7.3.4.2
SRE Invertebrate Fauna
The most significant threat to local SRE invertebrate fauna biodiversity as a result of the Proposal is
vegetation clearing, which can reduce the habitat available to these species as well as physically
remove them from the landscape. Secondary impacts include vibration, which could disturb SRE and
potentially reduce the viability of some SRE populations, and fire and dust, which could reduce the
quality or health of habitat.
For the majority of the Proposal Area there are large areas of potential SRE habitat, and a narrow
linear feature is unlikely to cause a significant impact on the regional population of these species. Of
particular note are the design refinements to avoid remnant vegetation clearing in the freehold area
where practicable. This will reduce the disturbance of the vegetation communities Yp2, Gf2, Gy1,
Yp2, Gf2, Gy1, which are represented throughout remnant vegetation in the freehold area and which
have been identified as potentially supporting SRE species. Teyl sp., Austrohorus sp., Beierolpium
sp.8/2 and Beierolpium sp.8/4 were all identified as utilising these vegetation communities.
Furthermore, implementation of the management strategies in Section 7.2.5, which relates to
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
167
protection of remnant vegetation within the freehold area will minimise impacts to SRE species that
may occur in this area.
7.3.4.3
Subterranean Invertebrate Fauna
Stygofauna
The most significant potential threat to stygofauna biodiversity is the reduction in the quantity
and/or quality of groundwater available. Stygofauna may be impacted as a direct result of
construction water drawdown abstraction, or as a result of changes in groundwater chemistry
(Eberhard 2004).
Groundwater abstraction is expected to be the primary water source for the construction phase of
the Proposal. Abstraction is expected to occur at regular intervals along the Rail Corridor, with a
total abstraction of 3.5 GL over the 36 month construction period. Significant sources of
groundwater for construction are likely to come from deeper confined or semi‐confined aquifers
which are unlikely to impact on stygofauna.
All groundwater abstraction will be carried out in accordance with licences issued by the Department
of Water under the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 (RIWI Act), which will ensure the
sustainable use of water supplies and protection of stygofauna and their habitat. On this basis, it is
unlikely that the Proposal presents a significant risk to stygofauna. Further groundwater
investigations and water abstraction modelling will be completed as a part of the Department of
Water (DoW) licensing process. These investigations will ensure that any licences issued will reduce
potential impacts to these subterranean species.
Furthermore it is considered that stygofauna habitat and populations extend well beyond the
Proposal Area.
Vegetation clearing may indirectly impact stygofauna communities present within the Proposal Area
as vegetation plays a vital role in the transport of nutrients into subterranean systems. However
given the narrow clearing footprint and subsequent rehabilitation in any single locality this activity is
unlikely to present a significant risk.
Troglofauna
The Proposal has very limited potential to impact upon troglofauna due to the narrow linear
footprint of the Proposal and minimal excavation requirements.
7.3.5
Proposed Mitigation and Management Measures
7.3.5.1
Performance Management
OPR has developed environmental management objectives, targets and performance indicators for
fauna (Table 7‐12).
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
168
Table 7‐12 Fauna management objectives, targets and performance indicators
OPR Management Objective
Target
Performance Indicators
Protect fauna, including conservation
significant fauna.
No disturbance to conservation
significant fauna and their habitats
beyond the disturbance areas described
in the PER.
Ground Disturbance Permits
Fauna habitat constraint maps
Conservation Significant Fauna
Database
Pre-disturbance fauna surveys
Fauna injury/death register
Incident
Register
Rehabilitation
criteria
Prevent the introduction or spread of
introduced fauna, and control species
currently present.
No introduction of domestic
animals or pets.
No introduction of feral animals or
increase in numbers of existing
feral animal species.
Incident
Register
Success of feral animal controls
Landfill
inspections
7.3.5.2
Management Strategies
Vertebrate Fauna
Management measures relating to the minimisation of habitat disturbance are addressed in Section
7.2. Specific management measures that relate to the conservation significant species that may
potentially be impacted by the Proposal are identified in Table 7‐13 below.
Impacts to the Crested Bellbird (southern subspecies) and Rufous Fieldwren (western subspecies) are
expected to be minimised by remnant vegetation protection measures in the freehold land area
(specified in Section 7.2). The protection of remnant vegetation in the freehold area will ensure
suitable habitat is available for these species. Therefore no additional management measures are
proposed for these species.
SRE Invertebrate Fauna
As many of the impacts to SRE fauna relate to the clearing of vegetation, management of vegetation
clearing will in turn minimise the potential impacts on SRE fauna. Management actions relating to
vegetation clearing are detailed in Section 7.2. Of particular note is the commitment to minimise
remnant vegetation clearing in the freehold area, which will protect areas of potential SRE habitat.
Subterranean Invertebrate Fauna
Management of subterranean invertebrate fauna will be limited to the direct management of
groundwater abstraction activities being implemented in accordance with licences issued under the
RIWI Act (refer to Section 7.6).
Table 7‐13 lists the summarised management measures proposed to minimise the impact on fauna
during construction and operation of the Proposal.
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
169
Table 7‐13 Proposed fauna management strategies
Management Strategies
Relevant
EMP
Phase
Responsible
Persons
Where practicable, rocky outcrops and large trees will be left in situ for
fauna habitat.
Fauna
Management
Plan (FMP)
Design &
Construction
Construction
Manager
With the exception of the Rail Corridor, no disturbance will occur
within a 200 m buffer of known Egernia stokesii badia habitat. If the
Rail Corridor must pass through these areas, a 50-60m buffer will be
maintained between the rail line and outcrops, and the construction
disturbance width will be limited to an average of 100 m. Individuals
will be relocated if found within construction areas, and additional
culverts will be installed in these areas to act as fauna underpasses.
FMP
Design &
Construction
Project Engineer,
Construction
Manager
Any handling of Egernia stokesii badia will be undertaken by a suitably
licensed reptile handler
FMP Construction
Environment
Manager
Borrow pits or turkeys nests in the Weld Range area will be avoided
where practicable, and the Rail Corridor will be restricted to an
average 100 m in width.
FMP
Design &
Construction
Project Engineer,
Construction
Manager
No active Malleefowl nests will be disturbed. Where a nest is
discovered that cannot be avoided the nest will be disturbed only once
all Malleefowl adults and chicks have left the nest. If this is not
possible OPR will apply for Ministerial permission to disturb.
FMP Construction
Construction
Manager
Minimise trench length where practicable. Should trenching be
required for distances in excess of 1000 m, inspect trenches and
excavations outside of construction envelopes regularly and where
any trenching is to remain open overnight, provide fauna ramps and
inspect before work resumes the next morning to remove any trapped
fauna
FMP Construction
Construction
Manager,
Environment
Manager
All disturbance areas have or will be surveyed for Priority Fauna and
EPBC protected species prior to disturbance. The survey information
will be included in OPR databases and documented to ensure that
OPR will not disturb species or their habitat beyond the disturbance
areas approved in the PER. Should these species be found during
construction in locations where impacts are unavoidable, OPR will
minimise the disturbance in those areas and will seek permission to
disturb.
FMP Construction
Construction
Manager,
Environment
Manager
Turkeys nest dams will be fenced to restrict access by fauna. Fauna
escape methods such as wire mesh will be fixed within turkeys nests
to allow fauna egress.
FMP
Construction
& Operation
Construction
Manager,
Operations
Manager
No domestic animals or pets will be permitted on site
FMP
Construction
& Operation
Construction
Manager,
Operations
Manager
Feral animal controls will be specified in the FMP. Control strategies
will be developed consistent with regional and local feral animal
control initiatives.
FMP
Construction
& Operation
Environmental
Manager
The Rail Corridor will be fenced throughout the freehold area to
prevent livestock death from train strikes
- Operation
Construction
Manager
The design and construction of the rail crossing of the State Barrier
Fence of WA will be in consultation with relevant government
authorities
-
Design &
Construction
Project Engineer,
Construction
Manager,
Environment
Manager
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
170
7.3.6
Predicted Outcome
After mitigation and management measures have been applied, the Proposal is expected to result in
the following outcomes in relation to fauna:
Approximately 6,000 ha of potential fauna habitat will be cleared. The majority of fauna
habitat within the Proposal Area is well represented beyond the Proposal footprint and
throughout the surrounding region. The most significant and limited habitats within the
freehold area will be predominantly avoided.
The Rail Corridor alignment has been designed to avoid all but two of the more than 50
populations of the Western Spiny‐tailed Skink recorded in surveys undertaken within the
Study Area. The Rail Corridor has been deviated to provide at least a 200 m buffer between
most populations and the Rail Corridor. Only two populations will potentially be bisected
by the proposed rail centreline. A buffer of 50 ‐ 60 m will be maintained between
disturbance and outcrop locations so that no known habitat will be directly impacted. As
such there are not expected to be any significant impacts to the Western Spiny‐tailed Skink.
Impacts to the remaining conservation significant vertebrate fauna are expected to be
negligible given that the habitat types are extensively represented beyond the Proposal
Area and the minimal disturbance of the habitat through avoidance and minimisation.
As threats to SRE relate to the clearing of vegetation, the narrow linear nature of the
Proposal and management of vegetation clearing will minimise the potential impacts on
SRE fauna. Given that SRE habitat is well represented throughout the Proposal Area there
is not considered to be a significant threat to the viability of known or potential SRE species.
Given the short‐term nature of peak water demand required for construction and the
results of subterranean invertebrate fauna studies in the region (species are expected to be
found extensively through groundwater reserves), there are not expected to be any
significant impacts to subterranean invertebrate fauna.
There may be some direct loss of fauna due to accidental vehicle strikes.
There may be some localised movement of fauna away from the rail construction and
operational corridor due to increased presence of people and machinery and the resulting
increase in ambient noise and vibration.
With the implementation of the identified management measures, potential impacts on fauna are
expected to be minor.
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
171
7.4
CONSERVATION ESTATES
7.4.1
Overview
OPR has excluded declared conservation reserves from the Proposal Area with one exception which
is Reserve 16200. Four conservation reserves or proposed conservation reserves have now been
excluded from the Proposal Area; Moresby Range, Urawa and Wokatherra Nature Reserves, as well
as one un‐named nature reserve. As the boundaries of the Proposal Area have been altered to avoid
these reserves the edge of the reserves are therefore at, or near to, the boundary of the Proposal
Area (Figure 5‐6)
The Proposal will intersect three proposed conservation reserves (Figure 5‐6):
former Woolgorong Pastoral Lease;
former Twin Peaks Pastoral Lease; and
former Narloo Pastoral Lease.
7.4.2
Key statutory requirements, environmental policy and guidance
7.4.2.1
EPA Objective
The EPA objective for management of potential impacts to conservation estates is to protect the
environmental values of areas identified as having significant environmental attributes.
7.4.2.2
EPA statements and guidelines
EPA Guidance No. 33 ‐ Environmental Guidance for Planning and Development (EPA, 2005)
7.4.2.3
Applicable Legislation and Policy
Conservation reserves are covered primarily by the following legislation:
Conservation and Land Management Act 1984;
Land Administration Act 1997; and
Soil and Land Conservation Act 1945.
The majority of conservation reserves are managed by DEC under the Conservation and Land
Management Act 1984. Under this act, land is vested in the Conservation Commission of WA and set
aside as a national park, conservation park or nature reserve.
Conservation reserves managed by other bodies may be created and manages under the Land
Administration Act 1997 or the Soil and Land Conservation Act 1945, or come under the management
of local government.
7.4.3
Aspects and Impacts
The main aspect of the Proposal with the potential to impact conservation estates is clearing.
Potential impacts are loss of values of conservation areas due to loss of vegetation and flora, and
consequently fauna habitat.
7.4.4
Conservation Estate Impact Assessment
A considerable amount of planning and consultation has been used to define the Proposal Area to
avoid conservation estates. There is a cluster of conservation estate adjacent to the western end of
the Proposal Area, centred around the Moresby Range. Further conservation estate exists near the
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
172
edge of the freehold area and proposed conservation estate (recently acquired pastoral leases) in the
pastoral area.
A summary of the potential impacts are detailed in Table 7‐14.
Table 7‐14 Potential impacts on conservation and proposed conservation reserves
Reserve
Reserve
Purpose
Management
Body
Potential impact
Area potentially
impacted (ha)
16200
Water
supply and
conservation
of flora and
fauna
Minister for
Water
The Proposal will require the Rail Corridor to
pass through this reserve. The width of the
Rail Corridor will be minimised through this
area, as it will through all areas of native
vegetation in the freehold area. No borrow
areas will be located within this reserve.
Up to approximately 2.5
ha out of a total of 17.1
ha (up to 14.6%)
Woolgorong ex-
pastoral station
Unoccupied
Crown Land
proposed for
conservation
purposes
DEC
The Proposal fully intersects these proposed
reserves and therefore will require the Rail
Corridor to pass through. Some borrow
areas will need to be located within the
proposed reserve due to large transport
distances to the edge of the reserves.
Up to approximately 260
ha out of a total of
116,350 ha (up to 0.2%)
Twin Peaks ex-
pastoral station
Up to approximately 350
ha out of a total of
27,250 ha (up to 1.3%)
Narloo ex-
pastoral station
This proposed reserve boundary corner
intersects with the Proposal Area. The
Proposal may pass through this proposed
reserve; although it will be avoided if
practicable. Borrow areas will not be located
within the proposed reserve.
Up to approximately 31
ha out of a total of
14,750 (up to 0.2%) but
expected to be fully
avoided (based on
current Rail Corridor
alignment).
The Proposal is not expected to have any indirect impacts on other conservation reserves or
proposed conservation reserves. Surface water hydrology into those areas will not be significantly
impacted (refer to Section 7.5), and other indirect impacts such as dust will have a minimal impact.
All potential impacts within the proposed conservation reserves will be subject to management
measures as defined throughout this PER.
7.4.5
Proposed Mitigation and Management Measures
7.4.5.1
Performance Management
OPR has developed environmental management objectives, targets and performance indicators for
conservation estates (Table 7‐15).
Table 7‐15 Conservation estate management objectives, targets and performance indicators
OPR Management Objective
Target
Performance Indicators
Avoid disturbance to conservation
estates for construction and operation of
the Project where practicable.
Disturbance within conservation
reserves does not exceed what is
described within this PER.
Use of and compliance with the Ground
Disturbance Permit system.
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
173
7.4.5.2
Management Strategies
Table 7‐16 details OPR’s proposed management strategies for current and proposed conservation
estates.
Table 7‐16 Proposed conservation estate management strategies
Management Strategies
Relevant
EMP
Phase
Responsible
Persons
Impacts on conservation reserves or areas proposed for conservation
reservation will be avoided during Proposal design wherever practicable.
Where disturbance is unavoidable, the width of the Rail Corridor and the size
and location of borrow areas will ensure that the area of disturbance within
current or proposed reserves will be minimised as much as possible.
N/A Design
Project
Engineer
The implementation of temporary construction infrastructure such as turkey
nests, borrow pits, lay down areas and construction roads will be minimised
as much as possible within proposed and gazetted nature reserves.
N/A
Design &
Construction
Project
Engineer,
Construction
Manager
No accommodation areas will be established within proposed or gazetted
nature reserves.
N/A
Design &
Construction
Project
Engineer,
Construction
Manager
Consideration to ongoing management requirements for these areas will be
incorporated into the design and construction phase to ensure that matters
including continued access requirements, weed control, feral animal control
are appropriately addressed. OPR will liaise with DEC to ensure that their
requirements are addressed.
N/A
Design &
Construction
Project
Engineer,
Construction
Manager
7.4.6
Predicted Outcome
OPR has designed the rail infrastructure to avoid the conservation estate as much as possible. The
Proposal Area has been amended to exclude the Moresby Range, Urawa and Wokatherra Nature
Reserves, and an un‐named nature reserve.
The recently acquired pastoral leases of Narloo, Woolgorong and Twin Peaks have been proposed as
nature conservation reserves. 0.2%, 0.2% and 1.3% of the former Narloo, Woolgorong and Twin
Peaks pastoral leases respectively will be potentially impacted by the Proposal.
14.6% of Reserve 16200, vested in the Minister for Water, will be impacted by the Proposal as it
enters the Oakajee Industrial Estate. This is a small reserve, and due to its proximity to the Proposal
impacts are unavoidable.
OPR Rail Development
Public Environmental Review
174
Dostları ilə paylaş: |