GOLDEN FUNNEL TO RACETRACK DEWATERING WORKS … · 2020. 8. 5. · DEWATERING WORKS APPROVAL...

GOLDEN FUNNEL TO RACETRACK

DEWATERING WORKS APPROVAL

APPLICATION

PADDINGTON GOLD PTY LTD

JULY 2020

Prepared for:

Department of Water and Environmental

Regulation

Locked Bag 33 Cloisters Square

PERTH WA 6850

Phone (08) 6364 7000

Prepared by:

Menzies Highway

PO Box 1653, KALGOORLIE, WA 6430

TEL (+61) 8 9080 6800 FAX (+61) 8 9080 6871

Paddington Gold Pty Ltd – Golden Funnel to Racetrack Dewatering Works Approval Application

2

Contents

1.0 PREMISES DETAILS .......................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Occupier of Premises .................................................................................................... 5

1.2 General Company Description ................................................................................... 5

1.3 DWER Environmental Operating Licences .................................................................. 6

1.4 Name and Location of Premises ................................................................................. 6

2.0 PRESCRIBED PREMISES CATEGORY ........................................................................... 8

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY........................................................................................... 9

3.1 Existing Activities ........................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Proposal Description ..................................................................................................... 9

3.2.1 Discharging water into Racetrack Pit ............................................................................. 9

3.3 Premises Boundary ...................................................................................................... 11

4.0 OTHER APPROVALS ...................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Environmental Impact Assessment ........................................................................... 15

4.2 Other Decision Making Authorities ........................................................................... 15

4.3 Other Legislation and Guidance Material................................................................ 15

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT ................................................................... 16

5.1 Climate ......................................................................................................................... 16

5.1.1 Temperature ...................................................................................................................... 16

5.1.2 Rainfall ................................................................................................................................ 17

5.1.3 Winds ................................................................................................................................... 17

5.1.4 Evaporation ....................................................................................................................... 17

5.2 Geology ....................................................................................................................... 18

5.2.1 Regional Geology ............................................................................................................ 18

5.2.2 Local Geology ................................................................................................................... 19

5.3 Landforms ..................................................................................................................... 19

5.4 Hydrology ..................................................................................................................... 19

5.4.1 Surface Hydrology ............................................................................................................ 19

5.4.2 Groundwater ..................................................................................................................... 21

5.5 Vegetation and Flora .................................................................................................. 21

5.6 Fauna ............................................................................................................................ 22

5.7 Aboriginal heritage ..................................................................................................... 23

5.8 European heritage ...................................................................................................... 23

5.9 Sensitive Receptors ..................................................................................................... 23

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS FROM EMISSIONS ........................ 24

6.1 Risk Identification ........................................................................................................ 24

6.2 Potential emissions: ..................................................................................................... 24

6.3 Risk Assessment ........................................................................................................... 24

6.4 Risk Management ....................................................................................................... 25


3

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES, STANDARDS AND

MEASUREMENT CRITERIA ...................................................................................................... 27

7.1 Objectives and Standards ......................................................................................... 27

8.0 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY .................................................................................. 28

8.1 Commissioning ............................................................................................................ 28

8.2 Clearing ........................................................................................................................ 28

8.3 Monitoring .................................................................................................................... 29

8.4 Rehabilitation ............................................................................................................... 29

8.5 Contingencies ............................................................................................................. 29

8.5.1 Hypersaline spill ................................................................................................................. 29

8.5.2 Hydrocarbon Spill.............................................................................................................. 30

8.5.3 Dewatering ........................................................................................................................ 30

8.6 Records ......................................................................................................................... 30

8.7 Management Responsibilities .................................................................................... 31

8.7.1 Chief Operations Officer ................................................................................................. 31

8.7.2 Open Pit Manager and Superintendent ...................................................................... 31

8.7.3 Environmental Superintendent ...................................................................................... 31

8.7.4 Operator ............................................................................................................................. 31

8.8 Competence, Training and Awareness .................................................................... 31

8.9 Communication .......................................................................................................... 32

9.0 CONSULTATION .............................................................................................................. 32

10.0 COMMITMENTS .............................................................................................................. 33

11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 34

TABLES

Table 1 - Prescribed Premises Category Details .............................................................. 8

Table 2 - Climate data for Golden Funnel project ........................................................ 16

Table 3 - Water Parameters of Pits ................................................................................... 21

Table 4 - Risk Identification, Analysis and Management .............................................. 25

Table 5 - Environmental Performance Objectives and Standards ............................. 27

Table 6 - Estimated Cost of Project ................................................................................. 28

Table 7 - Consultation Register ......................................................................................... 32

Table 8 - Summary of Commitments ............................................................................... 33

FIGURES

Figure 1 – Golden Funnel Project Location ...................................................................... 7

Figure 2 - Location of Prescribed Activity and Discharge Location relative to

Golden Funnel Project Infrastructure .............................................................................. 13

Figure 3 - Prescribed Premises Boundary ........................................................................ 14

Figure 4 - Mean monthly maximum temperature and rainfall at KGI weather station

.............................................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 5 - Annual average evaporation ......................................................................... 18

Figure 6 - Catchment Plan of Project Location ............................................................. 20


4

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – AQ2 Groundwater study

Appendix 2 – Groundwater Well License 151865(11)

Appendix 3 – Commissioning Plan

Appendix 4 – Mine Dewatering Procedure 2015

Appendix 5 – Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of Racetrack, Royal

Standard and Golden Funnel Projects

Appendix 6 – L1 Fauna Assessment Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel

Project Areas

Appendix 7 – Risk Rating Matrix

Appendix 8 – Dust Suppression Procedure

Appendix 9 – Environment and Community Policy


5

1.0 PREMISES DETAILS

1.1 Occupier of Premises

Name of Occupier:

Paddington Gold Pty Ltd

(ACN 008 585 886)

Address of Occupier:

35 km NE Menzies HWY

PO Box 1653

Kalgoorlie WA 6430

Contact Details of Occupier

Paddington Gold Pty Ltd

PO Box 1653

Kalgoorlie WA 6430

Phone: (08) 9080 6800

Fax: (08) 9080 6893

Australian Business Number (ABN)

98 008 585 886

1.2 General Company Description

Paddington Gold Pty Ltd (‘Paddington’) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Norton Gold

Fields Limited. The Paddington Mill is located 33km north-northwest of Kalgoorlie-

Boulder, has a planned capacity of more than 170,000 ounces of gold annually from

3.7 million tonnes of ore, and is one of the larger gold mining and processing

operations in the region.

Norton’s Paddington Operations’ current projects include:

Enterprise, open pit operation has ceased and is transitioning to underground

operations, located 68km north-west of Kalgoorlie-Boulder (L8692/2012/1);

Bullant Underground, located approximately 65km north-west of Kalgoorlie-

Boulder (8512/2010/2);

Rose Dam South open pit operation, located 27km north-west of Kalgoorlie

Boulder (L8327/2008/2);

Golden Cities Project, involving expansion of the Federal and Mulgarrie Mining

areas (L9242/2020/1); and

A number of other ancillary sources such as low grade stockpiles and third

party mining operations.


6

All of the ore produced from Norton’s Paddington Operations is processed through

the Paddington Mill. Tailings from the Paddington Mill are deposited into the

adjacent Paddington In-pit Tailings Facility.

The Paddington Mill is operated under the Environmental Protection (Gold Extraction

Operations) Exemption Order of 1993.

1.3 DWER Environmental Operating Licences

Mining Proposal approval was granted 29 May 2020 for the expansion of the Golden

Funnel Project with cutbacks to the existing Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North

pits.

As part of this development, a Works Approval was submitted and subsequently

issued on 23 March 2020 (W6348/2020/1). The Works Approval provided for the

construction of a dewatering pipeline from the Golden Funnel Project area to the

Natal pit, west of the Project area, to facilitate dewatering of Golden Funnel.

It has since been determined that the quality of water within the Golden Funnel pits,

may periodically, be suitable for processing usage and therefore an additional

dewatering pipeline is required from Golden Funnel to the Racetrack area, which

currently serves to store processing water.

1.4 Name and Location of Premises

Premises Name

Golden Funnel Project Area Dewatering

Tenements

Tenements relevant to this application include:

M24/102

M24/304

Location

The premises for dewatering discharge is the Racetrack Pit, located 2.8km north of

the Golden Funnel Project area. The Golden Funnel project is located

approximately 14 km southwest of Paddington Mill and 25 km northwest of the City

of Kalgoorlie-Boulder. Racetrack pit is located 2.3km and 2.7km northwest of

Golden Funnel North pit and Golden Funnel pit respectively. A regional overview of

Racetrack and Golden Funnel areas is provided in Figure 1.


7

Figure 1 – Golden Funnel Project Location


8

2.0 PRESCRIBED PREMISES CATEGORY

Table 1 - Prescribed Premises Category Details

Activity Category

Number

Production or

Design Capacity

Nominated Rate of

Throughput

New/

Existing

Mine Dewatering:

premises on which

water is extracted

and discharged into

the environment to

allow mining of ore.

6 1,9000,000 kL per

annum

More than 500,000

kL per annum New

The pumping and pipeline infrastructure will have a design capacity of 1,900,000kL.

However, the nominated throughput is expected to be between 1,400,000kL and

1,800,000kL per annum.

The Golden Funnel pit commenced mining in 1990 and was completed by 1991,

which included Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits, the deposits were

mined by open cut and underground mining. Mining last occurred in 2004 which

included a pit cut back to the Golden Funnel Pit. A cutback to the Golden Funnel

and Golden Funnel North pits the current pit is anticipated to commence in 2020.

Historically, the Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits have been pit lakes

with water yield 500 to 1,500KL/d (or 6 to 17L/s).

A Groundwater Study was completed by 3rd party consultant AQ2 based on the

proposed cut back on Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits (Appendix 1).

The study included a groundwater flow modelling, pit inflow predictions,

recommended dewatering strategy and potential impacts of dewatering.

The study outcomes are as follows:

Predicted groundwater inflows to the existing Golden Funnel pits, as the

existing pit lakes are pumped down, increase from negligible at the start of

pumping up to around 6 to 17L/s. This wide range in predicted inflows results

from residual uncertainties in local hydrogeological conditions and the lack

of historical dewatering data to calibrate the pit inflow model.

To dewater the current pit lakes (ahead of new pit development) in 3 months,

and accounting for groundwater inflows as the pit lake is lowered, initial

pumping rates of up to 60L/s for Golden Funnel and 30L/s for Golden Funnel

North may be required.

Predicted groundwater inflows to the new pits increase up to around 13 to

32L/s (assuming the existing pits have been pumped dry). Again, this wide

range of predicted inflows results from residual uncertainties.

Predicted total dewatering volumes over the life of project range from 1.4 to

1.8GL. This is less than the current storage volume available in the nearly


9

Racetrack Pit, where it is proposed to discharge a portion of the dewatering

production.

Ongoing calibration of the pit inflow model (against pumping and pit lake

level data) as the existing pits are pumped dry will allow for improved model

prediction reliability and refined dewatering predictions.

Sump pumping is considered to be the most cost-effective means of pit

dewatering.

It is noted that predicted inflows (discussed above) are groundwater inflows

and do not include any incident rainfall runoff. By way of comparison, the

estimated rainfall runoff to the combined final pits during a 10yr ARI 72hr storm

event would be around 70L/s.

Dewatering of either/both pits will have little to no impact on the local

environment, other than drawdown in the local hypersaline aquifers.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY

3.1 Existing Activities

The Golden Funnel has been developed to date as per the “Addendum to Golden

Funnel NOI - April 2004.” (DMIRS reference ID 18034/NOI 4651), and the Mining

Proposals preceding 2004.

An addendum to this mining proposal was submitted in December 2019 and

approved 29 May 2020, and includes a cutback to the existing pits, development of

a new waste landform and associated infrastructure.

Dewatering of the Golden Funnel Pits will commence in advance of mining

operations, with discharge to occur strategically between the Natal and Racetrack

pits, depending upon water quality and requirement for additional process water

supply. Mining activities are expected to commence in Q3/Q4 of 2020 and the Life

of Mine is approximately 10 months.

3.2 Proposal Description

3.2.1 Discharging water into Racetrack Pit

It is proposed that the Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits will be

dewatered into the nearby Racetrack pit located approximately 2.7km to the north

via a dewatering pipeline. In addition, dewatering will also occur to the Natal pit

which has a total volumetric currently has 1.9GL of storage capacity available

above the current pit lake and below the nominated freeboard of 6m below

surface. Dewatering to the Natal Pit was approved under W6348/2020/1. This

application addresses the dewatering activities between Golden Funnel and

Racetrack.


10

Natal and Racetrack pits have an estimated capacity of 1,900,000kL and

6,000,000kL respectively, which is sufficient to contain the groundwater expected

from the Golden Funnel Project which is approximately 1,400,000kL to 1,800,000kL.

Any groundwater directed from Golden Funnel to Racetrack pit will supplement that

already stored for processing use and storage levels will not be maintained above

the 6m freeboard limitations.

The pipeline will connect to the Natal pipeline and run northwards from the Golden

Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits to the southern boundary of the eastern end

of the Racetrack Pit (Figure 2 & 3). If required, a standpipe may be installed at the

Golden Funnel pit for dust suppression purposes.

The Pipeline may be moved to optimal positions within the pits as mining

commences and progresses, and multiple pipelines may be used to dewater. The

pipeline will be placed in an earthen v-drain bund, which in combination with scour

pits, will have sufficient capacity to contain spillage over a 12 hour period in the

event of a pipeline failure. Scour pits will be located in strategic locations as

determined by topography. Air release valves will be positioned at relevant high

points. Discharge will be moved through a 110mm pipeline over 12 hours at 30-

60lts/sec.

The following general principles will be followed to ensure compliance to license

conditions and to ensure Paddington maintain a high standard of environmental

practices during dewatering activities:

Service and maintenance of pumps, breathers, isolation values and flow

meters;

Bund, sump, culverts and scour pit maintenance and upgrades when

required;

12 hourly pipeline inspections;

Site training and induction of all personnel working in the area; and

Dust suppression used on haul roads and as applicable access tracks.

Standard dewatering pipeline used at Paddington has been previously constructed

of PE100 PN16 HDPE piping that meets:

AS/NZS 2033:2008: Installation of polyethylene pipe systems;

AS/NZS 4129:2008 Fittings for polyethylene (PE) pipes for pressure applications;

AS/NZS 4130:2009 Polyethylene (PE) pipes for pressure applications; and

AS/NZS 4131:2010 Polyethylene (PE) compounds for pressure pipes and

fittings.

Groundwater Licence: GWL 151865(11) is retained for abstraction operations. This is

included in Appendix 2.


11

Norton proposes to undertake a commissioning phase once pipelines are

constructed. Details of this proposal are outlined in Appendix 3. Norton implements

a Mine Dewatering Procedure (PGM-ENV-PRO-06-002) to ensure compliance with

the above matters (Appendix 4).

3.3 Premises Boundary

Figure 2 and 3 provides the locations of the tenements, the proposed prescribed

boundary and prescribed activity, and identifies the proposed discharge location.

GPS co-ordinates (GDA94/ MGA Zone 51) for the proposed prescribed premises

boundary, starting from base eastern corner and moving clockwise are as follows:

333226.6149 mE 6614423.397 mS

333210.8096 mE 6613580.05 mS

333205.9103 mE 6613318.632 mS

331787.2456 mE 6613344.751 mS

331536.206 mE 6613349.374 mS

331520.2762 mE 6614349.105 mS

330101.7078 mE 6614375.243 mS

330100.8908 mE 6614331.123 mS

329513.3367 mE 6614322.67 mS

329336.0622 mE 6614319.391 mS

329330.2884 mE 6614571.156 mS

329365.094 mE 6614574.98 mS

329376.6034 mE 6614762.716 mS

329325.9384 mE 6614761.639 mS

329314.0015 mE 6615283.02 mS

329307.6304 mE 6615686.551 mS

329353.9628 mE 6615889.476 mS

329371.0814 mE 6616811.761 mS

330570.8582 mE 6616789.359 mS

330894.0161 mE 6616796.816 mS

330359.961 mE 6617663.245 mS

330799.1241 mE 6617923.903 mS

331109.7127 mE 6618105.414 mS

331363.1037 mE 6618254.049 mS

331352.7429 mE 6619149.42 mS

332706.894 mE 6619116.308 mS

332988.4728 mE 6618270.017 mS

332994.5369 mE 6617433.154 mS

332987.4311 mE 6616629.946 mS

333001.7477 mE 6615855.334 mS

332553.4119 mE 6615854.512 mS

332552.273 mE 6615793.508 mS

332537.7827 mE 6615018.403 mS

332526.9076 mE 6614436.501 mS


12

332319.455 mE 6618454.247 mS

332118.8242 mE 6618442.38 mS

332133.0554 mE 6618201.83 mS

332333.6896 mE 6618213.692 mS


13

Figure 2 - Location of Prescribed Activity and Discharge Location relative to Golden

Funnel Project Infrastructure


14

Figure 3 - Prescribed Premises Boundary


15

4.0 OTHER APPROVALS

4.1 Environmental Impact Assessment

This discharge of mine dewater is deemed a low risk and an Environmental

Impact Assessment or referral to Office of Environmental Protection Authority is

not required.

4.2 Other Decision Making Authorities

The Mining Proposal (Reg Id 85119) for the expansion of the Golden Funnel

Project was approved 29 May 2020, which provided for cutback of the existing

Golden Funnel Pits (Golden Funnel North), and the development of the Golden

Funnel South Pit.

The Native Vegetation Clearing Permit (8784/1) for the clearing works to be

undertaken for the Golden Funnel Project expansion was granted on 23 April

2020.

Works Approval W6348/2020/1 was granted on 23 March 2020 for the

dewatering infrastructure between the Golden Funnel Pits and the Natal Pit to

the west of the Golden Funnel project. The current application seeks approval

for the construction of an additional dewatering pipeline to the Racetrack open

pit located to the north of the Golden Funnel Project.

Groundwater Licence GWL151865 (11) held by Norton has an allocation of

6,200,000kL abstraction of water annually and includes project tenements

M24/304 and M24/102.

4.3 Other Legislation and Guidance Material

Norton Gold Fields will comply with the provisions in applicable Acts and

Regulations which include the following, but may not be restricted to:

Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972;

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016;

Conservation and Land Management Act 1984;

Environmental Protection Act 1986;

Environmental Protection Regulations 1987;

Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997;

Environmental Protection (Clearing of Native Vegetation) Regulations

2004;

Environmental Protection (Controlled Waste) Regulations 2001;

Environmental Protection (Unauthorised Discharge) Regulations 2004;

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

(Commonwealth);


16

Explosives and Dangerous Goods Act 1961;

Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990;

Land Administration Act 1997;

Land Drainage Act 1925;

Local Government Act 1995;

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1960;

Mining Act 1978 and Regulations 1981;

Mines Safety and Inspection Act 1994, Mines Safety and Inspection

Regulations 1995;

Native Title Act 1973 (Commonwealth);

Occupation Safety and Health Act 1984; and

Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914 particularly licence to Take Water

GWL 151865(11).

5.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT

5.1 Climate

Table 2 - Climate data for Golden Funnel project

Average

Temperature

(°C)

9am Conditions 3pm Conditions

Min Max Temp Humidity

(%)

Wind

Speed

(km/hr)

Temp Humidity

(%)

Wind

Speed

(km/hr)

Jan 18 34 24 45 17 32 24 15

Feb 18 32 23 51 16 31 30 15

Mar 16 29 21 54 16 29 32 14

Apr 13 25 18 60 14 24 38 14

May 9 21 14 67 12 20 44 14

Jun 6 18 11 74 12 17 48 16

Jul 5 17 10 73 12 16 46 17

Aug 6 19 12 65 14 18 39 17

Sept 8 22 15 54 16 21 31 18

Oct 11 26 18 47 17 25 27 18

Nov 14 29 21 45 17 28 25 17

Dec 17 32 23 43 16 31 24 16

Annual 12 25 17 57 15 24 34 16

Sourced from BoM, 2020 weather station location #12038 Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport

5.1.1 Temperature

Golden Funnel falls within the semi-arid region of WA, characterised by hot

summers and mild winters. Mean annual maximum temperature is 25.2oC and

mean annual minimum is 11.6oC. The coldest month is July and diurnal

temperature variations are commonly high throughout the year.


17

5.1.2 Rainfall

The area is arid and the annual average rainfall at Kalgoorlie-Boulder is

268.4mm. Most of the rain falls between February and July, and this amount

varies greatly both seasonally and annually.

Figure 4 - Mean monthly maximum temperature and rainfall at KGI weather station

Sourced from BoM, 2020

5.1.3 Winds

The average wind speeds at Kalgoorlie-Boulder vary throughout the year from

11.8 – 17.2 km/h in the morning to 13.7 – 17.8 km/h in the afternoon.

5.1.4 Evaporation

Annual potential evaporation is approximately ten times higher than rainfall,

and evaporation greatly exceeds average rainfall during each month of the

year. The annual evaporation rate is approximately 2,628 mm (BOM, 2018),

compared to the annual rainfall of 267 mm. Error! Reference source not found.

shows the average annual evaporation rate ranges throughout Australia.


18

Figure 5 - Annual average evaporation

Sourced from BoM, 2020

5.2 Geology

5.2.1 Regional Geology

The Mount Pleasant gold camp forms part of the Mount Pleasant Dome within

the Ora Banda Domain, which is one of the six tectonostratigraphic domains of

the Archaean Kalgoorlie Terrain. The Ora Banda domain comprises the full

Kalgoorlie stratigraphical suite outlined by Swagger et al. (1990) including

maficultramafic volcanics, felsic volcaniclastics and epiclastic sedimentary

rocks. Late stage Archaean deformation resulted in upright-open folds (D2),

ductile shear zones (D3) and a brittle ductile fault network (D4).

The major feature of the Mount Pleasant gold camp is the Mount Pleasant

Dome, a shallow, southwest-plunging anticline. The Mount Pleasant gold

deposits are hosted within the upper mafic stratigraphical units (Bent Tree and

Victorious Basalt units). Each basalt unit is defined by internal volcanic textures

including coarse-grained, massive and pillowed basalt varieties.

Two major faults control gold mineralisation within the gold camp. The Black Flag

and Royal Standard faults are steeply-dipping north-east striking (020 degrees)

structures that change orientation to 045 degrees around the gold camp and

accompanied by a zone of dilational vein emplacement. The Black Flag fault is

interpreted to be an early ductile structure overprinted by a series of brittle


19

failure events, resulting is multigenerational hydrothermal vein breccias. Several

mineralised vein orientations have been described within the Mount Pleasant.

Gold camp including: 020 degrees, 040 degrees, 060 degrees, 080 degrees, 115

degrees and 150 degrees which have been interpreted to be accommodation

structures associated with the changing orientation and reactivation of the

Black Flag fault.

5.2.2 Local Geology

The Golden Funnel ore deposit is located south of the hinge of the Mt Pleasant

anticline. The host rock is a porphyritic basalt which has been structurally

disrupted, and has a faulted contact with the overlying sediments and intrusive

Andesite porphyries. These rock units form part of the western limb of the

anticline. The core of the anticline has been intruded by the Liberty

Granodiorite.

The Golden Funnel deposit is located on or near the interpreted north, northeast

to south, south-west trending Royal Standard Fault and splays.

5.3 Landforms

The survey area lies in the Coolgardie bioregion within the Eastern Goldfields

subregion, which lies on the Yilgarn Craton's 'Eastern Goldfields Terrains'. The

relief is subdued and comprised of gently undulating plains interrupted in the

west with low hills and ridges of Archaean greenstones and in the east by a horst

of Proterozoic basic granulite.

A series of large playa lakes in the western half are the remnants of an ancient

major drainage line (Cowan, 2001). The Project area is gently undulating and

mainly of subdued relief standing at about 400-470 metres above sea level.

Scattered, small, granite and greenstone hills and ridges are the only apparent

topographic features in the area

5.4 Hydrology

5.4.1 Surface Hydrology

Creeks in the region are ephemeral with runoff through the creeks responding

to significant rainfall events. Flows from the region generally discharge to Black

Flag Lake and/or White Flag Lake to the east and south of the Project area

(Figure 4). The Black Flag Lake catchment is a subcatchment of the larger White

Flag Lake catchment.


20

Black Flag and White Flag Lakes are seasonal/intermittent hypersaline Lakes.

Black Flag Lake is defined as a Small Closed Lake or Pan and White Flag Lake

as a Large Playa Lake. The project is located just downstream of subcatchments

A and B (including B1 – B4) shown on Figure 6 which is a significant portion of the

overall catchment area for Black Flag and White Flag Lakes.

The project is located downstream of Racetrack Creek catchment which drains

from the north around Racetrack West Mine flowing towards the Black Flag

Lake/White Flag Lake system in a floodplain that spans multiple creeks. The

Racetrack Creek catchment (Catchment ‘A’) and other local catchments

upstream of the Golden Funnel Mine Site are shown on Figure 6.

Figure 6 - Catchment Plan of Project Location

During construction and operations, unconsolidated surfaces such as

overburden storages, stockpiles, embankment faces and unsealed roads may

contribute to sediment loads in the runoff water. V-drains and spoon drains will

be used to manage surface water runoff and limit the emissions of sediment into

the natural environment. Culverts will be installed to allow surface water to flow

under transport and infrastructure corridors.


21

5.4.2 Groundwater

Surface water flow direction is to the southeast and groundwater flow is

expected to follow in the same direction, draining towards White Flag and Black

Flag Lakes, approximately 3km to the southeast of Golden Funnel.

Groundwater in the region is saline to hypersaline with Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)

content generally around 100,000mg/L. The major ionic composition of the

groundwater is salts of sodium and chloride with minor levels of sulphate,

magnesium and calcium present. Most other ions are by comparison in low total

concentrations. Given the highly saline nature of the groundwater, it is

considered to have uses suitable for the mining industry only. Table 3 - Water

Parameters of Pits presents the most recent comparison of the Total Dissolved

Solids (TDS), pH and Electrical Conductivity (EC) of Golden Funnel, Golden

Funnel North and Racetrack pits.

Lower TDS values are found in Racetrack and Golden Funnel North, which the

water is deemed suitable for mill use. The current water levels in Golden Funnel

and Golden Funnel North are higher than the depth of water reached at Natal

by over 20m. Currently Racetrack, Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North pits

have total freeboard of 37m, 11.3m and 7.3m respectively.

Table 3 - Water Parameters of Pits

Sample Point pH EC Field TDS

pH units mS/cm mg/L

Racetrack 7.6 78 63,000

Golden Funnel 7.3 220 340,000

Golden Funnel North 7.5 6 3,400

5.5 Vegetation and Flora

A flora and vegetation survey of an area in Mt Pleasant was conducted by

Native Vegetation Solutions in 2019, which included Racetrack, Royal Standard

and this application applicable Golden Funnel Project.

Golden Funnel area lies in the Coolgardie (COO) bioregion within the Eastern

Goldfields (COO03) subregion which totals over 5.1 million hectares (CALM,

2002). The COO03 subregion lies on the Yilgarn Craton's 'Eastern Goldfields

Terrains'. The relief is subdued and comprises of gently undulating plains

interrupted in the west with low hills and ridges of Archaean greenstones and in

the east by a horst of Proterozoic basic granulite. The underlying geology is of

gneisses and granites eroded into a flat plane covered with tertiary soils and

with scattered exposures of bedrock. Calcareous earths are the dominant soil

group and cover much of the plains and greenstone areas. A series of large


22

playa lakes in the western half are the remnants of an ancient major drainage

line. The vegetation is of Mallees, Acacia thickets and shrubheaths on

sandplains. Diverse Eucalyptus woodlands occur around salt lakes, on ranges,

and in valleys. Salt lakes support dwarf shrublands of samphire. Woodlands and

Dodonaea shrubland occur on basic graninulites of the Fraser Range. (CALM,

2002).

A total of 28 Families, 58 Genera and 113 Species were recorded within the

survey area. Eighteen major vegetation groups were recorded in the survey

area.

The field assessment established that the condition of the vegetation in the

proposed disturbance area is overall “Good”, with certain areas affected by

historical exploration in “Degraded” condition, and undisturbed areas in “Very

Good” condition. No areas of vegetation were assessed to be in “Pristine”

condition.

No plant taxa located in the survey area are gazetted as DRF pursuant to

Subsection 2 of Section 23F of the Wildlife Conservation Act 1950. No plant taxa

listed as Threatened pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 was located in the survey area. No Priority or

Threatened Flora were recorded within the survey area.

No Threatened Ecological Communities, Priority Ecological Communities or

Environmentally Sensitive Areas were recorded in the survey area.

Several non-native species were recorded within the survey area. Non-native

species recorded were Centaurea melitensis (Maltese Cockspur), Asphodelus

fistulosus (Onion Weed), Xanthium spinosum (DP) (Bathurst Burr), Salvia

verbenaca (Wild Sage) and Lysimachia arvensis (Pimpernel).

Of the weed species above, only Xanthium spinosum is a Declared Pest s22(2)

according to DPIRD (2019). This species has a control category of C3, according

to the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007 (BAM Act).

This survey can be found in Appendix 5.

5.6 Fauna

Terrestrial Ecosystems conducted a Level 1 fauna assessment in the project area

in June 2019.

Three broad fauna habitats were delineated across the larger study area;

open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods;

mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods; and


23

eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered

grasses of varying densities.

The fauna habitat varies from highly degraded to good, with the majority

showing high levels of degradation; the more degraded areas are due to

recent exploration activity and cattle grazing. There are a few access tracks in

the area, but these are narrow and mostly only wheel tracks which do not overly

impact on fauna habitat.

The area has been grazed by cattle with many areas showing obvious

degradation (i.e. cattle tracks, chewed bushes and shrubs, etc). There was

extensive evidence of rabbits and other feral fauna in the area.

The full report is available in Appendix 6.

5.7 Aboriginal heritage

A search of the Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System maintained by the

Department of Aboriginal Affairs did not record any registered sites within the

Golden Funnel project area.

In May 2019, Norton Gold Fields Limited commissioned R. & E. O’Connor Pty. Ltd.

to carry out Aboriginal heritage surveys of which covered the Golden Funnel

Project area with members of the Central West Goldfields People, and Sambo

families, which include the former Kaparn Native Title Claimant Group; the

Kelamaia Kabu(d)n People and Champion family; the Maduwongga native

title claimants, Strickland and Nudding families ; the Donaldson family group

and the Marlinyu Ghoorlie native title claimant group. The survey confirmed that

the Project will not impact any known heritage sites.

5.8 European heritage

There are no sites of European Heritage within the Golden Funnel project area

5.9 Sensitive Receptors

The nearest residential community is the city of Kalgoorlie Boulder, located 28km

to the southeast of the project area.

Freshwater recreational Lake Douglas is the nearest sensitive receptor located

approximately 32km to the southeast of the project.

Dewatering activities are not expected to have an effect on either receptor.


24

6.0 ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS FROM

EMISSIONS

6.1 Risk Identification

From the risk identification process, four potential emissions were identified

associated with the dewatering into any of the open pits. The likelihood of an

event happening where the emissions affect the environment is detailed in

Section 6.4.

6.2 Potential emissions:

Hyper-saline water (spill into dewatering system, breach of pipeline,

overtopping of any pit);

Hydrocarbon spill(spill from water pump);

Noise (from water pump and pipeline inspection vehicles); and

Dust (from discharge points and pipeline inspection vehicles).

6.3 Risk Assessment

To identify the risks associated with discharging, each component of the process

flow chart was assessed to identify any risk that may occur within each

component. Risks that were identified are summarised below.

Hypersaline spill occurring has potential and is considered a high risk without

management measures and a moderate risk after management measures are

put in place. The consequences would be a loss of vegetation and/or habitat

from contaminating the soil and water.

Hydrocarbon contamination is possible but considered a low risk. The

consequences would be water and soil contamination which would lead to

vegetation deaths and habitat decline. Only a small amount of fuel will be

stored within the day tanks of the dewatering pump, therefore a hydrocarbon

contamination will not be sizeable.

Noise impacts are unlikely and not expected. The consequence of residential

disturbance would not occur as there are no residents within the immediate

vicinity. There is also risk of impact on local fauna populations. It is highlighted

that neither of these are likely to be greater than noise impacts from mining

operations (excavators, dump trucks, dozers, graders, service trucks, drill rigs and

rock breakers).

Dust accumulation is possible and considered a low risk. Again, the impact from

discharge points and vehicle movements is not likely to be greater than the

mining operations.


25

6.4 Risk Management

Table 4 - Risk Identification, Analysis and Management

Risk Identification Risk Analysis Risk Management Residual Risk

Analysis

Issu

e

Ev

en

t/In

cid

en

t

Po

ten

tia

l

Imp

ac

t

Ca

use

s

Co

nse

qu

en

ce

Lik

elih

oo

d

Ris

k R

an

kin

g

Ma

na

ge

me

nt/

Co

ntr

ol

Me

asu

res

Co

nse

qu

en

ce

Lik

elih

oo

d

Ris

k R

an

kin

g

Hypersaline

water

Release of hypersaline

water into the

environment

Soil, surface water

contamination.

Vegetation deaths.

Pipeline failure.

Lack of appropriate

containment facilities.

3 B High 12 hourly Pipeline inspections

Pipeline maintenance

Sufficient containment bunds

2 C Moderate

Hypersaline

water - Water

holding

capacity of

the pit

Exceed the water

holding capacity of

the pit

Soil, surface water

contamination.

Vegetation deaths.

Lack of inspections.

Lack of water volume

monitoring.

Large rainfall event.

3 C Moderate Dewatering pipeline procedure.

Monthly water volume monitoring.

Monthly surveying of water level in

pits.

Installation of markers at 6m below

crest level.

Develop groundwater management

plan should water levels get within

6m of the pit crest.

3 D Low -

Moderate


26

Hydrocarbons Release of

hydrocarbons into the

environment

Release of

hydrocarbons into

dewatering network

Soil, surface water

contamination.

Vegetation deaths.

Lack of appropriate

containment facilities.

Lack of fuel/oils

storage and handling

procedures.

Lack of adherence to

existing fuel/oil

storage and handling

procedures.

2 B Moderate Appropriately designed and

maintained service truck.

Waste management plan.

Hydrocarbon management and spill

procedure.

Collection of waste oil and grease.

Hydrocarbon spill kits.

Toolbox presentations to employees.

1 C Low

Noise – pumps &

engines

Noise – impact on local

fauna

Disturbance to

habitats

Inappropriate

positioning of pump

2 D Low If required, place noise barrier around

pump.

2 E Low

Dust Dust accumulation on

vegetation

Vegetation decline

Nuisance

Heavy use of vehicles

on track to check

pipeline

2 C Moderate Use appropriate dust suppression

techniques on the track.

Daily observations on dust within work

area and additional measures

implemented if required.

2 D Low

Refer to Appendix 7 for Norton Gold Fields Risk Rating Matrix.

27

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES,

STANDARDS AND MEASUREMENT CRITERIA

7.1 Objectives and Standards

Table 5 - Environmental Performance Objectives and Standards

Environmental

Performance

Objectives

Standards Measurement Criteria

Hypersaline water

emissions: ensure all

hypersaline water is

contained within the

pipeline bund, open

pits and scour pits

- Environmental Protection

Act Regulations 1986

- Mine Dewatering

Procedure

- Pipeline inspection carried out on 12

hourly basis

- Mine Dewatering Procedure

- Pipeline logbook and inspection

sheets

- Isolation and breather valves

- Monthly surveys of water level in pits

- When water level approaches 6m

from the surface of any pit, implement

development of groundwater

management plan to ensure water

levels remain less than 6m below

surface at nearest natural vegetation

Dewatering: ensure

groundwater

abstraction is not

exceeded

- Groundwater Abstraction

Licence 151865(11 )

- Groundwater Operating

Strategy

- Water and Irrigation

Regulations 1914



- Mine Dewatering

Procedure

- Flow meters installed and measured

monthly

- Annual Groundwater Monitoring

Summary

Hydrocarbon

emissions: ensure

hydrocarbons do not

leak into the

environment

- Waste Management Plan

- Groundwater Operating

Strategy

- Small quantities stored on active

machinery

- System in place to immediately deal

with a hydrocarbon spill

- Hydrocarbon spill kit located nearby

- Annual water quality monitoring

- Hydrocarbons not stored in fuel tanks

to be bunded

Noise emissions:

ensure noise is kept at

a suitable level to

avoid fauna

disturbance and

residential

communities.


(Noise) Regulations 1997

- Wildlife Protection Act

1950

- Fauna observations in the area, in

particular that travel patterns are not

changing

Dust accumulation:

ensure dust is

managed so it does

not affect vegetation

and the public.

- Dust Suppression

Procedure



- Follow Dust Suppression Procedure

- Monitor dust in the area

28

Norton’s Dust Suppression Procedure and Mine Dewatering Procedure are

attached as Appendix 8 and Appendix 4, respectively.

8.0 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

8.1 Commissioning

The pipeline will be constructed by Norton staff once approvals are in place.

The v-drain and scour pits will be constructed by use of a grader and/or

excavator. Maintenance staff will install flow metres, breather and carry out

welding of the pipeline. Estimated costs are shown below in Error! Reference

source not found..

Table 6 - Estimated Cost of Project

Activity Estimated Cost

4 000m 110mm HDPE polypipe ($46/m) $184,000

Hire Pump (15 months) $90,000

Flow metre, breather, etc. $6,500

Pipeline installation Labour ($50/m) $200,000

TOTAL $480,500

Norton proposes to undertake a commissioning phase once pipelines are

constructed. Details of this proposal are outlined in Appendix 3.

8.2 Clearing

A clearing permit application for the Golden Funnel project area has been

granted (CPS 8784/1). This clearing permit will manage the clearing required for

the activities proposed in this Works Approval application.

Management strategies for clearing will include:

The areas to be cleared will be well-defined so that over-clearing will be

avoided;

Dust suppression will be implemented where required during clearing

activities;

All employees will be inducted to ensure disturbances are confined to

areas identified in the field;

Clearing operators will be supervised;

Protecting all vegetation outside of the clearing profile;

Rehabilitating disturbed areas no longer required and progressively

rehabilitating completed areas as soon as practicable;

Prior to any development being commenced, vegetation and topsoil will

be cleared and stockpiled separately for future use;

Topsoil stockpiles will not exceed 2m in height; and

29

Only use local native plant species for seeding

8.3 Monitoring

Monitoring of the pipeline occurs every 12 hours;

The pipeline flow meter will be monitored on a monthly basis;

Monthly water level survey of Racetrack and Golden Funnel pits;

The water quality will be monitored annually and will include pH, EC, TDS

and heavy metals analysis;

Noise will be monitored on as required basis – given it is a work area

triggered by OHS standards; and

Dust observations will be carried out regularly.

8.4 Rehabilitation

The pipeline will be rehabilitated and revegetated with local species once the

pipeline is no longer required in accordance with Department of Mines, Industry

Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) requirements.

Rehabilitation is guided by the following principles:

Ensure that vegetation clearing is kept to a minimum;

Collect and correctly stockpile vegetative material and available topsoil

for later use at selected sites;

Strip topsoil for immediate re-use on prepared surfaces where possible;

Progressively rehabilitate completed areas as soon as practicable;

Only use local native plant species for seeding; and

Undertake decommissioning and closure of the site to industry leading

practice principles and to statutory requirements.

To assist with ongoing review of the rehabilitation and environmental

management at the Golden Funnel project, Norton submit an Annual

Environmental Report (AER) to DMIRS in March each year.

8.5 Contingencies

8.5.1 Hypersaline spill

In an event of a hypersaline spill:

Bunding will assist to contain the spill and the isolation valves will be

turned on by the person inspecting the pipeline;

Repairs will be carried out on the pipeline and any bunding that may

have been damaged will be reconstructed to standard by the service

crew.

Earthmoving equipment will be used by the service crew to remove

contaminated soil. Soil sampling will be carried out by the Environment

Department to assess the extent of the contamination.

30

Reports will provided in accordance with Section 72 of the Environmental

Protection Act 1986 should any environmental harm occur; and

Rehabilitation of the affected area will be carried out by Environmental

Department if required.

8.5.2 Hydrocarbon Spill

In an event of a hydrocarbon spill:

The source will be stopped immediately and the spill will be contained

with additional bunding from the spill kit that will be in the vicinity;

Any contaminated soil will be removed and disposed of appropriately by

the service crew;

Soil and water sampling will be carried out by the Environment

Department to assess the extent of the contamination. Reports provided

in accordance with Section 72 of the Environmental Protection Act 1986;

and

Rehabilitation of the affected area will be carried out by the

Environmental Department if required.

8.5.3 Dewatering

To ensure the pit volume is not exceeded, monthly water volumes deposited in

to the Racetrack pit will be collected by the pipeline service crew. In addition,

surveyors will measure the water levels in the Racetrack pit on a monthly basis

to ensure the water holding capacity is not exceeded and to ensure sufficient

capacity continues to remain. The Environment Department will check this data

on a monthly basis and examine any inconsistencies or unusual readings.

If dewatering volumes approach the allowed amount, relevant authorities will

be notified by the Environmental Department and pumping volumes will be

reduced or ceased to prevent exceedance of the allowed limit.

8.6 Records

The records that are maintained at Norton to ensure systems, practices and

procedures are in place are listed below:

Groundwater well licence reports;

Groundwater Operating Procedure;

Pipeline inspection log book;

Flow meter log book;

Groundwater monitoring database;

Environmental Incident report form;

Environmental Incident log book; and

Shift logs.

31

8.7 Management Responsibilities

Management responsibilities are detailed below to ensure the Environmental

Management System (EMS) is established, implemented and maintained

throughout the operation. These are in line with Norton Gold Fields Environment

and Community Policy, attached as Appendix 9.

8.7.1 Chief Operations Officer

Provides resources to implement, maintain and improve the EMS; and

Appoints and supports the Environment, Community and Security

Superintendent who is responsible for implementation of the EMS.

8.7.2 Open Pit Manager and Superintendent

Ensures that sufficient personnel and resources have been engaged to

implement the plans and procedures within the EMS as applicable to the

Golden Funnel project.

8.7.3 Environmental Superintendent

Ensures that the EMS is established, implemented, reviewed and

maintained throughout the year in accordance with progress and

changes that occur; and

Reports to the General Manager on the performance of the system.

8.7.4 Operator

Carries out relevant requirements of the EMS such as the plans and

procedures to aim for a minimal incident operation;

Reports all environmental incidents and opportunities for improvement on

the current practices; and

Report and record all carried out inspections.

8.8 Competence, Training and Awareness

To ensure competence and understanding of operational and license

requirements:

All of the workforce, both Norton staff and contractors, are given a wide

ranging safety, occupational health and environmental management

induction on arrival at the site;

Pipeline inspectors are trained on the Mine Dewatering Procedure

(attached as Appendix 4) to ensure inspectors have a full understanding

of their responsibilities;

32

Water cart operators are trained on the Dust Suppression Procedure

(attached as Appendix 8) to ensure minimum impact on the vegetation;

and

Continuous staff training will involve environmental input at “tool-box”

meetings and specific environmental courses as required.

8.9 Communication

Daily meeting with Department Managers are held to ensure communications

are effectively passed through the system. In addition, all EMS policies and

procedures are available to all personnel through the Environmental

Department upon request. Weekly meetings are conducted with the Technical

Services Department to discuss any matter that may need addressing.

9.0 CONSULTATION

Table 7 - Consultation Register

Organisation/

Individual

Contact

Person

Initial

Contact Topic Discussed Outcome

Department of

Water and

Environment

Regulation

Fiona

Sharpe 04/12/2019

Called to Fiona

Sharpe at DWER

office to discuss

Golden Funnel

dewatering

project

application

process

Advised of

dewatering

pipeline design

requirements for

application

Black Flag

Pastoralist Brett Crook 13/11/2019

Requested

consent to the

proposed

activities

associated with

the Golden

Funnel Project

and proximity of a

pastoral dam.

A written response

was received and

the pastoralist had

no objections

33

10.0 COMMITMENTS

Norton’s Paddington Operations has made a number of specific commitments

within this works approval. See page numbers to reference back to relevant

page/s:

Table 8 - Summary of Commitments

Issue Commitment Page

Number

Water Monitoring

- Monthly water volumes will be undertaken during

dewatering

- Annual water quality sampling will be undertaken

whilst dewatering activities are operational

29

Hypersaline Spill

Control

- 12 hour pipeline monitoring will occur while actively

dewatering

- V-drain and pipeline bunding is maintained

- Monthly water level monitoring within Golden Funnel

open pits

- Report all incidents internally and externally as

required by Section 72 of EP Act

29 - 30

Rehabilitation

- The pipeline will be rehabilitated and revegetated

with local species once the pipeline is no longer

required in accordance with DMIRS requirements

29

Hydrocarbons

- Hydrocarbons not within fuel tanks for engines will be

stored in bunded areas

- Hydrocarbons and hydrocarbon contaminated

material will be collected and sent offsite for

treatment and disposal

- Spill kits will be available near each machine

30

Dust

- Dust generating activities will be monitored to ensure

that vegetation and workers are not impacted

- Dust generating equipment will be assessed and a

range of measures implemented including water

carts, restricting access, increased wind breaks, and

change to nozzle parameters

- Any action being implemented will be reviewed to

ensure that it is (a) effective and (b) not having other

adverse impacts

27

Noise - Operations will adhere to Environmental Protection

(Noise) Regulations 1997 27

These commitments will ensure the project is managed in an environmentally

sound manner, consistent with the statutory requirements, the company’s

objectives and conditions imposed by DWER.

34

11.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY

AQ2 (2019), Dewatering Requirements at Golden Funnel Pits. Memo prepared

for Norton Gold Fields Pty Limited, October 2019.

Bureau of Meteorology. 2020. Average annual evaporation. Retrieved 3/07/2020, from

http://www.bom.gov.au/watl/evaporation/

Bureau of Meteorology. 2020. Climate of Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport. Retrieved

10/01/2020, from http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_012038.shtml

CALM, (2002), A Biodiversity Audit of Western Australia’s Biogeographical

Subregions in 2002- Coolgardie (COO03 – Eastern Goldfields synopsis),

Department of Conservation and Land Management.

Cowan (2001), A Biodiversity Audit of Western Australia’s 53 Biogeographically

Region in 2002- Coolgardie 3 Eastern Goldfields Subregion, Department of

Conservation and Land Management.

Native Vegetation Solutions (NVS) (2019), Reconnaissance Flora and

Vegetation Survey of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel

project areas. Unpublished report prepared by Native Vegetation Solutions for

Norton Gold Fields Pty Ltd, November 2019.

O’Connor, RE (2019), Aboriginal Heritage Surveys of Rose Dam South, Tuart,

Racetrack and Royal Standard/Golden Funnel Project Areas. Report

commissioned for Norton Gold Fields Pty Ltd, June 2019.

Swager, CP Witt, WK Griffin, TJ Wyche, S Ahmat, AL Hunter, M and McGoldrick,

PJ (1990), Geology of the late Archaean Kalgoorlie terrane - an explanatory

note: Western Australia Geological Survey, Report 48, p26.

Terrestrial Ecosystems (2019), Level 1 fauna assessment for the Racetrack, Royal

Standard and Golden Funnel project areas. Unpublished report for Native

Vegetation Solutions, August 2019.

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

APPENDICES

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 1 – Dewatering Requirements at Golden Funnel Pits

Level 4, 56 William Street

Perth WA 6000

Tel +61 8 9322 9733

www.aq2.com.au

AQ2 Pty Ltd ABN 38 164 858 075

Memo

\\DC01\Jobs\234\Task F - Golden Funnel\3.C&R\Reports\Report 002a\002b - Final.docx 1

To Wayne Astill/Tari Pawlyk Company Norton Gold Fields – Paddington Operations

From Jon Hall Job No. 234-F1

Date 14th October 2019 Doc No. 002b

Subject Dewatering Requirements at Golden Funnel Pits

Hi Wayne/Tari,

Further to our review of background information and our discussions around planned dewatering of

the existing Golden Funnel pits and the development of two new pits, we are pleased to present the

following assessment of mine inflows and dewatering requirements.

This brief report includes a description of the groundwater flow modelling approach used, the results

of pit inflow predictions, an outline of the recommended dewatering strategy and discussion of the

likely environmental impacts of dewatering.

SUMMARY OF KEY OUTCOMES

The key outcomes of this assessment are:

• Predicted groundwater inflows to the existing Golden Funnel pits, as the existing pit lakes

are pumped down, increase from negligible at the start of pumping up to around 6 to 17L/s.

This wide range in predicted inflows results from residual uncertainties in local

hydrogeological conditions and the lack of historical dewatering data to calibrate the pit inflow

model.

• To dewater the current pit lakes (ahead of new pit development) in 3 months, and accounting

for groundwater inflows as the pit lake is lowered, initial pumping rates of up to 60L/s for

Golden Funnel and 30L/s for Golden Funnel North may be required.

• Predicted groundwater inflows to the new pits increase up to around 13 to 32L/s (assuming

the existing pits have been pumped dry). Again, this wide range of predicted inflows results

from residual uncertainties.

• Predicted total dewatering volumes over the life of project range from 1.4 to 1.8GL. This is

less than the current storage volume available in the nearly Natal Pit, where it is proposed

to discharge most of the dewatering production.

• Ongoing calibration of the pit inflow model (against pumping and pit lake level data) as the

existing pits are pumped dry will allow for improved model prediction reliability and refined

dewatering predictions.

• Sump pumping is considered to be the most cost-effective means of pit dewatering.

• It is noted that predicted inflows (discussed above) are groundwater inflows and do not

include any incident rainfall runoff. By way of comparison, the estimated rainfall runoff to

the combined final pits during a 10yr ARI 72hr storm event would be around 70L/s.

• Dewatering of either/both pits will have little to no impact on the local environment, other

than drawdown in the local, hypersaline aquifers.

http://www.aq2.com.au/


1. BACKGROUND

1.1 Mining

Norton Gold Fields are planning to re-commence mining at Golden Funnel (see Figure 1). This will

require the existing flooded pits to be pumped dry (or near dry) ahead of development of the new

pits. Key details for both existing pits are follows:

• Golden Funnel Pit – pit base at 294mRL (48m below surface) and pit lake level at 331mRL

(11m below surface).

• Golden Funnel North Pit - pit base at 309mRL (33m below surface) and pit lake level at

331mRL (7m below surface).

• Pit lake water (both pits) – hypersaline (>100,000mg/L TDS).

It is planned to pump out the existing pit lakes over a three-month period before commencing

development of the new pits. Key details of the proposed new pits are as follows:

• Golden Funnel Pit – final pit base at 265mRL (77m below surface).

• Golden Funnel North Pit – same as Golden Funnel with a final pit base at 309mRL (33m below

surface).

It is planned to mine both pits concurrently over a 12-month period.

It is proposed to pump all dewatering production to the nearby Natal Pit, which has a currently

estimated static storage capacity of 1.9GL.

1.2 Hydrogeology

1.2.1 Geology

Basement geology in the Golden Funnel area comprises steeply dipping volcanics of the Archean

aged Victorious Basalt. The orebodies are associated with a roughly north-south trending Royal

Standard Fault system. Nearby pits include:

• Natal Pit – which is located some 2.5km to the west and associated with the subparallel Black

Flag fault system; and

• Racetrack Pits – which are located around 3km north associated with splay structures

between the Royal Standard and Black Flag Fault systems.

1.2.2 Conceptual Hydrogeological Model

The conceptual hydrogeological model for the Golden Funnel Pits is as follows:

• Three minor aquifers (or aquitards) associated with the following (in increasing order of

permeability):

o Fresh basement rock - associated with fresh and weakly fractured basalt basement

rocks at depth.

o Saprock - associated with weathered basalt in the transition zone from decomposed

basalt (clay rich saprolite) to fresh rock.

o Fault zone – associated with the Royal Standard fault zone and mineralisation.

• Little to no local recharge and hypersaline groundwater quality.

• Pre-mining local groundwater flow would have been to the south and east towards White

Flag and Black Flag Lakes. However, current groundwater flows have been (and will continue

to be) influenced by mining and dewatering.

• The Golden Funnel pits (and nearby Natal Pit) will currently be groundwater sinks as a result

of evaporative loss from the pit lake surfaces, with local groundwater flows towards the pits.

The Racetrack pits are also currently groundwater sinks as a result of active dewatering.


2. GROUNDWATER (MINE INFLOW) MODELLING

2.1 General Modelling Approach

An analytical pit inflow modelling approach was adopted for this assessment. The model used is a

simple analytical groundwater flow model based on the Dupuit-Forcheimer and Theim Equations for

groundwater flow to a large diameter well. Key steps in the model are as follows:

• The mine, or various sections of the mine, is represented by a large diameter well (or series

of large diameter “equivalent wells”) of similar base area and depth at various time steps,

representing various stages of mine development.

• Average aquifer parameters are applied to the equivalent well(s).

• The model is used to calculate the pumping rate required to maintain pumping water levels

in each equivalent well at or below the base of each well (mine base) at the end of each time

step. This is the analogue equivalent of groundwater inflow to a dewatered mine.

The model makes a number of other simplifying assumptions, including lumped (bulk average)

aquifer parameters and radial flow from an aquifer of infinite areal extent. As such, it cannot be

considered as an exact model, however, the model does allow for good approximations of bulk mine

inflows.

It is noted that this analytical modelling approach has been applied to numerous gold mines (open

pit and underground) throughout Australia and internationally, and has been found to provide reliable

predictions of bulk mine inflows, based on corroboration with numerical models and historical

performance.

Notwithstanding the above, there are inherent constraints to any modelling (due to limited aquifer

distribution data) and it is generally considered that predicted dewatering requirements should be

considered (at best) to be plus or minus 25%.

2.2 Specific Modelling Approach

A four phased approach to the modelling was adopted, as follows:

• Phase 1 – Confirmation of aquifer parameters: The pit inflow model was set up and calibrated

against two conditions (current evaporative losses and assumed final pit dewatering rates).

This process is sometimes called “inverse modelling”.

• Phase 2 – Prediction of mine inflows to the existing pits once the pit lakes have been pumped

dry: Calibrated aquifer parameters were used in the model set-up to simulate inflows to the

dry existing Golden Funnel pits.

• Phase 3 – Prediction of mine inflows to the final new pits. Calibrated aquifer parameters

were used in the model set-up to simulate inflows to the final (expanded) Golden Funnel pits.

In all cases, the aquifer system was assumed to be unconfined. In practice, the aquifer system will

be semi-confined, semi-unconfined and unconfined at various depths. However, our experience

shows that adopting an unconfined aquifer model produces the most reliable predictions.

It was also assumed that no other pits or pit lakes were in direct hydraulic connection with the Golden

Funnel pits.

2.3 Initial Model Setup and Calibration

2.3.1 Calibration to Evaporation Losses

A simple water balance model was developed for the existing Golden Funnel pits and used to derive

the evaporative losses from the current pit lakes for a arrange of effective evaporation rates. The

water balance model was also used to derive the current “drawdown” in response the evaporative

losses.


However, it is noted that no pre-mining water table data were available, and a range of drawdowns

were derived for a range of likely pre-mining water tables.

The pit inflow model was then set-up to simulate the effective evaporation loss from the pit lakes

and aquifer parameters were varied (within limits consistent with the conceptual hydrogeological

model) until a good match between predicted and observed dewatering was achieved. Key features

of the model set up are:

• The model extends from the average natural surface (342mRL) down to the currently planned

depths of the final new pits (265mRL).

• The pre-mining groundwater level was set at 332mRL consistent with monitoring data.

• An average equivalent well radius of 70m – representing average pit dimensions of both pits

combined, between 332mRL (pre-mining water table) and bases of the pits.

• Bulk aquifer storativity (specific yield) is 0.5%.

• A bulk single aquifer is assumed, with radial flow to the pits.

• Evaporation pan factors of between 50% and 60% were used, which resulted in losses

ranging from 220 to 265KL/d.

• The pre-mining water table was assumed to be between 3m and 5m below surface (which

resulted in drawdowns of between 5m and 8m.

The model was run to simulate drawdown in response to pumping (at rates equivalent to derived

evaporative losses and to calibrate the model to bulk aquifer permeability. The model was found to

be relatively insensitive to the adopted evaporation pan factor (and aquifer storativity) but very

sensitive to the assumed pre-mining depth to water table. The range of derived bulk aquifer

permeability was in the range 0.2 to 0.6m/d.

2.3.2 Calibration to Likely Historical Dewatering Rates

In an effort to refine the range of bulk aquifer permeability, an alternative calibration was undertaken

based on likely historical dewatering rates. There are no available data on historical dewatering rates

(the pits were mined in the 1990’s) but it is noted that no reports of “excessive” dewatering have

been found in the available records, and it is assumed that historical pit inflows were within a

relatively normal range.

Key features of the model set up are:

• Model geometry, starting water levels and aquifer storativity – same as in Section 2.3.1.

• Pit bases – as per mine design records.

• Assumed range of pit inflows:

o Low Case – 500KL/d

o High Case 1,500KL/d

The calibrated bulk aquifer permeability ranged from 0.2 to 0.6m/d, which is consistent with the

calibration to evaporative losses, and is considered to be an appropriate range to carry forward to

model predictions.

2.4 Predicted Inflows – Exiting Golden Funnel Pits

The calibrated model (with the same set-up as described above) was run to predict inflows to the

base of the existing pits once the pit lakes had been pumped out for the range of derived bulk aquifer

permeabilities. It was assumed that pumping the pit lake dry would take 90 days from the

commencement of pumping. The outcomes are as follows:

• Predicted groundwater inflows at base of existing Golden Funnel pits – 500 to 1,500KL/d (or

6 to 17L/s).


2.5 Predicted Inflows – Final Golden Funnel Pits

The model set-up was modified to simulate the final Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North Pits.

Key features of the model set-up are as follows:

• The base of the modelled pit was lowered to 265mRL as per the mine plan.

• The equivalent well radius increased to 150m to cover the expanded pits.

• It was assumed that mining to the final pits would take 12 months (that is, 455 days after

the commencement of pit lake dewatering).

The outcomes are as follows:

• Predicted groundwater inflows at base of the final Golden Funnel pits – 1,100 to 2,700KL/d

(or 13 to 32L/s).

2.6 Prediction Reliability

The current reliability of predictions is limited by available calibration data and this is reflected in the

wide range of predicted groundwater inflows.

It is noted, however, that model reliability could be significantly improved once pit lake dewatering

commences. The process would involve the following:

• Develop a pit water balance model – based on available pit shape and water level monitoring

data.

• Run the water balance model after one month’s pit lake pumping to derive the groundwater

average groundwater inflow.

• Re-calibrate the pit inflow model for measured drawdown vs derived groundwater inflows to

derive more reliable estimates of bulk aquifer permeability.

• Re-run the prediction model to derived refined predictions of groundwater inflows.

2.7 Cumulative Dewatering Volumes

A simple water balance model was set up to predict the total dewatering volumes over the proposed

life of mine (including pit lake pumping and dewatering during mining). Key assumptions in the

water balance are that the pit lakes will be pumped (at whatever rate necessary) to empty the pits

in 3 months and that mining will commence as soon as the pits lakes are pumped dry and will take

12 months to complete.

The predicted dewatering volumes (and average pumping rates) required are as follows:

• Total dewatering volume – 1.4 to 1.8GL

• Average pumping rates – 3,100 to 3,700KL/d (or 36 to 45L/s)

However, it is recognised that much higher pumping rates will be initially required to empty the pit

lakes in 3 months. The static volume of water in the existing pit lakes is around 638,000KL. Pumping

at a total rate of around 7,100KL/d (or around 80L/s) would be required to pump this volume in 90

days. This would need to be split around 2:1 between the Golden Funnel and Golden Funnel North

pits. Allowing for average groundwater inflows while the pit lakes are being pumped out, total

pumping requirements over the first 3 months could be as 7,900KL/d (or around 90L/s).

2.8 Rainfall Runoff

Detailed rainfall runoff predictions are not part of this assessment. However, to put the predicted

groundwater inflows into a total water management context, the potential runoff from a peak storm

event were estimated for comparison.


The estimated incident rainfall runoff to both pits (i.e. runoff from within the pit containment bunds)

for the 10yr ARI 72hr storm event is as follows:

• Runoff volume – around 18,800KL

• Average inflow rate (over 3 days) – around 6,300KL/d (or around 70L/s

Total sump pumping capacity will need to take potential rainfall runoff into account.

3. DEWATERING STRATEGY

The most practical way of dewatering the pits is likely to be pit floor sump pumping, using the same

(or similar) pumps as those used to pump out the pit lakes; this assumes that no highly unanticipated

permeable faults become evident during pump-out. It is noted that Paddington Operations have

extensive experience in the successful dewatering of pits using sump pumps. Also, given the nature

of the local aquifers (low permeability), it is not considered practical to attempt some advanced

dewatering using perimeter dewatering bores.

As outlined in Section 2.7, the predicted total volume of required pumping ranges from 1.4 to 1.8GL.

It is proposed to pump all dewatering pumping (less local dust suppression requirements) to the

Natal Pit. It is noted that Natal Pit currently has 1.9GL of storage capacity available above the current

pit lake and below the nominated freeboard of 6m below surface.

4. IMPACTS OF DEWATERING PUMPING

It is concluded that there will be no negative impacts on local groundwater or the environment, as

follows:

• The principal impact of dewatering will be the propagation of groundwater level drawdowns

away from the pit. These will tend to be elongated along the main aquifers (fault zone and

transition zone).

• Drawdowns will not impact on any other groundwater users.

• The groundwater is hypersaline and does not support any groundwater dependent flora or

fauna.

We trust this brief report is enough for your immediate needs. If you have any question, please do

not hesitate to contact us.

Regards

Jon Hall Duncan Storey Consulting Hydrogeologist Consulting Hydrogeologist - Director

Attached: Figure 1 Author: JWH (03/10/19) Reviewed: DGS (04/10/19)

Location Plan - Golden Funnel Pits FIGURE 1F:\234\Task E - Rose Pits\2.TECH\Background Data\Mine Design

Natal

Racetrack

Golden Funnel North

Golden Funnel

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 2 – Groundwater Well License 151865(11)

Licensee(s) Paddington Gold Pty Limited

Description of Water Resource

GoldfieldsPalaeochannel - Fractured Rock

Annual Water Entitlement

6,200,000kL

Location of Water Source L24/119L24/144L24/145L24/164L24/19L24/29L24/63M16/150M16/58M24/101M24/102M24/155M24/165M24/166M24/182M24/223M24/227M24/234M24/236M24/265M24/304M24/393M24/451M24/79M24/838

Authorised Activities Taking of water for Location of Activity

Dewatering for mining purposes L24/196

L24/34

L26/247

M16/106

M16/150

M16/48

M16/58

M16/86

M24/101

M24/102

M24/155

M24/165

This Licence is granted subject to the Rights in Water and Irrigation Regulations 2000.

File No: RF6423-02Page 1 of 6

Instrument No. GWL151865(11)

LICENCE TO TAKE WATERGranted by the Minister under section 5C of the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914

M24/181

M24/182

M24/183

M24/20

M24/223

M24/227

M24/234

M24/236

M24/265

M24/266

M24/304

M24/393

M24/446

M24/447

M24/451

M24/708

M24/79

M24/796

M24/81

M24/82

M24/838

M26/446

M26/629

Dust Suppression for mining purposes L24/196

L24/34

L26/247

M16/106

M16/150

M16/48





M16/58

M16/86

M24/101

M24/102

M24/155

M24/165

M24/181

M24/182

M24/183

M24/20

M24/223

M24/227

M24/234

M24/236

M24/265

M24/266

M24/304

M24/393

M24/446

M24/447

M24/451

M24/708

M24/79

M24/796

M24/81

M24/82

M24/838

M26/446

M26/629





Earthwork and construction purposes L24/196

L24/34

L26/247

M16/106

M16/150

M16/48

M16/58

M16/86

M24/101

M24/102

M24/155

M24/165

M24/181

M24/182

M24/183

M24/20

M24/223

M24/227

M24/234

M24/236

M24/265

M24/266

M24/304

M24/393

M24/446

M24/447

M24/451

M24/708

M24/79





M24/796

M24/81

M24/82

M24/838

M26/446

M26/629

Mineral ore processing and other mining purposes

L24/196

L24/34

L26/247

M16/106

M16/150

M16/48

M16/58

M16/86

M24/101

M24/102

M24/155

M24/165

M24/181

M24/182

M24/183

M24/20

M24/223

M24/227

M24/234

M24/236

M24/265

M24/266

M24/304





M24/393

M24/446

M24/447

M24/451

M24/708

M24/79

M24/796

M24/81

M24/82

M24/838

M26/446

M26/629

Duration of Licence From 19 May 2020 to 10 October 2026

This Licence is subject to the following terms, conditions and restrictions:

1. The annual water year for water taken under this licence is defined as 1 January to 31 December.

2. The licensee shall comply with the commitments of the operating strategy Norton Gold Fields Limited - Paddington Operations Groundwater Operating Strategy, as prepared by licensee and approved by the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation on 19/05/2020 including any modifications to the commitments as approved during the term of the licence.

3. All monitoring and reporting shall be carried out in accordance with Operational Policy 5.12 'Hydrogeological reporting associated with a groundwater well licence'.

4. Every 12 Months the licensee shall provide to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation a Groundwater Monitoring Summary for the preceding water year. The first report is due 31/03/2021.

5. Every 3 Years the licensee shall provide to the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation a Groundwater Monitoring Review. The first report is due 31/03/2022. A Groundwater Monitoring Summary need not be submitted in a year in which a Groundwater Monitoring Review is due.

End of terms, conditions and restrictions





Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 3 – Commissioning Plan

Golden Funnel Dewatering Works Approval – Commissioning Plan

Following installation of dewatering infrastructure, Norton will undertake a

commissioning period to verify the correct installation and operation prior to

obtaining a discharge license. Commissioning will include both no-load and load

commissioning to ensure compliance against design criteria. Load commissioning is

proposed to occur for a period of either six months or until a discharge license is

obtained (whichever occurs sooner).

No-load commissioning

Prior to any dewatering a no-load commissioning check will occur to ensure correct

installation and integrity of infrastructure. This will include:

Confirming pumps, flow meters, air valves and scour valves are installed

correctly.

Inspecting pipeline weld integrity.

Pressure testing of the pipeline to maximum credible operating pressure for a

period of at least 2 hours.

Confirm pipeline has been anchored with earth or other measures at top of

discharge locations.

Ensuring that the v-drains are a maximum of 30cm deep and sufficient to

contain a volume of discharge from the pipeline.

Ensure that v-drains contain entire pipeline.

Ensuring that scour pits have been installed at strategic locations along to

pipeline corridor, which in combination with bunding are sufficient.

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 4 - Mine Dewatering Procedure 2015

Norton’s Paddington Operation – Procedure

Uncontrolled if printed, retrieve current version from STEMS Page 1 of 11

MINE DEWATERING PROCEDURE

Document No: PGM-ENV-PRO-06-002

Revision: A B

Prepared by:

Anna Dyer

Environmental

Advisor

Tari Pawlyk

Environmental

Advisor

Reviewed by:

Wayne Astill

Environmental

Superintendent

Wayne Astill

ECS Superintendent

Approved by:

Brian Sowden

Manager HSE

Albert Schaus

Acting General

Manager -

Operations

SUMMARY OF DOCUMENT REVISIONS

Rev.

No.

Date

Revised

Section

Revised Revision Description

A 18/10/2012 Initial Document

B 24/04/2017 All Revision and update



1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance to Norton Gold Fields (NGF)

employees and contractors on the process of mine dewatering out of open cut and

underground mines with discharge primarily into inactive open cut voids, or via other

means into the environment.

2. SCOPE

This procedure applies to all sites within the NGF Operations.

3. DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

Definitions

Mine dewatering is the extraction of water from an underground or open cut

mine and discharge of it into another open cut void or into the environment via

other means, such as into a salt lake other water body.

Monthly measurements are to be taken more than 15 days apart across two

separate months, but not more than 45 days apart, as per operating license

conditions.

Acronyms

DER – Department of Environment Regulation

DoW – Department of Water

GWL – Groundwater Well License

4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

General Manager

Responsible for ensuring sufficient resources are available to implement this

Procedure.

Environmental Superintendent

Responsible for an annual discussion/biennial review of this Procedure with Area

Superintendents and other responsible departments; and

Responsible for maintaining records of open cut and underground mine

dewatering volumes, pit water levels and pit water parameters, as required by

the relevant DER Works Approval and Licences, and DoW GWLs.

Area Superintendents

Responsible for ensuring that staff adhere to procedure and are made available

to carry out inspections as required by relevant licences;

Informing the NGF Environmental Section of any issues identified during

dewatering inspections; and



Ensuring logbooks/inspection books are filled out as required by license

conditions and when completed, provided to the Environmental Superintendent,

or made available to view when requested for inspection purposes.

Surveyors

Surveyors are responsible for ensuring that water levels within the discharge pit

are surveyed on a monthly basis or more frequently as required by the relevant

licences; and

Responsible for surveying extent of any environmental harm resulting from

incidents of hypersaline water discharge.

Dewatering

The Dewatering Section is responsible for ensuring all flow metre readings are

recorded on a monthly basis for all pits registered on active GWLs and DER

Environmental Operating Licenses.

5. TRAINING

NGF will ensure that training is provided to appropriate responsible site personnel and

will include as a minimum the understanding of:

Requirements for dewatering mines as per the relevant licences; and

The requirements of this Procedure.

6. PROCEDURE

Dewatering is required during the operation of a mine where groundwater is infiltrating

into an underground or open cut mine at a rate in which it cannot be reutilised for

purposes such as dust suppression. In these circumstances, water is collected in either

a sump or dam and pumped via a pipeline to a discharge location such as an inactive

open cut void with sufficient storage capacity.

Considerations for the discharge location must be investigated prior to requesting

government agency approval and include; water quality, storage capacity,

geotechnical stability, safe access and groundwater flow direction.

In instances where a salt lake is considered as a potential discharge location,

archaeological, hydrological and ecological studies may also be required prior to

application to ensure impacts to the environment are minimised.

6.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW DEWATERING POINTS

Government Approval

Prior to undertaking the construction or operation of a dewatering network, approvals

are required from DER when design capacity of the discharge could exceed 50,000 t



per year (if pipeline infrastructure were to be operated at maximum capacity 24hrs/day

for 365 days per year).

The application for Works Approvals and Environmental Operating Licences will be

made via the Environment Section after an appropriate discharge receiving location

has been identified and risk assessed.

Pipeline

Pipelines are to be constructed of HDPE piping that meets Australian Standards:

AS/NZS 2033:2008: Installation of polyethylene pipe systems;

AS/NZS 4129:2008 Fittings for polyethylene (PE) pipes for pressure applications;

AS/NZS 4130:2009 Polyethylene (PE) pipes for pressure applications; and

AS/NZS 4131:2010 Polyethylene (PE) compounds for pressure pipes and fittings.

All pipelines are to be fitted with isolation and breather valves, as dewatering pipeline

networks do not generally have telemetry systems installed. Additionally, a flow meter is

required to be installed with monthly readings to be reported and made available to

the Environment Section to ensure compliance with relevant licences.

Pipeline Bunding

As water in the Goldfields is brackish to hypersaline, an uncontrolled release of water

can have a detrimental effect on the surrounding environment. Therefore, all pipelines

on the surface must be contained within an earthen bund or v-drain that directs water

either to a mining void or catchment pit. The bund must be constructed in such a way

that if a pipeline were to fail, the bunding would sufficiently contain the volume of

discharge from the pipeline and prevent the release of water into the surrounding

environment.

Pumping

All pumps using fuel are required to have a hydrocarbon spill kit nearby to ensure that

any hydrocarbon spills are managed appropriately. Each department is responsible for

ensuring their spill kits are stocked and in good order. Where it is identified there is

inadequate spill response equipment available, the Environment Section shall be

contacted to supply a new or refurbished spill kit for the area.

6.2 Monitoring

Monitoring is required whilst dewatering activities are undertaken to ensure that risks

identified by dewatering are controlled/managed (these are generally licence

conditions also). Dewatering monitoring includes but is not limited to:

12 hourly inspections

Whilst dewatering is occurring, 12 hourly inspections shall be carried out and recorded

in the pipeline inspection logbook held within the Area Superintendent’s office. The

recommended schedule for 12 hourly inspections should include the following:

http://www.saiglobal.com/online/Script/Details.asp?DocN=AS0733787916AT






Inspection of the pipeline network for leaks and to check that all pipelines, valves,

flow meters, fittings and other equipment are in good operating condition;

Inspections of pipeline bund for erosion, degradation and to ensure pipeline

remains within the confines of the bund;

Inspections of active groundwater discharge point to ensure that operational

procedures are being implemented in accordance with deposition plan; and

Inspection of discharge pit water levels to ensure water levels are maintained

within the nominated free board associated with the relevant licences (generally

6 metres below ground level).

Monthly Monitoring

Monthly monitoring includes:

Monthly surveys of water levels within the discharge pit are required to be carried

out and recorded to ensure the water levels do not breach the freeboard levels

outlined in the relevant licences; and

Flow meter readings are required to be recorded monthly from water meters

associated with active dewatering pipelines.

Annual Monitoring

Groundwater quality sampling is required to be carried out annually (unless stated

otherwise on a license). This should include sampling the following analytes (also unless

stated otherwise) in all receiving pits:

Electrical conductivity;

Water temperature;

pH;

Total Dissolved Solids; and

A metals suite analysis.

Ground water sampling procedures shall be conducted in accordance with Australian

Standard AS/NZS 5667.11 and the groundwater samples sent to a NATA accredited

laboratory for analyses.

Additional Inspections

The following additional inspections should be carried out following heavy rainfall

events:

Integrity of pipeline bund and of pipeline and pit access roads;

Integrity of safety bund, diversion embankment and diversion trench; and

Integrity of pit margins.

Additional monitoring requirements may be necessary in conjunction with those

stipulated above, due to the nature of the area and/or the monitoring requirements

outlined in the relevant licences.



7. RECORD KEEPING

Records of pipeline inspections will be maintained and stored within the Area

Superintendents office, to be made available upon request when an internal or external

audit is carried out.

Water level surveys, water meter readings and water quality analysis will be maintained

by the Survey, Regional Infrastructure and Environment Sections and stored in an

appropriately marked folder in the Environmental Superintendent’s office, or in an

appropriate digital folder on P drive.

8. CONTINGENCY PLAN

In the event of a spill, the following measures should be implemented to reduce the risk

of further damage to the environment:

Dewatering activities to stop immediately until the issue has been resolved;

The Area Superintendent and Environment Section to be notified of spills or

breaks in containment to ensure that appropriate remediation measures can be

implemented;

Pipeline breaks will be repaired immediately and spilled material collected or

pumped and discharged into the pit; and

In the event of erosion or scouring resulting from the spillage, appropriate

remediation measures will be implemented, as per the Environmental

Superintendent’s advice.

9. REPORTING

All spills, pipeline infrastructure failures, breakdown of containment bunding and failure

to carry out 12 hourly inspections without reasonable cause are classed as reportable

incidents and are required to be entered into STEMS.

If the incident is also classified as externally reportable, the Environment Section will

notify relevant government authorities within the timeframes stipulated by legislation or

licence requirements and to the prescribed standard, usually within one working day of

becoming aware of the incident, by verbal or written notification.

10. REVIEW

A review shall be carried out to ensure the content of this procedure is still applicable,

current and practicable. A review should take place:

a. Whenever the process/equipment changes

b. At a periodic frequency (every two years)

c. At incident investigation.



11. LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS

Environmental Protection Act 1986; and

Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914.

12. RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION

The following documentation may be utilised or referenced to comply with the

requirements of this procedure:

Norton’s Groundwater Operating Strategy

Department of Water:

Groundwater Well License 151865(10) – Paddington Gold

Groundwater Well License 160697(3) – Ora Banda

Groundwater Well License 167686(3) – Navajo Chief and Janet Ivy

Groundwater Well License 182749(1) – Bullabulling

Department of Environment Regulation:

Environmental Operating License L8327/2008/2 – Rose Pit

Environmental Operating License L8512/2010/2 – Bullant and San Peblo

Environmental Operating License L8692/2012/1 – Enterprise

Environmental Operating License L9048/2017/1 – Janet Ivy



Appendix 1: Homestead and Quarters 040 DER License L8327/2008/2 Activities



Appendix 2: Bullant Underground DER License 8512/2010/2 Activities



Appendix 3: Janet Ivy DER License L9048/2017/1 Activities



Appendix 4: Enterprise DER License 8692/2012/1 Activities

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 5 - Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects

Native Vegetation Solutions Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects- November 2019

Prepared by: Native Vegetation Solutions PO Box 41 KALGOORLIE Ph: (08) 9021 5818 Mob: 0407 998 953 Email: [email protected]

Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the

Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects- November

2019

Prepared for

Norton Gold Fields Pty Ltd

FINAL V2.0 December 2019

mailto:[email protected]

Native Vegetation Solutions Page i Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects- November 2019

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 GEOLOGY AND VEGETATION ........................................................................................... 3 1.3 CLIMATE ........................................................................................................................ 3

1.3.1 Temperature ......................................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Rainfall .................................................................................................................. 4

2. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................... 6

2.1 PERSONNEL AND REPORTING ......................................................................................... 6 2.2 PRELIMINARY DESKTOP STUDY ....................................................................................... 6

2.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Protected Matters....... 6 2.2.2 Threatened Flora and Communities ...................................................................... 6 2.2.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Conservation Reserves .................. 6 2.2.4 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status ...................................................................... 6 2.2.5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................... 6 2.2.6 Dieback ................................................................................................................. 6

2.3 SITE INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................... 7 2.3.1 Licenses ................................................................................................................ 7 2.3.2 Field Methods ....................................................................................................... 7 2.3.3 Post-Field Methods ............................................................................................... 8 2.3.4 Mapping ................................................................................................................ 8 2.3.5 IBSA Data Package .............................................................................................. 8

2.4 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................. 9

3. RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 10

3.1 PRELIMINARY DESKTOP ASSESSMENT ........................................................................... 10 3.1.1 EPBC Act Protected Matters ............................................................................... 10 3.1.2 Threatened Flora and Communities .................................................................... 10 3.1.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas and Conservation Reserves ............................. 10 3.1.4 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status .................................................................... 10 3.1.5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................. 12 3.1.6 Dieback ............................................................................................................... 12

3.2 FIELD ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................... 12 3.2.1 Threatened Flora ................................................................................................. 12 3.2.2 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status .................................................................... 13 3.2.3 Non-Native Species ............................................................................................ 33 3.2.4 Vegetation Condition ........................................................................................... 33

4. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................... 34

5. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 35

6. GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................... 37

APPENDIX 1 RELEVANT GOVERNMENT DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS ....................... 40

APPENDIX 2 THREATENED FLORA DATABASES SEARCH RESULTS ............................ 51

APPENDIX 3 VEGETATION CONDITION SCALE (KEIGHERY, 1994) .................................. 54

APPENDIX 4 VEGETATION MAPPING.................................................................................. 56

APPENDIX 5 SPECIES LIST .................................................................................................. 61

Native Vegetation Solutions Page ii Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects- November 2019

Figures Figure 1: Regional map of survey location .................................................................................. 2 Figure 2: Mean temperature ranges for Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport weather station .................... 4 Figure 3: Monthly and mean rainfall for Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport weather station 2019 ........... 5 Figure 4: Chenopod Shrubland within the survey area ............................................................. 14 Figure 5: Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia woodland within the survey area ............................ 15 Figure 6: Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland within the survey area ............................................... 16 Figure 7: Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa shrubland within the survey area .............................. 17 Figure 8: Tecticornia Shrubland within the survey area ............................................................ 18 Figure 9: Creekline Vegetation within the survey area .............................................................. 19 Figure 10: Eucalyptus oleosa over Acacia ramulosa over sclerophyll shrubland within the survey area .......................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 11: Acacia acuminata shrubland on rocky outcrop within the survey area ..................... 21 Figure 12: Eremophila miniata shrubland within the survey area .............................................. 22 Figure 13: Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus gracilis over Tecticornia on rocky hill slopes within the survey area .............................................................................................................. 23 Figure 14: Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora over Tecticornia on quartz hill within the survey area .............................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 15: Acacia ramulosa and Acacia ligulata shrubland within the survey area .................... 25 Figure 16: Casuarina over sclerophyll shrubland within the survey area ................................... 26 Figure 17: Eucalyptus gracilis woodland within the survey area ............................................... 27 Figure 18: Eucalyptus ravida woodland over Tecticornia disarticulata shrubland within the survey area .............................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 19: Eucalyptus lesouefii woodland within the survey area ............................................. 29 Figure 20: Transitional Eucalyptus woodland within the survey area ........................................ 30 Figure 21: Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll shrubland on rocky hills within the survey area 31 Figure 22: Bare Salt-Lake within the survey area ..................................................................... 32

Tables Table 1: List of potential survey limitations ................................................................................. 9 Table 2: Summary of information regarding Pre-European and current vegetation extent of Vegetation Association 125 within the survey area ................................................................... 11 Table 3: Summary of information regarding Pre-European and current vegetation extent of Vegetation Association 468 within the survey area ................................................................... 11 Table 4: Summary of information regarding Pre-European and current vegetation extent of Vegetation Association 540 within the survey area ................................................................... 12 Table 5: Vegetation Group Summary ....................................................................................... 13

Native Vegetation Solutions Page 1 of 63 Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Projects- November 2019

1 INTRODUCTION

Norton Gold Fields Pty Ltd (Norton) operate the Paddington Operations, approximately 28km north of Kalgoorlie-Boulder. Norton proposes to develop the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Mining Projects, approximately 10.7km southwest of the Paddington Mill. Mining proposals are currently being prepared for these projects and will be submitted with the inclusion of this report. Norton commissioned Native Vegetation Solutions (NVS) to conduct a Reconnaissance Flora and Vegetation Survey of the project area. The survey area (approximately 948.38ha) lies within tenements M24/102, M24/155, M24/166, M24/172, M24/265, M24/302, M24/304 and M24/390. The survey area also lies within the Coolgardie Region (COO) of Western Australia (Figure 1). Actual disturbance footprints were not defined prior to the survey field work; however, clearing required within the boundary of the survey area was anticipated to be less than the total survey area. This report will encompass results of the reconnaissance flora and vegetation survey within the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Mining Project survey area.


Figure 1: Regional map of survey location


1.1 Objectives

The objective of this report is to document the results of the flora and vegetation component of a reconnaissance assessment conducted in accordance with:

• Environmental Factor Guideline- Flora and Vegetation (EPA, 2016); and • Technical Guidance- Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact

Assessment (EPA, 2016a). A reconnaissance assessment has two components: 1). Desktop study which includes a literature review and a search of the relevant databases; 2). Reconnaissance survey of the survey area to verify the desktop survey, to define

vegetation units present in the area, search for species of conservation significance and to determine potential sensitivity to impact.

As part of the reporting for the reconnaissance assessment, NVS has conducted a Flora and Vegetation Survey which includes broad-scale vegetation mapping and vegetation condition mapping of the survey area. The scope of work for the reconnaissance flora and vegetation survey was to: ▪ conduct a desktop study that includes a literature review and search of the relevant

databases; ▪ describe the vegetation associations in the survey area; ▪ prepare an inventory of species occurring in the survey area; ▪ identify any vegetation communities or flora species of conservation significance; ▪ Map broad-scale vegetation groups found within the survey area, including vegetation

condition; and ▪ provide recommendations, including the management of perceived impacts to flora and

vegetation within the survey area. 1.2 Geology and Vegetation

The survey area lies in the Coolgardie (COO) bioregion within the Eastern Goldfields (COO03) subregion which totals over 5.1 million hectares (CALM, 2002). The COO03 subregion lies on the Yilgarn Craton's 'Eastern Goldfields Terrains'. The relief is subdued and comprises of gently undulating plains interrupted in the west with low hills and ridges of Archaean greenstones and in the east by a horst of Proterozoic basic granulite. The underlying geology is of gneisses and granites eroded into a flat plane covered with tertiary soils and with scattered exposures of bedrock. Calcareous earths are the dominant soil group and cover much of the plains and greenstone areas. A series of large playa lakes in the western half are the remnants of an ancient major drainage line. The vegetation is of Mallees, Acacia thickets and shrubheaths on sandplains. Diverse Eucalyptus woodlands occur around salt lakes, on ranges, and in valleys. Salt lakes support dwarf shrublands of samphire. Woodlands and Dodonaea shrubland occur on basic graninulites of the Fraser Range. (CALM, 2002).

1.3 Climate

The climate is Arid to Semi-arid with 200-300 mm of rainfall, sometimes in summer but usually in winter (CALM, 2002). The nearest official meteorological weather station with the most complete and up to date information is Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport, which is located approximately 35 km southeast of the survey area. 1.3.1 Temperature Mean annual minimum temperature at Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport is 11.7°C and mean annual maximum temperature is 25.3°C. The coldest temperatures are attained in July (mean minimum temperature 5.1°C), the hottest is January (mean maximum temperature 33.7°C) and diurnal temperature variations are relatively consistent throughout the year (Figure 2).


Figure 2: Mean temperature ranges for Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport weather station

1.3.2 Rainfall The annual average rainfall at Kalgoorlie-Boulder is 266.9 mm, which falls (>1 mm) on an average of 39.9 days (BOM, 2019). Rainfall is relatively even throughout the year with slightly larger rainfall events occurring between the months of January and August (Figure 3). Prior to the survey in 2019, rainfall in April and June exceeded monthly averages, with April receiving almost double the average rainfall. March received no rainfall and August received similar rainfall to its’ monthly average (BOM, 2019).


Figure 3: Monthly and mean rainfall for Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport weather station 2019


2. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

2.1 Personnel and Reporting

The following personnel were involved in the Reconnaissance flora and vegetation survey: • Mr Eren Reid (BSc- Biological Science), Principal Botanist, Native Vegetation Solutions,

undertook the survey, vegetation mapping, data collation, field identification of flora, preparation and review of the report.

2.2 Preliminary Desktop Study

A preliminary assessment of the survey area and its potential constraints was undertaken by reviewing relevant government agency managed databases (Sections 2.2.1 to 2.2.6, and Appendices 1 & 2) and consulting with government agencies where necessary. The following sections provide a summary of desktop searches undertaken for the project. 2.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act Protected Matters The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) Protected Matters Search tool was utilised to provide results for matters of National Environmental Significance within the survey area using the survey area as the search criteria with a 2km buffer (DOTEE, 2019). (http://www.environment.gov.au/arcgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst-coordinate.jsf) 2.2.2 Threatened Flora and Communities The Threatened and Priority Flora Database managed by the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions (DBCA) was searched for threatened and priority flora within a 40km radial area of a supplied shapefile (Reference: 08-01217FL). The Threatened and Priority Ecological Communities (TECs and PECs) database was searched to determine the presence of PECs or TECs (Reference: 08-01217EC), with Geographic Information System (GIS) data supplied for assessment, within a 10km radial area of a supplied shapefile. 2.2.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Conservation Reserves The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER, 2019) Clearing Permit System Map Viewer was used to determine the location of any ESAs and Conservation Reserves (https://cps.der.wa.gov.au/main.html). 2.2.4 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status Vegetation extent and status data was sourced from the Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) report “Land-Use and Vegetation in Western Australia- National Land and Water Resources Audit Report” and its associated GIS file (Shepherd et al, 2002). This data comprises Beard’s Pre-European vegetation groups. DBCA's Statewide Vegetation Statistics (DBCA, 2019b) was also referenced for the current extent of Beard's Vegetation Groups. 2.2.5 Wetlands The potential of wetlands within the project area was determined by examining DWER’s Clearing Permit System Map Viewer (DWER, 2019). 2.2.6 Dieback Dieback is only considered a potential issue for the project if both the mean annual rainfall of the area is >400mm, and if the project area resides south of the 26th parallel (CALM, 2003).

http://www.environment.gov.au/arcgis-framework/apps/pmst/pmst-coordinate.jsf

https://cps.der.wa.gov.au/main.html


2.3 Site Investigation

A site visit of the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Mining Project area was carried out by Botanist Eren Reid from Native Vegetation Solutions on the 7th June 2019 and 5th November 2019 to examine the flora and vegetation groups contained within the survey area. A total of 24 hours was spent on site traversing the survey area, by Yamaha Viking and on foot. The survey was conducted in accordance with relevant EPA’s Statements and Guidelines (Section 1.1). The EPA uses the Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) as the largest unit for Environmental Impact Assessment decision making in relation to the conservation of biodiversity. Given the scale and nature of the proposed disturbance as well as the existing disturbance, and that the survey area is located within the Coolgardie (COO) IBRA region, a reconnaissance flora and vegetation survey was deemed adequate.

2.3.1 Licenses

Field work was conducted under the following Scientific Licenses • SL012445, held by Mr ER Reid with expiry 18/09/2019; and • FB62000171, held by Mr Eren Reid with expiry 08/10/2020

2.3.2 Field Methods

Prior to the field work, the aerial photography was examined and representative sample sites for relevés were chosen to provide coverage over all viable vegetation groups. In the field, these sites were visited and non-permanent 20 x 20m relevé sites established in appropriate locations, considering representativeness of the site to surrounding vegetation and vegetation boundaries. Relevé sites are represented in Appendix 4. Each relevé site was captured on a TwoNav Aventura GPS at ±4m accuracy, using Universal Transverse Mercator location on GDA94 datum. Digital photographs were taken of each representative vegetation group present in the survey area. Data collected at each relevé included:

• Photograph of representative vegetation group: • GPS Location: • Species Present; • Population Count/Estimate of Conservation Significant Flora (if present); • Disturbance Level; and • Vegetation Condition

Specimens of taxa not recognised by the Botanists were collected and pressed along with specimens of taxa recognised as, or thought to be, conservation-significant species. The condition of each relevé was assessed using the method developed by Keighery (1994). Definitions of the condition scale are presented in Appendix 3. Vegetation groups were mapped (section 2.4.4 below). Opportunistic sampling of plant taxa and vegetation group mapping was also utilised in the survey area between relevé sampling points, via wandering traverses. Smaller singular relevé sites were also utilised as opportunistic sample sites to collect flora specimens and assist in mapping vegetation groups.


All sample sites and GPS tracks are included in Appendix 4.

2.3.3 Post-Field Methods

Unknown specimens collected in the field were identified post field work by Eren Reid with reference to published keys, NVS’ reference herbarium and information published on Florabase (WAHERB, 2019). Species information was transferred into Microsoft Excel® worksheets representing presence/absence of species per vegetation group.

2.3.4 Mapping

Vegetation mapping was produced via GPS recorded information in the field, cross-referenced with vegetation descriptions made in the field, overlaid on aerial imagery of the survey area. The GPS utilized (TwoNav Aventura GPS) displayed aerial imagery, hence real-time mapping of vegetation groups was available during field work. Vegetation Health Condition was assessed in the field with reference to Keighery (1994). GPS tracks and waypoints recorded during field work are presented in Appendix 4.

2.3.5 IBSA Data Package

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) and Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) require Index of Biodiversity Surveys for Assessments (IBSA) Data Packages to be submitted to support assessment and compliance under the Environmental Protection Act 1986. An IBSA data package is a single file in .zip format, containing:

• one Metadata and Licensing Statement in .pdf format;

• one survey report in .pdf format;

• one plain-text survey report in .txt format; and

• a set of electronic data files, comprising: o one survey details spatial dataset in shapefile (.shp, etc.) or MapInfo (.tab, etc.)

format; and

o one or more survey data spatial datasets, as required, in shapefile (.shp, etc.) or MapInfo (.tab, etc.) format.


2.4 Limitations

Table 1 lists potential limitations that may have affected the survey. As shown, this survey was not limited by any factors listed below.

Table 1: List of potential survey limitations

Potential Limitations Constraint (Y/N) Comment Competency and experience of the consultants undertaking the survey

N

Mr Eren Reid is an experienced botanist who has conducted many flora and vegetation surveys in the Goldfields, Pilbara and South-west regions of WA.

Proportion of flora identified during survey

N

As the survey was planned to target species of conservation significance and flora within a known survey area, a complete census of the species present was attempted (Approx. 95%). Sufficient identifications were made to allow vegetation descriptions to be made.

Sources of information N

Threatened and Priority Flora GIS information was available from DBCA.

Proportion of the task achieved N All tasks completed Timing/Season

N

The targeted survey was conducted in Winter and Spring 2019. Conditions were slightly dry due to the lack of rain in January and February, however recent above average rainfalls for April, June and August encouraged enough flowering material of perennial plants for identification purposes.

Disturbance in survey area N Disturbance was present in the form of historic exploration.

Intensity of survey effort N

Transects were walked through the survey area with all parts visited

Resources N Adequate resources were available Access problems N No problems with access Availability of contextual information on the region N Information on the Coolgardie (COO)

Bioregion is readily available.


3. RESULTS

3.1 Preliminary Desktop Assessment

3.1.1 EPBC Act Protected Matters The EPBC Protected Matters search tool revealed that the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project survey area could possibly contain suitable habitat for the Threatened species Gastrolobium granitica (DOTEE, 2019). This species is known to occur only on granite outcrops. No granite outcrops were located during fieldwork; therefore, it is highly unlikely for this species to occur within the survey area. The search results also indicated the survey area may contain suitable habitat for the weed species Carrichtera annua (Ward’s Weed) (DOTEE, 2019). This species was not recorded within the survey area.

3.1.2 Threatened Flora and Communities The DBCA database searches revealed a potential for 2 Threatened and 49 Priority Flora species to occur within a 40km radius of the survey area (DBCA, 2017a). No known locations of these Flora occur within the survey area, while the closest location occurs approximately 1.9 km east of the survey area. Results of the threatened flora database search are included in Appendix 2. The PEC/TEC search (DBCA, 2017) revealed that there are no TECs or PECs in the survey area. 3.1.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas and Conservation Reserves

No ESA’s are located within the survey area (DWER, 2019 and DOTEE, 2019). 3.1.4 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status Three vegetation units defined by Beard (1990) were identified as part of the desktop assessment. The vegetation units identifiy the Pre-European extent of vegetation, as mapped by Beard (1990). Information relating to known Beard (1990) vegetation units within the survey area has been summarised in Tables 2, 3 and 4 below. This information has been compiled through both desktop assessments and the site visit.


Table 2: Summary of information regarding Pre-European and current vegetation extent of Vegetation Association 125 within the survey area

Factor Value Beard Vegetation Association*

125

Vegetation Association Description*

Bare areas; salt lakes

Pre-European Extent (ha)

Scale By Association (WA)

By Association (WA)

By IBRA Region (COO)

By IBRA Sub-region (COO03)

By Shire (City of Kalgoorlie-Boulder)

3,578,590* 3,485,785** 545,717** 303,090** 112,542** % Pre-European Extent Remaining

90.46%* 90.27%** 92.87%** 99.13%** 99.74%**

Surrounding Land Use***

Mining, Exploration, Pastoral Lease

Weed prevalence***

Low

* Source: Shepherd et al. (2002) Appendix 2 **Source: DBCA, (2019) ***Source: Field Assessment



468


Medium woodland; salmon gum & goldfields blackbutt



By Association (WA)




476,113* 592,022** 583,357** 482,361** 303,529** % Pre-European Extent Remaining

100.00%* 98.63%** 98.63%** 98.34%** 97.75%**



Weed prevalence***

Low





540


Succulent steppe with open low woodland; sheoak over saltbush



By Association (WA)




163,291* 202,423** 75,810** 75,810** 137,022** % Pre-European Extent Remaining

100.00%* 98.88%** 97.11%** 97.11%** 99.04%**



Weed prevalence***

Low


3.1.5 Wetlands An extension of White Flag Lake occurs in the lower section of the survey area (DWER, 2019). However, this is not a permanent wetland. White Flag Lake is a salt-lake receiving water from the regional surrounds after prolonged sporadical rainfall. This is not a permanent wetland and not a listed RAMSAR site. 3.1.6 Dieback The survey area lies south of the 26th parallel, however receives average annual rainfall of 267.7 mm, below the 400mm threshold mark. There is no record of Phytophthora cinnamomi establishing in natural ecosystems in regions receiving <400mm rainfall per annum (CALM, 2003). Therefore, Dieback is not considered an issue for this survey area, however all measures should be taken to prevent any possible soil contamination (seeds of non-native species etc.) which poses a risk in the survey area during seasonally favourable conditions. 3.2 Field Assessment

3.2.1 Threatened Flora No flora located in the survey area, are gazetted as Threatened pursuant to Section 5(1) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. No plant taxa listed as Threatened pursuant to Schedule 1 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 were located within the survey area. No Priority Flora were recorded in the Survey area.


3.2.2 Vegetation Type, Extent and Status A total of 28 Families, 58 Genera and 113 Species were recorded within the survey area. Eighteen major vegetation groups were recorded in the survey area and are in Degraded, Good or Very Good condition (using the scale of Keighery 1994, see Appendix 3). Existing disturbance within the survey is comprised of historic exploration. No unique or restricted vegetation communities were identified, and all vegetation types/communities are common, widespread and well represented in the Eastern Goldfields subregion. The summary of vegetation groups contained within the survey area is summarised in Table 5 below. Maps of the survey area can be seen in Appendix 4.

Table 5: Vegetation Group Summary

Vegetation Group Families Genera Species Area (ha) Percentage of Survey

Area (%)

Chenopod Shrubland 14 25 39 557.33 58.69%

Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia woodland 14 20 32 60.45 6.37%

Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland 13 19 19 1.95 0.21%

Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa shrubland 17 29 40 26.07 2.74%

Tecticornia Shrubland 11 15 21 73.21 7.71%

Creekline Vegetation 19 35 51 43.00 4.53%

Eucalyptus oleosa over Acacia ramulosa over sclerophyll shrubland

12 16 26 9.00 0.95%

Acacia acuminata shrubland on rocky outcrop 11 14 24 8.92 0.94%

Eremophila miniata shrubland 14 18 25 38.02 4.00%

Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus gracilis over Tecticornia on rocky hill slopes

15 22 36 14.19 1.49%

Bare salt-lake N/A N/A N/A 8.45 0.89%

Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora over Tecticornia on quartz hill

16 19 26 7.55 0.80%

Acacia ramulosa and Acacia ligulata shrubland 6 9 13 5.18 0.55%

Casuarina over sclerophyll shrubland 14 16 24 33.73 3.55%

Eucalyptus gracilis woodland 11 15 22 10.28 1.08%

Eucalyptus ravida woodland over Tecticornia disarticulata shrubland

9 11 14 9.58 1.01%

Eucalyptus lesouefii woodland 4 6 7 5.74 0.60%

Transitional Eucalyptus woodland 16 21 27 33.90 3.57%

Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll shrubland on rocky hills 13 15 18 3.05 0.32%

Total 28* 58* 113* 949.60# 100.00%#

Note: * Within total survey area (not sum of column) # Sum of column

The Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project vegetation groups are described in more detail below.


3.2.2.1 Chenopod Shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 14 Families, 25 Genera and 39 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 557.33 ha which makes up 58.69% of the survey area. Low Heath C (Muir, 1977) dominated by Maireana pyramidata, Atriplex vesicaria, Atriplex bunburyana, Lycium australe and Cratystylis subspinescens.

Figure 4: Chenopod Shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.2 Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia woodland This vegetation group consisted of 14 Families, 20 Genera and 32 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 60.45 ha which makes up 6.37% of the survey area. Open Woodland (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus salmonophloia over sclerophyll shrublands including Eremophila scoparia, Maireana pyramidata, Atriplex vesicaria, Ptilotus obovatus, Atriplex nummularia subsp. spathulata and Scaevola spinescens.

Figure 5: Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia woodland within the survey area


3.2.2.3 Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland This vegetation group consisted of 13 Families, 19 Genera and 19 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 1.95 ha which makes up 0.21% of the survey area. Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus griffithsii over a sclerophyll shrubland of Eremophila scoparia, Exocarpos aphyllus, Atriplex vesicaria, Maireana pyramidata, Cratystylis subspinescens and Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia.

Figure 6: Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland within the survey area


3.2.2.4 Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 17 Families, 29 Genera and 40 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 26.07 ha which makes up 2.74% of the survey area. Scrub (Muir, 1977) dominated by Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa over shrubland of Maireana pyramidata, Ptilotus obovatus, Solanum lasiophyllum, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia, Dodonaea lobulata and Enteropogon ramosus.

Figure 7: Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.5 Tecticornia Shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 11 Families, 15 Genera and 21 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 73.21 ha which makes up 7.71% of the survey area. Low Heath C (Muir, 1977) dominated by Tecticornia indica subsp. bidens, Tecticornia disarticulata, Carpobrotus modestus, Disphyma crassifolium subsp. clavellatum and Atriplex vesicaria.

Figure 8: Tecticornia Shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.6 Creekline Vegetation This vegetation group consisted of 19 Families, 35 Genera and 51 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 43.0 ha which makes up 4.53% of the survey area. Heath A (Muir, 1977) dominated by Melaleuca lateriflora over shrubland of Acacia ligulata, Cratystylis subspinescens, Atriplex vesicaria, Maireana pyramidata, Acacia tetragonophylla and Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima.

Figure 9: Creekline Vegetation within the survey area


3.2.2.7 Eucalyptus oleosa over Acacia ramulosa over sclerophyll shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 12 Families, 16 Genera and 26 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 9.00 ha which makes up 0.95% of the survey area. Open Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus oleosa subsp. oleosa, over a sparse shrubland of Acacia ramulosa subsp. ramulosa, Eremophila miniata, Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia, Atriplex nummularia subsp. spathulata, Cratystylis subspinescens and Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima.

Figure 10: Eucalyptus oleosa over Acacia ramulosa over sclerophyll shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.8 Acacia acuminata shrubland on rocky outcrop This vegetation group consisted of 11 Families, 14 Genera and 24 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 8.92 ha which makes up 0.94% of the survey area. Heath A (Muir, 1977) dominated by Acacia acuminata over Eremophila miniata, Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia, Atriplex nummularia subsp. spathulata, Cratystylis subspinescens and Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima.

Figure 11: Acacia acuminata shrubland on rocky outcrop within the survey area


3.2.2.9 Eremophila miniata shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 14 Families, 18 Genera and 25 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 38.02 ha which makes up 4.00% of the survey area. Low Scrub A (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eremophila miniata over Acacia tetragonophylla, Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima, Grevillea sarissa subsp. sarissa, Cratystylis subspinescens, Eremophila scoparia, Ptilotus obovatus and Solanum orbiculatum.

Figure 12: Eremophila miniata shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.10 Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus gracilis over Tecticornia on rocky hill slopes

This vegetation group consisted of 15 Families, 22 Genera and 36 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 14.19 ha which makes up 1.49% of the survey area. Open Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus gracilis over shrubland of Acacia kalgoorliensis, Grevillea sarissa subsp. sarissa, Eremophila scoparia, Eremophila oppositifolia subsp. angustifolia, Atriplex vesicaria, Scaevola spinescens, Tecticornia disarticulata and Tecticornia indica subsp. bidens.

Figure 13: Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus gracilis over Tecticornia on rocky hill slopes within the

survey area


3.2.2.11 Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora over Tecticornia on quartz hill This vegetation group consisted of 16 Families, 19 Genera and 26 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 7.55 ha which makes up 0.80% of the survey area. Dwarf Scrub C (Muir, 1977) dominated by Tecticornia disarticulata, Tecticornia indica subsp. bidens, Maireana glomerifolia, Frankenia interioris, Frankenia setosa and Dodonaea lobulata with occasional Casuarina pauper overstorey.

Figure 14: Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora over Tecticornia on quartz hill within the survey area


3.2.2.12 Acacia ramulosa and Acacia ligulata shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 6 Families, 9 Genera and 13 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 5.18 ha which makes up 0.55% of the survey area. Heath A (Muir, 1977) dominated by Acacia ramulosa subsp. ramulosa and Acacia ligulata over Maireana pyramidata, Atriplex bunburyana, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia, Atriplex vesicaria and Dodonaea lobulata.

Figure 15: Acacia ramulosa and Acacia ligulata shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.13 Casuarina over sclerophyll shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 14 Families, 16 Genera and 24 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 33.73 ha which makes up 3.55% of the survey area. Scrub (Muir, 1977) dominated by Casuarina pauper over Pittosporum angustifolia, Acacia tetragonophylla, Grevillea acuaria, Cratystylis subspinescens, Eremophila scoparia and Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia.

Figure 16: Casuarina over sclerophyll shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.14 Eucalyptus gracilis woodland This vegetation group consisted of 11 Families, 15 Genera and 22 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 10.28 ha which makes up 1.08% of the survey area. Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus gracilis over shrubland of Atriplex nummularia subsp. spathulata, Atriplex vesicaria, Eremophila scoparia, Acacia erinacea, Cratystylis microphylla and Ptilotus helichrysoides.

Figure 17: Eucalyptus gracilis woodland within the survey area


3.2.2.15 Eucalyptus ravida woodland over Tecticornia disarticulata shrubland This vegetation group consisted of 9 Families,11 Genera and 14 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 9.58 ha which makes up 1.01% of the survey area. Open Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus ravida over Tecticornia disarticulata, with occasional shrubs of Eremophila oppositifolia subsp. angustifolia, Acacia erinacea and Maireana pyramidata.

Figure 18: Eucalyptus ravida woodland over Tecticornia disarticulata shrubland within the survey area


3.2.2.16 Eucalyptus lesouefii woodland This vegetation group consisted of 4 Families, 6 Genera and 7 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 5.74 ha which makes up 0.60% of the survey area. Open Low Woodland A (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus lesouefii over Eremophila scoparia, Maireana glomerifolia, Ptilotus helichrysoides and Tecticornia disarticulata.

Figure 19: Eucalyptus lesouefii woodland within the survey area


3.2.2.17 Transitional Eucalyptus woodland This vegetation group consisted of 16 Families, 21 Genera and 27 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 33.90 ha which makes up 3.57% of the survey area. Low Forest A (Muir, 1977) dominated by numerous Eucalyptus species over sclerophyll shrubland of Pimelea microcephala subsp. microcephala, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia, Eremophila scoparia, Exocarpos aphyllus, Cratystylis microphylla, Scaevola spinescens and Maireana sedifolia.

Figure 20: Transitional Eucalyptus woodland within the survey area


3.2.2.18 Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll shrubland on rocky hills This vegetation group consisted of 13 Families, 15 Genera and 18 Species. The vegetation group was approximately 3.05 ha which makes up 0.32% of the survey area. Open Tree Mallee (Muir, 1977) dominated by Eucalyptus gracilis, over sclerophyll shrubland of Scaevola spinescens, Acacia erinacea, Grevillea acuaria, Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia, Eremophila oppositifolia subsp. angustifolia, Eremophila parvifolia subsp. auricampa and Olearia muelleri.

Figure 21: Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll shrubland on rocky hills within the survey area


3.2.2.19 Bare Salt-Lake This area contained no flora species. The bare salt-lake was approximately 8.45 ha which makes up 0.89% of the survey area.

Figure 22: Bare Salt-Lake within the survey area


3.2.3 Non-Native Species Several non-native species were recorded within the survey area. Non-native species recorded were Centaurea melitensis (Maltese Cockspur), Asphodelus fistulosus (Onion Weed), Xanthium spinosum (DP) (Bathurst Burr), Salvia verbenaca (Wild Sage) and Lysimachia arvensis (Pimpernel). Of the weed species above, only Xanthium spinosum is a Declared Pest s22(2) according to DPIRD (2019). This species has a control category of C3, according to the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007 (BAM Act), which means that the organism should have some form of management applied that will alleviate the harmful impact of the organism, reduce the numbers or distribution of the organism or prevent or contain the spread of the organism. 3.2.4 Vegetation Condition Evidence of historic exploration was observed during the field assessment. Overall, the condition of the vegetation was determined to be “Good” with areas which were affected by historic exploration in “Degraded” condition, whilst undisturbed areas were in “Very Good” condition. A map of the vegetation condition within the survey is depicted in Appendix 4.

https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/bam/biosecurity-and-agriculture-management-western-australia

https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/bam/biosecurity-and-agriculture-management-western-australia


4. DISCUSSION

A total of 28 Families, 58 Genera and 113 Species were recorded within the survey area. Eighteen major vegetation groups were recorded in the survey area. The field assessment established that the condition of the vegetation in the proposed disturbance area is overall “Good”, with certain areas affected by historical exploration in “Degraded” condition, and undisturbed areas in “Very Good” condition. No areas of vegetation were assessed to be in “Pristine” condition. Five non-native species were recorded the survey area. No Threatened Flora, TECs or PECs were recorded in the survey area. No Priority Flora were recorded within the survey area. No unique or restricted vegetation communities were identified, and all vegetation types/communities are common, widespread and well represented in the Eastern Goldfields subregion. Any proposed disturbance/clearing of vegetation will result in a loss of species. However, given the size of the area and the extent of the Beard (1990) vegetation association elsewhere, the impact on the vegetation and its component flora will not affect the conservation values of either, or create fragmentation or patches of remnant vegetation. The following recommendations arise from the reconnaissance flora survey:

• Weed control measures should be implemented during and following earthworks. • Dust control measures should be implemented during earthworks.


5. REFERENCES

Beard, J.S., (1990), Plant Life of Western Australia, Kangaroo Press Pty Ltd, NSW BOM, (2019), Climate Data Online, Bureau of Meteorology, http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/ Accessed: 06/12/2019) CALM, (2002), A Biodiversity Audit of Western Australia’s 53 Biogeographical Subregions in 2002- Coolgardie (COO03 – Eastern Goldfields synopsis), Department of Conservation and Land Management CALM, (2003), Phytophthora cinnamomi and Diseases Caused by It, Volume 1-Management Guidelines, Department of Conservation and Land Management http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/images/documents/conservation-management/pests-diseases/disease-risk-areas/Phytophthora_cinnamomi_and_disease_caused_by_it-_Vol._1_Management_Guidelines_.pdf Accessed: 17/12/2019 DBCA, (2017), TEC/PEC Database Results Ref:08-01217EC, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions DBCA, (2017), Threatened Flora Database Results Ref: 08-01217FL, Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions DBCA, (2019), 2018 Statewide Vegetation Statistics incorporating the CAR Reserve Analysis (Full Report)- Current as of March 2019, WA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Perth https://catalogue.data.wa.gov.au/dataset/dbca-statewide-vegetation-statistics Accessed: 17/12/2019 DOTEE (2019), Protected Matters Search Tool, Department of the Environment and Energy http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/protected-matters-search-tool Accessed: 06/12/2019 DWER, (2019), Clearing Permit System Map Viewer, Department of Water and Environmental Regulation https://cps.der.wa.gov.au/main.html Accessed: 06/12/2019 EPA, (2016), Environmental Factor Guideline: Flora and Vegetation, Environmental Protection Authority, Western Australia EPA (2016a), Technical Guidance- Flora and Vegetation Surveys for Environmental Impact Assessment, Environmental Protection Authority, Western Australia Keighery, B.J., (1994), Bushland Plant Survey; A guide to plant community survey for the Community, Wildflower Society of Western Australia (Inc.) Nedlands Muir, B.G. (1977), Biological Survey of the Western Australian Wheatbelt. Pt. 2. Vegetation and habitat of the Bendering Reserve. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement 3. Shepherd, D.P., Beeston, G.R., and A.J.M. Hopkins, (2002), Land-Use and Vegetation in Western Australia- National Land and Water Resources Audit Report, Technical Report 250, Department of Agriculture Western Australia

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/

http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/images/documents/conservation-management/pests-diseases/disease-risk-areas/Phytophthora_cinnamomi_and_disease_caused_by_it-_Vol._1_Management_Guidelines_.pdf



https://catalogue.data.wa.gov.au/dataset/dbca-statewide-vegetation-statistics

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/protected-matters-search-tool

https://cps.der.wa.gov.au/main.html


WAHERB, (2019), Florabase- the Western Australian Flora, http://florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au/ Accessed 17/12/2019

http://florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au/


6. GLOSSARY

Acronyms: BOM Bureau of Meteorology, Australian Government BSc Bachelor of Science CALM Department of Conservation and Land Management (now DBCA) COO Coolgardie Bioregion (IBRA) COO03 Eastern Goldfields Subregion (IBRA) CPS Clearing Permit System (DWER) DBCA Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Western Australia DMIRS Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety, Western Australia DOTEE Department of the Environment and Energy, Australian Government DPAW Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australia (now DBCA) DPIRD Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia DRF Declared Rare Flora (now classed as Threatened Flora) DWER Department of Water and Environmental Regulation, Western Australia EPA Environmental Protection Authority, Western Australia EP Act Environmental Protection Act 1986, Western Australia EPBC Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth Act) ESA Environmentally Sensitive Area GIS Geographical Information System ha Hectare (10,000 square metres) IBRA Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia, DOTEE IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources – commonly known as the

World Conservation Union km Kilometres m Metres NVS Native Vegetation Solutions PEC Priority Ecological Community, Western Australia Ramsar A wetland site designated of international importance under the Ramsar Convention (UNESCO) TEC Threatened Ecological Community UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization WA Western Australia WAHERB Western Australian Herbarium (DBCA) Definitions: {DBCA (2019) Conservation Codes for Western Australian Flora and Fauna. Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Western Australia, January 2019}: - T Threatened species:

Listed by order of the Minister as Threatened in the category of critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable under section 19(1), or is a rediscovered species to be regarded as threatened species under section 26(2) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act). Threatened fauna is that subset of ‘Specially Protected Fauna’ listed under schedules 1 to 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for Threatened Fauna. Threatened flora is that subset of ‘Rare Flora’ listed under schedules 1 to 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for Threatened Flora. The assessment of the conservation status of these species is based on their national extent and ranked according to their level of threat using IUCN Red List categories and criteria as detailed below.

CR Critically endangered species

Threatened species considered to be “facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”. Listed as critically endangered under section 19(1)(a) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 20 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for critically endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for critically endangered flora.

EN Endangered species

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramsar_Convention


Threatened species considered to be “facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”. Listed as endangered under section 19(1)(b) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 21 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 2 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for endangered flora.

VU Vulnerable species

Threatened species considered to be “facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”. Listed as vulnerable under section 19(1)(c) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 22 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for vulnerable fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for vulnerable flora.

Extinct species:

Listed by order of the Minister as extinct under section 23(1) of the BC Act as extinct or extinct in the wild. EX Extinct species

Species where “there is no reasonable doubt that the last member of the species has died”, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 24 of the BC Act). Published as presumed extinct under schedule 4 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for extinct fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for extinct flora.

EW Extinct in the wild species

Species that “is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalised population well outside its past range; and it has not been recorded in its known habitat or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite surveys over a time frame appropriate to its life cycle and form”, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 25 of the BC Act). Currently there are no threatened fauna or threatened flora species listed as extinct in the wild. If listing of a species as extinct in the wild occurs, then a schedule will be added to the applicable notice.

Specially protected species

Listed by order of the Minister as specially protected under section 13(1) of the BC Act. Meeting one or more of the following categories: species of special conservation interest; migratory species; cetaceans; species subject to international agreement; or species otherwise in need of special protection. Species that are listed as threatened species (critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable) or extinct species under the BC Act cannot also be listed as Specially Protected species.

MI Migratory species

Fauna that periodically or occasionally visit Australia or an external Territory or the exclusive economic zone; or the species is subject of an international agreement that relates to the protection of migratory species and that binds the Commonwealth; and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 15 of the BC Act). Includes birds that are subject to an agreement between the government of Australia and the governments of Japan (JAMBA), China (CAMBA) and The Republic of Korea (ROKAMBA), and fauna subject to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention), an environmental treaty under the United Nations Environment Program. Migratory species listed under the BC Act are a subset of the migratory animals, that are known to visit Western Australia, protected under the international agreements or treaties, excluding species that are listed as Threatened species. Published as migratory birds protected under an international agreement under schedule 5 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

CD Species of special conservation interest (conservation dependent fauna)


Fauna of special conservation need being species dependent on ongoing conservation intervention to prevent it becoming eligible for listing as threatened, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 14 of the BC Act). Published as conservation dependent fauna under schedule 6 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

OS Other specially protected species Fauna otherwise in need of special protection to ensure their conservation, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 18 of the BC Act). Published as other specially protected fauna under schedule 7 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

P Priority Species Possibly threatened species that do not meet survey criteria, or are otherwise data deficient, are added to the Priority Fauna or Priority Flora Lists under Priorities 1, 2 or 3. These three categories are ranked in order of priority for survey and evaluation of conservation status so that consideration can be given to their declaration as threatened fauna or flora. Species that are adequately known, are rare but not threatened, or meet criteria for near threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened species or other specially protected fauna lists for other than taxonomic reasons, are placed in Priority 4. These species require regular monitoring. Assessment of Priority codes is based on the Western Australian distribution of the species, unless the distribution in WA is part of a contiguous population extending into adjacent States, as defined by the known spread of locations.

Priority 1: Poorly-known species Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less) which are potentially at risk. All occurrences are either: very small; or on lands not managed for conservation, e.g. agricultural or pastoral lands, urban areas, road and rail reserves, gravel reserves and active mineral leases; or otherwise under threat of habitat destruction or degradation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under immediate threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey.

Priority 2: Poorly-known species Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less), some of which are on lands managed primarily for nature conservation, e.g. national parks, conservation parks, nature reserves and other lands with secure tenure being managed for conservation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey.

Priority 3: Poorly-known species Species that are known from several locations, and the species does not appear to be under imminent threat, or from few but widespread locations with either large population size or significant remaining areas of apparently suitable habitat, much of it not under imminent threat. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from several locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and known threatening processes exist that could affect them. Such species are in need of further survey.

Priority 4: Rare, Near Threatened and other species in need of monitoring (a) Rare. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed, or for which sufficient knowledge is available, and that are considered not currently threatened or in need of special protection but could be if present circumstances change. These species are usually represented on conservation lands. (b) Near Threatened. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed and that are close to qualifying for vulnerable but are not listed as Conservation Dependent. (c) Species that have been removed from the list of threatened species during the past five years for reasons other than taxonomy.


Appendix 1

Relevant Government Database Search Results










DWER’s Clearing Permit System Map Viewer showing no ESA’s (dark green shaded areas) within the survey area (DWER, 2019)

Survey Location


DWER Clearing Permit System Map Viewer showing an extension of White Flag Lake in the lower section of the survey area (DWER, 2019)

Survey Location


Appendix 2

Threatened Flora Databases Search Results


GIS information provided in the Search results (Reference: 08-01217FL) listed the following species within a 40km radius of the survey area:

Taxon Status Distribution Flowering Period

Acacia coatesii 1 Coolgardie

Acacia crenulata 3

Southern Cross, Carrabin, Bullabulling, Walyahmoning Rock, Chiddarcooping, Sandford Rocks N.R., Marvel Loch Sep-Oct

Acacia epedunculata 1

Acacia websteri 1 Bencubbin, Coolgardie -

Alyxia tetanifolia 3

Angianthus prostratus 3

Atriplex lindleyi subsp. conduplicata 3

Baeckea sp. Gnarlbine Rocks (G. Barrett GRH469) 1 Gnarlbine Rocks, Coolgardie Oct

Banksia lullfitzii 3 Southern Cross, Frank Hann N.P., Coolgardie, Mt Manning Range, Ravensthorpe Mar-May

Bossiaea concinna 3 Cunderdin, Woolgangie, Coolgardie, Lake Mason Stn, Jerramungup, Pithara Sep,Oct

Chrysocephalum apiculatum subsp. norsemanense 3 Norseman, Fraser Range, Coolgardie, Boorabbin N.P., Walling Rock Stn.

Cryptandra crispula 3 Lake Lefroy, Bullabulling, Karonie, Fraser Range Jul-Sep

Cyathostemon verrucosus 3

Dampiera plumosa 1 Sandstone, Coolgardie, Lake Barlee Oct

Diocirea acutifolia 3 Coolgardie, Kambala, Widgiemooltha Nov-Dec

Diocirea microphylla 3 Bullabulling, Gibraltar, Maggie Hays Hill, Lake Johnston Dec

Elachanthus pusillus 2

Eleocharis papillosa 3

Eremophila caerulea subsp. merrallii 4

Eremophila mirabilis 2 Niagara, Morapoi, Kookynie, Woolgorong, Menzies Aug-Sep

Eremophila praecox 1 Five Mile Hill, (Kurrawang), Kalgoorlie, Kanowna Belle

Aug-Sep,Dec

Eremophila veronica 3 Queen Victoria Rock, Coolgardie Oct-Nov

Eucalyptus crucis subsp. crucis T Westonia, Southern Cross, Burracoppin, Ora Banda Dec-Mar

Eucalyptus jutsonii subsp. jutsonii 4 Comet Vale, Binti Rocks, Menzies, Jeedamya Stn Nov

Eucalyptus websteriana subsp. norsemanica 1 Norseman, Coolgardie -

Eucalyptus x brachyphylla 4

Frankenia glomerata 4

Gastrolobium graniticum T Coolgardie,Gnamma Hill,Narembeen,Yellowdine, Bullabulling Aug-Nov

Gompholobium cinereum 3

Gunniopsis propinqua 3 Laverton, Mt Margaret, Lake Carnegie, Windidda, Mt Eureka, Mt James, Menzies Aug-Sep

Hakea rigida 2

Lepidium fasciculatum 3

Melaleuca coccinea 3

Melichrus sp. Coolgardie (K.R. Newbey 8698) 1 Coolgardie

Notisia intonsa 3

Gibraltar, Boorabbin, Dundas, Ravenshtorpe, North Ironcap, Ora Banda, Lake Cowan, Parker Range Sep

Persoonia leucopogon 1 Between Coolgardie & Laverton, Comet Vale (Menzies) -

Phebalium appressum 1

Philotheca coateana 3 Menzies, Gidgee, Cashmere Downs, Walling Rock Aug-Oct

Phlegmatospermum eremaeum 3

Coolgardie, Norseman, Cocklebiddy, Forrest, Bruce Rock, Helena and Aurora Range, Caiguna Aug-Oct

Psammomoya ephedroides 3 Toolonga N.R., Kalbarri, Woolgorong, Mount Gibson, Coolgardie, Albany

Ptilotus chortophytus 1

Ptilotus procumbens 1

Ptilotus rigidus 1

Rhagodia sp. Yeelirrie Station (K.A. Shepherd et al. KS 1396) 1

Ricinocarpos sp. Eastern Goldfields (A. Williams 3) 1

Rumex crystallinus 2


Taxon Status Distribution Flowering Period

Styphelia sp. Bullfinch (M. Hislop 3574) 3 Jackson Range, Bullfinch, Koolyanobbing, Bullabulling, Diemals Stn. Apr-May

Thryptomene eremaea 2 Menzies, Queen Victoria Spring, Comet Vale, Edjudina Station, Kirgella Rocks Jul-Sep

Thryptomene sp. Coolgardie (E. Kelso s.n. 1902) 1 Coolgardie

Thryptomene sp. Londonderry (R.H. Kuchel 1763) 1 Coolgardie, Kambalda

Xanthoparmelia dayiana 3


Appendix 3

Vegetation Condition Scale (Keighery, 1994)



Appendix 4

Vegetation Mapping






Appendix 5

Species List


Family Genus Species A, P, NN Chenopod Shrubland

Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia

woodland

Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland

Acacia ramulosa

var. ramulosa shrubland

Tecticornia Shrubland

Creekline Vegetation

Eucalyptus oleosa over

Acacia ramulosa

over sclerophyll shrubland

Acacia acuminata

shrubland on rocky outcrop

Eremophila miniata

shrubland

Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus

gracilis over Tecticornia on

rocky hill slopes

Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora

over Tecticornia on

quartz hill

Acacia ramulosa and

Acacia ligulata

shrubland

Casuarina over

sclerophyll shrubland

Eucalyptus gracilis

woodland

Eucalyptus ravida

woodland over Tecticornia

disarticulata shrubland

Eucalyptus lesouefii

woodland

Transitional Eucalyptus woodland

Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll

shrubland on rocky hills

Aizoaceae Carpobrotus modestus P * *

Aizoaceae Disphyma crassifolium subsp. clavellatum P * * * * *

Aizoaceae Gunniopsis quadrifida P * *

Amaranthaceae Ptilotus drummondii P *

Amaranthaceae Ptilotus helichrysoides P * * *

Amaranthaceae Ptilotus obovatus P * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Apocynaceae Alyxia buxifolia P * *

Apocynaceae Marsdenia australis P * * * * *

Asparagaceae Thysanotus manglesianus P *

Asphodelaceae Asphodelus fistulosus* A, NN *

Asteraceae Brachyscome ciliaris A *

Asteraceae Centaurea melitensis* A, NN *

Asteraceae Cratystylis microphylla P * * * * * *

Asteraceae Cratystylis subspinescens P * * * * * * * * * * * *

Asteraceae Olearia muelleri P * * * *

Asteraceae Pterocaulon sphacelatum P * *

Asteraceae Xanthium spinosum* A, NN *

Boraginaceae Heliotropium curassavicum A *

Casuarinaceae Casuarina pauper P * * * * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex bunburyana P * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex codonocarpa A * * *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex lindleyi subsp. inflata A *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex nummularia subsp. spathulata P * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex stipitata P * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Atriplex vesicaria P * * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium gaudichaudianum P *

Chenopodiaceae Dissocarpus paradoxus P *

Chenopodiaceae Enchylaena tomentosa var. tomentosa P * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Eriochiton sclerolaenoides P *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana amoena P * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana georgei P * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana glomerifolia P * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana planifolia P *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana platycarpa P *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana pyramidata P * * * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana sedifolia P * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana tomentosa P * * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Maireana triptera P * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Rhagodia drummondii P *

Chenopodiaceae Rhagodia eremaea P * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena cuneata P * * *

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena densiflora P * *

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena diacantha P * * *

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena eriacantha P * * *

Chenopodiaceae Sclerolaena patenticuspis P * * *

Chenopodiaceae Tecticornia disarticulata P * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Tecticornia indica subsp. bidens P * * * * * *

Chenopodiaceae Tecticornia pergranulata subsp. pergranulata P *

Fabaceae Acacia acuminata P * * * * *

Fabaceae Acacia aneura P *

Fabaceae Acacia caesaneura P *

Fabaceae Acacia erinacea P * * * *

Fabaceae Acacia kalgoorliensis P * * * *

Fabaceae Acacia ligulata P * * *

Fabaceae Acacia ramulosa var. ramulosa P * * * *

Fabaceae Acacia tetragonophylla P * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Fabaceae Senna artemisioides subsp. artemisioides P * * * * *

Fabaceae Senna artemisioides subsp. filifolia P * * * * *

Frankeniaceae Frankenia interioris P * * * *

Frankeniaceae Frankenia pauciflora P * * * *

Frankeniaceae Frankenia setosa P * * * * *

Goodeniaceae Scaevola spinescens P * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hemerocallidaceae Dianella revoluta var. divaricata P *

Lamiaceae Salvia verbenaca* P, NN *

Lamiaceae Teucrium teucriiflorum P * *

Loranthaceae Amyema gibberula var. gibberula P *

Malvaceae Brachychiton gregorii P *


Family Genus Species A, P, NN Chenopod Shrubland

Open Eucalyptus salmonophloia

woodland

Eucalyptus griffithsii woodland

Acacia ramulosa

var. ramulosa shrubland

Tecticornia Shrubland

Creekline Vegetation

Eucalyptus oleosa over

Acacia ramulosa

over sclerophyll shrubland

Acacia acuminata

shrubland on rocky outcrop

Eremophila miniata

shrubland

Eucalyptus salubris and Eucalyptus

gracilis over Tecticornia on

rocky hill slopes

Casuarina pauper and Melaleuca lateriflora

over Tecticornia on

quartz hill

Acacia ramulosa and

Acacia ligulata

shrubland

Casuarina over

sclerophyll shrubland

Eucalyptus gracilis

woodland

Eucalyptus ravida

woodland over Tecticornia

disarticulata shrubland

Eucalyptus lesouefii

woodland

Transitional Eucalyptus woodland

Eucalyptus gracilis over sclerophyll

shrubland on rocky hills

Malvaceae Sida calyxhymenia P *

Montiaceae Calandrinia eremaea A * * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus gracilis P * * * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus griffithsii P *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus lesouefii P * * * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus oleosa subsp. oleosa P * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus ravida P * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus salmonophloia P * * * * *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus salubris P *

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus yilgarnensis P *

Myrtaceae Melaleuca lateriflora P * * *

Pittosporaceae Pittosporum angustifolium P * * *

Poaceae Aristida contorta A * * * * *

Poaceae Austrostipa elegantissima P * * * * * *

Poaceae Austrostipa nitida P * *

Poaceae Cymbopogon ambiguus P *

Poaceae Enneapogon caerulescens P * * * *

Poaceae Enteropogon ramosus P * * * * * *

Poaceae Eragrostis australasica P *

Poaceae Eragrostis dielsii A * * * *

Primulaceae Lysimachia arvensis* A, NN *

Proteaceae Grevillea acuaria P * * * * * *

Proteaceae Grevillea sarissa subsp. sarissa P * *

Proteaceae Hakea preissii P * * * *

Santalaceae Exocarpos aphyllus P * * * * * * * *

Santalaceae Santalum spicatum P * *

Sapindaceae Alectryon oleifolius subsp. canescens P * * * * *

Sapindaceae Dodonaea lobulata P * * * * * * * * * * * *

Sapindaceae Dodonaea viscosa subsp. angustissima P * * * * * * * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila alternifolia P * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila decipiens subsp. decipiens P * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila glabra subsp. glabra P * * * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila granitica P *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila granitica P * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila longifolia P *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila miniata P *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila miniata P * * * * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila oldfieldii subsp. angustifolia P * * * * * * * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila oppositifolia subsp. angustifolia P * * * *

Scrophulariaceae Eremophila scoparia P * * * * * * * * * * *

Solanaceae Duboisia hopwoodii P *

Solanaceae Lycium australe P * * * * * * *

Solanaceae Solanum lasiophyllum P * * * * * * * *

Solanaceae Solanum orbiculatum subsp. orbiculatum P * * * *

Thymelaeaceae Pimelea microcephala subsp. microcephala P * * * * * * * * *

Zygophyllaceae Roepera eremaea A *

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 6 – L1 Fauna Assessment Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

1

Level 1 fauna assessment for the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel project

areas

Version 1. August 2019

Prepared for:

Native Vegetation Solutions PO Box 41 Kalgoorlie, WA 6430

By: Terrestrial Ecosystems 10 Houston Place Mt Claremont WA 6010

ii

RECORD OF DISTRIBUTION

No. of copies Report File Name Report Status Date Prepared for: Initials Electronic 2019-0036-002-st-V1 Draft 14 August 2019 Native Vegetation Solutions ST Electronic 2019-0036-002-st-V1 Final 20 August 2019 Native Vegetation Solutions ST

Suggested citation: Terrestrial Ecosystems (2019) Level 1 fauna assessment for the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel project areas. Unpublished report for Native Vegetation Solutions, Perth.

DISCLAIMER

This document is prepared in accordance with and subject to an agreement between Terrestrial Ecosystems and the client, Native Vegetation Solutions. It has been prepared and is restricted to those issues that have been raised by the client in its engagement of Terrestrial Ecosystems and prepared using the standard of skill and care ordinarily exercised by environmental scientists in the preparation of such reports.

Persons or agencies that rely on or use this document for purposes or reasons other than those agreed by Terrestrial Ecosystems and its client without first obtaining prior consent, do so at their own risk and Terrestrial Ecosystems 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.

Front Cover: Fauna habitats in the project area

iii

Contents 1 Introduction 1

1.1 Background 1 1.2 Project objectives and scope of works 1

2 Existing Environment 2 2.1 Location of project area 2 2.2 Land use history 2 2.3 Climate 2 2.4 Regional biological fauna context of project area 3

2.4.1 Fauna species at risk 4 3 Methodology 5

3.1 Database searches 5 3.2 Site Inspection and fauna habitat assessment 5 3.3 Survey and reporting staff 7 3.4 Taxonomy and nomenclature 7 3.5 Limitations 7

4 Results 9 4.1 Fauna habitat 9 4.2 Bioregional vertebrate fauna assemblage 11 4.3 Conservation significant fauna 14

5 Discussion 19 5.1 Adequacy of the fauna survey data for fauna habitats represented in the project area 19

5.1.1 Amphibians 19 5.1.2 Reptiles 19 5.1.3 Birds 19 5.1.4 Mammals 20

5.2 Biodiversity value of the project area 20 5.2.1 Ecological functional value at the ecosystem level 20 5.2.2 Maintenance of threatened ecological communities 20 5.2.3 Condition of fauna habitat 20 5.2.4 Ecological linkages 20 5.2.5 Size and scale of the proposed disturbance 21 5.2.6 Abundance and distribution of similar habitat in the adjacent areas 21 5.2.7 Potential impacts on ecosystem function 21

6 Potential environmental impacts 22 6.1 Direct impacts 22

6.1.1 Animal deaths during the clearing process and displacement of fauna 22 6.1.2 Reduction or loss of activity areas and closure of burrows 22

6.2 Indirect impacts 22 6.2.1 Habitat fragmentation 23 6.2.2 Introduced fauna and weeds 23 6.2.3 Road fauna deaths 23 6.2.4 Fire 23 6.2.5 Anthropogenic activity 24 6.2.6 Dust 24 6.2.7 Uncapped drill holes 24 6.2.8 Rehabilitation of cleared areas 24

7 Risk assessment 25 7.1 Native vegetation clearing principles as they pertain to vertebrate fauna 27 7.2 Referral under the EPBC Act 27

8 Summary 28 9 Management Strategies 29

9.1 Induction and awareness 29 9.2 Dust 29 9.3 Minimising secondary impacts to the habitat 29 9.4 Uncapped drill holes 29 9.5 Road fauna deaths 30

10 References 31

iv

Chart 1. Climate averages for Kalgoorlie Plates 1. Open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods 2. Open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods 3. Mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods 4. Mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods 5. Eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities 6. Eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities Tables 1. Fauna survey limitations and constraints 2. Birds potentially found near of the project area 3. Amphibians potentially found near of the project area 4. Mammals potentially found near the project area 5. Reptiles potentially found near the project area 6. Assessment of the potential presence of a conservation significant fauna species in the project area 7. Fauna impact risk assessment descriptors 8. Levels of acceptable risk 9. A risk assessment of the impact of ground disturbance activity on fauna 10. Assessment of impact using the Native Vegetation Clearing Principles

Figures 1. Regional location 2. Habitat assessment locations Appendices A. Results of the EPBC Act national protected matters search B. Vertebrate fauna recorded in biological surveys in the region C. Definitions of Significant Fauna under the WA Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Priority

Species D. Fauna Habitat Assessment Results

v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Norton Gold Fields Limited (Norton) is planning to undertake exploration and mining activities across its Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel project areas which are near existing mining operations in the Goldfields of Western Australia (i.e. project areas). The project areas are approximately 35km north of Kalgoorlie and approximately 15km south-west of Broad Arrow on the Goldfields Highway (Figure 1).

The total assessed area was approximately 984ha but only a portion of this will be disturbed. There are three broad fauna habitats in the project area:

• open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods; • mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods; and • eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities.

In additional there were other areas that were completely degraded or cleared of fauna habitat. The density of trees and shrubs in the relatively undisturbed areas varied across the project areas but were mostly sparse. As a consequence, fauna habitats vary from highly degraded to good, with the majority showing high levels of degradation; the more degraded areas are due to recent exploration activity and cattle grazing. There are a few access tracks in the area, but these are narrow and mostly only wheel tracks which do not overly impact on fauna habitat.

The area has been grazed by cattle with many areas showing obvious degradation (i.e. cattle tracks, chewed bushes and shrubs, etc). There was extensive evidence of rabbits and other feral fauna in the area.

Potential impacts on vertebrate fauna associated with clearing vegetation in the project areas in a landscape or bioregional context are likely to be low as there are vast tracts of similar habitat in adjacent areas.

The proposed exploration and mining developments are unlikely to significantly impact on a conservation significant species, so a referral under the EPBC Act is not recommended.

It is recommended that: • an induction program that includes a component on managing fauna is a mandatory component of

working on the project; • the impact of dust on adjacent vegetation and fauna habitat is managed in accordance with Norton’s

Environmental Management System; • pets are not permitted on site; • all waste and rubbish be contained in bins and regularly removed from site or buried so it is unavailable

to pest and feral species; • feeding of native fauna should be actively discouraged; • a feral and pest animal management program is implemented to reduce the predation risk on native fauna.

This program needs to be undertaken in collaboration with the landowner, pastoralist and neighbouring tenement holders and concentrate on reducing the impacts of cats, foxes, wild dogs and rabbits;

• drill holes are capped and rehabilitated in accordance with Department of Mines, Industry, Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) requirements, along with associated reporting and auditing;

• speed limits are implemented and enforced on-site. These should be determined based on the quality and condition of the roads, but be a maximum of 80km/h; and

• signage is erected to indicate the maximum travelling speeds and the possible presence of wildlife crossing roads.

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Norton Gold Fields Limited (Norton) is planning to undertake exploration and mining activities across the Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel project areas which are near existing mining operations in the Goldfields (i.e. project area). The project areas are approximately 35km north of Kalgoorlie and approximately 15km south-west of Broad Arrow on the Goldfields Highway (Figure 1). The total assessed area was approximately 984ha but only a portion of this will be disturbed.

1.2 Project objectives and scope of works

Terrestrial Ecosystems was commissioned by Native Vegetation Solutions on behalf of Norton to undertake a Level 1 vertebrate fauna risk assessment and search of the project areas for Malleefowl and their mounds. The purpose of this Level 1 fauna risk assessment was to provide information to the Department of Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety (DMIRS) and/or the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) on the potential impacts on the vertebrate fauna assemblage in the project areas to enable the proposed development to be adequately assessed. The methodology broadly follows that described in the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Technical Guidance Terrestrial Fauna Surveys (Environmental Protection Authority 2016) and the Technical Guidance - Sampling methods for terrestrial vertebrate fauna (Environmental Protection Authority 2016).

A Level 1 fauna risk assessment involves undertaking a desktop review and reconnaissance site visit. The objectives of this fauna risk assessment were to:

• provide an indication of the vertebrate fauna assemblage (reptiles, amphibians, mammals and birds) on and near the project areas, so that potential impacts on the fauna and fauna assemblage might be adequately assessed;

• identify the presence and/or potential risk of impacts on species of conservation significance that are present or likely to be present in the project areas;

• assess the impact and environmental risks associated with the proposed development on the fauna assemblage;

• determine if any additional surveys are required to assess the potential impact on fauna assemblages in the project areas including impacts on species of conservation significance; and

• make recommendations that avoid, mitigate or minimise potential impacts on resident fauna.

To achieve these objectives, Terrestrial Ecosystems: • reviewed Terrestrial Ecosystems’ database [includes Atlas of Living Australia and Department of

Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions’ (DBCA) records in NatureMap] to identify potential vertebrate fauna within the area;

• searched the DBCA's NatureMap for Threatened and Priority Species; • searched the Commonwealth Government’s database of fauna of national environmental significance

to identify species potentially occurring within the area that are protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999 or international migratory bird agreements (JAMBA/CAMBA);

• undertook a site reconnaissance survey; • reviewed previous fauna surveys conducted near the project areas; • undertook an assessment of the potential risks to the fauna associated with clearing additional areas

of native vegetation; • discussed the likelihood of EPBC Act 1999 and Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act 2016)

listed species being present in the project areas; and • provided management recommendations to avoid, mitigate and minimise potential impacts on the

fauna in the project areas.

2

2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

2.1 Location of project areas

The project areas are within the Coolgardie (COO3) Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation of Australia (IBRA) subregion. This subregion is a gently undulating plain on the Yilgarn Craton with calcareous soil being dominant (Cowan 2002). The subregion supports a diverse eucalypt woodland around the salt lakes, on the low ranges and in the broad valleys and mallee and Acacia thickets and shrub heaths on the plains (Cowan 2002). The sub-region is rich in endemic Acacias (Cowan 2002).

2.2 Land use history

The dominant land uses in the bioregion outside urban development are grazing on natural pasture, crown reserves and mining. Kalgoorlie is the main regional urban and industrial centre in the region. Mining is evident in many areas close to Kalgoorlie, Coolgardie and many of the small and sometimes abandoned towns in the Goldfields, with numerous small abandoned mines and open shafts dotting the landscape. Land developments closer to the centre of town are mostly industrial.

2.3 Climate

The project areas are characterised as semi-arid. Kalgoorlie, which is 42km to the south, has an annual rainfall of approximately 267mm, although this varies considerably from year-to-year. The highest mean maximum and minimum temperatures in Kalgoorlie are in January with an average of 33.6°C and 18.3oC, respectively (Bureau of Meteorology 2017). The lowest mean daily maximum and minimum temperatures occur in July (Chart 1). Rainfall is spread over the year with summer thunderstorms and winter rains resulting from low pressure cells moving in an easterly direction.

Chart 1. Climatic averages for Kalgoorlie

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Jan

uar

y

Feb

ruar

y

Mar

ch

Ap

ril

May

Jun

e

July

Au

gust

Sep

tem

be

r

Oct

ob

er

No

vem

be

r

De

cem

ber

Rai

nfal

l (m

m)

Tem

pera

ture

(o C

)

Rainfall

Max Temp.

Min. Temp.

3

2.4 Regional biological fauna context of project areas

The frogs, reptiles, mammals and birds in the goldfields have been surveyed on many occasions for a variety of purposes and are therefore well known. Fauna surveys and assessments undertaken near the project areas that have been reviewed for this assessment include: ATA Environmental (2006a) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around Black Flag. Unpublished report for

Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006b) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Grants Patch Mine Site.

Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006c) Fauna Assessment Proposed Clearing at the Janet Ivy Site. Unpublished report for

Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006d) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Moonbeam Mine Site.

Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006e) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Natal Mine Site. Unpublished

report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006f) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Ora Banda Mine Site.

Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006g) Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Rose West Site. Unpublished

report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. ATA Environmental (2006h) Malleefowl assessment for clearing application at Janet Ivy Site. Unpublished

report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. Bamford, M.J., Davies, S.J.J.F. and Ladd, P.G. (1990) Biological Survey of the Kangaroo Hills and Calooli

Timber Reserves, Coolgardie, Western Australia. Chapman, A., Kealley, I., McMillan, D., McMillan, P. and Rolland, G. (1991) Biological surveys of four

Goldfields Reserves, Landnote, 1/91, 1-26 Eco Logical (2016) Biological Assessment - Binduli Expansion Project. Level 1 vertebrate fauna and Short-

range Endemic invertebrate survey, Unpublished report for Norton Gold Fields, Kalgoorlie. Hart and Associates (2000) Anaconda Nickel Ltd, Cawse Expansion Project, Fauna Survey, Unpublished report

for Anaconda Nickel Ltd, Perth. McKenzie, N.L. and Hall, N.J. (1992) The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part

8: Kurnalpi - Kalgoorlie study area, Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement 41. McKenzie, N.L., Rolfe, J.K. and Youngson, W.K. (1992) IV Vertebrate fauna, Records of the Western

Australian Museum, Supplement, No 41, 37-64. Ninox Wildlife Consulting (1999) Fauna Survey for the White Foil Gold Project, Unpublished report for Mines

and Resources Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. Ninox Wildlife Consulting (2002) A Vertebrate Fauna Assessment of the Proposed White Foil Haul Road Route

near Kalgoorlie, Western Australia, Unpublished report for Mines and Resources Pty Ltd, Perth. Risbey (2000) An assessment of the populations of feral cats and foxes in the Ora Banda region for Cawse

Nickel Operations, Western Australia. Kalgoorlie. Shepherdson Environmental Services (2001a) Fauna of the Black Cat and Panther Leases, M16/34 and

M16/365 (P16/1675). Unpublished report for Kinver Mining NL, Perth. Shepherdson Environmental Services (2001b) Fauna of the proposed Golden Cities to Paddington Haul Road

and surrounding area, Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2010) Level 1 Fauna Risk Assessment for La Mancha Resources White Foil Gold

Deposit Project Area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2013) Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Borefields Road at Coolgardie,

V3. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2016) Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Mungari Tailing Storage

Facility Cell 3 (TSF3). Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2017) Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Jaurdi Hills Mining Area.

Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2018) Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Anzac Drive West Industrial

Estate, V2. Perth Terrestrial Ecosystems (2018a) Annual Malleefowl Survey - Enterprise, Mulgarrie and north of Federal. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2018b) Annual Malleefowl Survey - Enterprise, Carbine and Golden Cities. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2018c) Level 1 Fauna Risk Assessment and the results of a Malleefowl search for the

Golden Cites project area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2018d) Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for Lot 500 Great Eastern Highway,

Kalgoorlie. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems (2019b) Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Tuart Project Area. Perth.

4

Terrestrial Ecosystems (2019a) Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for Rose South Project Area. Perth. Thompson, S. (2004) Mine site rehabilitation index using reptile assemblage as a bio-indicator, PhD thesis and

additional surveys.

In addition, Terrestrial Ecosystems has included in the Thompson (2004) fauna survey data, data collected after Thompson’s (2004) PhD was completed. Much of this work has been published or been presented at various workshops and conferences (Thompson 2001, Thompson and Thompson 2002, Thompson 2002, Thompson et al. 2003a, Thompson et al. 2003b, Thompson et al. 2003c, Thompson and Thompson 2003a, Thompson 2003c, a, b, Thompson and Thompson 2003b, Thompson and Thompson 2004a, Thompson 2004, Thompson and Thompson 2004b, Thompson and Thompson 2005a, Thompson and Thompson 2005c, b, Thompson et al. 2005a, b, Thompson and Thompson 2006a, Thompson and Thompson 2006c, b, Thompson and Thompson 2006e, d, Thompson and Thompson 2007a, b, Thompson and Thompson 2008) and is particular relevant as it includes fauna habitat similar to that in the project areas.

Data in the Atlas of Living Australia and Western Australian Museum has also been added to the information contained in Appendix B, and the compilation of the species lists for the project areas.

The most useful and representative data for the project areas are the information from Thompson’s PhD thesis

and the additional data from these surveys. These surveys were undertaken in fauna habitat similar to that in the project areas and are nearby. Hart and Associates (2000) also surveyed the Cawse mine site, which is nearby, but these data are not as comprehensive as that provided by Thompson (2004).

2.4.1 Fauna species at risk

Cowan (2002) reported the fauna species at risk in the Eastern Goldfields subregion as Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata), Carpet Python (Morelia spilota imbricata), Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus), Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) and the Freckled Duck (Stictonetta naevosa).

5

3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Database searches

A review of the EPBC list of protected species was undertaken to identify species of conservation interest to the Commonwealth Government. The search circle had a radius of 50km around a centre point coordinate of -30.58034oS and 121.22623oE (Appendix A). In addition, a desktop search of the Terrestrial Ecosystems’ fauna

survey database was used to develop an appreciation of the vertebrate fauna assemblages in relevant sections of the bioregion near the project areas. The DBCA threatened and priority species database was searched via the records in NatureMap.

Other more general texts were also used to provide supplementary information on vertebrates in the bioregion, including Tyler et al. (2000) for frogs; Storr et al. (1983, 1990, 1999, 2002) and Thompson and Thompson (2006e) for reptiles; Johnstone and Storr (1998, 2004) for birds; and Van Dyck and Strahan (2008) for mammals.

Collectively these sources of information were used to create lists of species expected to utilise the project areas and broader bioregion. It should be noted that these lists will include species that have been recorded in the general region but are possibly vagrants and they will not generally be found in the project areas due to a lack of suitable habitat (e.g. water and shore birds). Vagrants can be recorded almost anywhere. Many of the records are historical and the species is no longer present in the area (e.g. Bilby). Many of the bird, mammal, reptile and amphibian species have specific habitat requirements that may be present in the general area but not in the project areas. Also, the ecology of many of these species is often not well understood and it can sometimes be difficult to indicate those species whose specific habitat requirements are not present in the project areas. Therefore, many species will be included in the lists produced from database searches but will not be present in the actual project areas.

There are errors in most databases, including NatureMap, Atlas of Living Australia and the WAM collection. These errors occur because of a misidentification of individuals, taxonomic name changes and incorrect coordinates being entered into the database. Terrestrial Ecosystems was unable to verify the primary records, so it has used the information provided. Readers should therefore appreciate that species lists and fauna surveys reported in the appendices may include these errors.

3.2 Site Inspection and fauna habitat assessment

A site visit was undertaken on 7 June 2019 to assess fauna habitat types and condition in the project areas. This fauna habitat assessment methodology required the assessor to stop at multiple locations within the project areas and to assess a suite of data about the fauna habitat and its condition. This information included a description of the habitat structure, habitat condition, landform, soils and vegetation and time since last fire.

The fauna habitat assessment was undertaken for the majority of the project areas. This field assessment had two foci:

• assessing fauna habitat types and their condition; and • assessing the possible presence of and recording evidence of conservation significant fauna so that

mitigation and management strategies might be implemented to reduce potential impacts.

Dr Scott Thompson, who undertook the site assessment, stopped at multiple locations within the project areas and recorded a suite of data about the fauna habitat and its condition. This information included a description of the habitat structure, habitat condition, landform, soils and vegetation and time since last fire. The following data were assessed at each location as part of the habitat assessment:

Observer’s name Coordinates of the location as UTM (WGS 84) Fire history – options

> 5 years 1-5 years < 1 year

Landform – options Beach Clay plain Cliff

Lake / lake edge Lower slope Mid slope

6

Creek line Dam Drainage line Dune crest Dune slope Dune swale Escarpment Flat Gorge Gully Intertidal / mangrove

Ridge River Rocky outcrop / breakaway Salt lake Sand dune Sand plain Stony plain Swamp Undulating Upper slope Wetland Water hole

Habitat quality – options o High quality fauna habitat – These areas closely approximate the vegetation mix and quality that

would have been in the area prior to any disturbance. The habitat has connectivity with other habitats and is likely to contain the most natural vertebrate fauna assemblage.

o Very good fauna habitat - These areas show minimal signs of disturbance (e.g. grazing, clearing, fragmentation, weeds) and generally retain many of the characteristics of the habitat if it had not been disturbed. The habitat has connectivity with other habitats and fauna assemblages in these areas are likely to be minimally effected by disturbance.

o Good fauna habitat – These areas showed signs of disturbance (e.g. grazing, clearing, fragmentation, weeds) but generally retain many of the characteristics of the habitat if it had not been disturbed. The habitat has connectivity with other habitats and fauna assemblages in these areas are likely to be affected by disturbance.

o Disturbed fauna habitat– These areas showed signs of significant disturbance. Many of the trees, shrubs and undergrowth are cleared. These areas may be in the early succession and regeneration stages. Areas may show signs of significant grazing, containing weeds or have been damaged by vehicle or machinery. Habitats are fragmented or have limited connectivity with other fauna habitats. Fauna assemblages in these areas are likely to differ significantly from what might be expected in the area had the disturbance not occurred.

o Highly degraded fauna habitat – These areas often have a significant loss of vegetation, an abundance of weeds, and a large number of vehicle tracks or are completely cleared. Limited or no fauna habitat connectivity. Fauna assemblages in these areas are likely to be significantly different to what might have been in the area pre-disturbance.

Habitat structure – combined into habitat description Upper stratum

Tall open woodland Tall woodland Open woodland Woodland Open forest Closed forest Tall closed forest Tall open forest

Scattered tall trees Scattered trees Scattered low trees Low closed forest Low open forest Low woodland Low open woodland

Middle stratum Shrubland Tall shrubland Tall open shrubland Low shrubland Scattered low shrubs Low open shrubland Scattered tall shrubs Closed heath

Open heath Low closed heath Low open heath Tall closed scrub Tall open scrub Scattered tall shrubs Open shrubland Scattered shrubs

Lower stratum Closed hummock grassland Mid-dense hummock grassland Hummock grassland Open hummock grassland Scattered hummock grassland

Closed tussock grassland / sedgeland / herbland Tussock grass land / sedgeland / herbland Open tussock grassland / sedgeland / herbland Scattered tussock / grasses / sedges / herbs Very open tussock grassland / herbland

7

Soil Type – options Sand Loamy sand Clayey sand Sandy loam Loam Silty loam Sandy clay loam

Clay loam Silty clay loam Clay Rock Peat / organic Stony

Soil Colour –options Black Brown Grey Orange

Red White Yellow

Surface stones - options None Pebbles (0-50mm) Cobbles (51-250mm)

Boulders (>250mm) Rocks

3.3 Survey and reporting staff

Dr Scott Thompson undertook the site investigation and fauna habitat assessment and searched the site for Malleefowl and their mounds. The field work was completed with the assistance of Eren Reid from Native Vegetation Solutions. Dr Scott Thompson prepared this report and Dr Graham Thompson reviewed the report before it was sent to the client. Both senior scientists have appropriate relevant post-graduate qualifications, extensive experience in conducting fauna assessments in the Goldfields, have published research articles on biodiversity, fauna assemblages, conservation significant species, trapping techniques and temporal variations in trapped fauna assemblages based on Goldfields surveys and are therefore appropriately trained and experienced for the task of preparing this assessment. Both Scott and Graham have undertaken multiple trapping surveys at sites within 5km of Rose South and are familiar with the site and habitat in the project areas.

3.4 Taxonomy and nomenclature

Taxonomy and nomenclature for fauna species used in this report are generally based on the WA Museum species list except for bats, which follow Churchill (2008) and birds which follow Christidis and Boles (2008). Terrestrial Ecosystems’ has presumed that the identifications referred to in the appendices or in reports used to provide local and regional comparative data are correct and we have only corrected obvious records where the nomenclature was known to be incorrect.

3.5 Limitations

This Level 1 fauna risk assessment is based on information contained in the Commonwealth Government database and other published and unpublished fauna survey data for the bioregion and a site visit. It is acknowledged that multiple surveys conducted in different seasons, repeated over several years are necessary to fully appreciate the fauna assemblage in the project areas.

The EPA’s (2016) Technical Guidance Terrestrial Fauna Surveys suggested that fauna surveys may be limited by many variables. Limitations associated with each of these variables are assessed in Table 1.

8

Table 1. Fauna survey limitations and constraints

Possible limitations

Constraint (yes/no); significant, moderate or negligible

Comment

Competency and experience of the consultant carrying out this assessment

No The environmental scientists that undertook the site assessment, drafted and reviewed this report are familiar with the vertebrate fauna of this bioregion.

Scope No All aspects of the scope of works have been addressed.

Proportion of fauna identified, recorded and/or collected

No Not applicable.

Accuracy of previous survey work

Yes, negligible

Terrestrial Ecosystems has reported fauna survey data recorded by various authors but is not able to vouch for the accuracy of much of this information. It is acknowledged that the taxonomy of Western Australian vertebrates is continually being revised and the nomenclature of some of the species listed in the appendices may have changed since publication by the authors.

Sources of information

Yes, negligible

Vertebrate fauna information was available from an on-line database and unpublished and published reports of surveys conducted in the bioregion in a variety of habitat types. Many of these surveys employed a low level of trapping effort which significantly impacts on the capacity of these data to represent the fauna assemblages in the areas surveyed.

Proportion of the task achieved

No All tasks completed.

Timing/weather/ season/ cycle

N/A Weather was fine during the site visit.

Disturbances which affected results of the survey

No Minor disturbances in the project areas have been factored into this assessment.

Intensity of survey effort

N/A

Completeness No All aspects of this assessment have been completed.

Resources No Adequate resources were available.

Remoteness and/or access problems

No All areas could be accessed.

Availability of contextual information on the region

No Fauna survey data are available for the general area and specifically fauna habitats accessed in the project areas.

9

4 RESULTS

4.1 Fauna habitat

There are three broad fauna habitats in the project areas: • open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods (Plates 1 and 2);• mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods (Plates 3 and 4); and• eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities

(Plates 5 and 6).

In additional there were other areas that were completely degraded or cleared of fauna habitat (Plates 7 and 8). The density of trees and shrubs in the relatively undisturbed areas varied across the project areas but was mostly sparse. The fauna habitat varies from highly degraded to good, with the majority showing high levels of degradation; the more degraded areas are due to recent exploration activity and cattle grazing. There are a few access tracks in the area, but these are narrow and mostly only wheel tracks which do not overly impact on fauna habitat.


Plate 1. Open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods

Plate 2. Open eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods

Plate 3. Mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods

Plate 4. Mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods

10

Plate 5. Eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland

and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities

Plate 6. Eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying

densities

Plate 7. Completely degraded or cleared of fauna

habitat Plate 8. Completely degraded or cleared of fauna

habitat

11

4.2 Bioregional vertebrate fauna assemblage

Appendix B provides a summary of the fauna survey data that are available near the project areas. There are appreciable differences in the recorded fauna assemblages within and among fauna surveys shown in Appendix B. These differences are partially due to the low survey effort deployed by some of the surveys and they also reflect variations in soils and vegetation as well as temporal variations in the fauna assemblages.

Tables 2-5 provide a list of vertebrate species potentially found near the project areas that have been compiled based on the fauna survey report results shown in Appendix B.

Table 2. Birds potentially found near the project areas

Family Species Common Name

Casuariidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu

Megapodiidae Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl

Anatidae Stictonetta naevosa Freckled Duck

Chenonetta jubata Australian Wood Duck

Anas gracilis Grey Teal

Anas superciliosa Pacific Black Duck

Podicipedidae Poliocephalus poliocephalus Hoary-headed Grebe

Columbidae Phaps chalcoptera Common Bronzewing

Phaps elegans Brush Bronzewing

Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon

Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth

Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar

Aegothelidae Aegotheles cristatus Australian Owlet-nightjar

Anhingidae Anhinga melanogaster Australasian Darter

Otididae Ardeotis australis Australian Bustard

Phalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax sulcirostris Little Black Cormorant

Ardeidae Ixobrychus sinensis Yellow Bittern

Nycticorax caledonicus Nankeen Night Heron

Accipitridae Elanus axillaris Black-shouldered Kite

Lophoictinia isura Square-tailed Kite

Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle

Falconidae Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel

Falco berigora Brown Falcon

Rallidae Fulica atra Eurasian Coot

Charadriidae Charadrius ruficapillus Red-capped Plover

Vanellus tricolor Banded Lapwing

Scolopacidae Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper

Cacatuidae Eolophus roseicapillus Galah

Nymphicus hollandicus Cockatiel

Psittacidae Glossopsitta porphyrocephala Purple-crowned Lorikeet

Polytelis anthopeplus Regent Parrot

Platycercus icterotis Western Rosella

Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck

Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot

Cuculidae Chalcites basalis Horsfield's Bronze-cuckoo

Chalcites osculans Black-eared Cuckoo

Chalcites lucidus Shining Bronze-cuckoo

Cacomantis pallidus Pallid Cuckoo

Strigidae Ninox novaeseelandiae Southern Boobook

Tytonidae Tyto alba Barn Owl

Halcyonidae Todiramphus pyrrhopygius Red-backed Kingfisher

Meropidae Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater

Climacteridae Climacteris rufa Rufous Treecreeper

Ptilonorhynchidae Ptilonorhynchus maculatus Spotted Bowerbird

Maluridae Malurus splendens Splendid Fairy-wren

Malurus leucopterus White-winged Fairy-wren

Malurus pulcherrimus Blue-breasted Fairy-wren

Acanthizidae Sericornis frontalis White-browed Scrubwren


Hylacola cauta Shy Heathwren

Calamanthus campestris Rufous Fieldwren

Pyrrholaemus brunneus Redthroat

Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill

Gerygone fusca Western Gerygone

Acanthiza robustirostris Slaty-backed Thornbill

Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Yellow-rumped Thornbill

Acanthiza uropygialis Chestnut-rumped Thornbill

Acanthiza iredalei Slender-billed Thornbill

Acanthiza apicalis Inland Thornbill

Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface

Pardalotidae Pardalotus punctatus Spotted Pardalote

Pardalotus rubricatus Red-browed Pardalote

Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote

Meliphagidae Certhionyx variegatus Pied Honeyeater

Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater

Lichenostomus leucotis White-eared Honeyeater

Lichenostomus flavicollis Yellow-throated Honeyeater

Lichenostomus cratitius Purple-gaped Honeyeater

Lichenostomus ornatus Yellow-plumed Honeyeater

Lichenostomus plumulus Grey-fronted Honeyeater

Purnella albifrons White-fronted Honeyeater

Manorina flavigula Yellow-throated Miner

Acanthagenys rufogularis Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater

Anthochaera carunculata Red Wattlebird

Epthianura tricolor Crimson Chat

Epthianura aurifrons Orange Chat

Epthianura albifrons White-fronted Chat

Sugomel niger Black Honeyeater

Lichmera indistincta Brown Honeyeater

Phylidonyris niger White-cheeked Honeyeater

Melithreptus brevirostris Brown-headed Honeyeater

Pomatostomidae Pomatostomus superciliosus White-browed Babbler

Psophodidae Cinclosoma castanotum Chestnut Quail-thrush

Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella

Campephagidae Coracina maxima Ground Cuckoo-shrike

Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike

Lalage sueurii White-winged Triller

Pachycephalidae Pachycephala inornata Gilbert's Whistler

Pachycephala pectoralis Golden Whistler

Pachycephala simplex Grey Whistler

Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler

Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush

Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird

Artamidae Artamus personatus Masked Woodswallow

Artamus cinereus Black-faced Woodswallow

Artamus cyanopterus Dusky Woodswallow

Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird

12


Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird

Cracticus tibicen Australian Magpie

Strepera versicolor Grey Currawong

Rhipiduridae Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail

Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail

Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian Raven

Corvus bennetti Little Crow

Corvus orru Torresian Crow

Monarchidae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark

Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter

Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin

Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin


Eopsaltria griseogularis Western Yellow Robin

Drymodes brunneopygia Southern Scrub-robin

Megaluridae Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark

Cincloramphus cruralis Brown Songlark

Timaliidae Zosterops lateralis Silver-eye

Hirundinidae Cheramoeca leucosterna White-backed Swallow

Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow

Petrochelidon ariel Fairy Martin

Hirundo nigricans Tree Martin

Nectariniidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird

Estrildidae Taeniopygia guttata Zebra Finch

Motacillidae Anthus novaeseelandiae Australasian Pipit

Table 3. Amphibians potentially found near the project areas


Hylidae Litoria moorei Motorbike Frog

Limnodynastidae Neobatrachus kunapalari Kunapalari Frog

Neobatrachus pelobatoides Humming Frog


Neobatrachus sutor Shoemaker Frog

Neobatrachus wilsmorei Goldfields Bullfrog

Myobatrachidae Pseudophryne occidentalis Orange-crowned Toadlet

Table 4. Mammals potentially found near the project areas


Bovidae Capra hircus Goat

Bovidae Ovis aries Sheep

Canidae Canis familiaris Dog

Canis lupus Dingo

Vulpes vulpes Red Fox

Felidae Felis catus Cat

Molossidae Austronomus australis White-striped Free-tail Bat

Mormopterus planiceps Southern Free-tail Bat

Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat

Chalinolobus morio Chocolate Wattled Bat

Mormopterus sp. Free-tail Bat Sp.

Nyctophilus geoffroyi Lesser Long-eared Bat

Nyctophilus gouldi Gould's Long-eared Bat

Nyctophilus major Greater Long-eared Bat

Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat

Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat


Vespadelus regulus Southern Forest Bat

Dasyuridae Antechinomys laniger Kultarr

Ningaui ridei Wongai Ningaui

Ningaui yvonneae Mallee Ningaui

Pseudantechinus woolleyae Woolley's False Antechinus

Sminthopsis crassicaudata Fat-tailed Dunnart

Sminthopsis dolichura Little Long-tailed Dunnart

Sminthopsis gilberti Gilbert's Dunnart

Sminthopsis murina Common Dunnart

Sminthopsis ooldea Ooldea Dunnart

Burramyidae Cercartetus concinnus Southwestern Pygmy Possum

Macropodidae Macropus fuliginosus Western Grey Kangaroo

Macropus robustus Euro

Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo

Leporidae Oryctolagus cuniculus European Rabbit

Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna

Table 5. Reptiles potentially found near the project areas


Agamidae Ctenophorus caudicinctus Ring-tailed Dragon

Ctenophorus cristatus Crested Dragon

Ctenophorus fordi Mallee Dragon

Ctenophorus isolepis Crested Dragon

Ctenophorus maculatus Spotted Dragon

Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon

Ctenophorus reticulatus Western Netted Dragon

Ctenophorus salinarum Saltpan Dragon

Ctenophorus scutulatus Lozenge-marked Dragon


Diporiphora amphiboluroides

Mulga Dragon

Moloch horridus Thorny Devil

Pogona minor Dwarf Bearded Dragon

Tympanocryptis cephalus Pebble Dragon

Tympanocryptis lineata Lined Earless Dragon

Boidae Morelia spilota imbricata Carpet Python

Carphodactylidae Nephrurus laevissimus Smooth Knob-tail

Nephrurus vertebralis Midline Knob-tail

Underwoodisaurus milii Barking Gecko

Diplodactylidae Amalosia reticulata Reticulated Velvet Gecko

13


Crenadactylus ocellatus Clawless Gecko

Diplodactylus conspicillatus

Fat-tailed Diplodactylus

Diplodactylus granariensis Wheat-belt Stone Gecko

Diplodactylus pulcher Fine-faced Gecko

Hesperoedura reticulata Reticulated Velvet Gecko

Lucasium damaeum Beaded Gecko

Lucasium maini Main's Ground Gecko

Oedura marmorata Marbled Velvet Gecko

Strophurus assimilis Goldfields Spiny-tailed Gecko

Strophurus elderi Jewelled Gecko

Elapidae Acanthophis antarcticus Southern Death Adder

Brachyurophis fasciolata Narrow-banded Burrowing Snake

Brachyurophis semifasciata

Half-girdlerd Snake

Demansia psammophis Yellow-faced Whipsnake

Echiopsis curta Bardick

Furina ornata Orange-naped Snake

Neelaps bimaculatus Black-naped Burrowing Snake

Parasuta gouldii Gould's Snake

Parasuta monachus Monk Snake

Pseudechis australis Mulga Snake

Pseudonaja affinis Dugite

Pseudonaja mengdeni Gwardar

Pseudonaja modesta Ringed Brown Snake

Simoselaps bertholdi Jan's Banded Snake

Suta fasciata Rosen's Snake

Suta suta Curl Snake

Gekkonidae Christinus marmoratus Marbled Gecko

Gehyra purpurascens Purplish Dtella

Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella

Hemidactylus frenatus Asian House Gecko

Heteronotia binoei Bynoe's Prickly Gecko

Rhynchoedura ornata Western Beaked Gecko

Pygopodidae Aprasia repens Sedgelands Worm-lizard

Delma australis Marble-faced Delma

Delma butleri Unbanded Delma

Delma fraseri Fraser's Delma

Lialis burtonis Burton's Snake-lizard

Pygopus lepidopodus Common Scaly-foot

Pygopus nigriceps Western Hooded Scaly-foot

Scincidae Cryptoblepharus buchananii

Buchanan's Snake-eyed Skink

Ctenotus atlas Southern Mallee Ctenotus

Ctenotus australis Western Limestone Ctenotus

Ctenotus brooksi Wedgsnout Ctenotus

Ctenotus leonhardii Leonhardi's Ctenotus

Ctenotus schomburgkii Schomburgk's Ctenotus

Ctenotus uber Spotted Ctenotus

Cyclodomorphus branchialis

Common Slender Bluetongue

Cyclodomorphus melanops Spinifex Slender Bluetongue

Egernia depressa Southern Pygmy Spiny-tailed Skink

Egernia formosa Goldfields Crevice-skink

Egernia richardi Bright Crevice-skink

Eremiascincus richardsonii Broad-banded Sand Swimmer


Hemiergis initialis South-western Earless Skink

Hemiergis peronii Lowlands Earless Skink

Lampropholis guichenoti Pale-flecked Garden Skink

Lerista kingi King's Slider

Lerista picturata Southern Robust Slider

Liopholis inornata Desert Skink

Liopholis striata Nocturnal Desert Skink

Menetia greyii Common Dwarf Skink

Morethia adelaidensis Saltbush Morethia Skink

Morethia butleri Woodland Morethia Skink

Morethia obscura Shrubland Morethia Skink

Tiliqua occipitalis Western Blue-tongued Lizard

Tiliqua rugosa Bobtail

Typhlopidae Anilios australis Austral Blind Snake

Anilios bicolor Dark-spined Blind Snake

Anilios bituberculatus Prong-snouted Blind Snake

Anilios hamatus Pale-headed Blind Snake

Anilios waitii Waite's Blind Snake

Varanidae Varanus caudolineatus Stripe-tailed Monitor

Varanus gouldii Gould's Goanna

Varanus tristis Black-headed Monitor

14

4.3 Conservation significant fauna

Conservation significant fauna are protected by the Commonwealth EPBC Act 1999, and this list includes species covered by international treaties such as the Japan-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (JAMBA) and China-Australia Migratory Bird Agreement (CAMBA) and the Western Australia (WA) BC Act 2016. The WA BC Act 2016 provides for the publishing of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice that lists species under multiple categories. In addition, DBCA maintains a list of fauna that require monitoring under four priorities based on the current knowledge of their distribution, abundance and threatening processes. The EPBC Act 1999 and BC Act 2016 imply legislative requirements for the management of anthropogenic impacts to minimise the effects of disturbances on species and their habitats. Priority species have no statutory protection, other than the DBCA wishes to monitor potential impacts on these species. Environmental consultants and proponents of developments are encouraged to avoid and minimise impacts on these species. Definitions of the significant fauna under the BC Act 2016 are provided in Appendix C.

The fauna species that have special status in either State or Commonwealth government legislation or are on the DBCA Priority species list and are potentially present in the vicinity of the project areas are listed in Table 6. Although they were recorded in the search of the MNES online database, migratory species that typically would be found around the edges of salt lakes, clay pans, estuaries and marshes have been excluded from Table 6 as there is no suitable habitat nearby.

Five threatened species of fauna and three migratory species of birds were identified under the EPBC Act 1999 as potentially occurring in the project areas or surrounds. There is one Schedule 7 species as listed under the BC Act 2016 and four species listed on the DBCA’s Threatened and Priority Fauna List that potentially occur in the project areas or surrounds. The following is an assessment of the likelihood of each of the species listed in Table 6 being found in the project areas and their potential to be impacted by clearing of vegetation.

Table 6. Assessment of the potential presence of a conservation significant fauna species in the project areas

Species DBCA

Schedule / Priority

Status under Commonwealth

EPBC Act Comment on the potential presence of a species

Arid Bronze Azure Butterfly Ogyris subterrestris petrina

Critically Endangered

Critically Endangered

Unlikely to be in the project areas due to a lack of recent records and unsuitable habitat.

Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis Critically

Endangered Endangered Highly unlikely to occur in the project areas.

Malleefowl Leipoa ocellata Vulnerable Vulnerable Present in the broader area but not in the project areas. Chuditch Dasyurus geoffroii Vulnerable Vulnerable Highly unlikely to occur in the project areas. Butterfly Jalmenus aridus Priority 1 Unlikely to be in the project areas due to a lack of

recent records and unsuitable habitat.

Princess Parrot Polytelis alexandrae Priority 4 Vulnerable May very infrequently be seen in the region, but unlikely to be in the project areas.

Western Rosella Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys (Mallee)

Priority 4 Potentially in the region.

Central Long-eared Bat Nyctophilus major tor

Priority 4 Potentially in the project areas.

Oriental Plover Charadrius veredus Migratory Migratory May infrequently be seen in the region. Fork-tailed Swift Apus pacificus Migratory Migratory May infrequently be seen in the region.

Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea Migratory Migratory Highly unlikely to be seen in the project areas.

Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Schedule 7 May infrequently be seen in the area.

Results of the Commonwealth EPBC Act 1999 protected matters database search are provided in Appendix A.

Arid Bronze Azure Butterfly (Ogyris subterrestris petrina) – Critically endangered under the BC Act 2016 and EPBC Act 1999

This butterfly is associated with colonies of the ant Camponotus terebrans in mallee vegetation on sandy soil, often near flood plains, and typically digs its nest at the base of eucalypts. Larvae hatching from eggs laid near ant nest entrances (often near the bases of various mallee eucalypts) are carried by the ants into their nest. Details of its

15

biology and of any form of herbivory by the larvae are unknown; however, it is likely that the larvae are myrmecophagous (Camponotus terebrans). These butterflies fly close to the ground, and have been observed flying over agricultural lands near presumed breeding colonies. It is known from Lake Douglas, about 12kms south-west of Kalgoorlie (Field 1999) and in the Barbalin Nature Reserve (approximately 11km west of Mukinbudin) in the Avon Wheatbelt (Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2014) .

It is unlikely that this butterfly is in the project areas as there are no records of it nearby; therefore Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment is that vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have a significant impact on this species.

Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) – Critically endangered under the BC Act 2016 and Endangered under the EPBC Act 1999

The Night Parrot is a small, arid-adapted, nocturnal, ground-feeding parrot (Johnstone and Storr 1998, Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2016). Its length is 22-25cm with a body mass of approximately 104g (Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2016), although it was suggested that they were semi-nomadic, the Night Parrots in south-western Queensland appear to be sedentary (Murphy 2015).

The Night Parrot was probably originally distributed over much of semi-arid and arid Australia (Garnett et al. 2011, Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2016). Recordings in north-west and western Queensland in the early 1990-2000s were in a broad cross section of the habitats available (Garnett et al. 1993, Cupitt and Cupitt 2008, Boles et al. 2016). There have been recent sightings in the Pilbara in 1980, 2005 and 2017, central WA in 1979, north-eastern South Australia in 1979, western Queensland (including Pullen-Pullen-Mt Windsor-Diamantina population) in 1980, 1990, 1993, 2006 and 2013-17 (Davis and Metcalf 2008, Garnett et al. 2011, Charalambous 2016, Pickrell 2016, AG staff 2017, Palaszxzuk and Miles 2017, Rykers 2017, AG staff 2018), Pilbara in 2017 (Jones 2017) and the northern Goldfields (Jackett et al. 2017). Garnett et al. (2011) suggested that there were between 50-250 mature individuals in less than 5% of its previous range.

Wilson’s (1937) summary of observations provided information on the early records of Night Parrots’ preferred

habitat and breeding sites. Recent information indicates its preferred habitat appears to be in Triodia grasslands, chenopod shrublands, shrubby samphire and floristically diverse habitats dominated by large-seeded species (Threatened Species Scientific Committee 2016, McCarthy 2017, Murphy et al. 2017b). At Pullen Pullen Reserve it nests in large, more or less ring-shaped Triodia, and the nest consists of a tunnel (25-30o and 0o to the ground; 20-33cm long) through an apron of dead spinifex leaves that leads to a chamber under a live hummock, with a shallow depression (3-4cm) excavated into the gravelly/sandy soil (Murphy et al. 2017a). In the northern Goldfields the nest was again in a spinifex hummock, it was circular, with an excavated depression (~1.5-2.0cm) in sandy substrate (Hamilton et al. 2017, Jackett et al. 2017). The entrance tunnel was 62cm long, and was downward sloping (27o) with the entrance 28cm above the ground (Hamilton et al. 2017). It has clutches of two to four sub-elliptical, white eggs with a lustrous appearance (Murphy et al. 2017a). Breeding followed significant rains in March for the observations in Pullen-Pullen Reserve and in April in the northern Goldfields (Hamilton et al. 2017, Murphy et al. 2017a), but it is thought that breeding generally occurs between April and October (Murphy et al. 2017a).

Murphy et al. (2017b) placed a GPS tag on Night Parrots and reported that the two birds called at dusk from their diurnal roosts among spinifex hummocks and then flew to more floristically diverse habitats dominated by large-seeded, prolifically seeding species to feed.

There are no recent Night Parrot records near the project areas, and there are no mature, circle forming spinifex hummocks in the project areas. As the preferred roosting and nesting sites for Night Parrots are not present in the project areas, it is Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment that Night Parrots are not present in the project areas.

16

Malleefowl (Leipoa ocellata) – Vulnerable under the BC Act 2016 and EPBC Act 1999

Malleefowl are large, ground-dwelling birds that rarely fly unless alarmed or are perching for the night. Historically, Malleefowl have been found in mallee regions of southern Australia from approximately the 26th parallel of latitude southwards. Prior to vegetation clearing for agriculture, Malleefowl were abundant in the WA Wheatbelt. Vegetation clearing for agriculture also opened adjacent bushland to predators, and in the south-west of WA, Malleefowl often only persist in isolated remnant patches of native vegetation. Sheep and other herbivores (e.g. goats, kangaroos) grazing in remnant vegetation removes or thins the undergrowth, and they also compete with Malleefowl for herbaceous foods and can cause changes to the structure and floristic diversity of foraging habitats (Benshemesh 2007).

Malleefowl and their eggs are vulnerable to predation by foxes, and newly hatched chicks are vulnerable to foxes, cats and raptors (Priddel and Wheeler 1990, 1997, Benshemesh and Burton 1999, Benshemesh 2007, Lewis and Hines 2014). Their abundance in the Goldfields is low and they are sparsely distributed, favouring those areas that are more densely vegetated. Malleefowl build distinctive nests that comprise a large mound of soil/rock covering a central core of leaf litter. These nest mounds range in diameter but can span more than five metres and may be up to one metre high. Malleefowl are generally monogamous and once breeding commences they pair for life. The presence of nest mounds provides an indication of the presence of Malleefowl in the area.

Malleefowl have been observed in the bioregion, however, there are no recent records of active breeding mounds in the vicinity of the project areas. No old or active mounds were recorded in the project areas. Open fauna habitat and presence of feral and pest species significantly reduce the probability of Malleefowl utilising the project areas. As a consequence, Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment is that vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have any significant impact on this species.

Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) – Vulnerable under the BC Act 2016 and EPBC Act 1999.

The Chuditch is the largest extant carnivorous marsupial in WA. It is usually active from dusk to dawn. Formally known from over 70% of Australia, the Chuditch now has a patchy distribution throughout the Jarrah forest and mixed Karri/Marri/Jarrah forest of south-west WA and other isolated areas. Chuditch are solitary animals for most of their life and den in hollow logs, burrows, culverts, etc. and have also been recorded in tree hollows and rock cavities. Chuditch are opportunistic feeders, and forage primarily on the ground at night. Their diet can include other mammals, birds, lizards, bird and reptile eggs but the majority is a mixture of large invertebrates (e.g. spiders, scorpions and crickets).

How et al. (1988) reported Chuditch being found near the Norseman-Lake King Road and near Mount Holland. DBCA records show that one specimen was recorded in 1974 in Kambalda East. There are records south of Southern Cross and Marvel Loch and there have been other reported sightings east of Kambalda and near Norseman. It is therefore possible that this species is in the bioregion, and this could only be verified with an extensive trapping or camera trapping program. As the project areas are north-east of the species known distribution it is unlikely that the Chuditch would be found in the project areas. As a consequence, Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment is that vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have any significant impact on this species.

Jalmenus aridus - Priority 1 with the DBCA

Caterpillars of this butterfly are green with some red and white lines along the body, and it has a black head and tail. This species is known to feed on the foliage of Senna sp. and Acacia tetragonophylla. DBCA reported sightings of this species in the vicinity of Lake Douglas, west of Kalgoorlie. Jalmenus aridus is known from only a single colony, on a single Acacia tree. Subsequent searches have failed to reveal additional colonies.

It is Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment that vegetation clearing of the project areas are unlikely to have a significant impact on this species as it is highly unlikely to be in the project areas.

Princess Parrot (Polytelis alexandrae) - Priority 4 with the DBCA and Vulnerable under the EPBC Act 1999

The species is found mostly in the inland arid areas of Australia, and in Western Australia in the Gibson, Little Sandy and Great Victoria Deserts (Johnstone and Storr 1998, Pavey et al. 2014). However, they occasionally occurred in lightly wooded areas adjacent to the sandy deserts (Moriarty 1972).

17

The project areas are a long way south and west of its known geographic distribution, so it is Terrestrial Ecosystems’

assessment it is highly unlikely to be seen in the project areas, unless it is an aviary escapee.

Western Rosella (Platycercus icterotis xanthogenys) – Priority 4 with the DBCA

The mallee form of the Western Rosella is found mostly in eucalypt and Casuarina woodland and shrub lands, especially Wandoo, Flooded Gums and Salmon Gums. This species was sighted by Dames and Moore (1999) around Lake Lefroy, Outback Ecology Services (2009) at Randalls and it was reported by Dell and How (1984) in the biological survey of Widgiemooltha. A search of NatureMap indicated that they have been recorded in the vicinity of Kalgoorlie.

It is possible that this species could be infrequently seen in the project areas. However, given that the project areas represents a very small fraction of similar habitat in adjacent areas, it is Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment that

vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have a significant impact on this species.

Central Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus major tor) – Priority 4 with the DBCA

This species is probably the species referred to by Churchill (2008) as the Central Long-eared Bat (Nyctophilus major tor.). Records in the Atlas of Living Australia indicated this species has been found west of Kalgoorlie and in other areas in the Goldfields and the Wheatbelt. It roosts in tree cavities, foliage and under loose bark.

Given that project areas represent a very small fraction of similar habitat in the general area, it is Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment that vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have a significant impact on this species.

Oriental Plover (Charadrius veredus) - Migratory species under the EPBC Act 1999 and BC Act 2016

A migrant species with patchy distribution in Australia, the Oriental Plover is sparsely distributed across arid and semi-arid Australia but avoids truly desert regions. Its preferred habitat is dry plains. The species is under threat because of habitat reduction due to agriculture and changing fire regimes. The Oriental Plover has not been recorded in the general area during any of the other regional surveys.

Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment is that the Oriental Plover is unlikely to be seen in the project areas, due to a lack of previous records in the general area.

Fork-tailed Swift (Apus pacificus) - Migratory species under the EPBC Act 1999 and BC Act 2016

This species breeds in the northeast and mid-east Asia and winters in Australia and southern New Guinea. It is a visitor to most parts of Western Australia, beginning to arrive in the Kimberley in late September, in the Pilbara in November and in the southwest land division in mid-December, and leaving by late April. The Fork-tailed Swift is an almost exclusively aerial species, foraging and sleeping on the wing. It rarely comes to ground, usually only for breeding. It is common in the Kimberley, uncommon to moderately common near northwest, west and southeast coasts and rare to scarce elsewhere. It is rarely seen in the Goldfields.

Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment is that the Fork-tailed Swift may infrequently be seen in the project areas. However, the proposed vegetation clearing is unlikely to significantly impact on this species as it will move away to other areas if it is disturbed.

Grey Wagtail (Motacilla cinerea) - Migratory species under the EPBC Act 1999 and BC Act 2016

The Grey Wagtail is a small yellow breasted bird with a grey back and head. Johnstone and Storr (2004) reported this migratory species as breeding in Palearctic from western Europe and north-west Africa to eastern Asia and wintering in Africa, south-east Asia, Indonesia, the Philippines, New Guinea and Australia. Its preferred habitat in Australia is banks and rocks in fast-running fresh water including rivers, streams and creeks where it feeds on insects. The Atlas of Living Australia records two sightings on the south-coast of Western Australia and none around the project areas.

18

It is highly unlikely to be seen in the project areas due to a lack of records and suitable habitat.

Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) – Other specially protected fauna under the BC Act 2016

The Peregrine Falcon is uncommon, although widespread throughout much of Australia excluding the extremely dry areas and has a wide and patchy distribution. It favours hilly or mountainous country and open woodlands and may be an occasional visitor to the project areas. Nesting sites include ledges along cliffs, granite outcrops and quarries, hollow trees near wetlands and old nests of other large bird species. There is no evidence to suggest any change in status in the last 50 years. A Peregrine Falcon was seen at the Randalls Timber Reserve (Ninox Wildlife Consulting 1998) and around St Ives mine (Dames and Moore 1999, Ninox Wildlife Consulting 2004) and during the Widgiemooltha biological survey (Dell and How 1984), so they are in the region. It could therefore infrequently be seen in the project areas.

It is Terrestrial Ecosystems’ assessment that vegetation clearing in the project areas are unlikely to have a significant impact on this species as the bird will readily move away from disturbance and there is abundant areas of similar habitat in the region.

19

5 DISCUSSION

5.1 Adequacy of the fauna survey data for fauna habitats represented in the project areas

The EPA’s (2016) Technical Guidance on Terrestrial Fauna indicated that a Level 2 fauna assessment is required for a disturbance area of in excess of 75ha in this bioregion. The project areas are greater than 75ha, so the disturbance exceeds one of the criterion to require a Level 2 survey in the Coolgardie IBRA bioregion, however, fauna survey data provided by Bamford, et al. (1990), Chapman, et al. (1991), Hart and Associates (2000), McKenzie, et al (1992), Ninox (1999) and particularly by Thompson (2004b) provide a good indication of the vertebrate fauna assemblage in the project areas. Thompson (2004b) has provided in excess of 120,000 pit/funnel trap-nights of data in fauna habitats that are present in the project areas, so the results of this survey alone are much more comprehensive than is typically undertaken for a Level 2 fauna assessment.

Although the project areas are larger than 75ha, given the fauna survey data that are available nearby and the level of existing disturbance in the project areas, there is sufficient information on the fauna assemblages to enable potential impacts to be assessed and additional on-the-ground surveys are not required. It is unlikely that a Level 2 vertebrate fauna survey in the project areas will provide new species not previously identified for this area that would alter the assessment of potential impacts. However, as with all surveys, until it is completed the outcome is unknown.

5.1.1 Amphibians

Amphibians typically found in eucalypt woodlands in the Goldfields are listed in Table 3. Frogs are normally only detected immediately after rainfall or around semi-permanent pools. It is likely that Cyclorana maini, Pseudophryne occidentalis, Neobatrachus kunapalari and Neobatrachus wilsmorei would be found in the general area. These species, other than P. occidentalis, burrow into the ground and aestivate between rainfall events. Pseudophryne occidentalis find shelter under rocks and in crevices during the dry periods and enter temporary ponds to breed after major rainfall events. All four species have a wide-spread distribution and are abundant. Clearing vegetation is likely to result in a loss of individuals within the disturbed area, however, is unlikely to have a significant impact on these species when assessed in a regional context. There are no conservation significant amphibians in the Goldfields.

5.1.2 Reptiles

Reptile species richness in the project areas will be comparable with similar eucalypt woodlands elsewhere in the bioregion. The list provided in Appendix A represents species likely to be found over a large area of diverse habitat types. Eucalypt woodlands would typically support up to 40 species of reptiles, but many of these would be in low abundance (see Table 5). Fauna habitats in the project areas are likely to be similar to that in the adjacent areas, so the loss of reptiles during vegetation clearing is unlikely to be significant in a bioregional context.

Terrestrial Ecosystems’ view is that the proposed clearing of the project areas is unlikely to significantly impact on the reptile fauna of the bioregion.

5.1.3 Birds

Avian species richness in the Goldfields is influenced by rainfall and is generally higher in woodlands compared with chenopod shrublands and more sparsely vegetated areas. The list provided in Table 2 represents species likely to be found over a large area of diverse habitat types. Eucalypt woodlands would typically support up to 50-70 species of birds, but many of these would be in very low numbers (see Appendix A) and are only present after significant rainfall. Birds typically move from an area once vegetation clearing commences, so the impact is relatively low if the area is small. However, eggs and chicks in nests are often lost during the clearing process.

Predation by feral cats, foxes and wild dogs has significantly reduced the abundance of Malleefowl in the Goldfields and there are a few remaining small populations, mostly in areas of dense shrubland, as the dense vegetation provides the adult birds with some protection from predators. There are no active Malleefowl mounds in the project areas.

20

The Princess Parrot is nomadic and moves around the arid interior often in search of water and resources and has not been recorded this far away from the sandy deserts, so it is unlikely to be recorded in the project areas. The Peregrine Falcon will normally have a very large home range in the Goldfields and clearing a small section of the project areas, particularly when similar habitat exists in the adjacent areas, is unlikely to significantly impact on this species.

Terrestrial Ecosystems’ view is that the proposed clearing is unlikely to significantly impact on the avian fauna of the bioregion.

5.1.4 Mammals

The diversity of small terrestrial mammals potentially caught in the project areas would be low due the sparsely vegetated habitat. Although, records of Numbats (Myrmecobius fasciatus), Burrowing Bettongs (Bettongia lesueur) and Bilbies (Macrotis lagotis) are shown in the Atlas of Living Australia and Western Australian Museum records (Appendix B), they are no longer present in this area, having been predated on by foxes, cats and dogs many years ago. None of the mammals potentially found in the project areas are of conservation significance and the loss of small mammals during vegetation clearing is unlikely to be significant in a bioregional context.

It was noted during the site visit that there was evidence of rabbits, feral cats and dogs in the project areas and surrounds.

5.2 Biodiversity value of the project areas

An ecological assessment of a site should consider its biodiversity value at the genetic, species and ecosystem levels, and its ecological functional value at the ecosystem level. There are inadequate data to assess the ecological value at the genetic level.

Fauna habitat types represented in the project areas are abundant and in similar condition in adjacent areas. Therefore, the fauna assemblage that is present in the project areas will also be present and abundant in the adjacent areas. The available fauna survey data (Appendix B) provides a good indication of the vertebrate fauna that are potentially in the project areas.

5.2.1 Ecological functional value at the ecosystem level

Much of the project areas have been highly disturbed by previous mining or exploration activity, with the consequence that the project areas will have a depleted vertebrate fauna assemblage. The most significant impact on vertebrate fauna in the project areas and surrounds will have been feral cats, foxes and wild dogs. Goats have heavily grazed some areas, and this would have impacted the vertebrate fauna assemblages, but the recent increase in the wild dog population has reduced the abundance of feral goats.

5.2.2 Maintenance of threatened ecological communities

No threatened ecological fauna communities were identified in the project areas.

5.2.3 Condition of fauna habitat

Some of the project areas have been disturbed due to historical development activity (i.e. tracks, water pipeline and fences). There is also extensive evidence of disturbance by cattle and the presence of rabbits and cats. There is a large area of recent exploration which has completely degraded the habitat. The uncleared fauna habitat present in the project areas are similar to many square kilometres of adjacent habitat; the clearing of vegetation is therefore unlikely to have a significant impact on the vertebrate fauna when considered in a bioregional context.

5.2.4 Ecological linkages

The project areas do not provide an important ecological linkage or fauna movement corridor.

21

5.2.5 Size and scale of the proposed disturbance

The project areas are a small proportion of similar habitat found in the adjacent area and region. Given the available fauna survey data for these habitat types, no additional surveys are warranted.

5.2.6 Abundance and distribution of similar habitat in the adjacent areas

Fauna habitats present in the project areas are abundant in adjacent areas. It is therefore likely that the fauna assemblage in the project areas are similar to the many square kilometres of similar habitat in adjacent areas and the bioregion.

5.2.7 Potential impacts on ecosystem function

Clearing native vegetation is likely to result in the loss of small vertebrate fauna on-site that are unable to move away during the clearing process. The few larger animals, such as kangaroos and large goannas, and most of the birds will move into adjacent areas once clearing commences. Shifting animals into adjacent areas will increase the pressure on resources in those areas and it is likely that there will be some disruption to the ecosystems in these areas for a period until a balance is restored.

Impacts associated with clearing vegetation in the project areas in a landscape or bioregional context on the vertebrate fauna are likely to be low as the proposed disturbance area is small relative to the quantity of similar habitat in the bioregion.

22

6 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Clearing of vegetation will potentially affect vertebrate fauna in numerous ways, including death/injury of fauna during clearing, grading and impacts with vehicles and the loss of habitat.

Although there are anticipated short term impacts on fauna, they are not considered to result in significant impacts on fauna habitat and fauna assemblages in the long term. The overall impact on fauna species and species of conservation significance will be minimal provided the recommended management procedures are implemented and adhered to.

6.1 Direct impacts

Clearing vegetation and activities associated with the development will result in the loss of small fauna that retreat to burrows, such as reptiles and mammals. Nocturnal species are unlikely to be active when most of the land clearing and construction work is taking place which may result in these individuals being adversely impacted when they attempt to escape. This loss of vegetation is unlikely to have a significant impact when considered in a bioregional context.

Clearing linear corridors and other large areas increases fauna habitat edges. Small mammals can respond both positively and negatively to edges depending on their ecological traits (Laurance 1991, 1994, Goosem and Marsh 1997, Goosem 2000). Edge and disturbance effects can lead to altered and most often higher levels of predation, restricting or increasing fauna movements and altering assemblage structure (Oxley et al. 1974, Paton 1994, Baker et al. 1998, Temple 1998, Luck et al. 1999, Goosem et al. 2001). Goldingay and Whelan (1997) and Clarke and Oldland (2007) reported that edge effects can extend up to 150-200m from the edge for some species, meaning the impact area on vertebrate fauna is likely to be larger than the cleared footprint.

Edge effects can lead to the disruption of ecological processes such as predation and dispersal, animal movements and can change assemblage structure. The consequence is that the impact area will always be much larger than the cleared area.

6.1.1 Animal deaths during the clearing process and displacement of fauna

Clearing vegetation and activities associated with the mining development will result in the loss of small fauna that retreat to burrows, such as reptiles and mammals. Nocturnal species are unlikely to be active when most of the land clearing and construction work is taking place which will inevitably result in these individuals being killed or injured in their burrows or as they attempt to escape. Larger terrestrial animals and avian species will most often move to adjacent areas. These species will be required to establish new activity areas and home ranges, and this could result in the temporary displacement of resident species, however, this loss of fauna is unlikely to have a significant impact when considered in a bioregional context.

6.1.2 Reduction or loss of activity areas and closure of burrows

Clearing vegetation and associated construction activities are likely to destroy reptile and mammal burrows and foraging habitat that are currently in use or could be used again. Clearing vegetation that forms part of the activity area of individuals has the potential to force these animals into adjacent areas. These areas may offer fewer resources placing individuals under survival pressure. It could also cause individuals to move into the territories of other individuals increasing competition for resources. Forced relocations could increase the possibility of predation.

6.2 Indirect impacts

In addition to the obvious impact of vegetation clearing there can be an equally significant or greater impact in the adjacent areas because of ‘edge effects’. Edge effects can lead to the disruption of ecological processes such as

predation and dispersal, animal movements and can change assemblage structure. The consequence is that the impact area will always be much larger than the cleared area. Vehicle tracks also have the propensity to develop weed infestations which can impact on natural fauna habitats. Cleared corridors can also provide improved predator access to areas, enhance the invasion of pest species into areas and may act as inhibitors or disrupt fauna migration and movement patterns.

23

There are numerous potential threats associated with vegetation clearing and the construction of infrastructure that could have an impact on the vertebrate fauna in the project areas. Some of these are discussed below.

6.2.1 Habitat fragmentation

In addition to vegetation clearing, infrastructure including tracks, has the potential to fragment habitat. Cleared linear tracks of land are ‘unnatural’ in much of the habitat. These linear structures that partition existing activity areas, isolate sections of established communities and may alter long and medium-term patterns of movement around established home ranges particularly for small mammals and reptiles. A reduction in the population because of this development would be difficult to detect given our current knowledge of the spatial ecology for most of the small mammals known to be in the area.

6.2.2 Introduced fauna and weeds

An increase in habitat fragmentation and human activity is often associated with an increase in the abundance of introduced species such as the house mouse (Mus musculus), foxes (Vulpes vulpes), cat (Felis catus) and wild dogs (Canis lupus). This increase may be due to a decline in habitat health, increased road kills, poor disposal of waste and easier access to areas via tracks.

House mice, foxes, cats and wild dogs are known to be established in the area. In many situations they have become a ‘naturalised’ species in the Australian bush. Increases in fox, dog or cat numbers can have a detrimental impact on native fauna because they predate on and compete with native species, severely disrupting the natural balance. The cat is a particularly damaging predator on native fauna and any increase in their numbers could have a detrimental effect of local native fauna (Kinnear 1993, Bamford 1995, Woinarski et al. 2017, Woinarski et al. 2018, Murphy et al. 2019); hence it is important to ensure that populations of the feral predators, such as cats under control.

There are reliable reports that the population of wild dogs has significantly increased in response to the abundance of feral goats that were present in the region. The goat population has now been significantly reduced, so the wild dogs will turn their attention to predating of station cattle and sheep and native animals.

Infrastructure known to support feral species, such as rubbish disposal sites and bins, permanent water, should be managed to minimise increases in these populations.

Introduced plant species can successfully and rapidly invade areas of cleared native vegetation or otherwise disturbed by humans. Introduced plant species may replace native species that provide shelter or foraging areas for native fauna. Major changes to the structure of vegetation will alter the fauna habitat and consequently may influence fauna species composition. Preparing and implementing a weed management plan will largely reduce their threat to native fauna species.

6.2.3 Road fauna deaths

An increase in road fauna deaths is likely to occur where new roads / tracks are constructed or upgraded, in particular, affecting kangaroos, nocturnal birds and ground dwelling large carnivorous predators. Species such as goannas and raptors are attracted to carrion on road verges and therefore, there is an increased propensity for these species to be killed by vehicles.

6.2.4 Fire

Increased human activity is often associated with an altered fire regime which lead to a degradation of natural ecosystems. Fire has been identified as one of the threatening processes for some conservation significant species as a number of small mammal and bird species rely on long unburnt vegetation.

Large and widespread fires are unlikely to be a significant threat to native fauna species near the project areas due to the sparseness of the vegetation.

24

6.2.5 Anthropogenic activity

Unnatural noises, vibrations, artificial light sources, and vehicle and human movement in an area may be sufficient to force individuals or fauna species to move from adjacent areas, or alter their activity periods. This form of disturbance is likely to occur during the vegetation clearing and when mining activity commences. The overall impact is likely to be confined to a relatively small area and is unlikely to be a significant impact.

6.2.6 Dust

Dust generated from shifting topsoil and spoil and vehicle traffic can potentially degrade surrounding vegetation, reducing its ability to absorb sunlight and influencing photosynthetic rates. Degradation of these areas may potentially render habitat unsuitable for fauna. Dust suppression and management programs are an essential component of minimising impacts on fauna in areas adjacent to the mine. An effective dust management and monitoring program is required.

6.2.7 Uncapped drill holes

An ongoing potential risk to terrestrial fauna is the presence of uncapped drill holes within the project areas. Small animals, particularly lizards and mammals, can become trapped in the drill holes and eventually die. Therefore drill holes that are open for periods of months or years can be particularly detrimental to small animal populations (Malnic 1997).

6.2.8 Rehabilitation of cleared areas

To minimise the long-term potential impacts, rehabilitation programs should be progressively implemented and evaluated. An emphasis should be placed on the establishment of near-natural, self-sustaining, functional ecosystems in rehabilitation planning, and this should be one of the focal criteria for assessing the success of rehabilitation programs.

25

7 RISK ASSESSMENT

Fauna surveys to support Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) are part of the environmental risk assessment undertaken to consider what potential impacts a development might have on the biodiversity on a particular area and region. Potential impacts on fauna from the proposed development are identified and briefly described above. Tables 7, 8 and 9 provide a summary of the risk assessment associated with this project.

Table 7. Fauna impact risk assessment descriptors

Any risk assessment is a product of the likelihood of an impact occurring and the consequences of that impact. Likelihood and consequences are categorised and described below. The assessed risk level (likelihood x consequences) is then calculated as the overall risk for the development. This is followed by an assessment of the acceptability of the risk associated with each of the impacts. Disturbances and vegetation clearing have an impact on the fauna at multiple scales – site, local, landscape and regional. Each of these is considered in the risk assessment. This assessment should be considered in the context of the summary in Table 9.

Likelihood Level Description Criteria A Rare The environmental event may occur, or one or more conservation significant species

may be present in exceptional circumstances. B Unlikely The environmental event could occur, or one or more conservation significant

species could be present at some time. C Moderate The environmental event should occur, or one or more conservation significant

species should be present at some time. D Likely The environmental event will probably occur, or one or more conservation

significant species will be present in most circumstances. E Almost certain The environmental event is expected to occur, or one or more conservation

significant species is expected be present in most circumstances. Consequences Level Description Criteria 1 Insignificant Insignificant impact on fauna of conservation significance or regional biodiversity,

and the loss of individuals will be insignificant in the context of the availability of similar fauna or fauna assemblages in the area.

2 Minor Impact on fauna localised and no significant impact on species of conservation significance in the project areas. Loss of species at the local scale.

3 Moderate An appreciable loss of fauna in a regional context or a limited impact on species of conservation significance in the project areas.

4 Major Significant impact on conservation significant fauna or their habitat in the project areas and/or regional biodiversity and/or a significant loss in the biodiversity at the landscape scale.

5 Catastrophic Loss of species at the regional scale and/or a significant loss of species categorised as ‘vulnerable’ or ‘endangered’ under the EPBC Act (1999) at a regional scale.

Acceptability of Risk Level of risk Management Action Required Low No action required. Moderate Avoid if possible, routine management with internal audit and review of monitoring results

annually. High Externally approved management plan to reduce risks, monitor major risks annually with

external audit and review of management plan outcomes annually. May a referral to the Commonwealth under the EPBC Act 1999.

Extreme Unacceptable, project should be redesigned or not proceed.

26

Table 8. Levels of acceptable risk

Likelihood

Rare or very low

(A) Unlikely or low

(B) Moderate (C) Likely (D)

Almost certain (E)

Con

sequ

ence

s Insignificant (1) Low Low Low Low Low Minor (2) Low Low Low Moderate Moderate

Moderate (3) Low Moderate Moderate High High Major (4) Moderate Moderate High High Extreme

Catastrophic (5) Moderate High High Extreme Extreme

Table 9. A risk assessment of the impact of ground disturbance activity on fauna

Before Management

With Management

Factor Potential Impact Inherent Risk Risk Controls /

Management Residual Risk

Lik

elih

ood

Con

sequ

ence

Sign

ific

ance

Lik

elih

ood

Con

sequ

ence

Sign

ific

ance

Fauna survey data

Inadequate survey data to adequately assess the risks

Unknown loss of fauna, fauna of conservation significance, and fauna assemblages, and an incomplete fauna assessment.

B 2 Low

Inadequacy of comparative data

Limits on the availability of comparative data reduced the capacity to assess the uniqueness of the fauna assemblages in the project areas.

B 2 Low

Clearing vegetation

Loss of fauna habitat – local scale

Loss of terrestrial fauna in the project areas. E 2 Mod.

Loss of fauna habitat – landscape scale

Loss of some fauna during vegetation clearing. B 1 Low

Loss of fauna habitat – regional scale

Small loss of some fauna from the region. B 1 Low

Loss of a threatened ecological fauna community

Loss of an undetected threatened ecological fauna community. A 3 Low

Habitat fragmentation Fauna movement restricted resulting in the death of fauna and a loss of biodiversity.

A 2 Low

Loss of a unique terrestrial fauna ecosystem

Loss of an ecosystem containing fauna with high species richness, high abundance and numerous top of the food chain predators.

A 2 Low

Death or loss of conservation significant fauna

Malleefowl Death or the reduced viability of Malleefowl. A 3 Low Peregrine Falcon Death or the reduced viability of the Peregrine Falcon. A 2 Low Western Rosella Death or the reduced viability of the Western Rosella. A 2 Low

Central Long-eared Bat Death or the reduced viability of the Central Long-eared Bat.

A 2 Low

Oriental Plover Death or the reduced viability of the Oriental Plover. A 2 Low Fork-tailed Swift Death or the reduced viability of Fork-tailed Swift. A 2 Low

Human impacts Spread of weeds Changed vegetation and a resulting loss of fauna habitat.

E 2 Mod.

Implementation of a weed management plan.

D 2 Low

Road kills Animals being killed by vehicles as they cross roads E 1 Low Limiting speeds E 1 Low

Increase in feral fauna, specifically the wild dog, fox and feral cat

Increased predation on the native fauna C 2 Low

Management of waste, implementing a feral and pest fauna management program and not-feeding feral animals.

B 2 Low

27

7.1 Native vegetation clearing principles as they pertain to vertebrate fauna

The Environmental Protection Act (1986) outlines 10 principles that are to be used in the assessment of native vegetation clearing permit applications which are also applicable for other assessments and approvals (Table 10). Where possible, native vegetation should not be cleared if any of the following principles are comprised.

Table 10. Assessment of impact using the native vegetation clearing principles

Principle Response

It comprises a high level of biological diversity. Clearing vegetation will not comprise a high level of biodiversity.

It comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of, a significant habitat for fauna indigenous to Western Australia.

Clearing the vegetation will not result in the loss of significant habitat for indigenous fauna.

It includes, or is necessary for the continued existence or, rare flora. N/A It comprises the whole or a part of, or is necessary for the maintenance of, a threatened ecological community.

The area does not contain a threatened ecological fauna community.

It is significant as a remnant of native vegetation in an area that has been extensively cleared.

The area is not a remnant.

It is growing in, or in association with, an environment associated with a watercourses or wetland.

The area does not contain a wetland.

The clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause appreciable land degradation.

N/A

The clearing of the vegetation is likely to have an impact on the environmental values of any adjacent or nearby conservation area.

Clearing of vegetation is unlikely to impact on the environmental values of the bioregion.

The clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause deterioration in the quality of surface or underground water.

N/A

The clearing of the vegetation is likely to cause, or exacerbate the incidence of flooding.

N/A

7.2 Referral under the EPBC Act

The proposed project is unlikely to significantly impact on a conservation significant vertebrate fauna species, so a referral under the EPBC Act is not recommended.

28

8 SUMMARY

The total assessed area was approximately 984ha but only a portion of this will be disturbed. There are three broad fauna habitats in the project areas:

• open Eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods; • mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods; and • eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying densities.

In additional there were other areas that were completely degraded or cleared of fauna habitat. The density of trees and shrubs in the relatively undisturbed areas varied across the project areas but was mostly sparse. The fauna habitat varies from highly degraded to good, with the majority showing high levels of degradation; the more degraded areas are due to recent exploration activity and cattle grazing. There are a few access tracks in the area, but these are narrow and mostly only wheel tracks which do not overly impact on fauna habitat.


Clearing native vegetation is likely to result in the loss of small vertebrate fauna on-site that are unable to move away during the clearing process. The few larger animals, such as kangaroos and large goannas and snakes, and most of the birds will move into adjacent areas once clearing commences.

Development and vegetation clearing will have a minimal impact on the fauna in areas adjacent to those that will be cleared. There will be a small loss of native fauna to vehicle strikes on access tracks, but this will be low. Migrants increase competition for resources, which may result in the subsequent loss of migrants or local individuals. Individuals shifted out of their established activity areas are also vulnerable to predation until they have become established in their new areas.

Impacts associated with clearing vegetation in the project areas in a landscape or bioregional context on the vertebrate fauna are likely to be low as there are vast tracts of similar habitat in adjacent areas.

The proposed project is unlikely to significantly impact on a conservation significant species, so a referral under the EPBC Act is not recommended.

29

9 MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

9.1 Induction and awareness

All contractors and people involved in vegetation clearing and development should be made aware of the possible presence and issues associated with terrestrial fauna in the area through the induction process.

Recommendation 1: An induction program that includes a component on managing fauna is a mandatory component of working on the project.

9.2 Dust

Dust generated from the project could potentially degrade surrounding vegetation, reducing its ability to absorb sunlight and influencing photosynthetic rates. Degradation of these areas will potentially render habitat unsuitable for fauna. Dust suppression and management programs are an essential component of minimising mining impacts on fauna during the construction program.

Recommendation 2: The impact of dust on adjacent vegetation and fauna habitat is managed in accordance with Norton’s Environmental Management System.

9.3 Minimising secondary impacts to the habitat

Pets and feral animals have the potential to impact on fauna. Pets should not be permitted on site and feral and pest fauna numbers monitored and controlled. To be effective, management of feral and pest species needs to be undertaken in collaboration with the landowner, pastoralist and neighbouring tenement holders. All rubbish likely to attract animals should be suitably contained and disposed of so as not to encourage the feeding of fauna around the site.

Based on feral cat tracks and scats recorded in the project areas it is highly probable that the project areas currently supports a population of feral cats. Rabbits were also present in the project areas. Reducing the impacts of feral cats and rabbits will reduce the stress on fauna and fauna assemblages in the area.

Recommendation 3: Pets are not permitted on site.

Recommendation 4: All waste and rubbish be contained in bins and regularly removed from site or buried so it is unavailable to pest species.

Recommendation 5: Feeding of native fauna should be actively discouraged.

Recommendation 6: A feral and pest animal management program is implemented to reduce the predation risk on native fauna. This program needs to be undertaken in collaboration with the landowner, pastoralist and neighbouring tenement holders and concentrate on reducing the impacts of cats, foxes, wild dogs and rabbits.

9.4 Uncapped drill holes

Uncapped drill holes can pose a serious threat to small animals, including ground dwelling reptiles, frogs and small mammals. All drill holes should be temporarily capped on completion of drilling and permanently capped or closed as soon as possible after exploration activities have ceased.

Recommendation 7: Drill holes are capped and rehabilitated in accordance with DMIRS requirements, along with associated reporting and auditing.

30

9.5 Road fauna deaths

Increased activity will result in increased traffic and a consequential increase in the fauna deaths on tracks. Limiting vehicle speed on mine roads can reduce collisions with fauna, particularly larger animals such as kangaroos and emus. Dead animals on the road also have the propensity to attract raptors, goannas and even cattle, which are then likely to be killed.

Recommendation 8: Speed limits are implemented and enforced on-site. These should be determined based on the quality and condition of the roads, but be a maximum of 80km/h.

Recommendation 9: Signage is erected to indicate the maximum travelling speeds and the possible presence of wildlife crossing roads.

31

10 REFERENCES

AG staff. 2017. Night parrot feather discovered in South Australia gives hope to ecologists. Australian Geographic September.

AG staff. 2018. Critically endangered night parrot fledging photographed on Queensland reserve. Australian Geographic February.

ATA Environmental. 2006a. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around Black Flag. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006b. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Grants Patch Mine Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006c. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Janet Ivy Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006d. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Moonbeam Mine Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006e. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Natal Mine Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006f. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Ora Banda Mine Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd, Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006g. Fauna assessment proposed clearing around the Rose West Site. Unpublished report for Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd., Perth.

ATA Environmental. 2006h. Malleefowl assessment for clearing application at Janet Ivy Site. Perth. Baker, J., R. L. Goldingay, and R. J. Whelan. 1998. Powerline easement through forests: a case study of impacts

on avifauna. Pacific Conservation Biology 4:79-89. Bamford, M. J. 1995. Predation by feral cats upon lizards. The Western Australian Naturalist 20:191-196. Bamford, M. J., S. J. J. F. Davies, and P. G. Ladd. 1990. Biological Survey of the Kangaroo Hills and Calooli

Timber Reserves, Coolgardie, Western Australia. Benshemesh, J. 2007. National Recovery Plan for Malleefowl. South Australia. Benshemesh, J., and P. Burton. 1999. Fox predation on Malleefowl three years after the spread of RCD in Victoria.

Unpublished report for Parks Victoria and Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Mildura. Boles, W. E., N. W. Longmore, and M. C. Thompson. 2016. A Recent Specimen of the Night Parrot Geopsittacus

occidentalis. Emu 94:37-40. Chapman, A., I. Kealley, D. McMillan, P. McMillan, and G. Rolland. 1991. Biological surveys of four Goldfields

Reserves: Kurrawang Nature Reserve, Burra Rock Nature Reserve, Cave Hill Nature Reserve and Dordie Rocks Nature Reserve. Landnote 1/91:1-26.

Charalambous, S. 2016. First night parrot fledgling spotted in 100 years spotted in western Queensland. Australian Geographic November.

Christidis, L., and W. E. Boles. 2008. Systematics and Taxonomy of Australian Birds. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria.

Churchill, S. 2008. Australian Bats. Jacana Books, Crows Nest, NSW. Clarke, M. F., and J. M. Oldland. 2007. Penetration of remnant edges by noisy miners (Manorina melanocphala)

and implications for habitat restoration. Wildlife Research 34:253-261. Cowan, M. 2002. Coolgardie 3 (COO3 - Eastern Goldfields subregion). Pages 156-169 A Biodiversity Audit of

Western Australia’s 53 Biogeographical Subregions in 2002. Department of Conservation and Land Management, Perth.

Cupitt, R., and S. Cupitt. 2008. Another recent specimen of the Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis from Western Queensland. Australian Field Ornithology 25:69-75.

Dames and Moore. 1999. Public Environmental Review - Gold Mine Developments on Lake Lefroy. Unpublished report to WMC Resources Ltd (St Ives Gold), Perth.

Davis, R. A., and B. M. Metcalf. 2008. The Night Parrot (Pezoporus occidentalis) in northern Western Australia: a recent sighting from the Pilbara region. Emu 108:233-236.

Dell, J., and R. A. How. 1984. Vertebrate Fauna in 'The Biological Survey of the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia. Part 2. Widgiemooltha-Zanthus Area'. Records of the Western Australian Museum 18:21-157.

Eco Logical Australia. 2016. Biological Assessment - Binduli Expansion Project. Level 1 vertebrate fauna and Short-range Endemic invertebrate survey. Perth.

Environmental Protection Authority. 2016. Technical Guidance - Sampling methods for terrestrial vertebrate fauna. Environmental Protection Authority, Perth.

Field, R. P. 1999. A new species of Ogyris Angus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) from southern arid Australia. Memoirs of Museum Victoria 57:251-251.

32

Garnett, S., G. Crowley, R. Duncan, N. Baker, and P. Doherty. 1993. Notes on live Night Parrot sightings in north-western Queensland. Emu 93:292-296.

Garnett, S. T., J. K. Szabo, and G. Dutson. 2011. The Action Plan for Australian Birds 2010. CSIRO, Collingwood, Melbourne.

Goldingay, R. L., and R. J. Whelan. 1997. Powerline easements: do they promote edge effects in eucalypt forest for small mammals? Wildlife Research 24:737-744.

Goosem, M. 2000. Effects of tropical rainforest roads on small mammals: edge changes in community composition. Wildlife Research 27:151-163.

Goosem, M., Y. Izumi, and S. Turton. 2001. Efforts to restore habitat connectivity for an upland tropical rainforest fauna: A trial of underpasses below roads. Ecological Management and Restoration 2:196-202.

Goosem, M. W., and H. Marsh. 1997. Fragmentation of small mammal community by a powerline corridor through tropical rainforest. Wildlife Research 24:613-629.

Hamilton, N., A. Burbidge, T. Douglas, and L. Gilbert. 2017. Piecing the puzzle together: the fate of the Night Parrot nest found in Western Australia by Jackett et al. (2017). Australian Field Ornithology 34:151-154.

Hart Simpson and Associates. 2000. Anaconda Nickel Ltd, Cawse Expansion Project, Fauna Survey. Perth. How, R. A., J. Dell, and B. G. Muir. 1988. Vertebrate Fauna. Pages 44-94 in R. A. How, K. R. Newbey, J. Dell,

B. G. Muir, and R. J. Hnatiuk, editors. The Biological Survey of the Eastern Goldfields of Western Australia; Part 4, Lake Johnston - Hyden Study Area. Records of the Western Australian Museum.

Jackett, N., B. Greatwich, G. Swann, and A. Boyle. 2017. A nesting record and vocalisations of the Night Parrot Pezoporus occidentalis from the East Murchison, Western Australia. Australian Field Ornithology 34:144-150.

Johnstone, R. E., and G. M. Storr. 1998. Handbook of Western Australian Birds. Volume I - Non-Passerines (Emu to Dollarbird). Western Australian Museum, Perth.

Johnstone, R. E., and G. M. Storr. 2004. Handbook of Western Australian Birds, Volume II Passerines (Blue-winged Pitta to Goldfinch). Western Australian Museum, Perth.

Jones, A. 2017. Night parrot sighting in Western Australia shocks birdwatching world. ABC News. Kinnear, J. 1993. Masterly marauders: the cat and the fox. Landscope 8:20-28. Laurance, W. F. 1991. Edge effects in tropical forest fragments: application of a model for design of nature

reserves. Biological Conservation 57:205-219. Laurance, W. F. 1994. Rainforest fragmentation and the structure of small mammal communities in tropical

Queensland. Biological Conservation 69:23-32. Lewis, M., and M. Hines. 2014. Malleefowl activity at nesting sites increase fox and other feral animal visitation

rates. Pages 242-247 Proceedings of the 5th National Malleefowl Forum 2014. Luck, G. W., H. P. Possingham, and D. C. Paton. 1999. Bird responses at inherent and induced edges in the Murray

Mallee, South Australia. 1. Differences in abundance and diversity. Emu 99:157-169. Malnic, J. 1997. Uncapped drill holes are silent killers. Australia's Mining Monthly March:16. McCarthy, M. 2017. Night parrot feather discovery proves Australia's most elusive bird is alive in South Australia.

ABC News. McKenzie, N. L., and N. J. Hall. 1992. The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part

8 :Kurnalpi - Kalgoorlie study area. Records of the Western Australian Museum Supplement No. 41:37-53.

McKenzie, N. L., J. K. Rolfe, and W. K. Youngson. 1992. IV Vertebrate fauna. Records of the Western Australian Museum, Supplement, No 41:37-64.

Moriarty, T. K. 1972. Birds of Wanjarri, W.A. (27o25'S, 120o40'E). Emu 72:1-7. Murphy, B. P., L.-A. Woolley, H. M. Geyle, S. M. Legge, R. Palmer, C. R. Dickman, J. Augusteyn, S. C. Brown,

S. Comer, T. S. Doherty, C. Eager, G. Edwards, D. A. Fordham, D. Harley, P. J. McDonald, H. McGregor, K. E. Moseby, C. Myers, J. Read, J. Riley, D. Stokeld, G. J. Trewella, J. M. Turpin, and J. C. Z. Woinarski. 2019. Introduced cats (Felis catus) eating a continental fauna: The number of mammals killed in Australia. Biological Conservation 237:28-40.

Murphy, S. 2015. Shining a light: The research unlocking the secrets of the mysterious Night Parrot. Australian Birdlife 4:30-35.

Murphy, S. A., J. J. Austin, R. K. Murphy, J. Silcock, L. Joseph, S. T. Garnett, N. P. Leseberg, J. E. M. Watson, and A. H. Burbidge. 2017a. Observations on breeding Night Parrots (Pezoporus occidentalis) in western Queensland. Emu 117:107-113.

Murphy, S. A., J. Silcock, R. Murphy, J. Reid, and J. J. Austin. 2017b. Movements and habitat use of the night parrot Pezoporus occidentalis in south-western Queensland. Austral Ecology.

Ninox Wildlife Consulting. 1998. A Vertebrate Fauna Survey of Randell Timber Reserve. Ninox Wildlife Consulting. 1999. Fauna Survey for the White Foil Gold Project. Perth. Ninox Wildlife Consulting. 2002. A Vertebrate Fauna Assessment of the Proposed White Foil Haul Road Route

near Kalgoorlie, Western Australia. Perth.

33

Ninox Wildlife Consulting. 2004. St Ives Gold Mine, Vertebrate fauna assessment. Perth, unpublished report for Goldfields - St Ives Mining Company Pty Ltd.

Outback Ecology Services. 2009. Integra Mining Limited Randalls Gold Project, Fauna Survey. Oxley, D. J., M. B. Fenton, and G. R. Carmody. 1974. The effects of roads on populations of small mammals.

Journal of Applied Ecology 11:51-59. Palaszxzuk, A., and S. Miles. 2017. New night parrot community discovered in central west Queensland. Paton, P. W. C. 1994. The effect of edge on avian nest success: How strong is the evidence? Conservation Biology

8:17-26. Pavey, C. R., C. E. M. Nano, J. R. Cole, P. J. McDonald, P. Nunn, A. Silcocks, and R. H. Clarke. 2014. The

breeding and foraging ecology and abundance of the Princess Parrot (Polytelis alexandrae) during a population irruption. Emu:NULL.

Pickrell, J. 2016. The night parrot's secret sanctuary. Australian Geographic August. Priddel, D., and R. Wheeler. 1990. Survival of Malleefowl Leipoa ocellata chicks in the absence of ground-

dwelling predators. Emu 90:81-87. Priddel, D., and R. Wheeler. 1997. Efficacy of fox control in reducing the mortality of released captive-reared

Malleefowl, Leipoa ocellata. Wildlife Research 24:469-482. Risbey, D. 2000. An assessment of the populations of feral cats and foxes in the Ora Banda region for Cawse

Nickel Operations, Western Australia. Kalgoorlie. Rykers, E. 2017. Night parrot call recordings released online for first time. Australian Geographic February. Shepherdson Environmental Services. 2001a. Fauna of the Black Cat and Panther Leases, M16/34 and M16/365

(P16/1675). Unpublished report for Kinver Mining NL. Shepherdson Environmental Services. 2001b. Fauna of the proposed Golden Cities to Paddington Haul Road and

surrounding area. Perth. Storr, G. M., L. A. Smith, and R. E. Johnstone. 1983. Lizards of Western Australia. II: Dragons and Monitors.

Western Australian Museum, Perth, Western Australia. Storr, G. M., L. A. Smith, and R. E. Johnstone. 1990. Lizards of Western Australia. III: Geckos and Pygopods.

Western Australian Museum, Perth. Storr, G. M., L. A. Smith, and R. E. Johnstone. 1999. Lizards of Western Australia. I: Skinks. Western Australian

Museum, Perth. Storr, G. M., L. A. Smith, and R. E. Johnstone. 2002. Snakes of Western Australia. Western Australian Museum,

Perth. Temple, S. A. 1998. The edge of the cut: implications for wildlife populations. Journal of Forestry 96:22-26. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2010. Level 1 Fauna Risk Assessment for La Mancha Resources White Foil Gold Deposit

Project Area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2013. Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Borefields Road at Coolgardie,

V2. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2016. Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Mungari Tailing Storage Facility

Cell 3 (TSF3). Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2017. Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Jaurdi Hills Mining Area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018a. Annual Malleefowl Survey - Enterprise, Mulgarrie and north of Federal. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018b. Annual Malleefowl Survey – Enterprise, Carbine and Golden Cities. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018c. Level 1 Fauna Risk Assessment and the results of a Malleefowl search for the

Golden Cites project area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2018d. Level 1 Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for Lot 500 Great Eastern Highway,

Kalgoorlie. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2019a. Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for Rose South Project Area. Perth. Terrestrial Ecosystems. 2019b. Vertebrate Fauna Risk Assessment for the Tuart Project Area. Perth. Thompson, G., and S. Thompson. 2006a. Terrestrial Fauna Survey of Waste Dumps and Undisturbed Areas

Around Placer Dome Australia Pty Ltd - Kalgoorlie West Operations and OMG Cawse Nickel Operations during January 2006.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2002. Terrestrial fauna surveys: Why, when and how much? Pages 25-36 in Goldfields Environmental Management Group 2002 Workshop on Environmental Management in Arid and Semi-Arid Areas. Goldfields Environmental Management Group, Kalgoorlie.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2004a. Rehabilitation: Being environmentally neutral. Pages 129-134 in Workshop on Environmental Management: Proceedings 2004. Goldfields Environmental Management Group, PO Box 2412, Boulder, WA 6432, Kalgoorlie.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2005a. Mammals or reptiles, as surveyed by pit-traps, as bio-indicators of rehabilitation success for mine sites in the goldfields region of Western Australia? Pacific Conservation Biology 11:268-286.

34

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2006b. The impact of land clearing and mining on arid-adapted frogs. Pages 18-35 in Goldfields Environmental Management Workshop 2006 Proceedings. Goldfields Environmental Management Group, Kalgoorlie.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2006c. Small vertebrate colonisers of mine site rehabilitated waste dumps in the Goldfields of Western Australia. Pages 309-318 in Mine Closure 2006, Proceedings of the First International Seminar on Mine Closure 13-15 September 2006. Australian Centre for Geomechanics, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2007a. Early and late colonizers in mine site rehabilitated waste dumps in the Goldfields of Western Australia. Pacific Conservation Biology 13:235-243.

Thompson, G. G., and S. A. Thompson. 2007b. Temporal and spatial variability in trappable terrestrial vertebrate fauna assemblages in semi-arid habitats. Page 162 in ESA 2007, Program and Abstracts. Ecological Society of Australia, Perth.

Thompson, G. G., S. A. Thompson, and J. L. Fraser. 2003a. Surface activity of arid-adapted frogs. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 86:115-116.

Thompson, G. G., S. A. Thompson, P. C. Withers, and E. R. Pianka. 2003b. Diversity and abundance of pit-trapped reptiles in Australian arid and mesic habitats: Biodiversity for environmental impact assessments. Pacific Conservation Biology 9:120-135.

Thompson, G. G., P. C. Withers, E. R. Pianka, and S. A. Thompson. 2003c. Assessing biodiversity with species accumulation curves; inventories of small reptiles by pit-trapping in Western Australia. Austral Ecology 28:361-383.

Thompson, S., and G. Thompson. 2003a. Rehabilitation index and monitoring protocol for evaluating the success of rehabilitated mining sites. Perth.

Thompson, S. A. 2001. Fauna communities as an indicator of rehabilitation success - a preliminary analysis.in Goldfields Land Rehabilitation Group Annual general meeting, Kalgoorlie.

Thompson, S. A. 2002. Rehabilitation index based on reptile community structure for mine site monitoring. Pages 13-24 in 2002 Workshop on Environmental Management in Arid and Semi-arid Areas. Goldfields Environmental Management Group, Kalgoorlie.

Thompson, S. A. 2003a. Geckos show the way. Page 10 Kalgoorlie Miner. Kalgoorlie Miner, Kalgoorlie. Thompson, S. A. 2003b. Mine rehabilitation and pygmy possums. Page 3 Kalgoorlie Miner. Kalgoorlie Miner,

Kalgoorlie. Thompson, S. A. 2003c. Reproductive observations of a Thorny Devil, Moloch horridus, in a natural semi-arid

environment. The Western Australian Naturalist 24:73-78. Thompson, S. A. 2004. Mine site rehabilitation index using reptile assemblage as a bio-indicator. PhD. Edith

Cowan University, Perth. Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2003b. The western bearded dragon, Pogona minor, (Squamata:

Agamidae): An early lizard coloniser of rehabilitated areas. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 86:1-6.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2004b. Adequacy of rehabilitation monitoring practices in the Western Australian mining industry. Ecological Management and Restoration 5:30-33.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2005b. Rehabilitation index for evaluating the success of rehabilitated disturbed areas using reptile assemblages as a bio-indicator. Page 98 in Fifth World Congress of Herpetology. Fifth World Congress of Herpetology, Stellenbosch, South Africa, June 2005.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2005c. Temporal variation in reptile assemblages in the Goldfields of Western Australia. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 88:25-36.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2006d. Quantification of rehabilitation success on mine site waste dumps. Pages 731-740 in Mine Closure 2006, Proceedings of the First International Seminar on Mine Closure 13-15 September 2006 Australia. Australian Centre for Geomechanics, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2006e. Reptiles of the Western Australian Goldfields. Goldfields Environmental Management Group, Kalgoorlie, WA.

Thompson, S. A., and G. G. Thompson. 2008. Vertebrate by-catch in invertebrate wet pitfall traps. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 91:237-241.

Thompson, S. A., G. G. Thompson, and P. C. Withers. 2005a. Capture rates of small vertebrates decrease as the pit-trapping effort increase at Ora Banda. Journal of the Royal Society of Western Australia 88:37-39.

Thompson, S. A., G. G. Thompson, and P. C. Withers. 2005b. Influence of pit-trap type on the interpretation of fauna diversity. Wildlife Research 32:131-137.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee. 2014. Conservation Advice Ogyris subterrestris petrina Arid bronze azure (a butterfly). Canberra.

Threatened Species Scientific Committee. 2016. Conservation Advice Pezoporus occidentalis Night Parrot. Canberra.

35

Tyler, M. J., L. A. Smith, and R. E. Johnstone. 2000. Frogs of Western Australia. Western Australian Museum, Perth.

Van Dyck, S., and R. Strahan. 2008. The Mammals of Australia. Reed New Holland, Sydney. Wilson, H. 1937. Notes on the Night Parrot, with references to recent occurrences. Emu 37:79-87. Woinarski, J. C. Z., B. P. Murphy, S. M. Legge, S. T. Garnett, M. J. Lawes, S. Comer, C. R. Dickman, T. S.

Doherty, G. Edwards, A. Nankivell, D. Paton, R. Palmer, and L. A. Woolley. 2017. How many birds are killed by cats in Australia? Biological Conservation 214:76-87.

Woinarski, J. C. Z., B. P. Murphy, R. Palmer, S. M. Legge, C. R. Dickman, T. S. Doherty, G. Edwards, A. Nankivell, J. L. Read, and D. Stokeld. 2018. How many reptiles are killed by cats in Australia? Wildlife Research 45:247-266.

Figures Vertebrate Fauna Assessment – Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

SITELOCATION

KALGOORLIEKALGOORLIE

Native Vegetation SolutionsLEVEL 1 FAUNA ASSESSMENTRACETRACK, ROYAL STANDARD & GOLDEN FUNNEL PROJECT AREAS Figure 1

REGIONAL LOCATION

DerbyBroome

Port Hedland

Geraldton

Kalgoorlie

Albany

Bunbury

PERTH

Karratha

WA Location

N0 20 40 60 80

SCALE 1 : 2 000 000 at A4 (MGA)

100km

0 250 500 750 1000m

SCALE 1 : 25 000 at A4 (MGA)

N

Legend

Site Boundary

Habitat Assessment Location

Figure 2

HABITAT ASSESSMENT LOCATIONS

Native Vegetation SolutionsLEVEL 1 FAUNA ASSESSMENTRACETRACK, ROYAL STANDARD & GOLDEN FUNNEL PROJECT AREAS

Appendix A Results of the EPBC Act Protected

Matters Search Vertebrate Fauna Assessment – Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

EPBC Act Protected Matters Report

This report provides general guidance on matters of national environmental significance and other mattersprotected by the EPBC Act in the area you have selected.

Information on the coverage of this report and qualifications on data supporting this report are contained in thecaveat at the end of the report.

Information is available about Environment Assessments and the EPBC Act including significance guidelines,forms and application process details.

Other Matters Protected by the EPBC Act

Acknowledgements

Buffer: 50.0Km

Matters of NES

Report created: 18/06/19 16:30:53

Coordinates

This map may contain data which are©Commonwealth of Australia(Geoscience Australia), ©PSMA 2010

CaveatExtra Information

DetailsSummary

http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/environment-assessments

Summary

This part of the report summarises the matters of national environmental significance that may occur in, or mayrelate to, the area you nominated. Further information is available in the detail part of the report, which can beaccessed by scrolling or following the links below. If you are proposing to undertake an activity that may have asignificant impact on one or more matters of national environmental significance then you should consider theAdministrative Guidelines on Significance.

Matters of National Environmental Significance

Listed Threatened Ecological Communities:

Listed Migratory Species:

None

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park:

Wetlands of International Importance:

Listed Threatened Species:

None

7

1

None

National Heritage Places:

Commonwealth Marine Area:

World Heritage Properties:

None

None

7

The EPBC Act protects the environment on Commonwealth land, the environment from the actions taken onCommonwealth land, and the environment from actions taken by Commonwealth agencies. As heritage values of aplace are part of the 'environment', these aspects of the EPBC Act protect the Commonwealth Heritage values of aCommonwealth Heritage place. Information on the new heritage laws can be found athttp://www.environment.gov.au/heritage

This part of the report summarises other matters protected under the Act that may relate to the area you nominated.Approval may be required for a proposed activity that significantly affects the environment on Commonwealth land,when the action is outside the Commonwealth land, or the environment anywhere when the action is taken onCommonwealth land. Approval may also be required for the Commonwealth or Commonwealth agencies proposing totake an action that is likely to have a significant impact on the environment anywhere.

A permit may be required for activities in or on a Commonwealth area that may affect a member of a listed threatenedspecies or ecological community, a member of a listed migratory species, whales and other cetaceans, or a member ofa listed marine species.


None

None

None

Listed Marine Species:

Whales and Other Cetaceans:

12

Commonwealth Heritage Places:

4

None

Critical Habitats:

Commonwealth Land:

Commonwealth Reserves Terrestrial:

NoneAustralian Marine Parks:

Extra Information

This part of the report provides information that may also be relevant to the area you have nominated.

1

7State and Territory Reserves:

Nationally Important Wetlands:

NoneRegional Forest Agreements:

Invasive Species: 17

NoneKey Ecological Features (Marine)

http://www.environment.gov.au/protection/environment-assessments

http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/permits-and-application-forms

Details

Listed Threatened Species [ Resource Information ]Name Status Type of PresenceBirds

Curlew Sandpiper [856] Critically Endangered Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Calidris ferruginea

Malleefowl [934] Vulnerable Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Leipoa ocellata

Night Parrot [59350] Endangered Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Pezoporus occidentalis

Insects

Arid Bronze Azure [77743] Critically Endangered Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Ogyris subterrestris petrina

Mammals

Chuditch, Western Quoll [330] Vulnerable Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Dasyurus geoffroii

Plants

Granite Poison [14872] Endangered Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Gastrolobium graniticum

Star Sun-orchid [7060] Endangered Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Thelymitra stellata

Listed Migratory Species [ Resource Information ]* Species is listed under a different scientific name on the EPBC Act - Threatened Species list.Name Threatened Type of PresenceMigratory Marine Birds

Fork-tailed Swift [678] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Apus pacificus

Migratory Terrestrial Species

Grey Wagtail [642] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Motacilla cinerea

Migratory Wetlands Species

National Heritage Properties [ Resource Information ]Name StatusStateHistoricGoldfields Water Supply Scheme, Western Australia Listed placeWA

Matters of National Environmental Significance

Name Threatened Type of Presence

Common Sandpiper [59309] Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Actitis hypoleucos

Sharp-tailed Sandpiper [874] Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Calidris acuminata


Calidris ferruginea

Pectoral Sandpiper [858] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Calidris melanotos

Common Greenshank, Greenshank [832] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Tringa nebularia

Listed Marine Species [ Resource Information ]* Species is listed under a different scientific name on the EPBC Act - Threatened Species list.Name Threatened Type of PresenceBirds

Common Sandpiper [59309] Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Actitis hypoleucos

Fork-tailed Swift [678] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Apus pacificus

Great Egret, White Egret [59541] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Ardea alba

Cattle Egret [59542] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Ardea ibis

Sharp-tailed Sandpiper [874] Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Calidris acuminata


Calidris ferruginea

Pectoral Sandpiper [858] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Calidris melanotos

Black-eared Cuckoo [705] Species or species habitatknown to occur

Chrysococcyx osculans

Commonwealth Land [ Resource Information ]The Commonwealth area listed below may indicate the presence of Commonwealth land in this vicinity. Due tothe unreliability of the data source, all proposals should be checked as to whether it impacts on aCommonwealth area, before making a definitive decision. Contact the State or Territory government landdepartment for further information.

NameCommonwealth Land -Defence - AIRTC KALGOORLIEDefence - KALGOORLIE RIFLE RANGEDefence - KALGOORLIE TRAINING DEPOT


Name Threatened Type of Presencewithin area

Rainbow Bee-eater [670] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Merops ornatus

Grey Wagtail [642] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Motacilla cinerea

Hooded Plover [59510] Species or species habitatknown to occur within area

Thinornis rubricollis

Common Greenshank, Greenshank [832] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Tringa nebularia

State and Territory Reserves [ Resource Information ]Name StateClear And Muddy Lakes WACredo WAKalgoorlie Arboretum WAKangaroo Hills Timber Reserve WAKurrawang WALakeside Timber Reserve WARowles Lagoon WA

Extra Information

Invasive Species [ Resource Information ]Weeds reported here are the 20 species of national significance (WoNS), along with other introduced plantsthat are considered by the States and Territories to pose a particularly significant threat to biodiversity. Thefollowing feral animals are reported: Goat, Red Fox, Cat, Rabbit, Pig, Water Buffalo and Cane Toad. Maps fromLandscape Health Project, National Land and Water Resouces Audit, 2001.

Name Status Type of PresenceBirds

Rock Pigeon, Rock Dove, Domestic Pigeon [803] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Columba livia

Spotted Turtle-Dove [780] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Streptopelia chinensis

Laughing Turtle-dove, Laughing Dove [781] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Streptopelia senegalensis

Mammals

Dromedary, Camel [7] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Camelus dromedarius

Domestic Dog [82654] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Canis lupus familiaris

Goat [2] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Capra hircus

Donkey, Ass [4] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Equus asinus

Horse [5] Species or speciesEquus caballus

Nationally Important Wetlands [ Resource Information ]Name StateRowles Lagoon System WA

Name Status Type of Presencehabitat likely to occur withinarea

Cat, House Cat, Domestic Cat [19] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Felis catus

House Mouse [120] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Mus musculus

Rabbit, European Rabbit [128] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Oryctolagus cuniculus

Red Fox, Fox [18] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Vulpes vulpes

Plants

Ward's Weed [9511] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Carrichtera annua

Buffel-grass, Black Buffel-grass [20213] Species or species habitatmay occur within area

Cenchrus ciliaris

Prickly Pears [85131] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Cylindropuntia spp.

African Boxthorn, Boxthorn [19235] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Lycium ferocissimum

Reptiles

Asian House Gecko [1708] Species or species habitatlikely to occur within area

Hemidactylus frenatus

- non-threatened seabirds which have only been mapped for recorded breeding sites

- migratory species that are very widespread, vagrant, or only occur in small numbers

- some species and ecological communities that have only recently been listed

Not all species listed under the EPBC Act have been mapped (see below) and therefore a report is a general guide only. Where available datasupports mapping, the type of presence that can be determined from the data is indicated in general terms. People using this information in makinga referral may need to consider the qualifications below and may need to seek and consider other information sources.

For threatened ecological communities where the distribution is well known, maps are derived from recovery plans, State vegetation maps, remotesensing imagery and other sources. Where threatened ecological community distributions are less well known, existing vegetation maps and pointlocation data are used to produce indicative distribution maps.

- seals which have only been mapped for breeding sites near the Australian continent

Such breeding sites may be important for the protection of the Commonwealth Marine environment.

Threatened, migratory and marine species distributions have been derived through a variety of methods. Where distributions are well known and iftime permits, maps are derived using either thematic spatial data (i.e. vegetation, soils, geology, elevation, aspect, terrain, etc) together with pointlocations and described habitat; or environmental modelling (MAXENT or BIOCLIM habitat modelling) using point locations and environmental datalayers.

The information presented in this report has been provided by a range of data sources as acknowledged at the end of the report.Caveat

- migratory and

The following species and ecological communities have not been mapped and do not appear in reports produced from this database:

- marine

This report is designed to assist in identifying the locations of places which may be relevant in determining obligations under the EnvironmentProtection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. It holds mapped locations of World and National Heritage properties, Wetlands of Internationaland National Importance, Commonwealth and State/Territory reserves, listed threatened, migratory and marine species and listed threatenedecological communities. Mapping of Commonwealth land is not complete at this stage. Maps have been collated from a range of sources at variousresolutions.

- threatened species listed as extinct or considered as vagrants

- some terrestrial species that overfly the Commonwealth marine area

The following groups have been mapped, but may not cover the complete distribution of the species:

Only selected species covered by the following provisions of the EPBC Act have been mapped:

Where very little information is available for species or large number of maps are required in a short time-frame, maps are derived either from 0.04or 0.02 decimal degree cells; by an automated process using polygon capture techniques (static two kilometre grid cells, alpha-hull and convex hull);or captured manually or by using topographic features (national park boundaries, islands, etc). In the early stages of the distribution mappingprocess (1999-early 2000s) distributions were defined by degree blocks, 100K or 250K map sheets to rapidly create distribution maps. More reliabledistribution mapping methods are used to update these distributions as time permits.

-30.58034 121.22623

Coordinates

-Environment and Planning Directorate, ACT-Birdlife Australia-Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme

-Department of Parks and Wildlife, Western Australia

Acknowledgements

-Office of Environment and Heritage, New South Wales

-Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, Tasmania

-Department of Land and Resource Management, Northern Territory-Department of Environmental and Heritage Protection, Queensland

-Department of Environment and Primary Industries, Victoria

-Australian National Wildlife Collection

-Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South Australia

This database has been compiled from a range of data sources. The department acknowledges the followingcustodians who have contributed valuable data and advice:

-Australian Museum

-National Herbarium of NSW

Forestry Corporation, NSW-Australian Government, Department of Defence

-State Herbarium of South Australia

The Department is extremely grateful to the many organisations and individuals who provided expert adviceand information on numerous draft distributions.

-Natural history museums of Australia

-Queensland Museum

-Australian National Herbarium, Canberra

-Royal Botanic Gardens and National Herbarium of Victoria

-Geoscience Australia

-Ocean Biogeographic Information System

-Online Zoological Collections of Australian Museums-Queensland Herbarium

-Western Australian Herbarium

-Tasmanian Herbarium

-Northern Territory Herbarium

-South Australian Museum

-Museum Victoria

-University of New England

-CSIRO

-Other groups and individuals-Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, Hobart, Tasmania

-Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory

-Reef Life Survey Australia-Australian Institute of Marine Science-Australian Government National Environmental Science Program

-Australian Tropical Herbarium, Cairns

-Australian Government – Australian Antarctic Data Centre

-Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, Inveresk, Tasmania

-eBird Australia

-American Museum of Natural History

© Commonwealth of Australia

+61 2 6274 1111

Canberra ACT 2601 Australia

GPO Box 787

Department of the Environment

Please feel free to provide feedback via the Contact Us page.

http://www.environment.act.gov.au/

http://birdlife.org.au/

http://www.environment.gov.au/science/bird-and-bat-banding

http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/

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

http://dpipwe.tas.gov.au/

https://nt.gov.au/environment/environment-data-maps

http://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/

http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/home

http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Collections/ANWC

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/Home

http://australianmuseum.net.au/

http://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/science/Herbarium_and_resources/nsw_herbarium

http://www.forestrycorporation.com.au/

http://www.defence.gov.au/

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/Science/Science_research/State_Herbarium

http://www.qm.qld.gov.au/

http://www.anbg.gov.au/cpbr/herbarium/

http://www.rbg.vic.gov.au/science/herbarium-and-resources/national-herbarium-of-victoria

http://www.ga.gov.au/

http://www.iobis.org/

http://ozcam.org.au/

http://www.qld.gov.au/environment/plants-animals/plants/herbarium/

http://www.dpaw.wa.gov.au/plants-and-animals/wa-herbarium

http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/collections_and_research/tasmanian_herbarium

https://nt.gov.au/environment/native-plants/native-plants-and-nt-herbarium

http://www.samuseum.sa.gov.au/

http://museumvictoria.com.au/

http://www.une.edu.au

http://www.csiro.au/

http://www.tmag.tas.gov.au/

http://www.magnt.net.au/

http://reeflifesurvey.com/reef-life-survey/rls-australia/

http://www.aims.gov.au/

https://www.environment.gov.au/science/nerp

https://www.ath.org.au/

https://data.aad.gov.au/

http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/qvmag/

http://ebird.org/content/australia/

http://www.amnh.org/

http://www.environment.gov.au/copyright-statement

http://www.environment.gov.au/about-us/contact-us

Appendix B Vertebrate Fauna Recorded in Biological

Surveys in the Region Vertebrate Fauna Assessment – Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

Appendix B(1). Vertebrate fauna assessments Surveys A B C D E F

Family Species Common Name Unk

now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Fish Cobitidae Carassius auratus Goldfish X Terapontidae Leiopotherapon unicolor Spangled Perch X Amphibians Hylidae Litoria moorei Motorbike Frog X 1 Limnodynastidae Neobatrachus kunapalari Kunapalari Frog X 10 1 8 1 1 1 1 Neobatrachus pelobatoides Humming Frog X 2 Neobatrachus sutor Shoemaker Frog X 1 Neobatrachus wilsmorei Goldfields Bullfrog X 2 Myobatrachidae Pseudophryne occidentalis Orange-crowned Toadlet X 32 Reptiles Agamidae Ctenophorus caudicinctus Ring-tailed Dragon X Ctenophorus cristatus Crested Dragon X 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ctenophorus fordi Mallee Dragon X 16 1 7 Ctenophorus isolepis Crested Dragon X 8 Ctenophorus maculatus Spotted Dragon X Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon X Ctenophorus pictus Painted Dragon X Ctenophorus reticulatus Western Netted Dragon X 29 1 1 Ctenophorus salinarum Saltpan Dragon X 10 Ctenophorus scutulatus Lozenge-marked Dragon X 12 1 4 Diporiphora amphiboluroides Mulga Dragon X 1 Moloch horridus Thorny Devil X 12 1 1 1 1 Pogona minor Dwarf Bearded Dragon X 20 1 2 1 Tympanocryptis cephalus Pebble Dragon X 1 Tympanocryptis lineata Lined Earless Dragon X 1 Boidae Morelia spilota imbricata Carpet Python X 3 Carphodactylidae Nephrurus laevissimus Smooth Knob-tail X 1 Nephrurus vertebralis Midline Knob-tail X 1 Underwoodisaurus milii Barking Gecko X 35 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 Diplodactylidae Amalosia reticulata Reticulated Velvet Gecko X 3 1 1 Crenadactylus ocellatus Clawless Gecko X Diplodactylus conspicillatus Fat-tailed Diplodactylus X Diplodactylus granariensis Wheat-belt Stone Gecko X 24 1 3 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 Diplodactylus pulcher Fine-faced Gecko X 16 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Hesperoedura reticulata Reticulated Velvet Gecko X Lucasium damaeum Beaded Gecko X 3 Lucasium maini Main's Ground Gecko X 21 2 1 1 6 1 Oedura marmorata Marbled Velvet Gecko X Strophurus assimilis Goldfields Spiny-tailed Gecko X 4 5 2 5 Strophurus elderi Jewelled Gecko X 5 Elapidae Acanthophis pyrrhus Desert Death Adder X 1

Surveys A B C D E F


now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Brachyurophis fasciolata Narrow-banded Burrowing Snake X 1 Brachyurophis semifasciata Half-girdlerd Snake X 4 1 Demansia psammophis Yellow-faced Whipsnake X 1 1 1 1 Echiopsis curta Bardick X 1 Furina ornata Orange-naped Snake X 1 Neelaps bimaculatus Black-naped Burrowing Snake X 5 Parasuta gouldii Gould's Snake X 6 Parasuta monachus Monk Snake X 17 Pseudechis australis Mulga Snake X 5 1 Pseudonaja affinis Dugite X 1 Pseudonaja mengdeni Gwardar X 32 Pseudonaja modesta Ringed Brown Snake X 15 Simoselaps bertholdi Jan's Banded Snake X 14 1 1 Suta fasciata Rosen's Snake X 9 Suta suta Curl Snake X Gekkonidae Christinus marmoratus Marbled Gecko X Gehyra purpurascens Purplish Dtella X 3 1 1 2 Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella X 24 1 2 1 1 1 1 Hemidactylus frenatus Asian House Gecko X 3 Heteronotia binoei Bynoe's Prickly Gecko X 67 1 1 1 Rhynchoedura ornata Western Beaked Gecko X 7 1 Pygopodidae Aprasia repens Sedgelands Worm-lizard X Delma australis Marble-faced Delma X 6 1 1 1 Delma butleri Unbanded Delma X 5 Lialis burtonis Burton's Snake-lizard X 2 1 Pygopus lepidopodus Common Scaly-foot X 1 1 Pygopus nigriceps Western Hooded Scaly-foot X 4 Scincidae Cryptoblepharus buchananii Buchanan's Snake-eyed Skink X 8 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ctenotus atlas Southern Mallee Ctenotus X 10 1 1 7 Ctenotus australis Western Limestone Ctenotus X Ctenotus brooksi Wedgsnout Ctenotus X Ctenotus leonhardii Leonhardi's Ctenotus X 7 Ctenotus schomburgkii Schomburgk's Ctenotus X 2 1 1 7 Ctenotus uber Spotted Ctenotus X 15 1 1 1 Cyclodomorphus branchialis Common Slender Bluetongue 1 Cyclodomorphus melanops Spinifex Slender Bluetongue X 6 Egernia depressa Pygmy Spiny-tailed Skink X 10 1 1 Scincidae Egernia formosa Goldfields Crevice-skink X 12 Egernia richardi Bright Crevice-skink X Egernia stokesii Western Spiny-tailed Skink X 1 Eremiascincus richardsonii Broad-banded Sand Swimmer X 3 1 Hemiergis initialis South-western Earless Skink X 19 Hemiergis peronii Lowlands Earless Skink X 1

Surveys A B C D E F


now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Lampropholis guichenoti Pale-flecked Garden Skink X Lerista kingi King's Slider X Lerista muelleri Wood Mulch-slider X 33 Lerista picturata Southern Robust Slider X 10 1 1 1 Lerista timida Timid Slider X Liopholis inornata Desert Skink X 7 1 1 1 Liopholis striata Nocturnal Desert Skink X 2 Menetia greyii Common Dwarf Skink X 19 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 Morethia adelaidensis Saltbush Morethia Skink X 12 Morethia butleri Woodland Morethia Skink X 9 Morethia obscura Shrubland Morethia Skink X 2 Tiliqua occipitalis Western Blue-tongued Lizard X 1 2 1 Tiliqua rugosa Bobtail X 5 1 1 1 3 1 Typhlopidae Anilios australis Austral Blind Snake X 18 1 1 Anilios bicolor Dark-spined Blind Snake 6 Anilios bituberculatus Prong-snouted Blind Snake X 26 Anilios hamatus Pale-headed Blind Snake 1 Anilios waitii Waite's Blind Snake 2 Varanidae Varanus caudolineatus Stripe-tailed Monitor X 8 1 Varanus gouldii Gould's Goanna X 8 2 1 1 1 1 1 Varanus tristis Black-headed Monitor X 3 3 Chelidae Chelodina colliei Oblong Turtle X Birds Casuariidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu 2 2 1 1 1 Megapodiidae Leipoa ocellata Malleefowl 1 Columbidae Phaps chalcoptera Common Bronzewing 5 2 2 1 Phaps elegans Brush Bronzewing 2 Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon 2 1 1 Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth 2 1 1 1 Caprimulgidae Eurostopodus argus Spotted Nightjar 1 Aegothelidae Aegotheles cristatus Australian Owlet-nightjar 1 Accipitridae Lophoictinia isura Square-tailed Kite 2 1 1 1 Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle 1 Falconidae Falco cenchroides Nankeen Kestrel 1 1 Falco berigora Brown Falcon 1 1 1 Charadriidae Vanellus tricolor Banded Lapwing 1 Cacatuidae Eolophus roseicapillus Galah 1 1 1 Psittacidae Glossopsitta porphyrocephala Purple-crowned Lorikeet 10 31 4 13 6 Polytelis anthopeplus Regent Parrot 2 8 1 1 1 Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck 6 2 6 2 6 3 31 3 1 Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot 5 1 Cuculidae Chalcites osculans Black-eared Cuckoo 1 1 3 1 2 1 Chalcites lucidus Shining Bronze-cuckoo 1

Surveys A B C D E F


now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Cacomantis pallidus Pallid Cuckoo 2 1 1 Strigidae Ninox novaeseelandiae Southern Boobook 1 Meropidae Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 Climacteridae Climacteris rufa Rufous Treecreeper X 26 4 Ptilonorhynchidae Ptilonorhynchus maculatus Spotted Bowerbird 1 Maluridae Malurus splendens Splendid Fairy-wren X 5 1 Malurus pulcherrimus Blue-breasted Fairy-wren X 2 5 1 Acanthizidae Sericornis frontalis White-browed Scrubwren X Hylacola cauta Shy Heathwren X 2 Calamanthus campestris Rufous Fieldwren X Pyrrholaemus brunneus Redthroat X 6 9 11 1 5 6 1 Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill 24 19 1 30 23 8 40 57 1 1 1 1 1 Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill X Gerygone fusca Western Gerygone X 1 Acanthiza robustirostris Slaty-backed Thornbill X Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Yellow-rumped Thornbill X 2 5 5 1 1 1 Acanthiza uropygialis Chestnut-rumped Thornbill X 35 45 41 1 1 23 8 1 1 1 Acanthiza iredalei Slender-billed Thornbill X Acanthiza apicalis Inland Thornbill X 2 4 2 3 6 5 1 1 Aphelocephala leucopsis Southern Whiteface X 1 Pardalotidae Pardalotus punctatus Spotted Pardalote X Pardalotus rubricatus Red-browed Pardalote X Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote X 1 1 5 2 1 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 Meliphagidae Certhionyx variegatus Pied Honeyeater X Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater X 1 Lichenostomus leucotis White-eared Honeyeater X 4 4 6 3 16 2 3 1 14 1 1 Lichenostomus cratitius Purple-gaped Honeyeater X Lichenostomus ornatus Yellow-plumed Honeyeater X 19 2 1 30 6 52 94 14 16 1 1 1 1 1 Lichenostomus plumulus Grey-fronted Honeyeater Purnella albifrons White-fronted Honeyeater X 5 25 8 6 28 21 12 28 1 Manorina flavigula Yellow-throated Miner X 8 11 2 6 8 1 1 1 1 Acanthagenys rufogularis Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater X 2 7 1 3 4 5 2 4 1 1 1 Anthochaera carunculata Red Wattlebird X 4 1 3 8 3 2 14 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 Epthianura tricolor Crimson Chat X Epthianura aurifrons Orange Chat X Epthianura albifrons White-fronted Chat X Sugomel niger Black Honeyeater X Lichmera indistincta Brown Honeyeater X 2 1 1 5 1 1 Phylidonyris niger White-cheeked Honeyeater X Melithreptus brevirostris Brown-headed Honeyeater X 2 1 4 1 5 4 Pomatostomidae Pomatostomus superciliosus White-browed Babbler X 6 15 1 Psophodidae Cinclosoma castanotum Chestnut Quail-thrush X 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella X 7

Surveys A B C D E F


now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Campephagidae Coracina maxima Ground Cuckoo-shrike 1 Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike X 3 1 6 7 2 2 1 1 1 Lalage sueurii White-winged Triller X 1 Pachycephalidae Pachycephala inornata Gilbert's Whistler X 1 1 Pachycephala pectoralis Golden Whistler 1 1 Pachycephala simplex Grey Whistler 1 Pachycephala rufiventris Rufous Whistler X 2 Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush X 1 3 3 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird X 2 2 2 6 2 5 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 Artamidae Artamus personatus Masked Woodswallow X Artamus cinereus Black-faced Woodswallow X 1 1 1 Artamus cyanopterus Dusky Woodswallow X 2 6 Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird X 1 3 2 4 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird X 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cracticus tibicen Australian Magpie X 2 2 1 1 1 1 Strepera versicolor Grey Currawong 2 4 1 4 1 2 3 3 5 1 1 1 Rhipiduridae Rhipidura albiscapa Grey Fantail X Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail X 1 4 1 Corvidae Corvus coronoides Australian Raven X 6 1 4 1 1 8 1 3 1 Corvus bennetti Little Crow X 1 1 3 1 1 1 Corvus orru Torresian Crow X Monarchidae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark X 1 1 Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter X 11 1 1 Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin X 8 16 1 1 Eopsaltria griseogularis Western Yellow Robin X 2 Drymodes brunneopygia Southern Scrub-robin X Megaluridae Cincloramphus mathewsi Rufous Songlark X Cincloramphus cruralis Brown Songlark Timaliidae Zosterops lateralis Mauritius Olive White-eye X Hirundinidae Cheramoeca leucosterna White-backed Swallow X 1 Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow X 2 Petrochelidon ariel Fairy Martin X Hirundo nigricans Tree Martin X Nectariniidae Dicaeum hirundinaceum Mistletoebird X 1 1 Estrildidae Taeniopygia guttata Zebra Finch X Motacillidae Anthus novaeseelandiae Australasian Pipit X 1 Mammals Bovidae Capra hircus Goat 1 Ovis aries Sheep 1 Canidae Canis lupus Dingo X 3 Vulpes vulpes Red Fox 1 Felidae Felis catus House Cat X 1 Molossidae Austronomus australis White-striped Free-tail Bat X 6

Surveys A B C D E F


now

n

Site

9

Site

1

Site

10

Site

2

Site

5

Site

6

Site

12

Site

3

Site

8

Site

7

Site

11

Site

13

Whi

te F

oil

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#6

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#4

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#7

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#2

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#1

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#3

Kur

raw

ang

NR

#5

Site

3

Site

9

Site

1

Site

8

Mormopterus planiceps Southern Free-tail Bat X 18 Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus gouldii Gould's Wattled Bat X 17 Chalinolobus morio Chocolate Wattled Bat X 35 Nyctophilus geoffroyi Lesser Long-eared Bat 5 Nyctophilus geoffroyi Lesser Long-eared Bat X Nyctophilus major Greater Long-eared Bat 1 Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat X 4 Vespadelus baverstocki Inland Forest Bat X 1 Vespadelus regulus Southern Forest Bat X 8 Dasyuridae Antechinomys laniger Kultarr X 1 Ningaui ridei Wongai Ningaui X 2 1 2 Ningaui yvonneae Mallee Ningaui X 8 1 Pseudantechinus woolleyae Woolley's False Antechinus X 1 Sminthopsis crassicaudata Fat-tailed Dunnart X 58 2 1 Sminthopsis dolichura Little Long-tailed Dunnart X 30 1 13 4 1 1 15 1 2 2 Sminthopsis gilberti Gilbert's Dunnart X 2 Sminthopsis murina Common Dunnart X Sminthopsis ooldea Ooldea Dunnart X 1 Myrmecobiidae Myrmecobius fasciatus Numbat X 1 Burramyidae Cercartetus concinnus Southwestern Pygmy Possum X 1 1 2 1 2 1 4 1 3 2 3 1 1 Macropodidae Macropus fuliginosus Western Grey Kangaroo X 5 1 Macropus robustus Euro X 1 1 Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo 1 Potoroidae Bettongia lesueur Shark Bay Burrowing Bettong X Leporidae Oryctolagus cuniculus European Rabbit X 1 1 Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus Short-beaked Echidna X 1 1 1 1 Thylacomyidae Macrotis lagotis Bilby X 3 Muridae Mus musculus House Mouse X 45 4 9 1 Notomys alexis Spinifex Hopping Mouse X Notomys mitchellii Mitchell's Hopping Mouse X 2 42 1 29 2 1 Pseudomys albocinereus Ash-grey Mouse X 1 Pseudomys bolami Bolam's Mouse X 32 1 Pseudomys hermannsburgensis Sandy Inland Mouse X 41 1 1 13 2 1 1 Pseudomys nanus Western Chestnut Mouse X

A Atlas of Living Australia B Western Australian Museum records C Bamford, M.J., Davies, S.J.J.F. and Ladd, P.G. (1990) Biological Survey of the Kangaroo Hills and Calooli Timber Reserves, Coolgardie, Western Australia. D Ninox Wildlife Consulting (1999) Fauna Survey for the White Foil Gold Project, Unpublished report for Mines and Resources Australia Pty Ltd, Perth. E Chapman, A., Kealley, I., McMillan, D., McMillan, P. and Rolland, G. (1991) Biological surveys of four Goldfields Reserves, Landnote, 1/91, 1-26. F Hart and Associates (2000) Anaconda Nickel Ltd, Cawse Expansion Project, Fauna Survey, Unpublished report for Anaconda Nickel Ltd, Perth

Appendix B(2). Vertebrate fauna assessments Surveys A B

Spin

ifex

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Tra

ns

Gim

let

Sout

h Und

ist

Ros

e T

rans

Salm

on G

ums

Gim

let

Sout

h T

rans

Pal

ace

Reh

ab

Dav

yhur

st

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Und

ist

Pal

ace

Und

ist

Secu

rity

Cro

ssro

ads

Gim

let

Sout

h R

ehab

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Reh

ab

Pal

ace

Tra

ns

Ros

e R

ehab

Ros

e U

ndis

t

Wen

dy G

ully

Reh

ab

Wen

dy G

ully

Tra

ns

Wen

dy G

ully

Und

ist

Flo

odpl

ains

KK

4

KK

1

KK

2

KK

11

Amphibians Limnodynastidae Neobatrachus kunapalari Kunapalari Frog 1 1 Neobatrachus sutor Shoemaker Frog 9 6 30 5 3 6 5 10 19 25 22 12 7 2 2 1 9 1 8 Neobatrachus wilsmorei Goldfields Bullfrog 1 Myobatrachidae Pseudophryne occidentalis Orange-crowned Toadlet 5 84 1 147 1 1 1 95 4 158 2 2 2 2 Reptile Agamidae Ctenophorus caudicinctus Ring-tailed Dragon Ctenophorus cristatus Crested Dragon 1 5 3 1 3 1 10 1 1 1 2 4 1 3 Ctenophorus reticulatus Western Netted Dragon 13 2 3 1 3 4 19 30 6 12 18 1 1 3 3 5 Ctenophorus scutulatus Lozenge-marked Dragon 2 2 3 2 5 2 1 13 8 Diporiphora amphiboluroides Mulga Dragon 7 Moloch horridus Thorny Devil 1 5 1 1 17 1 Pogona minor Dwarf Bearded Dragon 1 Pogona minor Dwarf Bearded Dragon 13 9 3 2 2 4 20 11 14 3 14 21 12 10 8 18 2 14 4 24 2 Tympanocryptis cephalus Pebble Dragon 7 1 2 1 1 Carphodactylidae Nephrurus laevissimus Smooth Knob-tail 1 Nephrurus vertebralis Midline Knob-tail 1 Underwoodisaurus milii Barking Gecko 11 75 18 68 31 231 20 16 22 22 2 83 97 47 98 10 37 33 28 10 2 Diplodactylidae Amalosia reticulata Reticulated Velvet Gecko 1 4 1 Diplodactylus granariensis Wheat-belt Stone Gecko 77 6 71 36 18 8 2 74 13 62 8 29 22 2 2 34 68 33 38 76 1 1 2 4 Diplodactylus pulcher Fine-faced Gecko 53 2 21 3 8 1 1 86 78 88 123 80 6 3 4 100 1 3 46 12 1 2 Lucasium maini Main's Ground Gecko 9 1 60 346 1 9 6 39 1 9 2 69 1 1 1 3 5 Strophurus assimilis Goldfields Spiny-tailed Gecko 44 4 7 1 3 1 19 1 3 8 1 1 14 15 112 Elapidae Brachyurophis semifasciata Half-girdlerd Snake 9 6 7 6 5 2 1 Demansia psammophis Yellow-faced Whipsnake 1 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 Parasuta gouldii Gould's Snake 1 Parasuta monachus Monk Snake 2 4 2 7 3 9 3 11 4 2 1 3 1 3 1 6 1 Pseudechis australis Mulga Snake 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 Pseudonaja mengdeni Gwardar 1 1 1 1 1 Pseudonaja modesta Ringed Brown Snake 1 1 2 2 1 1 Simoselaps bertholdi Jan's Banded Snake 2 4 8 2 1 1 2 1 Suta fasciata Rosen's Snake 3 2 1 1 Gekkonidae Gehyra purpurascens Purplish Dtella 1 1 1 1 1 9 6 6 Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella 23 37 13 14 27 2 38 28 45 39 6 18 1 1 3 37 3 1 12 2 1 3 2 Heteronotia binoei Bynoe's Prickly Gecko 24 53 9 27 10 21 19 16 12 28 25 1 29 43 42 34 13 42 27 8 1 2 6 6 Rhynchoedura ornata Western Beaked Gecko 4 3 5 23 20 41 1 106 9 1 Pygopodidae Delma australis Marble-faced Delma 8 3 1 4 2 9 1 2 6 1 Delma butleri Unbanded Delma 4 2 2 Delma fraseri Fraser's Delma 1 1 Lialis burtonis Burton's Snake-lizard 5 2 3 2 Pygopus lepidopodus Common Scaly-foot 2 2 3 2 1

Surveys A B

Spin

ifex

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Tra

ns

Gim

let

Sout

h Und

ist

Ros

e T

rans

Salm

on G

ums

Gim

let

Sout

h T

rans

Pal

ace

Reh

ab

Dav

yhur

st

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Und

ist

Pal

ace

Und

ist

Secu

rity

Cro

ssro

ads

Gim

let

Sout

h R

ehab

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Reh

ab

Pal

ace

Tra

ns

Ros

e R

ehab

Ros

e U

ndis

t

Wen

dy G

ully

Reh

ab

Wen

dy G

ully

Tra

ns

Wen

dy G

ully

Und

ist

Flo

odpl

ains

KK

4

KK

1

KK

2

KK

11

Pygopus nigriceps Western Hooded Scaly-foot Scincidae Cryptoblepharus buchananii Buchanan's Snake-eyed Skink 12 3 10 1 5 3 1 7 4 Ctenotus atlas Southern Mallee Ctenotus 16 1 1 2 104 6 Ctenotus schomburgkii Schomburgk's Ctenotus 2 2 1 Ctenotus uber Spotted Ctenotus 7 Ctenotus uber Spotted Ctenotus 46 2 13 6 29 48 5 44 27 1 3 2 1 25 Cyclodomorphus melanops Spinifex Slender Bluetongue 24 2 2 1 1 6 2 2 2 24 1 Egernia depressa Southern Pygmy Spiny-tailed Skink 15 68 1 3 1 57 2 3 27 3 2 2 3 Egernia formosa Goldfields Crevice-skink 1 4 8 2 8 1 14 1 Eremiascincus richardsonii Broad-banded Sand Swimmer 3 4 6 2 1 5 4 6 2 1 1 1 Hemiergis initialis South-western Earless Skink 12 5 1 4 1 Lerista picturata Southern Robust Slider 14 18 20 18 17 5 1 5 20 2 1 Liopholis inornata Desert Skink 4 8 2 71 2 1 1 1 Liopholis striata Nocturnal Desert Skink 2 9 1 Menetia greyii Common Dwarf Skink 6 3 11 3 4 19 6 23 17 4 2 4 12 18 1 1 Morethia adelaidensis Saltbush Morethia Skink 1 Morethia butleri Woodland Morethia Skink 4 1 4 7 3 14 6 4 17 1 2 Morethia obscura Shrubland Morethia Skink Tiliqua occipitalis Western Blue-tongued Lizard 5 1 2 3 4 Tiliqua rugosa Bobtail 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 7 Typhlopidae Anilios australis Austral Blind Snake 14 14 7 2 8 7 7 1 3 1 2 1 6 Anilios bicolor Dark-spined Blind Snake 1 1 1 Anilios bituberculatus Prong-snouted Blind Snake 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 Anilios hamatus Pale-headed Blind Snake 9 5 24 2 10 2 2 10 18 7 2 13 4 1 6 1 1 9 Anilios sp. Anilios Cape Range Pop 1 Varanidae Varanus caudolineatus Stripe-tailed Monitor 1 15 11 11 1 17 9 2 1 9 1 Varanus gouldii Gould's Goanna 6 2 9 3 8 1 3 10 9 3 2 2 1 4 1 3 7 2 1 1 1 2 Varanus tristis Black-headed Monitor 3 1 1 3 5 Birds Casuariidae Dromaius novaehollandiae Emu 14 11 Anatidae Anas gracilis Grey Teal 10 Columbidae Phaps chalcoptera Common Bronzewing 4 3 Ocyphaps lophotes Crested Pigeon 2 Podargidae Podargus strigoides Tawny Frogmouth 1 Accipitridae Aquila audax Wedge-tailed Eagle 2 Falconidae Falco berigora Brown Falcon 1 Cacatuidae Eolophus roseicapillus Galah 10 Nymphicus hollandicus Cockatiel 15 Psittacidae Glossopsitta porphyrocephala Purple-crowned Lorikeet 3 6 Barnardius zonarius Australian Ringneck 11 63 16 Psephotus varius Mulga Parrot 7 1 Cuculidae Chalcites basalis Horsfield's Bronze-cuckoo 1 2 1

Surveys A B

Spin

ifex

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Tra

ns

Gim

let

Sout

h Und

ist

Ros

e T

rans

Salm

on G

ums

Gim

let

Sout

h T

rans

Pal

ace

Reh

ab

Dav

yhur

st

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Und

ist

Pal

ace

Und

ist

Secu

rity

Cro

ssro

ads

Gim

let

Sout

h R

ehab

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Reh

ab

Pal

ace

Tra

ns

Ros

e R

ehab

Ros

e U

ndis

t

Wen

dy G

ully

Reh

ab

Wen

dy G

ully

Tra

ns

Wen

dy G

ully

Und

ist

Flo

odpl

ains

KK

4

KK

1

KK

2

KK

11

Cacomantis pallidus Pallid Cuckoo 1 4 1 Strigidae Ninox novaeseelandiae Southern Boobook 1 Halcyonidae Todiramphus pyrrhopygius Red-backed Kingfisher 2 Meropidae Merops ornatus Rainbow Bee-eater 19 10 Climacteridae Climacteris rufa Rufous Treecreeper 4 Maluridae Malurus leucopterus White-winged Fairy-wren 10 Acanthizidae Pyrrholaemus brunneus Redthroat 2 1 Smicrornis brevirostris Weebill 1 12 155 77 Acanthiza chrysorrhoa Yellow-rumped Thornbill 4 Acanthiza uropygialis Chestnut-rumped Thornbill 33 2 25 Acanthiza apicalis Inland Thornbill 14 Pardalotidae Pardalotus striatus Striated Pardalote 56 9 Meliphagidae Lichenostomus virescens Singing Honeyeater 9 15 Lichenostomus leucotis White-eared Honeyeater 3 Lichenostomus ornatus Yellow-plumed Honeyeater 30 8 Purnella albifrons White-fronted Honeyeater 17 11 19 Manorina flavigula Yellow-throated Miner 52 86 36 Acanthagenys rufogularis Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater 20 10 14 Anthochaera carunculata Red Wattlebird 31 Lichmera indistincta Brown Honeyeater 30 Melithreptus brevirostris Brown-headed Honeyeater 5 Pomatostomidae Pomatostomus superciliosus White-browed Babbler 1 5 28 Neosittidae Daphoenositta chrysoptera Varied Sittella 15 Campephagidae Coracina maxima Ground Cuckoo-shrike 4 Coracina novaehollandiae Black-faced Cuckoo-shrike 6 13 9 Lalage sueurii White-winged Triller 2 Pachycephalidae Colluricincla harmonica Grey Shrike-thrush 1 1 Oreoica gutturalis Crested Bellbird 5 5 Artamidae Artamus cinereus Black-faced Woodswallow 1 7 Artamus cyanopterus Dusky Woodswallow 3 Cracticus torquatus Grey Butcherbird 5 3 Cracticus nigrogularis Pied Butcherbird 9 2 Cracticus tibicen Australian Magpie 30 4 Strepera versicolor Grey Currawong 2 7 7 Rhipiduridae Rhipidura leucophrys Willie Wagtail 1 2 Monarchidae Grallina cyanoleuca Magpie-lark 6 Petroicidae Microeca fascinans Jacky Winter 1 11 6 Petroica goodenovii Red-capped Robin 5 5 6 Melanodryas cucullata Hooded Robin 1 Hirundinidae Hirundo neoxena Welcome Swallow 4 Hirundo nigricans Tree Martin 4 Motacillidae Anthus novaeseelandiae Australasian Pipit 1 1 4 4 1

Surveys A B

Spin

ifex

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Tra

ns

Gim

let

Sout

h Und

ist

Ros

e T

rans

Salm

on G

ums

Gim

let

Sout

h T

rans

Pal

ace

Reh

ab

Dav

yhur

st

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Und

ist

Pal

ace

Und

ist

Secu

rity

Cro

ssro

ads

Gim

let

Sout

h R

ehab

Gol

den

Arr

ow

Reh

ab

Pal

ace

Tra

ns

Ros

e R

ehab

Ros

e U

ndis

t

Wen

dy G

ully

Reh

ab

Wen

dy G

ully

Tra

ns

Wen

dy G

ully

Und

ist

Flo

odpl

ains

KK

4

KK

1

KK

2

KK

11

Mammals Canidae Vulpes vulpes Red Fox 1 Molossidae Austronomus australis White-striped Free-tail Bat 5 17 1 Mormopterus planiceps Southern Free-tail Bat 11 8 Vespertilionidae Chalinolobus morio Chocolate Wattled Bat 1 3 Nyctophilus geoffroyi Lesser Long-eared Bat 1 2 Nyctophilus gouldi Gould's Long-eared Bat 10 42 Nyctophilus major Greater Long-eared Bat 1 Scotorepens balstoni Inland Broad-nosed Bat 2 11 Vespadelus regulus Southern Forest Bat 1 5 Dasyuridae Antechinomys laniger Kultarr 1 1 1 Ningaui ridei Wongai Ningaui 1 2 Ningaui sp. Ningaui Sp. 35 3 2 2 22 1 4 2 17 Ningaui yvonneae Mallee Ningaui 1 Pseudantechinus woolleyae Woolley's False Antechinus 1 Sminthopsis crassicaudata Fat-tailed Dunnart 2 11 2 63 5 14 67 15 12 4 26 32 27 57 143 28 121 100 24 108 1 2 5 1 Sminthopsis crassicaudata Fat-tailed Dunnart Sminthopsis dolichura Little Long-tailed Dunnart 63 16 15 5 34 4 2 47 25 36 46 11 2 17 4 2 28 7 4 32 2 7 1 3 4 Sminthopsis sp. Dunnart Sp. 2 Burramyidae Cercartetus concinnus Southwestern Pygmy Possum 23 11 62 11 15 23 9 37 32 20 8 17 27 3 8 20 22 9 6 16 2 8 1 Macropodidae Macropus fuliginosus Western Grey Kangaroo 8 2 6 Macropus robustus Euro 2 Macropus rufus Red Kangaroo 1 15 8 Leporidae Oryctolagus cuniculus European Rabbit 1 1 1 1 Muridae Mus musculus House Mouse 26 36 25 33 6 62 49 19 2 24 10 18 128 24 47 56 22 181 88 13 31 1 13 4 Notomys mitchellii Mitchell's Hopping Mouse 1 1 Pseudomys albocinereus Ash-grey Mouse 1 Pseudomys bolami Bolam's Mouse 9 39 13 19 30 11 49 3 13 1 8 20 35 4 25 24 5 4 9 2 Pseudomys hermannsburgensis Sandy Inland Mouse 8 9 5 9 3 9 3 4 2 5 7 14 2 1 5 2

A Thompson, S. (2004) Mine site rehabilitation index using reptile assemblage as a bio-indicator, PhD thesis and additional surveys. B McKenzie, N.L. and Hall, N.J. (1992) The biological survey of the eastern goldfields of Western Australia. Part 8: Kurnalpi - Kalgoorlie study area, Records of the Western Australian

Museum, Supplement 41.

Appendix C Definitions of Significant Fauna under the

WA Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and Priority Species

Vertebrate Fauna Assessment – Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

ATTACHMENT C DEFINITIONS OF SIGNIFICANT FAUNA UNDER THE WA BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION ACT 2016

Threatened, Extinct and Specially Protected fauna or flora1 are species2 which have been adequately searched for and are deemed to be, in the wild, threatened, extinct or in need of special protection, and have been gazetted as such. The Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 and the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 have been transitioned under regulations 170, 171 and 172 of the Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2018 to be the lists of Threatened, Extinct and Specially Protected species under Part 2 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. Categories of Threatened, Extinct and Specially Protected fauna and flora are:

T Threatened Species

Listed by order of the Minister as Threatened in the category of critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable under section 19(1), or is a rediscovered species to be regarded as threatened species under section 26(2) of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act).

Threatened fauna is that subset of ‘Specially Protected Fauna’ listed under schedules 1 to 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for Threatened Fauna.

Threatened flora is that subset of ‘Rare Flora’ listed under schedules 1 to 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for Threatened Flora.

The assessment of the conservation status of these species is based on their national extent and ranked according to their level of threat using IUCN Red List categories and criteria as detailed below.

CR Critically endangered species

Threatened species considered to be “facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”.

Listed as critically endangered under section 19(1)(a) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 20 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 1 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for critically endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for critically endangered flora.

EN Endangered species

Threatened species considered to be “facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”.

Listed as endangered under section 19(1)(b) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 21 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 2 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for endangered fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for endangered flora.

VU Vulnerable species

Threatened species considered to be “facing a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future, as determined in accordance with criteria set out in the ministerial guidelines”.

Listed as vulnerable under section 19(1)(c) of the BC Act in accordance with the criteria set out in section 22 and the ministerial guidelines. Published under schedule 3 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for vulnerable fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for vulnerable flora. Extinct Species

1 The definition of flora includes algae, fungi and lichens

2 Species includes all taxa (plural of taxon - a classificatory group of any taxonomic rank, e.g. a family, genus, species or any infraspecific category i.e. subspecies or variety, or a distinct population).

Listed by order of the Minister as extinct under section 23(1) of the BC Act as extinct or extinct in the wild.

EX Extinct species

Species where “there is no reasonable doubt that the last member of the species has died”, and listing is otherwise in

accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 24 of the BC Act).

Published as presumed extinct under schedule 4 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018 for extinct fauna or the Wildlife Conservation (Rare Flora) Notice 2018 for extinct flora.

EW Extinct in the wild species

Species that “is known only to survive in cultivation, in captivity or as a naturalised population well outside its past range; and it has not been recorded in its known habitat or expected habitat, at appropriate seasons, anywhere in its past range, despite surveys over a time frame appropriate to its life cycle and form”, and listing is otherwise in

accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 25 of the BC Act).

Currently there are no threatened fauna or threatened flora species listed as extinct in the wild. If listing of a species as extinct in the wild occurs, then a schedule will be added to the applicable notice.

Specially Protected Species Listed by order of the Minister as specially protected under section 13(1) of the BC Act. Meeting one or more of the following categories: species of special conservation interest; migratory species; cetaceans; species subject to international agreement; or species otherwise in need of special protection.

Species that are listed as threatened species (critically endangered, endangered or vulnerable) or extinct species under the BC Act cannot also be listed as Specially Protected species.

MI Migratory birds protected under an international agreement

Fauna that periodically or occasionally visit Australia or an external Territory or the exclusive economic zone; or the species is subject of an international agreement that relates to the protection of migratory species and that binds the Commonwealth; and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 15 of the BC Act).

Includes birds that are subject to an agreement between the government of Australia and the governments of Japan (JAMBA), China (CAMBA) and The Republic of Korea (ROKAMBA), and fauna subject to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention), an environmental treaty under the United Nations Environment Program. Migratory species listed under the BC Act are a subset of the migratory animals, that are known to visit Western Australia, protected under the international agreements or treaties, excluding species that are listed as Threatened species.

Published as migratory birds protected under an international agreement under schedule 5 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

CD Species of special conservation interest (conservation dependant fauna)

Fauna of special conservation need being species dependent on ongoing conservation intervention to prevent it becoming eligible for listing as threatened, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 14 of the BC Act).

Published as conservation dependent fauna under schedule 6 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

OS Other specially protected species

Fauna otherwise in need of special protection to ensure their conservation, and listing is otherwise in accordance with the ministerial guidelines (section 18 of the BC Act).

Published as other specially protected fauna under schedule 7 of the Wildlife Conservation (Specially Protected Fauna) Notice 2018.

P Priority species

Possibly threatened species that do not meet survey criteria, or are otherwise data deficient, are added to the Priority Fauna or Priority Flora Lists under Priorities 1, 2 or 3. These three categories are ranked in order of priority for survey and evaluation of conservation status so that consideration can be given to their declaration as threatened fauna or flora.

Species that are adequately known, are rare but not threatened, or meet criteria for near threatened, or that have been recently removed from the threatened species or other specially protected fauna lists for other than taxonomic reasons, are placed in Priority 4. These species require regular monitoring.

Assessment of Priority codes is based on the Western Australian distribution of the species, unless the distribution in WA is part of a contiguous population extending into adjacent States, as defined by the known spread of locations

P1 Priority 1: Poorly-known species

Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less) which are potentially at risk. All occurrences are either: very small; or on lands not managed for conservation, e.g. agricultural or pastoral lands, urban areas, road and rail reserves, gravel reserves and active mineral leases; or otherwise under threat of habitat destruction or degradation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under immediate threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey.


Species that are known from one or a few locations (generally five or less), some of which are on lands managed primarily for nature conservation, e.g. national parks, conservation parks, nature reserves and other lands with secure tenure being managed for conservation. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from one or more locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and appear to be under threat from known threatening processes. Such species are in urgent need of further survey.


Species that are known from several locations, and the species does not appear to be under imminent threat, or from few but widespread locations with either large population size or significant remaining areas of apparently suitable habitat, much of it not under imminent threat. Species may be included if they are comparatively well known from several locations but do not meet adequacy of survey requirements and known threatening processes exist that could affect them. Such species are in need of further survey.

P4 Priority 4: Rare, Near Threatened and other species in need of monitoring

(a) Rare. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed, or for which sufficient knowledge is available, and that are considered not currently threatened or in need of special protection but could be if present circumstances change. These species are usually represented on conservation lands.

(b) Near Threatened. Species that are considered to have been adequately surveyed and that are close to qualifying for vulnerable but are not listed as Conservation Dependent.

(c) Species that have been removed from the list of threatened species during the past five years for reasons other than taxonomy.

Appendix D Fauna habitat assessment results

Vertebrate Fauna Assessment – Racetrack, Royal Standard and Golden Funnel Project Areas

Date: 7-Jun-19 Habitat Assessment #: 1 Observers: Dr Scott Thompson

Zone: 51 Easting: 332331 mE Northing: 6618720 mN Landform: Flat

Fire History: > 5 years Surface: Sandy clay Habitat Quality: Disturbed

Habitat Structure: Disturbed



Fire History: > 5 years Surface: Sandy clay Habitat Quality: Disturbed to Good

Habitat Structure: Open Eucalypt woodland over sparse shrubs and chenopods


























Zone: 51 Easting: 333038 mE Northing: 6617864 mN Landform: Hill

Fire History: > 5 years Surface: Stony Habitat Quality: Disturbed to Good

Habitat Structure: Mixed sclerophyll shrubland and chenopods
























































Habitat Structure: Eucalypt woodland over mixed shrubland and chenopod over scattered grasses of varying

densities





densities

























































































































densities








































































































































Habitat Structure: None





















densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





















































































































































































































































































































densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities













densities









































densities





densities









densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities









































densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





densities





Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 7 – Risk Rating Matrix

TABLE A. CONSEQUENCE OF EVENT (Actual and Potential)

Level Descriptor Injuries Environment Corporate liability Cost

1 Insignificant No injuries No permanent damage to the

environment or heritage feature

No corporate liability <$10,000

2 Minor First aid

treatme

nt

Spillage immediately contained;

Minor short-term damage to the

environment or heritage feature;

Low corporate

liability

$10,000 -

$50,000

3 Moderate Minor

medical

treatme

nt

Spillage contained with some

difficulty;

Significant short-term or minor long-

term damage to the environment

Moderate level

of corporate

liability

$50,000 -

$750,000

4 Major Serious

extensiv

e injuries

Major short-term or significant long-

term damage to the environment

or heritage feature.

High level of

corporate liability.

$750,000 -

$3,000,000

5 Catastrophic Fatality Major long-term damage to the

environment or heritage feature

Very high level of

corporate liability

>$3,000,000

TABLE B. LIKELIHOOD OF EVENT OCCURRING

Level Descriptor Description

A Almost Certain Is expected to occur in most circumstances (ie > once per day)

B Likely Will probably occur in most circumstances (ie > once per month but < once per

C Possible Should occur at some time (ie > once per year but < once per month)

D Unlikely Could occur at some time (ie < once per year)

E Rare May occur only in exceptional circumstances (ie unlikely to ever occur)

TABLE C. RISK RANKING

Consequenc

1 2 3 4 5

A 15 10 6 3 1

B 19 14 9 5 2

C 22 18 13 8 4

D 24 21 17 12 7

E 25 23 20 16 11

Table D. RISK LEVEL

TYPE RANKING ACTION REPORTING

Extreme risk 1 – 5 • Cease all affected work immediately.

• In the event of an incident an

ICAM is required.

Area Manager to be

notified immediately High risk 9 – 12 • Consider ceasing all affected work.

• In the event of an incident an ICAM is to be

considered.

• Action/s & responsibilities to be

assigned by end of the shift. Moderate

risk

13 – 19 • In the event of an incident an ICAM is to be

considered.

• Manage by routine procedures.

Area Manager to be notified before the end of

shift

Low risk 20 – 25 • Manage by routine procedures.

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 8 – Dust Suppression Procedure

Norton’s Paddington Operations –NGF-ENV-PRO-06-002B

Uncontrolled if printed, retrieve current version from Cintellate Page 1 of 5

DUST SUPPRESSION PROCEDURE

Document No: NGF-ENV-PRO-06-002B

Revision: A B

Prepared by:

Tari Pawlyk

Graduate

Environmental

Advisor

Kellie Carter Senior

Environmental

Advisor

Reviewed by:

Wayne Astill

HSE

Superintendent

Wayne Astill ECS

Superintendent

Approved by:

Brian Sowden

Manager HSE

Brad Daddow

Acting General

Manager

SUMMARY OF DOCUMENT REVISIONS

Rev.

No.

Date

Revised

Section

Revised Revision Description

A 09/08/2013 Initial Document

B 23/03/2018 Full doc. Required review. Updated organisational structure, improved

grammar, included reference to new EMS documents.



1. PURPOSE

The purpose of this procedure is to outline the process to suppress prevalence of dust

during mining activities, whilst avoiding damage to the surrounding environment.

Dust is generated by wind or vehicle movement over areas cleared of vegetation

such as haul roads, ROMs, laydown areas, etc. Risks of generated dust may include;

contamination with heavy metals or fibrous materials which may cause harm to health

if inhaled, obstruction of vision whilst driving and damage to nearby vegetation if dust

settles on leaves and impacts ability to photosynthesise light. Dust suppression is

therefore required on a regular basis and is generally through the use of stored

groundwater via a standpipe and use of a watercart.

The salinity level of the groundwater resources in the Kalgoorlie region is comparable

to salinity levels of sea water or greater (hyper-saline), however, it is the most

appropriate and readily available water source to use for dust suppression purposes.

The spraying of hyper-saline groundwater to control dust generation is necessary but

it is important the application of water is controlled in a manner that prevents

secondary impact to vegetation and contamination of the surrounding environment

via runoff.

2. SCOPE

The scope of the procedure applies to all sites within the NGF Paddington Operations.

For specific applications and the related job steps for dust abatement methods on

ramps, haul roads, ROM and mine areas please see specific site safe work procedures.

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

Definitions

‘Dust suppression’ is the spraying or dribbling of water on all trafficable roads to

abate the dust that rises as vehicles drive over it.

‘Raw water’ refers to saline and/or hyper-saline water that contains high levels

of dissolved salts and is intolerable to most living things.

3. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

General Manager Responsible for ensuring sufficient resources are available to implement this

Procedure.



Environment, Community and Security Superintendent Responsible for discussion/review of this procedure and ensures the Procedure

complies with site standards.

Area Superintendents Responsible for ensuring that staff adhere to procedure; and

Informing the Environmental Department of any issues arising from dust

suppression procedures.

Water-Cart Vehicle Operators

Responsible for maintaining awareness and ensuring the correct procedure for

spraying roads is adhered to, preventing negative impacts to the environment;

and

Reporting any defects associated with the vehicle that may affect the correct

application of raw water.

4. PROCEDURE

Dust suppression is required during the operation of a mine where dust can be, or is

prevalent, on haul roads and has potential to cause nuisance or present a potential

hazard to mine site personnel, operations, or members of the public.

Raw water will be obtained from stand pipes directly to water-carts at various

locations on site when needed.

The preferred method of raw water application is via the use of dribble bars as

opposed to spray bars. Dribble bars reduce the chance of spraying surrounding

vegetation.

Water may be sprayed where adjacent v-drains are in place to capture runoff and

prevent spray drifting outside of v-drains, and wind conditions are moderate.

If visible dust is observed, then attempts shall be made to contact an appropriate

area shift supervisor, who is to contact the driver of a water cart and organise the

application of water in the dusty area. Water is not to be sprayed where any topsoil

stripping operations are occurring. If contact cannot be made with either the shift

supervisor or water cart driver, the Area Superintendent is to be contacted regarding

visible dust.

The use of dust suppression additives is to be assessed via the Hazardous Substances

Management Procedure (NGF-SAF-PRO-08-001) if necessary.

Any spills or inappropriate use of hyper-saline water is to be contained where possible

and reported to the Environmental Department immediately.



4.1 Monitoring

Monitoring is required whilst dust suppression is undertaken to ensure that risks

identified are controlled/managed. Dust suppression monitoring includes but is not

limited to:

Daily visual observations; and

Annual visual audits of road corridors, bunding, v-drains and spoon drains.

5. CONTINGENCY PLAN

In the event of an uncontrolled discharge of raw water onto vegetation, the following

measures should be implemented to reduce the risk of further damage to the

environment:

Dust suppression is to stop immediately until the issue has been resolved;

The Area Superintendent and Environment Department will be notified of the

spill or where vegetation is affected to ensure that appropriate remediation

measures can be implemented;

The spill will be contained within earthen bunds or otherwise to prevent further

environmental harm; and

If necessary, contaminated soils should be removed and disposed of from the

area.

6. REPORTING

All incidents associated with dust suppression and uncontrolled hypersaline water

discharge are classed as reportable incidents by NGF. In the event of an incident, it is

required to be entered into Cintellate.

If an incident triggers the criteria within applicable tenement conditions or Section 72

of the Environmental Protection Act 1986, the Environment Department will notify

relevant government authorities within the timeframes stipulated within legislation or

licence, and to the prescribed standard stipulated within the NGF Incident Reporting

and Investigation Procedure.

7. REVIEW

A review shall be carried out to ensure the content of this procedure is still applicable

and practicable. A review should take place:

Whenever the process/equipment changes;

At a periodic frequency (every two years); and/or

At incident investigation.



8. LEGISLATION AND STANDARDS

Environmental Protection Act 1986; and

Mining Act 1978

9. RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION

Incident and Investigation Procedure

Hazardous Substances Management Procedure

Environmentally Hazardous Substances and Dangerous Goods Management

Plan

Bianca.Meagher

Typewritten text

Appendix 9 – Environment and Community Policy

Sheree.Blechynden

Typewritten text

C

Sheree.Blechynden

Typewritten text

15/08/2019

Date post:	15-Nov-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

GOLDEN FUNNEL TO RACETRACK DEWATERING WORKS … · 2020. 8. 5. · DEWATERING WORKS APPROVAL...

Documents