Flora and habitat assessment - Glen Innes Severn...Flora and fauna habitat assessment of Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes, NSW. Prepared for Glen Innes Severn

F lo r a a n d h a b i t a t a s se s sm e n t o f Lo t s 1 8 4 a n d 1 8 5 DP 7 5 32 8 2 , H u n t er S t r e e t , G l e n I n n es

© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D i

Flora and habitat assessment Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282 Hunter Street, Glen Innes, NSW Prepared for Glen Innes Severn Council

25 June 2014


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D ii

DOCUMENT TRACKING

Item Detail

Project Name Flora and habitat assessment Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes

Project Number

14COFECO-0006

File location H:\Synergy\Projects\14COFECO\14COFECO-0006 Hunter Street, Glen Innes - Flora and habitat assessment for Urban Release Area\Photos

Prepared by Liz Brown and Lachlan Copeland

Approved by Peter Knock

Status FINAL

Version Number 1

Last saved on 14 August 2014

Project Name Flora and habitat assessment of Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes

Cover photo Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes. Liz Brown.

This report should be cited as „Eco Logical Australia September 2014. Flora and fauna habitat assessment of Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes, NSW. Prepared for Glen Innes Severn Council‟

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document has been prepared by Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd.

Disclaimer

This document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the contract between

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd and Glen Innes Severn Council. The scope of services was defined in consultation with Glen Innes

Severn Council, by time and budgetary constraints imposed by the client, and the availability of reports and other data on the

subject area. Changes to available information, legislation and schedules are made on an ongoing basis and readers should

obtain up to date information.

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for or in respect of any use of or reliance upon this

report and its supporting material by any third party. Information provided is not intended to be a substitute for site specific

assessment or legal advice in relation to any matter. Unauthorised use of this report in any form is prohibited.

Template 22/08/13


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iii

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 6

2 CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION ................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Description of the study area ........................................................................................................ 7

2.2 Description of the proposal ........................................................................................................... 7

3 METHODS .................................................................................................................................. 10

3.1 Mapping ...................................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Audit of flora and fauna values ................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Site inspection ............................................................................................................................ 11

4 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................... 12

4.1 Audit of flora and fauna values ................................................................................................... 12

4.2 Site inspection ............................................................................................................................ 12

4.2.1 Geology ...................................................................................................................................... 12

4.2.2 Flora species .............................................................................................................................. 12

4.2.1 TSC Act listed threatened species and/or ecological communities ............................................ 13

4.2.2 EPBC Act listed threatened species and/or ecological communities ......................................... 13

4.1 Vegetation................................................................................................................................... 16

4.1.1 Tree regeneration, hollows and sizes ......................................................................................... 16

4.1.1 Border Rivers-Gwydir catchment vegetation mapping ............................................................... 16

4.1.2 Plant communities ...................................................................................................................... 16

4.2 Habitat corridors ......................................................................................................................... 20

4.3 Koala habitat ............................................................................................................................... 20

4.4 Habitat assessment .................................................................................................................... 21

4.5 Condition classes ....................................................................................................................... 21

5 RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICIES ............................................................................ 24

5.1 Legislation ................................................................................................................................... 24

5.1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) .......................... 24

5.1.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) ............................................... 24

5.1.3 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act) ............................................................. 25

5.1.4 Native Vegetation Act 2003 No 103 (NV Act) ............................................................................. 25

5.2 Local Planning Instruments ........................................................................................................ 26

5.2.1 Glen Innes Severn Local Environmental Plan 2012 ................................................................... 26

5.2.2 Glen Innes Severn Council Development Control Plan 2008 .................................................... 26

5.3 State Planning Instruments ........................................................................................................ 26

5.3.1 SEPP 44: Koala Habitat Protection ............................................................................................ 26


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D iv

5.4 Key Threatening Processes ....................................................................................................... 27

5.4.1 Clearing of native vegetation ...................................................................................................... 27

5.4.2 Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses ............................................. 27

5.4.3 Removal of dead wood and dead trees ...................................................................................... 28

6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS .............................................................................................................. 29

7 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................. 31

8 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES .......................................................................... 33

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 37

APPENDIX A: Box Gum Woodland Criteria ........................................................................................ 41

APPENDIX B: Flora species list recorded within the study area, Glen Innes (12/6/2014). ............ 44

APPENDIX C: TSC / EPBC Act Threatened species data search results ........................................ 46

List of Figures

Figure 1: LEP zones covering the study area under Glen Innes Severn LEP 2012 ................................. 8

Figure 2: Overview of the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes ........... 9

Figure 3: Vegetation communities recorded within the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282,

Hunter Street, Glen Innes ......................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 4: Vegetation condition classes recorded within the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282,

Hunter Street, Glen Innes ......................................................................................................................... 23


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D v

Abbreviations

Abbreviation Description

DEC Department of Environment and Conservation

DCP Development Control Plan

DNG Derived Native Grassland

DoE Department of Environment

DSEWPaC Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

EEC Endangered Ecological Community

EP&A Act Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

GIS Geographic Information System

GISC Glen Innes Severn Council

KTP Key Threatening Process

LEP Local Environment Plan

NV Act Native Vegetation Act 2003 No 103

OEH Office of Environment and Heritage

PKFT Preferred Koala Food Trees

PMST Protected Matters Search Tool

SEPP State Environmental Planning Policy

TEC Threatened Ecological Community

TSC Act Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

TSSC Threatened Species Scientific Committee

VMP Vegetation Management Plan


© E CO LO G ICA L A U S T RA L IA P T Y LT D 6

1 INTRODUCTION

Eco Logical Australia Pty Ltd (ELA) was commissioned by Keiley Hunter (Keiley Hunter Urban Planner)

on behalf of Glen Innes Severn Council („the client‟) to undertake an flora and fauna habitat assessment

of Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, located at the corner of Hunter and Taylor Streets, Glen Innes, NSW.

The requirements of this assessment within the subject site were as follows:

Identify the floristic composition of the vegetation;

Identify any threatened flora species;

Identify any Endangered and/or Threatened Ecological Communities (EECs and/or TECs);

Undertake a fauna habitat assessment;

Undertake a hollow-bearing tree assessment;

Identify any threatened fauna habitat;

Provide detailed vegetation mapping; and

Identify any constraints associated with future vegetation modification (Section 6).

The data search, literature review, fieldwork results and mapping provided in this report are intended to

inform the process of developing a site-specific residential Master Plan and Development Control Plan

(DCP) to guide design and development of the proposed „Hunter Street Urban Release Area‟ as

identified within the Glen Innes Severn LEP 2012.



2 CONTEXTUAL INFORMATION

2.1 Descript ion of the study area

The proposed two-lot land release at Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, located at the corner of Hunter and

Taylor Streets, Glen Innes (the subject site) is located approximately one kilometre (km) north-east of

the Glen Innes township, NSW (Figure 2). The subject site is located between the New England Hwy to

the west and Gwydir Highway to the east (Figure 2) and south of the existing Glen Innes Cemetery.

The two Lots cover approximately 19.6 hectares (ha), with Lot 184 covering 10.3 ha, Lot 185 covering

8.0 ha and the privately-owned, closed road easement dividing Lots 184 and 185 covering 1.2 ha

(Figure 2).

The subject site is bounded to the north and east by rural agricultural lands, to the west by Hunter

Street and rural agricultural lands, and to the south by Taylors Street and privately-owned urban land

(Figures1, 2 and 3).

Within the subject site, approximately 18 hectares (93%) supports threatened native vegetation in a

variety of conditions, with a history of selective logging of mature remnant trees, grazing and weed

incursion.

Approximately 1.24 hectares (7%) of the site is modified or cleared and comprising an access road, a

residential dwelling, four farm dams and ornamental landscape plantings (Figure 3). The subject site is

currently zoned „R1- General Residential and is surrounded by RU1 – Primary Production (Figure 1)

under Glen Innes Severn Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2012. The subject site is located on a gentle

westerly slope with a westerly-flowing drainage line running through the privately-owned, closed road

easement dividing Lots 184 and 185. The elevation is approximately 1130 – 1135 ASL.

2.2 Descript ion of the proposal

GISC is developing a site-specific residential Master Plan and Development Control Plan (DCP) to

guide design and development of the proposed „Hunter Street Urban Release Area‟ as identified within

the Glen Innes Severn LEP 2012. The ecological assessment undertaken during the current survey

aims to inform this process.

A series of written guidelines and associated mapping addressing the ecological features of the subject

site is required by GISC. These guidelines aim to ensure that the Hunter Street Urban Release Area is

developed in an ecologically sensitive manner.

In the event of future residential development of these Lots, there is potential for portions of the native

vegetation within the subject site to be lost via clearing, or be significantly altered through partial

clearing and/or „under-scrubbing‟. It is important that the threatened native vegetation of this site is

either protected or appropriately considered in any planning development situation.



Under the Section 6, Clause 6.3 (c) of the Glen Innes Severn LEP 2012, a DCP must provide for “an

overall landscaping strategy for the protection and enhancement of riparian areas and remnant

vegetation, including visually prominent locations, and detailed landscaping requirements for both the

public and private domain”. As such, a development design which is sensitive to any remnant

vegetation and/or habitat features within the subject site will be required as part of any future

development associated with this land. This may include consideration of individual covenants which

protect specific ecological features (e.g. basalt rocky habitat, stands of remnant trees, native grassland)

retained within rural residential lots.

Figure 1: LEP zones covering the study area under Glen Innes Severn LEP 2012

Source: www.legislation.nsw.gov.au

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/



Figure 2: Overview of the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes



3 METHODS

The survey methodology and effort have been adapted to comply with the former NSW Department of

Environment and Conservation (now the Office of Environment and Heritage or OEH) Draft Threatened

Biodiversity Survey and Assessment: Guidelines for Developments and Activities (2004) and the

specific requirements of the subject site, given available communities, habitats, likelihood of occurrence

of targeted threatened species and the locations of the proposed residential dwellings.

3.1 Mapping

Geographic information system (GIS) layers utilised for analysis and mapping for this project were

derived from a variety of sources and include:

Digital cadastre (Land and Property Information);

Border Rivers-Gwydir catchment vegetation mapping (Eco Logical Australia 2009) was further

refined during site inspection;

Threatened species data sourced from the Bionet (Office of Environment and Heritage) and

Water Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) threatened species report;

State Environment Protection Policy (SEPP) mapping (Department of Planning); and

Bing maps aerial imagery (Microsoft).

3.2 Audit of f lora and fauna values

A preliminary list of threatened flora and fauna species, populations and ecological communities likely to

occur within the study area was prepared by searching the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage

(OEH) Wildlife Atlas records for species listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act

1995 (TSC Act), and the Department of Environment (DoE) (formerly the Department of Sustainability,

Environment, Water, Population and Communities or DSEWPaC) database for threatened species and

Matters of National Environmental Significance as listed under the Commonwealth Environment

Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST).

Threatened species data searches were undertaken on the 13th June, 2014.

The OEH Wildlife Atlas and EPBC data searches were based upon a five kilometre radius from a point

located at the centre of the subject site from a point located at Easting 29.73403 Northing 151.75236

(Figure 2).

Resultant lists were then filtered to identify threatened species considered likely to occur on, or utilise,

the subject site, based upon information obtained during the site inspection (Appendix C). Any SEPP

features that may affect the subject site, as well as local environmental planning instruments, such as

the GISC LEP 2012 and GISC DCP 2008 were also considered. The resultant list of likely species was

further filtered to identify those species considered likely to be affected by any future development of the

site, and would therefore require an assessment of significance (Seven-part test) under Part 5 of the



Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) in the event of future residential

development of the subject site.

3.3 Site inspection

ELA flora ecologist Liz Brown conducted a site inspection on 12th June 2014 for a total of 2.5 hours.

The aim of the site inspection was to delineate the type, extent and location of vegetation communities

and to conduct an assessment of the presence and quality of threatened species habitat and hollow-

bearing trees. A random meander search for threatened plant species was also undertaken during the

site inspection. This level of assessment is considered more than adequate in relation to the suggested

survey effort provided in the (former) Department of Environment and Conservation‟s (DEC) Survey

Guidelines (DEC, 2004).

Further survey (during December or January) has the potential to reveal the Federally „Vulnerable‟

species Thesium australe (Austral Toadflax) in areas supporting Themeda australis (Kangaroo Grass)

within the subject site. The Federally „Vulnerable‟ species Dichanthium setosum (Bluegrass) also has

the potential to be detected during these months, as both these threatened species can occur in higher

altitude sites on basalt geology and soils.



4 RESULTS

4.1 Audit of f lora and fauna values

The data search of TSC Act and EPBC Act threatened species, populations and communities produced

a total of eight threatened fauna species, three threatened ecological communities and 30 threatened

fauna species known to occur, or considered likely to occur, within five km of the subject site (note that

marine fish, sea birds, marine mammals, marine reptiles and migratory wetland birds were excluded

from this search). These species are listed in Appendix C, with those occurring or considered likely to

occur on / utilise the subject site highlighted in bold.

4.2 Site inspection

4.2.1 Geology

The subject site represents a „cap‟ overlying basaltic geology, with scattered embedded basalt rocks

present throughout the site.

Scattered embedded basalt rocks within Lot 184 Photo: Liz Brown

4.2.2 Flora species

A total of 58 plant species were recorded during the current site assessment, of which 22

(approximately 38%) were introduced species and one was a planted native species (Callitris

glaucophylla). A list of plant species recorded within the subject site and adjacent vegetation is

provided as Appendix B. Note that it is likely that not all plant species present on the subject site were

recorded during this assessment due to seasonality and other factors.



4.2.1 TSC Act listed threatened species and/or ecological communities

Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New England Tableland

Bioregion

The area mapped as NSW EEC Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of

the New England Tableland Bioregion (Figure 3) comprises approximately 1.0 ha within the subject site.

White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland

The area mapped as NSW EEC White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland or Box-Gum

Grassy Woodland (Figure 3) comprises approximately 1.17 ha within the privately-owned road reserve,

and 17.3 ha across the subject site as a whole (Figure 3).

Therefore, approximately 18 ha (93% of the site) of NSW „Endangered‟ vegetation communities have

the potential to be affected via clearing or degrading processes associated with future residential

development.

Listings for this community differ under both state and Commonwealth legislation, with state legislation

generally incorporating vegetation in a wider range of conditions than the Commonwealth.

Furthermore, this community is listed as „Critically Endangered‟ under the EPBC Act. A set of criteria

for determining the presence of the EEC at a site has been prepared for the TSC Act, and has been

included in Appendix A.

Threatened species

No further species listed under the TSC Act were recorded during the current assessment.

Several rare or threatened plant species have been recorded within five km of the subject site. It must

be emphasised that the timing of the survey (mid-June) was not ideal, and more than one additional

threatened flora species may be present that are not visible during early winter.

4.2.2 EPBC Act listed threatened species and/or ecological communities

The area mapped as the Federally-listed Threatened Ecological Community (TEC) White Box-Yellow

Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland represents an example of the

NSW EEC White Box Yellow Box Blakely‟s Red Gum Woodland or Box-Gum Grassy Woodland

(Section 4.2.4 and Figure 3). This vegetation community comprises approximately 1.17 ha within the

privately-owned road reserve and 17.3 ha across the subject site as a whole (as detailed in Section

4.2.4).

Therefore, approximately 17 ha (89% of the site) of a Federally „Critically Endangered‟ vegetation

community has the potential to be affected via clearing or degrading processes associated with future

residential development. Derived Native Grassland (DNG) forms part of the woodland TEC component

of the vegetation within the subject site.



No further species listed under the EPBC Act were recorded during the current assessment.


species Thesium australe (Austral Toadflax) in areas supporting Themeda australis (Kangaroo Grass)

within the subject site. The Federally „Vulnerable‟ species Dichanthium setosum (Bluegrass) also has

the potential to be detected during these months, as both these threatened species can occur in higher

altitude sites on basalt geology and soils.



Figure 3: Vegetation communities recorded within the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes



4.1 Vegetat ion

4.1.1 Tree regeneration, hollows and sizes

This community supports scattered, immature eucalypts (less than a metre high), which indicates

potential for regeneration of this community if grazing pressures were removed. No hollow-bearing

trees were recorded within the subject site during the current survey. Trees sizes range throughout the

property from saplings of approximately 15cm Diameter-at-Breast-Height (DBH) up to mature trees of

approximately 100cm DBH.

Regenerating Eucalyptus viminalis (Ribbon gum) in Lot 184 Photo: Liz Brown

4.1.1 Border Rivers-Gwydir catchment vegetation mapping

Border Rivers-Gwydir catchment mapping defined a patch of remnant vegetation to the east of the

subject site as the EEC Box-Gum Grassy Woodland. The extent and vegetation type of this mapping

required refinement considering the findings of the current assessment, as described below.

4.1.2 Plant communities

1. White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland TEC (Box-Gum Grassy Woodland)

The majority of the native vegetation community within the subject site represents a variant of the

vegetation unit White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native

Grassland (Figure 3) which is listed under the EPBC Act as „Critically Endangered‟. Much of this

vegetation represents a variation of Derived Native Grassland (DNG) which has been impacted by



grazing practices and historic selective logging of mature trees. This vegetation community occurs on

the lower flats and depressions of the subject site.

White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland TEC within the north-westerly portion of Lot 184. Photo: Liz Brown

There are very few native shrubs within this community, except for scattered occurrences of the

prostrate shrubs or sub-shrubs Pimelea curviflora var. divergens and P. linifolia (Slender Rice Flower).

Several invasive, exotic species such as Crataegus monogyna (Hawthorn), Pyracantha angustifolia

(Orange Firethorn), Ligustrum sinense (Small-leaved Privet) and Blackberry (Rubus anglocandicans)

are present in low numbers, controlled by grazing pressure.

Canopy species present in this community include Eucalyptus blakelyi (Blakely‟s Red Gum) and E.

melliodora (Yellow Box). The derived grassland at the ground layer supports native grasses such as

Poa sieberiana var. sieberiana (Snow Grass), Aristida personata (Purple Wire-grass), Bothriochloa

macra (Red-leg Grass), Chloris truncata (Windmill Grass), Rytidosperma racemosum, Sporobolus

creber (Western Rat-tail Grass), Dichanthium sericeum subsp. sericeum (Queensland Bluegrass) and

Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides (Weeping Grass).

Scattered native herbs at the groundlayer include Ammobium alatum, Chrysocephalum apiculatum

(Common Everlasting), Cymbonotus lawsonianus (Bear‟s-ear), Vittadinia cuneata (Fuzzweed),

Convolvulus graminetinus, Asperula conferta (Common Woodruff), Acaena sp. (Bidgy Widgee), Urtica

incisa (Stinging Nettle), Scleranthus biflorus (Knawel), Leucochrysum albicans subsp. albicans,



Veronica calycina (Hairy Speedwell) and Desmodium varians (Slender Tick-trefoil).

Within this community, patches of grassland dominated by Themeda australis (Kangaroo Grass) exist

within Lot 185, and these areas support species such as Rhodanthe anthemoides (Chamomile Sunray).

These areas may potentially contain the cryptic threatened species Thesium australe (Austral Toadflax),

commonly detected during more favourable survey seasons (December - January).

Embedded basalt rocks within an area dominated by Kangaroo Grass which supports Chamomile Sunray (Lot 185). Photo: Liz Brown

The derived grassland vegetation is in moderate condition due to disturbance by previous logging

practices, grazing and weed incursion of invasive grass species such as Dactylis glomerata

(Cocksfoot), Eragrostis curvula (African Lovegrass), E. lugens, Festuca pratensis (Meadow Fescue)

and Paspalum dilatatum (Paspalum). A range of exotic herbs are present throughout this layer,

including Plantago lanceolata (Plantain), Hypochaeris radicata (Catsear) and Leucanthemum vulgare

(Ox-eye Daisy).

A portion of this TEC also occurs within the privately-owned, closed road reserve (Figure 3).

The patch of mapped vegetation to the east of the subject site (ELA 2009) was previously classified as

„Box-Gum Grassy Woodland‟, whereas the findings of the current survey suggest this community

supports the EEC Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New

England Tableland Bioregion (Figure 3). This EEC is described below.



2. Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New England Tableland Bioregion EEC

Two smaller patches of this vegetation community co-occurs with White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red

Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland within the subject site, and is characterised by a

canopy of Eucalyptus viminalis (Ribbon Gum). Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy

Forest/Woodland of the New England Tableland Bioregion is listed under the TSC Act as an

„Endangered Ecological Community‟. This community occurs on ridges or rises within the northerly

portion of the subject site (Figure 3), and is commonly found on basaltic substrate.

Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New England Tableland Bioregion EEC

within the northerly portion of Lot 184. Photo: Liz Brown

The shrub and derived grassland vegetation within this community, is similar to that described above for

White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland, and is also

controlled by grazing pressure.

The derived grassland at the ground layer is dominated by Snow Grass, along with a mixture of native

grasses and scattered native herbs. It is in moderate condition due to disturbance by previous logging

practices, grazing and weed incursion of invasive grass and herb species as described above.

The patch of mapped vegetation to the east of the subject site (ELA 2009) was previously classified as

„Box-Gum Grassy Woodland‟, whereas the findings of the current survey suggest this community forms

part of this patch of Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New



England Tableland Bioregion (Figure 3).

3. Modified lands and dams

The remainder of the subject site is mapped as modified land comprising an access road, a residential

dwelling, four farm dams and ornamental landscape plantings (Figure 3), covering approximately 1.24

ha (7% of the site). These plantings are introduced and native trees, none of which support hollows.

This assessment considers that clearing of ornamental landscape plantings within the subject site would

not pose any significant habitat loss to the study area.

A previously cleared and more heavily grazed area exists immediately west of the existing residential

dwelling (Figure 3) within Lot 185. The area is dominated by weed species, and as such does not

represent derived grassland within the TEC White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy

Woodland and Derived Native Grassland mapped across the majority of the subject site.

Modified, grazed and weedy grassland adjacent to residential dwelling within Lot 185 Photo: Liz Brown

4.2 Habitat corridors

At a landscape scale, the remnant vegetation of the subject site does not form part of any mapped key

habitats or corridors within the region.

4.3 Koala habitat

Approximately one hectare of Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the

New England Tableland Bioregion EEC exists within Lot 184 of the subject site, which supports mature



Ribbon Gum. Ribbon Gum is a Preferred Koala Food Tree (PKFT) listed under Schedule 2 of the State

Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 44 – Koala Habitat Protection.

No evidence of Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) usage of these trees was noted during the current

assessment, and no SEPP 44 mapping exists within the subject site.

4.4 Habitat assessment

The native vegetation of the subject site supports the following fauna habitat features:

Ribbon Gum Koala present as PKFT;

Clusters of basalt rocks as potential reptile habitat;

Small to medium sized farm dams;

Scattered small to medium logs on the ground (coarse woody debris); and

A seasonal nectar resource in parts of the overstorey canopy such as various eucalypts.

Left: Common Wallaroo on-site. Right: Clusters of basalt rocks in Lot 185. Photos: Liz Brown.

4.5 Condition c lasses

Remnant Box Gum grassy woodlands exist in three different states or condition classes, as defined in

advice given to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage from the Threatened Species Scientific

Committee (TSSC) on amendments to the list of threatened species under the Environment Protection

and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), for the TEC White Box - Yellow Box - Blakely's

Red Gum Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands.

Those three condition classes are as follows:

An overstorey of eucalypt trees exists, but there is no substantial native understorey.



A native understorey exists, but the trees have been cleared.

Both a native understorey and an overstorey of eucalypts exist in conjunction (TSSC 2006).

Table 1 provides an estimation of the areas of different condition classes of remnant vegetation within

the subject site, which has been broken down into condition classes in accordance with the EPBC Act

Conservation Advice (TSSC 2006) for White Box - Yellow Box - Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodlands

and Derived Native Grasslands. Condition classes of remnant vegetation within the subject site are

also depicted in Figure 4 below.

Table 1: Area comparison between different vegetation condition classes within the subject site.

Condition class Definition Area (ha)

4 Both a native understorey and an overstorey of

eucalypts exist in conjunction 4.18

3 A native understorey exists, but the trees have been

cleared 14.14

2 An overstorey of eucalypt trees exist, but there is no

substantial native understorey; N/A

1 Modified (cleared and / or cultivated lands) 1.26



Figure 4: Vegetation condition classes recorded within the subject site, Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes



5 RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICIES

5.1 Legislation

5.1.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)

The Commonwealth EPBC Act establishes a requirement for Australian Government environmental

assessment and approval of:

actions that are likely to have a significant impact on matters of national environmental

significance;

actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment on Commonwealth land;

actions taken on Commonwealth land that are likely to have a significant impact on the

environment anywhere; and

actions by the Commonwealth that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment

anywhere.

The matters of national environmental significance (commonly referred to as matters of NES) are:

World Heritage properties and National heritage places.

Wetlands of international importance (Ramsar wetlands).

Listed migratory species, threatened species and ecological communities.

Commonwealth marine areas.

Nuclear actions (including uranium mining).

The following TEC listed under the EPBC Act occurs within the subject site:

White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland

(approximately 17 ha).


species Austral Toadflax in areas supporting Kangaroo Grass within the subject site. The Federally

„Vulnerable‟ species Bluegrass also has the potential to be detected during these months, as both

these threatened species can occur in higher altitude sites on basalt geology and soils.

5.1.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act)

The EP&A Act is the principal planning legislation in NSW. Part 3 of the EP&A Act sets the framework

for preparation of environmental planning instruments such as Local Environment Plans (LEPs).

Parts 3A, 4 and 5 of the EP&A Act outline the decision-making processes for assessment of proposed

development and activities. When deciding if a proposal should be approved, the consent/determining

authority (e.g. PMHC) must consider a range of environmental matters including maintenance of

biodiversity and the likely impact on threatened species, populations or ecological communities.



The NSW Assessment of Significance (Seven-part test) is a statutory mechanism under Section 5A of

the EP&A Act for assessing whether a proposed development activity may have a significant impact

on threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their habitats as listed under the

Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act). The results of this test are used to determine if

a Species Impact Statement (SIS) is required for each species potentially occurring within the subject

site.

When a threatened species or community known to occur within the vicinity of a subject site is not

recorded during a survey, the presence of potential habitat for this species is used to determine the

need to undertake a Seven-part test. Where there is no potential habitat in the subject site for

threatened species or communities, there is unlikely to be any impact on these species or community

and therefore Seven-part tests are not required for these species.

Seven-part tests relevant to this proposal are not included in the scope of this project, which aims to

inform potential development via a Master Plan for the subject site. In the event a DA is lodged for

residential development of the site, assessment/s of significance under Section 5A of the EP&A Act

would then be undertaken for the threatened vegetation communities and/or species recorded within

the subject site.

5.1.3 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act)

The TSC Act (and amendments in 2002 and 2005) identifies threatened species, communities and

populations. The TSC Act outlines the assessment process for proposed development that is likely to

have a significant effect on threatened species. Council is the primary agency for determining whether

a significant effect is likely to occur, irrespective of whether a recovery plan exists. Council has a

responsibility to ensure that it makes decisions relating to threatened species, communities and

populations, on the best available information.

The following EECs listed under the TSC Act occur within the subject site:

1. Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New England

Tableland Bioregion (approximately 1.0 ha).

2. White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red Gum Woodland (approximately 17 ha).

5.1.4 Native Vegetation Act 2003 No 103 (NV Act)

The objects of this Act include the protection of “native vegetation of high conservation value having

regard to its contribution to such matters as water quality, biodiversity, or the prevention of salinity or

land degradation”. Within Clause 7 of this Act, the definition of clearing native vegetation (relevant to

the subject site) is as follows:

“cutting down, felling, thinning, logging or removing native vegetation”.

The Minister is the consent authority for clearing native vegetation, and for any DA made under that

Act for any clearing that requires development consent.



Under Part 1, Section 5 of the NV Act, land excluded from operation of this Act includes „R1 General

Residential‟ zones such as the subject site, as follows:

(c) the land described or referred to in Part 3 of Schedule 1 (Urban areas).

5.2 Local Planning Instruments

5.2.1 Glen Innes Severn Local Environmental Plan 2012

The Glen Innes Severn (GIS) Local Environmental Plan 2012 (GIS LEP, 2012) provides the statutory

framework for land use management in the GIS LGA, subject to overriding planning controls in SEPPs

and other State legislation.

The subject site is zoned as „R1- General Residential‟ under the GIS LEP (Figures 2 and 3).

GISC requires that a series of written guidelines and associated mapping addressing the ecological

features of the subject site. These guidelines will ensure that the Hunter Street Urban Release Area is

developed in an ecologically sensitive manner.

Under the Section 6, Clause 6.3 (c) of the GIS LEP 2012, a DCP must provide for “an overall

landscaping strategy for the protection and enhancement of riparian areas and remnant vegetation,

including visually prominent locations, and detailed landscaping requirements for both the public and

private domain” (GIS LEP, 2012).

As such, a development design which is sensitive to any remnant vegetation and / or habitat features

within the subject site will be required as part of any future development associated with this land.

The remnant vegetation within the subject site constitutes the following communities:

3. TSC ACT-listed EEC Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the

New England Tableland Bioregion (approximately 1.0 ha).

4. EPBC Act-listed TEC White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and

Derived Native Grassland and/or TSC Act-listed EEC White Box Yellow Box Blakely’s Red

Gum Woodland (approximately 17 ha).

5.2.2 Glen Innes Severn Council Development Control Plan 2008

The Glen Innes Severn Council (GISC) Development Control Plan (DCP) 2008 supports the provisions

of GIS LEP 2012 and provides a set of development objectives and provisions.

5.3 State Planning Instruments

5.3.1 SEPP 44: Koala Habitat Protection

This Policy aims to encourage the proper conservation and management of areas of natural vegetation

that provide habitat for koalas to ensure a permanent free-living population over their present range

and reverse the current trend of koala population decline.



SEPP 44 applies to the „Severn‟ LGA, and therefore to the subject site.

No current Koala Plan of Management is in place which covers the subject site.

5.4 Key Threatening Processes

5.4.1 Clearing of native vegetation

The proposed actions would constitute "clearing of native vegetation" as a Key Threatening Process

(KTP) as defined in the Final Determination of the Scientific Committee on Schedule 3 of the TSC Act.

The definition of clearing under this KTP is as follows:

“… 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 stand or stands. The definition of clearing does not preclude management

activities to control exotic species, or Australian species growing outside their natural geographic

range”.

The Scientific Committee has found that:

“1. Clearing of native vegetation is recognised as a major factor contributing to loss of biological

diversity.

2. Land Clearance is listed as a KTP under the Commonwealth's EPBC Act.

3. In NSW since 1788 at least 61% of the original native vegetation has been cleared, thinned or

substantially or significantly disturbed (Environment Protection Authority, 1997). The proportion of

area cleared varies between region and community type (Native Vegetation Advisory Council, 1999)

and in some cases has exceeded 90% [e.g. South East Grassy Forests (Keith & Bedward 1999)].

4. Clearing of any area of native vegetation, including areas less than two hectares in extent, may

have significant impacts on biological diversity”.

5.4.2 Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses

Invasion of native plant communities by exotic perennial grasses is a KTP relevant to this proposal, as

defined in the Final Determination of the Scientific Committee on Schedule 3 of the TSC Act.

The definition of exotic perennial grasses under this KTP is as follows “...those that are not native to

NSW and have a life-span of more than one growing season”.

This definition would include the spread of established species such as Dactylis glomerata

(Cocksfoot), Eragrostis curvula (African Lovegrass), E. lugens, Festuca pratensis (Meadow Fescue)

and Paspalum dilatatum (Paspalum) within the native vegetation of the subject site, which have the



potential to further adversely affect native plant communities and species.

5.4.3 Removal of dead wood and dead trees

This KTP is relevant to this proposal, as defined in the Final Determination of the Scientific Committee

on Schedule 3 of the TSC Act. Small and moderate sized logs exist within the native vegetation of the

subject site.

This KTP states “the removal of dead wood and dead trees includes: the removal of forest and

woodland waste left after timber harvesting, collecting fallen timber for firewood, burning on site,

mulching on site, the removal of fallen branches and litter as general tidying up, and the removal of

standing dead trees”.



6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS

Threatened vegetation communities

The current site assessment recorded the following threatened vegetation communities within the

subject site:

NSW-listed EEC Ribbon Gum-Mountain Gum-Snow Gum Grassy Forest/Woodland of the New

England Tableland Bioregion (approximately 1.0 ha or 5% of the site).

Federally-listed TEC White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and

Derived Native Grassland (approximately 1.17 ha within the privately-owned road reserve, and

17.3 ha across the subject site as a whole, or 88% of the site).

Therefore, approximately 18 ha (93% of the site) of threatened vegetation communities have the

potential to be affected via clearing or degrading processes associated with future residential

development. Any loss of this EEC and/or TEC as part of the future residential development would

require further negotiation with OEH and/or DoE.

Potential threatened flora species

The timing of the survey (mid-June) was not ideal, and more than one additional threatened flora

species may be present that are not visible during early winter. Further survey (during December or

January) has the potential to reveal the Federally „Vulnerable‟ species Thesium australe (Austral

Toadflax) in areas supporting Themeda australis (Kangaroo Grass) within the subject site. The

Federally „Vulnerable‟ species Dichanthium setosum (Bluegrass) also has the potential to be detected

during these months, as both these threatened species can occur in higher altitude sites on basalt

geology and soils.

Koala habitat

A portion of native vegetation within the subject site (approximately one hectare) supports preferred

Koala food trees (Ribbon Gum). Removal of Koala food trees would reduce potential availability of

habitat resources for this species.

Tree health

In the event of future residential development of this site, any retained trees and/or stands of treed

vegetation must retain a suitable Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) under the AS 4970-2009 specifications

(Committee EV-018, Aboriculture, 2009).



Key Threatening Processes (KTPs)

Clearing of native vegetation (including EEC and/or TEC), increased grassy weed invasion and

removal of dead wood and/or trees are relevant KTPs associated with the current proposal.

Loss of native fauna

The potential for increased numbers of domestic cats and dogs as a result of the proposal may impact

on local fauna (e.g. ground-dwelling fauna) which utilise this native vegetation. Control mechanisms

should be a consideration for any new residential development within the GISC LGA (e.g. full

perimeter fencing).

Rock clusters as habitat

Removal of areas containing high levels of basalt rocks within the subject site has the potential to

reduce available habitat for ground-dwelling mammals, reptiles and/or amphibians in the locality.



7 RECOMMENDATIONS

The issue of dealing with EECs and/or TECs throughout the GISC LGA on a site-by-site basis make it

difficult to address the broader issue of how to conserve threatened vegetation communities across the

Northern Tablelands. Fragmentation and loss of threatened native vegetation, species and habitat over

time throughout the Tablelands results in poor conservation outcomes at a local, regional and national

scale, and sets poor precedents for vegetation conservation within the Glen Innes LGA.

To help resolve this issue, a regional assessment of threatened vegetation throughout key areas likely

to experience future development pressure within the Glen Innes LGA needs to be conducted by local

and state government. Part of this assessment may be funded via the Department of Planning‟s (DoP)

Planning Reform Fund, upon application by GISC. This assessment should ideally define „high‟,

medium‟ and „low‟ conservation impact areas, and focus on key development areas of the LGA (e.g.

Glen Innes, Glencoe and Emmaville). This assessment would allow future re-zoning of high

conservation values within these areas (e.g. patches of remnant vegetation, habitat values and/or

corridors) to „E3 Environmental Management‟ zones under the GIS LEP 2012. A similar approach has

been undertaken in the 2012 Biodiversity Strategy for Uralla Shire Council.

This assessment would allow independent consideration of future residential development areas over

time. This landscape approach to vegetation management would be more cost-effective for Council in

the long-term, and would provide a robust and scientific framework for developers to use as a tool when

undertaking residential land developments.

A range of available options exist which would enable future residential development of the subject site,

including:

1. Negotiation of a strategy between GISC, OEH and/or DoE regarding an offset agreement to

address any potential clearing of EEC and/or TEC within the subject site. This offset area may

constitute management of an alternative area of native vegetation or land as defined by GISC

(e.g. the local GISC-owned quarry, local EEC and/or TEC native vegetation). In the event of

developing an offset agreement, a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) would be required to

address issues such as revegetation, weed control works and improvement of the condition of

any offset vegetation. Any offset agreement is likely to include a nominal fee dedicated to GISC

by the site developer for ongoing vegetation management costs.

2. Developing covenants for individual residential lots within any future residential development

plan for the subject site. These covenants would require clear restrictions to be placed upon

landowners in terms of management of any threatened native vegetation retained within Lots,

and would travel with the sale of the land in perpetuity.

3. Development of a swale-edged (not curb and gutter) road reserve which incorporates a



significant percentage of the treed vegetation within the subject site (Figure 4). This option is

likely to include a Section 94 Contribution (s94) towards provision or improvement of amenities

or services under the EP&A Act. These monetary contributions would be dedicated to GISC

and levied on developers at the DA stage of a development to help pay for ongoing vegetation

management costs associated with community facilities and/or infrastructure such as open

space.

4. Developing a „community title‟ lot in order to retain biodiversity values within the subject site.

The following measures are recommended to be included as part of the subject site design, in order to

retain biodiversity values and protect adjacent vegetation and potential habitat.

Any building envelopes should be placed well outside the remnant treed vegetation stands

(Figure 4), therefore restricting the impact upon native canopy.

Mature scattered trees should be retained within the subdivision layout.

Diagnostic species from locally mapped native vegetation (i.e. endemic „New England‟ tree

species) should be selected for landscaping and plantings within any future residential

development plan for the subject site, rather than introduced tree species (e.g. Poplars, Elms).

An additional, detailed pre-clearing survey by a qualified ecologist may be required, once a final

proposal footprint is defined for the subject site, in order to mark out any clearing and EEC / TEC

boundaries, as well as define any retained ecological features within the site (e.g. trees, stands of trees,

areas of basalt rocks). Any further site survey should be undertaken in an appropriate season to detect

potential threatened flora species such as Austral Toadflax and/or Bluegrass (December to January).

The report associated with this survey should clearly define limits to clearing, using materials such as

temporary plastic fencing, star pickets and fluorescent tape.

Best practice hygiene and soil management protocols during any future construction works are

recommended to prevent introduction of any weed seeds and propagules to the subject site. These

protocols would include:

Off-site wash-down of all machinery and equipment prior to and after site works.

Installation of sediment retention fencing to protect adjoining down-slope vegetation from the

effects of soil run-off during storm events.

No stockpiling of soil or equipment around the bases of any trees to be retained (e.g. within any

TPZs).



8 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES

The following guidelines provide information to aid decision makers in determining how to assist

recovery of the listed ecological communities within the subject site, and examples of activities that may

potentially have a significant impact on these communities and therefore require further environmental

assessment and/or management via a Vegetation Management Plan (VMP).

As set out in Section 14.1 of the National Recovery Plan for White Box - Yellow Box - Blakely’s Red

Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland, the following management practices aim to

maintain and/or improve of threatened vegetation within the subject site.

Development activities which have the potential to result in changes to conditions within, or adjacent to,

an area of threatened native vegetation may have a significant impact on the listed ecological

communities within the subject site. Such developments would require referral for environmental

assessment and approval under the EPBC Act (DECCW 2010).

Many of the impacts associated with development activities can be reduced if they are considered at the

planning stage. The management practices outlined below will further facilitate the improvement of

degraded areas of threatened vegetation within the subject site.

Maintain or improve soil conditions

Avoid physical disturbance (e.g. ripping, excavation).

Avoid soil compaction from vehicles / machinery or stock camps.

Maintain or improve drainage conditions / existing hydrological regime

Do not direct run-off (from roads, urban developments, contour banks) into remnant areas.

Do not divert existing run-on from remnant areas (e.g. diversion drains).

Control exotic plant introductions

Prevent the introduction of exotic pasture species (i.e. pasture improvement).

Prevent the introduction of non-indigenous native species.

Ensure machinery hygiene protocols are implemented to prevent the spread of weeds.

Prevent the stockpiling of topsoil or overburden within remnant areas.



Implement a weed control program to control weed invasion, wildlings from adjacent tree

plantings and garden escapees. Implement a buffer zone to help control weed introductions

and protect remnant from herbicide drift.

Avoid inappropriate native tree planting

Do not plant indigenous native trees/shrubs in high quality and/or small derived grassland sites.

Use high quality seed. Where practical this should be of local provenance, but high quality non-

local seed should be used in preference to low quality local seed.

Plant trees and shrubs at natural grassy woodland densities.

Maintain or improve connectivity

Ensure existing links are maintained between threatened vegetation remnants and/or between

threatened vegetation and other native vegetation types, for example grassland, woodland,

forest, riparian and/or wetlands.

Expand sites to increase viability where possible.

Avoid excessive shading

Prevent changes which will result in prolonged shading (e.g. dense tree plantings).

Maintain or improve structural diversity

Prevent the removal of regenerating trees and shrubs within remnant patches.

Prevent firewood collection or the “tidying up” of fallen dead timber and leaf litter.

Prevent rock removal.

Prevent the removal of standing dead hollow trees.

Maintain complete structure of woodland without allowing a full canopy to develop, shading out

understorey species.

Ensure adequate buffers are retained

Protect areas of Box-Gum Grassy Woodland from adjacent land use (e.g. urban and

agricultural development) that may potentially impact on its integrity.

Minimise chemical use



Weed control should use spot-spraying, basal spraying, stem injection or cut and paint

application methods.

Avoid overspray and minimise impacts on non-target species.

Monitor treated areas to ensure weeds do not establish on any resultant bare patches.

Implement strategic grazing

Ensure remnant areas are rested at appropriate times, for example when perennial native

ground cover species are flowering and seeding.

Limit grazing during drought periods.

Grazing levels should not be increased above historical levels. Where a site has never before

been grazed by livestock, an alternative (e.g. fire, no intervention) should be used for

management.

Maintain a minimum of 80% ground cover at all times and biomass at an appropriate level to

the region and season. Monitor outcomes to determine effectiveness and adapt management

efforts.

Implement appropriate burning regimes

Minimum fire intervals suggested for threatened vegetation remnants should be adhered to

(e.g. five years, with a maximum interval of 40 years). Fire regimes implemented should have

regard to the floristic composition and condition of the remnant to be burned. For example,

remnants dominated by Snow Grass and Kangaroo Grass were found to regenerate well with

autumn burning cycles approximately every 5-8 years, where this had historically occurred

(Prober et al. 2008). Such high frequency burning cycles may negatively impact other native

species, however, and further research is required before burning regimes can be explicitly

determined.

Any burning should be applied to remnants in mosaics (i.e. burning small areas at staggered

intervals) to allow survival of soil and ground fauna (including invertebrates, amphibians and

reptiles) and promote diversity in the states of the ecological community.

Sites where burning is practiced should retain unburnt areas, to provide refuges for species of

fauna and flora that may be intolerant of fire.

Timing of burns must be considered in relation to the flowering and seeding of native and exotic

species. Where possible burns should be carried out after natives have seeded but before

weeds flower and seed.



Be aware that some weed species increase with burning.

Avoid inappropriate mowing / slashing

If mowing/slashing is used to reduce biomass within remnants and increase species diversity, it

should be carried out sporadically, and in a mosaic pattern to allow for the retention of refuges

for tall tussock grasses, regenerating overstorey and groundlayer dependent fauna as well as

habitat features (such as fallen logs, litter). The height of the slasher must be sufficient to

maintain enough cover to offer native fauna species protection.

Mow/slash at appropriate times (e.g. late summer or autumn after native ground layer plants

have seeded and become dormant).

On-road sides, only mow areas essential for visibility and safety, in most cases this will be to

the table drain. Mow from clean areas out.

Ensure machinery hygiene protocols are implemented to avoid the spread of weeds.

Control feral animals

Protect native fauna and flora populations by controlling feral predators; foxes, dogs, cats, pigs

within and/or adjacent to remnant areas.

Do not push fallen or felled timber into stacks or windrows within remnant areas as these form

harbours for foxes, cats and rabbits.

If ripping is used to control rabbits within remnants ensure machinery hygiene procedures are

adhered to, and ripped areas are monitored to prevent weed infestations.

Protect native flora by controlling feral grazers (e.g. rabbits, goats and deer) within remnants.

Erecting appropriate fencing (e.g. fencing of stock dams, individual guards for targeted

threatened plants) may help.

Exclude commercial apiary sites

Do not permit commercial apiarists to place bee hives within the area. Landholders should not

allow the placement of bees on their property within three km of a remnant patch of vegetation

(DECCW 2010).



REFERENCES

Aumann, T. & D. Baker-Gabb (1991). RAOU Report 75. A Management Plan for the Red Goshawk. RAOU. Royal Australasian Ornithologists Union, Melbourne. Belcher, C.A. (2000). The Ecology of the Tiger Quoll, Dasyurus maculatus, in south-eastern Australia. Ph.D. Thesis. Melbourne, Victoria: Deakin University. Bennett, A.F. (1987). Conservation of mammals within a fragmented forest environment: the contributions of insular biogeography and autecology. In: Saunders, D.A., G.W. Arnold, A.A. Burbridge & A.J.M. Hopkins, eds. Nature conservation: the role of remnants of native vegetation. Page(s) 41-52. Chipping Norton, NSW: Surrey Beatty & Sons. Blakers, M., Davies, S., and Reilly, P.N (1984). The Atlas of Australian Birds. RAOU Melbourne University Press. Catling, P.C., R.J. Burt & R.I. Forrester (1998). Models of the distribution and abundance of ground-dwelling mammals in the eucalypt forests of south-eastern New South Wales. Wildlife Research. 25(5):449-466. Catling, P.C., R.J. Burt & R.I. Forrester (2000). Models of the distribution and abundance of ground-dwelling mammals in the eucalypt forests of north-eastern New South Wales in relation to habitat variables. Wildlife Research. 27:639-654. Churchill, S. (2008). Australian Bats. Second edition. Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest, NSW. Claridge, A.W., M.T. Tanton, J.H. Seebeck, S.J. Cork & R.B. Cunningham (1992). Establishment of ectomycorrhizae on the roots of two species of Eucalyptus from fungal spores contained in the faeces of the long-nosed potoroo (Potorous tridactylus). Australian Journal of Ecology. 17: 207-217.

Committee EV-018, Aboriculture. (2009). Australian Standards – Protection of trees on development

sites (AS 4970-2009). Report to Council of Standards Australia.

Danks, A. (1997). Conservation of the Noisy Scrub-bird: a review of 35 years of research and management. Pacific Conservation Biology. 3:341-349. Danks, A., A.A. Burbidge, A.H. Burbidge & G.T. Smith (1996). Noisy Scrub-bird Recovery Plan. Wildlife Management Recovery Plan. 12. [Online]. WA Dept Conservation & Land Management, Perth. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/noisy-scrub-bird/index.html. Debus, S.J.S., and Czechura, G.V. (1988). The red goshawk Erythrotriorchis radiatus: a review. Australian Bird Watcher. 12, 175-199. Debus, S.J.S. (1991). An annotated list of NSW records of the Red Goshawk. Australian Birds. 24:72-89. 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. del Hoyo, J., A. Elliot & J. Sargatal (1992). Ostrich to Ducks. In: Handbook of the Birds of the World. 1. Spain: Lynx Edicions. Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) (2007) Threatened species assessment guidelines DECC, Heathcote. Department of the Environment and Heritage (DEH) (2005). Background Paper to the Wildlife

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/noisy-scrub-bird/index.html






Conservation Plan for Migratory Shorebirds. [Online]. Canberra, ACT: Department of the Environment and Heritage. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/publications/pubs/shorebird-plan-background.pdf Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (DECCW) 2010. National Recovery Plan for White Box - Yellow Box - Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland. Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, Sydney. Eby, P. (1998). An analysis of diet specialisation in frugivorous Pteropus poliocephalus in Australian subtropical rainforest. Australian Journal of Ecology 23:443-456.

Eco Logical Australia (ELA) 2009. Upgrade of Vegetation Mapping in the Border Rivers-Gwydir

Catchment - A Product for the High Conservation Value Project. Prepared for the Department of

Environment and Climate Change.

Edgar, R. & C. Belcher (2008). Spotted-tailed Quoll, Dasyurus maculatus (Kerr, 1792). In: Strahan, R., ed. The Mammals of Australia. Page(s) 61-62. Carlton, Victoria: Reed New Holland. Environment Australia (2000). Threat Abatement Plan for Predation by Feral Cats. [Online]. Biodiversity Group, Environment Australia. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/cats08.html Franklin, D., P. Menkhorst & J. Robinson (1989). Ecology of the Regent Honeyeater Xanthomyza phrygia. Emu. 89:140--154.

Frith, H.J. (1982). Pigeons and Doves of Australia. Melbourne: Rigby.

Garnett, S. (Ed) (1993). Threatened and extinct birds of Australia. Royal Australian Ornithologists Union and Australian NPWS, Royal Australian Ornithologists Union Report, No. 82.

Geering, D. & K. French (1998). Breeding biology of the Regent Honeyeater Xanthomyza phrygia in the Capertee Valley, New South Wales. Emu. 98:104--116.

Glen lnnes Development Control Plan (GI DCP) 2008. Glen Innes Severn Council (GISC).

Glen Innes Severn Local Environmental Plan (GIS LEP) 2012. Glen Innes Severn Council (GISC).

Green, R.H. & T.J. Scarborough (1990). The spotted-tailed quoll Dasyurus maculatus (Dasyuridae, Marsupialia) in Tasmania. The Tasmanian Naturalist. 100:1-15.

Hancock, J.A., J.A. Kushlan & M.P. Kahl (1992). Storks, Ibises and Spoonbills of the world. London, Academic Press. Higgins, P.J., J.M. Peter & W.K. Steele (Eds) (2001) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Five - Tyrant-flycatchers to Chats. Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Higgins, P.J. & S.J.J.F. Davies, eds (1996). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume Three - Snipe to Pigeons. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Kemper, C.M. & B.A. Wilson 2008 New Holland Mouse, Pseudomys novaehollandiae. In: Van Dyck, S. & R. Strahan, eds. The Mammals of Australia. Third Edition. Page(s) 643-644. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Reed New Holland.

Ley, A. & M.B. Williams (1992). The conservation status of the Regent Honeyeater near Armidale, New South Wales. Australian Bird Watcher. 14:277--281. Longmore, N.W. (1976). Squatter Pigeon near West Wyalong, New South Wales. Australian Birds. 11:18. Native Fish Australia (2007). Maccullochella peelii (Murray Cod) habitat description. Available at:

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/publications/pubs/shorebird-plan-background.pdf

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/cats08.html



http://www.nativefish.asn.au/cod.html Mac Nally, R., T. Soderquist & C. Tzaros (2000). The conservation value of mesic gullies in dry forest landscapes: avian assemblages in the box-ironbark ecosystem of southern Australia. Biological Conservation. 93:293-302. Mac Nally, R. & G. Horrocks (2000). Landscape-scale conservation of an endangered migrant: the Swift Parrot (Lathamus discolor) in its winter range. Biological Conservation. 92:335-343. Mansergh, I.M. (1984). The status, distribution and abundance of Dasyurus maculatus (Tiger Quoll) in Australia with particular reference to Victoria. Australian Zoologist. 21:109-122. Marchant, S. & P.J. Higgins (1990). Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Volume One - Ratites to Ducks. Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press Marchant and Higgins (1993) Handbook of Australian, New Zealand and Antarctic Birds. Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Mason, R.J. (1997). Habitat use and population size of the long-nosed potoroo, Potorous tridactylus (Marsupialia: Potoroidae) in a coastal reserve, north-eastern New South Wales. Australian Mammalogy. 20:35-42. McKilligan, N. (2005). Herons, Egrets and Bitterns: Their Biology and Conservation in Australia. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing. Menkhorst, P.W. (1997) Regent Honeyeater Recovery Plan 1994-1998. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne. Morcombe, M. (2004) Field Guide to Australian Birds, Steve Parish Publishing. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (1995) Endangered Fauna of Western New South Wales. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Hurstville. NSW Scientific Committee (2005). Booroolong Frog - endangered species listing - final determination. Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) 2014. Threatened species profile search. Available at: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/ Oliver, D., A. Ley, H. Ford & B. Williams (1999) Habitat of the Regent Honeyeater Xanthomyza phrygia and the value of the Bundarra-Barraba region for the conservation of avifauna. Pacific Conservation Biology. 5:224--239. Pizzey, G. & Knight, F. (1997). Field guide to the birds of Australia. HarperCollins. Australia.

Prober SM, Lunt ID and Thiele KR (2008) Effects of fire frequency and mowing on a temperate,

derived grassland soil in south-eastern Australia. International Journal of Wildland Fire 17:586-594

Seebeck, J.H. (1995). Long-footed potoroo. In: Menkhorst, P, ed. Mammals of Victoria. Page(s) 129-

131. Melbourne, Oxford UP.

Simpson, K. & Day, N. (1999). Field Guide to the birds of Australia. Simpson & Day, sixth edition,

Penguin Books Australia Ltd.

Smith, G.T. (1996). Habitat use and management for the Noisy Scrub-bird Atrichornis clamosus. Bird Conservation International. 6:33-48. Smith, G.T. & F.N. Robinson (1976). The Noisy Scrub-bird: an interim report. Emu. 76:37-42.

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/



Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) 2006. Commonwealth Listing Advice on White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland.

Watt, A. (1993). Conservation status and draft management plan for Dasyurus maculatus and D. hallucatus in southern Queensland. Queensland: Department of Environment and Heritage. Webster, R. & P. Menkhorst (1992) The Regent Honeyeater Xanthomyza phrygia: population status and ecology in Victoria and New South Wales. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series Number 126. Dept of Conservation & Environment, Melbourne. Welbon, C. (1993). The diet, prey handling behaviour and habitat of the Noisy Scrub-bird (Atrichornis clamosus). Hons. Thesis. Honours thesis, Murdoch University.

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communities/box-gum.html

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/communities/box-gum.html



APPENDIX A: Box Gum Woodland Criteria

White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland is found on relatively fertile soils on the

tablelands and western slopes of NSW and generally occurs between the 400 and 800 mm isohyets

extending from the western slopes, at an altitude of c. 170m to c. 1200 m, on the Northern Tablelands

(Beadle 1981). The community occurs within the NSW North Coast, New England Tableland,

Nandewar, Brigalow Belt South, Sydney Basin, South Eastern Highlands and NSW South Western

Slopes Bioregions.

White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland includes those woodlands where the

characteristic tree species include one or more of the following species in varying proportions

and combinations - Eucalyptus albens (White Box), Eucalyptus melliodora (Yellow Box) or Eucalyptus

blakelyi (Blakely's Red Gum). Grass and herbaceous species generally characterise the ground layer.

In some locations, the tree overstorey may be absent as a result of past clearing or thinning and at

these locations only an understorey may be present. Shrubs are generally sparse or absent, though

they may be locally common.

The trees may occur as pure stands, mixtures of the three species or in mixtures with other trees,

including wattles. Commonly co-occurring eucalypts include Apple Box (E. bridgesiana), Red Box (E.

polyanthemos), Candlebark (E. rubida), Snow Gum (E. pauciflora), Argyle Apple (E. cinerea), Brittle

Gum (E. mannifera), Red Stringybark (E. macrorhyncha), Grey Box (E. microcarpa), Cabbage Gum

(E. amplifolia) and others.

Woodlands with Eucalyptus albens are most common on the undulating country of the slopes region

while Eucalyptus blakelyi and Eucalyptus melliodora predominate in grassy woodlands on the

tablelands. Drier woodland areas dominated by Eucalyptus albens often form mosaics with

areas dominated by Eucalyptus blakelyi and Eucalyptus melliodora occurring in more moist

situations, while areas subject to waterlogging may be treeless. E microcarpa is often found in

association with E. melliodora and E. albens on the south western slopes. Woodlands including

Eucalyptus crebra, Eucalyptus dawsonii and Eucalyptus moluccana (and intergrades with Eucalyptus

albens), for example in the Merriwa plateau, Goulburn River National Park and western Wollemi

National Park, are also included. Intergrades between Eucalyptus blakelyi and Eucalyptus tereticornis

may also occur here.

Within White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland, species such as Rostellularia

adscendens, Chloris ventricosa, Austrodanthonia racemosa, Brunoniella australis, Cymbopogon

refractus, Swainsona galegifolia, Notelaea microcarpa, Stackhousia viminea, Olearia elliptica,

Jasminum suavissimum, Plantago gaudichaudii, Dichanthium sericeum, Plantago debilis and

Wahlenbergia communis are generally more restricted to more northern areas (eg. Prober 1996).

Some other species in White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland were generally restricted

to southern areas.

These include Gonocarpus elatus, Austrostipa blackii, Aristida behriana, Bracteantha viscosa,

Austrodanthonia auriculata and Austrostipa nodosa (Prober 1996). The understorey in intact sites is

characterised by native grasses and a high diversity of herbs; the most commonly encountered include

Kangaroo Grass (Themeda australis) Poa Tussock (Poa sieberiana), wallaby grasses

(Austrodanthonia spp.), spear-grasses (Austrostipa spp.), Common Everlasting (Chrysocephalum

apiculatum), Scrambled Eggs (Goodenia pinnatifida), Small St John's Wort (Hypericum gramineum),



Narrow-leafed New Holland Daisy (Vittadinia muelleri) and blue-bells (Wahlenbergia spp.).

Shrubs are generally sparse or absent, though they may be locally common. Remnants generally

occur on fertile lower parts of the landscape where resources such as water and nutrients are

abundant. Disturbed remnants are considered to form part of the community, including where the

vegetation would respond to assisted natural regeneration. White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum

Woodland includes vegetation described as Eucalyptus albens alliance and E. melliodora / E. blakelyi

alliance in Beadle (1981), the Eucalyptus albens alliance in Moore (1953a, b), the grassy white box

woodlands of Prober and Thiele (1993, 1995) and Prober (1996) and the Grassy white box woodland

of the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. In the

southern tablelands and parts of the southwest slopes, White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum

Woodland is described in Thomas et al. (2000).

Related communities are the Eucalyptus microcarpa, Eucalyptus pilligaensis Grey Box/ Eucalyptus

populnea Poplar Box communities of the western slopes and plains and the Eucalyptus moluccana,

Grey Box, communities of the Clarence, lower Hunter Valley and Western Sydney. These are not

covered by this Determination. Similarly the natural temperate grasslands and the Eucalyptus

pauciflora grassy woodlands of the cooler parts of the southern tablelands are not covered by this

Determination.

The understorey may be highly modified by grazing history and disturbance. A number of native

species appear not to tolerate grazing by domestic stock and are confined to the least disturbed

remnants (Dianella revoluta, Diuris dendrobioides, Microseris lanceolata, Pimelea curviflora,

Templetonia stenophylla (Prober & Thiele 1995). Dominant pasture species typically change from

Themeda australis, Austrostipa aristiglumis and Poa spp. to Austrostipa falcata, Austrodanthonia spp.

and Bothriochloa macra as grazing intensity increases (Moore 1953a). This may reflect differences in

palatability of these species and their ability to tolerate grazing pressure. Light grazing and burning

may also be a problem and lead to Aristida ramosa dominance (Lodge & Whalley 1989).

Disturbed remnants are still considered to form part of the community including remnants

where the vegetation, either understorey, overstorey or both, would, under appropriate

management, respond to assisted natural regeneration, such as where the natural soil and

associated seed bank is still at least partially intact.

Remnant Box-Gum Woodland can occur in a range of conditions, from almost pristine to highly

modified. The importance of a particular Box-Gum Woodland remnant to the maintenance and

recovery of this EEC in a local region needs to be considered in the context of the extent and condition

of Box- Gum Woodland in the local region.

Where the Box-Gum Woodland remnant is in less than pristine condition it is still considered part of the

EEC as long as the site has at least part of its natural soil and seedbank intact, so that under

appropriate management it would respond to assisted natural regeneration. Therefore, the Box-Gum

Woodland EEC can include the following conditions,

• Trees present as a canopy with a non-native ground-layer;

• Characteristic tree species absent as a result of past clearing or thinning and only other tree

species and groundlayer present; and

• Overstorey absent as a result of past clearing or thinning and only a ground-layer present.

For isolated Box-Gum Woodland trees to be considered part of the EEC, it must be considered that



the site, under appropriate management, would respond to assisted natural regeneration. The

community is poorly represented in conservation reserves. There are small occurrences of White Box

Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Woodland in Border Ranges National Park, Goobang National Park,

Goulburn River National Park, Manobalai Nature Reserve, Mt Kaputar National Park, Oxley Wild

Rivers National Park, Queanbeyan Nature Reserve, Towari National Park, Warrumbungle National

Park, Wingen Maid Nature Reserve and Wollemi National Park. The community also occurs in the

following State Conservation Areas, Copeton State Conservation Area, Lake Glenbawn State

Conservation Area and Lake Keepit State Conservation Area.



APPENDIX B: Flora species list recorded within the study area, Glen Innes (12/6/2014).

This species list was recorded within Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes, and the

adjoining native vegetation immediately north and east of the subject site. This list does not include

the tree species used as landscape plantings within these Lots.

Species Family Exotic Common Name

Acaena sp. ROSACEAE

Bidgy Widgee

Acetosella vulgaris PLOYGONACEAE Yes Sheep Sorrel

Ammobium alatum ASTERACEAE Anagallis arvensis MYRSINACEAE Yes Scarlet Pimpernel

Aristida personata POACEAE

Purple Wire-grass

Asperula conferta RUBIACEAE

Common Woodruff

Bothriochloa macra POACEAE

Red-leg Grass

Callitris glaucophylla CUPRESSACEAE Planted White Cypress Pine

Chloris truncata POACEAE

Windmill Grass

Cirsium vulgare ASTERACEAE Yes Spear Thistle

Convolvulus graminetinus CONVOLVULACEAE Crataegus monogyna MALACEAE Yes Hawthorn

Chrysocephalum apiculatum ASTERACEAE

Common Everlasting

Cymbonotus lawsonianus ASTERACEAE

Bear's-ear

Dactylis glomerata POACEAE Yes Cocksfoot

Desmodium varians FABACEAE - FABOIDEAE

Slender Tick-trefoil

Dichanthium sericeum subsp. sericeum POACEAE

Queensland Bluegrass

Dichondra repens CONVOLVULACEAE

Kidney Weed

Dichondra sp. A sensu Harden (1992) CONVOLVULACEAE Einadia trigonos CHENOPODIACEAE

Fishweed

Epilobium billardierianum subsp. cinereum ONAGRACEAE Eragrostis curvula POACEAE Yes African Lovegrass

Eragrostis lugens POACEAE Yes Eucalyptus blakelyi MYRTACEAE

Blakely's Red Gum

Eucalyptus melliodora MYRTACEAE

Yellow Box

Eucalyptus viminalis MYRTACEAE

Ribbon Gum

Festuca pratensis POACEAE Yes Meadow Fescue

Gamochaeta sp. ASTERACEAE Yes Cudweed

Geranium solanderi GERANIACEAE

Native Geranium

Glycine tabacina FABACEAE - FABOIDEAE

Hydrocotyle laxiflora APIACEAE

Stinking Pennywort

Hypochaeris radicata ASTERACEAE Yes Flatweed

Leucanthemum vulgare ASTERACEAE Yes Ox-eye Daisy

Leucochrysum albicans subsp. albicans ASTERACEAE Ligustrum sinense OLEACEAE Yes Small-leaved Privet

Marrubium vulgare LAMIACEAE Yes White Horehound

Microlaena stipoides var. stipoides POACEAE

Weeping Grass

Oxalis sp. OXALIDACEAE Yes Paspalum dilatatum POACEAE Yes Paspalum

Pennisetum alopecuroides POACEAE

Swamp Foxtail

Pimelea curviflora var. divergens THYMELAEACEAE



Species Family Exotic Common Name

Pimelea linifolia subsp. linifolia THYMELAEACEAE Plantago lanceolata PLANTAGINACEAE Yes Plantain

Poa sieberiana var. sieberiana POACEAE

Snow Grass

Pyracantha angustifolia MALACEAE Yes Orange Firethorn

Rhodanthe anthemoides ASTERACEAE

Chamomile Sunray

Rubus anglocandicans ROSACEAE Yes Blackberry

Rumex sp. POLYGONACEAE Yes Dock

Rytidosperma racemosum POACEAE Scleranthus biflorus CARYOPHYLLACEAE

Knawel

Solanum nigrum SOLANACEAE Yes Black-berry Nightshade

Sonchus oleraceus ASTERACEAE Yes Common Sowthistle

Sporobolus creber POACEAE

Western Rat-tail Grass

Themeda australis POACEAE

Kangaroo Grass

Trifolium campestre FABACEAE - FABOIDEAE Yes Hop Clover

Urtica incisa URTICACEAE

Stinging Nettle

Veronica calycina SCROPHULARIACEAE

Hairy Speedwell

Vittadinia cuneata ASTERACEAE

Fuzzweed



APPENDIX C: TSC / EPBC Act Threatened species data search results

Highlighted rows and bold text represents subject species listed under the TSC Act or EPBC Act

considered as known or likely to occur on, or to utilise, the subject site.

*Five categories for likelihood of occurrence of species are used in this report and are defined below.

Assessment of likelihood was based on species locality records, presence or absence of suitable

habitat features within the subject site, results of previous studies, on-site field surveys and

professional judgement.

yes - the species is known to occur within suitable habitat within the subject site.

likely - a medium to high probability that a species occupies or uses habitat within the subject

site.

potential - suitable habitat for a species occurs within the subject site, but there is insufficient

information to categorise the species as likely to occur, or unlikely to occur.

unlikely - a very low to low probability that a species occupies or uses habitat within the

subject site.

no - habitat within the subject site and in the immediate vicinity is unsuitable for the species,

or, in the case of plants, the species was not located during searches of the subject site.

CE = Critically Endangered species, population or ecological community.

E = Endangered species, population or ecological community.

M = Migratory species.

V = Vulnerable species, population or ecological community.

TSC Act = NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

EPBC Act = Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.



FLORA SPECIES

SCIENTIFIC COMMON TSC Act EPBC Act LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

Callistemon pungens - V No

Dichanthium setosum Bluegrass V V Potential

Diuris pedunculata Small Snake Orchid - E Potential

Eucalyptus nicholii Narrow-leaved Black Peppermint V V No

Eucalyptus rubida subsp.

barbigerorum

Blackbutt Candlebark - V

Unlikely

Haloragis exalata subsp.

velutina

Tall Velvet Sea-berry - V

No

Streblus pendulinus Siah's Backbone - V No

Thesium australe Austral Toadflax V V Potential

ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES

ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITY TSC Act EPBC Act LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

Natural grasslands on basalt and fine-textured alluvial plains of northern New South Wales and

southern Queensland - CE No

New England Peppermint (Eucalyptus nova-anglica) Grassy Woodlands - CE No

White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native

Grassland - CE Yes



FAUNA SPECIES

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME HABITAT TSC Act EPBC

Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

Ray-finned fish

Maccullochella peelii Murray Cod Widespread throughout the Murray-Darling system originally being

found in virtually all waterways of that system. Habitat varies

greatly, from quite small clear, rocky, upland streams with riffle

and pool structure on the upper western slopes of the Great

Dividing Range to large, meandering, slow-flowing, often silty

rivers in the alluvial lowland reaches of the Murray-Darling Basin.

Prefer deep holes with cover in the form of large rocks, fallen

trees, stumps, clay banks and overhanging vegetation (Native

Fish Australia 2007).

- V

No

Amphibians

Litoria booroolongensis Booroolong Frog Typically inhabits rocky western-flowing creeks and their

headwaters, although a small number of animals have also been

recorded in eastern-flowing streams (NSW Scientific Committee

2005).

- E

No

Litoria castanea Yellow Spotted Tree Frog Ponds, wetlands and slowly moving streams with abundant

marginal growth of bulrushes and other vegetation. The southern

population has been noted to occur in both woodland and

improved pastoral areas (DECC 2007).

CE E

No

Reptilia

Underwoodisaurus

sphyrurus (Uvidicolus

Border Thick-tailed

Gecko

Found only on the tablelands and slopes of northern NSW and

southern Queensland, reaching south to Tamworth and west to

Moree. Most common in the granite country of the New England

- V

Unlikely




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

sphyrurus) Tablelands. Rocky hills with dry open eucalypt forest or woodland.

Favours forest and woodland areas with boulders, rock slabs,

fallen timber and deep leaf litter (DECC 2007).

Birds

Anthochaera phrygia Regent Honeyeater Regent Honeyeaters mostly occur in dry box-ironbark eucalypt

woodland and dry sclerophyll forest associations, wherein they

prefer the most fertile sites available, e.g. along creek flats, or in

broad river valleys and foothills (Franklin et al. 1989; Geering &

French 1998; Ley & Williams 1992; Oliver et al. 1999; Webster &

Menkhorst 1992). The Regent Honeyeater primarily feeds on

nectar from box and ironbark eucalypts and occasionally from

banksias and mistletoes (NPWS 1995).

- E

Potential

Ardeotis australis Australian Bustard Mainly inhabits tussock and hummock grasslands, though prefers

tussock grasses to hummock grasses; also occurs in low

shrublands and low open grassy woodlands; occasionally seen in

pastoral and cropping country, golf courses and near dams.

Breeds on bare ground on low sandy ridges or stony rises in

ecotones between grassland and protective shrubland cover;

roosts on ground among shrubs and long grasses or under trees

(DECC 2007).

E1 -

No

Atrichornis clamosus Noisy Scrub-bird Inhabits communities that support a dense understorey or lower

stratum of sedges and shrubs, a dense accumulation of leaf litter

and an abundant population of litter-dwelling invertebrates. It

mainly occurs in low closed forests (Smith 1996; Welbon 1993).

_ V

No




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

Erythrotriorchis radiatus Red Goshawk Associated with forests and woodlands with a mosaic of

vegetation types, an abundance of birds and permanent water. In

NSW, this species is thought to favour mixed subtropical

rainforest, Melaleuca Swamp Forest, and open eucalypt forest

along rivers, often in rugged terrain (Marchant & Higgins 1993;

Debus 1993 & 1991; DECC 2007). The Red Goshawk nests in

large trees, frequently the tallest and most massive in a tall stand,

and nest trees are invariably within one km of permanent water

(Aumann & Baker-Gabb 1991; Debus & Czechura 1988).

- V

No

Geophaps scripta scripta Squatter Pigeon In New South Wales, the Squatter Pigeon (southern) is thought to

have formerly occurred in sites that, today, consist of eucalypt

woodlands that are intersected with patches of acacia and stands

of cypress pine Callitris columellaris and that have a ground cover

of grasses and herbs (Frith 1982). The subspecies has also been

recorded in scrub and acacia growth. It has also been recorded in

sown grasslands with scattered remnant trees and disturbed

habitats (i.e. around stockyards, along roads and railways, and

around settlements) (Longmore 1976).

- V

No

Lathamus discolor Swift Parrot Breeds in Tasmania between September and January. Feeds

mostly on nectar, mainly from eucalypts, but also eats psyllid

insects and lerps, seeds and fruit. Migrates to mainland in autumn,

where it forages on profuse flowering Eucalypts. Favoured feed

trees include winter flowering species such as Swamp Mahogany

(Eucalyptus robusta), Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata), Red

Bloodwood (C. gummifera), Mugga Ironbark (E. sideroxylon),

White Box (E. albens) and Forest Red Gum (E. tereticornis)

(DECC 2007). Box-ironbark habitat in drainage lines, and coastal

forest in NSW is thought to provide critical food resources during

E

Unlikely




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

periods of drought or low food abundance elsewhere (Mac Nally et

al. 2000).

Oxyura australis Blue-billed Duck The Blue-billed Duck prefers deep water in large permanent

wetlands and swamps with dense aquatic vegetation. The species

is completely aquatic, swimming low in the water along the edge

of dense cover (DECC 2007).

V -

Unlikely

Rostratula benghalensis

australis (Rostratula

australis)

Painted Snipe (Australian

subspecies)

Prefers fringes of swamps, dams and nearby marshy areas where

there is a cover of grasses, lignum, low scrub or open timber.

Nests on the ground amongst tall vegetation, such as grasses,

tussocks or reeds (ibid.). Forages nocturnally on mud-flats and in

shallow water (DECC 2007).

- E

Unlikely

Mammals – terrestrial (excluding bats)

Dasyurus maculatus Spotted-tailed Quoll The Spotted-tailed Quoll inhabits a range of forest communities

including wet and dry sclerophyll forests, coastal heathlands and

rainforests (Mansergh 1984; DECC 2007). Preferred habitat is

mature wet forest (Belcher 2000; Green & Scarborough 1990;

Watt 1993). Unlogged forest or forest that has been less disturbed

by timber harvesting is also preferable (Catling et al. 1998, 2000).

Maternal den sites are logs with cryptic entrances; rock outcrops;

windrows; burrows (Environment Australia 2000).

V -

No

Dasyurus maculatus

maculatus

Spotted-tailed Quoll (SE

Mainland Population)

See above - E

No

Petrogale penicillata Brush-tailed Rock- Rocky areas in a variety of habitats, typically north facing sites - V No




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

wallaby with numerous ledges, caves and crevices (Strahan 1995).

Phascolarctos cinereus Koala Associated with both wet and dry Eucalypt forest and woodland

that contains a canopy cover of approximately 10 to 70% (Reed et

al. 1990), with acceptable Eucalypt food trees. Some preferred

Eucalyptus species are: Eucalyptus tereticornis, E. punctata, E.

cypellocarpa, E. viminalis.

V V

Potential

Potorous tridactylus

tridactylus

Long-nosed Potoroo (SE

Mainland Population)

There is no consistent pattern to the habitat of the Long-nosed

Potoroo (SE Mainland); it can be found in wet eucalypt forests

(Seebeck 1995) to coastal heaths and scrubs (Mason 1997). The

main factors would appear to be access to some form of dense

vegetation for shelter (Bennett 1987) and the presence of an

abundant supply of fungi for food (Claridge et al. 1992).

- V

No

Pseudomys

novaehollandiae

New Holland Mouse This species has been recorded from Queensland to Tasmania,

though with a sporadic and patchy distribution. Most records are

coastal. However, populations have been recently recorded up to

400km inland. The species includes heathlands, woodands, open

forest and paperbark swamps and on sandy, loamy or rocky soils

(Kemper and Wilson 2008).

- V

No

Mammals – terrestrial (bats)

Chalinolobus dwyeri Large-eared Pied Bat The Large-eared Pied Bat has been recorded in a variety of

habitats, including dry sclerophyll forests, woodland, sub-alpine

woodland, edges of rainforests and wet sclerophyll forests

(Churchill 1998; DECC 2007). This species roosts in caves, rock

overhangs and disused mine shafts and as such is usually

associated with rock outcrops and cliff faces (Churchill 1998;

- V

Unlikely




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

DECC 2007).

Nyctophilus corbeni South-eastern Long-

eared Bat

Inhabits a variety of vegetation types, including mallee, bulloke

Allocasuarina leuhmanni and box eucalypt dominated

communities, but it is distinctly more common in

box/ironbark/cypress-pine vegetation that occurs in a north-south

belt along the western slopes and plains of NSW and southern

Queensland. Roosts in tree hollows, crevices, and under loose

bark (OEH 2014).

- V

Unlikely

Pteropus poliocephalus Grey-headed Flying-Fox Inhabits a wide range of habitats including rainforest, mangroves,

paperbark forests, wet and dry sclerophyll forests and cultivated

areas (Churchill 1998, Eby 1998). Camps are often located in

gullies, typically close to water, in vegetation with a dense canopy

(Churchill 1998).

- V

No

Migratory terrestrial species

Apus pacificus Fork-tailed Swift Inhabits varied habitat with a possible tendency to more arid areas

but also over coasts and urban areas (Simpson & Day 1999).

- Mi

Unlikely

Calidris melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper In Australasia, prefers shallow fresh to saline wetlands. The

species is found at coastal lagoons, estuaries, bays, swamps,

lakes, inundated grasslands, saltmarshes, river pools, creeks,

floodplains and artificial wetlands. The species is usually found in

coastal or near coastal habitat but occasionally found further

inland. It prefers wetlands that have open fringing mudflats and

low, emergent or fringing vegetation, such as grass or samphire.

The species has also been recorded in swamp overgrown with

lignum. They forage in shallow water or soft mud at the edge of

- Mi

No




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

wetlands (Higgins & Davies 1996).

Haliaeetus leucogaster White-bellied Sea-Eagle Forages over large open fresh or saline waterbodies, coastal seas

and open terrestrial areas (Marchant & Higgins 1993, Simpson &

Day 1999). Breeding habitat consists of tall trees, mangroves,

cliffs, rocky outcrops, silts, caves and crevices and is located

along the coast or major rivers. Breeding habitat is usually in or

close to water, but may occur up to a kilometre away (Marchant &

Higgins 1993).

- Mi

Unlikely

Hirundapus caudacutus White-throated Needletail Forages aerially over a variety of habitats usually over coastal and

mountain areas, most likely with a preference for wooded areas

(Marchant & Higgins 1993; Simpson & Day 1999). Has been

observed roosting in dense foliage of canopy trees, and may seek

refuge in tree hollows in inclement weather (Marchant & Higgins

1993).

- Mi

Unlikely

Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater Resident in coastal and sub-coastal northern Australia; regular

breeding migrant in southern Australia, arriving September to

October, departing February to March, some occasionally present

April to May (Pizzey and Knight 1997). Occurs in open country,

chiefly at suitable breeding places in areas of sandy or loamy soil:

sand-ridges, riverbanks, road-cuttings, sand-pits, occasionally

coastal cliffs (ibid).

- Mi

Potential

Monarcha melanopsis Black-faced Monarch Rainforest and eucalypt forests, feeding in tangled understorey

(Blakers et al. 1984).

- Mi

No

Myiagra cyanoleuca Satin Flycatcher Associated with drier eucalypt forests, absent from rainforests

(Blakers et al. 1984), open forests, often at height (Simpson & Day

- Mi Unlikely




Act

LIKELIHOOD OF

OCCURRENCE

1999).

Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis The Glossy Ibis' preferred habitat for foraging and breeding are

fresh water marshes at the edges of lakes and rivers, lagoons,

flood-plains, wet meadows, swamps, reservoirs, sewage ponds,

rice-fields and cultivated areas under irrigation. The species is

occasionally found in coastal locations such as estuaries, deltas,

saltmarshes and coastal lagoons (del Hoyo et al. 1992; Hancock

et al. 1992; Marchant & Higgins 1990).

- Mi

Unlikely

Rhipidura rufifrons Rufous Fantail The Rufous Fantail is a summer breeding migrant to southeastern

Australia (Morcombe, 2004). It is found in rainforest, dense wet

eucalypt and monsoon forests, paperbark and mangrove swamps

and riverside vegetation (Morcombe, 2004).

- Mi

No

Sources of habitat information for species are as follows:

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH), Atlas of NSW Wildlife website, 13 June 2014, BioNet website:

http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/atlaspublicapp/UI_Modules/ATLAS_/AtlasSearch.aspx Search area: 5 km radius centred on subject site.

Department of Environment (DoE), Protected Matters Search Tool (PMST) website, 13 June 2014, http://www.environment.gov.au/webgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst.jsf

Search area: 5 km radius centred on subject site.

Birds (Morcombe 2000; Pizzey and Knight 1997), Mammals (Strahan 1995, Menkhorst and Knight 1998), Bats (Strahan 1995, Churchill 1998), Frogs (Barker et al. 1995),

Plants (Harden 1990-2002; PlantNet 2013) and OEH Threatened Species profiles available online at http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedspeciesapp/



HEAD OFFICE

Suite 4, Level 1

2-4 Merton Street

Sutherland NSW 2232

T 02 8536 8600

F 02 9542 5622

SYDNEY

Level 6

299 Sussex Street

Sydney NSW 2000

T 02 8536 8650

F 02 9264 0717

ST GEORGES BASIN

8/128 Island Point Road

St Georges Basin NSW 2540

T 02 4443 5555

F 02 4443 6655

CANBERRA

Level 2

11 London Circuit

Canberra ACT 2601

T 02 6103 0145

F 02 6103 0148

NEWCASTLE

Suites 28 & 29, Level 7

19 Bolton Street

Newcastle NSW 2300

T 02 4910 0125

F 02 4910 0126

NAROOMA

5/20 Canty Street

Narooma NSW 2546

T 02 4476 1151

F 02 4476 1161

COFFS HARBOUR

35 Orlando Street

Coffs Harbour Jetty NSW 2450

T 02 6651 5484

F 02 6651 6890

ARMIDALE

92 Taylor Street

Armidale NSW 2350

T 02 8081 2681

F 02 6772 1279

MUDGEE

Unit 1, Level 1

79 Market Street

Mudgee NSW2850

T 02 4302 1230

F 02 6372 9230

PERTH

Suite 1 & 2

49Ord Street

West Perth WA 6005

T 08 9227 1070

F 08 9322 1358

WOLLONGONG

Suite 204, Level 2

62 Moore Street

Austinmer NSW 2515

T 02 4201 2200

F 02 4268 4361

GOSFORD

Suite 5, Baker One

1-5 Baker Street

Gosford NSW 2250

T 02 4302 1220

F 02 4322 2897

DARWIN

16/56 Marina Boulevard

Cullen Bay NT 0820

T 08 8989 5601

BRISBANE

51 Amelia Street

Fortitude Valley QLD 4006 T 07 3503 7193

1300 646 131 www.ecoaus.com.au

http://www.ecoaus.com.au/

Documents

Flora and habitat assessment - Glen Innes Severn...Flora and fauna habitat assessment of Lots 184 and 185 DP 753282, Hunter Street, Glen Innes, NSW. Prepared for Glen Innes Severn