus Solutions, 2017). The species preferred habitat is

likely to be eucalypt woodlands close to watercourses/low-lying areas (Pandanus Solutions, 2017).

The BHM-BH mine lease area contains large tracts of remnant vegetation dominated by E. tetrodonta

woodlands with potential to contain tree hollows. As a conservative approach all areas of eucalypt, corymbia

and melaleuca woodlands are considered potential denning and foraging habitat for the Black-footed Tree-

rat (Figure 2-1).

2.2 Residual Impacts to Habitat

Due to similar habitat requirements for all four fauna species where there is a reliance on E. tetradonta

woodlands that support tree hollows (as illustrated in Figure 2-1) a total residual impact of 2,746ha is

required to be offset based on the current mine design. As the mine design is still being finalised, for the

purposes of this OS, a total area estimated as requiring to be offset under the EPBC Act Environmental

Offset Policy is 3,000ha. The Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld) is only required to be offset on BHM-BH,

therefore while it does not alter the total area required to be offset, it is noted that only a residual impact of

1,550ha is required to be offset for this species.

Progressive vegetation clearing will generally occur on an annual basis for the area required to be mined in

that same year. Clearing will occur over the life of BHM, which is planned for up to 18 years, resulting in an

average of 153ha of clearing per annum. However the actual amount will vary from year to year based on

operational constraints and market conditions. This approach minimises the extent of clearing required each

year, and reduces impacts to fauna species by increasing habitat availability and connectivity between

habitat patches. Progressive rehabilitation of cleared areas will also be undertaken as mining is completed.

In the first year the priority areas to be cleared will be mine infrastructure areas such as the port and barge

loading facility, accommodation camp and haul roads. There will also be some pit areas required to be

cleared, however these are still being finalised as part of the mine planning.

Metro Mining - 652740 - Title: Bauxite Hills - Skardon River Offset LOCATION DIAGRAM

AMEC does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the map and does not make any warranty about the data.AMEC is not under any liability to the user for any loss or damage (including consequential loss or damage) which the user may suffer resulting from the use of this map.

Path:

W:\P

ROJE

CTS\

EI\M

etro M

ining

Ltd\6

5274

0\2.0_

Proje

ct_De

livery\

GIS\

Mapp

ing\Fi

gure2

_1_V

egeta

tion_

Mapp

ing_V

s_dis

turba

nce_

areas

.mxd

Accomodation Camp

Skard

onRiv

erHa

ulRo

ad

Namaleta Creek

Airstrip

BH1 Haul Road

BH1 MLA boundary

BH6 West MLA boundary

Skardon River 1 MLA

BH6 East MLA boundary

BargeLoadingFacility

SKARDON RIVER

NAMALETA CREEK

(A3) GCS GDA 1994

1:78,041

LEGENDFigure 2-1

Vegetation Mapping andDisturbance Areas

WORK REQUEST NUMBER: 652740ISSUE DATE

14/08/2017

AUTHOR

JLG

QA CHECK APPROVED

JB

0 0.75 1.5Kilometers

!

!

WEIPA

THURSDAYISLAND

MAP REV.

A

REVISION NOTE

Issued for Information

Major RiverProject SiteMine Pit ExtentsPotential Habitat for Target Species

WaterCorymbia clarksonia dominated forests and woodlandEucalyptus tetradonta woodlandsMangrove closed forests in and wetland complexesMelaleuca open woodlands and tall shrublandsMelaleuca quinquenervia woodlandsMelaleuca spp. open forestsPalustrine wetlands

DATA SOURCES:World Base Map Copyright © 2015 DeLormeMining leases, Roads, Rivers - QLD Government ¹


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 15 of 31

Species Conservation Advice For each threatened species required to be offset, research has been undertaken of the applicable recovery plans, conservation advice statements and threat

abatement plans. Key findings are summarised in Table 3-1 below and have informed the identification and prioritisation of particular conservation actions,

recovery and research themes for delivery of the required environmental offsets.

Table 3-1 Information on MNES Species

Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat, Vulnerable (EPBC Act), Endangered (NC Act)

Key Threats# Recovery Plan Conservation Advice

Habitat loss

Parts of its range have been subjected to extensive habitat clearance for agriculture (some coastal areas south of Townsville and in the Wet Tropics bioregion) and, in some areas, urban development (Cairns and Townsville areas) (Duncan et al. 1999).

Tree hollow availability is likely to be reduced in some areas due to land clearance, such as in the Darwin-Mary River area (Woinarski & Milne 2002).

Vegetation change

Vegetation change due to a variety of factors, such as clearing of understorey vegetation for agriculture and livestock grazing, altered fire regimes, saltwater intrusion and invasion by exotic weed species (such as Mimosa (Mimosa pigra)) may adversely affect habitat suitability (Duncan et al. 1999; Woinarski & Milne 2002).

Timber collection and targeted tree removal

Timber collection and the targeted removal of hollow-bearing and dead trees along road reserves, in parks (such as old trees deemed to be a potential threat to visitors due to falling branches) and other urban situations may result in the destruction of some roosts (Schulz & Thomson 2007).

Competition for hollows

In urban and some agricultural areas this species may be adversely impacted by feral birds (such as the Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis)), native birds that have benefited as a result of urban/agricultural environments (for example, the Rainbow Lorikeet (Trichoglossus haematodus) and the Sulphur-crested Cockatoo (Cacatua galerita)) and introduced insects (for example, feral bees) through competition for tree hollows as roosting and breeding resources (Schulz & Thomson 2007).

There is a National Recovery Plan for the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat (Schulz & Thomson, 2007).

The following recovery objectives are identified:

• Develop more effective detection techniques (including obtaining echolocation reference calls) and undertake systematic surveys to enable a more comprehensive assessment of distribution, population size, status and habitat preferences.

• Increase protection of known roosts both on and outside reserved lands.

• Better determine roosting requirements and document foraging requirements of the species, including potential seasonal and distributional differences and the identification of threatening processes.

• Establish monitoring sites to investigate population trends in the species.

• Clarify the taxonomic status of the species.

Following information is derived from the Conservation Advice Statement (TSSC, 2016).

The small number of roosts recorded in Australia have all been found in deep tree hollows of the following species: poplar gum (Eucalyptus platyphylla), Darwin woollybutt (E. miniata), Darwin stringybark (E. tetrodonta) and weeping paperbark (Melaleuca leucadendra syn. leucodendron).

Threats to the species are:

• Habitat loss and fragmentation

• Competition for tree hollows by bees, non-native and native birds

• Disease

• Too frequent burning. Primary Conservation Actions identified are:

• Undertake targeted surveys to identify important subpopulations, roost sites and habitat requirements.

• Protect important subpopulations, roost sites and mature trees within the subspecies’ distribution.

• Maintain the quality of habitat, particularly around roost sites.

• Assess trends in population and distribution, and the relative impacts of threats.

A summary of some additional management actions recommended of high and medium priority are:


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 16 of 31


Disease

Diseases such as Australian Bat Lyssavirus (ABLV) have not been recorded for the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat, but this may be a function of the lack of specimens presented for examination. In the related Yellow-bellied Sheathtail Bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), five of seven individuals (71.4%) examined in Queensland were found to be ABLV-positive (Barrett 2004).

Climate Change

The loss of climatic habitat such as tropical forests caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases has been identified as a key threatening process under the EPBC Act. The narrow bioclimatic habitat range occupied by the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat potentially makes it susceptible to climate change (Schulz & Thomson 2007).

• Prevent extensive tree clearing in areas occupied by this subspecies; and/or ensure mature trees and corridors are retained.

• Involve Indigenous ranger groups in survey, monitoring and management.

• Undertake fine-scale sampling to identify and circumscribe important subpopulations (and roost sites), and assess the population size of these.

• Identify the population-level responses to a range of fire regimes, and model population viability across all fire scenarios (including consideration of fire impacts on roost site availability).

• Assess the impact of recently invading insects that may interfere with hollow use (notably Asian honey bees).

# Threats have been summarised from the Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) where available


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 17 of 31

Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld), Vulnerable (EPBC Act)


Threats are not available in SPRAT profile. The threats below were taken from Conservation Advice Statement (TSSC, 2015):

Inappropriate fire regimes (i.e. frequent fire)

Habitat loss and fragmentation

Predation by feral cats

Habitat change due to exotic invasive grasses

Habitat degradation and resource depletion due to livestock and feral herbivores

Predation by dogs/dingoes

Poisoning and trapping

No Recovery Plan for this species.


The distribution of the black-footed tree rat (north Queensland) is poorly known. It has been recorded mostly from eucalypt forests and woodlands (but not rainforests) around Mareeba (Burnett, 2001), but there are records sparsely across Cape York Peninsula (Watts & Aslin, 1981; Dixon & Huxley, 1985).

There is little information available about the ecology of the black-footed tree rat (north Queensland). In north Queensland, this species mostly occurs in eucalypt forests and woodlands, especially where hollows are relatively plentiful.

The black-footed tree rat is a nocturnal rodent that dens mostly in tree hollows, but occasionally in dense foliage (notably of Pandanus), and occasionally in buildings. It forages on the ground and in trees, and individuals may make movements of at least 500 m from roost sites to foraging areas (Friend et al., 1992).

Threats include:

1. Inappropriate fire regimes (i.e. frequent fire) 2. Habitat loss and fragmentation 3. Predation by feral cats 4. Habitat change due to exotic invasive grasses 5. Habitat degradation and resource depletion due to livestock and feral herbivores 6. Predation by dogs/dingoes 7. Poisoning and trapping.

Conservation actions identified include:

• develop or maintain regimes that reduce frequency and intensity of fire

• implement cost-effective control measures to reduce the abundance or impacts of feral cats

• maintain patch integrity and increase connectivity, especially in regions subject to clearing and intensification of land use

• implement integrated monitoring program linked to assessment of management effectiveness

• involve Indigenous ranger groups in survey, monitoring and management. Research priorities include:

• survey to resolve distribution (and to establish which areas may support significant populations)

• assess the extent to which predation by feral cats is responsible for decline

• quantify the relative impacts upon population of a range of current fire regimes, and the mechanisms by which those fire regimes have impacts on this species

• assess the landscape-scale distribution and habitat use of the species, especially in fragmented and modified landscapes

• design a monitoring program across range

• assess the extent to which feasible management options for feral cats can lead to population recovery

• assess landscape-scale options for retention of longer-unburnt (>5 years) patches.

# Threats have been summarised from the SPRAT where available


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 18 of 31

Masked Owl (Northern), Vulnerable (EPBC Act), Vulnerable (NC Act)


The reason for the low population density of the Masked Owl (Northern) is unknown (Garnett & Crowley 2000). The subspecies has undoubtedly been affected by:

Habitat alterations

Broad-scale changes to the environment of northern Australia caused by altered fire regimes, grazing by livestock and feral animals, and the invasion of native woodlands by exotic plants, particularly introduced pasture grasses (Woinarski 2004).

Decline in prey

There is some evidence of a broad-scale decline in the numbers of small and medium-sized endemic mammals across northern Australia over the last century (Braithwaite & Griffiths 1994; Pardon et al. 2003; Sattler & Creighton 2002; Winter & Allison 1980; Woinarski et al. 2011) that may have reduced the availability of food for the Masked Owl (Northern) (Garnett & Crowley 2000; Woinarski 2004).

No current Recovery Plan for this species.


The distribution of the Masked Owl (Northern) is very poorly known (Woinarski 2004). Three subpopulations have been suggested: Kimberley, Northern Territory and Cape York (Garnett et al., 2011).

The reason for the decline and low density of masked owls in northern Australia is unclear. The subspecies has undoubtedly been affected by broad-scale changes to the environment of northern Australia caused by altered fire regimes, grazing by livestock and feral animals, and the invasion of native woodlands by exotic plants, particularly introduced pasture grasses (Woinarski, 2004). However, the most likely cause of declines is a shortage of food, as small and medium-sized native mammals are becoming increasingly uncommon across much of northern Australia.

The current regime of more intense, frequent and extensive fires may also reduce the availability of the large trees and hollows (Williams et al., 1999) required for nesting.

Conservation actions include:

• Implement an appropriate fire management regime for preventing the loss of large, hollow-bearing trees, and which promotes the density of prey (native mammals).

• Reduce the impacts from feral animals and weeds at a landscape scale.

• Assess the subspecies’ population size and distribution.

Research priorities include:

• Identify the habitat requirements of the subspecies

• Assess population trends in response to fire management and weed and feral species control programs.

• Identify the causes for the decline in the masked owl’s main prey species.



652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 19 of 31

Red Goshawk: Vulnerable (EPBC Act), Endangered (NC Act)


Habitat loss

Habitat loss has been, and is likely to continue to be the biggest threat to the viability of the Red Goshawk, especially in eastern Australia. Widespread deforestation, particularly of lowland and riverine forests, is thought to have caused the historical decline in northeastern NSW and Queensland (Aumann & Baker-Gabb 1991; Debus 1993; Debus & Czechura 1988; Olsen 1998), and may affect more northerly birds as clearing continues (Baker-Gabb 1998).

Habitat alterations

It has been suggested that there may be a threshold above which habitat alterations within a breeding pairs home range will not be tolerated (Debus & Czechura 1988);

Land management and threats to prey

Overgrazing, or other changes in land management could reduce prey availability, which may reduce productivity. It is suggested that Red Goshawks appear to be tolerant of moderate stocking levels, but that overgrazing can reduce the viability of riparian trees used for nesting, and could reduce prey availability (Aumann & Baker-Gabb 1991). Increased Red Goshawk sightings were preceded by a cessation of stock grazing and annual burning resulting in an increase in ground cover and ground dwelling birds (Hughes & Hughes 1988).

Fire

Fire, and changed burning regimes have the potential to impact breeding sites and reduce prey availability, thus reducing productivity.

There is a National Recovery Plan for the Red Goshawk (DERM, 2012).

Management practices necessary to protect the Red Goshawk are primarily those related to surveys, monitoring and habitat protection. They also include vegetation management (forestry and land clearing), fire management, and implementing appropriate grazing regimes.

The following recovery actions are identified:

• Identify and map important red goshawk habitat.

• Important habitat areas are protected and managed.

• Conduct searches to identify previously unknown pairs of red goshawks, nest sites, and habitats critical for Red Goshawk survival.

• Reduce the effects of habitat fragmentation and habitat degradation by encouraging land owners to enter into voluntary conservation covenants/agreements in areas where Red Goshawks are located to protect both the birds and their habitat.

• Conduct research to understand the relationship between fragmentation, prey density and population persistence to better inform management.

• Produce and distribute information / educational materials on the conservation status and habitat requirements of the Red Goshawk.

Following information is derived from the Conservation Advice Statement (TSSC, 2015c).

The species occurs in a patchy, widespread distribution across coastal and sub-coastal regions of northern and eastern Australia. The species inhabits coastal and sub-coastal tall open forests and woodlands, tropical savannas traversed by wooded or forested rivers, and the edges of rainforests, usually on fertile soils (Marchant & Higgins, 1993).

Primary conservation actions identified are:

• Encourage landholders to protect and manage red goshawk territories.

• Promote information used to identify and protect nesting habitat.

• Limit access to known nest sites.

• Protect habitat through purchase or voluntary conservation agreements.

• Produce habitat descriptions and maps for management purposes.

• Produce educational materials that promote the recovery process.

• Consult with Indigenous groups, including Indigenous rangers on Tiwi Island, on appropriate management actions.

Research priorities include:

• Determine the population size and structure, including the number of subpopulations.

• Map essential habitat across the whole range of the species.

• Determine the habitat-use and home-range patterns of red goshawks on the mainland.

• Identify population dynamics, especially adult survivorship.



652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 20 of 31

Offset Strategy Framework 4.1 Environmental Offset Principles

Metro Mining are committed to delivering environmental offsets over the life of the BHM that delivers

conservation outcomes for the four target species and compensates for the loss of 3,000ha, which will

incrementally occur over 18 years of mining operations.

It is proposed that these residual impacts are offset through offset measures which are consistent with the

EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy and conservation advice statements and recovery plans for the

species.

Indirect offsets may consist of actions that:

• reduce threatening processes,

• improve habitat availability and foraging resources

• are recovery actions

• supports research to improve the knowledge of a species ecology, including distribution or preferred

habitats.

They are not necessarily land-based and should lead to benefits for the protected matter.

The EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy states that “An offsets package is a suite of actions that a

proponent undertakes in order to compensate for the residual significant impact of a project. It can comprise

a combination of direct offsets and other compensatory measures. Offsets should align with conservation

priorities for the impacted protected matter and be tailored specifically to the attribute of the protected matter

that is impacted in order to deliver a conservation gain. Other compensatory measures are those actions that

do not directly offset the impacts on the protected matter, but are anticipated to lead to benefits for the

impacted protected matter, for example funding for research or educational programs”.

Where possible, an offset should address key priority actions outlined for the impacted protected matter in

any approved recovery plans, threat abatement plan, conservation advice, ecological character description

or approved Commonwealth management plan. Higher priority actions are preferred to lower priority actions.

The EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy requires that when looking to provide other compensatory

measures in the form of research or an education program the following rules are applied:

A suitable research or education program must:

1. endeavour to improve the viability of the impacted protected matter, for example:

o signage in key areas to educate the public regarding the risks to a threatened animal, or

o research into effective re-vegetation techniques for a threatened ecological community.

2. be targeted toward key research/education activities as identified in the relevant Commonwealth

approved recovery plan, threat abatement plan, conservation advice, ecological character

description, management plan or listing document. Where Commonwealth approved guidance

documents are not available or are insufficient in detail, the department will consider additional

information sources such as state and territory management plans or peer reviewed scientific

literature to inform priority offset activities

3. be undertaken in a transparent, scientifically robust and timely manner

4. be undertaken by a suitably qualified individual or organisation in a manner approved by the

department

5. consider best practice research approaches.

4.2 Financial Commitment

Metro Mining propose that an overall budget of $8.45 million will be allocated to the delivery of the required

environmental offsets for the BHM. This equates to AUD $2,817 per hectare of native vegetation cleared as

a result of implementing EPBC 2014/7305 and EPBC 2015/7538.

The $8.45 million budget for the Offset Strategy is comprised only of expenditures associated with

implementing Offset Projects approved by the DAWE. The budget does not therefore include costs


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 21 of 31

associated with formulating, negotiation and consulting with stakeholders on draft Offset Projects, or salaries

to coordinate and administer the Offset Project program.

4.3 Offset Projects

Metro Mining will prepare and submit Offset Projects for approval by the Department. The Offset Projects, based on the recovery and research themes outlined in Table 4.1, will, as a minimum:

• specify the location and nature of Offset Project activities. In this regard, Metro Mining will ensure all

Offset Projects are undertaken in, or directly related to, the habitat of the four nationally listed

species impacted by the Bauxite Hills Mine;

• include project goal/s, budget and a detailed Offset Project description, including timeframes for

implementing the Offset Project, and reporting and publishing of Offset Project results;

• demonstrate how the Offset Project is consistent with this Offset Strategy;

• outline consultations associated with developing the Offset Project, including the outcomes of those

consultations. To this end, and where Metro Mining will implement the project through partnership

arrangements with third parties, Metro will provide the Department evidence of agreement from

those parties to the project;

• outline how the Offset Project complies with the principles of the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets

Policy and, if relevant, details of how the Offset Project meets the criteria for research and

educational programs identified in Appendix A of the EPBC Act Environmental Offsets Policy; and

• identify and manage risks associated with implementing the Offset Project, including risks associated

with partnerships/collaborative arrangements required to implement the project.

In the development of draft Offset Proposals, Metro Mining will consult with relevant stakeholders and

potential partners in Offset Project delivery. Stakeholders to be consulted include, as appropriate:

• DAWE. DAWE will be consulted in the first instance on project concepts, to ensure the project aligns

with this Strategy current species information and relevant EPBC Policy, and that all appropriate

stakeholders are identified for the purpose of further designing and consulting on the proposed

project.

• State Government Agencies, including Parks & Wildlife and Department of Environment and

Heritage Protection. These agencies will be consulted to ensure technical knowledge and expertise

is addressed in project design, and that benefits and outcomes of the proposed project are

maximised.

• Traditional Owners and other land managers. It is anticipated that a portion of the Offset Projects

will be undertaken on Traditional-owner managed land, and that projects on these lands would not

be able to proceed without input and support from Traditional Owners. To this end, Metro Mining will

seek to implement and maximise the benefits of traditional knowledge for species habitat

conservation management.

• Relevant species recovery teams and research institutions. Although DAWE and state agencies

are often represented on species recovery teams, recovery teams will also be consulted on project

proposals to ensure the technical robustness of the project, and experimental design to maximise

scientific and research outcomes from the approved Offset Project. Also, this will create

opportunities for improved science and information for recovery planning purposes.

• Cape York Natural Resource Management Group. The NRM Group operates extensively in the

region and may have related projects being designed or implemented, and where there may be

partnering opportunities to extend the benefits of the Offset Project.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 22 of 31

Metro Mining will implement a staged process for submitting Offset Projects for approval. The stages process will be comprised of the following actions:

• by 1 December 2017, Metro Mining will submit project concepts to the Department for consultation.

Following the outcomes of that consultation, Metro Mining will proceed to consult with appropriate

stakeholders to develop Offset Projects for approval;

• by 9 April 2020 Metro Mining will submit draft Offset Project 1 to the Department for approval;

• by 1 September 2020 Metro Mining will submit draft Offset Projects 2 and 3 to the Department for

approval. The draft Offset Project proposals will be to a total value of no less than $4M (CPI

adjusted);by 1 December 2020, Metro Mining will be implementing approved Offset Projects to the

total value of no less than $3M (CPI adjusted), and

• by 30 June 2021, Metro Mining will submit project concepts to the Department for consultation to the

total value of no less than $5.45M (CPI adjusted).

Under its EPBC conditions of approval (Condition 5B), Metro Mining must expend on approved Offset Projects, at least $2,817 (excluding GST) per hectare of habitat cleared during any financial year, by 30 June of the following financial year. In order to meet this approval condition, Metro Mining will prepare and submit to the Department, by 31 July each year, an annual impact reconciliation report demonstrating compliance with this condition and the staged implementation of approved Offset Projects.

The Offset Projects will be prepared in accordance with the template at Attachment A, and will be consistent with the recovery and research themes outlined in Table 4.1.

4.4 Offset Project Delivery Themes

An assessment for each of the four threatened fauna species has been conducted against the applicable

conservation advice statements and recovery plans (as summarised in Table 3-1) to identify appropriate

offset recovery and research themes that will inform offset projects.

The evaluation initially identified five main themes that were used to inform the objectives and design of

environmental offset projects to be delivered. One theme is tailored specifically to the Black-footed Tree-rat

(North Qld) as this species has been confirmed on the BHM-SR site, and little is known about the species

distribution, population numbers and habitat preferences. Therefore a specific research program informed by

the conservation advice statement to gain more knowledge on the species is proposed and considered of

high priority. Inappropriate fire regimes is a recognised threat for all species (to both habitat quality and

abundance of foraging resources) and identified by many regional organisations as a key threatening

process for ecological communities and threatened species in Cape York. Therefore it forms one of the main

themes.

The Offset Project delivery themes are outlined in Table 4-1.*

* Following concept project development work, one of the focus species (Red Goshawk) was not

progressed in detail, as this is being heavily studied in the area by a different mining company and this would

be a duplication of research effort. Much of the work for the offset project will still be relevant for application

to this species and the outcomes of the Red Goshawk research will be incorporated into the final outcomes

for this project, especially for any suggested changes to management practices. Relevant information on the

Red Goshawk that is produced as part of this project will be provided to the mining company to support their

work on the Red Goshawk, including any information on the location of nests and breeding of Red Goshawk

within the Metro Mining lease.”


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 23 of 31

Table 4-1: Offset Project Themes

All species - Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern), Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed Bat, Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld)

Offset Project Theme Why this needs to be addressed Consistency with Conservation Advice/Recovery Plans etc

Fire management

Research into appropriate fire

regimes for Masked Owl

(Northern) and Black-footed

Tree-rat (North Qld)

Reducing impacts of exotic

pasture plants such as invasive

gamba grass.

There are recognised threats for all target species

around the frequency, intensity and scale of fires.

Fire regimes in northern Australia have changed

significantly since European arrival; they are now

dominated by very large fires occurring at shorter fire

return intervals. These changed regimes (frequency and

extent) have been implicated in the decline of small

mammals in northern Australia during recent decades

(Griffiths et al. 2015, Lawes et al. 2015).

Loss of small mammals reduces the availability of prey

for species such as Red Goshawk and Masked Owl.

These altered fire regimes can also reduce prey

abundance for the Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed Bat.

Recurrent intense fires reduce the abundance of fleshy-

fruited shrubs favoured by Black-footed Tree-rats and

may be causing a decline in their populations.

Intense fires may reduce the availability of the large

trees and hollows required for nesting, or prey species

nesting.

Fire frequency and intensity can also impact on forest

structure and impact on habitat suitability for fauna

species.

Introduced pasture grasses promote intense, late-

season fires by increasing fuel loads. Also reduce food

over extended periods for grainivorous bird species

(potential prey items).

Exotic grasses deliberately introduced for pastoralism

are transforming the north Australian landscape.

Invasive grasses such as gamba grass modify the sub-

CA for Black-footed Tree-Rat (TSSC, 2015a).

Inappropriate fire regimes (i.e. frequent fires) are a recognised threat with a

‘severe’ rating. Also habitat changes due to exotic invasive grasses is a threat

with a ‘moderate’ rating.

CA for Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat (TSSC, 2016)

Too frequent burning is a recognised threat to the species with a ‘minor’

consequence rating. Fire has potential impacts on pre abundance and/or

availability of large hollow trees used for roosting.

A recovery action is to identify the population-level responses to a range of fire

regimes, and model population viability across all fire scenarios (including

consideration of fire impacts on roost site availability).

CA for Masked Owl (Northern) (TSSC, 2015b)

The current regime of more intense, frequent and extensive fires may also reduce

the availability of the large trees and hollows required for nesting.

Research priority identified is to assess population trends in response to fire

management.

TAP to reduce the impacts on northern Australia's biodiversity by the five listed

grasses (DSWEPaC, 2012)

The identified five grass species are:

• Gamba grass (Andropogon gayanus)

• Perennial mission grass (Pennisetum polystachion)

• Annual mission grass (Pennisetum pedicellatum)

• Olive hymenachne grass (Hymenachne amplexicaulis)

• Para grass (Urochloa mutica)

These invasive high-biomass species can increase fuel loads and/or alter nitrogen

cycling and water availability within systems (Douglas et al., 2004; Rossiter et al.,

2004), resulting in ecosystem degradation, habitat loss and biodiversity decline.

https://soe.environment.gov.au/theme/biodiversity/topic/2016/altered-fire-regimes#biodiversity-4631





652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 24 of 31


species’ habitat reducing hollow bearing trees and

reducing habitat.

It is likely that frequent, extensive, high intensity fires

reduce habitat suitability for this sub-species and may

result in increased direct mortality. Small fires that

promote a mix of burnt patches and patches unburnt for

various ages are more likely to increase habitat

suitability. Intense, frequent fires may also reduce

habitat for this sub-species’ prey, reducing the sub-

species’ available food sources

The Masked Owl (Northern) is a species recognised as under threat from five

listed grasses. Introduced grasses promote intense, late-season fires by

increasing fuel loads. Also reduce food over extended periods for grainvorous bird

species (potential prey items). Increasing intensity of fires may reduce number of

nesting hollows available for breeding

State of the Environment Report (Biodiversity) Cresswell ID, Murphy H (2016)

A recent review concluded that the current fire regime in northern Australia is

suboptimal for many bird species, especially grain-eating and fruit-eating birds,

and hollow-dependent and ground-nesting species. The review recommended

that, in northern Australia, at least 25 per cent of the savanna landscape should

be unburned for at least 3 years and at least 5 per cent should be unburned for at

least 10 years (Woinarski & Legge 2013).

Threats to tree hollows

Improved understanding of

species tree hollow

requirements, time and hollow

creation and artificial hollows,

and competition for hollows

All four target species have a reliance on tree hollows

whether it be for roosting and denning (Masked Owl

(Northern), Bare-rumped Sheath-tailed Bat, Black-footed

Tree-rat (North Qld)) or prey species rely on tree

hollows for breeding such as for the Red Goshawk.

There are a number of recognised threats to hollows

through land clearing, altered fire regimes, competition

for hollows from species such as common brushtail

possums and exotic bees.

A key threat for the Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat is loss

of roost and maternity sites, which occur in hollows in

trees, with known roost sites occurring in Eucalyptus

platyphylla, Eucalyptus miniata and Eucalyptus

tetrodonta. Roosting and maternity sites need to be

identified and protected/managed, including by

Aboriginal organisations and range groups.

Surveys and monitoring are required to better identify

the use of and requirements for roosting sites versus

maternity sites, including assessing surrounding habitat

use and the efficacy of threat reduction measures.

CA for Masked Owl (Northern) (TSSC, 2015b)

Conservation actions that prevent the loss of large, hollow-bearing trees, and

which promote density of prey are recommended.

RP for the Bare-rumped Sheathtail bat (TSSC, 2016)

In Australia all confirmed roosting records are from long deep tree hollows in the

poplar gum Eucalyptus platyphylla, Darwin woollybutt E. miniata and Darwin

stringybark E. tetrodonta. Hollows in these tree species have also been used as

maternity roosts. The known primary threat is habitat loss. Possible threats

include vegetation change, timber collection and targeted tree removal,

competition for tree hollows, disease and climate change.

Recovery actions that aim to protect roosts from known threatening processes

and improve the knowledge of roosting requirements.

CA for Black-footed Tree-rat (TSSC, 2015a)

In north Queensland, this species mostly occurs in eucalypt forests and

woodlands, especially where hollows are relatively plentiful. Habitat loss is

classified as a ‘severe’ consequence rating which includes loss of tree hollows for

denning.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 25 of 31


Improved knowledge and

information

Support to a recovery or

research project for one or

more target species. This may

be an existing project or new

project.

There is a lack of knowledge and information on the

target species and their distribution in Cape York,

particularly in the western Cape York region. There may

be value in undertaking fauna surveys of a chosen area

to identify the species that are utilising this area, and

evaluating their habitat requirements. This may be able

to coincide with the new protected area Metro Mining

are looking to establish. Ongoing monitoring could be

undertaken of the area over a period of time to evaluate

the effectiveness of management actions.

There are a number of actions recommended for the species within conservation

advice and recovery plans associated with conducting research to gain more

information on the species including their distribution, habitats and survey

methods.

Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld), Red Goshawk, Masked Owl (Northern)


Feral animal control

Develop cost-effective control measures

to reduce abundance and impact of feral

cats on Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld)

Feral cats and wild dogs are a recognised

threat as they directly prey on Black-footed

Tree-rats (North Qld).

Feral cats also predate on small mammals

which are prey for Red Goshawk and

Masked Owl (Northern) resulting in a

shortage of food.

Feral cats and foxes are key pressures that

have contributed to the population decline of

small mammals in northern Australia.


Identifies predation by feral cats as a threat and consequence rating of ‘severe’.

Predation by wild dogs is a threat and consequence rating of ‘minor’.

An identified conservation action is to implement cost-effective control measures to reduce the abundance or impacts of feral cats

TAP: Feral Cats (DoE, 2015)

Feral cats are a serious vertebrate pest in Australia, and have severe to catastrophic

effects on native fauna. The ongoing decline of small mammals across northern

Australia to very low numbers is also believed to be due, in a major part, to predation

by the feral cat.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 26 of 31

Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld)

Offset Project

Theme

Why this needs to be addressed Consistency with Conservation

Advice/Recovery Plans etc

Black-footed

Tree-rat

Research

Program

One individual Black-footed Tree-rat (North Qld) was captured in a camera trap on the BHM-SR site.

But no further information is known about this record, and what the total population or extent of their

distribution might be in the area.

Conservation Advice for the species states the distribution and population size of the Black-footed

Tree-rat (North Qld) is poorly known. Information on the ecology of the species is mostly derived from

studies of other subspecies. Woinarski at al. (2014) notes there is little known about the distribution,

abundance or population trends for this subspecies. It has been recorded at relatively few locations in

its north Queensland range.

It forages on the ground and in trees, and individuals may move 500m from roost sites to foraging

areas (Friend et al, 1992). Their diet comprising mostly fruits and seeds, and may include

invertebrates, flowers and grass. (Morton, 1992; Rankmore, 2006; Rankmore & Friend, 2008).

Studies on another subspecies in the Northern Territory have shown that the Black-footed Tree-rat

has a large home range (60-70 ha: Rankmore, 2006; Rankmore & Friend, 2008), so population

density (and hence total population) is likely to be relatively low. Also the species is mostly solitary, so

the total number of individuals in any location is probably small.


Primary conservation objective is identified as

stabilising or increasing subpopulations across their

range, through amelioration of existing threats.

Threats include:

• reducing frequency and intensity of fires

• implementing an integrated monitoring

program linked to assessment of management

effectiveness

• involving indigenous rangers in survey,

monitoring and management

• survey to better define the species distribution

and establish areas that may support

significant populations

• assess the extent to which predation by feral

cats is responsible for decline and their

management can lead to population recovery

• assess factors influencing habitat suitability,

and characterise habitat preference.


652720-ENV-RPT-001 Page 27 of 31

Monitoring & Reporting Ongoing and regular monitoring of the implementation of the approved Offset Projects will be undertaken by

Metro Mining. Monitoring will target compliance with project schedule and budget and attainment of

performance objectives, and whether corrective actions are required.

Progress reporting on the approved Offset Projects will be provided as part of annual compliance reporting to

DAWE.

At the completion of each Offset Project a detailed Offset Project Outcomes Report will be prepared. This

report will be made available on the Metro Mining website within three months of completion and submitted

to DAWE.

The Offset Project Outcomes Report will include:

• summary of actions that have been implemented, responsible parties and budget expenditure

• summary of results and key findings, compliance with performance objectives and the conservation

and/or research outcomes achieved

• identification of any issues that have arisen during project implementation and corrective actions that

were implemented.

Roles & Responsibilities Metro Mining will ultimately be responsible for implementing and reporting on this OS. A summary of key

roles and responsibilities is provided in Table 6-1.

Table 6-1: Roles and Responsibilities

Role Accountabilities for this document

CEO, Metro Mining • Sufficient time and resources (including budget) are allocated to allow

for the implementation of this EOS and Offset Projects.

• Metro Mining meets its obligations under this EOS and EPBC Act conditions of approval.

Environment & Community Manager

• Allocate sufficient resources and time for the implementation of the EOS and preparation of Offset Projects.

• Management of project relationships with external organisations, stakeholders and government agencies.

• Periodically review progress against performance criteria and objectives.

• Internal and external reporting requirements are met, including necessary revisions of the Offset Projects and preparation of progress reports.

Site Environmental Superintendent • All relevant site records are effectively maintained.

• Coordinate day to day implementation of the Offset Projects.

• Coordinate monitoring and reporting requirements.

All persons • Undertake activities directly in accordance with the requirements of the

EOS and Offset Projects, as directed by the Environment and Community Manager and Metro Mining Officers.

• Any potential or actual issues, including environmental incidents, are reported to their immediate supervisor.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 28 of 31

References Aumann T and Baker-Gabb DJ (1991). A management plan for the Red Goshawk. Royal Australian

Ornithologists Union Report 75.

Baker-Gabb, D. (1998). Red Goshawk Decline. Wingspan. 8(4):6.

Barrett, J.L. (2004). Australian Bat Lyssavirus. PhD Thesis. Ph.D. Thesis. Queensland: School of

Veterinary Science, University of Queensland.

Braithwaite, R.W. & A.D. Griffiths (1994). Demographic variation and range contraction in the

Northern Quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae). Wildlife Research. 21:203-218.

Burnett, S. (2001). The mammals of Mount Molloy Stock Route. Reserves and Spear Creek.

Townsville: Environmental Earthworks Services.

CDM Smith (2017) Bauxite Hills Project – Preclearance Tree Hollows and Habitat Surveys, Haul

Roads and Other Infrastructure. Prepared for Metro Mining, August 2017.

Cresswell ID, Murphy H (2016). Biodiversity: Biodiversity. In: Australia state of the environment 2016,

Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy, Canberra.

Debus SJS and Czechura GV (1988). The red goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus: a review. Australian

Bird Watcher 12, 175−199.

Debus, S.J.S. (1993). The status of the Red Goshawk (Erythrotriorchis radiatus) in New South Wales.

Olsen, P., ed. Australasian Raptor Studies. Page(s) 182-191. ARA-RAOU, Melbourne.

Dixon, J. M., & Huxley, L. (1985). Donald Thomson’s mammals and fishes of northern Australia.

Melbourne: Nelson.

Department of Environment and Resource Management (DERM) (2012). National recovery plan for

the red goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus. Report to the Department of Sustainability, Environment,

Water, Population and Communities, Canberra. Queensland Department of Environment and

Resource Management, Brisbane. Available online at:

http://www.environment.gov.au/resource/national-recovery-plan-red-goshawk-erythrotriorchis-radiatus

Department of the Environment (DoE) (2015) Threat abatement plan for predation by feral cats.

Commonwealth of Australia 2015.

Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Populations and Communities (DSEWPaC) (2012)

Threat abatement plan to reduce the impacts on northern Australia’s biodiversity by the five listed

grasses. Commonwealth of Australia, 2012.

Dixon, J. M., & Huxley, L. (1985). Donald Thomson’s mammals and fishes of northern Australia.

Melbourne: Nelson.

Douglas MM, Setterfield SA, Rossiter N, Barratt J & Hutley LB 2004, ‘Effects of mission grass

(Pennisetum polystachion (L.) Schult.) invasion on fuel loads and nitrogen availability in a northern

Australia tropical savanna’, in Sindel BM & Johnson SB (eds), Proceedings of the 14th Australian

Weeds Conference, Wagga Wagga, NSW, pp. 179–181.

Duncan, A., Baker, G. B., & Montgomery, N. (1999). The action plan for Australian bats. Environment

Australia, Canberra.

Friend, G. R., Kemper, C. M., & Kerle, J. A. (1992). Rats of the tree tops. Landscape 8, 10-15

Garnett ST and Crowley GM (2000). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2000. Environment Australia

and Birds Australia: Canberra, ACT.

Garnett ST, Szabo J and Dutson G (2011). The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO

Publishing: Canberra, ACT.

Griffiths AD, Garnett ST & Brook BW (2015). Fire frequency matters more than fire size: testing the

pyrodiversity–biodiversity paradigm for at-risk small mammals in an Australian tropical savanna.

Biological Conservation 186:337–346.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 29 of 31

Gulf Alumina Limited (2015) Skardon River Mining Project Environmental Impact Statement

Gulf Alumina (2016) Skardon River Mining Project Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement.

Higgins PJ (Ed.) (1999) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume 4: Parrots

to Dollarbirds. Oxford University Press: Melbourne, Victoria.

Hughes, P. & B. Hughes (1988). Notes on the Red Goshawk in the Widgee area of south-east

Queensland. Sunbird. 18:99-103.

Lawes MJ, Murphy BP, Fisher A, Woinarski JCZ, Edwards AC & Russell-Smith J (2015). Small

mammals decline with increasing fire extent in northern Australia: evidence from long-term monitoring

in Kakadu National Park. International Journal of Wildland Fire 24:712–722.

Marchant and Higgins (Eds) (1993). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds.

Volume 2: Raptors to Lapwings. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Olsen, P. (1998). Australia and Raptors: Diurnal Birds of Prey and Owls. Wingspan. 8(3):1-16. Birds

Australia, Melbourne.

Pandanus Solutions (2017) Bauxite Hills Mine - Significant Species Management Plan. Dated August

2017

Pardon LG, Brook BW, Griffiths AD and Braithwaite RW (2003). Determinants of survival for the

Northern Brown Bandicoot under a landscape-scale fire experiment. Journal of Animal Ecology.

72:106-115.

Rankmore, B. (2006). Impacts of habitat fragmentation on the vertebrate fauna of the tropical

savannas of northern Australia; with special reference to medium-sized mammals. Ph.D. thesis.

Darwin: Charles Darwin University.

Rankmore, B. R., & Friend, G. R. (2008). Black-footed tree-rat Mesembriomys gouldii. In S. Van Dyck

& R. Strahan, The mammals of Australia (Third edition, pp. 591-593). Sydney: Reed New Holland.

Rossiter N, Setterfield S, Douglas M, Hutley L & Cook G (2004). Exotic grass invasion in the tropical

savanna of northern Australia: ecosystem consequences. In Sindel BM & Johnson SB (Eds),

Proceedings of the 14th Australian Weeds Conference, Wagga Wagga, NSW, pp. 168–171.

Schulz, M., & Thomson, B. (2007). National recovery plan for the bare-rumped sheathtail bat

Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency,

Brisbane.Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus. Report to Department of the Environment and

Water.

Sattler P and Creighton C (2002). Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Audit. National Land and Water

Resources Audit: Canberra, ACT.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2016). Approved Conservation Advice for Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus (bare-rumped sheathtail bat). Canberra: Department of the Environment and Energy. In effect under the EPBC Act from 07-Dec-2016. Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015a). Approved Conservation Advice for Mesembriomys gouldii rattoides (Black-footed tree-rat (north Queensland)). Canberra: Department of the Environment. In effect under the EPBC Act from 26-Jun-2015.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015b). Approved Conservation Advice for Tyto

novaehollandiae kimberli (masked owl (northern)). Canberra: Department of the Environment. In

effect under the EPBC Act from 01-Oct-2015.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2015c). Approved Conservation Advice for

Erythrotriorchis radiatus (red goshawk). Department of the Environment. In effect under the EPBC Act

from 27-Oct-2015.

Watts, C. H. S., & Aslin, H. J. (1981). The rodents of Australia. Sydney: Angus & Robertson.

Williams RJ, Cook GD, Gill AM and Moore PHR (1999). Fire regimes, fire intensity and tree survival in

a tropical savanna in northern Australia. Australian Journal of Ecology.24:50-59.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 30 of 31

Winter JW and Allison FR (1980). The native mammals of Cape York Peninsula – changes in status

since the 1948 Archibold Expedition. In Contemporary Cape York Peninsula. (Eds NC Stevens and A

Bailey) pp. 31–44. Royal Society of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland.

Woinarski, J. & D. Milne (2002). Bare-rumped Sheathtail Bat Saccolaimus saccolaimus. Threatened

Species Information Sheet. Darwin: Parks and Wildlife Commission.

Woinarski JCZ (2004). National multi-species recovery plan for the Partridge Pigeon [eastern

subspecies] Geophaps smithii smithii, Crested Shrike-tit [northern (sub)species] Falcunculus

(frontatus) whitei, Masked Owl [north Australian mainland subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae kimberli;

and Masked Owl [Tiwi Islands subspecies] Tyto novaehollandiae melvillensis, 2004– 2009. Northern

Territory Department of Infrastructure Planning and Environment: Darwin, NT.

Woinarski, J.C.Z., S. Legge, J.A. Fitzsimons, B.J. Traill, A.A. Burbidge, A. Fisher, R.S.C. Firth, I.J.

Gordon, A.D. Griffiths, C.N. Johnson, N.L. McKenzie, C. Palmer, I. Radford, B. Rankmore, E.G.

Ritchie, S. Ward & M. Ziembicki (2011). The disappearing mammal fauna of northern Australia:

context, cause, and response. Conservation Letters. 4(3):192-201.

Woinarski JCZ & Legge S (2013). The impacts of fire on birds in Australia’s tropical savannas. Emu

113(4):319–352.

Woinarski, J. C. Z., Burbidge, A. A., & Harrison, P. L. (2014). The action plan for Australian mammals

2012. Collingwood, Australia: CSIRO Publishing.


652740-ENV-RPT-001 Page 31 of 31

APPENDIX A: MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR AN OFFSET PROJECT PROPOSAL

1. PROJECT TITLE

2. LOCATION/S OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES

3. PROJECT OBJECTIVE/GOAL

4. DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION

5. MNES MANAGEMENT/RESEARCH OUTCOMES AND OUTPUTS

6. ALIGNMENT WITH OFFSET STRATEGY AND CONSERVATION/RESEARCH PRIORITIES

7. MANAGING/RESEARCH ORGANISATION

8. STRATEGIC LINKAGES AND/OR PARTNER ORGANISATIONS/COMMUNITY GROUPS

9. PROJECT BUDGET

Item Year 1 Year 2 Year 3-10 Description

Total

Figures are rounded to the nearest $100 and GST exclusive.

10. RISKS TO PROJECT COMPLETIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION/S

(Identify and discuss factors that will prevent project implementation or completion)

11. PROJECT OFFICER

12. PROJECT SUPERVISOR (ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER)

Documents

Bauxite Hills Mine Offset Strategy