Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
HEALTH MONITORING PROGRAM
2014
F Q M A U S T R A L I A N I C K E L P T Y L T D
M A R C H 2 0 1 5
TEL.
(08) 9315 4688
office@woodmanenv.com.au
PO Box 50, Applecross WA 6953
www.woodmanenv.com.au
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
DOCUMENT REVISION HISTORY
Revision
Description
Originator
Internal
Reviewer
Internal
Review
Date
Client
Reviewer
Client
Review
Date
Rev A
Draft report
BL
CG/GW
5/3/2015
Tony
Petersen
6/03/2015
Rev 0
Final report
BL
GW
Report Reference:
FQM14‐33‐01
Cover Photographs: Clockwise from top left – Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea monitoring
quadrat; flowers; typical yellowing of leaves on growing tip; fruit
(Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd)
DISCLAIMER
This document is prepared in accordance with and subject to an agreement between
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (“Woodman Environmental”) and the client for
whom it has been prepared (“FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd”) and is restricted to those issues
that have been raised by the Client in its engagement of Woodman Environmental and
prepared using the standard of skill and care ordinarily exercised by Environmental Scientists
in the preparation of such Documents.
Any organisation or person that relies on or uses this document for purposes or reasons other
than those agreed by Woodman Environmental and the Client without first obtaining the prior
written consent of Woodman Environmental, does so entirely at their own risk and Woodman
Environmental denies all liability in tort, contract or otherwise for any loss, damage or injury
of any kind whatsoever (whether in negligence or otherwise) that may be suffered as a
consequence of relying on this document for any purpose other than that agreed with the
Client.
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ....................................................... 1
1.1
OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 1
2.
MONITORING PROGRAM ........................................................................ 1
3.
METHODS ............................................................................................... 2
3.1
QUADRAT ESTABLISHMENT ......................................................................................... 2
3.2
PLANT COLLECTION, LICENSING AND NOMENCLATURE ............................................. 4
3.3
MONITORING ............................................................................................................... 4
3.3.1
Health Ranking ................................................................................................................... 4
3.3.2
Quadrat Health .................................................................................................................. 6
3.3.3
Plant Health ........................................................................................................................ 6
3.3.4
Multispectral Imagery Interpretation ............................................................................... 7
3.4
RAINFALL DATA ............................................................................................................. 8
4.
RESULTS .................................................................................................. 9
4.1
QUADRAT HEALTH ........................................................................................................ 9
4.2
PLANT HEALTH ............................................................................................................ 10
4.3
RAINFALL ..................................................................................................................... 12
4.4
MULTISPECTRAL IMAGERY RESULTS ........................................................................... 13
4.4.1
Interpretation of 2013 VCD Image ..................................................................................13
4.4.1.1
Correlation with Rainfall ........................................................................................................................... 16
4.4.2
Interpretation of 2014 VCD Image ..................................................................................16
4.4.2.1
Correlation with Health Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 16
4.4.2.2
Correlation with Rainfall ........................................................................................................................... 17
5.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................... 17
6.
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................ 19
7.
REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 20
Tables
Table 1:
Site Selection of Quadrats
Table 2:
Personnel and Licensing Information
Table 3:
Quadrat Vegetation Health Score Ranking Scale
Table 4:
Plant Health Score Ranking Scale
Table 5:
Plant Health Monitoring Parameters
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Representation of Fecundity Classifications and
Upright Stems
Appendix B: Pseudo‐colour Change Detection Scale Range
Appendix C: Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Monitoring 2014 Raw Data
Appendix D: Photographic Record of Plots 2014
Appendix E: Photographic Representation of Plant and Foliage Death
Appendix F: Photographic Representation of Ground‐truthed Points
Charts
Chart 1:
Monthly and Mean Annual Rainfall for Ravensthorpe (Bureau of
Meteorology 2015)
Figures
Figure 1:
Field Location of Quadrats and 2013 0.5m Pseudo‐colour Image
(2012‐2013 Change)
Figure 2:
2013 0.2m Pseudo‐colour Image (2012‐2013 Change)
Figure 3:
2014 0.2m Pseudo‐colour Image (2013‐2014 Change)
Figure 4:
2014 0.2m Pseudo‐colour Image (2012‐2014 Change)
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
1
1.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
FQM Nickel Australia Pty Ltd’s (FQM) Ravensthorpe Nickel Operations have approval under
Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act) for their lateritic nickel mining
operations near Ravensthorpe. A condition of operation is to monitor the health of
populations of the Threatened ‐ Declared Rare Flora (T‐DRF) taxon Kunzea similis subsp.
mediterranea. The operation currently has an agreed monitoring program for this taxon
focusing on transect based sampling conducted on a quarterly basis.
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd (Woodman Environmental) were commissioned
to design a less intensive and intrusive monitoring program to monitor the health of the
naturally occurring population of Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea (Kunzea) within the
Kunzea Conservation Area, that could be used in conjunction with remote sensing
multispectral imagery (flown annually in October) to track vegetation health on an annual
basis.
Following a review of the existing monitoring program parameters and historical results
(Western Botanical 2008), a revised method utilising a quadrat based sampling regime with
parameters designed to be repeatable, reduce observer variation during monitoring, limit
errors in interpretation of parameters by different recorders, and take into account the form
of the taxon, was proposed (Woodman Environmental 2014). This report details the new
methods and 2014 monitoring results (baseline sampling) for the program.
1.1
Objectives
The objectives required to fulfil the condition of monitoring the health of Kunzea similis
subsp. mediterranea include:
Establish a new monitoring method to reduce variations and errors in results due to
human sampling, and to increase time effectiveness;
Conduct baseline monitoring of the population during Spring 2014 utilising the new
method; and
Prepare a report documenting the methods and results of the initial sampling, and
recommendations for additional investigations if deemed appropriate.
2.
MONITORING PROGRAM
The monitoring program incorporates 2 distinct aspects (interpretation of remotely sensed
multispectral imagery / field observation of vegetation and plant health) that are compared
to each other. The program is designed to provide correlation of multispectral data with
field observations which will allow the use of the multispectral data as a monitoring tool in
the absence of annual field monitoring. Field monitoring would therefore become a regular
(every 3 to 5 years) check on the multispectral data and also a response to observed
significant change in vegetation health when indicated by the remote sensing imagery.
The first aspect (multispectral imagery) is utilised to provide an overview of the Kunzea
Conservation Zone, focussing on general vegetation health. The vegetation health is
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
2
interpreted from data presented in the imagery on photosynthesising plant cell density, with
changes in health identified from comparison of digital images collected over time.
The second aspect (field observation) involves the use of a plant and vegetation health
ranking system applied to a set of small portions (subsamples/quadrats) of the Kunzea
population to assess visual symptoms of vegetation health/stress.
The monitoring program design was initially provided to FQM in a separate report
(Woodman Environmental 2014) that described the approach and proposed data collection
and analysis methods. Some aspects of the proposed design have been modified to reflect
field conditions and these revised methods are described below.
3.
METHODS
3.1
Quadrat Establishment
Identification of potential sampling locations (quadrats) within the Conservation Area
involved inspection of existing remote sensing data at 0.2m pixels (the 2013 pseudo‐colour
image showing changes in vegetation from 2012 to 2013, specifically plant cell density
(loss/gain of leaves)) in conjunction with previously prepared Kunzea population polygons
(Western Botanical 2008). Proposed sampling locations were chosen to incorporate areas
that appeared to be healthy and also areas that appeared to be distressed (as per the 2013
pseudo‐colour image) to provide an overview of the population health and also to help
calibrate the monitoring method. Another parameter utilised in the selection of sampling
sites was proximity to areas of mine activity in order to monitor or gauge the effects of
mining activities, both direct and indirect on the community and the Kunzea itself (i.e. dust,
spread of Dieback, altered hydrological regimes, disturbance).
Quadrats locations were spread across the Kunzea population to measure variation and
incorporated some of the original transect locations (Western Botanical 2008). Six quadrats
were initially proposed, three placed in vegetation showing signs of foliage loss and three in
vegetation in good health (foliage gain) based on the vegetation change detection (VCD)
multispectral image, with one of each in proximity to the original monitoring transects. Final
selection of quadrat locations was determined on‐site following a reconnaissance of the
Kunzea Conservation Area in conjunction with the 2013 0.5m pixel VCD pseudo‐colour image
which gave the impression of more drastic change from 2012 to 2013 (see Section 2.2.4).
A total of eight quadrats measuring 10m x 10m were established during the field
assessment, with 30 individual plants tagged and monitored within each quadrat. Table 1
presents quadrat location information and justification for site selection. Figure 1 presents
the quadrat locations in conjunction with the 2013 0.5m pixel VCD pseudo‐colour image.
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
3
Table 1:
Site Selection of Quadrats
Quadrat
Original
Transect
Vegetation Health*
Other Parameter
Q1
Potentially distressed ‐ Intense
area of red on imagery
indicating reduction of foliage)
Located on northern edge of population
adjacent to cleared area; potentially
prone to dust, altered hydrology and
future ground disturbance/excavation
Q2
X
Possibly slightly stressed ‐
Area with yellow patches on
imagery
Located on northern edge of population
adjacent to cleared area; potentially
prone to dust, altered hydrology and
future ground disturbance/excavation
Q3
Probably healthy vegetation ‐
Area of green with little to no
yellow or red present on
imagery
Objective to observe any differences in
vegetation health between Q3 and Q4
given distinction in imagery along track
(i.e. N versus S)
Q4
X
Possibly slightly stressed ‐
Area with yellow patches on
imagery
Located towards eastern edge of the
population and located adjacent to a haul
road
Q5
Possibly slightly stressed ‐
Area with yellow patches on
imagery
Located on western slope/change of
slope; near northern edge of the
population with potential of future
ground disturbance adjacent
Q6
X
Probably healthy vegetation ‐
Area of green with little to no
yellow or red present on
imagery
Located near northern edge of the
population with potential of future
ground disturbance adjacent
Q7
X
Probably healthy vegetation ‐
Area of green with little to no
yellow or red present on
imagery
Located on southern slope; to the south
of potential future ground disturbance
Q8
Probably healthy vegetation ‐
Area of green with little to no
yellow or red present on
imagery
Located
towards
the
centre
of
Conservation Area away from any
potential direct impacts of mining
* ‐ Based on the 2013 0.5m pixel VCD pseudo colour image
Initially, quadrat dimensions of 20m x 20m were proposed in order to capture a suitable
sample size of at least 5‐10 plants/quadrat (Woodman Environmental 2014). However, once
in the field the density of plants was found to be extremely high, with plant numbers within
a 20m x 20m quadrat too large (100+) to effectively monitor all plants present. Monitoring
of individuals was therefore restricted to 30 plants per quadrat, regardless of the total
number of plants in the quadrat, to establish consistency between quadrats for comparative
purposes and limit monitoring time. The smaller quadrat dimensions will also assist with
relocating plants in subsequent monitoring periods given the extremely dense nature of the
vegetation.
The quadrats were orientated along cardinal points with a pink pin dropper placed in each
corner and pink flagging tape tied above the location of each pin dropper. A quadrat
FQM Australia Nickel Pty Ltd
Kunzea similis subsp. mediterranea
Health Monitoring Program 2014
Woodman Environmental Consulting Pty Ltd
4
identifier (unique number) was labelled on the north‐west pin dropper, with a photograph of
the quadrat and its vegetation taken from this corner towards the south‐east corner. A
structural description of the vegetation, with identification of dominant taxa, was recorded
to describe and characterise the vegetation associated with the Kunzea in each quadrat.
Each Kunzea to be monitored was demarcated with pink flagging tape and a labelled ear tag
(with unique identifier number) attached to an upright stem. A number of existing tagged
plants (with ear tags) from the original monitoring transects were utilised. The GPS location
of each plant was also recorded, utilising a hand‐held GPS. A total of 240 Kunzea individuals
were demarcated for monitoring.
3.2
Plant Collection, Licensing and Nomenclature
Specimens of dominant taxa were collected for positive identification under scientific licence
pursuant to the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950 Section 23C and Section 23F as listed in Table
2. Taxon nomenclature generally follows Florabase (DPaW 2015b) with all names checked
against the current DPaW Max database to ensure their validity. However, in cases where
names of plant taxa have been published recently in scientific literature but have not been
adopted on Florabase (DPaW 2015), nomenclature in the published literature is followed.
The conservation status of each taxon was checked against Florabase, which provides the
most up‐to‐date information regarding the conservation status of flora taxa in Western
Australia.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |